The URL can be used to link to this page

2014-08-27 Planning Board PacketMEETING AGENDA PLANNING BOARD Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex 250 5th Avenue North August 27, 2014 7:00 PM 1. Call to Order and Roll Call 2. Reading / Approval of Minutes: August 13, 2014 3. Announcement of Agenda 4. Audience Comments: (3 Minute Limit Per Person)* *Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings 5. Development Services Director Report to Planning Board 6. Public Hearings: (Public participation is welcome) 7. Unfinished Business: (No public participation) a. Discussion on Planning Board Report to Council on Sept. 16 8. New Business: (No public participation) a. Priorities for Development Code Update b. Overview of Comprehensive Plan Sustainability Element 9. Administrative Reports: Review Extended Agenda 10. Planning Board Chair Comments: 11. Planning Board Member Comments: 12. Adjournment PARKING AND MEETING ROOMS ARE ACCESSIBLE FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES (Contact the City Clerk at 771-0245 with 24 hours advance notice for special accommodations) AI-7090 Planning Board Agenda Meeting Date: 08/27/2014 Reading / Approval of Minutes: August 13, 2014 Department: Initiated By: Planning Information Subject/Purpose Reading / Approval of Minutes: August 13, 2014 Staff Recommendation It is recommended that the Planning Board review and approve the draft minutes. Previous Board Action N/A Narrative The draft minutes are attached. Attachments PB Draft minutes 8.13.14 2. CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 13, 2014 Vice Chair Tibbott called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex, 250 — 5`h Avenue North. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Neil Tibbott, Vice Chair Bill Ellis Philip Lovell Daniel Robles Careen Rubenkonig Valerie Stewart BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT Todd Cloutier, Chair (excused) Ian Duncan (excused) READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES STAFF PRESENT Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager Jerry Shuster, Stormwater Engineering Program Manager Shane Holt, Development Services Director Karin Noyes, Recorder BOARD MEMBER ELLIS MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2014 BE APPROVED AS AMENDED. BOARD MEMBER RUBENKONIG SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, WITH VICE CHAIR TIBBOTT AND BOARD MEMBER STEWART ABSTAINING. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA The agenda was accepted as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS No one in the audience indicated a desire to address the Board during this portion of the meeting. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR'S REPORT TO PLANNING BOARD Ms. Hope referred the Board to the written report that covers information on the status of plans, code updates, and community boards and events. Board Member Lovell referred to the supplemental document the Board received, which lists the key objectives for the Development Code re -write. He recalled that at the Board's previous discussion with staff, it was recommended that they focus on appropriate revisions to the code first and then consider changes to the processes. Ms. Hope explained that the intent is to use an integrated approach to change and/or adjust a number of items in the Development Code. Changes to the process would be considered as part of the overall update and not as a separate item after the update has been completed. Board Member Lovell expressed concern that people may try to focus more on the administrative processes and governmental functions as a way to address their perceived shortfalls with the code. Ms. Hope clarified that the list of "key objectives" provided in the supplement was intended to reflect the Board's retreat discussion and provide a broad overview of the underlying direction of the Development Code update. More details will follow. She reminded the Board that there is money in the City's budget to hire a consultant to do a great deal of the work, but there will be numerous opportunities for public input and the Planning Board will have extensive involvement in the process, as well. Board Member Stewart thanked Ms. Hope for her very interesting and informative Director's Report, which helps the Board Members think about things they may not have considered before. It also informs the Board of what other cities in the area are up to, as well as the nationwide trend. DISCUSSION ON THE CITY OF EDMONDS STORMWATER CODE UPDATE PROCESS Ms. Hope advised that the presentation would summarize the materials provided in the Staff Report regarding the Stormwater Code update. She explained that information is changing even as the City tries to get a handle on the requirements. Mr. Shuster provided a picture of a bio-retention facility, also known as a rain garden, which is located on the Key Bank property on SR104 and 100t' Avenue. He explained that stormwater from the parking lot goes into the facility where it is treated and infiltrated into the ground. He advised that the City encourages this type of stormwater facility so that stormwater can be treated on site rather than being discharged into Puget Sound and/or other waterways. Mr. Shuster explained that the City has a mandate to meet the requirements of the Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit, which is issued by the Department of Ecology (DOE) to approximately 84 municipalities in the Puget Sound Region. The permit allows the City to discharge stormwater into Puget Sound, Shell Creek, and Lake Ballinger, as long as certain things are done to make the stormwater as clean as possible. This water -quality permit is intended to protect fish and other aquatic habitat, and is not intended to protect houses from flooding. Other City regulations address flooding issues. Mr. Shuster explained that the new permit mandates a new approach to development. Currently, developers design a site using the Development Code and then manage the stormwater generated by the project through the stormwater code. The new approach requires the Development Code to include site design goals that minimize the amount of stormwater that is generated by reducing the amount of impervious surface and retaining native vegetative. In addition, the stormwater that is generated by default must be controlled using Low -Impact Development (LID) Techniques. Conventional stormwater control techniques would only be allowed if a developer can demonstrate that LID would not be feasible. He provided a diagram to illustrate how the new development paradigm could be implemented using drought tolerant, native plants; minimizing lawn area; pervious walkways, driveways and deck; low -impact foundation technology and rain garden infiltration. Ms. Hope emphasized the need to look at the development code as a whole. In addition to stormwater, they must also think about how to accommodate and provide a healthy transportation system, pedestrian opportunities, housing, and places for business. The City is part of a growing region and must find ways to have healthy development and retain existing places. It is a balancing act, in which stormwater is an important component. She suggested that, as the City updates its Development Code, there will be opportunities to address stormwater issues in a new way, particularly by encouraging a variety of LID techniques. Other potential code amendments to evaluate include reduced road width, changes in road layout and orientation, clustering, higher buildings and smaller footprints, parking regulations, and landscaping using bio-retention. She summarized that this will be a lengthy process that will start with identifying and understanding the LID topics that need to be addressed and then reviewing existing codes and standards and filling in the gaps. Mr. Shuster advised that, in addition to updating the Edmonds Stormwater Code to incorporate and require LID principles and best management practices to make LID the preferred and commonly used approach to site development by December 31, 2016, the City must update its Stormwater Code (ECDC 18.30), with a goal of dispersing, infiltrating and retaining stormwater on site to the extent feasible. The more stormwater is managed on site, the less impact there will be on waterways. He reviewed that the Stormwater Code was last updated in 2010 as required by the initial permit that was issued in 2006. The 2010 update is a 72-page guide to stormwater management in Edmonds for small and large sites. It outlines the Planning Board Minutes August 13, 2014 Page 2 minimal technical requirements and references portions of the 2005 Ecology Stormwater Management Manual, which addresses site planning and selecting and maintaining treatment systems. It also outlines Edmonds Specific Flow Control Requirements. In addition to the Edmonds Specific Flow Control Requirements, the 2016 Stormwater Code revisions will reference the 2012 Ecology Stormwater Management Manual, the Low -Impact Development Technical Guidance Manual for Puget Sound and the Rain Garden Handbook for Western Washington. Mr. Shuster advised that the Phase II Permit was appealed by several jurisdictions. The Pollutions Control Hearings Board heard the appeal and directed the DOE to make changes. On August 6th, the DOE came out with a new draft permit and stormwater manual, which is now out for public comment through October 6th. The DOE will then review the comments and make appropriate changes, and the revised permit and manual should be out by the end of year and effective early next year. In particular, the new draft permit makes it clear that the Low Impact Development Technical Guidance Manual for Puget Sound is not intended to be used for regulatory purposes and the Rain Garden Handbook for Western Washington is intended for guidance only. Cities are still trying to figure out what the changes mean. Mr. Shuster advised that implementation of the new permit requirements will require: • Staff Training. Many of the requirements are new, and staff members will need to participate in the training opportunities offered by the DOE. At this time, they are very busy reviewing development permits under the current code and will wait to participate in training until the DOE figures out exactly what the new requirements will be. • Developer, Homeowner and Contractor Training. The City will need to provide information and training to developers, homeowners and contractors regarding the new permit requirements. • Administrative Revisions. The application forms, review checklists and permit tracking program will need to be modified. • Maintenance of LID Facilities. LID stormwater facilities can be very different from conventional facilities, and there will be a learning curve. Addressing this issue appropriately may require the expertise of a landscaper or another professional. Mr. Shuster reported that the City has started the process of updating the LID stormwater management standards to match the most current standards. They have also started to update the Edmonds Stormwater Code Supplement to require LID stormwater techniques as the default approach for all size of sites, which should be finished by the end of 2015. Ms. Hope advised that, as part of the process of updating the Development Code, staff has requested funding from the Stormwater Utility Fund in 2015 to help them through the process. In addition, they anticipate grant funding from the DOE will be available after the 2015 Legislative session. Board Member Lovell asked if existing homeowners would be required to comply with the new stormwater requirements. Mr. Shuster answered that the new requirements would only apply to new construction and major revisions. If a property is developed or modified significantly, the owner would be required to comply and utilize LID techniques to the extent possible. Board Member Rubenkonig asked how the City would determine the threshold for when compliance would be required. Mr. Shuster said the current threshold is set at 2,000 square feet or more of new and/or replaced impervious surface. For example, replacing a garage on the existing foundation would not be considered replaced impervious surface, but removing the foundation and expanding the house out to where the garage was located would be. He noted that the City's threshold has been in place since 2008, and the DOE's threshold is actually 5,000 square feet. Board Member Stewart commended staff for their work and said she understands the need for time to address all of the issues in a holistic way. However, she is concerned that development permits continue to be processed based on the less restrictive requirements. It is likely that developers with projects that have remained dormant for a number of years will try to push them through before the new standards are adopted. She questioned if it would be possible to mandate a three-year expiration period in light of the higher standards. Another option would be to provide incentives for developers to go Planning Board Minutes August 13, 2014 Page 3 forward under the new 2012 manual. Mr. Shuster agreed that vesting to the less restrictive requirements will be a problem. Ms. Hope explained that the City has the ability to control some situations; but others, such as how long a subdivision application can remain active, are mandated by state law. She said the City is trying to encourage people to do the right thing by providing more information about low -impact approaches to stormwater control. She reminded the Board that they recently forwarded proposed amendments to the City Council that would require developers at Westgate to use LID techniques. Board Member Stewart said it is important for the City to point out the advantages of doing LID and encourage developers to be an example for others to follow. She said she understands that staff is working hard to help property owners and developers make forward -thinking decisions even before they are mandated. She feels good that the City is actually doing a lot of thinking earlier than expected so they will be ready to implement more LID requirements in early 2016. Board Member Stewart requested more information about why the DOE has determined that compliance with the Low - Impact Development Technical Guidance Manual for Puget Sound and the Rain Garden Handbook for Western Washington cannot be required for certain types of new projects. Mr. Shuster explained that there is a regulatory distinction between a bio-retention facility and a rain garden. While they are essentially the same thing, rain gardens are smaller and serve just one lot. He said the City provides copies of the 2013 Rain Garden Handbook to interested property owners, and they are working to create a handout for rain gardens and permeable pavement infiltration. They are also working to update the handout related to LID techniques to incorporate the new standards. While they cannot require people to meet the new standards yet, they can encourage them to do so by pointing out the benefits. Board Member Stewart stressed the importance of making sure that rain gardens are installed by trained professionals. There should also be performance measures in place to ensure that rain gardens are properly maintained or serious problems can occur. She noted that there are examples of low -performing rain gardens throughout the City. Mr. Shuster agreed that the concept is new, and it is important to find the right contractor. Staff is not currently trained to inspect rain gardens, and he can make a plea to the City Council for additional funding for staff to perform this work. Board Member Stewart reported that she participates on the Sno-King Watershed Council, which recently put together a letter to the DOE commenting on the 2012 Stormwater Management Manual. The council suggested that cities collaborate with nearby cities to address stormwater issues on a regional basis. Watersheds do not have jurisdictional boundaries. Mr. Shuster said it would be great if the DOE provided a model code, but they did not. Board Member Stewart reported that King County has started its review of the 2012 Stormwater Manual, and she has forwarded comments to Mr. Shuster. Mr. Shuster explained that the Phase II Permit allows the City to either adopt the 2012 (soon to be 2014) Stormwater Management Manual or another manual written by a selected Phase I jurisdiction (such as King or Snohomish County and/or the City of Seattle) that the DOE approves by June 20, 2015. He advised that the City of Seattle has a very good manual for and urban environment that could be used to address the urban parts of Edmonds. He noted that the 2012 manual was mostly written for growing communities with subdivisions. Vice Chair Tibbott said he assumes that the 2012 Stormwater Management Manual, Low -Impact Development Technical Guidance Manual for Puget Sound and the Rain Garden Handbook for Western Washington represent Best Available Science (BAS). He said his understanding is that the City will be reviewing some aspect of BAS within the next few years. Ms. Hope clarified that this work relates to the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO), which must also reflect BAS. The CAO must be updated by the end of 2015, as mandated by the Growth Management Act. Vice Chair Tibbott pointed out, and Ms. Hope agreed, that the updates to the stormwater code could dovetail with CAO update. Ms. Hope cautioned that there is no one -size -fits -all standard for addressing stormwater issues, and stormwater requirements must be different depending on the environment. For example, an urban environment with compact development is much different than a large undeveloped area or an area with wetlands and/or steep slopes. Vice Chair Tibbott requested information regarding maintenance needs for rain gardens and bio-retention facilities. Mr. Shuster said it is important to start with a certain pallet of plants, and he expects they would need to be trimmed on a regular basis. In addition, rain gardens require a certain mix of soil and mulch in order to function properly. Board Member Rubenkonig noted that pervious surface, such as pervious concrete, requires regular maintenance, as well. Mr. Shuster agreed that all LID techniques have their own special maintenance requirements. Planning Board Minutes August 13, 2014 Page 4 Vice Chair Tibbott asked if there is any way for the City determine the amount of stormwater that is being handled by any particular system. Mr. Shuster explained that the engineer who designs a bioswales can determine the appropriate size for the facility by creating a computer model that measures the rain flow coming from the site. The DOE has its own software that it requires engineers to use and it is available free of charge. Board Member Stewart said she has personal experience with a rain garden that functions well. However, homeowners must take responsibility for regular maintenance so that plants continue to filter the toxins and the water can be absorbed. It is also critical to clean the drain pipe going into the rain garden, which often gets clogged with leaves. She said she also collects about 800 gallons of rainwater each year, which she uses for irrigation. Excess rainwater goes to into the rain garden. She said her system has functioned well during times of heavy rain. Mr. Shuster reminded the Board that if a rain garden is used by a developer as opposed to an underground system, a covenant would be required to ensure that the rain garden is not removed. This requirement would be applicable to any subsequent owner, as well. Board Member Rubenkonig said it is important to be clear that the City is not proposing to regulate someone's private rain garden. A property owner can install their own rain garden without meeting any specific City requirements, and the City would not require them to disconnect from the City's stormwater system. No covenant would be required, either. The new stormwater requirements would apply primarily to new construction and significant changes. Board Member Rubenkonig asked if developers who choose the rain garden approach would be required to obtain the services of a professional to ensure that the facility is designed and installed properly. Mr. Shuster said there would be no specific requirements for existing homeowners who want to install a rain garden, but the City would refer the property owner to the Rain Garden Handbook for Western Washington as a guide. There are two options the City could consider for development or redevelopment that triggers the stormwater code threshold: 1. Adopt pre -size tables that have been vetted by an engineer. The size of the rain garden would depend on the projects total square footage. This approach would be easy for staff to implement. 2. Require developers to hire an engineer to design the facility. This could involve a more rigorous assessment of the soils, and the City would review the proposal for compliance with the standards. Board Member Rubenkonig suggested that maintenance agreements could offer another tool for ensuring that LID techniques are designed and maintained to function properly. She questioned if there is sufficient staff to regularly check each situation. Mr. Shuster pointed out that the City routinely inspects to make sure that conventional stormwater systems are constructed to meet the code requirements, and they try to do the same with rain gardens. However, he felt they could probably do a better job. Board Member Rubenkonig suggested that staff research how other jurisdictions address design and maintenance issues. Board Member Robles recalled that many years ago, the energy code required that buildings be sealed tight, which caused buildings to rot from the inside out because they retained moisture. He cautioned that there may be unintended consequences associated with some of the LID techniques. For example, if the ground absorbs too much water, it may infiltrate into the foundation of a structure. If a roof garden is not done right, it can result in leaks. He stressed the need to require that designs be stamped by a professional at every opportunity to ensure that LID techniques are done right and function properly. Board Member Robles observed that the documents related to stormwater are large, and he reminded the Board that the City's intent is to create a condensed version of the stormwater management documents that is simple and more user friendly. Developers could still review to the more detailed documents for additional information. Mr. Shuster agreed that is the intent. OVERVIEW OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES Mr. Chave advised that part of the 2014 Comprehensive Plan update will include integrating performance measures into the various plan elements. Preferably, there would be just one measure per plan element that tries to capture what is important to the public. He recalled that the Board did some work on the subject in 2010, but the measures were complex and difficult to implement. The staff and Planning Board has discussed the issue again in recent months and concurred that it is important that the performance measures be meaningful for the community, relevant to the particular element, related to the specific Planning Board Minutes August 13, 2014 Page 5 goals and policies in the element, easy to gather information and report on and something that can be summarized and communicated effectively. Examples include: • Permitting activity • Annual registration for park related events and programs • Air quality information available from the Puget Sound Air Quality Agency • Energy measures available from the Snohomish County Public Utility District and/or Puget Sound Energy • Water quality measures such as those reported by the City on an annual basis • Sidewalk construction/rehabilitation projects as reported by the Public Works Department Mr. Chave emphasized that the goal is to have a variety of measures tied to different plan chapters or sections. However, they must be comparable and easy for staff to assemble on an annual basis. The performance standards would allow the Planning Board and City Council to review the plan's performance each year. Mr. Chave advised that there are a number of statements throughout the Comprehensive Plan that call out actions. These are general statements with no timeline attached. The goal is to identify at least some of these actions and add dates and/or milestones to give them more definition. He said staff has reviewed the Board's previous work on performance measures, and a summary was provided in the Staff Report. They have also had internal discussions about potential performance measures and action items. He plans to bring back more specific ideas at subsequent meetings. Board Member Lovell referred to the list of performance measures that would be easy to track and asked if it would be possible for staff to gather information from other departments. Mr. Chave agreed that the intent is to tap into the resources that are already available. He stressed the importance of starting simple and not trying to take on too much. The key is to figure out what is already available that they can report on without spending a tremendous amount of effort. They should start with an easy -to -understand report card that means something. If the initial measures are successful, more can be added over time. Board Member Lovell asked if it is staff s intent to identify dates for one or two action items in each plan element to help prioritize the work program. Mr. Chave agreed that is the intent. Board Member Lovell pointed out that many of the action items in the Strategic Action Plan can be directly linked to action items in the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Hope agreed there will be some cross over between the Strategic Action Plan and the Comprehensive Plan. Board Member Robles noted that many of the performance measures identified earlier by the Board are considered intangible and difficult to measure, such as how many people attend fairs and facilities. It is important to keep in mind that there are data sites that provide tools to measure this type of intangible activity. Board Member Stewart said she tends to want to review the Comprehensive Plan elements to get an idea of the categories that might have measurable indicators. She thought perhaps it would be helpful to coordinate their efforts with the work being done to update the Climate Change Action Plan. There may also be some good ideas in the summary staff prepared of the Board's previous work. In the meantime, the Board should think about indicators that are understandable, communicate results to the community, easy to measure, and easy to obtain information. Mr. Chave said staff would bring back some suggestions that are tied to specific elements for the Board's continued discussion. Initially, they will not be able to tackle measures that are analytical and require the staff to hunt for data. Vice Chair Tibbott suggested it would be appropriate to have at least two performance measures for the Transportation Element to address both roadways and walkways. Again, Mr. Chave suggested they start with at least one performance measure for each element and then the program can grow over time. Vice Chair Tibbott asked if identifying performance measures for each Comprehensive Plan element will involve a public process. Mr. Chave advised that there will be numerous public hearings over the course of the Comprehensive Plan update. These hearings will allow the Board to solicit input from the public regarding each of the elements, including potential performance measures. In addition, the concept could also be outlined in the City's quarterly newsletter, and the public could be invited to provide input. Planning Board Minutes August 13, 2014 Page 6 Board Member Stewart commented that the Sustainability Element identifies climate change, community health, and environmental quality as a lens through which the City takes a broader look at the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Chave observed that the Sustainability Element is a key component of the Comprehensive Plan. As it is somewhat nontraditional, it may require a different type of measure. It will take some careful thought to figure out what is actually measurable. Again, Board Member Robles commented that there are ways to measure the intangible. Board Member Lovell observed that identifying performance measures in conjunction with updating the Comprehensive Plan will demonstrate that the City wants to make the Comprehensive Plan a reality. Ms. Hope agreed that it is important to demonstrate the City's desire to implement the Comprehensive Plan by providing a meaningful way to measure its progress on an annual basis. The hard part is figuring out what the City has control over versus what is influenced by a larger region. For example, the sustainability element will have a broader base, as air and water quality are impacted by areas outside of Edmonds. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA Mr. Chave announced that a public hearing on the Capital Facilities Plan Element Update is scheduled for September 24th. It is anticipated that copies of the draft plan will be sent out well in advance of the public hearing, and Board Members will be invited to provide feedback, comments and questions. Staff will not make a preliminary presentation prior to the public hearing. Vice Chair Tibbott requested an update on the Five Corners Plan. Mr. Chave replied that the Five Corners Plan is on hold pending the outcome of Westgate Plan. It is anticipated that the City Council's actions regarding the Westgate Plan will inform what they want to do with the Five Corners Plan. Vice Chair Tibbott also requested an update on Development Code amendments related to Highway 99. Mr. Chave reviewed that the Board forwarded a recommendation to the City Council regarding proposed amendments related to Highway 99. In addition, the proposed 2015 budget includes funding for a consultant to study options for a planned action on Highway 99 that would push forward the idea of transit -oriented development nodes. If this funding is not approved, they will have to do what they can at the Planning Board and staff level. He reminded the Board that having a plan in place would give the City an advantage in obtaining grant funding for improvements along Highway 99. However, it is difficult to obtain funding for planning. Vice Chair Tibbott announced that Board Member Duncan has submitted his resignation. Mr. Chave said the Mayor's office is in the process of advertising the vacant position. Vice Chair Tibbott inquired if the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department would be providing a report to the Board before the end of the year. Mr. Chave agreed to contact the Director to schedule a report on the Board's extended agenda. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Vice Chair Tibbott said he regularly drives through the Five Corners intersection and has been amazed at how well traffic has moved through during construction of the roundabout. He commended the City for keeping the roadway open throughout a very rigorous construction schedule. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Board Member Ellis encouraged Board Members to patronize the businesses at Five Corners as often as possible, as the construction disruptions do harm the businesses. Board Member Stewart announced that the City is sponsoring a Volunteer Picnic on August 24th from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m. at City Park. Board Members each received invitations via email, and the City would like them to RSVP by the end of the week. Board Members can contact Council Member Johnson for more information. She said she attended the picnic last year. It was well done, and she enjoyed the opportunity to talk with other City volunteers in a social setting. Planning Board Minutes August 13, 2014 Page 7 Board Member Stewart reminded the Board of the open house sponsored by the Tree Board on August 10 from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. in the Library Plaza Room. She explained that the Tree Board is working on the Tree Code update, as well as the Heritage Tree Program. The open house is an opportunity for citizens to comment and help with the plans. She encouraged interested Board Members to attend. Board Member Lovell noted that he did not attend the Board's last meeting, but he read the minutes. He said he wholeheartedly supports the motions that were approved and the recommendations that were forwarded to the City Council related to Highway 99. Board Member Lovell thanked Board Members Rubenkonig and Robles for volunteering to fill in for him at the August 20t' Economic Development Commission Meeting, which he cannot attend because he will be attending a workshop sponsored by Northwest Sustainable Energy for Economic Development (Northwest SEED). The workshop will focus on an initiative called "Solarize South County," which is designed to help single-family homeowners and small businesses purchase solar equipment via a streamlined process and group discount. Participants at the workshop can learn about the technical and economic aspects of solar energy. He said he has been invited to provide a testimonial about the solar installation he just completed on his home. He summarized that the costs are about a third of what they were 10 years ago, and his system should pay for itself within six years. Board Member Robles referred to the attachments provided in the Staff Report related to performance measures (Sustainability Element and Sample of Previous Planning Board Work on Indicators). He agreed that the Sustainability Element should be an overreaching foundational document for other work the Board does. Board Member Robles asked what Board Members should do when approached by members of the public with input regarding the Planning Division and Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department. Mr. Chave encouraged Board Members to pass the information on. Board Member Rubenkonig reported on her attendance at the last City Council Meeting where the draft Westgate Plan was discussed. Recognition was given to the large number of citizens involved in the process over the past four years. At the request of Board Member Rubenkonig, Mr. Chave reviewed the opportunities that were provided for public input throughout the process. He summarized that a lot of people were aware of and pleased with the process. The City received letters from people who testified at the hearings complimenting the Board. They felt they were listened to and were pleased with the discussion and outcome from the Board. This speaks well for how the Board handled the process. Mr. Chave noted that the Economic Development Commission instigated the Westgate and Five Corners planning processes, and they prepared a white paper outlining the public process for the Westgate Plan. There was unanimous support for the Westgate Plan amongst the original Commissioners, and nearly unanimous support from the current Commissioners. Board Member Rubenkonig observed that a lot of eyes have reviewed and critiqued the plan on behalf of the City. Board Member Rubenkonig advised that she served on the exploratory committee for creating a Metropolitan Park District in Edmonds. While the City decided not to move the concept forward at this time, the conversation has not ended. She noted that the City of Seattle recently passed an initiative to create a Metropolitan Park District. ADJOURNMENT The Board meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Planning Board Minutes August 13, 2014 Page 8 AI-7094 Planning Board Agenda Meeting Date: 08/27/2014 Development Services Director Report to Planning Board Staff Lead/Author: Shane Hope Department: Planning Initiated By: City Staff Information Subject/Purpose Development Services Director Report to Planning Board Staff Recommendation Review the attached Development Services Director Report to Planning Board. Previous Board Action N/A Narrative Development Services Director Report to Planning Board is attached. Attachments Director Report 8.27.14 5. DIRECTOR REPORT August 27, 2014 To: Planning Board From: Shane Hope, Development Services Director Subject: Development Services Director Report Below are several items related to planning and development in Edmonds. Strategic Action Plan Implementation The City `s consultant, Cynthia Berne, working with an advisory group, has been able to clarify the intent of most of the 86 action items in the adopted Strategic Action Plan and to identify a primary lead for almost all items. The advisory group met twice this month. Some of the items will be short -to -medium term to implement. Others, especially those that would require significant funds to implement, are long- term in nature. A written report is being prepared to document the status of the action items and identify a way forward. The City Council is scheduled to hear an update at its October 7 meeting. Citizens Tree Board The Tree Board held an open house on August 14 to introduce the Tree Code update to the public and seek input early in the process. The Tree Board also took the opportunity to inform attendees about the Tree Board in general and their activities. Approximately twenty people were present throughout the open house and provided input into the Tree Code update. Citizens Economic Development Commission The Citizens Economic Development Commission met August 20 and heard a compelling presentation about Salish Crossing, a project that will re -use a former Safeway store near the waterfront, from developer Nick Echelbarger. The Commission also discussed: tourism, the 2015 Comprehensive Plan update process, and Strategic Action Plan implementation. Highway 99 Task Force Topics for the August 18 meeting of the Highway 99 Task Force included: an update on key properties, Community Transit, marijuana businesses that were denied (due to being too close to certain youth -oriented facilities), status of Highway 99 zoning amendments, proposal for a Highway 99 planning process (which largely depends on City budget capacity), and community issues related to existing Highway 99 motels. 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments The set of 2014 Comprehensive Plan amendments recommended by the Planning Board was considered for action by the City Council on August 19. Recommended amendments were: (1) Revise text to reflect goals for the Westgate visioning project; (2) Replace the 2008 Parks Recreation and Open Space Plan with a newer version that was approved in early 2014; and (3) Replace the 2008 Community Culture Plan with a newer version approved earlier this year. This agenda topic did not start until late in the Council's meeting and, after some discussion and questions, the Council chose to delay a decision. Council members decided to first have a study session on prioritizing capital projects and perhaps look more closely at the proposed Westgate zoning regulations before considering further action on the 2014 Comp Plan amendments. In addition to the three 2014 amendments already proposed, a new 6-year capital improvement plan (CIP) will be considered for adoption into the Comprehensive Plan later this year. Capital facilities elements can be amended at a different time as needed to match the jurisdiction's budget adoption timeline. (This is one of the few types of Comp Plan amendments that can be adopted either with or apart from the jurisdiction's annual amendment process.) The Planning Board will have a public hearing this fall on an update to the CIP. It is tentatively set for September 24. Westgate Zoning Code Amendment Process Following the Planning Board's recommendation on Westgate zoning code amendments, the City Council reviewed and briefly discussed the Board's recommendation for Westgate zoning (along with the proposed 2014 Comp Plan amendments) on July 22. On August 4, the Council held a public hearing. On August 26, the City Council's meeting includes discussion of the zoning proposal. A decision on it could occur in September. Historic Preservation Commission The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) has been busy working on the printing of the much loved Historic Calendar (2015), which should be available by Thanksgiving. On Sept. 11, the HPC will have a public hearing for a nomination to the Historic Register at City Hall - 3rd floor Fourtner Room 5:30 - 7:00 pm: Schumacher Building (known as Chanterelle) at 316 Main St. Coal and Oil Train Issues A panel discussion sponsored by Snohomish County Tomorrow brought different points of view together on oil and coal train issues. The event occurred August 22 in Everett. Panelists included representatives of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, Sightline, Climate Solutions, SSA International, Puget Sound Regional Council, and the City of Edmonds. (Mayor Earling spoke to Edmonds' concerns about the impact of increased oil and coal trains.) Community Calendar Upcoming community events include: ❑ August 24: Annual Volunteer Appreciation Picnic, City Park - Shelter #3 beginning at 2 pm ❑ August 26: Last Summer concert @ Hazel Miller Park, Rocklyn Road, Country & Rock) 12:00 to 1pm ❑ Sept. 5 - 7: Puget Sound Bird Fest (see: http:/lpugetsoundbirdfest.org) ❑ Sept. 11: Mayor's Highway 99 Town Hall Meeting @ Community Health Center (23320 Hwy 99), 6:30 to 8:30 pm (see http://www.edmondswa.go ❑ Sept. 18: (and every third Thursday): Art Walk in downtown Edmonds, 5:00 to 8:00 pm ❑ Oct. 1 - 15 (Registration): Edmonds Museum second annual Scarecrow Festival (see: http://www.historicedmonds.org/ ❑ Oct. 25: Edmonds Street Scramble: For families, friends, runners, cyclists and walking enthusiasts! With a special map as your guide, find as many checkpoints as you can before time runs out! Registration now open! (see https://secure.getmeregistered.com/get information.php?event id=11685 AI-7095 Planning Board Agenda Meeting Date: 08/27/2014 Staff Lead/Author: Shane Hope Department: Initiated By: Planning Information Subject/Purpose Priorities for Development Code Update Staff Recommendation Based on the presentation and discussion at the meeting, make a recommendation. Previous Board Action Narrative W Updating the City's development code is an important goal of the City Council and community. However, since the development code is complex and consists of many chapters, it cannot all be tackled at once. At a joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Board this spring, the Council asked the Planning Board to recommend priorities for the update. The Planning Board held a retreat in July and gave special consideration to this topic. The Board quickly concurred that an open public process in decision -making for code updates would be critical. Agreement was also reached on 7 key principles and 7 key objectives for the development code update. (See Exhibit 1: Code Re -write/ Update.) After further discussion about the code's complexities, it was decided to look at specific priority topics at a later meeting. The Board's August 27 meeting is an opportunity to discuss and make a recommendation about priorities for the update. To start the discussion, staff will present a prioritization option and the Board will provide input. The prioritization option that will be presented can be summarized as: - First, focus on any changes needed to be consistent with state laws. - Second, focus on existing sections or chapters that have been especially problematic, due to unclear language or processes. - Third, focus on sections or chapters that can be improved or added to better fit Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives. - Fourth, as part of the more substantive work, take care of any housekeeping issues —such as duplications or minor inconsistencies —and reorganize chapters in a logical order. Certainly, the following specific code topics will be high priorities —but not the only ones —in the update process: - Critical areas (work on this will start soon) - Low stormwater impact techniques - Permit and approval processes - Non-conformance and variance processes - Subdivisions A more detailed presentation (and longer list of priorities and approaches) will be provided at the August 27 meeting. Attachments Code Update Code Re-write/Update As Identified at the July 2014 Planning Board Retreat Public Process An open public process is vital. It will include many opportunities for public input from a broad range of persons. Principles ❑ Consistency with current state laws ❑ Consistency with Edmonds Comprehensive Plan ❑ Predictability ❑ Some flexibility ❑ Recognition of property rights ❑ Clear, user-friendly language and format ❑ Enforceability Key objectives ❑ Ensuring reasonable and clear processes for all actions ❑ Providing expanded and up-to-date set of definitions ❑ Encouragement of appropriate development ❑ Protection of critical areas and shorelines ❑ Recognition of diverse neighborhoods and their characteristics ❑ Encouragement of pedestrian -friendly and bicycle -friendly access ❑ Encouragement of low impact stormwater management (consistent with Ecology rules) AI-7091 Planning Board Agenda Meeting Date: 08/27/2014 Overview of Comprehensive Plan Sustainability Element Staff Lead/Author: Shane Hope Department: Initiated By: Planning Information Subject/Purpose Overview of Comprehensive Plan Sustainability Element Staff Recommendation Review the Sustainability Element or consider the presentation at the August 27 meeting. Previous Board Action N/A Narrative M. • As part of the City's responsibility under the state Growth Management Act (GMA) to review and update its Comprehensive Plan by mid-2015, each element of the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan is being reviewed. The Planning Board's August 27 meeting will include a brief review of the existing Community Sustainability Element and the upcoming public process. Because the City's Comprehensive Plan is mostly in compliance with the GMA, the Planning Board and City Council have concurred that any 2015 Plan updates will be modest, focusing on data updates and refreshing of key policies and information as needed. The Sustainability element (attached) is an important part of the Comprehensive Plan and is the culmination of considerable effort by the community. Recent analysis by City staff, using a checklist from the state, did not reveal the need to make any changes to this part of the plan in order to be consistent with the GMA or other state laws. Furthermore, this element does not contain any data that needs to be replaced with newer data. No action on the Sustainability element is requested for August 27. However the following meeting, September 10, is expected to include discussion of any minor adjustments to the element —primarily options for adding one "performance measure" and one or more time -based "action items" as a special section of the element. Attachments Community Sustainability Element Community Sustainability Element Background: Climate Change, Community Health, and Environmental Quality Introduction. A relatively recent term, "sustainability" has many definitions. A commonly cited definition is one put forward by the Brundtland Commission' in a report of the World Commission on Environment and Development (December 11, 1987). The Commission defined sustainable development as development that "meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." Not focused solely on environmental sustainability, the Commission's report emphasized the inter -related nature of environmental, economic, and social factors in sustainability. One of the keys to success in sustainability is recognizing that decision - making must be based on an integration of economic with environmental and social factors. The City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan contains a number of different elements, some mandated by the Growth Management Act, and others included because they are important to the Edmonds community. A requirement of the Growth Management Act is that the various comprehensive plan elements be consistent with one another. This Community Sustainability Element is intended to provide a framework tying the other plan elements together, illustrating how the overall plan direction supports sustainability within the Edmonds community. A key aspect of this approach is also to provide more direct linkages between long term planning and shorter -term strategic planning and policy review which guide the use of city resources and programs, especially budgeting. For example, a new emphasis on life cycle efficiency may take precedence over simple least -cost analytical methods. The City of Edmonds is gifted with unique environmental assets, such as the shoreline on Puget Sound, urban forests, diverse streams and wetlands, Lake Ballinger and a range of parks and open spaces. In addition, the city has the benefit of an established, walkable downtown served by transit, a framework of neighborhood commercial centers providing local access to business services, and the potential to see significant economic development in the Highway 99 activity center. Recently, the City has also experienced the beginnings of new economic initiatives, such as a new fiber-optic infrastructure and locally -based businesses and organizations supporting local sustainability and greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction approaches. Combined with local government initiatives, such as the Mayor's Citizens Committee on U.S. Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement and a series of resolutions adopted by the Edmonds City Council, there is a growing recognition and harnessing of the power of citizen knowledge to encourage and support changes in City policies and operations which are making the City a leader in environmental stewardship. Given this combination of assets and knowledge, the City of Edmonds has a compelling responsibility to utilize these capabilities to address the challenges of climate change, community health and environmental quality. 18 Community Sustainability Sustainability Framework This section describes the general goals and principles underlying the City's approach to community sustainability. Three important guiding principles central to a successful approach are: • Flexible — In an environment where what we understand and can predict is still developing and will be uncertain for some time to come, providing ways to monitor, assess, adapt, and to be flexible in our responses will be critical. Climate change is but one example; the uncertainties acknowledged in that subject area should be instructive in helping us understand that a flexible approach is necessary when addressing all areas of sustainability. Holistic — The components of sustainability — in terms of both its inputs and outputs —are complex and synergistic. No single action will result in a sustainable result, and sustainable initiatives taken in one area don't necessarily lead to sustainability in another. For example, sustainable land use practices don't necessarily result in a sustainable transportation or health system. A holistic approach is required that includes all levels of governance and encompasses planning, funding, evaluation, monitoring, and implementation. • Long-term — Focusing on short-term, expedient solutions will only make actions necessary to support sustainability more difficult to take in the future. For example, in the areas of environmental issues and climate change, deferred action now will only make the cumulative effects more difficult to resolve in the future. The familiar GMA-based 20-year planning timeframe will not be sufficient — planning for sustainability must take an even longer view. Sustainability Goal A. Develop land use policies, programs, and regulations designed to support and promote sustainability. Encourage a mix and location of land uses designed to increase accessibility of Edmonds residents to services, recreation, jobs, and housing. A.1 Adopt a system of codes, standards and incentives to promote development that achieves growth management goals while maintaining Edmonds' community character and charm in a sustainable way. Holistic solutions should be developed that employ such techniques as Low Impact Development (LID), transit -oriented development, "complete streets" that support multiple modes of travel, and other techniques to assure that future development and redevelopment enhances Edmonds' character and charm for future generations to enjoy. A.2 Include urban form and design as critical components of sustainable land use planning. New tools, such as form -based zoning and context -sensitive design standards should be used to support a flexible land use system which seeks to provide accessible, compatible and synergistic land use patterns which encourage economic and social interaction while retaining privacy and a unique community character. A.3 Integrate land use plans and implementation tools with transportation, housing, cultural and recreational, and economic development planning so as to form a cohesive and mutually -supporting whole. Community Sustainability 19 A.4 Use both long-term and strategic planning tools to tie short term actions and land use decisions to long-term sustainability goals. City land use policies and decision criteria should reflect and support sustainability goals and priorities. Sustainability Goal B. Develop transportation policies, programs, and regulations designed to support and promote sustainability. Take actions to reduce the use of fuel and energy in transportation, and encourage various modes of transportation that reduce reliance on automobiles and are supported by transportation facilities and accessibility throughout the community. B.1 Undertake a multi -modal approach to transportation planning that promotes an integrated system of auto, transit, biking, walking and other forms of transportation designed to effectively support mobility and access. B.2 Actively work with transit providers to maximize and promote transit opportunities within the Edmonds community while providing links to other communities both within and outside the region. B.3 Explore and support the use of alternative fuels and transportation operations that reduce GHG emissions. BA When undertaking transportation planning and service decisions, evaluate and encourage land use patterns and policies that support a sustainable transportation system. B.5 Strategically plan and budget for transportation priorities that balances ongoing facility and service needs with long-term improvements that support a sustainable, multi -modal transportation system. B.6 Strategically design transportation options — including bike routes, pedestrian trails and other non -motorized solutions — to support and anticipate land use and economic development priorities. Sustainability Goal C. Promote seamless transportation linkages between the Edmonds community and the rest of the Puget Sound region. C.1 Take an active role in supporting and advocating regional solutions to transportation and land use challenges. C.2 Local transportation options should be designed to be coordinated with and support inter -city and regional transportation programs and solutions. C.3 Advocate for local priorities and connections and the promotion of system -wide flexibility and ease of use in regional transportation decisions. Sustainability Goal D. Develop utility policies, programs, and maintenance measures designed to support and promote sustainability. Maintain existing utility systems while seeking to expand the use of alternative energy and sustainable maintenance and building practices in city facilities. 20 Community Sustainability DA Balance and prioritize strategic and short-term priorities for maintenance and ongoing infrastructure needs with long-term economic development and sustainability goals. D.2 Strategically program utility and infrastructure improvements to support and anticipate land use and economic development priorities. D.3 Explore and employ alternative systems and techniques, such as life -cycle cost analysis, designed to maximize investments and/or reduce ongoing maintenance and facilities costs. DA Include sustainability considerations, such as environmental impact and GHG reduction, in the design and maintenance of facilities and infrastructure. Sustainability Goal E. Develop economic development policies and programs designed to support and promote sustainability. Encourage the co -location of jobs with housing in the community, seeking to expand residents' ability to work in close proximity to their homes. Encourage and support infrastructure initiatives and land use policies that encourage and support home -based work and business activities that supplement traditional business and employment concentrations. E.I Economic development should support and encourage the expansion of locally - based business and employment opportunities. E.2 Land use policies and implementation tools should be designed to provide for mixed use development and local access to jobs, housing, and services. E.3 Regulatory and economic initiatives should emphasize flexibility and the ability to anticipate and meet evolving employment, technological, and economic patterns. EA Land use and regulatory schemes should be designed to encourage and support the ability of local residents to work, shop, and obtain services locally. E.5 Land use and economic development programs should provide for appropriate scale and design integration of economic activities with neighborhoods while promoting patterns that provide accessibility and efficient transportation options. Sustainability Goal F. Develop cultural and recreational programs designed to support and promote sustainability. Networks of parks, walkways, public art and cultural facilities and events should be woven into the community's fabric to encourage sense of place and the overall health and well being of the community. F.1 Cultural and arts programs should be supported and nourished as an essential part of the City's social, economic, and health infrastructure. F.2 Recreational opportunities and programming should be integrated holistically into the City's infrastructure and planning process. Community Sustainability 21 F.3 Cultural, arts, and recreational programming should be an integral part of City design and facilities standards, and should be integrated into all planning, promotion, and economic development initiatives. Sustainability Goal G. Develop housing policies, programs, and regulations designed to support and promote sustainability. Support and encourage a mix of housing types and styles which provide people with affordable housing choices geared to changes in life style. Seek to form public and private partnerships to retain and promote affordable housing options. G.1 Land use and housing programs should be designed to provide for existing housing needs while providing flexibility to adapt to evolving housing needs and choices. G.2 Housing should be viewed as a community resource, providing opportunities for residents to choose to stay in the community as their needs and resources evolve and change over time. G.3 Support the development of housing tools, such as inclusionary zoning incentives and affordable housing programs, that promote a variety of housing types and affordability levels into all developments. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Our Common Future, U.N. General Assembly Plenary Meeting, December 11, 1987. 22 Community Sustainability Climate Change Introduction. The quality of the environment we live in is a critical part of what people often describe as the "character" of Edmonds. Even if it is not something we overtly think about, it is an intrinsic part of our everyday experience, whether at work, at rest or at play. Until relatively recently, environmental quality has often been thought of in terms of obvious, easily observable characteristics — such as the visible landscape, the quality of the air, the presence and variety of wildlife, or the availability and character of water in its various forms. However, recent evidence on climate change points to the potential fragility of our assumptions about the environment and the need to integrate and heighten the awareness of environmental issues as they are inter -related with all community policies and activities. Recognizing the importance of addressing the issues surrounding the environment and climate change, in September 2006, the City of Edmonds formally expressed support for the Kyoto Protocol' and adopted the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement4 by Resolution No. 1129, and joined the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI)' by Resolution No. 1130. Scientific evidence and consensus continues to strengthen the idea that climate change is an urgent threat to the environmental and economic health of our communities. Many cities, in this country and abroad, already have strong local policies and programs in place to reduce global warming pollution, but more action is needed at the local, state, and federal levels to meet the challenge. On February 16, 2005 the Kyoto Protocol, the international agreement to address climate change, became law for the 141 countries that have ratified it to date. On that day, Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels launched an initiative to advance the goals of the Kyoto Protocol through leadership and action by at least 141 American cities. The State of Washington has also been taking steps to address the issues surrounding climate change. For example, in March, 2008, the state legislature passed ESSHB 2815, which included monitoring and reporting mandates for state agencies along with the following emission reduction targets: Sec. 3. (1)(a) The state shall limit emissions of greenhouse gases to achieve the following emission reductions for Washington state: (i) By 2020, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases in the state to 1990 levels; (ii) By 2035, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases in the state to twenty- five percent below 1990 levels; (iii) By 2050, the state will do its part to reach global climate stabilization levels by reducing overall emissions to fifty percent below 1990 levels, or seventy percent below the state's expected emissions that year. The City of Edmonds has formally approved the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement which was endorsed by the 73rd Annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting, Chicago, 2005. Under the Agreement, participating cities committed to take three sets of actions: Community Sustainability 23 1. Urge the federal government and state governments to enact policies and programs to meet or beat the target of reducing global warming pollution levels to 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012, including efforts to: reduce the United States' dependence on fossil fuels and accelerate the development of clean, economical energy resources and fuel -efficient technologies such as conservation, methane recovery for energy generation, waste to energy, wind and solar energy, fuel cells, efficient motor vehicles, and biofuels. 2. Urge the U.S. Congress to pass bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legislation that 1) includes clear timetables and emissions limits and 2) a flexible, market -based system of tradable allowances among emitting industries 3. Strive to meet or exceed Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing global warming pollution by taking actions in our own operations and community. Given this background, the City of Edmonds recognizes that global climate change brings significant risks to our community as a shoreline city. At the same time, the City understands that we have a responsibility to play a leadership role both within our own community as well as the larger Puget Sound region. To that end, the City establishes the following goals and policies addressing climate change. Climate Change Goal A. Inventory and monitor community greenhouse gas emissions, establishing carbon footprint baselines and monitoring programs to measure future progress and program needs. A.1 Establish baselines for greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprint for both Edmonds city government and the broader Edmonds community. A.2 Establish a monitoring program for consistently updating estimates on City and community greenhouse gas emissions. The monitoring program should be designed so as to enable a comparison between measurement periods. A.3 The monitoring program should include assessment measures which (1) measure progress toward greenhouse gas reduction goals and (2) evaluate the effectiveness of or need for programs to work toward these goals. Climate Change Goal B. Establish targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and promoting sustainability for both city government and the Edmonds community. Regularly assess progress and program needs, identifying opportunities and obstacles for meeting greenhouse gas emission targets and sustainability. B.1 City government should take the lead in developing and promoting GHG emissions reduction for the Edmonds community. B.2 Establish and evaluate targets for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions for both Edmonds city government and the broader Edmonds community. Targets should be set for both short- and long-range evaluation. B.2.a. By 2020, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels; 24 Community Sustainability B.2.b. By 2035, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases to twenty-five percent below 1990 levels; B.2.c. By 2050, Edmonds will do its part to reach global climate stabilization levels by reducing overall emissions to fifty percent below 1990 levels, or seventy percent below the expected emissions that year. B.3 Establish measures for evaluating the degree of sustainability of Edmonds city government and the broader Edmonds community. BA Annually assess the status and progress toward emissions reduction goals. Climate Change Goal C. Assess the risks and potential impacts on both city government operations and on the larger Edmonds community due to climate change. The assessment of risk and potential responses — both in terms of mitigation and adaptation — should evaluate the full range of issues, paying particular attention to those arising from the city's location on Puget Sound. C.1 Develop a climate change risk assessment and impact analysis for city government facilities and operations. C.2 Develop a climate change risk assessment and impact analysis for the Edmonds community which considers the potential long-term impacts to economic, land use, and other community patterns as well as the risks associated with periodic weather or climate events. Climate Change Goal D. Work with public and private partners to develop strategies and programs to prepare for and mitigate the potential impacts of climate change, both on city government operations and on the general Edmonds community. D.1 Develop a strategic plan that will help guide and focus City resources and program initiatives to (1) reduce greenhouse gas production and the carbon footprint of City government and the Edmonds community, and, (2) reduce and minimize the potential risks of climate change. The strategic plan should be coordinated with and leverage state and regional goals and initiatives, but Edmonds should look for and take the lead where we see opportunities unique to the Edmonds community. D.2 Build on and expand the strategic action plan to include programs that can involve both public and private partners. D.3 Undertake a policy review of City comprehensive, strategic and specific plans to assure that City policies are appropriately targeted to prepare for and mitigate potential impacts of climate change. These reviews may be done to correspond with scheduled plan updates, or accelerated where either a higher priority is identified or the next update is not specifically scheduled. Community Sustainability 25 Climate Change Goal E. Develop mitigation strategies that can be used by both the public and private sectors to help mitigate the potential impacts of new and ongoing development and operations. Develop programs and strategies that will encourage the retrofitting of existing development and infrastructure to mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change. E.l Develop policies and strategies for land use and development that result in reduced greenhouse gas emissions for new development as well as redevelopment activities. E.2 Develop mitigation programs and incentives that both public and private development entities can use to reduce or offset potential greenhouse gas emissions associated with both new development and redevelopment. E.3 Develop programs and incentives that encourage existing land use, buildings, and infrastructure to reduce their carbon footprint. Demonstration programs and other cost-efficient efforts that do not rely on long-term government subsidies are preferred, unless dedicated funding sources can be found to sustain these efforts over time. 2 For example, see the Fourth Assessment Report; Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report, by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, February 2007. 3 The Kyoto Protocol was adopted at the third Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Kyoto, Japan, on 11, December 1997, and established potentially binding targets and timetables for cutting the greenhouse -gas emissions of industrialized countries. The Kyoto Protocol has not been ratified by the U.S. government. 4 The U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement is as amended by the 73rd Annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting in Chicago in 2005. 5 ICLEI was founded in 1990 as the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives following the World Congress of Local Governments for a Sustainable Future, held at the United Nations in New York. 26 Community Sustainability Community Health Introduction. Community health as it is used here means the overall aspects of public facilities and actions that can have an effect on the health and welfare of the community's citizens. The focus here is on the public realm, understanding that public actions and policies can have an impact on the well- being of Edmonds citizens. The idea is that whenever possible, government should be an enabler, supporting the expansion of opportunities for people so that they can be as self-sustaining as possible, thereby reducing the potential need for intervention from government, community -based or privately -derived services — services which are becoming increasingly costly and difficult to provide. Community health is closely linked to land use, transportation, public service delivery, and environmental quality. Clean water and clean air are a basic necessity when seeking to keep people healthy. In addition, there are certain land use and other actions that Edmonds can take to help foster healthy lifestyles throughout the community. Government also has a role in providing basic services, such as police and fire protection, while encouraging access to affordable housing and opportunities to live, work, and shop close to home. Community Health Goal A. Develop a reporting and monitoring system of indicators designed to assess Edmonds' progress toward sustainable community health. A.1 Develop community indicators designed to measure the City's progress toward a sustainable community. A.2 Use these community indicators to inform long-term, mid-term (strategic), and budgetary decision -making. Community Health Goal B. Develop and maintain ongoing City programs and infrastructure designed to support sustainable community health. B.1 Promote a healthy community by encouraging and supporting diversity in culture and the arts. B.2 Promote a healthy community by encouraging and supporting access to recreation and physical activity. B.3 Promote a healthy community by planning for and implementing a connected system of walkways and bikeways which will provide alternative forms of transportation while also encouraging recreation, physical activity and exposure to the natural environment. B.4 Promote a healthy community by seeking to protect and enhance the natural environment through a balanced program of education, regulation, and incentives. Environmental programs in Edmonds should be tailored to and reflect the unique opportunities and challenges embodied in a mature, sea -side community with a history of environmental protection and awareness. Community Sustainability 27 B.5 Develop and encourage volunteer opportunities in community projects that promote community health. Examples of such programs include beach clean-ups, walk -to -school groups, and helpers for the elderly or disabled. B.6 Increase access to health -promoting foods and beverages in the community. Form partnerships with organizations or worksites, such as health care facilities and schools, to encourage healthy foods and beverages. Community Health Goal C. Promote a healthy community by encouraging and supporting a diverse and creative education system, providing educational opportunities for people of all ages and all stages of personal development, including those with special needs or disabilities. C.1 City regulatory and planning activities should be supported by education programs which seek to explain and encourage progress toward desired outcomes rather then relying solely on rules and penalties. C.2 The City should partner with educational and governmental organizations to encourage community access to information and education. Examples include the Edmonds School District, Edmonds Community College, Sno-Isle Library, the State of Washington (including the Departments of Ecology and Fish and Wildlife), and the various private and public educational programs available to the Edmonds community. C.3 Encourage and support broad and flexible educational opportunities, including both traditional and new or emerging initiatives, such as technology -based solutions. Education should be flexible in both content and delivery. Community Health Goal D. Promote a healthy community through supporting and encouraging the development of economic opportunities for all Edmonds' citizens. D.1 Sustainable economic health should be based on encouraging a broad range of economic activity, with an emphasis on locally -based businesses and economic initiatives which provide family -supporting wages and incomes. D.2 Encourage the provision of a variety of types and styles of housing that will support and accommodate different citizens' needs and life styles. The diversity of people living in Edmonds should be supported by a diversity of housing so that all citizens can find suitable housing now and as they progress through changes in their households and life stages. D.3 Encourage the development and preservation of affordable housing. D.4 Develop programs and activities that promote and support a diverse population and culture, encouraging a mix of ages and backgrounds. Community Health Goal E. Support a healthy community by providing a full range of public services, infrastructure, and support systems. 28 Community Sustainability E.1 Recognize the importance of City services to local community character and sustainability by planning for and integrating public safety and health services into both short- and long-term planning and budgeting. Strategic planning should be a regular part of the decision -making process underlying the provision of these services to the community. E.2 Reduce energy consumption and maximize energy efficiency by promoting programs and educational initiatives aimed at a goal to "reduce, re -use, and recycle" at an individual and community -wide level. E.3 Future planning and budgeting should be based on full life -cycle cost analysis and facility maintenance needs, as well as standards of service that best fit clearly articulated and supported community needs. Community Health Goal F. Support a healthy community by providing for community health care and disaster preparedness. F.1 Plan for and prepare disaster preparedness plans which can be implemented as necessary to respond effectively to the impacts of natural or man -induced disasters on Edmonds residents. F.2 Prepare and implement hazard mitigation plans to reduce and minimize, to the extent feasible, the exposure of Edmonds citizens to future disasters or hazards. F.3 Promote food security and public health by encouraging locally -based food production, distribution, and choice through the support of home and community gardens, farmers or public markets, and other small-scale, collaborative initiatives. FA Support food assistance programs and promote economic security for low income families and individuals. F.5 Promote and support community health by supporting national, state and local health programs and the local provision of health services. Community Sustainability 29 Environmental Quality Introduction. The environmental quality and beauty of the City of Edmonds is largely reflected through its natural resources, and especially its location on the shores of Puget Sound. The city's watersheds — including Lake Ballinger, a well-known landmark — and streams that flow into the Sound provide a rich and diverse water resource. The beaches, wetlands, and streams provide habitat for diverse wildlife including many species of migrating and resident birds which adds to the aesthetic and pleasing quality of the environment. As Edmonds has grown and developed, what were once abundant native forest and wetland habitats have now become increasingly scarce. Nonetheless, our parks, open spaces, and the landscaped areas of our neighborhoods integrate pleasing vistas and differentiation necessary to provide relief in a highly developed landscape. Throughout the city, woodlands, streams, wetlands and marine areas contain native vegetation that provide food and cover for a diverse population of fish and wildlife. Preserving and restoring these natural resources through environmental stewardship remains a high priority for the Edmonds community. Healthy ecosystems are the source of many less tangible benefits that humans derive from a relationship with nature such as providing a sense of well-being and sites for nature trails and other educational and recreational opportunities. Some ecological services that native plants and trees provide are stabilizing slopes and reducing erosion, replenishing the soil with nutrients and water, providing barriers to wind and sound, filtering pollutants from the air and soil, and generating oxygen and absorbing carbon dioxide. Our city beaches and the near - shore environment also represent unique habitats for marine organisms. So interconnected are the benefits of a functioning ecosystem, that non -sustainable approaches to land development and management practices can have effects that ripple throughout the system. The combination of marine, estuarine, and upland environments should be seen as an integrated and inter- dependent ecosystem supporting a variety of wildlife valuable to the entire Edmonds community. Environmental Quality Goal A. Protect environmental quality within the Edmonds community through the enforcement of community -based environmental regulations that reinforce and are integrated with relevant regional, state and national environmental standards. A.1 Ensure that the city's natural vegetation associated with its urban forests, wetlands, and wildlife habitat areas are protected and enhanced for future generations. A.2 City regulations and incentives should be designed to support and require sustainable land use and development practices, including the retention of urban forest land, native vegetation, and wildlife habitat areas. Techniques such as tree retention and low impact development methods should be integrated into land use and development codes. A.3 Provide for clean air and water quality through the support of state and regional initiatives and regulations. A.4 Coordinate land use and transportation plans and implementation actions to support clean air an water. 30 Community Sustainability Environmental Quality Goal B. Promote the improvement of environmental quality within the Edmonds community by designing and implementing programs based on a system of incentives and public education. B.1 The City should promote and increase public awareness and pride in its natural areas and wildlife heritage. Special emphasis should be directed toward preserving natural areas and habitats (forests, wetlands, streams and beaches) that support a diversity of wildlife. B.2 Education and recreation programs should be designed and made available for all ages. B.3 Environmental education should be coordinated and integrated with other cultural, arts, and tourism programs. B.4 To encourage adherence to community values and goals, education programs should be designed to help promote understanding and explain the reasons behind environmental programs and regulations. Environmental Quality Goal C. Develop, monitor, and enforce critical areas regulations designed to enhance and protect environmentally sensitive areas within the city consistent with the best available science. C.1 Critical areas will be designated and protected using the best available science pursuant to RCW 36.70A.172. C.2 In addition to regulations, provide incentives that encourage environmental stewardship, resource conservation, and environmental enhancement during development activities. Environmental Quality Goal D. Develop, implement, and monitor a shoreline master program, consistent with state law, to enhance and protect the quality of the shoreline environment consistent with the best available science. D.1 Adopt a Shoreline Master Program that meets the requirements of state law and is consistent with community goals while being based on the best available science Community Sustainability 31 Implementing Sustainability Introduction. One of the reasons for adopting this Community Sustainability Element as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan is to provide a positive conceptual framework for coordinating and assessing the community's progress toward sustainability. For that to happen, there must be a tie between long-range comprehensive planning, mid -range strategic planning, and short-term implementation decisions embodied in budgeting and operations. There are a number of important principles to keep in mind when linking these sets of plans and actions. • Engage and educate. Connect with the community and provide ways to access and share information and ideas. • Integrate. Be holistic in approach, recognizing linkages and seeking to expand problem - solving and solutions beyond traditional or institutional boundaries. • Innovate. Go beyond conventional approaches; be experimental. • Be adaptive. Be flexible, discarding or modifying approaches that don't work and shifting resources where or when needed. Rigid rules will not always work or result in the most effective solution. • Be strategic. Target and prioritize actions to be effective and gain community support and momentum. Acknowledge limitations, but be creative and persistent in seeking solutions. • Be a leader. Lead by example, and by forming partnerships that effect decision -making while providing ways to address differing views and perspectives. • Measure and assess. Set benchmarks to monitor progress and provide feedback to policy development and decision -making. A key to being successful in applying these principles to sustainability will be the need to apply an adaptive management approach to planning and resource allocation. A passive approach can emphasize predictive modeling and feedback, with program adjustments made as more information is learned. A more active approach will emphasize experimentation — actively trying different ideas or strategies and evaluating which produces the best results. Important for both approaches is (a) basing plans and programs on multi -scenario uncertainty and feedback, and (b) integrating risk into the analysis. Either of these approaches can be used, as appropriate in the situation or problem being addressed. Implementation Goal A. Develop benchmarks and indicators that will provide for measurement of progress toward established sustainability goals. A.1 Benchmarks and indicators should be both understandable and obtainable so that they can be easily explained and used. 32 Community Sustainability A.2 Establish both short- and long-term benchmarks and indicators to tie long-term success to interim actions and decisions. A.3 Develop a reporting mechanism and assessment process so that information can be gathered and made available to the relevant decision process at the appropriate time. Implementation Goal B. Provide mechanisms to link long-range, strategic, and short-term planning and decision -making in making progress toward community sustainability. B.1 Schedule planning and budgeting decision processes to form a logical and linked progression so that each process builds on and informs related decisions. 13.2 Long-range, strategic, and short-term planning should acknowledge the other time frames, decisions, and resources involved. For example, short-term budgetary and regulatory decisions should be designed to effect strategic and long-term goals. Figure 7: Example of Process Coordination Annual Plan Coordination Schedule JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC City Council Retreat Strategic Plan • Budget........✓, '-------------- , • TBD -------►. Capital Facilities Plan Comprehensive • iD Plan , Mes 1 Preliminary • Final Approval 010110. Prep / Development ---- Do- Input/Feedback Community Sustainability 33