Edmonds Planning Board backs interim step-housing ordinance language but asks council to handle safety/operations in appropriate code sections

The Edmonds Planning Board on Wednesday endorsed the city’s draft interim ordinance for ‘‘step housing’’ (the proposed ECDC Chapter 17.125) while asking that operational requirements and ‘‘code-of-conduct’’ language be handled outside the planning chapter.

Board members reviewed a draft the city circulated and raised objections to several provisions that had been framed as expectations for operators (examples discussed in the meeting included residency exclusions and facility siting statements). Members said those items are operational and enforcement matters and would be more appropriately located in code titles that govern public health, safety or licensing.

Planning Board member Steven said the committee should remove the “expectations” language from the development code because it is outside planning’s land-use role and could be difficult to implement. Several other members agreed. One board member suggested the Planning Board’s recommendation explicitly ask the City Council and city staff to consider complementary safety measures—lighting, surveillance, access control, operational plans and other design measures—placed in the appropriate city code chapter (for example, title sections that govern public safety or health), not inside the land-use chapter.

The board’s recommended edits also struck language that duplicated state rules (members noted the draft included a buffer-distance suggestion for schools that overlaps state statute). The board asked staff to circulate a revised draft that removes the expectations and clarifies where any safety- or operations-related obligations should sit in the municipal code.

On process, Chair Michael said the Planning Board will forward its revised language and comments to council. Board members asked staff to coordinate with the city attorney and public-safety staff to identify the correct code locations for operational and safety requirements, then return a redlined ordinance for final board review before transmittal to council.

Ending — Next steps: Staff will update the ECDC chapter language to remove the operational expectations, note the Planning Board’s concerns about safety and operations, and provide suggested locations in the municipal code (for example, public safety or health code chapters) where the council could adopt those operational requirements.