Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. I'd like to welcome everyone to tonight's hearing. It's 02/09/2026, and the time is now 06:13, and the Seattle Seahawks are Super Bowl champions. This meeting will come to order. Tanya, will you please call the roll?

Yes. Ali Shosti is absent. Ben Reed is excused. Brian Kesterson?

Here.

Justice Phelps? Sandra Pereira Reynolds is excused. Todd Oyo Fesso?

Here.

And Bonnie Williams? Here. And with the Internet down, Justice will be joining us through a phone connection.

Thank you, Tanya. Are there any added items or changes to the agenda from staff?

No changes to the agenda. I did want to note for the record that we have two excused absences due to illness and family emergencies and that our fourth member for the quorum is attending via phone. He's able to hear and participate in conversations, and that is an approved remote attendance. So just wanted to note that for the record.

The minutes from the previous meeting have been presented to the board. I call for a motion to approve the minutes of 01/26/2026 as presented.

So moved. Brian Kesterson.

Approved. Bonnie Williams.

Is there any discussion? Okay. We will move on. I call for a vote to approve the minutes. All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

The vote is approved four to zero. Tonight we are holding a public hearing in which staff will give a brief presentation of the critical area ordinance update. This is an action and a vote, or sorry, this is an action item and a vote that will be held to make a formal recommendation to city council for this item. Once the hearing concludes, the staff will give presentations on community commercial zone updates and Mill Creek Historic District update. The process for tonight's hearing is as follows.

I will open and close the public hearing. Staff will make the presentation, then board members will have the chance to ask questions. Board members will place miniature houses on on the dais to indicate they would like to speak. After board members questions, I will invite testimony from the public in chambers. Tanya will call you one at a time.

When you are called, please come up to the podium and state your first and last name and zip code for the record. You'll each have three minutes to speak. After all all public comments have been made, board members may ask have questions for the staff. If you are a member of the public and wish to provide public comment, please notify Tanya by signing up on the sign in sheet near her desk. And if there are no objections from the board members at this time, I will open the public hearing for the critical area ordinance update. We will begin with a presentation from Lindsey Walker.

Thank you. Before I begin, justice, can you confirm that you can hear me?

I can hear you.

Perfect. Thank you. So thanks for joining us today. We are here for a hearing for the critical area

You can go faster because they've heard

Okay. Yeah. For the critical areas ordinance update. We started this process last August. So we're starting the adoption process now, which will start with you all making a decision tonight.

And then in the next couple months, counsel will be following with their decision. So we are required by state law to give a sixty day notice to state agencies in the Department of Commerce on our draft code so they can review them and provide comments. We have gotten 65 comments from three state agencies on our draft ordinance, and then we also received a comment letter from the master builders and an updated comment letter last week, from the master builders. All these comments as well as our responses to the agency comments are included in your packet. For administrative updates, we have a few new definitions, some amended definitions, all based on best available science.

We updated some language about when critical area fencing is required, as well as vesting language. And then finally, we added a new section for public agency exceptions. This is specific to public agencies when they need to do infrastructure work. This allows them to continue the permitting process even if it doesn't quite meet the critical areas code, so it allows them to work with us on how to meet those infrastructure needs. For general mitigation and monitoring, I know we've discussed this before.

Just some minor updates for buffer averaging in lieu of fees for mitigation banking, off-site mitigation, and then that monitoring schedule. And then a reminder for the wetland buffer changes. The most significant changes we're seeing is for category one and two for wetlands of high habitat scores. You can see we highlighted those changes on the screen with the old table at the top right. So it's important to note it's pretty rare to see development near these, category one and two wetlands with high, habitat scores.

There are some minor updates to category three wetland buffers. So the best available science does have an option for a mitigated reduced buffer if you keep a 100 foot vegetated corridor and do minimization efforts. So we are in an urban environment, and it can't quite common accommodate a 100 foot corridors for every site. But we do have some mitigation options still available. We work with our consultants to prepare an analysis for appropriate buffers if you do some additional mitigation.

So this allowed some extra flexibility while maintaining a no net loss of ecological function. So that's where you're seeing the mitigated lines on that graph. So as you can see, the most significant changes will be for compensation based on the type of wetland and proposed mitigation. These ratios are triggered when there's permanent impacts to a wetland that can't be avoided. So this is released from the Department of Ecology as the best available science.

So this is gonna be adopted across the board for the Puget Sound region. So what it really does is incentivize avoiding impacts to the wetland. And if they're not avoidable, it creates more compensation for that impact. And the ratios are based on the type of wetland buffer as well as the type of mitigation proposed. Just a couple updates for fish and wildlife conservation areas, the most significant being that stream typing and the buffers associated with those streams.

Beyond that, we just explained that the permitted use and some other language updates. And as a reminder, we originally had proposed a 100 foot fish bearing stream buffers and 75 feet for the non fish bearing stream buffers. This was submitted to the Department of Commerce and to state agencies. We got comments back from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. So we had conversations with them as well as other South King County jurisdictions, which led us to increase those buffers to a 150 feet for fish bearing and a 100 feet for the non fish bearing streams.

And then as a comparison here, these are some other South King County jurisdictions. Maple Valley was the first to adopt last year with a 100 foot buffers. Since then, the Department of Fish and Wildlife have had some stronger language and comments specifically towards type f streams. Berrien, Covington, and Ritten all adopted buffers that had conditions for additional requirements that needed to be met or the buffers would increase, which is why you see those ranges on the graph there. So we've put our standard at 150 feet to be consistent with neighboring jurisdictions, but it can be reduced with mitigation.

And then to call Auburn, we see that they had proposed to keep 100 feet for fish bearing, 50 feet for nonfish bearing. This has not been adopted. It's still their drafts, and they're working on addressing comments. Kristen and I did meet with them last week, they indicated that they would be updating those buffers. So happy to share that once we find out what they're proposing.

And then for SeaTac, they adopted 200 foot buffers. Important to note, they actually don't have maps type f streams. So when they got that comment, they said, sure, we can adopt that. It doesn't really impact them. For geological hazard areas, I know we previously talked about this at past meetings but haven't focused lately on it.

There isn't really significant updates. It's mostly language updates that we had previously proposed. And then we received some agency comments, so we did more language updates, like, for an example, replacing sensitive area tracks with critical area tracks. They essentially mean the same thing, but critical area is a more commonly used term for it now. And then finally, have the critical aquifer recharge areas.

Like we mentioned before, the best available science was already met protection plan. This is housed in our public works department in their water safety plan and was last updated in January 2022. So what we did with the language is pull in some of the information from that wellhead protection plan and specifically language about the different categories, what were the prohibited uses, and then report requirements based on those categories. So we do still have our engagement website available for the public to view. And then for next steps, committee of the whole will be presenting a similar presentation with your recommendations.

And then there'll be final revisions made by the law department once they complete their review. So happy to answer any questions if anyone has any.

Was looking over the letter from the Master Builders Association.

Yes.

And, it didn't seem to have a specific suggestion unless I missed it, but it was mostly seemed to be challenging whether it was whether the new recommendations were made on best available science. Could you respond to that, please?

Yeah, certainly.

So when it comes to buffer updates mitigation impacts, those were all requirements. We had some discretion to it. So based on our urban environment, we were able to essentially review mitigation options to reduce those buffers from the best available science. We do have a lot of other updates that weren't required by state law, and this goes to expanding our exemptions and updating our language. So those regulations are helping mostly with our public departments and, in general, just exemptions to allow people not to go through a strenuous process if there's no net loss of ecological function.

I did want to note, so there was a second letter provided from the Master Builders Association, so we will need a motion after discussion on Lindsay's presentation to add that second letter into the record because it wasn't part of the original agenda materials. We received it after we published the materials.

Okay. So I call for a motion to accept the letter for the Master Builders Association for the record.

So moved.

Moved.

I

motion. Second

The motion carries. Sorry, we still want to wait for adjustments.

The motion has been made and seconded. We will now place it to a vote.

Go ahead.

Sorry. So the motion carries.

Go ahead and say the motion has been seconded. All in favor say aye.

Okay.

We'll update our script, sorry.

The motion has been seconded. All in favor say aye.

Aye. Aye. Okay.

The motion carries. Thank you staff. Members, are there any questions for staff?

Alright. We can.

Alright. If there are no further questions from the board, we will call on the public speakers. Tanya, is there anyone signed up to speak? If so, please call the first speaker. Each speaker will have three minutes to speak.

Nobody has signed up. There's one gentleman from the public. Would you care to speak? Then you can jump to chair 16 in the script.

Okay. Seeing no further speakers from the public, I want to ask staff if they have any further comments. Okay. I will now call for a motion to close the public hearing.

So moved. I second the motion.

Okay. I call for a vote to close the public hearing. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Okay. The motion is passed four to zero. Public hearing is closed. I will now call for a motion.

This is Bonnie. I move to recommend the city council adopt the proposed amendments to Chapter eleven-six, KCC addressing the city Of Kent Critical Area Ordinance as presented by staff, subject to revisions during ordinance drafting and review by the city attorney.

This is Brian Kesterson. I second the motion.

Any discussion?

No.

No. If no further discussion, I call for a vote to approve the motion as presented. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Those against say nay. The vote is approved four to zero. Okay. If there are no objections from the board members at this time, we are ready to begin the community commercial zones updates.

And, Chair, I apologize. We're going to have the historic preservation and Mill Creek Historic District first because we have a member of the public here, and then we will do community commercial.

Okay. If there are no objections from the board members at this time, we are ready to begin. We are ready for the Mill Creek Historic District update. Staff, you may begin.

To to the

and in

We We business continue legislation for historic preservation, and we some code updates for historic preservation, as well as some code updates for Mill Creek Historic District. And then we'll jump into a timeline or timeline for adoption. So State House Bill fifteen seventy six is a house bill that was adopted surrounding historic preservation. It states that cities must adopt regulations that prohibit the designation of a property as historic landmark if it's outside of a designated historic district. And that's if the property is less than 40 years old, if its designate if its designation would restrict or alter the use or demolition of the property, and if the property is less than one hundred and twenty five years and the property owner has not given consent.

So currently, the city of Kent regulates historic designations through our interlocal agreement with King County, and we also adopt King County's code through reference. So through that reference, King County already requires the forty or let forty years or less requirement here on the screen. So what will be new in our code would be the highlighted portion here. And just for reference, that code that we referenced in the King County code is 2062040. Essentially, it states that a historic reference may be designated as a King County landmark if it's more than 40 years old.

So that's the point here. We're making along with some other stipulations. But so under this agreement, it's already already regulated for the forty years. However, the remaining requirements for 1576 or House Bill fifteen seventy six are not fully reflected in our King County code or the Kent City code. So, because we still do have that regulation that abides by the forty year stipulation, We still plan to keep our King County code by reference, so the adoption that we have for King County code by reference.

So we'll keep that. However, we will be adding the remaining sections of 1576 as you can see on the screen. So a property shall not be designated as historic landmark outside of a designated historic district if it is or if it would restrict the use of the property or if the property is a 125 years old or less than a 125 years old and the owner has not provided written consent. So that will be what we'll add to Kent City Code. So not the biggest change there, but we do wanna represent what we have or we need to adopt Floor 1576.

Moving on to our Mill Creek Historic District. So we talked about this a little bit last time I seen you all and just recognizing that in phase one, we did have some community concern around keeping the historic nature of the Mill Creek Historic District. However, we were not able to codify anything in phase one, so we're back in phase two. We're almost in phase three, and we're wanting to adopt code to that formalizes or formally recognizes the Mill Creek Historic District. And, again, this district is not new.

It was approved for landmark designation in 2013. It was designated as a historic district in 2014 by the Kent Landmark Commission. And then in 2020, the corresponding guidelines were adopted by King County Landmarks Commission. And currently, it sits in our N R 2 zone, and you can see that here on our map or at least the where it's at in the city of Kent. So the draft code that we proposed tonight will explicitly have or provide language around historic preservation of building and property in this area.

So going forward as far as the major code updates, so we have about three major code updates. The first two are adding a footnote. It is saying that we have developed we have guidelines for the Mill Creek Historic District, and all development in this area are subject to the Mill Creek guidelines. And in the case that residential design guidelines so the the guidelines that we already have in King or Kent City code for single family homes, in the case that those guidelines conflict with our Mill Creek guidelines to adhere to those Mill Creek guidelines. The next major update we have is actually adding regulations for our Mill Creek Historic District to our supplementary provisions.

So it's broken down into three different sections here. So our first section is properties located within the Mill Creek Historic District. That essentially just describes the location as well as the boundaries of the Mill Creek, which you all seen in the previous map in the the previous slide here. Secondly, we'll have applicability and review process that essentially states that all new construction and exterior modification are applicable or it applies to all new construction construction and or exterior modifications are subject to a certificate of appropriation I'm sorry, appropriation with King County. My apologies.

And they have their own rules and regulation around approving certificates. So And lastly, we have the preservation of existing historic structures. So that's basically just code regarding preservation of historic buildings in this area. So as far as the preservation of existing historic structures, we have split it up into two parts. So there's contributing properties and non contributing properties.

So and just a little background, there are 60 properties within the historic district. 57 of them have homes, and that's including our Kent Lynn or Kent Museum, I'm sorry, which is one of the homes or historic homes that are in this area. And of those 57 properties, 49 of them are contributing and eight are non contributing. So, essentially, a contributing home is a home that's built on a property before 1962, and it remains in its original design and in its original location, so it hasn't been extremely altered. Whereas a non contributing property is built after 1962 and it has been altered in such a way that it's no longer historic or it's changed in location, things of that nature.

So we have divided up our code into two, the contributing and non contributing, whereas the non contributing has less regulations simply simply because it's doesn't have historic character. However, for our contributing properties, Cove states or will state that in a case that a structure shall be demolished due to fire or some type of unforeseen circumstance, that they'll have to make sure they qualify for a certificate of appropriateness with King County. So, again, that's its own regulations. They'll consent with us, but, again, it's a it's a process that the owner or developer will have to go through. So they can't just remove the home.

Secondly, for non contributing properties, because I said there are less regulations for these properties. However, if a noncontributing property is damaged or replaced or new construction is proposed, the style of that new structure shall be compatible with the architectural style of the Mill Creek design guidelines. And we also do understand that there is some more nuance to the contributing properties and other situations that can happen, so we added two extra regulations or stipulations. So, again, if if a property for a contributing property if a building on a contributing property was lost due to an unforeseen event such as fire or some type of hazard there, then the replacement is considered non contributing. And similar to the last slide, that the new home or new building must be must be compatible with the architectural style of the Mill Creek design times.

And secondly, if a structure is partially damaged, again, due due to that unforeseen event, fire, whatever it may be, that the owner must consult with city staff as well as King County to determine what the extent of the damage is and see whether restoration is feasible. Where restoration is feasible, they'll work with King County, and King County may provide assistance through grants and technical support. Where it's not beautiful and the home may need to be demolished, they will again have to go through that certificate of appropriateness with King County Landmark Submission. So that, again, is another process in its own, and whomever is building on that property will have to go through that. So, again, they won't be able to just remove the home even if there's fire or some type of unforeseen event.

So that is pretty much the gist of our code updates for historic preservation as well as Mill Creek. We do have a quick turnaround for adoption here. We're looking for adoption on or around March 17. We'll also have a hearing for you all in a couple of weeks with Committee of the Whole in between both of those. That's all I have for that presentation. Are there any questions?

I call for a motion to accept.

Can I ask a general question? Are there other historic districts or historic properties within our downtown corridor that we would also be assessing as a part of this?

Currently, no. So that's a process that that owner or whoever would have to go to designate their home as historic if they if they wanted to. But right now, we just have the Mill Creek Historic District.

Is the only one? Okay. Thank you.

Deja, this is Justice. Can you explain the difference between the hundred and twenty years and the three years?

Yeah. So King County states that if you're outside of a historic district or designated historic district, then you have it has to be more than forty years to just outright be designated as historic. However, if it is a hundred twenty five years or less, then you have to have consent. So I think the part here is the consent of the owner versus not having consent for the forty years.

Okay. Thank you.

No problem.

I call for a motion to accept the recode Kent Phase two briefing for the record.

We don't need to accept a briefing. We'll just move to the next agenda item. So if you go back into your script, it'll be item number 20 Chair 22.

Okay. If there are no objections from the board members at this time, we are ready to begin the community commercial zone updates. Staff, you may begin.

So as Todd said, I am here to present another presentation on updates to our community commercial zone. Again, on our agenda, just jumping into some legacy code here that we have for that community commercial zone, then we'll do some proposed code changes and go into our timeline for adoption. So last time I was here, we did talk about our community commercial and community mixed use zones, in particular this area here that you'll see highlighted or circled rather in red, which houses our Benson Corridor on 104th and 108th. So the comprehensive plan for this area is for it to be a robust mixed use area. It's also designated as an activity center and a county designated growth center.

However, Legacy Code has limited redevelopment and residential growth as well. So these legacy codes include barriers such as site coverage, so limited building footprints, which creates a lot of surface parking. There's also height restrictions. Obviously, the higher you go, the more residential units you could put on a lot. And then also commercial requirements.

So we require commercial in our residential units in this area, and that can create a carrying cost for commercial space that isn't leased. So we're looking to increase homeownership opportunities in this area that push that mixed use vision and address those barriers in our Kinsen code. I should note that we do intend to come back during our mid and quarter plan and refine what we're presenting today. However, we're doing some quick adoptions or quick fixes rather so we can start to get the ball rolling on making this area mixed use. And just going into some examples.

So I presented the same examples last time, but I do want to remind us of why we're here and why we're wanting to do these code updates. So this is a property that's not necessarily in GC. It's in I'm sorry, in CC. It's in GC, so general commercial opposed to community commercial. It is off of Canyon Drive and behind a car dealership or truck dealership.

So code currently requires this residential development that if you wanted to build here, you have to have com or commercial space. So they've built their residential development, as you can see, and there is commercial space. Why does this work? There is commercial space here, but it sits empty. Not a lot of people are coming off of Canyon to do commercial or to come to commercial on this area, so it sits empty.

And some of those unintended consequences of that is, obviously, there are less residential units. We're in a housing crisis and we need all the residential units we can get, but also having those empty commercial spaces, residential components or residential units absorb that cost of those vacant commercial exits. And again, they just kind of sit empty, and we don't want that at all. Another unintended consequence is wrap parking and unfriendly pedestrian environment. So this sits off of Alderwood Mall Boulevard, a main thoroughfare in Lynnwood.

And as you see in the pictures, there's really no activation here. It's unfriendly to pedestrians and also not very appealing. So when we're looking at our CC and our CCMU zones, we really wanna have those spaces activated if they do have commercial spaces. And if they don't, we still wanna make it friendly for someone to walk on the sidewalks here next to the building. So as far as what we're actually updating here, so we heard your feedback from last time we were here in our last meeting and we decided to not touch our CCMU zone.

So if you remember last last presentation, we talked about our community commercial and the community commercial mixed use zone, which is just an overlay of our community commercial zone. So we decided to not touch that. What we'll do is just do some light touches on our community commercial zone. So we have about six major updates. They will be increasing permanent land uses and the corresponding footnotes of those land uses, increasing maximum site coverage and height, and then we'll have a director's authority for parking and some updated review or design review requirements.

And I'll further go into detail on the next few slides on these points here on the screen. Just a little background for our code.

You said

director's authority for off street parking could you explain what director's authority means here?

It's basically just saying that the plane director has the authority to modify or waive parking requirements. It's something that's already in the code, but we just put it on our actual table here so developers aren't shy or shied away from building because of parking regulations that are likely to change anyway because of legislation or things that are coming down the pipeline.

Okay.

So moving into what those proposed code changes looks like and just some background again. So prior to what you see on your screen here and what we're proposing, code states that if you want to do residential units within our community commercial zone, you can only do it in the community commercial mixed use zone, so that CCMU zone we talked about last time. Also, four plexes, five plexes, six plexes were not allowed to be built in that overlay. So it was only multifamily townhomes and residential facilities that were allowed to be built within that CCMU zone. So we said, let's allow four plexes, five plexes, six plexes, townhomes, multifamily, and all residential facilities within our C C zone as well.

So no restriction there as far as, an allowed of land use. However, we did restrict where exactly they can be. So we do really wanna focus some growth or focus that growth on our Benson corridor and around that area. So we have allowed these land uses within a quarter mile of a Hundred And 4th Avenue Southeast, so that main thoroughfare for Benson. And we have also updated residential facilities to no longer require a minor conditional use permit, and I will further get into that in the next slide here.

We've also allowed for live work units in the CC zone. They weren't allowed previously in the overlay or in this zone. So we have allowed them with some updated conditions. They already possess conditions that we didn't quite touch, but we did update two of them. So working spaces, or these live work spaces, shall be reserved and regularly used for one or more persons residing there.

And the second update is no portion of that live work unit shall be sold as space or an additional unit. So moving forward until our residential facilities. So as I stated, we did open it up for residential facilities to be allowed in community commercial. So prior to, they were allowed in community commercial and general commercial, but under the guise of a minor condition or use permit, which essentially an extra step instead of allowing them out just outright or permitting them outright. My apologies.

And they were also allowed or they were only required to do a minor conditional use permit if they are developed with commercial or office uses. So like I said, we do want to promote that mixed use in the area of the Benson Corridor and our CC zone. So we decided to get rid of that. However, it still will be required or allowed within the quarter mile of one hundred and fourth of the CC zone, and there still will be spacing and amenity requirements that we haven't touched. So those amenity requirements are they must be located within a half mile of a public publicly accessible amenity.

So that could be a public park or a preschool or culture center, things like that. So they'll still have those requirements. We didn't touch them, but we since we just allowed them outright in the quarter mile of a hundred and fourth. Next, we have updated our development standards. So we have updated maximum site coverage, so increasing that building footprint so there's more space for someone to have their building footprint. So it was at 30. We've moved it I'm sorry. That was wrong. It was at 40. We moved it to 80.

So, again, increasing that building footprint, hopefully, people will have structured parking, and there will be less less lots with just asphalt and parking and no real amenities there. We're also updating the height limitations. So before, it was capped at three stories. We've updated it to a five story for everyone in general in this zone, but we've also added a caveat. So if you're a residential use and you propose commercial on-site or that structured parking that we really want, then we'll allow you to have two extra stories.

And lastly is that director's authority or or that director's rule, I guess, for our parking. So it says the planning director shall have the authority to waive or modify specific requirements in our parking code. This is something that's already in our parking code. So it's already in KCC15O5010. So it's nothing new.

We simply just copied and pasted it here so people won't shy or get get scared to build because they think they're gonna have parking requirements that may restrict them. We are willing to work with our developers so we can get to more residential in this area. And lastly, we have switched our design requirements for residential and mixed use in the CC zone. So prior to mixed use in residential development in the CC zone, but really in the c c m u zone required we're requiring to have mixed use design standards. They aren't as comprehensive as our multifamily design standards and don't provide provide as much standards for pedestrian walkways and things of that nature.

So we are now requiring multifamily design standards for our residential and mixed use in the CC zone. And that is all I have for that update. This timeline also follows a similar timeline as our historic preservation in Mill Creek. So we are hoping to have adoption by March 17, and then we'll have a hearing here in two weeks. Question? And then committee of a whole in between. Question?

Good job, Deja. I wanted to give land use and planning board a little bit more background on this. So when we were doing the comprehensive plan, this area along the southern portion of Benson Corridor 104th was called to have increased density and to allow a mix of uses. We have that in some locations, but not all. And so this is the stopgap to allow that residential and mixed use until we do a broader study.

So a lot of this may seem like it's coming fast, but it is really we already have the policies in place through the comp plan. It's just updating the code for that consistency now. And there's a couple reasons why we're doing it now. One is we have heard from council as well as the community a desire to see redevelopment happen along those corridors. And one of the big things that's a barrier is our height and our site coverage limitation.

So they produce because of the site coverage, large parking lots with smaller buildings. And so that's number one, as we want to encourage redevelopment when the market's ready for it. And then number two is is that this is an interim step. So there's the CCMU zone already allows these residential uses, so we're just broadening it to the rest of the Southern Corridor. There's other state legislation happening this year that we're waiting to see where it goes, and there's other legislation that was adopted in previous years that will become effective in 2020 and 2029.

So we're trying to kind of do some modicum of people are starting to ask us questions. And so this is a step towards that without doing the full work to update all of the design standards and do things that we know we need to do, but we don't have staff capacity right now to fully do it. So this is a step in that direction.

Yeah, I'd like to make a comment on the parking standards in residential areas. So I know we've been trying to you know there have been moves to reduce the requirement for parking available in residential areas and this one says basically that the director can even waive that. My daughter lives in a current standard apartment complex and my wife needed to go visit her early in the morning. There are like an apartment complex that handles like that has like over a hundred, two hundred units. There are 10 parking spots available for non residents.

They were all full. She had tried to go across the street where there's a neighborhood built to current standards, kind of minimum current standards. The people who live there had filled all available parking. She was I think she had to go like a half mile away to park. I worry about moving to reduce parking requirements even further when you know if you live in these kinds of environments it's virtually impossible to have somebody come visit you.

We do understand the concern about parking. A lot of these legislation are coming down from the states, so it's not just Kent creating them out of nowhere. So there there are rules and regulations that we have to follow, so we're just putting them in place. And also when it comes to those director's rules, the the onus is on the the applicant. So they must show why they need reduced parking and that they won't necessarily get it, but it could be something along the lines of this apartment is really close to the light rail And I don't know, most of our applicants or most of our residents don't own a car. And they use transit a lot. So maybe they don't need as many parking spaces. But there are additional requirements and things that they'll have to show. So you don't just get that modification waived outright.

Yeah, answer. I have good news and bad news. The good news is this is not a new process for us. This is something that's been in place for a long time. So it's just highlighting it in our code because we get a lot of times developers will call us asking about the process for parking reductions and the request process.

So we're not adding anything new. The bad news is that by 2027, maybe 2029, I'll have to check my dates, this will be nonexistent because the state has preempted us with local legislation, saying essentially in most areas in Kent, we cannot require parking. So it will be truly left to the developer and the market to decide how much parking is needed. I will say that this is something that in the Washington State Legislation, Kent testified frequently on and said that we understand the intent to have multimodal communities, and we are fully supportive of that. We also recognize that, especially in communities like Kent, where people work in off hours and don't work traditional shifts that transit can support, it can be incredibly hard to live without a vehicle.

And so we have continued to raise this as an issue at the state legislature, but we will be preempted by the state. So this is this is again one of those stop holdovers. We are not getting rid of our parking requirements earlier than we have to at this point. We're not trying to rush to do that, but that is an eventuality that we will be facing.

All

right. If there are no further questions, I call for a motion to accept this.

Oh, okay. Did staff have any other questions or feedback on the proposed changes? No? Okay. And we can go to number 26.

Is there any further business to bring before the Board?

No further business. I did want to highlight that the mayor's state of the city, her annual address is on March 19. We will forward you information about that.

Alright. Since there is no further business, this meeting is adjourned.