The Edmonds Planning Board at its Wednesday, March 27 meeting recommended amending one of the growth alternatives proposed for Edmonds’ 2024 Comprehensive Plan update, a guide to the city’s development in the next 20 years.  The city has worked with consultants to develop the draft growth alternatives, which were the topic of discussion during a March 23 citywide forum.

The all-volunteer planning board serves in an advisory capacity to the City of Edmonds in regional and local planning, and assists in the development of the Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinances.

The city’s contract with consultant VIA Perkins Eastman (planners) and Herrera (environmental) included studying a “no action” (status quo) alternative, and two growth scenarios that would accommodate the city’s allocated growth targets under the updated Comprehensive Plan. The growth scenarios are designed to account for and comply with the state’s housing bills and the mandatory Comprehensive Plan elements, and to align with multicounty and countywide planning policies. 

The ”no action” alternative is the existing land-use capacity as is – with no changes. This alternative is required as part of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Environmental Impact Statement process to establish a benchmark, to compare with the other proposed alternatives from an environmental impact perspective.

The City of Edmonds needs to accommodate the expected growth of 13,000 people over the next 20 years, as required by the state’s Growth Management Act (GMA). These new residents will require 9,000 new housing units.

Edmonds currently has the capacity to add 4,862 units. The city will also need to add 1,642 accessory-dwelling units (ADUs) and 42 single-family homes, bringing the total to 2,454 units that Edmonds needs to fulfill the GMA requirements.

However, the proposed growth alternatives include a higher goal of 2,700 units by 2044 based on the potential for zoning downsizing or land-use changes.

As part of this effort, the City of Edmonds must comply with three House Bills – HB 1110, HB 1220 and HB 1337. (See more about these requirements in our previous story here)

The consultants proposed two initial alternatives: focused growth and distributed growth. The focused growth alternative proposes building neighborhood centers in the Firdale Village, Westgate and Five Corners neighborhoods, while creating hubs in the North Edmonds Bowl, Perrinville and Firdale. The city’s Medical District – located near Swedish Edmonds Hospital – would also be expanded to complement medical services and provide temporary housing for medical workers. Housing units would be limited to four stories within neighborhood centers and medical centers. 

The distributed growth alternative is similar to the focused growth option except that it would limit buildings up to three stories in neighborhood centers and hubs. Growth in the Medical District could be expanded up to 2,000 units.

Both alternatives have a “15-minute neighborhood plan” in mind, which means that residents can easily walk, bike or take public transit to daily necessities and services. Both also included bonus height incentives, which refers to additional building height allowances granted to developers if they include specific features or amenities in their projects, such as neighborhood open space, affordable child care and small-scaled retail and cafes.

During the March 27 planning board meeting, Director of Planning and Development Susan McLaughlin summarized some of the feedback that she had received from the March 23 public forum, including:

– Requests to emphasize Edmonds Citizens’ Housing Commission recommendations.

– Concerns regarding urban heat islands impacting denser areas.

– Frustration with state directives.

– Clarification around where growth was proposed and how much of a guarantee that will actually occur.

– Confusion around the 15-minute city concept and land-use designations within that 15-minute boundary.

– Support for the Medical District expansion.

– A request for more information on how infrastructure, transportation and parking will be factored into the decision-making process.

– Concern about the possibility of having five-story buildings in neighborhood centers.

– Interest in curating neighborhood uses, such as grocery stores or cafes.

– New ideas, including designating other areas of the city as hubs, such as the Lake Ballinger area at 244th Street Southwest and 76th Avenue West, the Maplewood/Seaview area at 196th Street Southwest and 86th Avenue West. and the Westgate area at 226th Street Southwest and 15th Avenue West. In addition, participants suggested that the Medical District could become a “new Edmonds uptown,” and there could be growth centers in school areas, such as Firdale and Westgate. 

Focused growth vs. distributed growth

The initial “focused” growth alternative (Alternative A) proposes building neighborhood centers in the Firdale Village, Westgate and Five Corners neighborhoods, while creating neighborhood hubs in the North Edmonds Bowl, Perrinville and Firdale. The city’s Medical District – located near Swedish Edmonds Hospital – would also be expanded to complement medical services and provide temporary housing for medical workers. Housing units would be limited to four stories within neighborhood centers and medical centers, with an incentive for five-story buildings in select centers.

The initial “distributed” growth alternative (Alternative B) is similar to the focused growth option in terms of growth locations, except that it would limit buildings up to three stories in neighborhood centers and hubs. Growth in the Medical District could be expanded up to 2,000 units.

Both of the initial Alternatives A and B include bonus height incentives, which refers to additional building height allowances granted to developers if they include specific features or amenities in their projects. These could include neighborhood open space, sidewalks (beyond what is required by code), public enhancements, affordable child care and small-scaled retail and cafes.

Based on public feedback, the planning board throughout February and March considered and made several suggestions to the two proposed growth alternatives for both centers and hubs. Planning Board Chair Jeremy Mitchell said in an email Saturday that the goal was to provide an adequate growth study area  –referred to as the “bookends” –  that would allow for a degree of flexibility in making land-use and policy decisions once the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) has been issued and the mitigation measures for each alternative are fully understood.

Planning board confirms support for Alternative A, revises Alternative B

In the end, during its March 27 meeting, the board ended up confirming its support for the original proposal for Alternative A (focused growth) – including bonus height incentives –  but approving a revised version for Alternative B (distributed growth). The revised Alternative B limits building heights in all three of the hubs to three stories – with no incentives – and includes support for additional hubs at 226th and 15th, 196th and 86th, and 76th and 244th (Edmonds Way).

According to Mitchell, the revised Alternative B would give options for both commercial/retail businesses at the ground level as well as allow for entirely residential, but would still enable up to five stories in the Medical District and Firdale Village centers. (See graphic below for a summary.)

The planning board is also considering better transitions from taller buildings and commercial areas in the Highway 99 areas to residential neighborhoods. Under the revised proposal, some parcels would include buildings as high as 75 feet to 85 feet adjacent to Highway 99, while parcels beyond the Highway 99 area would be limited to a maximum height of 55 feet. According to these proposals, the new transitions would not impact the existing growth capacity of the Highway 99 area – otherwise known as no net loss.

Currently, most buildings in downtown Edmonds are about 25 feet high – or two stories. The Westgate neighborhood has a mix of three to four stories with a few two-story buildings. Under current zoning, most of Firdale Village allows four-story buildings.

In his email, Mitchell stressed that the planning board’s recommendation for the alternatives at this stage in the Comprehensive Plan update process “does not constitute a final decision to go with one alternative over the other (our ‘preferred’), nor does it finalize any land-use decisions regarding building heights in the proposed growth areas. We’re setting the study parameters for the EIS process so we can understand the environmental impacts and mitigation of each alternative, which will help inform final land-use direction,” he said.

Mitchell noted that the city council approved a consultant work plan and contract to provide two growth alternatives in addition to the no-action alternative. Working within these parameters, the planning board thought it made the most sense to choose “a range that looks at high-intensity density and low-intensity density – while in the confines of good planning principles and multi(county) and countywide planning policy.”  This range of choices “would give us worst- and best-case scenarios for mitigation measures of each intensity and provides a degree of flexibility to work between building height ranges and where they best make sense as we continue to develop the Comp Plan,” he said. 

“The council can always opt to incorporate more alternatives if they feel the range needs to be further broadened, or they would like to obtain a certain data point, but those do require significant resources of time and money, both of which the city does not have on their side currently,” Mitchell added.

Under state law, the Comprehensive Plan update must be completed by Dec. 31. 2024. You can see the planned timeline below:

Meanwhile, Edmonds residents are invited to share their thoughts on the original proposed growth alternatives. The planning board encourages those interested to take the online survey that will be available until April 2 (extended from the original April 1 deadline). McLaughlin said that while more than 1,200 people have visited the survey site, only 226 had submitted responses as of March 27.

“It’s also helpful to educate people on the [planning] process,” Chair Mitchell said during the meeting. “It’s not all accurate in their minds because it is complex.”

The planning board will next meet on April 10 to discuss Comprehensive Plan-related transportation issues and recommendations for detached accessory dwelling units (DADUs).

— By Nick Ng