Loading...
20170509 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES May 9, 2017 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Thomas Mesaros, Council President Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Michael Nelson, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Phil Williams, Public Works Director Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir. Scott James, Finance Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Dave Turley, Assistant Finance Director Rob English, City Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Andrew Pierce, Legislative/Council Assistant Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7.00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5'11 Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. PRESENTATION 1. PROCLAMATION FOR NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION MONTH Mayor Earling recognized several members of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) in the audience. He read a proclamation declaring May 2017 as Historic Preservation Month and calling upon public officials, educators, business owners, property owners, and all people of Edmonds to join in celebrating the history preserved in unique building and structures and strive to protect and preserve Edmonds' heritage. HPC President Tim Raetzloff accepted the proclamation, commenting the HPC is different than the Historic Society and focuses on preserving and maintaining older buildings in Edmonds by working with home owners and building owners. The HPC hopes to preserve the City's history rather than have older buildings demolished. He thank the City for the proclamation and introduced Historic Preservation Commissioners Steve Waite, Sandy Albery, Emily Scott, and Larry Vogel and the HPC staff liaison, Planning Manager Rob Chave. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 9, 2017 Page 1 5. PUBLIC COMMENT Shannon Lair, a 12 -year member of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, explained she attended the April 25, 2017 Council meeting in support of the City maintaining its current apprenticeship utilization language in Public Works contracts. She was saddened when it failed but angry about some of the reasons. She recalled Councilmember Tibbott, who spoke in favor of the change, stated few other surrounding cities had apprenticeship programs. The Public Works Director also spoke about apprenticeship programs. She asserted both were likely using the wrong terminology and consequently provided misinformation. A majority of surrounding cities do have apprenticeship utilization language in their Public Works contracts. Apprenticeship utilization and responsible bidder language is what the City has in its contracts; apprenticeship programs are what labor unions and contractors have. It was also mentioned that smaller contractors who may have apprentices would have to lay off one or more of their journeypersons. She asserted if the contractor was following the rules of the contract he was bidding on, he would already have apprentices in his employment. Apprentices save money as they are cheaper labor and do the grunt work while learning the craft. Contractors who are not using apprentices are also likely not using journeymen, but rather have employees who may not earn union wages. Contractors refusing to use apprentices also often do not hire women and minorities and may use undocumented workers, paying them less than minimum wage under the table, discrimination at its worst. Responsible bidder and apprenticeship utilization language helps drive out discrimination. Making a livable wage promotes the economy and the City. People eat, drink, fuel their vehicles and often buy groceries in areas where they work. The misinterpreted terminology may or may not have changed the outcome of the vote, but she felt the need to clarify so when the language is next evaluated, it is done properly. Larry Vogel, Edmonds, expressed his personal appreciation for the proclamation for Historic Preservation Month. He has been honored to serve on the HPC for ten years, three years as chair and the last two as vice chair. It has been a fantastic experience and through his involvement, he has gained a deep appreciation for the City's heritage, history, and cultural appurtenances. Edmonds is blessed to have a rich, multi -faceted cultural history and he was honored to have a part in helping preserve it and increase the public's awareness. 6. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Council President Mesaros requested Item 6.4, Confirm Salary Commission Appointment, be removed from the Consent Agenda as the Council was not prepared to act. COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 2, 2017 2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM, PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE PAYMENTS 3. SETTLEMENT OF CLAIM STUDY ITEM UNIT LOT SUBDIVISION CODE AMENDMENT (AMD20170003) Planning Manager Rob Chave reviewed the proposed Unit Lot Subdivision Code Amendment: Application for a code amendment Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 9, 2017 Page 2 o Application from private party o Amendment would add "unit lot subdivision" as an option in the subdivision code o Process is Type V ■ Planning Board public hearing and recommendation • City Council public hearing and decision (potential ordinance amending ECDC) Unit Lot Subdivision o Doesn't change underlying zoning o Doesn't change applicable design, height or bulk considerations o External project setbacks are preserved o Provides for an alternative form of ownership for multifamily projects (as opposed to condominiums) o Requires homeowners association and agreements for maintenance of common areas or facilities, and building exteriors for multi -unit buildings Mr. Chave displayed an aerial view of an existing, standard multifamily project which has a "parent lot" for the overall project development. He displayed an aerial view of the same development with unit lot subdivision where each unit is identified via the subdivision and owned by an individual. If the buildings are attached, a common maintenance agreement would be required and the overall homeowners association (HOA) would be responsible for maintaining internal drives, common and open space, etc. He summarized unit lot subdivision was an alternative to condominiums or someone owning the overall development and renting units. The recommendation is to include unit lot subdivision in the City's code. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to the aerial view of an existing, standard multifamily project. Mr. Chave explained if unit lot subdivision was used, each lot would contain a dwelling unit. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked the benefit of unit lot subdivision versus condominium. Mr. Chave responded the genesis was issues that occurred with condominiums a number of years ago such as difficulty obtaining insurance. For example, problems with Dryvit and other products on building exteriors that failed and subsequent issues with responsibility, etc. Builders and developers found insurance got in way of dividing up ownership which created problems for the multifamily market. Unit lot subdivision preserves the option for individual ownership which people want, but removes a development from the condominium process. The Planning Board's recommendation requires common maintenance agreements as protections. One of the benefits of unit lot subdivision is an owner is not a common owner of the entire development. For example in a fourplex, the ownership is focused on those four units. Unit lot subdivision potentially makes it easier to divide up ownership in a logical manner while still providing for maintenance and ownership of the common areas. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about the downside to unit lot subdivision. Mr. Chave answered he did not see a downside; it is an alternative form of ownership which is a good thing as long as protections are in place such as an HOA and maintenance agreements. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why this did not go through the new committee structure. Mr. Chave answered when there is a recommendation from the Planning Board, the recommendation is to the entire Council. If the recommendation is forwarded to a committee, there is only review by 2-3 Councilmembers. The Council could forward unit lot subdivision to a committee but recommendations to full Council have always come to the Council first. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why this would apply citywide when it was only for Westgate. Mr. Chave answered unit lot subdivision is not specific to Westgate, it would apply to multifamily development citywide. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the applicant's name is Westgate Woods but it is not specific to Westgate. Mr. Chave agreed. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 9, 2017 Page 3 Councilmember Buckshnis asked how problems with common areas such as the roof or decks would be addressed if there was no condominium budget, meetings, etc. Mr. Chave said HOA and maintenance documents would identify responsibility and authorize the ownership group to assess individual owners to provide ongoing maintenance. Councilmember Buckshnis observed there would still be annual meetings, budgets, etc. like a condominium. Mr. Chave agreed it would be similar. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the four-plex example and asked what happens if there are three great owners and one who is not. Mr. Chave answered they are all responsible which is the reason for the agreements. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if that was strictly spelled out in the code. Mr. Chave assured it was. Council President Mesaros asked if developments have to apply to use unit lot subdivision. Mr. Chave answered yes, just like any subdivision; a short subdivision for four units or less or the full subdivision process for more than four units. Councilmember Teitzel referred to the statement that external project setbacks are preserved which he assumed meant the outer perimeter of the parent lot. Mr. Chave answered yes. Councilmember Teitzel observed within the parent lot there could be zero lot line setbacks. Mr. Chave agreed, explaining that was unclear in the code unless unit lot subdivision was allowed. Councilmember Teitzel recalled a statement in the packet that unit lot subdivision could help create more affordable housing and keep the cost of units down. Mr. Chave said that was in the applicant's materials. Individual single family lots tend to be larger while multifamily tends to be smaller ownership; to the degree less land is owned, the land cost is reduced, potentially providing more affordable housing than a standard single family development. It will depend development to development. Councilmember Johnson referred to the example Mr. Chave provided, explaining Dryvit was a stucco material developed in the dry climate in the southwest but failed in the northwest and had to be replaced. Most condominiums were wrapped during the replacement and it took a long time to fix the problem. Under unit lot subdivision, if a multifamily project used Dryvit, she asked if there would there need to be 16 individual insurance claims, lawsuits, etc. She recognized unit lot subdivision would be an advantage for the builder but questioned the advantage for the owner. Mr. Chave answered the overall advantage for the owner was individual lot ownership. He would think as a group, the owners could get together to seek a remedy if a common product/installation were used. Worst case, the groups of owners in each duplex, fourplex, etc. could seek to recover damages. Unit lot subdivision distributes the ownership as well as the responsibility. Councilmember Johnson remarked it also distributes the risk, commenting most people who bought condominiums that used Dryvit were not aware of the problem. Mr. Chave answered most of those were larger buildings with flats. The unit lot subdivision process would not apply to those buildings; a unit lot subdivision cannot be used for stacked flats in a large building. Unit lot subdivision can only be used if the ownership goes all the way to the ground. Councilmember Johnson commented Dryvit could be used on any building. Councilmember Johnson observed this was a proposal from an individual and she was interested in the benefit to the homeowners. Mr. Chave commented the HOA provides some protections and collective ownership responsibilities would apply. Councilmember Tibbott commented there are more than six units in the aerial photograph of the development used in the example. Mr. Chave clarified the code allows up to six units per building; the aerial photograph illustrates multiple buildings. There is not a limit of six units in the overall development. Councilmember Tibbott asked if a 24,000 -square foot lot in the RS -12 zone could utilize Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 9, 2017 Page 4 unit lot subdivision. Mr. Chave answered no, a standard subdivision would be required in an RS zone. Unit lot subdivision only applies to multifamily zones or zones that allow multifamily development. Councilmember Tibbott observed there appeared to be some open space shown in the example and asked if that would be a qualification in the parent lot. Mr. Chave answered it depends, it could be established as a separate tract but if it is under common ownership, the ownership, maintenance, etc. would be addressed in the subdivision documents. Councilmember Tibbott asked if there was any requirement for open space. Mr. Chave answered only what was required in multifamily zones which includes setbacks and there is typically some open space within the development in addition to drive aisles, etc. All the areas that serve the overall development would be classified as common areas and would be owned and maintained by the overall HOA. That would be considered in the review of the unit lot subdivision Councilmember Tibbott inquired about percentage of lot coverage. Mr. Chave said that would be the same as the underlying multifamily zone. Councilmember Tibbott said open space and adequate parking would be beneficial and did not want that eliminated. Mr. Chave said a standard multifamily development would look like one big lot, drive aisles, exterior setback, maybe some open space, etc. Unit lot subdivision does not change that, does not give any bonuses or anything other than the ability to subdivide the ownership within that multifamily development. He summarized the development standards for a unit lot subdivision are exactly the same as a standard multifamily development, only the ownership is different. Councilmember Tibbott referred to Section 20.75.045.I, "An application for final Unit Lot plat will not be accepted until all foundations, including common wall foundations, are installed and located on the face of the final plat by the land surveyor of record." Mr. Chave explained this was requested by the applicant after researching codes in other jurisdictions. In this type of subdivision, the lines are very specifically drawn. If the subdivision was done up front, there is the chance that the party wall between the units might not exactly align with the subdivided line. Having the foundations including common wall foundations done first ensures the location of the subdivision line and provides confidence for the subdivider that what is proposed aligns on the ground. Councilmember Tibbott observed it also provides protection for the new owner that their property lines are certain. Councilmember Tibbott commented one of the public comments provided to the Planning Board offered critiques for unit lot subdivision, addressing some of the potential downfalls. Those were answered via the proposed code, anticipating some of the potential problems. He commented the Planning Board process illustrates the City's forward thinking and ability to provide protection for homeowners. He referred to a picture of a triplex in the packet and described meeting one of the homeowners who was thrilled with the opportunity to buy house. When asked how she liked having a home that she shared with the neighbors, the homeowner said it was fantastic and went on to describe features of the home, private backyard, etc. Councilmember Tibbott summarized unit lot subdivision is an opportunity for homeownership for the "missing middle." He was in support of the proposal. Councilmember Nelson asked if unit lot subdivision was condominiums but without the problems. Mr. Chave answered to some degree; the problems with condominiums are somewhat anecdotal. Unfortunately in the past there were more problems obtaining condominium insurance due to physical problems with specific products. Councilmember Nelson asked if new condominiums were being built in Edmonds. Mr. Chave answered they are still built but this provides another option. Councilmember Nelson commented condominiums may not be utilized to the fullest due to the problems in the past. Mr. Chave answered many of those problems are historical. Builders are still occasionally interested in another option for dividing up ownership. Not everyone wants to be in a condominium association, some prefer to own their own plot of land. There is also a difference in scale, large buildings will still be condominiums; this type of ownership makes more sense in an individual building with up to six units. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 9, 2017 Page 5 Councilmember Nelson referred to the applicability section which states unit lot subdivision is applicable in the following zones: Multiple Residential, General Commercial, and Westgate Mixed Use, noting that may have precipitated Councilmember Buckshnis' earlier question about applicability citywide. Mr. Chave clarified it was not tailored for Westgate. Councilmember Nelson asked how unit lot subdivision would look in General Commercial. Mr. Chave answered townhouses are allowed in Westgate and unit lot subdivision would make sense in an area where townhouses are allowed. Unit lot subdivision would not be allowed in General Commercial where there is commercial on the ground floor and residential above. Unit lot subdivision would only apply to multifamily areas of Westgate; Westgate includes a myriad different types of buildings and uses. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to the language in the packet about affordable housing. She asked whether that would depend on the builder's intent or would a percentage be required to be affordable housing. Mr. Chave answered there was nothing in the proposal regarding affordable housing, that was a separate issue. Unit lot subdivision is a way to provide smaller scale homeownership without large lots which add to the cost. Some people like this type of development and for them, it is more affordable than a traditional single family home on a larger lot. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas wanted to ensure it was clear that affordable housing would not be required; it was only affordable if whoever built it wanted it to be affordable. Councilmember Buckshnis commented she owns a townhouse like this in Charlotte. As part of a six-plex, it was affordable and made sense for her family. There is a HOA and the same rigmarole with pest inspectors, etc. like in a condominium. Mr. Chave commented in a development like depicted in the example, he anticipated there would be a HOA for the entire development rather than for each building. 8. ADJOURN TO COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS Mayor Earling explained the Council has decided to hold committee meetings on the second and fourth Tuesdays. There are three committees: Parks, Planning & Public Works Committee meets in the Jury Meeting Room, the Finance Committee meets in Council Chambers and the Public Safety & Personnel Committee meets in the Police Training Room. The Council adjourned to committee meetings at 7:42 p.m. A ID O. EARLING, MAYOR 4� 17 SCOTT PASSEY, CITY C K Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 9, 2017 Page 6