Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, good evening. This is Chair Artsy calling to order the Red Zim Planning Commission for Wednesday, July 1st, 2026 at 6 p.m. Our first order of business is a roll call. So if, I guess, Commissioner Bayan, if you wouldn't mind calling a roll and get started.

Okay. Chair Artsy.

Right here.

Myself is here. Commissioner Fixdahl.

Here.

Commissioner Kelly.

Here.

Commissioner Mattson. Commissioner Patek. Vice Chair Plants. Commissioner Poole.

Here.

Secretary Roche. Here. Chair, there are six people, or commissioners.

Okay. We have six ministers in attendance, and therefore we have a quorum to hold the meeting. Next item is correspondence received. So we received two different items. First, on June 30th, we received comments from the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation on Docket 21, Group B, D-253, RMF 2, Rezones of Comp Plan Amendment. Also on June 30th, we received a letter from the Still a Guamish tribe, stating that they have no comments and they defer to and support tribes in closer proximity to the affected areas. Next up are audience comments. However, since this is a public hearing item, we will not be taking comments on the public hearing agenda items until after a staff presentation. Outside of the public hearing, those attending virtually will be offered an opportunity to speak after the in-person comments are completed. Each speaker will be provided three minutes to address an item. Interested parties may also provide written comments to planningcommission at rentanois.gov. Groups or organizations may select a spokesperson to speak on a group's behalf. As of today, no one has signed up to speak on non-agenda items. If there is anyone in the audience that would like to speak, please raise your hand.

Okay.

Seeing no one in the audience are online, we can go on to the next item. So next would be approving the meeting minutes for June 17th, 2026. Is there a motion to approve the meeting minutes for the June 17th meeting?

I move we approve the minutes.

Second. Moved by Commissioner Kelly and seconded by Commissioner Fixdahl. We do... Yeah, are there any objections to, or any discussion to review minutes? Okay, hearing none, those in favor say aye. Aye. Those who are not in favor say nay. And the motion passes, minutes are approved. Next up is the director's report, Angie, or I guess, sorry, yeah, Clark, I think, whenever you're ready.

Good evening, planning commission members, Clark Close, current planning manager. Pretty rare occasion where Matt and Angie both are kind of away at the same time. Kind of left the goal unattended here, so to speak, for me to sub in. So in case you're wondering where the starters are at today, the director, he's still enjoying his time away from the office. Expect Matt to return on the 13th. And then Angie is out today with a last minute family item. So I do have three things here for the full hat trick. The first one is Legacy Square and World Cup. Then I want to talk about population estimates and then a few MVP current planning projects. So kick things off. And before I talk about the World Cup events, the Office of Financial Management released their official 2026 population estimates for cities and counties across Washington yesterday. Renton's 2026 population now stands at 109,800. This is an increase of 100 residents from last year. This keeps Renton as the ninth largest city in the state and the fourth largest in King County. Currently still behind Seattle, Bellevue, and Kent. We're not quite within striking distance of catching up with Kent at 140,400, but we are ahead of Federal Way on the field at, they're only at 103, so... And then now feel free to take a hydration break before I cross over into the project updates. First on the list is the Renton School District. Renton School District is going to, we went through their long land use entitlement process last year, and they're looking to do a replacement and site expansion. And they're expected to dribble this construction phase one Starting next week. So hope to issue that civil construction permit so they can kick off the student parking lot there and then can you don't gateway. This is Golly, what did I write Um, Yeah, okay. This is what I was going to say. The city's no longer the keeper of their civil construction permit. That got issued beginning of this week. And so they are going to start the first of three phases. First phase is going to kind of tie in with what's going on with the I-405 widening, with the... construction that's going on there down there at Exit 7 with the roundabouts. So they'll be part of that roundabout construction. And this is for three, four-story apartment buildings with 1,500 square feet of retail and approximately 385 residential units. If you're not familiar with that, you know, Exit 7, that's near the VMAX. So Next up is Willowcrest Phase 2, 19 affordable housing units. They submitted their first building permit recently for a shoring wall and a vault. Solera Phase 2 subdivisions anticipated to record their final plat by the end of the month. This is 90 owner-occupied townhouse units. And then Camellia Horse, a bit of a dark horse, originally submitted their building permits in March of 2024, six-story, 72 apartment buildings on Williams. It's just north of Merrill Gardens, if you're familiar with Merrill Gardens. Anyways, they submitted a building permit revision last month, which to me feels like a bunch of bonus time for, needed for that project so they can get their legs back under them and keep that project rolling. Now, finally, the World Cup, as long as Mexico and USA keep winning, Legacy Square is going to be a very popular attraction to the community. Mexico beating Ecuador 2-0 in the round of 32. USA, don't look at your phones unless you've got it recorded and you're going to go home and watch it. I did see a stat that they're 71% win probability there. So as long as those two teams keep going, we'll keep adding... Watch parties to Legacy Square. So USA, Bosnia going on right now. Sunday, July 5th, Mexico versus England. And then when the USA wins, Monday, July 6th, that'll be the next watch party. Kickoff time for that one is 5 p.m. Not to play favorites. I do hope at some point Norway, you know, comes out of their bracket and, and you know, performs well, but anyways, USA, it's all about USA, Mexico quarterfinals, July 10th and 11th semifinals, July 14th and 15th. And then third place playoffs and finals. Those will happen towards the middle of July. So. That's the end of my report. Happy to answer any questions.

Is that the Panabote site where this Kenny Dale Gateway is going?

That's the former Panabote site. Yep. All right. So Vulcan ended up selling their entitlements, and we've got a new well-seasoned developer that's ready to go. Wow.

Josh Triplett- parking places are they're going to be to know.

Josh Triplett- Others I don't remember off the top of my head, but roughly as many units, as there are so in the neighborhood of. Josh Triplett- Three to 400 some of them will be. Josh Triplett- surface parking okay yeah.

And I'd also like to mention that our resident team here in Renton won today, Belgium. However, we're going to have to choose a side, potentially. But anyway, I'm happy because I have Belgian friends and they're very excited. And I get to say that, you know, They are housed here, and they're staying at the higher agency, which is pretty cool.

One of our hotels was a location for one of the teams.

The Econo Lodge.

Not the Red Lion, but let's go with the Hyatt. The Hyatt makes sense, so that's awesome.

Yep.

Well, nothing else. Thanks, Clark, for that phenomenal sport report. Appreciate it. Next item is the briefing and public hearing for the Arts and Cultural Master Plan update.

Excellent. Thanks a lot, Clark. I was actually hoping to get a break from legacy score and soccer for a few seconds with this planning commission meeting. I think this is the first watch party I have not been in attendance at rooting against USA, but it would be nice to have a break.

Yeah.

So just to give you a brief headline, I'm Jesse Kutarski. I'm with the Community and Economic Development team and our Economic Development staff. I'm the manager. And I am here serving as the staff liaison for the Arts Commission to present the update to the Arts and Culture Master Plan with consideration for adoption.

Jesse, just a moment. Chair, do we need to open the public hearing?

We do need to open the public hearing. Thank you.

Is there a motion to open the public hearing? Move we open the public hearing.

Motion made by Commissioner Kelly and seconded by Commissioner Fixall. All those in favor, opening the hearing. Aye. All those against, please say nay. Motion passes. The hearing is now open. Thank you.

For the record, please.

For the record, my name is Jessie Gutarski with our Community and Economic Development team, and I'm here as our staff liaison for our Arts Commission, which don't meet on the dais. This feels very fun. They would be very jealous. I'm not going to tell them. We can do without visuals if we want to, but it's a lot more fun as an arts presentation with the slides, I promise. I can get started. So just to give you a little background, so as required by city code, the Arts Commission oversees implementation and periodic updates to the March and Culture Master Plan. The current plan was last adopted in 2010. So as you are all aware in your current roles as residents and commissioners, there have been some significant changes in the community since then. So this process was in direct response to all of the community changes, some new initiatives, the populations that are here, policy changes, and a general reflection of how we deal with arts in the city and specifically within city policies and within city decision-making. I think she's close.

Yay.

So this has been a long time in the making. We started in 2023 with this process and here we are today. So 2020-10 to 2023 and here in 2026. But a lot of those years not just since the last two years, but even since 2010 have been in community engagement and how to get arts and culture and response to what community needs and growing changes and to respond moving forward to those continuing changes. So all of that is reflected in this 2026 arts and culture master plan update. So this is what I just spoke about. Here we go, thank you. So to give you again kind of the process and how we got here so far, beginning in 2023, community engagement to guide the plan drafting process included community listening sessions, steering committee meetings, and interviews with artists, businesses, residents, and city departments. Outreach also included pop-up events, an online survey, and door-to-door engagement with the distribution of over 3,000 door hangers to targeted residential areas across the city, making broader participation available to people of all cultures, locations, and backgrounds. This input informed review of existing efforts and gaps, helping identify opportunities for improvement. The focus extended beyond arts programming to how arts and culture connect to broader community needs, including identity, access, and economic opportunity. At its core, the 2026 plan reflects a shift, and this is very important to the arts commissioners, toward ongoing partnership and co-creation rather than a one-time planning effort. The true intent of this plan is not for something to sit on a shelf, but for something that can be easily implemented and carried forward. This updated master plan is action-oriented and guides how arts and culture are integrated into city policy, investment, and community development over time. It recognizes arts and culture as central to community identity, economic vitality, and quality of life, and embeds them more directly into city decision-making. Strategic priorities focus on five areas, integrating public art into capital projects, expanding private sector partnerships, increasing community engagement through inclusive programming, diversifying funding sources for long-term sustainability, and strengthening implementation through clear actions, timelines, and accountability measures.

Next slide.

The updated master plan builds on the 2010 foundation and reflects how Renton has evolved over the past decade plus. The key shift is moving arts and culture from standalone programming into city investment, economic development, and policy decisions. Key updates include integrating public art into capital projects, strengthening the creative community or economy by growing opportunities for artists and creative businesses, expanding partnerships across city departments, community organizations and private partners, expanding access to arts and culture across neighborhoods and ensuring equitable opportunities and establishing clear actions and metrics for implementation. Next slide. The plan is intended to function as an implementation framework, again, moving into action as opposed to plan on a shelf. And so rather than a static document, to support that work is organized into three phases to help sequence actions and keep momentum over time. As this slide shows you, there are the short term. This is a focus on establishing a leadership structure, identifying early actions and integrating arts and culture into existing city processes and investments. A real example, if you've had a chance to look at the draft plan is Legacy Square. That project was identified pretty early as what we called a quick win because of the rapid timeline that was necessary and also the cross section interest in the program. So something that was already set up and arts were at the table early on in the project. So there was an arts and culture plan built directly into that project from the start rather than an add-on at the end. So that project was intended to be sort of an example of what these short-term quick wins could look like. The mid-term phase, that is focusing on growth, so expanding partnerships, increasing visibility of arts initiatives, identifying sustainable funding opportunities, and building momentum for implementation. The long-term goal is more integrating arts and culture into community development and economic vitality, with ongoing evaluation and periodic updates to keep the plan aligned with community needs. Another focus from the Arts Commission, specifically in this long-term piece, was making sure that the plan does not go another 16 plus years without changes in response to community needs. brings us to where we are today. We are in the formal adoption process at the moment. And this has been briefed with the planning committee. And we are here today with the public opening hearing so that people can see what has been proposed. And our hope and consideration is that this will be soon adopted so we can be in the implementation and continue the process moving forward. Happy to take any questions or whatever's allowed.

Thank you, Jesse. Are there any questions at this time? I guess more of a comment from my end. I went through the, at least sort of the handout we received earlier, and we appreciate the attention to detail that went into identifying specific measures and metrics in terms of tracking the progress that you're making on this plan. I think it's something that we don't always see very much in a lot of these types of plans from other groups, and it's really appreciated.

One of my questions is about I'm really pleased to see funding opportunities for the arts. Fundraising is what I do for a living, so it's always good to see this. I'm just wondering about the revenue streams and wondering what opportunities might be out there for the city and kind of what you're thinking in that direction.

right now internally and part of the adoption of the plan is to make those discussions priority. So nothing has been uniquely identified. What we have been doing is comparing what other communities around us are using and trying to identify what might work well for Renton. A big part of the, I would say, delay in getting the plan to this phase was that there have been a lot of those cross-department conversations because we wanted to make sure that across the city departments, we're going to be supportive of this plan and of these discussions. So nothing has been written in stone for what those are. But what the plan does is open the doors for those comparisons and those discussions with support.

Yeah, especially the budget increases. Well, I'm sure it'd be helpful. But the plan I hope will help with that as well. This is well done.

As part of your goal three, I noticed, too, you discussed promoting the creative economy. So I was wondering if that also includes looking... So it seems like it's geared towards more about creating, like, or supporting arts in the... supporting arts, like, jobs and opportunities in local areas as well. Is there an opportunity to include in this, like, a partnership between Renton and some larger companies that might also, that would also be working on this kind of field, like, outside of Renton itself? Because I know there's, like, Nintendo and other video game companies based in Renton, and there's also, like, a lot of, like, video and, like, this, like, movie industry out in Vancouver. So I don't know if there's an opportunity to include that in this portion too as well.

That was the intent here with the economic development piece of it was that arts be viewed as part of that business recruitment that we're doing as a holistic plan. Maybe not putting as the stepchildren, the creative economy industries, but while you're looking at what gaps exist within and where we can start to recruit the companies that would find themselves happy and healthy here. Maybe that's competitors with wizards or people like the Nintendo areas that are growing outside of their Bellevue based offices to consider Renton as a place to be. So actively pursuing those and really making the case that Renton is a community that supports the arts and sees the arts as being critical to our growth. Intentional recruitment. But also making it easier for some artists and arts businesses to do their work here. And one of the projects that we're working on right now is trying to identify what some barriers might be to artists working in Renton. A specific example would be film. There are some barriers that we are not aware of that is leading filmmakers to go elsewhere rather than come here. And so we're trying to figure out what those are and how we can work with them to identify what would make this a more appealing place to do business.

That's great to see. Thank you. Are there any other comments or questions at this time? Let's see. So hearing none, is there a motion to close the briefing and public hearing for the Arts and Culture Master Plan update?

So moved. Thank you. Is there a second? Second.

All right. Moved by Commissioner Kelly and seconded by Commissioner Mayan. All those in favor of closing the public hearing, please say aye.

Aye. All those against, please say nay. And motion passes.

The public hearing and briefing are now closed. Okay, thank you, Jesse. Next up on the docket is the public hearing on docket 221, group B, D251, child care centers. Is there a motion to open a public hearing on this item at this time?

I move that we open the public hearing at this time.

Thank you, Commissioner Kelly. Is there a second? Second.

Okay.

And second by Commissioner Fickstall. All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye. All those against, please say nay. And motion passes. The public hearing is now open. So we've, I guess, not Maya. Is there, it is Maya? Yep. Oh, okay. Awesome. Great, Maya, whenever you're ready, you should be able to go.

All right, Maya Simon, associate planner for the record. And let me know if you can see my speaker notes because you should not see those. So this item is on child care centers. And I just want to note before we begin that all facilities still have to comply with state regulations and licensing, regardless of what changes we make to our local code here. So childcare is obviously a expensive, low-profit service that is in really high demand. In Washington, 63% of families live in a childcare desert and a lot in Renton, as you can see by that map. 74% of parents in the U.S. report difficulty finding a program spot for their child. And locally, Renton has just under 12,000 children under 10 years old. Recently, the state has increased childcare subsidies, which means we need more program spaces so that people can take advantage of those subsidies. And this is really high need in our community, so we want to reduce the barriers and make it easier to site child care facilities in Renton. To that end, the state recently passed Senate Bill 5509 in 2025, and this requires cities to allow child care centers in all zones except industrial zones, light industrial zones, and open space zones. We can impose reasonable restrictions on the permit. We need to adopt these requirements by July 27th of next year, but we're doing a little bit early because we recognize this is a need in Renton. And then the bill also has this provision that we can allow childcare centers in other zones, but must provide for a conditional use approval of onsite childcare centers in industrial zones, except around high hazard facilities. And the wording on that is a little bit open to interpretation, but hopefully we've written this amendment so we don't have to get into those weeds. Under our current code, we have these split into two uses. There's the family home daycares, which are an operation licensed by the state with 12 or fewer children in the caregiver's place of residence. So this is what you might think of as an in-home childcare center. And these are allowed as an accessory use to that residence in all zones. Then we also have daycare centers, which are an operation licensed by the state with 13 or more children or any number in a non-residential structure. And right now, these are allowed with a hearing examiner conditional use permit in Residential 4 through Residential Multifamily 2. They are outright permitted in industrial commercial zones, and they are permitted with certain conditions in Commercial Office Residential and Urban Center 1 and 2. So our proposed amendments are to update some definitions. So recently the state allowed a waiver through the Department of Children, Youth, and Families that allows up to 16 children instead of 12 in in-home daycare centers. So we just want to make sure that our definitions for both family home daycare and daycare center kind of align with that state waiver up to 16 children. We would then permit daycare centers outright in all residential zones, RC through RMF2. They would obviously remain permitted outright in industrial and commercial zones. And then we would remove the condition in commercial office residential that requires childcare centers to be co-located with certain uses. And then, as I mentioned, the state law allows us to impose reasonable restrictions on the centers, especially as these expanded to more traditionally residential areas. So we looked into both what our peer cities have for restrictions on child care centers, what state licensing already requires as kind of the baseline, including fences around outdoor play areas. And we tried to anticipate restrictions that anticipate the impacts of child care centers on existing residences now that they're permitted outright in those residential zones. All that to say, we're proposing to add a setback of 20 feet for outdoor play areas in the residential zones, and that would apply to any property lines that abut residentially zoned properties. And that 20 feet is really consistent with the cities around us that we researched. Obviously, that doesn't work for every property, especially smaller properties in residential zones, so we wanted to add some flexibility into the code. So we settled on the administrator can reduce that 20 foot setback if landscaping is proposed, and that provides a better sound and visual buffer from those existing residences. We also recognize that traffic is a major concern with child care pickup and drop off, especially as these expand into residential areas. And while we already acquire almost twice as many pickup and drop off spaces as peer jurisdictions, We currently have a minimum and maximum of two spaces per 25 clients, and we're proposing to remove that maximum. So senators can provide at least two spaces per 25 clients, but they can provide more if they would like to. We recommend adopting the amendments as proposed to comply with state regulations. The timeline of this amendment is planning commission deliberations and recommendations on July 15th. and then off to Planning and Development Committee on July 27th for their recommendations before it goes to the full city council for adoptions. Happy to answer any questions.

So thank you, Maya. Are there any questions or comments at this time?

Fair. My question is around setbacks for play structures. I don't think I see a reason to change setbacks for play structures. So I just wanted to voice that as my assessment. There's been a conversation going back and forth with me and staff as I've asked some questions around this. So I just want to mention that.

So are you recommending that, like, the 20-foot setback not be included for specifically for by structures but for the rest of the daycare?

I don't see a reason to have a setback other than the setback that would already be present on a residential zone property. So the residential zone property already has setbacks. And so in this case, we would essentially be adding a different setback for this type of use. And I don't see a reason for that.

Yeah, if I could clarify, so the setback that already exists in the residential zone is for any structure in the residential zone. This would apply to any outdoor play area. So it would be more restrictive than the existing residential setbacks. It would apply to grassed areas or a slide or a jungle gym, whatever it may be that's that outdoor play area for the daycare.

My position would be that we don't need to be more restrictive. We could use the setback that's already present in the zone as the requirement, as opposed to moving play structures further away from the property lines.

Point of clarification, if I may, Chair Artsy. This is Patrice Kent, City Attorney's Office. Maya, perhaps when you have the presentation and deliberations, you could provide some technical advice on this as well. I think that would probably help the commission. Thank you.

Also a question for you, Maya. Is there, would adding these daycare centers in residential areas also require updating or paving new sidewalks along that street as well? And would that change the amount of the width of the sidewalk depending on the size of a daycare center if it's in a residential area?

That is a good question. I will have to look into it and get back to you. I'm not sure kind of what threshold our frontage improvements would apply at. I don't think it would impact the size of the sidewalk, but I will have to get back to you on whether it triggers the sidewalk improvements or not.

Thank you.

Any other questions at this time? Okay. Hearing none, is there a motion to close the public hearing for DACA 21 Group E, T501, child care centers?

Actually, I note for the record that there is no one online and there is no one in the hall for members of the public who may be interested in making a statement at this time as part of the public hearing for the record. Thank you.

Move we close the public hearing.

Okay. Okay. All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

All those not in favor, please say nay. And motion passes. The public hearing is now closed. Next up is Docket 21B, D252, Urban Design Regulations Update. Is there a motion to open this public hearing at this time?

Motion to open hearing.

Okay. Motion made by Commissioner Bayan and seconded by Commissioner Roche. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. All those not in favor, please say nay. Motion passes. Public hearing is now open. So Anjali, whenever you're ready.

Well, thank you so much, Angelia Weiss with Long Range Planning for the Record. And this is the most planning commissioners I have seen in person in a long time, almost a full row. So that is exciting. It's just unfortunate that Matt and Angie are not here. And I'm surprised there are so many of you because it is right before the 4th of July. That being said, if you were to look outside, you would never guess because it looks like March. right now. But no, I'm glad to see you all. So this presentation is regarding docket number 252 related to the urban design regulations. And just like, oh, and if any members of the public, if you're viewing this later, I can be reached by email at aweihs at rentonwa.gov or by phone at 425-430-7312. So just like Maya's project, this one is proposed as an amendment in response to a state law update. And this is specifically ESHB 1293. And what this is intended to do by the state is to remove some regulatory barriers regarding urban design, as well as make urban design standards across the state more objective and easier to understand. So they want to make sure that our code is less open to interpretation when it comes to our design standards, that it is less vague, and that way it is easier for an applicant to determine what is required just by looking at the code. Just as an example, For example, two people would have different ideas of what is considered adequate. So that's just an example of what they're trying to do. So that is one aspect. And the other large aspect is to ensure that our design standards do not result in reductions in density, height, bulk, or scale below what is otherwise allowed by the underlying zoning standards. So they want to make sure that all the development complies with our development standards for setbacks, height, and building coverage and that our urban design standards do not add additional reduction on top of that. So just some examples. I think I read most of these examples in our last briefing. So I did replace some of them though. For example, one of the new ones I'm showing here are buildings that are taller than 30 feet in height. So also ensure that The weather protection is proportional to the distance above ground level. So once again, proportional is pretty vague. And then also a service elements shall be located and designed to minimize impacts on the pedestrian environment and adjacent and or abutting uses. So minimizing impacts is pretty open to interpretation. So those are two new examples that I'm showing in this presentation. So therefore, staff proposes amendments to Renton's urban design regulations that serve to remove or replace objective design review language, remove or replace discretionary standards, ensure standards do not reduce building scale beyond zoning standards, and therefore comply with state law. And in addition to that, staff also received a citizen-initiated request to amend the city's urban design regulations, which will be incorporated in this docket item. So staff recommendation is to amend our urban design regulations for compliance. And next steps are the same as Maya's that she already described. So deliberations and recommendations on July 15th. Any questions?

I will note for the public record that there are no members of the public in the room with us. or in the participant list on the meeting. Mike, I would be interested in more information about the citizen request for update.

Absolutely, I will include a slide in the next deliberations and recommendations that describes their proposal. The to be clear, their particular request touches a particular standard that is not in compliance with state law, and it may be a struggle to adapt it to comply with state law, but I will be sure to provide that excerpt as part of the next presentation.

Do you also plan to include examples for how you would correct the language from what was on previously? Because I'm interested to see how you would minimize the impacts on a pedestrian environment and what you would end up recommending changing that to instead.

Absolutely. So now, to be clear, I have not been given an AOK for any proposed amendments, and we do not have a draft yet. And these amendments are particularly challenging. But an example of how to amend, for example, the service elements can be located and designed to minimize the impacts on the pedestrian environment. and adjacent or abutting uses. That was probably the easiest one for me to describe off the top of my head. So an example would be to revise it to ensure that those service elements are located behind the structure or out of view. If it is not feasible to locate it behind the structure, if it must be on the side to set back instead to ensure that it is properly screened and therefore it would minimize the impacts on the pedestrian environment.

Thank you. Yeah. Any other questions or comments at this time?

I have a question. Sorry. I just, you've probably already covered this, but I just kind of want to make sure I understand this in my head a little bit better. A while back, we talked about how certain areas of the downtown Renton properties budding up to like neighborhoods or smaller scale would be like Cut back, buildings would be cut back in certain ways to allow for more light, better transitions. The state law is now saying you can't have any of that. Is that? Pretty clear or so that you have an excellent memory.

That is a fantastic point. So yes, the state law would not permit to the city to have additional setbacks beyond the zoning development standards. However, as part of this proposal, we would be reviewing some of those design standards. and if it is feasible to revise our development standards as an alternative to the design standards we may just relocate to those we do i think it's in the cd zone uh however i may i may be wrong i think we have a um a standard in our development standards for the cd zone that requires an additional 15 foot setback if the property abuts a residential zone so it technically already exists um and our urban design regulations are a little bit more vague so it may be duplicative um but uh so yes that is something that we would need to evaluate thank you okay hearing no further questions or comments is there a motion to close the public hearing for this item

Would we close the public hearing? Second.

Okay. Motion moved by Commissioner Vixall and seconded by Commissioner Kelly. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those who are not in favor, please say nay. And motion passes. Public hearing is now closed. Okay. Next up is Docket 21, Group B, D-253, RMF-2, Rezone of Comp Plan Amendments. Is there a motion to open this item for public hearing?

So moved.

Motion moved by both Commissioner Fixtall and Kelly at the same time. Oh, sorry. Commissioner Maia and Kelly at the same time. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Was not in favor, please say nay. And the public hearing is now open. Okay. Angelia, I guess whenever you're ready, you're already there.

Wonderful. Thank you. Angelia Weiss with Long Range Planning for the Record once again. This presentation is regarding docket number 253 related to a rezone proposal with a comprehensive plan update. So I have brought you rezones in the past. This particular one is not just a rezone, but also requires a corresponding comprehensive plan amendment. And it is for two sites. Site one is Southwest Sunset Boulevard and Maple Avenue Southwest. And that property is located in the city center. It includes several parcels, I think six in total. And then 433- and 450 Bremerton Avenue Northeast. That property is located in the Highlands, and that property includes a total of four parcels. And both of these properties are located in the commercial arterial zone, and we are proposing to rezone it to the RMF2 zone with a commercial, I'm sorry, the existing comp plan designation is commercial mixed use, and the proposed comp plan designation is residential high density. And the RMF2 zone allows a residential density of 20 to 40 dwelling units per net acre. And the purpose of this proposal is to help facilitate development. Both of these properties have some either visibility or site constraints based on the depth of the lot that make commercial inviable on this site. And then on one site, Site 1 has a citizen-initiated request for a rezone, so they are proposing a development and request that it be rezoned to RMF2, and both property owners for both sites have been notified of this proposal. So I already described the sites, but you can see here that Site 1 is located on the left-hand side, and then Site 2, located in the Highlands, is located on the right-hand side. So site one, I said, let's see, yep, it is a total of six lots there. You can see if you compare the lot depth to the residential lots to the south, that there is not a lot of depth there. In the last briefing, I remembered to gather the depth before the presentation. However, I forgot to do it this time. I think it's about 80 feet in total depth, 80 to 100 feet, which is pretty shallow for a commercial lot. This property is directly adjacent to several transit stops, so there is definitely transit in the vicinity. And we are proposing RMF2 for this site. And it is currently occupied by some nonconforming uses. So for example, single family is nonconforming in this zone. It has some vacant properties which are currently used for parking. And then on non-conforming auto sales, as well as a dog grooming or daycare facility, some of those uses do not have active business licenses. If they were to try to develop with compliance with the CA zone, they would be required to have ground floor commercial. So if you incorporate the ground floor commercial with whatever parking needs that they would need to meet, it makes it very challenging for redevelopment. And that's why we're proposing rezoning this to RMF2. The next site has four lots. So this is the site on Bremerton. It is located very close to transit, so about 0.32 miles away from transit. Northeast 4th Street is located just a block to the south. And so we are proposing RMF 2 here. You can kind of see in the picture that there is a very large retaining wall. So the site that is already built, including the two parcels on the left-hand side, those are already developed, and you can see that they don't have a lot of commercial visibility because of that retaining wall. And the site that is proposed for redevelopment currently, they have a land use application currently, which is on hold. That site does not have any visibility from the public street. And this property is owned by, let's see, I have it located, Vision House, Vision House, of course. And so staff recommendation is to approve the zoning map amendments and corresponding comprehensive plan amendments for the two sites to the RMF2 zoning. Any questions?

For the first site, it's hard to tell how large the actual block is. Is it able to handle an RMF2 zone, considering it seems to be pretty small and surrounded by streets at that point?

So your question is, is it pretty small for RMF2? When we're thinking about RMF2, we might be thinking of townhomes. I think that the proposal that they have now is for townhomes on the site. And even with townhome development, it may still be a very tight squeeze. but most definitely more appropriate than any commercial proposal. So it's going a huge step in the right direction. But yes, you're correct. It may still be a challenge with townhome development.

I have a question about Site 2. It lists the address 433 as well, which is across the street. Is that correct or is it supposed to be 460?

That is a good question. I think I'm pretty sure that it was accurate because there are several addresses on that particular parcel. However, I may be wrong. Usually what I do is I right click on a parcel and just copy and paste. So if I collected a wrong number, I can check and verify and revise it next time. But that being said, the staff report does include for each site a table with all of the addresses and all of the parcel numbers. So that error would most certainly be caught by GIS, our GIS analyst.

So I remember we talked a few months ago about the idea of having corner stores, you know, sort of like local markets. Is that part of this zone as well, or is that not? I'm not sure where that sort of left off at that point. I'm not sure if it's included here, if that's a separate item that wouldn't be expected to be included in Form F2.

Oh, that's a good question. You're talking about the small-scale retail in residential zones. That is an excellent question. So that is Katie's project. If I'm remembering off the top of my head, I do not think that the RMF2 zone was included as part of that proposal. I think it was the RC through the R8 zone, or the R14 zone, but I may be incorrect. And I think that that proposal is on hold, waiting for a further update. The reason why we are considering not including the RMF2 as part of that small scale retail is only because we are considering evaluating what uses we should open up in the RMF2 zone. For example, if the state is going to require that we have commercial type uses in medium or low density residential zones, then it makes absolute sense for us to reevaluate what commercial uses are allowed in the RMF2 zone and the RMF1 zone, but we have not done a comprehensive review of the zoning use table yet, and we would also be proposing new development standards or touching the development standards for the RMF2 zone as well, because at this time they completely mirror the RMF1 zone. So that's the justification I have for you now, but I can certainly talk to Katie and ask her for a quick update and include that as a note in my next presentation.

Yeah, because I mean, this site would be too small or wouldn't be able to handle like a larger commercial sort of like set up for that. But I think even a smaller store with all the housing surrounded by it would still potentially be like beneficial there.

Yes, that is a good point. I think where we left off with the small scale commercial was a maximum of 1,500 or 1,800 square feet, something to that effect. So that makes total sense. It's not a matter of we want to limit the commercial that's on the site. It's a matter of we want to make it easier for them to develop. And the way it is currently written, they are required to provide a commercial on the ground floor. And that can make it very expensive.

I remember we ran into a similar issue with Altitude Apartments, I think it was, because they also required a provide commercial on the ground floor, but it's like up a hill and tucked away. So we just, we rezoned for them as well. So, okay.

And I may be wrong, but I actually do think that the RMF2 does currently allow for some retail uses on the ground floor. They're just heavily conditioned. And I would be happy to add to the slide what commercial uses are allowed.

Yeah, that'd be great to see. Thank you.

Yeah.

Any other comments or questions at this time? Okay, hearing none, is there a motion to close the public hearings? Motion made by Commissioner Kelly and seconded by Commissioner Fixdahl and Ryan. All those in favor of closing public hearing, please say aye. Hi. All those against, please say nay. And motion passes. This public hearing is now closed. Thanks, Frangeline, for all your work.

Thank you.

Commissioner comments. Are there any commissioner comments at this time? Hearing none, the last item on the docket is adjournment. Is there a motion to adjourn the public hearing or to adjourn for the day?

All right.

Second. Okay. All right. All those in favor for adjourning for today, please say aye. Aye. Aye. All those not in favor, please say nay. And the meeting is now adjourned at 6.55 p.m.