Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

and welcome to the planning commission meeting for December 3rd, 2025. If you would all join me for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you so much and welcome. I am Janice Huxford. I will chair the meeting um this evening. I'm looking forward to uh serving Lake Stevens this evening with my fellow commissioners. Let's start with a roll call. I'll start to my right. Roll call. Davis Jennifer present. Roll call. Morton present. Roll call Davis Connor present. And roll call doer Michael here.

Thank you. Next time I'll use your middle name, so it'll be fun. Um, we appreciate you calling in, uh, Michael Der, and hope that you will, uh, continue to heal well, but appreciate you being a part of the commission this evening. We have some interesting business to, uh, follow up on from our last meeting. With that, we're going to turn the time over to guest business. Is there any guest in the audience that would like to address anything that is not addressed in the actual agenda items? Do we have any guests online that would like to address the commission? Can we wait a wait a moment for the party outside to I think we're all okay. All right. Hearing none and seeing none online, let's move on to the action items. Number four, this is the approval of the planning commission meeting minutes from our November 19th meeting. This was a lengthy meeting. It was an interesting meeting and I wanted to make sure that all of the commissioners had a moment to review and um approve the minutes with or without any edits. Thoughts? I actually watched the video

and uh just to see what I missed. So, um yeah, I'm uh it was a lot of lot to discuss and a lot of public comments. So, that was quite interesting. Um make sure you're speaking into your mic. We've got um uh this is Commissioner Morton. So, I wasn't here and um I move that we uh uh approve the minutes from for last time's meeting. Okay. Uh do I have a second? Commissioner Connor Davis seconds. All those in favor? I I any [clears throat] any abstain? Michael Der, you sound like God in this room.

You are doing well from afar. Thank you so much for being a part of that. Uh we are going to move on to the public hearing. This is a continuence of the meeting that we had back on the 19th. Uh there were some uh comments that were brought up by our public that was here. uh we all felt that they um merited some vetting and so we kept it open for today. I'm not going to reopen the public hearing because it remains open. So with that, I'll turn time over to Chrissy Schmidt for the updates on uh what is happened between then and now.

Thank you. And good evening, planning commission. Christy Schmidt, planning manager. This is part two of the public hearing from the last meeting. And so this evening within your packet, you'll see that you have four attachments. You have a revised strikeout version of chapter 1410, which is concurrency management systems, along with 14112, which is traffic mitigation impact fees, along with the SEPA exemption letter. and included you do have a staff report that notes the revisions and the activities taken place since then and I'll go ahead and go over those. Just for the record, the comprehensive plan was adopted last year. After that, the city contracted with transpo to assist in updating the technical documents. And in addition, we've held four work sessions since then and then a public hearing recently back in November and now it's been continued to December 3rd. So since the last meeting, city staff has gone ahead. We reviewed all the public comment received and in addition, we met with our transportation consultant transfers. We've provided them the comments. They've looked at it. We are meeting with them later this week, which would be tomorrow. and then we will have additional information back to the city council for the traffic impact fees and methodology. So, in order to keep the code amendments moving forward, as you remember at your last meeting, we made a motion to go ahead and direct staff to make the amendments that are listed in the packet, and I'll go over those shortly. So, we've separated out the methodology and the traffic impact fee and the and the administrative documents. So, those are being pulled apart separately and we're waiting for a reanalysis from our transportation engineer and then that financial decision will go back to city

council. But we will make sure to follow back with planning commission so you are kept in the loop of what the outcome was just since you participated in part of that with your public hearing. Christy, if I may. Yes. Um, I know that we lengthened that that conversation back and forth with transpo, but is that going to have that conversation going to have happened by the end of this year or is it going to go into next year with a new council? I don't have the answer to that yet. We are hoping to have our information back from them before the end of the year. That was our request.

Excellent. So for the purposes of the amendments were to re refine the concurrency standards and include the level of service along with the multimodal and update the traffic impact fee methodology which is coming out which I just stated and I'm going to go through these fairly quickly because you have heard this now several times and this is really basically a repeat of what we had last time and since we don't have anyone new here in the audience I'll just skip to the pertinent parts for your decision-m process. So, let's start out with the revisions based on your last meeting that you directed staff to do. If you look at the first chapter, the concurrency section 1410, there was a request to be consistent with the city city name and to capitalize the city. That has been completed. You'll see that in the text. And then in addition, there was a clarification regarding the exemptions for a single family dwelling on an existing lot that's not part of a subdivision. So I went through all the exemption sections and added that in where it was appropriate, make sure it didn't conflict with any other section. There was a awkward section that Commissioner Huxford had pointed out, so I went in and I rewarded that uh to make it flow better. So thank you for that comment. And in addition, the request, we had someone from the public, they had requested to include all the losses within the code. In relooking at that was staff and looking at our comprehensive plan and how extensive that was. Staff recommends that we stay with just listing the thresholds within the code itself. If they need any of the technical documents, they can go into the concurrency handbook and or the cost basis analysis or the comp plan. um we just felt that that is an easier more

streamlined place to do it and it reduces future code amendment changes if when we update the comprehensive plan. So that is our recommendation for that. With that I will move into the changes done to 1408 which there were none for the definitions. So that brings us to 14112 which is the traffic impact fee section. We went ahead and also made the capitalization changes. Um we took a look at the authority section and I would like to point out I did notice as I was going through um Russ and I both agree the authority is stated under each applicable section and so I it we are going to be changing that and actually listing it at the top of the section. So then it's not redundant for each every criteria as you go down. It doesn't say u planning director and public works director. So I did want to let you know that we're going to make that streamline change there. The definition for fee in lie of uh there is a definition. It is defined somewhere. It's not in that section but I found it and I wanted to let you know that it is defined in the code. So there's an applicability section for that in the streets and sidewalk section. So that way um because that section does refer to the other section. So you would read the two hand inand essentially.

So that was addressed also. Other actionable items you had requested that we take a look at the decision makers and streamline that that could be enhanced and that was part of my comment two comments ago that I did go in and make sure that those were streamlined so the authority section was clear. There was one comment about um charging the impact fees in the authority. That section actually doesn't need an authorative section because it's a mandate from the RCW just stating that the city has the authority to impose and collect impact fees. So that area was not changed with that. That is really the just of the changes that have been made since the last time. I did leave this information in not knowing we we would have some repeat people from the public coming in and for their education. So I'm going to slip through the next couple slides to the findings.

Do we have anybody online at this point?

Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. So the findings and conclusions are that staff finds that we have met our noticing policies. the proposed code amendments are consistent with the comp plan the goals and policies and it complies with uh GMA 3678 and that it's categorically exempt from SEIPA the code amendment changes are and with that staff's recommendation to the planning commission this evening is recommendation of approved amendments for these three sections 1408 110 and 112 and with that I would turn it back to the commission for any questions. for staff. Thank you so much. I appreciate the um extra eyes, a little extra time, the fact that the um uh conversation is happening with transpo. Uh we are interested in seeing what comes out of that. But in the meantime, our work here is pretty succinct. But I want to start with you, Commissioner Morton. You were here, not here last week. What would you prefer to bring up?

Um, I I I have no real issues to bring up. Uh, I've I I reviewed the video. I reviewed the documents. Uh, there's uh the comments were helpful. uh not earthshattering, but um I I thought uh my overall opinion is that the changes uh to these uh are uh are are adequate and uh and relevant and uh appear to be bringing everything up to date. So I have no complaints or changes. So um that's basically

Excellent. Thank you. We did have a comment um about the neighborhood character that I read in the document that is being changed back to neighborhood character. Um I that's is that that that would David Levitan's topic. Okay. Okay. Same different topic. So that leads me to the conversation that Connor Davis had in our last meeting. Um but bringing it back to tonight. Sorry, I was marrying the two because I had documents in front of me for the last couple of days. Connor Davis, any comments?

No. Um, yeah, I think that that a lot of the concerns the gentleman had in particular have been addressed. Uh, I love when I first looked at this, I I'm like chuckling to myself. All of the the C's, capital, all the capital capital C's. Um but yeah, you know the any concerns that uh that I'd had um been addressed document looks good. Thank you. And Jennifer Davis, um I concur with the other commissioners. I think it's I'm very comfortable voting to move it forward to the council. Thank you so much. So we can um have a motion to close then the public hearing. Michael Der.

Mike Der. I'm here. Um, no, I I really appreciate the uh leg work that was done to uh fry out some of these concerns uh that were brought forward. Um, I appreciate the explanation and the corrections. I think it helps with the readability. So, I'll support uh these changes. Thank you so much. And my apologies for not having your face in front of me and and noticing that you weren't here. So, I for a moment neglected that. I won't ever do that again. I'm like Santa Claus. I'm always watching. Yes. Yes. Uh with that said, do I have a motion? Perhaps. Um Commissioner Der, you would do so.

Gladly. I'll move to advance as proposed. Do I have a second? Second. All those in favor? I I. Any opposed? [clears throat] Any abstain? Okay, that was Commissioner Morton that seconded for the document. We're going to move on now to Thank you so much. That was we had a good discussion and some extra time and I I appreciate you all looking into that further as I do you. Thank you. And as staff, I'd like to say thank you for all the time and effort you've put into this particular code amendment. So, thank you. Let's move on to discussion items. What would we like to discuss?

I think we're on to reports. I think they're in our discussion items tonight. Your reports. Oh, that' be yours. Okay, Commissioner reporting. Um, Commissioner Derer, so that I give you first billing. I really appreciate the flexibility uh in being able to do this online tonight. um getting around is a little tough uh these last couple days. So, uh being able to do this from home has been outstanding and thank you so much. Are you able to hear us? I can.

Okay. I I would just urge that whenever we have a commissioner offsite to make sure that we take extra effort. It gets complicated. Yeah. All right. Commissioner Jennifer Davis, let's start with you. Uh nothing for me tonight.

Commissioner Bruce Martin. Um, the only comment I've got is um Oh, I just have a comment about uh about the um uh the traffic impact fees and the the and the uh and currency. It's it's interesting whenever I look at Facebook comments about development or people's comments about development and first thing people bring up is you know what there should be a system where we make sure that before the buildings happen that there's the the the the infrastructure around it will be built up before the the construction is approved and it's you know of course I didn't know you know before coming into this I didn't know nobody really knows hey you know what that's a great idea it's been in place for decades [laughter] so uh and it's good that uh we're clarifying this and um uh I just wish that it was proclaimed on the mountain tops for everyone to know that there's already a system in place to take care of all these concerns uh uh about development within the city. Um and that infrastructure can keep up with all the new people and businesses coming in. It's already taken care of. You're all doing a great job.

Well, thank you. That's all we got. Website um there is there should be a blurb somewhere on this code amendment and then we'll put out a news flash if council passes it. So Oh, that'd be great. Let's move on to Connor Davis and uh no report on my behalf.

Okay, I will be brief in my report, but a couple different things. One is a follow-up to something that I put in the minutes on our last meeting. The signage has already been placed for the new three-way stop at uh South Lake Stevens and Machias Cutoff. It has not been unveiled yet. I will just simply say it's under wraps kind of within the season. uh but we are looking forward to as a community to that being unveiled. So again that was something that was not on the original roadmap for improvements that has been um uh dearly needed and and we are uh uh very appreciative. Uh the other couple of comments are um I've had a opportunity to work with one of our other municipalities, a neighboring city in the last couple of days and um I'm appreciative of communication and simply the ability to call, get someone on the phone, have a question answered, and move on. Other cities are not doing that very well. And I would hope that Lake Stevens would continue to promote the fact that we as citizens of Lake Stevens are your customer and uh you are a business, a city is a business just like anything else, but that you have clients and as a client uh we have value and I have witnessed what happens when that doesn't get recognized and I appreciate the fact that Um we're working hard to do that and would encourage um anything that can be done to perpetuate that ongoing.

Navigating city government is a challenge in any g any given city, not ours excluded. And um I just wanted to make sure that I said that on record this evening and recognize that Lake Stevens is trying to do that to the best of their ability and would encourage them to continue to do so. I will end my soapbox by turning it over to our planning director for his report. Thank you.

Great. Um have a few things for you tonight. So, just to let you know, the um city council took up the step housing proposal at their last council meeting. They did hold it over. They would like some additional clarification um around the definition of transitional housing and just what makes it different than permanent supportive housing.

Um otherwise, they were comfortable with the amendment. And as you know, we had talked about um based on the um comments we got from the department of commerce as well as the nexus and the findings of fact, we did remove the buffers just because we couldn't show that there was um an impact to public health and safety by not including those buffers. So that was the direction that the city council went. And again, they're holding it over for a week just asking us to do some additional clarifications. one of the definitions. I will say that as I was on the Alliance for Affordable Housing meeting this afternoon, a very similar topic came up and the definition of transitional housing and I'll be punny here. It's in transition right now based on the implementation of funding and different agencies. The work they're doing is

making that a moving target. So one, this Commissioner Morton, when we were starting this discussion there, we were looking at what different cities were doing and Redmond was at the far end of the spectrum. How did they get away with having their buffers which were a lot more restrictive than we were even thinking of? I I can't answer that question. I don't know it. I guess it's your individual reviewer or Yeah. get away with. [clears throat] I I would Well, I would agree to disagree.

All right. All right. Sure. But my my wording is biased, but yeah, there you go. Let's see. Second item. You guys need to start thinking about who you want your officers to be next year. So, think about you want to nominate the person to your right or [snorts] for some leadership role. Um or if you're happy with your leadership, keep it the way it is. Um and se last item, we have four planning commission candidates now. Um some actually really good quality candidates. So we're going to do I think we actually have a fifth. Okay. Maybe it's five. Yeah.

Um and we're going to do interviews on the 9th. So you will have new planning commissioner um in January of next year. Two new. Two. Two new. Yeah. Yeah. Two new planning commissioners. And then there are five candidates and I plan to sit in and Jennifer has kindly if if I get pulled out of town unexpectedly, she will kindly sit in on that. That would be great. I do have a followup. Yes.

There are canned questions for said candidates. We are handed set questions. Is it appropriate that any of the commissioners could funnel to me or Jennifer a question that they might have that we can ask as a planning commission? I think as long as that question is asked of everyone and I guess just to keep everything transparent, if you were going to solicit questions from your commissioners, then you should probably do it now, but they may want to to ask

then I'm soliciting if you want to ask questions. My concern is only that we have um experienced what it's like to be a planning commissioner. Only us can only we can um truly uh vet out perhaps who would be a good fill for a couple of seats that we have open and I would encourage um questions that might be appropriate. I don't know if that's something that I can do on the spot. Is that something that they could funnel through you or through Don?

I was just going to suggest why don't you have those go to Dawn if you have questions and then we can work directly with the chair to kind of maybe summarize one question. Fair. I would appreciate that. I would encourage that. Thank you. Thank you. Um, anything else? No, that's it. Thank you. I would only add one more thing on there is a a threehour training right on the 15th. Just making sure that everybody has that on the calendar.

You can watch a 4-hour meeting if you're interested in watching the city council last night. Moving on to our volunteerism. Uh, with nothing else from the planning director, uh, may we have a motion to adjurnn? Commissioner Connor Davis, motions to adjurnn. Do I have a second? Second. All those in favor? I I. Any opposed? Moving on. Thank you, Michael. Thanks, everybody.