City planning staff presented a draft rewrite of the Neighborhood Centers and Hubs ("NC Hubs") development code and accompanying map overlays, and the Edmonds Citizens Planning Board spent extensive time questioning standards for ground‑floor commercial, open space and amenity requirements, heights and setbacks before making several map‑specific decisions.

Planning staffer Navisha (last name given variously in the packet) opened the discussion with an overview of the draft's purpose: to encourage compact, walkable mixed‑use development that integrates public space, activates street frontages and provides a mix of housing. "The requirements for this overlay in specific is to have commercial within the first 45 feet depth from the street frontage, and at least 60% of the street frontage need to have this active commercial use," Navisha said, summarizing the ground‑floor commercial overlay proposed in the draft.

Key code elements presented and discussed

- Ground‑floor commercial overlay: staff proposed requiring active commercial uses for the first 45 feet of depth from the street and for at least 60% of a project's street frontage in parcels where the overlay applies. Navisha framed the rule as intended to "activate the build of streetscapes and create places that are walkable and pedestrian oriented." (presentation materials)

- Build form, heights and incentives: the draft ties maximum base heights to subdistricts (MU3/MU4/MU5) and offers bonus height floors where projects meet incentive criteria. For example, bonus floors would require additional amenity/open space and other public benefits; the board discussed different mixes of required amenities, open space percentages (staff proposed 15% total open space with at least 5% usable amenity space; incentive thresholds would require more), and whether to weight criteria differently.

- Open space and amenities: staff proposed a 15% total open‑space requirement with at least 5% as usable amenity space. For bonus incentives, staff described increasing that total (examples in the presentation used 20–25% depending on incentive configuration) and allowing rooftop or indoor community space to count when appropriately accessible.

- Allowed and prohibited uses: the draft lists allowed primary and secondary uses (retail, office, light industrial studios, multifamily and middle housing), and prohibits uses judged incompatible with walkable environments (large outdoor vehicle displays, heavy industrial, drive‑throughs, large commercial parking lots, etc.). Existing nonconforming uses would be handled under standard code provisions.

Board discussion and map decisions

Board members asked numerous clarifying questions about how the code would treat existing single‑family homes inside hub boundaries, whether expansions would be allowed and how the draft interfaces with other parts of the code that address nonconforming structures. Judy Gladstone pressed staff on whether expansion of an existing single‑family structure is covered by the draft's LDR references; staff said expansions can be permitted if they meet the standards in the draft section that applies to single‑family expansions.

On maps, the board debated parcel‑level overlays and voted on several motions. After a discussion focused on a set of MU3 parcels west of 80th Avenue (the board reviewed a public petition from residents on that topic), the planning board voted to add a residential‑exception overlay to interior MU3 parcels between 2nd/13th and 2nd/16th on the west side of 80th Avenue but explicitly excluded parcels that directly abut 80th Avenue from that exception; the motion passed. A parallel motion to add the same residential exception on the east side of 76th Avenue failed.

The board also approved adding a ground‑floor commercial requirement (the commercial overlay) to a small cluster of parcels on the corner of 20th and 76th Avenue that the staff had identified as appropriate for required ground‑floor commercial uses.

Board members requested more detailed scoring or a matrix for bonus incentives so that criteria such as affordable housing, extra amenity space and community indoor spaces could be weighted rather than treated as an undifferentiated list. Several members said they preferred a points or matrix approach to make incentive tradeoffs explicit.

Next steps and scheduling

Staff said remaining NC Hubs map edits and text refinements will continue at upcoming meetings; the board scheduled continued deliberations and a public hearing on the NC Hubs draft as part of the June/July review schedule. Staff asked the board to finish map edits before the public hearing so the hearing can consider a near‑final draft.