2019-06-26 Planning Board Packetti3 f!}:qr
Agenda
Edmonds Planning Board
't j4yx COUNCIL CHAMBERS
250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020
JUNE 26, 2019, 7:00 PM
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Approval of Draft Minutes: June 12, 2019
3. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA
4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
5. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
A. Development Services Director Report
B. Comprehensive Plan Performance in 2018
C. Development Activities Update
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
8. NEW BUSINESS
9. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA
A. Review Planning Board Extended Agenda
10. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS
11. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
12. ADJOURNMENT
Edmonds Planning Board Agenda
June 26, 2019
Page 1
2.A
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 06/26/2019
Approval of Draft Minutes: June 12, 2019
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:
PB190612d
Packet Pg. 2
2.A.a
CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD
Minutes of Regular Meeting
June 12, 2019
Chair Cheung called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public
Safety Complex, 250 — 5' Avenue North.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
Matthew Cheung, Chair
Daniel Robles, Vice Chair
Alicia Crank
Phil Lovell
Carreen Nordling Rubenkonig
Mike Rosen
Conner Bryan, Student Representative
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT
Todd Cloutier (excused)
Nathan Monroe (excused)
READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES
STAFF PRESENT
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager
Jerrie Bevington, Video Recorder
BOARD MEMBER TOSEN MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF MAY 22, 2019 BE APPROVED AS PRESENTED.
BOARD MEMBER CRANK SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA
The agenda was accepted as presented.
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
There were no audience comments.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT TO PLANNING BOARD
Chair Cheung referred the Board to the Development Services Director's Report that was provided in the packet. Board
Member Lovell asked if the City's new Housing Commission would have some interface with or representation on
Snohomish County's Housing Affordability Regional Task Force. Director Hope explained that the task force will be
looking at countywide policies, and the City's Housing Commission could certainly share information with this group. She
summarized that, at this point, it is too early to tell how the two groups will interface.
Board Member Lovell asked if the draft Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) would come back to the Board with a
potential ordinance to adopt it as a code change. Director Hope answered that the UFMP will go next to the City Council.
While it does not need to be adopted by ordinance, it will come back to the Board for information and potential
implementation and coordination. Board Member Lovell summarized that, as currently proposed, the UFMP does not
Packet Pg. 3
2.A.a
involve any code changes. Director Hope answered that the plan identifies some changes that need to be made, but necessary
code changes will come later.
Board Member Lovell observed that the Graphite Arts Studio Project, which is currently under review by the Architectural
Design Board, will now involve two buildings: a single -story artist studio on Main Street, with a two-story mixed -use
building behind it on 2nd Avenue. Director Hope advised that, in the near future, staff will present a report on the
development activities that are occurring in the City. Board Member Lovell pointed out that the Architectural Design
Board's continued hearing on the project will be on August 7'.
LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
Director Hope shared some highlights of legislation that was considered this year, paying special attention to things related to
community planning (land use capacity, housing, environment, energy, infrastructure and economic vitality).
House Bill 1377 requires cities and counties within the urban growth area to allow density bonuses for housing
development that is located on properties that are owned or controlled by religious organizations if the development
will be for exclusive use by low-income households and is part of a lease or some other kind of binding obligation
for 50 years. The housing cannot not discriminate against any person who qualifies as a member of a low-income
household. In addition, the allowed density bonus must be consistent with local needs for housing. At this time, she
is unsure what that means, and she doesn't know of any local religious organizations interested in taking advantage
of this provision in Edmonds. As per the legislation, the City could develop policies to implement the density bonus
if a religious organization requests it. By 2030 the legislature will review the results of the bill and determine
whether it should be continued, amended or repealed. Board Member Crank asked if low-income would include
low -barrier or just low-income, and Director Hope answered that it is more general.
House Bill 1923 relates to voluntary things that cities and counties in urban growth areas are encouraged to do to
promote urban density and infill. For example, the State's liability and insurance laws made condominium
development prohibitive except in some high -demand areas. The legislature softened the state rules to make it
easier to produce some housing types. The encourages cities to take action to increase residential building capacity
and housing affordability. It authorizes cities to adopt housing action plans and exempts certain actions that
implement the residential building capacity. For example, it allows exemptions from State Environmental Policy
Act (SEPA) appeals and authorizes planning grants up to $100,000 for qualifying cities to work on these issues. It
directs a University of Washington research facility to prepare reports on housing supply and affordability around
the state and also sets up a document recording fee that would be used for certain kinds of planning grants. In
addition, cities and counties that are near frequent -service transit and where facilities serve extremely low -incomes
can require no more than 1 parking space per bedroom unit or .75 spaces per studio unit. Areas in Edmonds where
this provision might be applied are on Highway 99. With some exceptions, cities and counties cannot require that
housing near transit that serves seniors or people with disabilities must provide a minimum number of parking
spaces. Lastly, the bill prohibits cities and counties from prohibiting permanent supportive housing in multifamily
zones. At this time, she is not clear on the definition of "supportive housing."
The bill includes voluntary actions (not requirements) that cities and counties can take, such as allowing high -
density and medium -density development in large areas (500 acres or more) near train stations, allowing additional
units (triplexes, courtyard apartments, etc.) in one or more single-family zones, allowing cluster zoning or lot size
averaging, authorizing both attached and detached accessory dwellings units, adopting a subarea plan or planned
action, adopting an increase in categorical exemptions under SEPA to encourage urban infill, adopting form -based
code where residential uses are permitted, authorizing a duplex on each corner lot where single-family residences
are permitted, authorizing minimum net density of 6 units per acre in all single-family zones, and developing a
housing action plan.
Board Member Lovell asked if the list of potential voluntary actions would be made available to the City's new
Housing Commission so they can study the various options. Director Hope answered affirmatively. She said the
Department of Commerce will be establishing a planning grant program whereby cities that intend to implement at
least two of the voluntary actions are eligible to receive a grant.
Planning Board Minutes
June 12, 2019 Page 2
Packet Pg. 4
2.A.a
• Senate Bill 5383 provides some options for tiny house communities, which is not something that really applies to
Edmonds. It is intended for application in county areas where urban services are available.
• House Bill 1798 is about short-term rentals, such as vacation rentals. One challenge for some communities is that
the short-term rental market is so hot that it is taking things off the market for regular people. In some communities,
it has become a big challenge to provide adequate housing for long-term residents. Some cities have taken steps to
restrict short-term rentals, but there was no clear state law that required short-term rental units to be registered. As
per the new law, short-term rentals must be registered through the state. The law doesn't change any other
requirements. Chair Cheung asked what state licensing involves, and Director Hope said it involves an application
and small fee to check to ensure the property has been properly permitted.
• The Legislature allocated $175 million to the Housing Trust Fund, which is more than in 2018 but not as great as
some had hoped for.
• House Bill 1406 provides a local option for sales tax transfer. By taking certain steps, cities and counties can now
apply a portion of their sales tax revenue to housing. The bill does not include a tax increase, and a City ordinance
would be required to enact the transfer.
• House Bill 1219 allows for the transfer of a portion of the Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) for project construction
or rehabilitation of housing in the city or the region. A council action would be required to implement the transfer.
• A number of bills passed that provide more protection for tenants. For example, eviction notice time period was
increased from 3 days to 14 days. In addition, all of the money tenants pay prior to the deadline goes towards rent
due. Previously the money could be allocated for fees instead of rent. House Bill 1440 created a 60-day notice for
rent increases, and House Bill 1462 provided a longer 120-day notice for tenants when a building is going to be
demolished. Legislative action was also taken to increase the notice period for mobile homes before eviction, and a
longer notice time is required for mobile home parks that are being converted to something else to give owners time
to find another location. Nothing changed fundability about where and how much housing is provided, but the
legislation provided more notice for tenants if something is happening to their homes.
• House Bill 1587 has to do with safer oil transport. The primary intent is to protect the habitat of Orcas. Oil is often
transferred near water, and spills can become a problem.
• House Bill 1579 is labeled as a Chinook Abundance Bill and implements some recommendations from the Orca
Recovery Task Force to provide more protection. There is also a bill that requires vessels to stay further away from
Orcas. Another bill provides whale -watching guidelines to make sure the tour boats stay a safe distance away from
the whales.
• The legislature funded a Plastic Packaging Study to look at what can be done differently, as a state, to reduce
plastic waste. The legislation is similar to what Edmonds and other cities in the state have already done, but would
be a statewide approach for reducing the use of plastic (packaging, straws, etc.).
• House Bill 1652 is a paint stewardship bill. Former Council Member Pederson sponsored this bill with the idea of
making sure that paint is properly disposed of. The legislation establishes some restrictions and fines for people
who violate the regulations.
• Senate Bill 5116 is called a Clean Energy Bill and requires utilities to eliminate coal-fired resources by 2025. All
retail electricity sales have to be greenhouse neutral by 2030. The City has been making progress on that in recent
years, but there is still room for improvement across the state.
• House Bill 1257 sets some requirements for the State Department of Commerce to do some things that may
ultimately affect Edmonds and other cities and counties. For example, it calls for establishing energy performance
Planning Board Minutes
June 12, 2019 Page 3
Packet Pg. 5
2.A.a
standards for commercial buildings. It also calls for establishing an incentive program for developers who adopt the
standards before they become requirements. Lastly, it calls for developing rules for electric vehicle infrastructures
with all new buildings. The City has talked about the importance of this requirement, which already applies in some
locations and building types.
• House Bill 1444 talks about energy efficiency standards for some kinds of appliances. This requirement is not out
of line with what many other states are doing, but more than what Washington State has done in the past.
• There was a lot of effort to adopt more opportunities for infrastructure funding. For example, in past years, the
Public Works Trust Fund, which has long been a source for local governments to finance infrastructure at really
low interest and occasional grants, had been swept and there was no ability to get funding for needed capital
projects. This year, some funding was allocated.
• Initiative 1000 was focused on economic vitality. It prohibits discrimination in contracting for public projects such
as buildings and public education.
• House Bill 1746 provided for cities outside of King County the option to incentivize development of commercial
office space in urban centers. The City may be interested in this option.
• Senate Bill 5160 modifies the threshold for property tax exemptions and deferrals for low-income seniors, disabled
people and veterans. It allows them to qualify for a property tax exemption at a lower threshold than previously.
• Senate Bill 5995 is related to the Real Estate Excise Tax (BEET). The REET tax is based on a percentage, and one
percentage fits all. The tax applies whenever property is sold. The new bill approved a tiered approach. Properties
that sell for $500,000 or less will be taxed at a lower rate, and properties that sell for more than $500,000 will be
taxed at a slightly higher rate. The thought was to protect the lower -priced sales but still put slightly more money
into the budget for other needed things.
• The budget provides funding for housing support services. These are state funds that will not be allocated to cities
and counties. A lot of money has been allocated for whale -protection activities and fish -barrier removal. There are
a lot of culverts on state and local roads that block fish passage.
Director Hope summarized that it was a very active year for legislation, and balancing the budget was a big topic. Topics
such as infrastructure, education, energy, climate control and mental health were also big issues. The progress made on
climate -related bills was notable. There is so much interest in housing needs that it could become a subject for next year, as
well.
Board Member Rubenkonig referred to the legislation that requires cities and counties to allow permanent, supportive
housing within a single-family zone. She recalled that, years ago, homes for the aging used to be located on the outskirts of a
city rather than in the neighborhoods. The same was true for people who required long-term medical support. There has
been a lot of discussion concerning Fircrest, where the number of residents has significantly declined. Now it is very difficult
for agencies that provide these services because they encounter a great degree of neighborhood resistance. She observed that
House Bill 1923 is intended to eliminate part of the resistance to the location of such agencies and services. She commented
that there will never be a perfect place, but there must be a better balance. She is grateful that the situation has gotten much
better.
Vice Chair Robles said he is impressed by the breadth of the legislation, particularly as it pertains to housing. Short-term
rentals are an enormous topic, and he is glad the legislature is working to address the issue. He referred to the legislation
related to the use of coal and asked how much shifting would be done to negate the state and City's efforts and costs. If coal
is no longer used in Washington State, will it simply leave more coal to be exported someplace else. He asked how deep the
state's new requirements go and how well do they match what is being done in other states and at the national level. Director
Hope replied that at least a couple of other states have taken steps to eliminate coal-fired utility plants, but most have not and
have no plans to do so in the future. While the outcome on a national level is unknown, the state is working towards
becoming independent of coal-fired plants. The world is changing, as well. For example, China used to be the largest coal
Planning Board Minutes
June 12, 2019 Page 4
Packet Pg. 6
2.A.a
importer but is now looking to phase out coal use due to pollution problems. She expects the situation will change as
technology improves, too. Vice Chair Robles said he learned at a recent conference that United Emirates just came to the
realization that the current oil situation will not continue and they need to look for solutions, as well. He said it is important
to keep in mind that an arbitrage opportunity could be created and there will always be a capitalist who will jump in to scoop
up a bunch of cash while "do gooders" try to mitigate a problem. He asked if there are watchdog agencies who are looking
out for that. Director Hope agreed it is a potential issue, but she doesn't know exactly what is being done about it. She said a
lot of research was done, along with a lot of negotiation, so she assumes this was part of the conversation.
Board Member Crank said she appreciates the overview. She and her colleagues at the YWCA spend a lot of time in
Olympia. Not only did the legislature look at housing and homelessness, but land use issues, as well. While she doesn't
know how the state will define permanent supportive housing, the YWCA's permanent supportive housing often includes
daycare services, case workers and other human resources. As the YWCA works to provide more permanent supportive
housing, they will be interested in the list of voluntary actions. She observed that the legislature provided more funding for
fish and orcas than people as far as housing and homelessness is concerned. The YWCA is hoping that changes moving
forward will be beneficial for the community, as a whole, especially those who are low income.
Student Representative, Conner Bryan, referred to the numbers that were tossed out for allocation in the state budget, such as
for homeless housing reform and worker protection. However, it is hard to comprehend what the numbers mean without
knowing the amount of the total budget. Board Member Rubenkonig said the total budget is $52.2 billion. Director Hope
explained that the budget is separated into a Capital Budget, which can only be spent on capital projects (physical
environment, roadways, buildings) and an Operating Budget, which can only be spent on operations and services (criminal
justice, social services, education, etc.) Education is the biggest expense in the state, and expenses related to criminal justice
and correctional facilities are second.
Chair Cheung said he would be interested in learning more about House Bill 1746 related to incentivizing the development of
office space in urban centers. Specifically, he would like staff to share thoughts on what the City can do to attract more
commercial office uses to support the restaurants and other businesses in the downtown area.
PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL (PSRC) VISION 2050 PLANNING PROCESS
Director Hope explained that the PSRC is comprised of elected officials from King, Snohomish, Kitsap and Pierce Counties,
as well as representatives from transportation agencies, the Tribes, economic development organizations, etc. One of the
PSRC's original focuses was on transportation funding. Regional organizations across the country have the opportunity and
duty to distribute transportation funds from the federal government to the local governments. The PSRC has also been the
"big picture" planning agency for transportation, general land use and growth, the environment and climate issues. The
PSRC is authorized under state law to be a regional planning body that brings the various jurisdictions together and provides
policy guidance on a number of issues.
Director Hope said the PSRC's currently general planning document for the 4-county region is called Vision 2040, and they
are working to update the document to Vision 2050. The update is required by both federal and state law. She explained that
Vision 2040 emphasizes having a strong economy and healthy environment and focusing growth in the Urban Growth
Centers. It identifies a number of actions (guidance) that local governments can implement to achieve the vision. As they
look ahead to the updated document (Vision 2050), they are anticipating a new forecast for population growth in the region.
Between 2017 and 2050, it is anticipated that population in the region will grow by about 1.8 million. About 1.2 million
more jobs are also anticipated. Consistent with current trends, it is anticipated there will be more older people, more
diversity and smaller households by 2050. She noted that about one third7 of the City's population are single -person
households, and the average household size is expected to get smaller.
Director Hope reported that the PSRC has completed its environmental review of the Vision 2050 update, and a process was
established for selecting alternatives. A Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement was issued this past spring to
update the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that was completed in 2008 for Vision 2040. It is anticipated that the
preferred alternative will be selected soon, and the draft Vision 2050 Plan should be presented this summer for more
comment. The final EIS and Vision 2050 will be adopted in the spring of 2020.
Planning Board Minutes
June 12, 2019 Page 5
Packet Pg. 7
2.A.a
Director Hope reviewed the topics that were raised during the PSRC's scoping process:
• Housing supply and affordability.
• Growth strategies for the region that are achievable and take into account the known trends.
• Climate change.
• Access to jobs.
• Equity and fairness to a variety of people.
• The ability to be healthy.
• Revisit the role of urban, unincorporated areas.
• Implementing Vision 2050 so there is accountability and incentives.
• Large regional goals with some flexibility at the local level.
Director Hope said three growth alternatives were identified in the process:
• Stay the Course (No Action). This alternative presumes that the same general patterns established under Vision
2040 would continue. It continues to direct the largest share of future growth to the region's metropolitan areas and
allocates less growth in urban unincorporated and rural areas and more growth in cities. This alternative would
substantially increase access to jobs via biking, walking or transit. Greenhouse gas emissions would be slightly less
than the Reset Urban Growth alternative and would provide less moderate -density housing than the Transit Focused
Growth alternative. The displacement risk would be greater with this alternative.
Transit Focused Growth. This alternative focuses on a compact growth pattern that assumes accelerated growth
near the region's existing and planned high -capacity transit areas. This includes primarily larger cities, but also
includes areas outside of the metropolitan and core cities that are served by high -capacity transit. It assumes there
will be more growth scattered throughout all four counties, including rural and unincorporated areas, as well as a 5%
shift of employment from King County to the other counties in the region. With this alternative, people would have
more opportunity to access jobs via bike, walking or transit. Greenhouse gas emissions would be the lowest under
this alternative and it would result in more moderate -density housing than the other two alternatives.
• Reset Urban Growth. This alternative shares similarities with actual growth patterns that occurred from 2000 to
2016 and assumes a more dispersed growth pattern throughout the urban area. It would continue to allocate the
largest shares of growth to large cities, but less so than the other two alternatives. This alternative would decrease
job access via biking, walking or transit. Greenhouse gas emissions would be the highest under this alternative and
would provide the least amount of moderate -density housing.
Director Hope said that, common to all three alternatives, is the fact that about 830,000 new housing units will be needed in
the 4-county region between 2017 and 2050. All of the scenarios recognize that redevelopment could increase the threat of
displacement for some people, and that needs to be mitigated. They also assume that air quality will improve due to other
regulations and that transit ridership will increase. The average drive time and distances are anticipated to be less than they
are now, but the length of time someone is stuck in traffic will depend on the alternative.
Board Member Lovell referred to a letter from Mayor Earling that was included in the packet, which recommends the Transit
Focused Growth Alternative. He said he serves on the Snohomish County Citizens Advisory Board, and they are currently
talking about the urban growth area east of Bothell. People living there want the area to grow, but they want the ability to
utilize mass transit, too. This flies in the face of some of the growth principles. The further out you go, the lower the
housing cost, but then there is a higher demand for connectivity to get to mass transit services. Director Hope agreed that,
although housing is less costly the further you get away from the metropolitan areas, you also have to consider impacts to
traffic and infrastructure. People might not be better off if they have to pay more for transportation.
Director Hope shared the results of an equity analysis that identifies which areas would be most impacted by the three
alternatives. She summarized that the environmental impacts of the Transit Focused Growth Alternative are overall a bit less
than the other alternatives. She shared the key themes of the proposed Vision 2050 policies: compact, walkable places;
Planning Board Minutes
June 12, 2019 Page 6
Packet Pg. 8
2.A.a
leverage transportation investments; promote affordable housing in all development; preserve open space and farmland;
social equity and avoiding displacement; and a 4-part strategy to address climate change.
Director Hope reviewed that an open house on the draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was held at
Edmonds City Hall on March 12', and the public was invited to submit written comments, as well. The public comment
period is closed, and Mayor Earling submitted a letter on behalf of the City recommending the Transit Focused Growth
Alternative, noting that local flexibility and climate change are important issues to address in future planning. A number of
other cities and counties also submitted comment letters, which are available on the PSRC's website. She summarized that
the next step is to identify a preferred alternative, which is likely to be the Transit Focused Growth Alternative.
Vice Chair Robles commented that, as technology advances, they are seeing anchor retail stores fold in commercial areas
where transit is centered. He suggested the City must consider the causes of these changes. He questioned how future
planning can get in sync with these changes and harness future predictions. Director Hope agreed that is one thing that the
PSRC and local jurisdictions will continue to wrestle with. She pointed to Northgate, one of the oldest malls in the country,
as a good example. While some of the larger anchors are moving out, there is an opportunity to replace them with other
types of retail businesses, services and housing. It is likely the area will continue to be a major hub, but for different
purposes. Vice Chair Robles commented that there is an opportunity for great ideas to emerge, such as more indoor
recreation that will be a tremendous asset to the community.
Board Member Rubenkonig asked if the presentation is available on line. Director Hope said it was prepared by the PSRC
and she isn't sure how easy it would be to access online. However, it was included as part of the Board's meeting packet
that was posted on line.
Board Member Rosen commented that some of the numbers are stunning in terms of the pace of future projections. Based on
the numbers for 2010 to 2017, the population increased by 147 people per day. He likes the idea of Vision 2050, which
provides an opportunity to look at who we are becoming and identifies trends for forecasting. He noted that household size
will continue to decrease, and the current housing inventory in Edmonds provides way more space than people can fill up.
An aging population may increase reliance on public transportation, and the younger workforce is also shifting towards fewer
cars and more public transportation. He observed that many of the issues are regional: air quality, water supply, water
quality and transportation. Although they are forecasting these things as a region, he is concerned that they sometimes don't
solve them that way. For example, every community has its own bus system and there are a variety of other transit services.
For transportation to work well in the future, it needs to be convenient, reliable and safe. He encouraged not just regional
coordination and collaboration, but they need to think about form following function. The forms for the existing transit
services were set in place a long time ago, and he isn't sure that their organizational structures make sense any more.
Board Member Rosen observed that there is a long list of issues to deal with, and they aren't all equal. Some of them have a
greater sense of urgency and they need bold solutions to solve them. This includes bold ways of thinking about organization
and collaboration. He applauded PSRC's efforts to make Vision 2050 data driven, but incremental changes are not enough.
In addition, residents must start shifting their ethics, culture and expectations.
Board Member Lovell said not only are the population growth numbers astounding, he is surprised by the number of new
jobs that are anticipated, about 36,000 new jobs each year for the next 33 years. He said he can't believe the region has the
ability to create this large quantity of jobs in that period of time. Director Hope responded that a huge number of jobs have
been created in the region over the past 10 to 15 years. Much of this growth has occurred in the technology field. She
commented that, oftentimes, jobs come before the people.
Vice Chair Robles asked what kind of diversification is expected for industries in the region. Are they planning to rely
primarily on technology and aerospace? Board Member Crank expressed her belief that there will be a resurgence of jobs.
There has been so much focus on the technology industry in past years and blue-collar jobs were left in the dust. If you are
talking about having transit -oriented growth, there will be an increased need for skilled laborers. She anticipates that part of
the growth will be the resurgence of the blue-collar work force.
Planning Board Minutes
June 12, 2019 Page 7
Packet Pg. 9
2.A.a
PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA
Mr. Chave announced that the Board's extended agenda would be updated and sent out to the Board Members later in the
week. He summarized that the June 26r' agenda will include a presentation on development activities in the City, particularly
projects on Highway 99. It will also include an update on the climate goals project, which is the City Council's big initiative
that a consultant is working on. Other upcoming discussions will include an update on what the City Council is doing with
the Urban Forest Management Plan; an update on the multi -county planning policies, which are a significant part of the
Vision 2050 Plan; and an update on the William D. Ruckelshaus Center Report.
Director Markle explained that the William D. Ruckelshaus Center is a research -driven, policy -neutral organization that is
good at engaging a variety of people. About two years ago, the legislature approved funding for the organization to look at
state laws pertaining to land use and community planning (i.e. Growth Management Act, Shoreline Management Act, State
Environmental Policy Act, annexation laws, subdivision laws, etc.) The idea was to identify potential improvements. The
center interviewed hundreds of people and organizations and did a lot analysis in trying to mold together the different laws.
Their report is due out at the end of June. While the report will not make specific recommendations, it will identify things
that need attention.
PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS
Chair Cheung announced that the Board's joint meeting with the City Council has been rescheduled to a date yet to be
determined. Mr. Chave said the City Council's agendas are full for the remainder of June. It will likely be August or
September before the joint meeting can occur.
Board Member Rubenkonig asked if the Board would be meeting jointly with the Architectural Design Board. Mr. Chave
said the joint meeting will probably take place in August and the topic of discussion will be the design review process. He
explained that the Architectural Design Board has reviewed the design review process, and specifically their role in it.
They've reached some conclusions to present to the Board for discussion.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
Board Member Lovell advised that his resignation will become effective following the meeting, since the City Council will
officially appoint a new member of June 181. He said he has enjoyed serving on the Board and working with all of the Board
Members. He also thanked staff for all the help they have given the Board over the years.
Vice Chair Robles thanked Board Member Lovell for his service and for providing great leadership to new members. Board
Member Rubenkonig also thanked Board Member Lovell.
Board Member Rubenkonig asked if any Board Members have an interest in the City putting out a pamphlet that explains
how property owners can use their properties to create an income stream. For example, they can rent out a room or develop
an accessory dwelling unit. Some members of the Board voiced support for the idea.
Board Member Rubenkonig asked what zones allow duplexes, and Mr. Chave answered that they are only allowed in
multifamily residential zones. Board Member Rubenkonig asked what process would be required to allow duplexes in
single-family residential zones. Mr. Chave answered that a code amendment would be required. Another option would be to
rezone properties that are currently zoned single-family residential to multifamily residential. He said that, at one time,
Snohomish County allowed duplexes on lots that were 1.5 times the minimum lot size. Some of these situations exist where
property has been annexed into the City, but Edmonds zoning does not allow duplexes in single-family residential zones.
Board Member Rubenkonig pointed out that these situations also exist in Esperance, which is part of unincorporated
Snohomish County. It can become confusing for people who do not have a clear understanding of where the City boundary
is.
Board Member Rubenkonig recalled that the extended agenda included updating the development regulations pertaining to
fading technologies that are still addressed in the code. Mr. Chave said some very specific code work was done to address
emerging technology, and accessory dwelling units will be addressed later in the year. Some of the larger topics will be
Planning Board Minutes
June 12, 2019 Page 8
Packet Pg. 10
2.A.a
challenging because, although development activity is down from last year, it is still quite high. He summarized that the
Board will review some specific topics, but there will not be a general code update.
Board Member Rubenkonig commented that updates to the accessory dwelling unit regulations are not tied to the work that
will be done by the new Housing Commission. Mr. Chave said the Commission will look broadly at a variety of housing
subjects, but the City Council has already indicated that updating the accessory dwelling unit regulations is a priority. Fairly
soon, the Board will also be considering potential changes to the design review process in conjunction with the Architectural
Design Board. Right now, the process is overly complicated and there are multiple processes depending on location. Some
of the rules about design review are fairly antiquated, as well. Board Member Rubenkonig recalled that significant changes
were made to the design review process in 2008. She asked if that as the last time the Architectural Design Board's role in
design review was modified. Mr. Chave agreed it has been awhile. He said that he and Mr. Clugston would provide staff
support for the Planning Board and Architectural Design Board discussions. Board Member Rubenkonig said it would be
helpful for them to provide historical information about how the process has changed through the years.
Board Member Rubenkonig advised that Board Member Monroe has agreed to continue to serve as the Board's liaison to the
Economic Development Commission. If he can no longer continue, she agreed to assume that role.
Student Representative Conner Bryan asked what an ADU is. Chair Cheung clarified that it is an acronym for an accessory
dwelling unit. It is a similar to a mother-in-law apartment, but many people use them as rentals to supplement income.
Currently, the code only allows attached ADU's, and the Board has discussed potential code amendments that would alloiw
detached ADU's, as well. Vice Chair Robles said the intent is to give single-family property owners the same opportunities
as developers and to provide additional opportunities for infill.
Board Member Crank thanked Board Member Lovell for sharing his time, energy and knowledge with the Board. She
learned a lot from him. Board Member Rosen also thanked Board Member Lovell for his service. In addition to serving as
Chair of the Board, he has also served on the Citizen Oversight Panel and as a committee member of the Senior Center. He
has served on the AGC and was part of the Waterfront Access Study Task Force. He is in the University of Washington Hall
of Fame, as well. He thanked him for all he has done for the community.
I�1 111111 111►% _1_0401"
The Board meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
Planning Board Minutes
June 12, 2019 Page 9
Packet Pg. 11
5.A
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 06/26/2019
Development Services Director Report
Staff Lead: Shane Hope, Director
Department: Planning Division
Prepared By: Diane Cunningham
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
N/A
Narrative
The Development Services Director will give an update on the Housing Commission.
Attachments:
Director. Re po rt.06.21.19
Packet Pg. 12
5.A.a
°F E L Af
rrrc. i !t'y.
Date:
To:
From:
Subject
MEMORANDUM
June 21, 2019
Planning Board
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Director Report
When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in
the universe.
- John Muir
Next Planning Board Meeting
The next regular Planning Board meeting is June 26. It will include presentations on:
(a) development activities and (b) 2018 Comprehensive Plan performance.
STATE & REGIONAL NEWS
RoadMap Report
The "Roadmap Report" is due to be issued on June 30. The report is based on a two-year study
commissioned by the state legislature to review laws related to environment, growth,
annexations, transportation, and other development and land use issues.
Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC)
❑ PSRC's Executive Board will meet on June 27 to discuss:
o New 2050 forecasts for commercial, air cargo and general aviating activities in the
region
o Designation of the proposed Arlington -Marysville Manufacturing Industrial Center
(which will probably have the new —shorter --name of "Cascade...")
❑ PSRC's Regional Staff Committee, which includes the Edmonds Development Services
director representing "other Snohomish County cities", discussed at its June 20 meeting:
o Work of the regional Economic Development District Board
o Status of VISION 2050, (the long-term plan being developed for our four -county
region to replace the current VISION 2040) and an update on regional growth
strategy alternatives
o Outreach strategy to provide information and gather input on the upcoming Draft
VISION 2050,
1 1 P a g e
Packet Pg. 13
5.A.a
Snohomish County Tomorrow (SCT)
❑ The County has proposed considering a change to the SCT structure and possibly making
it into a Council of Governments structure. It is not yet clear what this would mean.
❑ The SCT Steering Committee (comprised of city and county elected officials, along with
Tulalips representation) met June 19 on the following:
o Update on PSRC activities and Economic Alliance Snohomish County activities
o Appointment of Citizen Advisory Committee members
o Dues assessment for members (which will probably increase)
o Housing Trends (with a presentation focused on supply and demand)
Housing Affordability Regional Task Force (HART)
Executive Director Dave Somers, Snohomish County, has invited a new countywide task force to
identify opportunities for the region to meet affordable housing needs. The task force is
comprised of local leaders from county, city, and tribal governments. The work will focus on
middle income housing, affordable housing, subsidized housing, alternative housing models, and
land use and redevelopment. A report is expected by the end of the year. So far, HART has had
three meetings, consisting mostly of presentations from various housing -related organizations
(both private and public). Mayor Dave Earling is the City of Edmonds' representative to the new
county -wide task force and Shane Hope, Development Services Director, is the alternate.
LOCAL PROJECTS
Housing Commission Applications
The Council President plans this week to assign one Council member to each of the City's seven
Housing Commission districts. The districts are based on Census tracts and have roughly equal
populations.
Local residents have submitted a total of 135 applications for the Citizens' Housing Commission
Each of the seven districts has at least ten applications. The seven City Council members will
review the applications for their assigned districts and then select two appointees and one
alternate to serve on the Commission. After that, the Mayor will select one Commissioner and
one alternate from the remaining applicant pool.
Meanwhile, the City Council has approved additional resources (consultant and possible part-
time temporary staff person) to support the Commission's work through 2020. This will include
the videotaping of Commission meetings and events.
Urban Forest Management Plan
A new revised draft Urban Forest Management Plan has been issued and was reviewed at a City
Council committee meeting on June 11. This version contains various changes, including:
❑ Additional emphasis on native Northwest trees
❑ Re -write of the "Diseases and Pests" section
❑ Modification of statements that are not backed by scientific findings for the region
❑ Removal of references to any specific "opportunity planting area"
2 1 P a g e
Packet Pg. 14
5.A.a
❑ Removal of specific dollar amounts to represent the benefits of tree functions (while still
recognizing that trees provide important benefits)
❑ More information about tree values and related issues
❑ Additional information on city regulations addressing trees
❑ More information on selecting trees ("right tree, right place")
❑ Information on pruning trees.
The City's website has a link to the draft plan at:
http://www.edmondswa.gov/images/COE/Government/Departments/Development Services/PI
anning Division/Plans/UFMP/EdmondsWA-UFMP-2019 06 3-1.pdf. It is scheduled for
consideration and potential action by the City Council on June 25. The Planning Board will be
briefed on the final version later this summer.
OTHER LOCAL NEWS
Architectural Design Board (ADB)
The ADB meets next on July 3. An agenda will be posted online when available.
Cemetery Board
The cemetery Board met on June 20. Items of discussion included:
❑ Cemetery sales and burials
❑ Mapping project
❑ Walk Back in Time
❑ Advertising Budget
Diversity Commission
The Diversity Commission meets next on August 7. An agenda will be posted online when
available.
Economic Development Commission (EDC)
The EDC met on June 19. Attendees discussed:
❑ Update for city
❑ Recap of retreat
❑ Storytelling Project update
❑ Native land acknowledgement
❑ U funds Policy
❑ Arts & Youth Commission Partnerships
Hearing Examiner
The Hearing Examiner meets next on July 11. An agenda will be posted online when available.
Historic Preservation Commission (HPC)
The HPC's next meeting is on July 11. Items for discussion will include:
❑ Public Hearing for inclusion to the Edmonds Register of Historic places for property
located at 560 Bell St.
31
Packet Pg. 15
5.A.a
Lodging Tax Advisory Committee
The committee last met on June 20. Attendees discussed:
❑ Budget 2020 Funding requests for 2020
❑ Miscellaneous
Tree Board
The Tree Board meets next on June 27 to replace the Board's monthly meeting that would
otherwise fall on July 4t". An agenda will be posted online when available.
Youth Commission
The Youth Commission met June 12 for a Special Meeting. Attendees discussed:
❑ Work session of 6/12/19
❑ Planning opportunity
❑ McCleary Decision
❑ Current Edmonds news.
City Council
Activities at the June 18 City Council meeting included:
❑ Vote to not approve a supplemental contract that would have allowed more specific
project design
❑ Approval of the consent agenda, including:
o Boards and commission appointments (Including Roger Pence as a Planning Board
alternate)
o Authorization for Intergovernmental Services Agreement for development of an
ongoing water quality monitoring program for Lake Ballinger
o Authorization for interlocal agreement with Mountlake Terrace for aquatic
vegetation removal in Lake Ballinger
o Sanitary sewer easement along portion of 625 Alder Street
❑ Review and Approval for new Park Rules and Dog Rules to come back for adoption on the
next Consent Calendar
❑ Approval for final code update, regarding land use permit decision -making and quasi-
judicial process, to come back for adoption on the Council's consent calendar.
COMMUNITY CALENDAR
• July 3: Low -Tide Beach Walk, Olympic Beach Visitor Station, 10 am
• July 4: Baby Brackett 1K, City Park at 7 am
• July 4: Beat Brackett 5K, City Park at 7am
• July 4: Children's parade at 11:30 & main parade at 12 pm
• July 4: Fireworks show, Civic Center playfield, 6 pm
• July 10: Ranger Talk: A Natural History of the Edmonds Waterfront, Brackett's Landing at
1 pm
• July 14: Low Tide Beach Walk: Olympic Beach station at 9:30 am
41Pane
Packet Pg. 16
5.6
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 06/26/2019
Comprehensive Plan Performance in 2018
Staff Lead: Shane Hope
Department: Planning Division
Prepared By: Diane Cunningham
Background/History
Every year, a check -back is done on the City's progress in implementing key Comprehensive Plan items.
The annual report focuses on:
1. Implementation actions
2. Performance measures.
Implementation actions are steps that are intended to be taken within a specified time frame to address
high -priority sustainability goals related to specific chapters of the Comprehensive Plan.
Performance measures are specific, meaningful items that relate to sustainability for certain
Comprehensive Plan chapters and can be easily tracked and reported each year.
Staff Recommendation
N/A
Narrative
This year's annual report (see attachment) focuses on the four most current implementation actions and
the six standard performance measures for Edmonds. The information was also presented at the City
Council's May 21 meeting.
Attachments:
Att. 1: IAPM Monitoring Report 2018
Packet Pg. 17
IMPLEMENTATION ACTION &
PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MONITORING REPORT
Shane Hope
Development Services Director
Planning Board
June 26, 2019
•JIVII J ko
IMP
_.
C
_ r-
City of Edmonds
Comprehensive Plan
F LD4,
Y M
4 n
Adopted July 28, 2015
a
m
U)
_
d
s
L
Q.
E
O
V
v
T
C
O
N
d
00
T
O
N
t
O
Q
d
tM
_
O
_
CO
CG
G
a
r
Q
_
V
R
Q
Packet Pg. 19
I-MPLE
MENTATION ACTIONS:
1. Develop an update to the
Street Tree Plan (2018).
2. Develop an Urban Forest
Management Plan (2018).
3.
Develop level of service
standards for key public
facilities (2019).
4. Develop a housing strategy
(2019).
Packet Pg. 20
a
m
.N
L
Q.
0
0
.N
00
0
N
V'
0
C
0
Q
Q
a
5.B.a
sr
r'
I
i
�`
Fuuvuwsr
i
Fww UTSr
_
M
a
m
F >
i� ff v
wiHaf C ib
O
N
r—
i w M
3 O
Y
—ursr titi =
EDMONDS DOWNTOWN STREET TREE PLAN
Symbol Botanical Name 1 Common Name
- Ace platonoides'Columnare'/Columnar Norway Maple
0 Ace rubrum'Scarsen'/ Scarlet Sentinel Maple
0 Are rubrum'BowhaI1V Bowhall Maple
0 Are x freemanfi Jeffsred'/ Autumn Blaze Maple
0 Fraxinus pennsylvanica'Summit'I Summit Ash
0 Pryus cal leryana'Capital'/ Capital Pear
0 Pyrus cal leryana'Chanticteer'/ Chanticleer Pear
- Stewartia ps e u d ocame I I ia /Japanese Stewartia
0 Acer rubrum "Ka rpick' / Ka rpick Maple
0 Fraxinus pen nsyl ava ni ca Johnson"/ Leprachaun Ash
0 Ginkgo biloba'BlagorV Goldspire Ginkgo
0 Mix of tree species as identified in the 4th Ave. Cultural
Corridor Design Implementation and Funding Plan (2009) &
4th Ave. Arts Corridor appendix to the Streetscape Plan
Special Intersection Treatment as approved by City
Packet Pg. 21
Implementation Actions A
2. Develop an Urban
Forest Management
Plan by end of 2018
• Draft was done
• Revisions to UFMP are ..,-An=
underwayand
expected to be
f r
ready for review in
` i * ►
June .r x�k,
ism" ,cket - .
.tip l 1 3i nee+f
Implementation Actions
3. Develop level of service standards for key
public facilities by the end of 2018 and
consider including the standards in the
Comprehensive Plan
• Completed Pavement
Analysis report in August 2017
Implementation Actions
4. Develop a strategy by 2019 for increasing
the supply of affordable housing and
meeting diverse housing needs
• In progress. Amendment to
be considered later this year
5.B.a
4
IMPLEMENTATION ACTIOK14Z*
C✓I Develop an update to the Street Tree Plan (2018)
C✓I Develop an Urban Forest Management Plan (2018)
� Develop level of service standards for key public facilities (2019)
� Develop a housing strategy (2019)
d =Complete
d = In progress
Packet Pg. 25
PERFORMANCE MEASURES:
PREHENSIVE
COMa
PLAN
6
a
MONITORING
1.
Annual city-wide and city
m
2
N
Q
••••••••••• •••
government energy use.
Performance -.
- 2.
Number of residential units
N
permitted annually.
3.
Yearly average number of
00
o
Provide • • - - •
jobs within the city.,
information about
C• • 4.
Lineal feet of water, sewer,
r_
Plan's
:
and stormwater mains
0
a
effectiveness
replaced or rehabilitated.
Q
5.
Capital facilities plan project
delivery results.
6.
Lineal feet of sidewalk
a
renovated or re h a b i l i t a Packet Pg. 26
Performance Measures
1. Annually report on energy usage within the City,
both by City government and by the larger
Edmonds community
5.B.a
a a.• a t t. a a a r r■■ r•••##•• r#•■ r r
a a • • • . . • • . . . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .. • • .. •
i i • • • • . a • a a a a a i a i • # # • • # # • • # •
• • 1 • . # • • • # • • ■ ■ . # . • • • • • • i • • •
i • • • • • • • • s • • a a a a • • ■ • ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
a a a a a . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . i •�.�.. • • • • • • • •
\-I
r
c
Cu
a
N
i
.y
C
d
t
N
L
Q
E
�O♦
V
a
Packet Pg. 28
• 5.B.a
Sp Performance Measures
a a • • t • a a ■ ■ . . . . . . . . . . . ;
a a•• a t t t a a a r r■■ r a••##•• r#•■ r r
0� CV)`0 Go Iq CO
M M
O
CO CO
01- 06
O
O� OO
CO
O O a
w—
oo
LO
r
^
Lq
N
O
CO
00
�p
a0
•
•
M
^
�
M
n
'�
N
1.0
I*
N
t*-.
000
Packet Pg. 29
upPerformance Measures
Y H i i i i i i l
Report the number of
residential units permitted
each year with a goal of
reaching 21,168 units by
2035, or approximately
1 12 additional dwelling
units annually from 2011
to 2035
2.
is An average of 108
housing units per year
have been permitted
SF MF Duplex ADU Total
2018 57 4 4 9 74
2017 60 120 4 7 191
2016 41 97 - 4 142
2015 53 4 - 5 62
2014 46 43 14 6 109
2013 36 - - 5 41
2012 27 - - - 27
2011 15 89 - 5 109
Total 335 357 22 41 755
Fol
3.
i t i i i t i i• t i i■ t i i L L i• i t i
• • • . • • • . • . • i . . • . • f . . • f
+•i•ifi.i•i•ifiis •f •i f•.■•■•■. •■.■.■•■•Lf Lf L•
. • • f f f f • f f f ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ f
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
:. '.i'.ZILAliIZZIIZZI
Report the numl
within the City each year
with a goal of reaching
13,948 jobs, excluding jobs
within the resource and
construction sectors, by
2035. This would require
adding approximately 95
jobs annually from 2011 to
2035
• An average of 324
jobs per year have
been added
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
Average Employment'
13,151
12,717
10,883
10,677
1 1, 542
12,721
11,952
10,880
L'1 Average employment summary derives from the Quarterly Census of Employment and
Wages (QCEW). The unit of measurement is jobs, temporary or part-time positions are
included. The summary excludes employment within the construction or resources sectors
as jobs within these sectors tend to not be tied to a particular location; therefore, they are
not included in local targets.
•{La•a•aL*Li•i•�L*. •...•.i r.•...i a.a
a a s i • # • w w w • w • ***Ole* ■ • • ■ • • ■ • • 0110 • • 0 • •
• • • • • r • • • r • • • r .
r • • • • • • • r i �i66i r ��r r. r ■ a•
■ i a a i i a a a a ■■■■■ ■■■■ifi i■■■
r • r r r • 6 • • • • •• a •
a
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • a • • • a • • • •
■ # • ■ f • • i f • • i f • • i f • • i f • • i f r • i f r • ■ ■ •
■ • • i f • • i f • • i f • • i f • • i f • • i f • • i f • • i f •
• « • « « « • « « • • r i i r « « r ■ « « « « « « • « « • • « « • a.a
■ ■ ■ • ■ • • ■ • • « • « • F ■ • • ■ • • ■ a a ■ ■ ■ •
• • • r • r • i r r • i • a i r • a a • • a a • • r a i • r • • • • • •
•+•••••••f•■•■•■
r r r r r a a a a a a a a a a# a a a# a a a s a• a a• a a a.a
s a a • w •
r r ■ r r
� iLa raLi La 1 Replaced
•• e• Re
i • a
• • •
• r •
# # • •
+a+a+a*a+s+i•V 41F% _ _ _ _ _ _ _
• i{{ i i t i a
5.B.a
FAVTT`
Packet Pg. 32
L=
tr�Performance Measures Lroject
__J6
Civic Playfield Acquisition and/or
!.■ • f • • • • • • • • • • • s s a a a a • • • . a
5. Capital facilities
plan project
delivery results
Development
Community Park/Athletic Complex -
Old Woodway High School
Main St. & 9th Ave S (interim solution)
76th Ave. W & 212th St. SW
intersection improvements
228th St SW Corridor Safety
Improvements
Residential Traffic Calming
Phase (as of
2015 CFP)
Conceptual
Conceptual
Conceptual
Design/ROW
Design/ROW
Conceptual
Current Progress
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete/On going ;
Trackside Warning System or Quiet Conceptual Construction
Zone @Dayton and Main St.
Dayton St. and Hwy 104 Drainage Design In Progress
Improvements
Edmonds Marsh/Shellabarger
Cr/Willow Cr/Day-lighting Study Conceptual
/Restoration
Perrinville Creek High Flow Reduction/ Study In Progress
Management Project
Nr���New CFP projects that are active
Highway 99 Gateway/Revitalization
238 St. SW Walkway from Hwy 99 to
SR104
Dayton St. Walkway from 3rd Ave to
9th Ave
Edmonds St. Waterfront Connector
Conceptual
Conceptual
Conceptual
Complete
Construction
Design
Performance Measures µ
• :.k� � �- .. ill, '. ..� }
ii
L4ea eet of
sidewalk renovated =�
or rehabilitated
.� ' :,ram " ;::,-' - �• �....'� �,; � • _ �:
� . r:rr r:s, �.• .�
1�7�. �• .ice`~ -
-_
655 lineal feet of new .. "
" sidewalk was added in 2018acket Pg.
-
■
5.B.a
c
FL
a
PERFORMANCE MEASURES:
°
L
Q
E
�j Annual city-wide and city government energy use. °
U
7l Number of residential units permitted annually.
Yearly average number of jobs within the city. 00
0
N
Lineal feet of water, sewer, and stormwater mains replaced or Q
°
rehabilitated.
Capital facilities plan project delivery results.
�j Lineal feet of sidewalk renovated or rehabilitated.
Q
All performance measures have been reported.
a
Packet Pg. 35
3-
_ WN
• � r
•• �-s
f 1
*. . 14 : �
oi�z
■ a■sa� ��r�mi�rwrRr�low
- - -ANP-;�
• •} : �_ -
C
a
m
•N
C
d
s
m
L
Q
E
O
0
c
0
m
co
"
o
N
tm
q
cket Pg. 36
��
5.0
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 06/26/2019
Development Activities Update
Staff Lead: Shane Hope
Department: Development Services
Prepared By: Diane Cunningham
Background/History
Highlights of Development Services activities are presented to the City Council each spring.
Staff Recommendation
N/A
Narrative
A presentation will be given on June 26 to highlight:
(1) Permit data
(2) Development projects
Permit data
In 2018, the number of building permits and permit revenues were down a little from 2017. Regardless,
2018 numbers were still strong --and the revenues were higher than any of the previous "peak years" of
2004-2007.
Development protects
Updates on 23 development projects in town are included in the attached presentation.
Attachments:
Dev_Serv_Pres_2019_PB
Packet Pg. 37
5.C.a
SHANE HOPE
Development Services Director
DEVELOPMENT
ACTIVITIES
a�
r
a
a�
u
Q
c
m
E
a
0
m
CD
0
m
a
rn
I
0
N
I
0
L
IL
2I
a�
>I
m
C
c
0
E
M
u
0
r
r
Q
CITYOF EDM
Development S Packet Pg. 38
5.C.a
r
Counter service, pre -
application meetings,
intake appointments.
CITYOF EDV
packet Pg. imir
39
Development
a�
a
D
N
U
Q
c
m
E
a
0
m
CD
0
m
d
CD
I
0
NI
N
N
L
IL
I
a�
I
m
C
M
a
a
Pre-annhicafic
�
rodom
=V l i s le
�
ANIP�
�
Packet Pg. 4
5.C.a
do
EAK_�.r.
Ah
Packet Pg. 41
5.C.a
11
,lift
r
NZ
z die.�ddIr
_
0—
i
0 Permit history, valuation
of activities, solar; impact
Lc
es and generalfacility
arges (GFC)
M. , � a -
a�
r
a
U)
a�
U
Q
c
m
E
a
0
m
CD
0
m
a
i
rn
0
NI
N
L
IL
2.1�
a�
C
C
d
E
M
R
r
Q
'r"',r My
CITYOF EDM packet Pg. 42
Development 5
5.C.a
Development Services
Permit History
$2,000,000
1,800
$1,800,000
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
$1,600,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------
I
1,400
$1,400,000
-----
1,200
$1,200,000
-----
1,000
$1,000,000
---------------------------------
800
$800,000
------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
600
$600,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --- --- -- --- --- --- -- --- --- -- --- --- --- -- --- --- -- ---
$400,000
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---
400
$200,000
-------------------- --
200
V$0
0
v) \p l- 00 C� O — N M It v') \p l- 00 CT O — N M It kn 110 l- 00 C� O — N M It kn 110 l- 00
00 00 00 00 00 C� C� C� C� C� C� C\ C1 01� C� O O O O O O O O O O — — — •--+ --+ •--+ — — —
ON 0� 0� 0� 0� O1) O1, 01) 01) 01) 01) 0� C� C� O1\ C� C� C� O O C�O O O O O O O O O O O O O
�--� N N N N N N N N N N N N
� Total Devel Svc Revenue # Building Permits
CITYOF EDM himir
Packet Pg. 43
Development S
5.C.a
Permits
Reviewed by development services 2017 vs. 2018
I -Iqw
JL� Type of Permit
New
Single Family
Duplex
Apartment/Condo
Commercial
Mixed Use (Office/condo)
Additions / Alterations
Single Family
Apartment / Condo
Commercial
Other
Mechanical / Plumbing
Demolition
Miscellaneous
llfotalll
.E
2 (4units)
1 (9units)
1
2(111units)
57
2 (4units)
1 ( 4units)
1
X
$21,183,868
$788,348
$893,224
$7,549,151
$14,756,385
$21,063,845
$935,029
$402,926
$2,619,780
X
159 143 $8,947,055 $9,088,843
21 15 $3,654,817 $785,891
63 50 $12,384,817 $10,100,158
431/414
23
581
413/442
24
482
$17,224,983
$3,051,647
jr!j Packet Pg. 44
5.C.a
Engineering Division
Right-of-way, side sewer, street use, and encroachment activity 2016-18
Permits Issued
Permit Revenue
Inspection & Review Revenue
429
$581082
$2141337
415
$42,806
$416,959
M
$581221
$2491427
a
CITYOF EDM packet Pg. 45
Development S
5.C.a
IMPACT FEES AND GENERAL FACILITY CHARGES (GEC's) FOR 2018
Transportation Impact Fees
Parks Impact Fees
Water GFC
Sewer GFC
Storm GFC
$201,348.49 '
Q
d
E
0.
$1521152.79
0
m
$1961293.00 r
0
N
N
L
a
L
$400,755.78
0
E
$35,991.22
a
CITYOF EDM
Developments Packet Pg. 46
5.C.a
Solar Permits
Yea r
2012
# of Permits
3
# of Permits Online
0
% Online
0%
kW
11
2013
6
5
83%
41
2014
39
35
90%
241
2015
32
29
91%
211
2016
17
16
94%
137
2017
0
0
0%
0
2018
Totals00
3
2
67%
28.7
669.7
a
CITYOF EDM Packet Pg. 47
Development S
Z
1
FIF
i
I
T=
. Zyrti•i J �!L
5.C.a
r
- -'���`
-
7 552
C
41
0
•. �;
1
Building
m
a'
- ..
• ,-1 �'
Inspections
N
L
T
"1
3,158
�
Engineering
16
Inspections
._
M9 FL
. I
1
Ow. _
' + �_
�♦
ti ..
z -
CITYOF EDM
Packet Pg.
DevelopmentS2 48
5.C.a
.#
11
OJ
a
Key projects
CITYOF EDMpacket Pg. 49
Development Si
-■ ■
Post Office Mixed Use Beach Walk Apts. :�
� �
* *Civic Field '':=�
Waterfront Graphite
Center
Marine Retail*
001IL111 "Mall
A
Studios
Main Street
I
� HomeStreet " Ilk Bank _
V
Westhaven��
Platte
ALL, I =
,�=0-
Paradise Height l�
b
Westgate
dway
urt *
S
Northpoint
Recovery
Cummings Apts*
Apartments
Crossing Apts.
i �'�
rdaS b I d
68 Units
50 Pine St.
s C Om :Packet
Pg. 511
A
Beachwalk Ap
men s
AC
Tp'
9 Units T-"�
303 Edmonds St.
i7
. . . . . . . . . .
----- ---
Com��w�w�
Packet Pg
Jig
r�
North 0 int
a�
Recovery
r.
Tenant Improvement
7416-212th St.
p
:' i � � .V'4 � fie', 7T� —�•—
+..,: 4;.
PCt
Completecs
Post Office
"Tr�w
28 Units + 7,600 si
New Commercial
201 Main St.
phase I I '■
I .�oil
JEF'F
71 -
11 II .
MEW
i
ConstriE10-114:
et, Li. �.�,.r �i•-r ` 1-k �A .re: bra ,4`�.
- - - .. \ .. h i fin•' 'y` � Y :S - ,y� .,l4 1 t 'si' >. � 5 - � i..
r
I _
�, �~_•Ili, ` �� ; III,,
V� I
91 Units+ 33100
New Commercial
Edmonds Way
Packet Pg. 55
ou s Mazda'
Eft"=W7
12,000 Sf
New Commercial
22214 Highway 99
OV,
W,,fv A%2
Constr
■ mp,%'-: AOWA a$,% acket Pg. 56
r,j
IL
Cummings Apartments
4 N
L
n
3
ew Residential Units
0904-72nd Ave W
mob
Constructi
dmonds Village
Tenant Improvement
22019 Highway 99
P.
r
` t
RIM
Construct!
Kids Foundati
�,�� �+�•q� ��� DTI •� ` �� +
Change of Use
21827-76thAve W
on =
- . _
h f� • f
-"
at
+�`} cJJ iL,•
Issued
Change of Use
21827-76thAve W
on =
- . _
h f� • f
-"
at
+�`} cJJ iL,•
Issued
5.C.a
ONAVU PARif OfVfSION i
�Ud�fRPG�tIa CICDI
215TH a
ST SW
3Q00'
�
I
i
I
I'
I
I
�
W
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
Q
Z
3
� W
NV,
H
Z
III
�
I
I'I
30
I
)Rr PLAT S•02-204
NO. 200301256001
4 3
215TH PL SW
Ja
LZ •
ma",
CITYOF EDM Packet Pg. 60
Development S
Q
Waterfront Center
%% -
26,000 sf New Commercial
220 Railroad Ave.
PFWI�W I
Applied
i Port Ma
rine
Reta
6,650 New Commercial
471 Admiral Way
Design Revie
HomeStreet Ban
■ memo 0
IM,
6,763 sf New Commercial
614-5th Ave S
moo
"4Mq
IIDesign Revie
!
GRE Apartments
P
I in
now
.. elf r
SO
J. _,
i
IRV
LI
�,loopN . , .
OL
loop
192 New Residential Units
23400 Highway 99
ZO
Applied
F
-.Packet -•
3�
V
aradise Heights
4
�n
M. M mft�
i.11�Wl
12 New Residential Units
546 Paradise Lane
■ LEI
Applied
Meitzner Plat
11 New Residential Units
8609-244th St. SW
Issued
Edmonds Crossing
.� j i
�■ ,�- .�i��i . '� III
�I,
Sol..
I !ti�l� III 1�~ �■
oil
OqL—
Ll Mill
■
10 New Residential Units
23830 Edmonds Way
Design Revieqj
isan Apartments
- "AM&
18 New Residential Units
22810 Edmonds Way
DC
esign Revie
Graphite Studios
'll
Artist studios, art gallery,
cafe, + 3 residential units
202 Main St.
1�
F7
Design Review
�r
I Civic Field
Sprague St
I ., A
i
PTK
Al
EADW
THE GREAT LAWN
spmgUe t
A
a
Edmonds S1
W
Master Plai
11 . m
r A
41
5.C.a
a i ire Co amr
-NMI"
'�ti11 'ti15u � :u �yj�►
,5i i5 ,1z1�` i11111 oil
pollkit,
5 11
61
Retail,
restaurant
event
space
550
Main
St
Fpfl- -
A4of
rn IR
0
N
N
O
a
ar
ar
0
c
r
a
Design �
Re "mPacket Pg. 71
IV
-4'- A- l i
5.C.a
a
L
^; * IL >
a
CITYOF EDM
Development S Packet Pg. 72
LA
``-- -- -'
-~~~_ ---
�
.
'
m
m
!tw
04
Ch
M
IL
q Ift - 4�Z 11 t�
>
ew Single Family Homes
of
Is
Cr
ki
uj
OK 10
IULL
`
ti
184th St. SW
236th St. SW
5.C.a
u
-r Q
E
�o
0
hx d
o
N
G1
- L
a
_ ne St.
CITYOF EDM
Development S Packet Pg. 75
Cn
d
C
E
Q
5.C.a
a�
r
a
U)
a�
u
Q
c
m
E
a
0
m
CD
c
Co
a
CD
I
0
N
I
N
N
L
IL
I
a�
Co
I
m
C
c
m
E
u
0
r
r
Q
CITYOFEDM "'�`
Development S Packet Pg. 76
5.C.a
THANKYOU
a�
r
a
a�
u
Q
c
m
E
a
0
m
CD
c
m
a
rn
I
0
N
I
N
N
L
IL
I
CD
cn
I
m
C
c
m
E
u
a
r
r
Q
CITYOF EDM packet pg. 77
Development S
9.A
Planning Board Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 06/26/2019
Review Planning Board Extended Agenda
Staff Lead: N/A
Department: Planning Division
Prepared By: Diane Cunningham
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
N/A
Narrative
The extended agenda will be reviewed at the meeting.
Attachments:
06-21-2019 PB Extended Agenda
Packet Pg. 78
OY F.➢M
N
pLAKIMFC� BOARD
7911 Extended Agenda
June 21, 2019
Meeting Item
JUNE, 2019
June 1. Development Activities Presentation
26 2. 2019 Comp Plan Performance
iiiv 7nia
9.A.a
Items and Dates are subject to change
July 1. Urban Forest Management Plan Update
10 2. Climate Goals Project
3. Street Vacation Code Update Chapter 20.70 ECDC
July PB/ADB Joint Meeting
24
d Ir:l ICT 7ni n
August 1. RoadMap Project (update on Ruckelshaus Center Report
7 2. Public Hearing Street Vacation Code Update Chapter 20.70 ECDC
August 1. VISION 2050 Multicounty Planning Policies Update (next steps in
21 PSRC process)
bEFI HVIBEK, LU1y
Sept. 1.
11
Sept. PB/Council Joint Meeting
24
Sept. 1.
25
OCTOBER, 2019
October 1. Housing Commission Update
9
Q
Packet Pg. 79
9.A.a
Items and Dates are subject to change
Pending 1. Community Development Code Re -Organization
2019 2. Further Highway 99 Implementation, including:
✓ Potential for "urban center" or transit -oriented
design/development strategies
✓ Parking standards
3. Exploration of incentive zoning and incentives for sustainable
development
Current Priorities
1. Neighborhood Center Plans & implementation.
2. Highway 99 Implementation.
Recurring 1. Election of Officers (1st meeting in December)
Topics 2. Parks & Recreation Department Quarterly Report (January, April, July,
October)
Packet Pg. 80