Edmonds Comprehensive Plan - Changes!

EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD MEETING -
MAY 12, 2010
Update on Comprehensive Plan purpose, effect, and context amendments and Hearing Examiner comprehensive plan review requirements.
7PM

The purpose of a Comprehensive Plan is to establish a long-range plan, looking into the future, addressing the needs and vision relating to land use, transportation, parks and open space, community facilities and economic development. The Edmonds Comprehensive Plan sets a foundation for decision-making from a broad and far-reaching policy standpoint for all governmental action even though the plan itself is not regulatory.


The most important power and duty granted to the City of Edmonds is the authority and responsibility to regulate land-use for the sole purpose of protecting and promoting public health, safety and general welfare of current and future citizens.

All private projects requiring city review and approval should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.

All public projects should have Hearing Examiner review and advisory opinion. All public projects and street vacations must be consistent with and satisfy the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Having this requirement of a Hearing Examiner advisory opinion for all public projects, capital facilities projects and street vacations provides additional public participation and ensures the city council has another legal opinion ensuring consistency.

Planning Staff’s recommendation to the Planning Board to make changes to the Effect of Plan is inconsistent and contrary to the Edmonds Municipal Code (EMC) and Hearing Examiner duties. Specifically EMC 10.35(F) requires hearing examiner review, Vacations and Dedications, The hearing examiner will review the comprehensive plan and report on the same prior to any street vacation of dedication as provided in ECDC 15.05.020.

ECDC 15.05.020 was the Comprehensive Plan, Effect of Plan prior to the 1997 adoption of the Comprehensive Plan as a separate stand alone document. The Mayor and City Staff admit their failure to not act according to the mandatory requirement of a Hearing Examiner advisory opinion prior to Council decision-making in the adoption of the street vacations, capital facilities and property purchases. This failure is not a good enough reason to make changes to the current Comprehensive Plan. Saying long ago adopted procedure was forgotten and does not apply does not make it ripe for wholesale edit and elimination.

The Planning Board should not accept any change to the current Edmonds Comprehensive Plan that is inconsistent with the Edmonds Municipal Code. Action like this just makes the process less certain and more contentious for those of us who know the code and understand the meaning of the words.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

EMAIL TO COUNCIL PRESIDENT

Dear D.J., If you get a chance, I would appreciate your sharing the attached PowerPoint with the Citizens Committee. This information provides evidence, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the City of Edmonds has been providing Fire and Emergency Medical Services for less than the cost of service to the unincorporated Esperance and Fire District No. 1. I'm hoping the group will truly look to Budget before focusing on just the taxpayer's pocketbook. The question I ask you; Is the newly created EMS Transport fee required for the subsidization of the two interlocal agreements with Esperance and Woodway ? The council, mayor and staff have not done proper due diligence of the current and passed city financial decisions to start requesting more and new taxes from the citizens. Fire District No. 1 collects tax revenue 1 million City of Edmonds charges 300,000 for service. City of Edmonds makes annual payment for Station No. 10 to Fire District No. 1 65,000. City of Ed
Read more

Lighthouse Law Group's inferior legal representation

 Email to Jeff Taraday  PROVIDED FOR THE RECORD:   In Washington State there can be only one open public hearing.   The Hearing Examiner had 10 working days to make a decision. Any extension of that time requirement requires agreement from the applicant and the parties. Uniquely, the Edmonds City Code requires agreement from all parties. I testified at the hearing and was not asked to participate in this extension or provide any further testimony. In fact, my participation has been excluded because of the one open meeting. If there have been communications between the Hearing Examiner and the Applicant those communication would  be ex parte and needed to be provided to me.    Mr. Clugston testified that traditionally the Planning Staff posts the Agenda and Staff report at the Civic Center and Library. Then he stated that ECC 1.03.09 didn’t apply that was for City Council hearings. He stated the Agenda was posted on the City’s website 7 or 6 days prior to hearing. The City C
Read more

The Edmonds City Council Again Violates the Open Public Meetings Act.

Edmonds City Council First Executive Session of May 26th 2020 The City Council may meet in executive (closed) session but only for one of the reasons specified in and in accordance with procedures identified in RCW 42.30.110. A personnel matter including a separation agreement is not specifically identified in RCW 42.30.110(1) and therefore is not a legally sufficient reason to meet in closed executive session. The Council discussed the Finance Director Scott James, Separation Agreement in the closed executive session under the guise of potential litigation. When in fact, any potential litigation ceased to exist on May 25 th , 2020, and the seven days from the date Mr. James signed the Separation Agreement, May 18 th , 2020, thus waiving all of his rights to pursue any civil action against the City of Edmonds. On May 26 th , 2020 during agenda item (4) Council President Adrienne Fraley-Monillas moved to add an Executive Session regarding “potential litigation” per RCW 42.30.1
Read more