Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

should just be able to just click undo that tab. So, close that tab that's open there. Yeah, perfect. That should do it. All right. Ready?

Okay. I'm gonna Good evening everybody. I'm going to call the April 22nd meeting of the Lacy Planning Commission to order. We do have a quorum in place. We do have two members that are absent, Judy and Robert. And so the first thing we need is a reading of the land acknowledgement. And I'm going to ask Kyrion to do that, please. We the city of Lacy are on the ancestral land of the tribal people of the Treaty of Medicine Creek, including the Nisquali Indian tribe and the Squaxen Island tribe. We acknowledge and remember those tribal people who had not recognized today who were absorbed or relocated into other tribes for survival. We recognize the ancestors and their descendants who are still here. We recognize and respect the tribal people of the treaty of Medicine Creek as a traditional stewards of this land since time in memorial and their role today in taking place uh taking care of these lands in perpetuity. We recognize and have the responsibility to call attention to the histories of dispossession, force removal, and abridged treaty rights that allowed our nation, state, and city to develop as they have today. We recommend that community members read the Medicine Creek Treaty of 1854.

Thank you very much. Okay, first up is an action item, approval of the agenda. So, I'd be looking for a motion to second. move. Second. It was Tanya, then Aaron. Okay. Moved and seconded to approve the agenda. All in favor? Perfect. Okay. And then the April 8 minutes. Be looking for a motion and second on those. Motion to approve. I'll second that. Okay. So, Jennifer then Kieran. Okay. Okay. Moved and seconded to approve the April 8 minutes. All in favor? I.

Perfect. Okay. We have no members of the public present tonight for public comment. Any commission member reports. Oh, and Spencer's missing the name. I'm sorry I didn't list that. Just I believe today is Earth Day. So, happy Earth. It is. Happy Earth. Happy Earth. And you know, city of Lacy and the city of YM have a very strong partnership on Arbor Day and every year they exchange trees. So, have we done the YM thing yet? I think it was on a council agenda. I'm not exactly sure the night, but it's either it happened or it is about to happen. Um, yes, it still exists. So,

awesome. Well, I know Yelm presented their tree. I don't know if we present. Okay. Y I I do not know the answer. Okay. But that was cool. Yeah. If you go out, there's some trees we get point out in the parking lot and I can say, "Yeah, those were here in the council chambers once upon a time." Okay. Uh, department report.

Sure. I've got a few things tonight. Um, so we have some upcoming events that I wanted to make planning commission aware of. Um, if you'd like, um, between now and our next Wednesday meeting, we can fill your Wednesdays between now and then with with events. So, next Wednesday, uh, the 29th, there is, and hopefully you've already got invitations for this, a advisory board recognition event that's at the senior center. Um, hopefully you're able to attend this. This will, um, obviously be a recognition of your service for on the planning commission um that the city will be doing. But in addition to that, uh, Rick Walker, city manager, will be doing a state of the city um, presentation. So, uh, if you've been involved long enough, maybe like Kyrion has, the city manager used to come to all of our advisory boards and provide kind of a state of the city discussion about this time every year. And I I think now that the city has so many advisory boards that it's probably logistically not feasible anymore for the city or for the uh, city manager to do that. And so this will um serve as that purpose to kind of give kind of a little bit of an overview of of some of the major initiatives happening at the city right now. Um and then as well the the advisory board chairs will be providing some some information on what their advisory boards are and their role in the city and chair Gavin will be providing that for on behalf of planning commission. So, um it'd be great to um hear from from Jeff and the other chairs as far as what the roles of their committees are and some of those major things that those um other advisory boards are working on. So, um hope to see you there. Um and again, that's uh 5:30 on April 29th.

And I would love to see as many of you there as possible because I want to recognize you in front of the community. I plan on being there for you, Jeeoff. Thank you.

Great. And then the other one, so so that's next Wednesday. The Wednesday following in two weeks, there is uh what's called a short course on local planning being held at the um Tom Water City Hall. This is uh Wednesday, May 6th at 5, I think it's 5 to 8:00 p.m. So, it is a rather large session. So, if you're not familiar with the short course on local planning, it's essentially kind of an introduction or let's say kind of a planning 101 course on planning in Washington state, an overview of the growth management act and some of the other um laws and regulations that that apply to um planning in our community. I think it's put on jointly with the Department of Commerce and the Planning Association of Washington. uh if you have the opportunity to attend that I sent you an email about it a little earlier today and there is a registration with with a link there that you can click on and register. There is also an um it's a hybrid meeting so it will be at some water city hall but then also on Zoom I believe as well. So if you're able to attend uh that would be great. I I would um really suggest it especially for our newer members. Um this is a a good learning opportunity. Um, we'll give you some good background and overview of of planning in the state. Any questions on either of those two items? The last thing I'll mention is that um myself and our director, Vanessa Dolby, we're headed to on Friday, we're headed to Detroit to attend the national planning conference. Um, uh, that'll happen basically through this weekend. We'll be back on Tuesday. So um for our next meeting I'll for the department report I'll give a little bit of a insight into what you know we found at the national planning conference. I've you know my 25 years of being a a city planner I've only attended the national planning conference for one day and it

was in Seattle in I think about 2015. So, um I've never had the opportunity to attend a a full conference before and so it should be interesting and um you know Detroit is an area that's certainly had its challenges and so it'll be interesting to learn more about about all those things. I don't know how much of it be applicable to to Lacy. I think, you know, especially I remember in the economic crisis in 2007 and 8, you know, you could have bought property for, I don't know, $500 for a lot or something like that in downtown Detroit and you know, um, for those that were around, yeah, our local economy wasn't doing so well, but we were not as impacted here as other places around the nation. So, it'll be interesting to see how they're how they maybe pulled out of some of those e economic issues that they've had, you know, 15 years ago or so. So um so with that that I'll bring some information back on on that for the next department report but that's it for me.

Nice. So now a lot of those conferences like that especially national conferences will have like a large city sessions and then they've got medium city and small. Do do they do that?

Yeah they've they've got different tracks. So they've also got like transportation tracks and housing tracks and those kinds of things. And so there are so many sessions that are offered that you can really tailor your schedule to kind of fit more for what you know we would be you know experiencing here in Lacy. And the other thing will be I think I'm doing two mobile workshops as well. So actually getting out and doing um you know different different um site visits and tours and those kinds of things. And one of them that I signed up for is um redevelopment of an old shopping center. Oh,

so we were just talking about Yeah, just talking about South Sound Center before the meeting started. Um and so you know, obviously we've got we've had a lot of plans for the redevelopment in that area for a number of years. Um and uh you know, it'll be interesting to see what's occurred there and see if we can learn any lessons from that. So yeah, definitely trying to tailor things to be as specific as possible for, you know, my job here rather than, you know, because Detroit, the major cities, you know, are much different scale than we are and have much different resources and different issues than we do. So

So just as an aside here, would the report out from that conference be an appropriate new business agenda item for a meeting? Um I I think let's just keep it under department report for now. Um I'll I don't know exactly what I'll have yet. Okay. And I don't want to overcommit and overpromise a full agenda item. Um you know it may just if it does what I'll do since I I do the agendas anyways. If it looks like it should be its own agenda item, I will make it that.

Well, I am open to that. So there you go. I'll live with your judgment. Okay, thank you. We have no public hearing tonight. We have no new business. So, old business, we're going to hear from the great haunts about three things here. So, I'm going to turn it over. Wonderful. I'm going to start by sharing my screen if there's a way to make that larger. Make it a little bit bigger on my end as well. Ryan, do you know how to make this? We can work with it.

Can you slide that over to the right a little bit? Or that that view? Maybe hit view on the upper right and see what other there.

Um, so yeah, as far as material that we're going to run through, uh, this is, uh, information that you guys have been briefed on in the past. Uh, and really actually as far as tonight's meeting, I'm just going to run through everything that's in your packet, uh, so we can do it together. Um, but at a high level, uh, we're going to cover, uh, a range of different state legislation, uh, having to do with parking, daycare centers, and the conversion of existing buildings. Uh, all of this has been, uh, statemandated in the last couple legislative cycles, uh, with a, um, implementation date of June of this year. Uh so we're really just going through and taking that language and uh tweaking it to the degree that it will fit within our code. Uh but in large part it will remain as written within the state legislature or state legislative code I should say. Um but yeah, so tonight is kind of a a review of those draft changes and then looking forward the next time that we're going to meet on this is going to be on May 27th for an opport for a public hearing for the community to also provide their feedback on it. So we have a couple different rounds of review kind of scheduled out here. this being one of them, the public hearing, and then after that, we can get back together again and kind of take all that information that we've gathered and and see where the code's at and make some final changes before we kind of get to that final version of it. Um, but for the purposes of tonight, um, I just wanted to show these are the primary bills uh that we're responding to as part of this. I'm not going to read through them all, but they are in your packet. Um, I don't actually think unfortunately uh your staff report from this time around those links worked, but they are all linked in the first uh staff report as part of the cycle. So, you should have access to the actual bills as they're written. Um, but with that, I'm going to jump into uh one of the C categories here. I'm going to do it in a little bit of reverse order

because they get kind of simple to progressively more complicated as we go through. So hopefully we'll start with the simple stuff and then we'll get into the more uh complicated stuff as we go along. But daycare centers was one of the areas that we had to do some updates in large part. Uh there are a few different definition changes uh the state created. So those have been implemented within our chapter 1665 which is our daycare facilities chapter. Um those are shown here on the screen but then also in your packet. Um, so there's some red lining that's going on there just to really align our code, lacy code, with what was required at the state level. Uh, we also have two new uh sections within this chapter, occupancy load calculations and design guidelines. Those are really for our building department uh so that they know how to navigate and respond to uh daycare center applications when they come in because there are some new requirements at the state level that we have to respond to there. Um, and then the other part of this document really has to do with all of the other chapters that we have that reference daycare centers and it's just making sure that those chapters are consistent with the state level mandate. So, uh, we call out low density, moderate density, high density, quite a few different chapters that all have daycare centers listed within them and we're just making sure that those chapters are consistent with the changes that we're making here. Do you want to just clarify a little bit the really the the genesis for this is the state legislation that requires us to allow daycare centers as a permitted use basically in every zone across the city with some limited exceptions.

Yep. Uh the two caveats being light industrial zones and open space institutional zones where we are still required to allow them but through a conditional use permit. So, um, yeah, they are now a a permitted use in all of our different zones or a conditional use in those two. Maybe you can clarify this in the open space institutional zones, they are already allowed as a permitted use and so we're not changing that. So really the only change would be as a conditional conditional use and light industrial. Correct. Correct.

Any questions about that from anybody? And I just want to say here that all of those bills, so you can search real easily for the legislature website and it is really easy to navigate. I mean, the first page that comes up, type in a bill number and and if you're a real geek like me, all of the iterations of that bill that have happened during the session are there. So anyway, it's a real easy site to work with.

Wonderful. Well, that covers it for daycare centers and the different chapters that we're going to be updating in response to that. U if there's no other questions, I can move into our parking code updates. Um for this one, uh Jennifer is also working on some uh missing middleinfill housing legislation that does touch on this chapter a little bit. So, we're actually incorporating her work into this chapter uh specifically in the table farther down and I'll get to that in a second. But so two parallel tracks that are advancing different uh updates in response to state level uh requirements that are converging in this document here. So we'll get to that. Um I do want to call out right out of the gate we are getting rid of or we are proposing I should say to get rid of the intent statements. Uh we're slowly doing that within all of our different uh zoning designations and chapters. Reason being is that we want the intent statements to exist more within our comprehensive plan and the actual code to be very kind of direct and what you can and can't do and what the conditions are. So intent statements aren't really a good fit within our municipal code. So that's what's taking place there. So that first section has been uh deleted. Um if that moves it on your end be able to see here. Okay. Info parking. Yep. So then scrolling down, uh there's some light uh just text additions to reference the updates that we did, but we already had language in there that now is expanded upon based on that legislation. So just making sure that everything kind of references back on itself. So that's notation that you see there. Um and then this uh there's a TDM travel demand management um section that again is more kind of in that intent style language. uh there's no hard requirements or or conditions applied within that. So we removed that paragraph there because again it's kind of more of that aspirational think about

these things but no real directives in that. So trying to get just down to the the base language as much as possible. Um those are all kind of topics we already talked about or referenced but yeah I think the the majority of the updates uh as far as as far as this chapter is concerned is within table 16 T13 which is where it lists all the different uses and then their uh optional minimum requirements then maximum requirements then bicycle requirements. So, a lot of the legislation that addressed parking uh reduced uh the uh optional minimums that we're allowed to require. Um so, a lot of what you see here, uh I did go ahead and remove things like billiard halls and bowling alleys. I don't know that we need a special call out for those. Um but other things like commercial space uh our optional minimum that we're allowed to require now is dropping from a three to a two per uh 100 thou or a thousand square feet of space. Uh and that's that's pretty consistent throughout here. You see a couple different uses. Um so that's that optional minimum column here. And then moving over to bicycle uh required bicycle parking spaces. We did up those numbers a little bit in a corresponding move. Uh whenever we were reducing the number of uh parking spaces that were required, we did expand the bicycle parking in those situations a little bit to kind of offset some of that lost uh transportation storage, however you want to phrase it, uh opportunities there. Um in practice, I honestly don't know that I anticipate a whole lot of change as a result of this. A lot of times developers are going to come in and build the right amount of parking for whatever it is that they're uh building. So we don't necessarily see a lot of people trying to push the envelope in

one in either direction on these. Um but now now our numbers are adjusted a little bit. Um, one area that I did want to call out within this table, um, within the bills, it does create opportunities for us to require designated spaces for, uh, drop offs, waiting spaces, or carpool stalls. um that is not something that we necessarily went in and injected into this, but if we're looking through these uh uses and some of those conditions may make sense and more of kind of a temporary parking situation, that is something we are allowed to add. Uh one good example of that is actually our daycare facilities, which I think is on See if I can find it here. There's our middle housing section. I think I blew right by it then. Sorry for anybody that's watching from home. Um,

it was right at the top like the right there in the middle.

Okay. Yeah. So, uh, kind of a combination of our parking updates and our daycare requirements. We're no longer allowed to require parking spaces for daycare. Uh that said, we are able to require designated drop off and loading zones for that type of use because there's a lot of people coming to and from that style of facility over the course of a day. Um yeah, and typically students won't be driving. So there's not a need for storing those vehicles there while daycare isn't typically in session. So that's a good example of how that could play out in practice. Um, but I'm going to keep scrolling here because I do want to identify a few other updates that we are required to work into this chapter. Um, there are a range of uses and I did highlight this last time that we were looking at this uh that we're no longer allowed to require any form of parking for. And again, that's us requiring it. That's not to say that these uses won't choose to do it on their own, but as part of our code, we are not allowed to require um the listed uses here to have parking. Uh, and those uses include things like uh residences under uh 1,200 square feet, uh commercial spaces under 3,000 square feet, uh any kind of affordability affordable housing project, uh ground level non-residential spaces in mixeduse buildings, uh and then existing an existing building undergoing a change where uh residential units are essentially added to that building. uh new construction or retrofit of existing buildings needing passive housing requirements. And we will get to our definition section in a little bit where we do define some of these things because they are new terms for our code. Um and then modular construction and mass timber construction. All three of those are new terms that we now will have to allow for and then define. Um but we'll get to that in a second. And then uh the following parking

configurations also apply to residential uses. And then there's a range of scenarios primarily having to do with the addition of residential uses where uh when residential uses are going into an existing building, we're not allowed to require additional parking as a result of that addition. Uh there may well be parking already in place as a result of whatever that building is currently or initially. But through the addition of residential uses, we're not allowed to stack on and require additional parking as a result of that. Um 916 plan review. Just a few more um requirements uh related to uh when and how we're allowed to require parking. Um on this one, trying to remember. Yep. So, this has to do with proximity to transit stops that meet certain criteria. We don't actually have this example within our city today, but looking forward, there might be a scenario where we have bus rapid transit where this would come into play. So, it's bringing that code into our bringing that language into our code today in anticipation of that going forward. Um, and I think that making sure Yeah. And so that's everything for parking related updates uh that we're looking at. Um are there any questions or thoughts on any of that stuff that we ran through that you guys want to talk about?

Start with Jennifer. Do you have any questions? Uh no, no questions. I like the pragmatism, freedom, and flexibility that your edits represent. Uh letting demand dictate the development with the option of modification scenarios being accessible. Uh yeah, I think that's that's a great track we're on. Uh thanks for doing it. Okay, Erin. Uh yeah, in the in the table, um I'm just kind of curious what where that came the what the bike the bicycle spots how how it came the we're tying bicycle spots to number of auto stalls or or like there's a few of them here.

Yeah. like commercial like the under commercial section, you know, one one bike per 15 auto stalls. Um just thinking like to provide flexibility going forward if we like not you know looking looking at a city that's moving toward less and less parking or fewer parking. I you and you and Jeff have mentioned before developers are going to build what what where the demand is, but say there's a future where there's no parking spots and u maybe just putting like hey here's a minimum number of bicycle spots and um but or yeah I guess my original question I was kind of curious yeah was that in code already or was is that just sort of a legacy uh uh part of this table? Yeah. So it was previously in code uh before this update uh it was there was a requirement of a minimum of three parking stalls for commercial uses and then tied to that we had uh one bicycle parking per 20 stalls of vehicle parking was the requirement.

Uh as part of this update our optional minimum dropped from three to two. So there are less required stalls. Um but in response to that, we wanted to up the number, make sure that that ratio kind of remained the same. Uh so we're upping the bicycle parking requirement, uh factoring in that lower um vehicle stall parking requirement, if that makes sense.

Yeah. So that's that's exactly right. So as you know, vehicle parking kind of goes down, we don't want, you know, because this is an older table built on, you know, the the idea is the more auto stalls, the more bike stalls you have. And then so if we're going to update it to reduce the number of parking stalls, we didn't want the the converse to happen where you reduce, you know, standard parking stalls and then you also at the same time end up reducing the number of bike parking stalls. So this is a way to be able to kind of rectify that and say, okay, we're going to actually increase the minimum of bicycle parking stalls required. I will say and I think for probably the the purpose of maybe a future work program item is that our bicycle parking standards are relatively antiquated um and a lot of them are essentially kind of a covered bike rack is really if you think about a a um bicycle parking stall and and you know in this day and age and especially I'll say like maybe even in a more kind of multif family housing context do people want to park a bike out in the rain or you know out out in the open and you know lock it up no they're going to, you know, either bring it inside or, you know, so I think it's it's time to for us to take a more modernize our bicycle parking stalls. It's it's outside of the scope of what we're able to do with this update. So, for the time being, we will, you know, um make these edits to kind of up our biking bike parking styles where we can, but long term, I think, especially because in the next year or two, we will have an updated pedestrian and bicycle plan for the whole city. is that I think we could take a hold and get our bicycle parking standards and wrap that into part of the um pedestrian bicycle plan update and look at okay is are these stalls the number of stalls that are required is that the right amount the configuration of these stalls should we look at other things like like lockers or um indoor facilities in certain larger contexts and office complexes and multif family so stay tuned on that front at this point this is kind of a

minimal touch to this section without getting too deep into like changing our entire bicycle parking code. Yeah. The focus is the the auto parking. So like Okay.

Yeah. And and those standards came in when I was on city council and it was because of a legislative mandate that now you must include bicycle parking stalls in your planning. So um that's probably antiquated at this point with current thinking. But, you know, I was going to mention what you were saying about indoor storage. So, took a tour of BART a few years ago when I was at city council and one of the cool things that they've got is at some of their stations they've got actually all of their No, not all of them. They've got these rooms where you can park a bicycle and you sign up to get access. They're they're card locked, but they also have in these rooms stansions that have bicycle tools on them that are on tethers on on steel tethers. So if you suddenly need to do a repair or something like that, you've got tools right there. It's pretty cool.

Okay, Ellen, do you have anything? That's a good point. And uh yeah, just was just thinking the other day, group of kids were on their electric uh bikes and some of them were on their scooters a long way from us growing up in our BMX days. So, right, got a lot of uh lithium batteries. So, something the city might It's just a trend that's it's moving towards. I mean, I had a a dozen kids go from multiple neighborhoods go through my neighborhood and not one single one was on a Mongoose or a BMX. They were all on a electric bicycle or scooter and those things move pretty quick. Yes.

Um and so with lithium batteries or whatever the battery technology getting wet weather I don't think they'll maybe have covered but it's just something that I've seen in the bigger city. I just got back from DC. All those all those are pretty almost normalized now in the big big city. So yeah moving that way. Thank you Tanya. I just had a question for hotels and motel. I see that it got categorized under retail. How did how did that get there? Just curious. So, for the specific to the bicycle parking component,

yeah, so that one wasn't changed as part of this update. Uh why that decision was initially made, I'm not sure. Um but with this new language, it's pretty much anything that is a commercial in nature. Okay. Uh has a pretty much a flat uh per thousand square feet of space uh you know you're allowed x number of uh parking stalls. Okay.

Um so while we do kind of call it out as unique here as a specific use uh in practice based on the code that's coming down um they're all pretty much the same. So it it's easier to find those because sometimes when you're thinking of hotels and motel that's not cleanly identified as commercial. So, it's just a way for people to actually find that use when they're looking for it specifically, even though really it just falls under that umbrella category of commercial along with most of these other uses. Okay, great. Thank you. Yeah, Karen. Oh, good. Thank you. Okay, I do have something on the drop off zones

if we haven't already. Can we do a check-in with the council on what their vision of that would look like before we send a recommendation to them and they kick it back? Yeah. Uh, and are there specific uses that you had in mind where you're have any in mind? I want to I would like to have some guidance from them to where they would like to see that installed maybe what uses they want us to emphasize so that when like I said when we send a recommendation we get what they want into it. Can you go back to the section on drop off so maybe we can go through that a little bit?

Yeah, I just have it actually as a note right here. So within the legislation, uh most of it is dedicated to you shall not exceed this number of stalls for these types of uses. Uh at the end of the the bill, they did uh put a little note in essentially that said that while you are limited on just traditional parking stalls and how many you're allowed to, uh you are allowed to make conditions for uh uses. So drop off stalls, uh waiting spaces, so like your 15 minutes stall kind of thing. Um, dedicated carpool stalls is another one. And then, uh, and I will call out that, uh, ADA accessibility stuff is not impacted by any of these changes. So, all of those regulations are still in place and are not going to be updated as result of anything that we're talking about. Um, but those are also a different type of parking that is not impacted by these limitations that we're now putting into place. So, I'm I'm wondering if maybe we can look at some other jurisdictions and what some model codes might have for for drop off spaces and those kinds of things. I think especially in the areas that are like reducing or like substantially or eliminating parking where drop off is going to be much more important and I think that was the intent of

um the the legislature on on this section. So, um, you know, with the public hearing draft, we can come up with some language or some, you know, model code that might work for for drop off areas and and, um, I think go from there rather than checking with the council and coming back. I think maybe we can start with it like kind of, you know, looking at some best practices and those kinds of things because I think at this point, if we were to take this to council, they're going to open up the whole thing. They're not going to talk about my hesitancy as what what kind of like what that opens up. It's better in my you my my recommendation my experience is is if you go to them with kind of an answer and say hey this is what the plan commission is recommending what do you think then they have better feedback than like

uh drop off areas discuss and give us direction back and it's like oh boy that could open a little bit of a you know be a little bit of an issue for timing and those kinds of things that's actually a fair comment that would be too open so maybe we can use that yeah I think just so that we have some sort of guidance on what we want to put together. Sure. Yeah, we can do that. For sure. Yeah, I did put a note down at the bottom of this table for senior housing. Uh that might be a good fit for those types of uh kind of temporary parking, drop off, pickup, that kind of thing. Uh so we can kind of explore that code language as it relates to maybe senior housing.

There we go. Yeah, I'm looking at my screen over here. we've got extra things going on. Um but yeah, and then also specific to senior housing, I will note um that there's additional allowances for uh staff and visitor parking, designated parking. Um so there are some unique callouts for different types of uses that we can explore if we feel like our uh maximum and minimums aren't really quite meeting the target that that we're looking for. So something to think about. Um but yeah, as far as the public hearing, it's again just another forum to get additional feedback from the community so that we're as kind of taking in as many different perspectives as possible before we kind of start drilling down on exactly what the legacy version of this looks like.

Perfect. And you know, in like you mentioned and I've mentioned many many times, the development community is full of a bunch of smart people. They want customers, right? So they know what there's what they need to do to attract customers. And that's why you see most of your medical facilities have a drop off lane. Most of your daycare centers have a drop off lane. Right. But yeah,

and again just to say this is while we are limited, it's not necessarily limiting what a developer can do to really meet their customer or visitor demand needs. So there's still quite a bit of flexibility within this code to really accomplish those goals. Um but yeah, any other questions on the parking related updates that we're covering? Okay. Uh and then from there, and I really am going from 431 here as far as my attachments. So, oh, and that is hidden behind the window. Oh, boy. There we go. Okay. Uh, now we're moving into general provisions. So, chapter 1603. Um, this chapter is kind of a catch-all for a lot of things that don't fit cleanly into one zoning designation or one part of our code or another. Um, and then a lot of the additions that we're actually adding to this come from a bill that is kind of also other bill requirements that didn't cleanly fit into either the parking bill or the housing bill. Um, so there's quite a few kind of individual entries in there that that uh are a little bit of a scattershot if you will as far as where they're coming from, but to the best of our abilities, we tried to fit them into the Lacy code based on what the what the requirements were and how how they best aligned with the code that we already had in place. Um, so with that, um, there's a range of different additions that we're going to be covering here, but the first one, scrolling down, so is within uh, our 160340 exemptions category. Uh so while each zone has some kind of criteria specific to that zone, there are some exemptions

uh that kind of apply across all of our zones that are listed within this section here. Uh so we're adding a little bit at the end of this section. So in exemptions uh section C, uh we now have a facade modulation and upper level setbacks are not required uh are not a required condition of permitting the following types of residential projects. And again, this is something that we ran through in the last time they were talking about this within our presentation in the slides, but um the listed uses here. So, affordable housing, uh new construction meeting passive housing requirements, the retrofit of existing buildings meeting passive housing requirements, the conversion of existing buildings to housing or mixeduse developments that include housing, modular construction, and mass timber construction. So again, there's some new language in there that we're going to be covering in our definitions. And I will note that this is when it's going into existing buildings. So those existing buildings will have already had to have met uh previously are either uh uh modulation requirements or upper level setbacks. Uh this is most often when uh it's taking something is being added to an existing structure. So, uh, there's not a significant level of concern, I guess, that we have around a lot of these conditions as are listed here. And I I'll just add as well that for the most part, except for a slight RCW reference there that we did add, is that this this let language all come straight from the RCW. Like we could in our code just simply say meet the RCW for conversion of an existing building for residential purposes. Um, but because the way we use our code is we like to, you know, at the counter or in a presub or something like that, you know, refer to what the requirements of our code are and and hand them to people and say, "Here it is." Um, that doesn't work well when we just say, "Well, just meet the RCW." And

so the these things come essentially straight from RCW will be put into city code for our application, but it's not something that we have a lot of difference on. Like these are pretty much just requirements that we're mirroring in our own code. But I'm happy we're not being passive aggressive. That's it's also Yeah. Go look over there.

We also met with our current planning staff and our building staff uh and met with them to find out what the best kind of blend of referencing the RCW versus having it in our code is. And for day-to-day operations, meeting with people at the counter, uh this was kind of their request as far as how we navigate uh those requirements. So, it really is in large part, as Brandon said, a copy and paste. The downside to that is that if the RCW was to change in future bill amendments, you know, that we would then have to come back and retroactively change our code to reflect it. So, that's the downside. Um, but, you know, we would rather have this be an open book um assignment than one that's closed.

Well, I think there's a better service to the community.

Yeah, agreed. Uh within this section we also have uh criteria. So within commercial, mixed use and residential zones uh when new housing is proposed within an existing building. And then there's a range of criteria here that we now have to adhere to. Um I'm not going to read through all of it. It is in your packet. Uh we will have multiple opportunities to review this. Uh the two areas that I did want to highlight though as part of this section are actually highlighted on the screen there. So uh they use uh a phrase character defining streetscapes and they also use the language major pedestrian corridors. So we actually have uh quite a few different definitions in our existing code today that kind of relate to these conditions um that I and I do have some notes over here but we uh essentially have a definition for key multimodal corridors. We have a definition for major pedestrian corridors. We have another definition for zones with pedestrian emphasis. And then within our comprehensive plan, we actually have a definition for strategy corridors that all generally speak to similar uh conditions within the inter urban environment. So kind of uh the streetscape, how people interact with it, trying to be more pedestrian, bicyclist, multimodal oriented, that kind of thing. Um, and this language from the legislature uh really made us uh realize that we need to kind of consolidate and simplify all of those definitions. Um, for two reasons. One, because they all kind of mean the same thing, and it would for simplistic reasons, it would be better that we just reference one definition instead of multiple. Uh but two uh within uh D3 here uh and I will read this one. Residential uses are permitted in all parts of the building except ground floor commercial or retail

that is along a major pedestrian corridor. Um and the reason that that requirement is a little bit problematic based on how our code currently is written today is that we only have one section of one street within the entire city that actually meets that definition. So, uh, it'll be important to update that to better reflect where kind of more loosely defined or some of our other definitions call out pedestrian oriented streetscapes or corridors uh to make sure that uh it's not kind of a opening the floodgates per se to all of our commercial designated spaces. Um, so that is going to be while this language that's shown here in red is going to be what we're proposing as part of the code update. uh in response to this legislation, there will be some additional kind of carryover uh work that will probably be spurred as a result of this to clean up some of those definitions and make sure that they're consistently defined across the entirety of the city.

Any questions on any of that or I keep moving here? Jennifer, any questions?

No, thank you. And then we do have a little bit more. So, scrolling down within this chapter, uh, permitted intrusions into required yards is already a section that we do have within our code, but there is some new requirements that relate to that. uh specifically around when you're either building energy efficient uh buildings or when you're retrofitting existing buildings for more energy efficient oriented um structures. There's there's an allowance to expand into those setbacks essentially to accommodate uh additional insulation uh or solar panels and a couple other allowed uses there. So, it's really just talking about a couple additional inches allowances so that if a home was previously built right up to that property line, it's a or not property line, but that that setback that they're allowed another few inches in order to accommodate uh retrofits to make their home more energy efficient is what we're looking at there. And then the final one, I believe, I'm going to scroll down just to make sure that that is in fact the final one. Yep. Okay. So, the final one from this chapter uh is getting slotted in uh 160355. Uh currently we do have a section that's called minimum density requirements and we're changing that to residential density requirements uh and adding uh section B here and that's the one um which is allowing essentially a 50% residential density increase in all residential designated zones within the existing uh footprint of an existing structure. Um, so that's that's kind of a unique case, but essentially any existing residential structure that's in

place uh today uh or in the future, and we do have a definition of that timeline. It has to be three years apart, but we'll get into that in a second. Um is allowed to essentially increase the allowed density by 50% over top of whatever is required or permitted within that designated zone. Um so for example, in low density residential, we have six units per acre. So, uh, an existing residence would be able to exceed that by another 50%. Uh, in a remodel case. Yeah, Jennifer's already covered that pretty extensively. So, more familiar.

Yeah, in large part that's probably a lot of the work that Jennifer is doing where we're going to see that take place most of the time. Um, but we are required to have this language in our code. So, this is kind of where that lives to allow a lot of that type of development to take place. I I'll send you a quick note, but one thing I just noticed on this section, it's not related to section B, but related to section A, is that um we've made several modifications to the section in Jennifer's

middle housing. So, I'll just send you a little reminder because looking at that, I'm like, "Oh, no, that's we want to get rid of that." So, I just it's like alarm bells going off. So, not that not for the planning commission to know, but just like, you know, just putting it out there that um and I'll send you the the section so that we can make sure that we're not we're part of as staff. We have so many of these code updates happening concurrently that like as we work on one section, we're modifying others and you know with different staff we need to make sure that we're being consistent. So it creates some confusion and some things that can be overlooked when it's like oh no we're we're changing that but then you guys see something and it's not changing and so I just want to clarify that.

Any other questions on this chapter? Okay. Um, and then hopping into our final uh, chapter for this one. So, this is our definition section. And to Ryan's point, um, Jennifer is also adding things to our definitions chapter. So yeah, whenever we get closer to that final adoption date, there will be a lot of consolidating all of our parallel working tracks that we're all advancing stuff on to make sure that when we do ultimately adopt this language into our code that we're not over adopting on top of other work that's also taking place. Um but yeah, to that point, uh we have new definitions for solar energy panels, uh upper level setbacks. Oh, I'm actually starting at the bottom of this chapter, so let's start over. Uh, facade modulation, uh, mass timber construction, modular construction, and passive housing requirements. Uh, so those are all again definitions that were created at the state level and are now referenced within our code. So, it's important to also bring those definitions in so that when they are referenced, people actually have a clear definition of what we're talking about. uh that will also result in some cascade numbering effects, but that's not changing the definitions themselves. It's just changing the chapter a little bit. Um but yeah, with that, that's actually everything that I have lined up for you guys this evening. So, are there any questions on the definitions or any of the other stuff that we ran through so far?

Anybody? Jennifer? Yeah. Oh, Kieran, sorry. I'm sorry. I I keep seeing that term and when I see the the mast I'm just thinking of like a wooden framed house but is that something different? So it is Yeah. So you can actually we'll find that our destination here made primarily of mass timber product. So is it this is like a a steel structure building? Yeah. So it's it's to based on my understanding it's it's kind of like a laminating process. So, it's taking a lot of pieces of uh wood and laminating them together. Uh, which actually strips

glued together like Yeah, beams are sewn together. Yeah. You see the beams? See all the layers? Those are all glued together. Yeah. If you have a chat there, um, there's a number of them in buildings that are mass timber in Portland. Um, so if you probably do like a web search, you can probably see what they look like. You can come down to the atrium and look up at the ceiling. As soon as you said that, like all these different visions I I places I encounter. Yeah. So it's it's essentially taking uh many pieces of wood and laminating them to make a larger structure than we

um yeah we're as as the supply of larger trees goes away uh people are turning to this laminating process to those larger structures out of predominantly wood and it's actually allowing them to developers to go much taller uh with purely wood frame. framed buildings because of the laminating process that increases the the structural integrity of them.

And you'll you'll notice that they get quite a bit of benefit in here. You know, as I think it's part of the the legislature wanting to encourage more mass timber construction to say kind of like the same benefits you give for affordable housing and some other housing types. If you were to do mass timber, you get some of those same same bonuses, I guess. So, um yeah. Yeah. So, just piece of trivia for your next party. Um, you know, when I was going through civil engineering and learning all this, four stories was about as tall as you could go with a woodframe structure and and have it be structurally sound. And with modern lumber treating techniques that they've got now, they're able to go up to 10

and they're shooting for 25. There's a uh I don't know along along those lines. There's a there was a podcast for a while called Sidewalk Labs that was actually based out of Milwaukee area I think. Um but they actually did a did an episode on tall timber mass timber and that it's actually pretty interesting if you guys want some uh additional listening just in case you're bored one. Yeah. But uh it it goes into a pretty great detail on what it is and kind of its origin and where it's currently being implemented today and uh the applications and use cases that that it could be utilized for in the future. So

hey Jennifer, did you have anything? No, just uh reiterate what Ryan said earlier about um next week at the senior center. Um, I think it would be great as if as many board members as possible could join us. Um, yeah. No, that's it. Thanks. I agree with that. Okay. Well, thank you, Lance.

Thank you. Um, yeah. And just to recap, uh, the next time that we'll be looking at this stuff is May 27th at the public hearing. Uh, in advance of that, we'll be putting a cleaned up version of these updates out to the community. in uh requesting community feedback as part of that process and then they'll uh community members will also have the opportunity to come in person and and provide that feedback to you guys.

And our approach on these you know some of the amendments that we've been bringing to you I'll use the the tree amendments as an example. We definitely before public hearing want to get feedback from the community and be doing some public engagement and outreach on those things. these things which are very highly technical and are required by bills anyways were essentially taking them right from planning commission review right into a public hearing and then to the council. So kind of a little bit of an expedited process mostly because you know even if the community did have some concerns which they might we'll see we haven't heard from anybody yet but um is that the lion share of this is is required right and so you know us as the city are implementing what the the state legislature is requiring us to do. So, I guess, you know, if the community's got issues, they really need to talk to their their legislators.

You know, the city's just really doing what what the legislators asked us to do. So, yeah, if we don't implement this by June, we are preempted anyways. So, yeah. So, if we don't take action, then the state's going to say, well, you know, these things will apply anyways, right? Okay. So, with that, I'm going to call the meeting ajourned and we'll see you all in three weeks. Thank you everybody. Hi. Thank you guys. Bye Jennifer.