Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

all right good evening welcome to the March 18 2025 meeting of the ever Planning Commission uh Ayan would you please call the role chair Chatters present commissioner Atkins present commissioner Finch commissioner Sullivan here commissioner Shelby here commissioner rage here commissioner Walch here thank you thank you um could we uh hold this open for like 20 seconds absolutely no and commissioner Ballard welcome you want to utter a quick hear for us commissioner Ballard here all right perfect thank you Ayana uh let's see uh commissioner Atkins if you wouldn't mind reading the land acknowledgement yes the Planning Commission wishes to acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place the stobes people and their successors the TB tribes since time of Memorial they have hunted fished gathered on and taken care of these lands and Waters we respect their sovereignty their right to self-determination and honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water we will strive to be honest about our past mistakes and bring about a future that includes their people stories and voices to form a more just and Equitable Society thank you uh everyone has had an opportunity un to look at the minutes from our March 4th 2025 meeting uh are there any corrections that anyone would like to offer no correction um but I know I know the meeting was brief but these minutes may be even more brief than the meeting itself I don't know if that's a style we're moving toward but um I seem to remember a more robust conversation than what I'm seeing here in the

minutes do you have a do you do you have a request that uh that the staff maybe take another pass through and see if there was more substantive conversation do you have a suggestion around a particular segment that you think would be good to focus on no need to go back but I think going forward um I I I just recall there being someone other than myself talking at the meeting and um there's more formatting than content here noted thank you for your comments on that commissioner bench uh do we have any corrections uh for the minutes okay um any objections to approving the minutes as they stand okay without objection the M minutes from March fourth are then approved thank you uh let us now move on to commissioner reports Commissioners is there anyone who has a report for us this evening okay uh we'll turn it over to staff thank you all right good evening Commissioners York stens watcha planning director steadily working through the elements we've got two of the last elements of goals and policies on your agenda this evening that leaves only one after this evening which is public facilities uh working with other departments on that and we'll get you that uh either at the next meeting or very soon um wanted to catch you up on a couple things with Council we had a built environment committee last week uh the built environment committee invited uh Lo Lisk local and initiatives support corporation uh to come give a briefing on the work that they've been doing with the city and with Partners in Casino Road working on engagement affordable housing strategy and an economic development work plan for that neighborhood um I joined that meeting to provide a little bit bit of Staff

context around what we have done with some of the recommendations that they've made made you'll remember from a meeting two months ago maybe uh that uh Alex Brennan and Tina vity um and I think a couple other folks came to um cover a memo with some recommendations on the comprehensive plan with this Planning Commission we made a few edits to the housing element especially based on those recommendations and that was folded into the council early review draft package that was shared in February February 14th about I believe I shared with you a quick um response sheet that went through all of the specific action items that were part of the memo that we discussed at this Planning Commission meeting a couple months ago and where um what staff had done with each of those comments some of them were taking uh and and made the change some of them we had some explanation as to why we felt the change maybe wasn't uh needed or had it already been handled in some other way um and then some others in there um you've only had a few minutes with this I don't think we need to go through Point by point but uh that offer is on the table if the commission would like to otherwise you can see kind of what we've done uh it's both instructive a little bit on how we work with the policies in this phase of amending or modifying or tweaking some of the uh work that we've done previously in the year and then also it's something that this uh commission was interested in I think the biggest uh the biggest topic is that we are working on fleshing out a proposal for inclusionary zoning in uh South

Everett the area that is highlighted as a high displacement risk in Regional displacement risk mapping EX excises um this was one of the recommendations from Lisk futurewise and the housing Consortium so we revised a policy pretty simply from explore to implement and um that's how the policy stands right now we'll hear tomorrow from the council if that's among the issues that they would like to take up or change I'll draw your eye to that most of the rest of it are pretty um small scale changes in wording there was some discussion about concentration of poverty and that uh tension between not wanting to concentrate poverty or affordable housing or subsidized housing yet not wanting to the avoidance of such to result in displacement of a community that exists there I think we all acknowledge the difficulty in threading the needle on that made some policy changes um and then maybe the other one that was kind of interesting and it's still in play a little bit as a discussion on mixed use zoning or opportunities for small scale commercial uh establishments along West Casino Road we have a couple of uh arterial intersections that have neighborhood business zone right now those are identified you see this on the last page in the drafts zoning map um those have been changed to mixed Urban Zone which allows the full Suite of commercial um uses we also have the neighborhood commercial uh framework that we shared with you months ago uh it hasn't really changed since the memo that we went over

if you remember that when we were talking about land uses we've started to write that into code and put some um specifics to it so with the combination of the neighborhood commercial which provides some small scale up to 3,000 square ft on Corners which we are I think interpreting as Public Public Road corners but that is still um something that we're discussing and then those mixed Urban zones there is some opportunity for uh small scale Commerce on West Casino Road I think actually now that I'm remembering it didn't we add Casino Road as of yesterday yes we did yesterday uh actually just to take another look at this we had been a little bit um equivocal or unclear as to whether what what a corner lot would be and whether private roads would count and I think that was part of the question here this is a corridor that over a mile and a half only has two Public Road intersections so there aren't many corners it's somewhat rare in being relatively intensely developed yet residential Zone in most of our other arterial corridors are mixed use so you already allow all the Commerce um so I think we looked at all of the different places in the city and would it make sense to call out Casino Road specifically and we thought that it would make sense and so wrote Into the latest draft which we'll share uh soon that corner Lots or Lots adjacent to Casino Road I think we had fronting on Casino fr on Casino Road yeah so that you would be able to have those small scale up to 3,000 square ft neighborhood serving commercial uses anywhere along that Corridor in addition to the more um more wide availability of Commerce at the intersections and of course at Evergreen

Way so that uh you see these the code sections here a proposed 19545 in your mind you can add to that um Corner lots and lots fronting on Casino Road for the latest proposal we will see how that evolves and we will check back in with you any questions on uh the casino Road Lisk future wise work we'll come back to you when we kind of bring it all together in the next couple of months for another touch point on that but thought it was a good time to give an update I I know that a central proposal was around delaying um zoning changes how did that discussion go was it by kind of agreement that um the folks in that area work their way around to because I see you're recommending uh not to delay changes did the folks uh work their way around to sharing that perspective or is that still um being debated I think there are two aspects to delaying zoning changes one is the underlying zoning and then the second is that we will be doing a sub area plan in association with the to which may bring a little bit more clarity as to what it means to be a center and how that works and have it in coordination with the plans for the Light Rail station so what we are saying is Baseline we are really not changing the zoning in that area because what is commercial will still stay mixed use commercial and what is residential is literally only changing to the

comparable residential right now okay so there really isn't a change so in a way yes we did agree and in a way yes we did not agree so but it sounds like there's more clarity around that issue right okay I think I think the um exploration and potential implementation of mandatory inclusionary zoning really helped too that was one of the main reasons they wanted to delay was don't excuse me you may miss an opportunity that's only available when you uh change the zoning and um if we're going to do that now then that took one of the main reasons for the delay uh so I think I think your team will be watching the that affordable housing work group team Commissioners questions on this comments um input does the drive to to limit neighborhood commercial only to Corners is it really just to avoid parking issues or I mean what is because from from what I have heard from others is that they would love to have neighborhood commercial but you know they may not own a corner lot and it seems like we're add you know providing an unfair advantage to business that happens to be on a corner lot we are limiting it to Corner Lots because they would have a limited impact on a block face in an existing neighborhood we are also using historic buildings that were commercial and it doesn't matter where those are so if it was a historic storefront that was in the middle of the block and you can tell that it was a historic storefront by the the Lo and scale of the building or that you can show it was at some

point then that is perfectly fine so yes it's for limited impact on the neighborhood it does have impact on parking it does have impact on a whole host of things but yes that's why it was starting with the corners at this point it also fits the pattern of where Commerce usually likes to go because you got two directions that people can notice you from We're I think proposing sort of a middle ground um we've had some questions from Council Members my next piece was going to be uh we're we're meeting with the council and have gotten a couple of questions and that was one of them both just helped me understand this New Concept and then also some hesitancy about um all Corners so there there may be a call um we'll see the council is at potentially tomorrow on that to limit it to Corners that have at least one minor arterial [Music] um that would be going the other direction from all Lots um so I think there's there's a good case to be made for both directions for maybe it's something we ease into too do you expect a lot of demand for Corner Lots I don't we don't expect we expect very little demand for Corner lots that are not on at least a minor arterial minor arterials or things like Beverly and so adding that language is not highly beneficial if there's already not any land demand but there are some arterials that if you were to add it not necessarily on corners or in the middle of a residential district so that would be and so you could ore some opportunities for

maybe a developer to want to do that which is why we might want to we're considering adding some Lang we're going to have a dialogue about adding some language to limit that scope is that what I'm hearing okay yeah I think um we I don't think uh we don't think it's going to happen as a compelling argument to allow something that you wouldn't want to happen so the question is if there is a demand for it is it a bad thing if it were to site there on and we're talking about whether it's mid block or on a two very small the intersection of 147th and 22nd or something like that yeah um you're right would that be a bad thing if it's not a bad thing then it's no problem to allow it and we'll see where the market decides we do expect for the most part if you want customers you don't want to be very hidden right okay that's fair yeah I mean that was my point like are we withholding somebody's ability but it doesn't sound like that's really the case right cool thanks did did the council report receiving any feedback on that or on that issue uh from the community not that I've heard but it could be not in the meetings we've been at okay right okay additional questions on that topic Commissioners okay couple more I think that relative to the definition of neighborhood commercial as proposed um given the bre of the potential uses I I would think pretty hard about where you allow it to happen um you know to me a small scale daycare family run daycare is quite different than um a vet clinic or a butcher shop if you are in a neighborhood whether it's on a corner or not um and let's just say there is sign ific demand for that butcher shop there's likely a pretty significant

negative externality for those neighbors as well so um I would say just think through not only what it could be but um the nightmare it could also be yeah we're trying so much of this is putting on your imagination cap and and thinking exactly of that what is the the worst outcome possible you don't want to plan to only the worst possible outcome interesting you mentioned butcher shop we had a market study um kind of a regular update thing that we subscribe to that goes through all the different categories of businesses and what we are over subscribed in and unders subscribed in relative to demand or how much capacity versus demand and butcher shop and specialty grocery was one of those that we were short on so that's uh if anybody's looking to open a business that's when apparently You' get some good demand in Everett can I ask you to teach that out a little bit more about what you're trying to say I think some business is generate um a level of traffic and or a wayist stream that would be undesirable to live next to so um relative to a vet clinic um sometimes somebody doesn't pick their animal up and they Yelp all night relative to a butcher store people don't pick their children up that's right but I think that um and that that happens right I think um that's normal um but I don't know that I want to live next to um a dumpster where the discards of a butcher shop end up um it will never I mean yeah it just we need to be thinking through um the kind of negative externalities we could create for others by allowing this to happen thank you yeah well we think of the the positive aspect our favorite Corner Store a nice place to go get breakfast um we need to think of those too um so do think there is location there are

performance standards like hours of operation or or we have a noise ordinance that that overlaps this then there's the uses are any of those maybe not appropriate and I know there's a definition of Clinic um in the code I don't recall exactly what that relates to in this circumstance um what would constitute as a clinic we were thinking more along the dentist or the doctor that was a small operation because you're limited at 3,000 square ft so but it's pretty much anything with a under it's it's medical surgical diagnosis under the care of a doctor but it doesn't have to be strictly a doctor so call that a medical professional with and with the definition of clinic in this instance also appli to some of the uses that are currently not allowed out on the street level in Metro Everett yes not the social services category but yes the clinic category which is all well there's a list of six or seven that have been Exempted from that but everything they would not be Exempted under this definition in a neighborhood commercial setting or they could be I I would recommend thinking through that and of course even small scale businesses are are subject to the Industry Safety and Health regulatory standards so like for example butcher Butcher Shop I would hope there are standards around a dumpster full of end Trails but surprisingly in some Industries there are fewer standards than you think so I think commissioner Vin's point is well taken could be a rough July in that

neighborhood yeah additional uh on that subject Commissioners in defense of butcher shops a quick question if we're allowing commercial neighborhood commercial that doesn't make the existing place non-conforming if it's on a corner right I just want to make and the 3,000 square F feet that is like the built structure used for the business not the lot size or like structure or the used footprint the the use footprint for the the business could be the ground floor and then there's other stuff it and then the outdoor that's the other one that's that's a potential for concern that you have a patio or something there is an administrative use permit for outdoor use so at least there's some discretion there what what an outdoor patio count then let's say it's we'll do what if question so I'm going to do I'll do the what if I I what if like a room or a brewery they you like to have the outside let's say as an example would the outside since patrons could go out there does that count as the footprint or not my comment would be no okay that's we should probably clarify that it was for the building was the 3,000 squet Cafe because you go outside yeah thought yep it would probably be tough to fit the indoor portion and still have a sizable outdoor patio but I'm not great on Dimensions play W yeah no that's what we need what are we using as the definition of small animal it's a not horses and stuff it's in code I think it is there's

a large animal vet and a small animal vet so I think they're commonly kept as household pets uh so great danes you which could be a small horse but lovable I think we're ready to move to the next topic okay that's uh just a couple others so again tomorrow is uh opportunity for the council to make amendments and it it doesn't have to be that formal but we gave them the early Council package we're looking for any uh major changes in Direction before we wrap up the full draft and and send it off to the state end of the month um looking specifically at things like the map and the policies in those uh key elements that we shared about a month ago so far we have heard of one around uh actually this is relates to the Planning Commission around West bucko Boulevard and the lowrise designation and the ur4 so there will be a motion to uh pull back the ur4 on West mleo Boulevard except for the Far Western end close to the city of mleo around where there is a current neighborhood business node some recent tow houses were built in the neighborhood business Zone and the sound view Deli across the street so from Sound Avenue um a pretty small area but that would be kind of a little node of more residential capacity but otherwise reverting the rest of that Corridor to Neighborhood residential and balancing that with um a couple extra floors of height on the two parking lots uh and the Machine shop for the old Cadman mine on Glennwood Glennwood and Kenwood so a little bit down over here and a little bit up over here is the one kind of clear amendment that we know of so far but we may have some more that

emerge tomorrow there have also been a couple of questions um SL concerns one of them is where on the zoning map the height limits don't kind of STI D step down from a higher level to a lower level in almost every case 15 story zoning is next to seven or four story zoning before you get to Neighborhood residential there are a couple um that have some funny stories around not funny at all uh just outliers um one of them is West Mall place just north of Everett Mall um it's existing zoning six floors I think and you are three um it is developed with an apartment complex we wouldn't expect to to redevelop anytime soon but at the same time like I said you want to plan for um the future that you want so questions about places like that where you have 15 story zoning directly next to Neighborhood residential um Silver Lake and along 19th where the lower density is in the county is another example of that so we're going to talk about or we have um passed along that we have in the Cod height is limited within 50 ft of the 15 story zoning so if your parcel store if your parcel that is zoned for 15 floors is next to Neighborhood residential then for 50 feet into your parcel you are have to meet the height of that zone 35 ft as currently there's also a 10 foot setback from those Zone boundaries and a type one sight obscuring landscaped buffer trees dense hedges and or a fence sufficient to block The View so those are um and then the 10-ft setback and the type one Landscaping buffer is also required for any interior

lot line um that abuts ur4 and ur7 zones so the other residential zones there's a whole table of adjacency and what different Landscaping height reduction and setbacks are required when one zone meets another that we can share with you um but at least that was some of the answer is that we do have measures to soften the transition from a high Zone to a lower Zone and then also if that isn't enough and this is not a good transition to have then that would be an opportunity to change the zoning on one side or the other yor when when will we have that table of Zone transitions shared with us I think in the next uh we're talking about that today how to structure going through the development regulations um I think during April would be the right time for that um it's going to be two meetings maybe three there's a lot of material to cover um we've covered a lot of it neighborhood residential for example about setbacks and height and all that stuff and you can see exactly how it's worded um there's other things like the Landscaping chapter we've not gotten into and we're going to have to find a way to get through that efficiently um but let's say April would be the time and when we talk landscaping and we'll have maybe a unit on Transitions and give you that material uh we talked about neighborhood commercial that was another question um there was uh question or concern about we haven't gotten to parking yet but we will soon um and this council member didn't want less than one vehicle or one parking space per household if it's more than four blocks from a Transit stop with frequency of 15 or so minutes so sounds like maybe okay with in those

non-transit adjacent parts of the city that one per unit would be okay um parts of the city that are adjacent to frequent Transit brt Light Rail and all of that might be okay for lower parking ratio so that seems like about where we were headed as well at staff which was a baseline of one and then reductions from there but um the council member uh if you remember with accessory dwelling units we picked up all day transit as a concept which I think we've had some we all agree that that is difficult to live without a car if you've got hourly buses or less um so making sure that the definition of Transit adjacent uh reflects a real level of Transit service will be part of that but otherwise that seems like about where staff was heading and we'll that'll also be an April thing and then in the neighborhood residential Zone a strong preference for requiring front doors to face the street and we do have that in our draft middle housing uh regulations those are mostly in 19.08 the chapter and that is in the early Council draft package and there's a require that requirement that buildings in the NR Zone must front either a public Street or shared yard space and must include a frontage type on each individual or shared building entry the frontage types are different types of porches dards Stoops that kind of a thing so I think again all of those seem like the the adjacency thing maybe there's an amendment there that might need to be made or maybe the features that we have to soften the transition are enough otherwise it seems like we're in about the right place this is one out of seven council members but uh we've heard similar things on a couple of these from other council members as well that's a little preview of what we'll cover uh tomorrow but all of those

things you've talked about here so thought it was worth CH the the front door thing Commissioners do we recall that conversation I think that had to do with the potential of building housing that was alley adjacent on the back end of property when we were talking about potentially segregating property is that am I remembering that correctly that that was how did that issue play into that uh preference that the front doors be facing the street we are being uh that fronting on an alley and life on an alley is something that I we think is something that we should look into as a city that there we have a lot of alley Frontage and we have a lot of rows of houses on the street that it makes sense that you build um there's room for more structures along the alley fire is requiring a walkway and that there be a clear orientation to the street um that's something that we'll need to cover we need addressing and there's historic historic regulations in some areas that require that the units be visible from the street for the most part what this is about I think is avoiding sideways developments where you have a driveway kind of thing Auto court and then units facing that and only that so when you're walking down the street you see big broadside and a driveway rather than front doors whether it's allowed to have something in the back or not I think that's where the shared yard would come in and that could be compatible with an alley loaded structure commissioner Shelby uh you had

a a question or comment oh I was uh Curious um back to the change in in West mtio um you it east of sound view are you going all the way potentially then to Dogwood where it becomes westo to the rest of so that I mean that kills that neighborhood center at Beverly Dogwood and maybe not and uh West mleo that that if you make that change that that's half the neighborhood center gone uh it goes to Glenwood okay so not all the way to that uh little mu4 cluster that's still in there so B be just the neighborhood residential um from Glenwood to S sound okay relative to Alley development um are alleys and Everett different widths there must be but I think for the most part about 25 ft okay um I agree with your approach to activating alleys I think that um long term I would rather see lots being split in half as opposed to flag lots for a number of reasons um I think both homes live better like that um and so if there's a way to thread the needle with the zoning that provides for um alley Frontage presence on the Alley um maybe if alleys are improved and if they're over a certain width um that's maybe a first way to activate the lwh hanging fruid and alleys and in theory can you have Frontage I guess Frontage and rear I don't know the name of it like I mean you could like you have it facing the the road but then you could also just have like a really nice back porch that faces the alleyway in like in a

current Adu right I mean you you just do both right to be comp okay I'm just making sure that I'm following this because I also think it's a good idea but we agree I love that for both of us that's it those were kind of the key issues that we've heard about in advance of tomorrow's council meeting we'll report back on the outcome of that okay uh anything further on those topics Commissioners okay then I think we're ready to move on to agenda item four uh healthy community element so oh you I'm sorry I should ask if there uh is anyone who wishes to offer public comment before we move on to agenda item four okay thank you okay we're ready to move on to agenda item four so healthy communities I guess is um an Alice and creation of sorts um when you look at that the growth management act I mean as a whole the whole point of the growth management Act is to create livable communities not to encroach on our natural resources as well as to use our resources wisely and to connect our communities together and when the Act was initially developed it probably wasn't thought of in terms of healthy Community but since then the whole aspect of a community being healthy and the ideas behind zoning being more integrated and mixed use has changed dramatically and so when you look at the origin at the 2016 plan for Everett there are literally two places where the health is mentioned one

is in a healthy environment and the second one is in a healthy economy we don't mention people at all and if we are not doing this for the health of the people in the city my comment is why are we doing this so there are a whole host of goals and policies that we have written into other sections of the plan our land use section our environmental section our climate change section our transportation section our Housing section our parks and open space section our Economic Development vment section are all aspects have all aspects of health because without all of them we still don't have a healthy community so what we were pulling together here was items that impact the health of the community in the global aspect of Health not just not being sick but what makes us a good place to live to breathe the air to be able to walk from A to B that is safe for us that we are taking care of those amongst us that are not necessarily able to take care of themselves and we are pro we are working with other agencies to make those things happen together so in putting it together and looking at it we've looked worked with our Community Development Department to come up with these six goals and um you've all read them um and then the 16 policies to enact them behind it so healthy communities is brought up in Vision 20150 in separate segments again it's very split out but not necessarily brought together as a whole entity the same thing with the

Metropolitan planning process and this snow omish County goals and then the state of Washington has its own Washington Health guidance which goes a little bit more into health and epidemiology than what we would have responsibility for here so um with that being said I am open to conversation as to where it came from how we put it together and to discuss in any any other questions you may have yeah I uh so in another role I serve on the pesan clean a agency's advisory Council as the tribal Nations representative and something that um I was very shocked to learn about a few month mons ago um was that Everett's considered Everett as a whole is considered an overburdened Community with regards to uh air pollution um so I I just wanted to to thank you for for including uh talking about overburden communities in goal hc2 but I was wondering if in goals hc15 um or hc6 if there's a way that we could kind of implement more of the language from the goal into the policies we could try um and just because I and I would love to see and I don't know if it's uh if this document is exactly the most appropriate place to put it in but um I would love to see it just somewhere in the document on uh talking about just kind of the um the unique challenges that Everett faces as one of the 16 overburdened communities in Washington state um that I I I just I feel like this isn't necessarily pointing out that we we as a city are particularly affected by air pollution and that would probably go more in the

text of the document rather than in I mean recognizing the the state of air quality in Everett currently and that we are working to improve it is definitely part of it and it is also reflected in the transportation goals too one question oh I'm sorry were you about to okay um one question I had about uh the goal section um there are several that reference Everett households having access to something that is a an element of Health um and and I don't even know if this would be necessary because there are other sections but what was coming to mind for me was uh non-card dependent access um and so I I don't know if it would be useful to articulate that specifically that because access uh to a lot of folks who have the privilege of a car um they don't think about non-card dependent and that is actually a serious challenge for some of our most vulnerable families is not just the access piece but the non-car dependent I can say that earlier Drass had it within the neighborhoods or within walking distance that got through edits and and it doesn't necessarily have to be walking distance but because this ties into the transportation element and like commissioner Atkins has pointed out just many times uh about access to howth park in particular um so this has to do with our public transportation as well which is why I I'm not sure if uh if this needs to be kind of hammered home in this section or if it's picked up in other elements of Transportation or I don't know Commissioners what do you think about I mean it can also be into this section that saying access means that you can

get to Transportation you can walk there you can use active modes to get there safely and that can also be in the write up leading to it so thank you because I I do think that it it needs to be underscored the idea of it like our dependence on cars is making us unhealthy and but if we're talking about Healthy Communities like making sure that people are able to walk is of course one of the most simple ways that we can uh increase people's positive he Health outcomes I think one of my general comments when I was reading through this was for that goal hc5 if felt like there weren't many policies directly addressing that goal as opposed to some of the other ones and so maybe that ties into part of the conversation too and similarly I did kind of do a little cross reference of the transportation element because I also thought that was a really important um element to make sure that we're making active Transportation a priority as that does really play into healthy communities and making sure we address that in all those different elements speaking of hc5 um is there a different word we could use other than affordable which hc5 access to Safe has access to safe and affordable physical activity yeah yeah the term affordable just seems odd to have when describing physical activity part of it I think part of it is a very real thing because we have a parks department that does not offer Recreation I mean so opportunities for people who are of limited means are really Limited in this jurisdiction and scholarships are even more limited because we have a parks

department that doesn't offer Recreation I mean in the par Parks plan one of the quote Recreation things that they highlight is the number of park benches and I was amazed quite honestly yeah I guess trying to get down to my picnic tables and park benches uh trying to get down to where where why exactly I feel uncomfortable with the the use of the word affordable I I guess I just don't like the idea that like the physical activity incurs a cost no matter what um and that putting affordable implies that like you're going to spend money on it um but I don't I don't have an alternative word to use up either um you could remove the word it doesn't have to be there yeah it's Suess really you think about justes it physical activity why does it affordable and even need to be that part doesn't even need to be mentioned really could just remove it well I guess affordability is a component of access it's also subjective yeah because affordable to what's affordable one is I mean even a$ five doll charge to like a $5 monthly charge for a gym that could be affordable but still be a barrier to access and so I just I I feel like I see what the the word having the word affordable there is meant to to be saying about how we approach the but I I just feel like there's a better way to to say that because ultimately at least from my perspective like we would want every ever resident to be within easy walking distance of free physical activity they could participate in yeah I think free definitely fits under affordable it is trying to make sure that not every uh opportunity is behind a pay wall so you have either whether it's Parks or Trails for walking running and that kind of thing or uh

swimming if we have if our our Recreation approach does rely on private uh Partnerships but part of that approach includes as I understand it set as sides and requirements for Community Access so it's uh does get to that I found where it came from um one of the key documents that we I think alisan mentioned is the Washington State plan for Healthy Communities under domain 2 environment mental approaches strategy one is increase access to safe and affordable physical activity where people work learn live play and worship I think I couldn't figure out how um physical activity and uh and places of worship connected so I did not include that piece there's also a reference to Tobacco free that seemed more detailed than was necessary for the comprehensive plan but otherwise that's where that strategy came from we tried as much as possible if things have already been vetted by Professionals in the industry to just pick that up um well if it's good enough for them it's good enough for me so I'll but if it's not hit in the right tone is it I mean it sounds like we agree on the concept that if you have limited means you should not you should still have the ability to find physical activity so it's more that maybe affordable implies that there is a cost rather than yeah okay I I agree with commissioner Atkins um I would also uh advise to remove where they work live and play I think the concept here is um we want um unfettered access to publicly available Outlets of activity and so um the implication of work live and play seems to fall on um potential developers

adding costs to projects that would otherwise deliver units and or Office Space that does a variety of things to the community in other ways so um by making these public spaces and prioritizing that I think it's implicit they are without cost um and barrier free so that maybe one way to address that yeah that that sounds perfectly like what I I was trying to get at um because when I think of um like safe and free physical activity I think of like well the the uh Park the the just an empty field near your house that maybe you have your kids go and play soccer at or whatever um versus putting the word affordable makes me think of oh well maybe the city's going to get a real good deal on the new contractor for the new swimming pool or something and Vin I only have to pay $5 a month to use the swimming pool because now it's affordable um I don't know those that's a good comment um I'm looking at the um the version of the materials that I was sent in the mail it's a fold out and it may have been revised since then but um I'm noting that um gold five and six are repeated in number it looks like there may be actually eight total goals rather than two5 and two sixes um Minor Detail But ultimately want to catch that um relative to goal the second goal six goal eight um ever is a city that is safe for all residents and visitors to me that's a very basic simple goal that I hope everyone can agree to it's unfortunate that it's listed last I think as it relates to goals in addition to reader fatigue I think it also telegraphs the importance um the

order does and so I would encourage you to prioritize these goals and make them as simple as possible I think we just did that relative to the access ability I recommend moving the um safety component up in the list um on uh goal number six the real six um we talk about minimal exposure to air pollution and toxic chemicals while I agree with that I might recommend broadening that to noise pollution um we have a freeway that runs through Everett and it's not LED it's not landscaped you can hear the freeway from just about every Point within Everett uh it's great for Mobility but um there's a noise component to that that wealthier communities don't have to deal with and so I recommend highlighting that as a priority in dealing um with noise pollution good catch I have I have two I guess piggybacks onto that um for the uh ever is a city that is safe for all residents and visitors would there be a way that we could incorporate that into goal hc1 um because it talks about ever is a caring Community built on trust inclusion and Equity where everyone lives in a socially and physically connected environment I feel like at some point in that sentence you could have something said where everyone lives in a safe Liv safely and a socially yeah um and then at least on the part about uh the real uh goal six people living and working in ever have minimal exposure to air pollution and toxic chemicals um I feel like goals are supposed to be aspirational and talking about a minimal exposure to air pollution doesn't exactly scream as this aspirational goal that we want to get to as a city it screams more of well the reality is there's going to

be air pollution that we're all exposed to regardless and so I I just feel like that's language that's more suited for the policies rather than the goal itself um specifically even just using the word minimal um like I I would would feel much better about it if the goal was people living and working in Everett um have no exposure to air pollution and toxic chemicals or or just or maybe exposure to those elements of um air pollution noise pollution as commissioner fin mentioned and toxical toxic chemicals at a level uh that is in accordance with what professionals tell us is healthy or what experts tell us is healthy or maybe defining it a a little bit more yeah because I'm sorry I didn't mean to jump on you oh I I was doing some research just on that and um I don't know if adding a Target I put on there uh meeting Who air quality guidelines by 2040 like setting a an actual I like goals I don't when I say a goal I actually like a solution I'm an engineer I like Solutions so I saw that the who meeting maybe their requirements by a certain time at least it's a we might not get there but that's the goal and is you know that it's kind of like Target zero you know you're never going to get to zero but you're going that direction so to maybe meet a Target and would be a international organization of air quality say because if if we're talking about the brand of Everett and you know I just shared earlier that like we are one of 16 overb overburdened communities for air pollution in the state it just feels like we're almost self dunking on ourselves to be like well no ever we're overburdened we have a lot of air pollution so our goal is to make it be not the minimal amount of air pollution um when these goals again they should be aspirational they should be

the city we we dream of not the city that we begrudgingly go well it's okay I agree with you I think what we were trying to get to is that there are some levels of air pollution that we have absolutely no control over forest fires yeah and honestly just us living in a large metropolitan area with mountains on both sides and water and inversions and all those wonderful things I really love commissioner Welch's suggestion to tie it to an actual uh scientifically accepted metric I think that is a wonderful idea if possible but is that picked up in the environmental component um this would be the place when we're we're dealing with exposure there may be other transportation and others we talk about production of of air hug just sound clean air agency regulates and has a strategic plan to um it's cut bmts and and to get electrification and there are measurable objectives exposure brings in uh did a lot of learning about this in the last couple of weeks i' also do some work with P sound clean air agency so kind of uh hear about this a lot micro scale um the amount of pollution that's in the air varies within a number of feet of a major arterial um we have within 500 feet of a roadway over 100,000 average daily Vehicles which is our freeways and Evergreen Way pretty much I don't think any of the other arterials get up to that level that is a threshold at which there are more noticeable or significant risks to health so what happens throughout the whole city is different than what happens right next to one of those major

corridors we were thinking about how to uh reduce exposure so there's we I would look to the transportation element and um for and outside of the city we obviously there's we're Limited in what we can do on the vehicle Fleet that's in Washington state over the next 20 years um but we can impact somewhat some of the exposure of it so you look to children and other vulnerable groups groups who are particularly vulnerable um and we were looking at child care facilities and wondering if that's something that should be restricted or play areas or Recreation we were talking about exercise and uh do you want to avoid exercise next door to a freeway probably but what if that's the only option we have a care at a train station you mean yeah right we have a child care shortage right now that is itself a significant problem with health um so those are some of the things that we were kind of balancing and I think we one specific thing that we proposed uh where we require common and open space and active Recreation as part of a development require about 75 to 100 square feet of that for per apartment in um multi-unit developments uh some of that is playgrounds and we drafted into code a requirement that that be as far from Evergreen Way or freeway as possible if that's where your site is um beyond that what what to do and we would love to hear some thoughts on it I do think that goals should be in the realm of achievable um I don't know what I would say to something like Vision zero which unfortunately we are not going to

hit in 2044 I don't believe is that do you want to start giving up on that you know it's we're trying to make these goals all what we intend to achieve and what we believe we have the ability to achieve and a zero air pollution everit is just not possible we don't control enough of it um and even if everybody was aligned I think that would be difficult so that's why we landed on minimize um we think it's more important to have kind of the measurable objectives that over time you have accountability towards your goals rather than having a set of goals that are maybe so um aspirational that they get ignored and it's easier to do away with them so couple of the things that we're thinking through on that but I strong agreement on the importance of the issue yeah because I just feel like minimizing or minimal that that potentially allows people in the future Beyond us um to look at it and go well we're doing the bare minimum or like not bare minimum but we're doing what we feasibly can to minimize it and that's it like there's it just feels like the the definition of minimal exposure could just be what we have right now um yeah I mean we read it as at every turn try to drive that number down with every um pool that we have the tough one diesel particulate pollution I think is the number one culprit in terms of air pollution it's chiefly trucks and other heavy vehicles um yeah just being next to the poort I5 just so many so many things culminate in vet like we're we are just going to be

in a place where we are going to have more air pollution than the communities around us probably regardless of what we do fuget sound cleaner agency does prioritize those overburdened communities that's one of their metrics and their goals is that they spend half of their time and energy on overburdened communities and that more reduction in pollution is uh felt in those communities so that there is on a regional scale we are getting some help there um obviously everything we do of just about the whole Community is overburdened everything we do is supportive of that I if anybody's interested in air quality and planning Belleview had a excellent report very accessible um synthesizes the science and there's links to other information Belle air quality and planning or something like that you'll find it on Google um and yet they didn't include it in their comp plan yeah that was the interesting thing and I don't you know not going to read all of bw's plan and code but I'm not sure what their answer was I don't have not found that any jurisdiction uh not that I've know how to search perfectly but have not found any jurisdiction that prohibits Child Care next to a freeway there are plenty of policies that say should try not to but nobody has said don't wonder if that's a function of just how limited access to child care is right now sure yeah there's a lot of parcels that are not on Evergreen Way but maybe not the right one Commissioners were there any policies that jumped out at you uh that you wanted to discuss

further I wanted to ask about hc9 and how that came to be um mentioning that specific demographic and pose the question of why maybe older members of our community which I think is a really vulnerable population a lot of times was not included um it was one of the many I mean yes older people are a vulnerable population and we probably should include them um and there probably is a way to add that not necessar on nine but create a a senior population I think relative to hc9 I think it's an important concept um I find the language a little odd encouraging young adults to find acceptance with mentors apprenticeships and Leadership opportunities we're putting it on the the people that probably need to be reached out to rather than making them do the reaching out well it's the school districts universities to provide programs to support and encourage young adults that's that's them it's not the young adults that to find it understood um I think there's a there's a multiple populations out there the the mentors not the mentees that also need to be encouraged and referenced in a goal like this okay so um on hc14 collaborate with Everett and mtio school districts other Educators to assist in promoting and accessing lifelong learning from Early Childhood to adulthood uh I would love to see that prioritized higher in the list and then hc12 support efforts to ensure the safety and well-being of unhoused people um I would broaden that

to um all residents and visitors not just the unhoused well as supporting thei prioritizing hc14 should we also include the community college in that school districts College University and Community Partners I was almost wondering if uh hc9 and hc14 might be able to be combined I know they they have slightly different elements but there are some very same elements in both of those I I would disagree with that I think um hc9 I I I see the point of it's trying to be made there and I think that there's particularly something to be said about including talk about like Community spaces or like third places or something for young people um is that that is a as we see the death of third places um and of course the rise of social media and whatnot uh young young people are increasingly feeling isolated there's all the additional mental health issues and a lot of that's is driven by how much clubs and associations have fallen how much their places have fallen and how for a lot of young people there's not really places for them to go where they're not expected to spend money and having been a young person you know you want to go find places where you don't have to spend money um and it's not uh you know even if even paying a few bucks is enough to just make you go no I want nothing to do with that place so not just to confirm so nine has a has a home with the um third place kind of a feel whereas 14 is more unlearning and educa yeah because I find the language around to find acceptance under nine just strange

and um well we're talking about mentors apprenticeships and Leadership opportunities that sounds a little bit more like jobby to me maybe that's something we can rear and separate there something around community building and then there's something around Education and Training yeah I mean Education and Training is in Economic Development so but I mean you can have a mentor that is not necessarily education based well and also like the mentors and apprenticeships like all that's going into building this this feeling of place for young people um and I I feel like that like fits in with the idea of just trying to make sure that young people have things to do and have places to go and and can build that Community because again I I feel like for so many young people their connection to Everett is it's no more than just the address they have on their uh for for where they're where they live uh and they don't feel that like sense of community Pride that I I feel like we we need to instill to prevent brain Trin um this is a simple question or silly question what is what are what is a real life example we're thinking of here for ht9 Brother Big Sisters okay that's what I'm wondering like what are we talking about other things like a teen center like things like Boys and Girls Clubs um there's uh of course Cocoon House is serving a very specific population but um The Hub uh they have the U-turn Center they have for um homeless or at risk youth to be able to go and use and have community and have mentors and have those kinds of employment opportunities in addition to just building that sense of community and so that would expand into early adulthood which I'm just going to pick a low number of 25 years old but I think I

can argue that it's all the way up to 29 um are we thinking of that demographic because I think there's a wildly different difference between 18 to 20 and 20 to 25 so I'm just trying to I'm trying to understand who young adults is is I don't want to not mention it because I agree it's not mentioned enough I I'm just trying to tease this out so I can kind of understand what we're going with at the end of the day I think we're being vague agree with it I I understand and I know that that's the point sometimes to be kind of vague but it's also the point to be able to come up with real life example so if somebody asks me I can tell them I remember reading not too long ago in the ever heral of this um I think he has sort of a mission involved but he teaches motorcycle repair and stuff to a whole bunch of Youth and he just sort of takes them under their wing and does this as part of his reason for being in a way and operates it out of a shop and it's just a safe place and I have a distinct memory of reading the article and thinking wow that was really cool don't know anything more about it no I mean I'm not a motorcycle repair person totally but also I don't I don't have my leather sorry not this time all right so by next year when the C's done um I felt like I heard somebody say we should combine 14 and nine I don't want to do that I want them separate I think lifelong learning in early childhood into adulthood is different than appr apprenticeships and Leadership opportunities okay I think that's all I got for now um I was wondering about HC 11 through 13 they seemen they're kind of Mill around on the same subject like even 11 and 13 really seem

almost the same thing yes except for if you're working with those groups they're very different and our community development folks would agree differently take a look at that though but we can look at them yeah I I do agree that I think 12 and 13 um could be could be combined I do feel like 11 there is a point to be made that like you know we're maybe 11's about trying to stop people from becoming unhoused yeah I agree I think 12 and 13 are the kind of the same thing almost 12's not doesn't need to be there 13 kind of covers that and then 11's on its own because of the difference in Mission I guess yeah I I like I I think it should be like 11 should be prevention of and 13's like treatment well two is 12 is for taking care of those that are on the street for whatever you know not if they while they're on the street making sure that they are safe so or living in a a situation where they do not have a fixed location because the the violence of those individuals geared towards them is a real problem in a whole host of communities and then 13 is for working to get them the services so though because are a little bit different and nuanced and one one thing that um kind of stood out to me is is that it was stated in hc4 to assist in the development of Community Gardens including on city-owned land um and that there's not really ever I don't think there's ever been a mention in anything in Everett uh with community

centers Everett does not have them uh and and so I I don't know if that's something that ever has ever considered assisting in the development of um it's a it's a real deficit in this city to have no community centers um because that has a lot to do with where children can play and where they can go to connect um and other cities certainly have them but Everett just has no network whatsoever of those things and I know that we partner with agencies like the boys and girls club like the YMCA to offer uh kids youths in the city access to those at some of them free um access to those types of things but um it's not a community center so I don't know that it needs to be included it's just something that jumped out at me that we are are uh saying we're willing to assist in the development of Community Gardens even using community-owned land but no mention of actual community centers or Community gathering places which community centers are usable by not just kids I mean families use them that sounds like some of the conversation or reminds me of the the conversation on HC 11 and no 9 and 14 and this third place that's a community center by another name or a different type of it but yeah we'll do some work around that um not going to be able to commit the city to building community centers unfortunately um but we can still do as as much as we can around that function Commissioners additional uh questions additional comments on the policies or the goals for healthy communities oh I have a was just while

we were talking about other things I was also looking at bw's uh report um what would it look like if we did an overlay for air quality next to the freeway at X number of feet and say you know like the building would need to have triple pane windows you know improved building envelopes High nve filtration for indoor air quality you know move the vents as far away from possible uh those kind of things those things you could take actions for future development they would incur cost I'm not you know saying that they wouldn't but you would improve indoor air quality for those folks and and limit you know what exposure they could inside structures as well uh we'll do some looking into that I have to imagine it's doable yeah I'll think about I'll think about the route I I believe that in the past we have we started tentatively using sea authority to require I think it was more around like window and noise control next to freeways but we don't do sepa for lots of uh State Environmental Policy Act for a lot of housing developments um so a code based way to do that would be better um yeah we'll do some thinking about that and commissioner's Last Call on Healthy Communities I had one I forgot I was going to mention when we were talking about physical activity another element to look at is the parks recreation and open space plan they do talk about uh trails and access to exercise in there

if I had a magic wand I would I would add a goal of extending the trail system from end to end rather than having having it uh terminate in the middle of the city there's a that's one it's in the pros plan yeah it is in the pros plan you're talking about the in urban trail yeah so there's a kind of a gap where it turns into Federal Avenue for a while I think we have um yeah as soon as we uh as it'll be a funding thing but that's the kind of thing you can usually get grants for um I thought I heard that we were going to start working on some Design Concepts to be ready for that uh we have a along the shoreline I think is a really good story for growing trail system through our Shoreline Management program and when you develop uh Shoreline and that's Riverfront or Waterfront you have to build your part of the trail there and um we're seeing development on the shoreline in a variety of places and those little sometimes they isolated segments that they're starting to get knitted together and I think it's quite likely that in the planning period we'll have uh nearly the whole Shoreline covered I think we got a grant through the recreation and conservation office for a segment underneath where us2 goes on the shore on the uh snow Amish Riverfront and that is close to connecting to the riverfront development Trail which itself is getting close to um the County trail system same thing on the North End so I think there is a lot of really good progress that I'm seeing uh year by year in the trail system and I think that in urban Gap will will get that too it's going to be the way to get to the train pretty soon that's right

okay I I think we're ready to move on to agenda item five uh engagement Administration and implementation so basically what we've done here is this is how to get stuff done I guess it's the easiest way to say it and what we need to do to communicate and to implement the plan and um I know you haven't had this for very long um we can read through it or we can give you a couple minutes or we can just leave it on the table and bring it up next meeting if there was something in particular that you wanted to draw our attention to uh that you thought might uh be something that the Commissioners would like to discuss specifically that that might be a good thing I think it's just common sense but that's my opinion on the subject take maybe take about uh 30 60 seconds and look through it and see if there's any piece of it that you want to address today and we can always marinate on it and and talk about it uh at our next meeting

two comments um one has to do with I guess the the timely processing of requests specifically permitting but I'm sure you could generalize that um I see that um goal seven it's not the goal the under the engagement section E7 uh talks about timely notification I don't see the timely um component referenced anywhere else but I think that capturing efficient processing of applications um that's important for you know the economic health of our community it is in Economic Development okay all right me I was I was going to look in design and development I think you're right Economic Development economic development is where it is once we have everything we're going to do um a a balancing of so many of these it's like could go in lots of different elements it's possible that we have duplicates hopefully nothing that's inconsistent maybe better ways to organize it so at the before hitting print will make sure that things are both cross referenced so if you're picking up this element you see see also this other U element in this policy in there the other concept and maybe it's embraced in here in some way but um I keep thinking back to um our discussion on the Park District and I think ultimately um uh my fellow planning Commissioners um they bought the idea that there was a required choice between providing that product and where it was cited um that they had to they had to take both for me there was zoning in place that already dictated where I thought that project should be cited um not denying the fact that it was an important use but rather we' already

made a series of community decisions about where projects like that should go um when it comes to implementation is Administration um how do we emphasize in the goals that um while it's okay to revisit decisions that have been made we shouldn't bring them into question every time somebody proposes a project durability of decisions I think it does a couple of things it potentially undermines the process and others willingness to participate in the future because what's the point if it gets thrown out when some asks the question um the other thing it does is I think it has a potential impact on property values and um Outsiders interest in making long-term investment decisions if uh plans change frequently yeah that is a tough one um it certainly is uh and by Design things like the comprehensive plan are supposed to be durable and hopefully what we get out of this process lasts for a long while ever is in a period right now of a lot of rethinking uh and this zoning code has changed too much uh in the process of changing too much in a six-year period from brething zoning to and Metro ever to rethink zoning to uh the periodic update and everything so I'm hopeful that we have some more durability to this and that we plan it in a place that's going to work for a long time has broad acceptance um that concept of flexibility versus predictability and durability is so difficult because when a good idea comes along and um not going to debate the park district but other things um is just so hard to say well we already made that decision so don't come back for a while um but I wonder if we

could find ways to be have more commitment to aspects of it while allowing that reasonable flexibility in other ways I think the comprehensive plan versus the development regulations once we're done with this and it's adopted it's hands off for at least one year that's not very long in planning terms but um we're hoping that it's mostly hands off for 10 years and then maybe even little tweaks this is a pretty big period of adjustment here before this we had pretty much the same zoning from 1956 to 1990s or 2010s additional uh questions or comments on the engagement Administration and implementation piece Commissioners okay we have one final opportunity for public comment Ayan do we have anyone online who would like to comment okay with that we have I'm sorry did you have a were you reaching for your okay okay uh we have completed our agenda