2019-09-11 Planning Board MinutesCITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD
Minutes of Meeting
September 11, 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
Todd Cloutier
Nathan Monroe
Roger Pence
Mike Rosen
Conner Bryan, Student Representative
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT
Alicia Crank (excused)
Carreen Nordling Rubenkonig (excused)
READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES
STAFF PRESENT
Rob Chave, Development Services Manager
Jerrie Bevington, Video Recorder
BOARD MEMBER ROSEN MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 28, 2019 BE APPROVED AS
PRESENTED. BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA
The agenda was accepted as presented.
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Ken Reidy, Edmonds, commented that the Street Vacation Code Amendments will come back before the Board on
September 25'. He recalled that City Attorney has stated that the starting point in analyzing conditions is that the City can
never be compelled to approve a street vacation but can deny the request at any time for any reason. However, if a proposed
street vacation is in the public interest and no property will be denied direct access, he questioned if the City can really deny a
request at any time for any reason. He pointed out that City code allows property owners to apply for street vacations, and a
fee is required. When an application is made and paid for, he felt it should be processed per the City's code. He said the
City's General Code of Conduct states that "the City's primary function is to provide service to the citizens of Edmonds."
The City's Code of Ethics says that "elected officials shall emphasize friendly and courteous service to the public and each
other and seek to improve the quality of public service and confidence of citizens. " He said his hope is that any and all
updates to the street vacation code will lead to improvements in the quality of service provide by the City. He questioned if
the- City Council can condition a street vacation on the granting of an easement to a third party.
Mr. Reidy recalled that at the Board's August 14' meeting, the City Attorney stated that, as a home rule city, the City has
broad powers. He further stated that "the City doesn't need to point to something that's expressly stated in State Law to
authorize its actions; it just can't contradict State Law. " In other words, as long as the City isn't violating the statute, it's
good. Mr. Reidy pointed out that State Law clearly says that the ordinance may provide that the City retain an easement or
rights, and the definition of retain is clear and simple. He expressed his belief that the City is violating State Law when it
does something other than retain. Mr. Reidy agreed that the City has broad powers. However, once the City exercises its
broad powers, the code adopted by the City Council must be followed by the City Attorney and City staff. The adopted code
must also be faithfully enforced by the mayor.
Mr. Reid recalled that, at the last meeting, he mentioned that the 2012 Planning Board was involved in an amendment that
added language regarding the types of easements that may be retained during a street vacation. Ordinance 3910 clearly states
that easements or rights may be reserved for the City. It doesn't say for third parties. The City Attorney is required to
approval all ordinances as to form, and Mr. Taraday signed Ordinance 3910. The 2012 Planning Board was also involved in
another amendment to the street vacation code. Ordinance 3901 required a description of any easement under consideration
to be retained by the City. This ordinance uses the same word (retain) that the State Law uses. He summarized that
Ordinance 3901 does not require a description of any easement that the City wants to grant to a third party. If such was legal
and if the City Council wanted to do so, Ordinance 3901 would have required a description of those easement, as well. This
was not an oversight by either the 2012 Planning Board or the 2012 City Council, and Mr. Taraday also signed Ordinance
3910. Both of the ordinances show that the Edmonds City Council has adopted City laws that do not involve property
owners granting easements to third parties. He questioned why the City's laws would allow such. Wouldn't requiring rights
to be granted to a third party be a gift to that third party? Do third parties and/or the general public even have legal standing
to contest a street vacation? He said he has never seen dedication language that says if the City doesn't use the easement for
a public use, it can convey rights to a third party instead.
Mr. Reidy commented that both the City Attorney and City staff are able to point to something that is expressly stated in the
City's own code to see what actions are authorized. It's simple, the City can retain rights for the City. Previously -elected
City Council Members decided that when the City retains an easement, it will not require compensation. It is either/or. He
expressed his belief that the either/or law improves citizen confidence in City government and stating that the City can never
be compelled to approve a street vacation does the opposite. Title 21 of the City's code defines a dedication as a gift, and
charging compensation to vacate an easement that was gifted doesn't make sense to him and such conduct is arbitrary.
Regarding rights to be granted to third -party utilities, Mr. Reid said it is best to do what the code allows, reserve for the City
any easements or rights needed. The City used to do it this way, as evidenced by Ordinances 3188 and 3202. He expressed
his belief that an easement is superior to rights that utility companies have under a franchise contract. For example, franchise
contracts often require a franchise fee, have terms and can expire. Requiring easements to be granted to utilities may be
another gift. Mr. Reidy concluded his comments by asking the Board to remind City staff to bring the aerial photo the Board
requested during its July 241 meeting to the September 25'.
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. There were
no comments or questions from the Board.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD (ADB) ROLES AND SCOPE
Mr. Chave reported that the ADB had a lengthy review of a project at their last meeting, and they didn't have time to discuss
their role in design review and finalize their recommendation to the Planning Board. Hopefully, they will be able to do so at
their October 2nd meeting. He suggested that, when the Board meets jointly with the City Council, it would be appropriate to
mention that they are working with the ADB on this item.
DISCUSSION ON JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING BOARD MEETING
Chair Cheung advised that the Planning Board will meet jointly with the City Council on September 24', at which time the
Board will advise the City Council of their work with the ADB regarding their role in design review and potential changes.
Planning Board Minutes
September 11, 2019 Page 2
In addition, the Board wants to have discussions about housing and improving communications. Mr. Chave said they could
also report on what the Board has been working on recently. Mr. Chave advised that the joint meeting is scheduled to last
about 45 minutes.
Chair Cheung recalled that the Board was interested in feedback from the City Council regarding certain housing types, such
as accessory dwelling units (ADUs). Vice Chair Robles commented that in addition to feedback relative to attached and
detached ADUs, he would like to discuss potential regulations for short-term rentals to address security, parking, etc. The
current code does not adequately address this use, and there needs to be rules in place before problems arise and blanket
legislation ends up throwing the whole concept out the window. Board Member Rosen responded that, given the amount of
change that will happen on the City Council and the Board's strong opinions, it might be better to wait until those who are in
a position to take action are seated.
Board Member Rosen recalled that the Board was interested in hearing from the City Council about the newly -formed
Housing Commission's charge. Mr. Chave suggested that the Board could ask the Council if there are specific concepts,
such as ADU's, that they would like the Board to work on while the Housing Commission proceeds with its work. Vice
Chair Robles recalled that, at their joint meeting with the ADB, the ADB expressed interest in providing input regarding the
design -related elements of the ADU code. He suggested the Board could advise the City Council of its desire to continue
collaborations with the ADB and the Housing Commission regarding ADUs. Board Member Rosen suggested that the
Economic Development Commission should also be involved in discussions related to housing, since there are economic
development impacts associated with ADUs, short-term rentals, etc.
Chair Cheung asked when the Housing Commission would commence its work. Mr. Chave answered that the City is
currently working to get consultants on board to assist the Commission, and the goal is for them to start meeting in October.
No meeting date has been confirmed yet.
Board Member Pence observed that the Housing Commission and Planning Board interests overlap substantially, and he
would like to have a discussion with the City Council about the role liaisons could plan in relaying information amongst the
two groups. Mr. Chave advised that the Housing Commission meetings will be open to the public, and a Planning Board
representative could certainly attend. However, the City Council would have to approve a Planning Board Member's formal
participation on the Commission. Otherwise, a Board Member could be assigned to attend their meetings and report back.
Mr. Chave explained that the Housing Commission will report directly to the City Council, and any code amendment
referrals would come to the Board via the City Council. Board Member Pence said he was simply interested in the Board
being kept in the loop regarding the Commission's activities.
Based on his experience watching the Economic Development Commission and other commissions and boards, Board
Member Cloutier cautioned against the Board being directly involved with the Housing Commission's process. He suggested
it would be best for the Board to wait until the Housing Commission has come to some conclusions and forwarded a
recommendation to the City Council. The City Council can then assign the Board specific tasks.
Board Member Monroe summarized that the joint meeting will include a brief report on Planning Board activities, followed
by a discussion on housing and the Board's interest in continuing the ADU discussion with ADB collaboration. The Board
would like to talk about possible collaboration with the Housing Commission, and a potential liaison assignment, as well.
Lastly, the Board would like discuss the most appropriate and effective way for the various Boards, Commissions and the
City Council to communicate with each other.
In addition to the Planning Board report and the discussion about housing, Chair Cheung recalled the Board's desire to
discuss ideas for how they can better communicate their recommendations to the City Council. Specifically, are the Planning
Board's minutes effective, or would it be helpful for the Board to submit a more formal recommendation to them in writing.
Board Member Rosen commented that the Board serves the City Council, and it would be helpful to know how they can best
give the City Council the benefit of their work. Board Member Monroe suggested the Board could describe their current
process for making recommendations to the City Council. He pointed out that staff does a good job of conveying the
Planning Board's discussions and recommendations to the City Council.
Planning Board Minutes
September 11, 2019 Page 3
Chair Cheung and Vice Chair Robles agreed to prepare a summary report of the Board's recent activities, as well as an
agenda and opening statements regarding each topic of discussion.
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR PUBLIC MEETINGS
Mr. Chave reported that, on August 27', the City Council chose to use a statement recommended by the Tulalip Tribe to
acknowledge that the land that is now part of the City of Edmonds is also the land of the Salish people, who have inhabited it
since long before the 19'-century settlers arrived. The statement will be read early in their meetings and printed on their
written agendas. The Council agreed that it would be up to each board and commission to decide whether they wanted to use
the statement, and if so, whether to simply have it printed on agendas or read out loud at their meetings. However, they must
use the statement that was provided by the Tulalip Tribe and adopted by the City Council.
As adopted by the City Council, the statement reads:
"We acknowledge the original inhabitants of his place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip
Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered and taken care of these lands. We respect their
sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water.
BOARD MEMBER MONROE MOVED THAT THE STATEMENT BE READ OUT LOUD AT THE BEGINNING
OF EACH PLANNING BOARD MEETING.
Board Member Cloutier reviewed that the options include: do nothing, add the statement to the Board's written agenda,
make an oral statement at the beginning of each meeting, or do both a written and oral statement at each meeting. He said he
would prefer to include the statement in writing on each agenda, but he felt that reading the statement orally at each meeting
would actually diminish its value by making it a recitation.
Board Member Rosen observed that the Edmonds Center for the Arts reads the statement before each performance, and it is
always very well received. He commented that the City Council would not have made this decision if there wasn't sufficient
community support.
Board Member Cloutier said it is important to remember who occupied the land before them and what they have done,
particularly since the Board's job is land related. However, he is concerned that if the statement is read over and over again,
people will start to time it out and it will lose its value. Including the statement on the agenda will be a constant reminder,
but won't be seen as something that "holds up the clock."
Board Member Rosen suggested that perhaps they could read the statement periodically, such as once each month or once
each quarter. Mr. Chave suggested the statement could be added at the bottom of each Planning Board agenda, and then the
Board could choose to read it periodically.
BOARD MEMBER MONROE WITHDREW HIS MOTION.
BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER MOVED THAT THE BOARD ADD THE STATEMENT, AS WRITTEN AND
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, TO EACH OF THEIR AGENDAS. THE STATEMENT MAY ALSO BE
READ OUT LOUD PERIODICALLY. BOARD MEMBER MONROE SECONDED THE MOTION.
Chair Cheung said he wouldn't be opposed to reading the statement at every meeting.
CHAIR CHEUNG MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION SO THAT THE STATEMENT IS READ OUT LOUD AT
MEETINGS AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIR. BOARD MEMBER ROSEN SECONDED THE MOTION
TO AMEND.
Student Representative Bryan commented that it is good to be educated about the City's history, but he agreed with Board
Member Cloutier that reading the statement at every meeting might diminish its value because it is not pertinent to anything
the Board actually discusses at its meetings.
Planning Board Minutes
September 11, 2019 Page 4
Board Member Cloutier summarized Student Representative Bryan's point that the Board does not deal with land and water
issues in a manner that is affecting a local native population. He noted that the statement does not capture the concept that
the City should deal with land and water with the respect it is due in connection with its past. Vice Chair Robles agreed that
respect for the land and water and those who came before is something the City should definitely aspire to. Board Member
Cloutier observed that most of the concepts captured in the approved statement are Federal Law issues and have nothing to
do with the City.
THE MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA
Chair Cheung once again reminded the Board of the joint meeting with the City Council on September 241. The Board's
September 251 meeting will be continued deliberation on the proposed street vacation code update. The October 9' meeting
will be a joint meeting with the ADB and a presentation on the 2050 Multicounty Planning Policies Update. Mr. Chave
advised that the planning policy update may be postponed to the October 23' meeting. Chair Cheung advised that the Board
will receive an update on the Housing Commission on October 23ra
Board Member Cloutier asked when the Board would start working on neighborhood center plans and implementation, which
is identified on the extended agenda as a current priority. Mr. Chave advised that neighborhood center plans are not a City
Council priority for 2019.
Chair Cheung asked if the Board will be having any discussion about parking in the near future. Mr. Chave said it will
depend on the recommendations that come out of the parking study, if the City Council decides to proceed. Currently, the
study is on hold.
Board Member Cloutier recalled that, at the their retreat, the Board requested some charts to show the City's progress on
code review and other major topics. Mr. Chave advised that the Board would have to talk to the Development Services
Director about whether or not staff could prepare this information.
Chair Cheung asked when the next Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services update would be presented to the Board. Mr.
Chave responded that the City just hired a new director. He agreed to contact her to find out when the next update might be
scheduled.
Vice Chair Robles asked if the City has a Social Media or Communications Policy that could provide guidance to the Board.
Mr. Chave said he would look into the matter and report back.
PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS
Chair Cheung did not provide any additional comments.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
Board Member Rosen recognized the September 111 date and reminded his fellow Board Members that freedom is not free.
As much as he believes the country can do better, he is incredibly grateful for the opportunities it provides and that everyone
can participate in the public process. He remembered and honored those who have sacrificed so that community discussions
can occur.
Board Member Monroe asked staff to provide the aerial photograph that the Board requested at their July 24t1i meeting and
referenced earlier in the meeting by Mr. Reidy. Mr. Chave agreed to remind Ms. McConnell of the request.
Vice Chair Robles read the City Council -approved statement acknowledging indigenous peoples into the record.
Planning Board Minutes
September 11, 2019 Page 5
"We acknowledge the original inhabitants of his place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip
Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered and taken care of these lands. We respect their
sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water.
ADJOURNMENT
The Board meeting was adjourned at 7:44 p.m.
Planning Board Minutes
September 11, 2019 Page 6