Board member Claudia Balducci sparked some discussion at the June meeting about the heavy property-takings-first approach to proposed project alternatives, but those alternatives were ultimately left in the motion directing their incorporation into the DEIS, for now. That means staff and their consultant Kimley-Horn will proceed with evaluating hundreds of potential property takings that disproportionately impact low-income and minority families and minority-owned businesses, barring additional direction from the board.

Following guidance from the agency’s Technical Advisory Group that Sound Transit staff make recommendations to the board, agency staff did offer their own recommendations for each segment and facility. But all of those recommendations curiously mimic the recommendations made by the Elected Leadership Group (ELG), raising red flags over whether staff were truly given independence in this endeavor. Some Snohomish County members of the ELG have harshly criticized corridor planning staff when they stray from their vision, excoriating them at a public meeting. Going against the grain of the ELG publicly at this point in the process may be something that staff are loath to do.

The DEIS will evaluate alternatives for dozens of alignments, six stations, one provisional station, and four sites for an operations and maintenance facility (OMF). Those alternatives have shaken out as follows:

By and large, it’s hard to get excited about many of these alternatives that have been identified as preferred or are otherwise set to be studied further. There are a lot of tradeoffs for them given the nature of the alignments being threaded through so much private property and overengineered station designs.

For instance, all three West Alderwood alternatives would plow through a church property as the alignment makes its way from Lynnwood City Center station to a station near the mall. Landing the elevated guideway itself on Alderwood Mall Boulevard — a massive stroad — is apparently a transgression against cars, but taking a house of worship is blessed. Whether or not the many pleas of churchgoers — some of who turned up to the June meeting — will be heard and change the hearts and minds of policymakers and planners alike remains to be seen.

As for the West Alderwood station location alternatives go, ALD-D being preferred is a genuinely good choice. This would put a station in an optimal location for walk-to-station ridership and building up transit-oriented development compared to alternatives that place stations far too close to I-5. But like its alternatives, ALD-D is proposed to be an overbuilt station on private property rather than in the middle of 33rd Avenue W. Sound Transit is proposing to build West Alderwood almost as a transit center with tons of off-street add-ons that are wholly unnecessary. This station isn’t even getting a parking facility. Using a little curb space on 33rd Avenue W would more than suffice for bus stops and security/operations needs.

Similarly for Ash Way, Sound Transit is studying a genuinely good alternative east of I-5 (ASH-D) that has better transit-oriented development and walkshed potential, but the station design is on steroids. The agency is seriously considering acquisition of multiple properties, including another church, to build a massive off-street bus facility, replacing the existing one west of I-5. Once the Everett Link Extension opens, express and commuter buses are poised to disappear so there is little apparent benefit of an off-street bus facility over using curb space on 164th Street SW for bus stop zones.

164th Street SW is a terrible stroad, but an underpass is proposed for Link so expanding that ever so slightly more for the Interurban Trail and riders alike is an obvious solution. This would allow riders to alight and board eastbound buses on the south side of 164th Street SW without having to deal with the threat of the stroad. Better that than forever punishing bus riders with long waits at stoplights and loops to an unnecessary off-street bus facility.

Just a bit further up the line, Sound Transit is tasked with looking at two alternatives for Mariner. MAR-D would pulverize many apartments and several businesses as it emerges from the south side of I-5 and reaches toward the Safeway commercial plaza just so it can be more centrally located and offer another massive off-street bus facility that isn’t needed. MAR-B is comparatively delicate, at least until it heads up 128th Street SW, by skirting most buildings and being better centrally located near 8th Avenue W on 128th Street SW. But west of here, both alignments continue via private property and require many more residential displacements.

Once the alignment reaches toward Evergreen Way near SR 526, the remaining alternatives all leave a bad taste in the mouth. All of the alternatives south of SR 526 (EGN-B and EGN-E) would route the alignment through apartment complexes and commercial businesses in an area of primarily low-income and minority families and minority-owned businesses. On top of this, large station footprints would maximize commercial displacements because of Sound Transit’s peculiar obsession with unnecessary off-street bus facilities.

As for EGN-A, it would result in many fewer displacements, but the station location would offer substantially worse access for walk-to-station riders. Understandably, residents and advocates along Casino Road have been very vocal about getting this segment right to avoid harsh impacts. EGN-E could be a workable alternative if the station is right-sized and located in the street — as well as its alignments to the west and east — to eliminate the displacements.

And then there are the decisions around an Everett Station station. Preferred alternatives (EVT-C and EVT-D) would actually abandon Everett Station and all the benefits it offers in order to locate yet another station near a massive jail complex or the Angel of the Winds Arena (and a possible new minor league baseball field). Both station alternatives would involve wiping out the blocks between Broadway and McDougall Avenue to build guideway and station facilities, at the cost of hundreds of jobs and low-income residents. Those station facilities would try to duplicate many of the features already present at Everett Station, such as bus bays, security and operations parking, and kiss-and-ride zones.

What these station alternatives would, however, lack is the superior station amenities offered at the real Everett Station and intercity transit options. And though parking is a decidedly poor investment to win Link ridership, the agency is slated to construct another 1,000 parking stalls at Everett Station. Co-locating a station (EVT-A) at Everett Station itself is the better choice. And ultimately, cumulative project savings could be put into planning and building a thoughtful and strategic Link extension deeper into Downtown and North Everett.

So far, the Everett Link Extension plans aren’t offering a lot of utility to Snohomish County residents. That’s, in part, the result of misdirected design priorities and a misunderstanding of the future transit network. Less impactful alignments and, perhaps counterintuitively, simpler stations would better serve the county. Adjusting alignments and stations to be elevated in streets offers greater opportunity to integrate them neatly with existing neighborhoods and surface transit while delivering better amenities beneath them, such as bike lanes, trails, and play spaces. It’s not too late to get Everett Link back on track, but right now the project is barreling toward a disastrous outcome.

The post Sound Transit Board Okays Displacement Heavy Everett Link Alternatives first appeared on The Urbanist.

“Whether you’re looking to enjoy the fireworks, meet friends to ring in the New Year, or have a quiet dinner at your favorite restaurant, you can leave the driving to us. We look forward to seeing you on board!” King County Executive Dow Constantine said in a statement.

The fareboxes, card readers, and ticketing apps will be covered or turned off to remind customers not to pay.

Regional transit agencies will be operating on the following schedules to accommodate fare-free New Year’s Eve rides:

• King County Metro: Buses will operate on their regular Saturday schedule and be fare-free from 3am Saturday, Dec. 31, through 3am Sunday, Jan. 1. Other Metro services operating fare-free include DART, Via to Transit, Ride Pingo to Transit, Community Van, and Access service. Please note Via to Transit will only operate until 2am Sunday, Jan. 1.
• Sound Transit: Link light rail and Sound Transit Express buses are fare-free from 4am Saturday, Dec. 31, to 2am Sunday, Jan. 1. Sound Transit will operate extended Link light rail service on New Year’s Eve, with 15-minute, late-night service. The last southbound trip will leave Northgate Station at 1:58am The last northbound train will leave Angle Lake Station at 1:41am. For more information, go to Sound Transit’s webpage.
• Community Transit: All Community Transit buses, Zip Alderwood Shuttle, and Snohomish County DART paratransit services will operate on a Saturday schedule and are fare-free from 4am Saturday, Dec. 31 through the end of the service day. Please check the Community Transit website, as route times vary.
• Everett Transit: All services will operate fare-free on a regular Saturday schedule from 7am to 9:30pm.
• Pierce Transit: Rides on Pierce Transit buses and SHUTTLE paratransit vehicles, as well as two of the agency’s on-demand Runner services will be charging fares this year. Customers can use Pierce Transit’s Trip Planner.
• Seattle Streetcar: Both streetcar lines will operate Saturday service hours. The South Lake Union Streetcar will operate on New Year’s Eve until 12:30am to accommodate fireworks viewing downtown.
• King County Water Taxi: The water taxi will operate fare-free on Dec. 31 but will be out of service on Jan. 1. and Jan. 2.
• Seattle Monorail: The monorail will collect regular fares and is scheduled to operate from Westlake to the Seattle Center until 11pm on New Year’s Eve. After the evening’s events at Seattle Center, service to Westlake will run from 12:30an to 1:00am.

Service will return to Sunday schedules with fares collected on Sunday, Jan. 1 beginning at 3am. Pierce Transit will be using a Saturday schedule. Reduced schedules will continue through Monday. Details are posted on Metro’s, Sound Transit’s, and Pierce Transit’s holiday and reduced service pages.

Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that Pierce Transit was going fare free this New Years Day and Eve. While that was true last year, the agency opted to charge fares this year. We apologize for the error.

The post Transit Agencies Waive Fares on New Years Eve first appeared on The Urbanist.

With the boost from pandemic-era legislation, street cafés have become a fixture in a variety of locations across Seattle, such as a popular stretch along Ballard Avenue.

Beyond the Emerald City, a growing number of municipalities are also working to establish programs to make it easier for businesses to activate sidewalks and parking spaces with outdoor dining. The Urbanist checked in with a few to learn more about the current status and future of street cafés in their jurisdictions. 

Bellevue

Similar to Seattle, Bellevue began an expanded outdoor dining pilot, dubbed Al Fresco Dining, during the pandemic, although it applied only to certain areas of Downtown Bellevue, notably pedestrian-friendly Main Street. 

The pilot was very popular. A survey found that 80% of respondents said that outdoor dining areas made them more likely to visit Main Street in the future, and about 70% were satisfied with curbside dining areas (e.g. streateries), while 75% were satisfied with sidewalk cafés. 

The survey also found that while inclement weather during summer of 2021 negatively impacted restaurants’ financial performance as a whole in Bellevue, restaurants with sidewalk café seating or curbside dining generally still outperformed their pre-pandemic revenue. 

As a result, the City of Bellevue has extended the Alfresco Dining pilot into 2023; although, communications officer Michelle DeGrand said “specific program details are still being worked out.”

Support for the pilot came from Microsoft, which provided sponsorship for the Main Street dining area by paying for traffic control, ramps, and other elements. The Bellevue Downtown Association (BDA) provided technical assistance with restaurants’ permit application and general marketing support and coordination for the program. 

During warmer months, the BDA identified 40 plus businesses across Bellevue with outdoor dining, the majority of which were located in Downtown, although only five businesses created streateries on Main Street. 

During the pandemic the City of Bellevue waived the lease fee for using city sidewalk space, although the annual fee of about $2 per square foot, may be returned in 2023. Participating businesses in Bellevue also pay application and review fees of $325 and inspection fees of $217 per hour.

It seems likely that street cafés and sidewalk cafés have a future in Bellevue given their popularity — even if it means losing some parking spaces. 

“While some [survey respondents] expressed concerns about parking, a strong majority of respondents indicated they were willing to sacrifice some on-street parking for outdoor dining space and a more active street life,” DeGrand said.

Everett

Support for outdoor dining is not new to Everett.

“We always had a café seating program that’s free,” said Tyler Chism, who is the City of Everett’s placemaking manager.

Everett has always been open to street cafés, in part because its large downtown and abundant parking have dampened potential controversy over loss of parking spaces, Chism said. 

“We try to be good hosts for anybody — whether it’s a resident or business owner – that provides quality of life amenities for tourists or residents,” Chism added. “And we try to make it as easy as possible for creative uses of right of way.”

But openness to these creative uses has not translated into widespread adoption of street cafés — at least not yet. While it was possible to receive support from the City to create street and sidewalk cafés, many restaurant owners opted to use city funded Everett Forward grants to instead cover operational expenses like rent, payroll, updating takeout programs, and website improvements. 

“Ultimately we wanted to support our downtown retailers and restaurants and that meant letting them use funding for expenses that were more useful and appreciated than streateries,” Chism said. 

Still Everett did support the street cafés that opened by paying for fencing and road safety items during the beginning of the pandemic. 

While these pandemic streateries have since downscaled to sidewalk cafés, Everett envisions they will be back and the City is taking strides to facilitate this return by creating a more formalized outdoor seating program that would include pre-approved streatery designs, which Chism described as “off the shelf,” and lists of resources for businesses. 

Downtown Everett took a hit during the pandemic, but the City hopes that placemaking efforts, like making it easy and affordable to hold special events, changing city code to allow for downtown food trucks, and supporting the creation of murals by matching interested businesses with local artists, will help the neighborhood to grow. 

“We want to make it easy for residents who want to shut down the streets to do cool things,” Chism said. “This isn’t the Downtown Everett your grandpa would remember.”

Tacoma

During the pandemic, the City of Tacoma began a Curbside Cafe and Marketplace program that has since become permanent.

“The City’s goal is to find ways to partner with our businesses to bring vibrancy to our community and enhance the livability of Tacoma for residents, people who work here and for visitors. The Curbside Café and Market Place Program is an example of this partnership,” said Megan Snow, communication specialist for the City of Tacoma.

Downtown businesses like Wooden City, The Mix, and Dystopian State Brewing have used street cafés to expand their business presence and dining options. According to the City of Tacoma, about 16 businesses have received permits through the Curbside Café and Marketplace program. The permits are technically temporary, but they can be regularly renewed. “The temporary status is so that the City can be responsive to sidewalk and infrastructure needs or concerns,” Snow said.

Additionally, any site plans for street cafés must be reviewed and approved in advance by the City of Tacoma. Similar to Everett, Tacoma has reduced costs to businesses by waiving application fees, street use fees, and the cost of on-street parking.

The post Street Cafés Becoming a Permanent Amenity in More Puget Sound Cities first appeared on The Urbanist.

The city’s zoning and development codes have long been a hodgepodge spread across various titles of the municipal code and 56 separate chapters. The “Rethinking Zoning” changes adopted fully consolidated regulations in one title with 35 separate chapters under the banner of the “Unified Development Code” similar to Snohomish County. Many of the chapters simply were ported over to the Unified Development Code title, but there were some deep amendments made in some to consolidate zoning and reform development standards.

Through the update process, Everett was careful in how Metro Everett was dealt with. The adopted legislation does technically repeal the Metro Everett provisions, but has essentially reincorporated them into the new chapters of the land use code mostly as they were. This was done through consolidated zoning and applying a citywide approach to height limits, uses, bulk regulations, urban design standards, and street improvement standards.

Chief among the zoning changes are consolidations of multifamily, commercial, industrial, and overlay zones. The number of zoning districts was trimmed from 25 to 15. Overlay zones were also reduced from 11 to just five. Single-family zones were the only zoning classifications to escape changes for now, which include Suburban Residential (R-S), Single Family Detached Low Density (R-1), Single Family Detached Medium Density (R-2), and Single Family Detached Medium Density (R2-A) zones, though an earlier concept had envisioned trimming single-family zones down to two with more flexibility. By category, zoning districts were collapsed into the following:

• Six multifamily zoning districts became just two as as Urban Residential 3 (UR3) and Urban Residential 4 (UR4) zones;
• Eleven commercial zoning districts became only three as Neighborhood Business (NB), Business (B), and Mixed Urban (MU); and
• Five industrial zoning districts became either Heavy Industrial (HI), Light Industrial 1 (LI1), or Light Industrial 2 (LI2).

Everett also reformed open space and critical environments into three zoning districts, namely the Agriculture (AG), Park-Open Space (P), and Watershed Resource Management (WRM) zones.

To retain unique bulk attributes that many of the zones contained, Everett adopted a height map that overlays zoning districts and new general height standards. This largely retains the status quo with regard to height limits that were in place, but there were some cases where things went up or down. Building height measured in floors is 15 feet for the first floor and 10 feet for each floor above, meaning that a lot limited to three stories would be limited to 35 feet in height. However, single-family zones are strictly limited to 28 feet in height and UR3 zones are still limited to a maximum of 50 feet in height.

The adopted legislation builds upon Metro Everett which used this overall height limit approach. In some cases, development on properties with higher intensity multifamily and commercial zoning or a TOD street designation will need to meet minimum height limits to avoid underbuilding. New transition standards were also implemented when taller development is adjacent to residential zones, decreasing the height limits at the border.

Other notable changes that the legislation made, include:

• Simplifying uses by combining the general use table (160 recognized uses) and Metro Everett use table (70 recognized uses) into one use table with 83 listed uses. This also involved the creation of corresponding definitions for each use since not every use had a definition previously.
• Streamlining other bulk standards (i.e., setbacks, lot coverage, and density) by using simplified tables. There were changes that lifted density caps in some zones, introduced density minimums to prevent underbuilding, and allowed setback averaging exceptions to provide flexibility.
• Expanding the street designation approach to regulate street improvements, building form, and street-level uses that Metro Everett introduced. This was introduced to areas outside of the city center to reach Broadway, Rucker Avenue and Evergreen Way, Everett Mall Way, 19th Street SE, and areas zoned NB and with CO overlays. Application of these standards on the new streets could result in wider and more sidewalks, greater overhead weather protection, restrictions on street-level uses, and building transparency requirements.
• Triggering street improvements at three dwelling units instead of five dwelling units and sidewalk improvements at one dwelling if located in a sidewalk priority area (i.e., Metro Everett or within a quarter mile of a frequent transit corridor, major arterial, public school, or public park).
• Consolidating building form and design standards for development in zones and other cases where it is required into three streamlined chapters for residential uses (e.g., single-family detached, townhouses, cottages, and accessory dwelling units), multifamily development, and non-residential development.
• Allowing one accessory dwelling unit (ADU) to be paired with each duplex, triplex, and townhome in addition to a single-family home, increasing the allowed size of ADUs from 800 square feet to 1,000 square feet with some conditions, adding additional height flexibility, and eliminating ADU parking requirements when located within a quarter mile of a transit stop.
• Eliminating parking requirements for some housing for seniors or people with disabilities when located near frequent transit.
• Expanding the environmental review (SEPA or State Environmental Policy Act) categorical exemption of up to 200 dwelling units of residential development to all UR4 and MU zones.

To facilitate these zoning changes, Everett also adopted a slate of updates to the Comprehensive Plan. These largely involved acknowledging the new zoning names and consolidated zoning types as well as better defining the purpose of zoning districts. The adopted Comprehensive Plan update also made a spate of changes to the city zoning map and Future Land Use Map for consistency.

Last month, Mayor Cassie Franklin announced that Everett would begin a multiyear process to “Rethink Housing“. The process will look at how the city will be able to deliver affordable and no-income housing across the income spectrum for residents through a housing action plan.

Everett estimates that about 9,267 housing units will need to come online in the next 15 years to serve people in the supportive housing and income-based rental housing band, which is generally below 50% of the area median income (AMI). Another 3,529 housing units will need to be created that serve people in rent-restricted housing and market-rate rental housing bands below 80% AMI. Beyond that, Everett thinks that 9,981 housing units will be needed for people with higher incomes looking for homeownership and market-rate rental housing. In all, that’s 22,777 homes over 15 years–a 1,519 per year pace.

In her directive, Mayor Franklin outlined progress that the city has made in addressing housing needs. “Since 2018, we have made meaningful progress in our efforts to encourage building capacity,” she wrote. “We have implemented actions such as adopting the Metro Everett Plan that increases residential densities in the downtown core and adjacent areas, expanded the Multi-Family Tax Exemption to other areas of the city, adopted reduced residential parking standards and adopted a special connection charge exemption for affordable housing.”

However, Everett continues to suffer like much of the region in making housing affordable and access to people. “…[L]ocal incomes are increasingly out of step with the cost of housing. In 2019, the median house purchase price in Everett was $389,000,” she noted. “Rental prices increased by 53% between 2010 to 2018. The median household income in Everett is only $55,000. Owning a home in Everett is out of reach for too many of our residents and even renting a home is challenging. Many households are one paycheck away from housing instability.”

She also explained at length that homelessness was especially acute in Everett due to a lack of resources and expressed a need for additional shelter and permanently supportive housing. Last year, low-income housing opponents waged a campaign that succeeded in blocking a Housing Hope supportive housing project, arguing such projects shouldn’t go in single-family zones or near them.

Her directive comes with three specific initiatives. The first deals with a public engagement process and development of a housing action plan by the end of June. The second calls for improving the city’s procedures and permitting processes around development. This specifically involves preparing for transit-oriented development and light rail that includes higher densities and mixed-income housing as well as encouraging more affordable and market-rate housing developers through reformed housing policies and incentives. The third directs the city to develop recommendations and solve student homelessness, pilot a shelter program with the state using Pallet shelters, allocate emergency federal funding for rental assistance and housing stability, and hire additional social workers.

In the coming month, the city will be hosting several events to engage in the process and help residents learn about housing challenges. The most concrete and long-lasting actions of the process though will probably be the recommendations derived from the housing action plan that the city will be able to pursue and further reforming procedures and processes around development.

The post Everett Reforms Citywide Zoning, Embarks on Affordable Housing Plan first appeared on The Urbanist.

Then last year, the city was briefed on new revenue problems that have led administrators to reconsider the delivery of service, including merger with the countywide transit operator Community Transit. All of that was before the economic blow that the Covid-19 pandemic is dealing to the city, which has no doubt worsened the financial situation since about 80% of revenues come from sales taxes.

For years, there have been swirling proposals to make such a merger happen, including during the Great Recession when Everett Transit went through a similar shrinking and rethinking process. In the decade since, the agency has largely been a political token of city administration and sacrosanct tool of transit unions, but the quality of service is substandard. With a population of 111,475, Everett is the largest city and county seat of Snohomish County, which has about 822,000 residents in total. Had a merger–or even some hybrid model like Seattle’s service purchasing approach–occurred, Everett transit riders would have seen a marked improvement. Service could be more than double what there is now, providing more frequency, span, and coverage to communities in the city.

Everett Transit treats the bus system as a bizarre anachronistic fiefdom. Riders know when they have arrived in Everett, where overlapping Community Transit’s operations within the city’s corporate boundaries are decidedly limited, with the exception of the jointly funded Swift Blue Line, and Everett Transit service is sparse. Routes have traditionally and routinely bended to the whims of the loudest constituents over rational system operations. Basic rider-demanded amenities have been denied because of influential lobbying groups. And the scope of bus service has been somewhat inequitably distributed across the city, even after the latest consolidation reforms.

The agency has said there is no clear path to achieve system growth within existing revenue sources. City administrators have refused to take even the most basic actions since the last recession to move serious tax and fee proposals that could grow revenues and service. Aside from remaining authority to increase the sales tax by 0.3%, the city could have sought transportation impact fees for capital transit improvements, imposed special taxes on ridehailing services, increased business license fees, raised commercial parking taxes and on-street parking fees, and levied additional vehicle licensing fees before Tim Eyman took a swipe at them. Yet, none of those options were sought despite the very clear need for better transit.

Transit service was slashed 7% as part of the consolidation and system restructure process that was approved in 2018 and implemented in 2019. Meanwhile, Community Transit took a completely different approach after countywide voters approved a 0.3% sales tax increase in 2015, allowing the system to grow incrementally every year since. Service was poised to grow 36% between 2018 and 2022 alone, but those hopes have been somewhat diminished under the pandemic. Nevertheless, the system is on an overall trajectory of growth whereas Everett Transit is well on its way on a downward trajectory.

With hat in hand, the agency has embarked on a “rethink transit” effort, which lays out three possible options, two of which pursue future system growth:

• Option 1 would partially help realize the “Growth Option” laid out in the approved long-range plan for Everett Transit by increasing the sales tax. The city would present a ballot measure where voters could choose to approve an increase up to 0.3%. That would move the transit sales tax from 0.6% to 0.9% in the city.
• Option 2 would abolish Everett Transit and result in the transit system being annexed into the Snohomish County Public Transit Benefit Area. Community Transit would then become the sole countywide operator, allowing for substantially better service quality, enhanced integration into the regional transit system, and more efficient use of staffing and equipment. The city would need to present voters with a ballot measure to allow the annexation and approval of a transit sales tax replacement. The sales tax for transit would rise by 0.6% so that Community Transit collects a 1.2% sales tax in the city, which is common in all other areas of the public transit benefit area.
• Option 3 would maintain the existing system with no new revenue. That would mean the city would retain a very poor quality transit system for the foreseeable future.

As has been stipulated though, these options continue to show a total lack of vision and creativity by city administration in raising revenue to fund transit. Only now coming forward with a plan to raise the sales tax by 0.3% to attain an inferior service to Community Transit really begs the question of where officials’ minds have been for a decade. Communities in Everett have been in need of quality transit for much longer and it is not clear how Option 1 will truly get them where they need to go anytime soon. Even a presentation from December shows that:

Under the best case scenario of a revamped Everett Transit, there would be shorter span of service and lower frequencies all days of the week and virtually at all times than under a merger scenario. The biggest supposed strike against a merger is that special shuttle service, like that of Sorticulture during the spring, might not happen since Everett would not have direct control. Nevermind that is something Everett could negotiate or simply pay Community Transit to provide.

For its part in a merger, Community Transit would be able to provide a streamlined, integrated service that adds routes, provides a 19.5-hour span of service per day, and offers 10-minute peak and 20-minute off-peak frequencies on weekdays. On weekdays, 20-minute and 30-minute frequencies would be possible. The earliest that a merger proposal could come before voters is November 2021, if city officials act to put it on the ballot.

The timeline for evaluating options charts a process that could wrap up next year. This summer city staff will proceed through the public engagement process on options and conduct technical analysis on the three options. City officials will then be briefed on community feedback and options analyses. Then in the fall, city staff will check in again with the public on the results of the future transit options and city officials will get to decide what to do about them in 2021.

A survey to steer Everett Transit’s future is open through July 13th and feedback will be critical to putting feet to the fire to finally make needed reforms. Those reforms should absolutely include the abolition of Everett Transit and annexation into the Snohomish County Public Transit Benefit Area so that Community Transit can take over the reins. Everett deserves much better than what Everett Transit can deliver and what city officials are willing to bankroll, which is why a merger is a necessity as soon as possible.

The post Everett Transit Rethinks Its Future, But Is It Time For A Merger? first appeared on The Urbanist.

Zoning Changes

Zoning throughout the Metro Everett was overhauled by largely consolidating existing zones into three categories: Urban Mixed (UM), Urban Light Industrial (ULI), and Urban Residential (UR). Layered on the zones are several key development standards for minimum and maximum building heights, orientation and design in relation to street classification, drive-through restrictions, and off-street parking requirements by parking zone.

• Metro Everett Zoning. As their might names suggest, the types of uses allowed in the new Metro Everett zoning types differ. Urban Mixed allows the most intensive commercial uses like office, dense residential, retail, and service. Urban Light Industrial helps maintain and encourage flexible light industrial uses as well as some office and urban residential. Urban Residential generally permits a spectrum of residential uses that could large apartment buildings and townhouses to cottage housing and single-family homes in some cases.

• Building heights. Building heights are regulated by an overlay map that specifies the maximum heights permitted. The lowest heights are planned for the edges of the Metro Everett area, generally at four or five stories. At the heart of the district, buildings could rise to 25 stories. Some areas have a range of allowed buildings heights, which indicate that incentives must be used to gain additional building height above the lower base maximum height. Examples of incentives that developers might choose include on- and off-site affordable housing, achieving green building standards, historic preservation, and providing public art and parking.

• Street classifictions. Blockfaces throughout much of Metro Everett have been given street classifications. The purpose of the classification system is to ensure that development is compatible with a street type. For instance, building setbacks, overhead weather protection, building transparency, allowed uses, and street design are predicated on the street classification of a blockface. There are four street classification types with Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Streets being the most active type. TOD Streets encourage high building transparency, uses that generate foot traffic, and limit parking visibility.

• Parking Areas. Two Parking Areas have been established in Metro Everett to provide for certain off-street parking exceptions. Parking Area A provides for significant off-street parking exceptions with no requirement for non-residential uses.

• Drive-through areas. Drive-through uses are now prohibited throughout much of Metro Everett with the exception of several areas. Sites that are still eligible for drive-throughs are designated specifically.
  

• Core Residential Area. Beyond the bounds of Metro Everett, the city adopted a new overlay district for higher-density residential and semi-mixed-use. The Core Residential Area (CRA) overlay applies similar development standards as those contained in Metro Everett to existing zones, such as R-2 and R-3. The underlying zoning regulations still apply, except when superseded by the CRA overlay development standards. As part of the new CRA overlay, the city revised maximum building heights in some cases, allowing new buildings as tall as 65 feet near Colby Avenue.

Development Regulation Changes

Aside from mapped zoning regulations, Everett adopted slate of new development standards for Metro Everett:

• Allowed uses. The newly established zones come paired with detailed use matrices to identify whether or not specific uses are allowed and any special conditions that apply to them.
  

• Overhead weather protection. Overhead weather protection will need to meet specific standards depending upon the street classification of a blockface. TOD Streets will command a very robust amount overhead weather protection along street faces while unclassified blockfaces will essentially require none.

• Residential density. In Metro Everett and the CRA, Everett has adopted differing minimum and maximum residential densities. 

• Building modulation and floorplate limits. Upper floor modulation, articulation, and floorplate limits will apply to taller structures in Metro Everett depending upon the floor level, zone, and building side.

• Ground floor design standards. New ground floor design standards control minimum ceiling heights, finished floor level, and building depth to promote convertibility of spaces and ensure that they reflect the intent of their zones. UR zones, for instance, are allowed to have low building depth and ceiling height requirements since development in the zone is largely anticipated to be residential in nature. UM zones, on the other hand, have higher minimum standards, particularly for non-residential uses which would need to have at least 15-foot ceilings, a floor-to-ceiling height typical in retail and restaurant spaces.

• Setbacks and lot coverage. New setback and lot coverage standards will apply in Metro Everett by zoning type. The setback standards are meant to generally encourage buildings to be close to the main street frontage. Maximum lot coverage by structures ranges from 85% to 100% of a site. 

• Structured parking restrictions. Depending upon the street classification of a blockface, structured parking is subject to maximum frontage widths. The more active the street classification type, the less impactful structured parking is supposed to be.

• Building transparency requirements. The ground floor of buildings throughout Metro Everett will need to achieve minimum amounts of transparency through windows and doors based upon the blockface street classification. TOD Streets require the highest amounts of transparency to help with street activation.

• Minimum building heights. Some zones and street types will require primary buildings to achieve a minimum number of stories. TOD Streets will set the minimum at four stories while the ULI zone will require none (de facto one story).

• Street improvement standards. New development will need to improve streetscape frontages based upon blockface classification. TOD Streets command the widest pedestrian zones and planter/furniture strips.

• Parking reductions. Minimum off-street parking requirements apply throughout Metro Everett by use. However, Parking Areas have a variety of possible exceptions, particularly for non-residential uses. The city also offers several parking reductions for multifamily uses by location and unit size or by resident, transportation, or development characteristics. For instance, low-income and affordable housing units or multifamily sites served by frequent transit can obtain off-street parking reductions. Alternative reduction options are provided for carsharing, additional bicycle parking, motorcycle parking, mixed-use projects, and submission of a parking study.

• Bicycle parking. New bicycle parking requirements will apply whenever non-residential developments are required to provide six or more off-street parking spaces and multifamily developments contain four or more dwelling units. The bicycle parking ratio will be set at one for every 12 off-street parking spaces provided in non-residential developments, with an upper maximum of 20 bicycle parking space required. In multifamily developments, the ratio is generally four covered bicycle parking spaces for every 10 dwelling units. New bicycle parking guidance also provides specificity in the location of spaces, access to them, and their design requirements.
  
• Other development standards. Metro Everett also have several other new development standards that touch on: the amount of and type open space and landscaping required; the manner in which fencing and retaining walls are allowed; design of porches, stoops, plazas, forecourts, and parking facilities; and the placement of street trees and lighting.

New SEPA Exemptions

In addition to the changes to zoning and development regulations, the city has opted to cut some of the procedural red tape for development proposal in Metro Everett. Projects may be eligible for further exemption from environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) if they are located in UR, MR, or ULI zones and consist of mixed-use development, contain 200 or fewer dwelling units, or involve 65,000 square feet or fewer of commercial uses. Increasing exemption thresholds means that projects will be subject to one less element of appeal and scrutiny; instead the established development regulations are intended to adequately address SEPA-related issues.

The post Everett Adopts Rezones Topping Out at 25 Stories first appeared on The Urbanist.

What’s Proposed

The Metro Everett proposal resembles many of the key features from a draft plan released in January. Three new zoning districts would be in established the city center, largely replacing existing ones, in addition to a new zoning overlay in adjoining higher-density residential and semi-mixed-use areas.

The key zoning districts include Urban Mixed (UM), Urban Residential (UR), and Urban Light Industrial (ULI). As the names suggest, certain uses would be encouraged and restricted by design. Urban Residential would primarily consist of multifamily uses, but some commercial and institutional uses could be allowed. Urban Mixed would provide for a wide variety of uses, except for industrial and lower-density residential uses. Urban Light Industrial would similarly allow for a wide spectrum of uses, including residential, commercial, and low-intensity industrial.

Beyond the bounds of Metro Everett, the city is considering a new overlay district for higher-density residential and semi-mixed-use area. The Core Residential Area (CRA) overlay would apply similar development standards as those contained in Metro Everett to existing zones, such as R-2 and R-3. The underlying zoning regulations would stilly apply, except when superseded by the CRA overlay development standards.

The Metro Everett planning process has resulted in very fine-grained development standards, often a on block-by-block basis in addition to use. Other overlay maps help establish these standards like street type designations, permitted locations for drive-throughs, building height maximums, and parking zones.

Click to view slideshow.

The proposal outlines the following overlays:

• Street types. The proposal would create four different types of street designations (listed from highest to lowest classification) in Metro Everett: Transit-Oriented Development (TOD), Pedestrian, Pedestrian Connector, and Residential Mixed-Use Corridor.
• Building height maximums. Three separate maps address building height maximums. For Metro Everett, building height maximums would be addressed in two ways. The proposal would establish building height maximums as-of-right. Developers would be able to build to designated building heights without the use of special incentives. To exceed these ordinary maximums, developers could “buy” additional height up to the absolute maximum through various incentive options. Generally, the absolute maximum building heights in Metro Everett would reach six to eight floors at the edge of the district and 25 floors in the center. The CRA would have a range of maximum building heights, from 35 feet to 65 feet.
• Parking zones. Two parking zones would be established for Metro Everett: Parking Area A and Parking Area B. Generally, Parking Area A would require less or no off-street parking for allowed uses as compared to Parking Area B.
• Drive-through areas. Generally, new drive-throughs would be prohibited in Metro Everett. However, several sites in the eastern frame could be designated to allowed them.

Aside from the development regulations and zoning, the proposal would also be coupled with changes to the city’s comprehensive plan, adoption of a subarea plan, and new exemption thresholds from the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for larger developments in Metro Everett.

Use Regulations

Uses in Metro Everett would be largely controlled by zone. However, the street type could play a role in determining whether a use is allowed or not and the type of conditions applied to it. As a general rule, corner lots would be subject the most restrictive use conditions related to a street type fronting the lot, up to 100 feet into the lot interior to effectively realize the overall use objective by street type. Additionally, on TOD streets, residential uses would generally be restricted on ground floor street frontages to no more than 25% of a block (defined as 400 feet of frontage) in order to encourage active streets.

Click to view slideshow.

Urban Design, Density, and Building Form Regulations

Density in Metro Everett would not be capped by new development regulations; however, new requirements would set minimum density at three dwellings per lot (where a lot is at least 5,000 square feet, 50 feet wide, 80 feet deep, and 40 feet of frontage), except when residential uses occupy 50% or less of gross floor area on a site. The CRA overlay would have no minimum density requirements, but residential density would be capped at one dwelling unit per 1,500 square feet in the R-3 zone only.

Building heights in Metro Everett would be controlled by the base maximum height and absolute maximum height limits noted before (see the first slider above for height limit maps). The absolute maximum heights would be available to developments that use incentives such as affordable housing contributions, green building, transfer of development rights, public parking, and public art.

Specific standards would be established for most types of incentives, such as the rent thresholds for affordable housing and green building eligibility criteria. The additional height gained from incentives would be converted primarily on square footage basis (e.g., five square feet of additional floor area for every one square foot on on-site or off-site affordable housing).

Principal structures would need to achieve a minimum of two floors in the UR and UM zones while TOD streets would need to achieve at least four floors, and no minimum floor height would apply to the ULI zone.

Building locations would be controlled to encourage more pedestrian-oriented developments throughout Metro Everett and CRA. On the whole, this would promote buildings to be placed close to the street frontage, often with no setback requirements. Buildings that are set back more than 10 feet would need to include special elements like plazas and forecourts to develop a better connection to the street. Where minimum setbacks do apply, a variety of architectural and urban design exceptions would still be available for things like stoops, fences, bay windows, porches, rockeries, signs and awnings, and even transit shelters. In terms of lot coverage, the UR zones and CRA would set the maximum at 85% for structures while the UM and ULI zones would allow for full site utilization.

Ground floor spaces would be controlled in minimum ceiling heights, finished floor level, and building depth to promote convertibility of spaces and ensure that they reflect the intent of their zones. UR zones, for instance, would have low building depth and ceiling height requirements since development in the zone is largely anticipated to be residential in nature. Meanwhile, UM zones would have higher minimum standards, particularly for non-residential uses which would need to have at least 15-foot ceilings, a floor-to-ceiling height typical in retail and restaurant spaces. Finished floors across the board would be restricted to no more than six inches above grade for non-residential uses to keep them easily accessible from the street.

Modulation and floorplates requirements would apply to taller buildings starting at three floors and above for interior sides of lots and six floors and above for front and side streets faces of a building. At lower levels, buildings would generally need to achieve a minimum stepback ranging from five feet to 10 feet, depending upon the side. Once a structure gets beyond seven floors, it wouldn’t have a prescribed additional stepback but would be subject to a design review process that could require additional upper-story facade changes for bulk control. The UM zone would also have a floorplate maximum of 12,000 square feet per floor above 11 floors,

Building modulation would be controlled in several other ways. Whenever a building facade would exceed 100 feet in width, it would need to use a mixture of vertical and horizontal articulation to break up the facade in addition to changing the theme of chosen materials, details, and motifs. Residential buildings would have similar requirements, except that the standards would kick in at 50 feet in width with an objective of making the structure look like multiple distinct buildings to create a finer grain. Lastly, horizontal articulation would apply generally to all front and side street facades for every 25 feet of facade width. Developments would have to accomplish this by using different architectural expressions to facades like bay windows, columns, pilasters, recesses, and mullions. 

The proposal would control how much structured parking could be visible and front a street. To do this, street types would dictate the standards in addition to whether or not structured parking is an accessory or principal use. TOD streets would be the least permissive street type for structured parking uses.

Overhead weather protection would apply to buildings fronting a public sidewalk. Developers could choose a variety of canopy and awning techniques, but the minimum sidewalk coverage, depth, and height would be established by street type. To promote walkability and street activity, the highest standards would apply to TOD streets with Pedestrian streets following only a little behind in quality and quality.

Transparency on street frontages would be highly encouraged throughout Metro Everett in order to engender visual interest, connections between the street and building interiors, and overall safety. TOD streets would have the highest transparency requirements at 90% on ground floors. Other street designations would have lower standards since they are not envisioned to be nearly as active spaces. Where no standard applies, blank walls would still be prohibited.

Frontage improvement standards would apply to new development, including wider sidewalks, frontage zones, and planter strips. These would be determined by the applicable street type to a property frontage. On the high-end, developers could be responsible for 24-foot wide areas of pedestrian realm improvements. The spaces would need to include several special amenities such as pavers, artwork, decorative tree grates, and information kiosks as well as street trees.

In addition to the general urban design, density, and building form standards described above, the proposal would establish prescriptive standards for the design of plazas, forecourts, recessed entryways, open space, and landscaping.

Parking Regulations

New off-street parking regulations (see general parking requirements in the slider below, the first slider above shows the parking zones) will apply to Metro Everett resulting in a major overhaul to the city’s parking policies. Non-residential uses would generally be eligible for reductions over the standard parking requirements:

• In Parking Area A, no off-street parking would be required for non-residential uses with the exception of government offices, which would need to meet the standard parking requirements or receive approval for a parking management plan. Developments with more than 5,000 square feet of non-residential uses would still need to seek approval of a Transportation Demand Management plan to assist with transportation accessibility.
• In Parking Zone B, off-street parking may be reduced by 25% over the standard requirements for non-residential uses.

Meanwhile, multifamily residential developments in Metro Everett would generally be eligible for lower off-street parking requirements as compared to areas outside. Parking Area A would have lower requirements over Parking Area B, but overall both would still establish parking minimums. Several reduction options would be available to developments, including reductions for affordable housing, proximity to frequent or semi-frequent transit (must be a quarter-mile or less), approved Transportation Demand Management plans, and shared parking as part of mixed use.

Bicycle parking would come into play whenever a non-residential development requires six or more vehicle parking spaces and whenever a residential development contains four or more dwelling units. For non-residential uses, one bicycle parking space would be required for every 12 vehicle parking spaces up to a maximum of 20 spaces while four bicycle parking spaces would be required for every 10 dwelling units in multifamily developments. Senior housing would have a lower requirement and developments within individual garages could receive bicycle parking reductions. In addition, bicycle parking would be subject to special design and location standards to make it accessible, secure, and usable.

The new parking code would further provide other reduction, exception, and incentive (e.g., carsharing, more bike parking, and motorcycle parking) options to eligible developments over the standards discussed, and in all cases, historic structures and site with historic would be eligible for full exemptions from parking requirements.

Click to view slideshow.

Next Steps

A public hearing will be held before the Everett Planning Commission tonight (June 5th) beginning at 6.30pm at city hall. You can provide feedback on the proposal in-person or submit comments to the planning commission via metro@everettwa.gov. Following the public hearing, the planning commission may further amend the proposal and recommend it to the city council, which would take it up sometime later this summer.

Metro Everett Framework Moves Forward with Draft Plan

The post Metro Everett Has A Fully-Baked Rezone Proposal first appeared on The Urbanist.

Draft Plan Recommendations

The draft plan provides an extensive number of recommendations. One of the key objectives is to modify land use patterns. The plan, if implemented, would consolidate a spectrum of zoning types into three land use types: Urban Residential, Urban Mixed, and Urban Light Industrial. Most of the zoning would be Urban Mixed. Layered on top of zoning, the city would regulate buildings by height and other supplementary development standards. Right now, the city has more than a dozen zoning types within the Metro Everett area.

Urban Residential areas would primarily encourage multifamily residential development, but some mixed-uses and institutional uses would also be allowed. Urban Mixed would be some of the densest areas and allow wide mixing of commercial, residential, and institutional uses. Urban Light Industrial would continue to allow industrial uses while accommodating flexible commercial and multifamily residential uses.

Another controlling feature recommended in the draft plan is street designation types. These would act as an overlay setting differing requirements. Four types could be recognized, including: Pedestrian Streets, Pedestrian Connector Streets, Residential Mixed-Use Corridor, and Transit-Oriented Development Streets.

• The draft plan describes Pedestrian Streets as areas where the ground floor of buildings are typically composed of commercial and active uses. Special development regulations would be applied to these street frontages, such as overhead weather protection, transparency, pedestrian access, and discouraging vehicles. Streetscape standards would also be specially tailored to the street type.
• For Pedestrian Connector Streets, the draft plan identifies these as a secondary street type than have less rigorous standards than Pedestrian Streets.
• Residential Mixed-Use Corridor streets would primarily serve as a transition to residential areas or are located key gateways.
• Finally, Transit-Oriented Development Streets would be tied to proximity to frequent transit and functional resemble Pedestrian Streets. The difference, however, would be that they would directly require minimum density and building height on lots in addition to creating block requirements for minimum active ground floor uses.

The draft plan would largely encourage the tallest buildings toward the existing downtown core. Buildings up to 25 stories would be allowed. Closer to the edges of the Metro Everett boundary, maximum building heights would be considerably lower to transition into detached single-family areas. Policies related to building height would generally encourage compatibility and urban design best practice such as stepping back upper stories for taller structures while allowing reduced lower floor setbacks. Developers would be able to unlock additional building height in two-tiered height areas (e.g., 7-11 Floors and 7-25 Floor noted above in the map) by providing specific public benefits (e.g., public art, transfer of development rights, and affordable housing).

The draft plan makes several other key recommendations on zoning, including:

• Elimination of density limits and maximum floor area ratio;
• Establishment of different off-street parking standards (including parking maximums) by two parking zone types;
• Financial incentives that encourage infill and redevelopment (e.g., multifamily property tax exemptions);
• Creation of flexible zoning regulations;
• Increased SEPA threshold exemptions for development;
• Encouragement of at least four-story development within a quarter-mile of existing or planned light rail and Swift stops;
• Maintaining historic overlay zones and districts to preserve certain structures and character elements;
• General prohibition of single-family homes, except in very specific circumstances;
• Zoning incentives for low-income housing projects like added building height and floor area;
• Establishment of minimum density and building height requirements when development is located along Pedestrian or Transit-Oriented Development Streets.

The Metro Everett plan explicitly identifies several areas where redevelopment and reuse are especially desired. Some areas east of Colby Avenue and on the western reaches of Hewitt Avenue are highly run down and blighted. The city ideally would like to adaptive reuse or full redevelopment.

Another priority is redevelopment around Everett Station where light rail is eventually supposed to arrive. The city is considering a few options to incentivize redevelopment, which could involve reducing impact fees, offering jobs tax credits, and reducing off-street parking requirements. Other efforts could include sale of surplus city land and development of public spaces such as a farmers market.

On the Lowe’s property just north of the station, Everett would like to see the 10-acre parcel blossom into a high-density mixed-use district. The draft plan suggests working with the property to identify several strategies to realize this objective (e.g., higher allowed building heights, minimum floor area ratios, and development of public spaces).

The draft plan is a fairly expansive document touching on more than just regulatory objectives and incentives. Other programs and actions to help facilitate and realize a denser city core are also embodied in the plan, including wayfinding objectives, needed pedestrian and bike facilities, and community initiatives. The city’s planning commission will have its first opportunity to review the full draft plan tonight (February 6th). An open house on the plan will be held sometime next month and public hearings could come in April. For now, the public has an opportunity to weigh in on the draft plan.

Metro Everett Draft Recs Offer Window Into Building Heights, Parking Policy, And More

The post Metro Everett Framework Moves Forward with Draft Plan first appeared on The Urbanist.

Everett Transit is trying to identify what types of priorities that area residents, employees, and visitors have in remaking the transit system. The agency is focusing on six key transit service objectives:

• Coverage (the areas where bus is provided);
• Frequency (how often buses provide service);
• Comfort and safety (how the transit experience feels);
• Span of service (the hours that bus service is provided);
• Low cost (how much fares should be);
• Service type (local, commuter, and high capacity).

These objectives inevitably come down to values and corresponding costs. Reducing fares or keeping them low, for instance, can induce ridership and make transit more accessible, but it could come at the cost of additional service. Graduating fares based upon income and station in life can spread transit dollars more equitably while still inducing ridership and investing transit in other ways. Expanding coverage can provide greater accessibility to more places, but it can come at the cost of travel times, frequency, and span of service. Ultimately, the public has the opportunity to consider how the levers should be pulled in each direction for differing objectives. Those objectives will necessarily help determine how Everett Transit deploys service in the future.

Currently, Everett Transit runs mostly a local bus network. Sound Transit, Community Transit, Kitsap Transit, Amtrak, and Island Transit step in to provide more regional, commuter, and high capacity transit service. The initial long-range plan survey, however, considers how Everett Transit might diversify its bus network. Specifically, the survey identifies three service types:

Local. Local service provides all-day connections with stops that are close to a rider’s starting point and destination, limiting the distance that riders must walk while providing a consistent level of service throughout the day.

Commute. Commute service emphasizes peak-period travel, with limited stops that require longer distance to access, but with faster travel times and more frequent service during the traditional commute hours.

High-capacity. High-capacity service has limited stops, but more frequent service all day to allow for more spontaneous travel. This type of service focuses primarily on higher density areas of the city to provide more frequent and faster service between high concentrations of housing and employment centers.

The initial survey also highlights specific areas that the long-range planning effort will evaluate, which include:

• Alternative mobility options (i.e., looking at possible partnerships with emerging mobility technologies, such as bikeshare, carshare, and taxis);
• Autonomous technology (i.e., how driverless and automatic vehicle technology may be used in transit);
• Battery technology (i.e., considering how battery buses may be adopted into the fleet in the future); and
• Access-to-transit (i.e., considering last-mile strategies and investing in pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure).

The long-range planning process will continue through Spring 2018. Once the initial visioning and values process wraps up, Everett Transit will analyze the information before coming back to the public to get feedback on service options in the fall. A draft plan will then be released in the New Year for public consideration with a final long-range plan to be published in March.

Everett Transit is inviting the public to learn more about the long-range planning process and provide early feedback that will be used to inform the overall process. An online open house is available through June 22nd. The agency will also hold a visioning workshop tonight and two open houses this month.

Visioning Workshop (Everett Station)
Thursday, June 8 (6pm to 8pm)
3201 Smith Ave, Everett (Weyerhaeuser Room, 4th Floor)

Drop-In Session (Everett Mall)
Saturday, June 10 (4pm to 6pm)
1402 SE Everett Mall Way, Everett (Near Massage Envy)

Drop-In Session (Everett Community College)
Monday, June 12 (12pm to 2pm)
2000 Tower Street, Everett (Gray Wolf Hall, Lobby)

The post Everett Transit Kicks Off Long-Range Planning Process first appeared on The Urbanist.

Over the past 10 years, more than 1,000 new housing units have been added and planners anticipate that another 1,000 housing units will be built over the next decade. Everett is targeting 60,000 new residents city-wide over the next 20 years with 8,000 to 13,000 planned to move into the Metro Everett area. If all goes to plan, Metro Everett’s population share will grow from 6.5% to a whopping 12%.

Metro Everett Zoning

The Metro Everett area has a broad spectrum of zoning in place. Most of the downtown core is principally zoned as B-3, a mixed-use zone with an emphasis on commercial activities. Maximum building heights range from 45 feet to more than 200 feet, but there are specific controls on the amount of building square footage for B-3-zoned lots through FAR minimums and maximums.

Surrounding the downtown core is a variety of multi-family residential zones (R3, R-4, and R-5) that range in maximum building heights and density allowances. At the high end, structures could reach 80 feet in height under R-4 and R-5 zones while the R-3 zone is more tempered at 45 feet. Each of the multi-family residential zones allow some modest types of commercial uses like offices and medical clinics, uses which are apparent through most of the multi-family residentially-zoned areas.

Closer to I-5, C-1 and C-2ES zones predominate with 97-foot and 80-foot height limits respectively. The C-1 and C-2ES commercial zones allow for mixed-uses like retail and multi-family residential, but also permit some types of light industrial uses, which are still observed throughout the zoned areas today. On portions of Broadway, a corridor of BMU zoning is in place to allow a mix of general commercial, retail, hotel, office, and residential uses. The zone doesn’t contain any maximum density controls, but limits building heights to a maximum of 85 feet.

Zoning and development regulations could be modified as part of the Metro Everett masterplanning process to further incentivize and allow infill urban development, and to ensure that future residents, visitors, and employees are better served by new development.

Proposed Strategies

The Metro Everett Draft Action Strategy Report makes targeted recommendations to improve and support the subarea. These including strategies for affordable housing, urban design, historic preservation, and inducing urban infill development:

• Tax exemption incentives. Everett already provides a tax exemption program for multi-family residential development located in the city’s designated Urban Centers. Such projects are eligible for an eight- to 12-year property tax exemption if at least 20% of the dwelling units will be provided to low-income households. The program, however, is not applicable to all areas of the Metro Everett subarea and could be expanded to encourage multi-family residential development and further community equity and opportunity.
• Transportation impact fee reductions. A 25% reduction for transportation impact fees are offered for developments in the downtown area of Everett, but it could be expanded to include all of the Metro Everett subarea to further incentivize development. The transportation fee reduction is tied to the idea that vehicular transportation impacts are fewer per capita in the downtown area due to more walk, biking, and transit-related trips.
• Impact fee deferral. Under a state-mandate, Everett was required to provide a deferred impact fee option for single-family residential development, but the provisions don’t apply to other project types. As a further incentive to developers, the same type of impact fee deferral could be extended to larger mixed-use projects (seven or more stories) in the Metro Everett area.
• New placemaking program and incentives. Planners have floated strategies to make street vending easier, address instances of blighted and deteriorating proprieties in active pedestrian areas, installing wayfinding and interpretative signage, and deploying gateway branding (e.g., pole banners) and public art.
• Reducing parking requirements and modifications to other development regulations. Residential development in the Metro Everett subarea requires a minimum parking ratio of 1.5 parking stalls per dwelling unit while commercial uses require none in the downtown area. Parking ratios could be reduced to encourage development that emphasizes walking, biking, and transit use. Meanwhile, height and floor area allowances could be increased to allow more development capacity. Changes in those policies would likely be coupled with commensurate requirements for added public amenities to be delivered by new development. Similarly, on-site open space and landscaping requirements could be modified by reducing them in exchange for funding and developing more neighborhood park facilities.
• Historic preservation. Everett has many registered and unregistered historic structures throughout downtown and the Metro Everett subarea. One strategy to further preserve historic structures and in particular their facades could be a low interest loan program for qualifying properties.

Future Transit and TOD District

The plan lays out a bold proposal for future transit. The draft action strategy lays out conceptual plans for a new light station closer to the downtown core (Broadway and Pacific Avenue) with a busway (via McDougall Avenue) and new multi-modal bridge span on Pacific Avenue. Everett already has a train station, but it is situated at the far reaches of the Metro Everett subarea, south of Pacific Avenue and east of Smith Avenue. Walking times to the heart of downtown (approximately Colby Avenue and Hewitt Avenue) are in excess of 15 minutes, even for the fastest of walkers and includes a walk up and down steep hill grades. A variety of bus lines operated by Everett Transit do connect up to downtown, but at infrequent and uncoordinated times with Community Transit and Sound Transit services. And the popular Swift Blue Line skirts the southern end of the downtown core, limiting direct access from a very frequent line.

Everett hopes to resolve some of these issues by locating the Sound Transit’s future light rail station on east side Broadway with an elevated station platform over Pacific Avenue. Immediately below, a new bridge span on Pacific Avenue is proposed over McDougall Avenue to connect up with the existing Pacific Avenue bridge over the railway tracks and higher portion of Pacific Avenue at Broadway. The benefit of this investment would be better bridge-level bus bays for direct access to the elevated light rail station and the conversion of McDougall Avenue to a busway and pedestrian mall.

The McDougall busway would deliver direct access for buses between downtown and the upper end of the Broadway corridor to the proposed light rail station and existing Everett Station transit center, eliminating some impediments to bus reliability, particularly in a much denser and likely more congested Metro Everett. Other improvements could be coupled with the plan, like two pedestrian bridges over Broadway and another three over the railway tracks east of Smith Avenue.

The map below gives additional details of the many transit-related investments and strategies that could be employed:

Of particular note in the map, beyond the concepts for transit service, are pedestrian activity and transit-oriented development (TOD). Planners have identified where future development and possible investments should employ pedestrian-oriented designs and infrastructure. Much of this is focused on McDougall Avenue and 32nd Street, but the concept map recognizes that other streets will likely serve as important pedestrian corridors and nodes. West of Smith Street, the concept map calls out six blocks that could provide significant TOD investments between both Everett Station and future light rail station. On the other side of the tracks, planners envision redevelopment of the 10-acre Lowe’s Home Improvement site for TOD as well, which could entirely transform this part of Everett into a vibrant, connected urban district.

And interestingly, the park-and-ride lots associated with Everett Station could be consolidated to one parking garage east of the station. That would mean light rail riders who might drive to and from the station would be at least a three-block walk away from their cars. Some may grumble, but it could improve placemaking and spur better mixed-use projects at the station area.

Traditionally, Sound Transit has worked closely with local jurisdictions on identifying the precise location of transit facilities and light rail alignments. Recent examples include the laying the groundwork for a NE 130th St station in Seattle, the Downtown Bellevue station and tunnel alignment, and extension of light rail to Federal Way. Everett’s overall transit concept east of Broadway will likely be given serious weight as both the Metro Everett and Sound Transit 3 expansion plans move forward.

Next Steps

Planners at the City of Everett are currently working toward a final recommended subarea plan for the Metro Everett Plan; part of that work will culminate in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to be issued in 2017. The plan will detail specific strategies and paths to realize the goals and objectives for the Metro Everett area over the coming decades. The Everett Planning Commission and City Council will both have an opportunity to review the plan and proposed actions prior to adoption. Final adoption is anticipated somewhere toward the middle of 2017.

UPDATE (1/9/2016): City staff have indicated that the City is no longer likely to pursue an EIS for the Metro Everett plan.

Metro Everett Draft Action Strategy Report 09-28-16 by The Urbanist on Scribd

The post Everett Is Developing A Bold Downtown Area Plan first appeared on The Urbanist.