Loading...
2019-03-27 Planning Board MinutesCITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD SUMMARY MINUTES OF RETREAT March 27, 2019 Chair Cheung called the meeting the retreat of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Brackett Room of City Hall, 12151 Avenue North, Edmonds, WA. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Matthew Cheung, Chair Daniel Robles, Vice Chair Todd Cloutier Alicia Crank Carreen Nordling Rubenkonig Mike Rosen BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT Nathan Monroe (excused) Phil Lovell (excused) ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA The agenda was accepted as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS There were no audience comments. STAFF PRESENT Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager POSSIBLE UPDATES FROM STAFF: HEIGHTS, ESPERANCE ANNEXATION AND PARKING • Building Height in the Downtown. It was noted that the Council recently rejected a proposal by the Economic Development Commission to adjust the ground -floor height requirement in the Downtown Business (BD) zones, which is related to height. Board Members indicated that they were not in favor of discussing height limits in downtown Edmonds at this time. Annexation of Esperance. It was discussed that, last year, the Council decided not to go forward with any actions related to Esperance annexation at this time. However, if the Council decides to move forward with annexation at some point in the future, it would direct staff to work through the process with the Snohomish County Boundary Review Board, and the Planning Board would likely be involved in discussions related to zoning and land use. They briefly reviewed the annexation process and discussed potential pros and cons of annexation. They also discussed how the City can inform members of the community that Edmonds does not have jurisdiction over development that occurs in Esperance. They generally agreed that the only thing City staff can do is advise citizens on an individual basis when they approach the City. • Downtown Parking. The Board discussed that restriping created additional parking spaces on the street, and the Edmonds Downtown Alliance (ED) is working with banks in the downtown to allow parking on their sites during non- business hours. They acknowledged and discussed a current community concern that the new Civic Park will add additional stress to the current parking situation in Downtown Edmonds. They also discussed a variety of ideas and opportunities to address parking, as well as the need for better management of the existing spaces. It was noted that the City Council has earmarked funding for a parking study in 2019. They generally agreed to postpone any future discussions about parking until the parking study has been completed, but they requested an opportunity to provide input on the parameters of the study. DISCUSSION: HOUSING AND WATERFRONT DISTRICT Housing. It was discussed that the Board has already had a number of discussions related to housing, but it seemed that some of the guidance it provided on the draft Housing Strategy, both the content and the process, were ignored. They talked about how the Board could appropriately share its work and information with the Citizen Housing Commission. They also stressed the need to have a well-defined process in place that addresses when and how the public can be involved, what the Planning Board's role will be, who will make the final decision, etc. Council Member Tibbott shared his vision of how the process would move forward, noting that the Housing Commission's initial meetings would be somewhat educational and the intended outcome is a list of housing policy options that focus on strategies that are already outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. This work will be followed by potential code changes to implement the strategies, and that is when the Planning Board will become involved in the process. He advised that the Council is considering adding ad hoc members to the Housing Commission from both the Economic Development Commission and the Planning Board. The Board emphasized the need to provide adequate information to the public and solicit input from residents of all ages and in all areas of Edmonds. Waterfront District. The Board was reminded that issues such as a shuttle to the retail district, a year-round farmer's market, waterfront center and coordination with the Port, Sound Transit, and Community Transit are outside of the Board's purview unless a zoning or land use amendment is involved. Mr. Chave advised that the Board could request updates and information from various agencies. For example, they could request a presentation from the Port of Edmonds and/or Sound Transit about current projects and their long-term impact on Edmonds. These presentations could lead to issues the Board wants to explore. He briefly shared how the City staff, boards and commissions often coordinate with each other and other agencies. The Board agreed that updates or presentations from time to time would be helpful, perhaps starting with the Port of Edmonds and Sound Transit. INCREASING EFFECTIVENESS TO COUNCIL, STAFF AND PUBLIC Council. The Board discussed a concern that some members of the City Council publicly admonish the Board for their recommendations, which does not generate trust between the two groups. It would be helpful for the Board to have a clearer idea of the Council's expectations. In addition, when the City Council disagrees with a Planning Board recommendation, it would be helpful for them to do so more respectfully. Council Member Tibbott observed that the Planning Board has the luxury of discussing a topic for as long as needed to ask all of the questions of staff and seek public feedback. The Council's time is more limited, and that is why the Board's work is so important in helping them understand the broader context of an issue. It was observed that the Board's role is to represent the public, seek public input and provide counsel to the City Council. However, if the Council Members do not make a concerted effort to review all of the information provided to them by the Board, the public will lose interest in providing their input at the Planning Board level and the process will have little value. They agreed that clear ground rules and expectations are needed and then the public, Planning Board and City Council can be held accountable to the process. Good decision making requires the trust of the public, whom the Board is supposed to represent. Ideas to improve communications between the City Council and Planning Board include appointing a City Council Member to serve as a Planning Board Liaison, quarterly updates to the City Council, periodic joint meetings and follow up meetings after major initiatives. It was suggested that the Board Members should share information about their background, expertise and experience that might lend support to their comments. They should also provide sufficient background information to support their Planning Board Minutes March 27, 2019 Page 2 comments and use vocabulary that the general public is familiar with. Chair Cheung advised that he intends to share background information on each of the Board Members when he presents the next Planning Board Update to the City Council. Staff. The Board had a brief discussion about how they can improve their communications with staff, and Mr. Chave said the only time staff is taken aback is when they don't understand what the Board is looking for when preparing a meeting or discussion, but that doesn't happen very much. Board Member Rubenkonig commended Mr. Chave for keeping the Board on topic, answering questions that come up during their discussions, and guiding the Board to a good approach. She would like the other planners to use this model, as well. They agreed that, at the end of each meeting, it would be helpful for staff to summarize the action steps, assignments and timelines identified throughout the Board's discussions. It was discussed that the Board Members typically receive their meeting materials a week early, which is ample time for them to review and contact staff with requests for additional information. They also discussed that it is helpful for the minute writer if the Board members provide their more specific comments and motions in writing when possible. • Public. The Board discussed ideas for improving communications with the public in a meaningful way. They talked about opportunities to share information on various social media platforms and agreed it would be helpful to establish a social media policy. Mr. Chave advised that the Board can post announcements and updates on the City's social media website, and they can individually post information that comes from the public domain, too. However, he cautioned against posting individual comments as representative of the entire Planning Board. Board Member Crank summarized that it is okay for the Board Members to post information on social media sites, but not respond or provide an opinion. Questions were raised about whether or not the Board could conduct meetings outside of their regular meetings, such as listening sessions in neighborhoods. Mr. Chave agreed it is possible, but it would be extremely important to carefully define what is and is not within the Board's jurisdiction. The topic of discussion would need to be clearly defined and within the Board's purview. It was discussed that the public engagement process has changed, and the City will need to use platforms that are convenient and have meetings in times and places that are convenient. Aside from their regular meetings, the Board has not provided a lot of other good opportunities for the public to engage. They talked about a number of ideas that included the City's Facebook page and using a centralized ledger. DEFINING THE PLANNING BOARD'S VISION FOR SUCCESS Board Member Cloutier suggested the Board use stoplight charts or matrix charts to evaluate success and help them figure out what to focus on. They discussed establishing a process to follow for each topic: training/informational meeting, study session, public hearing, deliberation, recommendation to Council, and a follow-up discussion on the Council's final decision. Vice Chair Robles commented there are very novel and new methods available to gather data and score a project's success, and he agreed to explore the issue further and report back. The Board talked about how the public's perception of the Board can impact their opinion of the Board's work. Board Member Cloutier observed that the Board Members are not elected officials and do not make final decisions. The only opinion that matters is that of the City Council, and the City Council is accountable for the public's perception of the Board. Board Member Rubenkonig commented that the Comprehensive Plan calls for the makeup of the Board to be diverse and geographically spread out. In addition to providing background information on each of the Commissioners, Chair Cheung advised that his presentation to the City Council will also include a map showing their residential addresses. Because he is not an elected official, Chair Cheung commented that public comment do not necessarily have to shape his opinion. Board Member Rosen questioned why the Board would have a public process if each member is going to make a recommendation based on his/her own opinion. Board Member Cloutier pointed out that all of the Board members can benefit and learn from listening to the voice of the people, and they should acknowledge and respond to the comments that are valid and on topic. Board Member Crank commented that the Board should listen to learn, recognizing that everyone comes with their own set of experiences and public comments can re -inform her opinion when making a recommendation. Board Member Rubenkonig suggested that, following a public hearing and prior to the Board's deliberation and Planning Board Minutes March 27, 2019 Page 3 recommendation, the Chair should summarize the issues that have been brought forward. This will help the Board hear the issues a second time, and will tell the public that their viewpoint has been considered. The Board agreed to schedule a future discussion about creating a matrix or some other method for evaluating the Board's success in addressing items within their purview. They agreed to start by identifying the Board's responsibilities and then work to identify the best way to measure success for each one. Chair Rubenkonig reminded them that the Planning Board Chair and the City Council President can meet from time to time to discuss upcoming issues and get feedback. STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE Chair Cheung reported that he and Vice Chair Robles met with three of four candidates for the Student Representative position. The plan is to present the preferred candidate at the next Planning Board meeting for final confirmation. SUMMARY OF MEETING Mr. Chave summarized that: • Staff will contact the Port of Edmonds and Sound Transit and request a representative attend an upcoming Board meeting to provide an update on their activities. • Staff will investigate a potential social media policy and present it to the Board for consideration. • The Board will have a study session to identify specific responsibilities and come up with a method for measuring success. • The Board will have a future discussion to expand on ideas about how the Planning Board and City Council can more effectively communicate. • Chair Cheung will work with staff to schedule a joint meeting with the City Council. �IL111J 711u_1.0401" The Board meeting was adjourned at 8:57 p.m. Planning Board Minutes March 27, 2019 Page 4