2019-10-10 Citizens Housing Commission Packeto Agenda
Edmonds Citizens Housing Commission
V
tiHy° BRACKETT ROOM
121 5TH AVE N, CITY HALL - 3RD FLOOR, EDMONDS, WA 98020
OCTOBER 10, 2019, 6:30 PM
HOUSING COMMISSION'S MISSION
"DEVELOP DIVERSE HOUSING POLICY OPTIONS FOR (CITY) COUNCIL CONSIDERATION DESIGNED
TO EXPAND THE RANGE OF HOUSING (INCLUDING RENTAL AND OWNED) AVAILABLE IN
EDMONDS; OPTIONS THAT ARE IRRESPECTIVE OF AGE, GENDER, RACE, RELIGIOUS AFFILIATION,
PHYSICAL DISABILITY OR SEXUAL ORIENTATION." - FROM CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 1427
I. OPENING
II. ROLL CALL
III. PUBLIC COMMENTS
IV. INTRODUCTION OF CONSULTANTS
1. Introduction of Consultants
V. DISCUSSION OF OPERATING PRINCIPLES
1. Operating Principles
VI. REVIEW OF TOPICS AND SCHEDULE
1. Topics and Schedule
VII. FRAMEWORK FOR COMMUNITY PLANNING IN WASHINGTON
1. Framework for Community Planning in Washington
VIII. EDMONDS' HOUSING ELEMENT
1. Edmonds' Housing Element
IX. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT GOALS
1. Community Engagement Goals
X. MEETING LOGISTICS AND GENERAL EXPECTATIONS
1. Meeting Logistics and General Expectations
XI. ADJOURN
Edmonds Citizens Housing Commission Agenda
October 10, 2019
Page 1
4.1.a
/eN
CASCADIA
CONSULTING GROUP
Cascadia Consulting Group — Edmonds Citizen's Housing Commission
Gretchen Muller I Project Manager & Lead Facilitator
Gretchen brings 15 years of experience facilitating high -profile stakeholder groups
and managing a broad range of public engagement projects. She brings first-hand
expertise to all stages of the process, from facilitating strategic planning processes
and creating public involvement plans to implementing engagement programs
and evaluating results. Gretchen prides herself on providing clients and audiences
with seamless, open, and inclusive communication —ensuring that the project
planning and implementation is transparent and fair while meeting the client's
needs. She is trained in the Open Standards facilitation methodology and is a
LEED Green Associate, Sustainable Building Advisor, and accredited Low Impact
Development Professional. Gretchen holds a M.S. in Social Science for the University of Washington and a
B.S. in Environmental Science and B.A. in Anthropology from Dickinson College.
Facilitation experience: Gretchen is currently managing the Department of Ecology's Water Restoration
and Enhancement Committee contract and serves as Facilitation Lead. In 2018, Gretchen facilitated two
working groups as part of the Governor's Southern Resident Killer Whale Task Force (she is currently
managing the project in its second year, which is focused on implementing the recommendations).
Gretchen facilitates two workgroups focused on specific elements of Puget Sound recovery and has
served as Lead Facilitator for the South Central Action Area Caucus Group —a watershed -level ecosystem
recovery organization in South King County —for nearly five years. In addition, Gretchen facilitated two
groups as part of King County's Green Tools green building program, one for local residents affected by
the County's Riverbend restoration project and a second that brought together a broad range of
stakeholders to evaluate and prioritize alternatives to environmentally problematic rubber turf fields at
parks.
Public engagement experience: Gretchen currently manages the public engagement portions of three
large Seattle Public Utilities infrastructure projects and is also PM for an ongoing public involvement
contract with the Seattle Department of Transportation, overseeing public engagement efforts in support
of transportation projects citywide. Gretchen led the development of a communications plan for The
Nature Conservancy's Floodplains by Design program and Over the past decade, Gretchen has overseen
communications planning, outreach strategy development, and hands-on engagement that has reached
10,000+ community members in the Puget Sound corridor; she uses a large suite of engagement tactics,
from surveys and online tools such as PollEverywhere and Social pinpoint to in -person open houses, drop -
in sessions, and community -informed design workshops.
C ASCADIA
CONSULTANT BIOS
Packet Pg. 2
4.1.a
Kate Graham I Communications Coordinator
Kate brings two years of experience leading community participatory design, with
expertise in universal design and strategic and inclusive outreach to the disability
community. Currently she supports outreach for SDOT—including Neighborhood
Crossing improvements, Vision Zero construction projects, and multiple bridge
retrofit planning and construction projects —where she draws on transportation
outreach skills learned as a public engagement intern with the Neighborhood
Traffic Safety Services division at the Bellevue Transportation Department. Kate is
passionate about crafting messages and outreach strategies that have a clear
positive impact on the public awareness of, and support for, local government initiatives.
CASCADIA CONSULTANT BIOS 1 2
Packet Pg. 3
6.1.a
September 26, 2019
Housing Commission Meeting Notes
The September 26, 2019 meeting of the Edmonds Citizens' Housing Commission began at approximately
7:00 pm. (It was also live -streamed and available on the City's webpage.)
Commissioners present were: Tana Axtelle, Jess Blanch, Will Chen, Nichole Franko, Judi
Gladstone, Karen Herrick- Hassse, Tanya Kataria, George Keefe, Greg Long, Mike
McMurray, Alena Nelson-Vietmeier, James Cgonowski, John Reed, Keith Soltner, Bob
Throndsen, and Weijia Wu.
a�
Alternates present were: Shirley Havenga, Eva -Denis Miller, Rick Nishino, Jean Salls, Kenneth Sund, Leif
Warren, and Wendy Wyatt
t
City Council liaisons present were: Dave Teitzel and Neil Tibbott U)
c
Staff resent were: Shane Hope and Brad Shipleyf°
p p N
The meeting began with a welcome to the new Commission and the community members attending or o
listening in. ~
Two audience members gave public comments, namely Lori Rasmussen with suggestions for process
and public outreach and Evan Wilson with a recommendation to include one or more Esperance
residents.
Development Services Director Shane Hope provided context about the Housing Commission's assigned
mission to recommend housing policy options to expand the range of housing available in Edmonds, per
Council Resolution 1427. Appointments to the Housing Commission were completed in late August,
providing for 15 Commissioners and eight alternates. The appointees represent seven districts within
the city, based largely on Census areas that have roughly equal populations. Commission
recommendations are due to the City Council by the end of 2020. Besides at least monthly Commission
meetings, additional public events and various activities will be planned to engage a broad cross-section
of the community.
City Council liaisons for the meeting, Neil Tibbott and Dave Teitzel, introduced themselves and the
importance of the work being undertaken. Each Commissioner, followed by each alternate, introduced
themselves and mentioned their own experience with housing in Edmonds.
An exercise was undertaken to identify topics to explore in future meetings. Based on the exercise,
high -priority topics included information on: community engagement, the city's comprehensive plan,
city housing and demographic data, incentive programs, objectives and targets, city's financial
sustainability, housing types, zoning effects, background on the prior draft housing strategy, housing
programs and ideas from other cities, and more. Director Hope acknowledged that probably much of
the Commission's work for the remainder of 2019 would be on gaining a common understanding of
definitions, data, and the project framework. This would be followed by more specific policy work in
2020. Commissioners discussed the results of the exercise.
Packet Pg. 4
6.1.a
A schedule for future monthly meetings was the next agenda item. Commissioners concluded that the
second Thursday of each month would be the regular meeting date. Additional meetings and public
events would be figured later.
An update was provided on the consultant assistance that was being planned. A request for
qualifications had gone out and various firms applied. From the applications, finalists were interviewed
and references checked. Currently, the City is working to finalize a contract with the selected firm. The
firm's representative(s) are expected to attend the next Housing Commission meeting. Consultant
assistance will focus on: (a) meeting facilitation; and (b) community engagement.
The meeting adjourned at about 9:15 pm.
a�
Packet Pg. 5
6.1.b
7 C -0
Citizens' Housing
c o m In i s s i n n
HOUSING COMMISSION INTEREST RESULTS
Housing Types (incl. ADUs) & Zoning
28
Housing types/barriers to types (pros & cons)
12
Development
Zoning effects on housing
10
Development
Accessory Dwelling units (ADU)
6
Development
City Revenue
22
Financially sustainable (balance of uses)
16
Finance
Edmonds financial situation
6
Finance
Multi -family Tax Exemption (MFTE) & other Incentive Programs (Tools & Abatements)
22
Programs
Guiding Principles
21
Objectives/targets
14
Goals
Clarify mission
7
Goals
Housing Efforts in Other Cities
19
Group tour —interesting projects in other cities
9
Community
Housing strategies, programs, & Ideas (other cities)
10
Research
Housing Cost Factors
18
Housing costfactors (developmentfees)
10
Development
Development fees
8
Development
Community Engagement
17
Community
Comprehensive Plan and Future Growth
14
Comprehensive Plan
14
Background Documents
Coordination with parks & school district
0
Background Documents
Transportation
14
Light rail impacts
7
Transportation
Transit hubs
7
Transportation
Housing Affordability
13
Threshold of what is affordable
8
Data
Housing instabilty
5
Data
State Law & Recent Legislation
13
Recent state legislation
3
Regional Efforts
Growth Management Act (GMA)
8
Regulation & Law
State or Federal laws
1
Regulation & Law
Open Government/legal issues for boards and commissions
1
Regulation & Law
Distribution of Income/Housing/etc.
12
Distribution of income/housing/etc.
8
Data
Range of income
4
Data
Edmonds Housing Data (by Zone)
12
Data
Needs of seniors, veterans, etc.
12
Community
Definitions
11
Definitions (come to agreement)
6
Definitions
Housing terms/definitions
5
Definitions
Housing Strategy Background
11
Background Documents
Coordination w/ other cities
9
Regional Efforts
Vibrancy & community
9
Community
Environmental impacts
8
Environment
How housing affects economy
7
Data
Fed, state, regional housing programs & Resources
6
Regional Efforts
Tree canopy balance
5
Environment
Housing instabilty
5
Data
Humanize affordability
4
Community
Data on workers (in Edmonds)
3
Data
Summary data (demographics)
3
Data
Existing projects
3
Data
Infrastructure capacity
3
Data
What is off topic/mission?
0
m
a
Packet Pg. 6
6.1.c
Oct. 4, 2019
Key Subjects for Housing Commission Meetings: Month -by -Month
Note: This list includes topics identified by the Housing Commission at its September 2019 meeting.
It provides initial guidance, although subject to change.
September 2019
Welcome
Mission/Process z
Introductions
as
Tops of interest for future meetings (group exercise)
c
Schedule for future meetings f°
Updates on consultant assistance & community outreach o
October 2019 �o
Meet consultants -q
0
Discuss meeting rules/expectations
3
a�
Begin planning for community engagement
m
Discuss timeframe & subjects for Commission meetings
Update on Open Public Meetings Act & public record requirements
Review federal & state laws (incl GMA + new legislation)
:.o
c
Review regional planning framework
E
Review local planning process (incl. coordination w/ parks, schools & future growth)
a
Review Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Review Hwy 99 Area Plan
Review prior Housing Strategy process
Consider next HC meeting logistics
November 2019
Consider community engagement plan & next steps
Review general data about region (population, demographics, etc.)
1
Packet Pg. 7
6.1.c
Review general data about Edmonds (demographics, workforce, housing inventory, etc.)
Review housing's relationship with zoning
Affordability:
Terminology/definitions
Income thresholds & what they mean for people
Data about housing affordability (for different types, income -levels & needs) in:
Region
Edmonds overall
Within specific Edmonds zones/districts (i.e. 1-7)
December 2019
Review community input to date & next steps
Consider housing needs of specific populations
Seniors
Veterans
Families
Others?
Consider housing cost factors (incl. development fees)
Learn about housing types (incl. pros/cons/impacts)
January 2020
Discuss environmental (incl. tree canopy) & infrastructure impacts/choices
Discuss transportation issues/ light rail impacts
Discuss economic & fiscal sustainability aspects of housing & other uses
Discuss vibrancy/community livability
Consider characteristics of different areas of the city
Learn about major development projects in Edmonds (such as Westgate Village)
Learn what programs & incentives Edmonds has for housing
Learn what other cities and agencies are doing about housing
Learn about state & federal resources
Introduce next steps for developing policy framework
2
Packet Pg. 8
6.1.c
February 2020
Discuss mission & values
Consider developing issue statement, principles, goals, or objectives related to mission
Discuss meaning of "policy" and "policy options"
Discuss final product to give City Council
Identify preferred subjects for housing policies
March 2020
Review and refine subjects to be addressed by housing policies
Discuss and prioritize housing policy subjects
Review Commission's timeframe & any emerging needs
Consider community engagement & next steps
April 2020
Identify approach to policy development
Discuss intent & options for Vt set of subjects for housing policy development
May 2020
Revisit & make any refinements regarding 1st set of housing policy recommendations
Discuss intent & options for 2nd set of subjects for housing policy development
June 2020
Revisit & make any refinements regarding 25t set of housing policy recommendations
Discuss intent & options for 3rd set of subjects for housing policy development
Discuss community engagement & next steps
July 2020
Revisit & make any refinements regarding 3rd set of recommended housing policies
Discuss intent & options for 4t" set of recommended housing policies
August 2020
Revisit & make any refinements regarding 4t" set of housing policy recommendations
Discuss community engagement & next steps
a�
Packet Pg. 9
6.1.c
September 2020
Finalize package of draft policy recommendations
Review community input to date & next steps
October 2020
Consider any refinements to draft policy recommendations
Discuss community engagement & next steps
a�
a�
November 2020
Review community input to date c
c�
Make any changes to draft recommendations
.Q
0
Consider draft report about Housing Commission process ~
0
December 2020
Consider any other input
Finalize package of housing policy recommendations
4
Packet Pg. 10
HOUSING COMMISSION WORK PLAN OVERVIEW
6.1.d
Task
Sep-19
Oct-19
Nov-19
Dec-19
Jan-20
Feb-20
Mar-20
Apr-20
May-20
Jun-20
Jul-20
Aug-20
Sep-20
Oct-20
Nov-20
Dec-20
Establish foundation
Identify Framwork for Policies
Prioritize Policy Topics & Develop
Options
Develop Preliminary Policy
Recommendations
Refine & Finalize
Recommendations
Provide for Community
Engagement
♦ •
Update City Council
■
■
■
■
■
Key
♦ Potential Survey
• Potential Special Event
■ Report to City Council
Note: This timeframe is proposed
and subject to change as the
process evolves.
m
Packet Pg. 11
8.1.a
Housing Element
Introduction. This section looks at the character and diversity of housing in the City of Edmonds.
Part of this process includes looking at housing types and affordability. The goal of this section is to
provide the necessary information to anticipate housing needs.
General Background
According to the Office of Financial Management (OFM), there were an estimated 18,378 housing
units within the City of Edmonds in 2010. This represents an increase of 5 percent in the city's
housing stock since 2000, when there were 17,508 housing units. In comparison, over the period
1990-2000, the city's housing stock grew 35.2 percent, or approximately 3.5 percent per year. This
increase is largely explained by annexations that occured during the 1990s in the south and southwest
portions of the city. Figure 22 summarizes recent growth trends and forecasts for the City of
Edmonds.
Of the total stock of housing in 2010, 11,685 (63.5 percent) were single family units, 6,664 (36.3
percent) were multi -family units, and 29 (0.2 percent) were mobile homes or trailers. Compared with
Snohomish County as a whole, Edmonds has a lower percentage of single-family homes (63.6 percent
vs. 66.9 percent, respectively) and mobile homes (0.2 percent vs. 6.8 percent, respectively) and a
higher proportion of multi -family homes (36.3 percent vs. 26.4 percent, respectively).
Much of the existing housing stock was built between 1950 and 1969 (see Figure 23) as Edmonds
annexed lands east on Main Street, through Five Corners, and over to the western side of Lake
Ballinger. As part of the greater Seattle metropolitan area, Edmonds experienced growth earlier than
most in Snohomish County.
Housing
Units
Increase
Percent
Increase
Avg. Annual
Increase
Census: 1980
10,702
1990
12,245
1,543
21.0%
1.9%
2000
17,508
5,263
35.2%
3.1%
2010
18,378
870
5.0%
0.5%
Growth Target: 2035
21,168
2,790
15.2%
0.6%
Figure 22: City of Edmonds Housing Growth
Source: US Census; Snohomish County Tomorrow
Housing 83
Packet Pg. 12
8.1.a
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
1949 or earlier 1950 to 1969 1970 to 1989 1990 to 1999 2000 or later
❑ Edmonds ■ King County ■ Snohomish County
Figure 23: Age Distribution of Housing Stock, City of Edmonds and Snohomish County
Source: American Community Survey
Household Characteristics
At the time of the 2010 Census, Edmonds Housing stock was approximately 94.6 percent occupied.
The average household size has declined since 1990, when it was 2.37 persons, to 2.26 persons in
2010. The average household size within the city is expected to decrease to approximately 2.2 persons
by 2035 (Snohomish County Tomorrow, 2013).
Understanding how the City's population is changing offers insight for planning housing types that
will be in demand. Based on Census data, residents of Edmonds are older than those of Snohomish
County, taken as a whole. In 2000, the median age of Edmonds residents was 42.0 years, compared
with 34.7 years countywide. By 2010, the median age in Edmonds had increased to 46.3 years,
compared to 37.1 years countywide. During the same period, the population of Edmonds residents, 14
years of age and younger, shrank in each age category (Figure 25). A natural increase in population is
likely to decline as the female population ages beyond childbearing age. These trends are consistent
with national trends.
Housing 84
Packet Pg. 13
8.1.a
90 +
85 - 89
80 - 84
75 - 79
70 - 74
65 - 69
60 - 64
55 - 59
50 - 54
45 - 49
40 - 44
35 - 39
30 - 34
25 - 29
20 - 24
15-19
10 - 14
5-9
0-4
2,0
00
1
1,509 1,000 509 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500
■ 2010 ■ 2000
Figure 24: Edmonds Population Pyramid
Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 and 2010
15%
10%
5%
0%
-5%
-10%
-15%
-20%
Age Groups 0 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 14
❑ Edmonds ■ Snohomish ■ Washington State
Figure 25: Population Growth of Children 14 years of Age and Younger, 2000 to 2010
Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 and 2010
Housing
85
E
W
.N
0
0
E
w
Packet Pg. 14
8.1.a
Household Income: In general, residents of Edmonds earn relatively more income than residents of
Snohomish County as a whole. The Edmonds' median household income was $67,228 according to
the 2011-2013 American Community Survey 3-year data, similar to the County median of $67,192.
This is in contrast to per capita income, which is substantially higher in Edmonds compared to
Snohomish County ($40,892 vs. $31,049, respectively). These figures reflect Edmonds' relatively
smaller household sizes.
Housing Ownership: According to the 2000 Census, 68.1 percent of the housing units within the city
were owner -occupied and 31.9 percent were renter -occupied. This represented an increase in owner -
occupancy from the 65.3 percent reported in the 1990 Census. The trend continued into 2010, with
69 percent of the City's housing being occupied by owners. The direction of the trend in housing
occupancy is similar for Snohomish County as a whole, although ownership rates countywide were
slightly lower in 2010, at 67 percent.
Housing Values: According to the 2011-2013 ACS 3-year data, the median value of owner -occupied
units had increased to $371,700 in Edmonds and $276,800 in Snohomish County, with Edmonds
approximately 34.3 percent higher than the countywide median. Within Edmonds, median housing
values vary considerably between neighborhoods; the highest valued homes are found along the
waterfront, while the lowest values are found within interior neighborhoods and east of Highway 99.
Housing Affordability: For the purposes of calculating the housing affordability in Edmonds, this
document uses the median income for the Seattle -Bellevue HUD Fair Market Rent Area (HMFA)
instead of the Snohomish County Area Median Income (AMI). The Seattle -Bellevue AMI is used as
Edmonds is considered a suburb of Seattle, not Everett. The 2013 HMFA AMI for Seattle -Bellevue is
$86,700, which is the same as Snohomish County's AMI at $86,700. The 2013 median household
income for Edmonds is $67,192.
AMI is an important calculation used by many agencies to measure housing affordability. Standard
income levels are as follows:
• Extremely low income: <30 percent AMI
• Very Low Income: between 30 and 50 percent AMI
• Low Income: between 50 and 80 percent AMI
• Moderate income: between 80 and 95 percent AMI
• Middle Income: between 95 and 120 percent AMI
Using rental data obtained from Dupre and Scott by the Alliance for Housing Affordability (AHA),
Figure 26 provides a clearer view of what a household looking for a home in Edmonds would expect
to pay for rent and utilities. The data includes both single family and multifamily rental units.
Housing sizes and the corresponding minimum income required for a full time worker to afford the
home are listed. For example, a family of four searching for a 3 bedroom unit could expect to pay on
average $1,679 per month for rent and utilities. In order to afford housing, the family would need an
annual income of $67,160.
Housing 86
Packet Pg. 15
8.1.a
Average Rent (w/
Utilities)
Minimum Income Required
Lowest Rent
Highest
Rent
Per Hour
Annual
Studio
$
833
$
16.02
$
33,320
$
546
$
1,187
1 Bedroom
$
887
$
17.06
$
35,480
$
662
$
1,521
2 Bedroom
$
1,097
$
21.10
$
43,880
$
777
$
1,916
3 Bedroom
$
1,679
$
32.29
$
67,160
$
1,094
$
4,215
4 Bedroom
$
2,545
$
48.94
$
101,800
$
1,947
$
41347
5 Bedroom
$
2,844
$
54.69
$
113,760
$
2,276
$
3,771
Figure 26: Average Rent and Affordability (housing plus utilities) by Size
Source: Dupree and Scott, 2013; National Low Income Housing Coalition, 2014
Figure 27 shows the distribution of rent affordability at different income levels using the Seattle -
Bellevue AMI. "Yes" means that the average rent is affordable to a household at that income level,
adjusting for size, "Limited" means that the average rent is not affordable but there are lower end
affordable units, and "No" means that the entire rent range is not affordable. As seen below, a four
bedroom home is not affordable for persons with a household income at 80 percent or below of the
HFMA AMI.
Income Level
Number of Bedrooms
Studio
1
2
3
4+
Extrememly Low
No
No
No
No
No
Very Low
Limited
limited
Limited
Limited
No
Low
Yes
Yes
Yes
Limited
No
Moderate
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Limited
Middle
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Figure 27. Distribution of Rent Affordability by Size
Source: Dupree and Scott, 2013
Between 2008 and 2012, 85 percent of home sales in Edmonds were three or four bedrooms in size
according to County records. According to tax assessor data, the 2012 median sales price for a single
family home in Edmonds was $339,975. Assuming a 20 percent down payment and using average
rates of interest, taxes, utilities, and insurance as determined by the Federal Housing Funding Board,
the monthly payment for this home would be $1,895. For a family to not be cost burdened, they
would require an annual income of at least $75,796, which is above the City's median income.
Figure 28 shows that the percentage of home sales affordable to each income level has changed
between 2008 and 2012.
Housing 87
Packet Pg. 16
8.1.a
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Extremely Very Low Low Moderate Middle
Low
Figure 28: Home Sales Affordability, 2008-2012
Source: Dupree and Scott, 2013
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Housing Needs: Edmonds is targeted to grow from a 2013 population of 40,381 to 45,550 by 2035.
This translates to an estimated need of 2,790 housing units in the city to accommodate the targeted
growth. The Buildable Lands Report for Snohomish County indicates that the majority of this
increase will be in redevelopment occurring on multifamily properties, including mixed use projects.
Because the City of Edmonds does not construct housing itself, the housing targets are helpful in
assessing needs and providing a sense of the policy challenges that exist. Future housing needs will be
met by a combination of the housing market, housing authorities, and governmental housing agencies.
However, the City of Edmonds can do things to assist in accommodating projected housing needs,
such as adjusting zoning and land use regulations. The City may also be able to assist in supporting
the quality of housing through progressive building codes and programs for healthy living.
Forecasting future housing needs for specific populations and income ranges is difficult. One method
to arrive at an initial estimate of housing needs is to take the Edmonds' housing target (2,790) and
apply the countywide breakdown for each income group. Data shown in Figure 29 is based on
household income from the 5-year American Community Survey in 2007-2011. The City of Edmonds
will take into account local population and housing characteristics when determining housing targets.
Housing
Total Projected
Under 30% AMI
30-50% AMI
50-80% AMI
Jurisdiction
Housing Unit
Housing Need
Housing Need
Housing Need
Growth Need
(11%of Total)
(11%of Total)
(17%of Total)
Edmonds
2,790
307
307
474
Figure 29: Projected Housing Need
Source: Snohomish County Tomorrow, "Housing Characteristics and Needs in Snohomish County," 2014
88
Packet Pg. 17
8.1.a
As previously mentioned, the median age of Edmonds residents is the highest in Snohomish County
at 48.1 years compared to 37.5 years countywide (2011-2013 American Community Survey) and
second highest of Washington state cities with a population of 25,000 or more. In 2011, the first
persons of the Baby Boom generation turned 65 years of age and represent, what demographers
project, the fastest growing age group over the next 20 years. An older population will require
specific needs if they are to "age in place." In Edmonds, the effects may be particularly strong.
Developing healthy, walkable communities with nearby retail and transit options will help an aging
population retain their independence.
Assisted Housing Availability: In 1995 there were two HUD -assisted developments providing a total
of 87 units for low-income, senior residents within the City of Edmonds. This was more than doubled
by a new development approved in 2004 for an additional 94 units. Since 1995, 167 assisted care
living units have been built in the downtown area, specifically targeting senior housing needs.
Although the Housing Authority of Snohomish County did not operate any public housing units
within Edmonds prior to 1995, it purchased an existing housing complex totaling 131 units in 2002.
The Housing Authority continues to administer 124 Section 8 rent supplement certificates and
vouchers within the city. In addition, there are currently 36 adult family homes providing shelter for
187 residents. This is a substantial increase from the 13 adult family homes providing shelter for 66
residents in 1995.
Growth Management goals and policies contained in the City's Comprehensive Plan encourage
availability of resources to ensure basic community services and ample provisions made for necessary
open space, parks and other recreation facilities; preservation of light (including direct sunlight),
privacy, views, open spaces, shorelines and other natural features, and freedom from air, water, noise
and visual pollution; and a balanced mixture of income and age groups. Land Use policies encourage
strategic planning for development and redevelopment that achieve a balanced and coordinated
approach to economic development, housing and cultural goals; and encourage a more active and
vital setting for new businesses supported by nearby residents, downtown commercial activity and
visitors throughout the area. Policies encourage identification and maintenance of significant public
and private social areas, cultural facilities, and scenic areas; and maintenance and preservation of
historical sites. Commercial Land Use policies encourage identification and reservation of sufficient
sites suited for a variety of commercial uses.
Housing goals are directed toward providing housing opportunities for all segments of the city's
households; supporting existing neighborhoods and preserving/rehabilitating the housing stock;
maintaining high quality residential environments; and providing assistance to developing housing
for special needs populations, such as senior, disabled and low-income households. These goals are
supported by policies which include review of regulatory impediments to control of housing costs and
affirmative measures to support construction of housing for protected groups; encouraging expansion
of the types of housing available, including accessory dwelling units, mixed use, and multi -family
housing; flexible development standards; and review and revision of development regulations,
including assessing the feasibility of establishing time limits for permitting; consolidating permitting;
implementing administrative permitting procedures and instituting preapplication hearings.
Other measures to mitigate potential housing impacts include determining whether any public land is
available which could be used to help meet affordable housing targets; development of a strategy
plan, including target number of units and development timeline; technical assistance programs or
information to encourage housing rehabilitation and development of accessory units; and a strong
monitoring program with mid -course correction features (see the discussion below).
Housing 89
Packet Pg. 18
8.1.a
Strategies to Promote Affordable Housing.
In order to respond to the continuing need to provide affordable housing for the community, the City
has undertaken a series of reasonable measures to accomplish this goal, consistent with the policy
direction indicated by Snohomish County Tomorrow and the Countywide Planning Policies. These
reasonable measures or strategies to promote affordable housing include:
Land Use Strategies
• Upzoning. The City upzoned a substantial area of previously large lot (12,000+ square
foot lots) zoning to ensure that densities can be obtained of at least 4.0 dwelling units per
acre. The City has also approved changes to its zoning codes to encourage more
multifamily development in mixed use areas, especially in corridors served by transit
(e.g. Highway 99 along the Swift high capacity transit corridor).
• Density Bonus. A targeted density bonus is offered for the provision of low income
senior housing in the City. Parking requirements are also reduced for this housing type,
making the density obtainable at lower site development cost.
• Cluster Subdivisions. This is accomplished in the city through the use of PRDs. In
Edmonds, a PRD is defined as an alternate form of subdivision, thereby encouraging its
use as a normal form of development. In addition, PRDs follow essentially the same
approval process as that of a subdivision.
• Planned Residential Development (PRD). The City has refined and broadened the
applicability of its PRD regulations. PRDs can still be used to encourage the protection of
environmentally sensitive lands; however, PRDs can also be used to encourage infill
development and flexible housing types.
• Infill Development. The City's principal policy direction is aimed at encouraging infill
development consistent with its neighborhoods and community character. This overall
plan direction has been termed "designed infill" and can be seen in the City's emphasis
and continued work on streamlining permitting, revising codes to provide more flexible
standards, and improving its design guidelines. The City is also continuing the process of
developing new codes supporting mixed use development in key locations supported by
transit and linked to nearby neighborhoods.
Conversion/Adaptive Reuse. The City has established a historic preservation program
intended to support the preservation and adaptive reuse of existing buildings, especially
in the historic downtown center. Part of the direction of the plans and regulations for the
Downtown/Waterfront area is to provide more flexible standards that can help businesses
move into older buildings and adapt old homes to commercial or mixed use spaces. An
example is the ability of buildings on the Edmonds Register of Historic Places to get an
exception for parking for projects that retain the historic character of the site.
Housing 90
Packet Pg. 19
8.1.a
Administrative Procedures
Streamlined approval processing. The City generally uses either a Hearing Examiner or
staff to review and issue discretionary land use decisions, thereby reducing permitting
timelines and providing an increased degree of certainty to the process. The City
continues to provide and improve on an extensive array of information forms and
handouts explaining its permitting processes and standards. The City has also established
standards for permit review times, tailored to the type and complexity of the project. For
example, the mean processing time for processing land use permits in 2011 was 36 days,
less than one-third of the 120-day standard encouraged by the State's Regulatory Reform
act.
• Use -by -Right. The City has been actively reviewing its schedule of uses and how they are
divided between uses that are permitted outright vs. permitted by some form of
conditional use. The City has expanded this effort to include providing clearer standards,
allowing more approvals to be referred to staff instead of the Hearing Examiner hearing
process.
Impact mitigation payment deferral. The City's traffic mitigation impact fees are assessed
at the time of development permit application, but are not collected until just prior to
occupancy. This provides predictability while also minimizing "carrying costs" of
financing.
Development Standards
• Front yard or side yard setback requirements. Some of the City's zones have no front or
side yard setback requirements, such as in the downtown mixed use zones. In single
family zones, average front setbacks can be used to reduce otherwise required front yard
setbacks.
• Zero lot line. This type of development pattern can be achieved using the City's PRD
process, which is implemented as an alternative form of subdivision.
• Street design and construction. Edmonds has adopted a `complete streets' policy. Street
standards are reviewed and updated periodically, taking advantage of new technologies
whenever possible. A comprehensive review and update of the city's codes is underway
• Alleys. The City has an extensive system of alleys in the downtown area and makes use
of these in both mixed use and residential developments.
• Off-street parking requirements. The City has substantially revised its off-street parking
standards, reducing the parking ratios required for multifamily development and in some
mixed use areas, thereby reducing housing costs and encouraging more housing in areas
that are walkable or served by transit.
• Sanitary Sewer, Water, and Stormwater systems. Innovative techniques are explored and
utilized in both new systems and in the maintenance of existing infrastructure.
Housing 91
Packet Pg. 20
8.1.a
Low -Cost Housing Types
• Accessory dwellings. The City substantially revised its accessory dwelling regulations,
providing clearer standards and streamlining their approval as a standard option for any
single family lot.
Mixed -use development. The City has strengthened and expanded its mixed use
development approach. Downtown mixed use development no longer has a density cap,
and this — combined other regulatory changes — has resulted in residential floor space
drawing even with commercial floor space in new developments in the downtown area.
Mixed use zoning was applied in the Westgate Corridor, and revised mixed use
development regulations have been updated and intensified in the Hospital/Highway 99
Activity Center as well as along Highway 99.
• Mobile/manufactured housing. The City's regulation of manufactured homes has been
revised to more broadly permit this type of housing in single family zones.
Housing Production & Preservation Programs
• Housing preservation. The City provides strict enforcement of its building codes,
intended to protect the quality and safety of housing. The City has also instituted a
historic preservation program intended to provide incentives to rehabilitate and restore
commercial, mixed use, and residential buildings in the community.
• Public housing authority / Public and nonprofit housing developers. The City supports the
Housing Authority of Snohomish County, as evidenced by its approval of the conversion
of housing units to Housing Authority ownership. Edmonds is also a participant in the
Alliance for Housing Affordability (AHA) in Snohomish County, which is a consortium
of cities pooling resources to collectively address housing needs in the county.
For -profit housing builders and developers. Many of the strategies outlined above are
aimed at the for -profit building market. The City's budget restrictions limit its ability to
directly participate in the construction or provision of affordable housing, so it has chosen
instead to affect the cost of housing by reducing government regulation, providing
flexible development standards, and otherwise minimize housing costs that can be passed
on to prospective owners or renters. However, as noted above, the City is also a
participant in the Alliance for Housing Affordability in Snohomish County, which is
intended to collaborate on housing strategies countywide.
Housing Financing Strategies
• State / Federal resources. The City supports the use of State and Federal resources to
promote affordable housing through its participation in the Snohomish County
Consortium and the Community Development Block Grant program. These are important
inter jurisdictional efforts to address countywide needs.
Housing 92
Packet Pg. 21
8.1.a
Jurisdictions face challenges in meeting affordability goals or significantly reducing the current
affordable housing deficit. Edmonds is a mature community with limited opportunities for new
development and has limited powers and resources to produce subsidized housing on its own.
However, it is hoped that Edmonds' participation in joint planning and coordination initiatives, such
as the Alliance for Affordable Housing will point the way to new housing initiatives in the future.
Housing Goals & Policies
Each key goal in this element (or section) is identified by an alphabet letter (for example, "D").
Goals are typically followed by associated policies and these are identified by the letter of the goal
and a sequential number (for example, "D.2")
Housing Goal A. Encourage adequate housing opportunities for all families and individuals in
the community regardless of their race, age, sex, religion, disability or economic circumstances
A.1 Consider opportunities for short-term housing that can meet local needs in
case of an emergency or disaster.
Housing Goal B. Ensure that past attitudes do not establish a precedent for future decisions
pertaining to public accommodation and fair housing.
Housing Goal C. Provide for special needs populations — such as low income, disabled, or senior
residents — to have a decent home in a healthy and suitable living environment, including through
the following policies:
C.1. Encourage the utilization of the housing resources of the state or federal
government to assist in providing adequate housing opportunities for special needs
populations, such as low income, disabled, or senior residents.
C.2. Work with the Alliance for Housing Affordability and other agencies to:
C.2.a. Provide current information on housing resources;
C.2.b. Determine the programs which will work best for the community.
C.2.c. Conduct periodic assessments of the housing requirements of special needs
populations to ensure that reasonable opportunities exist for all forms of
individual and group housing within the community.
Housing Goal D. Maintain a valuable housing resource by encouraging preservation and
rehabilitation of the older housing stock in the community through the following policies:
D.1. Support programs that offer assistance to households in need, such as units with
low income or senior householders.
Housing 93
Packet Pg. 22
8.1.a
D.2. Enforce building codes, as appropriate, to conserve healthy neighborhoods and
encourage rehabilitation of housing that shows signs of deterioration.
D.3. Ensure that an adequate supply of housing exists to accommodate all households
that are displaced as a result of any community action.
DA. Evaluate City ordinances and programs to determine if they prevent rehabilitation
of older buildings.
Housing Goal E. Provide opportunities for affordable housing (subsidized, if need be) for special
needs populations, such as disadvantaged, disabled, low income, and senior residents through the
following policies:
E.1. Aggressively support efforts to fund the construction of housing for seniors, low
income, and other special needs populations, while recognizing that units should
blend into the neighborhood and/or be designed to be an asset to the area and create
pride for inhabitants.
E.2. Aim for city zoning regulations to expand, not limit, housing opportunities for all
special needs populations.
Housing Goal F. Provide for a variety of housing that respects the established character of the
community.
F.I. Expand and promote a variety of housing opportunities by establishing land use
patterns that provide a mixture of housing types and densities.
F. La. Provide for mixed use, multifamily and single family housing that is targeted
and located according to the land use patterns established in the land use
element.
F.2. Encourage infill development that is consistent with or enhances the character of
the surrounding neighborhood.
F.2.a. Within single family neighborhoods, encourage infill development by
considering innovative single family development patterns such as Planned
Residential Developments (PRDs).
F.2.b. Provide for accessory housing in single family neighborhoods to address the
needs of extended families and encourages housing affordability.
F.2.c. Provide flexible development standards for infill development, such as non-
conforming lots, when development in these situations will be consistent
with the character of the neighborhood and with the goal to provide
affordable single family housing.
Housing Goal G. Provide housing opportunities within Activity Centers consistent with the land
use, transportation, and economic goals of the Comprehensive Plan.
G.1. Promote development within Activity Centers that supports the centers' economic
activities and transit service.
Housing 94
Packet Pg. 23
8.1.a
G.l.a. Provide for mixed use development within Activity Centers.
G. Lb. Plan for housing that is located with easy access to transit and economic
activities that provide jobs and shopping opportunities.
G.l.c. Consider adjusting parking standards for housing within Activity Centers to
provide incentives for lower -cost housing when justified by available transit
service.
Housing Goal H. Review and monitor permitting processes and regulatory systems to assure
that they promote housing opportunities and avoid, to the extent possible, adding to the cost of
housing.
H.1. Provide the maximum amount of efficiency and predictability in government
permitting processes.
H. La. Consider a wide variety of measures to achieve predictability and efficiency,
including such ideas as:
... establishing time limits for permitting processes;
... developing consolidated permitting and appeals processes;
... implementing administrative permitting procedures;
...using pre -application processes to highlight problems early.
H.2. Establish monitoring programs for permitting and regulatory processes.
H.2.a. Monitoring programs should review the types and effectiveness of
government regulations and incentives, in order to assess whether they are
meeting their intended purpose or need to be adjusted to meet new
challenges.
Housing Goal I. Increase affordable housing opportunities with programs that seek to achieve
other community goals as well.
I.1. Research housing affordability and program options that address Comprehensive
Plan goals and objectives.
I.2. Develop housing programs to encourage housing opportunities that build on
linkages between housing and other complementary Comprehensive Plan goals.
I.2.a. New programs that address housing affordability should be coordinated with
programs that address development of the arts, encourage historic
preservation, promote the continued development of Activity Centers and
transit -friendly development, and that encourage economic development.
Housing Goal J. Recognize that in addition to traditional height and bulk standards, design is an
important aspect of housing and determines, in many cases, whether or not it is compatible with
its surroundings. Design guidelines for housing should be integrated, as appropriate, into the
policies and regulations governing the location and design of housing.
J.1. Provide design guidelines that encourage flexibility in housing types while
ensuring compatibility of housing with the surrounding neighborhood.
Housing 95
Packet Pg. 24
8.1.a
J.1.a. Incentives and programs for historic preservation and neighborhood
conservation should be researched and established to continue the character
of Edmonds' residential and mixed use neighborhoods.
J. Lb. Design guidelines for housing should be developed to ensure compatibility of
housing with adjacent land uses.
Implementation Actions and Performance Measures
Implementation actions are steps that are intended to be taken within a specified timeframe to address
high priority sustainability goals. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan contains a small number
performance measures (no more than one per element) that can be used to monitor and annually
report on the implementation and effectiveness of the Comprehensive Plan.
Performance measures, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, are specific, meaningful, and easily
obtainable items that relate to sustainability and can be reported on an annual basis. They are intended
to help assess progress toward achieving the goals and policy direction of each major Comprehensive
Plan element. {Note: The measure identified below is specifically called out as matching the above
criteria and being important to housing goals and will be reported annually, along with performance
measures for other Comprehensive Plan elements. It is not intended to be the only measure that the
City may use for housing purposes.
Implementation Action: Develop a strategy by 2019 for increasing the supply of
affordable housing and meeting diverse housing needs.
Performance Measure: Report the number of residential units permitted each year with a
goal of reaching 21,168 units by 2035, or approximately 112 additional dwelling
units annually from 2011 to 2035.
Housing 96
Packet Pg. 25