Loading...
2024-04-10 Planning Board PacketOF EDA' v ti Agenda Edmonds Planning Board REGULAR MEETING BRACKETT ROOM 121 5TH AVE N, CITY HALL- 3RD FLOOR, EDMONDS, WA 98020 APRIL 10, 2024, 7:00 PM REMOTE MEETING INFORMATION: Meeting Link: https://edmondswa- gov.zoom.us/s/87322872194?pwd=WFdxTWJIQmxITG9LZkc3 KOhuS014QT09 Meeting ID: 873 2287 2194 Passcode:007978 This is a Hybrid meeting: The meeting can be attended in -person or on-line. The physcial meeting location is at Edmonds City Hall 121 5th Avenue N., 3rd floor Brackett R000m Or Telephone :US: +1 253 215 8782 LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Approval of Minutes 3. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS For topics not scheduled for a public hearing. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes S. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 8. NEW BUSINESS A. Accessory Dwelling Unit Code Update (AMD2023-0008): 9. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT 10. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA A. Extended Agenda Edmonds Planning Board Agenda April 10, 2024 Page 1 11. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS 12. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS 13. ADJOURNMENT Edmonds Planning Board Agenda April 10, 2024 Page 2 2.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 04/10/2024 Approval of Minutes Staff Lead: Mike Clugston Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Michael Clugston Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Approve draft meeting minutes for March 27th. Narrative N/A Attachments: PB 03272024 draft Packet Pg. 3 2.A.a CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Minutes of Hybrid Meeting March 27, 2024 Chair Mitchell called the hybrid meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. at Edmonds City Hall and on Zoom. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The Land Acknowledgement was read by Board Member Golembiewski. Board Members Present Jeremy Mitchell, Chair Lauren Golembiewski, Vice Chair Judi Gladstone Richard Kuehn Susanna Martini Nick Maxwell Board Members Absent None Staff Present Susan McLaughlin, Development Services Director Mike Clugston, Acting Planning Manager Navyusha Pentakota, Urban Design Planner (online) Jeff Levy, Senior Planner (online) ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Samuel, Edmonds resident, expressed concern about the high -density rezoning proposal. He feels that Olympia is trying to turn Edmonds into a slum with mass housing and high density. He doesn't want Edmonds to turn into another Shoreline or Ballard. He is concerned about Olympia pushing this by trying to defund Edmonds and basically take over all zoning regulations. He hopes there is pushback on this. Roger Pence said he was very heartened by the involvement in the Saturday event. He is glad to see a greater degree of respect being shown to the Planning Board and attributes this to the new mayor. Regarding the Comprehensive Plan, he likes the idea of neighborhood hubs but noted that 15th and Edmonds Way was overlooked as a hub. He commented that the way RM zoning is structured drives large apartment units. They could get a lot more units out of the RM zone without increasing the size of the building envelope by allowing the units to be a little smaller. READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES Planning Board Meeting Minutes March 27, 2024 Pagel of 5 Packet Pg. 4 2.A.a MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR GOLEMBIEWSKI, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MARTINI, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MARCH 6 RETREAT AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED (3-0). AYES: MITCHELL, GOLEMBIEWSKI, MAXWELL NOES: NONE ABSTAIN: KUEHN, GLADSTONE, MARTINI Board Member Maxwell requested addition of his comments about sticking with the more restrictive requirements and revisiting them when the new guidelines come out in 2 or 3 years. He also requested that roll call vote counts be added to the minutes. He wanted it to be made clear that he voted against the final motion. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL TO ADD THE CONVERSATION AND HIS COMMENTS ABOUT THE AQUIFER REGULATIONS. THE MOTION TO AMEND WAS SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER KUEHN AND APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY (6-0). AYES: ALL MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE, SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR GOLEMBIESWSKI, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS AMENDED AND WITH THE AMENDMENTS REFERENCED IN BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE'S EMAIL AND IN THE DISCUSSION. THE MARCH 13, 2024 MINUTES WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED AS AMENDED (6-0). AYES: ALL The group debated how much detail they would like the minutes to contain going forward. MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR GOLEMBIEWSKI, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE, TO ASK THE STENOGRAPHER TO PROVIDE SUMMARY MINUTES WITH THE ONLY ATTRIBUTION BEING IN THE MOTIONS AND THAT THE VOTES BE ROLL CALL. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (6-0). AYES: ALL UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Comprehensive Plan Growth Alternatives Recommendation Director McLaughlin made a presentation regarding conceptual growth alternatives for the Comprehensive Plan. She shared information about how they got to the centers and hubs. There was some discussion about why Highway 99 was not included when looking at where to put the needed housing units and how Highway 99 has already accounted for a significant amount of the growth targets. There is also a desire to rebalance the growth allocation away from Highway 99. Director McLaughlin summarized feedback received from the citywide forum and online open house to date. Some new ideas were presented related to exploring new hubs; making the International District a neighborhood hub; creating the medical district as a "New Edmonds Uptown' ; and focusing growth centers around schools. When looking at the alternatives, online survey results showed more support for a distributed approach Planning Board Meeting Minutes March 27, 2024 Page 2 of 5 Packet Pg. 5 2.A.a (Alternative B) but the most responses indicated "Not sure yet". There was discussion about possible reasons why people would have selected that option including not being able to distinguish between Alternatives A and B and not preferring either of the alternatives because of conceptual reasons or because of concerns about the number of stories. Director McLaughlin reviewed ways they could modify both alternatives to limit the height to four stories without expanding the areas because they would be removing the 8% buffer and the incentive option resulting in larger developable lot areas. The difference between the two alternatives was reviewed as well as the difference between the alternatives and existing height limits. The policy framework used to support compact, mixed -use development was reviewed including PSRC's Multi County Planning Policies, Snohomish County Planning Policies, and existing Comprehensive Plan policy direction. There was discussion about how to potentially adjust the alternatives to align with the feedback received and also get the best use out of the Draft Environmental Impact Study (DEIS). It was emphasized that the end result will likely be a combination of A and B, and the group was not deciding on one of the alternatives now. Various topics were discussed including what would happen if the density in the Highway 99 zone were reduced with a step-down transition area; what would happen if the contingency were bumped up from 8% to 10 or 15%; the impacts of adding new hubs on the DEIS; and transit routes. It was noted that adding the proposed new hubs would help clean up the remaining neighborhood business parcels and update options for those areas. There were comments around ways to differentiate between the alternatives more in response to public comments and to provide enough flexibility to go in one direction or the other. There was support for having a high and a low extreme for the DEIS with the goal of eventually finding something in the middle. Board members asked questions about the difference between the alternatives in different hubs and centers, and staff clarified. There was some interest in considering a new Edmonds Uptown/Town Center and having taller buildings in the CG part of the medical district where they would match the height of the hospital. Concerns were raised about impacts to newer townhomes and residential areas nearby. Staff spoke to the capacity on Highway 99 that is already not being built and expressed concern about adding more to compete with this. Issues regarding transportation capacity and proximity to transit were raised with regard to increasing density along 76th versus Highway 99. There was consensus that the growth should occur in the hubs and the centers. Regarding bookends, there was interest in looking at five stories as an option on the high end with the recognition that they are not expecting the policy to get there. Concerns were raised about the adequacy of the infrastructure with increased density and how incentives might be able to address this. Director McLaughlin suggested that they could have public process around development of incentives before the DEIS comes out. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER KUEHN, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE, TO EXTEND THE MEETING TO 9:30 P.M. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (6-0). AYES: ALL There was significant debate about where the high end of the bookend should be. There was agreement that the vast majority of people don't want five stories and that including it as an option is aggressive. Several board members wanted to include it on the high end for informational purposes only, noting that they can always reduce the numbers. Others expressed concern about including the five -story option at all for various reasons. Clarification questions were asked and answered about the heights in the original Alternative A. There was discussion about how they would move through the process to get to the final land use. Planning Board Meeting Minutes March 27, 2024 Page 3 of 5 Packet Pg. 6 MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER GOLEMBIEWSKI, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER KUEHN, TO RECOMMEND MOVING FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL ALTERNATIVE A AS PREVIOUSLY PRESENTED WITH THE FIVE -STORY CENTERS WITH INCENTIVES AS ONE END OF THE BOOKEND FOR THE DRAFT EIS. MOTION PASSED (4-2). AYES: MITCHELL, GOLEMBIEWSKI, KUEHN, MARTINI NOES: GLADSTONE, MAXWELL MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER GOLEMBIEWSKI, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE, TO RECOMMEND MOVING FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL THE REVISED ALTERNATIVE B AS PRESENTED TONIGHT WITH THREE-STORY LIMITS IN ALL OF THE HUBS, TO GET RID OF NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS ZONING, AND TO CONSIDER THOSE PARCELS AS PART OF THE REVISED EIS ALTERNATIVE. There was discussion about whether the 84th and 196th proposed hub near the church should be included. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (6-0). AYES: ALL The group discussed next steps and decided Chair Mitchell will send out a draft recommendation for board members to return with tracked comments. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA April 10 — Transportation Element; Detached Accessory Dwelling Units May 22 is a possible date for another joint meeting with the Economic Development Commission to discuss their policy framework for the economic goals. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Board Member Martini commended everyone for their work. Board Member Maxwell thought it was a great evening. Board Member Gladstone said she is looking forward to policy discussion about the alternatives and not being hung up on the EIS alternatives which usually come afterwards. Board Member Kuehn agreed with Board Member Gladstone. He likes seeing and hearing all of the comments. He appreciates that people in Edmonds have a passion for the city. Vice Chair Golembiewski commented that it feels good to be at this stage. She is looking forward to seeing how this develops. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Planning Board Meeting Minutes March 27, 2024 Page 4 of 5 Packet Pg. 7 2.A.a Chair Mitchell agreed with Board Member Kuehn and said he is really proud of the Board and what they have done to date. He appreciates the extra time they have all put in which has been helpful for everyone. He urged them to continue educating the public. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:32 p.m. Planning Board Meeting Minutes March 27, 2024 Page 5 of 5 Packet Pg. 8 8.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 04/10/2024 Accessory Dwelling Unit Code Update (AMD2023-0008): Staff Lead: Rose Haas Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Rose Haas Background/History The core obiectives of the ADU code update are as follows: 1. To allow DADUs in the City of Edmonds. 2. To align with HB 1337 in terms of development standards. 3. To provide clear and objective guidance for those who choose to add ADUs or DADUs to their property. 4. To provide code standards for height, floor area, parking, utilities, etc. The Housing Element in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan recommends the following strategy to promote affordable housing: o The City [should substantially revise] its accessory dwelling regulations, providing clearer standards and streamlining their approval as a standard option for any single family lot (2020 Comprehensive Plan, p. 92). In 2021, the Citizens' Housing Commission stated the following policy recommendation for updating the ADU code to include detached accessory dwelling units (DADUs): o Allow either one attached or detached accessory unit on a property in the SFR area, with clear and definitive development requirements such as size, ownership, and parking, under the standard permitting process and not require a conditional use permit. In the spring of 2023, the state legislature passed HB 1337 which requires jurisdictions like Edmonds to update their development codes to allow for DADUs and make related code changes to make it easier to create accessory dwelling units. In late October of 2023, City Council indicated that they wished to allow detached accessory dwelling units (DADUs) in anticipation of conforming with the state mandate that takes effect in July 2025 (HB 1337). Staff introduced the proposal to allow for DADUs as well as to fully comply with the upcoming required State of Washington mandate at Council Committee on November 14, 2023. Staff held a live public webinar on November 30, 2023 with an online comment period Packet Pg. 9 8.A from November 30- December 31, 2023. Staff introduced the proposal at Planning Board on December 13, 2023. Staff discussed the proposal at Planning Board on January 10, 2024 and January 24, 2024. The preliminary discussion touched on the following topics: § Regulation of units in lots that contain critical areas; § Maximum unit square footage; § Setback reductions; § Utilities connections, metering, and Public Works' requirements; § Nullification of existing owner -occupancy covenants. Staff reintroduced the proposal and presented draft code amendments at City Council on February 27, 2024. Planning Board held a Public Hearing on the Proposal on February 28, 2024. Legal notice for the Public Hearing was published and posted on February 14, 2024. Written comments gathered by staff were presented prior to the hearing. Council and Staff held a study session on March 5, 2024. Staff has updated the webpage (Edmondswa.gov/ADU <https://www.edmondswa.gov/government/departments/development services/planni ng division/code modernization/accessory dwelling units code update>) throughout the entire process. The webpage includes the recorded webinar, draft code amendments, FAQs, self -guided slide shows, and has provided a forum for ongoing public comment. The project will be returning to Council on April 23, 2024 and is anticipated for adoption on May 7, 2024. Staff Recommendation Staff will present Planning Division recommendations as shown in the draft redline/strikeout code (Attachment 1). Staff and Planning Board will then discuss draft code language. If the Planning Board is satisfied with the draft language and has no substantive comments, staff requests that the Planning Board generate a decision memorandum for City Council that include recommendations on the following policy topics: 1. ADU size restrictions; 2. ADU setback reductions; 3. Parking restrictions; 4. Impact fees. Narrative Accessory dwelling units provide additional affordable housing options within existing single-family neighborhoods. Edmonds has allowed accessory dwelling units (ADUs) since 2000 but only when they are in or attached to a primary residence (ECDC 20.21). State legislation mandates that HB 1337 must be implemented no later than six months after the next Comprehensive Plan due date, or by June 30, 2025. The requirements for the City of Edmonds will be as follows: Allow two ADUs per lot (any configuration of ADU and DADU). No owner -occupancy requirements. Allow separate sale of ADUs. Packet Pg. 10 8.A No parking required within a half -mile of a major transit stop, as defined in RCW 36.70A.696(8). Maximum size limitation no less than 1,000sf. Allow DADUs to be sited at a rear lot line, the lot line abuts a public alley. No setback requirements, yard coverage limits, tree retention mandates, restrictions on entry door locations, or aesthetic requirements that are more restrictive than for the principal unit. Allow ADUs of at least 24-feet in height. Allow impact fees of no more than 50% of the fees imposed on the principal unit. While work on updating the Comprehensive Plan continues, changes to the accessory dwelling unit code can be made now using existing City policy guidance and the ADU guidance provided by the Department of Commerce. There is existing demand for this housing option; Planning staff receives significant interest through phone inquiries, a -mails and counter visits from community members on a weekly basis. Community members are interested in having accommodation for families to age in place or to help offset rising housing -related costs. Public Comments received after the February 28t" Planning Board meeting are attached (Attachment 2). Attachments: Attachment 1 - DRAFT Redline strikethrough Code Amendment Attachment 2 - Public Comment Attachment 3 - 04102024 PPT PB Discussion #3 Packet Pg. 11 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE— 1337 v.8 DRAFT ADU Code Amendments v.8 3.36.030 Assessment and payment of impact fees.) A. Required. The city shall collect impact fees, based on the rates in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125. from any applicant seeking development approval from the city for any development activity within the city as provided herein, including the expansion of existing structures or uses or change of existing uses that creates additional demand for public facilities. 1. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include miscellaneous improvements that do not add any demand for public facilities, including, but not limited to, fences, walls, swimming pools accessory to a residential use, and signs. 2. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include replacement of a residential structure with a new residential structure of the same type at the same site or lot when such replacement occurs within 12 months of the demolition or destruction of the prior residential structure. Replacement of a residential structure with a new residential structure of the same type shall be interpreted to include any residential structure for which there is no increase in the number of residential units. 3. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include alterations, expansions, enlargement, remodeling, rehabilitation or conversion of an existing dwelling unit where no additional dwelling units are created and the use is not changed. Note accessory dwelliRg units (ADIJs) aF@ ROt considered to create- additignal dwtalliRg WRitS becaus;o Grnr :20:21 WO d9tas; not Consider enl Ic as iRGreaSiRg the overall deRSit.y of a ogle family residential n inhhnrhood 1 B. Timing and Calculation of Fees. Impact fees shall be assessed based upon the impact fee rates in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit, including but not limited to change of use permit or remodel permit. 1. For a change in use of an existing building or dwelling unit, including any alteration, expansion, replacement or new accessory building, the impact fee shall be the applicable impact fee for the new use, less an amount equal to the applicable impact fee for the prior use. Commented [RH1]: I added Comments for annot whether the code is being deleted, moved or added why. Or, whether more info is needed Commented [HR2]: Under departmental internal and with the City Attorney Packet Pg. 12 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 2. For mixed use developments, impact fees shall be imposed for the proportionate share of each land use based on the applicable measurement in the impact fee rates set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125. 3. Where the impact fees imposed are determined by the square footage of the development, the building official will establish the gross floor area created by the proposed development. 4. Applicants that have been awarded credits prior to the submittal of the complete building permit application pursuant to ECC 3.36.050 shall submit, along with the complete building permit application, a copy of the letter or certificate prepared by the director pursuant to ECC 3.36.050 setting forth the dollar amount of the credit awarded. 5. Applicants shall pay an administrative fee that covers the cost of staff time in administering the impact fee program. The amount of the administrative fee shall be established and updated from time to time by resolution of the city council. C. Payment. Unless deferred pursuant to ECC 3.36.160, impact fees shall be paid at the time the building permit or business license is issued by the city. The department shall not issue the required building permit or business license or other approval unless and until the impact fees set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 have been paid in the amount that they exceed exemptions or credits provided pursuant to ECC 3.36.040 or 3.36.050; provided, that building permits may be issued without impact fee payment when payment is deferred in accordance with ECC 3.36.160. [Ord. 4048 § 1, 2016; Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.040 Exemptions. A. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from the payment of all impact fees under this chapter: 1. Alteration of an existing nonresidential structure that does not involve a change in use and does not expand the usable space or add any residential units; 2. Miscellaneous improvements that do not expand usable space or add any residential units, including, but not limited to, fences, walls, swimming pools, and signs; 3. Demolition or moving of a structure; Packet Pg. 13 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 4. Expansion of an existing structure that results in the addition of 100 square feet or less of gross floor area; 5. Replacement of a structure with a new structure of the same size and use at the same site or lot when a building permit application for such replacement is submitted to the city within 12 months of the demolition or destruction of the prior structure. Replacement of a structure with a new structure of the same size shall be interpreted to include any structure for which the gross square footage of the building will not be increased by more than 100 square feet; or 6. Alterations, expansions, enlargement, remodeling, rehabilitation or conversion of an existing dwelling unit where no additional dwelling units are created and the use is not changed (arco«or„ rtwe!liRg , nitS (ADUs) are not si.dere d to create a.JdWAn;4i dlAfpiifnn u.n.uts; hPc; ice CGDC 2021 0:20 dpps; not cAnr'dPr ADD is as g then roii density of a single family residential neighborhood, and beEause the Eit)(5 traffic Model does nAt assign additional trips to the ntati-A-fArk a It of ADI icy E. Low-income housing units shall be exempt from paying 80 percent of the street impact fees to the extent the units satisfy this subsection. Such exemption shall be conditioned upon the developer recording a covenant that prohibits using the low-income housing units for any purpose other than for low-income housing. At a minimum, the covenant must address price restrictions and household income limits for the low-income housing development, and that if the property is converted to a use other than for low-income housing, the property owner must pay the applicable impact fees in effect at the time of conversion. The covenant shall also require the owner to submit an annual report to the city along with supporting documentation that shows that the low-income units are continuing to be rented in compliance with the covenant. The covenant shall be an obligation that runs with the land upon which the housing is located. The covenant shall be in a form acceptable to the city attorney and shall be recorded upon the developer's payment of the remaining 20 percent of the street impact fee. C. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from the payment of park impact fees under this chapter: 1. Low-income housing provided by nonprofit organizations such as, but not limited to, Habitat for Humanity. Owners of low-income single-family dwelling units, condominiums and other low-income housing shall execute and record a lien against the property, in favor of the city, for a period of 10 years guaranteeing that the dwelling unit will continue to be Commented [HR3]: Under departmental internal and with the City Attorney Packet Pg. 14 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 used for low-income housing or that impact fees from which the low-income housing is exempted, plus interest, shall be paid. The lien against the property shall be subordinate only to the lien for general taxes. In the event that the development is no longer used for low-income rental housing, the owner shall pay the city the impact fee from which the owner or any prior owner was exempt, plus interest at the statutory rate. Any claim for an exemption for low-income owner occupied housing must be made no later than the time of application for a building permit. Any claim not so made shall be deemed waived. D. Early learning facilities shall be exempt from paying 80 percent of street and park impact fees; provided, that the early learning facility satisfies the conditions of this subsection. Such exemption shall be conditioned upon the developer recording a covenant that requires that at least 25 percent of the children and families using the early learning facility qualify for state subsidized child care, including early childhood education and assistance under Chapter 43.216 RCW, and that provides that if the property is converted to a use other than for an early learning facility, the property owner must pay the applicable impact fees in effect at the time of conversion, and that also provides that if at any point during a calendar year the early learning facility does not achieve the required percentage of children and families qualified for state subsidized child care using the early learning facility, the property owner must pay the remaining impact fee that would have been imposed on the development had there not been an exemption. The covenant shall also require the owner to submit an annual report to the city along with supporting documentation that shows that the early learning facility is in compliance with the covenant. The covenant shall be an obligation that runs with the land upon which the early learning facility is located. The covenant shall be in a form acceptable to the city attorney and shall be recorded upon the developer's payment of the remaining 20 percent of the impact fees. E. The director shall be authorized to determine whether a particular development activity falls within an exemption identified in this section, in any other section, or under other applicable law. Determinations of the director shall be in writing and shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in ECC 3.36.070. [Ord. 4268 § 1, 2022; Ord. 4048 § 1, 2016; Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.120 Park impact fee rates. The park impact fee rates in this section are generated from the formula for calculating impact fees set forth in the rate study, which is incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise Packet Pg. 15 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE - 1337 v.8 provided for independent fee calculations in ECC 3.36.130, exemptions in ECC 3.36.040 and credits in ECC 3.36.050, all new developments in the city will be charged the park impact fee applicable to the type of development as follows: A. Effective October 1, 2014: 1. Single-family house: $2,734.05 per dwelling unit. 2. Accessory dwelling units: $1,367.03 per dwelling unit. 3. 2-. Multifamily residential housing: $2,340.16 per dwelling unit. 4.3. Nonresidential development: $1 .34 per square foot. [Ord. 4048 § 1, 2016; Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.125 Street impact fee rates. The street impact fee rates in this section are generated from the formula for calculating impact fees set forth in the rate study, which is incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise provided for herein, all new developments in the city will be charged the street impact fee applicable to the type of development as follows in the table below. For properties zoned BD - Downtown Business, an ITE Land Use Code of 814 - Specialty Retail shall be applied. 2016 (w/ 2017 (w/ 2018 (w/ 2019 and ITE Land Use Code - Fee $1,049.41 $2,543.01 $4,036.61 beyond (w/ Description Calculation cost per cost per cost per $5,530.21 cost trip) trip) trip) per trip) 110 - Light Industrial per square foot $1.50 $3.64 $5.77 $7.91 140 - Manufacturing per square foot $1.12 $2.72 $4.32 $5.92 151 - Mini -warehouse per square foot $0.40 $0.97 $1.54 $2.10 210 - Single-family house per dwelling $1,196.33 $2,873.60 $4,561.37 $6,249.14 unit Commented [HR4]: Under departmental internal and with the City Attorney. Per RCW 36.70A.681(1)( city of county may not assess impact fees on the construction of accessory dwelling units that are grc than 50 percent of the impact fees that would be irr on the principal unit Q Packet Pg. 16 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE- 1337 v.8 ITE Land Use Code - Description Fee Calculation 2016 (w/ $1,049.41 cost per trip) 2017 (w/ $2,543.01 cost per trip) 2018 (w/ $4,036.61 cost per trip) 2019 and beyond (w/ $5,530.21 cost per trip) 215 - Accessory dwelling units per dwelling 1$3,124.57 unit 220 -Apartment per dwelling unit $776.56 $1,881.83 $2,987.09 $4,092.36 230 - Condominium per dwelling unit $629.65 $1,525.81 $2,421.97 $3,318.13 240 - Mobile home per dwelling unit $671.62 $1,627.53 $2,583.43 $3,539.33 251 - Senior Housing per dwelling unit $157.41 $584.89 $928.42 $1,271.95 320 - Motel per room $629.65 $1,525.81 $2,421.97 $3,318.13 420 - Marina per boat berth $188.89 $457.74 $726.59 $995.44 444 - Movie theater per screens $13,166.00 $31,905.90 $50,645.37 $69,384.85 492 - Health/fitness club per square foot $2.78 $6.74 $10.98 $14.66 530 - High school per square foot $0.82 $1.98 $3.15 $4.31 560 - Church per square foot $0.69 $1.68 $2.67 $3.65 565 - Day care center per square foot $6.57 $15.77 $25.02 $34.29 620 - Nursing home per bed $199.39 $483.17 $766.96 $1,050.74 710 - General office per square foot $2.07 $5.01 $7.95 $10.89 720 - Medical office per square foot $3.81 $9.54 $15.14 $20.74 - Commented [HR5]: Under departmental internal and with the City Attorney. Per RCW 36.70A.681(1)( city of county may not assess impact fees on the construction of accessory dwelling units that are grc than 50 percent of the impact fees that would be irr on the principal unit Packet Pg. 17 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE- 1337 v.8 ITE Land Use Code - Description Fee Calculation 2016 (w/ $1,049.41 cost per trip) 2017 (w/ $2,543.01 cost per trip) 2018 (w/ $4,036.61 cost per trip) 2019 and beyond (w/ $5,530.21 cost per trip) 820 - Shopping center per square foot $1.34 $3.26 $5.17 $7.08 826 - Specialty retail per square foot $0.93 $2.06 $3.27 $4.48 850 - Supermarket per square foot $4.80 $10.50 $16.84 $22.84 850 - Convenience market 15 - 16 hrs per square foot $5.80 $14.07 $22.38 $30.58 912 - Drive-in bank per square foot $7.00 $15.97 $25.41 $34.73 932 - Restaurant: sit-down per square foot $4.70 $10.04 $15.95 $21.84 933 - Fast food, no drive -up per square foot $9.19 $22.28 $35.36 $48.44 934 - Fast food with drive -up per square foot $11.23 $26.24 $41.66 $57.07 936 - Coffee/donut shop, no drive -up per square foot $5.73 $13.88 $22.04 $30.19 938 - Coffee/donut shop, drive- up, no indoor seating per square foot $10.55 $25.56 $40.37 $55.58 945 - Gas station with convenience per vehicle fueling position $3,347.62 $6,916.99 $10,979.58 $15,042.18 [Ord. 4048 § 1, 2016; Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016]. Packet Pg. 18 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.8 Chapter 16.20 RS - SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Sections: 16.20.000 Purposes. 16.20.010 Uses. 16.20.020 Subdistricts. 16.20.030 Table of site development standards. 16.20.040 Site development exceptions. 16.20.045 Site development standards - Single-family master plan. 16.20.050 Site development standards - Accessory dwelling units. 16.20.06050 Site development standards - Accessory buildings. 16.20.000 Purposes. The RS zone has the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for residential zones of ECDC 16.00.010 and 16.10.000: A. To reserve and regulate areas primarily for family living in single-family dwellings; B. To provide for additional nonresidential uses which complement and are compatible with single-family dwelling use. [Ord. 3547 5 1, 20053. 16.20.010 Uses. A. Permitted Primary Uses. 1. Single-family dwelling units; 2. Churches, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.020; 3. Primary schools subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050(G) through (R); 8 Packet Pg. 19 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.8 4. Local public facilities that are planned, designated, and sited in the capital improvement plan, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050; 5. Neighborhood parks, natural open spaces, and community parks with an adopted master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070. B. Permitted Secondary Uses. 1. Foster homes; 2. Accessory dwelling units, subject to the requirements of 16.20.050 ECDC; 3. 2—Home occupation, subject to the requirements of Chapter 20.20 ECDC; 3--.4. The renting of rooms without separate kitchens to one or more persons; 5.4. The following accessory buildings: a. Fallout shelters, b. Private greenhouses covering no more than five percent of the site, c. Private stables, d. Private parking for no more than five cars, e. Private swimming pools and other private recreational facilities; 6. -S-. Private residential docks or piers; 7. 6-. Family day-care in a residential home; 8. T Commuter parking lots that contain less than 10 designated parking spaces in conjunction with a church, school, or local public facility allowed or conditionally permitted in this zone. Any additionally designated parking spaces that increase the total number of spaces in a commuter parking lot to 10 or more shall subject the entire commuter parking lot to a conditional use permit as specified in subsection (D)(5) of this section, including commuter parking lots that are located upon more than one lot as specified in ECDC 21.15.075; 9. 8_ Bed and breakfasts, as in ECDC 20.23.020(A)(1). 9 00 0 0 0 A N O N Q O ca Q O O tU w. M co C_ Commented [MC6]: ADUs will be a permitted sec Z y use. ADUs currently require a conditional use perm addition to any building permit requirements. Redu permitting time and cost. O rn rn d t� t� Q Packet Pg. 20 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.8 C. Primary Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit. 1. High schools, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050(G) through (R); 2. Local public facilities that are not planned, designated, and sited in the capital improvement plan, subject to ECDC 17.100.050; 3. Regional parks and community parks without a master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070. D. Secondary Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit. 1. Preschools; 2. Guest house; 3. Amateur radio transmitting antennas; 4 Accessory wellingunits; 4— Commuter parking lots with 10 or more designated parking spaces in conjunction with a church, school, or local public facility allowed or conditionally permitted in this zone; and 6. -5-. Bed and breakfasts, as in ECDC 20.23.020(A)(2). [Ord. 3988 § 7, 2015; Ord. 3900 § 4, 2012; Ord. 3702 § 1, 2008; Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005]. 16.20.020 Subdistricts. There are established seven subdistricts of the RS zone in order to provide site development standards for areas which differ in topography, location, existing development and other factors. These subdistricts shall be known as the RS-6 zone, the RS-8 zone, the RS-10 zone, the RS-12 zone, the RSW-12 zone, the RS-20 zone, and the RS-MP zone. [Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005]. 10 Packet Pg. 21 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.8 16.20.030 Table of site development standards. Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum Maximum Minimum Sub Maximum Side Rear Maximum Lot Area Lot Street Coverage Parking Density' Height District (Sq.Ft.) Width Setback Setback Setback M Spaces' RS-20 20,000 2.2 100, 25' 3513 & 25' 25' 35% 2 10, IRS-1 2 12,000 3.7 80' 25' 10, 25' 25' 35% 2 RSW- 12,000 3.7 — 15' 10, 35' 25' 35% 2 124 IRS-1 0 10,000 4.4 75' 25' 10, 20' 25' 35% 2 RS-8 8,000 5.5 70' 25' 7-1/2' 15' 25' 35% 2 RS-6 6,000 7.3 60' 20' S' 15' 25' 35% 2 RS-MP5 12,0005 3.75 80'5 255 10i5 255 25' 35% 2 1 Density means "dwelling units per acre" determined by dividing the total lot area by the density allowed by the underlying zoning; the number of lots or units permitted shall be rounded down to the nearest whole number. 2 See Chapter 17.50 ECDC for specific parking requirements. 3 Thirty-five feet total of both sides, 10 feet minimum on either side. 4 Lots must have frontage on the ordinary high water line and a public street or access easement approved by the hearing examiner. 5 "MP" signifies "master plan." The standards in this section show the standards applicable to development without an approved master plan. Properties in this zone may be developed at a higher urban density lot pattern equivalent to RS-8 but this shall only be permitted in accordance with a duly adopted master plan adopted under the provisions of ECDC 16.20.045. [Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005]. 11 Packet Pg. 22 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.8 16.20.040 Site development exceptions. A. Average Front Setback. If a block has residential buildings on more than one-half of the lots on the same side of the block, the owner of a lot on that block may use the average of all the setbacks of the existing residential buildings on the same side of the street as the minimum required front setback for the lot. Detached structures such as garages; carports; and uncovered porches, decks, steps and patios less than 30 inches in height, and other uncovered structures less than 30 inches in height shall not be included in the "average front setback' determination. An applicant for such a determination shall provide a drawing which locates the street property line for the entire block, as well as the existing street setbacks of all buildings required to be used for the purpose of calculating the "average front setback." The drawing shall be prepared and stamped by a land surveyor registered in the state of Washington. B. Eaves and Chimneys. Eaves and chimneys may project into a required setback not more than 30 inches. C. Porches and Decks. Uncovered and unenclosed porches, steps, patios, and decks may project into a required setback not more than one-third of the required setback, or four feet, whichever is less; provided, that they are no more than 30 inches above ground level at any point. D. Reserved. E. Corner Lots. Corner lots have no rear setback; all setbacks other than the street setbacks shall be side setbacks. F. Docks, Piers, Floats. 1. Height. The height of a residential dock or pier shall not exceed five feet above the ordinary high water mark. The height of attendant pilings shall not exceed five feet above the ordinary high water mark or that height necessary to provide for temporary emergency protection of floating docks. 2. Length. The length of any residential dock or pier shall not exceed the lesser of 35 feet or the average length of existing docks or piers within 300 feet of the subject dock or pier. 3. Width. The width of any residential dock or pier shall not exceed 25 percent of the lot width when measured parallel to the shoreline. 12 Packet Pg. 23 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 4. Setbacks. All residential docks or piers shall observe a minimum 10-foot side yard setback from a property line or a storm drainage outfall. joint use docks or piers may be located on the side property line; provided, that the abutting waterfront property owners shall file a joint use maintenance agreement with the Snohomish County auditor in conjunction with, and as a condition of, the issuance of a building permit. joint use docks or piers shall observe all other regulations of this subsection. 5. Number. No lot shall have more than one dock or pier or portion thereof located on the lot. 6. Size. No residential dock or pier shall exceed 400 square feet. 7. Floats. Offshore recreational floats are prohibited. 8. Covered Buildings. No covered building shall be allowed on any residential dock or pier. [Ord. 3845 § 5, 2011; Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005]. 16.20.045 Site development standards - Single-family master plan. A. General. The "single-family -master plan" zone is intended to apply to the area lying along the south side of SR-104 north of 228th Street SW, where there are development constraints related to access and traffic on SR-104. Development in this zone may be approved at RS-12 standards without an approved master plan. An approved master plan is required before any development can occur at RS-8 densities. B. Criteria for Approving a Master Plan. Properties seeking to develop at RS-6 or RS-8 densities shall be developed according to a master plan (such as through a PRD) that clearly demonstrates the following: 1. That access and lot configurations shall not result in additional curb cuts or unmitigated traffic impacts on SR-104; at a minimum, a traffic study prepared by a traffic engineer approved by the city shall clearly demonstrate this requirement. 2. That the configuration and arrangement of lots within the master plan area provide for setbacks on the perimeter of the proposed development that are compatible with the zoning standards applied to adjoining developed properties. For example, a master plan adjoining developed lots in an RS-MP zone that were developed under RS-12 standards 13 Packet Pg. 24 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 shall have RS-12 setbacks along common property lines, although the lot sizes, widths, and other bulk standards may conform to the higher density lot configuration approved through the master plan. [Ord. 3547 § 1, 20051. 16.20.050 Site development standards - Accessory dwelling units, A. General. Accessory dwelling units must meet all of the standards of Chapter 16.20 ECDC except as specifically provided in this section. B. Number of Units. A principal dwelling unit may have two accessory dwelling units in the following configurations: one attached and one detached accessory dwelling units, two attached accessory dwelling units, or two detached accessory dwelling units. C. Table of ADU development standards. W Sub District Maximum ADU Minimum Maximum DADU Minimum Parking Gross Floor Area (Sq. Ft. DADU Rear Hei h Spaces Setback',' RS-20 1,200 25' 24' 0 RS-12 1,200 25' 24' 0 RS-10 1,200 20' 24' 0 RS-8 11000 1013 24' 0 RS 11000 10i3 24' 0 1 INo rear Setbacks are required for detached accessory dwelling units from the rear lot line if that lot line abuts a public alley, regardless of detached accessory dwelling unit size. 2 Standard street and side setbacks per ECDC 16.20.030 apply. 3 The normally required rear setback may be reduced to a minimum of five feet for a detached accessory dwelling units 15' in height or less. 14 Commented [MC7]: Moving and updating ADU Is currently in ECDC 20.21. ADUs are only allowed in si family (RS) zones so it is reasonable to include the A related standards in the IRS zoning chapter. At the si time, the standards are being updated to be consist, HB 1337 and best practices. Commented [RH8]: HB 1337 will require gross flc up to 1,000sf. Gross floor area is defined by RCW 36 as "the interior habitable area of a dwelling unit ind basements and attics but not including a garage or a structure." Commented [MC9]: Consistent with HB 1337 Packet Pg. 25 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 D. Types of Building. A manufactured or modular dwelling unit may be used as an accessory dwelling unit. Detached accessory dwelling units are allowed to be created in existing legally permitted buildings, including detached garages. Legal nonconforming buildings converted for use as an accessory dwelling unit must meet the requirements of 17.40.020(D). E. Driveways. Access to the principal unit and any residential units shall comply with city codes and policies as established by ECDC Title 18. d. Utilities and Services. The Public Works Department considers Accessory Dwelling Units dependent upon the principal unit and within the capacity of existing infrastructure of the primary unit. 1. Utilities. All new or extended utilities must be undergrounded in accordance with ECDC 18.05.010. 2. Utility Access. Occupants of Accessory Dwelling Units and the primary unit must have unrestricted access to utility controls for systems (Including water, electricity, and gas) in each respective unit or in a common area. 3. Water Meter. Only one water service and meter is allowed per parcel to serve the principal unit and each accessory dwelling unit. Private submetering on the property is allowed, but the City is not involved with installing or reading the submeter. 4. Sewer. Only one sewer lateral is allowed per parcel to serve the principal unit and each accessory dwelling unit. Separate connections to the main trunk line will not be permitted. �5. Septic System. 5. Mailboxes. Additional mailboxes may be added for each permitted unit, as approved by the Post Office. G. Health and Safety. Accessory dwelling units must comply with all the applicable requirements of the current building codes adopted by ECDC Title 19 and must comply in all respects with the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Accessory dwelling units will be required to have separate ingress/egress from the principal dwelling unit. H. Previously approved accessory dwelling units. ADUs that were previously approved by the City of Edmonds may continue and are not subject to the standards of this subsection. If expansion 15 Commented [HR10]: Language TBD by Public We Department. Per State requirements, cities may pro ADUs on properties not served by sewers. Commented [RH11]: Under review with City of E Public Works Department, Utility Billing, and olymp Water and Sewer District Packet Pg. 26 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 or modification to an approved unit is proposed, the ADU must come into full compliance with the requirements of this section. 16.20.060 16.20.050 Site development standards - Accessory buildings. A. General. Accessory buildings and structures shall meet all of the standards of ECDC 16.20.030 except as specifically provided in this section. B. Height. Height shall be limited to 15 feet, except for amateur radio transmitting antennas and their supporting structures. Garages or other accessory buildings attached by a breezeway, hallway, or other similar connection to the main building which results in a separation exceeding 10 feet in length may not exceed the 15-foot height limit. The separation shall be determined by the minimum distance between the outside walls of the main building and accessory building, exclusive of the connecting structure. C. Rear Setbacks. The normally required rear setback maybe reduced to a minimum of five feet for accessory buildings covering less than 600 square feet of the site. D. Satellite Television Antenna. A satellite television antenna which measures greater than one meter or 1.1 yards in diameter shall comply with the following regulations: 1. General. Satellite television antennas must be installed and maintained in compliance with the Uniform Building and Electrical Codes as the same exist or are hereafter amended. A building permit shall be required in order to install any such device. 2. Setbacks. In all zones subject to the provisions contained herein, a satellite television antenna shall be located only in the rear yard of any lot. In the event that no usable satellite signal can be obtained in the rear lot location or in the event that no rear lot exists as in the case of a corner lot, satellite television antennas shall then be located in the side yard. In the event that a usable satellite signal cannot be obtained in either the rear or side yard, then a roof -mounted location may be approved by the staff, provided, however, that any roof -mounted satellite antenna shall be in a color calculated to blend in with existing roof materials and, in the case of a parabolic, spherical or dish antenna, shall not exceed nine feet in diameter unless otherwise provided for by this section. In no event shall any roof- 16 Packet Pg. 27 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 mounted satellite television antenna exceed the maximum height limitations established by this section. 3. Aesthetic. Satellite television antennas shall be finished in a nongarish, nonreflective color and surface which shall blend into their surroundings. In the case of a parabolic, spherical or dish antenna, said antenna shall be of a mesh construction. No commercial advertising of any kind shall be displayed on the satellite television antenna. 4. Size and Height. Maximum size for a ground -mounted parabolic, spherical or dish antenna shall be 12 feet in diameter. No ground -mounted antenna shall be greater than 15 feet in height unless otherwise approved for waiver as herein provided. The height of roof - mounted satellite television antennas shall not exceed the lesser of the height of the antenna when mounted on a standard base provided by the manufacturer or installer for ordinary operation of the antenna or the height limitation provided by the zoning code. 5. Number. Only one satellite television antenna shall be permitted on any residential lot or parcel of land. In no case shall a satellite television antenna be permitted to be placed on wheels or attached to a portable device for the purpose of relocating the entire antenna on the property in order to circumvent the intentions of this section. E. Amateur Radio Antennas. 1. The following applications for the following approvals shall be processed as a Type II development project permit application (see Chapter 20.01 ECDC): a. Requests to utilize an amateur radio antenna dish which measures greater than one meter or 1.1 yards in diameter; b. Requests to utilize an antenna which: i. Would be greater than 12 feet in height above the principal building on a site. The height of the antenna shall be determined by reference to the highest point of the roof of the principal building, exclusive of the chimney or other roof -mounted equipment. The request to locate a 12-foot antenna on a building is limited to buildings whose height conforms to the highest limit of the zone in which the building is located. ii. Would exceed the height limit of the zone when mounted on the ground or on any accessory structure (see subsection (E)(2)(d) of this section). 17 Packet Pg. 28 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.8 2. The application shall comply with the following regulations: a. Definition. "Amateur radio antenna" means an antenna, or any combination of a mast or tower plus an attached or mounted antenna, which transmits noncommercial communication signals and is utilized by an operator licensed by the Federal Communications Commission. Guy wires for amateur radio antennas are considered part of the structure for the purpose of meeting development standards. b. General. Amateur radio antennas must be installed and maintained in compliance with the Uniform Building and Electrical Codes, as the same exist or are hereafter amended. A building permit shall be required to install an amateur radio antenna. c. Location. Amateur radio antennas may be ground- or roof -mounted, however, these devices shall: i. Be located and constructed in such a manner as to reasonably ensure that, in its fully extended position, it will not fall in or onto adjoining properties; ii. Not be located within any required setback area; and iii. Be retracted in inclement weather posing a hazard to the antenna. d. Height. The height of a ground -mounted tower or roof -top antenna may not exceed the greater of the height limit applicable to the zone or 65 feet when extended by a telescoping or crank -up mechanism unless an applicant obtains a waiver (see subsection (F) of this section). i. Only telescoping towers may exceed the height limits established by subsection (E)(1)(b) of this section. Such towers shall comply with the height limit within the applicable zone and may only exceed the height limit of the applicable zone and/or 65-foot height limit when extended and operating and if a waiver has been granted. ii. An antenna located on a nonconforming building or structure which exceeds the height limit of the zone in which it is located shall be limited to height limit of the zone plus 12 feet. 18 Packet Pg. 29 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.8 e. Aesthetic. To the extent technically feasible and in compliance with safety regulations, specific paint colors may be required to allow the tower to blend better with its setting. F. Technological Impracticality - Request for Waiver. 1. The owner, licensee or adjacent property owner may apply for a waiver if: a. Strict application of the provisions of this zoning code would make it impossible for the owner of a satellite television antenna to receive a usable satellite signal; b. Strict application of the provisions of this zoning code would make it impossible for the holder of any amateur radio license to enjoy the full benefits of an FCC license or FCC protected right; or c. An adjacent property owner or holder of an FCC license or right believes that alternatives exist which are less burdensome to adjacent property owners. 2. The request for waiver shall be reviewed by the hearing examiner as a Type III -A decision and may be granted upon a finding that one of the following sets of criteria have been met: a. Technological Impracticality. i. Actual compliance with the existing provisions of the city's zoning ordinance would prevent the satellite television antenna from receiving a usable satellite signal or prevent an individual from exercising the rights granted to him or her by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) by license, law or FCC regulation; or ii. The alternatives proposed by the property owner or licensee constitute the minimum necessary to permit acquisition of a usable satellite signal by a satellite television antenna or to exercise the rights granted pursuant to a valid FCC license, law or FCC regulation. b. Less Burdensome Alternatives. The hearing examiner is also authorized to consider the application of adjacent property owners for a waiver consistent with the provisions of subsection (F)(1)(c) of this section without the requirement of a finding that a usable satellite signal cannot be acquired when the applicant or adjacent property owner(s) 19 Packet Pg. 30 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 establish that the alternatives proposed by the applicant are less burdensome to the adjacent property owners than the requirements which would otherwise be imposed under this section. For example, adjacent property owners may request alternative or additional screening or the relocation of the antenna on the licensee's property. In the interactive process described in subsection (F)(3) of this section, the hearing examiner shall attempt to balance the impact of the tower on the views of adjacent properties, as well as the impacts of alternative screening and relocation in order to equitably distribute any negative impacts among the neighbors while imposing reasonable conditions on the antenna, its location and screening that do not impair the rights granted by the FCC to the licensee. 3. The process shall be an interactive one in which the hearing examiner works with the licensee to craft conditions which place the minimum possible burden on adjacent property owners while permitting the owner of the satellite antenna or holder of an amateur radio license to fully exercise the rights which he or she has been granted by federal law. For example, the number of antennas and size of the array shall be no greater than that necessary to enjoy full use of the FCC license. Conditions may include but are not limited to requirements for screening and landscaping, review of the color, reflectivity and mass of the proposed satellite television antenna or amateur radio facilities, and other reasonable restrictions. Any restriction shall be consistent with the intent of the city council that a waiver to the antenna owner be granted only when necessary to permit the satellite television antenna to acquire usable satellite signal or to allow the licensee to exercise the rights granted by Federal Communications Commission license after consideration of aesthetic harmony of the community. The process employed should involve the interaction of the licensee or owner and the neighborhood. Certain issues have been preempted by federal law and shall not be considered by the hearing examiner. Such issues include, but are not limited to, the impacts of electromagnetic radiation, the potential interference of the amateur radio facility with electronic devices in the neighborhood and any other matter preempted by federal law or regulation. Impact on view and on the values of neighboring properties may be considered in imposing reasonable conditions but shall not be a basis for denial of a permit to construct the antenna. 4. The application fee and notification for consideration of the waiver by an owner of a satellite television antenna shall be the same as that provided for processing a variance. No fee shall be charged to the holder of a valid FCC amateur radio license. 20 Packet Pg. 31 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 5. In the event that an applicant for waiver is also obligated to undergo architectural design review, the architectural design board shall defer any issues relating to the antenna and/or other amateur radio equipment to the hearing examiner. The hearing examiner may, at his or her discretion, request the architectural design board review and comment regarding required screening and landscaping and its integration into sight and landscaping plans. No additional fee shall be required of the applicant upon such referral. G. The provisions of subsections (D), (E) and (F) of this section shall be interpreted in accordance with the regulations of the Federal Communications Commission including but not limited to PRE-1. In the event of ambiguity or conflict with any of the apparent provisions of this section, the provisions of federal regulations shall control. [Ord. 3736 §§ 8, 9, 2009; Ord. 3728 § 3, 2009; Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005]. 117I.40.020 Nonconforming building and/or structure. A. Definition. A nonconforming building is one which once met bulk zoning standards and the site development standards applicable to its construction, but which no longer conforms to such standards due to the enactment or amendment of the zoning ordinance of the city of Edmonds or the application of such ordinance in the case of a structure annexed to the city. Subject to the other provisions of this section, an accessory building that is not an accessory dwelling unit shall be presumptively nonconforming if photographic or other substantial evidence conclusively demonstrates that the accessory building existed on or before January 1, 1981. In the case of a property that was annexed afterjanuary 1, 1981, then the date shall be that of the effective date of the annexation of the city of Edmonds. Such presumption may be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence. B. Continuation. A nonconforming building or structure may be maintained and continued, unless required to be abated elsewhere in this chapter or section, but it may not be changed or altered in any manner which increases the degree of nonconformity of the building except as expressly provided in subsections (C) through-(J)@ of this section. C. Historic Buildings and Structures. Nothing in this section shall prevent the full restoration by reconstruction of a building or structure which is either listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the Washington State Register of Historic Places, the Washington State Cultural Resource Inventory, or the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, or is listed in a council - approved historical survey meeting the standards of the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. "Restoration" means reconstruction of the historic building or structure 21 Commented [HR12]: Per HB 1337, a city or a cou allow detached accessory dwelling units to be convE from existing structures, including but not limited tc detached garages, even if they violate current code requirements for setbacks or lot coverage Packet Pg. 32 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 with as nearly the same visual design appearance and materials as is consistent with full compliance with the State Building Code and consistent with the requirements of Chapter 20.45 ECDC, Edmonds Register of Historic Places. The reconstruction of all such historic buildings and structures shall comply with the life safety provisions of the State Building Code. D. Maintenance and Alterations. 1. Ordinary maintenance and repair of a nonconforming building or structure shall be permitted. 2. Solar Energy Installations on Buildings That Exceed Existing Height Limits. A rooftop solar energy installation mounted on a nonconforming building that exceeds the existing height limit may be approved as a Type II staff decision if: a. The installation exceeds the existing roof height by not more than 36 inches. b. The installation is designed and located in such away as to provide reasonable solar access while limiting visual impacts on surrounding properties. 3. Alterations which otherwise conform to the provisions of the zoning ordinance, its site development and bulk standards, and which do not expand any nonconforming aspect of the building, shall be permitted. 4. In an effort to provide modular relief, minor architectural improvements in commercial and multifamily zones may encroach into the nonconforming setback adjacent to an access easement or public right-of-way not more than 30 inches. Minor architectural improvements may also be permitted in nonconforming side or rear yard setbacks only if they intrude not more than 30 inches nor one-half of the distance to the property line, whichever is less. "Minor architectural improvements" are defined as and limited to bay windows, eaves, chimneys and architectural detail such as cornices, medallions and decorative trim. Such improvements shall be required to obtain architectural design review. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to exempt such improvements in compliance with the State Building and Fire Codes. 5. Alterations required by law or the order of a public agency in order to meet health and safety regulations shall be permitted. E. Relocation. Should a nonconforming building or structure be moved horizontally for any reason for any distance, it shall thereafter come into conformance with the setback and lot 22 Packet Pg. 33 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 coverage requirements for the zone in which it is located. Provided, however, that a building or structure may be moved on the same site without full compliance if the movement reduces the degree of nonconformity of the building or structure. Movement alone of a nonconforming building or structure to lessen an aspect of its nonconformity shall not require the owner thereof to bring the building or structure into compliance with other bulk or site development standards of the city applicable to the building or structure. F. Restoration. 1. If a nonconforming building or structure is destroyed or is damaged in an amount equal to 75 percent or more of its replacement cost at the time of destruction, said building shall not be reconstructed except in full conformance with the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Determination of replacement costs and the level of destruction shall be made by the building official and shall be appealable as a Type II staff decision under the provisions of Chapter 20.06 ECDC. Damage of less than 75 percent of replacement costs may be repaired, and the building returned to its former size, shape and lot location as existed before the damage occurred, if, but only if, such repair is initiated by the filing of an application for a building permit which vests as provided in ECDC 19.00.025(G) et seq. within 18 months of the date such damage occurred. The director may grant a one-time extension of up to 180 days if a written extension request has been received from the applicant prior to the expiration of the initial 18 months. 2. Residential Buildings. Existing nonconforming buildings in use solely for residential purposes, or structures attendant to such residential use, may be reconstructed without regard to the limitations of subsections IEl and a of this section, if, but only if, the following conditions are met: a. If a nonconforming multifamily residential building or a mixed use building containing multiple residential units is damaged in excess of 75 percent of its replacement cost at the time of destruction, the building may be restored to the same density, height, setbacks or coverage as existing before the destruction or damage occurred if, but only if, an application for a building permit which vests as provided in ECDC 19.00.025(G) et seq. is filed within 18 months of the date the damage occurred. The director may grant a one-time extension of up to 180 days if a written extension request has been received from the applicant prior to the expiration of the initial 18 months. 23 Packet Pg. 34 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 b. All provisions of the State Building and Electrical Codes can be complied with entirely on the site. No nonconforming residential building may be remodeled or reconstructed if, by so doing, the full use under state law or city ordinance of a conforming neighboring lot or building would be limited by such remodel or reconstruction. c. These provisions shall apply only to the primary residential use on site and shall not apply to nonconforming accessory buildings or structures. d. A nonconforming residential single-family building maybe rebuilt within the defined building envelope if it is rebuilt with materials and design which are substantially similar to the original style and structure after complying with current codes. Substantial compliance shall be determined by the city as a Type II staff decision. The decision of the hearing examiner shall be final and appealable only as provided in ECDC 20.06.150. 3. The right of restoration shall not apply if: a. The building or structure was damaged or destroyed due to the unlawful act of the owner or the owner's agent; b. The building is damaged or destroyed due to the ongoing neglect or gross negligence of the owner or owner's agents; or c. The building was demolished for the purpose of redevelopment. G. Accessory Dwelling Units. A preexisting nonconforming detached accessory building may be converted into an accessory dwelling unit provided it meets the standards in ECDC 16.20.050(F) and G . -Minor exterior modifications required for conversion into conditioned space or other minor exterior modifications required by the International Residential Code adopted by ECDC Title 19 may be permitted. 'Minor exterior modifications' include, but are not limited to, egress windows, exhaust vents, and other minor modifications that are required for health and safety as determined by the Building Official. G- H. Subject to the other provisions of this section, an accessory building that is not an accessory dwelling unit shall be presumptively nonconforming if photographic or other substantial evidence conclusively demonstrates that the accessory building existed on or before January 1, 1981. In the case of a property that was annexed after January 1, 1981, then the date 24 Packet Pg. 35 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 shall be that of the effective date of the annexation to the city of Edmonds. Such presumption may be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence. k-l. BD5 Zone. The BIDS zone was created in part to encourage the adoption and reuse of existing residential structures for live/work and commercial use as set forth in ECDC 16.43.030(B)(5). In the BIDS zone, conforming and nonconforming buildings may be converted to commercial or other uses permitted by ECDC 16.43.020 without being required to come into compliance with the ground floor elevation requirements of ECDC 16.43.030(B). 1—LThe antenna and related equipment of a nonconforming wireless communication facility may be completely replaced with a new antenna and related equipment; provided, that, upon replacement, the applicant shall use the best available methods and materials to enhance the appearance of the antenna and related equipment and/or screen it from view in a manner that improves the visual impact or the conspicuity of the nonconformity. [Ord. 4154 § 6 (Att. D), 2019; Ord. 4151 § 2 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3961 § 3, 2014; Ord. 3866 § 2, 2011; Ord. 3781 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 §§ 13, 14, 2009; Ord. 3696 § 1, 2008]. 25 Commented [MC13]: Old code that is no longer part of this update. Packet Pg. 36 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 17.50.020 Parking space requirements. [Refer to ECDC 17.50.010(C) and 17.50.070 for standards relating to the downtown business area.] A. Residential. 1. Single-family and multifamily. a. Single-family dwellings: two spaces per principal dwelling unit, except: b. Multiple residential according to the following table: Required parking Type of multiple spaces per dwelling dwelling unit unit Studio 1.2 1 bedroom 1.5 2 bedrooms 1.8 3 or more 2.0 bedrooms 2. Boarding house: one space per bed. 3. Rest home, nursing home, convalescent home, residential social welfare facilities: one space per three beds. B. Business. 26 Packet Pg. 37 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 1. Retail stores, including art galleries, convenience stores, department stores, discount stores, drug stores, grocery stores, supermarkets: one space per 300 square feet; 2. Furniture, appliances, and hardware stores: one space per 600 square feet; 3. Services uses, including barber shops, beauty shops, dry cleaners, laundries, repair shops: one space per 600 square feet; 4. Medical, dental and veterinarian offices, banks and clinics: one space per 200 square feet; 5. Business and professional offices with on -site customer service: one space per 400 square feet; 6. Offices not providing on -site customer service: one space per 800 square feet; 7. Bowling alley: four spaces per bowling lane; 8. Commercial recreation: one space per 500 square feet, or one space for each customer allowed by the maximum permitted occupant load; 9. Car repair, commercial garage: one space per 200 square feet; 10. Drive-in restaurants, automobile service station, car dealer, used car lot: one space per 500 square feet of lot area; 11. Restaurant, tavern, cocktail lounge: if less than 4,000 square feet floor area, one per 200 square feet gross floor area; if over 4,000 square feet floor area, 20 plus one per 100 square feet gross floor area in excess of 4,000 square feet; 12. Plant nurseries (outdoor retail area): one space per five square feet of outdoor retail area; 13. Motels and hotels: one space per room or unit; 14. Retail warehouse, building materials yard: one space per 1,000 square feet of lot area or one per three employees; 15. Manufacturing, laboratories, printing, research, automobile wrecking yards, kennels: one space per two employees on largest shift; 27 Packet Pg. 38 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 16. Mortuary: one space per four fixed seats or per 400 square feet of assembly area, whichever is greater; 17. Marina: to be determined by the hearing examiner, using information provided by the applicant, and the following criteria: a. The type of storage facility (moorage, dry storage, trailer parking) and intended use (sailboats, fishing boats, leisure boats), b. The need to accommodate overflow peak parking demand from other uses accessory to the marina, c. The availability and use of public transit; 18. Storage warehouse: one space per employee; 19. Wholesale warehouse: one space per employee; 20. Adult retail store: one space per 300 square feet; 21. Sexually oriented business (except adult retail store): one space for each customer allowed by the maximum permitted occupant load. C. Community Facilities. 1. Outdoor places of public assembly, including stadiums and arenas: one space per eight fixed seats, or per 100 square feet of assembly area, whichever is greater; 2. Theaters: one space per five seats; 3. Indoor places of public assembly, including churches, auditoriums: one space per four seats or one space per 40 square feet of assembly area, whichever is greater; 4. Elementary schools, junior high schools, boarding schools (elementary through senior high), residential colleges and universities: six spaces per classroom, or one space per daytime employee, whichever is greater; 5. Nonresidential colleges and universities: one space per daytime employee; 6. High schools (senior): one space per daytime employee; 7. Museums, libraries, art galleries: one space per 250 square feet; 28 Packet Pg. 39 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.8 8. Day-care centers and preschools: one space per 300 square feet, or one per employee, plus one per five students, whichever is larger; 9. Hospitals: three spaces per bed; 10. Maintenance yard (public or public utility): one space per two employees. D. Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Infrastructure Parking Standards. See Chapter 17.115 ECDC for parking standards relating to electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure. [Ord. 4251 § 2 (Exh. A), 2022; Ord. 3496 § 2, 2004]. 20.01.003 Permit type and decision framework. A. Permit Types. TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE III - B TYPE IV TYPE V Zoning Accesser Contingent Essential Site specific complianc dwelling it critical area public rezone e letter review facilities Lot line Formal Shoreline Technological Development Zoning text adjustment interpretatio substantial impracticality agreements amendment; n of the text development waiver for area -wide of the ECDC permit, amateur zoning map bythe where public radio amendments director hearing not antennas required per ECDC 24.80.100 29 Commented [MC14]: ADUs will no longer requirc conditional use permit but rather a building permit to a single family residence. Packet Pg. 40 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.8 30 Commented [MC15]: Moved to ECDC 16.20 and consistent with FIB 1337 and best practices 00 CD CD CD A N O N Q O R Q O U r c a> 3 0 O d Q Packet Pg. 41 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE - 1337 v.8 31 Packet Pg. 42 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE -1337 v.8 32 Packet Pg. 43 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE -1337 v.8 33 Packet Pg. 44 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.8 20.35.020 *pplicability.� A. Planned residential developments (PRDs) may be located in any residential zone of the city Uses permitted in the PRD shall be governed by the use regulations of the underlying zoning classification. 1. PRDs in single-family zones shall be comprised of detached dwelling units on individual lots, and any appurtenant common open space, recreational facilities or other areas or facilities. a. The PRD process is not available to single-family lots that are incapable of further subdivision. b. The PRD process shall not be used to reduce any bulk or performance standard not specifically referenced herein. Bulk standards not referenced may be varied only in accordance with Chapter 20.85 ECDC, Variances, or through the modification provision provided through the subdivision process as outlined in Chapter 20.75 ECDC. B. Property included in a PRD application must be under the ownership of the applicant, or the applicant must be authorized pursuant to a durable power of attorney or other binding contractual authorization in a form which may be recorded in the land records of Snohomish County to process the application on behalf of all other owners. 34 Commented [MCI 6]: The PRD code currently prc ADUs. That restriction is proposed to be eliminated PRD is just another type of single family residential subdivision. As long as the PRD lot can meet the AD requirements proposed in ECDC 16.20.050, it could ADU. Packet Pg. 45 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 C. Accessory dwelling units and " Home use occupations restricted by ECDC 20.20.010(B) 01 5(D) shall not be permitted within a PRD. [ord. 3455 § 1, 20031. 21.05.015 Accessory dwelling unit,, attached An att child accessory dwelling unit is a sstructure attached- to or constructed ,.,,thin a ngle- famii dWelIiRg (ADU) is a subordinate dwelling unit added to, created within, or detached from a principal dwelling unit, providing independent living facilities that include permanent provisions for living sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation. Accessory dwelling unit does not include recreational vehicles or mobile homes. ^high has; ii"in^ f,^iitios; for nno inai.,ia,,,i nr ngle tarn'" herne [Ord. 3294 § 2, 2000]. 21.30.010 Family. A. Family means individuals related or unrelated by genetics, adoption, or marriage living in a dwelling unit. B. The term "family" shall include: 1. State licensed adult family homes required to be recognized as residential use pursuant to Chapter 70.128 RCW; 2. State licensed foster family homes and group care facilities as defined in RCW 74.15.180, subject to the exclusion of subsection u of this section; 3. Group homes for the disabled required to be accommodated as residential uses pursuant to the Fair Housing Act amendments as the same exists or is hereafter amended. C. The term "family" shall exclude individuals residing in halfway houses, crisis residential centers as defined in RCW 74.15.020(1)(c), group homes licensed forjuvenile offenders, or other facilities, whether or not licensed by the state, where individuals are incarcerated or otherwise required to reside pursuant to court order under the supervision of paid staff and personnel. 35 Packet Pg. 46 8.A.a DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.8 D. E—Nothing herein shall be interpreted to limit normal hosting activities associated with residential use. [Ord. 4260 § 4 (Exh. A), 2022; Ord. 3571 § 1, 2005; Ord. 3184 § 1, 1998]. 21.35.013 Gross Floor Area. An interior habitable area of an accessory dwelling unit, including basements and attics but not including unconditioned space, such as a garage or non -habitable accessory structures. 21.80.075 Principal dwelling unit Primary housing unit located on the same lot as an accessory dwelling unit. 21.90.080 Single-family dwelling (unit). Single-family dwelling (and single-family dwelling unit) means a detached building configured as described herein and occupied or intended to be occupied by one family, limited to one per lot. A single-family dwelling shall be limited to one mailbox, electric meter, gas meter, and water meter. It will also have common access to and common use of all living, kitchen, and eating areas within the dwelling unit. .n additienal ^ ailbAx can he added to the 'At 12. MMWMMI- M"INryMsMLbT .1.�yI:11i1.Y13!J� 1 36 Commented [RH17]: Consistent with RCW 36.70, Commented [RH18]: Consistent with RCW 36.70, 00 0 0 0 A N O N Q O R M Q O O U w. M c d 3 G Packet Pg. 47 8.A.b Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2024 8:06 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-28 09:05 PM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-28 09:05 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/28/2024 11:05:45 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value We drove to the city hall this evening hoping to hear the presentation and the building was dark with no one around! We are curious about the DADU proposed requirement to provide an EV hook up. Will the hook up be standard as Not All EV vehicles can use the same charging hookups!! Also, with new housing in Edmonds that has been constructed, many have less textarea-1700597715163-0than 25 feet setbacks. Please reduce the 25 ft rear requirement to 10 feet. We are in the Edmonds R12 zone and back up to another housing development called Meadowmere in Lynnwood. There is no ally between our properties. No right of way either. Our rear fence line has been the same for30 years. There is no need to waste 15-20 ft from the rear property line. Please reduce the rear setback to 10 feet or less to match the side setback. Thank you. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20136002&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 48 8.A.b Haas, Rose From: Haas, Rose Sent: Friday, March 1, 2024 12:51 PM To: John Weiss Subject: RE: Planning Board Meeting Feb 28 Thank you for your comments. I will pass them onto the Planning Board for their consideration. HB 1337 is a state mandate, and all of its requirements must be met. City staff believes that going above and beyond the requirements of HB1337 is the equitable best choice for the City of Edmonds. City staff also believes that the market should dictate parking space requirements for ADU additions and requiring a 3rd parking space may limit a homeowner's ability provide an ADU. City staff are not legislators and ultimately policy recommendations will be made by the Planning Board to City Council, who will make the final policy decision. Rose Haas I Planner City Hall 1 121 5th Ave N I Edmonds WA 98020 425.771.0220 ext. 1239 (office) 1425.758.1058 (mobile) rose.haas@edmondswa.gov www.edmondswa.gov The Permit Center is open M-F 8:OOam to 4:30pm for Telephone and Digital access. In -Person walk-in service is currently available M-F 8:30am-12:OOpm and 1:OOpm-2:OOpm -----Original Message ----- From: John Weiss <j rweiss98020@comcast. net> Sent: Thursday, February 29, 2024 5:49 PM To: Haas, Rose <rose.haas@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Re: Planning Board Meeting Feb 28 Please ensure all functions are operational for Zoom participants in the future, and ensure all chat and Q&A inputs are recorded, saved, and responded to. I didn't save a copy, of the Q&A, but below is what I can remember: Many of your proposals state "required by 1337". Is that a global requirement, or can the city restrict application as long as SOME of the ADUs meet the requirement. e.g., are 2 ADUs per property required to be allowed in all cases? Allowing ADUs for short-term rentals (AirBnB and similar) goes directly counter to the purpose of 1337 - to increase availability of "affordable housing". A vacation rental is NOT affordable housing, and should be discouraged in residential areas of Edmonds whenever possible. Why is the city going beyond the requirements of 1337? The city is currently in the process of REDUCING on -street (bike lane project 9th Ave S, Walnut, Bowdoin, etc) AND off- street (Edmonds Packet Pg. 49 8.A.b Commons) parking availability throughout the city. Community Transit has also reduced its route structure within the city (e.g., route that formerly along 9th Ave S, Walnut, 96th Ave W), making many areas a much farther walk to a bus stop. How can it justify exemptions for parking spots for ADUs or any other new construction? Exemptions for EV charging accommodations for parking spots in new construction goes counter to the Governor's push for EVs. How can the city justify exemptions? On 02/29/24 15:29, Haas, Rose wrote: > Mr. Weiss, > I apologize for missing your questions/ comments last night. I cannot retrieve the comments from the Q&A box from last night's meeting. If you respond to this message with your questions and comments, I would be happy to answer them and pass your comments onto the Planning Board. > Thank you, > Rose Haas I Planner > City Hall 1 121 5th Ave N I Edmonds WA 98020 > 425.771.0220 ext. 1239 (office) 1425.758.1058 (mobile) > rose.haas@edmondswa.gov www.edmondswa.gov > The Permit Center is open M-F 8:OOam to 4:30pm for Telephone and Digital access. > In -Person walk-in service is currently available M-F 8:30am-12:OOpm > and 1:OOpm-2:OOpm > -----Original Message----- * From: John Weiss <j rweiss98020@comcast. net> > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2024 7:59 PM > To: Haas, Rose <rose.haas@edmondswa.gov> > Subject: Planning Board Meeting Feb 28 > Importance: High > I have logged in twice, and do not have the capability to chat, see > other participants, or make a comment. > I have entered several questions in the Q&A box, which is the only > other function that is enabled. > Please answer my questions via e-mail or phone. > John Weiss >10139thAve S > 206-484-0372 Packet Pg. 50 8.A.b Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, March 3, 2024 5:15 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-03-03 06:14 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-03-03 06:14 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/3/2024 8:14:53 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Thank you for providing a forum to discuss development proposals that fundamentally change our neighborhoods and town. I think that everyone (almost) can agree that home prices are too high and that there is a housing shortage that drives much of the unaffordability. In that spirit, I welcome exploring zoning and building regulation ideas. Some of the following issues require more in-depth review: — Will we permit 24 foot homes anywhere on a property, even when the new home blocks neighbors views and sunlight? — Does the lack of total home square footage (current home of X square feet + textarea-1700597715163-01,000 square feet for each of the 2 new DADU's) size create more run-off and block out daylight from gardens — public and private? — What keeps a DADU from being another garage? — Are all areas of Edmonds appropriate for DADU's — especially in neighborhoods with small lots that already have crowded housing? — How do we incentivize developers to build townhouses that people can buy instead of renting? - How will the City of Edmonds defend preferential treatment for homeowners with an HOA restricting DADU's? There are certainly more creative ideas to build housing than simply stating: No rules apply. Developers have at it. Hank Turner Edmonds To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20141067&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 51 8.A.b Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, March 4, 2024 9:25 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-03-04 10:24 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-03-0410:24 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/4/2024 12:24:40 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value For comparing accessory units to apartments, has the City of Edmonds texta rea-1700597715163-0 confirmed that 2 br apartments in Western Washington actually average 1,200 sf? I work in the industry and 1,200 sf would be considered very large for a new 2 br apartment in this area. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20142038&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 52 8.A.b Haas, Rose From: Al Snapp <AI.Snapp@lakesideschool.org> Sent: Monday, March 4, 2024 12:57 PM To: Planning Cc: Eck, Chris; Chen, Will; Tibbott, Neil; Olson, Vivian; Paine, Susan; Nand, Jenna; Dotsch, Michelle Subject: planning for growth Some people who received this message don't often get email from al.snapp@lakesideschool.org. Learn why this is important I have been following presentations to the city council concerning the best way to alter current code to incorporate ADU and DADU's to better achieve necessary housing growth. I am writing to support this planning and to raise a strong caution. Recently at a meeting Susan McLaughlin, city planner, shared that the Unocal property next to the Edmonds Marsh was designated as a potential site for residential housing. There have been many reports previously about why that is a very poor use of the Unocal property. It would be very unsuitable in several ways for residences and very much a poor use of the property for the city compared with acquiring and using the Unocal site to expand the Marsh and in the process revive a true estuary for the benefit of salmon habitat restoration and stormwater handling. So again, I heartily support using other means to expand housing in Edmonds including maximizing thoughtful guidelines for incorporating ADU's and DADU's into the city code. Thanks for the great efforts to support best interest of the broad community of Edmonds residents. Al Snapp Edmonds resident Packet Pg. 53 8.A.b Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, March 4, 2024 6:11 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-03-04 07:10 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-03-04 07:10 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/4/2024 9:10:57 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0 Please do not ease the parking spaces per dwelling requirement. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20141247&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 54 8.A.b Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2024 10:59 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-03-10 10:58 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-03-10 10:58 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/10/2024 1:58:30 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I support the expansion of HB1337. 1 support the flexibility to build new ADUs or convert existing structures in order to provide additional income opportunities, increase the availability of affordable housing, and support textarea-1700597715163-0 aging in place. As the parent of an adult child with MS this would allow me to have my daughter close to home while still allowing her the independance of her own living space. Martha Karl 830 Olympic Ave. Edmonds WA 98020 To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20152894&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 55 8.A.b Haas, Rose From: Dawn Malkowski <dmmalkowski@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2024 1:25 PM To: Planning Subject: ADU's, DADU's Some people who received this message don't often get email from dmmalkowski@gmail.com. Learn why this is important March 13, 2024 Dear Planning Board Members, I'm writing to let you know how concerned I am, as well as many, many of our citizens are, about the your plans to alter the very fabric of our town, and what makes it such a fabulous place to live. I have attended several of the Board meetings on these housing changes, and I urge you to read and reconsider some of these changes. The current information that I have received from attending these meetings is 224 pages, not including dozens and dozens of emails that we were given to read. If these are changes are implemented, we can all kiss this lovely town good-bye. My husband and I moved here 11 years ago from downtown Kirkland, where we lived in the downtown area for 10 years. Kirkland's planning Director decided they should increase density in downtown Kirkland, along with height limits. Kirkland is similar to Edmonds in that they are a waterfront (lake) community with the small-town feel. They went up 5 plus stories, thinking that people living downtown without ample or sufficient parking, would forgo their cars and use mass transit. That did not happen. What did happen was a traffic nightmare. The infrastructure was unable to handle the thousands of people that moved into these places with their cars. Traffic and parking became a very unpleasant experience. Due to the fact that like Kirkland, Edmonds is pretty much, a built -out city, and it will be difficult to incorporate these massive changes. These ideas might work well in an area that is not yet established and built out. This brings me to another problem. You are discussing eliminating the need for parking for the ADU's and DADU's. I do not want my town to look like West Seattle, Ballard, or the Wedgewood neighborhoods. If the members haven't been to those areas recently, I urge you all to take a field trip to visit those neighborhood streets, and see what a trashy, congested mess they are. No parking requirements is a seriously bad idea. Accessory, by definition means, "a thing of secondary or lesser importance, an object or device that is not essential in itself, but adds beauty, convenience, or effectiveness of or to something else". The ADU's and DADU's that are being proposed, are too large to be an accessory unit. They are in and of themselves, full size homes using the streets as permanent parking places! 1200 square feet with a 24-foot height is not an accessory unit. It's a full-size home. I'm a baby boomer and I grew up in a home smaller than that. It was perfectly fine. Just imagine, worst case scenario, everyone in Edmonds builds another home on their property, and our population essentially doubles. That's 85,516 people. Worst case scenario, but, it's not inconceivable. How many cars does that add? Lots. Can our sewer and water systems handle that? I think not. What about pollution? It will dramatically increase. For example, car tire residue, "6PPD-quinone", running off the roads into the sound is toxic to Coho salmon, Chinook salmon, and Steelhead. 40% of Coho salmon deaths in Puget Sound have been attributed to the toxic tire runoff. It's at unhealthy levels now, imagine what will happen if we continue to increase density, especially in the bowl area. Adding to that problem of runoff, is the removal of trees, grass, shrubbery, all things green and permeable surfaces to build these structures. This will only add to toxic water runoff into the sound. Without permeable surfaces, i.e., grass, dirt, tree roots, all plant roots, to absorb and filter the water runoff, we will have more flash floods, and filthy, polluted water running into our marsh and sound. The other issue with more hard structures, i.e. wood, concrete, asphalt, metal, etc. is Global Warming. All those materials absorb and hold heat, thus raising the temperature. I find it difficult to understand the contradiction when the Packet Pg. 56 8.A.b tree board and other city officials want to increase the tree canopy, protect the sound, yet, builders and developers are permitted to literally bulldoze large amounts of mature trees in Edmonds. Imagine a 24-foot-tall building in your neighbor's backyard right next to your fence -line, that takes away any view you might have, either territorial, mountain, or water view, or the openness of the sky and sunshine. The value of your home has just dropped. If my neighbor built a 1200 sq ft, 24 ft high home in their backyard, I would not be able to have a garden as it would take all the sunlight from my yard, plus the water runoff would flood my backyard. We have already had to put in two French drains to alleviate flooding. You have also discussed allowing these structures to be sold as a separate property from the main house. Also, you discussed eliminating the need for owner occupied main house. On a final note, I do think there is a need for ADU'S and DADU'S, but on a smaller scale. Example, I have aging parents who would benefit from a small 700 sq ft dwelling in my backyard so that I could help them avoid a very expensive assisted living facility. Remember, these are accessory dwellings, not separate entities and should be treated as such. I don't envy you. This will be a tough road to navigate. The people planning to profit from this plan, are going to push hard. Most Sincerely, Dawn Malkowski Edmonds, WA 98020 425-213-2545 Sent from Mail for Windows Packet Pg. 57 8.A.b Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2024 12:45 PM To: Planning Subject: Contact Planning and Development 2024-03-17 12:44 PM(MST) Submission Notification Contact Planning and Development 2024-03-1712:44 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/17/2024 3:44:29 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Your Name Gerry Gibson Your Emailbonger@comcast.net Subject Density Type of Inquiry Zoning/Land Use Comment or Question First I completely agree with the comments made by Diane Buckshnis in the Beacon. Edmonds is unique in many ways, none are addressed by the Growth Management Act. As I understand , Edmonds is on target for the required growth planning. The growth of Edmonds was based upon a long standing plan and now that plan is required to change. The environment, infrastructure, and property use of Edmonds is now turned upside down. Changing density and adding ADUs are offensive to say the least. Who is to pay for the complications, infrastructure changes, Message environmental consequences of such density. Edmonds was not designed for such density. There are traffic, parking, sewer, water, and a never ending number of other matters to consider and figure out who is going to pay for this. I certainly do not want to pay for these changes. I understand the city cannot refuse to make the mandated requirements, but I recommend the amounts the city can charge for permits, use and other fees could possibly detour much density development by making such fees high enough. However, it can be done, I am against the density increases and urge the city to do whatever it can to keep Edmonds Edmonds. Acknowledgement I agree To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20166262&contextld=l 7263725&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 58 8.A.b Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 3:26 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-03-18 03:26 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-03-18 03:26 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/18/2024 6:26:21 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I support HR 1337. 1 bought a SFH in Edmonds with a basement at the end of 2023. My mortagage is very high at the moment. Creating an ADU in the textarea-1700597715163-0 basement and renting it out would be a great help. That in turn will help someone to have a living space. I think it's a win -win situation for all involved. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20168578&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 59 8.A.b Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2024 6:11 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-03-26 06:10 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-03-26 06:10 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/26/2024 9:10:32 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I support these measures and believe it will help increase housing textarea-1700597715163-0 availability and allow people to age in place. I had one at an only property in Seattle and plan to build one for my mom to age into. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20189675&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 60 8.A.b Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2024 10:10 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-03-26 10:09 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-03-2610:09 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/26/2024 1:09:32 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Pleaseeeeeee pass the ADU and DADU construction in City of Edmonds, textarea-1700597715163-Owould really help the owners and generational growth of Edmonds. Thank you! To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20181233&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 61 8.A.c Accessory Dwelling Unit Code Update Planning Board Discussion #3 4/10/2024 et Pg. 62 What the ECDC may look like: Permit needed Type of Unit Number of Units: Size Design Parking Occupancy =�_ Attached ADU only. May have ^"'accessory dwelling unit per lot. Permitted secondary use* ; Can be permitted in PRDs. DADUs and AADUs* Allow two ADUs on all lots in any configuration.* Max height 24'.* .Dwelling up to a maximum of 900 squaF„ feet If rear lot line abuts a public alley, no rear setbacks are ICI" mA-rn +h-+n +,e,r, hor:rr`r`01 mr required.* ,oL If�D l l Or-, -A sipgle fleer�xreptien ea he made In some instance, reduced rear setbacks. Depending on the zone, no more than 1,200 square feet gross floor area. No design restrictions.* One off street parking space in addition to the parking spaces No additional parking required for ADUs. normally required for the principal dwelling, but no less than three spaces per lot. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS *Required by 1337 Owner not required to reside in one of the units.* Allow sale as condominiums.* 8.A.c 8.A.c City of Edmonds Code Update: Staff Recommendations Based on the discussions with Planning Board, City staff is making the following recommendations: o Setback reductions on small parcels (10-feet). o Setback reduction incentives on small parcels if property owners limit height of ADU to 15' to preserve privacy and views of existing neighborhoods (RS-6, RS-8) to 5-feet. o Eliminating additional ADU parking requirements: • Decreases building costs; • Maximizes ADU usage on smaller lots; • Eliminates additional EV parking requirements. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS *Required by 1337 8.A.c City of Edmonds Code Update: Staff Recommendations Development Standards - Height Restrictions and Decreased Setbacks: o Decreasing rear setback requirements to allow for more flexibility on smaller lots (RS-6 and RS-8). X p X • / IV V I \ c�i I� � , \ O �, Allowing a minimum 10-foot rear setback for DADUs on small lots. `; Allowing a minimum 5-foot rear setback for DADUs on small lots that limit ADU height to 15-feet. I Lot coverage will remain at 35% for all Single-family zones. Limiting DADU height to no less than 24 feet.* No setbacks for ADUs that abut a public alley* • Primarily impacts parcels in RS-6 zones. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS *Required by 1337 Itog,16! 4MV-1 RMEMI'm o td �C n a a N - O � O II I��I II II M The majority of public alleys in the City of Edmonds are located it the downtown area (RS-6). 8.A.c City of Edmonds Code Update: Staff Recommendations Development Standards - Gross Floor Area: 3 0 0 y o Limiting ADUs to 1,000 sf of gross floor area on small lots (RS-6 and RS-8). o Allowing ADUs to have up to 1,200 sf of gross floor area on one or two floors on large lots (RS-10, RS-12, RS-20) • Remember: • gross floor area is defined as the "interior habitable area of an accessory dwelling unit, not including unconditioned space." • habitable space can be divided by two floors limited at 24 feet in height. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS *Required by 1337 Staff Recommendations Development Standards - Parking Requirements: o No additional parking required for ADUs • 2 parking spaces are currently required for all single-family homes. • Current regulations allow ADU parking to be tandem or within the existing driveway. • High cost of providing additional parking may limit some homeowners' ability to create additional housing. • Many lots do not have the capacity for a 3rd parking space. o Since 2021, no additional parking has been required for ADUswithin �/4 mileofa major transit stop. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS *Required by 1337 Distance to Transit i 8.A.c Stop for RS Parcels ; i Legend Bus Routes _ Eighth Mile ' '_. \\` ��• - Quarter Mile c Half Mile;\\ - Half Mile from Major Transit ML ON N A 1:43,344 r i J ■ -� i I 6 - -'- - -' --.-.... Packet Pg. 67 8.A.c City of Edmonds Code Update: Staff Recommendations Developmen t Standards - Putting it all together: Sub District Maximum ADU Minimum Maximum DADU Minimum Parking Gross Floor DADU Rear Height Spaces Area (Sq. Ft.) Setback'2 RS-20 1,200 25' 24' 0 RS-12 1,200 25' 24' 0 RS-10 1,200 20' 24' 0 RS-8 1,000 10'3 24' 0 RS-6 1,000 10'3 24' 0 1 No rear setbacks are required for detached accessory dwelling units from the rear lot line if that lot line abuts a public alley, regardless of detached accessory dwelling unit size 2 Standard street and side setbacks per ECDC 16.20.030 apply. 3 The normally required rear setback may be reduced to a minimum of five feet for a detached accessory dwelling units 15' in height or less. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS *Required by 1337 City of Edmonds Code Update: Staff Recommendations Development Standards - Putting it all together: 8.A.c 1-Story ADU (single story incentives) 1 r RS-6 and RS-8 - 1,000 sf. max. (per H131337) r(7 ':., 10 - 5' from rear property line 15' Height limit - 35% Lot coverage limit (existing code) iddff - On alleyway, 0' rear setback (per HB133' RS-10, RS-12, RS-20, etc... - 1,200 sf. max. (best practices) - Maintain existing setbac packet Pg. 69 - 35% Lot coverage limit City of Edmonds Code Update: Staff Recommendations Development Standards - Putting it all together: 8.A.c 2-Story ADU (no incentives) RS-6 and RS-8 - 1,000 sf. max. (per HB1337) - 10' From rear property line - 24' Height limit (per H131337) - 35% Lot coverage limit (existing code) - On alleyway, 0' rear setback (per HB1337) All others (RS-10, RS-12, RS-20, etc...) Q - 1,200 sf. max. (best practices) - Maintain existing setbacks - 35% Lot coverage limit (ex Packet Pg. 70 City of Edmonds Code Update: Staff Recommendations Development Standards - Putting it all together: 8.A.c 8.A.c Update: Critical Areas EHB 2321 - Section 6(c) (c) Shall apply to middle housing the same development permit and environmental review processes that apply to detached single-family residences, unless otherwise required by state law including, but not limited to, shoreline regulations under chapter 90.58 RCW, building codes under chapter 19.27 RCW, energy codes under chapter 19.27A RCW, or electrical codes under chapter 19.28 RCW; • ADUs are allowed on lots that contain critical areas or their associated buffers so long as they can meet protection standards in ECDC Title 23 (Natural Resources). Credit: City of Edmonds ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS 3 0 0 a� Q M U C 0 .y 0 m a n a a It N 0 N O 0 M C d E t V �4 w Q r c d E s ca Q 8.A.c Under Discussion: Allowing ADUs in PRDs: HOAs and CCRs: PDF RCW 64.38.160 New associations Accessory dwelling units. (1) Except governing documents of associations created to protect public health and safety, and ground and surface waters from on -site wastewater, governing documents of associations created after July 23, 2023, and applicable to a property located within an urban growth area may not impose any restriction or prohibition on the construction, development, or use on a lot of an accessory dwelling unit that the city or county in which the urban growth area is located would be prohibited from imposing under RCW 36.70A.681. (2) For the purposes of this section, "urban growth area" has the same meaning as in RCW 36.70A.030. (3) A city or county issuing a permit for the construction of an accessory dwelling unit may not be held civilly liable on the basis that the construction of the accessor dwelling unit would violate a restrictive covenant or deed restriction. [ 2023 c 334 § 11.] Planning Division Recommendations: • State law requires that ADUs be allowed in all zones that allow for single-family development • HOAs and CCRs that limited ADUs prior to July 23, 2023 can continue to do so. • Municipality will not regulate private agreements. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS 8.A.c Under Discussion: Impact Fees ECC Chapter 3.36 3. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include alterations, expansions, enlargement, remodeling, rehabilitation or conversion of an existing dwelling unit where no additional dwelling units are created and the use is not changed. Note: accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are not considered to create additional dwelling units because ECDC 20.21.020 does not consider ADUs as increasing the overall density of a single-family residential neighborhood. Planning Division Recommendations: • Count ADUs toward density requirements, consistent with 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update and GMA requirements.* • May result in applying impact fees for ADUs. • Reducing fees will incentivize ADU construction. *Pending internal discussion and review by the City Attorney. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS Credit: Trip Advisor 8.A.c Under Discussion: Utilities Water meters, sewer connections, and utility undergrounding can add costs to ADU development. The Planning Division is working with Public Works and Olympic View Water and Sewer District (OVWSD) to update regulations. Planning Division Recommendations: • Reduce costs for homeowners as much as possible. • Collaborate with the Public Works Department, Utility Billing, South County Fire, and OVWSD to ensure that all requirements are met. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS Credit: watercarexa.nz m a E if 8.A.c Under Discussion: Utilities Engineering Division Recommendations: • New and extended utilities must be undergrounded. • All units must have unrestricted access to utility control systems. • Only one water service and meter allowed per parcel. • Only one sewer lateral is allowed per parcel. • Upsizing or replacement of existing service lines/laterals may be required. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS DvAc he0 noun* with no Sharod Sewer% T•rIaced houwa mth shared ► sewers Planning Board recommendation memo should include the following policy direction: 0 ADU size restrictions o� ADU setback reductions G Parking restrictions O Impact fees ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS 8.A.c Schedule: • Council Introduction - November 14, 2023 • Planning Board Introduction - December 13, 2023 • Planning Board Discussion 1 -January 10, 2024 • Planning Board Discussion 2 -January 24, 2024 • Council Discussion 1 - February 27, 2024 • Planning Board Public Hearing - February 28, 2024 • Council Study Session - March 5, 2024 • Planning Board Discussion 3 - April 10, 2024 • Council Public Hearing - April 23, 2024 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS 10.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 04/10/2024 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: April 10 Extended Agenda Packet Pg. 79 10.A.a Planning Board Extended Agenda - April 10, 2024 C (O I O C (O I l0 C (O I [V LL I .-I LL I 00 N L l0 iccO G I m .-I iccO G I I� N Q Q I O -i Q Q I [V i6 00 G I N [V I N -i I l0 [V I o -i I 4 [V �/ Q 1 .-I Z5 Q 1 w [V N 1 rl .-I � N 1 Ln [V y- U O Ol U O I m [V O Z I m .-I O Z I�I [V v 0 I ci -i v 0 I Lf [V Comprehensive Plan High Level Alternatives D/R D/R Joint Discussion w/EDC D/R 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 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) I Design standards and processes (HB 1293 - mid 2025), including multfamily design standards Long Range Capital Improvement Program/Capital Facilties Plan Tree Canopy Policy I D/R 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 Neighborhood Center Plans Code Modernization Projects: 1. Unified Development Code (late 2025) Comp Plan Implementation Highway 99 Community Renewal Program Packet Pg. 80