Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I'm gonna open the meeting at 06:00, and I will stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America in which it stands, not religion, liberty, and justice for all. Okay. Right. So I'll I'll call the role. And Harley Guillory? Here. Joanne Overfield, here. Tom Green? See him yet.

Lauren Rickenbach? Here. Dan Burry? Here. Leila Church?

Here.

Carly Noir is on. Here. Yep. K. So alright. So hope you guys are all up for this now. We need a motion to approve the consent agenda.

I move that we approve the consent agenda. And may I have a second, please?

Commissioner Church seconds.

K. And Jan Fury was the first to approve. And all those in favor, say aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye.

We are approved. So we'll go on to the citizen comment section. And if there's anyone online, would you raise your hand function? Seeing none, we will go on to the next agenda, which is action item on the interim zoning ordinance. And who would like to speak?

Thank you, chair. I will take this one. So tonight, we are looking to act on the items that were that we had hearings on last month. First tonight is the interim zoning ordinance item. Amendments to EMC eighteen eighty o eight o.

Been discussed for several months. I had some good conversation and feedback last month. But in summary, the attached draft amendments update the purpose statements for these four zoning districts to be consistent with the 2024 comprehensive plan as adopted. It allows once again for townhomes and apartments in the business park zone as an outright permissible use rather than a conditional use near the inner urban trail, pending a small update to those rows, on the land use table. It replaces the 200 foot nonresidential use standard with the ground floor building frontage standard, which also includes a minimum unit depth for said nonresidential uses based on building height, clarifies what qualifies as a frontage occupied by building, and other clarifying edits.

Just to dive down in here, we did provide some blue highlight of the items that had been updated since the hearing. I wanna just make sure that's very clear for the record. Under the table, note two, this is speaking to, the minimal arterial roadway lot frontage occupied by a building. It clarifies that buildings must be located within five feet of the public right of way or an abutting easement might require greater distance. But the total length of frontage shall be measured on a line parallel to the centerline of the subject arterial roadway excluding the width of any planned intersecting public right of way required pursuant to the city's comprehensive plan.

In layman's terms, if we've got something on our comprehensive plan that shows a road's gonna cut through somebody's property, we're not going to, in effect, penalize them for that wider way width, and we'll discount that amount. On note three, this is, again, back to the 200 foot standard and the amount of the building furniture that needs to be that nonresidential use. So we're just clarifying that the ratio listed on that row on the table applies to the minimum arterial roadway lot frontage occupied by building only. So for example, if you have parcel in the commercial zone, the minimum arterial frontage occupied by building is 35%. Minimum ground floor building frontage along material revenues containing nonresidential use.

Sorry. Can't figure out a way to make that shorter description. But as long as you've got the the 35% requirement of that 35% of the lot frontage, a 100% of that has to be the the nonresidential. Now if you were to provide more than 35 building frontage, then anything beyond that 35% could be residential. That I could go further, but might just make it muddier.

But, and then speaking to the depth requirement, all nonresidential uses required under this provision shall occupy a minimum depth of the required building as follows, 45 feet for single story buildings and 35 feet for multistory buildings, essentially making sure there's a good minimum amount of nonresidential space. So with that, happy to take any questions commissioners may have, but the staff is looking forward to action on the draft recommendation.

Okay. So everybody's seen this and read it and gone over it. And are there any questions for Jeremy or anything that you want clarified? If not. So if if not, then, we want action to pass this on to the, city council?

That is correct. The draft recommendation would be to recommend the council adopt the proposed amendments related to the uses and development standards in town center commercial business park and mixed use residential.

Okay.

So And concluding the review directed by council under the interim zoning ordinance. So just gonna button that up.

So

I I would like a motion to recommend the city council the draft amendment related to uses and development standards in the town center, commercial business park, and mixed use residential zoning districts, and including the review directed by us. So the interim zoning ordinance two five dash zero six seven seven six. Yeah. So may I have a motion to approve?

So moved, commissioner Guillory.

And may I have a second?

I'll second it, commissioner Roggenbach.

Okay. Great. So and all those in favor, aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Jeremy. That that's passed, and we'll go on to the next one.

Alright. Thank you, chair. This item is the public works standards and code updates. Again, there is a lot of information here, a lot of technical stuff, but still looking forward to the planning commission providing a recommendation to the council. Trying to recall. Don't believe there were any substantive changes since this was last presented. Just some cleanup edits, references to the appendices. Still working with the engineering staff on the detailed drawings, but we're we're getting close.

Okay. So once again, we've seen and reviewed this document, and we've, you know, discussed it and asked questions. So but if if there's anything that you wanna ask of Jeremy before we move this on, now is the time.

This is commissioner Furey. I have one question. It doesn't really relate to the actual amendments, but it was something that was discussed in the document is that and I want to know what it is. It's the fee in lieu sidewalk construction program. What is that? Okay.

Good good question.

Yeah. Great question. This is something that has been an off and on conversation for several years recognizing that the there is little desire to have a small segment of sidewalk built in front of a development in the middle of nowhere. Rather than that, to have some kind of a program established where a developer could pay for the equivalent amount of sidewalk, but rather than be built in front of their development in the middle of nowhere, it goes to support the overall capital program and improve our pedestrian network from the core out.

So just another question. Does is the reason it hasn't there hasn't been much done on it is because there's no money for it?

No. It it's more that there hasn't been the staff bandwidth to establish it, but we are working through the ADA transition plan that was prepared, in 2024 that was adopted by reference with the adoption of the 2024 comprehensive plan that identifies critical project locations to close gaps and fix deficiencies.

Yeah. It seems like it's really easy just to say, okay. Let's not build a side a sidewalk to nowhere on 35th Street, and let's just put that money to the, you know, the basic our our basic funds. But it it it all has to be worked out in a certain language in order to do it. So, hopefully, we can do it and get it done for the future.

I will say it is being done by other cities. Yep. Gallup is an example of that. And to my knowledge, there haven't been any challenges to that type of program so long as it's still supporting safe routes to schools and that sort of thing. So

Well, as a longtime resident, an graduate, I'd like to see it become more of a priority.

Well, the the Puyallup document, I'm sure there's things that can be taken out of Puyallup or Sumner that would help us to do ours maybe more rapidly. Is that

I will say that

We don't have to invent the wheel.

Right. Yeah. We we love to take existing things and make them work for us for sure. And with us getting through the conference plan and getting through all the code updates that we've had do this year

Yeah.

Staff does anticipate there will be bandwidth in the not too distant future.

Yes. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Great. So we will then I will ask for a motion then for the planning commission for The us to send on to the city council the proposed public work standards and associated amendments to EMC titles 12 and I I have crappy glasses tonight. 13. So may I have a motion to approve, please? So moved. Okay. Commissioner Fleury.

And a second. Second, commissioner Guillory.

Okay. And all those in favor? Aye. Aye. Alright.

So on to the events codes. You sent us examples from Milton and Sumner and Puyallup. Go ahead, Jeremy.

Thank you, chair. Just do a a brief introduction here for public's benefit. This is something that has been talked about on staff for few years now, recognizing that we do have some provisions in Edgewood Municipal Code for events under the temporary use permit section that are clunky at best when it comes to what we would consider to be a special event. And other agencies have adopted code that that handles special events a lot better. Our insurance pool, WCIA, has a model ordinance that we can take from and craft something.

So we've been working on this off and on for quite some time, and we are finally at the point where we can bring something forward to you to to start looking at and giving us your input on. As as it stated with the TUP, provisions of the temporary use permit section are designed to provide standards and criteria for temporary relief to situations resulting from strict application of title 18. You know, does that really work for a special event? Yeah. Kind of.

Mhmm. But it it's not speaking to special events. It's more speaking towards, you know, you've got construction going on, you need a temporary office, or you've got a mother-in-law situation, or or some other thing that where you're again seeking relief from title 18. So I've also listed in in this staff report various temporary uses that might be considered special events. So as we look at adopting a special event code, staff's recommendation would be to actually remove some of these things from the temporary use permit section and make sure there is a a clear connection to the special event code for those types of things.

And so just, again, generally speaking, we find that the TUP section of code lacks clarity relating to special events, only pertains to regulations in title 18. Special events really touch on everything in code. You're talking public health and safety. You're talking,

you know,

traffic, emergency services, etcetera. So the attached code provides more clarity for special events without confusing or overburdening the temporary use code provisions developed by using that model ordinance that I mentioned as well as considering example codes from other nearby jurisdictions. Another consideration more for counsel but for for information purposes is that our temporary use permit fee is currently $500. We do have a $100 temporary use permit fee for nonprofit organizations, but we're finding special event applications. Those fees are usually in the 50 to $100 range for most agencies.

But then there's provisions in that code that allow for an agency to recover additional costs, like, say, for an overtime police officer or for renting restrooms and then just other things that special events typically need where our temporary use permit process doesn't have clarity around that. And then, I will acknowledge that the council adopted in 2024 a special section under the parks regulations for government sponsored or cosponsored events in city parks. That was a stopgap measure, and and it does address certain events on city owned property, but it doesn't address special events on private property or in public right of way. It also does not address special events in parks that are not government sponsored. So looking to provide this information for the planning commission.

Happy to take any questions you might have this evening. But really hoping you'll take the time between now and our next meeting to digest it a little further, ask for more questions. And if, the commission is amenable, we'd be happy to get this scheduled up for a public hearing. But there is no, hard deadline here. You know? We wanna make sure we're taking our due diligence to go through this. And so whether or not the commission's ready to schedule a hearing for January or wants to wait till the following meeting. We're completely open to that. Wanna offer Josh any upper any further notes on that? I have nothing to add.

Okay. Carly has her hand up. Go ahead, Carly.

Just kind of interested in what some of the nearby cities are charging in size reference to, like, Edgewood in comparable size. You know, obviously, Auburn has a really good system for public events and their process of getting permits and everything. But I'd love to know if you guys have, like, some comparisons to nearby cities of what they are charging. I think that would be helpful for us to make any recommendations on fees. I think this is a really big opportunity for our city and especially with our lovely park there right on a busy road.

It's great visibility, and I think this is an opportunity for us to make money for the city, but also, reasonably, obviously, because we don't wanna be overcharging, 500 is pretty steep.

Yeah. I I think that's a point well taken. We're not trying to create a hurdle here. Also recognizing, you know, the city does have limited resources, but not trying to make money on this. We wanna make sure whatever staff time is needed to kinda handle the impacts of the event. But, you know, perhaps the the review of the event application is something that, you know, council says, well, we wanna we wanna keep that a low bar to entry kind of a thing.

This is commissioner Ragenbeck. I have a question. When you when you're talking about the temporary use permits, you said it could be, like, a special event as in, like, a carnival, or it could be a special event as in, like, a construction project and they need a little facility temporarily. Those are very different. So would you did you say you were gonna put them in different categories and then there would be different fees assigned to those?

Yeah. That that would be the intent. You know, looking again at the the five bullets here on the screen, you know, circuses, carnivals, rodeos, fairs, or similar transient amusement or recreational activities, those absolutely feel like special events and wouldn't staff's recommendation would be to remove that from the temporary use permit section of code and have that be exclusively in the special event code.

Well, I mean, you've given us some great examples, you know, from the different cities, and they they seem to cover cover just about anything that could transpire. So we can certainly take that information and and use use some of it or, in ours. Mean, there's a lot of things that have to be covered. Go ahead, Carly.

Thanks, chair. So on page two twenty three of the packet, there's some language related to when an application is due asking for an application thirty days before a special event. So that's fine. But, the next section talks about waiving that application deadline, and I think having a language in our code that would allow the director to consider waiving that thirty day requirement is a nice touch. And then the second item, I have a question.

Often special events would like to close a portion of a public street down for the event. So having language that would address that, I think, might be helpful, allowing consideration of, you know, the director to consider that with a traffic safety plan, I think, would be prudent.

Okay. Great. Thanks. Carly, go ahead. Carly?

I'm good. Never mind. Sorry.

Okay. Okay. Anyone else have anything to say at this point, or we'll just wait? And what is your feeling in terms of discussing this again before we put it out for public, you know, for a public hearing? What what do you fellow commissioners think? Do you think we should discuss it more next time and then put it out for public hearing, or do you wanna put it out for public hearing and see what what kind of feedback we get and then discuss it? Any thoughts?

I'll just go ahead. Commissioner Linwa, I I if is that okay? Can you hear hear me okay?

Yep. Okay. Okay. Sorry.

I just was gonna say, I think it would be really helpful. I'd like to see that, you know, when once it's separated for special events versus the temporary use, I'd like to see how that's finalized, and I definitely wanna hear input. I'm also going to encourage some people from the local groups that have organized events previously to try and get them to come in and and make comment because I think it'll be really helpful to get, feedback from people who are actually actively doing events. I'm on one of those boards as well. So it's definitely something this is, like, very interesting to me, and I'm very excited for the city because I I think that the limitations of, you know, the ease of setting it up, it has been the biggest, inhibitor to using Edgewood as a location.

And this is like we're potentially opening a door that could be making Edgewood the stopping point versus a a pass by city. So this is really a big deal for the city, I think. And it seems maybe slightly insignificant, but I do think this is a very big deal for the city to have some great opportunities in the future, bringing bringing more business and bringing just more interest in the city.

Okay. Okay, Carly. Leila, you were saying that you would like to More have more time

to do that.

Time for us to review it as a board. And then, you know, I would I would like to hear what the other, you know, boards at the city might have, like, as far as feedback around this too, like the economic development board, the parks and recreation board too, to kind of see what their thoughts are because it kinda crosses over all of our use, as far as focus areas. And, yeah, we'd just like to hear how we can also plan for that operationally, the support, like, as far as, like, where are those funds currently being used if they haven't been used, if there you know, is a way that we're gonna plan to have staff time to support special events or how we would actually make that operational. So those are my thoughts. Thank you.

Anyone else have any thoughts I about maybe going over this a little more before we put it out for public hearing? Think so. Next time. Carly?

Thank you. I think it would be nice for us to read our draft language for us because we're looking right now at two examples of other jurisdictions. Is that right?

So in the packet, we actually have attachment a would be our draft.

Okay.

And and then attachment b has the other so this this is the what came from the model code Mhmm. From the insurance pool with legal counsel input and staff input.

Okay.

But then attachment b is the example codes from from the three other cities. So

Okay.

Yeah. Staff would really appreciate the commissioner's input on what pieces of those other city codes they'd like to see incorporated. Because right now, it's it has not fully integrated those.

Yeah. Okay. So I think that probably is worth another discussion at the in the January meeting before we put it out for the public input.

And to commissioner Church's point, we can certainly bring this up with the the EDAB. We're meeting with them in a week.

Yeah. That's a good idea.

The the parks board will not be meeting this month. So the soonest we'd be able to touch bases with them would be January after this board meets. So we could certainly get any feedback they might have for the February meeting, but I I feel Yeah. Between EDAB and planning commissioner, we we can have a pretty robust package that would be, I think, ready enough for for that public hearing piece.

Yeah. Okay. Alright. So that's what we'll do. So everybody read up over the holidays. Okay. So are there any other things that we need to discuss or anything in happening in the city that we should know about before we

I just have one quick, item, and hopefully, commissioners have been receiving emails from the clerk regarding OPMA.

Yes.

So I'll touch bases with those of you that I'm not certain have responded yet after the meeting, but, just wanted to make sure that, clerk hears that I have made the point with you guys. I

haven't received them. Oh.

If if you've done the training the training Oh, I did do the training,

but I haven't received any emails. Are you talking about the

There were some emails that went out a couple of weeks ago.

I got, I think, well, anyway, you have to do training if you if you're four four years in errors, careers, like I am. But if you're new, then you have to do it, and you can do it online and get your certificate and then give that certificate number to and if you have it, just give it to the clerk.

Right.

No. Every four years, I guess. Right? Every four years, I think.

Yeah. I'm I'm not

I think it's every I'm

not trying to confuse the commissioners. There's only a couple of you here that I I wanna touch bases with, but just making sure that the clerk hears that I made made mention of it tonight.

Yeah. Yeah.

And then I don't know. Josh, do you have anything? Yes.

Well, yeah. You have to anyway, I haven't done it. I haven't done it for a number of years. So

Alright. Thank you.

Okay. I'm looking for now.

Chair, I have a comment. Yes. Thank you. I would like to acknowledge the last week was the annual tree lighting ceremony held by the city, and I attended and wanted to just acknowledge and share some kudos for all that were involved. Thank you, city of Edgewood, for, facilitating that. It's a it's a an event my family looks forward to every year. And thanks to everyone who participated, all the sponsors, mister Birch and the Edgemont Junior High Band, everything and Santa, of course. Everything was wonderful. So if you didn't attend this year, I recommend next year for sure.

Great. Great. That's good. I I think it it it gets bigger every year, I think, which is nice. Yeah. Give us a I mean, we might work up to a Santa parade or something. Right? Just figure out where. I

go ahead.

Oh, yeah. I had a couple of things that I wanted resurface, I guess. I think it was at the beginning of the year. You shared a very thoughtful and detailed plan of items that you wanted to address this year. I think I've mentioned it a couple of times, but I would love to see, you know, that list come up and and talk about the traction we've made in those different areas or things that might have been pushed back to be because of new, more pressing projects that came up throughout the year just to kinda keep a a track of, like, what we're working on as a as a board and as a city.

And the other note is, I would love to see some community outreach planning happening, especially when I think about special events. I'm thinking about our schools, and I'm thinking about our children and how to get them more involved in planning. I remember when I was an elementary student, our little town had a a a planning board, and they asked for student volunteers to come. And we went, and I don't remember what we spoke about, but it was a nice activity and a way to get students interested in what's happening in their in their city. So I just was wondering if we could maybe add that to a discussion at some point or some kind of planning for our board to maybe look at doing.

Just to tag onto that, and I will note, I think it was the last month that we kinda brought up that I'd planning ahead for 2026, and we'll be bringing that back next month because we kinda get ready for our joint meeting annually. And just for the commissioner's information, the mayor actually had fifth grade classes from Northwood Elementary come in and do mock council meetings Oh. About a ago. I think there were a total of four classes that came in here. So that was that was a fun little thing. But, yeah, we're

Well, that's a that's a good example of and I don't think we've ever ever done that. We've had a summer program where they took a student from each school, each high school, and they went through, I don't know, it was three or four weeks of learning about how things operate in the city in terms of planning. And but, of course, it takes staff volunteer time to do it, so that's always that's always at a premium. Or board? Or or board volunteer time. That's true. Anyway okay.

I would like to add something to it real quick. Okay. I just wanna thank all the commissioners. Again, this is our last meeting of the year that we have had a very busy year with a lot of late meetings, multiple meetings. The city council is gonna start reviewing the critical area ordinances in the 2024 implementation. With those being passed, we'll be officially done with our 2024 comprehensive plan cycle after two to three years of working through it.

Yeah.

So it's been a lot of work, and we really appreciate planning commission's help going through all those documents.

Well, I have to say that the comprehensive plan update that it's certainly gotten more complex through the years. The first one was was difficult, but things as things change, things have to get added, and you have to deal with other things. So it takes the update takes longer these days as as with all things. Right? Anyway, well, I wanna thank my commissioners for, yeah, some of the late evenings in in 2025, so on on to the New Year.

And so happy holidays, merry Christmas, and happy New Year to the staff too for putting up with us and our and our city council representative. Okay. Well, I will adjourn the meeting at 06:35.

Thank you, everybody.

I think so.

Happy holidays.