Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2016-12-14 Planning Board Packet
�1 o� NJI Agenda Edmonds Planning Board "" Ixyo COUNCIL CHAMBERS 250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 DECEMBER 14, 2016, 7:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Approval of draft minutes of: November 9, 2016 3. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 5. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A. Development Services Director Report B. Election of 2017 Officers 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Public Hearing on Draft Highway 99 Subarea Plan 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 8. NEW BUSINESS 9. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA A. Discussion on Extended Agenda 10. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS 11. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS 12. ADJOURNMENT Edmonds Planning Board Agenda December 14, 2016 Page 1 2.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/14/2016 Approval of draft minutes of: November 9, 2016 Staff Lead: N/A Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Diane Cunningham Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review and approve the draft minutes Narrative Draft minutes are attached Attachments: PB161109d Packet Pg. 2 2.A.a CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 9, 2016 to Chair Lovell called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Safety 0 N Complex, 250 — 5"b Avenue North. m BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT STAFF PRESENT E Philip Lovell, Chair Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager o Carreen Rubenkonig, Vice Chair Carrie Hite, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Director Z Matthew Cheung Jerry Bevington, Video Recorder Todd Cloutier Karin Noyes, Recorder G Alicia Crank aa) Nathan Monroe 3 c Daniel Robles Valerie Stewart Malia Clark, Student Representative READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES BOARD MEMBERS STEWART MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 BE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. VICE CHAIR RUBENKONIG SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA M ti The agenda was accepted as presented. .. AUDIENCE COMMENTS No one in the audience indicated a desire to comment during this portion of the meeting. PUBLIC HEARING ON CIVIC PARK MASTER PLAN Chair Lovell reviewed the rules and procedures for the public hearing. He specifically noted that written comments submitted prior to the meeting were included in the packet for the hearing. They have been reviewed by the Board Members and included as part of the public record. Ms. Hite announced that several members of the Project Advisory Committee (PAC) were present at the meeting: Council Member Dave Tietzel, Board Member Valerie Stewart, Dick Van Hollebeke and Alex Witenberg. She explained that the City staff and design team (Walker Macy) have conducted three in -person and three on-line open houses. At the last open house, the design team unveiled a hybrid plan that incorporated community feedback to date. In an effort to solicit additional public feedback, the hybrid plan is being presented for public hearing before the Planning Board, followed by the City Council. She reviewed that the project has gone through a robust and difficult public process. She recalled a statement made Packet Pg. 3 2.A.a by Mayor Earling early in the process that "there is about 20 acres of need that they are trying to fit into an 8-acre downtown park." Ms. Hite reviewed that two options were presented at the 2nd in -person and on-line open houses, and to the Board at a previous meeting. Community input was split. Many people liked the activity level proposed in Option 2, but they preferred the aesthetics (meandering pathways, softer edges, etc.) of Option 1. The design team from Walker Macy did a great job of combining the desirable elements of each of the options into a hybrid plan. When the hybrid plan was presented at the 3rd open house on October 19th, community sentiment supported the general arrangement of spaces but expressed concern with the location of the skate park and its proximity to the neighboring condominiums. Additional critique suggested increasing the petanque area, moving stadium lighting to the perimeter of the field and looking at pedestrian safety along the alleys in further detail. She said staff attempted to respond to each of the public comments. To address some of the concerns, the design team has suggested a new location for the skate park. In addition, they will provide visuals to illustrate a densely - planted buffer between the park and alley edges, which will prevent children from crossing in non -designated areas. Ms. Hite summarized that, following the public hearing, the design team and staff is hoping to get more direction from the Board as they prepare to present the hybrid plan to the City Council on November 22°d for another public hearing. Chris Jones, Principal and Landscape Architect with Walker Macy, Seattle, advised that the master plan has been through a significant public outreach process, and the third and final in -person open house was held on October 19th, followed by an on-line open house. Each of the in -person open houses were well attended, and there was significant feedback from the on-line open houses, as well. He commented that the process put together by staff is probably the most significant public outreach process he has seen for a downtown signature park planning effort. While it is not possible to please everyone, he believes the proposed hybrid plan comes as close as possible with just a few minor tweaks. He reminded the Board that the goal is to create a downtown park that has something for everyone. Mr. Jones reviewed that the 1" open house was used to talk about potential programs for the park, and no drawings or designs were presented. Two design alternatives were presented at the 2nd open houses that incorporated the community comments as much as possible. Option 1 was a more passive design that was termed the "Meadow Loop," and Option 2 was a more active design that was termed "Activity Central." Participants at the 2nd open house were divided into groups and invited to share their thoughts on the two alternatives. The outcome of the in -person open house was that people preferred the more passive scheme identified in Option 1. However, participants in the on-line open house indicated a preference for the more active Option 2. With Option 1, people really gravitated towards the signature elements, such as the free -flowing structure and layout, walking paths, water feature, plaza, open green spaces and lawn. Common reasons respondents preferred Option 2 included the view terraces, long walking and running paths, expanded boys and girls club, skate park, the focus on fields and athletic facilities, and the potential for large events. When combining the comments from the in -person and on-line open houses, the majority preferred Option 2. Most people liked the lawn terraces and felt the skate park should remain. They liked the curves in Option 1, but wanted a more active program like in Option 2. In addition, respondents indicated a desire for additional restrooms, benches and/or seating areas, lighting, additional covered athletic facility and market stage, American's with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility, and a 400-meter track. The proposed hybrid plan that was introduced at the 3rd open houses incorporates the things that people liked best about each of the options. It includes the top 10 activities that were identified at the I" open houses: restrooms, petanque courts, jogging/walking paths, soccer, shade trees, skate park, playground, tennis courts, Boys and Girls Club, and a multi -use lawn. He noted that from a total list of 40 preferred activities, 36 were accommodated in the hybrid plan. The Hybrid Plan is organized similar to Option 1, but maximizes the recreational opportunities found in Option 2. He presented the hybrid plan and specifically noted the following features: There was a desire for wider buffers that allowed people to move around the park, to buffer the more active uses that are located towards the center of the park, and to create a civic active edge on the 61h Avenue side of the park. The plan includes pedestrian connections and a gracious sidewalk along 6th Avenue. As proposed, there would be several entries into the park, with a strong cast/west pedestrian connection on the vacated right-of-way (Sprague Street). This will allow people to easily moved through the park in an east/west direction. A 1/3-mile pedestrian jogging path would be provided for those who want to track the distance they walk or run. to 0 N ci `m E am 0 z M ti Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2016 Page 2 Packet Pg. 4 • Community hubs (gathering spaces) are included, as well as an expansion of the existing Boys and Girls Club. A shade pavilion, restroom and storage facility would be located to the south of the Boys and Girls Club. An alternative would be to relocate the Boys and Girls Club facility to the northwest corner of the park. • A multi -use lawn area would be located at the center of the park. Originally lights were proposed to be located at the center of the lawn area. However, in response to a citizen comment, the design team is now proposing that the lights be located around the perimeter of the lawn area. • A playground area would be located on the eastern edge of the park. • The skate park is currently shown on the design in the northeast corner, along with plantings and additional seating. The intent is to create more of a social atmosphere around the skate park. • The west side of the park, along 6 h Avenue, is identified as a market promenade, and the design team is suggesting that the sidewalk on either side of 6th Avenue would be flush with the roadway to give pedestrians the authority. While this concept will not be included as part of the master plan, it would help connect the park to the downtown and create a much friendlier space. to • Two tennis courts would be located in the northwest corner of the site, to the north of the existing Boys and Girls Club. N • To the south of the Boys and Girls Club, the design includes a water feature, with seating and tables and chairs. While the design team understands that water features are costly and one was just introduced at City Park, the water feature at L CU Civic Park would be more subtle and/or artistic rather than a spray feature. The community has indicated that a water E feature is an important element for this signature park. > • Petanque courts would be located in the southwest corner of the site, and trees and landscaping would be blended into Z the space to create a nice sequence and entry from the downtown. • Second to the goal of making the park something for everyone in the community is making the park as flexible as possible. It is very important to create spaces that are flexible to accommodate changing needs into the future. • The design incorporates a significant amount of utilities (power, water, video, telecom, etc.) There will be 10 stub outs 3 for all of the services at various locations in the park. E • The park is designed to easily accommodate small to medium-sized events. The design can also accommodate larger events such as the Taste of Edmonds, 4tb of July, and other markets and festivals. For example, the design team worked with the Chamber to accommodate the needs of the Taste of Edmonds. The Chamber has indicated it would be possible o for them to be more efficient with the space, and there appears to be consensus that the proposed design can R accommodate the event in a more compact configuration. Mr. Jones advised that, at the 3rd open house, participants were invited to provide additional comments regarding the Hybrid Q Plan. Since that time, the design team has been working with staff and the PAC to respond to the community requests. To address concerns from condominium owners adjacent to the proposed skate park, the design team is now proposing that the M rl- skate park and picnic area locations be swapped. They are also proposing that the petanque courts be expanded to six, with plantings, seating and trees on the southwest corner of the site. In addition, if the Boys and Girls Club relocates to the -0 northwest corner of the site, the multi -use courts could be relocated to a different area on the north side of the park. c Regarding the public comments about pedestrian safety, primarily along the alleyways, he explained that most successful r parks are as transparent as possible. Rather than placing a fence around the perimeter, plantings can be used to keep people from walking through certain areas. A buffer on the north and south sides of the park should help to mitigate the problems a associated with safety. He provided an illustration of the type of planted buffer that the design team is recommending, noting that it would be a minimum of 14-feet wide. c Mr. Jones explained that, as proposed, the project would be done in phases. Phase A would be redevelopment of the active civic space along 6`h Avenue (west side of park), and Phase B would include the more passive landscaped portion of the park. Phase C would involve street improvements along 6`h Avenue as suggested earlier. Chair Lovell opened the public portion of the hearing. Tom Benediktson, Edmonds, said he lives directly north from where the skate park was originally proposed. He thanked the design team for responding to neighborhood input. He explained that the previous version of the Civic Park Master Plan would have placed the skating facility right outside his living room window. He appreciates the change in plan, which moves the skating facility to a position equidistant from the condominiums on Bell and Daley Streets. This change will alleviate the noise generated by the skaters. Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2016 Page 3 Packet Pg. 5 Mr. Benediktson also read the following written statement from Pat Woodell, Edmonds, who lives on the north edge of Civic Park but was unable to attend the meeting: "I have read the packet that was prepared for this meeting, and I would like to compliment Walker Macy on the proposed changes in the design that is shown on Page 41. I ask that those making decisions about the final design, support this new proposal. I am excited about the new park and look forward to the coming changes. In my written submission to you, I stated my reasons for locating the skate park as far as possible from residential boundaries. Tonight's presentation showing revisions to the design, addresses the concerns of many who have worried about a skate park being so close to their balconies. The revised design shows sensitivity to these concerns. I would also like to compliment the decision to locate the picnic area near our buildings in place of the skate park. A picnic area provides an excellent buffer from higher -use activities in the park. The elevations presented in the to Planning Board packet show the potential for the park and all of the beautiful design elements we have to look N forward to. I appreciate Carrie Hite and Walker Macy's hard work on the design and would like to thank them for addressing our concerns as neighbors of the park. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for your CD consideration in supporting the skate park and picnic areas where they are located in the revised design. " .0 E m Linda Malan, Edmonds, indicated her support for Mr. Benediktson's comments and said she lives in the same o condominium development. She very definitely wanted to confirm how important Ms. Hite has been in the process. She said Z she and her neighbors began expressing concerns before any planning was ever presented, knowing that this was going to c impact them. She thanked Ms. Hite for her quick responses. She said she also lives adjacent to the parking lot that her m development shares with the church. She said her concern has always been about safety. She has seen children dropped off for soccer practice, and they have to run across the alley to get to the park. There have been many close calls. She asked that 5 the Board accept the changes to the Hybrid Plan that relocates to the skate park to a more central location. E Lorna Moffit, Edmonds, said she lives on the northwest end of the park. She complimented the overall design of the Civic Park, but said she has some major concerns about the northwest corner, which is where the four condominiums in her developmetn look out onto the park. She explained that, over the years, they have all enjoyed the active, positive view as they have watched children and adults of all ages participating in a variety of activities. They all chose to move to the condominiums largely because of this unique view. She further explained, that currently, the tennis courts and their tall fences are located across the alley in front of about 1/3 of their condominium property, and they all can enjoy some south and southeast views of the park's activities and beauty, along with the tennis courts. If the current Civic Park Master Plan is passed, the two tennis courts, with their tall fences, would be moved east and be located in front of their entire property. This would block their southeastern and southern views of the park. She provided pictures showing what they see now, as well as what the obstructed view would be if the tennis courts are moved east. She said the change would affect them on a daily basis, and she urged the board to put themselves in her place and imagine looking out to tall fences and hard surfaces. Hopefully, this will help them understand the concerns better, as well as a wish for a change in the plan. She proposed the following three options as a compromise to spread out the hard surfaces: Switch the tennis courts and petanque area. The tennis courts located there would not affect the view of the police department to the west or the church property and small condo to the south. Move the tennis courts back to their present location. While this would shorten the proposed 6t" Avenue promenade, it would also bring back the type of view they now have. The new multi -use court that would be located off of the alley and to the east of the tennis courts could be eliminated and replaced by the 2nd easternmost tennis court in front of their property. This would keep the wide promenade and give a much -appreciated natural opening for everyone to actually see and continue to enjoy the beauty of the park. This option could be a win -win for everyone. Over the years, we have all observed that there is much more activity on the two tennis courts than the two basketball/multi-use courts. Ms. Moffit summarized that, when looking at the Civic Park design and the neighboring homeowners all around the outline, their condominium property is the only one that would be blocked from the view of the park by hard surfaces. She asked the Board to please work to make a change. Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2016 Page 4 Packet Pg. 6 Michelle Martin, Edmonds, said she had the privilege of starting the Edmonds Petanque Club and it is an honor to serve as its president. She said the club is excited and pleased with the new design of the Civic Park, and they want to thank the City for the space the club has been given in the southwest corner of the park. She shared that the club's mission statement is to, "Introduce petanque to people of all ages, regardless of race or gender, to promote the game nationwide, to help establish Edmonds as a sport destination, and to raise money for charities. " She advised that, since 2011, the club has reached out to young people, including French students from Marysville, Japanese students from Hekinan, Japan, summer programs with the Boys and Girls Club, and next year the French classes from Edmonds Woodway High School. The club is also involved with the Senior Centers from Shoreline and Edmonds, the Taste of Edmonds, and the 4tb of July. She announced that the club was named the 2016 Edmonds Citizens of the Year. Ms. Martin explained that club tournaments (League, Bastille Day Tournament, Platinum Players for over those over 80 years old, and the Edmonds Foodbank) bring players from all over the Northwest. With the Foodbank Tournament and the support of merchants and businesses in town, the club has given $24,000 to the Edmonds Food Bank since 2011. The daily and weekly players and the tournaments also bring business to restaurants and shops in Edmonds. Petanque also has a great N impact with the older and retired citizens of Edmonds, and it is a social and recreational experience cherished by many. The 0 club currently has 83 members and has been successful because the City of Edmonds supported the construction of the `m courts. The club is a non-profit organization. A grant from the Hubbard Foundation and a donation from the McDevitt E Family Foundation was used to finance the materials and start the summer program with the Boys and Girls Club. With the proposed new Petanque Grove, the City will have the best place for petanque in Washington State. She urged the Board to 0 cooperate with the City staff to find a way to continue to have tournaments, raise money for a good cause, and attract a larger Z number of visitors to the City. o Jack McHenry, Shoreline, said he is an active member of the Edmonds Petanque Club and was present to share some thoughts about the Civic Park Master Plan. He explained that, since its founding, the club has reached out to the community as often as possible. Unfortunately, as fantastic as it is, the proposed design for the Petanque Grove will not allow for larger - format, community petanque events because the club will lose the use of the former soccer field. He asked the design team to consider modifications that allow the club's community functions to continue. For example, the club sponsors a yearly Foodbank Tournament that has contributed $24,000 to the Edmonds Foodbank, plans French and petanque instruction for Edmonds Woodway High School French Classes, and sponsors other tournaments that attract participants, as well as their families and friends, all of whom patronize Edmonds restaurants and shops while they are in town. With such activities, the club has contributed to the community beyond club members' play. The ability to continue such events is an important part of the club's mission and will depend on the ability to create temporary courts on a petanque-friendly surface. Mr. McHenry expressed his belief that the petanque area in the southwest corner of the playfield can provide ample room to stage all such community activities if left in as open a fashion as possible. The club is not asking for additional space, but they hope designers will consider modifications to the Petanque Grove, itself. For example, he asked the Board to consider constructing six standard courts on the perimeter for regular club play, amending the current proposal to retain the central CD area of the Petanque Grove in an open fashion interspersed with deciduous shade trees, and surfacing the resulting open space r with fast -draining, pervious, crushed granite so that additional, temporary courts can be formatted among the trees using easily removable string boundaries. This design would create a wet -weather -friendly open space with a pervious, crushed a granite surface for the public to use for a variety of activities and an area where the club can line out additional playing courts as needed for special events. The resulting open space would allow wider community use of the Petanque Grove year round d for activities such as the Taste of Edmonds and other festivals, or simply walking, reading, picnicking, game playing, and z stroller exercises. This would be especially true when the larger lawn areas are wet and muddy. 0 M On behalf of the club, Mr. McHenry reiterated the club's appreciation for all the planning that has gone into the playfield project and especially for the inclusion of the Petanque Grove in the southwest corner, near the storage facilities and restrooms. With the features he suggested above, an open space would be created that would allow the club to continue its community activities in Edmonds. The proposed modifications will also open the Petanque Grove to wider use by all park visitors, particularly in inclement weather. Danene Warnock, Edmonds, said she and her husband have been active members of the Edmonds Petanque Club since 2011. She voiced support for the recommendations put forward by Mr. McHenry for how it would be possible to meet the club's outreach mission goals, as mentioned by Ms. Martin, within the boundaries of the space allocated for the Petanque Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2016 Page 5 Packet Pg. 7 Grove. With wet grass a frequent reality, a pervious, crushed granite surface would be a great alternative for activities that she sees taking place on today's playfield. The option to avoid exercising or playing in wet shoes is appealing. What the club envisions just inside the park's entrance is an open, fast -draining surface for people to utilize for a variety of activities that will also provide the necessary open space for additional courts on an as -needed basis. Ms. Warnock said the club also envisions the grove as an attractive area, befitting its location next to the park's entrance. As a gardener and member of the Edmonds Garden Club, she certainly appreciates plants and plantings, but she has also found that open space has value of its own. This is especially true in an urban environment, where a spacious, uncluttered surrounding can be appropriate and welcoming in its unspecified potential. In this way, the grove will fill the same well - loved role as do plazas and squares around the world, with the occasional shade trees adding their own pleasant ambiance. An attractive, minimal, non -intrusively landscaped perimeter border would suit this space and maximize its available usable surface area, which is key to supporting the club's community -benefiting events. to Ms. Warnock reviewed that the community events produce positive results that could never have been anticipated. For T_ N example, at this year's Bastille Day Tournament, two visitors, after watching the interaction of the people and how the tournament was organized, approached Ms. Martin and asked not only to join the club, but about its other activities. Very impressed by what the club was doing and its positive effect on the City, one of them later sent a $2,000 donation to help the club continue its work in the community. 0 In closing, Ms. Warnock said she appreciates the location and area allocated as the Petanque Grove, and she is excited about Z its potential. She also expressed appreciation in advance for the Board's understanding of how attention to specific design c and layout elements of the space allocated for the Petanque Grove would allow the club to continue its community outreach, m as well as provide an open, pleasant space for the community -at -large to enjoy. Tom Greifendorff, Edmonds, said he lives on the Bell Street Alley, across from the petanque courts. He said he and his wife purchased their property because they enjoyed watching people play petanque. He suggested that the fairest way to address the suggestion to switch the petanque courts with the tennis courts is to consider that both were present when the residents purchased their homes. He felt it would be most fair to leave them where they are currently located. He voiced 0 concern that, although there are "no parking" signs along the alley, people still park there, leaving little room for cars to get by and making it impossible for emergency vehicle access. This is an unsafe situation that needs to be addressed. Ms. Hite 0 advised that the City is not planning to allow parking along the alley. Enforcement could be a matter of placing signs to a indicate that parking is not allowed. This issue would be addressed and enforced by the Police Department, and she Q suggested that Mr. Griefendorff contact them about his concerns. Mr. Greifendorff commented that they are anticipated more people will be using the park when it is redeveloped, and there will likely be more problems with people parking in the alley. ti He would appreciate the City ensuring their homes are safe and accessible to emergency vehicles. Bill Wood, Edmonds, said he also lives adjacent to Civic Park, and he urged the Board to not recommend approval of a master plan that does not include a fence along the northern boundary. It doesn't need to be a tall fence, as a three or four - foot fence would be more than adequate. The Board should be aware that the entire field is currently surrounded by fencing, with only two outlets on the north and east sides. This controls the flow of people to a single point where they can either enter or exit the field. The cars driving down the alley to the north of the field know there is only one location they need to look for people leaving the field. This is an important safety concern, yet a fence is not currently part of the design plan. Instead, it has been stated that a berm or landscaping would be used to minimize the risk of children darting out into the alley. For those who don't live adjacent to the park, it is difficult to understand the extent to which children run out into the alley, and there is currently a fence that keeps them away from traffic. It is not sufficient to just minimize opportunities for children to run out into the street, it must be prevented. Also, he felt that a fence would provide added security for people living along the alley from the risk of prowlers. Bill Moffit, Edmonds, said he and his wife were pretty excited when the City purchased the property and started planning for the park. He agreed with Mr. Wood's comments about the need to have a fence or border other than just landscaping along the two alleys, not just for safety of pedestrians, but also for the residents who live adjacent to the park. He said he was surprised to learn that the tennis courts would be relocated. He agreed that the tennis courts were in their present location when he and his wife purchased their home, but he was surprised to learn that many of the most imposing aspects of the plan will be located on the north and west sides of the park. As proposed, the tennis courts would basically be in his front yard Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2016 Page 6 Packet Pg. 8 2.A.a and tall fences would be required around them. He suggested that swapping the location of the tennis courts and petanque courts would be preferable to almost everyone. Mr. Jones agreed that fencing would be required around the tennis courts. However, rather than a chain link fence with plastic slats, the City could use a more transparent material such as the netting that is used at driving ranges. While the fence would still be visible from adjacent properties, a more transparent material would provide a better visual quality than a chain link, slat fence. He emphasized that the fence material is a design detail that will be addressed as part of future work. Jim Welsh, Edmonds, said he is the president of the Bell Street Homeowners Association, which has been quite active throughout the master plan process. He requested more information about the proposed new location of the skate park in relation to where it is currently located. Will it be located halfway through the field or more to the north of the field? Mr. Jones answered that the skate park would be located northeast of the existing skate park. Mr. Welsh asked if it would be located an equal distance from the north and south park boundaries, and Mr. Jones answered that it would be located just north of the center of the park. Mr. Welsh stressed the need to address safety along the alleyway, whether it is done via a to fence or some other device. He complimented staff and the design team for doing a superior job of public outreach during N the planning stages. He said he spoke at an earlier public open house about his desire that a large tree in the southeast section of the park be retained. He wanted to make sure it was included as part of the design. Mr. Jones said the intent is to retain CD this tree, but the determination will have to do with the final grading. .0 E m Kathy Teitzel, Edmonds, said she lives across from the northwest corner of the park and is concerned about the visual 90 barrier that would be created if the tennis courts are moved as currently proposed. She suggested that the City either sacrifice Z the promenade on that part of the street so the tennis courts can remain where they are or sacrifice one of the tennis courts for c more petanque courts. She said she looks out her window more often that people play tennis, and the two courts are rarely m used at the same time. While she understands the need for tennis courts, perhaps just one would meet the needs of the community. She said she is very excited about the proposed improvements to the park, and the thought of looking at either a 5 net or cyclone fence is not appealing. If the Boys and Girls Club is also relocated, it will create another visual barrier for the E people living in her condominium development. Many of the noisy elements are proposed for that end of the park, but she is most concerned about the visual barriers. Gretchen Sewall, Edmonds, said she lives in the condominium development across from the far northwest corner of the park. She said she enjoys the church parking lot and part of her condominium ownership is an easement to parking space in o that lot. She said she watches kids come and go at the park because she lives and works there, and she purchased her home a because she loves the park. She is concerned about safety given that no fences are being proposed. While she does not Q necessarily like fencing, in this situation it is warranted because there are so many kids going back and forth. She urged the City not to approve a plan until there is some degree of serious consideration given to fencing. M 77 Ms. Sewall suggested it is time for the City to step back a bit and look at the opportunity from a citizen's perspective. This is -0 one of the last times the public will have an opportunity to ask questions, get information and offer input before the plan c becomes the incredible vision they are all hoping for. She voiced concern that the Board is being asked to sign off on the r master plan when there are so many things that are fluid and so little detail has been provided. While she is neither a city planner nor a design professional, she has been a citizen of Edmonds for 25 years. She is waiting for a vision for the park to a emerge. She suggested that perhaps the plan is a bit too greedy trying to accommodate 36 of the 40 things that people want into an 8-acre park. Perhaps they need to let go of some of them. She voiced concern that there is no central vision or signature associated with the proposed plan, and she is afraid they are letting an opportunity slip away. Before the plan is E z approved, she would like to see a more complete plan for lighting and information about project costs. She would also like more information about park access, as well as more information about the dimensions of the various park features. She is Q pleased that the design team is proposing an alternative location for the skate park. However, she indicated concern that other things may be changed without the public knowing about it and having an opportunity to comment. She concluded that she would like there to be a truly remarkable vision before the Board forwards the plan to the City Council for approval. It is essential that the Board continue to work with the design team and staff until everyone is excited about the proposed plan. Bryan Berry, Edmonds, said he also lives adjacent to the northwest corner of the park, and he has enjoyed watching people use the park for the past 16 years. He voiced concern that all of the surface -covered activities are concentrated on the north side of the park. He suggested it would be nice if the multi -use court could be relocated to a different area of the park and if Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2016 Page 7 Packet Pg. 9 more greenery could be provided along the north side. He agreed with the previous speakers that a fence is needed on the north and south edges of the park to keep kids from running across the alleyways. Don O'Bryant, Edmonds, said he lives directly across from the proposed east entrance of the park. He commented that when the park gets busy, it creates a dangerous situation. People cross where there are no crosswalks and there is no defined plan for drop off areas. Currently, people pull into his driveway to turn around. He expressed his belief that the traffic problems will continue to increase and something needs to be done to manage the flow of people in and out of the park with crosswalks, drop-off areas, etc. He said he loves the plan for the park, but he suggested that more emphasis could be put on pickle ball, which is becoming a popular sport. He recognized that the tennis courts could accommodate pickle ball, but the footprint of a pickle ball court is 1/3 the size of a tennis court. He suggested they research how popular this sport is compared to tennis and then adjust the plan accordingly. Alex Witenberg, Edmonds, said he participates on the current PAC and was also a member of the original work group that helped design and locate the current skate park. He reviewed that the process started in the late 1990s when the City received N seed money of several thousand dollars from the Edmonds Police Foundation. The skate park group formed and had its initial meeting in 2004, and the process continued over several months as the work group developed criteria for evaluating potential sites for the skate park. The process included an extensive public outreach program, and the ultimate conclusion was to locate the park at Civic Field. Several residents living adjacent to civic field voiced concern about the noise created > by the skate park, and the concerns were mitigated by strategically locating the skate park within the park and by limiting its o hours. The process continued until the park was fully designed, and it opened in the spring of 2007. Although not everyone Z left the public meetings happy, he is not sure what else could have been done to address their concerns. o Mr. Witenberg said he supports the proposed relocation of the skate park, but felt it was important for the Board to understand that a lot of work went into the siting and design of the current skate park, particularly the concept of modular components that could be moved to accommodate other uses of the area. He expressed concern that as the park redevelopment proceeds in phases, the important information that was gleaned from the original public process for the skate park will be lost and the element will be eliminated. While he recognized that there are some drawbacks associated with the skate park, it is a popular amenity. He reminded the Board that there was tremendous support for retaining the skate park at Civic Park, and further design of this element is important as the process continues. Chair Lovell closed the public hearing. Chair Lovell reminded the Board that the proposed master plan is intended to represent a pictorial description of what the M public wants to put in the park. More detailed designs are yet to come. ti Board Member Crank thanked the design team, the public and staff for their hard work. She said she supports public comment related to fencing and safety, parking restrictions and providing a drop-off area. She pointed out that current surface of the field can accommodate vehicle parking during large events to allow people to unload and load, etc. She asked how the City plans to mitigate this since she presumes that vehicular traffic will not be allowed on the new turf. Mr. Jones said he cannot answer at this time whether vehicles will be allowed or not because it is a City determination. However, previous projects he has designed have allowed vehicles to access and even park on the turf. There are strategies, such as putting down a layer of sand rather than dirt, which allows the area to easily be reseeded if damaged. It will be up to the City to decide if vehicular traffic will be allowed. Board Member Crank said she finds it commendable that the proposed plan includes as many ideas from the public as possible. However, they are now at a finite point that there needs to be a cut off for changes. The City should strive for the complete vision for what the park is supposed to be rather than trying to create a park that has everything for everyone. She challenged the design team not to continue to try and block in everything. At some point, they need to stop and focus on a finite number of things. She does not necessarily think they need to do a water structure, which seems more of a want than a need. However, it is important to address the needs of the community as identified in the in -person and on-line open houses. She suggested that perhaps the difference in feedback between the on-line and in -person open houses is because most people who attended the in -person open houses live close to or adjacent to the park, and many who participated in the on-line open houses live elsewhere in the City. She felt that, as a whole, the community would support the plan once a final decision is made. Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2016 Page 8 Packet Pg. 10 Board Member Cloutier agreed with the comments and concerns raised by the citizens, as well. He suggested that the design team consider safety aspects first and then fit in the other elements. He said he loves the new hybrid plan that addresses the reservations brought up by the community. However, he stressed that the master plan is not intended be a final design. It is intended to be a vision of what could be built within the scope of the plan. He suggested it would be helpful for the design team and staff to make this clear when the plan is presented at the City Council's public hearing. Mr. Jones commented that Mr. Witenberg was a great addition to the PAC, and he values the input he provided. He has spoken eloquently to the importance of the public process. He clarified that the skate park is a placeholder and staff will engage the public in the conversation when the design work moves forward at a later date. Board Member Monroe complimented the staff and design team on the great plan. He asked how they decided to include two tennis courts as opposed to just one. Mr. Jones said the number of tennis courts is not fixed in stone. He explained that the feedback they received is that tennis courts are popular and are being used on a regular basis. This informs the design team N that they should include two tennis courts in the design unless directed to do otherwise. Ms. Hite added that the current tennis courts at Civic Park, as well as the tennis courts in the hybrid plan and tennis courts that exist elsewhere in the City, CD are all lined to be used for pickle ball courts, as well. She agreed that pickle ball is becoming a popular sport, and residents M can check out portable nets at the recreation center to use on the courts. The Parks Maintenance Manager has indicated that the tennis courts are heavily used, and the intent is to maintain the same number as currently exists. o Z Board Member Monroe asked if it would be realistic to think the tennis courts could be used for larger events if there are nets around them. Mr. Jones answered affirmatively, explaining that the nets could be portable. Board Member Monroe asked how moving the skate park to the center of the park would impact the park's ability to accommodate large events. Mr. Jones agreed that the event diagram would have to be changed since the skate park would not be available for flexible use. Board Member Monroe asked if the design team and/or staff has raised this concern with the Chamber as to whether the proposed change would still work for the Taste of Edmonds. He asked if it would be better to swap the playground with the skate park. Mr. Jones pointed out that the current skate park went through an extensive public process to identify the correct site, and it has been successful for a number of years. The design team and staff felt it would be appropriate to relocate the skate park within close proximity of its existing site rather than opening a can of worms by proposing an entirely new location. Board Member Monroe voiced support for a water feature at the park, but not a spray pad. Board Member Robles said he believes the proposed master plan will result in a wonderful asset for the community. Once Q the park is redeveloped, it will increase the value of everyone's properties regardless of why or where they purchased their homes and what their views are now. Compromise will be required, but having the park close by will be a tremendous asset. He said he does not live in the downtown, and he is very interested in the park's ability to serve people who live in other areas of the City. Providing parking space would be wonderful. He said he is also interested in some of the modern materials, such as the invisible net around the tennis courts. Mr. Jones clarified that the net would not be invisible, but it o would be more transparent. Board Member Robles said he is interested in learning more about some of the alternatives for r fencing. He noted that fences can make ADA access difficult. Perhaps selective fencing would be in order. He noted that fences can hide children as well as restrain children. He suggested the City consider more modern ways of creating blockage a where needed. Mr. Jones agreed that safety is a big concern, as well as a liability for the City. However, once a fence is put up, it creates a barrier that also presents challenges. From a design perspective, if children get beyond the landscape barrier, d there is usually a way to get across to rescue them. A fence would not allow this same flexibility. A person would have to go z all the way to the end of the fence to get around to find child. Board Member Robles agreed that a fence along the entire north and south boundaries of the park would probably not be desirable. Board Member Robles asked if the City has significant concerns about prowlers in the park and the surrounding neighborhoods given their close proximity to the Police Station. He said it seems like the neighborhood would be fairly safe. He concluded that he is happy with the rigorous public process and reminded the Board and public that they are talking about a master plan and not the final design for the park. He commented that the plan gets better every time he sees it. Ms. Clark said she also likes the plan, and she believes her peers at the High School and Junior High will like it, as well, because it includes a wide variety of activities. She said she has taken tennis lessons at the tennis courts at Civic Park, and she also plays there on a regular basis. Both courts are frequently used. She asked how the proposed plan would impact the Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2016 Page 9 Packet Pg. 11 2.A.a fire station, and Mr. Jones answered that the design of the park would not have any impact on circulation at the fire station. If the idea of the promenade ever moves forward, any booths associated with events would have to be situated west and/or south of the fire station. Ms. Clark said that she initially was not in support of having a fence on the north and south sides of the park, but she is more interested in the idea after hearing about the safety concerns. She said she has seen kids running around in the alleys and a fence would provide additional safety. Board Member Stewart said it was great to hear the public's comments and suggestions. She also said she appreciates the staff and design team's effort, and she has enjoyed serving on the PAC. She referred to the Edmonds Petanque Club's suggestion that the center area in the Petanque Grove have a crushed granite surface. She said it is good that the club is thinking creatively about how to expand the space when needed for tournaments. When it is not needed for tournaments, the surface could be used for other activities. If it could be incorporated to be aesthetically pleasing, she would support the proposal. Everyone seems to agree on the importance of creating flexible spaces, and she felt that the Petanque Grove should _ also be useable for all citizens for a variety of other activities. 0 N With regard to the tennis courts, Board Member Stewart agreed that having two courts would be great, especially if pickle 0 ball courts could fit right in. She asked if a basketball hoop could also be added along the side of at least one of the tennis `m courts to make the surface more versatile. She also asked if the plan includes a covered play area where people can shoot E hoops, etc. Mr. Jones pointed out that a pickle ball court would also be located north of the Boys and Girls Club, and a basketball court is proposed in the northeast corner. Board Member Stewart asked if it would be possible to combine some of p the uses that require a hard surface. Mr. Jones said they did consider this option but it is important to remember that the Boys Z and Girls Club currently has an indoor basketball court, so adding an additional outdoor covered basketball court would be c duplicative. Ms. Hite added that, with the revised Hybrid Plan, the north sport court would be an optional court. If the Boys m and Girls club expands over top of the multi -sport court, they can consider adding a basketball court on the sport court as needed. E Board Member Stewart noted that pickleball is also played on the tennis courts at Yost Park. She observed that pickleball creates a louder and more frequent noise than tennis. She hopes that the tennis courts won't be bothersome to the neighbors. Ms. Hite said people currently play pickleball at Civic Park, too; but not as frequently as at Yost Park. Board Member Stewart suggested that instead of a fence for safety, perhaps some type of "prickly" landscaping could be o used to keep kids from crossing from the park into the alley. She asked how high the landscaping would need to be to 0. a prevent balls from going over. She said it is important to think about safety first, but she is confident that staff can work with Q the design team to come up with a solution that is also aesthetically pleasing. She also referred to the concern that people living adjacent to the tennis courts would no longer be able to see into the park. She said that if she lived in close proximity M rl- to the park, she would also want to be able to see what is going on at the park. Again, she said she is confident that an aesthetically pleasing solution can be found. Board Member Cheung asked how the strip of green to the right of the pickleball court would be used, and Mr. Jones answered that it is proposed to be lawn area. He explained that, in the hybrid plan, there would be a trail through the space and the surrounding area would be lawn. Board Member Cheung asked if picnic tables and benches are planned in the area near the water feature to provide seating. Mr. Jones answered that seat walls and trees would be located to provide a pleasant place for people sit, and they anticipate that the area around the water feature would be very active. Board Member Cheung asked what is being planned for the picnic area that would be located in the northeast corner of the park. Mr. Jones said the intent is to provide standard picnic tables. Board Member Cheung suggested that because it is important to have restrooms nearby, more people will likely use the seating and tables near the water feature. He suggested that tables be incorporated into the area surrounding the water feature and then the area in the northeast corner could be used for something else. Board Member Cheung asked what material would be used to create the walkways through the park. Mr. Jones said the design team had originally identified the materials as unit pavers, but the estimated cost came in too high. The walkways could be constructed of poured, stamped, or colored concrete. Board Member Cheung asked if the walkways would be accessible to skateboards, and Mr. Jones answered that there would be an accessible route. Board Member Cheung said he is concerned about whether a vegetative fence would be adequate to provide safety. On the other hand, aesthetics are important, too. He felt that a chain -link fence would make people feel like they are caged in. He Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2016 Page 10 Packet Pg. 12 2.A.a noted that many parks have wooden log barriers that prevent children from bolting out into the street, but thcy don't rcally look like fences. He felt the intent is to slow people down without being too visually obstructive. Vice Chair Rubenkonig recalled that the Board heard during the hearing that the petanque courts could be used during events and as a dry place for children to play during the winter months. She asked what other activities the courts could be used for. Ms. Hite said the courts could have movable features that would allow them to be used for other types of games and activities. She said she heard from the Edmonds Petanque Club that they would like the Petanque Grove to be redesigned to leave a big open space in the middle, which could be good for kids to play on. She said she would also be open to other creative ideas for how the area could be utilized, but it is not easy to come up with other multi -use options that would be feasible for the area. Mr. Jones cautioned against creating an open field in the center of the Petanque Grove. He reminded the Board that the grove is located close to what he considers to be the front door of the downtown park. It needs to be crafted with a highly to horticultural design. While he recognizes the needs of the club, it is important to balance this need with the need to have an N attractive front door to the park. Leaving an expensive space with nothing in it and no shade would not be inviting to the 0 ordinary user. He emphasized that the space needs to be designed to work for everybody and not just one group. The space `m needs to be crafted and elegant or it will feel empty and not feel like a front door to the downtown park. .0 E m Dick Van Hollebeke, Edmonds, said he is a member of the Edmonds Petanque Club. He said he has been in the landscape o business for 20 years and has quite a bit of experience on visual impact and usage. He explained that the club's suggestion is Z to make the park as beautiful as possible at the entrance, but that doesn't mean it has to include 30 or 40 feet of landscaping. c It could have a perimeter of landscaping and strategically placed trees that can coincide with being able to use the space for m other activities without being a bare open space. A bare open space is not their vision, at all. W Vice Chair Rubenkonig said she likes what she is hearing about the tennis courts being used for pickleball and special events. She said she previously heard that the current skate park features are portable and can be relocated. However, when you talk about multi -purpose uses, it starts to pull away from the visionary plan. There must be a balancing act when considering the master plan. They should consider if the uses pull away from the grand plan of what the park can be for the City of Edmonds. Vice Chair Rubenkonig asked why two tracks have been proposed around the field. Mr. Jones explained that one would be a considered a track where people could measure the distance they walk or run and the other would be a pathway to provide Q circulation around the park. In addition, an cast/west connection would be provided towards the northern side of the park. While there may be some duplication, he would not recommend combining the two. Vice Chair Rubenkonig agreed that it M rl- would not be a good idea to combine people walking with strollers, etc. with people who are running on the track. 77 A member of the audience asked if the City has taken into consideration the high-water level at the park. The ground at the park is very squishy, with a lot of pooling water. She asked if there has been any discussion about how the water can be drained better. Chair Lovell advised that issues related to drainage would be addressed during the design phase of the project. Chair Lovell commented that the staff and design team have done a very nice job with the plan. He said he is unclear about comments that were received during the hearing about the need to create a vision for the park. He felt the proposed Hybrid Plan represents the desires of the majority of people who participated in the open houses. Once again, he reminded the public and the Board that the master plan is not intended to be a final design for the park. It is a program plan for use of the space and the activities and appurtenances that could be placed there. It is too early to talk about heights of trees, spacing of plantings, location of lights, etc. These issues will all be addressed as part of the final design, which will include another public process. He urged people who have concerns about the park to contact the Parks, Recreational and Cultural Services Director to volunteer to serve on the citizen's group that will be established to help with the final designs. Chair Lovell asked if the alley that runs behind the condominiums on the north side of the park a public or private right-of- way. Ms. Hite answered that it is a public right-of-way. Chair Lovell summarized that, because it is a public right-of-way, anyone in the public can use it at any time, and it is up to the police to handle any problems that come up. Ms. Hite agreed that it would remain as a public right-of-way and enforcement would be provided by the Police Department. Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2016 Page 11 Packet Pg. 13 2.A.a Chair Lovell asked what would happen to the existing Boys and Girls Club Building if a new one is constructed in the northwest corner of the park. Ms. Hite explained that the City has been in discussions with the Boys and Girls Club about what their programming will be at Civic Park. The current building is not a good space for them, and they would prefer to build a new facility. The master plan shows two alternatives. A new building could be constructed on the same site or in the northwest corner of the park. If the building is relocated to the northwest corner of the site, the tennis courts would likely be moved to where the existing building is currently located. The existing building would be removed if a new one is constructed. Chair Lovell asked if bicycles would be allowed on the 1/3-mile track around the perimeter of the park, and Mr. Jones answered that it would be for pedestrians, only. If it becomes a problem, signage could be added to make the allowed uses clear. m Chair Lovell pointed out that a water feature was not included in the list of the top ten elements the public wanted to have at N the park. Mr. Jones agreed but said it was identified as one of the top 20 elements the public wanted to have at the park. 0 Chair Lovell said he likes the idea of having a water feature, but he is concerned that the plan tries to cram too many elements `m into the space. Mr. Jones said that, from his experience, one thing that makes a signature downtown park is an interactive E water feature that is unique to the community it serves. It was a popular element that was included in both of the schemes > that were presented at the second open house. o Z Chair Lovell asked how porous the 14-foot landscape buffer would be and if it would be possible to create a cut -through path by frequent use. Mr. Jones felt this problem could be addressed. He explained that it is important to direct people to specific locations to enter the park, and if they start creating additional access points along the northern edge of the park, adjacent residential homeowners may become concerned. Placing a landscape buffer along the northern edge would meet the code requirements and also direct people to specific entry points. He felt that creating a barrier via a fence would be a less safe option. With a landscape barrier, people would always have the option of cutting through if needed. Chair Lovell asked if it would be possible to leave the skate park where it is and design around it. Ms. Hite answered that the o existing skate park has required significant repairs and it is to the point that the original movable modules are now poured in place. She would recommend the City provide new components for the skate park rather than using the old ones that require o a significant amount of maintenance. She recalled that there was significant public concern about the proposed location of a the skate park in the original Hybrid Plan, and the design team has recommended that it be relocated to a more central Q location close to where it currently exists. She indicated that staff would engage the community in the process to help with future design of the skate park element. M 77 Chair Lovell asked if staff and the design team would update the Hybrid Plan based on comments received at the public -0 hearing and from the Board. Ms. Hite answered affirmatively and said it would be helpful for the Board to provide specific o and clear direction. For example: • She heard concern about fencing versus a landscape buffer. The design team has recommended against a fence, and the Board appears to support a landscape buffer as long as it is does not allow access into the park. If a fence is considered, then more translucent materials should be used. • There was some discussion about how many tennis courts there should be, and it appears that the Board supports the current proposal, which identifies two courts. • There was also a recommendation from a citizen that the tennis courts be moved to a different location to improve the view for the adjacent condominium owners. It appears that the Board supports the tennis courts remaining in the location proposed in the plan as long as the fencing material allows some transparency for adjacent neighbors to see into the park. Board Member Cloutier reminded the Board that the Master Plan is not intended to be a final design document. The Board should speak to the purpose of the barrier on the north and south edges of the park. Once its function has been made clear, the design team will be able to figure out the right approach and materials. Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2016 Page 12 Packet Pg. 14 2.A.a Mr. Jones explained that moving the tennis courts to the northeast corner could be an option, but it would block the view for a different set of homeowners. The southwest corner is the entry of the park from downtown, and they probably don't want a fenced edge in that location. If they are moved to the southeast corner, there will be concern that the tennis courts are taking away other opportunities for active recreation. He pointed out that they are in a location that has generally worked, and views can be addressed as they move forward with final design. He emphasized that the City does not intend to put up a chain link fence with slats along the perimeter of the tennis courts as shown in the picture that was submitted during the hearing. A member of the audience suggested that perhaps one tennis court could be eliminated from the plan, and a new tennis court could be constructed in the southwest corner of City Park. Chair Lovell responded that the plan has gone through an extensive public process to arrive at the two tennis courts that have been proposed. Concerns about view blockage have been raised, and the design team has indicated that is possible to address the concerns. Another member of the audience explained that those who spoke about a fence along the northern edge of the park are simply interested in having a barrier incorporated into the plan to discourage people from leaving the park and entering directly onto N the narrow alley. Chair Lovell said the design team understands the challenges in this location and will address safety and 0i access issues as part of the final design, whether it be fencing or landscaping. Board Member Cheung asked if the proposed picnic area could be reserved for group activities. Mr. Jones said the plan does not address this level of detail. p z Board Member Robles asked if the master plan would identify parking for park users who do not live close to the park. Ms. Hite answered that there would be no parking on the park site. The public made it clear that they did not want any of the park space to be used for parking. However, there is parking on 6th and 7th Avenues. The design team has proposed some parking upgrades for both of these streets, but the upgrades will not be part of the actual park development. UPON REVIEW OF THE PACKAGE SUBMITTED FOR THIS PUBLIC HEARING AND UPON HEARING AND READING THE PUBLIC COMMENTS PROVIDED, VICE CHAIR RUBENKONIG MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF THE MASTER PLAN OF THE CIVIC CENTER TO THE CITY COUNCIL, LETTING THE RECORD SPEAK TO THE COMMUNITY'S CONCERNS. HOWEVER, CERTAIN ISSUES WARRANT FURTHER ATTENTION SUCH AS: • ADDRESS THE FUNCTIONALITY OF THE ALLEY BARRIER FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY. Q • MAINTAIN THE MATURE TREE IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. • INCREASE THE MULTI -PURPOSE ACTIVITY IF POSSIBLE WITHIN DESIGN CONSTRAINTS. ti • KEEP THE VISION OF A SIGNATURE PARK. • PROVIDE FUTURE DESIGNATED DROP-OFF AREAS ON 6TH AND 7TH AVENUES. • INTRODUCE OTHER ELEMENTS INTO THE TENNIS COURTS. c BOARD MEMBER ROBLES SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING ON 2016 COMPRENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS Mr. Chave advised that only minor amendments have been proposed for the Comprehensive Plan in 2016. These include amendments to the Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan to recognize and incorporate the Marina Beach Master Plan, and an amendment to the Capital Facilities Element to add an implementation action. In addition, a couple of more substantial amendments are being developed relative to the Water Comprehensive Plan and Street Tree Plan. These will be ready for the Planning Board's consideration after the first of the year. Vice Chair Rubenkonig pointed out that the list of City -owned parks needs to be updated to include Civic Park. Chair Lovell opened the public hearing. There was no one in the audience to participate in the hearing, and the hearing was subsequently closed. Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2016 Page 13 Packet Pg. 15 2.A.a Board Member Monroe referred to the proposed amendment to the PROS Plan that would replace the existing language in Policy 4.H with the following: "Ensure uses in environmentally sensitive areas are consistent with critical area regulations and the Shoreline Master Program. " He asked how the proposed amendment would impact the dog park that is identified in the Marina Beach Master Plan. Ms. Hite explained that Policy 4.H was adopted prior to the Marina Beach Master Plan. She reviewed that, based on community feedback, the dog park was included in the master plan. This decision made the master plan inconsistent with the current language in Policy 4.H, which reads, "Relocate incompatible uses from sensitive areas. " CHAIR LOVELL MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE 2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS AS PRESENTED. BOARD MEMBER MONROE SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA to Chair Lovell reviewed that the Board's November 23`d meeting has been cancelled. The agenda for their December 14th N meeting will include a public hearing on the draft Highway 99 Area Plan and election of officers for 2017. The December 28'b meeting has been cancelled. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS m 0 Chair Lovell reported that he and Vice Chair Rubenkonig met with Mayor Earling, who indicated that the sign code may be Z coming back to the Board for additional review. o PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Vice Chair Rubenkonig asked staff to provide an update on the City Council's decision to place a moratorium on the sign code. Mr. Chave said the City Council passed a resolution suspending enforcement of the pedestrian sign aspects of the sign code. They will form a task group to come up with some potential solutions to concerns that have been raised. ADJOURNMENT The Board meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. M ti Planning Board Minutes November 9, 2016 Page 14 Packet Pg. 16 5.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/14/2016 Development Services Director Report Staff Lead: Shane Hope, Director Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Diane Cunningham Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review and discuss Narrative Report is attached Attachments: Director. Report. 12.09.16 Packet Pg. 17 5.A.a -� OF Mo+ V rf MEMORANDUM Date: December 9, 2016 To: Planning Board Members From: Shane Hope, Development Services Director Subject: Director Report Happy holidays! This is the last Director Report for 2016. Next Planning Board Meeting A public hearing on the draft Highway 99 Subarea Plan is the main focus of the Planning Board's December 14 meeting. In addition, the Board is scheduled to vote on officers for next year. No other Planning Board meetings are scheduled this month. REGIONAL NEWS Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) PSRC continues to work on various regional issues, including preparation for updating key regional plans: Transportation 2040 (due by end of 2017) and VISION 2040 (due in 202). One of the working groups is focused on a framework for regional centers and manufacturing/industrial centers —reviewing the performance of those already designated and whether the criteria should change. One important idea seems to be providing for one or more tiers within each of these categories and tying them more closely to transit or other critical infrastructure. A recommendation from the working group to the Growth Management Policy Board is expected in early 2017, with further deliberation and public input to follow. Snohomish County Tomorrow (SCT) The SCT Steering Committee met December 7. Its agenda included three main items: ❑ Legislative Briefings ❑ PSRC Regional Centers Framework (see also PSRC item above) ❑ Strategic Plan: Draft Vision and Mission Statements LOCAL NEWS Architectural Design Board The Architectural Design Board has no meetings scheduled for December. There are several projects that are in the process for a January or February meeting. 1 1 P a g e Packet Pg. 18 Economic Development Commission 5.A.a The Economic Development Commission's will have a Special Meeting On December 14. An agenda will be ready before then and posted online. Hearing Examiner The Hearing Examiner has no meetings scheduled for December. Historic Preservation The Historic Preservation Commission's next meeting will be on December 8. Items for discussion are the Commissioner roles and to assess the current procedures. Tree Board The Tree Board's last meeting was December 1. The agenda included: ❑ Event planning for 2017 ❑ Tree Board University updates ❑ Presentation to City Council in 2017. Note: This year's Tree City USA application was submitted. City Council The City Council's December 6 meeting included the following planning -related items: ❑ Proclamation honoring Carl Zappora, who is retiring from the Verdant Health Commission ❑ Adoption of 2017 City Budget & use of REET funds (Note: Budget includes funding to develop a Housing Strategy; this item will be discussed with the Planning Board in 2017.) ❑ Review and approval of City's 2017 legislative agenda (which includes transportation funding for Hwy 99 to follow up on the Hwy 99 subarea plan and various other items, such as roof for the FA Center, local government revenue stability, funding for affordable housing and homeless, infrastructure funding (PWTF ,etc.), attention to potential amendments to Growth Management Act, and more) ❑ Public hearing and adoption of 2016 Comp Plan amendments (following some discussion about 2 items: dog park and track -side warning system) ❑ Public hearing on proposed Fire District 1 (FD 1) interlocal agreement —long presentation (it's complicated) & public comments ❑ Discussion re: FD 1 interlocal agreement —lots of discussion; contract will come back next week for possible approval ❑ Presentation of bids for Veterans' Plaza Project —with preferred bid to come back next week for approval The Council's December 13 meeting will include topics such as: ❑ Presentation of annual work plan by Edmonds Downtown Alliance ❑ Potential action on Fire District 1 interlocal agreement ❑ FEMA Map update process ❑ Supplemental agreement for Fishing Pier rehabilitation 2 1 P a g e Packet Pg. 19 COMMUNITY CALENDAR 5.A.a ❑ December 9: Free Family Movies, The Edmonds Theater beginning at 4:00 pm ❑ December 9 — 18: The Nutcracker, further information ❑ December 9: The Christmas Spirit, further information ❑ December 10: Edmonds Holiday Market, 10 am ❑ December 10 - 17: Ride the holiday trolley, 11 am — 6 pm, further information ❑ December 13: Argosy Christmas Ships, Edmonds Marina, at 7 pm, further information ❑ December 15: Edmonds Art Walk 3 1 P a g e Packet Pg. 20 5.B Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/14/2016 Election of 2017 Officers Staff Lead: N/A Department: Planning Board Prepared By: Diane Cunningham Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Elect a Chairman and Vice Chairman for 2017 Narrative N/A Packet Pg. 21 6.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/14/2016 Public Hearing on Draft Highway 99 Subarea Plan Staff Lead: Shane Hope / Brad Shipley Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Rob Chave Background/History Development of a comprehensive planning approach to the Highway 99 subarea has been a high priority for Edmonds. Work on developing the plan began in 2015 and ramped up significantly in 2106. A consultant team, led by Fregonese Associates, was hired to help develop the plan. Working on the plan did not start in a vacuum. Previous study efforts were considered, including the 2004 Highway 99 Enhancement Project, the 2004 Highway 99 Market Assessment, the 2007 Highway 99 Traffic Safety and Circulation Study, the 2014 Edmonds Transportation Plan, and the updated 2015 Comprehensive Plan. Public outreach on the current project included: Briefings/discussions with Planning Board and City Council at several public meetings Meetings with key property owners Three public open houses Three mailings about the project and input opportunities: o Flyer # 1 to nearly 2200 addresses o Flyer # 2 to nearly 2200 addresses o Postcard to nearly 2200 addresses Press releases News media articles (Beacon, My Edmonds News, City newsletter) At least two sets of email announcements to people signed up for emails Meetings with technical advisory committee (including transportation agencies and nearby local governments) Special City website information (updated on ongoing basis) Miscellaneous communication with interested parties. Staff Recommendation Hold the public hearing and recommend that the proposed Highway 99 Subarea Plan, with any technical changes, be forwarded to the City Council for adoption. Narrative An initial draft plan has been prepared for the Planning Boards' December 14 public hearing (Attachment 1). The proposal builds on values identified at community meetings, especially: Connectivity Packet Pg. 22 6.A Walkability Safety Enhancement of destinations Healthy businesses Affordable housing Beautification The plan establishes a vision to address land uses, affordable housing, economic factors, and transportation/infrastructure for the mid -to -long term. Improvements to the streets and the walking environment are fundamental. The proposed approach for transportation improvements is similar to what was done in the neighboring city of Shoreline for the same corridor. Also, the plan goes beyond just being a study or wish list - it identifies implementation strategies, policies, and action steps. At the December 14 public hearing, a presentation highlighting key aspects of the proposed Highway 99 Subarea Plan will be given. Time will then be available for public comments and for Planning Board discussion and potential action to recommend the plan to the City Council. The City Council is scheduled to hold a public hearing on the proposed plan on February 7, 2017. Soon after the plan is adopted (with any final changes), implementation will begin. For example, more detailed changes to the development code s and design standards to implement the plan will be prepared and presented for Planning Board and City Council consideration through a public process. In addition, the City will be actively seeking state transportation funds to implement the transportation projects identified in the plan. Of course, full achievement of the plan (including transportation improvements) will be a long-term effort. Attachments: 1. Draft Highway 99 Subarea Plan Attachments: Attachment 1: Highway 99 Subarea Plan Draft 2016-12-08 Packet Pg. 23 6.A.a E MONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN DRAFT DECEMBER 2016 LA EDMOP[D5AY 99 HIGHW Packet Pg. 24 6.A.a ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS List Acknowledgements: City Team Consultant Team Technical Advisory Committee Other Stakeholders? Packet Pg. 25 6.A.a CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..... 2 Document Overview The Planning Context The Planning Process Past Planning Efforts Planned Action EIS Overview VISION + COMMUNITY VALUES ..... 8 Vision Goals Community Values BACKGROUND + EXISTING CONDITIONS ..... 12 The Study Area Unique Districts Existing Land Use Patterns Existing Transportation Existing Economic Conditions and Market Trends COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT ..... 24 Technical Advisory Committee Key Stakeholder Interviews Community Visioning Workshop Public Open House Online Survey and General Comments Web Outreach and Social Media Engagement Outcomes CONSTRAINTS + CHALLENGES ..... 32 Land Use Constraints + Challenges Economic Constraints + Challenges Transportation/ Infrastructure Constraints & Challenges OPPORTUNITIES ..... 36 Land Use Opportunities Economic Opportunities Transportation/ Infrastructure Opportunities ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS ..... 40 Land Use and Transportation Scenarios Scenario Building Blocks Development Capacity Analysis IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES, POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS + ACTIONS ..... 46 Zoning and Development Affordable Housing Signage and Wayfinding Transit Transportation Infrastructure Packet Pg. 26 p ! ' 6.A.a INTRODUCTION The Subarea Plan is a vision and action plan to enhance the Highway 99 area, support prolonged economic prosperity in the corridor area, and build a more attractive place for the Edmonds community to live, work, and play. The City of Edmonds initiated the Edmonds Highway 99 Subarea Plan to address future land use and transportation needs on and around the Highway 99 corridor. The plan acts as a guide for future development of the corridor area, and includes specific actions and investments designed to bring positive changes to the community. DOCUMENT OVERVIEW This document provides guidance for how the corridor should grow and change in the future and sets forth the opportunities and actions needed to address the challenges on Highway 99. The Plan identifies the constraints and opportunities for land use, transportation, and economic development. It describes three alternative scenarios representing different intensities of investment and redevelopment in the short- and long-term future. The accompanying Implementation Strategy lays out the investments, policy changes, and short-, medium-, and long-term actions to transform the Highway 99 area into a vibrant, mixed -use, transit - oriented corridor. THE PLANNING CONTEXT As part of the ten-year state transportation budget adopted in 2015, $10 million was allocated for improvements to Highway 99 in Edmonds. However, the funds are not available in the early years of planning for the corridor. The Subarea Plan will help make the case for obtaining significant additional federal, state, and regional grant funds to implement the policies and strategies set forth in this plan. Successful implementation of the plan will depend on a secure source of funding and collaborative decision -making from state legislators and city officials. Neighboring directly south of Highway 99 in Edmonds, the City of Shoreline has embarked on significant improvements to Aurora Avenue within its boundaries, emphasizing improvements for transit and pedestrian use. Continuing this momentum in Edmonds will benefit the Edmonds community as well as the broader region creating a livable, vibrant community around high -capacity transit that visitors, businesses, and residents can take full advantage of. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 28 INTRODUCTION 6.A.a THE PLANNING PROCESS EDMONDS00 HIGHWAY Understanding Existing Conditions . R"-ew previous swdies of the Fri hrray 99 corridor and inpul from rhnconlmunily, • Ar4yre and vi#uali m C urre„r conditions of the iffoway anieq sur_h as land uses. transpartahon. real cslvlc trends. f.ousing arid business nee& and pareniial ogp*r1wrbH&s and Wrrler5 for development and place -making. Hands.oncomnvu"Ty yi siari ng wgrk9hpg and live poling cxarcise. Palling questions wera also &AAIQbtc ire a survey former on nce project we6slia far chose unable to allcnd rhr workshop. Develop Land Use and 'transportation Scenarios . Understpnd different land use and rrarespD tan impacts laihc corhdar ores, and develop leos+ble aliernari we scenarios hosed on [wreni marker mends. €valuaand dteocument land use and transporrorien allernotive scerOrioh Scenario rewl% were revealed or a public a hauseinMay- 7he scanario results were also available on rf,e wei]Vra ro Calked additional feedback frGm the pu6k (07� j � SE PA 8 Planned Action Environmental Impact Assessment • Preppne p Planned Action EIS to ensure Thar envirarmentai impacrS arc cansidercdand mrhgwed K:lWlcally. The scope of the Planned Action EIS was also revealed of the May public open house and availoble on the vrcT vts to collect addriorcol f ecdhack lrcrn +he public . Create a prelermd sirategy bssscd on evaluakion and fccdback of c�lernarivc sccr+orios • Devtlop a++ onion plan to implement the ydslon far the ffig?wmy 99 area grid phoririze preferred An ovcrsricw of The dr ail pion. uM recommendowts were rcvea[ d al a pub!k open hnt,"inNovember TIse potpie hod rfse gpporlunity #o provide feedback or+ the rccomrr.rnda+ians via +hc websire. . present the sub.4rea plan to the Planning Board and City Courtin. . Frta#2e the drail sub- area piar% and reoammendaHons, The pubis wos invired to offend a prcwWa11an ro 1 he Ptona-4rw] Board and Gry CouncII 7}`e droh ' Ab. ar to plan was alsq avpiroble on the vwebsire for the public ro reLiL-w and provide final comrr.enrs, 3 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 29 6.A.a I NTROD PAST PLANNING EFFORTS During a City Council retreat in 2002, the Highway 99 corridor was identified as one of the areas of greatest potential for generating tax revenue for the city. Subsequently, the Highway 99 Task Force was formed at the City Council retreat in 2003 to study and make recommendations on how to maximize economic growth along the Highway 99 corridor. As a result, the City of Edmonds Highway 99 Enhancement project began engaging neighborhood representatives and business and property owners in 2004 to identify key local objectives and recommendations along the corridor. This subarea plan is intended to augment the work started in 2004 and set forth concrete actions steps to move towards implementing land use and transportation improvements on Highway 99. The Highway 99 Subarea Plan is a result of many years of study and careful planning. Cdyo/Edmonds 2004 Highway 99 Enhancement Project t- This report identifies local objectives and development opportunities for Comprehensive Plan and Zoning d i Amendments eventually adopted 1.11�er�dnlon�, 2004. The plan outlined concepts for C'omprrhrnxi,'rPl■n HIGHWAY 99 ENHANCEMENT PREOQRLT four focus areas along the corridor and r� made recommendations for furthering redevelopment efforts. 2004 Highway 99 Enhancement Project Market Assessment This report is a market feasibility assessment of commercial and ~°~ residential development near Highway 99. The study identified enhancement • scenarios, market factors, multifamily housing considerations, and short- term retail development opportunities. The report also identified barriers to further development, including the need to improve left turns and highway crossings. 2007 Highway 99 Traffic Safety and Circulation Study The Traffic Safety and Circulation Study ■Ili All iv non » evaluated the transportation system's rRai i is snn c .i■r,i ;\Tilt] srUrry needs based on current and future traffic and land use conditions, developed a prioritized list of multi -modal solutions to the transportation needs of the study area, and identified projects for early implementation and incorporation into the City's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). 2015 City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan identifies Highway 99 as a major activity center "intended to encourage the development of a pedestrian and transit oriented area focused on two master planned developments, Swedish/ Edmonds medical center and Edmonds-Woodway High School, with a relate high -intensity of development corridor along Highway 99:' 2014 City of Edmonds Comprehensive Transportation Plan The Transportation Plan serves as the transportation element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. It identifies transportation infrastructure and services needed to support projected land use within the city through the year 2035. Several intersections along Highway 99 were identified for transportation improvements to provide safer access management throughout the corridor and additional safety and urban design improvements. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 30 INTRODUCTION 6.A.a PLANNED ACTION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY (EIS) OVERVIEW A Planned Action EIS is an upfront assessment of environmental conditions, potential impacts, and mitigation measures for the Edmonds Highway 99 Subarea, rather than a piecemeal analysis on a project -by project basis. As such, the EIS provides developers certainty and predictability while streamlining the environmental review and permitting process and furthering the goals of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and the Growth Management Act (GMA). Planned actions still need to meet the City's development regulations and to obtain necessary permits. The alternatives considered in the Draft EIS for the Subarea Plan include No Action (Alternative 1) and two action alternatives (Alternatives 2 and 3). Under Alternative 1, future growth would continue based on existing development regulations and past development trends. Alternative 2 assumes future mixed use growth with an emphasis on residential development and assumes a new vision for the area supported by transportation system improvements and minor updates to existing development regulations. Alternative 3 assumes future mixed use growth with an emphasis on commercial and office development, while assuming the same vision for the area and transportation system improvements and updated development regulations as assumed under Alternative 2. See Appendix X for a more detailed description of impacts for each alternative. FIGURE 1: PLANNED ACTION EIS PROCESS ISSUE DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE b SCOPING NOTICE 1 CONDUCT SEPA SCOPING PREPARE DRAFT EIS ISSUE DRAFT EIS DRAFT EIS PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD PREPARE FINAL EIS ISSUE FINAL EIS 5 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 31 6.A.a I NTROD TABLE 1: KEY FEATURES OF EACH ALTERNATIVE IN THE EIS New Housing Units 1,224 3,345 2,771 by 2035 New Jobs by 2035 2,317 872 3,010 New commercial 964,683 654,944 1,564,206 ft2 by 2035 Zoning No change Consolidate most zoning throughout the study area to one Designations CG zone. Development Code Existing development Amendments regulations would remain [include final amendments when available] unchanged Future improvements would continue to occur Improvements to the Highway 99 Corridor and adjacent Transportation on an incremental basis local streets would include measures to maintain level of Improvements with new development and service standards, increase east/west connectivity, provide as planned by the City's greater bicycle and pedestrian mobility, and improve Transportation Master Plan access to transit. and WSDOT plans. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 32 ram- it v5 F-� tV••�-. r r Packet Pg. 33 1 6.A.a VISION + COMMUNITY VALUES The Vision for the Edmonds Highway 99 area establishes a framework for the Subarea Plan and describes an ideal snapshot of how the area could evolve in the future. The vision is based on the knowledge and ideas of Edmonds residents and stakeholders gathered during public workshops, stakeholder interviews, and through public surveys. The Edmonds community shared a wide -range of creative ideas for improvements that will enable people to enjoy safe and easy access to Highway 99's diverse services and amenities, better access to the area's robust transit system, and more opportunities for affordable housing, jobs, and destinations. THE VISION GOALS The Vision goals here represent the themes that surfaced throughout community discussions with Edmonds residents and stakeholders. They describe the qualities residents want to see in the Highway 99 corridor area. Economic Development Stimulate the economy by attracting and encouraging new businesses, investment, and redevelopment. Safety and Walkability Create a safe and comfortable place for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists to move along and get across Highway 99. Housing and Development Encourage and incentivize mixed use development, affordable housing, office/commercial and other types of development. Identity Establish a distinct identity along the corridor that supports existing cultural destinations and amenities and creates a welcoming and attractive environment for visitors and residents alike. Transportation Create more efficient and accessible connections between districts and destinations, and other transit centers/stations. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 34 6.A.a VISION + GUIDING PRINCIPLES COMMUNITY VALUES 9,9 CONNECTIVITY WALKABILITY Better connections and access Create walkable neighborhoods c for pedestrians, bicyclists, and and commercial centers where transit riders to destinations visitors can walk safely and and amenities in the area. comfortably at all hours of the day. SAFETY M HEALTHY Better connections and access BUSINESSES for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders to destinations Bring in new businesses and and amenities in the area. jobs to the area, encourage existing businesses to thrive, and provide good quality retail and shopping amenities. DESTINATIONS Enhance distinct districts in the area such as the Health BEAUTIFICATION District and the International District to create more vibrant Create a more attractive place destinations and an even for residents and visitors through better sense of place. landscaping and urban design. ,tng&& AFFORDABLE HOUSING Encourage affordable housing options for a mix of income levels - low income, workforce, and moderate -income. 9 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 35 6.A.a VISION + GUIDING PRI This page is left intentionally blank. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 36 y MA N ST 08 H PL S r L208TH ST SW Q< �; -M d' > w z ch Q _ > uai i ■ J me'µ 2 J'.a PARK Rp CD Y j �0012TH ST Veg W 213TH S-. Op�N f4sq Y W 214TH PL 214TH PL SW > s tv#7 i 215TH-ST W 215TH ST SW o v 26THS-SW EDM ND >1 216THSTSW w v. 217TH 'ST S JI: > ; r ■ cct cd d ; 00 : F # 2 r218TH T SW z 3 ' ' c oCLI r 2 3 - • � 7i �o I 1220 T4+ ST jw iML > w J 22N ST S4 W ■ > ' Q �- 2 Wt- * y, 'z I COk oo co ' 22 TH ST SW f + D w'w�`` m Q s Q 1- f� 251 I-PL SW' o Q n 2 6-TH ST EW- cz ■ f m co co IM TH ST SWj ■` ' ' � ' + 00 L 2M F{.STSw MOUNTLAKErt 231STSTSW� + o ,� z _ TERRACE > HOLLY LN w 00 = a_LU z > TH 3T Q s MRDRONA LIVE .� > • Y Y i ' r ^ Q r I 236 W , _ Vv EDM 's • no 4 ID IH ST �' L D"N D 241ST 3T W Q 242 DST A� 242NQ ST- W > �=- III � Mp # t Q CO or CO • `� • �1 - P LAK�aALLIfdGC�R WAY' ''+� 6.A.a BACKGROUND + EXISTING CONDITIONS THE STUDY AREA The Edmonds Highway 99 subarea is approximately 2 miles bordered by several jurisdictions — Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, Shoreline, and the Unincorporated County community of Esperance. The area has distinct subdistricts and is already a horizontal mixed -use district. However, buildings along Hwy 99 are predominately highway -oriented, set far back from the road with large surface parking lots in front which results in an unpleasant and unsafe environment for pedestrians. Many of the buildings are old and reaching the end of their natural life. As Edmonds contemplates where new growth and economic development can occur within the community, this stretch of Hwy 99 has been identified for change and there is broad support for a reimagining of its historic role as just a high-speed highway. The study area currently has approximately 3,800 jobs and 1,600 housing units. There are about 2.4 jobs for every housing unit. As such, the subarea is currently an employment destination, with more than twice as many employees as households. Attracting more housing to this jobs - rich area will increase walking and biking trips and reduce the need for as many auto trips in the area. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 38 BACKGROUND + EXISTING CONDITIONS 6.A.a Key Assets in the Corridor Area: 1 Opportunity to build on the momentum of ongoing neighborhood improvements in Shoreline along Highway 99 while creating a mixed -use corridor that is distinctly Edmonds. High -quality transit facilities already in 2. place — Community Transit, Sound Transit, and Swift BRT— providing links to housing, employment and other amenities to the Seattle Metro region. Distinct districts are already emerging 3. along the corridor area — the International District and Health District — that provide core services and amenities for Edmonds diversifying population. Corridor area is already a mixed -use district 04. with retail uses adjacent to apartments and single-family neighborhoods. The business and developer community 5. and residents alike are ready to see positive changes in the area and are excited for the opportunity to create a pedestrian -friendly, transit -oriented environment. UNIQUE DISTRICTS The area has three distinct subdistricts with major local and regional destinations along the corridor. HEALTH CARE DISTRICT Located approximately between SW 208th St. to SW 220th St., the Health Care District is home to variety of health care facilities and offices, most notably the Swedish Hospital Edmonds Campus. The Edmonds campus includes 34 facilities and services, 217 beds, over 450 physicians and specialists and more than 1,400 staff members. The hospital provides medical and surgical services including Level IV Trauma emergency medicine, diagnostic, treatment and support services. There are many other medical clinics and offices across Highway 99 in Lynnwood as well as schools and higher education such as Edmonds Woodway High School, Mountlake Terrace High School, and Edmonds Community College, within approximately 1.5 miles from the Health Care District core on Highway 99. The Health Care District is not only a provider of vital health services for the region, but also a growing incubator for medical research, partnerships, health and wellness advocacy, and education opportunities. 44 .A Edmonds Health Care District 13 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 39 6Aa BACKGROUND + EXISTING CON FIGUREz DISTINCT DISTRICTS AND MAJOR DESTINATION WITHIN CORRIDOR AREA 220th StS ■ 2ah&sq | Edmonds | Woodway f� � Health Health High School 2� a� �b� m� Ell Swedish Hospitat District UAedidne ¢owl Heart Cente I ! 0thStSW , ■ ■ � | Plum � khgsW International m� ■ _ ■ � - _ me District Pu■i�c 99 Rarkh omg N. � � ■ � ��2: - _ ah k sq �G� � ) ■ ! / ��� �� �� ■f » ' 0thStSWEire - r. 2 @sm 2m4b St SW :I , k%p :;;.I� \|_ �4 - 7h&s rox._�.- marketplace Gateway 238@ kiq . 8431)in P District hks ' � ; �'' - 2-ndSt +hk Major - �� • • 00 T a rtt Gateway 'l.LI ���■� /�_� IL =4 OU EDM ONDS HIGHWAY 99Gu Packet Pg. 40 6.A.a BACKGROUND + EXISTING CONDITIONS INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT Located approximately between SW 224th St and SW 238th St, the International District is a major cluster of Asian -owned businesses, particularly Korean -American businesses, with diverse restaurants, grocers, and shops. The International District is already a regional destination for culture, food, and entertainment — but there is an opportunity to strengthen the identity of this district and help it thrive in the long term. The SIR 99 International District Enhancement Project was a key recommendation identified in the 2004 Enhancement Study and the 2006 Market Analysis to build on the growing cluster of international businesses, largely anchored by the Ranch 99 Market, Boo Han Plaza, and other specialty plazas. In 2006, the City began efforts through federal grant funds to strengthen the International District identity by improving the area's visual identity and aesthetics, and implement pedestrian -oriented improvements with new gateway elements including a new pedestrian level lighting, new district identification signage on custom light poles, resurfacing of the island on 76th Avenue and a solar lit sculptural piece on the island as part of the gateway. A major transportation gateway on 228th and Highway 99 is planned to create safe and easy access across the highway and connect to the recently completed bicycle lane that flows to the future regional trail (Interurban Trail) and to the Mountlake Terrace Transit Center. These transportation improvements will provide a critical connection for both local residents and regional transit riders to the International District. The gateway design potential here will also help solidify the identity of the district. GATEWAY DISTRICT The Gateway District, located approximately between SW 234th and the 104 Interchange north of SW 205th St, is the first introduction to Edmonds on Highway 99. This area was identified in the Enhancement Study as "Residential Area Retail Center" and "Hotels Area Improvement". However, the Edmonds community expressed a strong desire for a "gateway" and distinct transition point in and out of Edmonds during a community workshop. A recognizable marker identifying the entry point to the city will help unify Edmonds as a place with rich history, arts, culture, food, and sense of place. International businesses along Highway 99. Left: Boo Han Plaza; right: Ranch 99 Market 15 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 41 BACKGROUND + EXISTING CON 6.A.a EXISTING LAND USE PATTERNS The subarea today contains a mix of land uses including commercial, residential, industrial, public, and educational uses. Commercial uses make up the largest amount of square footage, which includes office, retail, services, and motels. Multi- family residential uses make up the second largest amount, most which are apartments but also townhomes or duplexes. Much of the surrounding areas to the east and west of the study area are developed as single family residential, and the residential uses on the edges of the study area help to provide transitions to these areas. There are vacant parcels located throughout the study area with a concentration in the south-central part of the study area. Existing development is generally low -intensity, with one- or two-story buildings and large surface parking areas. There are several plaza -type developments with larger scale grocers and marketplaces such as 99 Ranch Market, Boo Han Market, Aurora Marketplace, and Burlington Coat Factory. The Swedish Edmonds Campus is within a cluster of commercial uses ZONING ASSESSMENT The study area has many zoning designations applied within it, and often in odd configurations. The haphazard pattern reflects both zones inherited from the County when the area was annexed and a variety of zone changes in specific places over the past several decades. The Comprehensive Plan designates nearly all of the study area with a single Highway 99 Corridor designation. As of 2016, there are eight zoning designations CG and CG2: General Commercial NB: Neighborhood Business BC: Community Business MU: Medical Use • RM-1.5: Mulifamily • RM-2.4: Mulifamily RS-8: Single Family Residential Most the study area is zoned either General Commercial (CG or CG2) with Multifamily (RM-1.5) adjacent to the corridor. X%of the study area is within CG and CG2 and X%is within RM-1.5. The CG including medical offices and clinics and some zone allows buildings up to 60 feet tall and the CG2 higher -intensity and higher -scale buildings. zone allows buildings up to 75 feet tall. Zoning for TABLE 2: DISTRIBUTION OF LAND USES WITHIN STUDY AREA DEVELOPED• • OF • Commercial 5,729,924 50% Multi -Family Residential 3,070,474 27% Industrial 1,123,311 10% Single Family Residential 643,907 6% Public & Educational 808,607 7% TOTAL 11,376,223 100% EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 42 BACKGROUND + EXISTING CONDITIONS 6.A.a the areas surrounding the study area is established by the cities of Edmonds, Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, Shoreline and Snohomish County. In general, areas to the south, west and northeast are zoned for a mix of commercial and residential uses; areas to the east, southeast and southwest are zoned primarily for single family residential uses; and areas to the north and northwest are zoned for a mix of residential and public uses. Specific zoning designations in the area surrounding the study area are shown in Table 2 below. EXISTING HOUSING For the greater metropolitan region in which Edmonds is located, housing supply has not been not keeping up with demand. Housing needs —along with housing costs -have been rising rapidly. In fact, data was recently obtained through the Alliance households below 50%of the area median income. (`Affordable" rent for this purpose is considered to be a rental amount that does not exceed 30%of the household income.) EXISTING TRANSPORTATION REGIONAL ACCESS SR-99 is the highest -traffic carrying arterial in Edmonds and run north to Everett, and south through Shoreline to Seattle and the Tacoma metropolitan area. The subarea can be accessed through SR-1 04 which runs east -west through the southern -most border of the subarea between the Edmonds -Kingston Ferry dock in Downtown Edmonds to 1-5 east of Highway 99. 1-5 runs almost parallel to the east of Highway 99 providing regional access from surrounding cities to the north and south. for Housing Affordability about the availability of affordable housing along Highway 99 in the FIGURE 3: REGIONAL CONTEXT Edmonds area. Research conducted in November 2016 showed that the number of residential units affordable to households below 80%of the area median income was very limited and little housing at all was available at rents affordable to TABLE 3: ZONING DESIGNATIONS IN THE STUDY AREA CG2 - General Commercial 2 32% CG - General Commercial 33% BN - Neighborhood Business 2% BC - Community Business 4% IRS-8 - Single Family, 8,000 sq. ft. 2% RM-3 - Multi Family, 3,000 sq. ft. 1 % RM-2.4 - Multi Family, 2,400 sq. ft. 12% RM-1.5 - Multi Family, 1,500 sq. ft. 8% MU - Medical Use 5% bw S 17 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 43 or Im BACKGROUND + EXISTING CONDITIONS 6.A.a STREET NETWORK Highway 99 serves as a principal arterial in Edmonds providing north -south mobility and access to businesses and services along the corridor. Highway 99's diagonal orientation through a mostly gridded street pattern creates difficult and low visibility turns onto and from the highway for drivers and poses a major safety risk for bicyclists and pedestrians. The minor arterials in the subarea are on 238th Street, 228th Street, 220th Street, and 212th Street providing through traffic east -west. Many local streets are broken and do not have complete connections to other local streets and arterials, which is typical of a more suburban street network. A short portion of the right-of-way between 228th and 234th Street is located in Esperance, an unincorporated township of Snohomish County. TRANSIT SERVICE The subarea currently has a very robust transit network with enhancement and service frequency increases planned in the future. The subarea is served by Community Transit, Sound Transit, and Swift BRT lines. There are two Community Transit Swift Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) stops along the corridor and many local bus stops with several transit connections between transit providers. Edmonds sits at the intersection of two major transit providers. The Community Transit Swift BRT system serves Edmonds and areas north, while the King County Metro BRT system serves areas south of Edmonds. A transfer station is located just over the border in Shoreline adjacent to the large Costco and Home Depot shopping center. Transfers between transit providers can cause significant delay in travel times if arrival and departure times are not coordinated tightly. King County Metro and Community Transit are coordinating times to ensure efficient transfer times, but the City will continue to monitor this to ensure Edmonds has quick and efficient access to Seattle and other points south. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES Most area roads have sidewalks, but certain key streets that provide access to and across Hwy 99 currently lack sidewalks. Roads that form the border of Edmonds and other jurisdictions, such as 228th west of Hwy 99, pose unique problems for improvement and cost sharing. Improvements to substandard streets have been explored and recommendations have been identified in this plan's project list. Bicycle facilities are limited in the study area, particularly protected bicycle lanes. The proximity to the Interurban Trail, a major regional trail connecting Edmonds to communities north and south, is east of Hwy 99 and has limited access from the center of Edmonds to the west. This process examined improved and new bicycle connections through the study area and included several in the recommended project list. : ► A new commuter rail station is planned for nearby Mountlake Terrace. 228th will connect Edmonds and the Hwy 99 study area to this new regional transit option. The extension of the Link light rail is scheduled for completion in 2023. This plan has specific recommendations for how to improve linkages and wayfinding between the future rail station and the Hwy 99 corridor. PLANNED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS Content placeholder 19 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 45 6.A.a BACKGROUND + EXISTING CON FIGURE 5: CURRENT TRANSIT SERVICE FIGURE 7: CURRENTTRANSIT FREQUENCY a URA ca co _ PHICS CID V OY� [� T � 4 h 6 a 0 19 4 Bus Slops w1th WoO day TrJp Visits O o a-xx p 28-so $ O O 0 057.7b} 101-i5Q O 757 - 38U — FIGURE 6: EXISTING SIDEWALKS UPDA E H I C S Fknr Ev- a"E Dftt v MRp r .'l11bRdi Y 1 GS.d NOSH" Wp' ?-4+. agyn~ !R*f FIGURE 8: EXISTING BIKE INFRASTRUCTURE MAP PLACEHOLDER: Existing Bikeways and Trails EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 46 BACKGROUND + EXISTING CONDITIONS 6.A.a EXISTING ECONOMIC CONDITIONS b MARKET TRENDS In February 2016, an assessment of the development market and round of developer interviews was conducted. The results of the assessment and the interviews is summarized with the following five points. Further discussion of each is below. Edmonds is a good location for development, but has its challenges. 2. Residential uses will likely be the primary driver of development along the corridor. 3. Parking is an important factor in development form and feasibility. 4. The impact of right-of-way improvements on development was mixed. 5. Development incentives and regulatory process can support (or hinder) redevelopment. 1. EDMONDS IS A GOOD LOCATION FOR DEVELOPMENT, BUT IT HAS CHALLENGES Edmonds has a positive impression. It's viewed as a desirable community that people want to live and as a place they would consider building. Highway 99 in Edmonds does have some specific challenges, specifically crime, vehicle access, and the lack of large developable sites. Mixed -use, residential development 2. RESIDENTIAL USES WILL LIKELY BE THE PRIMARY DRIVER OF DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE CORRIDOR Apartment projects will likely be the main driver of development along the corridor. Most developers are looking to do sizable projects of 150 units or more, which requires larger sites. Mixed use development is fairly likely although the retail portion may be a drag on the project financially initially. Office development is not likely in the near - term, and demand for medical office use is not clear. 3. PARKING IS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN DEVELOPMENT FORM AND FEASIBILITY Accommodating parking is an important factor in redevelopment, particularly in a suburban and auto -oriented environment transitioning to being more dense and walkable. Future projects along the corridor will likely need structured or underground parking to maximize the development potential of a site. The cost of different parking types and site size and characteristics are important variables for parking configuration (surface/tuck-under/ underground). The number of spots per unit desired will vary depending on the project, but high minimum requirements and/or inflexible standards can be a significant barrier to new development. High parking requirements may impede new development 21 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 47 6.A.a BACKGROUND + EXISTING CON 4. THE IMPACT OF RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT WAS MIXED Shoreline has made significant improvements along Highway 99. One interviewee saw the improvements as critical to development. Several interviewees viewed them as nice to have, but not critical. Access, particularly for retail use, is viewed as important and something to be maintained if any improvements are made to Highway 99 in Edmonds. Right-of-way improvements, like improved sidewalks, will be a critical part of new development 5. DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES AND REGULATORY PROCESS CAN SUPPORT (OR HINDER) REDEVELOPMENT The multifamily tax exemption (MFTE) program was used by a number of developers, and was considered an effective incentive. Permitting and timeliness of the permit process was considered important for facilitating development. The permitting process is an important aspect of development. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 48 Adem- �r-MEW lwoa 4 '41& � # i : pp4j go t r" k. 6.A.a COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT The Subarea Plan is representative of input gathered from the overall community as well as key stakeholders, and other interested parties throughout the planning process. The public involvement process involved stakeholder interviews, a Technical Advisory Committee, a community visioning workshop, polling, and two open houses as well as online outreach and surveys. The community's participation during the planning process helped shaped the overarching vision and community values for the Highway 99 area which ultimately guides the recommended strategies in the Plan. The process also helped build public support around the near and long-term approach towards growth and prosperity for the Highway 99 area. Workshop participants during a design exercise about where they prefer to see different types of improvements in the study area. } EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 50 COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT 6.A.a Members of the Technical Advisory Committee City of Edmonds Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer Community Transit Eric Goodman, Transportation Service Planner Carol Thompson, Director of IT Operations Sound Transit Patrice Hardy, Government Relations Manager Kathy Leotta, Senior Transportation Planner Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Annie Johnson, Transportation Planner Mike Swires, Traffic Engineer Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) Ben Bakkenta, Growth Management Planning Program Manager Outreach Activity Timeline » CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING T» MEETING WITH PROPERTY OWNERS TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC) The committee met 3 times during the planning process. This group consists of representatives from several transit agencies including the Washington State's Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Community Transit, Sound Transit. The TAC also included a representative from the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) and a transportation engineer from the City of Edmonds. In addition, representatives from Snohomish County and the Cities of Shoreline, Mountlake Terrace, and Lynnwood also participated in TAC meetings. KEY STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS Six focus -group style meetings were conducted, including a round of developer interviews, a meeting with property owners, non-profit organizations, and a representative from the Swedish Edmonds Cam pus. COMMUNITY VISIONING WORKSHOP Over 50 people participated in the visioning workshop in March 2016 which involved a fun and interactive map -based design workshop and live polling questions using keypads that display results from all participants after each question. » COMMUNITY WORKSHOP >> MAPPING EXERCISE >> LIVE POLLING » ONLINE SURVEY » TAC MEETING >> OPEN HOUSE - SCENARIOS T>> ONLINE COMMENTING PERIOD » TAC MEETING 25 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 51 COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGA 6.A.a Both activities asked participants to envision and share their ideas about what kinds of changes they would like to see in the future, such as commercial, housing, or mixed use development, new pedestrian crossing, safety improvements, new traffic signals, traffic calming measures, wider sidewalks and others. PUBLIC OPEN HOUSES Two public open houses were held in May and November 2016 and served as an opportunity to learn about the project, hear from elected leaders, and converse with the project team and share their thoughts on the project. The May open house revealed near and long-term development and transportation scenarios for the study area, and the proposed scope of the Planned Action EIS. The November open house unveiled the draft recommended implementation strategies and before and after visualizations of what life could be like in the Highway 99 area. ONLINE SURVEYAND GENERAL COMMENTS The polling questions presented at the visioning workshop were also available in a survey format on the project website. The survey collected 167 responses and asked participants to share their top f » OPEN HOUSE - RECOMMENDATIONS » ONLINE COMMENTING PERIOD >> TAC MEETING priority of housing, business, and infrastructure. See pages 27-28 for combined results from live polling and survey responses. The public also had opportunities throughout the planning process to share general comments about the near and long-term land use and transportation scenarios, the scope of the Planned Action EIS, and key elements of the implementation strategies and recommendations for the subarea. WEB OUTREACH AND SOCIAL MEDIA A dedicated project website was created to inform the public about the project and regularly updated with most recent project developments and event announcements throughout the planning process. The website provided an opportunity for those unable to attend the workshop or open houses to provide input and learn about the overall planning process, see results of workshops and surveys, and explore alternative scenarios and implementation strategies. Event announcements were also posted on the City of Edmonds Facebook page and on the City's official website. » PUBLIC HEARING AND PLANNING TBOARD PRESENTATION OF DRAFT PLAN 2017 » CITY COUNCIL REVIEW, RECOMMENDATION AND ADOPTION EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 52 COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT 6.A.a WE ASKED EDMONDS... HOUSING DEVELOPMENT Widespread desire for housing, particularly in the south end. TRAFFIC ; CALMING i I r I I `--r'� MIXED USE ; DEVELOPMENT ; r r 1 .r r I I _I I r ENHANCED TRANSIT Desire for traffic calming on high speed southern area on HWY 99 & 104 interchange Widespread desire for mixed use, particularly in the south and central end J LANDSCAPED ' MEDIAN Ito I Widespread desire for landscaped median enhancements 27 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 53 COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGA 6.A.a I—---ra r PEDESTRIAN PEDESTRIAN REFUGE r r I - F_I � I #r i rf r r I -k I � I • I r — PEDESTRIAN ►A Pedestrian safety is a P7- major concern throughout the corridor WAYFINDING SIGNAGE I I I I r k +: 1 PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING r r I I #r A f r f _Ir r + 4 r I {y � I I r — EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 54 COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT 6.A.a 2t1%2% PARK WITHIN 19 SIGHT OF EACH 10 WALK, BIKE OR BUS DESTINATION PARKING ONCE AND WALK OTHERI NOTSURE BETWEEN SHOPS RACE 741/6, WHITE 10/q BLACK OR AFRI CAN AM ERI CAN 1°/q LATIN0OR HISPANIC 59/6, ASIAN OR PACIFIC ISLANDER 1°/q MULTIRACIAL 3%, OTHER 150/4 RATHER NOT SAY AGE I DRIVE MYSELF 19 BIKE BUS OTHER WALK 5°/q 20-29 17%, 30-39 199/q 40-49 22%, 50-59 269/q 60-69 11 °/q 70 OR BETTER GENDER 51 °/q FEMALE 40°/q FEMALE 1%OTHER 9% RATHER NOT SAY 29 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 55 COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGA 6.A.a BUSINESS CATALYST DEVELOPMENT ON MAJOR SITES STOREFRONT IMPROVEMENTS BRING NEW BUSINESS AND JOBS TO THE AREA HOUSING ADD MORE HOUSING ADD MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS BEAUTIFICATION, BLIGHT REMOVAL. CODE ENFORCEMENT INVEST I HOMEGROWN ENTREPRENEURS NO CHANCE SOMETHING ELSE INFRASTRUCTURE ADDRESS PARKING - MANACEMENT AND SHARE PUBLIC SPACE IMPROVEMENTS AND BEAUTIFICATION SAFETY IMPR VEMENTS FOR BIKES OR PEDESTRIANS HOMEOWNERS ASSISTANCE FOR REHABILITATION NO CHANGE SOMETHING ELSE BETTER CONNECTION FOR BIKES AND PEDESTRIANS NO CHANCE SOMETHING ELSE EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 56 Packet Pg. 57 6.A.a CONSTRAINTS + CHALLENGES LAND USE CONSTRAINTS & CHALLENGES One issue the corridor needs to overcome is a public perception as being unsafe, unattractive and undesirable. It is sometimes viewed as a leftover area of the city and is not inspiring. Citizens often pass through the area on their way to somewhere else. There are misperceptions of what the corridor is and what it could eventually become. Highway 99 is a wide auto -oriented regional thoroughfare; this type of road design can be challenging when attempting to create a more walkable and safe area. There are also many land owners in the area and some of the parcels are oddly shaped or have poor access to Highway 99. On top of that, compared with other communities in the region, potentially restrictive land use and parking regulations complicated future opportunities. These challenges can make it more difficult to design and build a viable development project. Key Takeaways: Constraints + Challenges Land Use Public perception of Highway 99 as a "pass - through" area and an unsafe, unattractive, and undesirable area Wide, auto -oriented thoroughfare Oddly -shaped parcels with poor access Restricitve land use and parking regulations Economic Limited retail trade area Lack of diverse housing choice and commercial space Transportation and Infrastructure Commute patterns of resident and outside labor force can cause traffic and safety issues Poor or lack of safe pedestrian crossings, traffic lights, and sidewalks EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 58 CONSTRAINTS + CHALLENGES 6.A.a TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRAINTS R CHALLENGES A substantial portion of the resident labor force commutes away for work, while large number of workers commute into town for work. This can create traffic and safety issues along the corridor Safe pedestrian crossings are presently inadequate. Many places where pedestrians want to cross the highway have no marked pedestrian crossing. This is particularly occurring in the southern section of the corridor. There are also long segments without any street crossings or traffic lights. For example, the central section of the corridor requires a 10-minute walk to find a safely marked crossing. Finally, sidewalks are limited along the stretch on the corridor and are not present everywhere. ECONOMIC CONSTRAINTS b CHALLENGES One challenge for the area is the limited retail trade area due to geographical constraints with Puget Sound to the west and Interstate 5 a short distance to the east. Several distinct major regional retail centers and lifestyle centers in nearby communities also compete with this area. Lack of housing choice can also be challenging. A wider variety of housing options and commercial space is available elsewhere in the region. The lack of housing variety has led to a shortage of affordable housing opportunities as well. The lack of commercial space may allow for retail "leakage," which is the loss of potential local sales activity to areas outside of the corridor and city. 1-L 33 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 59 6.A.a CONSTRAINTS + CHAL FIGURE 9: SAFETY HEAT MAP WITHIN THE STUDY AREA U P DAT F nn A 1) GRAPHICS EDMONDS wpoowav M1GH CH00 sw�ois�, EDMONDS cruaus r' l 1 r r' Lighted Crossings Safety High : 10 m Low; 0 Esri, HERE Del_orme.! contributors, and the GE rvia1)myIndia. - ,._Open56 user CoMmiUr}Ii. - EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 60 � � � � ��~ 2 � � � • � �,. � ■ �-�� a RURORR V \|� � ■ r. .� _ � � 6.A.a OPPORTUNITIES LAND USE OPPORTUNITIES Because of a long history of auto - oriented design along the Highway 99 corridor there are many opportunities for major land use changes. Three specific locations on the corridor already have reasonably good urban form and include the area east of Highway 99 between 238th and 240th, the area west of Highway 99 at 288th and the area just to the north of the Swedish Medical Center along 212th. These three areas are considered to have good urban form because they currently have well marked crossings, are near frequent transit service, have city block and lot sizes that are conducive to walking, and have a large amount of employment activity. Key Takeaways: Opportunities Land Use Good urban form already exists on the corridor Many opportunities exists for reinvestment, redevelopment, and increased density Economic Strong health services sector and International District Existing and planned transit connections creates opportunities for transit -oriented development and a stronger business and employee base Transportation and Infrastructure Providing a complete transportation system with efficient and cost-effective accessibilty and mobility Providing safe and convenient access all throughout the subarea especially for pedestrians EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 62 OPPORTUNITIES 6.A.a Although same areas have good urban form, there are also opportunities for better integrated land uses along the corridor. Many parcels are less than 25%covered with buildings, presenting an opportunity for redevelopment and increased density in the area. In addition, much of the buildings are between 25 and 60 years old and are nearing the end of their functional lifespan. Just a few new buildings or historic buildings along the corridor are expected to remain the same for the foreseeable future. Furthermore, there are many low -to -moderate value buildings and just a few new, higher value buildings in the area. This means that there is great potential for reinvestment and redevelopment along the corridor. FIGURE 10: URBAN FORM WITHIN STUDY AREA UPDATE MAP GRAPHICS ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES The service sector will continue to dominate the Edmonds employment base, with continued growth expected, especially in the health care sector. The burgeoning health services sector, anchored by Swedish -Edmonds Hospital is a perfect example. The Highway 99 corridor near the medical services node around the hospital offers opportunities for additional hospitality facilities. Other opportunities include leveraging the "International District" to provide culturally -specific goods and services. The corridor already has a strong international business community, offering diverse array of goods and services. A substantial number of jobs in Edmonds are occupied by residents of other outside communities. Additional housing variety in the area with a greater distribution along the affordability spectrum could help capture the latent housing demand of many Edmonds workers. Existing and planned intermodal transit connections can leverage transit -oriented development. Also, additional population density in business districts can add market demand for goods and services and employee base for new and growing businesses. New business and job opportunities are largely brought to the corridor through new development and redevelopment. Appropriately sited and sized development and redevelopment projects will increase: Property tax receipts through the new construction provision that captures new construction value -based property tax for the first year a project is brought on line and adds that value to the city's future property tax baseline. Sales tax revenue from construction materials and activity. 37 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 63 6.A.a OPPORT Sales tax revenue from both personal and business spending accruing from new residents, workers and businesses within newly developed buildings. Utility tax revenue from a greater number of utility customers. TRANSPORTATION b INFRASTRUCTURE OPPORTUNITIES One opportunity is to identify transportation improvements necessary to provide a complete system that will function safely and efficiently throughout the corridor. An efficient transportation system can provide cost-effective accessibility and mobility for people, goods, and services. Another major opportunity is to provide multimodal travel alternatives that are safe and have convenient access all through the area. This could include improvements to sidewalks and adding more safe connections for better pedestrian access and safety. It could also be a chance to expand and add signalized crossings where necessary. FIGURE 11: LAND VALUE PER SQUARE FEET F- UPDAT TIM, M . P GRAPHICS 4 Ymilue per W ' uams,s I uaioz3o I I _ upIQSW I i ryry�..�� .tee e.6i Mar tryrry S� FIGURE 12: FLOOR AREA RATIO a UPDAT f i GRAPHICS .. J Flnor Awed ROW aim , ikt G`_ I ., 025P54 .. am, 0M 0 7S - 1 40 -1 N fn FIGI�.�r.am cAMeq*Vt a LV&� y -t+tcrM'&P oCP .nr ae��rr, EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 64 Fww"r 1 A N; Packet Pg. 65 6.A.a ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION SCENARIOS Land use and transportation scenarios are an important part of the exploratory process in planning. Testing a range of policy options, development types and transportation improvements allows for a comparison of the relative strengths and weaknesses of virtual futures. Three separate land use and transportation scenarios were evaluated using the open source scenario planning platform Envision Tomorrow. The location and styles of development that were tested came from public input through the workshop process and the existing conditions analysis of redevelopment potential. The transportation components of the scenarios were a combination of public input from the workshops, and existing projects in previous plans. Sample scenario EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 66 6.A.a ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS The power of scenarios analysis lies in the ability to test out and compare different virtual futures. The three scenarios had different themes. Scenario Alternative 1 was the No Action Alternative, which assumes current zoning and roadway configurations remains the same. Alternative 2 was a residentially -focused scenario. The public workshops demonstrated a strong desire for additional housing on and around the Hwy 99 corridor. This scenario assumes significant new development of both mixed -use and residential apartment buildings on and around the corridor. Alternative 3 had a stronger employment growth focus, particularly in the hospital district to the north. This scenario assumes strong growth in health -related employment in the north, in addition to the new mixed -use and residential development in Alternative 2. TABLE 4: EXISTING AND PLANNED ACTIVITY UNITS HWY 99 TOTAL ACTIVITY CORRIDOR ACTIVITY UNITS / TOTAL UNITS ACRE ACRES SCENARIO BUILDING BLOCKS Each of the scenarios was constructed using a range of building types calibrated to the Edmonds market. Within a context such as the Hwy 99 study area, a range of buildings could be anticipated. However, existing roadway conditions and regulatory requirements have precluded the development of the mixed -use and residential building types desired by the public — predominantly three and four story apartments, and five and six story mixed -use buildings. Within the current context of the area, land developers are unable to achieve rents high enough to make these buildings feasible. However, with investments into roadway improvements and regulatory changes, such as a reduction in parking requirements, the market becomes much more desirable. More pedestrian -oriented road conditions Existing 352.55 9669 27.4 5,872 16.65 3,797 10.77 1,579 4.47 Conditions Alternative 1 352.55 13,226 27.5 7,112 20.17 6,114 17.34 2,803 7.95 (No Action) Alternative 2 (Residential 352.55 16,037 45.5 9,230 26.18 4,669 13.24 4,924 13.96 Focus) Alternative 3 (Employment 352.55 15,011 42.6 8,204 23.27 6,807 19.03 4,350 12.33 Focus) 41 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 67 6Aa ALTERNATIVE SC UPDATE MAP GRAPHICS FOR ALL FIGURE S:ALTERNATIVE 1RESIDENTIAL FOCUS FIGURE a:NORTHERN SECTION OF ALTERNATIVE 2 �A& ■A i ■ ii� � Ma ■ ■f _ ■r, ,r ti ma z I '.-jr 212 m 5, SW �■� ■�■ i � ■■■ � |f�■� � � � . ��■& |aa2■■ � ■-0 X.� ■�� � FIGURE 14:ALTERNATIVE 2EMPLOYMENT FOCUS ~W, ' ■ � _ ___ � EDM ONDS HIGHWAY 91Gu Packet Pg. ea 6.A.a ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS and development make the area more attractive to potential tenants, resulting in higher achievable rents, and therefore greater market feasibility for the type of development under consideration. This relationship between transportation, land use and the development market is well documented in Reid Ewing and Keith Bartholomew's research into Hedonic Price effects of Pedestrian- and Transit - Oriented Development (2011). 3-story apartment building type Given the assumption that these investments and regulatory changes would take place, three primary building types came forward as the most likely to occur in the Hwy 99 study area: 3 story apartments, six story mixed -use residential, and six story mixed - use office in which the mixed -use buildings would include ground floor retail and service uses with either residential or office on the upper floors. These Six story mixed -use building type with ground floor retail and residential above TABLE 5: BUILDING TYPE CHARACTERISTICS Six story mixed -use building type with ground floor retail and offices above » 0.75 spaces per dwelling unit » No parking required for first Parking ratios 0.75 spaces per » No parking required for 2,000 sq ft. dwelling unit first 2,000 sq ft. » 2.0 spaces per 1,000 sqft » 2.0 spaces per 1,000 sqft above 2,000 above 2,000 Housing density 51.2 82.6 - (dwelling units per acre) Employment density - 33.6 208.5 (jobs per acre) Average dwelling unit 850 759 - size in square feet » $22 sqft retail / Average rent $1,700 / unit $1,669 / unit » $26 / sqft office Achievable land cost per $41-$49 $80-$94 $36-$43 square foot 43 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 69 6.A.a ALTERNATIVE SC DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY ANALYSIS As part of the subarea planning process, a maximum development capacity number was estimated by Fregonese Associates using the Envision Tomorrow model. In general, existing development does not fully utilize the development capacity available under current zoning, as much of the existing development in the study area is low -intensity and low -scale, with the medical uses surrounding the Swedish Edmonds Campus being the exception. Because current zoning in the study area allows for a mix of uses, maximum development capacity was estimated for two scenarios, an employment focused scenario and a housing focused scenario. TABLE 6: DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY ANALYSIS MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY Table 6 shows the maximum development capacity numbers in comparison to existing development in the study area and growth targets for the three alternatives. Development capacity estimates are not a prediction that a certain amount of development will occur or when it may occur, but instead a measure of the maximum development that could occur in a given area. As Table 6 shows, estimated development capacity is significantly greater than the sum of existing and new growth planned under the alternatives and indicate sufficient development capacity in the study area to accommodate growth under the alternatives. Existing Development 1,579 3,797 Residential Focus 24,552 10,246 Employment Focus GROWTH TARGETS FOR 2035 (NEW DEVELOPMENT) Alternative 1 (No Action) 18,450 1,224 26,028 2,317 Alternative 2 (Residential Focus) 3,324 872 Alternative 3 (Employment Focus) GROWTH TARGETS FOR 2035 (TOTAL DEVELOPMENT) Alternative 1 (No Action) 2,750 2,803 3,010 6,114 Alternative 2 (Residential Focus) 4,924 4,669 Alternative 3 (Employment Focus) 4,350 6,807 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 70 6.A.a I A 01 -A"Pq i rT jiLe a , Lr Iry L i gkju I. a 4 - Z c F 4 � I Packet Pg. 71 6.A.a IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES, POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS + ACTIONS The most important part of a plan are the actions that are taken to achieve the vision identified by the plan. As this plan is very action -oriented and strategic, the implementation strategies focus generally on aligning the City's planning and regulatory structure to support the vision, and to identify those public and private investments that will lead to the vision's realization. The implementation strategies can be generally categorized as: Specific land use and transportation strategies, actions, policies and investments Timing and priority actions -organized into short, medium and long term action items Specific recommended changes to zoning and development standards Matrix of potential capital improvement projects Identification of actions to support public and along with preliminary costing and relevant private investment, including recommendations partner agencies to amend Edmonds land use and transportation policies and regulations for the entire 99 Subarea EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 72 IMPLEMENTATION 6.A.a 47 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 73 IMPLEME 6.A.a COMPREHENSIVE MAP MODIFICATIONS TO IDENTIFY DISTRICTS THE ISSUE TODAY: The Hwy 99 area has had several plans and studies in the past that have designated unique subdistricts within the Hwy 99 area. This process has affirmed two of those subareas and changed one other. The subareas include a Hospital District at the north end, an International district in the center and a Gateway District in the south. The current Comprehensive Plan includes a subdistrict map that designates four focus areas, but does not reflect the community's desire for a southern "gateway" district that defines the entry into Edmonds. #1 1 , 1 F , f .1 • Hospital Community! family Retail Center +� i 1 1 1 1 1—+1 InternatIOTial District i -1 I 1 � 1 4007" 0 �' Residential Area Retail Center y }�ERi SI 554 -1 4' 1 1 +-Hotets' area, #atisr 4w 1 � ; improvement ;�a..teaw y x]2o-5w I 1 Y RECOMMENDATION 1.1: The solution is simple. Replace the current Comprehensive Plan maps and text with updated materials that clearly identify the three distinct districts anchored around major transportation gateways and employment clusters, such as the hospital and international businesses. # 1 1 t 1 r 1 / 1 Health ' District 1 f :.1 , 1 Sri 1 1 1 1 1 International ' District 1 1- s�Lw 4�r 3inv. w sr� � 1 i 4 / 1 1 P - 1 /� I�IiiiLiY1 1 + Gateway 1� District 1 � r a 04 az EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 74 IMPLEMENTATION 6.A.a CONSOLIDATE CG-1 AND CG-2 INTO A SINGLE CG ZONE THE ISSUE TODAY: The zoning in the planning area is unnecessarily complex and confusing. Most of the area is either zoned CG1 or CG2. The difference between them is a minor height difference of 15 feet. CG1 has a height allowance of 60 feet while CG2 has a height allowance of 75 feet. RECOMMENDATION 2.1: Consolidate the existing CG and CG2 into a single CGzone with height limit at 75 feet. This allows for a cost-effective 6 story mixed -use building to be constructed with comfortable floor to ceiling heights The construction type of 5 wood framed floors over a ground floor, concrete podium (also known as a "5- over-1 building") is efficient and cost effective, and is also within the height capacity of fire truck ladders. SIMPLIFY ZONING DESIGNATIONS AND ALIGN ZONING WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THE ISSUE TODAY: Many of the current zones in the Hwy 99 study area are remnants from the zones that were in place when this area of Edmonds was annexed from the County. The patchwork of zones is outdated and, in some cases, not consistent with parcel boundaries, meaning that some lots have more than one zone. RECOMMENDATION 3.1: Instead of having 6 or more zones, it is recommended that the new, consolidated CG zone be applied to most of the study area. Additional recommendations below will ensure new buildings transition in scale into the surrounding single family neighborhoods. These changes will better align the zoning with the Comprehensive Plan map. 49 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 75 SIMPLEME 6.A.a s+J i %�-j 4 1 Y J �. TL �rha itm�s u n.soel� „ ■ oo rir tr.w� M/Y+wh meNF' tit � . "iw � x} 1 .mwftxR tEiltm 1 :.� _ IYJ'IiLF�i�SI i �,.� � I�FJ'YF�lY�■ ■ aw�.w++ x.m�t M +Nwd.up" vow t ire tiles. R. r..fa..r 4 :ILYh xln jai R."ftr lttlyi • ■ w,�b5r � ■ �� rr�Yr � Ir . . 1 11ik 1.� f - •W�li CURRENT ZONING RECOMMENDED ZONING ■ CG2 -General Commercial 2 ■ CG - General Commercial CG- General Commercial BN - Neighborhood Business BN - Neighborhood Business ■ BC- Community Business ■ BC - Community Business RS-8 - Multifamily, 8,000 sq. ft. RS-8 - Multifamily, 8,000 sq. ft. RM-3 - Multifamily, 3,000 sq. ft. RM-3 - Multifamily, 3,000 sq. ft. RM-2.4 - Multifamily, 2,400 sq. ft. RM-2.4 - Multifamily, 2,400 sq. ft. RM-1.5 - Multifamily, 1,500 sq. ft. RM-1.5 - Multifamily, 1,500 sq. ft. ■ MU -Medical Use ■ MU - Medical Use P - Public Use P - Public Use 0 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 76 6.A.a IMPLEMENTATION MODIFY CURRENT DESIGN STANDARDS ACCESS AND PARKING ►A:V.111VAAIIJ*11101R;»L1 III 111M14lL1lRIr.10117.1;I11.i10[4Lt1.11LlI1X41C 61LlIft Current standards require that not more than 50 percent of a project's total parking spaces may be located between the building's front facade and the primary street. Parking lots may not be located on corner locations adjacent to public streets. THE ISSUE TODAY: This standard can allow too much parking on street fronts, which impacts pedestrian activity and hinders a vibrant urban street. This standard is attempting to encourage more parking in the rear of buildings, but it is regulating the location of a percentage of the parking rather than the amount of building front should be located towards the road. Depending on the project or lot size, the amount of parking in the front could still be very large with the existing standard. Regulating the percentage of the frontage that needs to be occupied by building instead of parking area is a more appropriate approach. 51 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 77 SIMPLEME 6.A.a RECOMMENDATION 4.1: BUILDINGS ON THE STREET FRONTAGE Can a primary frontage, a minimum of 50%of the street frontage should have buildings within 10 feet of front property line (at the edge of Pedestrian Activity Zone) 50%of all other street frontages will have buildings, walls, or hedges at least 4 feet in height, within 10 feet of the property line. RECOMMENDATION 4.2: PARKING PREDOMINATELY ON SIDE OR REAR Parking areas may comprise 40%or less of street frontage. RECOMMENDATION 4.3: GROUND FLOOR TRANSPARENCY 50%of primary frontage building fagade within 10 feet lot line shall be made of transparent windows and doors. All other building frontages require 30%transparency. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 78 IMPLEMENTATION 6.A.a SCREENING AND BUFFERING WHAT ARE THE CURRENT DESIGN STANDARDS IN CG AND CG2 ZONES? Currently the design standards require a dense Type IV landscaping buffer, a minimum of four feet wide, along all street frontages. THE ISSUE TODAY: This standard creates landscaped barriers between pedestrians and buildings rather than enhancing a safe and comfortable pedestrian zone. RECOMMENDATION 4.4 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY ZONE Replace the 4-foot landscaped buffer with a required 10-foot Pedestrian Activity Zone setback on all primary frontages with ground floor retail. Future design standards may consider special circumstances, such as auto dealer locations. LkII2, a - Ar - � 6 53 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 79 IMPLEME 6.A.a SETBACK AND BUFFERS FOR USES ADJACENT TO SINGLE-FAMILY ZONES WHAT ARE THE CURRENT DESIGN STANDARDS IN CG AND CG2 ZONES? Ground Floor Setback: Current front setback is in RM-1.5 (the current multifamily zone near Highway 99) is 15' (ECDC 16.30.030). Where commercial, institutional, medical and multifamily uses are adjacent to residential zones, current standards require a 15' setback (ECDC 16.60.020). Where commercial, institutional, medical uses are adjacent to residential zones, current standards require a dense 10' landscaping buffer (ECDC 16.60.030.A.1.f) Where office and multifamily uses are adjacent to single-family zones, current standards require a minimum 4' wide and 10' tall landscaping buffer (ECDC 16.60.030.A.1.h) Upper Floor Stepback: No current standards exist for explicitly regulating the bulk and scale of buildings that are adjacent to single family zones. THE ISSUE TODAY: Current design standards do not ensure proper transition of higher density buildings adjacent to single-family neighborhoods. The current Design Criteria seek to ensure "buildings do not display blank, unattractive walls to the abutting streets or residential properties, walls or portions of walls abutting streets or visible from residentially zoned properties" and suggests a variety of architectural treatments to mitigate impact, but does not explicitly require a stepback. The Comprehensive Plan includes recommendations that should be considered when developing uses adjacent to single family areas. From "City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan (2015) — Medical/ Highway 99 Activity Center and Highway 99 Corridor" section, page 64: "New development should be allowed and encouraged to develop to the fullest extent possible while assuring that the design quality and amenities provided contribute to the overall character and quality of the corridor. Where intense development adjoins residential areas, site design (including buffers, landscaping, and the arrangement of uses) and building design should be used to minimize adverse impacts on residentially -zoned properties" EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 80 IMPLEMENTATION 6.A.a RECOMMENDATION 4.5: Establish stepback and setback standards for apartments and mixed -use buildings adjacent to single family zones and include these standards in the zoning code. GROUND FLOOR SETBACK For frontages on Highway 99, require a front setback of 10 feet to accommodate a Pedestrian Activity Zone. For frontages not on Highway 99, reduce frontage setbacks to 5 foot and encourage enhanced pedestrian realm (larger sidewalks, useable landscaping, etc.). Keep current 15 feet setback and 10' landscaping requirements for lot line adjacency with single family zones. UPPER FLOOR SETBACK Zero stepback up to 30 feet in height (30 feet is the maximum height in RM 1.5, which is the predominant zone surrounding the commercial zones on Highway 99). 10 foot stepback beyond 30 feet in height on sides with lot line adjacency to single family zones 8 foot stepback beyond 30 feet in height on sides across a street from single family zones Stepback areas can be used for active outdoor space such as balconies. 75' P Upper stories stepback 10' for every 30' of building height 15' setback with dense 10' landscape buffer 55 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 81 SIMPLEME 6.A.a ADOPT TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE PARKING STANDARDS Hwy 99 has many local and regional transit options as well as regional trails and bike routes, giving residents many travel options. In transit - rich areas, it is common for communities to reduce required on -site parking to encourage higher rents and reduced affordability. Current estimates for the cost of structured parking is anywhere from $20,000-25,000 per space, and underground parking can exceed $50,000 per space. Edmonds should adopt new, transit higher intensity and mixed -use development. supportive parking standards for the Highway 99 Parking is also expensive and high parking area. requirements can raise costs, which results in CURRENT PARKING STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL Studio apartment: 1.2 spaces 1-Bedroom: 1.5 spaces 2-Bedroom: 1.8 spaces 3-Bedroom: 2 spaces RECOMMENDATION 5.1- RESIDENTIAL Minimum average of 0.75 per unit for entire residential portion of each development COMMERCIAL 2.5 per 1,000 square feet (1 per 400 square feet) COMMERCIAL 2 per 1,000 square feet (1 per 500 square feet) Exempt the first 3,000 square feet of commercial within mixed -use buildings that have a shared parking plan (parking study and management plan). This reduces the cost burden for small, local entrepreneurs. Compliance should be at the staff level to reduce administrative time and cost. Allow for project -specific studies to reflect special situations. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 82 IMPLEMENTATION 6.A.a 7 57 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 83 SIMPLEME 6.A.a ENACT MULTIFAMILY TAX EXEMPTION (MFTE) PROGRAM RECOMMENDATION 6.1: The City of Edmond should pass an ordinance to define the Hwy 99 area a "target area" to allow MFTE projects within the Hwy 99 area. This would incentivize the construction of additional housing and mixed -use projects by enabling qualifying projects to take advantage of a tax exemption on the residential -portion of new buildings for 12 years in exchange for keeping 20%of units affordable during that period. Anthem on 12th: An award -winning workforce housing development in Seattle financed through a Multifamily Tax Exemption Program. ADOPT FEE WAIVER PROGRAM FOR MIXED -INCOME PROJECTS ;1:111•]ulluII►117:11IQL1WAI The City should adopt an ordinance that allows staff to waive City permitting and impact fees for projects that include affordable units for 12 years (the same timeline for the MFTE program). The exact affordability thresholds can beset by Council but common standards include 20%of units for households at 80-120%of Area Median Income (AMI). EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 84 IMPLEMENTATION 6.A.a FACILITATE A MIXED -USE, MIXED -INCOME DEMONSTRATION PROJECT RECOMMENDATION 8.1: Identify a site with willing owner/ partner, or » purchase or secure a transferrable option on a site. The City can establish a special fund targeted at affordability and/or redevelopment, or make use of one or more of the tools listed on the next page to establish a special assessment district or direct state and federal funds towards a project. Actively recruit developers, both non-profit affordable housing builders like the Korean Women's Association or other developers familiar with public -private partnerships. This recruitment can also be done by a specialized consultant. Cultivate a champion who can motivate the development community and advocate for more affordable housing projects. This could be a local or state leader, such as an elected representative or a prominent local business leader. III ��..� - ..: ■ � . rrrr Make this project the pilot project for the newly adopted M FTE and fee waiver program to ensure they function well and iron out any issues before broader adoption Consider adopting one or more of the special assessment districts listed below and locating this pilot project site within one of these districts. This will enable the City to make use of special funds to assist with development and infrastructure costs or other subsidies. The first project or few projects will require more assistance than subsequent projects. Assign special staff to the pilot project to ensure it remains a City priority and keeps moving forward. This staff person will also track what works well or what does not, and make final modification recommendations to the various programs before final broader adoption. 59 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 85 IMPLEME 6.A.a EXPAND USE OF FINANCING TOOLS RECOMMENDATION 9.1: The City should activity seek to make use of local, state and federal funds and funding mechanisms to expand the opportunities for affordable housing, redevelopment and economic development within the Hwy 99 area. Below is a list of some key tools and funding sources that should be considered. City Fund for Redevelopment and Affordable Housing Community Renewal Area (CRA)— used in Shoreline Hospital Benefit Zone (HBZ) Financing Program Local Infrastructure Project Area (LIPA) Financing Landscape Conservation and Local Improvement Program (LCLIP) Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) HUD HOME Program HUD CDBG Program Lovejoy Station in Portland, Oregon is a five -story apartment community that serves residents with incomes between 40%and 80%area median income. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 86 IMPLEMENTATION 6.A.a 10 61 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 87 SIMPLEME 6.A.a GATEWAY SIGNAGE AT HWY 99/ HWY 104 INTERCHANGE RECOMMENDATION 10.1: The public process identified the need to clearly establish the identify of Edmonds at the south end of the study area, through gateway features, such as signage and landscaping. The design treatments should clearly indicate-#.,. an arrival into Edmonds and distinguish this stretch of Hwy 99 from Shoreline. This could be accomplished in tandem" with the realignment of the on and off ramps of Hwy 104 proposed in the project list. TRANSIT GATEWAY SIGNAGE/STATION AT HWY 99/228TH RECOMMENDATION 11.1: Regional commuter rail to the Mountlake Terrace transit center is scheduled for completion in 2023. The link from Edmonds to this new rail station is 228th. It is important to identify this transit gateway at the intersection of Hwy 99 and 228th, and strengthen east -west connections for transit riders, bicyclists and commuters. Decorative and clear wayfinding signage at this intersection will establish the clear link for visitors and residents alike. A future transit linkage, either in the form of a reroute of existing local transit to connect Edmonds to the Mountlake Terrace transit station should be considered. In addition, an additional or moved BRT station and location at the intersection of 228th should also be examined in the future. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 88 IMPLEMENTATION 6.A.a IMPROVE WAYFINDING SIGNAGE ALONG THE CORRIDOR RECOMMENDATION 12.1: Many amenities and community destinations exist near Hwy 99, but the public process revealed that finding these amenities can be difficult, particularly for visitors. Wayfinding signage with a uniquely Edmonds identity should point out safe auto, bicycle and pedestrian routes to surrounding amenities. The amenities and destinations identified include downtown Edmonds, Lake Ballinger, the Interurban Trail, new regional rail at Mountlake Terrace, the International District, the Health District and hospital. DEVELOP A UNIQUE DISTRICT l DESIGN IDENTITY RECOMMENDATION 13.1: The subdistricts identified in this process and previous processes highlight the existing nodes of similar business activity, such as international businesses and health and hospital related uses. The City should invest in signage, lighting and art to improve the vitality of these areas, and support business development organizations that build capacity within the private sector. Some ideas the City should pursue are establishing unique branding for each district, public and local art, street furniture, unique bus shelter designs, pavement patterns, special lighting fixtures, colored crosswalks, and banners. I J. A -1 63 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 89 IMPLEME 6.A.a PROHIBIT NEW POLE SIGNS RECOMMENDATION 14.1: As the Hwy 99 area transitions from an auto -oriented highway to a more dynamic and mixed -use environment, new large pole signs designed to capture the attention of fast moving traffic are no longer compatible. The City should prohibit new pole signs within the study area. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 90 IMPLEMENTATION 6.A.a 65 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 91 SIMPLEME 6.A.a IMPROVE TRANSIT TRANSFERS RECOMMENDATION 15.1: The public workshop and stakeholder engagement process revealed a few needed improvements in transit, particularly related to improving transit transfers. The City should work with Community Transit and other transit partners to ensure regional and local bus stops are close together and schedules are aligned to ensure convenient and efficient transfers. This can be accomplished by a consolidation or colocation of stations to reduce walking distances between routes. Specific improvements related to emphasizing a new transit hub at 228th and Hwy 99 include: Consider a shuttle/transit service from HWY 99 to the Mountlake Terrace regional transit center Consider a consolidated transit stop at 228th Consider a new BRT station Provide clear signage Provide high -quality bike connection on 228th fmaLf. yNp T.� Gpna U*wwa onawa CgATM rr Bmn.nrr EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 92 IMPLEMENTATION 6.A.a I NCENTIVIZE ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS RECOMMENDATION 16.1: A robust and resilient transit system offers a wide range of options to commuters and the community. This includes convenient access to regional transit and transportation facilities, but also the finer grained connections that allow for quick, short connections to be made. The City should establish additional impact fee reductions and on -site parking reduction allowances for development project that offer or accommodate alternative transportation options on -site. Examples of on -site alternative transportation options include subsidized transit passes for residents, on -site car share parking, bicycle parking, electric car charging stations and temporary parking for private ride sharing services, such as Uber and Lyft. F 67 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 93 IMPLEME 6.A.a This page is left intentionally blank. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 94 IMPLEMENTATION 6.A.a fRAN5P0RTA7 INFRASTRUCTI RECAMMpnjDz • • !lam\l 69 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 95 IMPLEME 6.A.a This plan includes a detailed list of short term and long term transportation improvements. Improvements includes projects identified in previous plans and projects that have arisen as part of this process. THE PROJECTS ARE DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE A RANGE OF TRANSPORTATION GOALS, INCLUDING Improve traffic flow and general safety and access management Improve pedestrian safety and access to/from HWY 99 corridor Improve pedestrian environment along HWY 99 corridor Create safe pedestrian crossings of HWY 99 and access to transit Improve transit mobility and transit stop environment KEY TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS CONTENT PLACEHOLDER EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 96 6.A.a IMPLEMENTATION NORTHERNOF 1 AREA ■'r**y ■ a, s s s s s s INTERSECTION CAPACITY 0 00 � ■ ^ o & SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS ■ + PED REFUGE ISLANDS ( ) r . ■ ■ 212thStreet:■■■■■■��■���■���■■�■����■��-■�■■�■� ���1 ` ■ ■. ENHANCALOCAL�TRANSI ■ 216th Street■ ■'+j' �, ■ � F INTERSECTION CAPACITY &SAFETY ■ �+';' ® IMPROVEMENTS + PED REFUGE ■ ■ = _ ISLANDS ( ) SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION (S4) J ■ ■ S1- ■ 220thStreet: ■ INTERSECTION CAPACITY&SAFETY, ■ ® IMPROVEMENTS+ PED REFUGE ■ ISLANDS / ■ i SIDEWALK, SIGHT DISTANCE VISIBILITY, SIGNAL COORDINATION / ADA, AND LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS (S2) S10 224th Streetto ■ ■ :S16 ■ ■ Sill 228th Street: , IMPROVEMENT INDEX NUMBER (REFER TO TABLE OF IMPROVEMENTS) ® EXISTING SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION AND PED XING ® PROPOSED NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND PEDESTRIAN CROSSING INTERSECTION SAFETY & CAPACITY ❑ IMPROVEMENTS E HF" NEW BIKE ROUTE DESIGNATION ■■■■■ NEW CLASS II BICYCLE LANES STREET IMPROVEMENTS FOR PEDESTRIANS ACCESS MANAGEMENT (RAISED MEDIANS) ® © PEDESTRIAN HYBRID SIGNAL (HAWK) ACCESS MANAGEMENT (S28) ■�� S10 ■ ■ �'.:S18 ACCESS MANAGEMENT (S32) 71 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 97 SIMPLEME 6.A.a SOUTHERNOF 1 AREA �■■■■■■■■■■■■■ :S16 ■�S18 ■ - S11 228th Street■ ■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■I■■■■�■■■■ �� SIDEWALK, SIGHT DISTANCE VISIBILITY, ' COMP ■ IMPRO 230th Street 1 ■ COMMUNITY CENTE ■ IMPROVE LOCAL BUS STOPS SERVING COMMUNITY r HEALTH CENTER ( ) ■ ■ 234th Street♦ ■ ■ ■ ! ■ 236th Street■ LETE STREET 1♦. ADA AND LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS (S3) L VEMENTS( ) ■ i HEALTH (i 1 ■ BICYCLE CONNECTION t +— ACCESS MANAGEMENT (S2i � TO FUTURE REGIONAL R RAIL VIA228TH(S3) MID -BLOCK PEDESTRIAN HYB6 SIGNALIZED CROSSING BETWEEN BUS STOPS AND i����- COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER (S21) ♦♦ ACCESS MANAGEMENT(S26) j NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONCURRENT ') F WITH DEVELOPMENT(S22) ACCESS MANAGEMENT(S25) ` SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION, SIGHT♦♦� a DISTANCE VISIBILITY, ADA AND Lit] Mljmonsoons IMPROVEMENTS (aa) 238th StreetL13 0 S13 SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION, SIGHT ■■mons +�����������������■ �� DISTANCE VISIBILITY, ADA AND LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS (S6) COMPLETE STREET �� �� PED REFUGE ISLANDS (S23) IMPROVEMENTS( ) �� ACCESS MANAGEMENT (S24) SIDEWALK, SIGHT DISTANCE 240th Street VISIBILITY, ADA AND LIGHTING HIGH -VISIBILITY CROSSWALK IMPROVEMENTS (S1) MARKINGS ON RECONFIGURED SR 1040N AND . OFF-RAMPS(S19) k El 244th Street® 5)OC IMPROVEMENT INDEX NUMBER (REFER TO TABLE OF IMPROVEMENTS) EXISTING SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION AND PED XING ® PROPOSED NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND PEDESTRIAN CROSSING INTERSECTION SAFETY & CAPACITY ❑ IMPROVEMENTS E HF" NEW BIKE ROUTE DESIGNATION ■■■■■ NEW CLASS II BICYCLE LANES STREET IMPROVEMENTS FOR PEDESTRIANS ACCESS MANAGEMENT (RAISED MEDIANS) ® © PEDESTRIAN HYBRID SIGNAL (HAWK) RECONFIGURE SR 104 ON AND OFF -RAMPS AS CONVENTIONAL INTERSECTIONS TO ELIMINATE HIGH SPEED SLIP RAMPS AND IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE SAFETY (S20) EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 98 6.A.a IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSED SHORT-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS S1 Pedestrian Safety Improve sidewalks, sight distance visibility, street and safety lighting on 240th from 84th Ave W to 80th Way W (primarily along commercial frontages) S2 Pedestrian Safety / Implement safety improvements at 224th and 76th Avenue W including constructing new or Ped Circulation improving existing sidewalks on both sides of 224th approaching 76th Ave and SIR 99. Not Shown General Safety General need for safety and street lighting on residential streets surrounding SR 99. Workshop participants identified the need to widen sidewalks on 228th east of SR 99. Although the nature of the street warrants pedestrian amenities, wider sidewalks may be considered an amenity, but it is very costly to acheive for the benefit gained. Pedestrian amenities in -lieu of wider sidewalks including: 1. Buffer pedestrians from moving traffic with street trees in tree wells constructed within parking lanes. Pedestrian Consistent application of high visibility crosswalk markings at intersections. S3 Safety / Ped 2. Ensure street lighting illuminates entire width of street.Currently, street lights are located Circulation on one side of the street. Intersections with marked crosswalks should have safety lighting illuminating each end of crosswalks. 3. Install bus shelters at local bus stops with street lighting. Where right of waywont permit a shelter, use curb extensions to add width. 4. Install bus shelters at local bus stops with street lighting. Where right of way wont permit a shelter, use curb extensions to add width Pedestrian and S4 Vehicular Safety Sidewalk construction projects: 216th St. SW from 72nd Ave. W to SR 99 / Ped Circulation Pedestrian and S5 Vehicular Safety Sidewalk construction projects: 236th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 76th Ave. W / Ped Circulation Pedestrian and S6 Vehicular Safety Sidewalk construction projects: 238th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 76th Ave. W / Ped Circulation S7 Complete Streets 238th Street SW, between SR 104 and SIR 99. Widen to three lanes with curb, gutter, Impvts bike lanes, and sidewalk. Complete Streets 228th Street SW, between SR 99 and 95th PI. W Widen to three lanes with curb, S8 Impvts gutter, bike lanes and sidewalk, as well as intersection improvements at 228th @ 95th. 73 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 99 6.A.a IMPLEME Workshop 224th Street, as a route, provides access to a few destination such as the interurban trail, but is not a primary route to major generators. However, many residential neighborhoods feed into 224th and it may Workshop serve as a lower volume and lower speed alternative for pedestrians and bicyclists. Near SR 99 224th lacks sidewalks on one or both sides of the street. Many of the workshop participants commented on the lack of street lighting on streets intersecting or paralleling SR 99. Safety lighting (lighting that illuminates intersection corners where pedestrians are expected to cross) and street lighting (overhead lighting that Workshop generally illuminates the width of the street) is a fundamental prerequisite for walkable areas. Streets that cannot be safely traveled by pedestrians and bicyclists at night, will experience limited travel during the day. 228th Street SW is one of the study area's only Complete Streets. It connects the SR 99 corridor to numerous destinations including Highway 104 into downtown, the interurban trail, parks and recreational facilities, and the Mountlake Terrace Transit Center. 228th is a local bus route. Class II bicycle lanes connect SR 99 to the interurban trail. The City recently completed an extension of 228th from 76th Avenue to complete its connection to SR 99. Sidewalks on both side of the street measure about 5 feet in width with numerous curb cuts and non-ADA compliant driveway aprons and curb ramps. Project identified as a high priority in the Comprehensive 2015 Transportation Element Project identified as a high priority in the Comprehensive 2015 Transportation Element Project identified as a high priority in the Comprehensive 2015 Transportation Element This project is recommended for inclusion in the City's Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) for 2022-2035. Workshop Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element - Recommended Roadway Capital Projects Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element - Recommended Roadway Capital Projects Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element - Recommended Roadway Capital Projects Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element - Recommended Roadway Capital Projects This project is recommended for inclusion in the City's Transportation Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element - Improvement Plan (TIP) for 2022-2035. Recommended Roadway Capital Projects EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 100 6.A.a IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSED SHORT-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS S9 Bicycle Circulation Class II bike lanes on 212th Street from Main Street to 68th Avenue crossing SR 99 S10 Bicycle Circulation Bike route designation on 224th Street SW from 84th Avenue W across SR 99 to interurban trail. S11 Bicycle Circulation Class II bike lanes on 228th Street SW from SR 104 across SR 99 to existing Class II lanes on 76th Avenue W. S12 Bicycle Class II bike lanes on 76th Avenue W from 208th to 220th and bike route designation to Circulation 224th Street SW. S13 Bicycle Bike route designation on 238th Street SW from 84th Avenue W across SR 99 to existing Circulation Class II bike lanes on 76th Avenue W. S14 Bicycle Class II bike lanes on 84th Avenue W from 212th Street SW to 236th Street SW and bike Circulation route designation on 84th Avenue W south to 238th Street SW. S15 Bicycle Class II bike lanes on 236th Street SW from SR 104 to 84th Avenue W. Circulation S16 Bicycle Circulation Bike route designation on 80th Avenue W from 206th Street SW to 228th Street SW S17 Bicycle Bike route designation on 72nd Avenue W from 208th Street SW to 216th Street SW Circulation and continuing on 216th Street SW to SR99. S18 Bicycle Bike route designation on 73rd PI W from 224th Street SW to 226th PI SW. Circulation 75 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 101 IMPLEME 6.A.a City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 102 6.A.a IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSED SHORT-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS S19 Pedestrian Safety Provide high -visibility crosswalk markings on the SR 104 on and off -ramps (and ensure xings are well -illuminated) Pedestrian and Not Shown General Multimodal Implement corridorwide wayfinding signage to local districts and major multimodal facilities Circulation S20 Pedestrian Safety Reconfigure off -ramps as conventional 90-degree stop control intersections. 77 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 103 SIMPLEME 6.A.a This is an interim improvement prior to the proposed reconfiguration DKS Associates of the ramp termini to eliminate high-speed movememnts. A corridorwide wayfinding system should be established providing signing at key intersections conecting to major destinations such as downtown, train station, SWIFT stops, nearest bicycle facilities, Workshop and DKS Associates interurban trail access, parks and open space, local districts along the corridor, and freeway access. Diminates high-speed vehicle movements using slip ramps on and off SR 104 thus improving sight and stopping distance and DKS Associates pedestrian conflicts with fast moving merging vehicles. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 104 6.A.a IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSED SHORT-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS Pedestrian Safety / "Mid -block crossing between 234th and 230th connecting the Community Health Center S21 Access to Transit to the northbound local bus stop. This crossing may be a HAWK signal crossing or a pedestrian activated flashing beacon crossing. S22 Pedestrian Safety / New pedestrian crossing at 234th Street which is the approximate mid -point of the large Access to Transit gap in crossings. This crossing may be achieved as shown in the notes column. S23 Pedestrian Safety / Access to Transit Pedestrian refuge islands on SR99 at 238th (SWIFT stations located at this intersection) "Traffic Safety Access Install raised median (with potential gateway features) between 240th and 238th. S24 Management / Channelize westbound traffic on 240th for right turns only. Allow u-turns at 238th. See note Safe Pedestrian [1] below. Crossing" "Traffic Safety Access S25 Management / 236th Street to 234th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SR99. Restrict left Safe Pedestrian turns from stop -controlled 236th Street. Crossing" "Traffic Safety Access S26 Management / 234th Street to 230th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SR99. Restrict left Safe Pedestrian turns from stop -controlled 234th Street. Crossing" "Traffic Safety S27 Access Management / 230th Street to 228th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SR99. Safe Pedestrian Restrict left turns from stop -controlled 234th Street. Crossing" "Traffic Safety Access S28 Management / 224th Street to 220th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SR99. Safe Pedestrian Crossing" See Individual Safe Pedestrian Intersection Crossings Implement pedestrian refuge medians at select signalized crosswalks on SR99. Improve- ments 79 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 105 IMPLEME 6.A.a PROVIDE SAFE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING OF HIGHWAY 99 AND ACCESS TO TRANSIT This crossing should be a priority given it improves access to a public health facility including low income persons. It also would close a 3,500 foot gap in protected crossings within this segment of SR 99. FrOURCE DKS Associates A. With significant high density development at 234th node, potentially intersection would warrant a traffic signal (see long-term improvements) B. Install a HAWK pedestrian activated signal DKS Associates C. Install a temporary two -stage unsignalized crossing in the interim timeframe befotre a signal is warranted. A 6-foot wide pedestrian refuge island at each approach on SR 99 can be achieved within the approx. 82-foot curb to curb with 13-foot outside lanes, 1 0-foot inside lanes, DKS Associates and 10-foot left turn bay. Improvements at 240th are geared towards obtaining a pedestrian crossing of SR 99 to close one of the crossing gaps in the corridor and to improve vehicular safety and access to the Burlington Coat Factory site. 240th Avenue at SR 99 is one of the highest SR 99 Access Management and vehicular collision locations in the corridor and it is not prudent to add an unsignalized Cross Section Focused Assessment crossing at thgis location. Current crossing demand is too low to warrant a short-term pedestrian crossing improvement. See long-term improvements. For long segments with numerous driveways, use intermittently placed medians to allow left turn in/out functions at key driveways. Access managed segments must permit u-turns at adjacent signalized intersections. Use median to restrict left turns from stop- SIR 99 Access Management and controlled side streets with high collision histories unless the restriction conflicts with a Cross Section Focused Assessment short-term improvement or other proposed change in traffic control. With implementation of an access management strategy (e.g, raised medians), most, if not all, of the signalized intersections will be utilized for northbound and southbound u-turns. U-turns require a minimum width between the far side curb face and the inside curb face of the left turn lane of about 36 to 50 feet and pedestrian refuge islands (6 feet Workshop wide) can help achieve the width needed for these u-turns. Lane widths may be shifted or reduced to gain the 6 feet for pedestrian refuge islands along the 100+ foot crossings along the corridor, as well as requiring minor land dedication from adjacent property owners when redeveloping. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 106 6.A.a IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSED SHORT-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVE TRANSIT MOBILITY AND TRANSIT STOP ENVIRONMENT Not Shown Transit Mobility Implement a Transit Signal Priority (TSP) system along SR 99 for the SWIFT Bus Rapid Transit system. Access to Transit S30 / Transit Stop Improve local bus stops between 234th and 230th that serve Community Health Center Environment Access to Transit S31 / Transit Stop Provide enhanced local transit stops near Swedish Hospital. Environment 81 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 107 SIMPLEME 6.A.a Transit Signal Priority (TSP) systems allow BRT vehicles to trigger a change in traffic signal phasing in favor of the buses approaching a signalized intersection. TSP can either expedite a green light for buses passing through an intersection, or expedite buses DKS Associates stopping at far -side bus stops and using the traffic signal's following cycle to load / unload passengers thus avoiding the delay waiting to cross to the far -side stop. Provide shelters, benches, lighting, and buffer the stop from moving traffic. DKS Associates The Swift Rapid stations are excellent examples of Bus Rapid Transit stations with ample rider amenities. The nearby local bus stops are established some distance away and most have only signs, some have a bench and waste receptacle. Enhancements should be considered at local stops near major employment centers, major retail Workshop concentrations, or institutions where employees may commute by transit. Local bus stops enhanced with wider waiting areas with shelters, benches, shade, lighting, bike racks, etc. may help encourage transit ridership, particularly in combination with employer trip reduction programs. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 108 6.A.a IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSED SHORT-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVE TRAFFIC FLOW AND GENERAL SAFETY WITH ACCESS MANAGEMENT Pedestrian and Safety improvements at the intersection of SR 99 / 224th Street SW and between 224th S32 Vehicular Safety / and 76th Avenues (particularly LT into Ranch 99 Market). Ped Circulation "SR 99 and 212th Street SW Widen 212th to add a westbound left turn lane for 200- Intersection foot storage length and an eastbound left turn lane for 300-foot storage length. Provide S33 Capacity & Safety / protected left turn phase for eastbound and westbound movements. Ped Safety Recommend lane widths be reallocated to construct 6-foot wide pedestrian refuge islands on SR 99 approaches" "SR 99 and 220th Street SW Widen 220th to add a 325-foot westbound right turn lane and Intersection a 300-foot eastbound right turn lane. Widen 220th to add a second westbound left turn S34 Capacity & Safety / lane. (This would add about 24 additional feet of croswalk distance). Ped Safety Recommend lane widths be reallocated to construct 6-foot wide pedestrian refuge islands on SR 99 approaches" Intersection "SR 99 at 216th Street SW Widen to allow one left turn lane, one through lane and one right Capacity & turn lane in eastbound and westbound directions, with 100-foot storage length for turn S35 Safety / Ped lanes. Add eastbound right turn overlap with northbound protected left turn. Recommend lane widths be reallocated to construct 6-foot wide pedestrian refuge islands Safety on SR99 approaches" S36 Intersection Capacity Signal Coordination on 220th St. SW from 76th Ave. W to SR 99. Access "Consideration of operational strategies to help SR 99 traffic flow optimization, including: Not Shown Management - U-turns (recommended at intersections in the access management memorandum). & Traffic Flow - Jug handle movement accommodations at intersections. Improvements - Use of adaptive traffic signals" NOTES. 1. From the southern border at the county line (MP 43.50) until approximately 114 mile to the north, just past the interchange area but before 240th Street SW (MP 43.72), SR 99 is designated as Limited Access Partially Controlled. This is defined as 'At -grade intersections are allowed for selected public roads and approaches for existing private driveways, no commercial approaches allowed, and no direct access if alternate public road access is available". 2. From the point just north of the SR 104 interchange (MP 43.72) northward through both Edmonds and Lynnwood (MP 43.72 - 48,92), the designation of SR 99 is Managed Access Class 4. 83 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 109 6.A.a IMPLEME IMPROVE TRAFFIC FLOW AND GENERAL SAFETY WITH ACCESS MANAGEMENT Revision of the side street channelization at 224th to avoid the need for a split phase. WSDOT suggests changing the shared thru/left and right -only lanes to a left -only and Workshop and WSDOT shared thru/right configuration. "Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element - This project is recommended for inclusion in the City's Transportation Improvement Recommended Roadway Capital Plan (TIP) for 2016-2021. Projects Refuge Islands rec'd. by DKS Associates" "Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element - This project is recommended for inclusion in the City's Transportation Improvement Plan Recommended Roadway Capital (TIP) for 2016-2021. Projects Refuge Islands rec'd. by DKS Associates" "Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element - This project is recommended for inclusion in the City's Transportation Improvement Plan Recommended Roadway Capital (TIP) for 2016-2021. Projects Refuge Islands rec'd. by DKS Associates" Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element Note that 50 feet is the minimum U-turn diameter accepted in the past, with justification. WSDOT 3. State of Washington Legal Requirements of M4 Highways. Gass 4 Managed Access highways are designed to have a posted speed limit of 30 to 35 mph in urbanized areas and 35 to 45 mph in rural areas. In urban areas and developing areas where higher volumes are present or growth that will require a change in intersection control is expected in the foreseeable future, it is imperative that the location of any public access point be planned carefully to ensure adequate traffic progression. Where feasible, major intersecting roadways that might ultimately require intersection control changes are planned with a minimum of %smile spacing. Private access connections to the highway are spaced 250 feet apart, only a single access for individual or contiguous parcels under the same owner, and variance permits maybe allowed. 4. Within Incorporated Cities. Under RCW 35.78.030 and RCW 47.50, incorporated cities and towns have jurisdiction over access permitting on streets designated as state highways. Accesses located within incorporated cities and towns are regulated by the city or town and no deviation by WSDOT will be required. Document decisions made on these accesses in the DDP. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 110 6.A.a IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSED LONG-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS NO LONGTERM IMPROVEMENTS IN THIS CATEGORY Pedestrian Widen sidewalks on SR99 from 212th street to 240th Street to include a minimum 4-foot L1 Circulation wide planting strip to buffer pedestrians from moving traffic. Use space for placement of appropriate street trees. L2 Vehicular / Install street lighting on SR 99 corridor to close gaps and to achieve uniform spacing and Pedestrian Safety illumination. Install safety lighting at intersections as part of this improvement. Pedestrian Install new signal at 240th (with crosswalks on all four legs) concurrent with new L3 Circulation / development at 240th node. Consolidate and relocate driveways to 240th (helps meet Development signal warrants) Access Safe Pedestrian L4 Crossing / Install traffic signal at SR 99 / 234th including pedestrian crosswalks on all approaches Development and pedestrian refuge islands on SIR 99. Access 85 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 111 IMPLEME 6.A.a NO LONG-TERM IMPROVEMENTS IN THIS CATEGORY This improvement requires approximately 6-feet of right of way. The City should require dedication of right of way (or a permanent public access easement) from private property when redeveloped. "Highway 99 Traffic Safety and Circulation Study (2007) Dedication or easement may also be used when properties adjacent DKS Associates" to local bus stops redevelop in order to obtain width for ADA compliance and bus shelters. This improvement may also be implemented in conjuction with "Highway 99 Traffic Safety and Circulation Study (2007) district identity, streetscape, or themed urban design projects. DKS Associates" This improvement achieves a signalized crossing at the southern end of the corridor, but Workshop is only feasible with increased development intensity at the 240th node. This improvement may only be feasible with significantly high density development at 234th Street node and with access from 234th Street to meet signal warrants. New Workshop and DKS Associates development fronting SR 99 adjacent to the intersection should be required to dedicate land to provide width for wider sidewalks and pedestrian refuge islands. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 112 6.A.a IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSED LONG-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVE TRANSIT MOBILITY AND TRANSIT STOP ENVIRONMENT The following Transit Priority Corridor improvement designations are included in Edmond's Comprehensive Plan. Improvements specific to Transit Priority Corridors are not specifically defined but generally include frequent and reliable service, and bus stop amenities which can include wider waiting areas, shelters, seating, shade, good illunination, accessibility for the disabled, and buffers from moving traffic. L5 Transit Service / Priority Transit Corridor: SR 99 from 208th to SR 104 Ped Amenities L6 Transit Service / Priority Transit Corridor: 220th Street SW from 76th Avenue W to proposed light rail transit Ped Amenities station at 1-5 interchange. Transit Service / Priority Transit Corridor: 228th Street SW from SR 104 to 76th Avenue W L7 Ped Amenities continuing to the Mountlake Terrace Transit Center. A new SWIFT station is proposed at SR 99 and 228th Street SW. L8 Transit Service / Priority Transit Corridor: 238th Street SW from SR 104 to SR 99. Ped Amenities L9 Transit Service / Improve local bus stop northbound at 240th (provide seating, shelter, refuge can, Ped Amenities lighting, etc.) concurrent with new development at 240th Street node. L10 Transit Service / Improve local bus stop southbound at 240th (provide seating, shelter, refuge can, Ped Amenities lighting, etc.) concurrent with new development at 240th Street node. L11 Transit Service Extend BAT lanes on SR 99 onto overcrossing of SR 104 and continuing to 244th Efficiency Street. IMPROVE TRAFFIC FLOW AND GENERAL SAFETY WITH ACCESS MANAGEMENT DESCRIPTIONMAP IMPROVEMENT OF PR• IDENTIFIER TYPE L12 Access 238th Street to 236th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SIR 99. Management L13 Access 228th Street to 224th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SIR 99. Management L14 Access 220th Street to 216th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SIR 99. Management L15 Access 216th Street to 212th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SIR 99. Management 87 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 113 IMPLEME 6.A.a IMPROVE TRANSIT MOBILITY AND TRANSIT STOP ENVIRONMENT I&& These priority corridors would emphasize good daily transit service and bus stop Comprehensive Plan 2015 amenities to make transit attractive. Transportation Element These priority corridors would emphasize good daily transit service and bus stop Comprehensive Plan 2015 amenities to make transit attractive. Transportation Element These priority corridors would emphasize good daily transit service and bus Comprehensive Plan 2015 stop amenities to make transit attractive. Transportation Element These priority corridors would emphasize good daily transit service and bus Comprehensive Plan 2015 stop amenities to make transit attractive. Transportation Element This improvement most likely needed when higher intensity redevelopment Workshop occurs within the 240th node. This improvement would best benefit from the installation of a traffic signal at Workshop and DKS Associates SR 99 / 240th Street. Extension of the BAT lanes through the bottleneck created by the four -lane overcrossing provides additional efficiency for SWIFT service which has Community Transit experienced a drop in reliability due to congestion within the corridor. IMPROVE TRAFFIC FLOW AND GENERAL SAFETY WITH ACCESS MANAGEMENT m6k SOURCE For long segments with numerous driveways, use intermittently placed medians to allow "SR 99 Access Management and left turn in/out functions at key driveways. Access managed segments must permit Cross Section Focused Assessment u-turns at adjacent signalized intersections. Use median to restrict left turns from stop- (2015) controlled side streets with high collision histories unless the restriction conflicts with a Worksop short-term improvement or other proposed change in traffic control. DKS Associates" EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 114 6.A.a Edmonds Highway 99 Subarea Plan December 2016 EDMOPIDS99 HIGHWAY Packet Pg. 115 9.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/14/2016 Discussion on Extended Agenda Staff Lead: N/A Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Diane Cunningham Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review and discuss Narrative Extended agenda is attached Attachments: 12-14-2016 PB Extended Agenda Packet Pg. 116 of EbAf U� O�6 PLANNNS BOARD j�. t aao Extended Agenda December 14, 2016 Meeting Item DECEMBER 2016 9.A.a Items and Dates are subject to change Dec. 14 1. Public Hearing on the Draft Highway 99 Area Plan 2. Election of Officers Dec. 28 Cancelled — Holiday JANUARY 2017 Jan. 11 1. Presentation on UW/Forterra plan for Five Corners Jan. 25 1. Sound Transit presentation on ST3 (with emphasis on Edmonds area) FEBRUARY 2017 Feb. 8 Feb. 22 1. Comprehensive Plan Performance Report MARCH 2O17 March 8 March 22 a Packet Pg. 117 Items and Dates are 9.A.a to change Pending 1. Community Development Code Re -Organization 2016 2. Neighborhood Center Plans and zoning implementation, including: ✓ Five Corners 3. Further Highway 99 Implementation, including: ✓ Potential for "urban center" or transit -oriented design/development strategies ✓ Parking standards 4. Exploration of incentive zoning and incentives for sustainable development Current Priorities 1. Neighborhood Center Plans & implementation. 2. Highway 99 Implementation. Recurring 1. Annual Adult Entertainment Report (January -February as necessary) Topics 2. Election of Officers (1" meeting in December) 3. Parks & Recreation Department Quarterly Report (January, April, July, October) 4. Quarterly report on wireless facilities code updates (as necessary) Packet Pg. 118