Showing posts with label planning. Show all posts
Showing posts with label planning. Show all posts

Shoreline Planning Commission to consider amendments to tree codes

Friday, November 12, 2021


Shoreline Planning Commission Regular Meeting
November 18, 2021 from 7:00pm - 9:59pm

Click Here to Watch Online Live Streaming Video of the Meeting
Call into the Live Meeting: (253) 215-8782 (Webinar ID: 885 5782 3007)
Click Here to Sign-Up to Provide Oral Comment at the Meeting via Calling-In
Click Here to Submit Written Public Comment

Agenda Highlights
2021 Development Code Amendments - Part 2 - Tree Amendments
Draft Minutes from Thursday, November 4, 2021

Link to Full Meeting Packet

- Comment on Agenda Items
- About the Planning Commission

Contact us:
Carla Hoekzema, Planning Commission Clerk
(206) 801-2514
choekzema@shorelinewa.gov
Agenda: 11182021 PC Meeting Agenda



Read more...

Shoreline Planning Committee meeting Thursday: Shoreline Place signage design, Transportation Master Plan update

Monday, November 1, 2021


Shoreline Planning Commission Regular Meeting Thursday, November 4, 2021 from 7-10pm online

A live feed of the online meeting will be streaming on the City’s website, and the Commission is providing opportunities for public comment by submitting written comment or calling into the meeting to provide oral testimony.


Agenda Highlights
Link to Full Meeting Packet
Comment on Agenda Items

Contact us:
Carla Hoekzema, Planning Commission Clerk
(206) 801-2514
choekzema@shorelinewa.gov



Read more...

Notes from Shoreline Council meeting October 25, 2021 - including discussion with Planning Commission on MUR 70 building

Thursday, October 28, 2021

Pam Cross, reporter
Shoreline City Council Meeting
October 25, 2021

Notes by Pam Cross

Mayor Hall called the remote meeting to order at 7:00pm.
  • All Councilmembers were present.
  • Councilmember Chang was excused for personal reasons.
Approval of the Agenda
Agenda adopted by unanimous consent.

Report of the City Manager’s Office, Presented by John Norris, Assistant City Manager

COVID-19 UPDATE
There is encouraging news: case rates continue to slowly decline statewide. But we are still at a level of high transmission of COVID-19 infections. Shoreline has had a small increase in cases. So we must continue to take precautions.


This Public Health Order takes is now in effect for all of King County and applies› to Spartan Recreation Center.



PUBLIC REMINDERS

The PRCS/Tree Board will hold a remote meeting on Thursday, October 28 at 7pm.

Council Reports

Mayor Hall has proclaimed November 1 as Extra Mile Day in Shoreline. This is something we have done in the past to recognize and encourage people to go the extra mile by volunteering in the community and helping to make Shoreline an even better place.

Deputy Mayor Scully and Councilmember Robertson toured The Oaks facility. They relayed Ms Kurle’s concerns as well as other community concerns and had a long conversation with the staff about how their program works, and how it intersects with other regional programs. They feel it is very well run, and a well administered program that plays a vital role in combating homelessness. There’s lots more to do to combat homelessness and to make sure that we get people housed and that we prevent encampments from taking over our public spaces.

Public Comment

Kathleen Russell, Shoreline, Tree Preservation Code Team member
Incentives for tree retention in MUR 70 were discussed at length by Council in 2018, allowing additional height and parking reduction. Now we’re talking about removing those incentives. We request the Council to maintain current incentives for tree retention.

Martha Diesner, Shoreline and an owner at the Echo Lake Waterfront Condominiums
We need to retain as many tall mature trees as possible as the City goes through this period of rapid development. Trees provide both physical and mental benefits. I am dismayed that the mature trees on the 198th lot are slated to come down.

Jackie Kurle, Shoreline
I appreciate Deputy Mayor Scully’s update on the operations of The Oaks. I encourage continued oversight and maximum transparency to the public regarding activities surrounding the shelter. The parking lot adjacent to it seems to have some people camping there as well as garbage and refuse in that area.

Approval of the Consent Calendar
Consent Calendar approved unanimously 6-0

8(a) Discussion with the Shoreline Planning Commission on MUR-70’ Zone Development Regulations

This discussion will begin with an overview from staff and the consultant, followed by a discussion about the issues framed by staff and other related issues about MUR-70. It’s important to stay focused on the agenda topic of MUR-70 development regulations.

With the Planning Commission in attendance, there are 13 people instead of just 7. Everyone is asked to be brief and concise so there will be adequate time for everyone to share their thoughts.

Planning Commission members: Chair Laura Mork, Janelle Callahan, Mei-shiou Lin, Andy Galuska, Julius Rwamashongye, Jack Malek, Pam Sager

Andrew Bauer, Planning Manager, made the staff presentation

The MUR zones were adopted with the light rail station subarea plans. The MUR-70’ zone allows the most intensive development and is located closest to the two light rail stations at 148th Street and 185th Street.

Work began on the subarea plans in 2013 and they were adopted in 2015-2016. This followed substantial community outreach. What emerged was a vision to leverage the region’s investment in light rail and create desirable compact walkable, sustainable and inclusive communities that support the light transit that’s being developed there.

The purpose tonight is to have an in depth discussion of the MUR-70 zones and the issues that are constraining development, and to provide direction to the Planning Commission and staff as we develop future code amendments.

Why are we talking about this now? There has been a lack of development activity in our MUR-70 zone although there is continued interest from developers. We need to assess what, if any, refinements are needed to address the constraints on development, without changing the fundamental vision.


145th Station is now properly called the 148th Station.


MUR-70 is the colored teal area.

The City entered into a contract with FCS Group in 2021. One of the tasks FCS was contracted to conduct included an evaluation of the financial feasibility of new multifamily development scenarios that could be used to inform discussions on the refinement of the Development Code in the MUR-70’ zone.

Todd Chase, FCS Group

We looked at feasibility from the developer's point of view.


The detailed FCS report is available as part of the staff report. Due to time limitations, the presentation at this meeting was very brief.

Andrew Bauer

The topics and alternatives highlighted in the staff report:

Parking alternatives
  1. Expand 25% reduction
  2. Reductions more than 25% when demand can be managed
Catalyst Alternatives
  1. Modify or waive standards for impact fees, parking, height, step backs
  2. Performance-based criteria to qualify
  3. No performance-based criteria
Alternatives for Development Agreement Process and Building Height
  1. 140’ closest to a station without development agreement
  2. 90’ outright
  3. Revise development agreement requirements
  4. No changes
The next steps following tonight’s discussion include the Planning Commission discussion of amendment alternatives in the first quarter of 2022 followed by potential outreach, and further Council discussion.

DISCUSSION - COUNCILMEMBERS AND PLANNING COMMISSIONERS

This whole conversation is how to improve development outcomes in the City. We need to focus on how we achieve Council’s vision. For example, the vision states that the 185th station subarea will transform into a vibrant, transit-oriented village, with a variety of housing choices for people of various income levels and preserving the livable qualities that Shoreline residents cherish. Over time, public and private investment will enhance the village setting creating a walkable, safe, healthy and livable place for people of all ages and cultures. Some of our policies talk about the many things we want. How do we achieve that success? How do we move these ideals into building form? We have to figure out how we can maximize the use of that space.

I’m interested in “parking reductions of more than 25% when demand can be managed.” What percentages are we talking about here?
  • Reply: We didn’t put a number on it because it’s meant for discussion purposes. There are comparison tables in the staff report. Northgate has no minimum parking requirement. At the other end of the spectrum are Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace. Shoreline falls somewhere in the middle but we need to know what seems feasible in Shoreline.
About 30% of the Shoreline population rents. If we look at parking through the social justice and equity lens, when we reduce parking for them, where are the places we are earmarking on the streets for them to park? Is that clearly designated? Have we considered designated areas to park and not to park?
  • Reply: These are the buildings that will be located right next to a light rail station. We are assuming some percentage of residents won’t own or have access to a car. Other ways to manage the demand is providing subsidized transit passes.
The base cost of a unit with parking can create an equity issue. I would like to see the Planning Commission take a look at a reduced ratio of parking. Too great of a parking reduction would make the units undesirable.

There is fear that numbers of units equals numbers of cars so there’s going to be spillover into neighborhoods. Is there any evidence of that?

I’m not so keen on further parking reductions than the 25%. We came up with bundle pricing to keep people from parking in neighborhoods. We’re seeing spillover right now. I don’t think we’re at a time to further reduce parking. Maybe in the future, but people are still very auto dependent in our state, county and city. I think that’s just a fact.

I think we should continue to discuss parking reductions. We still have a lot of people driving cars and we have some spillover parking from apartment buildings, but the MUR-70 zone is in the core of the station area, and surrounded by MUR 45 and 35. Any spillover during the transition period is going to be pretty much contained within the station area which is different from what we’ve seen in other areas of the City. So there’s a buffer that will help. Parking reduction also improves the cost of the project, rather than just shifting the cost.

I don’t think we have the commerce and the businesses around to support car-free or mostly-car-free areas. I think 25% reduction is probably the maximum.

A lot of these properties will hopefully be rentals, the others will be the first chance for people to buy. This should invite more lower income people here. My experience of living in cities and working at low income jobs is that you have a car. This could be because you work different shifts or weird hours and sometimes at a location a long ways away from transit. So I am very cautious about zero or even low parking because it don’t think that’s going to match the reality of what is going to happen.

We have changed how we and our children look at transportation. I like the idea of Zip-cars and that kind of concept that may be a way to reduce the need for parking. We also need to consider having parking enforcement.
  • Reply from Mayor Hall: the City has discussed parking management plans several times and established a schedule for future parking enforcement.
The catalyst alternatives were of interest to me. Impact fees were mentioned a number of times, but not which impact fees. Does it matter?
  • Bauer: We have the transportation impact fees as well as the park impact fees.
It’s probably irrelevant to a developer. Council would need to decide if we are willing to under-collect for either of those fees, recognizing that we would still need to fully fund the projects that are funded by the impact fees. We would need to find other revenues.

If we reduce the impact fees, we’re not reducing the costs overall, we’re just shifting the cost of our parks and our roads from the developers (and the principle of growth paying for growth), and moving it to the taxpayers.

The property tax exemption that we already offer is shown to be more effective. The FCS group suggested this as a way to make the projects pencil out because they were unaware that we already offer the MFTE.

Catalyst development thresholds - what was written in the staff report was an example of 100 units or more as a threshold. But we’re talking about over 200 units in each of the four projects that are “on deck” right now. Why the 100 threshold? Maybe that could be increased.

As respect building height, I think we should just take the whole over 70’ height incentives or policies off of the table. It doesn’t sound like anyone is going to build with steel here for the extra height incentive.

Additional height listed as a catalyst may be less desirable because it creates the most visual impact.

There are Incentives currently in the code to preserve trees, but changing from wood construction to concrete or steel is very expensive. It doesn’t even pencil out here. We could say something like, in exchange for preserving more green space at street level for a healthy and visually appealing environment, we could offer more height. The MUR-70 area is already surrounded by tall buildings and from street level the difference between a 70’ building and 140’ doesn’t have much negative effect.

I agree. There should not be additional cost or hurdles to go higher than MUR-70.

I think we need to figure out exactly what our height priorities are and codify them. That way we can take the development agreement out of it to provide certainty to both the public and the developers. We spent a lot of time and money doing the development agreement on Shoreline Place.

With respect to the vision for the development of MUR-70, it is to occur over time or “eventually” recognizing that the development is somewhat organic. It is difficult to define how much it is organic and how much the City wants the area to fill out from essentially a residential area to multi-family. And during this transition time, is there a measure to help determine if the City’s plan is failing? Is there data available for a city of our size? For example, in Sacramento the commercial did not get filled in for quite a long time. It was only after the area became more vibrant that the ground floor commercial started to fill in. How much of a delay is acceptable for Shoreline?

Instead of thinking what’s the time line, I ask is there an emergency here? The timeline was considered at the very beginning of talking about this development. We were told development would follow the arrival of light rail. We were talking about a 50 to 100 year buildout. So before we start talking about getting rid of park and transportation impact fees (which contribute a huge amount to our ability to improve the City so that we can accommodate new residents), or talk about getting rid of parking, (which concerns me because I think we may create a mess if we do too much of that), I want to make sure there is an emergency here and that we really need to move this along faster that it is going right now. (Admittedly, that’s not very fast). We need to think broadly.

I think we need to decide what we are going to do to keep the ground floor available for future commercial. We need to be clear on this.

I too was wondering why “now” we are being asked to consider these issues with action as soon as next year. There are a few projects in the pipeline. MUR-70 is converting mostly single family residences which is one of the reasons that it’s stalling. It takes a lot of work for developers to combine several individual lots. I think this project is going to take patience. It will take a while for demand to get there for urban village development. I think it’s a good idea to look into these things, but I don’t see a pressing need for action. I would prefer a capital project undertaken by the City rather that something like subsidizing development by removing impact fees.

The City could take on surface water and stormwater projects. But instead of eliminating impact fees, maybe we can ask the State to take on those fees. If the State wants affordable housing and increased density, why not ask the State to put this into their economic development program? That way the cities aren’t harmed and State gets the benefit of the transportation (light rail) and the benefit of the housing.

There “is” pressure. There are legislators in our state who have proposed to ban single family zoning statewide. This even made it out of the senate in 2020. This and similar laws have been passed in Oregon and California. If cities like Shoreline along the light rail don’t do our part, we could see pressure on eliminating single family zoning across the rest of the City. And I don’t think that’s what we want. We are trying to reduce the impact from climate change and get people to walk and bike and take transit to work, shop and play. It's harder to do that if you’re living off a transit line. We have the infrastructure and we should make sure we make the most efficient use of that. Especially along the light rail line.

I think we’re short on information. I think a lot of what we did in 2015/2016 was good but it was all process driven. We don’t have any advertising - I don’t think we have any big picture vision to handle this. I love some of the ideas but I don’t think we understand our audience and because we don’t have a big picture vision, we don’t have a lot of marketing. We need to market our vision for this area.

For the most part, development in the station areas is proceeding as we expected - just not in the MUR-70. It will take decades for the entire area to develop. The transition will be awkward as it proceeds. Tall buildings will pop up in what is now a single family neighborhood that is now zoned MUR 70. Many of the properties have been sold to holding companies or LLCs and are being held for development. We don’t want this to go on for too long because the neighborhood will no longer be attractive.

We don’t want things forced - bad things can happen then. But we need to keep things moving along and continue our conversations.

We are in competition with other cities (Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace) and the newly opened Seattle stations. We need to minimize the stumbling blocks to development that we have created per the FCS report. We need to pay attention to that report and not be stagnant because the whole region is changing.

Condo liability reform was passed by the State in 2019 with the hope of spurring more condo development. Has the situation changed since this reform? Can we promote more condo development MUR-70 so people can a chance for ownership?
  • Reply: Developments don’t differentiate between ownership occupancy vs. rental housing. I don’t have any additional information on the results of this reform. We could note that for future analysis.
Mayor Hall: I apologize for not saying this earlier. In terms of the timeline, Council already included this in our goals and our actions steps for the coming years. So clear direction has been provided to staff and the planning commission to modify the MUR-70 development regulations in order to ensure that they achieve their vision. This conversation tonight was intended to provide the details but we were unanimous that we do want the planning commission too and staff to see if we can make some regulations that will make it more likely that we’ll get the vision we want. It’s not an emergency but the legislature is on the brink of eliminating single family zoning. Our approach of concentrating growth near light rail is a better approach. Another thing that is important is visible just south of us. Look how fast it has developed around Roosevelt Station. When the market decides it wants to build it can get vested really quickly. Look at our townhouse development standards: by the time we were able to make some basic changes, there were already dozens of projects in the pipeline. We need to make changes sooner rather later.

Andrew Bauer
I identified key themes for the planning commission to provide more data and analysis:
  1. Parking reduction but not elimination of requirements
  2. Catalyst developments - have infrastructure projects brought to the site by the City
  3. Impact fees
  4. Codify to eliminate development agreement necessity
  5. Building height
This is the beginning of the discussion.

MEETING ADJOURNED



Read more...

Shoreline Planning Commission will discuss MUR 70 development with City Council at joint meeting Monday

Monday, October 25, 2021

185th rezone
On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 7pm, the Shoreline Planning Commission will hold a joint meeting with the Shoreline City Council to discuss MUR 70 Development Regulations.

Read more...

Shoreline Planning Commission meeting October 7 looking at signage design and tree codes

Friday, October 1, 2021

The Shoreline Planning Commission regular meeting is Thursday, October 7, 2021 from 7-10pm online.

Agenda Highlights

Link to Full Meeting Packet

Attend the meeting, or make comments. Instructions HERE



Read more...

Classifieds: Shoreline Planning Commission to hold retreat Sept 2

Saturday, August 28, 2021


Planning Commission Special Meeting - Retreat
Planning Commission Retreat
Date: 09/02/2021 6:00pm - 8:00pm
Location: Richmond Beach Saltwater Park

As required by RCW 42.30, the Open Public Meetings Act, you are hereby notified of a special meeting of the Shoreline Planning Commission.

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT the Shoreline Planning Commission has cancelled its regular meeting on September 2, 2021 and instead will hold a retreat that evening.

PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE

When: Thursday, September 2, 2021 from 6:00 – 8:00pm
What: Planning Commission Retreat
Where: Richmond Beach Saltwater Park 2021 NW 190th St Shoreline, WA 98177

Planning Commission Special Meeting Notice

Read more...

Shoreline planning commission meets Thursday

Monday, August 2, 2021


Thursday, August 5, 2021 from 7:00 m - 9:59 m

Attend the Virtual meeting: 

Read more...

Shoreline Planning Commission regular meeting Thursday to review miscellaneous code amendments

Monday, July 12, 2021


Shoreline Planning Commission regular meeting Thursday, July 15, 2021 from 7-9pm - virtual meeting

Instructions for attending the meeting, making comments, and reviewing the agenda and staff documents can be seen here 

Agenda Highlights

Read more...

Survey: how do you want to get around Shoreline? Bus, bike, walk, drive? Tell the City planners in this survey which will guide planning for the next 20 years

Saturday, June 26, 2021



The TMP supports all forms of travel – by foot, bicycle, skateboard, scooter, stroller, wheelchair, transit, motorcycle, automobile, etc. The TMP will guide local and regional transportation investments and define the City’s future transportation policies, programs, and projects for the next 20 years.

The last update to the TMP was in 2011. The City must update the TMP by 2023 to align with the City Comprehensive Plan and meet the Growth Management Act requirements, maintain the City’s eligibility for pursuing future grant funding, and set transportation policies for guiding the development of Shoreline.

For additional information, visit the Current TMP webpage

The 2021 TMP update will:

  • Establish goals, policies, and prioritized projects for transportation improvements for the next 20 years.
  • Develop transportation networks for all users (people walking, cycling, riding transit, driving, etc.).
  • Make decisions now that will affect our community for years to come.

Survey 2 and Open House 2

A second round of public participation for the Transportation Master Plan (TMP) is now underway. The project team will be focusing on the transportation network elements for cars, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit.


Read more...

Shoreline Planning Commission hearing Thursday

Monday, June 14, 2021


The Shoreline Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Thursday, June 17, 2021 from 7 - 10pm
on Subdivision Vacation Development Code Amendments

Click Here to Watch Online Live Streaming Video of the Meeting
or Call into the Live Meeting: (253) 215-8782 (Webinar ID: 847 6646 7237 Passcode: 268841)

Full agenda, how to make live and written comments, link to full packet HERE



Read more...

Shoreline Planning Commission to consider "mobility hubs"

Saturday, May 29, 2021


The Shoreline Planning Commission will study the concept of mobility hubs at its meeting on Thursday, June 3, 2021, 7 - 10pm online.

To maximize the use of the upcoming light rail and to support in car-light and car-free lifestyles, the City is interested in creating “mobility hubs'' in strategic locations across Shoreline. 

The City is particularly interested in how these hubs can be integrated into rezoned mixed-use development surrounding the new light rail stations and connect residents to neighborhood-based commercial services. 

The City is also interested in better understanding the range of features and services offered at mobility hubs and how these might differ given community needs and the surrounding environment. 

Complete agenda, instructions on watching the meeting or making comments can be found HERE.


Read more...

Shoreline Planning Commission meeting and hearing Thursday March 18 at 6pm

Wednesday, March 17, 2021

Planning commission meeting
Shoreline Planning Commission Meeting
and Public Hearing Online
Thursday, March 18, 2021 
from 6pm to 10pm

The Planning Commission will hear a presentation on Shoreline Prop 1 for park improvements and land acquisition which will be on the April ballot. 

The public hearing is about the proposed zoning changes to allow enhanced homeless shelters. 

Per the staff documents:

The proposal before the Planning Commission is a code amendment defining Enhanced Shelters and permitting them as a use in the MB zoning district subject to certain index criteria. The MB zone, along with Community Business (CB) and Town Center (TC) 1, 2 and 3, already allows homeless shelters, though enhanced shelters have different operational criteria and therefore are being defined and regulated separately.

Read more...

Shoreline Planning Commission Public Hearing Thursday on housing action plan

Monday, March 1, 2021

Top Row: Laura Mork, Janelle Callahan, Andy Galuska,
Middle Row: Julius Rwamashongye, Mei-shiou Lin, Jack Malek,
Bottom Row: Pam Sager

Planning Commission Meeting - Public Hearing
Thursday March 4, 2021 7:00pm - 9:59pm

Planning Commission meeting scheduled on March 4th will take place online. A live feed of the online meeting will be streaming on the City’s website, and the Commission is providing opportunities for public comment by submitting written comment or calling into the meeting to provide oral testimony.

Click Here to Watch Online Live Streaming Video of the Meeting

Call into the Live Meeting: (253) 215-8782 (Webinar ID: 856 5171 0878 Passcode: 733827)

Click Here to Sign-Up to Provide Oral Comment at the Meeting via Calling-In

Click Here to Submit Written Public Comment

Agenda Highlights
Link to Full Meeting Packet


Read more...

Shoreline Planning Commission to discuss housing options in the "missing middle" Jan 21

Friday, January 15, 2021



Top Row: Laura Mork, Janelle Callahan, Andy Galuska, 
Middle Row: Julius Rwamashongye, Mei-shiou Lin, Jack Malek, 
Bottom Row: Pam Sager


Planning Commission Regular Meeting 
Thursday, January 21, 2021 7 - 10pm

Click Here to Watch Online Live Streaming Video of the Meeting

Call into the Live Meeting: (253) 215-8782 (Webinar ID: 970 0737 3625)

Click Here to Sign-Up to Provide Oral Comment at the Meeting via Calling-In

Click Here to Submit Written Public Comment

Agenda Highlights: Housing Action Plan

The 2020 Planning and Community Development work plan included a Housing Choices Project to expand the types of housing in Shoreline by exploring the “missing middle” suite of options including cottages, tiny houses, vacation rentals and accessory dwelling units.



Read more...

Classifieds: Shoreline Planning Commission meeting cancelled

Sunday, January 3, 2021

The Shoreline Planning Commission Regular Meeting scheduled for Thursday, January 7, 2021 at 7pm has been cancelled.




Read more...

Shoreline Planning Commission to review 185th Street Subarea Plan progress report

Monday, November 30, 2020


Shoreline Planning Commission Meeting
Regular Meeting
Thursday, December 3, 2020 at 7:00pm
Held Remotely on Zoom

Click Here to Watch Online Live Streaming Video of the Meeting
Note: If necessary, copy the link and paste it into your browser.

Call into the Live Meeting: 253-215-8782 or (Webinar ID: 930 9892 9154 passcode: 603720)

Click Here to Sign-Up to Provide Oral Comment at the Meeting via Calling-In

Click Here to Submit Written Public Comment

Read more...

Shoreline planning commission to discuss sign code amendments for Community Renewal Areas

Sunday, November 15, 2020


Shoreline Planning Commission Regular Meeting
Thursday, November 19, 2020 at 7pm

The meeting will take place online. A live feed of the online meeting will stream on the City’s website, and the Commission is providing opportunities for public comment by submitting written comment or calling into the meeting to provide oral testimony.

Click Here to Watch Online Live Streaming Video of the Meeting

Click Here to Sign-Up to Provide Oral Comment at the Meeting via Calling-In

Click Here to Submit Written Public Comment

Agenda Highlights

Read more...

Shoreline City Council, Planning Commission, and PRCS Board to participate in Racial Equity Training

Tuesday, October 20, 2020


As city officials, members of the Shoreline City Council, Planning Commission, and Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services (PRCS) Board have a responsibility to foster a community that is safe and welcoming for all.

Over the past few years, Shoreline City staff have attended trainings to further their understanding of how racism results in inequitable treatment and outcomes. 

During the City Council Strategic Planning workshop this past February, the Council discussed how it could further this work. The Council committed to offering a training this year for the City Council, Planning Commission, and PRCS Board to further their own learning in addressing racism and inequality.

The Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE)/Race Forward developed the training (Advancing Racial Equity: The Role of Government) and it has been used to train thousands of people in a variety of jurisdictions. Racial equity consultant DarNesha Weary of Let’s Do Work and the City’s Diversity and Inclusion Coordinator Suni Tolton will co-facilitate the training.

The training will help city officials:
  • Gain awareness of the history of race; implicit and explicit bias; and individual, institutional, and structural racism and how it impacts our lives,
  • Be able to identify instances of implicit and explicit bias and individual, institutional, and structural racism; and
  • Identify areas to take action

The three 90-minute sessions will be held on Zoom. The meetings will be open for the public to observe, per Open Public Meeting Act requirements, but the public will not be able to participate.

Trainings will be on:
  • Wednesday, Oct. 21, 7:00 to 8:30 p.m.
  • Wednesday, Nov. 18, 7:00 to 8:30 p.m.
  • Wednesday, Jan. 20, 7:00 to 8:30 p.m.

If you would like to observe the training, you can do so by going to:

Attend via Zoom:
https://zoom.us/j/91451105572?pwd=T1JIZUlWZnlwQXE3ZHdKMTRLbENSZz09

Join via Phone:
253-215-8782
Meeting ID: 914 5110 5572 Passcode: 676369



Read more...

Shoreline Planning Commission public hearing on Point Wells subarea plan

Sunday, October 11, 2020

The Shoreline Planning Commission meeting on Thursday, October 15, 2020 includes a public hearing on the 2020 comp plan amendments and the subarea plan for Point Wells.

The meeting will be held on zoom at 7pm.

Point Wells is an approximately 61-acre area of unincorporated Snohomish County. It is bound on the west by Puget Sound, on the north and east by the Town of Woodway, and on the south by the City of Shoreline. 

An active rail line, owned by Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF), bisects a portion of the subarea on the east.

There is also an existing portal structure near the southern portion of the subarea as part of the Brightwater sewage treatment pipeline, owned by King County.

The only vehicle access to the subarea is through Shoreline via Richmond Beach Drive. The majority of the subarea is owned by BSRE and is used as an asphalt plant. The subarea has been in industrial use for more than 50 years.

Read more...

Planning Commission Public Hearing on Point Wells code amendments

Thursday, October 1, 2020

Point Wells Photo by Steven H. Robinson


Shoreline Planning Commission Public Hearing October 15, 2020 at 7:00pm

The Planning Commission will hold an electronic public hearing on:
  • Amendments to the Point Wells Subarea Plan and Comprehensive Plan designation; and
  • Amendments to the Development Code establishing a Point Wells – Planned Area 4 zone and regulations to implement the Point Wells Subarea Plan

All interested persons are encouraged to listen and/or attend the remote online public hearing and to provide oral and/or written comments. Information on how to join the meeting is posted at shorelinewa.gov/plancom

Written comments should be submitted to Andrew Bauer, Senior Planner, at abauer@shorelinewa.gov by no later than 4:00pm local time on October 15.

Anyone wishing to provide oral testimony at the hearing is encouraged to register via the Remote Public Comment Sign-in form on the City’s webpage at least thirty (30) minutes before the start of the meeting. The webpage will also provide additional participation information. A request to sign-up can also be made directly to the Planning Commission Clerk at 206-801-2514.

Full public hearing notice [pdf]




Read more...
ShorelineAreaNews.com
Facebook: Shoreline Area News
Twitter: @ShorelineArea
Daily Email edition (don't forget to respond to the Follow.it email)

  © Blogger template The Professional Template II by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009

Back to TOP