Council continues debate on 2025 Comprehensive Plan and seeks clearer language on 'step-back' for taller buildings
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Sign Up Free
Summary
City planning staff presented the draft 2025 Comprehensive Plan — including a new climate element and major transportation and housing updates — and council requested clarifications and additional materials before adoption.
Planning Director John Coleman presented the 2025 Comprehensive Plan update and the planning-commission recommendations during a long council work session on Nov. 10. The major changes include a new climate element, updates to housing and a rewritten transportation element.
Council members and staff also reviewed planning-commission edits (eight items) and asked staff to supply missing or low-resolution materials — notably higher-resolution maps and a tree-canopy map — before final adoption. Libby Grange, planning manager, said staff revised environmental-policy language to avoid implying the city would protect one habitat area to the exclusion of others and added a glossary as requested.
A central regulatory question arose in development-regulation discussion: the CBD and Marine Mixed Use (MMU) zones include a bonus-height provision that requires a horizontal "step-back" for portions of a facade when a building exceeds the base height. Commenters and councilmembers said the code and the graphic are unclear about whether the requirement applies to a single upper floor, can include rooftop balconies or must be applied across multiple stories. Marcus (consultant) explained the intent: the requirement was meant to provide an eight‑foot horizontal setback across 75% of the street‑facing facade on one higher floor to reduce the tunnel effect and to allow light and potential outdoor space; staff agreed to clarify the language and update the graphic so it aligns with the code.
Councilmember Walters asked staff to strike or alter a transportation policy that could be interpreted to encourage creating alternate commuting routes through residential neighborhoods (example: West 2nd Street); staff and transportation consultant Chris Como agreed to refine the language to avoid unintended consequences and to ensure emergency-response needs are balanced with neighborhood integrity.
Next steps: staff will produce clarified development-regulation language and updated graphics for the CBD/MMU step-back requirement, provide higher-resolution maps and the animal-species list and tree-canopy map, and return to council on a short timeline so the city can meet its year-end adoption schedule if possible.