Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Centers And Hubs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board debates whether to require ground-floor commercial in Edmonds’ centers and hubs
Summary
At a follow-up code discussion the board and staff reviewed draft mixed-use maps and a proposed ‘commercial overlay.’ A motion to make ground-floor commercial optional in Mixed Use 3 and 4 failed; the board agreed to revisit parcel-level maps before a public hearing.
The Edmonds Planning Board spent substantial time reviewing draft code language and maps for neighborhood centers and hubs, focusing on whether ground-floor commercial uses should be required or merely allowed in Mixed Use 3 (MU-3) and Mixed Use 4 (MU-4) areas.
Staff presentation and maps Planning Department staff summarized a draft code that distinguishes parcels where ground-floor commercial would be required from parcels where commercial would simply be allowed. Where the commercial overlay applies, staff proposed a 10-foot front setback, a required active frontage and a 12-foot ground-floor height to support retail and other street-level uses, plus step-back and transition standards where mixed-use zones meet residential properties.
Public and board concerns Board members and speakers raised questions about particular map areas (for example, the Medical District expansion and parts of Westgate and 5 Corners). Several board members said some parcels mapped for required commercial appeared to cover large areas and that a parcel-by-parcel review would help avoid requiring unviable commercial uses in locations where demand is unlikely.
Motion and vote A motion to change the draft so that commercial ground-floor uses in MU-3 and MU-4 would be "allowed" rather than "required" was moved and seconded and taken to a voice vote; the motion was defeated. The board’s discussion and the vote signaled a lack of consensus and prompted a decision to continue detailed, map-by-map review before the Planning Board advances a final draft to the City Council.
Bonus-floor incentives and amenity requirements Staff described an incentive approach by which a project could earn an additional floor (a "bonus floor") if it meets community-benefit criteria such as providing amenity/open space, on-site affordable housing, transportation improvements (bike racks, EV charging), or significant ground-floor commercial percentages. The board discussed varying the amenity-size requirement (staff proposed a percentage-based approach tied to lot size rather than a single fixed square footage) and limiting bonus-floor availability to specific parcels near hubs and intersections.
Next steps and schedule The board asked staff to return with parcel-level maps and illustrative renderings showing how proposed setbacks, active frontage and bonus-floor incentives would appear at street level. Staff agreed to adjust the schedule so the board can hold at least one full session to review maps before a public hearing and before the board forwards recommendations to City Council.
Ending note Board members emphasized they wanted to present a clear, map-specific plan to the public rather than a draft that invites confusion. The board retains the ability to require commercial in targeted locations but decided to postpone final decisions until after a more detailed, parcel-by-parcel review.
