RECENT PSS PHOTOS

Recent Puget Sound Section Photos

The success of this year's conference is largely due to the dedicated service of Karen Smith and Richard Hart, AICP.

PSS Section President Robert W. Thorpe, AICP thanks Larry Philips for an enlightening keynote address.

PSS Section Conference "Worker Bees"; left to right Michelle Whitfield, Michael Whipple, student volunteer from Gonzaga Law School, George Steirer, student coordinator and technical point person, Chris Green, student volunteer from Eastern Washington University Planning, and Lyn Keenan. (Your name could be here in 2009!)

Not in photo: Clay Harris Veka, student volunteer from University of Washington

PSS SECTION ELECTIONS

Election Statements for Washington APA Puget Sound Section Board of Directors

Ballots will soon arrive in the mail to all APA members for three open positions on the PSS Section Board; President-Elect, Treasurer, and Snohomish County Representative. Candidate statements are provided here in this newsletter for your reference. Write in candidates are acceptable and the ballots will contain a space designated for these write in candidates. Be sure to postmark the ballot by the date indicated on the ballot.

Looking for a way to become more aware of the work being done at the PSS Section level? Consider attending a PSS Section Board meeting. Meetings are held the 4th Wednesday of the month at Mercer Island City Hall at 6:00 PM. The next meeting is scheduled for April 25, 2007.

President Elect

Patricia Love: As a planner for more than 17 years, I am lucky to thoroughly enjoy this work. I'm Patricia Love and I work at Perteet Inc., an engineering, planning and surveying consulting firm in Everett; I am the company's Community Planning Manager. For 15 years, I worked in the public side, implementing policies and programs under the Growth Management Act, developing and implementing Critical Area standards, conducting environmental evaluations under the State and Federal Environmental Policy Act, project impact analysis, and code development and implementation. One of my proudest professional moments was receiving a Vision 2020 award from PSRC. I'm a planner's planner who has participated in so many events and conferences sponsored by APA, I feel it is time for me to give back to APA through the office of President Elect. I will apply my experience and energy toward working with the APA Board and members on planning issues that are important to our region.

Treasurer

Richard Hart, AICP: I am running for re-election to the position of Treasurer for the Puget Sound Section, APA Board. I have served in this position for the past six years and have provided sound leadership in the financial realm. I have worked closely with the other Board members to bring new ideas to the Board and represent all viewpoints of our region membership. During this time I have increased advertising revenues in our quarterly newsletter. I have worked with other Board members to find ways to reduce costs of our newsletter publication by transitioning to on-line publication. I have supported both partial and full financial assistance for planning students to attend conferences and workshops as well as supported their orientation efforts with new incoming students at the University of Washington. I have carefully managed the financial resources of the Section to ensure that we have adequate resources to meet all obligations, fund future newsletter publications, support educational forums on relevant topics, as well as finance our traditional annual events of the Board Transition Dinner, the Holiday Party and the bi-annual Planning Law Conference. The last three Planning Law Conferences, which I helped plan and run have been a successful, fund-raising event for the Puget Sound Section. We currently are in a very sound financial position. I would appreciate your vote to continue in this position the next two years, and I pledge to work with the new Board members using fiscal responsibility and integrity, and supporting our current bylaws and policies.

Snohomish County Representative

Mike Stanger: I was appointed last year to finish the term of Hiller West, who moved into the President-Elect position. Now I would like to be elected for a full 2-year term. As a relative newcomer to the APA, I believe I have been able to add a fresh voice and represent well the interests of members working in Snohomish County. I organized and helped to bring a recent brown bag seminar to the north end, which proved popular; and I plan to help continue this practice in the future. I've also been active as a participant in this year's Planning Law Conference, and recruited sponsorship of the annual holiday dinner. Working with this board has been enjoyable and fulfilling, and I'd appreciate your vote to be able to serve another term.

PLANNING LAW CONFERENCE RECAPS

Planning Law Conference Recaps

"Best Practices for Use of Hearing Law Examiners"

Gordon Crandall, hearing examiner in Bellevue and elsewhere, led the panel through a series of topics, such as how planners can best prepare for hearings, the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine, and role expectations for examiners, planners, proponents, and other interested parties. Other panelists responding to Mr. Crandall's topics were Rod Kerslake (City of Tacoma hearing examiner) and Jim Driscoll (City of Everett and others). Among other things, the three recommended that planners submit synopses of their cases, rather than entire files; meet with the parties and attempt to reach agreements on as many issues as possible before hearing; and pay particular heed to the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine, which preserves the validity of decisions in this system. Avoid email contact with the examiner prior to a hearing and "overly friendly" relationships with examiners.

"Public Agency as Developer"

The session entitled "Public Agency as Developer" focused on three examples where the city is acting in a "developer" role, by purchasing and/or consolidating property in order to facilitate development pursuant to adopted plans. Hiller West (moderator) and Phil Olbrechts, who is city attorney for Monroe, discussed the city of Monroe's "North Kelsey Planned Development", which involves about 90 acres of city-owned land being developed into a mixed-use center with substantial public space. Bill Trimm, Community Development Director for the city of Mill Creek, spoke about the goals and development process for the "Mill Creek Town Center", which has developed over the last several years in accordance with a sub-area plan and extensive design requirements. Jack Pace, Deputy Community Development Director for the City of Tukwila, spoke about the "Tukwila Village" project, where the City began with an intensive crime reduction program and infrastructure improvements, and followed with strategic property sales to encourage development according to its adopted plan. The emphasis of the presentations was on legal issues that cities encounter when acting in the role of developer, and on the design parameters and recommendations for mixed-use public/private projects.

I-933 Retrospective

Speakers represented a cross section of groups with strong interests in past of potentially future Land Use Initiatives and Referendums. Mary McCumber, Futurewise President outlined a number of initiatives being taken to address some of the issues that led to I-933. These include efforts to provide relief from some environmental requirements, inappropriate taxation and related issues. Futurewise is also a strong advocate of Transfer of Development Rights in an effort create value from environmental restrictions. Leonard Bauer from CTED's GMA division outlined actions by State agencies to reduce regulatory complexity. Garrett Huffman, with Master Builders of King and Snohomish Counties noted that they did not actively support I-933 due to concerns with scope and language but that the issues that led to it are real and remain to be dealt with. PaulKrauss, Community Development Director for Lynnwood, spoke about the large amounts of funding and support that political operatives from around the nation are willing to lend to efforts to overturn our land use and environmental regulations and that we as planners continue to be guilty of giving them numerous issues to run with. He listed a number of recent issues and encouraged planners to think and act boldly, question the status quo and deal with the matters at hand. The entire panel agreed that we will probably see new initiatives in the future and must not assume that the voters will continue to demonstrate their wisdom without making real progress.

A DIRECTOR'S LIFE

A Director's Life

I'm shopping around an idea for a reality TV show called "When Good Cities Go Bad!". Over a 30 year career, I've seen fellow Directors, great professionals and friends I respect get chewed up and spit out of their positions by events beyond their control and sometimes, comprehension. The reasons are numerous; City Council's where the 4 to 3 splits become critical and turn in an election, City Managers and Mayors who come up with a notion that housecleaning is warranted or who simply turn weird for whatever reason, issues that blow up and tilt out of control or simple personality conflicts that become unmanageable. Generally speaking, we "serve at the pleasure" of our communities and when they are no longer pleased, we're gone. My heart has gone out to my friends. We commiserate over beers, share information about upcoming job openings and try to support them the best we can.

While I would share a sense of unease that this can happen at any time to any one of us, I managed to make it through most of a career without having to deal with it first hand. It's like when you read about an accident or a death from disease. You know it could probably happen to you but, out of conceit or hope, you start trying to think why that was a situation you could have avoided because you were somehow smarter, a better professional or just luckier.

Well, a while back, the odds caught up with me. Somehow, a City I cared about, labored mightily for and for which I accomplished a huge catalog of unique and game-changing programs and projects, where I had great relationships with the community, staff and electeds, didn't want me around any longer.

The situation was shocking but not completely unexpected. In fact, relief was one of the feelings that went along with self recrimination, anger, depression and panic. In retrospect, I knew the handwriting had been on the wall for a while. I retreated to my deck, read books about anything but planning or politics (non-fiction books on history making disaster seemed appropriate). My family was extremely supportive although after a while of dealing with me, my wife made me promise not to retire early. When I could motivate myself, I updated my resume, filled out job applications and networked. Some friends were great, going out of their way to commiserate and be supportive. A group of City Managers I worked with told me that anybody at our level who hadn't been fired at least once or twice in their career really hadn't yet arrived. Still my presence often seemed to make others vaguely uncomfortable, I assume because of that vague "there but for the grace of god go I" feeling that I would experienced when I was in their shoes.

Things began falling into place for me. I quickly had a few offers of temporary work, one of which I accepted to keep busy, earn a few bucks and help some folks out. They were great to me. After a time I caught on with interim contract work doing pretty much what I had been.

I learned that maybe too much of my self image is tied up in my career. I've got a great wife and kids, nice house and some things I enjoy doing. Yet it didn't seem to mean much to me as I obsessed about what I would be doing for the rest of my life and how I would pay the bills. Giving credit were it is due I'll acknowledge that the folks at Prothman were fantastic, with their guidance and bridge back to a permanent gig. I'm doing good work again, with a City I'm coming to care for and a group of people who seem to value my presence.

So the next time you come across someone wandering out in the wilderness, good professionals who didn't deserve whatever happened, reach out to them. Commiserate, talk, network, and buy them a beer. Let them know that while they may not be working at the moment, they remain a part of a small group of folks who've dedicated their lives to public service. Professionals who make communities better places to live and work and who give voice to those otherwise unheard. Friends who, like you, know down deep that some day they may share the same fate and all that may not matter.

KING COUNTY NEWS

City of Redmond's New E-Zoom Permit Process Provides Creative Solution to Approving Projects

As most jurisdictions are aware, a fast, efficient permit process relies not only upon the processes and procedures in place, but also upon the quality of the application submitted and amount of preparation put into the proposal by the applicant. The City of Redmond Development Services Center is now offering a new, optional entitlement review process called E-Zoom, which provides a unique solution to maximize both factors. The E-Zoom process is so named because of the time efficiency and predictability it affords during the Entitlement review phase.

Under the E-Zoom process applicants pay a small pre-submittal fee, and work one-on-one with City review staff prior to their application submittal, so that the project is already code compliant when the application is received. This review is informal, but thorough. It requires that the applicant team work one-on-one with City review staff via meetings, e-mails, faxes or whatever form is most convenient, to make the plan changes necessary to create a code compliant application. Projects must be code-compliant before an application is accepted, therefore putting more responsibility on the applicant to do more than just "get it in the door". And the new process is set up to make sure applicants have the staff resources to make it happen. A signed Memorandum of Understanding is required, which establishes commitments from both the City and Applicant Team to provide quick feedback and expeditious review.

The result is a consolidated review process, and approval or recommendation of approval at the first round of City review after formal submittal of the application. The E-Zoom review process has averaged 4 months per project. The timeframe from formal submittal to approval has averaged one month-primarily to meet legal requirements for public notice and environmental review, unless a public hearing is required.

Under the standard process, applicants typically have limited interaction with City review staff prior to submitting their application. The City has always provided an optional Pre-Application Meeting and has, in fact, highly encouraged them. However the Pre-Application meetings are relatively brief and have not been structured in a way to provide ongoing one-on-one collaboration with the applicant while the application is being prepared. The result has been submittals that are complete from a format and content perspective, but require multiple rounds of review to get to a point where the City can approve the project. Each round of review under the standard process adds about 3 weeks to the process. Normally, projects need between two to four resubmittals, adding months to the review process.

The City has been testing the E-Zoom process for the past several months and is currently E-Zooming about 20 different projects, with more on the way. Developers are starting to get wind of the new E-Zoom process and are showing greater interest. The process is becoming more refined as City staff gets used to working under this new paradigm and developers and their consultants get out of the "submit plans and wait to hear back" method of review. Should you have any questions about the new process, you may contact Judd Black, Development Review Division Manager, at 425-556-2426.

URBAN DESIGN AT A REGIONAL SCALE

Urban Design at a Regional Scale

Last summer, through a grant from the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development, the central Puget Sound region embarked on an effort to identify ways of addressing urban design considerations at a regional level. A team of volunteers has taken on the task of creating a Regional Design Strategy which will help define an interface between regional planning and design. By considering the statement of Reuben Rainey, architecture professor at the University of Virginia, "Design is, in essence, giving form to values," this Regional Design Strategy will seek to strengthen the connections between regional values and regionally-scaled forms.

The volunteer team - comprised of design professionals - has held several events to jump-start the process that will support the final Strategy. These regional design workshops have served not only as valuable brainstorm sessions, but begin to trace the foundations for the collaborative discussions that will be a critical component of implementing the Strategy. The team's steering committee has also collectively developed a working draft of the Regional Design Strategy with the following structure:

Four Principles underlie the entire document: 1) recognize that the natural setting provides a primary basis for urban form, 2) take a holistic approach to dealing with regionwide systems, 3) advance cooperation and a sense of regional citizenship, and 4) design so that systems function well at all scales, from an individual or neighborhood scale to a multicounty scale.

A set of geographically specific strategies bundles together policies, actions, and principles that can be used to focus implementation efforts; including: 1) a reassessment to address the coexistence of vital industrial areas and key ecological corridors, 2) a coordinated approach to achieve a fully articulated regional open space network, and 3) a study to identify and pressure points along the urban growth area boundary. A final compendium portion will help translate design ideas to implementation actions by cataloging model programs, best practices, and examples.

Central Puget Sound is in the middle of an ambitious effort to update VISION 2020, the region's long-range growth, economic, and transportation Strategy. Regional Design Strategy work has already been incorporated into subsequent phases of the VISION Update, including new design provisions in the draft multicounty policies and a series of proposed implementation actions. Collectively, the team has also helped the update process by commenting on the VISION 2020 Update DEIS.

By the summer of 2007, The Regional Design Strategy work will also contribute to a product that CTED can use in other regions of the state, with the hope that this document will be the solid basis for increasingly collaborative efforts in the immediate future to bring notions of design into the process of regional planning.

For more information, please visit the Design Team's web-blog at psudt.blogspot.com, or contact Talia Henze, thenze@psrc.org.

WHERE LAND MEETS WATER (PART 2)

Where Land Meets Water (Part 2)
By Colleen Whitten Sax

Spring is here, thankfully the days are getting longer! Time for setting intentions for greatest growth over the next few productive seasons. What I am intending for myself is to join with colleagues to address the integrated solutions our beautiful region needs from us -- a regional effort towards restoring "green infrastructure". Restoring natural functions that have been lost to the effects of urbanization.

I'm concerned that as planners, we may be missing the bigger picture. In my last article, I discussed the disconnect between urban planning and natural resource management. Land use is water-dependent, and water-impacting, yet this key relationship hasn't been addressed systematically in comprehensive plans. Land use that is impervious contributes to flood hazards, habitat fragmentation, loss of soils, stream health, shoreline, water quality and stormwater issues. Jurisdictional boundaries impede the flow of data that is needed to do landscape-based analysis. While multiple separate plans may serve each of these problems, the cumulative effects are calling for a greater, more integrated approach.

There are several promising tools and models to assist. Watershed characterization is a method for jurisdictions seeking to integrate these issues. Hydrologic modeling is getting finer-grained to provide guidance to the parcel level. Some relevant studies from UW's Urban Ecology Lab under Prof. Marina Alberti, explain relationships between land use and land cover to inform sustainable development patterns. Patrick Condon's free-to-download neighborhood patterns are available on his UBC website. And there are more examples "on the ground" of well-performing LID projects, such as the Highpoint Community Redevelopment in West Seattle.

It would be important to align with a number of parallel regional efforts, to achieve multiple benefits. To name a few, the WRIA Chinook Habitat Plans identify priority subbasins for protection and restoration. And PSRC's Vision 2020 Regional Design Strategy advocates for connected, linear elements that could serve multiple objectives.

Much has been written about the Governor's blueprint to restore Puget Sound, and the gaps therein addressing stormwater threats. Dare we suggest that GMA does not yet address this land use and water connection? I am suggesting we move towards reframing the comprehensive plan within the watershed context, and collaborating with ecologists, landscape architects, civil engineers, hydrologic modelers and others for expertise. Partnering with professional organizations such as AWRA, and restoration ecology groups would facilitate helpful dialog.

Out of necessity is not by choice, the watershed will become the planning unit of the future. To be in alignment with this, strategic long-range planning should consider the larger context of the watershed and subbasins within it. Issues such as critical area designations, wildlife corridors, stormwater and hazard mitigation planning are all potential multi-jurisdictional issues best addressed at the landscape level, informed by best available science. The benefits would include sharing the costs, and giving back to our region the capacity it needs to restore balance within the systems that support us.

Colleen Whitten Sax works in policy and planning to restore green infrastructure for multiple benefits. She has a MA in Urban Planning from the University of Washington, with a focus in land use and water issues, urban ecology and community sustainability. She can be reached by email at: colleensrull@earthlink.net.

WINTER '07 BROWN BAG RECAPS

Winter '07 Brown Bag Recaps

How to work with Public Works Departments (1/24/07)

Our panel consisted of the planning and public works directors of Burien (Scott Greenberg and Steve Clark), Kent (Fred Satterstrom and Larry Blanchard), and Jack Pace of Tukwila. All stressed the need to understand the other department's organization, management style, and culture. Both needs to trust each other, remain flexible, and look at what's good for the entire city. A cooperative mood needs to come from the top if turf issues are to be avoided. Bonney Lake planners showed a long flow chart of how planning and public works review processes interrelate for a commercial development in that city - it needs to be charted out to find the bottlenecks. Different ways to jointly staff the Permit Center were discussed, including the use of development review engineers. Planners tend to be the lead contact at first for many types of large developments but as construction approaches the lead contact shifts to people in the public works and building divisions.

Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) (1/31/07)

Allan Giffen of the City of Everett emphasized incentives, a reason to buy TDRs. Everett offers a Floor Area Ratio bonus for TDRs including in their Broadway Corridor Plan. The City is currently working with Snohomish County and CTED to identify ways to make the TDR program successful, such as code changes and greater than 1:1 ratios. Who should run the TDR bank was discussed. Brad Collins of Arlington discussed a "wipeout"/"windfall" approach where there must be a corresponding downzone to be granted an upzone where TDRs could be used. Arlington is also looking at using TDRs for UGA expansion.

Alternative Street Types (2/7/07)

Lucy Sloman of CityWorks and Dan Ervin of RH2 showed pictures of woonerfs in Issaquah Highlands. These communal spaces where up to 22 houses (detached or attached) come together. The houses generally face the other way, on a park or green. Pedestrians have the right-of-way on woonerfs, which are usually of concrete with inverted crown section, Y or L turnarounds, and no curbs. The rights-of-way can be public or private. They can blend into a plaza if desired. Because Issaquah Public Works doesn't consider them real streets they didn't have to comply with any standards. Houses on woonerfs sell faster. Builders love woonerfs now.

Next Lucy and Dan showed pictures of "fire service alleys." Again, the houses face on a green. The alley is a through street with 18-foot right-of-way, all driveable, of asphalt with concrete borders. Some are one-way, some are two-way. Parking may be allowed on one side. Another street type is their "secret streets," which are narrow lanes that provide additional connection between actual streets on steep terrain. They don't meet emergency vehicle standards and are rarely used by cars but are popular for walking and occasional parking.

Peg Staeheli of SVR Design talked about Highpoint's streets with their beautiful landscaped planter strips that soak up stormwater. All the planted swales are walkable and held up well in the recent storms. Rain gardens, patches of native habitat, and roof downspouts increase infiltration. Peg talked about the "complete streets" concept, where pedestrians and cyclists are raised to a more equal level with motorists. Thought must be given to how access is gained to utilities under the street or sidewalk, sometimes via vaults. The various underground utilities require complex coordination. Alternative streets often have public art and seating.

Urban Design in the Puget Sound Region (2/14/07)

Our brown bag marked the roll-out of the Puget Sound Urban Design Team's first report, a Regional Design Strategy. Speakers Talia Henze, John Owen, Rocky Piro, Michael Hintze, Roger Wagoner, and Ron Turner first presented the guiding principles: primacy of the natural environment, systems approach, reflection of design values at all scales (site to region), and balancing competition against cooperation. Next the document ponders regional identity and poses strategies related to centers, open space network, redevelopment of linear systems, protection of rural lands, and transformation of industrial floodplains and suburban areas. It also contains a compendium of successful examples. The CTED-funded effort is linked to a redrafting of Multi-county Planning Policies and the PSRC's Vision 20-20 Update. The Regional Design Strategy is an attempt to better manage the many natural and man-made systems that cross jurisdictional borders. The process continues - see also psudt.blogspot.com.

Stormwater Design for Planners II (2/21/07)

Greg Giraldo and Amalia Leighton of SvR Design Company recapped the innovative, multi-use stormwater techniques displayed at the fall stormwater brown bag: natural swales, rain gardens, porous pavement, green roofs, rainwater harvesting, and stormwater-as-art-and-environmental education. All is possible to design teams that consider stormwater early in the process.

Raymond Chung and Dustin Atchison of CH2MHill, Ron Straka of Renton Public Works, and Dan Grigsby of Bonney Lake Public Works agreed that these innovative approaches have a growing place in the stormwater designer's palate, but they elucidated some drawbacks. Foremost is maintenance requirements.

Planners often forget that these aren't static facilities. Depending on the type of facility, sediment load must be periodically cleaned out, plant growth must be managed, etc. Specialized equipment (vactor trucks, etc.) and training may be required. If these jobs fall to public works crews, will the needed funding and personnel be available over the long haul? Can homeowner associations be trusted to care for facilities they are unlikely to even understand? What sort of enforcement will private parties need? If the responsibility lies with the city or county government, the parks crew may do better since they are more used to caring for landscaping than the public works crew. Don't make maintenance assumptions without consulting your maintenance people.

Raymond Chung pointed out that water-quality wet ponds in non-rectangular, naturalistic shapes will probably have "dead zones" outside the flow path where little cleansing occurs. Thus, they may have to be larger. Also, designing non-geometric facilities is more difficult because such shapes aren't easily quantified.

Stormwater ponds are not a major source of mosquitoes. Nonetheless, mosquito control is an issue. Some jurisdictions are leaning toward dry ponds (designed to infiltrate or drain, containing water only in severe storms). Underground vaults are popular where land is at a premium, but maintaining them is difficult and they allow no biological activity, so some jurisdictions are getting away from vaults.

Liability is crucial in stormwater ponds. To avoid drownings, deep ponds with steep banks are typically fenced. But fences are ugly and unfriendly to humans and wildlife. So better to limit bank slopes to 3:1 (4:1 is better) and depth of pond to three feet or less. If your risk management officer still says it must be fenced, they're wrong.

Rain gardens, porous paving, and similar low-impact development (LID) concepts infiltrate water well in small storms, but they don't help much in the maximum design storm when the ground is already saturated. This limits their usefulness in complying with the stormwater manual, but LID may allow use of a small dry pond instead of a large wet pond. Because porous pavement is much more expensive for a given strength than standard pavement, its use is usually limited to walkways and parking lots. Also, they require different forms of maintenance.

Sometimes land use regulations work against LID, such as where rain gardens and the like are not counted toward the required open space, or where lot size averaging is not allowed, which makes subdivision layout difficult.

Developers and policy-makers often must decide between multi-functionality (such as gaining landscaped open space) and minimizing the stormwater facility's footprint. This is but one of many trade-offs inherent to stormwater design.

SPRING '07 BROWN BAG SCHEDULE

Spring 2007 Brown Bag Series Schedule

Come to the FREE session you need to do your job better! APA-subsidized lunches, only $2! RSVP to Steve Ladd, ladds@ci.bonney-lake.wa.us.

Attendees can receive AICP professional development credits.