Shoreline Planning Commission Meeting – October 7, 2021
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Shoreline Planning Commission Meeting – October 7, 2021
The Shoreline Planning Commission held a regular meeting on October 7, 2021, starting at 3:00 PM. The meeting focused on two study items: (1) the Shoreline Place Sign Design Guidelines and (2) a series of development code amendments related to tree preservation. After extensive public comment and discussion, the Commission agreed to continue both items to a future meeting in November without final action.
Consent Calendar
- The Commission approved the minutes for August 5, 2021 and September 2, 2021 without any concerns.
Public Comments & Testimony
General Public Comments – No speakers signed up.
Item 6B – Tree Preservation Code Amendments
- James, a 14-year resident, spoke in support of the code amendments proposed by the Tree Preservation Code Team, arguing they are usable and would benefit student schools, reduce carbon emissions, and address health and environmental concerns. He urged the Commission to support the amendments.
- C and S A (speaker name unclear) stated support for the proposed code amendments, specifically for a 20% minimum tree retention requirement. They argued that the city should study incentives for developers to retain more existing trees, referencing staff's own analysis of recent projects showing retention between 25% and 30%. They recommended that the Commission ask staff to study workable incentives and opposed the staff proposal that reversed existing code on tree retention.
- Lawrence Oswald, a 35-year Shoreline resident and former school board member, expressed concern about the number of trees being removed and replaced with smaller ones in residential neighborhoods. He emphasized that large trees are a defense against climate change, citing temperature differences of up to 10 degrees in neighborhoods with mature tree canopy. He supported the amendments from the Tree Preservation Code Team.
- An additional speaker (name not captured) supported the code amendments, citing need for community engagement, transparency, and protection of significant trees.
- (One speaker appeared to have technical difficulties but eventually spoke in support of the tree code amendments.)
Discussion Items
Item 6A – Shoreline Place Sign Design Guidelines
- Staff presented draft design guidelines for signs within the Shoreline Place area (properties at the intersection of 155th and Aurora, including the Central Market site and properties north and west). The guidelines apply to monument signs, wall signs, and under-canopy signs, but do not address dimensional standards (sizes, heights, locations).
- Key points: 15% of all sign area in the location must be devoted to identifying Shoreline Place. The guidelines are administrative and do not require code changes. The Planning Commission is the final decision-maker.
- During discussion, Commissioners asked about color options, accessibility (ADA compliance for sign placement), and requested that staff explore different color combinations as suggested by community feedback. Staff confirmed they would incorporate comments.
- The Commission decided to bring the sign design guidelines back for further discussion at a meeting in November rather than taking action that night.
Item 6B – Development Code Amendments (Tree Preservation)
- Staff presented recommendations on multiple proposed amendments related to tree preservation, including definitions of landmark and significant trees, tree retention percentages, replacement ratios, and other provisions.
- Staff did not support lowering the landmark tree diameter from 30 inches to 24 inches (as proposed by the citizen group) and recommended maintaining current thresholds. Staff also did not support some procedural changes that would require interdepartmental approvals.
- Staff recommended further study and analysis of the economic and regulatory impacts, and noted that a citywide tree canopy assessment was last done in 2018.
- Commissioners expressed general consensus that they needed more time to consider the comprehensive package. Specific concerns included: protecting trees outside critical areas, understanding the implications of special areas, and obtaining updated data on how recent development has affected citywide tree canopy.
- Commissioner requested that staff provide a current tree canopy study, a comparison of other cities' tree regulations, and an analysis of the number of properties that would be affected by the proposed amendments.
- The Commission unanimously agreed to table the tree code amendments until the first meeting in November (the next regular meeting, as the October 21 meeting was cancelled due to a City Council event).
Director's Report
- The Planning Director provided a permitting update for September and early October.
- Highlighted a new mixed-use building project in North City adjacent to the 148th Street light rail station: 252 apartment units with commercial space (potential cafe), designed to orient toward the station and connect with trails. The project is a deep green consent project and from the same developer as another nearby project.
- Notified Commissioners of a new city vaccination policy requiring all volunteers (including Planning Commissioners) to provide proof of vaccination by November 16, 2021.
- Mentioned that the city submitted a Housing Action Plan Implementation Grant application to the Washington Department of Commerce for assistance developing middle housing regulations.
- Noted that the last tree canopy assessment was in 2018.
Unfinished Business
- The City was set for oral arguments on November 1, 2021 regarding a variance appeal for the Second Mill project (a separate matter not discussed in detail).
Key Outcomes
- The Commission decided to continue both Item 6A (Sign Design Guidelines) and Item 6B (Tree Preservation Code Amendments) to the November meeting for further discussion and potential action.
- No formal votes were taken on either item; the decisions were procedural.
- Staff will prepare additional analysis on the tree code amendments, including a current tree canopy study, comparative review of other cities' regulations, and data on affected properties.
- For the sign guidelines, staff will explore alternative color schemes and accessibility considerations before returning in November.
- The Commission acknowledged the thoughtful public input and the effort put into the proposals by the Tree Preservation Code Team and other citizens.
Meeting Transcript
I'd like to call to order the October 7th final meeting. The first item on the agenda is the call to order. Present. Can you see one side? Present. Thank you. For the agenda, we must have a procedural change. Where for item 60, we will allow public comments higher to the presentation as opposed to at the end of the presentation value. So is there any concerns about the approval of the units for October for August 5? Is there any concern about the approval of the words for September 2? Now we're going to general public comments. And if I can just talk a little bit about read my script here, the during the general public comment period, the Planning Commission will take public comment on any subject which is not in the regular meeting. So this will be something other than the items 6A and 6B. During public hearings and study sessions, public testimony comment occurs after the initial questions from the commission, which in this case the 6D change. And so we're here the presentation of staff before the 60, we'll have the public mind afterward. And then for tonight, because we have a lot of interest, we're limiting the amount of time for each carrier to ten minutes. And we really appreciate your doing so right. And if the public comment that you have is very similar to the person in front of you, and you wish to say that you agree with that person, that's totally okay. You are on record. And with that, we are going to in every case in save the city of residence and is there anyone signed up for general public comment. So we'll move on to our study items. Alright, so um here tonight is about the showing places design paragraphs. And then next steps before turning it back over the cancer tonight. Um really uh the other side here, the purpose of the science design guidelines is to adjust the looking tool of the signs in related to most colors, palms and training uh slowly place the diamonds and uh and the design guidelines is important to remember as we discuss uh any dimensional standards, so they don't really uh science standards or the sizes heights or uh locations. So they don't relate to finance standards or the sizes, heights for locations and quickly for some brief background. And brain and signage was always intended to be a program vision. And then show you after that, some draft brain and sign concepts work with the 26 that they were never adapted. Then in 2019, as you know, we just do for the rebound to see the site. And following that updates where sign standards were adopted earlier this year, actually, and so tonight, as I mentioned, we're now focusing on the sign design guidelines. And so these guidelines apply to a subset of the properties within the S properties that are identified as long as these values are. So as background and somewhat of a refresher here, so the view area. This shows it here on the right, and so it's at the season at the intersection where lessons are the series site, the central market, and then the properties north of that are the section of 60 of the and then also includes the water side to this on the west. And then the show and place properties here the sign assigned and then apply, and so this is the same set of properties within the area referred to as a line place, and these guidelines apply to all the line zones, the monument signs, weight line, and the scenes. So the the way the standards have been prepared, they'll address or apply the volume and just the signs of the implement like brand and design within all the properties using line place. One way that they'll do that is um as adopted in the code 15% of all the sign area on signs in this location would be devoted to identifying the soil place uh locations, and that's what it means the design guys and review of these signs and the current status. So once the design guidelines are adapted, this would be a staff review where staff would review the sign permit details and uh the application and so that it's consistent with the design guidelines as adopted by the planning condition. Um and again, important to remember they don't relate any of the dimensions in the summation. So I'll offer this just the example and kind of talk to them real briefly, and they usually just write out the guidelines within the packet. So of course that discussed the timeline sign. Uh so this would be the largest uh identification signs on the readers of the site, and these would be intermediate. Uh, we have the business systems with no windows, they have a home or uh how the font can change and the font could be specific business or entity within the zero, but again, no logo. And then the brown, which you see there would be a good slap, and the social beard slash. So again, like I mentioned would be signs, and so just to kind of visualize kind of the components based on the areas. And then we have the monument signs again and same uh design for the small colors and all levels, but again, the fine change with the business and the only portion of the sign are so here. And then what if I use another big piece here? So the remote system opened to the thing, and then so with the idea that you know you're gonna want different sizes and kind of a different uh scale location by and then the last would be the underwater sign. So the idea here this would be right now is full of fine. Um post here uh essentially so you're out on the sidewalk or from the building, you can actually entire of this uh business. So one of the screening um doing this for uh we can reach out to the property and so on place to uh back in August the reset where we all do where we can find uh size users and opportunities and comments and specifically also clean seconds first and all those problems and by brief presentation, and uh we have three people um three property representative um representing two of the property uh one really sessions that we see from the screen for the contrasting colors and uh uh I think it was the the white layers on the background and just also I guess um depending on how the two classes. So next steps um here for any discussion of questions, but uh this is a little unique in uh this is uh an administrative document, and so this is not uh document or uh set the only code.
openpublica.com