2019-01-23 Planning Board MinutesCITY OF EDMONDS
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
January 23, 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
Nathan Monroe
Carreen Nordling Rubenkonig
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT
Mike Rosen (excused)
Todd Cloutier
READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES
STAFF PRESENT
Kernen Lien, Environmental Programs Manager
Jerrie Bevington, Video Recorder
BOARD MEMBER MONROE MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 9, 2019 BE APPROVED AS
AMENDED. BOARD MEMBER RUBENKONIG SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA
The agenda was accepted as presented.
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
No one in the audience indicated a desire to comment during this portion of the meeting.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT TO PLANNING BOARD
Board Member Lovell requested an update on the small cell wireless amendments. Mr. Lien advised that on January 151,
staff made the same presentation to the City Council that was provided to the Board on January 9'. The issue will come back
before the Board on February 131. Board Member Lovell pointed out that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
requires that all local regulations and guidelines related to small cell wireless facilities must be in place by April 131.
Otherwise, the City will have lost its opportunity. He asked if the City is on track to meet this deadline. Mr. Lien advised
that the City Council will consider an interim ordinance on February 5t1i, and the intent is to have a permanent ordinance in
place before the deadline. Board Member Lovell observed that a public hearing before the Planning Board on the permanent
ordinance is scheduled for February 27t1i
Board Member Monroe asked for a status report on the public process related to housing. He asked if the issue would come
back to the Planning Board at some point in the future. Mr. Lien answered that a public open house was held on January 10'
and was well attended. Board Member Crank said she did not attend the public meeting, but the ad hoc housing group is
having its final meeting on January 31". She anticipates the meeting will include information and feedback that was gathered
from the last two open houses, and it will likely be the official ending of the group. Board Member Monroe asked if a work
product would result from the housing group meetings, and Board Member Crank answered no. She explained that the group
was intended to be a type of stop gap to allow a pause and an opportunity to work the Housing Strategy back to what it was
supposed to be. At the group's last meeting, it was discussed that a Housing Commission could potentially be formed. If a
Housing Commission is appointed, she suggested it might be helpful for them to meet jointly with the Planning Board.
HAINES WHARF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT INTRODUCTION (FILE NO. AMD20180011
Mr. Lien advised that this is a City -initiated Comprehensive Plan amendment that involves four parcels in the Haines Wharf
area. The City owns a small parcel, and the other three are privately owned. Notice letters were sent to the three property
owners, but no response has been received to date. Mr. Lien explained that the current Comprehensive Plan Map designation
for the properties is Mixed Use Commercial and the properties are zoned Commercial Waterfront (CW). The only other area
in the City that is zoned Commercial Waterfront is near the downtown and near the Port of Edmonds. The remainder of the
tidelands are zoned Open Space (OS). With the exception of a few properties that are zoned Mixed Use Commercial,
properties further shoreland are zoned Single Family Resource (RSW). RS-20 requires a lot size of at least 20,000 square
feet and RS-12 requires a lot size of at least 12,000 square feet. He also advised that the existing structure on the subject
parcels has been deteriorating over the years.
Mr. Lien said the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment is primarily an outgrowth of the Shoreline Master Program
(SMP) update. He provided an image to depict the old shoreline designation for the properties and explained that under the
old SMP, the areas were intensely developed with a mixed use of commercial, port facilities, multi -modal transit facilities,
railroad facilities and limited light industrial uses. With the recently updated SMP (2017), the shoreline designation was
changed to Aquatic I. The purpose of the aquatic low -intensity environment is to protect, restore and manage the unique
characteristic and resources of the areas waterward of the Ordinary High -Water Mark (OHWM). The City initiated the
Comprehensive Plan Map amendment to change the designation to a more appropriate designation consistent with the SMP.
At the request of Board Member Lovell, Mr. Lien shared information about the properties that were developed under a
Planned Residential Development and a Contract Rezone.
Board Member Monroe requested clarification about what property the existing building is located on, and Mr. Lien
answered that part of it is on private property and part is on state tidelands. The current tideland lease with the Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) is month -to -month. He explained that before the wooden structure deteriorated, the property
owner applied for a shoreline permit to refurbish the site. The structure was non -conforming under both the current and
previous SMP. The property owner obtained a shoreline permit from the City but was unable to get a permit from the other
government agencies. At this time, nothing is being pursued. Board Member Monroe asked if the other permits would have
been required if the structure was located entirely on the private property. Mr. Lien responded that a variety of state agency
permits would be required because the structure is located within navigable waters.
To further clarify the proposal, Mr. Lien explained that zoning overlay, shoreline designation and Comprehensive Plan
designation are different designations that apply to the site. The zoning designation has to be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan designation of Mixed -Use Commercial, and both the zoning designation and Comprehensive Plan
designation must be consistent with the SMP. Currently, the zoning and Comprehensive Plan designations are not consistent,
and staff is proposing that the Comprehensive Plan Map designation be changed from Mixed Use Commercial to Open Space
(OS), which is consistent with rest of the tidelands next to the residential areas in North Edmonds (from the subject parcels
all the way to Brackett's Landing South).
Mr. Lien reminded the Commission that amendments to the Comprehensive Plan can only be adopted if the following
findings are made:
• Is the proposed amendment consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and in the public interest?
Planning Board Minutes
January 23, 2019 Page 2
• Is the proposed amendment detrimental to the public interest, health, safety or welfare of the City?
• Does the proposed amendment maintain the appropriate balance of land uses within the City?
• Is the subject parcel physically suitable for the requested land use designation and the anticipated land use
development, including, but not limited to, access provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining and uses and
absence of physical constraints.
Mr. Lien explained that the Comprehensive Plan requires the City to develop and implement the SMP consistent with the
Shoreline Management Act (SMA), and that is the purpose of the proposed amendment. When the amendment comes back
to the Board for a public hearing, he will present a staff report to further explain how the proposed change is consistent with
the four criteria. He summarized his presentation by stating that the next step would be a public hearing by the Planning
Board in March, followed by a recommendation to the City Council.
Board Member Lovell observed that one sliver of the property is owned by the City and the other three are privately owned,
and the entire Haines Wharf complex is crumbling into the Sound and causing pollution. He asked if the Corps of Engineers
has anything to say about the future of this property and the existing structure. Mr. Lien responded that number of agencies
have been watching the structure decay over the years with nobody really stepping up and taking the lead. The Department
of Ecology (DOE) has stepped in from time to time, as has the DNR because of the lease. After a significant storm a few
years ago, the City made the property owners remove the wood portion and stabilize the rest of the structure. Pollution no
longer occurs during high tide and/or significant storms. However, it is still a nonconforming structure that is inconsistent
with the SMP, and not a lot can be done with the site beyond maintaining it in its current condition.
Board Member Lovell asked if the properties would be considered undevelopable if the Comprehensive Plan Map
designation is changed to OS. Mr. Lien shared a zoning map and explained that, currently, the Haines Wharf properties are
designated as Commercial Waterfront, and the properties from Haines Wharf down to the Lynnwood Wastewater Treatment
Plant are zoned OS. The properties between the treatment plant and the ferry terminal are zoned RSW-12. The RSW-12
zone was primarily developed for Lake Ballinger, so it has setbacks that are described from the lake edge. The Zoning Code
has a chapter for the Marine Resource (MR) zone. Based on his research, the MR zone is supposed to apply to the OS and
RSW zones in the tidelands, but it has not been applied to any properties on the zoning map. When it was initially adopted, it
was applied to the tidelands outside of the City limits. However, when the City created the new electronic maps, the zone
disappeared from the zoning map.
Mr. Lien shared details about the MR zone, noting that its purpose is to regulate uses at the tidelands and other lands covered
by saltwater, to preserve and enhance the natural marine environment along the shoreline in Edmonds, and to provide local
control over the natural marine environment to the extent that state and federal regulations allow. The MR zone allows for
permitted uses such as commercial fishing, sports fishing, movement of vessels, swimming, and snorkeling. It also allows
uses that require a Conditional Use Permit such as submerged power and communication cables, filling, dredging, submerged
construction, breakwaters, bulkheads, scientific installation, marine extraction, mineral extraction from water, marine
agriculture and propagation, and educational and recreational facilities. He said that he plans to review this zone further at
some point in the future to determine how it could potentially be amended and applied to properties along the shoreline in
Edmonds.
Mr. Lien again emphasized that the property has three separate designations: Shoreline Environment, Comprehensive Plan
and Zoning. The current proposal would only amend the Comprehensive Plan Map designation for the subject parcels from
Mixed Use Commercial to Open Space, which is consistent with the rest of the waterfront. The proposed amendment would
make the Comprehensive Plan consistent with the SMP. Changing the zoning will be a separate action that would follow the
Comprehensive Plan amendment.
Board Member Lovell summarized that a future zoning amendment would involve a look at all of the rest of the zones along
the waterfront relative to tidelands and previous zoning designations, but zoning is not part of the current proposal. Board
Member Monroe asked if the Board would consider potential impacts to the property owners as part of any proposed zoning
change. Mr. Lien answered affirmatively. Again, he said he has notified the property owners of the proposed
Comprehensive Plan change, but he has not heard back from any of them.
Planning Board Minutes
January 23, 2019 Page 3
Board Member Rubenkonig asked for more information about how the federal and state agencies are also involved, given
that the properties are classified as tidelands. Mr. Lien explained that a variety of permitting agencies have responsibilities
associated with the properties. For example, if the property owners were to apply for a permit, the Washington State
Department of Fish and Wildlife would have permit authority and not the City of Edmonds. The DNR would also have
permit authority, as would the National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which would coordinate with the
Natural Marine Fisheries Services. Each of these agencies have different permitting requirements. Only the City of
Edmonds implements the SMP and the zoning, but the DNR has a tideland lease. Board Member Rubenkonig asked if the
DNR would find the proposed change suitable to its mission, and Mr. Lien answered affirmatively. He said he has had
numerous conversations with representatives from the DNR over the years as the site has deteriorated.
Board Member Rubenkonig asked when the last time the property was commercially viable. Mr. Lien answered that he does
not believe there was a commercial operation going on in 2008 when the property owners last applied for a Shoreline Permit.
Board Member Rubenkonig asked what is stopping the site from being commercially viable. Mr. Lien explained that the
property owners have not secured access from Burlington Northern Santa Fe, so there is no safe crossing across the tracks to
the subject parcels. The location is another factor. Board Member Rubenkonig recalled that there were viable businesses on
the properties at one point in time.
Board Member Rubenkonig asked if the owners would be compensated if the properties are rezoned. Mr. Lien said the
structure is non -conforming now, and it would remain non -conforming if the proposed amendment is approved. Therefore,
the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment and subsequent rezone would not really change what is allowed to be there.
He further explained that under the current SMP, a covered, over -water structure would not be allowed and the use would be
considered non -conforming, as well. If a non -conforming use ceases to exist for a period of time, only conforming uses and
structures would be allowed going forward. Board Member Rubenkonig summarized that the structure's commercial
viability has been significantly reduced over the past decade. Mr. Lien emphasized that the structure was considered non-
conforming under the previous SMP, which was adopted in 2000, so it has been non -conforming for the past 19 years. The
intent is not to continue the non-conformance forever, but ultimately for the use to go away.
Board Member Rubenkonig summarized her understanding that the proposed amendment would not take away from the
property owners' ability to have a business, but they will have to jump through hoops to get it to be viable. This is no
different than for any other business in Edmonds. Mr. Lien clarified that the structure can be maintained. However, he is not
aware of any commercial activity at the site at this time. He read from the non -conforming section of the code that if a non-
conforming use is discontinued for 6 consecutive months of for 12 months during any 2-year period, any subsequent use must
be conforming.
Board Member Monroe asked if structures could be built on the other properties under the Commercial Waterfront
designation. Mr. Lien answered that the property owners would not be allowed to construct a building over the water now.
The current SMP no longer allows covered structures over water. Board Member Monroe observed that the value of the
properties was significantly reduced when the previous SMP was adopted in 2000. Mr. Lien said all he knows is that the
structure was non -conforming when the City issued approval of a Shoreline Permit in 2008 under the old SMP that was
adopted in 2000. At least since 2000, the structure type was not allowed and the existing structure was non -conforming.
Board Member Monroe asked about the advantage of changing the Comprehensive Plan designation if the existing Mixed
Commercial Use designation does not allow development, either. Mr. Lien said the purpose is to make the SMP and
Comprehensive Plan consistent with each other. Board Member Monroe clarified that, in functionality, the proposed change
would not cause any additional impacts that were not present in 2000. Mr. Lien concurred.
Mr. Lien advised that the proposed amendments will come back to the Board for a public hearing in March.
REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA
Chair Cheung reviewed that the February 13t1i agenda will include a continued discussion on the Wireless Facilities
Ordinance for small cell standards.
Planning Board Minutes
January 23, 2019 Page 4
The Board briefly reviewed what took place at their 2018 retreat, which was more of an information -gathering session with
the City Attorney than a goal -setting session. They agreed it would be helpful to have their 2019 retreat earlier in the year so
it could be used as a goal -setting session. They decided to push the public hearing for the Haines Wharf Comprehensive Plan
Map amendment to April so the 2019 retreat could be scheduled for March 27'
Mr. Lien advised that another item that will be added to the extended agenda is a discussion on the Architectural Design
Review Board's (ADB) role. The ADB will be discussing this issue at their next meeting and look forward to a joint meeting
with the Planning Board, as well.
Board Member Rubenkonig recalled the items she brought forward at their last meeting for possible inclusion on the
extended agenda. She pointed out that, previously, the Board received a yearly report on activity on Highway 99, but it was
not included on the current extended agenda. In addition, the Board often has joint meetings with other City Boards and
Commissions. The Board also appreciates periodic Parks and Recreation Reports and reports from the Development Services
Director regarding development activity in the City.
Chair Cheung suggested that perhaps the Development Services Director could be invited to provide a report on Highway 99
activity at their February 13' meeting. Mr. Lien advised that the Development Services Director provides an annual report to
the City Council regarding development activity in the City. Following her presentation to the City Council, the information
is also presented to the Planning Board.
The Board discussed whether or not an additional study session is needed before the public hearing on the Small Cell
Wireless Facilities Ordinance. Board Member Lovell reviewed that the subject was introduced to the City Council last week,
and staff is working on proposed code changes that will be presented to the City Council as an interim ordinance. Mr. Lien
said his understanding is that an interim ordinance will be presented to the City Council for a public hearing and adoption on
February 51, which is before the Board's next meeting. On February 131, staff would introduce the Board to the proposed
code changes and the interim ordinance.
Vice Chair Robles commented that no further Board discussion is needed prior to the public hearing unless they have an
opportunity to discuss the issue with scientists who have expertise in the field. Board Member Rubenkonig reminded the
Board that the City does not have the ability to regulate wireless facilities for safety since the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) has already deemed them to be safe. Vice Chair Robles said he felt it was appropriate to get public
safety concerns on the record even if they are outside the City's purview to regulate. He reminded them that the City's
current moratorium on crumb rubber was based on unsettled science, and if small cell wireless facilities can also be classified
as unsettled science, the City could take a similar approach. Board Member Rubenkonig observed that Vice Chair Robles'
concerns were included in the January 91 minutes.
Board Member Monroe suggested it would be appropriate for the Board to review the ordinance prior to the public hearing
since that is the best time for them to affect change. Mr. Lien also recommended the Board have a study session to review
the interim ordinance and proposed permanent ordinance and provide feedback to the staff prior to the public hearing.
Chair Cheung asked if the Board will be expected to make a recommendation at the same meeting following the public
hearing. Mr. Lien reminded the Board of the April 13' deadline. Board Member Lovell commented that the Board would
have plenty of time to discuss the draft ordinance following the public hearing and prior to making their recommendation to
the City Council. Mr. Lien said his understanding is that staff will provide more pictures and information regarding small
cell wireless facilities at their next meeting, as well as the interim ordinance and draft language (design guidance) for a
permanent ordinance.
Board Member Rubenkonig pointed out that her neighborhood has below ground power lines, and allowing small cell
facilities on standalone poles would end up introducing more above ground wires and equipment. She felt it was important to
look carefully at the design standards for the facilities which can be up to 50 feet in height. She recalled that the Board
requested staff provide photographs of where they have been installed elsewhere, since there are none in Edmonds at this
time. It would also be helpful to see examples from the manufacturers. She acknowledged that the City does not have a lot
of ability to control small cell wireless facilities, but she is concerned that it is a bigger issue than it appears to be. Design
seems to be the only opportunity the City has to provide guidance for the local community.
Planning Board Minutes
January 23, 2019 Page 5
Board Member Rubenkonig pointed out that, although most items on the Board's agenda come from the City Council, the
Board can add items to its agenda, as well. This usually happens via the Chair working with the Mayor. The Board agreed it
would be appropriate to add other study items when their agendas are light.
PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS
Chair Cheung did not provide any additional comments.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
Vice Chair Robles observed that there are a lot of hot topics, especially surrounding affordable housing. Many of the topics
are showing up on social media and many of the comments are adversarial and unfounded. Recently, he has commented, as
well, in an attempt to direct the conversation towards encouraging citizens to participate in the public meetings. He
suggested it might be appropriate for the Board to have a social media policy of its own.
Board Member Lovell reported on his attendance at the January 16t' Economic Development Commission meeting. He
announced that Scott Merrick recently joined the Commission. His background is in healthcare, but he has also been
involved in a lot of development matters over the course of his professional life. He is currently a professor at Central
Washington University and is based at the University of Washington.
Board Member Lovell reported that the focus of the January 161 meeting was to review priorities for 2019 and hear reports
from the three major subcommittees: business attraction, arts and tourism, and development feasibility. The role and
responsibility of the three subcommittees is to study various issues that might directly impact the economic health of the City
and make recommendations to the City Council accordingly. Upon hearing the recommendations, the City Council will
decide whether to take action or not. Recommendations related to land use and zoning could eventually trickle down to the
Planning Board for additional work. There was quite a discussion about the final report outlining the status of the Strategic
Action Plan. He noted that a draft report was distributed at the Board's last meeting, and the final report is very similar
except that it highlights items that are within the realm of economic development. There seemed to be a particular interest in
revising some of the items that were very low priorities in the initial Strategic Action Plan, as well as those that have been put
aside or abandoned for lack of incentive or as a result of changes in the makeup, interest and concern in the City. They also
voiced interest in starting new categories. The list of new items includes:
• Consider ways to improve cast/west transportation.
• Look at programs to increase parking capability and parking enforcement.
• Look at 5G related business opportunities.
• Look at final development of Civic Park.
• Lend support to the Creative District designation that the City just achieved (1st in the State).
• Look at other types of like businesses that might want to relocate and center their operations in Edmonds.
• Collaborate more with the Port of Edmonds.
• Collaborate more with Edmonds Community College.
Board Member Lovell asked if another Board Member would be interested in taking his place as a liaison to the Economic
Development Commission. The Board Members agreed to consider the opportunity, and Board Member Lovell agreed to
continue to serve as liaison for the time being.
Board Member Crank announced that the quarterly Snohomish County Paine Field Airport Commission Meeting is on
January 24'. She advised that, due to the government shutdown, the commission has been unable to get final approval from
the Federal Aviation Administration so commercial service out of the new terminal has been postponed. Alaska Airlines was
scheduled to start flights on February 11', and the date has been pushed out to March 4'. She commended Alaska Airlines
for being expedient about reaching out to people who had already purchased tickets to change their flights to SeaTac. She
briefly described the various impacts associated with the government shutdown.
Planning Board Minutes
January 23, 2019 Page 6
Board Member Monroe said he attended a meeting to help finalize the Urban Forest Management Plan. The intent of the
meeting was to add specificity for Edmonds and make the plan less generic. The big thing he learned was that trees have a
lifecycle, and given when Edmonds was established, many are reaching the end of their lifecycle and are starting to fall
down. While the plan cannot solve the problem, it can at least start to address it.
ADJOURNMENT
The Board meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m.
Planning Board Minutes
January 23, 2019 Page 7