Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mukilteo staff bring 2026 docket items: rezonings, setbacks, fence rules and affordable-housing options
Summary
Planning staff reviewed the annual docket process and presented several public and city-initiated comprehensive-plan and code proposals, including a 44th Street rezone request, fence-on-retaining-wall code changes, reduced front setbacks in the Planned Community Business zone, and multiple options to ease or modify a 10% affordable-unit requirement in mixed-use projects.
City planning staff and councilmembers spent the latter portion of the Jan. 26 Mukilteo work session discussing the 2026 comprehensive-plan docket and related code proposals.
Christina Sarris, planning manager, explained the process: the annual call for submissions runs from November to January and the council decides the docket on Feb. 2; items that proceed require formal application fees and a Planning Commission review. "This happens once a year where we put a call out to the community," Sarris said, adding that the docket is the public27s primary opportunity to request plan or code changes.
Staff highlighted city-initiated items that are mostly clerical (map updates and PROSA integration) and reviewed a public rezone request for two parcels on 44th Street to change from planned industrial to planned community business to allow mixed-use redevelopment. Planning Director Andy Gluska said staff sees a zoning rationale for aligning those parcels to adjacent planned community business designations, but noted different property owners and potential legal issues for downzoning requests.
Council and staff also debated population-growth targets and the high-capacity transit designation; staff advised that Mukilteo must use Office of Financial Management numbers for 20-year growth targets and that formal changes are addressed through scheduled five-year check-ins rather than the annual docket.
On code items, staff presented a developer request to allow semi-transparent fences placed directly on retaining walls (instead of requiring a stepped-back fence), citing maintenance and visual concerns. Staff noted building-code and wind load issues would need review if the council directs study of the change.
Developers also requested reducing front setbacks in the Planned Community Business South zone from 25 to 10 feet (and a related variant for taller buildings); the council discussed whether to study that change citywide or focus on Harbor Pointe/Midtown areas and whether development agreements or variances might be an alternative.
The session included extensive discussion on Mukilteo27s affordable-housing requirement for mixed-use zones: current rules require 10% of units to be affordable at 80% of Snohomish County AMI. Public proposals included waiving permit or impact fees for the affordable units, sliding percentages by project size, establishing a fee-in-lieu program (with local staffing implications), adjusting AMI thresholds, or only applying requirements to developments over 40 feet. Staff recommended studying fee reductions and one other near-term option but cautioned that a fee-in-lieu program may not be cost-effective for a small city unless many projects contribute regularly.
Councilmembers asked for financial exhibits and developer analyses; staff pointed to submitted materials showing sample fee-in-lieu amounts (one developer suggested roughly $200,000 for a particular project) and said detailed financials would be available in the packet for the Feb. 2 docket action.
No zoning or code changes were adopted; council provided direction to staff about which proposals merited further analysis and which appeared unsuitable for Mukilteo given staffing and legal constraints.
