Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2021-03-16 City Council - Full Agenda-2818
O� LDIVO �o Agenda Edmonds City Council REGULAR MEETING - VIRTUAL/ONLINE VIRTUAL ONLINE MEETING EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS WEB PAGE, HTTP://EDMONDSWA.IQM2.COM/CITIZENS/DEFAULT.ASPX, EDMONDS, WA 98020 MARCH 16, 2021, 7:00 PM DUE TO THE CORONAVIRUS, MEETINGS ARE HELD VIRTUALLY USING THE ZOOM MEETING PLATFORM. TO JOIN, COMMENT, VIEW, OR LISTEN TO THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING IN ITS ENTIRETY, PASTE THE FOLLOWING INTO A WEB BROWSER USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE: HTTPS://ZOOM. US/J/95798484261 OR JOIN BY PHONE: US: +1 253 215 8782 WEBINAR ID: 957 9848 4261 PERSONS WISHING TO PROVIDE AUDIENCE COMMENTS USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE ARE INSTRUCTED TO RAISE A VIRTUAL HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED. PERSONS WISHING TO PROVIDE AUDIENCE COMMENTS BY DIAL -UP PHONE ARE INSTRUCTED TO PRESS *9 TO RAISE A HAND. WHEN PROMPTED, PRESS *6 TO UNMUTE. IN ADDITION TO ZOOM, REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS BEGINNING AT 7:00 PM ARE STREAMED LIVE ON THE COUNCIL MEETING WEBPAGE, COMCAST CHANNEL 21, AND ZIPLY CHANNEL 39. "WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE ORIGINAL INHABITANTS OF THIS PLACE, THE SDOHOBSH (SNOHOMISH) PEOPLE AND THEIR SUCCESSORS THE TULALIP TRIBES, WHO SINCE TIME IMMEMORIAL HAVE HUNTED, FISHED, GATHERED, AND TAKEN CARE OF THESE LANDS. WE RESPECT THEIR SOVEREIGNTY, THEIR RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION, AND WE HONOR THEIR SACRED SPIRITUAL CONNECTION WITH THE LAND AND WATER. - CITY COUNCIL LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 3. ROLL CALL 4. PRESENTATION 1. Hearing Examiner Annual Report (15 min) 5. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 7. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA Edmonds City Council Agenda March 16, 2021 Page 1 1. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2021 2. Approval of claim checks and wire payment. 3. Garden and Summer Market Event Contract 4. Public Hospital District No. 2 Grant ILA #2 - LEAP 5. January 2021 Monthly Financial Report 6. Authorization for Mayor to sign a Supplemental Agreement with Murraysmith for the Phase 9 Sewerline Replacement Project 7. Authorization for Mayor to sign a Supplemental Agreement with Blueline Group for the Ph. 12 Waterline Replacement Project 8. Award Construction Contract for the Phase 11 Waterline Replacement Project 9. Resolution adopting Electronic Signatures Policy and Budget Authorization 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Amendments to New Tree Regulations (45 min) 9. NEW BUSINESS 1. Introductory Overview of Housing Commission's Recommendations (60 min) 10. ACKNOWLEDGMENT 1. Public Comments on Tree Code (0 min) 11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS ADJOURN Edmonds City Council Agenda March 16, 2021 Page 2 4.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/16/2021 Hearing Examiner Annual Report Staff Lead: Shane Hope Department: Planning Division Preparer: Rob Chave Background/History The City's Hearing Examiner provides a report on activity each year. Staff Recommendation No action is required. Narrative The Hearing Examiner, Phil Olbrechts, hears quasi-judicial development applications under contract with the City of Edmonds. Mr. Olbrechts will be present to give his report, which is also attached to this agenda memo. Attachments: Exhibit 1: Hearing Examiner Annual Report Packet Pg. 3 4.1.a MEMORANDUM DATE: March 10, 2021 TO: Edmonds City Council FROM: Phil A. Olbrechts — Hearing Examiner RE: Annual Report SUMMARY: Three hearing examiner decisions have been issued since the last annual report to the City Council issued on February 12, 2020. Each decision is addressed in reverse chronological order below: Diamond Parking Conditional Use Permit (11/15/20): Approved conditional use permit to convert three private parking lots at the Bank of America site in downtown Edmonds to commercial parking lots. The proposal drew concern from some business owners and residents because it was perceived to reduce the amount of parking available in downtown Edmonds. Business owners felt that limited parking was driving away potential business and those working downtown were already having significant trouble finding places to park. However, the lots are private and according to staff they were created in the 50s and 60s and were not required to provide parking for any specific business. The proposal did not involve any improvements to the parking lots. The hearing on the application was re -opened twice to address potential irregularities in the mailed and posted notice of the project. Ultimately, the City was found to have complied with mailed notice requirements. However, in an abundance of caution, the City was found to have potentially violated posting requirements at designated bulletin boards. Hearing notice was re - posted to ensure compliance. Staff had not initially posted notice at the bulletin boards because the buildings in which they were located were largely inaccessible to the public due to the pandemic. Distinctive Dentistry Conditional Use Permit (10/22/20): Conditional use permit approved to relocate dental practice to an existing building located at 22815 Edmonds Way. No exterior modifications were proposed. The prior use was for a naturopathic clinic. The proposal didn't attract any public comment. Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Conditional Use and Variance (2/10/20): Conditional use permit and two variances approved for improvements to the Civic Center Playfield. The two variances were for the height and setbacks of fencing for existing tennis courts. The conditional use permit was for the height of light poles that will be replaced for the soccer field. One neighbor inquired about the lighting at the hearing and no other comments were received. Staff responded at hearing that there will be fewer lights replacing the existing lights and the new lights will have cut-off shields that would result in less light spillage on adjoining properties. After the close of the hearing a resident filed a request for reconsideration. The City moved to have the request dismissed because the resident had not participated in the hearing or provided Packet Pg. 4 4.1.a Examiner Annual Report - 2 written comment on the proposal. ECDC 20.06.140.A only authorizes reconsideration to be requested by persons who have participated in the original hearing. Based upon this requirement, the request for reconsideration was denied by decision issued February 26, 2020. Packet Pg. 5 7.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/16/2021 Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2021 Staff Lead: Scott Passey Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review and approve the draft meeting minutes on the Consent Agenda. Narrative N/A Attachments: 3-9-2021 Draft Council Meeting Minutes Packet Pg. 6 7.1.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL VIRTUAL ONLINE MEETING DRAFT MINUTES March 9, 2021 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Nelson, Mayor Susan Paine, Council President Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Luke Distelhorst, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Vivian Olson, Councilmember Laura Johnson, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Brook Roberts, Student Representative 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Phil Williams, Public Works Director Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir. Shane Hope, Development Services Director Angie Feser, Parks, Rec. & Cultural Serv. Dir. Jessica Neill Hoyson, HR Director Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks & Recreation Dir. Kernen Lien, Environmental Programs Mgr. Frances Chapin, Arts & Culture Program Mgr. Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Dave Rohde, GIS Analyst The Edmonds City Council virtual online meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Nelson. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT c Councilmember K. Johnson read the City Council Land Acknowledgement Statement: "We acknowledge o the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip v Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection o with the land and water." 0 N 3. ROLL CALL M �.i City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present, participating remotely. d E z 3. PRESENTATION c� a 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON, TO AMEND THE AGENDA TO ADD "COUNCILMEMBER REIMBURSEMENT CLAIM" AS NEW BUSINESS ITEM 8.3. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 1 Packet Pg. 7 7.1.a Councilmember Buckshnis explained this was on the Finance Committee agenda last month and the committee recommended it go to full Council. It was not scheduled on the Council agenda so it was suggested she request it be added via this method. Councilmember Distelhorst asked if could be scheduled as Item 9.3 because there was an hour of Unfinished Business that people want to get to. Council President Paine suggested since this item came to the Finance Committee last month, it was appropriate to place it on the agenda as Unfinished Business Item 9.3. Councilmember K. Johnson said this was actually New Business before the full Council even though it went to committee. She supported the motion. Councilmember Buckshnis explained the reason she made the motion to put it on the agenda as Item 8.3 was the Council would likely not get to it if it was Item 9.3. It will not take much time and it is New Business. It came to committee for transparency reasons and to avoid creating a rolling quorum. She questioned why it was not considered New Business. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed it would be New Business. She denied the reimbursement when she was Council President and it had been denied by Council President Paine. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, DISTELHORST, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO. MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Mayor Nelson invited participants and described the procedures for audience comments. Valerie Stewart, Edmonds, an Edmonds resident for 30+ years and now living in Port Townsend, commented she knew many Councilmember from the Planning Board and other committees related to the climate, backyard habitat, green resource center, rain gardens, starting Students Saving Salmon and as a Beach Ranger Naturalist. She has a lot of background in the environment and pays close attention to environmental issues. She recalled when the tree code was presented to the Planning Board many years ago, it was very challenging then and was still challenging today. Many years have passed and many trees have been cut down and it is time to head that off before more habitat is lost. She referred to potential ecosystem loss, commenting this was not just about one tree here or there, what really matters is the layering under the trees, the understory shrubs, the herbaceous level at the ground, smaller trees, what's in the dirt including microbes, fungi and root connections that create a community for diverse wildlife; all that is lost when a tree is cut down. She hoped somewhere in the code there would be a definition of native wildlife habitat and what that means and incorporate that when evaluating the tree inventory. More should be taken into consideration during the tree inventory including what's underneath the trees and what it supports and the City should have an expert to support staff in that effort. Her biggest concern is undeveloped land because that is where the most ecosystems are lost. She hoped during the Council's deliberations they would take into consideration the importance of protecting ecosystems and to make building positioning more flexible as side setbacks do not always work. (Written comments submitted to PublicComment@Edmondswa.gov are attached.) 7. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 2 Packet Pg. 8 N 0 N a� c� c d E z c� a 7.1.a 8. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS, MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 2, 2021 2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM, PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE PAYMENTS 1. YOUTH COMMISSION PRESENTATION -PRONOUNS Deputy Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Director Shannon Burley explained the Youth Commission's mission is to protect, preserve, and enhance the quality of life for Edmonds youth by advising City Council and the public on issues relating to youth policies, programs, and opportunities. Tonight's presentation is in direct alignment with their mission. Members of the Youth Commission's Diversity Committee introduced themselves and identified the personal pronouns they use: Owen Lee (he/him), Sydney Pearson (she/her), Grace Kamila (she/her), Aaron Nateephaisan (he/him), and Finn Paynich (they/them). Tonight's presentation will be to discuss with Council the inclusion of personal pronouns in their email signature, Zoom name, and biographies. Owen Lee commented in the Eurocentric society we live in, there is not a lot of understanding of gender and pronoun inclusion. However, as society has evolved, there have been changing views about gender and growing acceptance of the idea that gender is a social construct as opposed to a scientific fact. With that new understanding, it is no longer acceptable to assume that somebody's gender identity matches their appearance or can be assumed from their appearance. For a city that works to be as inclusive as Edmonds, a really important step is recognizing the need to view people's pronouns and to include pronouns in things like Zoom meeting names. Finn Paynich reviewed some important vocabulary; being transgender or trans is when a person's gender - does not match their biological sex. They may feel extreme discomfort when referred to as a member of c their biological sex or feel that their body doesn't match who they are. These feelings can be described as o dysphoria. Dysphoria means the anxiety a trans person feels surrounding their body or gender. A person v can have body dysphoria which relates to their body, or gender dysphoria which has to do with their gender. Another term is biological sex; this is what is written on a person's birth certificate or what T happened to a person's body during puberty. It is entirely related to what a person's body looks like and c not how they identify. Gender is different from biological sex; gender is a made up concept and is not "' a� determined by what someone looks like or who they are attracted to. ch c Finn Paynich explained another new word is misgendering; to misgender someone is to call them the wrong gender by using the wrong pronouns or using titles like sir when the person would rather be called ma'am. Pronouns are the words used to refer to someone such as she, he, they, or whatever a person chooses. Using the correct pronouns for someone is pretty easy and feels very validating to the person you Q are talking about. Cisgender or cis simply means a person who isn't trans. Non -binary is an umbrella term that describes anyone who isn't male or female. Some people identify as both male and female or neither or some people do not even have a gender. It is a very fluid and diverse concept. Grace Kamilla explained it is important to understand complexities of gender in day-to-day life and how important gender identity is to people. Misgendering can suppress people's true selves and lead to issues like gender dysphoria, isolation, stigma, depression, lower self-esteem and many other things like Finn Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 3 Packet Pg. 9 7.1.a mentioned. Transgender, non -binary and gender -fluid people already suffer disproportionate rates of homelessness and are at a higher risk of violence. Those who are misgendered more often suffer worse rates of anxiety, depression, suicidal thoughts and are four times as likely as cisgender individuals to experience a mental health condition according to the National Alliance of Mental Illness. In addition, a study done by the American Psychological Association reported that misgendering was correlated with higher feelings of stigma and had a positive association with depression. With all that said, you can see how crucial it is to take the time to practice someone's pronouns in order to show respect towards the trans, non -binary and gender -fluid community and prevent the damage and harm that can come from misgendering people. Edmonds as a city needs to encourage all people to learn about this issue for themselves and reinforce the mission to be an inclusive place for all. Sydney Pearson explained their main goal is to ensure that Edmonds continues to be inclusive place for all different identities. It is important to foster a welcoming community for everyone and as has been explained in this presentation, the normalization of making pronouns visible helps to do this. It creates a safer environment for people who go by pronouns other than the sex they were assigned at birth and stops people from assuming one's gender. Creating a welcoming environment for non -binary and transgender individuals allows them to fully represent themselves when dealing with city -related matters. Including pronouns will also help prevent the misgendering of individuals which, as Grace explained, is very important. Aaron Nateephaisan relayed an implementation plan is outlined in the recommendation to the Mayor and the Mayor sent this recommendation to all City staff members. Recommending these changes to all City bodies requires support from the City Council. He recognized there is a major issue when people are unaware of how to display their pronouns; therefore, tutorials have been created for different devices, making it simpler to have pronouns presented. The request is to have people's pronouns included in their City biographies and it is also recommended that this change be made during the update of the City's website. With regard to the potential negative effects of this plan on the City, Finn Paynich advised that there are none. All this does is create a more inclusive environment in Edmonds and encourages citizens to learn about LGBTQIA+ identities and issues. Sydney Pearson explained based on the Youth Commission Diversity Commission recommendation, they will be adding relevant resources to the Edmonds Youth Commission page on the City's website. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented she has been using pronouns for quite a while because it a respects those living among us and listing one's personal pronouns is important. She thanked the Youth o Commission for all they do. c N Councilmember Distelhorst thanked Youth Commission members for bringing this forward to the City a' g g Y c� and to the City Council. He saw this presentation last week at the Diversity Commission retreat and appreciated the Youth Commission taking their feedback into account in developing resources to allow E staff, Councilmembers and others to learn how to update and display their pronouns and create a more z inclusive environment. cvo Councilmember L. Johnson commented this was an excellent and very informative presentation. She a commended the Youth Commissioners for taking an active role in promoting inclusivity within Edmonds. Their perspectives and experiences are unique from a lot of adults and all can benefit from listing to them including the recommendation to use personal pronouns. She appreciated the resources provided, noting she finally learned how to permanently add her personal pronouns to her name. Council President Paine thanked the Youth Commission for the presentation and asked about tips and pointers for people who aren't as accustomed to using pronouns such as what to expect when misusing a Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 4 Packet Pg. 10 7.1.a pronoun. She assumed an immediate switch of pronoun and a fast apology. Finn Paynich answered as a person using they/them pronouns, they has had to correct people. A person who has corrected someone wants to hear an immediate switch to their preferred pronoun and not have the person make a huge deal out of apologizing. Apologizing puts the person on the spot, but a quick I'm sorry and switch to the preferred pronoun makes them feel supported but not othered. Councilmember Olson thanked the Youth Commission for the presentation, not only for the Council but also the public watching the meeting as this is a topic a lot of adults have not been exposed to. She was a little blown away by a statistic regarding how many cultures around the world recognize a lot of different genders; learning that was a tectonic shift in her thinking about this. She appreciated the Youth Commission bringing this message to more people and to the Council in particular. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked the Youth Commission for their presentation, commenting the best statement in the presentation was there is no negative impact. Everyone has learning moments, some people have archaic thinking. She has added her preferred pronoun on her phone. 2. 4TH AVENUE CULTURAL CORRIDOR PUBLIC PROCESS Economic Development/Community Services Director Patrick Doherty explained the 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor has been a concept -level project envisioned since 2004. It was also the keystone capital project v included in the City's application for Creative District designation. He reviewed: c • In 2020 staff worked with CREA AFFILIATES on concepts and public process o Considerations: o L ■ What is Edmonds Cultural Corridor? n ■ What is special about the location? a ■ How did it come to be? w ■ Creating a special place ■ Considerations for Schematic Design —roadway and public spaces • The City of Edmonds... a o Celebrates r ■ A seaside ambiance m ■ Appealing small-town quality ■ A walkable downtown ■ An active art community o o Showcases year-round events v ■ Community sense of pride and involvement in the arts a o Certified as the State's first Creative District o Civic commitment to arts and culture N ■ Integrates artwork into the "fabric" of public spaces N as • Goals CP o Draw pedestrians between the ECA and downtown businesses. o Transform a unique street into a walkable arts destination. o Establish a new community gathering place. o Provide a visible and accessible space to display temporary art and host related activities. • Objectives Q o Connect the Edmonds Center for the Arts with Main Street through an enhanced and unique pedestrian connection. o Welcome mixed -use development with upper story residential uses. o Accommodate a variety of cultural events and exhibits that will attract visitors and stimulate economic development. • Cultural Corridor Concept o Celebrates the variety in arts and culture in the Edmonds community. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 5 Packet Pg. 11 7.1.a o Establishes a unique and memorable sense of place. o Includes permanent and temporary cultural features and events. o Supports key goals of Edmonds Creative District o Draws residents and visitors to the downtown area. Arts and Culture o Transform the commonplace into surprising moments. o Bring mystery and magic to a streetscape experience. o Create a memorable experience. o Strengthen community. Connecting Anchors o Uninterrupted views between the ECA and downtown. o A block from City Hall, the Public Safety Complex and Civic Park. o Intersects with major paths between the waterfront and civic facilities. Why 4th Avenue? o Characteristics ■ A quiet street. ■ Historic buildings. ■ Less than an average 350 cars/ day in either direction at Main Street. ■ Few driveways onto 4th. ■ Secondary access through rear alleys. ■ Artwork references community history Arts & Culture Program Manager Frances Chapin reviewed: • Timeline o 2004-05: Planning Board identifies Arts Corridor on 4th which leads to a creation of BD5 zoning m 0 2006: Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department updates the Streetscape Plan, adding the 4th Avenue Corridor Concept Plan 0 2007-09: Parks, Recreation and Cultural Service Department gets 0 50,000 from the National Park Service's Preserve America for 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor Implementation & Funding Plan. 0 2014: Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services updates Community Cultural Plan that — prioritizes interim steps to implement the 4th Ave Cultural Corridor Plan. c 0 2016: Project funded by ECA and Edmonds Arts Festival Foundation "Luminous Forest" by �o artist Iole Alessandrini 0 2016: Western Washington University and Association of WA Cities on Sustainable Cities Partnership develop four potential public relations campaigns T 0 2018: Community identifies completion of 4thAvenue Cultural Corridor as goal in 5 year c work plan as a part of its Creative District designation. � 0 2019: Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services contracts for a site survey and a consultant to c� facilitate development of a feasible project concept. Meetings held with ECDAC and the public. E 0 2020: A tentative conceptual design is developed and tied to cost estimates. Through public input schematic design direction was identified. Drawings of earlier concepts in 2005-06 and 2007-09 Q Recurring themes from public input o Art reflecting both ends of corridor. o Sequential discovery of art elements. o Elements that are approachable and interactive. o Space for cultural events. o Space for street artists. o Pocket park at Sprague. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 6 Packet Pg. 12 7.1.a o Encourage artist studio store fronts. o Outdoor caf6 seating areas BD-5 Zoning o Ground floor with commercial space o Shall be oriented to 4th Avenue o At least one building entry shall face 4th Avenue o Architectural details and/or applied art shall be incorporated o If structure is set back from the street, it shall have landscaping and/or artwork o Live/work uses are encouraged within the BD5 zone Project limits have not changed since 2006. o Most recent work focused on middle section of corridor and ways of identifying phases and what would be feasible to do initially to transform the public right-of-way . Over the years o New downtown public restrooms. o Art elements that reflect history, like "The Stages of History" walking tour. o New Cascadia Art Museum. o Downtown Murals project. o Creative District designation by ARTSWA. Mr. Doherty described: t� Creating a Special Place 2020 Concept o • Proposed Phasing: Three blocks (Main to Daley) will be: > o Rebuilt and recreated for pedestrian -oriented design n o Recast for temporary and permanent art installations a o Rebranded to allow for complementary activities in the public realm • Activity Zone o Main to Edmonds Streets 3 c ■ Will be designed for active uses - Single event or short period of times ■ Will host permanent and temporary exhibits - Sculpture, painting, poetry, light art ■ May hold events - - Puppet shows and music to street plays and dance ■ Tie into utility improvements at Main Street intersection. v ■ Enhance Bell and Edmonds Street intersections. ■ Create a pedestrian oriented experience. o ■ Allow for flexibility in display and safe walking during events. r ■ Allocate space for permanent and temporary art and events. c ■ Create places to convene. ■ Plan for occasional displays and performances in roadway by closing to vehicular traffic. c� • Illustrations/Renderings of before and after enhancement and during a street closure c o Main Street Intersection d E o Bell Street Intersection o Edmonds Street Intersection • Passive Zone Q o Edmonds to Daley Streets ■ Will be designed for passive use - Walking dog, people watching, pocket park at Sprague ■ Will include new landscaping - Green infrastructure at Edmonds street intersection ■ Could host short-term exhibits on sidewalks - Sculpture, painting, poetry, light art Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 7 Packet Pg. 13 7.1.a Will transition from Yd Avenue entry - A new boulevard and entry plaza at Daley could be developed in partnership with the ECA For this block - Enhance intersections. - Retain street profile. - Explore a tree -lined boulevard along the west sidewalk. - Create a pocket park at Sprague Street. - Develop places to rest and talk. - Recreate surface light art in this section. Mr. Doherty reviewed inspirational/aspirational images: • Activating Space o Safe walking surfaces o Paving o Mini seasonal fairs o Street artists o Motion art o Street games o Occasional exhibits o Storytelling o Seating • Color in Space o Bollards o Lighting o Markers o Plants o Crosswalks o Painted intersections o Sculptures Temporary Art Passive Art o Benches as art o Lighting o Daydreaming o Walking o Paving T o Art as landscape c o Infrastructure art N a� o Light in the landscape c� c Mr. Doherty reviewed: E Considerations for Schematic Design • Phase 1 - How do we get there? o Main to Edmonds a ■ How do we create an art -infused safe and inviting pedestrian connection? ■ With limited right-of-way how can we provide more space for people and art? ■ What option(s) would you choose for reshaping 4thAvenue's public right-of-way? ■ How can we carve out a space that adjusts to unique site conditions? o Diagram of existing street Main to Bell ■ Features - 50' right-of-way Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 8 Packet Pg. 14 7.1.a - 36' improved as roadway - 7' sidewalks on either side - Two-way travel lanes. - Parking on both sides. - Few amenities, landscaping or artwork o Diagram of existing street Bell to Edmonds ■ Features - Wider right-of-way - 60'. - Narrower roadway - 30' within 43' total improved width - 6.5' sidewalks on both sides. - Old, narrow, cracked sidewalks. w - Two-way travel - 16-foot lanes - Parking on both sides. c - Few amenities, landscaping, lighting or artwork - Area perceived/maintained as front yards actual City right-of-way c o Diagram of Bell to Edmonds Built to Standards (not proposed) ■ Features - 56' street width - 10' sidewalks, - 36' roadway with 22' travel lane and parking on both sides. v - Area perceived/maintained as front yards would be used c Considerations o Need a minimum of 8' for an inviting and comfortable pedestrian experience. 0 o Need a minimum of an additional 4' for art, displays and activities. n o Maintain vehicular access per fire safety standards. a o Retain parking (on one or both sides). o Width of public sidewalk can vary to accommodate individual site conditions. o Art space beyond sidewalks can be overseen by adjacent properties. Roadway Options for existing street between Bell and Edmonds Streets a o Two -Way Travel, One Lane Parking ■ Slightly wider sidewalks ■ Some space for amenities, landscaping and artwork _ o One -Way Travel, Two Lane Parking ■ Roadway and sidewalk widths unchanged. o ■ Art and seating space in perimeter greenspace overseen by private property owners. v o Narrow Roadway ■ Roadway narrowed by 8.' ■ No parking between Bell and Edmonds Streets. c ■ Same traffic flow. N ■ Wider sidewalks for seating, lighting and art. M ■ Additional art and seating space in perimeter greenspace overseen by private property owners. o One -Way Back -In ■ Roadway widened by 3.' ■ One-way traffic flow north of Bell Street to Edmonds Street. Q ■ Similar number of parking between Bell and Edmonds Streets. ■ Narrower sidewalks do not allow for seating, lighting and art. ■ Additional art and seating space in perimeter greenspace overseen by private property owners. Mr. Doherty reviewed: Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 9 Packet Pg. 15 7.1.a Focus on Pedestrian Realm - options for creating a pedestrian realm for art, activities and a generous space for walking • New Edge o One sidewalk is widened by 9'. o Wider sidewalk allows for art, seating and pedestrian lighting. o The other sidewalk does not allow for pedestrian lighting. o Art and seating space for the narrow sidewalk is in the perimeter greenspace that will be overseen by private property owners. • Landscaped Walks o Both sidewalks are widened for 3-4 people and pedestrian lighting but not enough to accommodate art or seating. o A landscaped strip separates the sidewalk from the roadway and can hold pedestrian lighting and art / seating. o Additional art and seating space is in the perimeter greenspace that will be overseen by private property owners. • Wide Edges o Both sidewalks are widened for art/seating and pedestrian lighting. o Additional art and seating space is also available in the perimeter greenspace that will be overseen by adjacent property owners. • Full Buildout o Both sidewalks are widened for maximum art/seating and pedestrian lighting o Potential for mid -block landscaped areas and planters • Public Preferences o Virtual Open House held 8/24/20 o Online Survey 8/25-9/26/20 0 214 responses received (32 during Open House; 182 from survey) ■ Pedestrian Safety and Amenities are a Priority - Safety of walking surfaces - Wider walking areas - Added seating - Unique lighting - Trees and plantings - Art elements like colorful crosswalks - Permanent sculpture - Occasional exhibits - Opportunity for mini seasonal fairs ■ Preferences for Street Cross -Section and Sidewalk Treatment - The preferred option for future schematic design is the One-way Two -Parking Alternative with a focus on enhancing the pedestrian realm. This could be accompanied by new seating, adding color and unique lighting to the street, as well as making sure that the entire public space can host occasional or permanent exhibits, sculptures and events. - This option maintains parking while enhancing walkability, including artistic treatment and allowing for gatherings. Depending on location, improving portions of the right-of-way where encroachment exists would occur on a case -by -case basis and in close coordination with the property owners. • Next Steps o Council may wish to adopt the publicly preferred concept and design preferences o This will inform schematic design development in the future o Schematic design development will also involve public input and Council review Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 10 Packet Pg. 16 7.1.a Councilmember Buckshnis commented there are many cities with something like a 4th Avenue Corridor such as Copenhagen; Portland, Oregon; etc. She asked if estimated costs have been calculated. She personally preferred no traffic but knew that would not go over well. Mr. Doherty answered schematic design would cost approximately $125,000 and the cost of improvements vary widely. Any utility work that occurred would result in new pavement or repaving but the amount of utility work is unknown given other priorities. Recrowning and repaving would be needed in all the scenarios; the least expensive alternative would be one that does not increase the improved roadway width and only repurposes and focuses more on the sidewalk realm. The build to standard concept would be 2-3 times that cost. The project is in the concept development phase; schematic design will provide some cost estimates. Once Council gives direction regarding a preferred concept, cost estimates will be developed. Councilmember Buckshnis said she needed to know the cost range to determine a preferred concept. She asked if Utilities would pay for some of cost of the street. Mr. Doherty answered while there are older utilities in the street, there are higher priority streets in the oldest parts of the City for full utility replacement. There may be some utility replacement/upgrade required in the 4th Avenue Corridor so a small amount would be provided by Utilities but not as much as one might think. When the planning process began, it was thought more funding would be provided by Utilities. Ms. Chapin recalled the early plan was in the $6M range. When the current phase began two years ago, the goal was to develop a feasible plan that was still around $3M. That is the only number that has been identified as an estimate for some of the work. Mr. Doherty offered to confer with Public Works Engineering to develop ballpark figures for a range from full improvement to the most minimal. He noted sometimes the available funding determines the outcome. For example, if funding of $4M is identified, the effort is focused on how that funding can be used to meet most of the objectives. Councilmember K. Johnson commented many Councilmembers are seeing this for the first time. She goes way back on this project and has always been supportive. The challenge now is to complete the planning so when things loosen up, the City is ready to apply if there is a capital arts program in 2023-25 legislative biennium. She believed the City might get support for grants as this was a key feature in the Creative District. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she has heard a lot of comments from the people who live on 4th Avenue that do not support getting rid of parking on 4th Avenue. Her vote will be to predominately support the residents on 4th Avenue who purchased their houses not knowing there was the possibility they would lose parking. She acknowledged there are alleys but often there is not enough room for parking. Councilmember L. Johnson commented this is a unique opportunity for Edmonds. A lot of the items in c the presentation spoke to her such as interactive spaces, community gathering spaces, art displays, art N CD activities, pedestrian oriented experiences, pocket parks, etc. She referred to the objectives that include A welcome mixed use development with upper story residential and one of the characteristics regarding why 4th Avenue is an ideal place lists historic building. She wondered if those statements were in conflict and E asked how they would be balanced. Mr. Doherty answered that was more about zoning than street z improvements. The BD5 zoning is the lowest intensity of the downtown zones so the height limit is only cc 25' versus 30' and slightly higher in other parts of downtown. In addition to single family homes, the a corridor includes office buildings, old apartment buildings, an old motel, and an old commercial building. The 25' height limit is taller than some of the buildings so a property owner may decide it would make sense to add to or even possibly demolish and rebuild; there is little incentive to demolish a building that is close to the 25' height limit. Some of the buildings are nondescript, mid-century and do not have historic value. The BD5 zoning was not a historic preservation tool per se; the lower height gives less incentive or pressure for redevelopment. Anything further would require a historic preservation district or Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 11 Packet Pg. 17 7.1.a guidelines for redevelopment which is not technically part of this proposal but is related to what happens on 4th Avenue. Councilmember Distelhorst thanked Mr. Doherty and Ms. Chapin for the presentation and information and expressed his appreciation for describing where the corridor has been and where it is headed. He supported maintaining the current right-of-way at 30' and configuring it as necessary as well as maximizing the adjacent pedestrian spaces, basically the 1 way 2 parking and landscaping. He also supported safe crossings at the intersections such as bollards and speed table intersections that provide traffic/speed calming as well as a more welcoming space when the street is closed for events. He was excited to see this work continue. Councilmember Olson thanked staff for the presentation and the online survey which was really well done. It contained a great deal of information and gave her an opportunity to get up to speed with a project that has been in process for a long time. With regard to long term planning, she would be excited to have a second arts corridor near Highway 99 featuring an international flavor of art and implementing many of the same features, possibly in the neighborhood of the Esperance Park. With regard to the 4th Avenue Corridor, she favored the options that maintain parking on both sides as parking is important for residents as well as to provide parking for amenities and attractions downtown, citing past efforts to increase, not decrease parking. As a long term resident, she realized the 4th Avenue Corridor was less busy and having it be one-way would not be a huge sacrifice for the community. The one-way should be in the direction of the ECA. She commended staff for the work they have done and said she was excited about the proposal. Council President Paine supported having a better pedestrian environment and preferred the 1 way 2 parking. She worried the improvements would make some of the historic or unique flavor buildings vulnerable to redevelopment pressure. She asked if there were zero lot lines. Mr. Doherty answered some commercial buildings may be, but most of the single family homes were not. Council President Paine asked if a residential building could be replaced with a zero lot line commercial building. Mr. Doherty answered he was not certain but it may be possible. Council President Paine summarized she liked the street and viewed it as an asset to the community. She agreed with focusing on an area outside downtown next time. With regard to parking in the 4th Avenue Corridor, Councilmember K. Johnson said people may have an expectation when they purchase a home that the space in front is theirs for parking, but in fact it is public o right-of-way, not something they own. Although it makes sense to have some parking on that street, she v recommended counting the number of spaces along 4th Avenue and in the alleys and use that to help a determine whether to have parking on one side or no parking. From Bell north it makes sense to have a o one-way roadway with parking and enhancing the pedestrian corridor as much as possible. She loved the c idea of doing things in other parts of the City, but it has taken 15 years to get this point. She recalled the N original design had another arts corridor on Dayton that connected to the former Safeway property. M Projects like this take a long time and a lot of public will; she was willing to support this effort. c d Mr. Doherty said the public preference was one-way north, maintaining parking, maintaining the size of z the roadway, increasing amenities on the sides in the public realm. He invited Council to discuss their 2 preferences tonight or staff can return at a future meeting. a Councilmember Buckshnis said she personally liked the one-way with parking. She would like to have a cost analysis and supported having Utilities fund the road work where possible. She supported the recommendation from the open house. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 12 Packet Pg. 18 Council President Paine said she was in favor of looking at the next level of design and the associated costs. Mr. Doherty said no design work is currently planned; once the Council provides direction, that direction would be used to guide schematic design development with costs. A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST AND SECONDED TO RECOMMEND WE TAKE THE 30' ROADWAY WITH ENHANCED LANDSCAPED WALKS AS PRESENTED BASED ON PUBLIC FEEDBACK TO THE NEXT LEVEL OF SCHEMATIC DESIGN. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if that included parking. Mr. Doherty answered yes, it included parking on both sides. Councilmember L. Johnson said while she was leaning toward supporting the motion, it was on the agenda under New Business so she was not ready move forward tonight and preferred having additional time for review Councilmember K. Johnson agreed with Councilmember L. Johnson; because this item was on the agenda under New Business, it was more appropriate for the Council to be briefed first and come back for more deliberative action at another meeting. She was also not ready to move forward. Councilmember Olson said she was ready to support the motion, but agreed as it was a New Business item, she supported giving Councilmembers more time especially since when an item is not time critical. COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST WITHDREW THE MOTION. 3. COUNCILMEMBER REIMBURSEMENT CLAIM Councilmember Buckshnis explained this was discussed by the Finance Committee for transparency purposes and to avoid a rolling quorum. The agenda memo for this is very long and she was willing to provide it to the media with attachments. A Councilmember requested an approximately $307 reimbursement which was denied by last year's Council President and again by this year's Council President. She read from the City of Edmonds policy for expense reimbursement, the City of Edmonds reimburses employees and elected or appointed officials for reasonable expense incurred conducting City business provided the expenses are prudent and directly related to the individual's service on behalf of the City. This $307 expense was for investigative work related to hiring for the Chief of Police position. The information was obtained in a rush by Councilmember Olson related to a record for one of the candidates. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled there have been many respectful disagreements between r Councilmembers and Directors in the past; the most recent was in 2019 when the former HR Director N provided non -represented employee salary amounts and there was an honest disagreement between CD Council and the HR Director. Another example was a disagreement she had with a former Finance Director related to a GASB ruling. She concluded with regard to this item, the Finance Committee recommended the reimbursement claim be paid. E z Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she did not view this expense as reasonable or prudent. She denied it last year and one of the reasons was this is HR work and not the work of a Councilmember. She a believed there was some level of looking to find issues with this person because it was not brought up until this person was chosen to be the first person of color associated with the designation of Police Chief. She relayed Councilmember Olson stated she asked HR twice to do this; HR indicated to her last year when she was Council President that Councilmember Olson had not reached out to them to request assistance with this. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said in general she found it to be hunting for issues with this person that perhaps should not have been hunted for which is why she denied it. She was aware Council President Paine denied it this year when it was submitted again. She was uncertain why this was Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 13 Packet Pg. 19 7.1.a being brought up other than it had to do with perhaps looking at things in "a color sort of issue versus statistically an ability to do the job." Councilmember Olson said the packet that was prepared has much more content, background and support for the claim than when it was initially submitted. The fact that it was denied previously does not bear on whether it is denied this time. She obtained a lot of clarity and was unaware, as both Council Presidents may be unaware, that there is a City of Edmonds Employee Expense Volunteer Recognition and Reimbursement Policy that includes electeds and does not give guidance on the types of expenses that fall under their authority with the exception of travel which does have to be approved before the travel begins. With regard to the policy that states for reasonable expenses incurred conducting City business, providing expenses are prudent and directly related to the individual's service on behalf of the City, she questioned w whose service it was on behalf of other than the City. Although Councilmember Fraley-Monillas painted her as digging for dirt, in fact she was looking for the glory stories. As she learned tribal policing did not c have a lot of the same requirements, administration and body of laws, she was looking for good stories. When she found this, it was not that she knew it was a bad story, it just seemed like a stone that should be c turned over. She asked the Administration about that item before the appointment was made which disclaims and negates both of the claims by Councilmember Fraley-Monillas. Councilmember L. Johnson said given that Councilmember Olson did not take or consider taking the same measures when other director positions were vetted, it was hard to overlook the appearance of bias. v When the court summary was initially brought to the Council's attention, it was accompanied by a c subjective commentary of "he thinks he and his family are above the law." She found this odd because taking a grievance to the court is operating within the law. Later when the full report was circulated, 0 additional subjective interpretations were made. Councilmember L. Johnson acknowledged she was not n an HR or legal professional and did not have the training required to handle the multitude of a considerations when conducting this type of intensive background check and to the best of her knowledge none of her fellow Councilmember did either. Further, she did not know more than the three police departments, FBI, HR Director or the polygraph experts who all professionally vetted this candidate. Once the information was presented to Council in an unusual fashion, she checked with HR and found a they had knowledge of it and it had been addressed with the polygraph. She was very concerned that if the S r Council approved reimbursing this unauthorized expense, it would not only interfere with the work of trained professionals and dip into an Administrative function, but more importantly it would set a dangerous precedent with regard to liability concerns, a precedent she did not wished to set. 0 Council President Paine explained she received Councilmember Olson's request for reimbursement. v Similar to the prior denial, there had been no prior approval and the expenditure was not part of Council's a typical responsibilities as that function was normally done through the Administration. The way this was o done puts City at a level of liability and risk. With regard to the code that addresses how the City Council c pays claims and demands, it is very clear the Council Presidents audits and signs off on those claims, but N Chapter 2.25 allows the denial of any reimbursement claim to come to full Council. The additional policy M that has been presented certainly could include City Council but the language still states the Council President approves or denies claims. She was troubled by this reimbursement claim because as someone d who has spent some time in courts, one deposition does not provide the full story and the absence of the z full story makes it difficult to understand the full discussion which is why it is important for the professionals to consider the information. She, like other Councilmembers, inquired about the fullness of a knowledge of the City's HR professional and was assured she was aware of this court matter and there was no miscommunication from the applicant to the City. She concluded that information was enough for her to deny the request for reimbursement. Councilmember K. Johnson thanked Council President Paine for describing the procedures. She pointed out neither Council President Paine's denial nor the previous denial should not weigh on the Council's decision tonight. She believed there was a certain amount of due diligence incumbent on each Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 14 Packet Pg. 20 7.1.a Councilmember and if that incurred cost due to time constraints, in this case it was adequate to be reimbursed. The fact that the HR professional knew about this did not eliminate the question in her mind because her information wasn't shared with the public or the Council. She credited Councilmember Olson for doing the research and bringing it to the full Council because it had a great impact on her final decision and probably impacted the Mayor's final decision. She concluded this was a reimbursable amount and she will support it. Councilmember Distelhorst said when this brought up with him 2-4 weeks ago, he was hoping it would be a long term, sustainable policy; he thought the agenda item was a policy regarding reimbursement rather than reimbursement for a specific item. There is a need for a more sustainable, long term solution for something that is very subjective like this in developing a policy where the Council is potentially w subjecting the City to further liability. He did not feel requesting reimbursement in this manner solved the issue and actually increased the potential liability as he understood it. He was hoping for a longer term, c sustainable solution, realizing that was more work but would provide more benefit. a c Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said in her personal opinion this was a witch hunt, looking for problems that could occur with the person. The City knew about this individual and the issues that were brought up, talked about and he was found to be truthful. She believed this was done to create commotion regarding the person appointed by Mayor Nelson to the position. She believed the Council was not responsible for investigating these issues; HR was responsible for that. The person admitted to and denied what had v occurred and was found not guilty, the person requesting reimbursement had no reason to do it. In c considering this issue last year, she wondered why the Councilmember did not come to the Council E President and assumed it was because it would have been denied because it was not the Council's job to i look at those issues. She did not believe it was a Councilmember's responsibility to determine if whether n information was accurate or not, that is within the realm of the HR Director. The bias related to this has a created a lot of issues within the Black community and what occurred with Mr. Pruitt. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas concluded she made the best decision based on the information she had at the time. c Councilmember Buckshnis commented Councilmembers are all elected officials and the Council a President does not rule what they can/cannot do in terms of oversight. For example, Councilmember r Buckshnis asked if Councilmember Fraley-Monillas' work that utilized six months of the Council assistant's time to look at all non -represented employees' salaries had been a witch hunt. U c Councilmember Distelhorst raised a point of order, stating that was not germane to this topic. o Councilmember Buckshnis said it was a precedent. Mayor Nelson suggested Councilmembers narrow v their discussion to the topic. a 0 Councilmember Buckshnis suggested dropping the allegation of bias as Councilmembers have oversight N responsibilities. Oversight has occurred in the past when there were honest disagreements between N Councilmembers and the Administration. For example, in the past she cited a $4.9M issue in the budget M and it was determined she was accurate and the City had to restate its financial statements. There is c nothing wrong with Councilmembers doing oversight if it is done correctly and there is no reason for E Councilmembers to have their work preapproved by the Council President. She agreed the Council z President approves expenditures but as stated in the reimbursement policy approved by Council in 2014, Councilmember Olson was doing her job so she could make a decision on an agenda item that was moved a up a week when many citizens were contacting Councilmembers about additional information that was available. She concluded Councilmember Olson was doing her job by providing oversight. With regard to the policy versus just coming forward with this, Councilmember Olson said that change occurred after the discussion at the Finance Committee because the feedback from the City Attorney and Finance Director was the Council President could make the decision based on the information provided. She recommended the conversation related to liability stop because unless that liability was greater than Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 15 Packet Pg. 21 7.1.a the liability that would have occurred due to hiring someone with automatic disqualifiers as a police officer, it was a truly a moot point, very distracting and inappropriate. When she contacted Administration, she asked specifically if the source document, the testimony itself, had been looked at. The automatic disqualifier was one thing in there, but there were other concerning things and red flags. The Administration had never seen the source document and her request was treated like a public records request and the response was there were no documents to provide. She did not look at this as oversight, she looked at it as due diligence for her vote to confirm the candidate. Whether other Councilmembers or the Administration were satisfied without having that information, she wasn't and she ordered it because of her job. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she did not see it in that sense; she saw it in the sense that Councilmember Olson was going after this person because they were chosen to be first person of color to be appointed to the position. She believed the fact that Councilmember Olson did not ask whether it would be appropriate or okay sent a message that she would do what she wanted to do because she had a preference of police chiefs. The fact that the person Mayor Nelson brought up for appointment to the position had been through FBI checks and checks by their own departments told her that the person had been through all sorts of documentation regarding their ability to do the job. This was related to the fact that the police chief candidate was African American and Councilmember Olson did not do a similar check on the other police chief candidate which was inappropriate. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said in the 11 %2 years she has been on Council, she had never seen a Councilmember do anything like this, go after someone's background check. The fact that the background check that was completed showed the person admitted to this, denied it, and had gone through the process did not matter to Councilmember Olson because she wanted to see what they had done in the past and she wanted to make the person guilty whether or not they were. She denied the reimbursement because it was not a Councilmember's business; it was the HR department's responsibility to look into. If Councilmember Olson believed the HR Director was incompetent in their job, that should have been looked it. That issue was not raised, only that the Councilmember wanted the information regarding the police chief candidate. She still believes that person was treated very unfairly by Councilmember Olson. Councilmember K. Johnson said she had to make a comment after that diatribe; it is a danger to think you m know what a person is thinking and to assume they have done the worst thing. That is against the Council code of conduct and is very disrespectful. She recalled there had been many discussions about the role of the City Council and whether there were liabilities. She asked City Attorney Jeff Taraday to add clarity o and help the Council understand the main issues that should be considered. Mr. Taraday said he would v not express his personal opinion about whether this should be reimbursed or not. Some of questions that a are being asked are not the questions he would suggest be asked. The Council's confirmation power is a o very significant power, just like the U.S. Senate's confirmation power. In exercising that power, the c Council is not required to trust the Mayor or the Mayor's staff with regard to nominations that come N forward. If the Council was required to trust the Mayor and the Mayor's staff, there would be no point in M exercising any confirmation power, the Council would simply give the Mayor complete power to make all appointments without confirmation which many cities do. z Mr. Taraday said that is the starting point for his analysis; each Councilmember has a significant role to play in determining whether to vote to confirm or not confirm an appointee. In making that determination, a there is no guidance with regard to how to vote; it is entirely up to each Councilmember's legislative discretion whether to cast a vote to confirm. He suggested the question of whether an individual Councilmember would have spent this money or gone to the trouble of acquiring the transcript was not really relevant nor was it relevant whether Councilmembers agreed the money needed to be spent. The Councilmembers who have spoken against reimbursement could take the position that they did not think the transcript was necessary, that they preferred to rely on the HR Director, that they would not have themselves gone to the trouble of obtaining the transcript, and did not read or rely on the transcript or find Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 16 Packet Pg. 22 7.1.a it helpful and yet could still believe that the Councilmember who requested the reimbursement was doing so out of a good faith desire to be reimbursed for money she spent in performing her role as a Councilmember. Mr. Taraday reiterated he would not express his personal opinion regarding whether he would have wanted the transcript had he been in the Council's shoes or whether it was money well spent. The money was not used for a private party or to reupholster a Councilmember's couch; he suggested the analysis focus on whether the money was spent in the course of the Councilmember performing her duty and not on whether Councilmembers agreed with what the Councilmember did. Councilmembers can disagree on what the Councilmember did and have the opinion it was unnecessary and perhaps even money not well spent, but still feel the Councilmember should not have to pay it out of pocket. w m r With regard to liability, Mr. Taraday was unsure that was germane to the request unless there was a c criteria that expenses are only reimbursed when there is no risk associated with the expense which he was not aware existed. In researching law to guide their response, because this is such a unique situation, they c were unable to find any case related to a Councilmember or City being sued because of investigation done related to a Councilmember's confirmation vote. He could say there was zero risk associated with this but it did not appear to be a criteria in the policy in determining whether an expense was reimbursable. The criteria is whether the expense is prudent and directly related to the individual's service on behalf of the City. He suggested if a Councilmember wanted to vote no, they should make an argument that it was an v imprudent expense and if they wanted to vote yes, make an argument it was directly related to the c individual's service on behalf of the City. Councilmember K. Johnson thanked Mr. Taraday for his insightful analysis which she hoped would guide the Council. o n n Councilmember Buckshnis said she takes confirmation seriously. Although Councilmember Fraley- a Monillas had never seen it in her 11 years, she had seen it during her 11 years on Council. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas raised a point of order. Mayor Nelson requested Councilmembers refrain from making personal remarks or attacks. a c r Councilmember Buckshnis recalled former Councilmember DJ Wilson and she voted not to confirm a m director due to information he found over and above what the HR person presented. She summarized there was precedent regarding information like this. She thanked Mr. Taraday for saying Councilmember U Olson was doing her job. o U Councilmember L. Johnson said if the Council was to accept that this was something a Councilmember a could be expected or would be reasonable to do in undertaking their position, would the same be true if a o Councilmember wanted to hire someone to research proposals for a street overlay or to review finance c reports. She questioned where this ends when a Councilmember disagrees with something that has been N vetted by professionals, what reasonable measures could a Councilmember take that would be M reimbursable by the City in undertaking a Councilmember's job. The way this document was used and the c subjective nature of the interpretation and how widely it was circulated, it had been weaponized. There a) were a number of public comments made, including "he thinks he and family are above the law." There z was also an interpretation that the Marines froze his rank, that it contained automatic disqualifiers (which 2 Councilmember L. Johnson said she was unable to confirm), and that it contained instances of perjury a during sworn testimony. Those interpretations showed the document was not used properly and was something that should have stayed within HR and the work that HR did that came to the Council as a professional recommendation. Councilmembers were assured that the issues were vetted and that it was asked during the polygraph. When a Councilmember does not like something and wants it to go in a different direction should not override the expertise of staff. She concluded this seemed very dangerous and was not a road the Council should go down. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 17 Packet Pg. 23 7.1.a To those that say Councilmember Olson was doing her job by doing this, Councilmember Fraley- Monillas asked if that was saying the HR Director was not doing their job. Frankly, if the Council cannot trust staff to do their job, then shouldn't be there. She had great angst with whether people were doing or not doing their jobs. She summarized the candidate admitted to having an issue. Councilmember K. Johnson raised a point of order, stating this is the third time she has heard this same argument and Councilmembers need to move on. Mayor Nelson said that was true of most comments and he would allow Councilmember Fraley-Monillas to continue. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said a Councilmember with no experience in HR saying a person did wrong did not make sense to her. Councilmember K. Johnson raised a point of order, stating she never heard Councilmember Olson say anything derogatory about the HR Director. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said her comment was not about Councilmember Olson making derogatory remarks about the HR Director. Mayor Nelson requested Councilmembers refrain from referring to each other during their debate. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said the HR Director saying that the gentleman had been looked at and had admitted to anything uncomfortable was all the Council needed. She would not second guess the HR Director. Council President Paine said when the Council was presented with the candidates and the final choice, they all had opportunity to do their own research, some did more, some did less. Her outside research, comparing what she had seen to what was confirmed by the HR professional and considering other information received through the interview process, all informed her decision. When something else came in at the last moment out of the clear blue sky, it felt more punitive rather than adding daylight to that candidate. It did not add any information other than what the Council had already heard from the HR professional. When Councilmembers conduct research, it is to satisfy themselves and there is no policy stating it will be reimbursed. Out of courtesy and being upfront about something that may incur cost, that needs to be discussed with the Council President which never happened. The document did not add anything that the Council had not already heard and it made things a lot more volatile. Councilmember Olson said she has been slandered and accused of bias tonight. The summary that she had c first seen online with the summary judgment that did not go for the plaintiff indicated to her that there o was more to look at. It was a lawsuit against a municipality and Edmonds was a municipality that was v potentially hiring this person. The first time she asked about the lawsuit was when the person was a a candidate and before the appointment made. To say that this information had no value and there was o nothing to talk about, Councilmembers requested an executive session. She and at least three other c Councilmembers were not informed by HR until after HR indicated they did not have the document and N she indicated she would order it; that was when three other Councilmembers and she learned there were a' c� content issues. She acknowledged the Administration may have learned about it during their interviews c and apparently Councilmember Fraley-Monillas learned about it in her interview, but Councilmember Olson said she and three other Councilmembers were not informed by the Administration until she z indicated she would order the document. cvo a Mayor Nelson relayed staff was inquiring whether the Council would be discussing the Unfinished Business Items on tonight's agenda. Councilmember Distelhorst relayed his understanding was because this was New Business, the Council would not be acting on it tonight. He preferred to move onto the Unfinished Business items. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 18 Packet Pg. 24 7.1.a Councilmember Buckshnis said she was baffled by all the negative comments and the comments to Councilmember Olson about her intent. Some Councilmembers were out of loop and the fact that the entire confirmation process was pushed up a week was cause for even more due diligence. She twice requested an executive session. There is a huge miscommunication between what Councilmembers believe happened. This was a Councilmember doing her job in her oversight or due diligence role. Councilmembers are elected to be the checks and balance for the Administration and there are many examples of those checks and balances over the last few years. She will continue to do her due diligence and if she has to spend $307 to do something, she will. Councilmembers do not have to ask for permission from the Council President to do something; that is not the Council President's role. Councilmembers' role as elected officials is to do their job which is what Councilmember Olson did. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said it is the Council President's role to determine what money is and is not spent. The Council President determines appropriate expenditures and she did not believe this was appropriate. COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST, TO TABLE THIS TO A FUTURE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. ANALYSIS OF DIRECT HIRE VS. CONTRACTED SOCIAL WORKER Ms. Neill Hoyson explained this item is related to whether the social worker position would be a direct hire or contracted position. She recalled two weeks ago when the job description was approved, Council indicated the description could be used for either a direct hire or to guide the scope of work for a contract position. Council requested analysis reRardinR those two approaches and the pros and cons. She reviewed: Direct Hire Contracted Service Levels Would need to address how to provide Services should be able to start very adequate coverage with a single soon after contract is executed. Would person. While "on -call" hours can be be able to negotiate coverage for established this would need to be when dedicated social worker is on negotiated and additional leave and for after-hours access compensation would need to be paid. Would be difficult to cover time away sick &vacation leave Peer/Professional Support The City does not have a currently Peer/and professional support establish program so the new hire network would already be would be entering into a blank slate established as well as with no support. This could slow technology and other support down service offerings as they would services need to create relationships and determine what technology and other support is needed. It may be more difficult to tap into a peer network as a standalone practitioner. Supervision Without an established Supervisory structure is already in program/structure the necessary place. Casework auditing structure is supervision would not be in place. already established Contract(s) would most likely need to be executed to provide both su ervision and casework auditing. Cost Would need to provide benefits which Would control costs through contract run approximately 32% of wages. negotiations but would not have direct Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 19 Packet Pg. 25 N 0 N as c� c d E z c� a Would need to take into account any ongoing costs related to union negotiations as this is a covered position. Would be responsible for all employment liability costs such as unemployment and worker's compensation control of wages for position. Liability Considerations Interactions with clients could be Liability would be transferred if the fully/partially subject to public work was contracted. Disclosure. City liability policy excludes this work so an additional policy would need to be purchased. An analysis would need to be conducted to determine if this work would result in the City becoming a covered entity under HIPAA, which could result in costly security and privacy measures. Organization Culture May come to understand more readily Would not have direct managerial Edmonds institutional culture and control. Would possibly have expectations. Would have only direct competing cultural norms for the supervision and management by the organization. City, with no potential for another agency's managerial layer to affect performance, outcomes, etc. Analysis of direct hire vs. contracted Social Worker model o Goals: ■ Immediate: Immediately address the health, welfare, and human services needs of Edmonds' at -risk residents and do so in a way that delivers exceptional services and leverages allocated monies in order to achieve the most services possible. Together with the Human Services Program Manager, assess human services needs and gaps in Edmonds that will inform long-term decision making. ■ 1 Year: Using needs assessment data collected during the first year, establish the long- term plan and structure for the Edmonds Human Services Division and continue building the Human Services Program. ■ 18 Months: Launch the long-term structure for the Human Services Division. Recommendation: o In order to meet the immediate needs of the residents of Edmonds, it is recommended that the City contract with a human services agency to provide a dedicated Social Worker who is specifically assigned to Edmonds and whose duties align with the job description approved by Council. o Building a full-fledged Human Services program should be done in a way that is targeted and thoughtful and use data to drive deliverables and measure success. Contracting with a human services agency to provide social worker services at this time will allow the City to gather data on needs and gaps in Edmonds in order to make long-term decisions regarding the Human Services program. Once data is gathered, long-term decisions can be made regarding structure, program offerings, and whether continued contracting is in the best interest of the program goals. Key analysis areas: o Service Levels: Contracting will allow for services to begin very quickly once a contract is executed. Conversely, if direct hire is used, it will take time to establish program parameters, establish support for the work, and hire for the position. This will cause a delay in services which directly impact people's well-being. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 20 Packet Pg. 26 T N O N c� c d E z c� a 7.1.a ■ Contracting would also provide greater access to those needed services by ensuring greater coverage levels. Coverage levels such as having evening coverage, weekend coverage, and access while an employee is on leave may be negotiated as part of a contract and would be more difficult to provide as a stand-alone Social Worker if it is a direct hire. o Peer/professional support: ■ Contracting with a human services agency allows the City to tap into the established structure and resources of that agency. A contracted Social Worker would have the support of an agency that is focused on human services with ready access to other social workers, support staff and institutional support/resources. This directly translates into better services as the City does not have this established support network internally. ■ A direct hire Social Worker would have less ready interaction with other social workers and/or support staff for networking, problem -solving, etc. and would have less readily available institutional support and access to support resources. o Supervision: ■ Contracting for this service would provide the supervision that is needed for this type of work. ■ Supervision comes in to play in two key areas. If the Social Worker is attempting to gain higher licensure, then specific supervised hours must be achieved. If the Social Worker is at the highest level of licensure (LICSW) then a structure must be in place to review casework to ensure it is meeting standards. ■ If the City were to direct hire, a way to provide supervised hours or casework auditing would need to be established. As the City currently does not have the structure to provide this, it would most likely need to occur in the form of contracted supervision by a human services agency. This would be an additional cost that would take away money from program offerings. o Cost: ■ Contracting for a dedicated social worker will be less costly than direct hire and will allow more program monies to be allocated to the Human Services program. As a direct hire the City would be responsible for all benefit costs as well as be liable for any employment related claims. o Liability Considerations: ■ The direct hire model creates more liability for both the City and those who would access services. ■ With a direct hire Social Worker, documented interactions with clients could be partially/fully subject to public disclosure. If this work was contracted these interactions would be largely free from public disclosure requirements. ■ If the City is providing direct health care services and, depending on if the City is conducting transactions for the services as defined by HIPAA, this may cause the City to become a covered entity under HIPAA which creates much more stringent security protocols for data, which can be very costly to implement. ■ Currently, this type of work would be excluded from the City's liability coverage. A separate insurance policy would need to be purchased should the City direct hire a Social Worker who is engaging in casework. Contracting for this work would alleviate this need and would transfer risk to the contracted agency. o Organizational Culture: ■ If the Social Worker is contracted, it may take longer for this person to learn and embrace City of Edmonds institutional culture and expectations. This can be addressed by having the Social Worker "on -site" for the majority of their time, rather than at their agency. Additionally, performance outcomes of the contracted person would need to be very clear so issues of performance management can be addressed to the City's satisfaction. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 21 Packet Pg. 27 7.1.a Councilmember Distelhorst thanked Mr. Doherty and Ms. Neill Hoyson for the previous presentation and discussion, job description/scope of services and bringing back this matrix comparison which he found very helpful, well done and it confirmed his research with other healthcare social worker professionals. Councilmember Olson agreed with Councilmember Distelhorst's comments. Councilmember K. Johnson observed the Council -approved salary range was $79,000 to $98,000. However if the City contracted with Compass Health, their salary range for an equivalent position is $40,000 to $75,000. She asked if the City contracted, would the salary range be adjusted to fit the norm of the contract agency or would the person dedicated to Edmonds be out of sync with the social workers in that agency. Ms. Neill Hoyson answered the Council approved salary range and benefits (32%) and that is w the total authority for contracting. The intent was not to pay someone more simply because they were working for Edmonds; the City will work with the contracting agency with regard to the skills sets, the c position and the contract cost. She summarized the contracted position would be negotiated differently than the job description pay range. c a� Councilmember K. Johnson referred to a very good letter the City received from former Councilmember Joan Bloom who happens to be a MSW social worker. Ms. Bloom's questions seem to parallel staffs analysis which confirmed her belief that at least in the short term, contracting was the way to go for this position. v 0 Council President Paine commented the matrix was great to look at the layers of liability. She asked how the social worker would be supervised. Ms. Neill Hoyson commented it was similar to basic contract o management; the terms of the deliverables would be very clear in the contract. If the social worker works n within a department, it will be very clear in the contract regarding how performance feedback occurs, a whether it is directly to the person contracted to do the work, to the contract manager for the agency or m their supervisor and how any performance based issues will be resolved. c Council President Paine asked if the program manager would collect data. Mr. Doherty answered it was a almost as if this position would have two supervisors, the subject matter expertise would be in the r supervisory structure at the agency, but the day-to-day work, prioritization, reporting, etc. would be to the m City of Edmonds manager/supervisor. The relationship to the human services program manager is that person can refocus on building a human services program, gathering data on needs, gaps, etc., continuing to strengthen relationships with providers in the region, building the human services plan year-to-year, o etc. The two positions will work in tandem and have overlap but there are areas that do not overlap. v c� Councilmember L. Johnson thanked Mr. Doherty and Ms. Neill Hoyson for the matrix. She approached o the formation of a human services program favoring a direct hire social worker but was open to hearing c the pros and cons which was provided by the matrix. Given that this is a new, huge, wonderful N undertaking for the City, there are still a number of questions about structure that needed to be addressed. M She appreciated the approach staff provided, specifically the points about allowing for a quicker start-up, c providing the supervisory structure, transferring the liability risk, and the public disclosure issues. While those issues are addressed, the City can provide services more quickly and in 12-18 months when the z program is more established and a there is a clearer picture about what is needed, the structure can be revisited and a determination made whether it is the City's best interest to continue to contract out the a position or if it would be better served by a direct hire. She was excited to move forward. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST, TO APPROVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE CONTRACTED SOCIAL WORKER MODEL. Council President Paine relayed that Councilmember Fraley-Monillas had left the meeting. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 22 Packet Pg. 28 7.1.a MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was not present for the vote.) Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess. 2. AMENDMENTS TO NEW TREE REGULATIONS Development Services Director Shane Hope relayed the City Council has been working on tree regulations for the past several months. At the March 2nd meeting, the Council reviewed a draft ordinance regarding trees associated with development, Stage 1. Council also reviewed potential regulations for trees on property not being developed, Stage 2. Council decided that while State 2 is underway, an emergency interim ordinance was needed that would strictly limit the cutting of very large trees and adopted an emergency ordinance. Council also adopted an ordinance regarding trees associated with development which included amendments made at the March 2nd meeting. The Council agreed to consider additional amendments to the ordinance at tonight's meeting and have been compiling amendments to the Stage 1 regulations. Environmental Program Manager Kernen Lien displayed a table developed by Council Assistant Maureen Judge that compiled all the potential amendments received via email. The Stage column was added to the table and the table includes amendments that were addressed last week. He suggested focusing on Stage 1 amendments tonight. A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE AND SECONDED TO AMEND 23.10.060.C.2 IN THE SECTION REGARDING NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION AREAS, INSERT "EASEMENT" BETWEEN "PROTECTION" AND "AREAS." Mr. Lien pointed out not all Native Growth Protection Areas (NGPA) are established as easements. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE WITHDREW THE MOTION. Council President Paine suggested adding a definition, noting in the previous code in 18.45 it appeared there was a protected easement. Mr. Lien explained a NGPA could be an easement, a native growth protection tract, native growth protection area (30% NGPA established by 23.90.040.0 in RS-12 and RS- 20 areas), etc. There are a lot of different methods and language used for NGPAs. Mayor Nelson suggested tackling the amendments that have already been submitted that Mr. Lien o displayed rather than adding additional amendments. r N O Councilmember Distelhorst observed there are 20 Stage 1 amendments on the spreadsheet that could be C? run through quickly. M c A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST AND SECONDED TO STRIKE $1000 AND INSERT $350 FOR TREES UNDER 10.1" AND $1,000 FOR TREES OVER 10.1" IN SECTION 23.10.080.E.1. a Councilmember Olson recalled in another amendment she had recommended $350/tree because based on the size of the tree, the code also requires replacement with more than one tree and a fee to replace larger trees. There are some at -odds between development and trees previously on the property that will no longer fit. She expressed support for the amendment because it was a compromise the Council could agree on although she preferred $350 for all trees. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 23 Packet Pg. 29 7.1.a Councilmember K. Johnson recalled the City was charging $1000 based on the cost of planting three trees based on the Parks Department's estimate per tree and that was how the amount was rounded up to $1000. Mr. Lien explained the $350 was the per tree cost of purchasing and planting identified by Parks. For each significant tree that is removed, it must be replanted at a certain ratio; for trees 6-10" the ratio is 1:1, for trees 10.1-14" the ratio is 2:1 and for trees 14" and above the ratio is 3:1. If all the replacement trees cannot be replanted on the site, it goes to the fee -in -lieu program. The Planning Board discussed this at length and wanted to retain the higher fee as a reverse incentive; developers will make a greater effort to retain trees if there is a cost to replace them. With regard to the amendment for $350 for trees under 10.1", which tree was not replanted for the replacement ratio is unknown so the replacement ratio cannot be tied to a diameter of a tree. This would work if there was a fee associated with every tree that was cut, but not for replacement trees tied to a ratio. He attempted to include something similar when drafting the code but it only worked for trees that were cut but it could not be tied to the diameter of the trees that were not planted as that cannot be tracked. COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST WITHDREW THE MOTION. Mr. Lien summarized a straight -up $350 would work for replacement tree for the value, but tying it to a diameter doesn't work. COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE, TO AMEND 23.10.080 TREE REPLACEMENT, TO ADD A NEW #4 THAT READS, "FOR EACH SIGNIFICANT TREE GREATER THAN 24" DBH REMOVED, A FEE BASED ON AN APPRAISAL OF THE TREE VALUE BY THE CITY TREE PROTECTION PROFESSIONAL USING TRUNK FORMULA METHOD IN THE CURRENT EDITION OF THE GUIDE FOR PLANT APPRAISAL SHALL BE REQUIRED." Councilmember L. Johnson commented the loss of older growth trees will have a significantly larger environmental impact. Carbon sequestering alone is massive, a level that cannot be made up by replacement. Old growth trees provide habitat that cannot be replicated by replacement with multiple smaller trees. The established underlying root systems have a major benefit in stormwater retention and soil stabilization. Choosing to remove an older growth tree should not be an opportunity to profit from selling off a natural resources. Mr. Lien pointed out this section is related to replacement trees; it establishes the replacement ratio for each tree that is cut. The amendment is more related to the fee -in -lieu program, so for each 24" tree that is o cut, the money that would go into the tree fund is based on the plant appraisal. It would make more sense to have this statement in the fee -in lieu section. Further, the City currently does not have tree protection o professional that is qualified to do the appraisal method. When something like that is required, the r applicant would be required to pay a professional to do the appraisal and also pay into the tree fund which o seemed like a double dip. C? c� Mr. Lien said he has heard several times that a larger tree is worth more which is the reason for higher replacement ratios for larger trees. This is also related to how much money will be paid into the tree fund. E Another level could be added for larger diameter trees, requiring up to 4 replacement trees. He referred to Section 23.10.080E.1 which states the amount of the fee shall be $1000 multiplied by the number of trees necessary to satisfy the tree replacement requirements of this section and shall be deposited into the City's a Tree Fund so $3000 for a 3:1 replacement, $2000 for 2:1 replacement and $1000 for 1:1 replacement. He suggested moving the statement to the fee -in -lieu section, commenting it was difficult to tie fee -in -lieu to diameter. Mr. Lien explained it would be easier for both Councilmember Distelhorst's and this amendment if the fee -in -lieu was tied to trees that were being cut versus trees that were not being planted. One thing that is different about this code compared to other jurisdictions' codes is most replacement is required to meet a Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 24 Packet Pg. 30 7.1.a certain tree credit density/tree coverage requirement. When the Planning Board reviewed the tree code they wanted to meet the 30% retention requirement and require replanting. Therefore, even if a development met the 30% retention, replanting is still required and if there is not enough room on the site, they are required to pay into the fee -in -lieu fund. Councilmember L. Johnson restated the motion with the agreement of the seconder: SAME VERBIAGE BUT NEW ITEM #3 IN SECTION 23.10.080.E To the comment that the City does not have a City tree protection professional, Councilmember L. Johnson said she found that language in Item C in the violations section which states, removal will require an appraisal by a City tree protection professional. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST, TO EXTEND TO 10:20 PM. MOTION CARRIED (4-2). (Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was not present for the vote.) Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the City tree protection professional was an arborist or if it was defined. Mr. Lien answered the City has an arborist but the current arborist is not qualified to do that. The code contains a definition of qualified professional, but not specifically the City tree protection professional. The way the amended language is drafted and in the violations section, the City would have to need to hire someone with those qualifications. He pointed out this amendment may be double dipping on the fee -in -lieu because if every tree over 14" that is cut has to be replanted with 3 trees and they cannot plant those trees on site, they will have to pay $3000 for the trees that were not planted as well as the appraised amount for the 24" diameter tree. Council President Paine asked if was possible for the City to put a consulting arborist with that qualification on contract. Mr. Lien answered yes. Council President Paine asked if that would relieve the c double dip aspect. Mr. Lien it would not relieve the double dip, having someone on contract would mean they would be used to do the appraisal. The double dip is if a 24" tree is cut, that 24" inch tree is required to be replanted at a ratio of 3:1. If those three trees cannot be planted on the site, they would be required to pay $1000 per tree or $3000 plus the appraised amount for every 24" inch tree cut. Ms. Hope said if the City covered the cost of the appraisal, would that eliminate the double dip to the applicant. Mr. Lien the City tree protection professional is a cost borne by the City. The double dip is solely related to the removal of the 24" tree. When a 24" tree is cut, it is required to be replaced at a ratio of 3:1. If the three v trees cannot be planted onsite, the applicant pays $1000 per tree or $3000 as well as pays for the value of the 24" tree that was removed. One way around that would be to have the replacement ratio apply only to 0 trees 14"- 23.9" diameter and any tree greater than that does not have a replacement ratio, just a straight- N up payment for the appraisal under the tree fund. N aP Councilmember L. Johnson said that would be alleviated by her other amendment, under Tree Replacement A3, for each significant tree greater than 14" DBH removed and less than 24" DBH. Mr. Lien agreed that would alleviate the double dip. E z COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO AMEND 23.10.080.A.3 TREE REPLACEMENT, TO READ, FOR EACH Q SIGNIFICANT TREE GREATER THAN 14 INCHES AND LESS THAN 24" INCHES IN DBH REMOVED, THREE (3) REPLACEMENT TREES ARE REQUIRED. Mr. Lien advised this amendment in combination with the previous amendment alleviates the double dip. Councilmember Distelhorst asked the ballpark cost of an appraisal for trees 24"- 36" in diameter. Mr. Lien answered he only knew of one tree appraisal done by the City due to a violation but he was unable to Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 25 Packet Pg. 31 7.1.a find it. In researching other jurisdictions that have done tree appraisals, it depends on the species and size of the tree, but it could be upward of $10,000420,000 per tree and even more for larger trees. AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was not present for the vote.) MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was not present for the vote.) COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED TO ADD A NEW SECTION TO 23.10.080 THAT DEALS WITH MINIMUM TREE PLANTING REQUIREMENT, ADD A PROVISION REQUIRING A MINIMUM NUMBER TREES TO BE PLANTED ON ALL DEVELOPMENT PARCELS. THE NUMBER OF TREES WILL BE A FUNCTION OF THE ZONING, FOR EXAMPLE THREE TREES FOR A SMALL PARCEL OR SIX TREES FOR A LARGER PARCEL. Ms. Hope questioned how that related to the provision adopted by the Council last week requiring a minimum of 3 trees per 8,000 square feet to be planted when there are no significant trees on the site. Mr. Lien identified the amendment made last week for sites without trees, "For developing properties identified in ECDC 23.10.06.A that have fewer than three significant trees, trees shall be retained and/or planted that will result in the site having at least three trees which will be significant at maturity, per 8,000 square feet of lot area." COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS WITHDREW THE MOTION. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO CHANGE THE OPENING SENTENCE IN 23.10.080.E. TO "AFTER PROVIDING CLEAR DOCUMENTATION TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES THAT ALL TREE RETENTION AND/OR REPLACEMENT OPTIONS HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED AND ARE INFEASIBLE, INCLUDING ARBORIST REPORTS AS NECESSARY, THE DEVELOPER MAY APPLY FOR A FEE -IN -LIEU EXEMPTION TO THE TREE RETENTIONIREPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS. Councilmember Buckshnis said one of the issues is transparency and the need for clear documentation to show replacement or retention. Without the amendment, fee -in -lieu could be allowed; the amendment would require documentation. Councilmember Olson liked the concept of the Development Services Director consulting with the City arborist, but she did not like requiring arborist reports as necessary because it implies another fee and f° financial burden. As the City has an arborist, she asked if it would be unreasonable for that person to 0 consult with the Development Services Director on the information provided without requiring an c additional outside arborist report. Mr. Lien referred to another area of the code that states an arborist C? report is required with an application. The applicant's arborist would develop a plan showing the location M of all the trees. For trees that are not viable for retention, a description of the reason(s) for removal based on poor health, high risk of failure due to structure, defects, unavoidable isolation, etc. This section does E not address, and what will be the more difficult part of the code in general, the high replacement standards and replacement ratios and not being able to plant that many trees on the site. A developer or homeowner may not want to have the complete site planted in trees after constructing the house and may want an a open area for yard, solar panels on the roof which will require access, etc. Replacement trees will make it difficult to implement this code. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST, TO EXTEND TO 10:25 P.M. MOTION CARRIED (5-1). (Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was not present for the vote.) Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 26 Packet Pg. 32 7.1.a Council President Paine suggested bringing this back to a future meeting. 10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Nelson relayed the Snohomish Health District reported yesterday the County's case counts are the lowest they have been in five months, 84/100,000. He encouraged the public to keep up the good work by wearing masks, watching distances and washing hands. 11. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Olson thanked Alicia Crank for launching National Women's Month with her great program and panelists this weekend. Councilmember Distelhorst thanked Acting Chief Lawless for his dedication, leadership and long career serving the City and the people of Edmonds and wished him the best in his upcoming role. He relayed Mr. Doherty's report at the COVID-19 Recovery Task Force meeting that there would be more Working Washington grants coming through the Department of Commerce; further information is available on the state's website. There are also discussions about additional federal assistance to cities. The LEAP program at the Frances Anderson Center is serving about 31 kids/week with 27 on full scholarship. He thanked City staff and the Administration for working to ensure that that program is reaching the audience the City had hoped to reach. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed accolades to Alicia Crank, commenting it was a great two days of presentations that included her friends, Storm player Sue Bird and Storm owner Dawn Trudeau. She gave a shout out to everyone who is continuing wear to masks, noting the news contains reports of super - spreader events where people are not wearing masks. Councilmember Buckshnis was saddened by the recent loss of Shirley Wambolt who attended Council meetings with her husband, Ron Wambolt. She expressed her condolences to Ron Wambolt. Student Representative Roberts thanked the Council and Mayor for their ongoing support of the Youth Commission. He urged everyone to wear a mask. 12. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 27 Packet Pg. 33 T N O N M �.i C d E t t1 a 7.1.a Public Comment for 3/9/21 Council Meeting: From: Pujari Center Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 6:46 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Against Housing Commission 15 policy proposals Dear Edmonds City Council members, I am a resident of Edmonds since 2008. I am opposed to the Citizen's Housing Commission's 15 proposals, and I urge you to consider the negative impact on our family friendly, charming neighborhoods which are a key part of the attraction for both residents and visitors to Edmonds, and not to support them. Thank you, Astrid Astrid Pujari MD From: cdfarmen Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 3:33 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Tree Code Dear Council Members, I am submitting the following recommendations to be considered in your deliberation on the "updated tree code". o T The tree code title would be more appropriately named as the " Tree Preservation Code" or N the " Tree Retention and Protection code". The use of those terms in lieu of generic wording M gives more emphasis on the intent of the code. It raises an altogether different awareness. d We need a vigorous tree code that will be properly managed and justly applied. The current z tree board needs to be changed into a true tree board with 4 or 5 professional board members, 2 that would include an arborist and others with some forestry and LID knowledge. The current a tree board would then become an advisory committee to the board. The new Tree board should be included in the approval process of any subdivision development with a tree plan. They would be responsible to conduct the initial review of the plan and make recommendations to the Director. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 28 Packet Pg. 34 7.1.a They could assist the director with the onsite pre -development inspection and offer a recommendation to the director which subdivision plan should be presented to the developer. Additionally, they could conduct on -site monitoring of the tree removal, retention and protection measures of the plan and, do on -site monitoring during construction and post - development. They could also assist the city in any citywide canopy assessment, review any tree permits, do post -construction on -site tree replanting areas to assure they are being taken care of, and have oversight on any off -site replanting areas. The Tree board members with LID experience could monitor construction activities on a regular basis to assure plan requirements are being met. What I have mentioned may not be all the activities they could participate in, but whatever their responsibilities are, they will relieve the Director in many ways so that person can do other job -related duties and remove some of the "one person" discretion regarding the application of the overall tree code. Thank you for your diligent consideration of my recommendations. Duane Farmen Seaview resident From: Richard Senderoff a c Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 2:32 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Hope, Shane <Shane.Hope@edmondswa.gov>; Lien, Kernen 0 <Kernen.Lien @edmondswa.gov>; Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov> Subject: About the Tree Code Focused on New Development o N O N Dear Councilmembers, M r I am unable to watch or speak at tonight's Council meeting due to another commitment. But wanted to share my thoughts on the Tree Code. First, I understand the Council's interest in moving a Tree Code forward. But simply checking Q the box with something entitled "Tree Code" won't cut it. While I can't speak for the entire Edmonds environmental contingency, I am aware that many are concerned about the process and the current product. In fact, the Legacy Tree ordinance (which I support) is more restrictive for private property owners, than the current Tree Code focused on new development is for developers; this is primarily due to the extensive number of "exceptions". As such, the code is very complicated & confusing. And for this reason it will ultimately be subject to interpretation Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 29 Packet Pg. 35 7.1.a by the Hearing Examiner, regardless of Mr. Lien's interpretation or the apparent "spirit" of the exceptions. Furthermore, the fines for violations are much too small to have any impact on developers. The homes being built in Edmonds currently are mostly multimillion dollar McMansions; not exactly affordable housing, but that's a different issue. Anything that complicates or lengthens the building process will simply be perceived as a nuisance and the fines will be regarded as the cost of doing business and meaningless relative to the value of the homes being built... "Time is money." Second, it should be recognized that tree management, stormwater handling, and housing plans are all related and each of these elements need to be addressed holistically. And a holistic process should have begun with Council holding study sessions or a retreat to collectively assign congruent goals/objectives for each of the aforementioned elements. Only then could Council evaluate/amend the draft codes against a common set of objectives/goals. Finally, I understand that Mr. Lien (and others) has spent a great deal of time on this code. But my recommendation is to postpone/table the current Tree Code, until Council can collectively and holistically identify objectives/goals that provide a basis for assessment/measurement. Sincerely, Rich From: Duane and Sue Hoekstra as as Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 1:49 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> 0 Cc: LaFave, Carolyn <Carolyn.LaFave@edmondswa.gov> Subject: SINGLE FAMILY ZONING CHANGE o N O N O� To Edmonds City Council Members, r c After working in Seattle and residing in the Alderwood Manor area and Lynnwood for 20 years I E moved to Edmonds. I chose a single family area of Edmonds because buildings were not U crowded which enabled the enjoyment of a reasonable yard and a friendly community with an Q appealing business area within a few miles. I have lived in Edmonds for the past 38 years and have enjoyed the amenities of the area. I feel the change in zoning would seriously eliminate many of these attributes and destroy the attraction that draws people to and has people wanting to stay in Edmonds. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 30 Packet Pg. 36 7.1.a The changes in zoning would not only destroy the appeal of Edmonds but would reduce the vegetation and pervious surface which affects the watersheds and runoff that has to be considered when increasing the population and density of an area. There is traffic and street parking among other adverse problems to also consider. The proposed zoning change would eliminate one of the main reasons people want to move to Edmonds and remain a resident here. I strongly oppose the proposed single family zoning change. Duane Hoekstra Edmonds, WA 98026 From: Joan Bloom Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 11:58 AM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Doherty, Patrick<Patrick.Doherty@edmondswa.gov>; Taraday, Jeff <jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com> Subject: Agenda item 9.1 Analysis of Direct Hire vs Contracted Social Worker Council, Tonight you will be discussing staff's recommendation to contract for the Social Worker/Community Support Specialist position. I urge Council to follow staff's recommendation and also consider contracting with an outside agency, indefinitely. Five reasons to contract with an outside agency for this position 1) Reduction of liability risk to the City of Edmonds From "Liability considerations" p. 161 of your packet: N "If this work was contracted these interactions would be largely free from public disclosure Cn requirements." A r c m There are other important "liability considerations." Under the Involuntary Treatment Act, healthcare professionals must report an individual who presents an imminent danger to r themselves or to others, or is gravely disabled, for evaluation by a designated Mental Health Q Professional (MHP) for possible emergency detention. Clinicians are also required to report suspected abuse or neglect to Child Protective Services when a child is involved, or to Adult Protective Services when a vulnerable adult is involved. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 31 Packet Pg. 37 7.1.a The City of Edmonds could be liable should a direct hire social worker fail in their "mandatory" duty to report and a client they are working with subsequently harms themself or others, or if suspected child or vulnerable adult abuse or neglect are not reported as required. (2) Reduction of cost of the position if contracted out In addition to the added insurance cost of a direct hire, money can be saved on salary with a contracted position. The salary range for the Council approved position starts ABOVE the MAXIMUM pay offered for a MASTER's level position at Compass Health. Here's the breakdown: A Compass Health position for a Child and Family Therapist requires a MA/MS/MSW Degree in a Behavioral Science related field. The salary range for the Compass Health position is $40,622/year to $75,129.60/year. In contrast, the Council approved position requires a Master's degree and two (2) years' experience OR a Bachelor's degree and five (5) years' experience. The Council approved salary range for the Social Worker/Community Support Specialist is $79,488/year to $98,592/year (3) With a contracted position, those served will receive comprehensive services from a team of specialists. Those at high risk are best served by an agency organized to provide specific services, document consent to care, ensure privacy of personal information (except in event of mandatory reporting responsibilities), provide individual and family therapy when needed, assist with follow through with recommended treatments, and ensure access to services available to them. (4) The seven page job description is unrealistic, a set-up for failure, and puts the social worker c hired at risk M This job description is written for an entire department of clinicians. It is not possible for one a� Social Worker/Community Support Specialist to successfully perform all of the tasks listed in E this job description. r r Q The following is a fraction of the innumerable responsibilities assigned to this position. • "This position functions predominantly as a case manager" serving "at -risk populations within Edmonds who are dealing with issues such as housing stress or homelessness, addiction, mental or behavioral health challenges, disabilities, isolation," Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 32 Packet Pg. 38 7.1.a • "will directly contact and/or accompany emergency medical responders and/or law enforcement on patrol" • under "Hazards", "May involve contact with individuals resistant to service, exhibiting difficulty or hostility in being approached or engaged." • "Monitor contact behaviors and progress" • "schedule contacts appointments, visit and observe residences." In other words, visit "contacts" in their homes. As well as: • Develop "Collaborative working relationships with Edmonds Police Department personnel, South Snohomish County Fire and Rescue personnel," and innumerable other agencies and services, as well as the "court system." (5) The City of Edmonds is not, and should never become, a social service agency I hope that all of the reasons I have given above will help Council members to understand the complexity of serving at risk populations. City government is not equipped to provide such services. The best the City of Edmonds can do is refer Edmonds residents in need to agencies that ARE equipped to help them. Regards, Joan Bloom References: 2-23-21 Council agenda packet, job description on p. 200-210: http://edmondswa.igm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=2793&Inline=True Child abuse or neglect reporting requirements o N https://www.dcyf.wa.gov/safety/mandated-reporter CC o� M Vulnerable adult abuse or neglect reporting requirements c m https://www.dshs.wa.gov/altsa/home-and-community-services/reporting-abuse-mandatory-reporter U a r r Definition of mandatory reporters Q https://www.dshs.wa.gov/altsa/adult-protective-services-mandatory-reporters Link to Compass Health job openings: Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 33 Packet Pg. 39 7.1.a https://workforcenow.adp.com/mascsr/default/mdf/recruitment/recruitment.htmI?cid=ebfeb8b6- 8d00-4895-acee- e9d00c8131ca&ccld=19000101 000001&lobld=399443&source=CC2&lane=en US&selected Menu Key=C areerCenter Involuntary treatment WA RCW https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=71.05.153 https://www.hca.wa.gov/about-hca/behavioral-health-recovery/ricky-s-law-involuntary-treatment-act Joan M. Bloom From: Jeff Thiessen Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 6:04 AM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: No to Multi family zoning This proposal is at best, a half baked attempt by the city. Whomever you paid should refund any fees. You really need to look at the numbers involved - it simply is not a feasible venture for 90% of our area. And if implemented, you WILL lose your current residents. Edmonds has a feel and a theme. If your underlying motive is to change that, then go right ahead.... without me. The only thing keeping me here into and through retirement was the quality of life in Edmonds. Jeff Thiessen Edmonds WA From: J Sittauer N Sent: Monday, March 8, 2021 4:26 PM M To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) r c <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Housing commission policy U a r r Please slow down this process, be more transparent, and seek true citizen feedback through Q online town halls before making any decisions on the most important issue facing Edmonds today regarding Edmonds Citizens Housing Commission's proposed policies. Jennifer Sittauer Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 34 Packet Pg. 40 7.1.a From: Brian Duffy Sent: Monday, March 8, 2021 3:55 PM To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: A Vote Against the Citzens Housing Commission's Proposals on Urban Density Edmonds Council, I'm writing to voice my opposition to the recent urban high density proposals by the Citizens Housing Commission. These 15 proposals would change the character of our city in devastating ways. Growth needs to be managed effectively, with serious oversight and citizen input. These proposals do not reflect the character of our city, and I don't believe they reflect the wishes of citizens. I have been a resident of Edmonds since 1975, living in the Maplewood and now Perrinville area. I cannot imagine this type of urban density in our location, and worry that the environmental impact on Perrinville Creek and other wetlands could be greatly detrimental Please allow there to be public input and meetings on this issue before any votes are taken or decisions are made. I have seen many letters and comments on this issue in the Beacon and My Edmonds News. Please do not ignore concerned citizens. Thank you, Brian Duffy Edmonds, WA 98026 From: Mary Duffy Sent: Monday, March 8, 2021 2:59 PM o To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov> c Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> o Subject: A vote against the Citzens Housing Commission's proposals on Urban Density r c m E U Edmonds Council, r Q I'm writing to voice my opposition to the recent urban high density proposals by the Citizens Housing Commission. These 15 proposals would change the character of our city in devastating ways. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 35 Packet Pg. 41 7.1.a Growth needs to be managed effectively, with serious oversight and citizen input. These proposals do not reflect the character of our city, and I don't believe they reflect the wishes of citizens. I have been a resident of Edmonds since 1988, living in the Perrinville area. I cannot imagine this type of urban density in our location, and worry that the environmental impact on Perrinville Creek and other wetlands could be greatly detrimental. Please allow there to be public input and meetings on this issue before any votes are taken or decisions are made. I have seen many letters and comments on this issue in the Beacon and My Edmonds News. Please do not ignore concerned citizens. Thank you, Mary Duffy Edmonds 98026 From: Patrick Coleman Sent: Sunday, March 7, 2021 3:23 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Duane and Sue Hoekstra <dshoek@msn.com> Subject: URBAN UPZONING of ALL SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE LOTS in EDMONDS Dear City Council, I have lived in Edmonds for nearly 35 years. I moved here because of the charm of the City and for is warm, community feel. I believe that the proposed zoning changes will forever change the character and appeal of Edmonds. We don't need or want, changes in our governance that will increase population density and taxes. Please register a STONG NO from our family on the 0 proposed zoning/tax changes. N O Thank You, o� Patrick F. and Cynthia Coleman r Edmonds WA 98026 E U a r From: cdfarmen Sent: Friday, March 5, 2021 7:58 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Conservation Subdivision Design plan Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 36 Packet Pg. 42 r Q 7.1.a Dear Council Members, The following comments are focused solely on the Conservation Subdivision Design plan (CSD). In a prior presentation, Mr. Lien said there were two types of this plan, standard and flexible. Those two different design plans are not reflected in 20.75.xxx and should be appropriately included. The CSD should also be included in the table under "General tree retention requirements ...... page 7 of the proposed code. Nowhere in the proposed code does it state the percentage of tree retention for the CSD. The section on the CSD should also express that this plan is designed to encourage a form of development that conforms to the existing topography and its natural features and protects the lands natural resources such as groundwater, stream headwaters and drainages, steep slopes, woodlands, ecologically sensitive areas, and wildlife habitat. An exception should also be noted that the flexible CSD is the preferred plan when any property described in the previous paragraph exists. This should be explained to the applicant in any pre -application meeting. Every effort should be made to convince the applicant to become a partner in this conservation subdivision plan approach. Incentives are important to make CSD plan appealing to the applicant. The other options of cut and replace and cut and pay should only be considered as a last resort. The choice of subdivision types to be utilized should not be left up to the discretion of one individual in the planning department, especially in the instance of a one -of -a -kind property like the Seaview Woods. An arborist and an individual with LID background need to consult in making this decision after they, along with the lead planner, conduct an on -site inspection. Hopefully, as you continue the hard work to refine the tree code, you focus on this part of the code to assure any amendments will be effective in retaining as many significant trees as possible. Thank you, Duane Farmen Seaview Resident From: cdfarmen Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 2021 7:16 PM Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 37 Packet Pg. 43 N O N Cn M r c a) E U n: r r Q 7.1.a To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Tree code and Wildlife corridors Dear Council Members, The discussion about wildlife corridors struck a nerve with me. I totally disagree with the supposition that wildlife corridors primarily are located in critical areas. Here are some excerpts from my online research: There are two distinct types of Wildlife Corridors —either water or land. Water corridors are called riparian ribbons and usually come in the form of rivers and streams. Land corridors come on a scale as large as wooded strips connecting larger woodland areas. There was another type of wildlife corridor listed called Migration corridors. "Some species need to migrate for survival, depending on various seasons. Through corridors, such species can move back and forth safely and effectively when it does not interfere with human development barriers". Other important comments about wildlife corridors: Wildlife corridors are also known as habitat corridors or green corridors. They serve as significant and essential linkage areas that allow animals to move through the increasingly human -dominated landscapes. Corridors play an extremely important role in the maintenance of biodiversity, but they can only partly compensate for the overall habitat loss produced by the fragmentation of the natural landscape. A wildlife corridor is a link of wildlife habitat, generally native vegetation, which joins two or more larger areas of similar wildlife habitat. Corridors are critical for the maintenance of ecological processes including allowing for the movement of animals and the continuation of viable populations. The tree code needs to include a definition of what is considered a wildlife corridor. It should recognizes that there are both land and water wildlife corridors. The Seaview/Perrinville woods serves both as a land wildlife corridor and a migration corridor. And, if you really think about it, the east side of the woods is only 50 feet or so from the Perrinville creek riparian zone which is a critical area by definition in the tree code. I know personally how vital this issue is. Twenty years ago my property was certified as a wildlife habitat. I have always had an abundance of wildlife in my yard. That abruptly ended last week with the clear -cutting of the woods that were connected to my landscape. Most all my birds have left including three species of woodpeckers including the Pileated woodpecker, Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 38 Packet Pg. 44 T N 0 N M c d E z a 7.1.a Stellar jays, Wrens, Townsend warblers, Bushtits, Chickadees, Spotted towhees, Nuthatches, and even the hummingbirds. I don't even have those pestering squirrels coming into my yard. Please do what is right to protect our wildlife and follow through on an amendment to add and broaden the use of the term wildlife corridor. Thank you, Duane Farmen Seaview resident Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes March 9, 2021 Page 39 Packet Pg. 45 r Q 7.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/16/2021 Approval of claim checks and wire payment. Staff Lead: Dave Turley Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Nori Jacobson Background/History Approval of claim checks #246471 through #246562 dated March 11, 2021 for $347,865.31 and wire payment of $10,038.19. Staff Recommendation Approval of claim checks and wire payment. Narrative In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance #2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or non -approval of expenditures. Attachments: claims 03-11-21 wire 03-11-21 FrequentlyUsedProjN umbers 03-11-21 Packet Pg. 46 7.2.a vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Page 0 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun r c 246471 3/11/2021 073417 3M COMPANY 9410549437 TRAFFIC - SUPPLIES/ BLACK GRAF TRAFFIC - SUPPLIES/ BLACK GRAF >, 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 450.0( a 10.4% Sales Tax L_ 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 46.8( 3 9410549441 TRAFFIC - SUPPLIES/ RED GRAPHI -0 TRAFFIC - SUPPLIES/ RED GRAPHI c 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 1,517.81 � 10.4% Sales Tax (D 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 157.8( U Total: 2,172.5( E .ii 246472 3/11/2021 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 42221 MEADOWDALE CC PEST CONTROI U MEADOWDALE CC PEST CONTROI O 001.000.64.576.80.41.00 90.0( > 10.4% Sales Tax o 001.000.64.576.80.41.00 9.3E a 42354 PARK MAINT PEST CONTROL CUSS Q PARK MAINT PEST CONTROL CUS 001.000.64.576.80.41.00 125.0( N 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.41.00 13.0( c Total: 237.3E 246473 3/11/2021 064088 ADT COMMERCIAL 138851633 ALARM MONITORING CITY HALL fd ALARM MONITORING CITY HALL 122 U 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 129.0E 138851634 FIRE INSPECTION - CITY HALL E FIRE INSPECTION - CITY HALL 121 U 001.000.66.518.30.41.00 84.8E Total: 213.91 Q 246474 3/11/2021 074488 ALPHA COURIER INC 21886 WWTP: 2/1-2 P/U, 2/8-2 P/U, 2/16-2 2/1-2 P/U, 2/8-2 P/U, 2/16-2 P/U, 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 315.3( Page: 1 Packet Pg. 47 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 246474 3/11/2021 074488 074488 ALPHA COURIER INC 246475 3/11/2021 008835 ALTEC INDUSTRIES INC 246476 3/11/2021 001528 AM TEST INC Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 2 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) Total: 315.3( m 50662781 UNIT 18 - PARTS & LABOR E UNIT 18 - PARTS & LABOR sa 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 a 966.1 m 10.4% Sales Tax 3 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 100.4, Total: 1,066.61 120146 WWTP: SAMPLE 21-A001717 1k SAMPLE 21-A001717 t 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 25.0( U 120147 WWTP: SAMPLE 21-A000798 INCIN SAMPLE 21-A000798 INCINERATOF 2 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 165.0( o 120148 WWTP: SAMPLE 21-A001545 @ SAMPLE 21-A001545 > 0 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 110.0( a 120149 WWTP: SAMPLES 21-A001425-26 & Q' Q SAMPLES 21-A001425-26 & 1457-5E 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 340.0( 120150 WWTP: SAMPLES 21-A001260-126f SAMPLES 21-A001260-1269 M 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 510.0( N 120159 WWTP: SAMPLES 21-A001541-154z E SAMPLES 21-A001541-1544 M 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 130.0( U 120160 WWTP: SAMPLES 21-A001832-183E SAMPLES 21-A001832-1835 E E 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 300.0( u 120161 WWTP: SAMPLES 21-A001661-166" f° r SAMPLES 21-A001661-1663 Q 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 105.0( 120162 WWTP: SAMPLES 21-A001785-1781 SAMPLES 21-A001785-1787 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 105.0( Page: 2 Packet Pg. 48 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 3 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246476 3/11/2021 001528 AM TEST INC (Continued) 120163 WWTP: SAMPLES 21-A001973-197z SAMPLES 21-A001973 1974 E 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 80.0( a Total: 1,870.0( L 3 246477 3/11/2021 073573 ANIXTER 23K270959 LIBRARY - SUPPLIES/ KEY & DEAD LIBRARY - SUPPLIES/ KEY & DEAD 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 142.1 , Y 10.4% Sales Tax U 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 14.7� Total: 156.9E E 246478 3/11/2021 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 656000001866 FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS R U FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS o 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 29.5E -jj 10.4% Sales Tax o 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 3.0, a 656000005988 PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE Q PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 61.1 E 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 6.3, A Total: 100.1E N E 246479 3/11/2021 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 120518 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS M UB Outsourcing area Printing 2,297 U 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 160.7( UB Outsourcing area Printing 2,297 °' E 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 160.7E u UB Outsourcing area Printing 2,297 r 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 165.5E Q UB Outsourcing area Postage # 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 585.7z UB Outsourcing area Postage # 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 585.7' Page: 3 Packet Pg. 49 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 246479 3/11/2021 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 4 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) r 10.1 % Sales Tax c m E 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 16.2' 10.1 % Sales Tax a 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 16.21' L 10.1 % Sales Tax 3 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 16.7, 120519 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS UB Outsourcing area Printing 1,766 Y 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 123.5,1 UB Outsourcing area Printing 1,766 U 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 123.5f E UB Outsourcing area Postage 1,766 1 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 450.3< ,- UB Outsourcing area Postage 1,766 O 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 450.3: > 10.1 % Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 12.4E a 10.1 % Sales Tax Q 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 12.4E 10.1 % Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 12.8,1 UB Outsourcing area Printing 1,766 0 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 127.2� E 120558 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS UB Outsourcing area Printing 2,453 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 171.6" UB Outsourcing area Printing 2,453 m t 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 171.6- UB Outsourcing area Printing 2,453 r 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 176.8, Q UB Outsourcing area Postage 2,453 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 564.1 UB Outsourcing area Postage 2,453 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 564.1 Page: 4 Packet Pg. 50 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 246479 3/11/2021 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 5 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) r 10.1 % Sales Tax c d 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 17.3< >, 10.1 % Sales Tax a 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 17.3: L 10.1 % Sales Tax 3 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 17.8( 120559 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS ° UB Outsourcing area Printing 1,751 Y 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 122.5( y UB Outsourcing area Printing 1,751 U 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 122.5( E UB Outsourcing area Printing 1,751 ii 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 126.2' ,- UB Outsourcing area Postage 1,751 ° 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 402.7; > UB Outsourcing area Postage 1,751 ° 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 402.7; a 10.1 % Sales Tax Q 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 12.3 10.1 % Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 12.3 1 10.1 % Sales Tax o 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 12.7,' E 120579 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS UB Outsourcing area Printing 443 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 30.9E UB Outsourcing area Printing 443 W 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 30.9� t UB Outsourcing area Printing 443 r 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 31.9z Q UB Outsourcing area Postage 443 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 112.9 UB Outsourcing area Postage 443 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 112.9E Page: 5 Packet Pg. 51 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 6 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246479 3/11/2021 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER (Continued) 10.1 % Sales Tax E, 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 3.1 ' 10.1 % Sales Tax a 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 3.1 < L 10.1 % Sales Tax 3 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 3.21' Total: 6,264.91 246480 3/11/2021 069226 BHC CONSULTANTS LLC 13038 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FROM U Professional Services from 001.000.62.524.10.41.00 1,008.4( E Total: 1,008.4( 'jj z 246481 3/11/2021 073760 BLUELINE GROUP LLC 20646 EOJA.SERVICES THRU 2/27/21 — EOJA.Services thru 2/27/21 421.000.74.594.34.41.00 9,618.0( o Total: L 9,618.0( a Q 246482 3/11/2021 003001 BUILDERS SAND & GRAVEL 340944 WATER/SEWER/STREET/STORM - ; WATER/SEWER/STREET/STORM - ; N 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 636.5E WATER/SEWER/STREET/STORM - ; A 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 636.5E N WATER/SEWER/STREET/STORM - ; E 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 636.5E .2 WATER/SEWER/STREET/STORM - ; U 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 636.5 , 10.4% Sales Tax E E 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 66.2E U 10.4% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 66.2( Q 10.4% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 66.2( 10.4% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 66.2' Page: 6 Packet Pg. 52 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher List City of Edmonds Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 246482 3/11/2021 003001 BUILDERS SAND & GRAVEL (Continued) 340973 246483 3/11/2021 076240 CADMAN MATERIALS INC 246484 3/11/2021 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY PO # Description/Account WATER/SEWER/STREET/STORM - i WATER/SEWER/STREET/STORM - 1 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 WATER/SEWER/STREET/STORM - 1 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 WATER/SEWER/STREET/STORM - 1 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 WATER/SEWER/STREET/STORM - 1 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 Total 5743109 ROADWAY- 1/2" HMA ROADWAY- 1/2" HMA 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 8.6% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 5744455 ROADWAY - ASPHALT ROADWAY - ASPHALT 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 10.1 % Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 Total RN02210970 YOST POOL CYLINDER RENTAL YOST POOL CYLINDER RENTAL 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 10.4% Sales Tax 7.2.a Page: 7 Amoun c m E 869.2, a 869.2, 3 c 869.2, sa 869.2E y t U 90.4( E .ii 90.4( ,- 0 90.4( > 0 L 90.4, a 6,649.71 Q N 246.21 c 21.1 £ •� U 438.0< (D E t 44.2z 749.65 Q .M Page: 7 Packet Pg. 53 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher List City of Edmonds Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account 246484 3/11/2021 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY (Continued) 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 RN02210971 WWTP: 2/2021 CYLINDER RENTAL- 2/2021 nitrogen, oxygen, carbon 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 Total 246485 3/11/2021 063902 CITY OF EVERETT 121001288 WATER QUALITY LAB ANALYSIS WATER QUALITY LAB ANALYSIS 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 Total: 246486 3/11/2021 073135 COGENT COMMUNICATIONS INC MAR-2020 246487 3/11/2021 070323 COMCAST BUSINESS 8498310301175175 246488 3/11/2021 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 3365519 246489 3/11/2021 067794 DALCOINC 3365719 3365720 25568 C/A CITYOFED00001 Mar-2021 Fiber Optics Internet 512.000.31.518.87.42.00 Total CEMETERY INTERNET 820 15TH Sl CEMETERY INTERNET 820 15TH S� 130.000.64.536.20.42.00 Total EOJA.INVITATION TO BID AD EOJA.Invitation to Bid Ad 421.000.74.594.34.41.00 P&R: CONCESSION IN PARKS ADS P&R: CONCESSION IN PARKS ADS: 001.000.64.571.22.41.40 P&R: PROS PLAN ADS P&R: PROS PLAN ADS: 2/25/21 & 3/ 001.000.64.571.21.41.40 Total WWTP: NON-REFUNDABLE DEPOc NON-REFUNDABLE DEPOSIT FOR 7.2.a Page: 8 Page: 8 Packet Pg. 54 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 9 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246489 3/11/2021 067794 DALCOINC (Continued) 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 130.5f Tota I : 130.5' 246490 3/11/2021 006626 DEPTOF ECOLOGY 21-WA0024058B-1 WWTP: 2ND HALF BIOSOLIDS PER 2ND HALF BIOSOLIDS PERMIT #WE 423.000.76.535.80.41.50 28,624.3, Total : 28,624.3: 246491 3/11/2021 047450 DEPT OF INFORMATION SERVICES 2021020031 CUSTOMER ID# D200-0 SWV#0098 Scan Services for February 2021 512.000.31.518.88.42.00 285.0( Tota I : 285.0( 246492 3/11/2021 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 21-4073 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES city council meeting minutes 3/2 001.000.25.514.30.41.00 428.4( Tota I : 428.4( 246493 3/11/2021 076172 DK SYSTEMS 27584 CITY HALL - REPAIRS COMPRESSC CITY HALL - REPAIRS COMPRESSC 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 3,770.4( PREVAILING WAGE 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 20.0( 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 392.1 < Tota I : 4,182.5: 246494 3/11/2021 007253 DUNN LUMBER 7811978 PM: SUPPLIES ACCT E000027 PM SUPPLIES: LUMBER, CONCREI 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 48.4( 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 4.9� Total: 53.31 246495 3/11/2021 076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE 2127 WWTP: LIME SOIL LIME SOIL Page: 9 Packet Pg. 55 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 10 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246495 3/11/2021 076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE (Continued) 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 799.2( 10.4% Sales Tax >, 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 83.1 , a 2138 FAC MAINT - SHOP SUPPLIES/ SOC L FAC MAINT - SHOP SUPPLIES/ SOC 3 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 94.9, 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 9.8£ Y 2141 FAC MAINT - SHOP SUPPLIES U FAC MAINT - SHOP SUPPLIES 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 27.5E E 10.4% Sales Tax R 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.8, u 2143 F.A.C. - OFFICE FLOOR SUPPLIES F.A.C. - OFFICE FLOOR SUPPLIES _0 > 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 57.1 E o 10.4% Sales Tax a 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 5.9z Q 2151 FAC MAINT - SHOP SUPPLIES FAC MAINT - SHOP SUPPLIES N 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 40.7z 10.4% Sales Tax c 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 4.21 N Total: 1,125.6E 246496 3/11/2021 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES AR186266 INV AR186266 - ACCT MK5031 - EDI 9/20 BW CHARGE A12434 & A1243 (D 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 30.4E E 9/20 CLR CHARGE A12434 & A1243 U 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 m 152.9E P 10.4% Sales Tax Q 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 19.01 AR186267 AR186267 - EDMONDS PD 10/20 BW CHARGE A12434 & A124" 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 44.3< Page: 10 Packet Pg. 56 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 11 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246496 3/11/2021 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES (Continued) 10/20 CLR CHARGE A12434 & A124 E, 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 147.9( 10.4% Sales Tax a 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 19.9� L AR186268 INV AR186268 - ACCT MK5031 - EDI 3 11/20 BW CHARGE A12434 & A1243 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 39.3E c 11/20 CLR CHARGE A12434 & A124; Y 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 159.8E W 10.4% Sales Tax U 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 20.7, E AR186269 INV AR186269 - ACCT MK5031 - EDI ii 12/20 BW CHARGE A12434 & A124" U 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 39.8- _0 12/20 CLR CHARGE A12434 & A124 > 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 158.9( o 10.4% Sales Tax a 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 20.6, Q AR186270 INV AR186270 - ACCT MK5031 - EDI 1/21 BW CHARGE A12434 & A1243 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 39.2( 1/21 CLR CHARGE A12434 & A1243 0 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 191.1E 10.4% Sales Tax M 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 23.9( Z AR186736 DEV SVCS MONTHLY COPIER CON Contract overage charge for W 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 213.5E t 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 22.2- r Q Total : 1,344.0 , 246497 3/11/2021 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD EDH920027 EOJA.INVITATION TO BID AD EOJA.Invitation to Bid Ad 421.000.74.594.34.41.00 215.6( Page: 11 Packet Pg. 57 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 246497 3/11/2021 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD 246498 3/11/2021 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY 246499 3/11/2021 009880 FEDEX 246500 3/11/2021 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account (Continued) EDH920612 PLANNING -LEGAL AD PLN2021-0002- 001.000.62.558.60.41.40 Tota I : WAEVE179643 PM: SUPPLIES PM: SUPPLIES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 Tota I : 7-289-39638 SHIPPING CHARGES FOR INFORM. Freight charges to Prime Tech, Sanfo 512.000.31.518.88.42.00 Total 0960914 WATER - PARTS FOR 500 ADMIRAL WATER - PARTS FOR 500 ADMIRAL 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 0960922 WATER - PARTS FOR 500 ADMIRAL WATER - PARTS FOR 500 ADMIRAL 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 0961487 WATER - SUPPLIES/ VLV BOXES WATER - SUPPLIES/ VLV BOXES 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 0961487-1 WATER - PARTS WATER - PARTS 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 7.2.a Page: 12 Page: 12 Packet Pg. 58 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 13 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246500 3/11/2021 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC (Continued) 10.4% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 60.4, Total: 8,881.51 246501 3/11/2021 075871 FLOW TECHNOLOGIES INC E6GB.Pmt 4 E6GB.PMT 4 THRU 02/25/21 E6GB.Pmt 4 thru 2/25/21 423.000.75.594.35.65.30 70,423.8E E6GB.Ret 4 423.000.223.400 -3,189.4� Total : 67,234.35 246502 3/11/2021 012199 GRAINGER 9808553490 FIRE STATION 17 - SPRING RETURI FIRE STATION 17 - SPRING RETURI 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 725.7( 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 75.4 9808686365 PM SUPPLIES: V-BELT, POST BASE PM SUPPLIES: V-BELT, POST BASE 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 167.6� 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 17.4< 9808872833 PM SUPPLIES: VINYL PM SUPPLIES: VINYL 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 18.2E 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 1.9' 9815667150 STORM - SUPPLIES STORM - SUPPLIES 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 66.8( 10.4% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 6.9E Total: 1,080.21 246503 3/11/2021 074722 GUARDIAN SECURITY SYSTEMS 1108807 OLD PW - SECURITY OLD PW - SECURITY Page: 13 Packet Pg. 59 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 14 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246503 3/11/2021 074722 GUARDIAN SECURITY SYSTEMS (Continued) 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 55.0( 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 5.7; a Total: 60.7: L 3 246504 3/11/2021 012900 HARRIS FORD INC 21167 UNIT 285 - PARTS/ SWITCH ASSEM UNIT 285 - PARTS/ SWITCH ASSEM 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 39.9£ Y 10.5% Sales Tax U 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 4.2( Total: 44.15 E 246505 3/11/2021 069733 ICONIX WATERWORKS INC U2116004441 SEWER - PARTS/ PIPE & COUPLIN( R U SEWER - PARTS/ PIPE & COUPLIN( o 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 721.2£ R 10.4% Sales Tax o 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 75.0' a U2116004442 WATER - INVENTORY / RESETTER Q WATER - INVENTORY / RESETTER 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 7,946.5E 10.4% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 826.41 c� U2116006781 WATER - INVENTORY/ RESETTER WATER - INVENTORY/ RESETTER E 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 2,170.1 E 12 10.4% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 225.7( Total : 11,965.1( E t 246506 3/11/2021 076828 INSTRUMENT TECHNOLOGIES INC W210302 INV W210302 - EDMONDS PD r CALIBRATE EVIDENCE SCALES Q 001.000.41.521.80.41.00 260.0( Total : 260.0( 246507 3/11/2021 014940 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS 1905702017975 INV 1905702017975 - EDMONDS PE Page: 14 Packet Pg. 60 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 246507 3/11/2021 014940 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS 246508 3/11/2021 072627 INTRADO LIFE & SAFETY INC 246509 3/11/2021 068677 KONECRANES AMERICA INC 246510 3/11/2021 017050 KWICK'N KLEEN CAR WASH 246511 3/11/2021 075016 LEMAY MOBILE SHREDDING Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account (Continued) AA WORKAHOLIC BATTERIES 001.000.41.521.22.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.31.00 AAA WORKAHOLIC BATTERIES 001.000.41.521.22.31.00 Tota I : 7013272 MONTHLY 911 DATABASE MAINT Monthly 911 database maint 512.000.31.518.88.48.00 Tota I : 154437645 FLEET - SHOP CRANE PARTS FLEET - SHOP CRANE PARTS 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 Total 02192021-02 JANUARY2021 CAR WASHES JANUARY CAR WASHES - UNITS 3� 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 Total 4692325 SHREDDING SERVICES shredding services 001.000.25.514.30.41.00 shredding services 001.000.31.514.23.41.00 4692455 INV 4692455 - ACCT 2185-952778-8 SHRED 2 - 65 GAL TOTES 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 Total 7.2.a Page: 15 Page: 15 Packet Pg. 61 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 16 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246512 3/11/2021 067725 LES SCHWAB TIRE CENTER 40000403929 UNIT 14 - TIRE REPLACEMENT (AR UNIT 14 - TIRE REPLACEMENT (AR 511.000.77.548.68.34.30 519.OF WA STATE TIRE TAX 511.000.77.548.68.34.30 1.0( 9.2% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.34.30 47.7( Tota I : 567.81 246513 3/11/2021 074848 LONG BAY ENTERPRISES INC 2021-1020 REAL ESTATE CONSULTING SERVI REAL ESTATE CONSULTING SERVI 001.000.64.571.21.41.00 1,077.5( Tota I : 1,077.5( 246514 3/11/2021 067235 MARYS TOWING INC 92754 INV 92754 - CS 21-5699 - EDMOND,' TOW MUSTANG - CS 21-5699 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 184.0( 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 19.1 , Total : 203.11 246515 3/11/2021 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENTALL INC 344198 PM: CULTIVATOR PM: CULTIVATOR 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 199.9! 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 20.7� Total : 220.7' 246516 3/11/2021 021983 MOTOR TRUCKS INC ME169837 UNIT 66 - PARTS/ FILTER UNIT 66 - PARTS/ FILTER 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 142.5< 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 14.8, ME169897 UNIT 66 - PARTS/ INJECTOR UNIT 66 - PARTS/ INJECTOR 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 438.9: Page: 16 Packet Pg. 62 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 246516 3/11/2021 021983 MOTOR TRUCKS INC Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # (Continued) 246517 3/11/2021 075542 NORTHWEST LANDSCAPE SUPPLY 4458 246518 3/11/2021 065720 OFFICE DEPOT 158741178001 246519 3/11/2021 026200 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT 0000130 0001520 0001530 0002930 Description/Account 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 PM: WOOD CHIPS PM: WOOD CHIPS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 Total : Total : INV 158741178001 - ACCT 9052043, MED BINDER CLIPS -TIERED DISC 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 SMALL BINDER CLIPS 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 RETRACT PAPERMATE PENS - BLA 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 TAPE REFILLS 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 Total PLANTER IRRIGATION 220TH ST S\ PLANTER IRRIGATION 220TH ST S1 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 CEMETERY 820 15TH ST SW CEMETERY 820 15TH ST SW 130.000.64.536.50.47.00 CEMETERY SPRINKLER 820 15TH CEMETERY SPRINKLER 820 15TH 130.000.64.536.50.47.00 SPRINKLER @ 5TH AVE S & SR104 SPRINKLER @ 5TH AVE S & SR104 7.2.a Page: 17 Amoun c 45.6E >% 641.9: a m L 3 112.5( 11.7( U 124.2( E 2 U 14.4; o R 14.6z o L a 78.6E Q 17.9, N 13.0E c 138.7' E 20.6E E t U 48.0z Q 22.7, Page: 17 Packet Pg. 63 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 246519 3/11/2021 026200 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT (Continued) 0021400 246520 3/11/2021 072739 O'REILLYAUTO PARTS 246521 3/11/2021 060945 PACIFIC POWER BATTERIES 0026390 PO # Description/Account 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 FIRE STATION #20 88TH AVE W / MI FIRE STATION #20 88TH AVE W / MI 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 PLANTER IRRIGATION 10415 226TF PLANTER IRRIGATION 10415 226TF 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 Total 3685-118299 UNIT 123 - PARTS/ BELT UNIT 123 - PARTS/ BELT 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 3685-118639 FLEET - PARTS (RETURNED) FLEET - PARTS (RETURNED) 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 3685-118812 FLEET - PARTS RETURNED FLEET - PARTS RETURNED 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 3685-119643 UNIT 32 - PARTS/ AIR FILTER UNIT 32 - PARTS/ AIR FILTER 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 19015440 SEWER - PARTS SEWER - PARTS 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax Total 7.2.a Page: 18 Amoun c 22.7, �a a 291.2E L 3 22.7, 428.11 Y U m t U 19.11 •ii U 1.9� o M 0 L 109.91 a Q 11.5E N -109.9, c -11.5E .E 2 U 12.1' y E 1.2E u 34.5( Q 17.3z Page: 18 Packet Pg. 64 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 19 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246521 3/11/2021 060945 PACIFIC POWER BATTERIES (Continued) 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 1.8( 19015530 SEWER - PARTS SEWER - PARTS 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 15.6( 10.4% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 1.6, Total : 36.3E 246522 3/11/2021 063588 PACIFIC POWER GROUP 6532067-00 UNIT 120 - PARTS/ FUEL FILTER UNIT 120 - PARTS/ FUEL FILTER 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 118.5E Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 15.0( 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 13.8� Total : 147.4; 246523 3/11/2021 069873 PAPE MACHINERY INC 12522807 PARK MAINT: SEAL PARK MAINT: SEAL 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 22.1 E 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 2.3( 12526791 PARK MAINT: WASHER, V-BELT PARK MAINT: WASHER, V-BELT 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 157.5� 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 16.3� Total : 198.4' 246524 3/11/2021 073871 PERSONNEL EVALUATION INC 39359 INV 39359 EDMONDS PD FEB 2021 WEB -BASED PEP REPORT 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 20.0( Total : 20.0( 246525 3/11/2021 074793 PETDATA INC 9449 INV 9449 - FEB 2021 - EDMONDS PI Page: 19 Packet Pg. 65 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 20 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246525 3/11/2021 074793 PETDATA INC (Continued) 94 ONE YEAR PET LICENSES 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 394.8( 2 REPLACEMENT TAGS 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 8.4( Total: 403.2( 246526 3/11/2021 075565 PVP COMMUNICATIONS 128875 UNIT 960 - PARTS/ HELMET KIT UNIT 960 - PARTS/ HELMET KIT 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 146.8F Total : 146.81 246527 3/11/2021 030780 QUIRING MONUMENTS INC 30982 INSCRIPTION SHUTTER/NICHE-SEI INSCRIPTION SHUTTER/NICHE-SEI 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 150.0( 30983 INSCRIPTION SHUTTER/NICHE-MA INSCRIPTION SHUTTER/NICHE-MA 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 150.0( 30984 MARKER/INSCRIPTION-NORDBY MARKER/INSCRIPTION-NORDBY 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 185.0( 30985 MARKER/INSCRIPTION-DRAKE MARKER/INSCRIPTION-DRAKE 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 185.0( 31194 GRASS MARKER -DRAKE GRASS MARKER -DRAKE 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 575.0( Total : 1,245.0( 246528 3/11/2021 078261 R ALEXANDER ASSOCIATES INC 6281 WWTP:2/2021 SERVICES 2/2021 SERVICES 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 2,876.7'. Total : 2,876.7; 246529 3/11/2021 070955 R&R STAR TOWING 152447 INV 152447 - CS 21-5646 - EDMONE TOW GRY TACOMA -CS21-5646 1.51 Page: 20 Packet Pg. 66 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 21 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246529 3/11/2021 070955 R&R STAR TOWING (Continued) 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 276.0( 10.5% Sales Tax E 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 28.9E a 153041 INV 153041 - CS 21-2173 - EDMONE L TOW GOLD SABLE - CS 21-2173 3 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 184.0( 10.5% Sales Tax sa 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 19.3, Y Total: 508.3( u t 246530 3/11/2021 062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL COMPANY 0000054427 STORM - STREET SWEEPINGS STORM - STREET SWEEPINGS M 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 4,288.5E Z Total: 4,288.5E o 246531 3/11/2021 061540 REPUBLIC SERVICES #197 3-0197-0800478 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE R > 0 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE a 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 235.0E Q 3-0197-0800897 PUBLIC WORKS CIVIC 7110 210TH ; PUBLIC WORKS CIVIC 7110 210TH ; N 001.000.65.518.20.47.00 38.7' PUBLIC WORKS CIVIC 7110 210TH ; M 111.000.68.542.90.47.00 147.0E N PUBLIC WORKS CIVIC 7110 210TH ; E 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 147.0E fd PUBLIC WORKS CIVIC 7110 210TH : U 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 147.0E PUBLIC WORKS CIVIC 7110 210TH ; E 511.000.77.548.68.47.00 147.0� PUBLIC WORKS CIVIC 7110 210TH ; 422.000.72.531.90.47.00 147.0, Q 3-0197-0801132 FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 253.9< 3-0197-0829729 CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDAL Page: 21 Packet Pg. 67 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 22 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246531 3/11/2021 061540 REPUBLIC SERVICES #197 (Continued) CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDAL 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 71.6! Total: 1,334.8( 246532 3/11/2021 064769 ROMAINE ELECTRIC 5-030746 UNIT 947 - BATTERY UNIT 947 - BATTERY 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 197.7( 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 205, Total : 218.3: 246533 3/11/2021 067802 SAN DIEGO POLICE EQUIP CO 646216 INV 646216 - CUST 1733 - EDMOND 9MM AMMUNITION 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 11,943.0( 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 1,242.0( Total : 13,185.01 246534 3/11/2021 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC S3-6130685 UNIT 454 - PARTS/ IGNITION COIL UNIT 454 - PARTS/ IGNITION COIL 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 35.1, 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 3.6( Total : 38.8: 246535 3/11/2021 074997 SEITEL SYSTEMS, LLC 54961 REMOTE COMPUTER SUPPORT Remote computer support - 2/2/21, 512.000.31.518.88.41.00 2,047.5( Total: 2,047.5( 246536 3/11/2021 060889 SNAP -ON INDUSTRIAL ARV/46992093 FLEET - SHOP SUPPLIES/ BATTER` FLEET - SHOP SUPPLIES/ BATTER` 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 236.9( 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 24.& Page: 22 Packet Pg. 68 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 23 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246536 3/11/2021 060889 SNAP -ON INDUSTRIAL (Continued) ARV/47020891 FLEET - SHOP SUPPLIES/ ION BAT_ FLEET - SHOP SUPPLIES/ ION BAT- E 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 129.6� a 10.4% Sales Tax L 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 13.4� .3 Total: 404.7, c ea 246538 3/11/2021 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 200124873 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9933 100TH AVE W Y TRAFFIC LIGHT 9933 100TH AVE W U 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 39.3E 200202919 LIFT STATION #8 113 RAILROAD AV E LIFT STATION #8 113 RAILROAD AV 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 61.0" 200274959 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23602 76TH AVE W o TRAFFIC LIGHT 23602 76TH AVE W R 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 14.8E o L 200386456 CLUBHOUSE 6801 MEADOWDALE a CLUBHOUSE 6801 MEADOWDALE Q 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 84.5� 200422418 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70( N FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70( 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 1,024.0E c 200493153 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 76TH AVE W N TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 76TH AVE W E 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 33.9E 2 200748606 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9730 220TH ST SW TRAFFIC LIGHT 9730 220TH ST SW 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 16.6( E 200943348 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23202 EDMONDS V U TRAFFIC LIGHT 23202 EDMONDS V f° 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 42.9E Q 201192226 TRAFFIC LIGHT 20408 76TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 20408 76TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 17.2- 201236825 FISHING PIER RESTROOMS Page: 23 Packet Pg. 69 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 246538 3/11/2021 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 24 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) r FISHING PIER RESTROOMS c 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 618.5< >, 201265980 LIFT STATION #12 16121 75TH PL � f° a LIFT STATION #12 16121 75TH PL � L 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 172.91 .3 201374964 LIFT STATION #11 6811 1/2 157TH P LIFT STATION #11 6811 1/2 157TH P ca 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 20.2( Y 201532926 LIFT STATION #7 121 W DAYTON S- y LIFT STATION #7 121 W DAYTON S- U 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 160.5, E 201563434 TRAFFIC LIGHT 660 EDMONDS WA is TRAFFIC LIGHT 660 EDMONDS WA U 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 33.3E 201582152 TRAFFIC LIGHT 19600 80TH AVE W _0 > TRAFFIC LIGHT 19600 80TH AVE W o 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 28.4' a 201594488 LIFT STATION #15 7710 168TH PL S Q LIFT STATION #15 7710 168TH PL S 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 22.0' N 201610276 OVERHEAD STREET LIGHTING AT i OVERHEAD STREET LIGHTING AT i A 0 130.000.64.536.50.47.00 8.5E N 201656907 DECORATIVE LIGHTING 413 MAIN! E DECORATIVE LIGHTING 413 MAIN! 2 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 252.9 , +: 201703758 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 23190 10( PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 23190 10( E 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 34.5E m 201711785 STREET LIGHTING 1 LIGHTS @ 15( Q STREET LIGHTING (183 LIGHTS @ 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 8.6, 201762101 415 5TH AVE S 415 5TH AVE S 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 25.5� Page: 24 Packet Pg. 70 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 246538 3/11/2021 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 25 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) r 202077194 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE c FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE E 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 467.0E a 202289096 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22400 HWY 99 / ME L TRAFFIC LIGHT 22400 HWY 99 / ME 3 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 54.4E 202421582 LOG CABIN & DECORATIVE LIGHTI LOG CABIN & DECORATIVE LIGHTI Y 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 42.7, uw 202499539 LIFT STATION #1 105 GASPERS ST LIFT STATION #1 105 GASPERS ST E 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 654.7z 'm 202529186 STREET LIGHTING (406 LIGHTS @ v STREET LIGHTING (406 LIGHTS @ O 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 3,955.0" > 202529202 STREET LIGHTING 7 LIGHTS @ 40( o L STREET LIGHTING (7 LIGHTS @ 40 a 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 110.5E Q 202576153 STREET LIGHTING (2097 LIGHTS C STREET LIGHTING (2097 LIGHTS C N 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 13,536.9, 202579488 STREET LIGHTING (33 LIGHTS @ 2 c STREET LIGHTING (33 LIGHTS @ 2 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 378.& .E 202579520 WWTP: 2/1-2/28/21 ENERGY MGMT 2/1-2/28/21 ENERGY MANAGEMEN 423.000.76.535.80.47.61 8.7( (D 202620415 MATHAY BALLINGER PARK IRRIGA E MATHAY BALLINGER PARK IRRIGA U 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 m 16.6( 204292213 CHARGE STATION #1 552 MAIN ST Q CHARGE STATION #1 552 MAIN ST 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 130.1 , 204467435 HAZEL MILLER PLAZA HAZEL MILLER PLAZA Page: 25 Packet Pg. 71 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 26 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246538 3/11/2021 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 24.9� 204714893 STREET LIGHTING (1 LIGHT @ 150' STREET LIGHTING (1 LIGHT @ 150' a 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 6.1- L 204714927 STREET LIGHTING (19 LIGHTS @ 2 3 STREET LIGHTING (19 LIGHTS @ 2 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 158.7( 204714935 STREET LIGHTING (5 LIGHTS @ 40 Y STREET LIGHTING (5 LIGHTS @ 40 U 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 86.5E u 204714943 STREET LIGHTING (4 LIGHTS @ 10 E STREET LIGHTING (4 LIGHTS @ 10 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 _M 18.8, 204714950 STREET LIGHTING (12 LIGHTS @ 2 0 STREET LIGHTING (12 LIGHTS @ 2 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 134.9E o 220547582 TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 95TH AVE a TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 95TH AVE Q 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 37.8( 220792758 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22730 HWY 99 - ME N TRAFFIC LIGHT 22730 HWY 99 - ME 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 84.5E c 222704264 WWTP: 1/30-2/26/21 FLOWMETER 1/30-2/26/21 FLOW METER 23219 E 423.000.76.535.80.47.62 16.0' 2 222721177 STORMWATER PUMP STATION - 51 STORMWATER LIFT STATION - 51 V (D 422.000.72.531.90.47.00 42.6- E Total: 22,688.1f m r 246539 3/11/2021 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE 2021-6667 INV 2021-6667 EDMONDS PD JAIL P Q INMATE HOSPITAL CARE 12/9/20 001.000.39.523.60.41.00 1,395.3' INMATE HOSPITAL CARE 12/8/20 001.000.39.523.60.41.00 395.3' Page: 26 Packet Pg. 72 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 27 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246539 3/11/2021 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE (Continued) INMATE AMBULANCE 11/6/20 001.000.39.523.60.41.00 124.9� >, 2021-6667 CREDIT INV 2021-6667 CREDIT FOR 11/20 II f° a CREDIT -INMATE MEDS 11/20 L .3 001.000.39.523.60.31.00 -3.7( Total: 1,911.9° ea 246540 3/11/2021 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 103584 WWTP: 2/2021 RECYCLING 2/2021 Rolloff Ash disposal & taxes U 423.000.76.535.80.47.66 38.7. 103587 PARKS MAINT GARBAGE & RECYC E PARKS MAINT GARBAGE AND REC 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 1,040.2- 104757 WWTP: 2/2021 ROLLOFF ASH DISF o 2/2021 ROLLOFF ASH DISPOSAL+T R 423.000.76.535.80.47.65 1,753.8£ o Total: 2,832.81 a Q 246541 3/11/2021 038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS 102839/4 WWTP: GCARREON 2021 1 LYNNW, GCARREON 2021 UNIFORM ALLON 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 240.0z 10.4% Sales Tax M 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 24.9E N Total: 265.0( E .R 246542 3/11/2021 068439 SPECIALTY DOOR SERVICE 55930 PUBLIC WORKS - SERVICE CALL F U PUBLIC WORKS - SERVICE CALL F 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 324.0( E 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 33.7( Total : 357.7( Q 246543 3/11/2021 074990 STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES 1759625 EBJA.SERVICES THRU 1/31/21 EBJA.Services thru 1/31/21 421.000.74.594.34.41.00 3,552.0, Page: 27 Packet Pg. 73 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 28 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246543 3/11/2021 074990 074990 STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES (Continued) Total : 3,552.01, 246544 3/11/2021 039775 STATE AUDITOR'S OFFICE L141130 02-2021 AUDIT FEES 02-2021 Audit Fees 001.000.39.514.20.41.50 210.1( Total : 210.1( 246545 3/11/2021 071585 STERICYCLE INC 3005464957 INV 3005464957 - CUST 6076358 - E MONTHLY SERVICE CHARGE 001.000.41.521.80.41.00 10.3E Total: 10.3E 246546 3/11/2021 065578 SYSTEMS INTERFACE INC 25902 SEWER - LIFT STATION #1 & #7 SEWER - LIFT STATION #1 & #7 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 441.5( Total: 441.5( 246547 3/11/2021 071666 TETRATECH INC 51640389 E9FA.SERVICES THRU 8/28/20 E9FA.Services thru 8/28/20 422.000.72.531.90.41.20 47,502.6E Total : 47,502.6E 246548 3/11/2021 066056 THE SEATTLE TIMES 4825-1 DIGITAL TOURISM PROMOTION AD Facebook_Visit Edmonds Tourism 120.000.31.575.42.41.40 1,000.0( Total: 1,000.0( 246549 3/11/2021 073255 TOTAL FILTRATION SERVICES, INC PSV2123196 FAC MAINT - CITYWIDE FILTER FAC MAINT - CITYWIDE FILTER 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1,492.5 , 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 155.2< Tota I : 1,647.8( 246550 3/11/2021 077070 UNITED RECYCLING & CONTAINER 125865 STORM - DUMP FEES STORM - DUMP FEES 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 450.0( Page: 28 Packet Pg. 74 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 29 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246550 3/11/2021 077070 077070 UNITED RECYCLING & CONTAINER (Continued) Total : 450.0( m 246551 3/11/2021 071549 UNIVAR SOLUTIONS USA INC 48971361 WWTP: 2/22/21 CAUSTIC SODA E 2/22/21 CAUSTIC SODA sa 423.000.76.535.80.31.52 a 5,480.8z m 10.4% Sales Tax 3 423.000.76.535.80.31.52 570.0' Total: 6,050.8E 246552 3/11/2021 044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR 1010141 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI 1k UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI m t 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 100.4, u UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 100.4, U UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI o 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 103.5( @ 1020143 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI > 0 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI a 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 85.5 1 Q UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 85.5, N UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 88.1E A Total: 563M N E 246553 3/11/2021 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 9873936981 C/A571242650-0001 M iPhone/iPad Cell Service Bldg U 001.000.62.524.20.42.00 639.9, iPhone/iPad Cell Service City Clerk °' E 001.000.25.514.30.42.00 36.1E u iPhone/iPad Cell Service Comm Svc r 001.000.61.557.20.42.00 199.3< Q iPhone/iPad Cell Service Council 001.000.11.511.60.42.00 772.8E iPhone/iPad Cell Service Court 001.000.23.512.50.42.00 307.0, Page: 29 Packet Pg. 75 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 246553 3/11/2021 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 30 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) r iPhone/iPad Cell Service Dev Svcs c E 001.000.62.524.10.42.00 321.1E iPhone/iPad Cell Service Engineering a 001.000.67.518.21.42.00 1,474.5E L iPhone/iPad Cell Service Facilities 3 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 227.0E c iPhone/iPad Cell Service Finance 001.000.31.514.23.42.00 72.3( Y iPhone/iPad Cell Service HR 001.000.22.518.10.42.00 150.8z U iPhone/iPad Cell Service IS E 512.000.31.518.88.42.00 372.9( 2 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Mayor ,- 001.000.21.513.10.42.00 100.5E o iPhone/iPad Cell Service Park Admin > 001.000.64.571.21.42.00 50.2E iPhone/iPad Cell Service Parks Maint a 001.000.64.576.80.42.00 321.1E Q iPhone/iPad Cell Service Parks Rec 001.000.64.571.22.42.00 N 140.5 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PD 001.000.41.521.10.42.00 M 3,117.3' c Air cards PD N E 001.000.41.521.10.42.00 1,160.2E iPhone/iPad Cell Service Planning 001.000.62.558.60.42.00 120.0E iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin °' t 001.000.65.518.20.42.00 26.6E iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 r 7.6, Q iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 26.6E iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 7.6, Page: 30 Packet Pg. 76 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 246553 3/11/2021 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 31 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) r iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin c E, 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 7.6( iPhone/iPad Cell Service Street f° a 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 137.9 � L iPhone/iPad Cell Service Fleet 3 511.000.77.548.68.42.00 50.2E iPhone/iPad Cell Service Water/SeWe 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 95.4< Y iPhone/iPad Cell Service Water/Sewe 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 95.4, U iPhone/iPad Cell Service Sewer E 423.000.75.535.80.35.00 397.4' E iPhone/iPad Cell Service Sewer - 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 345.9E o iPhone/iPad Cell Service Water > 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 436.5< o iPhone/iPad Cell Service Storm a 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 156.1 E Q iPhone/iPad Cell Service Street/Storn 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 N 257.7E iPhone/iPad Cell Service Street/Storn 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 M 257.7 , c iPhone/iPad Cell Service WWTP E 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 660.3E 'M iPhone/iPad Cell Service Parks Disco 001.000.64.571.23.42.00 40.0' 9874069094 C/A 772540262-00001 m t Cradlepoint 1 - Court/IT 512.000.31.518.88.42.00 100.0" Trimble 2 - Engineering Storm r Q 421.000.74.534.80.49.20 3.3" Trimble 2 - Engineering Storm 422.000.72.531.90.49.20 3.3' Trimble 2 - Engineering Storm Page: 31 Packet Pg. 77 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 246553 3/11/2021 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 246554 246555 246556 Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) % Iim*j 3/11/2021 073832 WA ST DEPT OF ENTERPRISE SVCS 9512135 3/11/2021 065035 WASHINGTON STATE PATROL 3/11/2021 075635 WCP SOLUTIONS 121004747 PO # Description/Account 423.000.75.535.80.49.20 Trimble 1 - Storm 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 Lake Ballinger monitor 422.000.72.531.90.49.20 Wonderwear Modem Water/Sewer Te 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 Wonderwear Modem Water/Sewer Te 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 C/A 442201730-00001 iPad Cell Service Mayor's Office 001.000.21.513.10.42.00 Dayton St Stormwater Pump Station 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 Total WWTP: FEB 2021 C511 PROJECT N FEB 2021 C511 PROJECT MGMT FE 423.100.76.594.39.41.00 Total 121004747 - EDMONDS PD FEB 2021 BACKGROUNDS 001.000.41.521.11.41.00 12070175CR ORDER ENTRY ERROR ORDER ENTRY ERROR 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 12157668 PUBLIC WORKS - SUPPLIES PUBLIC WORKS - SUPPLIES 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax Total 7.2.a Page: 32 Amoun c 3.4( 10.0, a 32.2( .3 c 17.01 17.0' y t U E 35.1, n U 4" 39.2( O 12,852.1 S > 0 L a a Q 49,496.0( 49,496.0( N M O 68.5( E 68.5( fd U aD E -35.2( u m r -3.6( Q •: . Page: 32 Packet Pg. 78 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 33 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 246556 3/11/2021 075635 WCP SOLUTIONS (Continued) 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.2,' Tota I : 69.95 246557 3/11/2021 064800 WEHOP 643893 FLOWER PROGRAM: PLANTS FLOWER PROGRAM: PLANTS 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 516.5( 10.4% Sales Tax 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 53.7, 643894 FLOWER PROGRAM: PLANTS FLOWER PROGRAM: PLANTS 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 360.6� 10.4% Sales Tax 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 37.5" Tota I : 968.4, 246558 3/11/2021 074609 WEST COAST ARMORY NORTH 2168599 INV 2168599 - EDMONDS PD JAN & FEB 2021 RANGE FEES 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 179.3( 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 18.7( Tota I : 198.0( 246559 3/11/2021 069691 WESTERN SYSTEMS 0000046209 TRAFFIC - SUPPLIES/ BATTERY TRAFFIC - SUPPLIES/ BATTERY 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 993.4E Freight 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 222.0( 10.4% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 126.4- Tota I : 1,341.85 246560 3/11/2021 065869 WSNLA 300002425 EDHOUSE CPH CERTIFICATION FE EDHOUSE CPH CERTIFICATION FE 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 60.0( Tota I : 60.0( Page: 33 Packet Pg. 79 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 246561 3/11/2021 011900 ZIPLY FIBER Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 34 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 206-188-0247 TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY A, r TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY A, c E, 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 271.7' TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY A, f° a 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 271.7( L 253-003-6887 LIFT STATION #6 VG SPECIAL ACCI 3 LIFT STATION #6 VG SPECIAL ACCI 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 42.1E 253-007-4989 SEAVIEW RESERVOIR TELEMETR) Y SEAVIEW RESERVOIR TELEMETR) U 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 31.1 r- 253-012-9166 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES E TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES M 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 162.7' u TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES O 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 302.1, > 253-014-8062 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE o L TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE a 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 19.8 , Q TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 36.9( 253-017-4360 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE M 0 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 47.0z TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE E E 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 87.3E 425-712-8347 CIVIC CENTER ELEVATOR PHONE +% CIVIC CENTER ELEVATOR PHONE (D 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 74.8' E 425-774-1031 LIFT STATION #8 VG SPECIAL ACC[ m LIFT STATION #8 TWO VOICE GRA[ Q 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 47.5( 425-776-1281 SNO-ISLE LIBRARY ELEVATOR PH( SNO-ISLE LIBRARY ELEVATOR PH( 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 60.0E 425-776-5316 425-776-5316 PARKS MAINT FAX LII Page: 34 Packet Pg. 80 vchlist 03/11 /2021 11:47:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 246561 3/11/2021 011900 ZIPLY FIBER 246562 3/11/2021 073079 ZONES LLC 91 Vouchers for bank code : usbank 91 Vouchers in this report Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.a Page: 35 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) r 425-776-5316 PARKS MAINT FAX LII c 001.000.64.576.80.42.00 114.3z >, Total: 1,569.4: a m K16860840101 K16860840101 - ACCT 58931122 - E 3 20 CASES - SECTOR PAPER 001.000.41.521.11.31.00 1,099.6( 10.4% Sales Tax Y 001.000.41.521.11.31.00 114.3E u Total : 1,213.9E u Bank total : 347,865.3' •� U Total vouchers : 347,865.3' o �a 0 L Q Q Page: 35 Packet Pg. 81 r N M O N E M V C d E t V f0 r Q 7.2.b vchlist 03/11 /2021 12:13:20PM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 3112021 3/11/2021 062693 US BANK Voucher List City of Edmonds Page Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 3915 SHOPE US BANK d Association of WA Cities- E 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 100.0( Click2Mail Dev Svcs Mailings- m 001.000.62.524.10.41.00 4,500.0( 3 4697 CANVA Canva subscription 001.000.21.513.10.49.00 12.9E N 4929 DEV SVCS US BANK Q Click2Mail t 001.000.62.558.60.41.40 310.9< U Seattle Times 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 50.5E U Amazon- o 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 70.4E R Zoom- 0 0 001.000.62.558.60.49.00 L 88.3, 0- Event Public Records - a 001.000.62.524.20.49.00 280.0( .� Zoom-Dev Svcs- N 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 220.6� r Adobe Creative Cloud- c 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 117.0( Amazon- 3 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 14.0z }; Amazon- a� 001.000.62.524.10.35.00 88.3E E MailChimp- U 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 23.1, Click2Mail a 001.000.62.524.10.41.00 3,400.0( 8017 ENG. CREDIT CARD FEBRUARY 20 E20CE.Public Meeting Notice Mailing 112.000.68.595.33.41.00 576.8' Page: 1 Packet Pg. 82 vchlist 03/11 /2021 12:13:20PM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 3112021 3/11/2021 062693 US BANK 1 Vouchers for bank code : usbank 1 Vouchers in this report Voucher List City of Edmonds 7.2.b Page: 2 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) -� Lynch.Close Out PW Contract MRSC 001.000.67.518.21.49.00 35.0( E Schroder.CESCL Re-Cert Training 001.000.67.518.21.49.00 150.0( Total: 10,038.15 •3 Bank total : 10,038.1< R Total vouchers : 10,038.1 S m t U E M U 4- 0 �a 0 L Q Q El N T M 0 L 3 c a� E U a Page: 2 Packet Pg. 83 7.2.c PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Project Title Number Number STM 174th St. & 71st Ave Storm Improvements c521 EBFB STM 175th St. SW Slope Stabilization c560 E21 FB STM 2018 Lorian Woods Study s018 EBFA SW R 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project c516 EBGA STM 2019 Storm Maintenance Project c525 EBFC WTR 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement c523 EBJA STIR 2019 Traffic Calming i038 E9AA STIR 2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades i045 E9AD UTILITIES 2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update s020 EBJB WTR 2019 Waterline Overlay i043 E9CB WTR 2019 Waterline Replacement c498 E7JA STIR 2020 Guardrail Installations i046 EOAA STIR 2020 Overlay Program i042 EOCA STIR 2020 Pedestrian Safety Program i049 EODB STIR 2020 Pedestrian Task Force s024 EODA STIR 2020 Traffic Calming i048 EOAC STIR 2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades i047 EOAB STIR 2020 Waterline Overlay i053 EOCC STIR 2021 Guardrail Installations i057 E21AB STIR 2021 Overlay Program i051 E21CA STIR 2021 Traffic Calming i056 E21AA STIR 220th Adaptive i028 EBAB STIR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STIR 238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps i037 EBDC STIR 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) c423 E3DB STIR 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) c485 E6DA STIR 76th Ave Overlay (196th St. to OVD) i052 E20CB STIR 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements i029 EBCA STIR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1 CA STIR 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th i031 EBCC STIR 89th PI W Retaining Wall i025 E7CD STIR ADA Curb Ramps i033 EBDB STIR Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing i040 E9DA STIR Audible Pedestrian Signals i024 E7AB STM Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design s022 E91FA STIR Bikelink Project c474 ESDA STIR Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project i050 EODC SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II c488 E6GB STIR Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements i026 E7DC STIR Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion i015 E6AB PRK Civic Center Playfield (Construction) c551 EOMA PRK Civic Center Playfield (Design) c536 EOMA c m E M L 3 c M to Y V t c� E v w O O CL 0M Revised 3/10/2021 Packet Pg. 84 7.2.c PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Project Title Number Number WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) c482 ESJB STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E4FE FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB STR Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector c478 ESDB WTR Elm St. Waterline Replacement c561 E21JB STR Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave to 9th Ave i058 E21 DA WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating c473 ESKA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 EBMA STR Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization s014 E6AA STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study sol 1 ESGB SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC STR Minor Sidewalk Program i017 E6DD STM NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) m013 E7FG GF Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan Update s025 EONA STM OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization m105 E7FA STM Perrinville Creek Flow Reduction Improvements c552 E20FC WTR Phase 11 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project c549 EOJA WTR Phase 12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project c558 E21JA STM Phase 2 Annual Storm Utility Replacement Project c547 EOFB SWR Phase 8 Annual Sewer Replacement Project c548 EOGA SWR Phase 9 Annual Sewer Replacement Project c559 E21 GA FAC PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South c502 E9MA STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 ESFD STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility Phase 2 c546 EOFA WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA STR SR Revitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Signal) i055 E20CE UTILITIES Standard Details Updates solo ESNA STM Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW c495 E7FB STM Stormwater Comp Plan Update s017 E6FD STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 ElDA STR Trackside Warning System c470 ESAA STR Walnut St. Walkway (3rd-4th) i044 E9DC PRK Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction) c544 E7MA PRK Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design) c496 E7MA PRK Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design) m103 E7MA STM Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 ESHA WTR Yost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment s026 EOJB PRK Yost Park Infiltration Facility c556 E21 FA c m E M L 3 c M to Y V N t v E v 4- 0 O CL om Revised 3/10/2021 Packet Pg. 85 7.2.c PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Project Title EOAA i046 2020 Guardrail Installations STIR EOAB i047 2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades i048 2020 Traffic Calming STIR EOCA i042 2020 Overlay Program i053 2020 Waterline Overlay STIR EODA s024 2020 Pedestrian Task Force i049 2020 Pedestrian Safet STIR EODC i050 Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project Seaview Park Infiltration Facility Phase 2 STM EOFB c547 Phase 2 Annual Storm Utility Replacement Project c548 Phase nnual Sewer Replacement Project WTR EOJA c549 Phase 11 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project s026 Yost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment PRK EOMA c551 Civic Center Playfield (Construction) Civic Center Playfield (Design GF EONA s025 Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements STIR E1DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements i052 76th Ave Overlay (196th St. to OVD) STIR E20CE i055 SR Revitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Signal) Perrinville Creek Flow Reduction Improvements STIR E21AA i056 2021 Traffic Calming 2021 Guardrail Installations STIR E21 CA i051 2021 Overlay Program i058 Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave to 9th Ave PRK E21 FA c556 Yost Park Infiltration Facility 175th St. SW Slop SWR E21 GA c559 Phase 9 Annual Sewer Replacement Project c558 Phase 12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project WTR E21JB c561 Elm St. Waterline Replacement c423 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) STM E4FC c435 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration allinger Associated Projects STM E41FE c455 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study WWTP E4HA c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab STIR ESAA c470 Trackside Warning System STIR ESDB c478 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector Seaview Park Infiltration Facility SWR ESGB s011 Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study Revised 3/10/2021 Packet Pg. 86 7.2.c PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number E5HA � c481 WTR E5J13 c482 UTILITIES E5NA solo STR E6AB i015 STR E6DD i017 Project Title WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating Standard Details Updates Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) Minor Sidewalk Program Stormwater Comp Plan Updatqm SWR E6GB c488 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II Audible Pedestrian Signals STR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i025 89th PI W Retaining Wall STR E7DC i026 Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization STM E7FB c495 Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW m013 NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) WTR E7JA c498 2019 Waterline Replacement c544 Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction) PRK E7MA c496 Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design) aterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design) STR E8AB i028 220th Adaptive i029 76th Ave W & 220th St. SVIotersection Improvements STR E8CC i031 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th 8DB i033 ADA Curb Ramps STR E8DC i037 238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps 8FA s018 2018 Lorian Woods Study STM E8FB c521 174th St. & 71stAve Storm Impro c525 2019 Storm Maintenance Project W SWR E8GA c516 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project c523 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement UTILITIES E8J13 s020 2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor STR E9AA i038 2019 Traffic Calming i045 2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades WTR E9CB 1043 2019 Waterline Overlay Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing STR E9DC i044 Walnut St. Walkway (3rd-4th) s022 Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design FAC E9MA c502 PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South a Revised 3/10/2021 Packet Pg. 87 7.2.c PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Project Title PM EBMA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor STIR E1 DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements STIR E1CA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements STIR E3DB c423 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) STM E4FC c435 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration STM E4FD c436 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects E FAC E4MB c443 Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab Q WWTP E4HA c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring i STM E41FE c455 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station 3 SWR E4GC c461 Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study M STIR ESAA c470 Trackside Warning System Y v WTR ESKA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating t STIR ESDA c474 Bikelink Project E STIR ESDB c478 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector 2 v STM ESFD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility o WWTP ESHA c481 WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications WTR ESJB c482 Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) Q STIR E6DA c485 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) Q- Q SWR E6GB c488 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II r STM E7FB c495 Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW N PRK E7MA c496 Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design) A 0 WTR E7JA c498 2019 Waterline Replacement L FAC E9MA c502 PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South SWR EBGA c516 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project Z STM EBFB c521 174th St. & 71 st Ave Storm Improvements o WTR EBJA c523 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement m STM EBFC c525 2019 Storm Maintenance Project rn PRK EOMA c536 Civic Center Playfield (Design) c PRK E7MA c544 Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction) STM EOFA c546 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility Phase 2 STM EOFB c547 Phase 2 Annual Storm Utility Replacement Project LL SWR EOGA c548 Phase 8 Annual Sewer Replacement Project r E WTR EOJA c549 Phase 11 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project PRK EOMA c551 Civic Center Playfield (Construction) Q STM E20FC c552 Perrinville Creek Flow Reduction Improvements PRK E21 FA c556 Yost Park Infiltration Facility WTR E21JA c558 Phase 12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project SWR E21 GA c559 Phase 9 Annual Sewer Replacement Project STM E21 FB c560 175th St. SW Slope Stabilization WTR E21JB c561 Elm St. Waterline Replacement STIR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements STIR E6AB i015 Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion Revised 3/10/2021 Packet Pg. 88 7.2.c PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Project Title STR E6DD i017 Minor Sidewalk Program STR E7AB i024 Audible Pedestrian Signals STR E7CD i025 89th PI W Retaining Wall STR E7DC i026 Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements STR EBAB i028 220th Adaptive STR EBCA i029 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements STR EBCC i031 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th STR EBDB i033 ADA Curb Ramps STR EBDC i037 238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps STR E9AA i038 2019 Traffic Calming STR E9DA i040 Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing STR EOCA i042 2020 Overlay Program WTR E9CB i043 2019 Waterline Overlay STR E9DC i044 Walnut St. Walkway (3rd-4th) STR E9AD i045 2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades STR EOAA i046 2020 Guardrail Installations STR EOAB i047 2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades STR EOAC i048 2020 Traffic Calming STR EODB i049 2020 Pedestrian Safety Program STR EODC i050 Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project STR E21CA i051 2021 Overlay Program STR E20CB i052 76th Ave Overlay (196th St. to OVD) STR EOCC i053 2020 Waterline Overlay STR E20CE i055 SR Revitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Signal) STR E21AA i056 2021 Traffic Calming STR E21AB i057 2021 Guardrail Installations STR E21 DA i058 Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave to 9th Ave STM E7FG m013 NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) PRK E7MA m103 Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design) STM E7FA m105 OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization UTILITIES ESNA solo Standard Details Updates SWR ESGB s0l l Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study STR E6AA s014 Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization STM E6FD s017 Stormwater Comp Plan Update STM EBFA s018 2018 Lorian Woods Study UTILITIES EBJB s020 2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update STM E9FA s022 Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design STR EODA s024 2020 Pedestrian Task Force GF EONA s025 Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan Update WTR EOJB s026 Yost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment Revised 3/10/2021 Packet Pg. 89 7.2.c PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB FAC PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South c502 E9MA GF Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan Update s025 EONA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 EBMA PRK Civic Center Playfield (Construction) c551 EOMA PRK Civic Center Playfield (Design) c536 EOMA E PRK Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction) c544 E7MA Q PRK Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design) c496 E7MA i PRK Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design) m103 E7MA 3 PRK Yost Park Infiltration Facility c556 E21FA STM 174th St. & 71 st Ave Storm Improvements c521 EBFB Y v STM 175th St. SW Slope Stabilization c560 E21 FB v STM 2018 Lorian Woods Study s018 EBFA E STM 2019 Storm Maintenance Project c525 EBFC 2 U STM Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design s022 E9FA - STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E4FE STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD CL STM NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) m013 E7FG Q' Q STM OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization m105 E7FA r N STM Perrinville Creek Flow Reduction Improvements c552 E20FC STM Phase 2 Annual Storm Utility Replacement Project c547 EOFB c STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 ESFD L a� STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility Phase 2 c546 EOFA STM Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW c495 E7FB M Z STM Stormwater Comp Plan Update s017 E6FD o STM Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC m STIR 2019 Traffic Calming i038 E9AA 2, STIR 2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades i045 E9AD STIR 2020 Guardrail Installations i046 EOAA a STIR 2020 Overlay Program i042 EOCA u_ STIR 2020 Pedestrian Safety Program i049 EODB c STIR 2020 Pedestrian Task Force s024 EODA 0) E STIR 2020 Traffic Calming i048 EOAC STIR 2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades i047 EOAB Q STIR 2021 Guardrail Installations i057 E21AB STIR 2021 Overlay Program i051 E21CA STIR 2021 Traffic Calming i056 E21AA STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STIR 238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps i037 EBDC STIR 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) c423 E3DB STIR 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) c485 E6DA STIR 76th Ave Overlay (196th St. to OVD) i052 E20CB Revised 3/10/2021 Packet Pg. 90 7.2.c PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number STR 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements i029 EBCA STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA STR 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th i031 EBCC STR 89th PI W Retaining Wall i025 E7CD STR ADA Curb Ramps i033 EBDB STR Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing iO4O E9DA STR Audible Pedestrian Signals i024 E7AB STR Bikelink Project c474 ESDA STR Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project i050 EODC STR Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements i026 E7DC STR Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion i015 E6AB STR Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector c478 ESDB STR Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave to 9th Ave i058 E21 DA STR Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization s014 E6AA STR Minor Sidewalk Program i017 E6DD STR SR Revitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Signal) i055 E20CE STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 ElDA STR Trackside Warning System c470 ESAA STR Walnut St. Walkway (3rd-4th) i044 E9DC STR 2020 Waterline Overlay i053 EOCC STR 220th Adaptive i028 EBAB SWR 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project c516 EBGA SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II c488 E6GB SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study s0l l ESGB SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC SWR Phase 8 Annual Sewer Replacement Project c548 EOGA SWR Phase 9 Annual Sewer Replacement Project c559 E21GA UTILITIES 2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update s020 EBJB UTILITIES Standard Details Updates solo ESNA WTR 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement c523 EBJA WTR 2019 Waterline Overlay i043 E9CB WTR 2019 Waterline Replacement c498 E7JA WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) c482 ESJB WTR Elm St. Waterline Replacement c561 E21JB WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating c473 ESKA WTR Phase 11 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project c549 EOJA WTR Phase 12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project c558 E21JA WTR Yost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment s026 EOJB WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 ESHA c m E M O L 3 c M rn Y V N t c� E v 4- 0 O CL O. Revised 3/10/2021 Packet Pg. 91 7.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/16/2021 Garden and Summer Market Event Contract Staff Lead: Shannon Burley Department: Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Preparer: Shannon Burley Background/History The Council authorizes Event Agreements on behalf the City of Edmonds. In 2020 all but one contracted special event ("The Market") was cancelled due to COVID. The Market was deemed not only allowable but was considered essential as a food provider. At the direction of the Snohomish County Health Department the Market instituted several safety measures and was able to deliver much needed support to local farmers and fresh food to the community. If guidelines are lifted such that larger outdoor gatherings are allowable there may be future special event contracts brought forth. City Staff presented this Event Agreement for the Garden and Summer Market provided by the Historical Society in the Parks and Public Works Council Committee Meeting on March 9, 2021 and it was recommended for the Consent Agenda. Staff Recommendation Staff recommendation is the City Council support the Event Agreement between the City of Edmonds and Edmonds -South Snohomish County Historical Society to provide the 2021 Garden and Farmers Market program. Approval on consent would authorize the Mayor to sign the contract. Narrative The Event Agreement is very similar to the agreement in previous years. The Historical Society is required to meet the health and safety guidelines set forth by the Snohomish County Health Department. The Garden Market (smaller market) will run on Saturdays from May 1 -June 12 and the expanded Summer Market will run on Saturdays from June 19 - October 9, 2021. The contract has been reviewed and approved by our internal team (police, fire, public works, parks, planning, economic development), the City Attorney and the Parks and Public Works Council Committee. Attachments: Attachment 1_2021 Market Contract Packet Pg. 92 7.3.a EVENT AGREEMENT CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON AND EDMONDS-SOUTH SNOHOMISH COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY Event Dates — May 1-October 9, 2021 The following is an agreement ("Agreement") between the CITY OF EDMONDS (hereinafter referred to as the "City"), and the EDMONDS-SOUTH SNOHOMISH COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY (hereinafter referred to as the "Historical Society") (collectively, the "Parties"). WHEREAS, the Edmonds -South Snohomish County Historical Society has operated in the past a spring market and a summer market, providing a marketplace for Edmonds residents to display their wares, which uniquely promotes artists and other small business persons and their products; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that in addition to providing an opportunity for economic development and a recreational resource to the citizens of Edmonds, these events promote tourism to the community and could provide an initial springboard for the development of a small business; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the considerations the City provides are more than adequately recompensed by the promises of the Historical Society and the public benefit to be derived from this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the markets provide an important opportunity for local farmers to provide fresh food to the community, which is essential during the COVID-19 pandemic; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, covenants, conditions and performances set forth below, the Parties hereto agree as follows: Responsibilities of the City. 1.1 Garden Market (May 1 through June 12): The City will provide use of the right of way on Bell Street between 5th and 61h Avenues as outlined in Attachment A for farmer/producer- based vendors each Saturday. 1.2 Summer Market (June 19 through October 9): The City will provide use of the right of way on Bell Street between 5th and 6th Avenues and on 5th Avenue between Bell and Main Streets as outlined in Attachment B for farmer/producer-based vendors each Saturday. 1.3 The City will allow vendor parking on the south, east and west sides of the police parking lot each Saturday for the Garden Market and Summer Market. 1.4 The City will allow food truck parking on 51h Avenue N, just north of the Public Safety Complex south parking lot entrance as outlined in Attachment B during the Summer Market. Trucks must be placed in a way that allows for visibility while exiting the parking lot. The reserved space for food truck parking outside of the Bell and 5th street closures will not exceed 40 feet. Food trucks must distribute their goods on the sidewalk side, not the street side, of the truck. Packet Pg. 93 7.3.a 1.5 All use and configuration of tents and other temporary facilities used in the Garden Market and Summer Market will be inspected and reviewed prior to the event by the Edmonds Fire Marshal or designated representative, in accordance with the provisions of the Open -Air Market Ordinance. Tarps, tents, canopies and covers will be tested and labeled for fire resistance. Also, all participants will be required to adhere to all provisions of State and local law to ensure that no lasting or permanent damage is done to any public facility or property. The Fire Marshal or the City, in accordance with its lawful authority under statute and ordinance, may use their discretion to cancel this event or to prohibit the attendance of the general public in certain areas when doing so would be a violation of state law or local ordinance. 1.6 The City will install Summer Market banners as provided by Historical Society at approved sites. Historical Society will obtain a Street Banner Permit and pay the required fee. 1.7 The City will place six barricades behind the Museum prior to May 1 for the duration of the Garden Market and Summer Market. 1.8 The City will place rope and signage around the Holiday Tree requesting people not to enter the landscaped area. 1.9 The City will install appropriate "No Parking Saturdays" signage on Bell Street by April 27, 2021 and on 5th Avenue North by June 15, 2021. 1.10 The City will supply a list of acceptable compostable and recyclable food ware items and of suppliers for the compostable items to strongly encourage their use. The City will provide signage for the on -site collection containers, and any additional containers, if needed. 1.11 The City will supply a key to allow the Historical Society to unlock the public restrooms adjacent to the market at 6:OOam. A City employee will perform routine maintenance in the restrooms mid -day. The City will maintain responsibility for locking the restrooms in the evening. City will supply a contact number for issues related to the restroom. 2. Responsibilities of the Historical Society. 2.1 Garden Market (May 1 through June 12) and Summer Market (June 19 through October 9) 2.2 Set up hours begin at 6:OOam on Saturdays on 5t" Avenue and 7:OOam on Saturdays on Bell Street. 2.3 During the Garden Market and Summer Market, the sections of the Police parking lot not used by the Market will be reserved for police parking only. Parking restrictions will be posted and vendor and customer parking will not be allowed in this area. Violators may be towed at their own expense. 2.4 For the Garden Market and Summer Market, parking restrictions will be posted indicating violators will be towed. The Police Department will attempt to notify owners. If not located by 6:30am, the police will proceed to have violating vehicles towed. Packet Pg. 94 7.3.a 2.5 For the Garden Market, street barricades are in place at 7:00am and Summer Market street barricades are in place at 6:30am on Saturday and removed by 5:00pm for both. The Historical Society will ensure that Sound Disposal will have adequate access to the alley next to the Museum for Saturday morning pickup. Sound Disposal will enter 5th Avenue from Main Street and access the alley by 8:00am at the latest. 2.6 The Historical Society will provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing commercial general liability insurance written on an occurrence basis with limits no less than $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence and $5,000,000 aggregate for personal injury, bodily injury and property damage. The City will be named as an additional insured on the Commercial General Liability insurance policy and a copy of the endorsement naming the City as additional insured will be attached to the Certificate of Insurance. The insurance policy will contain a clause stating that coverage will apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respects to the limits of the insurer's liability. The insurance policy will contain, or be endorsed to provide, that the Historical Society's insurance coverage will be primary insurance. Any insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by the City will be in excess of the Historical Society's insurance and will not contribute to it. The Historical Society will provide a certificate of insurance evidencing the required insurance before using the property described herein. Insurance will be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A: VII. 2.7 The Historical Society agrees that the Garden Market and Summer Market are public events. The Historical Society further agrees that areas constituting the City -Provided Site that are covered under this Agreement, including but not limited to public right of way, streets, sidewalks, parks, parking lots, gardens, meeting halls and squares, are traditional public forums. As a result, the Historical Society will permit citizens attending events open to the general public at a City -Provided Site during the Market to exercise therein their protected constitutional right to free speech without interference. 2.8 Chapter 6.80 of the Edmonds City Code ("Plastic Bag Reduction") restricts the use of single -use plastic checkout bags. The restrictions do not apply to plastic bags used to carry out cooked food or provided solely for produce, bulk food or meat. The Historical Society will strongly encourage its vendors to comply with the purposes of the ordinance by utilizing paper bags or encouraging the use of reusable totes whenever practicable. 2.9 Pursuant to the provisions of RCW 70.93.093, concerning event recycling, the Historical Society will place clearly marked recycling containers throughout the Garden Market and Summer Market event areas for the collection of aluminum cans, glass and plastic bottles and other recyclable materials from event participants. The Historical Society will be responsible for providing recycling, compost, and garbage collection and removal services (see also Section 2.10, below). 2.10 Pursuant to Chapters 6.90 and 6.95 ECC, which prohibit the use of noncompostable food service containers and single -use plastic utensils (such as straws, stirrers and cutlery) at public events requiring a contract with the City, food vendors at the Garden Market and Summer Market events will provide only compostable food service containers and utensils, as defined in Chapters 6.90 and 6.95 ECC, to event participants. The Historical Society will provide for the on -site collection of compostable and recyclable materials and garbage from Packet Pg. 95 7.3.a event participants, using designated color -coded collection containers. The Historical Society will ensure that on -site collection containers are serviced properly and continually during the Garden Market and Summer Market events. The Historical Society representative will meet with the City's Recycling Coordinator or representative prior to April 29, 2021, in order to be educated on the 3-container system to maximize diversion of compostable and recyclable materials from the garbage. 2.11 The Historical Society will defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits, including attorney fees, arising from or in connection with the Historical Society's performance, or nonperformance, of this Agreement, except to the extent that claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits are caused by the sole negligence of the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. This promise to indemnify and hold harmless will include a waiver by the Historical Society of the immunity provided under Title 51 RCW, but only to the extent necessary to fully effectuate this promise. This provision will survive the termination and/or expiration of this Agreement. 2.12 Neither the Historical Society nor any of its officers, agents, or employees will discriminate in the provision of services under this Agreement against any individual, partnership, or corporation based upon race, religion, sex, creed, place of origin, or any other form of discrimination prohibited by federal, state or local law. 2.13 In addition, the Parties acknowledge that pursuant to Chapter 70.160 RCW (hereinafter the "smoking ban"), smoking is prohibited in indoor areas, within 25 feet of vents or entrances and in outdoor areas where public employees of the City, and employees of any vendor at the Garden Market or Summer Market events or of the contracting organization are required to be. This general description of the provisions of the statute is included for the purpose of reference and is not intended to expand or contract the obligations created by the smoking ban. The Historical Society warrants that it will comply with the smoking ban and will utilize the services and advice of the Snohomish County Health District in assuring compliance during the events described in this Agreement. 2.14 Historical Society agrees to the following Market days: Garden Market: Saturdays, May 1 through June 12, 2021 Summer Market: Saturdays, June 19 through October 9, 2021 Historical Society agrees to the following Market hours of operation: Set up: 6:OOam - 9:OOam (6:OOam start on 5tn Avenue; 7:OOam start on Bell Street) Open: 9:OOam - 2:OOpm Takedown: 2:OOpm - 3:30pm 2.15 The City will have no responsibility or liability for the provision of security services, nor will it be liable for any loss or damage incurred by the Historical Society or the participants in these events. 2.16 Historical Society will provide fire watch for all times in and around the booths and displays open to the general public as part of these events. Packet Pg. 96 7.3.a 2.17 Historical Society will provide a portable sani-can at 537 Bell Street 2.18 Historical Society will commit to being good stewards of the Veterans Plaza, including but not limited to monitoring and removal of garbage from the two (2) garbage cans located in Veteran's Plaza two (2) times per event and monitoring and prompt cleanup of any and all spills. 2.19 Individual vendors are responsible for packing out all of their own garbage. Historical Society may deposit up to sixteen (16) thirty-three (33) gallon bags of garbage generated in their area in the dumpster located in the Public Safety Center's trash enclosure that abuts Fire Station 17. 2.20 Historical Society will arrange for and pay for a recycling container from Sound Disposal. The container will be stored and serviced in the Public Safety Center's trash enclosure that abuts Fire Station 17. 2.21 Upon the completion of the events, Historical Society will make adequate provisions for the cleanup and restoration of all sites rented or provided under terms of this Agreement, including but not limited to removal of any grease stains as a result of the events. 2.22 Historical Society will pay the City all permit fees, in accordance with provisions of open-air market, Ordinance #3015, for the above -mentioned facilities use and services at least ten (10) days prior to the events. 2.23 Colored flags or banners may not be placed in the existing holes in the public sidewalk designated for the American flag program. 2.24 No ground penetrations are allowed unless authorized first by the City electrician and City Parks Department. Any unauthorized ground penetrations may be subject to fine and/or damage cost recovery from the Historical Society. It is not allowed to fasten anything to the buildings, structures or trees, and doing so may result in damage cost recovery and/or fine. 3. Miscellaneous. 3.1 Entire Agreement, integration and amendment. This Agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding between the Parties relating to the rights and obligations created hereby, and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous negotiations, understandings, and agreements, written or oral, between the Parties. Any prior discussions or understandings are deemed merged with the provisions herein. This Agreement will not be amended, assigned or otherwise changed or transferred except in writing with the express written consent of the Parties hereto. Any action to interpret or enforce this Agreement will be brought before the Superior Court of Snohomish County, Washington, and the Parties agree that, as between them, all matters will be resolved in that venue. 3.2 Force majeure. The Parties will not be liable for failure to perform or delay in performance due to fire, flood, strike or other labor difficulty, act of God, act of any governmental authority, riot, embargo, fuel or energy shortage, car shortage, wrecks or delays in transportation, or due to any other cause beyond the Parties' reasonable control. In the event Packet Pg. 97 7.3.a of delay in performance due to any such cause, the date of delivery or time for completion will be extended by a period of time reasonably necessary to overcome the effect of such delay. 3.3 Relationship between the Parties. Nothing in this Agreement will be interpreted to or in fact create an agency or employment relationship between the Parties. No officer, official, agent, employee or representative of the Historical Society will be deemed to be the same of the City for any purpose. The Historical Society alone will be solely responsible for all acts of its officers, officials, agents, employees, representatives and subcontractors during the performance of this Agreement. 3.4 Compliance with Laws. The Historical Society in the performance of this Agreement shall comply with all applicable Federal, State and local laws and ordinances, including all public health and safety guidelines and requirements of the federal government, the State of Washington, and the City in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. The most recent information regarding the applicable state and federal guidelines and requirements relating to the COVID-19 pandemic can be found on the Washington State coronavirus response webpage at www.coronavirus.wa.gov and on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website at www.cdc.gov. The Historical Society shall consult this information regularly during the course of the events to ensure that the latest guidelines and requirements are promptly implemented. DATED this day of CITY OF EDMONDS: Mike Nelson, Mayor ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Scott Passey, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney 2021. EDMONDS-SOUTH SNOHOMISH COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY: By: Its: _ Date: Packet Pg. 98 7.3.a Attachment A. fl � ram+ 1 0 Co (D (D m ❑, ro o � Q � n � 0 0 0 (D a r ai 0 C rr T O G) a! 2 fD ai F fD rr Packet Pg. 99 7.3.a Attachment B. Z m LA I m (D rt wnaSnW Z W O 7 Coo rD m r Q 6 7 h r ill o N p C N O rr M (OD- r N 2 rD 7 L, V Q 0 T 3 3 O 06N fD v n � T v � z O - � 7 N rr 2 C ,fir fl N S N N M (Cp c(D c N h O M A C Q M D N r C AJ014 .and u�5 WON Packet Pg. 100 7.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/16/2021 Public Hospital District No. 2 Grant ILA #2 - LEAP Staff Lead: Angie Feser Department: Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Preparer: Shannon Burley Background/History In October 2020 the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department of the City of Edmonds began offering a new program through their Recreation Services division. The "Learning Enhancement and Activities Program" (LEAP) was developed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the Edmonds School Districts' remote learning model. The initial program was funded in part by paid tuition and the Federal Cares Act. The Federal Cares Act Funding expired a the end of 2020. In January and February of 2021 50% of the LEAP expenses were paid for with Public Hospital District No. 2 (Verdant) grant #1 (attachment #1) and 50% of the expenses were paid for by utilizing the Council Authorized Recreation Division Budget. Since inception the LEAP program has supported 29-31 kids per week and will have delivered 24,971 hours of instructional, social and recreational activity support by the end of March. Staff Recommendation Authorize the City to accept $36,000 in grant funding from the Public Hospital District No. 2 (Verdant) by approving the attached Interlocal Agreement (Attachment #2) on the Consent Agenda. Narrative Public Hospital District No. 2 (Verdant) has awarded the City of Edmonds a second grant to use for expenses directly related to providing social, emotional and educational support for low-income students in Edmonds through the LEAP program in the amount of $36,000. This funding will assist in lowering the expenses incurred by the Recreation Division for the remainder of the school year April - June 2021. The LEAP program currently serves 31 students, 19 are 3rd - 5th grade and will not be returning to in - person classes this year as announced by the Edmonds School District. The remaining 12 students are in 2nd grade and have the option to return to in -person learning for 2 days per week and rely on LEAP the remaining 3 days or continue in full remote learning utilizing LEAP all 5 days. Many of the students who participate in LEAP have individualized education plans and are thriving from the added support they receive at the Frances Anderson Center. At this time over 80% of the participants are experiencing hardship or qualify for free and reduced lunch and are attending LEAP on a scholarship. Beginning March 1, the Edmonds School District Foundation will be providing free breakfast and lunch to LEAP participants to include food provided for students to utilize on Saturday and Sundays. Packet Pg. 101 7.4 LEAP employs 6 hourly individuals; 4 working 40 hours per week and 2 working between 20 and 25 hours per week. This Verdant grant will cover 50% of the expenses for April, May and June. The remaining expenses will be paid for utilizing the Council Authorized Recreation Division Budget while continuing to seek out additional grant opportunities. Attachments: Attachment #1 Public Hospital district No 2 Snohomish County Interlocal Agreement to Provide COVID- 19 Response January 2021 Attachment #2 C-S415 City of Edmonds LEAP Program April May June 2021 FINAL Packet Pg. 102 DocuSign Envelope ID: 37633DBB-1456-4961-A953-03ED3900B1F7 7.4.a INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE COVID-19 RESPONSE: Social Emotional Educational Support for Low-income Students This Agreement is made between Public Hospital District No. 2, Snohomish County, Washington and City of Edmonds to provide a COVID-19 Response distance learning support program for social, emotional, and educational support for low-income students. 1. PARTIES 1.1 Public Hospital District No. 2, Snohomish County, Washington ("PHD2"), a public hospital district formed under Chapter 70.44 RCW; and 1.2 City of Edmonds ("The City"), a Washington municipal corporation. 2. PURPOSE AND PROGRAM 2.1 The purpose of this Agreement is to enable the City to provide a COVID 19 Response distance learning support program referred to as Learning Enhancement and Activity Program (LEAP) to provide social, emotional and educational support for low-income students through the Recreation Services Division of the Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Services Department ("the Program") for the benefit of PHD2 residents. 2.2 On March 23, 2020, Gov. Jay Inslee issued a "Stay Home — Stay Healthy" Order in an effort to minimize COVID-19 exposure. On May 31, 2020 the Stay Home — Stay Healthy order transitioned to a county -by -county phased re -opening plan entitled Safe Start — Stay Healthy. The Program is designed to provide social, emotional, and educational support to low-income students. 3. AUTHORITY 3.1 PHD2 is authorized under RCW 70.44.240 to "contract" with any "legal entity" to "provide any hospital or other health care facilities or other health care services to be used by individuals, districts, hospitals, or others, including providing health care maintenance services." RCW 70.44.007 defines "other health care services" to include "services that promote health, wellness, and prevention of illness and injury." 3.2 The City of Edmonds is a Washington municipal corporation. 4. TERM AND TERMINATION Agreement. C-S402 4.1 The Agreement will begin on the date of the second signature on this PAGE 1 OF 5 Packet Pg. 103 DocuSign Envelope ID: 37633DBB-1456-4961-A953-03ED3900B1F7 7.4.a 4.2 The period for providing the Program is scheduled to begin on January 1, 2021 and end on February 28, 2021. 4.3 This Agreement will expire when the final reporting by the City is accepted and approved by PHD2. 5. OBLIGATIONS OF PHD2 5.1 PHD2 will fund the Program through a single payment of thirty thousand dollars and no cents ($30,000) to be paid within fourteen (14) days of execution of this Agreement with the understanding that the City will fund the balance of the costs for the Program. 5.2 Templates for required reporting by the City will be provided to the City by PHD2. 6. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY 6.1 The City will coordinate the Program including staffing, supplies, and scholarships to low-income students to operate the Program at the Frances Anderson Center Monday through Friday, 7:00 am to 6:00 pm. Programming is inclusive of social, emotional and educational supports, is focused on high risk and/or low-income youth and families, and will serve an average of at least 25 students weekly. 6.2 The City will submit a report of activities carried out under the Program, including summaries of results, to PHD2 by March 15, 2021. At a minimum, the City will track and report to PHD2 the number of participants who enroll in the Program, the number of hours of distance learning support provided, and any other relevant tracking data collected and compiled by the City during the course and scope of the Program. 6.3 The City will comply with all local, state and federal laws including, if applicable, the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ("HIPAA"). 6.4 The City will use the funds provided by PHD2 only for the Program and will return any portion of the payments that are not used for the Program on or before delivery of the report due on March 15, 2021. 6.5 During the term of this Agreement, the City will give every consideration to suggestions by PHD2 for modifications to the Program to obtain more favorable health outcomes for the participants. 6.6 The City will give credit (logo or language) to PHD2 ("Verdant") in its publicity vehicles about the Program, including but not limited to press releases, annual reports, newsletters, websites, brochures and fliers. Credit should also be given in newspaper interviews about the Program. Electronic communications/websites should also include a link to PHD2's C-S402 PAGE 2 OF 5 Packet Pg. 104 DocuSign Envelope ID: 37633DBB-1456-4961-A953-03ED3900B1F7 7.4.a website. The use of PHD2's logo, when appropriate, is encouraged. PHD2 will provide black - and -white or color versions in digital format. 6.7 The City recognizes that PHD2 is a public agency subject to audit by the Washington State Auditor. The City will provide PHD2 with any accessible information that PHD2 is requested to provide to the Washington State Auditor or otherwise required to provide to the State of Washington or to the Federal Government or pursuant to the Washington Public Records Act. 6.8 If PHD2 determines a breach of this Agreement has occurred, that is, the City has failed to comply with any terms or conditions of this Agreement or has failed to provide in any manner the work or services agreed to herein, the PHD2 will notify the City in writing of the nature of the breach within fourteen (14) calendar days if the deliverables are not on track to be met as anticipated. The City will develop a corrective action plan within fourteen (14) calendar days of delivering notice of the nature of the breach and will specify the proposed completion date for bringing the Agreement into compliance. Determination of sufficiency of the corrective action plan shall be at the sole discretion of PHD2. In the event a corrective action plan is not submitted, or the plan is determined by PHD2 to be insufficient, PHD2 reserves the right to suspend or terminate this Agreement for performance or other reasons solely at the discretion of PHD2. 7. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 7.1 Relationship of the Parties. The relationship created between PHD2 and the City in this Agreement is strictly that of independent contractors. This Agreement creates no partnership or joint venture between the parties, nor may any officer or employee of one party be considered to be an employee or agent of the other. Further, this Agreement provides no rights to any third parties and may not be relied on by any other person or entity. 7.2 Applicable Law. This Agreement is entered into under the laws of the State of Washington. Any litigation arising from this Agreement must be filed in Snohomish County Superior Court. 7.3 Liability and insurance. The City will indemnify, defend and hold PHD2 harmless from any claims, lawsuits or other actions, and judgments arising in any way from the Program provided under this Agreement. The City will maintain a liability insurance policy of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence during the term of the Agreement and provide proof of coverage upon request of PHD2. 7.4 Entire Agreement, Amendments. This Agreement is complete and integrates all understandings between the parties. No amendment or other change to the Agreement will be binding on either party unless agreed to in writing and signed by each party. 7.5 Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction rules any part of this Agreement to be invalid, the remainder of the Agreement will still be in full force and effect. C-S402 PAGE 3 OF 5 Packet Pg. 105 DocuSign Envelope ID: 37633DBB-1456-4961-A953-03ED3900B1F7 7.4.a 7.6 Force Majeure. Neither party will be in default or liable for failure to perform its obligations under this Agreement if that failure is due to causes beyond its reasonable control, including but not limited to acts of God, acts of terrorism, fires, floods, windstorms earthquakes, labor disputes or governmental acts. 7.7 Notices and Reporting. The parties agree to accept electronic service of all notifications and reporting, except original service of process. The parties may elect to transmit notices or reports electronically by transmitting such correspondence to the email addresses stated herein below, or to the mailing address stated herein below via United States Postal Service ("USPS") First Class postage prepaid. Any notice or reporting required or otherwise given via USPS under this Agreement will be considered delivered or given when actually delivered or forty-eight (48) hours after being deposited in the U.S. Mail as certified mail. Any notice or reporting required or otherwise given via electronic mail prior to 5:00 pm shall be considered delivered on the date sent. Otherwise, such electronic mail shall be considered delivered as of 9:00 am on the next business day following electronic transmission. To PHD2: Zoe Reese, Director of Community Impact and Grantmaking Public Hospital District No. 2, Snohomish County 4710 196th Street SW Lynnwood, WA 98036 zoe.reese@verdanthealth.org To the Citv: Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Services Director City of Edmonds 700 Main Street Edmonds WA 98020 Shannon.Burley@edmondswa.gov 7.8 Assignment. This Agreement may not be assigned without the written consent of the other party. Each party may consent to or decline a request for assignment by the other party at the sole discretion of the party from which consent is requested. 7.9 No Separate Legal Entity. The parties do not intend that this Agreement creates a separate legal entity. 7.10 Administration of Agreement. The individuals named in Section 7.7, above, will be the joint administrators of this Agreement. 7.11 Property. All real or personal property used by the City for the Program will be held in the City's name for the benefit of the Program. C-S402 [Signatures on next page.] PAGE 4 OF 5 Packet Pg. 106 DocuSign Envelope ID: 37633DBB-1456-4961-A953-03ED3900B1F7 7.4.a AGREED TO: PUBLIC HOSPITAL DISTRICT NO. 2 SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON 5Bfpnad by: f joAr s 2/23/2021 a�ssc �.r ccc�. Date: Lisa Edwards, EdD, Superintendent CITY OF EDMONDS Date: Mi e Nelson, Mayor C-S402 PAGE 5 OF 5 2/24/2021 Packet Pg. 107 7.4.b INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE COVID-19 RESPONSE: Social, Emotional & Educational Support for Low-income Students This Agreement is made between Public Hospital District No. 2, Snohomish County, Washington and City of Edmonds to provide a COVID-19 Response distance learning support program for social, emotional, and educational support for low-income students. 1. PARTIES 1.1 Public Hospital District No. 2, Snohomish County, Washington ("PHD2"), a public hospital district formed under Chapter 70.44 RCW; and 1.2 City of Edmonds ("the City"), a Washington municipal corporation 2. PURPOSE AND PROGRAM _J Q z 2.1 The purpose of this Agreement is to enable the City to provide a COVID- 19 Response distance learning support program, referred to as Learning Enhancement and c Activity Program (LEAP), to provide social, emotional and educational support for low-income students through the Recreation Services Division of the Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Services Department ("the Program") for the benefit of PHD2 residents. 2.2 On March 23, 2020, Gov. Jay Inslee issued a "Stay Home — Stay Healthy" Order in an effort to minimize COVID-19 exposure. On May 31, 2020, the Stay Home — Stay Healthy order transitioned to a county -by -county phased re -opening plan entitled Safe Start — Stay Healthy. The Program is designed to provide social, emotional, and educational support to low-income students. 3. AUTHORITY 3.1 PHD2 is authorized under RCW 70.44.240 to "contract" with any "legal entity" to "provide any hospital or other health care facilities or other health care services to be used by individuals, districts, hospitals, or others, including providing health care maintenance services." RCW 70.44.007 defines "other health care services" to include "services that promote health, wellness, and prevention of illness and injury." 3.2 The City of Edmonds is a Washington municipal corporation. 4. TERM AND TERMINATION 4.1 The Agreement will begin on the date of the second signature on this Agreement. 4.2 The period for providing the Program is scheduled to begin on April 1, 2021 and end on June 30, 2021. C-S415 PAGE 1 OF 5 Packet Pg. 108 7.4.b 4.3 This Agreement will expire when the final reporting by the City is accepted and approved by PHD2. 5. OBLIGATIONS OF PHD2 5.1 PHD2 will fund the Program through a single payment of thirty-six thousand dollars and no cents ($36,000) to be paid within fourteen (14) days of execution of this Agreement with the understanding that the City will fund the balance of the costs for the Program. 5.2 Templates for required reporting by the City will be provided to the City by PHD2. 6. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY 6.1 The City will coordinate the Program including staffing, supplies, and scholarships to low-income students to operate the Program at the Frances Anderson Center Monday through Friday, 7:00 am to 6:00 pm. Programming is inclusive of social, emotional and educational supports, is focused on high risk and/or low-income youth and families, and will serve an average of at least 25 students weekly. 6.2 The City will submit a report of activities carried out under the Program, including summaries of results, to PHD2 by July 15, 2021. At a minimum, the City will track and report to PHD2 the number of participants who enroll in the Program, the number of hours of distance learning support provided, and any other relevant tracking data collected and compiled by the City during the course and scope of the Program. 6.3 The City will comply with all local, state and federal laws including, if applicable, the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ("HIPAA"). 6.4 The City will use the funds provided by PHD2 only for the Program and will return any portion of the payments that are not used for the Program on or before delivery of the report due on July 15, 2021. 6.5 During the term of this Agreement, the City will give every consideration to suggestions by PHD2 for modifications to the Program to obtain more favorable health outcomes for the participants. 6.6 The City will give credit (logo or language) to PHD2 ("Verdant") in its publicity vehicles about the Program, including but not limited to press releases, annual reports, newsletters, websites, brochures and fliers. Credit should also be given in newspaper interviews about the Program. Electronic communications/websites should also include a link to PHD2's website. The use of PHD2's logo, when appropriate, is encouraged. PHD2 will provide black - and -white and/or color versions in digital format. C-S415 PAGE 2 OE 5 Packet Pg. 109 7.4.b 6.7 The City recognizes that PHD2 is a public agency subject to audit by the Washington State Auditor. The City will provide PHD2 with any accessible information that PHD2 is requested to provide to the Washington State Auditor or otherwise required to provide to the State of Washington or to the Federal Government or pursuant to the Washington Public Records Act. 6.8 If PHD2 determines a breach of this Agreement has occurred, that is, the Z City has failed to comply with any terms or conditions of this Agreement or has failed to provide in any manner the work or services agreed to herein, the PHD2 will notify the City in writing of N the nature of the breach within fourteen (14) calendar days if the deliverables are not on track to be met as anticipated. The City will develop a corrective action plan within fourteen (14)LO n calendar days of receiving notice of the nature of the breach and will specify the proposed o completion date for bringing the Agreement into compliance. Determination of sufficiency of the : corrective action plan shall be at the sole discretion of PHD2. In the event a corrective action plan is not submitted, or the plan is determined by PHD2 to be insufficient, PHD2 reserves the a right to suspend or terminate this Agreement for performance or other reasons solely at the Q discretion of PHD2. z 7. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 7.1 Relationship of the Parties. The relationship created between PHD2 and the City in this Agreement is strictly that of independent contractors. The Agreement creates no partnership or joint venture between the parties, nor may any officer or employee of one party be considered to be an employee or agent of the other. Further, this Agreement provides no rights to any third parties and may not be relied on by any other person or entity. 7.2 Applicable Law. The Agreement is entered into under the laws of the State of Washington. Any litigation arising from this Agreement must be filed in Snohomish County Superior Court. 7.3 Liability and Insurance. The City will indemnify, defend and hold PHD2 harmless from any claims, lawsuits or other actions, and judgments arising in any way from the Program provided under this Agreement. The City will maintain a liability insurance policy of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence during the term of the Agreement and provide proof of coverage upon request of PHD2. 7.4 Entire Agreement; Amendments. This Agreement is complete and integrates all understandings between the parties. No amendment or other change to the Agreement will be binding on either party unless agreed to in writing and signed by each party. 7.5 Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction rules any part of this Agreement to be invalid, the remainder of the Agreement will still be in full force and effect. 7.6 Force Majeure. Neither party will be in default or liable for failure to perform its obligations under this Agreement if that failure is due to causes beyond its reasonable C-S415 PAGE 3 OF 5 Packet Pg. 110 7.4.b control, including but not limited to acts of God, acts of terrorism, fires, floods, windstorms earthquakes, labor disputes or governmental acts. 7.7 Notices and Reporting. The parties agree to accept electronic service of all notifications and reporting, except original service of process. The parties may elect to transmit notices or reports electronically by transmitting such correspondence to the email addresses stated herein below, or to the mailing address stated herein below via United States Postal Service ("USPS") First Class postage prepaid. Any notice or reporting required or otherwise given via USPS under this Agreement will be considered delivered or given when actually delivered or forty-eight (48) hours after being deposited in the U.S. Mail as certified mail. Any notice or reporting required or otherwise given via electronic mail prior to 5:00 pm shall be considered delivered on the date sent. Otherwise, such electronic mail shall be considered delivered as of 9:00 am on the next business day following electronic transmission. To PHD2: Zoe Reese, Director of Community Impact and Grantmaking Public Hospital District No. 2, Snohomish County 4710 196t' Street SW Lynnwood, WA 98036 zoe.reese@verdanthealth.org To the City: Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Services Director City of Edmonds 700 Main Street Edmonds WA 98020 Shannon.Burley@edmondswa.gov 7.8 Assignment. This Agreement may not be assigned without the written consent of the other party. Each party may consent to or decline a request for assignment by the other party at the sole discretion of the party from which consent is requested. 7.9 No Separate Legal Entity. The parties do not intend that this Agreement creates a separate legal entity. 7.10 Administration of Agreement. The individuals named in Section 7.7, above, will be the joint administrators of this Agreement. 7.11 Property. All real or personal property used by the City for the Program will be held in the City's name for the benefit of the Program. AGREED TO: C-S415 [Signatures on next page.] PAGE 4 OF 5 Packet Pg. 111 7.4.b PUBLIC HOSPITAL DISTRICT NO. 2 SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON Lisa Edwards, EdD, Superintendent CITY OF EDMONDS Mike Nelson, Mayor C-S415 Date: Date: J a z U- PAGE 5 OF 5 Packet Pg. 112 7.5 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/16/2021 January 2021 Monthly Financial Report Staff Lead: Dave Turley Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Sarah Mager Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation No action needed; informational only. Narrative January 2021 Monthly Financial Report Attachments: January 2021 Monthly Financial Report Packet Pg. 113 I 7.5.a I OF EDP � d 1)7 C. 1 $9v CITY OF EDMONDS MONTHLY BUDGETARY FINANCIAL REPORT JAN UARY 2021 Packet Pg. 114 1 I 7.5.a I Page 1 of 1 C ITY OF EDMO NDS REVENUES BY FUND - SUMMARY Fund 2021 Adopted 1/31/2020 1/31/2021 Amount No. Title Budget Revenues Revenues Remaining %Receive 001 GENERAL FUND $ 42,450,777 $ 2,376,947 $ 2,740,276 $ 39,710,501 6 009 LEOFF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE 300,000 - - 300,000 0 012 CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND 2,620 - 2,620 0 014 HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND 5,010 - 5,010 0 104 DRUG ENFORCEMENT FUND 165,370 117 310 165,060 0 -r- O Ill STREET FUND 1,722,360 127,413 111,823 1,610,537 6 Q- N 112 COMBINED STREET CONS'T/IMPROVE 3,048,185 137,786 9,353 3,038,832 0 O 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS ACQUIS. FUND 165,060 1,845 2,840 162,220 2 U 118 MEMORIAL STREET TREE 270 58 84 186 31LL O C 120 HOTEL/MOTEL TAX REVENUE FUND 71,460 6,361 3,993 67,467 6 121 EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND 25,240 8,472 4,308 20,932 17 122 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND 1,390 41 58 1,332 4 0 123 TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS 24,000 2,236 1,560 22,440 7 N 125 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 2 1,282,050 169,198 324,010 958,040 25 0 N 126 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 1 1,285,240 168,964 322,781 962,459 25 O 127 GIFTS CATALOG FUND 103,930 1,585 984 102,946 1 cv 130 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE/IMPROVEMT 179,800 11,884 22,035 157,765 12 136 PARKS TRUST FUND 2,200 477 696 1,504 32 O O. 137 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE TRUST FD 29,220 4,317 6,911 22,309 24 � 138 SISTER CITY COMMISSION 10,120 30 43 10,077 0 iC .v 140 BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 79,239 28,992 23,740 55,499 30 O 141 AFFORDABLE AND SUPPORTIVE HOUSINGFUND 65,000 5,895 6,696 58,304 10 c LL 231 2012 LT GO DEBT SERVICE FUND 759,710 - - 759,710 0 z 332 PARKS CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION FUND 1,392,520 31,469 11,093 1,381,427 1 C 411 COMBINED UTILITY OPERATION - 12,015 80 (80) 0 421 WATER UTILITY FUND 10,299,357 851,740 868,240 9,431,117 8 r Np 422 STORM UTILITY FUND 1 6,012,300 386,687 920,517 5,091,783 15 N 423 SEWER/WWTP UTILITY FUND 2 28,131,150 1,468,879 2,459,980 25,671,170 9 M c 424 BOND RESERVE FUND 1,985,870 1 1 1,985,869 0 511 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND 1,331,100 136,607 117,942 1,213,158 9 O 512 TECHNOLOGY RENTAL FUND 1,204,880 100,385 103,236 1,101,644 9 E t 617 FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND 67,270 429 - 67,270 0 v O $ 102,202,698 $ 6,040,830 $ 8,063,589 $ 94,139,109 8 r .r Q 1 Difference primarily due to a Grant reimbursement in January 2021. 2 Differences primarily due to WWTP billings to their partners in January 2021. 1 Packet Pg. 115 1 I 7.5.a I Page 1 of 1 CITY OF EDMONDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - SUMMARY Fund 2021 Adopted 1/31/2020 1/31/2021 Amount No. Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent 001 GENERAL FUND $ 45,179,468 $ 3,641,481 $ 4,488,492 $ 40,690,976 1C 009 LEOFF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE 467,140 19,826 35,624 431,516 8 014 HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND 016 BUILDING MAINTENANCE FUND 018 EDMONDS HOMELESSNESS RESPONSE FUND 019 EDMONDS OPIOID RESPONSE FUND 104 DRUG ENFORCEMENT FUND 111 STREET FUND 112 COMBINED STREET CONST/IMPROVE 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS ACQUIS. FUND 120 HOTEL/MOTEL TAX REVENUE FUND 121 EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND 122 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND 123 TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS 125 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 2 126 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 1 127 GIFTS CATALOG FUND 130 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE/IMPROVEMT 136 PARKSTRUST FUND 137 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND 138 SISTER CITY COMMISSION 140 BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 231 2012 LT GO DEBT SERVICE FUND 332 PARKS CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION FUND 421 WATER UTILITY FUND 422 STORM UTILITY FUND 423 SEWER/WWTP UTILITY FUND 424 BOND RESERVE FUND 511 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND 512 TECHNOLOGY RENTAL FUND 617 FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND 5,900 - 5,900 C 210,222 - 210,222 C 123,581 - 123,581 C 28,445 - 28,445 C G 45,800 - - 45,800 C Q' d 2,172,530 311,388 275,734 1,896,796 13 2,781,828 41,487 - 2,781,828 C C 236,880 4,965 4,424 232,456 2 C 87,150 2,366 1,866 85,284 2 LL 26,880 - - 26,880 C 3,000 300 3,000 C p 29,900 468 - 29,900 C 1,428,736 - 4,494 1,424,242 C N 1,761,841 13,727 - 1,761,841 C �+ 100,900 2,762 - 100,900 C 7 C 200,998 10,963 13,305 187,693 7 50,000 - - 50,000 C 25,000 - 25,000 C C 0. 11,900 - 11,900 4) C w 76,340 5,089 17 76,323 C .� t� 759,700 - 759,700 C 5,360,378 - - 5,360,378 C C jL 10,578,596 482,583 364,887 10,213,709 3 s 6,847,783 353,267 281,015 6,566,768 r 4 C 35,634,329 736,167 658,837 34,975,492 2 1,985,870 - - 1,985,870 r C 04 1,292,815 90,505 135,027 1,157,788 1C 1,251,409 81,888 117,002 1,134,407 9 7 96,167 8,172 7,930 88,237 8 M n $ 118,861,486 $ 5,807,404 S 6,388,652 $ 112,472,834 5 }; .r Q 2 Packet Pg. 116 I 7.5.a I Page 1 of 3 Title TAXES: 1 REAL PERSONAL / PROPERTY TAX 2 EMSPROPERTY TAX 3 VOTED PROPERTY TAX 4 LOCAL RETAIL SALES/USE TAX 3 5 NATURAL GAS USE TAX 6 1/10 SALES TAX LOCAL CRIM JUST 7 ELECTRIC UTILITY TAX 8 GASUTILITY TAX 9 SOLID WASTE UTILITY TAX 10 WATERUTILITY TAX 11 SEWERUTILITYTAX 12 STORMWATER UTILITY TAX 13 T.V. CABLE UTILITY TAX 14 TELEPHONE UTILITY TAX 15 PULLTABS TAX 16 AMUSEMENT GAMES 17 LEASEHOLD EXCISE TAX LICENSES AND PERMITS: 18 FIRE PERMITS -SPECIAL USE 19 POLICE - FINGERPRINTING 20 VENDING MACHINE/CONCESSION 21 FRANCHISE AGREEMENT -COMCAST 22 FRANCHISE FEE-EDUCATION/GOVERNMENT 23 FRANCHISE AGREEMENT-VERIZON/FRONTIER 24 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT FRANCHISE 25 GENERAL BUSINESS LICENSE 26 DEV SERV PERMIT SURCHARGE 27 RIGHT OF WAY FRANCHISE FEE 28 BUILDING STRUCTURE PERMITS 29 ANIMAL LICENSES 30 STREET AND CURB PERMIT 31 OT R NON -BUS LIC/PERMIT S INTERGOVERNMENTAL: 32 DOJ 15-0404-0-1-754 - BULLET PROOF VEST 33 TARGET ZERO TEAMS GRANT 34 HIGH VISIBILITY ENFORCEMENT 35 CORONAVIRUS RELIEF FUND 2 36 DOC FAC ROOFING 37 STATE GRANTS- BUDGET ONLY 38 PUD PRIVILEDGE TAX 39 ARCHIVES AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT 40 CJ - POPULATION 41 TRIAL COURT IMPROVEMENT 42 CRIMINAL JUSTICE -SPECIAL PROGRAMS 43 MARIJUANA EXCISE TAX DISTRIBUTION 44 DUI - CITIES 45 LIQUOR EXCISE TAX 46 LIQUOR BOARD PROFITS 47 FIRST RESPONDERS FLEX FUND 48 DISCOVERY PROGRAMS TECHNOLOGY ACQ. C ITY O F IDMO NDS REVENUES - GENERAL FUND 2021 Adopted 1/31/2020 Budget Revenues 1/31/2021 Amount Revenues Remaining %Received $ 10,936,400 $ 38,921 $ 108,345 $ 10,828,055 1% 4,137,031 15,048 42,305 4,094,726 1% 500 (93) 1 499 0% 8,600,000 692,248 774,198 7,825,802 9% 7,600 698 500 7,100 7% 828,500 67,953 70,622 757,878 9% 1,710,000 179,486 192,356 1,517,644 11% 595,000 82,496 84,132 510,868 14% 364,000 31,041 27,563 336,437 8% 1,153,000 93,508 78,573 1,074,427 7% 894,600 79,154 80,611 813,989 9% 471,900 34,798 37,788 434,112 8% 722,000 68,728 67,310 654,690 9% 723,000 70,129 56,592 666,408 8% 55,200 18,305 21,500 33,700 39% 350 184 143 207 41% 295,900 - - 295,900 0% 31,494,981 1,472,606 1,642,539 29,852,442 5% 250 - 100 150 40% 700 40 - 700 0% 50,000 259 4,253 45,747 9% 702,700 173,761 170,449 532,251 24% 41,000 3,429 3,221 37,779 8% 100,600 - - 100,600 0% 434,000 79,538 - 434,000 0% 201,000 31,925 21,921 179,079 11% 58,700 5,230 7,190 51,510 12% 30,000 - 14,440 15,560 48% 650,600 56,046 31,022 619,578 5% 22,000 3,301 2,914 19,086 13% 50,000 50,481 2,280 47,720 5% 20,000 1,765 1,238 18,762 6% 2,361,550 405,775 259,027 2,102,523 11% 6,000 - 2,671 3,329 45% 4,000 - - 4,000 0% 7,100 - 417 6,683 6% - - 3,947 (3,947) 0% - - 379,270 (379,270) 0% 198,000 - - 198,000 0% 210,500 - 210,500 0% - 564 - - 0% 13,070 3,197 3,379 9,691 26% 16,740 4,038 - 16,740 0% 45,600 11,474 12,061 33,539 26% 60,000 - - 60,000 0% 4,500 1,383 1,667 2,833 37% 261,500 55,939 68,016 193,484 26% 343,200 - - 343,200 0% 2,000 1,812 2,000 0% 550 - - 550 0% 1,172,760 78,408 471,429 701,331 40% 3 2021 Local Retail Sales/Use Taxrevenues are $81,950 higher than 2020 revenues. Please also see pages pages 18 & 19 . 3 Packet Pg. 117 I 7.5.a I Page 2 of 3 CITY OF EDMO NDS REVENUES - GENERAL FUND 2021 Adopted 1/31/2020 Title Budget Revenues CHARGES FOR GOODS AND SERVICES: 1 RECORD/LEGAL INSTRUMENTS 2 ATM SURCHARGE FEES 3 CREDIT CARD FEES 4 COURT RECORD SERVICES 5 D/M COURT REC SER 6 DRE REIMBURSEABLE 7 WARRANT PREPARATION FEE 8 IT TIME PAY FEE 9 MUNIC.-DIST. COURT CURR EXPEN 10 SALE MAPS & BOOKS 11 CLERKS TIME FOR SALE OF PARKING PERMITS 12 BID SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 13 PHOTOCOPIES 14 POLICE DISCLOSURE REQUESTS 15 ENGINEERING FEES AND CHARGES 16 ELECTION CANDIDATE FILINGFEES 17 CUSTODIAL SERVICES(SNO-ISLE) 18 PASSPORTS AND NATURALIZATION FEES 19 POLICE SERVICES SPECIAL EVENTS 20 CAMPUS SAFETY-EDM. SCH. DIST. 21 WOODWAY-LAW PROTECTION 22 MISCELLANEOUS POLICE SERVICES 23 FIRE DISTRICT #1 STATION BILLINGS 24 LEGAL SERVICES 25 ADULT PROBATION SERVICE CHARGE 26 BOOKING FEES 27 FIRE CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION FEES 28 EMERGENCY SERVICE FEES 29 EMS TRANSPORT USER FEE 30 FLEX FUEL PAYMENTS FROM STATIONS 31 ANIMAL CONTROL SHELTER 32 ZONING/SUBDIVISION FEE 33 PLAN CHECKING FEES 34 FIRE PLAN CHECK FEES 35 PLANNING 1 % INSPECTION FEE 36 S.E.P.A. REVIEW 37 CRITICAL AREA STUDY 38 GYM AND WEIGHTROOM FEES 39 PROGRAM FEES 4 40 TAXABLE RECREATION ACTIVITIES 41 WINTER MARKET REGISTRATION FEES 42 BIRD FEST REGISTRATION FEES 43 INTERFUND REIMBURSEMENT -CONTRACT SVCS 1/31/2021 Amount Revenues Remaining % Received $ 3,000 $ 554 $ 417 $ 2,583 140/( 600 21 11 590 20/( 11,000 1,342 437 10,564 40/( 150 - - 150 00/( 300 10 - 300 00/c - - 168 (168) 00/( 4,000 639 - 4,000 00/( 1,000 72 28 972 30/( 50 3 20 30 400/( 100 - - 100 00/( O 25,100 - - 25,100 00/( y 600 - - 600 00/, 1,000 14 - 1,000 00/( io 500 - - 500 00/( 200,000 12,630 6,640 193,360 3°/ tC 1,400 - - 1,400 0% 85,000 22,954 600 84,400 10/( LL 10,000 2,520 - 10,000 00/( 30,000 - - 30,000 00/( 41 76,800 36,753 - 76,800 00/( O 195,000 49,715 51,206 143,794 260/( 2 - 20 - - 00/ N 57,000 16,140 - 57,000 00/( c 04 1,050 25 28 1,022 30/( 38,000 3,606 3,576 34,424 9°/ to 3,000 206 45 2,955 10/( O 10,000 1,485 1,748 8,252 170/( 3,500 353 187 3,313 501( 1,007,500 - - 1,007,500 00/( 2,500 555 - 2,500 00/( O 50 - - 50 CL 00/( 65,600 13,740 6,910 58,690 110/( 350,900 23,846 99,215 251,685 280/( 4,000 5,157 809 3,191 200/( .v 500 - - 500 00/( 3,000 670 - 3,000 00/c 14,000 1,495 715 13,285 501( LL 15,500 1,482 - 15,500 00/, s 900,662 38,235 7,559 893,104 1% 55 1,300 - - 1,300 00x O z 5,000 - 185 4,815 40/( 800 - - 800 00/( N 2,892,106 90,609 101,192 2,790,914 30/( N 6,021,568 324,853 281,694 5,739,874 571, >, 4 2021 Parks & Recreation Program Revenues are $(30,677) lower than 2020 revenues. 4 Packet Pg. 118 1 7.5.a Page 3 of 3 CITY OF EDMO NDS REVENUES - GENERAL FUND 2021 Adopted 1/31/2020 1/31/2021 Amount Title Budget Revenues Revenues Remaining %Received FINES AND PENALTIES: 1 PROOF OF VEHICLE INS PENALTY 2 TRAFFIC INFRACTION PENALTIES 3 NC TRAFFIC INFRACTION 4 CRT COST FEE CODE LEG ASSESSMENT (LGA) 5 NON -TRAFFIC INFRACTION PENALTIES 6 OTHERINFRACTIONS'04 7 PARKING INFRACTION PENALTIES 8 PARK/INDDISZONE 9 DWI PENALTIES 10 DUI - DP ACCT 11 CRIM CNV FEE DUI 12 DUI - DP FEE 13 CRIMINAL TRAFFIC MISDEMEANOR 8/03 14 CRIMINAL CONVICTION FEE CT 15 CRIM CONV FEE CT 16 OTHER NON-T RAF MISDEMEANOR PEN 17 OTHER NON TRAFFIC MISD. 8/03 18 COURT DV PENALTY ASSESSMENT 19 CRIMINAL CONVICTION FEE CN 20 CRIM CONV FEE CN 21 PUBLIC DEFENSE RECOUPMENT 22 BANK CHARGE FOR CONV. DEFENDANT 23 COURT COST RECOUPMENT 24 BUS. LICENSE PERMIT PENALTY 25 MISC FINES AND PENALTIES MISCELLANEOUS: 26 INVESTMENT INTEREST 27 INTEREST ON COUNTY TAXES 28 INTEREST - COURT COLLECTIONS 29 SPACE/FACILITIESRENTALS 30 BRACKET ROOM RENTAL 31 LEASESLONG-TERM 32 DONATION/CONTRIBUTION 33 PARKSDONATIONS 34 BIRD FEST CONTRIBUTIONS 35 POLICE CONTRIBUTIONS FROM PRIV SOURCES 36 SALE OF JUNK/SALVAGE 37 SALES OF UNCLAIM PROPERTY 38 CONFISCATED AND FORFEITED PROPERTY 39 OTHER JUDGEMENT/SETTLEMENT 40 POLICE JUDGMENTSiRESI'ITUTION 41 CASHIERS OVERAGES/SHORTAGES 42 OTHER MISC REVENUES 43 SMALL OVERPAYMENT 44 NSF FEES - PARKS & REC 45 NSF FEES - MUNICIPAL COURT 46 US BANK REBATE TRANSFERS -IN: 47 OPERATINGTRANSFER-IN 48 INTERFUND TRANSFER FROM FUND 018 49 TRANSFER FROM FUND 127 $ 2,000 $ 204 $ 244 $ 1,756 120/( 230,000 13,159 14,030 215,970 60% 18,000 809 946 17,054 50/c 10,000 1,089 1,154 8,846 120/( 1,000 - - 1,000 00/( 1,500 148 281 1,219 190/( 100,000 10,570 5,320 94,680 501( 2,000 272 - 2,000 0°/ 7,000 603 696 6,304 100/( 300 14 5 295 20/( 100 1 3 97 30/( 1,500 292 253 1,247 170/( 25,000 2,257 1,257 23,743 501( 2,000 220 151 1,849 80/( 700 17 13 687 20/( 100 9 - 100 00/( 10,000 (146) 298 9,702 3°/ 800 53 - 800 0°/ 1,000 73 1 999 00/c 200 4 7 193 30/( 8,000 492 205 7,795 30/( 14,000 1,061 757 13,243 501( 3,000 323 272 2,728 90/( 10,100 - - 10,100 00/( 150 - - 150 00/( 448,450 31,521 25,895 422,555 60% 155,090 35,988 40,842 114,248 260/( 9,980 1,281 755 9,225 80/( 3,400 364 835 2,566 250/( 153,000 5,314 183 152,817 00/( 2,100 200 - 2,100 00/( 205,000 17,584 16,215 188,785 80/( 2,500 58 - 2,500 00/( 3,500 300 - 3,500 00/( 2,000 - - 2,000 00/c 5,000 - - 5,000 00/( 300 - - 300 00/( 3,000 - - 3,000 00/( 2,000 - - 2,000 00/c 2,000 - - 2,000 0°/ 200 50 - 200 00/( - - 2 (2) 00/( 5,000 2,617 829 4,171 170/( 100 24 3 97 30/( 100 - 30 70 300/( 150 5 - 150 0°/ 8,500 - - 8,500 00/( 562,920 63,785 59,693 503,227 11% 238,667 - - 238,667 00/( 123,581 - - 123,581 00/( 26,300 - - 26,300 00/( 388,548 - - 388,548 00/( TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE $ 42,450,777 $ 2,376,947 $ 2,740,276 $ 39,710,501 60% 5 Packet Pg. 119 I 7.5.a I Page I of 6 CITY OF EDMONDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2021 Adopted 1/31/2020 1/31/2021 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining '%Spent GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES (001) 1 SALARIES AND WAGES $ 17,135,234 $ 1,283,573 $ 1,472,550 $ 15,662,684 9 2 OVERTIME 485,080 43,391 50,514 434,566 10 3 HOLIDAY BUY BACK 281,329 - 1,951 279,378 1 4 BENEFITS 6,665,844 525,968 548,288 6,117,556 8 5 UNIFORMS 88,651 11,546 7,484 81,167 8 6 SUPPLIES 397,115 32,923 22,981 374,134 6 7 SMALL EQUIPMENT 106,603 20,535 1,281 105,322 1 8 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 14,779,455 878,969 1,573,825 13,205,630 11 9 COMMUNICATIONS 159,495 1,845 5,878 153,617 4 10 TRAVEL 68,760 1,207 - 68,760 0 11 EXCISE TAXES 6,500 414 1,061 5,439 16 12 RENTAL/LEASE 1,574,465 155,815 123,212 1,451,253 8 13 INSURANCE 403,973 393,746 405,121 (1,148) 100 14 UTILITIES 536,762 42,334 36,889 499,873 7 15 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 917,742 99,939 82,644 835,098 9 16 MISCELLANEOUS 505,730 74,278 103,968 401,762 21 17 INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 50,000 75,000 50,000 - 100 18 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 932,880 - - 932,880 0 19 MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 23,120 - 844 22,276 4 20 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PRINCIPAL 54,530 - - 54,530 0 21 OTHER INTEREST & DEBT SERVICE COSTS 500 - 500 0 22 INTEREST ON LONG-TERM EXTERNAL DEBT 5,700 - 5,700 0 45,179,468 3,641,481 4,488,492 40,690,976 10 LEOFF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE(009) 23 BENEFITS $ 206,650 $ 5,211 $ 15,899 $ 190,751 8 24 PENSION AND DISABILITY PAYMENTS 252,990 14,615 19,725 233,265 8 25 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7,000 - - 7,000 0 26 MISCELLANEOUS 500 - - 500 0 467,140 19,826 35,624 431,516 8 HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND (014) 27 SUPPLIES $ 100 $ - $ - $ 100 0 28 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 200 - 200 0 29 MISCELLANEOUS 5,600 - 5,600 0 5,900 - 5,900 0 BUILDING MAINTENANCEFUND (016) 30 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES $ 210,222 $ $ $ 210,222 0 210,222 210,222 0 EDMONDS HOMELESSNESS RESPONSEFUND (018) 31 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $ 123,581 $ $ $ 123,581 0 123,581 123,581 0 EDMONDS OPIOID RESPONSEFUND (019) 32 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES $ 28,445 $ $ $ 28,445 0 28,445 28,445 0 DRUG ENFO RC EMENT FUND (104) 33 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $ 45,000 $ $ $ 45,000 0 34 REPAIR/MAINT 800 800 0 45,800 45,800 0 .r Q 6 Packet Pg. 120 I 7.5.a I Page 2 of 6 CITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2021 Adopted 1/31/2020 1/31/2021 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent STREEI'FUND (111) 1 SALARIES AND WAGES $ 716,890 $ 56,318 $ 63,485 $ 653,405 9 2 OVERTIME 18,400 9,926 4,417 13,983 24 3 BENEFITS 378,236 28,971 30,344 347,892 8 4 UNIFORMS 6,000 - - 6,000 0 5 SUPPLIES 263,000 17,123 151 262,849 0 6 SMALL EQUIPMENT 20,000 - - 20,000 0 7 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 23,210 452 3,505 19,705 15 8 COMMUNICATIONS 4,500 130 121 4,379 3 9 TRAVEL 1,000 - - 1,000 0 10 RENTAL/LEASE 247,270 19,063 20,471 226,799 8 11 INSURANCE 148,436 156,937 148,533 (97) 100 12 UTILITIES 280,918 18,654 2,775 278,143 1 13 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 52,000 3,814 - 52,000 0 14 MISCELLANEOUS 8,000 - 1,931 6,069 24 15 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PRINCIPAL 4,220 - - 4,220 0 16 INTEREST 450 - 450 0 $ 2,172,530 $ 311,388 $ 275,734 $ 1,896,796 13 COMBINED STREETCONST/1IMPROVE(112) 17 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $ 1,560,378 $ - $ - $ 1,560,378 0 18 REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 88,670 - 88,670 0 19 MISCELLANEOUS - 8 - 0 20 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 114,950 - 114,950 0 21 LAND 33,000 - 33,000 0 22 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 911,000 41,479 911,000 0 23 INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOANS 72,220 - 72,220 0 24 INTEREST 1,610 - 1,610 0 $ 2,781,828 $ 41,487 $ $ 2,781,828 0 MUNICIPAL ARTS ACQUIS. FUND (117) 25 SUPPLIES $ 4,700 $ - $ $ 4,700 0 26 SMALL EQUIPMENT 1,700 - 1,700 0 27 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 221,500 4,046 3,812 217,688 2 28 TRAVEL 80 - - 80 0 29 RENTAL/LEASE 2,000 2,000 0 30 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 300 - - 300 0 31 MISCELLANEOUS 6,600 919 612 5,988 9 $ 236,880 $ 4,965 $ 4,424 $ 232,456 2 HO TEL/MO TEL TAX REVENUE FUND (120) 32 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $ 83,150 $ 1,866 $ 1,866 $ 81,284 2 33 MISCELLANEOUS - 500 - - 0 34 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 4,000 - - 4,000 0 $ 87,150 $ 2,366 $ 1,866 $ 85,284 2 EMPLO YEE PARIUNG PERMIT FUND (121) 35 SUPPLIES $ 1,790 $ - $ - $ 1,790 0 36 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 25,090 - 25,090 0 $ 26,880 $ - $ $ 26,880 0 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND (122) 37 MISCELLANEOUS $ 3,000 $ 300 $ $ 3,000 0 $ 3,000 $ 300 $ $ 3,000 0 TO URISM PRO MO TIO NAL FUND/ARTS (123) 38 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $ 29,900 $ 468 $ $ 29,900 0 $ 29,900 $ 468 $ $ 29,900 0 .r Q 7 Packet Pg. 121 I 7.5.a I Page 3 of 6 C ITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2021 Adopted 1/31/2020 1/31/2021 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX (125) 1 SUPPLIES $ 121,000 $ - $ 4,494 $ 116,506 4 2 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 148,000 - - 148,000 0 3 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 152,000 - 152,000 0 4 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 190 - 190 0 5 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 1,007,546 - 1,007,546 0 $ 1,428,736 $ - $ 4,494 $ 1,424,242 0 REAL ESTATE EXC ISE TAX 1 (126) 6 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 8 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 9 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 10 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS 11 INTEREST GIFTS CATALOG FUND (127) 12 SUPPLIES 13 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 14 MISCELLANEOUS 15 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES C EVIEIERY MAINTENANC UIMPRO VEMEVT (130) 16 SALARIES AND WAGES 17 OVERTIME 18 BENEFIT S 19 UNIFORMS 20 SUPPLIES 21 SUPPLIES PURCHASED FOR INVENTORY/RESALE 22 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 23 COMMUNICATIONS 24 TRAVEL 25 RENTAL/LEASE 26 UTILITIES 27 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 28 MISCELLANEOUS PARKS TRUST FUND (136) 29 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CEMETERY MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND (137) 30 SMALL EQUIPMENT SISTER CITY COMMISSION (138) 31 SUPPLIES 32 TRAVEL 33 MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS IMPROVEMEVTDISTRICTFUND (140) 34 SUPPLIES 35 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 36 MISCELLANEOUS 2012 LTGO DEBT SERVIC FUND (231) 37 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND 38 INTEREST $ 560,000 $ - $ $ 560,000 0 32,000 7,253 32,000 0 138,910 - 138,910 0 769,351 6,474 769,351 0 144,530 - 144,530 0 117,050 - 117,050 0 $ 1,761,841 $ 13,727 $ $ 1,761,841 0 $ 67,500 $ 2,762 $ $ 67,500 0 6,500 - 6,500 0 600 - 600 0 26,300 - 26,300 0 $ 100,900 $ 2,762 $ $ 100,900 0 $ 95,824 $ 6,938 $ 7,143 $ 88,681 7 3,500 - 30 3,470 1 40,472 3,050 3,177 37,295 8 1,000 - - 1,000 0 7,000 - - 7,000 0 20,000 150 627 19,373 3 4,200 - 800 3,400 19 1,700 139 140 1,560 8 500 - - 500 0 16,650 686 1,388 15,263 8 5,652 - - 5,652 0 500 - 500 0 4,000 - - 4,000 0 $ 200,998 $ 10,963 $ 13,305 $ 187,693 7 $ 50,000 $ - $ $ 50,000 0 $ 50,000 $ - $ $ 50,000 0 $ 25,000 $ $ $ 25,000 0 $ 25,000 $ - $ $ 25,000 0 $ 1,500 $ - $ $ 1,500 0 4,500 - 4,500 0 5,900 - 5,900 0 $ 11,900 $ - $ $ 11,900 0 $ 2,050 $ 4,388 $ $ 2,050 0 70,035 701 70,035 0 4,255 - 17 4,238 0 76,340 5,089 17 76,323 0 $ 677,990 $ - $ $ 677,990 0 81,710 - 81,710 0 $ 759,700 $ - $ $ 759,700 0 8 Packet Pg. 122 I 7.5.a I Page 4 of 6 CITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2021 Adopted 1/31/2020 1/31/2021 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (332) 1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $ 113,453 $ - $ $ 113,453 0 2 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 44,000 - 44,000 0 3 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 5,202,925 - 5,202,925 0 $ 5,360,378 $ - $ $ 5,360,378 0 WATER FUND (421) 4 SALARIES AND WAGES 5 OVERTIME 6 BENEFIT S 7 UNIFORMS 8 SUPPLIES 9 WATER PURCHASED FOR RESALE 10 SUPPLIES PURCHASED FOR INVENTORY/RESALE 11 SMALL EQUIPMENT 12 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 13 COMMUNICATIONS 14 TRAVEL 15 EXCISE TAXES 16 RENTAL/LEASE 17 INSURANCE 18 UTILITIES 19 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 20 MISCELLANEOUS 21 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 22 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 23 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS 24 REVENUE BONDS 25 INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOANS 26 INTEREST STORM FUND (422) 27 SALARIES AND WAGES 28 OVERTIME 29 BENEFIT S 30 UNIFORMS 31 SUPPLIES 32 SMALL EQUIPMENT 33 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 34 COMMUNICATIONS 35 TRAVEL 36 EXCISE TAXES 37 RENTAL/LEASE 38 INSURANCE 39 UTILITES 40 REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 41 MISCELLANEOUS 42 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 43 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 44 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS 45 REVENUE BONDS 46 INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOANS 47 INTEREST $ 781,175 $ 75,363 $ 57,280 $ 723,895 7 24,000 1,208 1,468 22,532 6 325,765 28,144 23,617 302,148 7 4,000 - - 4,000 0 150,000 - 994 149,006 1 2,170,000 119,857 - 2,170,000 0 170,000 15,716 2,934 167,066 2 11,000 1,042 - 11,000 0 1,421,647 31,465 36,717 1,384,930 3 30,000 1,027 878 29,122 3 200 - - 200 0 1,649,700 121,017 109,183 1,540,517 7 124,630 10,784 10,086 114,544 8 97,844 52,541 98,196 (352) 100 35,775 2,745 2,079 33,696 6 258,130 12,967 10,211 247,919 4 123,600 8,707 11,242 112,358 9 644,130 - - 644,130 0 1,947,050 - 1,947,050 0 2,840 - 2,840 0 385,100 - 385,100 0 25,840 - 25,840 0 196,170 - - 196,170 0 $ 10,578,596 $ 482,583 $ 364,887 $ 10,213,709 3 $ 716,300 $ 51,356 $ 62,433 $ 653,867 9 6,000 2,700 1,395 4,605 23 316,335 25,827 27,072 289,263 9 6,500 396 20 6,480 0 46,000 - 969 45,031 2 4,000 - - 4,000 0 2,434,709 58,506 33,281 2,401,428 1 3,200 44 35 3,165 1 4,300 - - 4,300 0 470,100 38,496 42,906 427,194 9 267,778 25,465 21,872 245,906 8 66,216 116,576 66,228 (12) 100 11,025 1,418 1,636 9,389 15 64,130 12,967 10,211 53,919 16 232,300 16,246 12,959 219,341 6 281,810 - - 281,810 0 1,461,000 3,271 1,461,000 0 103,340 - 103,340 0 188,240 - 188,240 0 53,590 - 53,590 0 110,910 - - 110,910 0 $ 6,847,783 $ 353,267 $ 281,015 $ 6,566,768 4 9 Packet Pg. 123 I 7.5.a I Page 5 of 6 CITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2021 Adopted 1/31/2020 1/31/2021 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent SEWER FUND (423) 1 SALARIES AND WAGES $ 1,997,208 $ 160,318 $ 151,850 $ 1,845,358 8 2 OVERTIME 95,000 15,777 12,123 82,877 13 3 BENEFITS 863,464 76,692 65,060 798,404 8 4 UNIFORMS 8,500 1,891 267 8,233 3 5 SUPPLIES 404,000 21,331 13,736 390,264 3 6 FUEL CONSUMED 30,000 2,399 - 30,000 0 7 SUPPLIES PURCHASED FOR INV OR RESALE 4,000 - - 4,000 0 8 SMALL EQUIPMENT 35,000 5,465 1,468 33,532 4 9 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,049,848 79,915 67,560 1,982,288 3 10 COMMUNICATIONS 43,000 1,431 1,086 41,914 3 11 TRAVEL 5,000 - - 5,000 0 12 EXCISE TAXES 968,000 91,033 93,839 874,161 10 13 RENTAL/LEASE 329,898 30,931 26,905 302,993 8 14 INSURANCE 160,967 174,140 162,851 (1,884) 101 15 UTILITIES 1,979,985 32,440 38,612 1,941,373 2 16 REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 520,630 35,574 12,679 507,951 2 17 MISCELLANEOUS 129,350 6,831 9,420 119,930 7 18 INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 8,657,681 - - 8,657,681 0 19 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 16,552,508 - 16,552,508 0 20 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS 157,060 - 157,060 0 21 REVENUE BONDS 86,670 - 86,670 0 22 INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOANS 173,900 - 173,900 0 23 INTEREST 382,660 - - 382,660 0 24 DEBT ISSUE COSTS - - 1 380 (1 380) 0 $ 35,634,329 $ 736,167 $ 658,837 $ 34,975,492 2 BOND RESERVEFUND (424) 25 REVENUE BONDS $ 785,020 $ - $ - $ 785,020 0 26 INTEREST 1,200,850 - 1,200,850 0 $ 1,985,870 $ - $ $ 1,985,870 0 Q 10 Packet Pg. 124 I 7.5.a I Page 6 of 6 CITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2021 Adopted 1/31/2020 1/31/2021 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent EQUIPMENTRENTAL FUND (511) 1 SALARIES AND WAGES $ 269,184 $ 22,831 $ 23,099 $ 246,085 9 2 OVERTIME 2,000 606 - 2,000 0 3 BENEFITS 115,681 9,923 9,450 106,231 8 4 UNIFORMS 1,000 31 41 959 4 5 SUPPLIES 120,000 4,008 2,862 117,138 2 6 FUEL CONSUMED 1,000 - - 1,000 0 7 SUPPLIES PURCHASED FOR INVENTORY/RESALE 258,000 6,359 5,128 252,872 2 8 SMALL EQUIPMENT 58,000 - 55 57,945 0 9 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 46,750 445 ill 46,639 0 10 COMMUNICATIONS 3,000 121 121 2,879 4 11 TRAVEL 1,000 - - 1,000 0 12 RENTAL/LEASE 12,790 1,019 1,036 11,754 8 13 INSURANCE 40,910 40,270 39,334 1,576 96 14 UTILITIES 14,500 1,985 1,636 12,864 11 15 REPAIRS&MAINTENANCE 60,000 1,495 1,106 58,894 2 16 MISCELLANEOUS 12,000 - 1,487 10,513 12 17 MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 277,000 1,412 49,560 227,440 18 $ 1,292,815 $ 90,505 $ 135,027 $ 1,157,788 10 TECHNOLOGY RENTAL FUND (512) 18 SALARIES AND WAGES $ 373,762 $ 25,102 $ 25,594 $ 348,168 7 19 OVERTIME 2,000 - 303 1,697 15 20 BENEFITS 126,557 8,542 8,848 117,709 7 21 SUPPLIES 5,000 - 226 4,774 5 22 SMALL EQUIPMENT 141,300 - 1,922 139,378 1 23 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 171,460 - 1,016 170,444 1 24 COMMUNICATIONS 58,770 4,345 4,410 54,360 8 25 TRAVEL 1,500 - - 1,500 0 26 RENTAL/LEASE 7,400 374 367 7,033 5 27 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 302,660 39,671 74,316 228,344 25 28 MISCELLANEOUS 5,000 3,853 - 5,000 0 29 MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 56,000 - - 56,000 0 $ 1,251,409 $ 81,888 $ 117,002 $ 1,134,407 9 FIR]IVIEN'S PENSION FUND (617) 31 BENEFITS $ 24,560 $ 2,969 $ 2,804 $ 21,757 11 32 PENSION AND DISABILITY PAYMENTS 70,407 5,202 5,127 65,280 7 33 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,200 - - 1,200 0 $ 96,167 $ 8,172 $ 7,930 $ 88,237 8 TOTAL EXPENDITURE ALL FUNDS $ 118,861,486 $ 5,807,404 $ 6,388,652 $ 112,472,834 5 Q 11 Packet Pg. 125 7.5.a Page 1 of 1 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDPTURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN SUMMARY 2021 Adopted 1/31/2020 1/31/2021 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining CITY COUNCIL OFFICE OF MAYOR HUMAN RESOURCES MUNICIPAL COURT CITY CLERK FINANCE CITY ATTORNEY NON -DEPARTMENTAL POLICE SERVICES COMMUNITY SERVICES/ECONOMIC DEV DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PARKS& RECREATION PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION FACILITIES MAINTENANCE % Spent $ 430,493 $ 23,825 $ 26,808 $ 403,685 6% 345,501 28,750 27,531 317,970 8% 807,176 68,346 75,120 732,056 9% 1,157,083 79,231 93,953 1,063,130 8% 750,555 83,447 78,859 671,696 11% 0. 1,104,378 148,549 137,736 966,642 12% � 936,480 49,883 69,941 866,540 7% 12,881,593 1,280,852 2,013,112 10,868,481 16% 11,917,523 887,236 992,942 10,924,581 8% C LL 1,211,100 40,001 43,221 1,167,879 4% t 3,419,119 241,446 219,157 3,199,962 6% r� 4,503,783 278,296 308,283 4,195,500 7% T_ 3,286,985 254,086 258,921 3,028,064 8% N N 2,427,699 177,532 142,909 2,284,790 6% cv $ 45,179,468 $ 3,641,481 $ 4,488,492 $ 40,690,976 10% C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - UTILITY- BY FUND IN SUMMARY Title 2021 Adopted Budget 1/31/2020 Expenditures 1/31/2021 Expenditures Amount Remaining %Spent WATER UTILITY FUND $ 10,578,596 $ 482,583 $ 364,887 $ 10,213,709 3% STORM UTILITY FUND 6,847,783 353,267 281,015 6,566,768 4% SEWER/WWTP UTILITY FUND 35,634,329 736,167 658,837 34,975,492 2% BOND RESERVE FUND 1,985,870 - - 1,985,870 0% $ 55,046,578 $ 1,572,016 $ 1,304,739 $ 53,741,839 2% 12 Packet Pg. 126 I 7.5.a I Page I of 4 C ITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN DETAIL Title 2021 Adopted Budget 1/31/2020 Expenditures 1/31/2021 Expenditures Amount Remaining %Spent CITY COUNCIL SALARIES $ 199,052 $ 14,933 $ 17,347 $ 181,705 9% OVERTIME 1,000 - - 1,000 0% BENEFITS 118,713 7,675 8,436 110,277 7% SUPPLIES 2,000 49 - 2,000 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 62,160 - 62,160 0% COMMUNICATIONS 3,000 - 3,000 0% TRAVEL 6,700 90 - 6,700 0% RENTAL/LEASE 12,368 1,078 1,024 11,344 8% REPAIRS/MAINTENANCE 500 - - 500 0% MISCELLANEOUS 25,000 25,000 0% $ 430,493 $ 23,825 $ 26,808 $ 403,685 6% OFFICEOFMAYOR SALARIES $ 229,512 $ 18,536 $ 19,125 $ 210,387 8% BENEFITS 85,243 8,844 7,039 78,204 8% SUPPLIES 1,500 54 - 1,500 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,000 - 3,000 0% COMMUNICATION 1,400 - 1,400 0% TRAVEL 3,000 - - 3,000 0% RENTAL/LEASE 17,396 1,317 1,367 16,029 8% MISCELLANEOUS 4,450 - - 4,450 0% $ 345,501 $ 28,750 $ 27,531 $ 317,970 8% HUMAN RFS O URC ES SALARIES $ 387,048 $ 29,761 $ 32,894 $ 354,154 8% OVERTIME - - 121 (121) 0% BENEFITS 154,430 11,697 13,009 141,421 8% SUPPLIES 13,300 70 386 12,914 3% SMALL EQUIPMENT 300 - 198 102 66% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 175,000 1,041 717 174,283 0% COMMUNICATIONS 1,550 - - 1,550 0% TRAVEL 1,500 - - 1,500 0% RENTAL/LEASE 36,102 2,557 2,923 33,179 8% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 8,380 7,832 8,067 313 96% MISCELLANEOUS 29,566 15,388 16,806 12,760 57% $ 807,176 $ 68,346 $ 75,120 $ 732,056 9% MUNICIPAL C O URT SALARIES $ 643,567 $ 51,891 $ 62,317 $ 581,250 10% OVERTIME 800 19 5,621 (4,821) 703% BENEFITS 242,359 20,671 19,223 223,136 8% SUPPLIES 10,600 232 - 10,600 0% SMALL EQUIPMENT 1,000 - 1,000 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 124,925 - 124,925 0% COMMUNICATIONS 3,550 - 3,550 0% TRAVEL 6,500 - - 6,500 0% RENTAL/LEASE 70,682 5,429 5,657 65,025 8% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 4,880 - - 4,880 0% MISCELLANEOUS 25,100 989 1,135 23,965 5% MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 23,120 23,120 0% $ 1,157,083 $ 79,231 $ 93,953 $ 1,063,130 8% 13 Packet Pg. 127 1 I 7.5.a I Page 2 of 4 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN DETAIL 2021 Adopted 1/31/2020 1/31/2021 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent CITY CLERK SALARIES AND WAGES $ 391,926 $ 33,945 $ 33,306 $ 358,620 8% BENEFITS 168,469 14,324 14,985 153,484 9% SUPPLIES 7,000 266 403 6,597 6% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 34,200 459 1,094 33,106 3% COMMUNICATIONS 33,000 - 4,000 29,000 12% TRAVEL 1,980 - - 1,980 0% RENTAL/LEASE 55,980 5,357 3,332 52,648 6% REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 48,000 28,915 21,244 26,756 44% MISCELLANEOUS 10,000 181 494 9,506 5% $ 750,555 $ 83,447 $ 78,859 $ 671,696 11% FINANCE SALARIES $ 732,408 $ 72,777 $ 61,812 $ 670,596 8% OVERTIME 4,500 - - 4,500 0% BENEFITS 238,064 25,511 21,831 216,233 9% SUPPLIES 7,350 391 166 7,184 2% SMALL EQUIPMENT 2,650 - 73 2,577 3% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 9,300 - 18 9,282 0% COMMUNICATIONS 2,000 - - 2,000 0% TRAVEL 3,100 - - 3,100 0% RENTAL/LEASE 55,176 4,857 5,297 49,879 10% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 41,480 43,963 45,281 (3,801) 109% MISCELLANEOUS 8,350 1,051 3,258 5,092 39% $ 1,104,378 $ 148,549 $ 137,736 $ 966,642 12% CITY ATTO RNEY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $ 936,480 $ 49,883 $ 69,941 $ 866,540 7% $ 936,480 $ 49,883 $ 69,941 $ 866,540 7% NON -DEPARTMENTAL SALARIES $ 101,750 $ - $ - $ 101,750 0% BENEFITS -UNEMPLOYMENT 50,000 84 8,868 41,132 18% SUPPLIES 5,000 195 - 5,000 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 11,168,050 767,851 1,478,954 9,689,096 13% EXCISE TAXES 6,500 414 1,061 5,439 16% RENTAL/LEASE 6,366 1,689 532 5,835 8% INSURANCE 403,973 393,746 405,121 (1,148) 100% MISCELLANEOUS 96,344 41,874 68,576 27,768 71% CONTRIBUTION TO ECA 50,000 75,000 50,000 - 100% INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 932,880 - - 932,880 0% GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND 54,530 - 54,530 0% INTEREST ON LONG-TERM DEBT 5,700 - 5,700 0% FISCAL AGENT FEES 500 500 0% $ 12,881,593 $ 1,280,852 $ 2,013,112 $ 10,868,481 16% 14 Packet Pg. 128 1 7.5.a Page 3 of 4 CITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN DETAIL 2021 Adopted 1/31/2020 1/31/2021 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining �/, Spent POLICE SERVIC ES SALARIES $ 7,206,549 $ 514,591 $ 636,168 $ 6,570,381 9% OVERTIME 454,780 38,819 43,775 411,005 10% HOLIDAY BUYBACK 281,329 - 1,951 279,378 1% BENEFITS 2,819,711 215,970 225,810 2,593,901 8% UNIFORMS 78,426 11,050 7,216 71,210 9% SUPPLIES 86,500 5,234 6,326 80,174 7% SMALL EQUIPMENT 77,453 19,887 1,009 76,444 1% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 122,220 9,509 15,299 106,921 13% COMMUNICATIONS 34,000 275 325 33,675 1% TRAVEL 29,310 1,075 - 29,310 0% RENTAL/LEASE 651,715 68,320 52,810 598,905 8% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 15,180 907 979 14,201 6% MISCELLANEOUS 60,350 1,598 1,275 59,075 2% $ 11,917,523 $ 887,236 $ 992,942 $ 10,924,581 8% COMMUNITY S ERVIC ES /EC 0 N DEV. SALARIES $ 390,687 $ 21,050 $ 26,976 $ 363,711 7% BENEFITS 109,147 6,864 7,562 101,585 7% SUPPLIES 3,275 6,376 - 3,275 0% SMALL EQUIPMENT 800 - - 800 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 660,400 4,250 5,500 654,900 1% COMMUNICATIONS 3,675 21 22 3,653 1% TRAVEL 2,000 - - 2,000 0% RENTAL/LEASE 21,116 982 1,625 19,491 8% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 10,500 - - 10,500 0% MISCELLANEOUS 9,500 460 1,536 7,964 16% $ 1,211,100 $ 40,001 $ 43,221 $ 1,167,879 4% DEVELO PMENT SERVIC ES/PLANNING SALARIES $ 1,830,748 $ 140,364 $ 145,459 $ 1,685,289 8% OVERTIME 1,300 3,056 - 1,300 0% BENEFITS 680,921 53,307 54,939 625,982 8% UNIFORMS 500 - - 500 0% SUPPLIES 12,100 557 474 11,626 4% SMALL EQUIPMENT 7,300 648 - 7,300 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 678,380 24,915 3,015 675,365 0% COMMUNICATIONS 9,000 - - 9,000 0% TRAVEL 7,300 42 - 7,300 0% RENTAL/LEASE 135,710 14,066 10,847 124,863 8% REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 6,800 - - 6,800 0% MISCELLANEOUS 49,060 4,492 3,579 45,481 7% MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT - - 844 (844) 0% $ 3,419,119 $ 241,446 $ 219,157 $ 3,199,962 6% ENGINEERING SALARIES $ 1,773,720 $ 139,971 $ 144,364 $ 1,629,356 8% OVERTIME 5,000 891 408 4,592 8% BENEFITS 733,487 59,272 59,852 673,635 8% UNIFORMS 450 - - 450 0% SMALL EQUIPMENT 2,200 - 2,200 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 13,840 - 13,840 0% COMMUNICATIONS 19,600 20 19,600 0% TRAVEL 600 - - 600 0% RENTAL/LEASE 146,935 11,030 11,799 135,136 8% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 2,600 - - 2,600 0% MISCELLANEOUS 80,000 1,107 1,893 78,107 2% $ 2,778,432 $ 212,290 $ 218,316 $ 2,560,116 8% 15 Packet Pg. 129 I 7.5.a I Page 4 of 4 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN DEr'AIL 2021 Adopted 1/31/2020 1/31/2021 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent PARKS & REC REATIO N SALARIES $ 2,179,335 $ 150,486 $ 196,730 $ 1,982,605 9% OVERTIME 10,000 70 25 9,975 0% BENEFITS 804,577 61,215 69,709 734,868 9% UNIFORMS 6,275 255 203 6,072 3% SUPPLIES 127,890 11,759 5,942 121,948 5% SMALL EQUIPMENT 10,900 - - 10,900 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 718,300 4,647 (963) 719,263 0% COMMUNICATIONS 31,370 347 358 31,012 1% TRAVEL 5,270 - - 5,270 0% RENTAL/LEASE 251,549 26,891 17,068 234,481 7% PUBLIC UTILITY 230,507 14,891 13,795 216,712 6% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 29,700 596 - 29,700 0% MISCELLANEOUS 98,110 7,139 5,418 92,692 6% $ 4,503,783 $ 278,296 $ 308,283 $ 4,195,500 7% PUBLIC WORKS ADMINIS TRATIO N SALARIES OVERTIME BENEFITS SUPPLIES SMALL EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS TRAVEL RENT AL/LEASE PUBLIC UTILITY REPAIR/MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS FACILITIES MAINTENANCE SALARIES OVERTIME BENEFITS UNIFORMS SUPPLIES SMALL EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS TRAVEL RENT AL/LEASE PUBLIC UTILITY REPAIR/MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS TO TAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES $ 296,962 $ 24,320 $ 24,948 $ 272,014 8% 200 - - 200 0% 106,203 8,940 8,267 97,936 8% 8,600 138 1 8,599 0% 1,000 - - 1,000 0% 200 5 7 193 4% 1,350 24 24 1,326 2% 500 - - 500 0% 84,320 7,997 6,927 77,393 8% 3,318 373 430 2,888 13% 1,000 - - 1,000 0% 4,900 4,900 0% $ 508,553 $ 41,796 $ 40,605 $ 467,948 8% 771,970 70,950 71,104 700,866 9% 7,500 536 564 6,936 8% 354,520 31,593 28,759 325,761 8% 3,000 241 65 2,935 2% 112,000 7,604 9,282 102,718 8% 3,000 - - 3,000 0% 73,000 16,409 244 72,756 0% 16,000 1,158 1,150 14,850 7% 1,000 - - 1,000 0% 29,050 4,245 2,004 27,046 7% 302,937 27,069 22,664 280,273 7% 748,722 17,726 7,073 741,649 1% 5,000 5,000 0% $ 2,427,699 $ 177,532 $ 142,909 $ 2,284,790 6% S 45,179,468 S 3,641,481 S 4,488,492 S 40,690,976 10% 16 Packet Pg. 130 7.5.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -General Fund 2021 General Fund Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 2,288,254 $ 2,288,254 $ 2,740,276 19.75% February 4,615,700 2,327,446 March 7,110,111 2,494,410 April 10,178,867 3,068,757 May 18,381,821 8,202,954 June 20,794,250 2,412,429 July 23,089,086 2,294,836 August 25,626,204 2,537,118 September 27,892,507 2,266,303 October 31,761,425 3,868,919 November 40,124,213 8,362,788 December 42,450,777 2,326,564 City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Real Estate Excise Tax 2021 Real Estate Excise Tax 1 & 2 Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 195,748 $ 195,748 $ 625,840 219.72% February 341,557 145,810 March 525,343 183,786 April 697,989 172,646 May 895,413 197,424 June 1,120,061 224,648 July 1,335,075 215,015 August 1,581,214 246,138 September 1,849,736 268,522 October 2,083,774 234,038 November 2,308,787 225,013 December 2,500,000 191,213 *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 17 Packet Pg. 131 SALES TAX SUMMARY I 7.5.a I Sales Tax Analysis By Category Current Period: January 2021 Year -to -Date Total $774,198 Health & Personal Care, Automotive Repair, $24,118 1 $15,564 Construction Trade, $108,586 Accommodation, $1,817 Clothing and Accessories, $26,985 Communications, $20,829 Wholesale Trade, $37,746 Misc Retail, $158,008 1 10,000,000 8,000,000 $6,741,838 $6,905,122 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 2015 Amusement & Recreation, $3,363 Business Services, $77,563 Gasoline, $3,123 Retail Food Stores, k, $27,679 L Retail Automotive, 'M7$183,277 Manufacturing, $7,641 Others, $16,335 Eating & Drinking, $61,564 Annual Sales Tax Revenue $8,406,296 $8,452,715 $8,317,046 2017 2018 2019 2020 $774,198 YTD 2021 0 c c ii t w c 0 N O N L c V- 0 a a� c �a c ii 21 t c 0 N O N m r- m c d E R a 18 Packet Pg. 132 I 7.5.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Sales and Use Tax 2021 Sales and Use Tax Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 661,963 $ 661,963 $ 774,198 16.95% February 1,491,081 829,118 March 2,110,825 619,744 April 2,677,870 567,045 May 3,379,279 701,409 June 4,038,220 658,941 July 4,756,025 717,805 August 5,547,915 791,890 September 6,288,480 740,565 October 7,063,515 775,035 November 7,866,501 802,986 December 8,600,000 733,499 City of'Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Gas Utility Tax 2021 Gas Utility Tax Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 82,557 $ 82,557 $ 84,132 1.91% February 170,654 88,097 March 250,947 80,292 April 317,447 66,501 May 368,586 51,139 June 403,108 34,522 July 430,884 27,777 August 454,299 23,415 September 475,121 20,822 October 498,594 23,472 November 537,295 38,702 December 595,000 57,705 Gas Utility Tax 700,000 600,000 500,000 - - 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Yeaz Budget Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. O !Z N C flf C LL t C O N O N M 7 C tv O CL O U a M a E t r C O r N O N 7 C O 7 C E t U r Q 19 Packet Pg. 133 I 7.5.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Telephone Utility Tax 2021 Telephone Utility Tax Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 69,351 $ 69,351 $ 56,592-18.40% February 138,426 69,074 March 199,085 60,660 April 265,909 66,823 May 325,636 59,728 June 385,177 59,540 July 443,946 58,770 August 501,501 57,554 September 557,882 56,382 October 615,320 57,437 November 665,999 50,679 December 723,000 57,001 Electric Utility Tax 800,000 Telephone Utility Tax 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 / 200,000 100,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Yeaz Budget �Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Electric Utility Tax 2021 Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 179,984 $ 179,984 $ 192,356 6.87% February 379,889 199,905 March 546,637 166,748 April 730,293 183,656 May 873,813 143,520 June 997,568 123,755 July 1,114,337 116,769 August 1,230,154 115,816 September 1,342,671 112,517 October 1,453,976 111,305 November 1,576,729 122,753 December 1,710,000 133,271 Electric Utility Tax 1,800,000 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 , , 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC -0- Current Year Budget - Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 20 Packet Pg. 134 I 7.5.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Meter Water Sales 2021 Meter Water Sales Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 779,311 $ 779,311 $ 785,708 0.82% February 1,323,513 544,201 March 2,123,378 799,865 April 2,634,733 511,355 May 3,397,533 762,799 June 3,993,888 596,356 July 4,928,107 934,219 August 5,728,520 800,414 September 6,831,863 1,103,343 October 7,628,547 796,684 November 8,538,589 910,042 December 9,090,825 552,236 City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Storm Water Sales 2021 Storm Water Sales Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 384,276 $ 384,276 $ 377,845 6.87% February 1,216,009 831,732 March 1,599,504 383,495 April 1,939,303 339,799 May 2,323,204 383,901 June 2,663,931 340,727 July 3,048,086 384,154 August 3,880,066 831,980 September 4,263,771 383,706 October 4,604,458 340,687 November 4,988,465 384,006 December 5,316,477 328,012 Storm Water Sales 5,500,000 5,000,000 4,500,000 4,000,000 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 - 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC --6-- Current Year Budget � Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. O Q N C f� C LL t C O N O N O 7 c O CL O U a M C LL t r C O N O N 7 C O n C E t U r Q 21 Packet Pg. 135 I 7.5.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary-Unmeter Sewer Sales 2021 Unmeter Sewer Sales Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 846,742 $ 846,742 $ 806,699 -4.73% February 1,539,036 692,295 March 2,387,119 848,083 April 3,078,705 691,586 May 3,923,269 844,563 June 4,616,005 692,736 July 5,485,907 869,902 August 6,180,993 695,086 September 7,065,967 884,974 October 7,769,759 703,792 November 8,630,384 860,626 December 9,319,928 689,544 *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 22 Packet Pg. 136 I 7.5.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -General Fund 2021 General Fund Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 4,763,692 $ 4,763,692 $ 4,488,492 -5.78% February 8,102,761 3,339,069 March 11,550,167 3,447,406 April 14,976,824 3,426,657 May 18,175,079 3,198,255 June 22,305,837 4,130,758 July 26,106,634 3,800,797 August 29,720,247 3,613,613 September 33,095,759 3,375,511 October 36,818,699 3,722,940 November 40,835,625 4,016,926 December 45,179,468 4,343,843 City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Non -Departmental 2021 Non -Departmental Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 2,129,707 $ 2,129,707 $ 2,013,112 -5.479/, February 2,964,270 834,564 March 3,918,886 954,616 April 4,746,252 827,366 May 5,429,051 682,799 June 6,890,293 1,461,242 July 7,928,307 1,038,014 August 8,794,775 866,469 September 9,536,123 741,348 October 10,451,643 915,520 November 11,576,017 1,124,374 December 12,881,593 1,305,576 *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 23 Packet Pg. 137 I 7.5.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -City Council 2021 City Council Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 27,170 $ 27,170 $ 26,808 -1.33% February 57,559 30,389 March 91,021 33,462 April 121,761 30,741 May 162,400 40,639 June 211,053 48,653 July 245,137 34,084 August 292,412 47,276 September 331,547 39,135 October 355,831 24,284 November 391,926 36,095 December 430,493 38,567 City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Office of Mayor 2021 Office of Mayor Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 28,543 $ 28,543 $ 27,531 -3.55% February 58,378 29,835 March 86,855 28,477 April 115,847 28,992 May 144,377 28,530 June 172,357 27,980 July 200,988 28,631 August 230,481 29,494 September 259,088 28,607 October 287,175 28,087 November 315,280 28,104 December 345,501 30,221 Office of Mayor 350,000.00 300,000.00 250,000.00 200,000.00 150,000.00 / 100,000.00 / 50,000.00 0.00 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Year Budget - -PriorYear *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. O Q N C f� C LL t C O N O N O 7 C O iz O U a M c LL t r C O r N O N M 7 C O 7 C O E t U M r Q 24 Packet Pg. 138 I 7.5.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Human Resources 2021 Human Resources Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 70,645 $ 70,645 $ 75,120 6.33% February 133,817 63,171 March 194,869 61,053 April 253,374 58,505 May 314,638 61,264 June 389,004 74,366 July 447,996 58,992 August 509,552 61,556 September 577,098 67,546 October 640,237 63,138 November 705,461 65,225 December 807,176 101,715 Municipal Court Human Resources 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Yeaz Budget Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Municipal Court 2021 Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 87,732 $ 87,732 $ 93,953 7.09% February 183,658 95,926 March 277,088 93,430 April 372,050 94,962 May 474,182 102,132 June 564,520 90,338 July 657,862 93,341 August 754,726 96,864 September 848,582 93,856 October 947,082 98,500 November 1,039,678 92,596 December 1,157,083 117,405 Municipal Court 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC -0---CurrentYeaz Budget �PriorYear *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 25 Packet Pg. 139 I 7.5.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Community Services/Economic Development 2021 Community Services/Economic Development Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 80,002 $ 80,002 $ 43,221-45.98% February 171,172 91,170 March 262,430 91,258 April 357,508 95,078 May 453,339 95,831 June 545,783 92,444 July 645,125 99,342 August 751,947 106,822 September 843,469 91,522 October 945,696 102,227 November 1,067,925 122,230 December 1,211,100 143,175 City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -City Clerk 2021 City Clerk Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 72,647 $ 72,647 $ 78,859 8.55% February 132,803 60,156 March 194,510 61,706 April 259,653 65,143 May 319,306 59,653 June 377,113 57,807 July 440,842 63,728 August 507,499 66,657 September 562,881 55,383 October 619,955 57,074 November 686,148 66,192 December 750,555 64,407 City Clerk 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Year Budget � Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. O Q N C f� C LL t C O N O N O 7 C O O. O U C M c LL t r C O r N O N 7 C M n C O E t U M r Q 26 Packet Pg. 140 I 7.5.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Technology Rental Fund 2021 Technology Rental Fund Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 136,016 $ 136,016 $ 117,002-13.98% February 289,014 152,998 March 384,228 95,214 April 451,482 67,254 May 540,191 88,709 June 631,052 90,861 July 710,229 79,177 August 802,445 92,216 September 897,442 94,997 October 980,269 82,826 November 1,061,491 81,223 December 1,251,409 189,918 Finance Technology Rental Fund 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Year Budget � Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Finance 2021 Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 115,331 $ 115,331 $ 137,736 19.43% February 200,151 84,821 March 286,138 85,987 April 373,267 87,129 May 460,772 87,505 June 569,205 108,432 July 661,728 92,524 August 746,841 85,112 September 842,777 95,936 October 931,701 88,925 November 1,017,542 85,840 December 1,104,378 86,836 Finance 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 4 CPO` 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC +Current Yeaz Budget � Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. O Q d C C LL t C O N O N M 7 C O CL O U a M a LL t r C O r N O N 7 C O 7 C d E t V M r Q 27 Packet Pg. 141 I 7.5.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -City Attorney 2021 City Attorney Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 78,040 $ 78,040 $ 69,941-10.38% February 1S6,080 78,040 March 234,120 78,040 April 312,160 78,040 May 390,200 78,040 June 468,240 78,040 July 546,280 78,040 August 624,320 78,040 September 702,360 78,040 October 780,400 78,040 November 858,440 78,040 December 936,480 78,040 Police City Attorney 1,000,000 900,000 800,000 700,000 _100000- 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC -*-- Current Year Budget � Prior Year City of'Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Police 2021 Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 925,403 $ 925,403 $ 992,942 7.30% February 1,886,416 961,013 March 2,829,982 943,566 April 3,782,981 952,999 May 4,725,632 942,651 June 5,729,411 1,003,779 July 6,736,463 1,007,052 August 7,660,147 923,684 September 8,630,143 969,996 October 9,691,161 1,061,018 November 10,910,020 1,218,859 December 11,917,523 1,007,503 Police 12,000,000 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Year Budget Prior Year Q *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. Z$ Packet Pg. 142 I 7.5.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Development Services 2021 Development Services Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 244,151 $ 244,151 $ 219,157-10.24% February 512,682 268,530 March 780,153 267,471 April 1,064,982 284,829 May 1,353,718 288,736 June 1,619,863 266,145 July 1,907,483 287,620 August 2,201,287 293,804 September 2,485,656 284,370 October 2,763,764 278,107 November 3,086,765 323,002 December 3,419,119 332,354 Parks &z Recreation Development Services 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC --0-- Current Yeaz Budget - Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Parks & Recreation 2021 Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 304,498 $ 304,498 $ 308,283 1.24% February 620,652 316,154 March 956,699 336,047 April 1,305,795 349,096 May 1,666,114 360,320 June 2,028,272 362,158 July 2,484,241 455,969 August 3,009,180 524,938 September 3,435,053 425,873 October 3,799,710 364,658 November 4,117,176 317,466 December 4,503,783 386,607 Parks & Recreation 5,000,000 4,500,000 4,000,000 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC +Current Yeaz Budget � Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 29 Packet Pg. 143 I 7.5.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Public Works Administration 2021 Public Works Administration Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 41,785 $ 41,785 $ 40,605 -2.82% February 84,383 42,598 March 126,606 42,223 April 169,031 42,425 May 211,539 42,508 June 254,896 43,358 July 298,440 43,543 August 340,623 42,183 September 382,623 42,000 October 423,711 41,088 November 465,344 41,633 December 508,553 43,209 Facilities Maintenance Public Works Administration 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC � Current Yeaz Budget � Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Facilities Maintenance 2021 Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 166,680 $ 166,680 $ 142,909-14.26% February 346,708 180,027 March 529,946 183,238 April 702,232 172,286 May 888,675 186,443 June 1,037,310 148,634 July 1,216,290 178,980 August 1,406,137 189,848 September 1,612,152 206,015 October 1,886,923 274,771 November 2,112,684 225,761 December 2,427,699 315,015 Facilities Maintenance 4,000,000 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC -*-- Current Year Budget � Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. O Q N C O C LL t C O N O N O 7 c O CL O U a O a LL t r C O r N O N 7 C M 7 C E t C� r Q 30 Packet Pg. 144 I 7.5.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Engineering 2021 Engineering Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 211,557 $ 211,557 $ 218,316 3.20% February 421,058 209,501 March 649,561 228,503 April 886,152 236,591 May 1,124,971 238,819 June 1,364,775 239,803 July 1,608,706 243,931 August 1,859,537 250,831 September 2,090,173 230,636 October 2,325,192 235,019 November 2,546,320 221,128 December 2,778,432 232,112 *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 31 Packet Pg. 145 I 7.5.a I INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO SUMMARY Issuer Diversification Seattle WA Muni, 10% WA, 12% FFCB, City of Edmonds Investment Portfolio Detail As of January 31, 2021 Years Agency/ Investment Purchase to Par Market Maturity Coupon Issuer Type Price Maturity Value Value Date Rate First Financial CD 3,000,000 0.19 3,000,000 3,000,000 04/10/21 2.86% Port of Seattle WA Bonds 273,305 0.25 270,000 271,242 05/01/21 2.23% Grant Cnty WA Bonds 410,553 0.92 405,000 410,589 01/01/22 1.79% FFCB Bonds 1,998,548 1.37 2,000,000 2,047,512 06/14/22 1.88% Energy Northwest Bonds 1,466,077 1.41 1,345,000 1,437,079 07/01/22 5.00% Energy Northwest Bonds 260,748 1.41 250,000 259,118 07/01/22 2.95% Mason & Kitsap Cnty WA Bonds 948,084 1.83 855,000 928,906 12/01/22 5.00% Grant Cnty WA Bonds 1,517,955 1.92 1,500,000 1,534,905 01/01/23 1.54% Grant Cnty WA Bonds 576,332 1.92 520,000 568,038 01/01/23 5.00% Seattle WA Muni Bonds 2,224,500 2.00 2,000,000 2,193,220 02/01/23 5.00% FHLB Bonds 1,996,590 2.68 2,000,000 1,999,686 10/05/23 0.22% First Financial - ECA CD 2,803,516 2.79 2,803,516 2,803,516 11/15/23 2.08% Kent WA Bonds 286,648 2.83 250,000 284,008 12/01/23 5.00% Spokane County WA Bonds 259,075 3.84 250,000 264,913 12/01/24 2.10% First Financial - Waterfront Center CD 2,000,000 6.75 2,000,000 2,000,000 11/01/27 0.25% TOTAL SECURITIES 20,021,929 2.14 19,448,516 20,002,730 Washington State Local Gov't Investment Pool 24,409,886 24,409,886 Demand 0.14% Snohomish County Local Gov't Investment Pool 20,170,697 20,170,697 Demand 1.43% TOTAL PORTFOLIO $ 64,029,099 $ 64,583,313 Port of Kent WA, Seattle 1% Mason & Kitsap Cnty WA, 4% Grant Cnty J . 10% Energy FHLB, Spokane Northwest, 10% _ County 8% WA, 1% Fi rst Financial - CD, 40%4 Checking, Cash and Investment Balances $0.9 , 1%—__ (in $Millions) Bonds, $11.6, 18% State LGIP, CD's, $7.8, $24.4, 38% 12% County LGIP, I 32 Packet Pg. 146 1 I 7.5.a I INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO SUMMARY Annual Interest Income $1,400, 000 $1,306, 698 $1,200,000 $1,000,000 917 754 $970,550 $800,000 $653,690 $600,000 423,816 $400,000 $200,000 0 $123,799 $- 11 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 YTD 2021 Edmonds Rate of Return Compared to Benchmark (Rolling 12 months) - - 6 Month Treasury Rate (Benchmark) City Blended Rate 2.0% — 1.8% 1.5% 1.3% 1.0% % 0.8% 0.5 % 0.3% _ _ _ _ February April June August October December Maturity Distribution and Rate of Return $6,000,000 5.00% $ 5,000, 000 4.00% $4,000,000 3.00% $3,000,000 $2,000,000 2.00% $1,000,000 1.00% $- - 0.00% 0-6 Mo 6-12 12-18 18-24 24-30 30-36 36-42 42-48 48-54 54-60 60-66 66-72 72-78 78-84 Mo Mo Mo Mo Mo Mo Mo Mo Mo Mo Mo Mo Mo 33 Packet Pg. 147 1 7.5.a GENERAL FUND OVERVIEW CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES BALANCES GENERAL FUND ---- ACTUAL ---- ---- ACTUAL ---- & SUBFUNDS 1 /31 /2021 1 /31 /2021 Q1 YTD Fund Balance Cash Balance 001-General Fund " $ 8,843,662 $ 6,091,706 $ (1,748,216 009-Leoff-Medical Ins. Reserve 501,553 501,553 0 (35,624 0. 012-Contingency Reserve Fund 1,768,863 1,768,863 014-Historic Preservation Gift Fund 17,096 17,097 - .v 016-Building Maintenance 210,221 210,221 c 017 - Marsh Restoration & Preservation 864,616 864,616 - ii 018 - Edmonds Homelessness Response 123,581 123,581 - 019 - Edmonds Opioid Response 28,445 28,445 .r - 0 Total General Fund & Subfunds $ 12,358,037 $ 9,606,082 $ - $ (1,783,839 *$2,000,000 of the General Fund Balance has been assigned by management for the development of Civic Field. N N *$7,267,031of the fund balance in Fund 001 added to the $1,768,863 balance in Fund 012, represent the required 20% operating reserve. R 1` 0 GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS OVERVIEW 2 U U_ CHANGE IN FUND 2' FUND BALANCES BALANCES c GOVERNMENTAL ---- ACTUAL ---- 0 ---- ACTUAL ---- 2 FUNDS 1 /31 /2021 1 /31 /2021 Q1 YTD c Fund Balance Cash Balance N c� General Fund & Subfunds $ 12,358,037 $ 9,606,082 $ (1,783,839 c Special Revenue 10,330,042 9,928,663 542,384 Debt Service - - - m Capital Projects 5,980,832 5,987,481 11,093 t Total Governmental Funds $ 28,668,911 $ 25,522,226 1 $ - $ (1,230,362 43 Q *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. 34 Packet Pg. 148 7.5.a SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS OVERVIEW FUND BALANCES CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES ---- ACTUAL ---- ---- ACTUAL ---- GOVERNMENTAL SPECIAL REVENUE 1/31/2021 1/31/2021 Q1 YTD Fund Balance Cash Balance 104 - Drug Enforcement Fund $ 74,238 $ 74,352 $ 310 111 - Street Fund 830,465 834,529 (163,911 112- Combined Street Const/Improve 1,638,828 1,450,272 9,353 Q. 117 - Municipal Arts Acquis. Fund 679,521 679,521 (1,584 118 - Memorial Street Tree 20,258 20,258 84 120 - Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Fund 61,926 61,926 2,127 Z 121 - Employee Parking Permit Fund 111,133 111,133 4,308 c 122 - Youth Scholarship Fund 13,854 13,854 58 ii 123 -Tourism Promotional Fund/Arts 79,414 79,415 1,560 2, 125 - Real Estate Tax 2 2,589,088 2,589,088 319,515 126 - Real Estate Excise Tax 1 2,326,313 2,326,312 322,781 0 127 - Gifts Catalog Fund 298,234 298,235 984 130 - Cemetery Maintenance/Improvement 213,556 213,555 8,730 0 136 - Parks Trust Fund 166,972 166,971 696 N, 137 - Cemetery Maintenance Trust Fund 1,094,366 1,094,366 6,911 m 138- Sister CityCommission 10,387 10,387 43 140 -Business Improvement Disrict 42,875 42,876 23,723 141 - Affordable and Supportive Housing Fd 78,441 78,441 6,696 142 - Edmonds Cares Fund 174 (216,826) - Q. Total Special Revenue $ 10,330,042 $ 9,928,663 1 $ - $ 542,384 *$200,000 of the fund balance in Fund 125 has been reserved for Marsh Restoration Funding. ENTERPRISE FUNDS OVERVIEW c LL O FUND BALANCES CHANGE IN FUND o ---- ACTUAL ---- ---- ACTUAL ---- N ENTERPRISE FUNDS 1/31/2021 1/31/2021 Q1 YTD Fund Balance Cash Balance 421 -Water Utility Fund $ 21,527,615 $ 5,344,238 $ 503,354 c m 422 - Storm Utility Fund * 9,922,344 4,389,179 639,502 E 423 - Sewer/WWTP Utility Fund 39,403,158 19,761,274 1,801,142 Q 424 - Bond Reserve Fund 843,962 843,974 1 411 -Combined Utility Operation 80 37,899 80 Total Enterprise Funds $ 71,697,158 $ 30,376,564 $ - $ 2,944,079 *$250,000 of the Storm Utility Fund Balance has been reserved for Marsh Restoration Funding. *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. 35 Packet Pg. 149 7.5.a SUMMARY OVERVIEW CHANGE IN FUND FUND BALANCES BALANCES CITY-WIDE ---- ACTUAL ---- ---- ACTUAL ---- 1 /31 /2021 1 /31 /2021 Q1 YTD Fund Balance Cash Balance Governmental Funds $ 28,668,910 $ 25,522,226 $ (1,230,362 Enterprise Funds 71,697,158 30,376,564 2,944,079 0. Internal Services Fund 9,398,166 5,372,443 (30,850 am Agency Funds 112,185 112,185 (7,930 Total City-wide Total $ 109,876,420 $ 61,383,417 $ - $ 1,674,937 c ii t .r c 0 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS OVERVIEW N 0 N R 7 C R 7 FUND BALANCES CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES ---- ACTUAL ---- ---- ACTUAL ---- INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS 1 /31 /2021 1 /31 /2021 Q1 YTD Fund Balance Cash Balance ii 511 - Equipment Rental Fund $ 8,474,401 $ 4,632,081 $ (17,085 >, t 512 -Technology Rental Fund 923,765 740,363 (13,766 c 0 Total Internal Service Funds $ 9,398,166 $ 5,372,443 $ - $ (30,850 N 0 N fC 3 C fC 7 C d E L V r Q *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. 36 Packet Pg. 150 7.6 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/16/2021 Authorization for Mayor to sign a Supplemental Agreement with Murraysmith for the Phase 9 Sewerline Replacement Project Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History On February 18, 2020 Council approved MurraySmith to be the consultant to provide design services for the Phase 8 and Phase 9 Sewerline Replacement Projects and authorized the mayor to sign the Professional Services Agreement for the projects that were scheduled to be designed as part of the Phase 8 Sewerline Replacement Project. On March 9, 2021, staff presented this item to the Parks and Public Works Committee and it was forwarded to the March 16th consent agenda for City Council approval. Staff Recommendation Authorize Mayor to sign the Supplement. Narrative The City issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) in November 2019 to hire a consultant to provide design engineering services for the Phase 8 and 9 Sewerline Replacement Projects. The City received statements of qualifications from four engineering firms and the selection committee selected MurraySmith to provide design engineering services for the Phase 8 and 9 Sewerline Replacement Projects. On February 18, 2020 Council approved MurraySmith to be the consultant to provide design services for the Phase 8 and Phase 9 Sewerline Replacement Projects and authorized the mayor to sign the Professional Services Agreement for the projects that were scheduled to be designed as part of the Phase 8 Sewerline Replacement Project. A separate contract has now been negotiated for projects planned to be constructed in 2022. The City has negotiated a consultant fee of $419,885. This agreement will allow MurraySmith to provide services for the design of this project. This contract will be funded by the Sewer Utility Fund. The selection of sites were determined using the data supplied in the 2013 Comprehensive Sewer System Plan, coordinating with upcoming road, water, and storm drain projects, and input from Public Works maintenance staff. Projects will focus on replacement of pipes that have minimal slopes and existing pipe damage/degradation that cannot be addressed via trenchless construction methods. Attachments: Packet Pg. 151 7.6 MSA Supplemental Agreement Map of Phase 9 Sewer replacement design projects Packet Pg. 152 7.6.a nl CDt19p�� CITY OF EDMONDS MIKE NELSON 121 5T" AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 - 425-771-0220 - FAX 425-672-5750 MAYOR Website. www edmondswa,gov f890 19�° PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Engineering Division SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT 1 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT Phase 9 Sewerline Replacement Project WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds, Washington, hereinafter referred to as the "City", and Murraysmtih, hereinafter referred to as the "Consultant", entered into an underlying agreement for design, engineering and consulting services with respect to a project known as Phase 9 Sewerline Replacement Project, dated February 20, 2020; and WHEREAS, additional tasks to the original Scope of Work have been identified with regard to providing engineering services, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual benefits occurring, it is agreed by and between the parties thereto as follows: 1. The underlying Agreement of February 20, 2020 between the parties, incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth, is amended in, but only in, the following respects: 1.1 Scope of Work. The Scope of Work set forth in the underlying agreement shall be amended to include the additional services and material necessary to accomplish the stated objectives as outlined in the attached Exhibit A incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth. 1.2 The $371,912 amount set forth in paragraph 2A of the underlying Agreement and stated as an amount which shall not be exceeded, is hereby amended to include an additional not to exceed amount of $419,885 for the additional scope of work identified in Exhibit A to this supplemental agreement. As a result of this supplemental agreement, the total contract amount is increased to a new total not -to -exceed amount of $791,797 ($371,912 plus $419,885). 1.3 Exhibit B to the underlying agreement consisting of the rate and cost reimbursement schedule is hereby amended to include the form set forth on the attached Exhibit B to this addendum, incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth. Packet Pg. 153 7.6.a 2. In all other respects, the underlying agreement between the parties shall remain in full force and effect, amended as set forth in Supplemental Agreement No. 1 but only as set forth herein. DONE this day of , 20 CITY OF EDMONDS MURRAYSMITH By: Michael Nelson, Mayor ATTEST/AUTHENTICATE: Scott Passey, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney By: Tom Lindberg, PE I Principal Engineer s a Packet Pg. 154 7.6.a STATE OF WASHINGTON ) )ss COUNTY OF ) On this day of , 20 , before me, the under -signed, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared , to me known to be the of the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: s a \\edmsvr-deptfs\Engineering\Staf \Megan\Engineering Admin\PROJECTS\E2IGA.Ph 9 Sewerline ReplacemenAMurraysmith.Supp Ldoc Packet Pg. 155 7.6.a EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Project City of Edmonds Introduction/General/Background This Scope of Services has been separated into multiple different tasks for clarity and is described in detail below. ■ Task 1: Project Management ■ Task 2: Data Collection and Utility Coordination ■ Task 3: Preliminary Design ■ Task 4: Final Design ■ Task 5: Bidding Assistance (Limited) ■ Task 6: Engineering Support During Construction (Limited) ■ Task 7: Survey Services (DHA) ■ Task 8: Geotechnical Engineering Services (HWA) ■ Task 9: Potholing Services (APS, Limited) ■ Task 10: Unanticipated Task Reserve (As Needed) Project Understanding and Assumptions Murraysmith has developed the following scope of work and fee estimate to provide engineering services for the City of Edmonds (City) 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Project. This is the second phase of a 2-year program that is accomplished through two (2) separate design -bid -build packages with the first set of sites constructed in Phase 8 and the second set of sites constructed in Phase 9. This scope includes preliminary and final design engineering services for all sites in Phase 9, except Site 4 which was completed to the preliminary design level as part of Phase 8. The specific project locations and phasing were reviewed with the City and are described below. 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Sites ■ Site 1: 76th Avenue W, from 239th Place SW south to 241st Street SW, east along 241st Street SW, south along Beeson Place, extending east in a sewer easement onto Private Property. City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement February 2021 1 Packet Pg. 156 7.6.a ■ Site 2: Olympic View Drive, from 180th Street SW south to 7601 Olympic View Drive, east across Private Property to 70th Avenue W, including 180th Street SW and Private Properties off of Olympic View Drive. ■ Site 3: Alley between 3rd Avenue N and 4th Avenue N, from Main Street northeast to Bell Street. ■ Site 4: 203rd Street SW, from 77th Avenue W, along 203rd Street SW through Private Property to 7803 202nd Place SW. Scope of Services Consultant will perform the following services. Task 1 - Project Management Objective Provide overall leadership and team guidance aligned with City staff objectives. Coordinate, monitor, and control the project resources to meet the technical, communication, and contractual obligations required for developing and implementing the project scope. Activities 1.1 Correspondence and Coordination with City All communication will be coordinated through the City's Project Manager. Correspondence with the City Project Manager via phone conversations and e-mail will include the communication of project decisions, project status, work activities, and issues requiring City input. 1.2 Budget Review, Invoices and Progress Reports Murraysmith's Project Manager will monitor project costs and manage budget and billing tasks, including preparation and submission of monthly invoices and progress reports. 1.3 Kick-off and Project Coordination Meetings Prepare for and conduct project kick-off meeting with City staff and key team members to discuss the project, review project schedule, and discuss key elements of the project. In addition, prepare for and conduct up to three (3) project coordination or review meetings with City staff to discuss project elements. Prepare meeting agenda and record meeting summary to document items discussed and transmit to City. City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement March 2021 2 G:\PDX_BD\Cllents\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To Gty\Phase 9 Revised Final Scope and Fee_2021-03-04\Exh A- 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Scope_FINAL revised.docx Packet Pg. 157 7.6.a 1.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Perform in-house quality assurance reviews of all deliverables. Deliverables ■ Correspondence, emails, and other documentation ■ Consultant shall deliver to the City a monthly invoice and status report covering: o Work on the project performed during the previous month o Meetings attended o Problems encountered and actions taken for their resolution o Potential impacts to submittal dates, budget shortfalls, or optional services ■ Kick-off meeting agenda and summary ■ Project coordination meeting agenda and summary Assumptions ■ Consultant assumes a Notice to Proceed date by April 1, 2021. ■ Consultant will prepare for and attend one (1) kick-off meeting and up to three (3) project coordination or review meetings during the design phase. Meetings shall be two (2) hours in duration, attended by two (2) staff. ■ Project duration will be 12 months; therefore, it is assumed that there will be up to 12 progress payments/status reports. Task 2 — Data Collection and Utility Coordination Objective This task consists of data gathering and utility coordination work. City Involvement ■ CCTV inspection and deficiency reports ■ Provide all available as -built documents for City facilities Activities 2.1 Data Collection and Review Work under this subtask includes gathering and reviewing all relevant data to complete the preliminary engineering tasks. A number of documents and reports will be requested and City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement March 2021 3 G:\PDX—BD\Clients\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To City\Phase 9 Revised Final Scope and Fee_2021-03-04\Exh A - 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Scope_FINAL revised.docx Packet Pg. 158 reviewed as part of this task, including record drawings and CCTV inspections and deficiency reports. Murraysmith will develop a formal "Request for Information" process and coordinate with the City during data collection to ensure all necessary information is gathered for the project. This will also include obtaining the City of Lynnwood's construction standards for Site 2. 2.2 Utility Coordination and Analysis Collect and review existing available utility system mapping, perform a utility conflict analysis, and identify potential utility conflicts. Develop a list of potential conflict locations to obtain specific utility information including dimensions, location, and depth, utilizing potholing techniques on an as -needed basis. Potholing, if needed, will be completed under Task 9. Deliverables ■ Electronic copy of formal "Request for Information" Assumptions ■ Murraysmith will review relevant data for all project locations. Task 3 — Preliminary Design Objective This task provides for preliminary engineering design services for the proposed Phase 9 sanitary sewer replacement project sites, with exception of Site 4, which was designed to the preliminary design level under Phase 8. City Involvement ■ Complete review of the preliminary design drawings, engineer's opinion of probable construction cost and all supporting documentation with verbal or written comments. City review period is assumed to be two (2) weeks. ■ City to prepare and submit any required JARPA to Department of Ecology or Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. ■ Take the lead in coordinating all State and Federal permits. Activities 3.1 Plans (30% Design Completion Level) Using the project information developed in the previous tasks, prepare preliminary design drawings to the 30% design completion level. Preliminary drawings will show plan and profile views City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement March 2021 4 GAPD%—BD\Clients\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To City\Phase 9 Revised Final Scope and Fee_2021-03-04\Exh A - 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Scope_FINAL revised.docx Packet Pg. 159 7.6.a and major project elements. Drawings will be developed at 1 inch=20 feet scale in AutoCAD electronic format. The drawings will be prepared and submitted to the City for review and comment. 3.2 Engineer's Opinion of Probable Construction Cost A preliminary engineer's opinion of probable construction cost to 30% design completion level will be developed and include a schedule of estimated quantities, unit prices, and total preliminary construction cost for the project. 3.3 Permitting Support (Limited) Provide assistance as required in developing figures, preliminary plans, information, and supporting graphic documentation for permits prepared and submitted by the City. Deliverables 1. One (1) electronic copy in PDF format of the 30% design drawings 2. One (1) electronic copy of engineer's opinion of probable construction cost 3. Electronic copy of 30% design drawings in AutoCAD Civil 3D 2019 format Assumptions ■ Project Contract Documents including specifications will not be prepared for the preliminary design phase. ■ Murraysmith will follow the City's cost estimating policy in preparing the Engineer's Opinion of Probable Construction Cost. ■ Cost estimates for each site will be prepared as separate bid schedules. ■ Preliminary design will be completed for Sites 1, 2, and 3. ■ Preliminary design of Site 4 completed during Phase 8 work will be incorporated into the preliminary design. ■ Preliminary design plans to include plan and profile sheets. ■ At Site 1, a Shoreline Permit will not be required, as the segment within the 200-foot buffer of Lake Ballinger is replacement of the existing sewer and is therefore classified as a maintenance/replacement project. Critical Areas Study and a Mitigation Report will not be required for this site. ■ At Site 2, the Critical Areas Study and the Mitigation Report related to the crossing of the Perrinville Creek and associated wetland buffer is not a part of this scope of work. Work City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement March 2021 5 G:\PDX_BD\Clients\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To City\Phase 9 Revised Flnal Scope and Fee 2021-03-04\Exh A - 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerhne Replacement Scope_FINAL revised.docx Packet Pg. 160 7.6.a for finalizing the study and report will be completed under the 2021 (Phase 8) Sewerline Replacement scope of work. ■ The City is responsible for any SEPA/DARPA/HPA requirements for the project sites. Task 4 —Final Design Objective This task will produce final plans for the project with direction from the City received in the preliminary design work task for the sites that will be incorporated into the 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement bid package. Final design plans will be presented at the 60% and 90% completion level for review by the City. Final bid ready plans at the 100% completion level will incorporate all prior review comments and will be suitable for bidding. City Involvement ■ Complete review of the documents at 60% and 90% design completion level with verbal or written comments. City review period for the submittal is 2 weeks. ■ Provide electronic files and periodic updates of text, forms, schedules, and other components of the contract documents, including preferred front-end sections. ■ AutoCAD drawings of standard details to be incorporated into the contract documents. ■ Take the lead in coordinating all State and Federal permits. ■ Attendance and participation in coordination meetings with City of Lynnwood for Site 2 Activities 4.1 Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (60% and 90% Design Completion Level) A. The preliminary design drawings (30% design completion level) will be revised and further developed to incorporate comments from the City's review of the preliminary design. Develop design plans and engineer's opinion of probable construction cost to approximately 60% and 90% design completion level. A preliminary list of drawings anticipated in the complete plan set is shown below; actual list may differ depending on final set of improvements to be designed. Drawing No. Description General G1 Cover Sheet, Vicinity Map, List of Drawings G2 Legend and Abbreviations G3 General Notes City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement March 2021 6 G-\PDX_BD\Clients\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To City\Phase 9 Revised Final Scope and Fee_2021-03-04\Exh A- 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerlme Replacement Scope_FINAL revised.docx Packet Pg. 161 7.6.a G4 through G5 Survey Control Plan and Notes Civil C1 through C17 Sewer Plan and Profile D1 through D6 Civil Details B. Murraysmith will prepare technical specifications and appendices to support the design, which will be included in the project Contract Documents. Specifications will be prepared based on the WSDOT Standard Specifications, latest edition, and the City's standard supplemental special provisions. C. An engineer's opinion of probable construction cost will be developed and will include a schedule of estimated quantities, unit prices, and total construction cost for the project. D. Submit 60% and 90% design packages, including complete plan set, specifications, and engineer's opinion of probable construction cost, to the City for review and comment. 4.2 Final Bid Ready Plans, Specifications & Estimate A. The 90% design package will be revised and further developed to incorporate comments from the City's review of the 90% design. Develop design plans and engineer's opinion of probable construction cost that are ready for bidding. Revise bid proposal quantities to reflect a bid -ready design package. B. Submit stamped and signed bid -ready Contract Documents to City for distribution. 4.3 Constructability Review Provide a limited constructability review of the proposed improvements and identify issues that could affect the construction of the improvements as designed or the construction schedule. 4.4 Coordination with the City of Lynnwood Site 2 discharges into the City of Lynnwood's collection system. Contact the City of Lynnwood to review the project and identify any project constraints or requirements. Deliverables ■ Submissions for 60% and 90% design packages include an electronic copy in PDF format of plan set, specifications (also in MS Word), engineer's opinion of probable construction cost and breakdown of quantities by sheet in MS Excel via email. ■ Electronic copy of 60%, 90%, and 100% design drawings in AutoCAD 2019 Civil 3D format via email ■ Final bid ready plans and specifications in PDF format via email City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement March 2021 7 G:\PD% BD\Clients\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To City\Phase 9 Revised Final Scope and Fee_2021-03-04\Exh A - 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Scope_FINAL revised.docx Packet Pg. 162 Assumptions ■ Murraysmith shall apply a Washington Professional Engineer's stamp with signature and date on the final bid -ready edition of the design plans and specifications. ■ Review comments will be received in a complete, single submittal. Multiple rounds of review comments on the same design completion submittal are not anticipated. ■ Contractor shall be responsible for the development of traffic control and erosion control plans. ■ City to coordinate and submit bid -ready contract documents to Builders Exchange or similar service. ■ Murraysmith will follow the City's cost estimating policy in preparing the Engineer's Opinion of Probable Construction Cost. ■ Cost estimates and design plans for each site will be prepared as separate bid schedules ■ Restoration Plan sheets will not be developed. Task 5 — Bidding Assistance (Limited) Objective This task includes supporting the City on an as -needed basis, providing assistance during bidding of the Phase 8 project. City Involvement ■ Take the lead in tasks associated with printing bid documents, document distribution, bid advertisement, addenda distribution, plan holder administration, bid evaluation, bid tabulation, etc. ■ Host the pre -bid conference. Activities 5.1 Bidder Inquiries and Addenda Respond to questions from bidders, subcontractors, equipment suppliers, and other vendors regarding the project, plans, and specifications. Maintain a written record of communications during the bidding process. Prepare and provide information for the issuance of any addenda as necessary to clarify the contract documents. City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement March 2021 8 G-\PDX_BD\Clients\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To City\Phase 9 Revised Final Scope and Fee_2021-03-04\Exh A - 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerlme Replacement Scope FINAL revised.docx Packet Pg. 163 7.6.a Deliverables ■ Draft addenda as required for the City to distribute to plan holders Assumptions ■ Murraysmith's support services during bidding will be performed up to the extent of the fee estimate for the Bidding Support task, unless otherwise approved in advance by the City through a budget amendment or authorization to invoice against the Unanticipated Task Reserve budget. ■ Murraysmith will not charge for addenda if they are needed to correct or clarify errors or omissions in the bid documents. Task 6 — Engineering Support During Construction (Limited) Objective This task represents minimal involvement by Murraysmith during construction in support of the City's on -site inspector and construction management staff for the Phase 9 project. Murraysmith's services will be provided on an as -needed basis and will be limited to incidental support and periodic collaboration with the City and the construction contractor, all at the direction of the City. City Involvement ■ Initial review of all requests for information ■ Full-time on -site inspection and take the lead in administrating and managing the construction contract and communicating with the construction contractor ■ Single copy of complete and fully coordinated construction markups for production of record drawings Activities 6.1 Pre -Construction Conference Attend a pre -construction conference for the project and provide support to the City for specific agenda items. 6.2 Clarifications and Changes At the request of the City, Murraysmith will assist with issuing clarifications to the construction contractor and producing design changes if necessary. City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacemer` March 2021 9 GAPDX_BD\Clients\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To City\Phase 9 Revised Final Scope and Fee_2021-03-04\Exh A- 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Scope_FINAL revised.docx Packet Pg. 164 7.6.a 6.3 Record Drawings (As -built Drawings) Prepare record drawings in AutoCAD to indicate changes made during construction, based on notes and sketches provided by the City. Deliverables ■ Written clarifications and design plan modifications, as requested ■ One (1) electronic copy in PDF format of record drawings ■ Electronic copy of record drawings in AutoCAD Civil3D 2019 format Assumptions ■ Murraysmith will not be involved in construction meetings, on -site construction observation/inspection, submittal review, and other construction administration/ management activities not identified above. ■ Murraysmith's support services during construction will be performed up to the extent of the fee estimate for the Construction Management Assistance task, unless otherwise approved in advance by the City through a budget amendment or authorization to invoice against the Unanticipated Task Reserve budget. ■ For the purpose of developing this scope of work and associated fee estimate, two (2) clarifications and one (1) design change are anticipated. ■ Geotechnical monitoring and compaction testing services during construction will be provided by a firm retained by the City. Task 7 — Survey Services (DHA) Objective This task will provide surveying and base mapping services prepared by a licensed professional surveyor, which will be used to produce the design plans for the Phase 9 sites with previously completed survey segments from Phase 8 for Site 2. Surveying will be conducted by Murraysmith's subconsultant Duane Hartman & Associates, Inc. (DHA). Murraysmith will coordinate the extent of the survey and review and provide comments on the base mapping to the surveyor. City Involvement ■ City crews will locate and surface mark all water service connections, sewer laterals and storm laterals in advance of field surveys. ■ Review electronic copy of base map and provide written comments. City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement March 2021 10 G'\PD%_BD\Clients\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Protect 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To City\Phase 9 Revised Final Scope and Fee_2021-03-04\Exh A- 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Scope FINAL revised.docx Packet Pg. 165 7.6.a ■ Coordinate right -of -entry for surveying on private property. Activities 7.1 Control Horizontal control (NAD 83/91) and vertical control (NAVD 88) shall be established from the nearest approved City control monument for each of the various project sites. Control monument selection and survey methodology to be used shall be coordinated with and approved by the City prior to beginning the control survey. All survey control work shall be recorded in a field book. 7.2 Utility Locates Order and perform design locates (surface markings) of all known underground utilities and coordinate with City crews to physically locate all water service and sewer connections in the field, and incorporate those locations into the base maps. All other underground utility lines and services to be approximated based on painted surface markings and/or existing record as -built drawings obtained. 7.3 Survey Scope Show all known utilities including individual service lines, water meters, curb stops, water and gas valves, manholes, catch basins, power poles, buried power lines, etc. Survey the painted utility locate marks and coordinate the survey with utility locate personnel. Provide invert elevations of pipes, swales, ditches, or other conveyances for surface runoff, and lid and invert elevations for catch basins and manholes. Show right-of-way, centerline, property boundaries, and easements on plans. Locate and map all private structures within City right-of-way and easements. Show property lines and field check street addresses. Existing City sewer easement documentation will be reviewed and verified to confirm existing easement locations. 7.4 Base Mapping The preliminary survey base map will be submitted electronically for review in PDF format. Base mapping will be provided at a scale of 1 inch=20 feet and topographic contours at 2-foot intervals. Provide full-size hard copies of the final survey control drawing for project use. 7.5 Boundary Survey & Easement Development & Staking (As Needed) Work under this subtask will be performed on an as -needed basis and will include a boundary survey, sewer easement generation, and sewer easement staking. This subtask will be authorized by the City prior to beginning work, should the City determine this work is necessary. Work will include researching platted and recorded surveys in Snohomish County Assessor's office. Field surveyors will locate controlling monuments to generate property boundaries. Existing site features and sanitary sewer manholes will be located and shown on the Record of Survey. Sewer City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement March 2021 11 G:\PDX_BD\Cl`ents\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To City\Phase 9 Revised Final Scope and Fee_2021-03-04\Exh A - 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Scope FINAL revised.docx Packet Pg. 166 7.6.a easements will be created as instructed for width over the affected parcels. The easements will be shown on the Record of survey for each of the parcels. Easement will be staked in the field as specified in width and length. Deliverables ■ Base mapping at scale of 1 inch=20 feet and topographic contours at 2-foot intervals. ■ Copies of field notes, field book with survey control data, computer listings, and computer readable files of the survey data points. ■ Survey control drawing that is stamped and signed by a professional land surveyor. ■ Digital AutoCAD files containing boundary survey, easements, and associated sanitary sewer and property information. Assumptions ■ Topographic survey will be prepared for all sites. ■ Right-of-way limits will be shown using available GIS and AutoCAD information. ■ Surveyor will provide private utility locator to perform locating services. ■ The portion of Site 2 surveyed under Phase 8 will be incorporated into the project basemap. The area between Olympic View Drive and 76th Avenue W will not be re- surveyed. ■ Survey of Site 4 is not included as part of this scope of work. ■ Easements over existing sewer main and all adjacent Private Properties will be shown on the survey. ■ Field stake and prepare up to five (5) easement documents. Each easement document will be two (2) pages consisting of a map exhibit, and a legal description page containing square footage and acreage, signed and sealed by professional land surveyor. ■ Easement boundary surveys will be recorded with the Snohomish County Assessor's office and PDF copies will be sent to the City. City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement March 2021 12 G;\PDX_BD\Clients\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To City\Phase 9 Revised Final Scope and Fee_2021-03-04\Exh A - 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Scope_FINAL revlsed.docx Packet Pg. 167 7.6.a Task 8 — Geotechnical Engineering Services (HWA) Objective Murraysmith's geotechnical engineering subconsultant, HWA GeoSciences, Inc. (HWA) will conduct a geotechnical investigation including field investigations (borings), laboratory testing, technical evaluation, and design recommendations for Sites 1, 2, and 3. City Involvement ■ City crews will locate and surface mark all water service connections and sewer laterals in advance of borings. ■ Provide right-of-way use permit and City owned utility locates for exploration program. ■ Review proposed boring locations and make site visit to confirm proposed exploration program. ■ Provide available existing geotechnical investigation documents from past projects within the project vicinity. ■ Review and provide comments on the Draft Exploration Plan. ■ Review and provide comments on the Draft Geotechnical Engineering Report. Activities 8.1 Review Available Geotechnical Information Review available geotechnical information from and in the vicinity of the project sites to get a better idea of the general geology of the site and surrounding area. This includes review of geologic maps, HWA's library of geotechnical information in the area, and data from online databases. 8.2 Obtain City Street Use Permit Traffic control plans will be generated for the proposed drilling at Sites 1 and 2 where required drilling will be within the roadway and is anticipated to impact traffic. A WSDOT standard traffic control plans, requiring lane closures with flaggers, are anticipated to be adequate for this project. All required rights of entry and street use permits will be provided by the City at no cost. 8.3 Coordinate with the of City for Work Within Private Property HWA will work with Murraysmith and the City for permission to drill within private properties for sites where sewer lines run through private properties. City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement March 2021 13 G:\PDX_BD\Clients\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To City\Phase 9 Revised Final Scope and Fee_2021-03-04\Exh A - 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Scope FINAL revised.docx Packet Pg. 168 8.4 Plan and Coordinate Field Exploration Program HWA will plan and coordinate the geotechnical field exploration program for this project. Following the City's Geotechnical Engineering requirements for Utility Project Design, HWA proposes to drill at least five (5) boreholes at least 5 feet deeper than the proposed excavations. Borings will be extended deeper (to at least twice the excavation depth) if the conditions encountered indicate that dewatering with wells may be required. For estimating purposes, it is assumed one (1) site may need dewatering with wells (Site 1 due to its close proximity to Lake Ballinger). HWA will coordinate with a flagging subcontractor to complete this phase of work where necessary. The exploration plan will be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the start of field work. 8.5 Complete Utility Locates HWA will notify the one -call utility and engage a private locating service to have underground utilities located in the vicinity of the proposed borings. 8.6 Conduct Geotechnical Borings A truck -mounted drill rig equipped with hollow -stem auger will be used to drill the geotechnical borings. Borings anticipated include two (2) each at Sites 1 and 2, and one (1) at Site 3 for a total of five (5) borings. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) samples will be taken at 2-1/2 to 5-foot intervals throughout each boring. A groundwater monitoring well will be installed in the boring located near Lake Ballinger (Site 1) so that ground water levels can be monitored. The monitoring well will be monitored and logged under full-time observation of an HWA representative. The boring will be drilled by a licensed geotechnical/well driller under subcontract to HWA. 8.7 Generate Boring Logs and Assign Laboratory Testing Samples retrieved from explorations will be sealed in plastic bags and taken to HWA's Bothell, Washington laboratory for further examination and testing. Selected samples will be tested to determine relevant engineering and index properties. Depending on the type of soils encountered, laboratory testing performed may include moisture content, grain -size distribution and Atterberg limits. Soil and laboratory test information will be presented in summary boring logs that will be generated upon completion of the exploration program. 8.8 Obtain Groundwater Information from Monitoring Well HWA will install a water level data logger and a barologger in the well, that will be extracted from the well and the data downloaded after 12 months. The groundwater level data obtained will be provided in HWA reports. However, if the last round of data is not available at the time of the issuance of HWA's final report a simple letter report will be prepared to summarize the site groundwater data collected. City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement March 2021 14 G:\PDX RD\Clients\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To City\Phase 9 Revised Final Scope and Fee_2021-03-04\Exh A - 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Scope_FINAL rewsed.docx Packet Pg. 169 7.6.a 8.9 Dewatering Evaluation If groundwater is encountered, a hydraulic conductivity analysis will be performed. HWA will evaluate the data derived from the field investigation and ground water monitoring program to develop recommendations for construction dewatering. Hydraulic conductivity will be estimated using grain size distribution. Field measurement of hydraulic conductivity/flow rate is not included in this scope of work. 8.10 Temporary Shoring Pressure Diagrams HWA will recommend lateral earth pressures for shoring design where open excavations are required to complete the proposed sewer replacements. 8.11 Draft and Final Geotechnical Report HWA will prepare draft and final geotechnical reports presenting the results of their studies and design recommendations for geotechnical engineering related components of the project. The reports will include exploration logs, site and exploration plan, laboratory test results, groundwater level readings, analytical output and design charts as appropriate, and design recommendations relative to excavation and earthwork. The report will be finalized after comments from the City are received. The groundwater levels will be updated for the final report as appropriate. 8.12 Geotechnical Support and Coordination of Plans and Specifications HWA will collaborate with Murraysmith and the City to verify that the geotechnical engineering requirements are properly incorporated into the plans and specifications. 8.13 Project and Contract Management HWA will prepare monthly invoices and progress reports if required. Project management for the geotechnical engineering subtasks will be provided under this task, as well as coordination with and management of all of HWA's subcontractors. Deliverables ■ Exploration Plan; PDF via email ■ Draft and Final Geotechnical Engineering report; PDF via email Assumptions ■ Field investigation services will be scheduled to allow City to provide adequate notification to public. IN Up to five (5) exploration borings are anticipated to depths ranging from 10 to 20 feet below grade. City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement March 2021 15 G;\PDX_BD\Clients\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Pro)ect 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To City\Phase 9 Revised Final Scope and Fee_2021-03-04\Exh A - 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Scope FINAL revised.docx Packet Pg. 170 7.6.a ■ One (1) groundwater monitoring well will be installed in a boring at Site 1. ■ If groundwater is encountered, hydraulic conductivity will be estimated using the grain size. The proposed project fees do not include field measurement of hydraulic conductivity/flow rate. ■ WSDOT standard traffic control plans, requiring lane closures with flaggers, will be sufficient for this project. ■ Borings at Sites 1, 2 and 3 will be performed within the paved roadway and require right- of-way permits. ■ Access to the site and all required rights of entry and street use permits will be provide by the City at no cost to HWA. ■ HWA will coordinate with a flagging subcontractor as necessary to complete subsurface exploration work. ■ All geotechnical borings drilled through existing pavement will be patched with water activated Aquaphalt 6.0. ■ Geotechnical exploration at Site 4 is not included as part of this scope of work. Task 9 — Potholing Services (APS, Limited) Objective Under this task, potholing services will be performed by Murraysmith's subconsultant Applied Professional Services (APS) on an as -needed basis. City Involvement ■ Provide right-of-way use permit for potholing services. ■ Coordinate right -of -entry for potholing on private property. ■ Review proposed pothole locations and confirm proposed program. Activities 9.1 Potholes Services under this task will include conducting field investigations utilizing air vacuum excavation potholes, defining existing utility locations and sizes, and documenting findings in a data sheet. APS will provide the appropriate traffic control measures. Murraysmith will coordinate the extent of the potholing and will review and provide comment on field notes/data sheets. This task provides up to $22,000 for potholing support. This task will be authorized by the City prior to use should the City determine it appropriate. City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement March 2021 16 G\PDX_BD\Clrents\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To City\Phase 9 Revised Final Scope and Fee_2021-03-04\EA A- 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Scope_FINAL revised.docx Packet Pg. 171 7.6.a Deliverables ■ PDF copies of field notes and data sheets Assumptions ■ No temporary or permanent easements will be required. ■ Potholing services will be scheduled to allow City to provide adequate notification to public. ■ APS will conduct potholing work up to $22,000 to verify potential utility conflicts. ■ Test holes will be backfilled with S/8-inch select, sand or pea gravel and patched per City of Edmonds requirements at the time of permit issuance. ■ APS will prepare and submit to the City traffic control plans and permit applications needed for all lane closures or detours. Task 10 — Unanticipated Task Reserve (As Needed) A reserve budget amount has been included in the fee estimate for work under this task, which may include additional unanticipated work not specifically identified in the scope of work tasks defined above. Such work items will be undertaken only after written authorization from the City. Project Schedule Murraysmith shall begin work immediately upon receipt of Notice to Proceed from the City and proceed according to the preliminary estimated schedule presented below, which reflects the City's desire to complete all design and construction work by the end of 2022. Factors beyond Murraysmith's control may result in the schedule being extended. Notice to Proceed April 2021 Preliminary Design Submittal August 2021 60% Contract Document Submittal October 2021 90% Contract Document Submittal December 2021 Final Contract Document Submittal January 2022 Bidding and Award February 2022 Construction March -September 2022 City of Edmonds MURRAYSMITH 2O22 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement March 2021 17 G\PD%_BD\Clients\Edmonds, WA\2021-2022 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project 11-19\2022 SS (Phase 9) Scope-Fee\To City\Phase 9 Revised Final Scope and Fee_2021-03-04\EA A - 2022 (Phase 9) Sewerline Replacement Scope_FINAL revised.docz Packet Pg. 172 7.6.a 2022 (PHASE 9) SEWERLINE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF EDMONDS PROPOSED FEE ESTIMATE � � �Rr!I•!F�til�!I"fTR7���©��QO MEM � r • 000m©moats®��®®�®® • o©a00000am�®�®�®®�, r Uy of Edmonds Marc1+3031 G\c agora+q[a-oM,vi.Vwl N»Lrnayse+erfegxerrx e:e��)�qr)w]SSIe�+�915ccpe•eeVO»loy;..915e..en:c reyrzs-ev erelc]rv:c r:w ..nn_M]�o14. Packet Pg. 173 City of Edmonds Mapbook 7.7 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/16/2021 Authorization for Mayor to sign a Supplemental Agreement with Blueline Group for the Ph. 12 Waterline Replacement Project Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History On February 18, 2020 Council approved Blueline to be the consultant to provide design services for the Phase 11 and Phase 12 Waterline Replacement Projects and authorized the mayor to sign the Professional Services Agreement for the projects that were scheduled to be designed as part of the Phase 11 Waterline Replacement Project. On March 9, 2021, staff presented this item to the Parks and Public Works Committee and it was forwarded to the March 16th consent agenda for City Council approval. Staff Recommendation Authorize Mayor to sign the Professional Services Agreement. Narrative The City issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) in October 2019 to hire a consultant to provide design engineering services for the Phase 11 and 12 Waterline Replacement Projects. The City received statements of qualifications from three engineering firms and the selection committee selected Blueline to provide design engineering services for the Phase 11 and 12 Waterline Replacement Projects. On February 18, 2020 Council approved Blueline to be the consultant to provide design engineering services for the Phase 11 and Phase 12 Waterline Replacement Projects and authorized the mayor to sign the Professional Services Agreement for the projects that were scheduled to be designed as part of the Phase 11 Waterline Replacement Project. A separate contract has now been negotiated for the Phase 12 projects and planned to be designed in 2021 and constructed in 2022. The City has negotiated a consultant fee of $303,100. This agreement will allow Blueline to provide services for the design of this project. This contract will be funded by the Water Utility Fund. The Phase 12 Waterline Replacement Project will upgrade/replace portions of the City's potable water network by replacing approximately 6,700 linear feet of existing waterlines and associated appurtenances at various locations within the City. The selection of sites were determined using the data supplied in the 2017 Comprehensive Water System Plan, coordinating with upcoming road, sanitary sewer, and storm drain projects, and input from Packet Pg. 175 7.7 Public Works maintenance staff. Upgrade projects will focus on upsizing and/or looping portions of the existing network to improve flow and pressure. Replacement projects will remove and replace pipes that are near the end of their life cycle and are requiring additional maintenance. Attachments: Blueline Supplemental Agreement Map of Phase 12 Water replacement design projects Packet Pg. 176 7.7.a or EUlIyp�d CITY OF EDMONDS MIKE NELSON " `" MAYOR 121 STH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - 425-771-0220 - FAX 425-672-5750 Website' www.edmondswa.gov k• f890 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Engineering Division SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT 1 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT Phase 12 Annual Waterline Replacement Project WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds, Washington, hereinafter referred to as the "City", and The Blueline Group, hereinafter referred to as the "Consultant", entered into an underlying agreement for design, engineering and consulting services with respect to a project known as Phase 12 Annual Waterline Replacement Project, dated February 19, 2020; and WHEREAS, additional tasks to the original Scope of Work have been identified with regard to providing engineering services, NOW THERFORE, In consideration of mutual benefits occurring, it is agreed by and between the parties thereto as follows: 1. The underlying Agreement of February 19, 2020 between the parties, incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth, is amended in, but only in, the following respects: 1.1 Scope of Work. The Scope of Work set forth in the underlying agreement shall be amended to include the additional services and material necessary to accomplish the stated objectives as outlined in the attached Exhibit A incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth. 1.2 The $403,700 amount set forth in paragraph 2A of the underlying Agreement and stated as an amount which shall not be exceeded, is hereby amended to include an additional not to exceed amount of $303,100 for the additional scope of work identified in Exhibit A to this supplemental agreement. As a result of this supplemental agreement, the total contract amount is increased to a new total not -to -exceed amount of $706,800 ($403,700 plus $303,100). 1.3 Exhibit B to the underlying agreement consisting of the rate and cost reimbursement schedule is hereby amended to include the form set forth on the attached Exhibit B to this addendum, incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth. Packet Pg. 177 7.7.a 2. In all other respects, the underlying agreement between the parties shall remain in full force and effect, amended as set forth in Supplemental Agreement No. 1 but only as set forth herein. DONE this day of , 20 CITY OF EDMONDS Bv: Michael Nelson, Mayor ATTEST/AUTHENTICATE: Scott Passey, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney THE BLUELINE GROUP By: Deanna Martin PE I Principal Packet Pg. 178 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) )ss COUNTY OF ) On this day of , 20 , before me, the under -signed, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared , to me known to be the of the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: \\edmsvr-deptfs\Engineering\Stafl\Megan\Engineertng AdminTROJECTME21JAYli 12 Waterline Replacement\13lueline,Supp No. Ldoc Packet Pg. 179 7.7.a EXHIBIT A — SCOPE & FEE ESTIMATE Project Name: Phase 12 Waterline Replacement Job #: 21-048 Effective Date: March 4, 2021 Project Description The Blueline Group, LLC ("Blueline") will provide engineering services for City of Edmonds' Phase 12 Waterline Replacement Project ("Project") generally consisting of the replacement of ±6,700 LF of existing water main with 8-inch diameter ductile iron (DI) pipe at the following locations: Site 1-182"d PI SW (east of 88th Ave W) Site 2 — 71h Ave S (Dayton St - Cedar St); Maple St (7th Ave S - 8th Ave S); Walnut St (7th Ave S - 9th Ave S) Site 3 —185th PL W/1861h St SW (88th Ave W - 841h Ave W) — 90% to Final Design Site 4 — 86th PI W (north of Bowdoin W) — 90% to Final Design Site 5 — Seaview Hydrant Addition 184th St SW/Sunset Way/90th Ave W Design will consist of water main, fire hydrants, connections to existing mains, water services, other appurtenances, and surface restoration. Blueline will provide topographic base mapping, geotechnical investigation, design drawings, specifications, engineer's estimates (PS&E) and bidding and construction support services as outlined herein. Task Summary Task 001 Project Management Task 002 Survey & Base Mapping Task 003 Geotechnical Investigation Task 004 Water System Design (Phase 12 Sites) Task 005 Bidding Assistance Task 006 Construction Support Task 007 Management Reserve Project Schedule Our Team shall begin work immediately upon receipt of Notice to Proceed and proceed according to the following Project Schedule. Key dates include: Notice to Proceed.............................................................................................March 2021 Survey & Geotechnical Investigation.................................................................. April 2021 30% Design Submittal........................................................................................... May 2021 60% Design Submittal.......................................................................................... July 2021 90% Design Submittal.....................................................................................October 2021 Final Design Submittal.....................................................................................January 2022 Bidding & Award.............................................................................. February/March 2022 Construction Begins............................................................................................ April 2022 As-Builts & Project Closeout..................................................................... November 2022 Packet Pg. 180 7.7.a EXHIBIT A — SCOPE & FEE ESTIMATE Scope of Work Blueline's scope of work for the project is outlined on the following pages. Task 001 Project Management Fee: HR-NTE (Estimated $27,100) This task is for general coordination and meetings on the project, including plan review/discussion meetings, in-house quality assurance, coordination with subconsultants, etc. Blueline will prepare monthly invoices for work performed during the previous month. Task 002 Survey & Base Mapping Fee: Fixed Fee (48,300) Axis Survey and Mapping will prepare base mapping for the area specified below and shown in the attached Exhibit A-1: Site 01— Mapping of a portion of 182nd PI W from then intersection with 88th Ave W approximately 600 feet east to the end of the Cul-de-sac. Also including 87th PI SW adjacent to 182nd PI SW. Site 02 — 7th Ave S from the intersection with Dayton St, south to the intersection with Cedar St. Maple Ave from 7th Ave S to the intersection with 8th Ave S and Walnut St from 7th Ave S to the intersection with 9th Ave S. Site 05 — Mapping of a portion of 184th St SW from the intersection with Sunset Way, east to the intersection with 90th Ave W. AutoCad drawings will be prepared at a scale of 1"=20'. Existing aerial and/or LIDAR mapping sources may be utilized directly or as a basis for verification. Services will include the following: • Control survey in NAD 83/91 Horizontal Datum, with all elevations derived from and checked to NAVD 88 Vertical Datum. • Delineate parcel lines within above -described area as available from recorded plats and public records further compared to City of Edmonds and Snohomish County Parcel GIS lines. • Set additional elevation benchmarks at each end of project area and every 500-700' along the route. • Contract with and coordinate services of private utility locate company (APS) to ascertain conductible underground non -City owned utility locations and available asbuilt records. The cost of which ($5,100) is included in this proposal. • Depict hard and soft surfaces on individual layers per accepted APWA standards. • Show and dimension located topographic features and contours at 2' intervals. • Locate top of valve nut elevations on all existing water valves within the project limits. • Locate side sewer lines as delineated by the City of Edmonds Public Works. Packet Pg. 181 7.7.a EXHIBIT A — SCOPE & FEE ESTIMATE • Show known utilities as provided by City of Edmonds GIS, research of available utility as -built records and as located by utility locators. DELIVERABLES AutoCad 2016 drawing file with point database and dtm files ASSUMPTIONS & EXCLUSIONS The City will provide all necessary right of entry into private property and notice to landowners along the route of mapping activity. The City will provide a copy of the notice to be presented to landowners by Axis Survey Crews. Task 003 Geotechnical Investigation Fee: HR-NTE (Estimated $38,700) See attached Exhibit A-2 scope and fee breakdown. Task 004 Water System Design (Phase 12 Sites) Fee: HR/NTE (Estimated $137,200) Using the base maps provided under Task 002 and the Phase 11 Waterline Replacement Project, Blueline will produce design plans, engineer's estimate, and specifications (PS&E) for the Project. The services under this task will include: • Layout and location of ±6,700 LF of new DI water mains. • Design of fire hydrants, replacement of water services (to the existing water meter), connection to the existing system, and other associated appurtenances with the selected site limits. • Separating the PS&E into multiple schedules (A, B, C, D, E). • Coordination with franchise utility companies during design. • Prepare plan & profile split sheets for the proposed water main improvements. o Water design will be shown in plan and profile per City standards. o Sheets to be 22"x34" with roughly an 18"x28" drawing area. o Scale for these drawings it to be 1"=20' horizontal and 1"=5' vertical. o We estimate that ±30 plan sheets and ±4 detail sheets will be required. • Show details necessary for construction of the improvements, utilizing City standard water details and developing specialized details, as necessary. • Provide general temporary erosion and sedimentation control notes and details, as necessary. • Prepare technical specifications, including Proposal, Contract Forms, General Conditions, and Measurement and Payment in WSDOT format, using City -provided standard specifications when available. • Prepare 30% Plan View Layout and Preliminary Engineer's Estimate for Sites 1, 2, and 5. • Prepare Quantity Take -Off Spreadsheet with quantities broken down by plan sheet. Packet Pg. 182 7.7.a EXHIBIT A — SCOPE & FEE ESTIMATE • Prepare 60%, 90% and Final Design stage submittals for Sites 1— 5. Sites 3 and 4 will be included in 60% and 90% submittal package for review in case of changes in field conditions or City project goals. • Walk Through with City staff at Sites 1, 2, and 5 following 30% Design Submittal • Review meeting with City staff at each stage of the design and incorporate City comments into next submittal. • Constructability review and QA/QC. DELIVERABLES 30% Design Submittals: PDF of Site 1, 2, and 5 Plans (plan view only) and Preliminary Engineer's Estimate. Word document of Design Memo. 60% & 90% Design Submittals: PDF of Plans, Specifications, and Engineer's Estimate. Word document of Design Memo. Final Design Submittal: PDF of Plans, Specifications, Engineer's Estimates, plus all documents in digital format (including ACAD files). Task 005 Bidding Assistance Fee: HR/NTE (Estimated $6,100) Blueline will provide consultation services during the bidding process, including: • Attend Pre -Bid Conference and address questions from prospective bidders, if necessary. • Prepare and issue addenda to clarify the construction documents, if necessary. Consultant will not charge for addenda if they are needed to correct or clarify errors or omissions in the bid documents. • Generally assist the City during the bidding process as needed. ASSUMPTIONS & EXCLUSIONS The City will upload the bid documents to Builder's Exchange, conduct the bid opening, prepare the bid tabulation, review apparent low bidder references, and prepare recommendation for contract award. DELIVERABLES Addenda if necessary. Task 006 Construction Support Fee: HR/NTE (Estimated $16,800) Blueline will provide construction support services for this Project during the construction period. Blueline will closely coordinate construction management activities with the City's staff and field inspector. Services under this task are anticipated to include: • Prepare for and attend the pre -construction conference. Packet Pg. 183 E EXHIBIT A — SCOPE & FEE ESTIMATE • Review requests for information (RFIs) provided by the Contractor and coordinate responses to RFIs with the City. • Provide changes to drawings or specifications as necessary to respond to field conditions or RFIs. • General consultation and coordination on an as -needed basis. Address construction questions as they arise. • Prepare As-Builts in AutoCad. ASSUMPTIONS & EXCLUSIONS Construction inspection and administration services are not included. DELIVERABLES RFI responses if necessary, As-Builts provided electronically, transmit and provide Utility data and PDF to City's GIS group. Task 007 Management Reserve Fee: HR/NTE (Estimated $27,400) This task provides for unanticipated services deemed to be necessary during the course of the Project that are not specifically identified in the scope of work tasks defined above. Any funds under this item are not to be used unless explicitly authorized by the City in writing. Fee estimate is based on ±10% of Tasks 001— 006. General Assumptions and Notes • Scope and fees outlined above are based on the Project Description included in this proposal as well as the following information (any changes to these documents may result in changes to the fees): a. Scoping instructions and site maps emailed by the City of Edmonds January 13, 2021. b. City of Edmonds GIS records. c. Telephone/email conversations with the City prior to the date of this agreement. • We do not anticipate that environmental services will be necessary for this Project as work is anticipated to be completed in the paved areas of roadways outside of sensitive areas and buffers. If it is determined during the design phase that environmental services are needed, we will provide an Additional Services Authorization request for that effort. • We do not anticipate SEPA being required, and is therefore excluded. • We do not anticipate that traffic control plans, drainage calculations or reports, dewatering plans, electrical plans, or structural engineering plans will be necessary for this project, and are therefore not included. Should these services become necessary, we will provide an Additional Services Authorization to the City to retain subconsultants for those efforts. • Project stops/starts and significant changes to the Project Schedule may result in changes to the fees provided above and a separate fee proposal will be provided. Packet Pg. 184 EXHIBIT A — SCOPE & FEE ESTIMATE • Agency fees (if any) are not included as part of the fees outlined above. • Temporary Construction Easements and/or permanent easements are not included. If required, easement preparation and negotiation will be an additional service. It is assumed the City will coordinate directly with property owners with existing easements where work will be performed. • The fees stated above do not include reimbursable expenses such as large format copies (larger than letter/legal size), mileage, and plots. These items will be billed under a separate task called Expenses. Estimate: $1,500. • Time and expense items are based on The Blueline Group's current hourly rates. • Blueline reserves the right to move funds between approved Tasks 001— 006 as necessary based on approved scope of work provided the overall budget of Tasks 001— 006 is not exceeded. The City Project Manager shall provide written authorization prior to moving funds. Packet Pg. 185 SITE 5 " SITE 1 'SITE3 C"Perrinville �.•. D `. {!fm s° --..�pG9e\nr 1�61h-El•SW � _ _ - 1 .},�t � � _ + •*�• .1' r � - •... t. � - I L'yn�.vr•'1 -Easpers"st ;:`'�P_� - i•r� � '' � �.f ill •��,; ° ..,.�':`� ' f i.'TF1i'rl �s - ..,, ;� IvlainSt• ; `lac, -- !• r'•'.I� •' I-Sf�,� ... 2081' W- � . i. t , 1 �.. �� � � i •• "..'M.. SITE, 2 • E \\\\\\• nrn : , Walnut -St SIT E,4 y . �• �„ '.. f'.�S• .� ... I�r' hg1-g W � _ 242� �,Q ril :1t t 'F5 � • - � :� ` o .MSS• • •fie - 7Ix .7 tot o� Is Al fa- . pr— �_ Dayton-S� •, jq 71 Ilk U y V gnolia Ln--- I� . q < ". 6.202•(G o— r. m 7.7.a Site 3 - SURVEY EXCLUDED - COMPLETED UNDER PREVIOUS CONTRACT Site 4 - SURVEY EXCLUDED - COMPLETED UNDER PREVIOUS CONTRACT s a Packet Pg. 188 s 5� ! � t z 771, . • -' PT 1-84th•St•SW-- V � �GEOSCILNCESINC. EXHIBIT A-2 DBE/MWBE March 4, 2021 HWA Project No. 2021-PO24-21 Blueline 25 Central Way, Suite 400 Kirkland, Washington 98033 Attn: Deanna L. Martin, P.E. Subject: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES City of Edmonds —Phase 12 Waterline Replacement Project Edmonds, Washington 98026 Dear Ms. Martin: Thank you for the opportunity to present this proposal for HWA GeoSciences Inc. (HWA) to provide consulting services for the City of Edmonds -Phase 12 Waterline Replacement Projects. We presented a proposal for geotechnical engineering services on February 18, 2021. This scope of work and fee estimate is a revision of that proposal to reflect the change in patching method used after pavement coring. PROJECT BACKGROUND We understand that the City of Edmonds (City) is planning to replace segments of water pipelines at various locations within the city as part of its Phase 12 Waterline Replacement project. Five sites have been identified for waterline replacements and subsequent pavement restorations. Geotechnical engineering services will be required for four of the sites. The types of geotechnical explorations we will perform are shallow explorations consisting of pavement coring and deeper explorations consisting of auger borings completed with a drill rig. The project site segments, and geotechnical explorations proposed are summarized in Table 1. To complete the geotechnical portions of this work, HWA proposes the following scope of work for this project. SCOPE OF WORK HWA will provide geotechnical engineering services in support of the proposed pipeline replacement and pavement restoration. These services will consist of the following subtasks: Review Available Geotechnical information: Upon notice to proceed, HWA will review available geotechnical information from and in the vicinity of the project site improve our understanding of the local geological conditions at the sites and surrounding area. This z a Packet Pg. 190 7.7.a March 4, 2021 HWA Project No. 2021-P024-21 will include a review of geologic maps, HWA's library of geotechnical information in the area and data from online databases. Site reconnaissance will also be performed. Table 1: Project Locations Requiring Geotechnical Borings Number of Number of Site Location Pavement Geotechnical Coring Boring 1 182nd Place SW l 88ti' Avenue W. 1 2 7"' Avenue S 2 Maple Street 2 1 (71" — 8t" St) Walnut Street 4 1 (8ti' — 9t" St) 3 No geotechnical exploration 4 86th Place W 2 5 l 84t" St SW I Sunset Way 1 901" Ave W 1 TOTAL 15 2 Plan and Prepare Exploration Program for Geotechnical Borings and Pavement Coring within the City right of way: HWA will plan and coordinate the geotechnical field exploration program for this project. A work plan to perform 2 geotechnical borings and 15 pavement cores along the alignment will be prepared and submitted to the City for approval. HWA will drill the boreholes to at least 5 feet deeper than the proposed excavation depths. For the purpose of estimation, boring depths of 15 feet were assumed. Obtain City of Edmonds Street Use Permit: HWA will work with the City of Edmonds to generate appropriate traffic control plans for the proposed drilling pavement coring. For estimating purposes, we will assume that all drilling and pavement coring will be performed within the roadway. We anticipate that WSDOT standard traffic control plans, requiring lane closures with flaggers, will be adequate for this project. We assume that all required rights of entry and street use permits will be provided by the City at no cost Edmonds -Phase 12 Waterline Replacement 2 HWA GeoSciences Inc. s a Packet Pg. 191 7.7.a March 4, 2021 HWA Project No. 2021-P024-21 to HWA. HWA will coordinate with a flagging subcontractor to complete this phase of work where necessary. • Complete Utility Locates: HWA will notify the one -call utility and engage a private locating service to have underground utilities located in the vicinity of the proposed borings. Conduct Geotechnical Borings: A truck/trailer-mounted drill rig equipped with hollow - stem auger will be used to drill two borings on Site 2. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) samples will be taken at 2-1/2 to 5-foot intervals throughout each boring. All borings will be monitored and logged under full-time observation of an HWA representative. The boring will be drilled by a licensed geotechnical/well driller under subcontract to HWA. Generate Boring Logs and Assign Laboratory Testing: Samples retrieved from the borings will be sealed in plastic bags and taken to our Bothell, Washington laboratory for further examination and testing. Selected samples will be tested to determine relevant engineering and index properties. Soil and laboratory test information will be presented in summary boring logs that will be generated upon completion of our exploration program. Conduct Pavement Corings: HWA will perform pavement coring at 15 locations using a a 6-inch diameter core barrel. Cores will be patched using water activated AquaphaltTM 6.0 to minimum thickness of 6 inches. • Prepare Coring Summary Logs: HWA will develop summary logs for each of the corings from the results from the pavement corings. Engineering Analysis: We will evaluate the data derived from our field investigations and laboratory testing to complete our engineering analysis. The analysis will include utility subgrade support, trenching analysis and shoring considerations as appropriate. If groundwater is encountered, a hydraulic conductivity analysis will be performed, and dewatering method recommendation provided. Hydraulic conductivity will be estimated using grain size. Field measurement of hydraulic conductivity/flow rate is not included in this scope of work. Draft and Final Geotechnical Report: We will prepare draft and final geotechnical reports presenting the results of our studies and design recommendations for geotechnical engineering related components of the project. Our reports will include exploration logs, site and exploration plan, results of pavement coring, and laboratory test results, analytical output, and design charts, as appropriate, and design recommendations relative to excavation and earthwork. Our report will also include recommendations for pavement reconstruction based on the results of the pavement corings. Edmonds -Phase 12 Waterline Replacement HWA GeoSciences Inc. Packet Pg. 192 7.7.a March 4, 2021 HWA Project No. 2021-P024-21 • Geotechnical Support and Coordination of Plans and Specifications: We will collaborate with Blueline and the City of Edmonds to verify that the geotechnical engineering requirements are properly incorporated into the plans and specifications. Project and Contract Management: We will prepare monthly invoices, and progress reports if required. We will correspond with the City of Edmonds in the form of emails, fax, and telephone calls, as necessary. We will provide project management for the geotechnical engineering subtasks and we will coordinate with and manage all our subcontractors. ASSUMPTIONS/CONDITIONS The following assumptions were made as part of the development of the proposal for this phase: • Access to the site and all required exploration permits will be provided to HWA by the City of Edmonds at no cost to HWA. HWA will apply for the necessary ROW use permits (including up to two (2) traffic control plan revisions. The geotechnical explorations proposed herein will NOT be used to assess site environmental conditions. However, visual, or olfactory observations regarding potential contamination r z will be noted. Analysis, testing, storage, and handling of potentially contaminated soil and a ground water (either sampled or spoils from drilling) are beyond this scope of services. If contaminated soils and/or ground water are encountered, the material will be properly E contained on -site for disposal as mutually agreed upon without additional cost to HWA. 0 • All non -contaminated drilling spoils and related debris will be drummed on site and transported off site for disposal by the drilling subcontractor. • All geotechnical borings drilled through existing pavement will be patched with water activated AquaphaltTM 6.0 patching material. • HWA will contract with a subcontractor to perform the borings. The borings will be conducted during workday hours (8AM to 5PM) with no work hour restrictions. PROJECT BUDGET We estimate that the scope of services proposed herein will require a budget of $35,215 to accomplish, as detailed on the attached project cost estimate spreadsheets. Our costs assume the drilling and coring can be accomplished in 4 days. We will not exceed the above cost estimate without your prior authorization. However, if during the evaluation of the available data or during our field exploration unanticipated subsurface conditions are revealed which would require a level of effort beyond the scope of our study, we will contact you immediately to discuss any necessary modifications to our scope of services and/or budget estimate. Edmonds -Phase 12 Waterline Replacement HWA Geo5ciences Inc. Packet Pg. 193 7.7.a March 4, 2021 HWA Project No. 2021-P024-21 The budget presented in this proposal reflects an estimate based on our current understanding of the project requirements for a scope of work developed from information provided. HWA reserves the right to transfer hours and budget dollars between tasks to satisfy project requirements. Our budget also reflects estimated direct costs to the project for testing, drilling, equipment rental etc. HWA may also transfer funds allocated for direct costs to professional/technical hours or vice versa, to satisfy project requirements. M Thank you again for the opportunity to provide this proposal for the City of Edmonds — Phase 12 Waterline Replacement geotechnical engineering services. Should you have any questions regarding this proposal, or require additional services, please contact us at your convenience. Sincerely, HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. Dila Saidin, Ph.D. P.E. Senior Geotechnical Engineer Attachments: Project cost estimate Edmonds -Phase 12 Waterline Replacement HWA Geo5ciences Inc. Packet Pg. 194 7.7.a Project Cost Estimate City of Edmonds -Phase 12 Waterline Replacement Edmonds, Washington Prepared for Blueline, Attn: Deanna Martin Scope of Work Refer to the attached sco, e ESTIMATED HWA LABOR: ■ � � GEOSCIENCES INC. �, HWA a Date: 202211-P 21 Y DBE MWBE Prepared By: Reviewed By: DBS MSP Revised: 4-Mar-21 WORK TASKS DESCRIPTION PERSONNEL & 2021 BILLING RATES Principal IX Geotech, En . VII Geotech. Ens V Geotech, En II Geologist II CAD Administrative Support TOTAL HOURS TOTAL AMOUNT $91.50 S72.50 $53,00 $37.00 $36.20 S38.00 $26,44 Project Setup2 2 S106 Obtain/review existinggeotechnical data and site visit 4 4 8 $360 GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION Plan and prepare field exploration program 2 2 2 6 S252 Prepare Traffic Control Plans 4 2 8 14 $576 Obtain city street use perrimit 2 2 2 6 $252 Conduct utility locates I 1 8 9 $327 Perform geotechnical borings 1 4 5 $201 Prepare boring logs and assign laboratory tests 2 2 1 4 $180 Conduct pavement coning 3 days) 3 24 24 51 $1,916 Prepare coring summary logs 2 4 6 $251 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS Utility subgrade support and trenching analysis 2 2 4 $180 Temporary shoring pressure diagram 1 2 2 5 $203 Hydraulic conductivity analysis and dewatering evaluation 4 1 4 $212 Earthwork and drainage 1 4 5 $201 Pavement restoration recommendation 1 2 3 $179 Paving/subgrade recommendation 4 4 $212 REPORT AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT HWA QA/QC 4 2 1 6 $396 Prepare draft Letter report 2 8 8 4 1 23 $1,043 Address Review comments and prepare final letter report 4 2 I 7 $314 Plans andspec review 4 4 $212 Consultation / project management 1 2 1 2 1 8 1 4 16 $858 TOTAL LABOR CHARGES: 2 9 62 57 48 8 6 192 $8,431 LABORATORY TEST SUMMARY: Test Est, No. Tests Unit Total Cost Cost Combine Grain Size Analysis 2 $250 $500 Grain Size Sieve Analysis -wet 4 $115 $460 Moisture Content w/Description 4 $22 $88 LABORATORY TOTAL: PROJECT TOTALS AND SUMMARY: $1,048 Estimated Direct Salary Based on 2021 Rates Overhead at 19486 of Direct Salary�kk 30% Fixed Fee on Direct Salary TOTAL LABOR COST ESTIMATED DIRECT EXPENSES: Mileage @ 0.56/mi 8 round trip at 20mile/tri $179 Drilling Subcontractor (truck/trailer mounted rig)- 1 day S2,500 Traffic Control Fla ers/Arrowboard/Si ns/Etc - 3 days S3,000,00 Laboratory Testing $1,048 Aquaphalt Patching @ $60/hole $900 Private locate $200 TOTAL DIRECT EXPENSES: $7,827 PROJECT TOTALS AND SUMMARY: Total Labor Cost $27,388.10 Direct Expenses $7,827 GRAND TOTAL: $35,215 Assumptions: I- All costs are estimated, and may be increased or decreased within the limits of the total budget at the discretion of HWA's project manager, The HWA project manager may also transfer funds allocated for direst costs to professional/technical hours, and vice versa, as he/she determines appropriate. 2. The scope of work is related solely to geotechnical engineering evaluation of site soil and ground water, as they relate to geotechnical analysis for the project Neither identification nor evaluation of contaminants that may be present in the soil or ground water is included in this scope of work 3. Access to the site and all required exploration permits will be provided to HWA by the City of Edmonds at no cost to HWA. 4_ All geotechnical borings drilled through existing pavement will be patched with AquaphaltTM 6.0. t IL 2021-PO24 Edmonds -Phase 12- Fees rev3-4-21.xlsx Packet Pg. 195 Phase 12 Waterline Replacement Project Job Number: 21-048 Date: 3/4/2021 7.7.a Prepared By: Deanna Martin Checked By: Rob Dahn Q. Principal Project Engineer Engineer Engineering Designer Task # Base Tasks $215/hr $185/hr $166/hr $153/hr Hours Hours Hours Hours Total Hours Total Fee 001 Project Management 126 0 0 0 002 Survey & Base Mappping 003 Geotechnical Investigations 004 Water System Design (Phase 12 Sites) 48 150 302 320 005 Bidding Assistance 10 0 20 4 006 Construction Support 12 0 38 52 007 Management Reserve Expenses Total Hours 196 150 360 376 $42,140 $27,750 $59,760 $57,528 0 0 a� c 126 $27,100 m c a� E $48,300 $38,700 a m c 820 $137,200 L m 34 $6,100 N 102 $16,800 a $27,400 r $1,500 a� Q 1082 �o $303,100 E a� a a m c 00 c d E s c� r Q Packet Pg. 196 7.7.a Engineering Total 001 Project Management Principal Project Engineer Engineer Designer Hours Item # Description $215/hr $185/hr $166/hr $153/hr Hours Hours Hours Hours 1 Coordination with City and Subconsultants 24 24 2 Montly Invoices/Progress Reports 18 18 3 QA/QC 40 40 4 Management of Staff, Schedule and Budget 32 32 5 General Project Coordination 12 12 Total Hours 126 0 0 0 126 Total Fee $27,090 $0 $0 $0 $27,100 Total Cost 002 Survey & Base Mappping (consultant) Blueline Markup Total Item # Description 10% 1 Survey & Base Mapping $43,900 $4,390 Total Fee $43,900 $4,390 $48,300 Total Cost 003 Geotechnical Investigations (consultant) Blueline Markup Total Item # Description 10% 1 Geotechnical Investigations and Reporting $35,215 $3,522 Total Fee $35,215 $3,522 $38,700 Packet Pg. 197 7.7.a Engineering Total 004 Water System Design (Phase 12 Sites) Principal Project Engineer Engineer Designer Hours Item # Description $215/hr $185/hr $166/hr $153/hr Hours Hours Hours Hours 1 Kick -Off Meeting (Incl. Prep Time) 2 2 4 8 2 Initial Site Visit 6 6 6 18 3 30% Plan View Layout & Preliminary Estimate 4 24 48 80 156 4 30% Walk Through with City Staff 6 6 8 20 5 60% PS&E 8 32 92 100 232 6 90% PS&E 6 24 72 80 182 7 Final Design PS&E 6 24 60 60 150 8 Review Meetings with City (Incl. Prep Time) 6 12 18 9 Constructability Review & QA/QC 20 20 10 Design Memos 4 12 16 Total Hours 48 150 302 320 820 Total Fee $10,320 $27,750 $50,132 $48,960 $137,200 Engineering Total 005 Bidding Assistance Principal Project Engineer Engineer Designer Hours Item # Description $215/hr $185/hr $166/hr $153/hr Hours Hours Hours Hours 1 Answer Bidder Questions, as necessary 4 8 12 2 Attend Pre -Bid Conference, if necessary 2 2 3 Prepare and Issue Addenda, as necessary 2 8 4 14 4 General Assistance to the City 2 4 6 Total Hours 10 0 20 4 34 Total Fee $2,150 $0 $3,320 $612 $6,100 Packet Pg. 198 7.7.a 006 Construction Support Principal Project Engineer Engineer Engineering Total Designer Hours Item # Description $215/hr $185/hr $166/hr $153/hr Hours Hours Hours Hours 1 Attend Pre -Construction Conference (Incl. Prep) 4 6 10 2 Review RFls and Provide Responses 2 12 14 3 Prepare Field Changes, if necessary 2 10 12 24 4 General Assistance to the City 2 4 6 5 Provide As-Builts in ACAD from Inspector Redlines 2 6 40 48 Total Hours 12 0 38 52 102 Total Fee $2,580 $0 $6,308 $7,956 $16,800 007 Management Reserve Total Cost Total Item # Description 1 Unassigned Services Reserve $27,420 Total Fee $27,420 $27,400 Packet Pg. 199 City of Edmonds Mapbook 7.8 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/16/2021 Award Construction Contract for the Phase 11 Waterline Replacement Project Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History On March 9, 2021, staff presented this item to the Parks and Public Works Committee and it was forwarded to the March 16th consent agenda for City Council approval. Staff Recommendation Award the Phase 11 Watermain Replacement Project to SRV Construction, Inc. in the amount of $1,522,683.72 and authorize a construction management reserve of $152,268. Narrative This project is part of the City's program to replace and upgrade existing waterlines at various locations around the City that are reaching the end of their useful service life, are undersized and unable to meet current requirements, or have some other existing system deficiency. The project will replace waterline piping with associated services, meters and fire hydrants at various locations around the City. Refer to the attached project map. Four construction bids were received on March 3, 2021 and the bid results for the base bid ranged from a low of $1,522,683.72 to a high of $1,636,428.29. Refer to Exhibit A. The engineer's estimate was $1,505,083.20. SRV Construction, Inc submitted the low responsive bid of $1,522,683.72. A review of SRV's bid document was completed and it was positive. Construction is expected to begin in April or May and be completed in the fall of 2021. The proposed construction budget is attached as Exhibit B. The construction costs will be funded by the 421 Water Utility Fund. Attachments: Exhibit A -Bid Summary Exhibit B-Construction Budget Exhibit C-Project Map Packet Pg. 201 7.8.a 1' CITY OF EDMONDS �St 1890 PROJECT NAME: Phase 11 Waterline Replacement Bid Date: 03/03/2021 Engineer's Estimate: $1,505,083 CONTRACTOR Schedule A Schedule B Schedule D Base Bid 1 SRV Construction, Inc. $ 320,412 $ 1,015,983 $ 186,289 $ 1,522,684 2 Kar-Vel Construction $ 315,098 $ 1,012,456 $ 219,685 $ 1,547,239 3 DungenessConstruction Coorporation $ 322,870 $ 1,027,222 $ 254,041 $ 1,604,134 4 Oceanside Construction, Inc. $ 321,619 $ 1,050,688 $ 264,121 $ 1,636,428 a Packet Pg. 202 7.8.b Phase 11 Watermain Replacement Proposed Construction Budget Description Amount Contract Award $1,522,684 Construction Management, Inspection & Testing (12%) $182,722 Management Reserve (10%) $152,268 Total = $ 1,857,674 Construction Funding Funding Amount Water Funds (421) $ 2,119,050 Total = $ 2,119,050 Packet Pg. 203 City of Edmonds 7.9 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/16/2021 Resolution adopting Electronic Signatures Policy and Budget Authorization Staff Lead: Scott Passey Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History State and local agencies are authorized to use and accept electronic signatures, making them a good option for those agencies that can invest in the technology needed to use them. Beginning in 2016, local agencies were specifically authorized to use electronic signatures by Chapter 19.360 RCW, and effective June 11, 2020, Chapter 19.360 RCW was repealed and replaced by the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA). UETA provides for essentially the same authority as Chapter 19.360 RCW with respect to a local agency's use of electronic signatures: Unless state or federal law requires a wet signature, an electronic signature can be used and must be given the same legal effect as a wet signature. Therefore, typical local government records requiring a signature - such as contracts, meeting minutes, and claim vouchers - can utilize electronic signatures in lieu of wet signatures. Given the changes to the way public agencies must do business in the era of a worldwide pandemic, the use of electronic signature technology has not only become commonplace, but is quickly becoming the practical standard. To use electronic signatures, the agency must first adopt a local policy. This proposal was presented to the Council Finance Committee on 3/9/2021. The Committee approved the proposal and recommended it for adoption on the next Council consent agenda. Staff Recommendation Adopt resolution and approve budget authority on the consent agenda. Narrative The proposed policy authorizes electronic signature platforms, such as DocuSign, to be utilized in applying electronic signatures to City documents. DocuSign appears to be the frontrunner in electronic document signature technology, occupying approximately 70% market share among local government agencies. The estimated cost of an annual contract for this service is approximately $3,200-$5,200. Staff estimates that the Business Pro Package should suit the city's needs, which is on the lower range of the cost estimate. Attachments: DRAFT Electronic Signature and Remote Notarization Policy 2.18.2021 DRAFT Resolution to Adopt Electronic Signature and Remote Notarization Policy 2.18.2021 Packet Pg. 205 7.9 DRAFT - City of Edmonds WA - Public Works Dept_DocuSign Order Form FX2_2021-02-25 DRAFT - City of Edmonds WA - Public Works Dept_DocuSign Order Form FX2_2021-02-25 (1) DocuSign Package Comparison Packet Pg. 206 7.9.a City of Edmonds Electronic Signature and Remote Notarization Policy March , 2021 Resolution # XXXX Packet Pg. 207 7.9.a City of Edmonds Electronic Signature and Remote Notarization Policy Policy Statement The Washington State Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, Chapter 1.80 RCW, authorizes the electronic execution and remote notarization of City documents. Streamlining processes that require wet signatures and replacing them with electronic signatures, and remote notarizations when necessary, is consistent with the intent of this law to promote electronic transactions and remove barriers that might prevent the use of electronic transactions by governmental entities. By transitioning to a policy of executing documents electronically/remotely, the City will reduce its reliance on paper -based transactions and will further improve information security and sharing. Further, such transition will facilitate more efficient approval of and access to documents and reduce both costs and environmental impact. Reason for Policy The intent of this policy is to establish procedures for the acceptance, submission, and retention of electronic signatures and for the remote notarization of documents, as necessary, in compliance with State law. The guidelines set forth in this policy apply to the use of any electronic signature provider, such as DocuSign; any video conferencing provider, such as Zoom; and any other similar platform used to obtain such services. Who Must Comply This policy is applicable to all City departments, employees, volunteers, and officials References Chapter 1.80 RCW Uniform Electronic Transactions Act 15 U.S.C. Ch. 96 Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act WA Senate Bill 5641 Notary Laws RCW 42.45.280 Electronic Records Notary Public Proclamation 20-27 Electronic Notary Proclamation Amending Proclamation 20-05 (as amended or extended) Packet Pg. 208 7.9.a Definitions Electronic signature: An electronic sound, symbol, or process attached to or logically associated with a record and executed or adopted by a person with the intent to sign the record. Notary: An individual with the authorization to execute specific legal formalities, such as witnessing signatures on documents. Record: Information that is inscribed on a tangible medium or that is stored in an electronic or other medium and is retrievable in perceivable form. Remote notarization: A form of notarization where the signer appears before the notary at the time of notarization using audio-visual technology, as opposed to being in the room physically. Wet signature: A signature created in person when the signer physically marks a document. All other definitions set forth in RCW 1.80.010 shall also apply to this policy. Responsibilities It is the responsibility of all City of Edmonds employees, elected officials, and volunteers to ensure that they adhere to the electronic signature and remote notary procedures outlined in this policy to provide reasonable assurance of authenticity and accuracy when using electronic documents. Transmission and Storage of Electronic Transactions and Signatures Electronically signed electronic records shall be stored in such a way as to ensure their preservation, disposition, integrity, security, confidentiality, and auditability. Electronic records shall be transmitted only via secure services including, but not limited to, email, drop box, and cloud -based electronic signature platforms. Packet Pg. 209 7.9.a ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE POLICY 1. The City of Edmonds recognizes electronic signatures as legally binding and equivalent in nature to wet signatures. 2. The City of Edmonds authorizes electronic signature platforms, such as DocuSign, to be utilized in applying electronic signatures to City documents. 3. Any electronic signature platform used by the City of Edmonds is authorized to apply electronic signatures to any contracts or other documents to which the City of Edmonds is a party, including but not limited to City Council, Board or Commission actions or meeting minutes, Resolutions and Ordinances adopted or passed by the City Council, and claim vouchers approved by the City Council. 4. Electronic signatures may be used on City records requiring execution by a third party. 5. Electronic signatures may be applied using other electronic signature tools, such as Adobe, for documents such as internal city documents. 6. Electronic signatures may not be applied using another employee's name. Any employee or official applying an electronic signature shall use his or her own name. 7. If an electronic or digital signature is used for interstate transactions or for documents required by the US Federal government, the signature shall comply with the requirements of the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act. 8. This policy does not impact the use or legitimacy of wet signatures. 9. A City document that is required by law to be signed in non -electronic media may not be electronically signed. ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE PROCEDURES 1. A limited number of individuals are permitted to route documents for signatures between the City and outside organizations. The City Clerk determines who may use this tool for signatures that bind the City. The City Clerk will develop procedures for using electronic signature platforms, such as DocuSign; for establishing an approved list of individuals who may route documents for official signatures; and for the retention of electronically signed/notarized documents. The City Clerk will work with City Departments to support electronic signatures with software programs, such as Adobe, for internal signature processes. Packet Pg. 210 7.9.a 2. Process. a. If you receive a document from an electronic signature platform, such as DocuSign, that requires an electronic signature, select the "review document" or equivalent option. b. Once the document opens, review the contents of the document fully. When you are satisfied that you have the authority to sign the document, and that you agree to comply fully with the obligations of the document, you may proceed to take the steps required by the platform to apply your electronic signature to the document. c. Once you have applied your electronic signature to a document, take the steps required by the platform to return the signed document to the original sender. d. Alternatively, you may decline to sign a document, or just not proceed. If you would like assistance, you may contact the City Clerk or the City Attorney. REMOTE NOTARIZATION POLICY 1. The City of Edmonds recognizes remote notarization as legally binding and equivalent in nature to electronic notarization and physical notarization. 2. The City authorizes the use of remote notarization platforms, such as DocuSign, in conjunction with audio-visual platforms, such as Zoom, to notarize City documents. 3. Any remote notarization platform and any audio-visual platform used by the City is authorized to remotely notarize any contracts to which the City of Edmonds is a party. 4. Per RCW 42.45.280, a remotely located individual must personally appear for the notarial act using communication technology and must be identified by the notary public using at least two forms of valid identification. 5. A notary public must have an electronic notary endorsement and remote online notary (RON) authority prior to performing remote notarial acts. 6. A notary public must retain an audio-visual recording of the notarial act as outlined in RCW 42.45.280. 7. Per WAC 308-30-220, the maximum fee that a notary may charge for witnessing or attesting to a signature, taking an acknowledgement or a verification upon oath or affirmation, certifying or attesting a copy, administering an oath or affirmation or certifying that an event has occurred or an act has been performed is $10. 8. This policy does not impact the use or legitimacy of electronic or physical notarization. Packet Pg. 211 7.9.a REMOTE NOTARIZATION PROCEDURES Notary to Obtain Authorization. a. Apply for a remote online notary (RON) authority by sending an email to the Washington Department of Licensing notary group at notaries(a-dol.wa.gov. b. In the subject line, place "Remote Online Notary Endorsement Application" and in the body of the email, include your name, your notary license number, and the date that you applied for the electronic notary endorsement. 2. Notarization Process. a. The online notarization process begins when a sender prepares a document to send to the signer and the notary. b. After receiving the document, the notary schedules a remote audio-visual conferencing session with the signer. c. When the audio-visual conferencing session begins, the notary will start recording the session. d. Once the recording has begun, the notary will confirm the identity of the signer. e. After the signer's identity has been verified, the notary will share their screen to begin the signing portion of the process. The notary will indicate through the platform that they are witnessing a signature. g. The notary will then grant the signer control of the session to proceed with affixing their signature to the document. h. Once the signer has finished signing the document, they will notify the notary that they have signed, and the notary will then take back control of the session. The notary then stops sharing the audio-visual conferencing session and regains control of the session. The notary then completes the platform's processes to confirm the signer's identity. k. The notary then applies their electronic notarial stamp to the appropriate location of the document. If needed, the notary can also attach a notarial certificate. m. The notary then undertakes the platform's required processes to complete the remote notarization process. n. Once the remote notarization process has been completed, the notary will retain the recording and any relevant documentation in a secure area for the allotted length of time listed on the records retention schedule. Packet Pg. 212 7.9.b RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE USE OF ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES AND REMOTE NOTARIZATION IN CONDUCTING CITY BUSINESS; AND ADOPTING AN ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE AND REMOTE NOTARIZATION POLICY. WHEREAS, in Chapter 19.360 RCW, the Washington State Legislature, to the extent not already authorized by federal or state law, authorized municipalities in Washington to utilize electronic signatures in the conduct of governmental affairs and transactions; and WHEREAS, in March 2020, through Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 6028, now codified at Chapter 1.80 RCW, the Washington State Legislature repealed Chapter 19.360 RCW and adopted the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, effective June 11, 2020, which is intended to facilitate the use of electronic transactions consistent with other applicable law, and to bring consistency to reasonable practices concerning electronic transactions; and WHEREAS, RCW 1.80.010 defines "electronic signature" as "an electronic sound, symbol, or process attached to or logically associated with a record and executed or adopted by a person with the intent to sign the record"; and WHEREAS, RCW 1.80.010 defines "electronic record" as "a record created, generated, sent, communicated, received, or stored by electronic means"; and WHEREAS, RCW 1.80.060 provides that "[a] record or signature may not be denied legal effect or enforceability solely because it is in electronic form; a contract may not be denied legal effect or enforceability solely because an electronic record was used in its formation; if a law requires a record to be in writing, an electronic record satisfies the law; and if a law requires a signature, an electronic signature satisfies the law"; and WHEREAS, RCW 1.80.100 provides that "[i]f a law requires a signature or record to be notarized, acknowledged, verified, or made under oath, the requirement is satisfied if the electronic signature of the person authorized to perform those acts, together with all other information required to be included by other applicable law, is attached to or logically associated with the signature or record"; and WHEREAS, electronic signatures and remote notarization provide a convenient, time -saving, and secure way of signing documents, and the use of such procedures, where appropriate and permitted by law, will lessen administrative demands and improve efficiency; and WHEREAS, the value of electronic signatures and the need for remote notarization has been proven during the COVID-19 pandemic, when City business has been and continues to be largely conducted via remote technologies due to the Governor's Stay Home Stay Safe Proclamation and subsequent orders; and Packet Pg. 213 7.9.b WHEREAS, for these reasons, the City desires to leverage technology solutions which are in compliance with the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act to apply notarized electronic signatures to legally enforceable electronic records as allowed by Chapter 1.80 RCW; and WHEREAS, the method and process for electronic submissions and the use of electronic signatures must be established by ordinance, resolution, policy or rule, and the City wishes to establish a policy for using electronic signatures and remote notarization by way of a resolution adopted by Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt a policy to provide reasonable assurance of the integrity, authenticity, and non -repudiation of electronic records when electronic signatures and submissions are used and accepted and to formally authorize the use of electronic signatures and remote notarization in conducting City business; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are incorporated and fully made a part of this Resolution. 2. Public Interest. The City Council finds it to be in the public interest to allow the use of electronic signatures and remote notarization for City business to the fullest extent allowed by law. 3. Adoption ofPolicy. City Council hereby adopts the Electronic Signature and Remote Notarization Policy attached hereto as Exhibit A. 4. Ratification of Prior Signatures. The use and acceptance of electronic signatures by the City prior to the effective date of this Resolution that is consistent with its terms is hereby ratified and confirmed. 5. Severability. If any one or more section, subsections, or sentences of this Resolution are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Resolution and the same shall remain in full force and effect. 6. Effective Date. This Resolution and policy shall take effect immediately. RESOLVED this day of APPROVED: 2021. MAYOR, MIKE NELSON Packet Pg. 214 7.9.b ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. Packet Pg. 215 7.9.c DocuSign, Inc. Offer Valid Through: Mar 15, DocuSign, 221 Main Street, Suite 1000 2021 San Francisco, CA 94105 Prepared By: Weston Miller Quote Number: Q-00561883 SUBJECT TO APPROVAL ORDER FORM Address Information Bill To: City of Edmonds 121 5th Ave N, Edmonds, WA, 98020 United States Billing Contact Name: Scott Passey Billing Email Address: scott.passey@edmondswa.gov Billing Phone: +1.425.775.2525 Order Details Order Start Date: Mar 15, 2021 Order End Date: Mar 14, 2022 Billing Frequency: Annual Products Ship To: City of Edmonds 121 5th Ave N, Edmonds, WA, 98020 United States ,Shipping Contact Name: ,Scott Passey 'Shipping Email Address: scott.passey@edmondswa.gov Shipping Phone: +1.425.775.2525 Payment Method: Check Payment Terms: Net 30 Currency: USD Product Name Start Date End.. eSignature Enterprise Pro Edition - Envelope Subs. Mar 15, 2021 Mar 14, 2022 500 $3,900.00 Enterprise Premier Support Mar 15, 2021 Mar 14, 2022 1 $858.00 Adoption Consulting Lite Mar 15, 2021 Mar 14, 2022 1 $400.00 Single Sign -On Implementation Services Mar 15, 2021 Jun 13, 2021 1 $0.00 Product Details eSignature Envelope Allowance: 500 Grand Total: $5,158.00 Packet Pg. 216 7.9.c Overage/Usage Fees eSignature Enterprise Pro Edition - Envelope Subs. (Per Transaction): $8.80 Order Special Terms Terms & Conditions This Order Form is governed by the terms Master Services Agreement available online at: https://www.docusign.com/companv/terms-and-conditions/msa and the applicable Service Schedule(s) and Attachments for the DocuSign Services described herein available online at https://www.docusign.com/companv/terms-and-conditions/msa-service-schedules. Adoption Consulting Lite will expire if not used within 90 days of the product start date. The Single Sign -On Implementation Services indicated in the Products table above will be available to Customer during the longer of 90 days from the Order Start Date or the End Date stated in the Product table. The availability of the SSO services shall only be valid for such specified time period; no refunds will be provided for services not used by Customer during the specified time period. Billing Information Prices shown above do not include any state and local taxes that may apply. Any such taxes are the responsibility of the Customer and will appear on the final Invoice. Is the contracting entity exempt from sales tax? Please select Yes or No: If yes, please send the required tax exemption documents immediately to taxexempt(a)docusign.com. Invoices for this order will be emailed automatically from invoicing(a)_docusign.com. Please make sure this email is on an approved setting or safe senders list so notifications do not go to a junk folder or caught in a spam filter. Purchase Order Information Page 2 of 3 Packet Pg. 217 7.9.c Is a Purchase Order (PO) required for the purchase or payment of the products on this Order Form? Please select Yes or No: If yes, please complete the following: PO Number: PO Amount: $ Page 3 of 3 Packet Pg. 218 7.9.d DocuSign, Inc. Offer Valid Through: Mar 15, DocuSign, 221 Main Street, Suite 1000 2021 San Francisco, CA 94105 Prepared By: Weston Miller Quote Number: Q-00561883 SUBJECT TO APPROVAL ORDER FORM Address Information Bill To: City of Edmonds 121 5th Ave N, Edmonds, WA, 98020 United States Billing Contact Name: Scott Passey Billing Email Address: scott.passey@edmondswa.gov Billing Phone: +1.425.775.2525 Order Details Order Start Date: Mar 15, 2021 Order End Date: Mar 14, 2022 Billing Frequency: Annual Products Ship To: City of Edmonds 121 5th Ave N, Edmonds, WA, 98020 United States ,Shipping Contact Name: ,Scott Passey 'Shipping Email Address: scott.passey@edmondswa.gov Shipping Phone: +1.425.775.2525 Payment Method: Check Payment Terms: Net 30 Currency: USD Product Name Start Date End.. eSignature Business Pro Edition - Envelope Subs. Mar 15, 2021 Mar 14, 2022 500 $2,400.00 Premier Support Mar 15, 2021 Mar 14, 2022 1 $360.00 Adoption Consulting Lite Mar 15, 2021 Mar 14, 2022 1 $400.00 Product Details eSignature Envelope Allowance: 500 Grand Total: $3,160.00 Packet Pg. 219 7.9.d Overage/Usage Fees eSignature Business Pro Edition - Envelope Subs. (Per Transaction): $5.80 Order Special Terms Terms & Conditions This Order Form is governed by the terms Master Services Agreement available online at: https://www.docusign.com/company/terms-and-conditions/msa and the applicable Service Schedule(s) and Attachments for the DocuSign Services described herein available online at https://www.docusign.com/company/terms-and-conditions/msa-service-schedules. Adoption Consulting Lite will expire if not used within 90 days of the product start date. Billing Information Prices shown above do not include any state and local taxes that may apply. Any such taxes are the responsibility of the Customer and will appear on the final Invoice. Is the contracting entity exempt from sales tax? Please select Yes or No: If yes, please send the required tax exemption documents immediately to taxexempt(a)docusign.com. Invoices for this order will be emailed automatically from invoicinpCa_)docusign.com. Please make sure this email is on an approved setting or safe senders list so notifications do not go to a junk folder or caught in a spam filter. Purchase Order Information Is a Purchase Order (PO) required for the purchase or payment of the products on this Order Form? Please select Yes or No: If yes, please complete the following: PO Number: Page 2 of 3 Packet Pg. 220 7.9.d PO Amount: $ Page 3 of 3 Packet Pg. 221 7.9.e DocuSign Package Comparison Features Business Pro Enterprise Pro Send documents for eSignature Basic fields Mobile app Reusable templates Real-time audit trail Multiple languages Reminders and notifications Personalized branding Comments Collect Payments Advanced fields Signer attachments Bulk Send PowerForms Collaborative Fields In -person Signatures Advanced Authentication Single Sign On Advanced Workflows eNotary Document Visibility Org Admin Connectors Included Web Application Administrator Course Business Process Automation Standard Edition included Advanced Fields: formulas, custom fields, data fields, conditional logic, data validation Form Fields: radio buttons, drop downs, notes Bulk Send: create and send out up to 1,000 unique envelopes for signature, all at once PowerForms: enable self-service signing Payments: collect payment during the signing process Signer Attachments: upload attachment(s) during signing process DocuSign Connect: set up custom integrations or integrate with 300+ pre -built partner apps PDF Conversion: converts PDF fields to signer fields Approve/Decline Buttons In -Person Signing Business Transformation Business Pro Edition included Access Management wl SSO: enforce unique security policies using single sign -on Organization Management: centralized administrative tools to simplify enterprise management Advanced Workflows: signing groups, supplemental documents, document visibility, draft watermark, conditional routing, and more Advanced Compliance: read-only fields, masked fields, locked templates QA Testing Environment: testing environment enabling stable integration at launch Expanded Branding: multiple brands (up to 5) Document Retention Policies: automate your policies to ensure compliance SMS Authentication, eNotary & eWitness: authenticate signing DocuSign Packet Pg. 222 8.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/16/2021 Amendments to New Tree Regulations Staff Lead: Shane Hope Department: Planning Division Preparer: Kernen Lien Background/History Stage 1 of updating the City's tree regulations has primarily focused on protecting trees on sites where development is happening, along with related issues, such as a Tree Fund. On March 2, the City Council made significant progress by adopting anew ordinance (see Attachment 1 "Tree -Related Regulations") to put this into action. At the March 2 meeting, the City Council also reviewed a table of Stage 2 tree -related activities, which would be slated next. (SeeAttachment2 for "Tree Work Upcoming".) Stage 2 includes developing tree regulations that apply to private properties not covered by regulations for development. During the last few months while the new tree -related regulations were being prepared, the Council adopted two interim ordinances (No. 4200 and No. 4201) strictly limiting options for tree removal on potential development sites. These interim ordinances would have expired March 10 but, at the Council's March 2 meeting, they were extended until March 24, while the City Council continued to consider amendments to the new tree regulations. Council began making amendments to the tree regulations adopted by the ordinance in Attachment 1 at the March 9th Council meeting. Staff Recommendation Decide on amendment proposals to be included in an ordinance that would amend the new tree regulations. Narrative At the City Council's March 2 meeting, the Council adopted new tree regulations that primarily focused on protecting/retaining trees during development. The new regulations contained several changes from the prior version. (Note: The new tree regulations focus on development sites but tree regulations for other properties will be considered later as part of Stage 2 amendments.) Because the available time that evening did not allow all Council members to have amendment proposals considered, the Council concurred on revisiting the new tree regulations ordinance (Attachment 1) at the March 9 meeting and considering amendments. The Council began the amendment process at the March 9 meeting and the regulations provided in Attachment 4 reflect the changes approved by the City council at the March 9 meeting in a redline/strikeout format. The amendment highlighted in yellow at ECDC 23.10.080.E was under discussion when the March 9th meeting ended due to lateness of hour and was not voted on. Packet Pg. 223 8.1 The Council's Executive Assistant consolidated potential amendments that may be considered by the Council into an Excel spreadsheet. Administration staff identified which of the proposed amendments were either addressed at the March 2nd Council meeting or were Stage 1 or Stage proposals. This spreadsheet of potential amendments is provided in Attachment 3. In order to facilitate the amendment process, staff recommends considering the Stage 1 amendments one at a time working from the top to the bottom during the March 16th Council meeting. Any amendments supported by the Council majority will be included in an ordinance that comes back to the City Council for a final decision at its March 23 meeting. Such ordinance could be adopted as part of the Consent Agenda or by separate action. Attachments: Attachment 1: Tree Related Regulations 3.4.21 Attachment 2: Tree Work Upcoming Attachment 3: Council Tree Code Changes by Stage.03.09.21 Attachment 4: Draft Edmonds Tree Related Regulations with Council Amendments Packet Pg. 224 8.1.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REPEALING PRIOR TREE CLEARING REGULATIONS, ADOPTING NEW TREE RELATED REGULATIONS, NEW CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION DESIGN REGULATIONS, AND ESTABLISHING A NEW TREE FUND WHEREAS, the Planning Board has been reviewing draft tree regulations since September 2020, specifically at the September 9, October 14, October 28, November 12, and November 18 Planning Board meetings; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance 4200 (a moratorium on certain subdivision applications) and Ordinance 4201 (interim regulations to accompany the moratorium) on November 10, 2020 to preserve existing trees while the Planning Board completed its work; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board held a public hearing on the draft tree regulations on December 9, 2020 and completed its review on January 13, 2021 with a recommendation to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council received an introduction to the draft tree regulations at the January 26, 2021 Council meeting and held a public hearing on February 2, 2021; and WHEREAS, the regulations adopted by this ordinance represent the city's initial stages of implementing the Urban Forest Management Plan that the City Council adopted in 2019; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 18.45 (Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Code) of the Edmonds Community Development Code is repealed in its entirety and replaced by a new Chapter 23.10 added to Title 23 (Natural Resources) of the Edmonds Community Development Code . The new chapter 23.10 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Tree Related Packet Pg. 225 8.1.a Regulations," is hereby added to read as set forth in Attachment A hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 2. A new Section 20.75.048 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Conservation Subdivision Design," is hereby added to read as set forth in Attachment B hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 3. A new chapter 3.95 of the Edmonds City Code, entitled "Tree Fund," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Attachment C hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 4. The effectiveness of Ordinances 4200 and 4201 shall be extended to March 24 2021. Section 5. Emergency Declaration. The city council hereby declares that an emergency exists necessitating that this ordinance take effect immediately upon passage, and that the same is not subject to a referendum. Ordinances 4200 and 4201 were adopted on November 10, 2020, were only intended to remain in effect for four months, and need to be repealed by ordinance. Without an immediate adoption of this interim zoning ordinance, Ordinances 4200 and 4201 would either last longer than intended or would expire before this ordinance could take effect. In the latter scenario, any delay in the effective date of this ordinance could allow developers to vest applications under the preexisting set of tree regulations. Therefore, this ordinance should be imposed as an emergency measure to protect the public health, safety and welfare by ensuring that all future development be governed by the new code. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect immediately upon passage, as set forth in Section 5, as long as it is approved by a majority plus one of the entire membership of the council, as required by RCW 35A.12.130. If it is not adopted Packet Pg. 226 8.1.a by a majority plus one of the entire membership of the council, then Section 5 shall be disregarded, in which case, this ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. Section 7. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. APPROVED: MAYOR MIKE NELSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: IM JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 227 8.1.a SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2021, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING NEW TREE RELATED REGULATIONS, NEW CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION DESIGN REGULATIONS, AND ESTABLISHING A NEW TREE FUND The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2021. 4840-7251-8158,v. 1 M CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Packet Pg. 228 8.1.a ATTACHMENT A Draft Tree Related Regulations 23.10.000 Intent and Purpose 23.10.010 Administration Authority 23.10.020 Definitions 23.10.030 Permits 23.10.040 Exemptions 23.10.050 Tree Removal Prohibited 23.10.060 Tree Retention Associated with Development Activity 23.10.070 Tree Protection Measures During Development 23.10.080 Tree Replacement 23.10.085 Protected Trees Notice on Title 23.10.090 Bonding 23.10.100 Violation, Enforcement and Penalties 23.10.110 Liability 20.75.048 Conservation Subdivision Design Flexibility Chapter 3.95 Tree Fund 23.10.000 Intent and Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to establish a process and standards to provide for the evaluation, protection, enhancement, preservation, replacement, and proper maintenance use of significant trees. This includes the following: A. Implement the goals and objectives of the City's Urban Forest Management Plan; B. Implement the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan; C. Implement the goals and objectives of the City's Climate Action Plan; D. Preserve, through design and intention, wildlife corridors and habitat; E. To promote the public health, safety, biodiversity, environmental health and general welfare of the residents of Edmonds, provide greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and preserve the physical and aesthetic character of the city through the prevention of indiscriminate removal or destruction of trees and ground cover on improved or partially improved property; F. Preserve the maximum number of trees that are determined to be appropriate for preservation in the Edmonds urban environment and that have a reasonable chance of long-term survival; G. Promote site planning, building, and development practices that work to avoid removal or destruction of trees and vegetation, that avoid unnecessary disturbance to the City's natural vegetation, and that provide landscaping to buffer the effects of built and paved areas; H. Encourage tree retention efforts by providing design flexibility with respect to certain development requirements; City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 1 of 15 Packet Pg. 229 8.1.a ATTACHMENT A Retain as many viable trees as possible on a developing site while still allowing the development proposal to move forward in a timely manner and replanting when trees are removed during of development. J. Promote building and site planning practices that are consistent with the city's natural topographic and vegetation features while recognizing that certain factors such as condition (e.g., disease, danger of falling, etc.), proximity to existing and proposed structures and improvements, interference with utility services, and the realization of a reasonable enjoyment of property may require the removal of certain trees and ground cover; and K. Mitigate the environmental and aesthetic consequences of tree removal in land development through on -site and off -site tree replacement to help achieve a goal of no net loss of tree canopy coverage throughout the City of Edmonds; 23.10.010 Administering Authority The development services director ("director") or a designee shall have the authority and responsibility to administer and enforce all provisions of this chapter. 23.10.020 Definitions A. Caliper — The American Association of Nurserymen standard for trunk measurement of nursery stock. Caliper of the trunk shall be the trunk diameter measured six (6) inches above the ground for up to and including 4-inch caliper size and 12 inches above the ground for larger sizes. B. Canopy — The leaves and branches of a tree from the lowest branch on the trunk to the top. C. Critical Root Zone - The area surrounding a tree at a distance from the trunk, which is equal to one (1) foot for every one (1) inch of tree DBH. D. Developable Site —The gross site area of a lot minus critical areas and buffers. E. Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) - The diameter or thickness of a tree trunk measured at 4.5 feet from the ground. DBH is also known as Diameter at Standard Height (DSH). F. Dripline - The distance from the tree trunk, that is equal to the furthest extent of the tree's crown. G. Hazard tree - A tree that is dead, dying, diseased, damaged, structurally defective or exposed by recent removal of adjacent trees which makes it subject to a high probability of failure as determined by a qualified tree professional. H. Grove —A group of three (3) or more significant trees with overlapping or touching crowns. I. Improved lot — means mean a lot or parcel of land upon which a structure(s) is located, and which cannot be further subdivided pursuant to city subdivision regulations and zoning code. J. Limits of disturbance means the boundary between the area of minimum protection around a tree and the allowable site disturbance. K. Native Tree — Native trees are described in the Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) as being well -suited to our climate and tending to provide good habitat for local wildlife. The UFMP contains a partial list of species that are considered native trees. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 2 of 15 Packet Pg. 230 8.1.a ATTACHMENT A L. Nuisance Tree — is a tree that is causing significant physical damage to a private or public structures and/or infrastructure, including but not limited to: sidewalk, curb, road, water or sewer or stormwater utilities, driveway, parking lot, building foundation, or roof. M. Protected Tree — A tree identified for retention and protection on an approved tree retention plan, replacement in relation to a permit or plan, and/or permanently protected by easement, tract, or covenant restriction. N. Pruning- means the proper removal of roots or branches of a tree according to the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 pruning standards. O. Qualified professional —An individual with relevant education and training in arboriculture or urban forestry, having two (2) or more of the following credentials: 1. International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborist; 2. Tree Risk Assessment Qualification (TRAQ) as established by the ISA TRAQ (or equivalent); 3. American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA) registered Consulting Arborist; 4. Society of American Foresters (SAF) Certified Forester for Forest Management Plans; For tree retention associated with a development permit, a qualified professional must have, in addition to the above credentials, a minimum of three (3) years' experience working directly with the protection of trees during construction and have experience with the likelihood of tree survival after construction. A qualified professional must also be able to prescribe appropriate measures for the preservation of trees during land development. P. Significant Tree — A tree that is at least six (6) inches in diameter at breast height (DBH) as measured at 4.5 feet from the ground. For trees with multiple leaders at four and one-half (4.5) feet height, theDBH shall be the combined cumulative total of branches greater than six (6) inches diameter at four and one-half (4.5) feet above the average grade. If a tree has been removed and only the stump remains that is below four and one-half (4.5) feet tall, the size of the tree shall be the diameter of the top of the stump. Q. Specimen Tree — A tree of exceptional size or form for its species or rarity as determined by the city's qualified tree professional.. R. Tree - means a self-supporting woody plant characterized by one main trunk or, for certain species, multiple trunks, that is recognized as a tree in the nursery and arboricultural industries S. Tree Fund — refers to the fund created by Chapter 3.95 ECC. T. Tree removal — means the direct or indirect removal of a tree(s) or vegetation through actions including, but not limited to: clearing, cutting, girdling, topping, or causing irreversible damage to roots or stems; destroying the structural integrity of trees through improper pruning, unless pruning back to the point where the tree has been previously topped; poisoning; filling, excavating, grading, or trenching within the dripline that results in the loss of more than 20 percent of the tree's root system; or the removal through any of these processes of greater than 50 percent of the live crown of the tree. U. Tree topping - The significant cutting back of the leader stem or major branches, resulting in severely altering the growth potential of a tree. This definition does not apply when the sole purpose is to create a snag or snags for wildlife habitat. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 3 of 15 Packet Pg. 231 8.1.a ATTACHMENT A V. Viable tree - A significant tree that a qualified professional has determined to be in good health, with a low risk of failure due to structural defects, is windfirm if isolated or remains as part of a grove, and is a species that is suitable for its location. 23.10.030 Permits A. Applicability: No person shall remove, excessively prune, or top any significant tree except as provided by this chapter. B. Tree removal not specifically exempted in section 23.10.040 will be processed as a Type I permit. C. Procedural exemption. Tree removal associated with building permit, subdivision, or other land use approval will be reviewed with the associated project and will not require a separate tree removal permit. All clearing shall be consistent with and apply the standards established by this chapter. 23.10.040 Exemptions The following activities are exempt from the provisions of this chapter and do not require a permit: A. Removal of trees on an improved single-family lot, except for: That portion of the property containing a critical area or its associated buffer. Critical area in this context does not include erosion hazards with slopes less than 25 percent. B. Removal of non -significant trees that are not protected by any other means. C. Removal of trees by the public works department, parks department, fire department and or franchised utilities for one of the following purposes: Installation and maintenance of public utilities or motorized or non -motorized streets or paths 2. In response to situations involving danger to life or property, substantial fire hazards, or interruption of services provided by a utility. Franchised utilities shall provide notification to the City prior to tree maintenance or removal. A separate right-of-way permit may be required. D. Removal and maintenance of trees within City of Edmonds' parks at the direction of the Parks Department. E. Routine landscaping and maintenance of vegetation, such as pruning and planting, removal of invasive/exotic species, management of brush and seedling trees. Pruning should comply with ANSI A300 (Part 1— 2017), Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Management — Standard Practices, to maintain long term health. This includes maintenance of trees and vegetation required to be retained or planted under the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Pruning existing trees back to the point where they have been previously topped is considered maintenance for these trees alone provided pruning will be undertaken only to the extent necessary for public safety or tree health. F. Trees that do not meet the exemptions in subsections A through E of this section may be removed with supporting documentation: City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 4 of 15 Packet Pg. 232 8.1.a ATTACHMENT A a. Nuisance tree with documentation of the damage and any tree work that has been attempted to rectify the nuisance, and/or a statement from the applicant's qualified tree professional explaining why no arboricultural practices can safely rectify the nuisance. b. Hazard tree located outside a critical area with a tree risk assessment prepared by the applicants qualified professional documenting how the tree meets the definition of a hazard tree. c. Hazard tree removal in a critical area or critical area buffers consistent with the requirements of ECDC 23.40.220.C.8 23.10.050 Tree Removal Prohibited A. Protected Trees: Removal of protected trees is prohibited, except as provided for in ECDC 23.10.040.E Hazard and Nuisance Trees, or through an approved modification of a Landscape Plan B. Vacant Lots: Removal of trees from a vacant lot prior to a project development is prohibited except as provided for in ECDC 23.10.040.F, hazard and nuisance trees. C. Demolition of Structures: Tree removal shall be prohibited as part of a permitted demolition except as required to reasonably conduct demolition activities subject to approval of the director. Tree replacement may be required for removed trees. D. In critical areas, critical area buffers, and in all native growth protection easements, tree removal is prohibited except as allowed per Chapters 23.40 — 23.90 ECDC. 23.10.060 Tree Retention Associated with Development Activity A. Introduction. The City's objective is to retain as many viable trees as possible on a developing site while still allowing the development proposal to move forward in a timely manner. To that end, the City requires approval of a tree retention and protection plan in conjunction with the following applications: 1. Short subdivision 2. Subdivision 3. New multi -family development 4. New single-family development on a vacant lot or a demolition and replacement of a single- family house, and 5. Any tree removal on developed sites not exempted by ECDC 23.10.040. In order to make better decisions about tree retention, particularly during all stages of development, tree retention plans will require specific information about the existing trees before removal is allowed. Specific tree retention plan review standards provided in this section establish tree retention priorities, incentives, and variations to development standards in order to facilitate preservation of viable trees. B. Tree Retention Plan City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 5 of 15 Packet Pg. 233 8.1.a ATTACHMENT A 1. An applicant for a development identified in subsection A must submit a tree retention plan that complies with this section. A qualified professional may be required to prepare certain components of a tree retention plan at the applicant's expense. Tree Retention Plan Components. The tree retention plan shall contain the following information, unless waived by the director: a. A tree inventory containing the following: A number system of all existing significant trees on the subject property (with corresponding tags on trees); Size (DBH) and estimated tree crown diameter; iii. Proposed tree status (trees to be removed or retained); iv. Brief general health or condition rating of trees (i.e.: poor, fair, good, excellent, etc.) V. Tree type or species. b. A site plan depicting the following: Location of all proposed improvements, including building footprint, access, utilities, applicable setbacks, buffers, and required landscaped areas clearly identified. If a short subdivision or subdivision is being proposed and the location of all proposed improvements has not yet been established, a phased tree retention plan review is required as described in subsection (3)(a) of this section; Accurate location of significant trees on the subject property and adjacent properties where the canopy and/or critical root zone of adjacent significant trees extend onto the subject property (surveyed locations may be required). iii. Trees labeled corresponding to the tree inventory numbering system; iv. Location of tree protection measures; V. Indicate limits of disturbance drawn to scale around all trees potentially impacted by site disturbances resulting from grading, demolition, or construction activities; vi. Proposed tree status (trees to be removed or retained) noted by an `X' or by ghosting out; vii. Proposed locations of any required replacement trees as outlined in ECDC 23.10.080 and trees required to be planted in accordance with ECDC 23.10.060.C.5. c. An arborist report containing the following: A complete description of each tree's health, condition, and viability; A description of the method(s) used to determine the limits of disturbance (i.e., critical root zone, root plate diameter, or a case -by -case basis description for individual trees); iii. Any special instructions specifically outlining any work proposed within the limits of the disturbance protection area (i.e., hand -digging, tunneling, root pruning, any grade changes, clearing, monitoring, and aftercare); iv. For trees not viable for retention, a description of the reason(s) for removal based on poor health, high risk of failure due to structure, defects, unavoidable isolation City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 6 of 15 Packet Pg. 234 8.1.a ATTACHMENT A (windfirmness), or unsuitability of species, etc., and for which no reasonable alternative action is possible must be given (pruning, cabling, etc.); V. Description of the impact of necessary tree removal to the remaining trees, including those in a grove; 3. Additional Tree Retention Plan Standards for Short Subdivisions and Subdivisions a. Phased Review i. If during the short subdivision or subdivision review process the location of all proposed improvements, including the building footprint, utilities, and access, have not yet been established, the applicant may submit a Tree Retention Plan that addresses the current phase of development and limits removal to the impacted areas. A new Tree Retention Plan shall be required at each subsequent phase of the project as more information about the location of the proposed improvements is known subject to all of the requirements in this section. C. Tree Retention Requirements General Tree Retention Requirements: Significant trees on lots proposed for development or redevelopment shall be retained as follows: ECDC 23.10.060.0 Tree Retention Requirements for Proposed Development Development Retention Required New single-family, short subdivision, or 30% of all significant trees in the developable subdivision site Multi -family development, unit lot short 25% of all significant trees in the developable subdivision, or unit lot subdivision site 2. Trees that are located within Native Growth Protection Areas, critical areas and their associated buffers, or that have otherwise been designated for protection shall not be removed except as provide for ECDC 23.10.040.E hazard and nuisance trees and ECDC 23.40.220.C.8 critical area hazard tree. 3. The director may require the retention of additional trees to meet the stated purpose and intent of this chapter, as required by the critical area regulations (Chapters 23.40 — 23.90 ECDC), or the Shoreline Master Program (Title 24 ECDC) or as site -specific conditions demand using SEPA substantive authority. 4. Every significant tree that is removed under this chapter must be replaced consistent with the requirements of ECDC 23.10.080. 5. For developing properties identified in ECDC 23.10.060.A that have fewer than three significant trees, trees shall be retained and/or planted that will result in the site having at least three trees, which will be significant at maturity, per 8,000 square feet of lot area. D. Priority of Tree Retention Requirements: Significant trees to be retained should be retained in the following order of priority: 1. Priority One: City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 7 of 15 Packet Pg. 235 8.1.a ATTACHMENT A a. Specimen trees; b. Significant trees which form a continuous canopy; c. Significant trees on slope greater than 15 percent; d. Significant trees adjacent to critical areas and their associated buffers; and e. Significant trees over sixty (60) feet in height or greater than eighteen (18) inches DBH. 2. Priority Two: a. Healthy tree groupings whose associated undergrowth can be preserved; b. Trees within the required yard setbacks or around the perimeter; c. Trees that have a screening function or provide relief from glare, blight, or commercial development; d. Other significant native evergreen or deciduous trees; and e. Other significant nonnative trees. 3. Priority Three: Alders and cottonwoods shall be retained when all other trees have been evaluated for retention and are not able to be retained except where adjacent to open space, wetlands or creek buffers. E. In considering trees for retention, applicants and the City shall avoid, to the extent known, the selection of trees that may become hazardous because of wind gusts, including trees adjacent to utility corridors where falling trees may cause power outages or other damage. Remaining trees may be susceptible to blowdowns because of loss of a buffer from other trees, grade changes affecting the tree health and stability, and/or the presence of buildings in close proximity. 23.10.070 Tree Protection Measures During Development Prior to development activity or initiating tree removal on the site, vegetated areas, individual trees and soil to be preserved shall be protected from potentially damaging activities pursuant to the following standards: A. Preconstruction Meeting Required. Prior to the commencement of any permitted clearing and grading activity, a preconstruction meeting shall be held on site with the permittee and appropriate City staff. The project site shall be marked in the field as follows 1. The extent of clearing and grading to occur; 2. Delineation and protection of any critical areas and critical area buffers with clearing limit fencing; 3. Flagging of trees to be removed and tags on trees to be retained; and 4. Property lines B. Placing Materials near Trees. No person may conduct any activity within the protected area of any tree designated to remain, including, but not limited to, operating or parking equipment, placing solvents, storing building material or stockpiling any materials, or dumping concrete washout or City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 8 of 15 Packet Pg. 236 8.1.a ATTACHMENT A other chemicals. During construction, no person shall attach any object to any tree designated for protection. C. Protective Barrier. Before development, land clearing, grading, filling or any land alteration, the applicant shall: 1. Erect and maintain readily visible temporary protective tree fencing along the limits of disturbance which completely surrounds the protected area of all retained trees, groups of trees, vegetation and native soil. Tree protective fencing shall be a minimum height of three feet, visible and of durable construction; orange polyethylene laminar fencing is acceptable. 2. Install highly visible signs spaced no further than 15 feet apart along the entirety of the protective tree fencing. Said sign must be approved by the director and shall state at a minimum "Tree and Soil Protection Area, Entrance Prohibited" and provide the City phone number for code enforcement to report violations. 3. Prohibit excavation or compaction of soil or other potentially damaging activities within the barriers; provided, that the director may allow such activities approved by a qualified professional and under the supervision of a qualified professional retained and paid for by the applicant. 4. Maintain the protective barriers in place for the duration of the project until the director authorizes their removal. 5. Ensure that any approved landscaping done in the protected zone subsequent to the removal of the barriers shall be accomplished with machinery from outside the protected zone or by hand. 6. In addition to the above, the director may require the following: a. If equipment is authorized to operate within the protected zone, the soil and critical root zone of a tree must be covered with mulch to a depth of at least six (6) inches or with plywood, steel plates or similar material in order to protect roots and soil from damage caused by heavy equipment. b. Minimize root damage by hand -excavating a 2-foot-deep trench, at edge of critical root zone, to cleanly sever the roots of trees to be retained. Never rip or shred roots with heavy equipment. c. Corrective pruning performed on protected trees in order to avoid damage from machinery or building activity. d. Maintenance of trees throughout construction period by watering and fertilizing. D. Grade. 1. The grade shall not be elevated or reduced within the critical root zone of trees to be preserved without the director's authorization based on recommendations from a qualified professional. The director may allow coverage of up to one-half (1/2) of the area of the tree's critical root zone with light soils (no clay) to the minimum depth necessary to carry out grading or landscaping plans, if it will not imperil the survival of the tree. Aeration devices may be required to ensure the tree's survival. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 9 of 15 Packet Pg. 237 ATTACHMENT A 8.1.a 2. If the grade adjacent to a preserved tree is raised such that it could slough or erode into the tree's critical root zone, it shall be permanently stabilized to prevent soil erosion and suffocation of the roots. 3. The applicant shall not install an impervious surface within the critical root zone of any tree to be retained without the authorization of the director. The director may require specific construction methods and/or use of aeration devices to ensure the tree's survival and to minimize the potential for root -induced damage to the impervious surface. 4. To the greatest extent practical, utility trenches shall be located outside of the critical root zone of trees to be retained. The director may require that utilities be tunneled under the roots of trees to be retained if the director determines that trenching would significantly reduce the chances of the tree's survival. 5. Trees and other vegetation to be retained shall be protected from erosion and sedimentation. Clearing operations shall be conducted so as to expose the smallest practical area of soil to erosion for the least possible time. To control erosion, it is encouraged that shrubs, ground cover and stumps be maintained on the individual lots, where feasible. 6. The director may approve the use of alternative tree protection techniques if those techniques provide an equal or greater degree of protection than the techniques listed in this subsection. E. Directional Felling. Directional felling of trees shall be used to avoid damage to trees designated for retention. Additional Requirements. The director may require additional tree protection measures that are consistent with accepted urban forestry industry practices. 23.10.080 Tree Replacement A. Replacement required. Tree replacement is required for tree cutting permits required by this chapter and/or for tree removal associated with the development types identified in ECDC 23.10.060.A. Each significant tree to be removed shall be replaced as follows: 1. For each significant tree between 6 inches and 10 inches DBH removed, one (1) replacement tree is required. For each significant tree between 10.1 inches and 14 inches in DBH removed, two (2) replacement trees are required. For each significant tree greater than 14 inches in DBH removed, three (3) replacement trees are required. B. No tree replacement is required in the following cases: The tree is hazardous, dead, diseased, injured, or in a declining condition with no reasonable assurance of regaining vigor. 2. The tree is proposed to be relocated to another suitable planting site, provided that relocation complies with the standards in this section. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 10 of 15 Packet Pg. 238 ATTACHMENT A 8.1.a C. Prior to any tree removal, the applicant shall demonstrate through a tree protection and replacement plan, critical area mitigation plan, or other plans acceptable to the director that tree replacement will meet the minimum standards of this section. D. Replacement Specifications. 1. Minimum sizes for replacement trees shall be: a. one -and -one -half -inch caliper for deciduous trees; b. Six feet in height for evergreen trees. 2. The director may consider smaller -sized replacement trees if the applicant can demonstrate that smaller trees are more suited to the species, the site conditions, and the purposes of this section, and that such trees will be planted in sufficient quantities to meet the intent of this section. 3. Replacement trees shall be primarily native species. E. Tree Replacement Fee -in -lieu. A fee -in -lieu of tree replacement may be allowed, subject to approval by the director after consideration of all other options. A tree replacement fee shall be required for each replacement tree required but not planted on the application site or an off -site location. 1. The amount of the fee shall be $1000 multiplied by the number of trees necessary to satisfy the tree replacement requirements of this section and shall be deposited into the City's Tree Fund. The fee shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of a tree removal permit or associated development permit. 23.10.085 Protected Trees Notice on Title The owner of any property that included a tree(s) identified for retention and protection on an approved tree retention plan, replacement in relation to a permit or plan, and/or permanently protected by easement, tract, or covenant restriction shall, as a condition of permit issuance, record a notice on title of the existence of such protected trees against the property with the Snohomish County auditor's office. The notice shall be approved by the director and the city attorney for compliance with this provision. 23.10.090 Bonding A. The director may require a performance bond for tree replacement and site restoration to ensure the installation of replacement trees, and/or compliance with other landscaping requirements as identified on the approved site plans. B. The bond shall be in the amount of 120 percent of the estimated cost of implementation of the tree replacement and/or site restoration including trees, irrigation and labor. C. A two-year maintenance bond shall be required after the installation of required site improvements and prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or finalization of permit and following required landscape installation or tree replacement. The maintenance bond shall be in place to ensure adequate maintenance and protection of retained trees and site improvements. The City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 11 of 15 Packet Pg. 239 ATTACHMENT A 8.1.a maintenance bond shall be for an amount of 15% of the performance bond or estimate in subsection B. D. The director shall exempt individual single-family lots from a maintenance bond, except where a clearing violation has occurred or tree replacement is located within critical areas or critical area buffers. 23.10.100 Violation, Enforcement and Penalties A. Noncompliance with any section of this chapter constitutes a violation of this Code. A violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall constitute a misdemeanor and shall be punishable as provided in Chapter 5.50 ECC. C. Penalties: Aiding or Abetting: Any person who, through an act of commission or omission, procures, aids or abets in the violation shall be considered to have committed a violation for the purposes of the penalty. All persons who have been found to commit a violation under this chapter shall be responsible for an equal share of any penalties imposed under subsection C.2. Civil Penalties: Any person violating any provisions of this chapter shall have committed a civil infraction and may be subject to civil penalties in addition to any criminal penalties. Pursuant to Chapter 64.12 RCW, the City may be entitled to triple the amount of civil damages claimed or assessed. The extent of the penalty shall be determined according to one or more of the following: a. An amount reasonably determined by the Director to be equivalent to the costs estimated by the City to investigate and administer the infraction; b. The economic benefit that the violator derives from the violation (as measured by the greater of the resulting increase in market value of the property or the value received by the violator or savings of construction costs realized by the violator performing any act in violation of this chapter); Removal of existing 12" diameter or larger trees in violation of this chapter will require an appraisal of the tree value by the city tree protection professional using trunk formula method in the current edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal. The cost of the appraisal shall be paid by the person(s) who removed existing trees in violation of this chapter. Penalty for illegal removal of trees shall be $1,500 per tree less than 12" Diameter and the appraised value of trees 12" or more in diameter. Penalties shall be paid into the city Tree Fund. If diameter of removed tree is unknown, determination of the diameter size shall be made by the City Arborist by comparing size of stump and species to similar trees in similar growing conditions. The cost of replacing and replanting the trees and restoring the disturbed area according to a specific plan approved by the City. Violators of this chapter or of a permit issued thereunder shall be responsible for restoring unlawfully damaged areas in conformance with a plan, approved by the Director, that provides for repair of any environmental and property damage, and restoration of the site; and which results in a site condition that, to City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 12 of 15 Packet Pg. 240 ATTACHMENT A 8.1.a the greatest extent practical, is equivalent to the site condition that would have existed in the absence of the violation(s). If illegal tree topping has occurred, the property owner shall be required to have a certified arborist develop and implement a five (5) year pruning schedule in addition to monetary fines and required tree replacement. Civil penalties under this section shall be imposed by a notice in writing, either by certified mail with return receipt requested or by personal service, to the person incurring the same from the City. The notice shall describe the violation, approximate the date(s) of violation, and shall order the acts constituting the violation to cease and desist, or, in appropriate cases, require necessary corrective action within a specific time. 4. Any fiscal penalty recovered under this section shall be deposited in the City's tree fund as established in Chapter 3.95 ECC. 23.10.110 Liability A. Liability for any adverse impacts, damages or injury resulting from work performed in accordance with any permit issued by the city under ECDC 23.10.030 shall be the sole responsibility of the permit applicant and/or owner of the property or site for which the permit was issued, and shall not be the responsibility of the city of Edmonds. Issuance by the city of any permit under this chapter shall not be construed as an assumption of any risk or liability by the city of Edmonds, nor as a warranty or guarantee that the work authorized by the permit will have no adverse impact or will cause no damages or injury to any person or property. B. Issuance by the city of a permit under ECDC 23.20.030 and/or compliance by the applicant and/or property owner with any permit conditions therein shall not relieve an applicant and/or property owner from any responsibility otherwise imposed by law for any adverse impacts, injury or damage to persons or property resulting from the work authorized by any permit issued under this chapter. C. Nothing contained in this chapter shall be deemed to relieve any property owner within the city limits from the duties imposed under Chapter 9.25 ECC to keep any tree or vegetation upon his property or under his control in such condition as to prevent it from constituting a hazard or a nuisance. D. The amount of any security required as part of any land development permit with which tree removal is associated shall not serve as a gauge or limit to the compensation that may be owed by a property owner as a result of injury or damages to persons or property resulting from any tree removal authorized under this chapter. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 13 of 15 Packet Pg. 241 ATTACHMENT B 8.1.a 20.75.048 Conservation Subdivision Design A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to promote retention of significant trees or specimen trees and to protect natural resources through some amount of flexibility in lot layouts of subdivisions in order to preserve trees and provide for low impact development. The director and the applicant shall work in good faith to find reasonable solutions. Applicability. Administrative design flexibility in residential zones is limited to the following development standards: 1. Setbacks. Street, side and rear setbacks may be reduced in all residential zones provided that a. No street setback shall be less than fifteen (15) feet; b. No rear setback shall be less the ten (10) feet; c. No required side setback shall be less than five (5) feet; and d. Street and Rear setbacks in the RSW-12 zone shall not be reduced. Lot size and width. Lots within a subdivision may be clustered in a way that allows dwelling units to be shifted to the most suitable locations potentially reducing individual lot sizes and widths, provided that the overall density of the project complies with the density requirements of the zoning district in which it is located. Coverage. Structural coverage may be increased on individual lots provided that, in total, coverage of the area within the subdivision does not exceed the lot coverage allow required for the zoning district in which it is located. 4. Access. Variations in parking lot design and/or access driveway requirements may be granted when the public works, fire and planning officials determine the variations to be consistent with the intent of city codes and standards. C. Properties which include trees that are identified for retention and protection is association with design flexibility approved under this section must record a notice on title consistent with ECDC 23.10.085. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 14 of 15 Packet Pg. 242 ATTACHMENT C 8.1.a 3.95 Tree Fund 3.95.010 Tree Fund Established There is hereby created and established a fund known as the "Tree Fund." 3.95.020 Funding Sources Monies for the Tree Fund shall come from the following sources: A. All revenue, mitigation fees, civil fines, and penalties received by the city under Chapter 23.10 ECDC. B. All civil penalties received under Chapter 23.40 ECDC. C. Donations and grants for tree purposes; and D. Other monies allocated by the City Council 3.95.040 Funding Purposes A. Monies in the Tree Fund maybe used for the following purposes, as reviewed and approved by the city: 1. Providing tree vouchers to individuals purchasing and planting trees in the City of Edmonds; 2. Paying for services provided by a qualified tree professional; 3. Paying for services that support the urban forest management and health; 4. Acquiring, maintaining, and preserving wooded areas within the city; 5. Purchasing supplies and materials for the city's observance of Arbor Day or other educational purchases; 6. Other purposes relating to trees as determined by the city. B. Monies from the Tree Fund must not be used to purchase trees required for replacement under the conditions Chapter 23.10 ECDC, nor used to purchase trees required for replacement under the conditions of a violation. Further, they cannot be used in any manner that will profit the grantee. C. Monies deposited into the tree fund for a fee -in -lieu of tree replacements as provided for in ECDC 23.10.080.E must be used to purchase trees for planting. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 15 of 15 Packet Pg. 243 8.1.b Proposed 3/2/20 UPCOMING TREE -RELATED ITEMS & TIMING ITEM Q2 2021 Q3 2021 Q4 2021 2022 or TBD Inventory of downtown street trees Inventory of other public trees Street Tree Plan update N c Tree canopy assessment 0 r cv Heritage Tree Program Tree Canopy goal I — Assessment of staffing & other resource needs aa) Z 0 Incentive program using stormwater utility fee reductions r N c O Exploration of other incentive programs E c Open space acquisition m E Tree retention on private property (not related to development) E Partnerships with other organizations Q Annual reports on City tree activities Y 0 Tree give-away program L View corridors N r c m Wildlife & habitat corridors E t 0 Expanded public education & information Q Stormwater & Watershed Analysis m E t Other tree -related issues M r r Q Packet Pg. 244 8.1.c Tree Code Amendments 2021 Stage Code Number Change Councilmember Explanation of Amendment KEY: Column indicates Color Key Green highlight indicates change was accepted whether item was addressed Red indicates changes was not accepted on 3/2 or is Stage 1 or issue No color highlight indicates change is still being considered Strike through means change is no longer being considered Stage Key Indicates whether change was addressed at the 3.2 Council Meeting, Stage 1 Code Issue or Stage 2 Code Issue Addressed 3.2 23.10.000 Add new C. Preserve, through design and intention, wildlife corridors and habitat; Paine Addressed 3.2 23.10.000 Add new subsection C. Implement the goals and objectives of the City's Climate Action Plan; L. Johnson Addressed 3.2 23.10.000 [Revise the former subsection C (now subsection D) as follows]: D. To promote the public health, safety, biodiversity, environmental health, and general welfare of the residents of Edmonds and provide greenhouse gas emissions mitigation, and to preserve the physical and aesthetic character of the city through the preservation of indiscriminate removal or destruction of trees and groundcover on improved or partially improved property; L. Johnson Addressed 3.2 23.10.000 New D. — Preserve the maximum number of trees that are determined to be appropriate for preservation in Edmonds „whan tzAw0roPmPA:L nninl +h-,+ h ,ye a reaseRable .-haprne of I".,.._term survival- Paine New D was added on 3-2: "Preserve, through design and intention, wildlife corridors and habitat." This amendment was proposed by Paine and staff thinks replaces this Addressed 3.2 23.10.020 N2 Delete Track and replace with TRAQ (scrivner's error) Olson 29 i n 020 F . Change definition of paWF. Hazard tree to read a-sfollows: u dead,A eF tFee that is dying, diseased,damaged,strursturally defeetive as determined by a tFee B c-G�I(S,hrr i; SigRifieant qualified prefessiGlFlal, SiRg SigRifiGaRt damage to a er stri-let-i-lice, sidewalk, euFb, read, water eF sewer er ster.mAvatel: i_ltilitime�l phySiGal private pi-l-blic driveway, or parkiRg let." )2 1 no?() l' T F. Delete P NIii_lisaAc_pTrQp anrGhaRge all FQ{pYpycp_,c of }rpp }e "Ha;_z�r}TpQ". (see definition Hazard tFee TheFe is to distinguish tFees that damage to RirLchr,io aac�c�rrrrr.� revised of above. no Feasen sepaicately aFe ca6ising significant preperty they a a "hazard") 2340.020 u Tree" K. Delete K Preteeted Tree and ehange all references ef Preteeted Tree te gRifleant " B el( vci-G,�,-rshrRi-s 2340.020 Q. Delete Q SpeGimeR Tree _AAGI Change all refeFeRees of Spec--appeR Tree to "SigRifiGaRt TFPP" " B GI.rhn, vci-cnT-rrri ;r In WOTree��FlOtBUGI.ShRiS Stage 2 23.10.030 A. Applicability: to read as follows: "No person shall remove, excessively prune, top, or cut large lateral roots of any significant tree without a permit except for removal of trees, with notification to the Planning Department, for one of the following purposes by the Public Works Department, Parks Department, Fire Department and or franchised utilities: 1. Installation and maintenance of public utilities. 2. In response to situations involving public safety, substantial fire hazards, or interruption of services provided by a utility." Buckshnis This is phase 2. Bassically requires a permit for everything exept the two items noted. Stage 2 23.10.030 Delete partB. (Not needed with above change to part A) New part B. "B. 1. Application Fees. Permit application fees will be assessed for permits to remove significant trees, except no fees will be charged for permits solely for the removal of a significant tree on an improved single-family lot that is not suitable for subdivision." "B.2. Significant Tree Removal Fee. Significant tree removal associated with a building permit, subdivision, or other land use approval will be assessed a [$2,000 to $5,000] fee for each significant tree removed. The fees will be placed in the Tree Fund established in Section 3.95." Buckshnis Phase 2. Related to permits on all properties. Stage 2 23.10.040 Delete entire Section 23.10.040 Exemptions. (Exemptions should only apply in specific and necessary situations such as permit requirements and fees, and be noted in the applicable sections of the code) Buckshnis Stage 2 23.10.040 Delete the blue (new change) as growth above topped line of previously topped trees are inherently weak and dangerous to structures and/or people and animals who end up underneath at the wrong time. Olson Stage 2 23.10.040 A. Delete exemption from subsection (or otherwise modify to meet goal of reducing canopy loss and cutting of significant trees) I. Johnson Stage 2 23.10.040 A. Delete this exemption Buckshnis Q Packet Pg. 245 8.1.c Tree Code Amendments 2021 Stage Code Number Change Councilmember Explanation of Amendment E. Routine landscaping and maintenance of vegetation, such as pruning and planting, removal of invasive/exotic species, management of brush and seedling trees. Pruning should comply with ANSI A300 (Part 1— 2017), Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Management — Standard Practices, to maintain long term health. This includes maintenance of trees and vegetation required to be retained or planted under the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Pruning existing trees back to the point where they have been previously topped is considered maintenance for these trees alone and pruning will be undertaken only to the extent Addressed 3.2 23.10.040 necessary for public safety and tree health, with the goal of reversing damage from initial topping. L. Johnson Change/simplify this section to read as follows: "Removal or alteration of a significant tree is prohibited except as provided in a permit Stage 2 23.10.050 issued by the City of Edmonds." Buckshnis If the above amendment approve is not approved Add E. Tree removal on developed lots is to be limited to no more than 3 significant Stage 2 23.10.050 trees in a 24-month period beginning on the date of the issuance of the permit for tree removal. Buckshnis A. Introduction. The City's objective is to retain as many viable trees as possible on a developing site while still allowing the development proposal to move forward in a timely manner. To that end, the City requires approval of a tree retention and protection plan in conjunction with the following applications: o In order to make better decisions about tree retention, particularly during all stages of development, tree retention plans will require specific information about the existing trees before removal is allowed. Specific tree retention plan review standards provided 3.2 amendment added "tree retention and replacement plan". Staff missed adding the in this section establish tree retention priorities, incentives, and variations to development standards in order to facilitate preservation language in some other sections of the code but will do so on the next version. of viable identified trees. Meanwhile, no harm; it's easy for staff to indicate to applicants that the required plan is Addressed 3.2 23.10.060 Paine the same. Addressed 3.2 23.10.060 A. Add "and tree crown diameter;" to DBH measurement Paine Stage 1 23.10.060 A.5 Delete exemption Buckshnis B. Add "Describe and on show on maps exactly where replacement trees will be planted including location and description of Stage 1 23.10.060 alternate site and evidence of landowner approval for replacement plantings on the alternate site." Buckshnis Stage 1 23.10.060 B.2.c.iv Change to "Description of any hazardous tress including location and basis for hazardous determination." Buckshnis Stage 1 23.10.060 CA change to 50% retention of significant trees (regardless of type of development) Buckshnis D.1 Eliminate long list priorities and change to read: "Groupings of significant trees that form tree canopy and wildlife corridor must be retained to the maximum extent possible." Stage 1 23.10.060 Buckshnis B.2a,b,c Add requirement that the tree inventory, site plan, and arborist report must include trees outside the development boundary Addressed 3.2 23.10.060 and having a critical root zone that extends into the development area. Buckshnis 3.2 amendment added the critical root zone language on adjacent trees. B.2.b.ii Add and location of any neighboring properties (a) significant trees abutting subject property line and (b) shared groves Potentially covered by the 3.2 amendment regarding canopy and critical root zones of Addressed 3.2 23.10.060 (surveyed locations may be required). I. Johnson trees on adjacent property. C. Divide this section into multiple "Districts" within the city to acknowledge that tree retention requirements in the Bowl should not Stage 2 23.10.060 be the same as in the Seaview or Firdale Village neighborhoods. Buckshnis Stage 1 23.10.060 C.4 At beginning of sentence, add "In addition to the tree retention requirements noted above, every significant tree..." Buckshnis Stage 1 23.10.060 D.1 Add (f) Development Services may require site plan revisions in order to preserve Priority One trees on the site plan. Buckshnis Stage 1 23.10.060 D.2 Add (f) Development Services may require site plan revisions in order to preserve Priority One trees on the site plan. Add F. For developing properties identified in subsection A of this section that have fewer than three significant trees, tree planting shall be required to ensure that the site has trees that will be significant at maturity. An applicant subject to this subsection must submit a plan that shows existing and proposed site improvements, including topography, and identifies the location, species, and mature canopy of trees to be planted or retained that will result in the site having at least three significant trees per 8,000 square feet of area. Where possible, native trees shall comprise some or all of the trees being planted. Trees to be retained shall be subject to IThis Addressed 3.2 23.10.060 ECDC 23.10.070. Site development must comply with the planting plan as approved by the City. I. Johnson change is captured in the 3.2 change to 23.10.060.C.5 Stage 1 23.10.070 In opening paragraph, add "...and soil to be preserved in accordance with ECDC23.10.060.8 shall be protected from..." Buckshnis Q Packet Pg. 246 8.1.c Tree Code Amendments 2021 Stage Code Number Change Councilmember Explanation of Amendment Stage 2 23.10.080 Change/simplify this section to read as follows: "Every significant tree removed must be replaced with an ecologically equivalent number of same species trees (taking into account the growth and survival of replacement trees) in the parcel where removed, or in another parcel or park in the same watershed." "Significant trees removed from a watershed where residential views of Puget Sound and/or the Olympic mountains are an established real-estate marketing priority for that area of the watershed may be replaced with a different tree species that doesn't grow tall, or the same species replacement trees may be planted in a different watershed or a City Park." Buckshnis Stage 1 23.10.080 B.1. Add ",as determined by City arborist or other certified arborist." Olson Addressed 3.2 23.10.080 (or perhaps a new section for "Minimum Tree Planting Requirements") — Add provision that a minimum number of trees are required to be planted on all development parcels. The number of trees will be a function of the zoning, e.g., min 3 trees for small parcels, and min 6 trees for large parcels. Buckshnis Addressed by 23.10.060.C.5 Stage 1 23.10.80 E. Delete E. Tree Replacement Fee In -lieu (All significant trees removed should be replaced with same or similar species tree - no exception!) Buckshnis Stage 1 23.10.080 E. Change opening sentence to "After providing clear documentation to Development Services that all tree retention and/or replacement options have been considered and are infeasible, including arborist reports as necessary, the developer may apply for a fee -in -lieu exemption to the tree retention/replacement requirements. A tree replacement fee shall..." Buckshnis Stage 1 23.10.080 E. 1. Strike "$1000" and replace with "$350" (the cost to buy and plant a replacement tree per Parks staff) Olson Stage 1 23.10.080 E.1 The amount of the fee shall be $1000 350 for trees under 10.1 "and $1000 for trees over 10.1 multiplied by the number of trees necessary to satisfy the tree replacement requirements of this section and shall be deposited into the City's Tree Fund. Distelhorst Please see Columns D&E Stage 1 23.10.100 2. C. Change to 8" diameter Paine Stage 1 23.10.100 C.2.f In last line change "and required..." to "and/or required..." Olson Stage 1 23.10.100 2. D Change to $1000 per tree less than 8"diameter and the appraised value of trees 12" or more in diameter. Paine Stage 2 23.10.120 New Section - Add section for incentivizing retention of trees on developed parcels and on parcels being developed. Include storm drainage fee credit at various levels depending on the tree canopy cover on the property. Buckshnis Stage 1 3.95.040 3. Add and health, including canopy data collection and analysis; Paine Stage 1 3.95.040 A. Add (7) Public Works capital improvement infrastructure upgrade projects to enhance public rights of way with additional tree planting, improved sidewalks, etc. Buckshnis Stage 1 3.95.040 Council talked about at early meetngs on the tree code about adding something regarding purchase of forested areas to this section. r Q Packet Pg. 247 8.1.d ATTACHMENT A Draft Tree Related Regulations 23.10.000 Intent and Purpose 23.10.010 Administration Authority 23.10.020 Definitions 23.10.030 Permits 23.10.040 Exemptions 23.10.050 Tree Removal Prohibited 23.10.060 Tree Retention Associated with Development Activity 23.10.070 Tree Protection Measures During Development 23.10.080 Tree Replacement 23.10.085 Protected Trees Notice on Title 23.10.090 Bonding 23.10.100 Violation, Enforcement and Penalties 23.10.110 Liability 20.75.048 Conservation Subdivision Design Flexibility Chapter 3.95 Tree Fund 23.10.000 Intent and Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to establish a process and standards to provide for the evaluation, protection, enhancement, preservation, replacement, and proper maintenance use of significant trees This includes the following: A. Implement the goals and objectives of the City's Urban Forest Management Plan; B. Implement the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan; C. Implement the goals and objectives of the City's Climate Action Plan; D. Preserve, through design and intention, wildlife corridors and habitat; E. To promote the public health, safety, biodiversity, environmental health and general welfare of the residents of Edmonds, provide greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and preserve the physical and aesthetic character of the city through the prevention of indiscriminate removal or destruction of trees and ground cover on improved or partially improved property; F. Preserve the maximum number of trees that are determined to be appropriate for preservation in the Edmonds urban environment and that have a reasonable chance of long-term survival; G. Promote site planning, building, and development practices that work to avoid removal or destruction of trees and vegetation, that avoid unnecessary disturbance to the City's natural vegetation, and that provide landscaping to buffer the effects of built and paved areas; H. Encourage tree retention efforts by providing design flexibility with respect to certain development requirements; E Q c m E 0 a c m E z U 0 r r City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 1 of 15 Q Packet Pg. 248 8.1.d ATTACHMENT A I. Retain as many viable trees as possible on a developing site while still allowing the development W proposal to move forward in a timely manner and replanting when trees are removed during of development. z J. Promote building and site planning practices that are consistent with the city's natural topographic o and vegetation features while recognizing that certain factors such as condition (e.g., disease, r danger of falling, etc.), proximity to existing and proposed structures and improvements, m interference with utility services, and the realization of a reasonable enjoyment of property may E require the removal of certain trees and ground cover; and E K. Mitigate the environmental and aesthetic consequences of tree removal in land development a through on -site and off -site tree replacement to help achieve a goal of no net loss of tree canopy coverage throughout the City of Edmonds; 23.10.010 Administering Authority The development services director ("director") or a designee shall have the authority and responsibility to administer and enforce all provisions of this chapter. 23.10.020 Definitions A. Caliper — The American Association of Nurserymen standard for trunk measurement of nursery stock. Caliper of the trunk shall be the trunk diameter measured six (6) inches above the ground for up to and including 4-inch caliper size and 12 inches above the ground for larger sizes. B. Canopy — The leaves and branches of a tree from the lowest branch on the trunk to the top. C. Critical Root Zone - The area surrounding a tree at a distance from the trunk, which is equal to one (1) foot for every one (1) inch of tree DBH. D. Developable Site —The gross site area of a lot minus critical areas and buffers. E. Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) - The diameter or thickness of a tree trunk measured at 4.5 feet from the ground. DBH is also known as Diameter at Standard Height (DSH). F. Dripline - The distance from the tree trunk, that is equal to the furthest extent of the tree's crown. G. Hazard tree -A tree that is dead, dying, diseased, damaged, structurally defective or exposed by recent removal of adjacent trees which makes it subject to a high probability of failure as determined by a qualified tree professional. H. Grove —A group of three (3) or more significant trees with overlapping or touching crowns. I. Improved lot — means mean a lot or parcel of land upon which a structure(s) is located, and which cannot be further subdivided pursuant to city subdivision regulations and zoning code. J. Limits of disturbance means the boundary between the area of minimum protection around a tree and the allowable site disturbance. K. Native Tree — Native trees are described in the Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) as being well -suited to our climate and tending to provide good habitat for local wildlife. The UFMP contains a partial list of species that are considered native trees. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 2 of 15 Packet Pg. 249 8.1.d ATTACHMENT A L. Nuisance Tree — is a tree that is causing significant physical damage to a private or public structures and/or infrastructure, including but not limited to: sidewalk, curb, road, water or sewer or stormwater utilities, driveway, parking lot, building foundation, or roof. z M. Protected Tree —A tree identified for retention and protection on an approved tree retention and 0 r protection plan, replacement in relation to a permit or plan, and/or permanently protected by easement, tract, or covenant restriction. E N. Pruning- means the proper removal of roots or branches of a tree according to the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 pruning standards. E Q O. Qualified professional —An individual with relevant education and training in arboriculture or urban forestry, having two (2) or more of the following credentials: 0 1. International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborist; rn 2. Tree Risk Assessment Qualification (TRAQ) as established by the ISA TRAQ (or equivalent); m 3. American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA) registered Consulting Arborist; a� 4. Society of American Foresters (SAF) Certified Forester for Forest Management Plans; E For tree retention associated with a development permit, a qualified professional must have, in addition to the above credentials, a minimum of three (3) years' experience working directly with the protection of trees during construction and have experience with the likelihood of tree survival after construction. A qualified professional must also be able to prescribe appropriate measures for the preservation of trees during land development. P. Significant Tree — A tree that is at least six (6) inches in diameter at breast height (DBH) as measured at 4.5 feet from the ground. For trees with multiple leaders at four and one-half (4.5) feet height, theDBH shall be the combined cumulative total of branches greater than six (6) inches diameter at four and one-half (4.5) feet above the average grade. If a tree has been removed and only the stump remains that is below four and one-half (4.5) feet tall, the size of the tree shall be the diameter of the top of the stump. Q. Specimen Tree — A tree of exceptional size or form for its species or rarity as determined by the city's qualified tree professional..- R. Tree - means a self-supporting woody plant characterized by one main trunk or, for certain species, multiple trunks, that is recognized as a tree in the nursery and arboricultural industries. S. Tree Fund — refers to the fund created by Chapter 3.95 ECC. T. Tree removal — means the direct or indirect removal of a tree(s) or vegetation through actions including, but not limited to: clearing, cutting, girdling, topping, or causing irreversible damage to roots or stems; destroying the structural integrity of trees through improper pruning, unless pruning back to the point where the tree has been previously topped; poisoning; filling, excavating, grading, or trenching within the dripline that results in the loss of more than 20 percent of the tree's root system; or the removal through any of these processes of greater than 50 percent of the live crown of the tree. U. Tree topping - The significant cutting back of the leader stem or major branches, resulting in severely altering the growth potential of a tree. This definition does not apply when the sole purpose is to create a snag or snags for wildlife habitat. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 3 of 15 Packet Pg. 250 8.1.d ATTACHMENT A V. Viable tree - A significant tree that a qualified professional has determined to be in good health, with a low risk of failure due to structural defects, is windfirm if isolated or remains as part of a grove, and is a species that is suitable for its location. 23.10.030 Permits A. Applicability: No person shall remove, excessively prune, or top any significant tree except as provided by this chapter. B. Tree removal not specifically exempted in section 23.10.040 will be processed as a Type I permit C. Procedural exemption. Tree removal associated with building permit, subdivision, or other land use approval will be reviewed with the associated project and will not require a separate tree removal permit. All clearing shall be consistent with and apply the standards established by this chapter. 23.10.040 Exemptions The following activities are exempt from the provisions of this chapter and do not require a permit: A. Removal of trees on an improved single-family lot, except for: That portion of the property containing a critical area or its associated buffer. Critical area in this context does not include erosion hazards with slopes less than 25 percent. B. Removal of non -significant trees that are not protected by any other means. C. Removal of trees by the public works department, parks department, fire department and or franchised utilities for one of the following purposes: 1. Installation and maintenance of public utilities or motorized or non -motorized streets or paths. 2. In response to situations involving danger to life or property, substantial fire hazards, or interruption of services provided by a utility. Franchised utilities shall provide notification to the City prior to tree maintenance or removal. A separate right-of-way permit may be required. D. Removal and maintenance of trees within City of Edmonds' parks at the direction of the Parks Department. E. Routine landscaping and maintenance of vegetation, such as pruning and planting, removal of invasive/exotic species, management of brush and seedling trees. Pruning should comply with ANSI A300 (Part 1— 2017), Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Management — Standard Practices, to maintain long term health. This includes maintenance of trees and vegetation required to be retained or planted under the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Pruning existing trees back to the point where they have been previously topped is considered maintenance for these trees alone provided pruning will be undertaken only to the extent necessary for public safety or tree health. Trees that do not meet the exemptions in subsections A through E of this section may be removed with supporting documentation: City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 4 of 15 E Q Packet Pg. 251 8.1.d ATTACHMENT A a. Nuisance tree with documentation of the damage and any tree work that has been attempted to rectify the nuisance, and/or a statement from the applicant's qualified tree professional explaining why no arboricultural practices can safely rectify the nuisance. z b. Hazard tree located outside a critical area with a tree risk assessment prepared by the applicants o qualified professional documenting how the tree meets the definition of a hazard tree. r c. Hazard tree removal in a critical area or critical area buffers consistent with the requirements of c E ECDC 23.40.220.C.8. _ c m E Q 23.10.050 Tree Removal Prohibited A. Protected Trees: Removal of protected trees is prohibited, except as provided for in ECDC 23.10.040.E Hazard and Nuisance Trees, or through an approved modification of a Landscape Plan. B. Vacant Lots: Removal of trees from a vacant lot prior to a project development is prohibited except as provided for in ECDC 23.10.040.F, hazard and nuisance trees. C. Demolition of Structures: Tree removal shall be prohibited as part of a permitted demolition except as required to reasonably conduct demolition activities subject to approval of the director. Tree replacement may be required for removed trees. D. In critical areas, critical area buffers, and in all native growth protection easements, tree removal is prohibited except as allowed per Chapters 23.40 — 23.90 ECDC. 23.10.060 Tree Retention Associated with Development Activity A. Introduction. The City's objective is to retain as many viable trees as possible on a developing site while still allowing the development proposal to move forward in a timely manner. To that end, the City requires approval of a tree retention and protection plan in conjunction with the following applications: 1. Short subdivision 2. Subdivision 3. New multi -family development 4. New single-family development on a vacant lot or a demolition and replacement of a single- family house, and 5. Any tree removal on developed sites not exempted by ECDC 23.10.040. In order to make better decisions about tree retention, particularly during all stages of development, tree retention and protection plans will require specific information about the existing trees before removal is allowed. Specific tree retention and protection plan review standards provided in this section establish tree retention priorities, incentives, and variations to development standards in order to facilitate preservation of viable trees. B. Tree Retention and Protection Plan City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 5 of 15 Packet Pg. 252 8.1.d ATTACHMENT A 1. An applicant for a development identified in subsection A must submit a tree retention and protection plan that complies with this section. A qualified professional may be required to prepare certain components of a tree retention and protection plan at the applicant's expense. z 2. Tree Retention and Protection Plan Components. The tree retention and protection plan shall o contain the following information, unless waived by the director: r a. A tree inventory containing the following: c E i. A number system of all existing significant trees on the subject property (with corresponding tags on trees); E Q ii. Size (DBH) and estimated tree crown diameter; iii. Proposed tree status (trees to be removed or retained); c o .N iv. Brief general health or condition rating of trees (i.e.: poor, fair, good, excellent, etc.) m V. Tree type or species. U) b. A site plan depicting the following: c Location of all proposed improvements, including building footprint, access, utilities, applicable setbacks, buffers, and required landscaped areas clearly identified. If a short subdivision or subdivision is being proposed and the location of all proposed improvements has not yet been established, a phased tree retention and protection plan review is required as described in subsection (3)(a) of this section; ii. Accurate location of significant trees on the subject property and adjacent properties where the canopy and/or critical root zone of adjacent significant trees extend onto the subject property (surveyed locations may be required). iii. Trees labeled corresponding to the tree inventory numbering system; iv. Location of tree protection measures; V. Indicate limits of disturbance drawn to scale around all trees potentially impacted by site disturbances resulting from grading, demolition, or construction activities; vi. Proposed tree status (trees to be removed or retained) noted by an `X' or by ghosting out; vii. Proposed locations of any required replacement trees as outlined in ECDC 23.10.080 and trees required to be planted in accordance with ECDC 23.10.060.C.5. c. An arborist report containing the following: i. A complete description of each tree's health, condition, and viability; ii. A description of the method(s) used to determine the limits of disturbance (i.e., critical root zone, root plate diameter, or a case -by -case basis description for individual trees); iii. Any special instructions specifically outlining any work proposed within the limits of the disturbance protection area (i.e., hand -digging, tunneling, root pruning, any grade changes, clearing, monitoring, and aftercare); iv. For trees not viable for retention, a description of the reason(s) for removal based on poor health, high risk of failure due to structure, defects, unavoidable isolation City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 6 of 15 Packet Pg. 253 8.1.d ATTACHMENT A (windfirmness), or unsuitability of species, etc., and for which no reasonable alternative W action is possible must be given (pruning, cabling, etc.); V. Description of the impact of necessary tree removal to the remaining trees, including Z those in a grove; o r 3. Additional Tree Retention and Protection Plan Standards for Short Subdivisions and Subdivisions U' c m a. Phased Review E c i. If during the short subdivision or subdivision review process the location of all proposed E improvements, including the building footprint, utilities, and access, have not yet been a established, the applicant may submit a Tree Retention and Protection Plan that addresses the current phase of development and limits removal to the impacted areas. o ii. A new Tree Retention and Protection Plan shall be required at each subsequent phase of T) the project as more information about the location of the proposed improvements is known subject to all of the requirements in this section. L C. Tree Retention Requirements General Tree Retention Requirements: Significant trees on lots proposed for development or redevelopment shall be retained as follows: ECDC 23.10.060.0 Tree Retention Requirements for Proposed Development Development Retention Required New single-family, short subdivision, or 30% of all significant trees in the developable subdivision site Multi -family development, unit lot short 25% of all significant trees in the developable subdivision, or unit lot subdivision site 2. Trees that are located within Native Growth Protection Areas, critical areas and their associated buffers, or that have otherwise been designated for protection shall not be removed except as provide for ECDC 23.10.040.E hazard and nuisance trees and ECDC 23.40.220.C.8 critical area hazard tree. 3. The director may require the retention of additional trees to meet the stated purpose and intent of this chapter, as required by the critical area regulations (Chapters 23.40 — 23.90 ECDC), or the Shoreline Master Program (Title 24 ECDC) or as site -specific conditions demand using SEPA substantive authority. 4. Every significant tree that is removed under this chapter must be replaced consistent with the requirements of ECDC 23.10.080. 5. For developing properties identified in ECDC 23.10.060.A that have fewer than three significant trees, trees shall be retained and/or planted that will result in the site having at least three trees, which will be significant at maturity, per 8,000 square feet of lot area. D. Priority of Tree Retention Requirements: Significant trees to be retained should be retained in the following order of priority: 1. Priority One: City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 7 of 15 Packet Pg. 254 8.1.d ATTACHMENT A a. Specimen trees; L b. Significant trees which form a continuous canopy; ~ 3 c. Significant trees on slope greater than 15 percent; z 0 d. Significant trees adjacent to critical areas and their associated buffers; and n e. c Significant trees over sixty (60) feet in height or greater than eighteen (18) inches DBH. E 2. Priority Two: m a. E Healthy tree groupings whose associated undergrowth can be preserved; a b. Trees within the required yard setbacks or around the perimeter; c c. Trees that have a screening function or provide relief from glare, blight, or commercial •0 development; d. Other significant native evergreen or deciduous trees; and c e. Other significant nonnative trees. 3. Priority Three: Alders and cottonwoods shall be retained when all other trees have been evaluated for retention and are not able to be retained except where adjacent to open space, E wetlands or creek buffers. Q E. In considering trees for retention, applicants and the City shall avoid, to the extent known, the selection of trees that may become hazardous because of wind gusts, including trees adjacent to utility corridors where falling trees may cause power outages or other damage. Remaining trees may be susceptible to blowdowns because of loss of a buffer from other trees, grade changes affecting the tree health and stability, and/or the presence of buildings in close proximity. 23.10.070 Tree Protection Measures During Development Prior to development activity or initiating tree removal on the site, vegetated areas, individual trees and soil to be preserved shall be protected from potentially damaging activities pursuant to the following standards: A. Preconstruction Meeting Required. Prior to the commencement of any permitted clearing and grading activity, a preconstruction meeting shall be held on site with the permittee and appropriate City staff. The project site shall be marked in the field as follows 1. The extent of clearing and grading to occur; 2. Delineation and protection of any critical areas and critical area buffers with clearing limit fencing; 3. Flagging of trees to be removed and tags on trees to be retained; and 4. Property lines B. Placing Materials near Trees. No person may conduct any activity within the protected area of any tree designated to remain, including, but not limited to, operating or parking equipment, placing solvents, storing building material or stockpiling any materials, or dumping concrete washout or City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 8 of 15 Packet Pg. 255 8.1.d ATTACHMENT A other chemicals. During construction, no person shall attach any object to any tree designated for protection. C. Protective Barrier. Before development, land clearing, grading, filling or any land alteration, the applicant shall: 1. Erect and maintain readily visible temporary protective tree fencing along the limits of disturbance which completely surrounds the protected area of all retained trees, groups of trees, vegetation and native soil. Tree protective fencing shall be a minimum height of three feet, visible and of durable construction; orange polyethylene laminar fencing is acceptable. 2. Install highly visible signs spaced no further than 15 feet apart along the entirety of the protective tree fencing. Said sign must be approved by the director and shall state at a minimum "Tree and Soil Protection Area, Entrance Prohibited" and provide the City phone number for code enforcement to report violations. 3. Prohibit excavation or compaction of soil or other potentially damaging activities within the barriers; provided, that the director may allow such activities approved by a qualified professional and under the supervision of a qualified professional retained and paid for by the applicant. 4. Maintain the protective barriers in place for the duration of the project until the director authorizes their removal. 5. Ensure that any approved landscaping done in the protected zone subsequent to the removal of the barriers shall be accomplished with machinery from outside the protected zone or by hand. 6. In addition to the above, the director may require the following: a. If equipment is authorized to operate within the protected zone, the soil and critical root zone of a tree must be covered with mulch to a depth of at least six (6) inches or with plywood, steel plates or similar material in order to protect roots and soil from damage caused by heavy equipment. b. Minimize root damage by hand -excavating a 2-foot-deep trench, at edge of critical root zone, to cleanly sever the roots of trees to be retained. Never rip or shred roots with heavy equipment. Corrective pruning performed on protected trees in order to avoid damage from machinery or building activity. d. Maintenance of trees throughout construction period by watering and fertilizing. D. Grade. The grade shall not be elevated or reduced within the critical root zone of trees to be preserved without the director's authorization based on recommendations from a qualified professional. The director may allow coverage of up to one-half (1/2) of the area of the tree's critical root zone with light soils (no clay) to the minimum depth necessary to carry out grading or landscaping plans, if it will not imperil the survival of the tree. Aeration devices may be required to ensure the tree's survival. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 9 of 15 W W L H 3 a� z 0 r U) c m E c m E a Packet Pg. 256 8.1.d ATTACHMENT A 2. If the grade adjacent to a preserved tree is raised such that it could slough or erode into the tree's critical root zone, it shall be permanently stabilized to prevent soil erosion and suffocation of the roots. z 3. The applicant shall not install an impervious surface within the critical root zone of any tree to 0 be retained without the authorization of the director. The director may require specific r construction methods and/or use of aeration devices to ensure the tree's survival and to minimize the potential for root -induced damage to the impervious surface. E 4. To the greatest extent practical, utility trenches shall be located outside of the critical root zone c E of trees to be retained. The director may require that utilities be tunneled under the roots of a trees to be retained if the director determines that trenching would significantly reduce the chances of the tree's survival. 0 5. Trees and other vegetation to be retained shall be protected from erosion and sedimentation. .N > Clearing operations shall be conducted so as to expose the smallest practical area of soil to erosion for the least possible time. To control erosion, it is encouraged that shrubs, ground cover and stumps be maintained on the individual lots, where feasible. 6. The director may approve the use of alternative tree protection techniques if those techniques provide an equal or greater degree of protection than the techniques listed in this subsection. E E. Directional Felling. Directional felling of trees shall be used to avoid damage to trees designated for retention. Additional Requirements. The director may require additional tree protection measures that are consistent with accepted urban forestry industry practices. 23.10.080 Tree Replacement A. Replacement required. Tree replacement is required for tree cutting permits required by this chapter and/or for tree removal associated with the development types identified in ECDC 23.10.060.A. Each significant tree to be removed shall be replaced as follows: For each significant tree between 6 inches and 10 inches DBH removed, one (1) replacement tree is required. For each significant tree between 10.1 inches and 14 inches in DBH removed, two (2) replacement trees are required. For each significant tree greater than 14 inches and less the 24 inches in DBH removed, three (3) replacement trees are required. B. No tree replacement is required in the following cases: The tree is hazardous, dead, diseased, injured, or in a declining condition with no reasonable assurance of regaining vigor. 2. The tree is proposed to be relocated to another suitable planting site, provided that relocation complies with the standards in this section. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 10 of 15 Packet Pg. 257 8.1.d ATTACHMENT A C. Prior to any tree removal, the applicant shall demonstrate through a tree protection and replacement plan, critical area mitigation plan, or other plans acceptable to the director that tree replacement will meet the minimum standards of this section. D. Replacement Specifications. 1. Minimum sizes for replacement trees shall be: a. one -and -one -half -inch caliper for deciduous trees; b. Six feet in height for evergreen trees. 2. The director may consider smaller -sized replacement trees if the applicant can demonstrate that smaller trees are more suited to the species, the site conditions, and the purposes of this section, and that such trees will be planted in sufficient quantities to meet the intent of this section. 3. Replacement trees shall be primarily native species. E. Tree Replacement Fee -in -lieu. After providing clear documentation to Development Services that all tree retention and/or replacement options have been considered and are infeasible, including arborist reports as necessary, the developer may apply for a fee -in -lieu exemption to the tree retention/replacement requirements. A fee -in -lieu of tree replacement may be allowed, subject to approval by the director after consideration of all other options. A tree replacement fee shall be required for each replacement tree required but not planted on the application site or an off -site location. 1. The amount of the fee shall be $1000 multiplied by the number of trees necessary to satisfy the tree replacement requirements of this section and shall be deposited into the City's Tree Fund. 2. The fee shall be paid to the City prior to the issuance of a tree removal permit or associated development permit. 2-3. For each sienificant tree greater than 24" in DBH removed. a fee based on an appraisal of the tree value by the citv tree protection professional using trunk formula method in the current edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal shall be required. 23.10.085 Protected Trees Notice on Title The owner of any property that included a tree(s) identified for retention and protection on an approved tree retention and protection plan, replacement in relation to a permit or plan, and/or permanently protected by easement, tract, or covenant restriction shall, as a condition of permit issuance, record a notice on title of the existence of such protected trees against the property with the Snohomish County auditor's office. The notice shall be approved by the director and the city attorney for compliance with this provision. 23.10.090 Bonding A. The director may require a performance bond for tree replacement and site restoration to ensure the installation of replacement trees, and/or compliance with other landscaping requirements as identified on the approved site plans. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 11 of 15 E a Packet Pg. 258 8.1.d ATTACHMENT A B. The bond shall be in the amount of 120 percent of the estimated cost of implementation of the tree replacement and/or site restoration including trees, irrigation and labor. C. A two-year maintenance bond shall be required after the installation of required site improvements Z and prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or finalization of permit and following o required landscape installation or tree replacement. The maintenance bond shall be in place to r ensure adequate maintenance and protection of retained trees and site improvements. The m maintenance bond shall be for an amount of 15% of the performance bond or estimate in E subsection B. E D. The director shall exempt individual single-family lots from a maintenance bond, except where a a clearing violation has occurred or tree replacement is located within critical areas or critical area buffers. 23.10.100 Violation, Enforcement and Penalties A. Noncompliance with any section of this chapter constitutes a violation of this Code. A violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall constitute a misdemeanor and shall be punishable as provided in Chapter 5.50 ECC. C. Penalties: 1. Aiding or Abetting: Any person who, through an act of commission or omission, procures, aids or abets in the violation shall be considered to have committed a violation for the purposes of the penalty. All persons who have been found to commit a violation under this chapter shall be responsible for an equal share of any penalties imposed under subsection C.2. 2. Civil Penalties: Any person violating any provisions of this chapter shall have committed a civil infraction and may be subject to civil penalties in addition to any criminal penalties. Pursuant to Chapter 64.12 RCW, the City may be entitled to triple the amount of civil damages claimed or assessed. The extent of the penalty shall be determined according to one or more of the following: An amount reasonably determined by the Director to be equivalent to the costs estimated by the City to investigate and administer the infraction; The economic benefit that the violator derives from the violation (as measured by the greater of the resulting increase in market value of the property or the value received by the violator or savings of construction costs realized by the violator performing any act in violation of this chapter); Removal of existing 12" diameter or larger trees in violation of this chapter will require an appraisal of the tree value by the city tree protection professional using trunk formula method in the current edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal. The cost of the appraisal shall be paid by the person(s) who removed existing trees in violation of this chapter. d. Penalty for illegal removal of trees shall be $1,500 per tree less than 12" Diameter and the appraised value of trees 12" or more in diameter. Penalties shall be paid into the city Tree Fund. If diameter of removed tree is unknown, determination of the diameter size shall be made by the City Arborist by comparing size of stump and species to similar trees in similar growing conditions. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 12 of 15 Packet Pg. 259 8.1.d ATTACHMENT A e. The cost of replacing and replanting the trees and restoring the disturbed area according to a specific plan approved by the City. Violators of this chapter or of a permit issued thereunder shall be responsible for restoring unlawfully damaged areas in conformance with a plan, approved by the Director, that provides for repair of any environmental and Z property damage, and restoration of the site; and which results in a site condition that, to ° the greatest extent practical, is equivalent to the site condition that would have existed in U) the absence of the violation(s). E f. If illegal tree topping has occurred, the property owner shall be required to have a certified aa) arborist develop and implement a five (5) year pruning schedule in addition to monetary E a fines and required tree replacement. Civil penalties under this section shall be imposed by a notice in writing, either by certified mail with return receipt requested or by personal service, to the person incurring the same from the City. The notice shall describe the violation, approximate the date(s) of violation, and shall order the acts constituting the violation to cease and desist, or, in appropriate cases, require necessary corrective action within a specific time. 4. Any fiscal penalty recovered under this section shall be deposited in the City's tree fund as established in Chapter 3.95 ECC. 23.10.110 Liability A. Liability for any adverse impacts, damages or injury resulting from work performed in accordance with any permit issued by the city under ECDC 23.10.030 shall be the sole responsibility of the permit applicant and/or owner of the property or site for which the permit was issued, and shall not be the responsibility of the city of Edmonds. Issuance by the city of any permit under this chapter shall not be construed as an assumption of any risk or liability by the city of Edmonds, nor as a warranty or guarantee that the work authorized by the permit will have no adverse impact or will cause no damages or injury to any person or property. B. Issuance by the city of a permit under ECDC 23.20.030 and/or compliance by the applicant and/or property owner with any permit conditions therein shall not relieve an applicant and/or property owner from any responsibility otherwise imposed by law for any adverse impacts, injury or damage to persons or property resulting from the work authorized by any permit issued under this chapter. C. Nothing contained in this chapter shall be deemed to relieve any property owner within the city limits from the duties imposed under Chapter 9.25 ECC to keep any tree or vegetation upon his property or under his control in such condition as to prevent it from constituting a hazard or a nuisance. D. The amount of any security required as part of any land development permit with which tree removal is associated shall not serve as a gauge or limit to the compensation that may be owed by a property owner as a result of injury or damages to persons or property resulting from any tree removal authorized under this chapter. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 13 of 15 Packet Pg. 260 8.1.d ATTACHMENT B 20.75.048 Conservation Subdivision Design L A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to promote retention of significant trees or specimen trees ~ and to protect natural resources through some amount of flexibility in lot layouts of subdivisions in Z order to preserve trees and provide for low impact development. The director and the applicant 0 shall work in good faith to find reasonable solutions. r B. Applicability. Administrative design flexibility in residential zones is limited to the following c E development standards: 1. Setbacks. Street, side and rear setbacks may be reduced in all residential zones provided that: m E a a. No street setback shall be less than fifteen (15) feet; b. No rear setback shall be less the ten (10) feet; c 0 .N c. No required side setback shall be less than five (5) feet; and m d. Street and Rear setbacks in the RSW-12 zone shall not be reduced. 2. Lot size and width. Lots within a subdivision may be clustered in a way that allows dwelling c E units to be shifted to the most suitable locations potentially reducing individual lot sizes and widths, provided that the overall density of the project complies with the density requirements E of the zoning district in which it is located. Q 3. Coverage. Structural coverage may be increased on individual lots provided that, in total, coverage of the area within the subdivision does not exceed the lot coverage allow required for 0 the zoning district in which it is located. z 4. Access. Variations in parking lot design and/or access driveway requirements may be granted 3 when the public works, fire and planning officials determine the variations to be consistent with o the intent of city codes and standards. C. Properties which include trees that are identified for retention and protection is association with design flexibility approved under this section must record a notice on title consistent with ECDC 23.10.085. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 14 of 15 Packet Pg. 261 ATTACHMENT C 8.1.d 3.95 Tree Fund 3.95.010 Tree Fund Established There is hereby created and established a fund known as the "Tree Fund." 3.95.020 Funding Sources Monies for the Tree Fund shall come from the following sources: A. All revenue, mitigation fees, civil fines, and penalties received by the city under Chapter 23.10 ECDC. B. All civil penalties received under Chapter 23.40 ECDC. C. Donations and grants for tree purposes; and D. Other monies allocated by the City Council 3.95.040 Funding Purposes A. Monies in the Tree Fund may be used for the following purposes, as reviewed and approved by the city: 1. Providing tree vouchers to individuals purchasing and planting trees in the City of Edmonds; 2. Paying for services provided by a qualified tree professional; 3. Paying for services that support the urban forest management and health; 4. Acquiring, maintaining, and preserving wooded areas within the city; 5. Purchasing supplies and materials for the city's observance of Arbor Day or other educational purchases; 6. Other purposes relating to trees as determined by the city. B. Monies from the Tree Fund must not be used to purchase trees required for replacement under the conditions Chapter 23.10 ECDC, nor used to purchase trees required for replacement under the conditions of a violation. Further, they cannot be used in any manner that will profit the grantee. C. Monies deposited into the tree fund for a fee -in -lieu of tree replacements as provided for in ECDC 23.10.080.E must be used to purchase trees for planting. City Council Adopted March 2, 2021 Page 15 of 15 E Q a Packet Pg. 262 9.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/16/2021 Introductory Overview of Housing Commission's Recommendations Staff Lead: Shane Hope Department: Citizens Housing Commission Preparer: Debbie Rothfus Background/History Housing has been a topic of interest in Edmonds and our region for years. In April 2019, as had been requested by various local residents, the City Council established the Edmonds Citizens' Housing Commission. The tool for doing this was Resolution No. 1427 (attached). It set up a process for the City Council to select members who were local residents and would develop housing policy options for the Council's consideration. Because public concerns had been raised that the Commission should not be comprised of residents from only one or two neighborhoods, the Council looked for a way to appoint Commission members from across the city. This was accomplished by recognizing that Edmonds had seven U.S. Census tracts with roughly equal population and thus, each of the seven Council members could select two Commissioners and one alternate from each of the census tracts (aka "zones"), as assigned by the Council President. In addition, the Mayor was authorized to select one "at -large" Commissioner and one alternate. A postcard was mailed to every household in the City to invite applications and provide the specific City website for getting more information. This resulted in the submittal of 135 applications from local residents across the city. With so many qualified and interested applicants, it took time for Council members to review the applications, follow up with any interviews, and select their appointees. Meanwhile, the City Council approved the Development Services Department to obtain consultant assistance for meeting facilitation and community engagement as part of administering the project. The Council also provided budget authority for the Department to have all of the Housing Commission's meetings streamed live and recorded for viewing later. The Department proceeded with these efforts. After the Council members and Mayor announced their appointees, staff organized the first Housing Commission meeting. It occurred in September 2020. Agenda packages for this and every subsequent Commission meeting were available online from the City agenda portal. A broad community engagement process followed. This included a special website, press releases, advertisements on local media, email updates to 660 subscribers, social media announcements, open house events, surveys, and more. (See attached Summary.) NOTE: Commission meetings and the first open house were held in -person (with recordings also Packet Pg. 263 9.1 available online) until the coronavirus pandemic required the process to go mostly online. Early Commission meetings provided for members to learn more about housing issues, including applicable data for Edmonds, laws and city codes, common definitions, and the role of local government and others in housing. Members got to know each other, to hear from the public, and to understand different perspectives. At a February 2020 meeting, the Commission identified the broad -level housing topics it wanted to pursue and the priority policy committees that would be needed. All Commissioners indicated their first and second preferences for the committee on which they would serve. The five policy committees, based on the priority topics selected by Commission members, focused on the following broad topics: City Resources Incentives & Requirements Zoning Update Housing Types City Processes or Programs. Each policy committee met separately in its small group to work on housing issues and ideas related to its broad policy topic and reported back to the full Commission at subsequent public meetings. The committees identified preliminary policy ideas, which were revised along the way. The Housing Commission provided quarterly reports to the City Council. Other material was generated too. The Housing Commission's website contains extensive information about the Commission's work. See: http://www.edmondswa.gov/housing-commission.html. Throughout this effort, public engagement activities continued and were discussed at Commission and committee meetings. (Seethe attached Community Engagement Summary for more details.) Staff Recommendation Consider information at broad level now and concur on general next steps. Narrative The Housing Commission's mission, as stated in Council Resolution 1427, was to: "Develop diverse housing policy options for (City) Council consideration designed to expand the range of housing (including rental and owned) available in Edmonds; options that are irrespective of age, gender, race, religious affiliation, physical disability or sexual orientation." The due date for the Commission's policy recommendations was the end of 2020, though later the deadline was extended by one month to January 31, 2021. The Commission worked hard to meet its deadline and to identify policies consistent with its mission. The process included getting public feedback, having lively Commission discussion, and preparing/reviewing large amounts of information. All proposed policies were subject to changes along the way, taking public input into account, and, ultimately, to a final vote of the Commission on January 28, 2021. Packet Pg. 264 9.1 The result was a set of 15 key policy recommendations for the City Council to consider, along with several supplemental policy proposals that the Council might want to consider at a later time. A transmittal letter to accompany the policy recommendations was also prepared by a Commissioner and voted on by the full Commission. Each policy recommendation consisted of a title, a policy statement, and some additional explanatory information. The full package was quickly assembled and emailed to the City Council the following day, Friday, January 29. An updated version (with housekeeping corrections) was sent to the Council on Monday, February 1 and posted online. (See attached Policy Package.) The 15 policy titles are: Missing Middle Housing in Single Family Neighborhoods Equity Housing Incentives Medium Density Single Family Housing (SR -MD) Neighborhood Village Subarea Planning Cluster/Cottage Housing Detached Accessory Dwelling Units Multi -family Tax Exemptions (MFTE) Inclusionary Zoning Use of Existing Sales Tax Revenue for Affordable and Supportive Housing County Implementation of Sales and Use Tax for Housing and Related Services Edmonds-HASCO Interlocal Agreement Develop Community Housing Partners Multi -Family Design Standards Update Comprehensive Plan to Include "Parking Solutions" as a Goal in Transportation Element Section Eliminate Discriminatory Provisions in Covenants and Deeds. Of these 15 policy recommendations, 9 relate to planning or code amendments that would normally be reviewed by the Planning Board and subject to more public input, research, and options through that body before detailed consideration by the City Council. This stage of work could take months or for several items, a year or more. The other 6 policy recommendations are not directly related to the Planning Board's role and some of them could be considered in a shorter time frame. Examining any of these 6 would still take further exploration and consideration. All policy recommendations are simply recommended policy ideas from the Housing Commission. They have no effect of themselves and the City Council is not being asked to adopt them. However, the City Council may have further review of individual recommendations over a period of time and call for more public input, research, and options for following up on any of them. Council's consideration (perhaps with Planning Board input) could also result in some policy ideas taking shape in different ways than originally proposed by the Housing Commission. Latest Information Even though the City Council would not be making any final decisions on the Housing Commission's recommendations at the Council's March 16 meeting, the City wanted to ensure that people had the Packet Pg. 265 9.1 chance to know about the meeting and the Commission's work. A news memo update was sent to the City's housing subscription list of about 660 people. In addition, a postcard was mailed to every address in the City. Meanwhile, a new "Frequently Asked Questions" fact sheet was prepared and posted on the City website. It is included here. (See FAQ attachment.) Conclusion The Housing Commission's policy recommendations are being introduced now to kick off the City Council's consideration over time. Each of the policies are complex and will take careful follow-up. Those that relate to planning or zoning will needs an especially long time to fully consider. An effective way to do this would be to bring back one or two policy recommendations at a time over the next year for the City Council to consider during public meetings in a more detailed way and perhaps hear from the Commissioners and members of the public. The Council could also ask the Planning Board or others to do more research and seek further public input on some ideas. Attachments: Resolution 1427 Resolution 1428 CommunityEngagement_Summary.Jan.2021 POLICY PACKAGE FOR COUNCIL-02.01.21 ECHC FAQ March.2021 Packet Pg. 266 9.1.a RESOLUTION NO. 1427 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING THE CITIZENS' HOUSING COMMISSION WHEREAS, in 2017 the City of Edmonds began the process of developing a Housing Strategy to fulfill an objective of the Housing Element of the city's Comprehensive Plan at P. 96, which states: "Implementation Action: Develop a strategy by 2019 for increasing the supply of affordable housing and meeting diverse housing needs;" and WHEREAS, the Council has heard numerous comments and concerns from our constituents that the process for establishing policies around an expanded range of housing options should be revised to include greater public input and balanced representation; and WHEREAS, three primary themes have emerged from input the Council has received from its constituents; and WHEREAS, first, rather than an Administration -appointed task force working toward housing policy recommendations, members of the public have expressed a strong preference for a process which establishes a Housing Commission via applications from interested citizens; and WHEREAS, second, a strong preference has been expressed for sufficient time to be provided for all housing -related issues to be thoroughly vetted to enable policy recommendations to be brought forward that are in Edmonds' long term best interests; and WHEREAS, finally, the public has made clear it expects members of the Housing Commission should represent all areas of Edmonds and the Edmonds Bowl should not be over- represented; and WHEREAS, on December 11, 2018, the Council passed Resolution 1420 to docket a Comprehensive Plan amendment that is expected to result in the removal of the 2019 timeline for establishment of an Edmonds Affordable Housing strategy as called for in the current Comprehensive Plan and to provide additional time for development of an appropriate array of diverse housing options for Edmonds; and WHEREAS, the Council also agrees that the process for citizen involvement should be retooled to encourage volunteer participation from across Edmonds; and WHEREAS, the expanded timeline for development of diverse housing policy options provides the opportunity to establish a Citizens' Housing Commission to enable direct citizen involvement in this important process; and Packet Pg. 267 9.1.a WHEREAS, on February 19, 2019, the Council discussed next steps toward achieving this objective; and WHEREAS, a significant initial step will be to establish a Citizens' Housing Commission to assess all factors that must be considered in driving toward housing policies that expand the supply of diverse housing options while maintaining Edmonds' character and quality of life; and WHEREAS, on February 19, 2019, the Council also provided direction that such a Commission should be formed; and WHEREAS, on March 19, 2019, the Council provided more specific direction as to the contents of a resolution that would create the Citizens' Housing Commission; now therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Citizens' Housing Commission Created. The Citizens' Housing Commission is hereby created and shall be subject to the following provisions: A. Mission. The mission of the new Citizens' Housing Commission shall be as follows: Develop diverse housing policy options for Council consideration designed to expand the range of housing (including rental and owned) available in Edmonds; options that are irrespective of age, gender, race, religious affiliation, physical disability or sexual orientation. B. Appointment Process. The Commission shall consist of fifteen voting members: each Councilmember will select two appointees and one alternate; and the mayor will select one appointee and one alternate. The mayor's selection will be from the remaining pool of applicants after Councilmembers have made their selections. C. Appointment by Zone. Each of the seven Councilmembers shall be assigned a particular zone at the Council President's direction and will be responsible for assessing applications from that zone (see map attached as Exhibit A describing the seven geographic zones of Edmonds which will be attached to the Commission application form). Each Councilmember will select two appointees and one alternate from his/her assigned zone. In the event that there are insufficient applicants to fill the positions for a particular zone, the Councilmember assigned to that zone may select from the remaining applicants residing in any other zone, but only after the other Councilmembers have made their selections. D. Meetings. The Commission will meet at least once per month on a day and time to be determined by the Commission, and may meet more frequently at the Commission's discretion. The time and place of the first meeting of the Commission shall be established by the Council President. 2 Packet Pg. 268 9.1.a E. Voting. Alternates should attend meetings to remain current on the Commission's progress but shall not be voting members unless they are participating in lieu of an absent Commissioner from their assigned zone. F. Liaisons. Two Councilmembers shall be assigned to the Commission as Council Liaisons in an advisory (non -voting) role. G. Public Outreach. The Commission shall host public outreach sessions (open houses, town halls, etc.) once per quarter at varying public locations within Edmonds to provide updates on its progress in developing housing option policy recommendations. H. Website Updates. The status of the Commission's work on the development of expanded housing options shall be updated regularly on the city's Housing website. I. Reporting to the Council. The Commission shall report progress to the Council at least once per quarter, beginning in the 3rd quarter of 2019. J. Sunset Date. The Commission will complete its work by December 31, 2020 and have a sunset date of January 1, 2021. Section 2. Recruiting. A post card will be sent to each Edmonds household announcing the application process and deadlines. This mailing will be in addition to the process normally used to publicize Commission application availability (e.g., City website announcements, articles in local media, etc.). Section 3. Application Process. Applicants for appointment to the Commission shall be subject to the following: A. Qualifications. Commission applicants must be current residents of Edmonds. B. Zones. Each applicant must identify which of the seven "zones" he/she lives within (see map attached as Exhibit A describing the seven geographic zones of Edmonds which will be attached to the Commission application form). C. Application Contents. The following information will be requested on the application form: a. Occupational status and background. b. Organizational affiliation. c. Why are you seeking this appointment? d. What skills and knowledge do you have to meet the selection criteria? e. List any other Board, Commission, Committee or official position you currently hold with the City of Edmonds. f. How long have you lived in Edmonds? g. Do you rent or own your home? h. Are you currently a landlord of property located in Edmonds? Note: items a-e above are standard questions of applicants for any Edmonds Board or Commission. Items f-h above are specific to the Edmonds Citizens' Housing Commission. 3 Packet Pg. 269 9.1.a RESOLVED this 161h day of April, 2019. CITY OF EDMONDS M'AYOR,'DAVE EARLING ATTEST: CLERK, SC ASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. April 12, 2019 April 16, 2019 1427 4 Packet Pg. 270 OF ED4�� City of Edmonds Census -based Area Map Igo. lggo 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 Feet Sooth-Coo Park QC N O\y�,pCC�Ce�N W E S BeaNew Pak Hutt ve�k fia 0�? � see�lew '�,� Ekmentay Blerre PeM SoM1utM1 ' rls Park PeeeM1 Main St. Trek v .......... ,......................................... 196th St. SW M klePlewootl lull K� e eel 651 220th St. SW 212th St. SW v t 01 Z Pe* Mettmee KA SCM1ooI U Wootlway Elementay leke Bellinger Perk Eamo�w: Community College CP Eleme MO,l Place 'Etlle S-1 City of Edmonds 121 5th Ave N o Edmonds, WA 98202 h 1 inch = 2,000 feet February 201 Edmonds Housing Strateg Packet Pg. 271 RESOLUTION NO. 1428 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING RESOLUTION 1427, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE CITIZENS' HOUSING COMMISSION. WHEREAS, on April 16, 2019, the Edmonds City Council adopted Resolution 1427, which established the Citizens' Housing Commission; and WHEREAS, the Council desires to ensure that the Citizens' Housing Commission supplements the work being performed by its other boards and commissions by bringing forward fresh perspectives on the subject of housing in Edmonds; and WHEREAS, to make it more likely that the Citizens' Housing Commission does not duplicate the work done or perspectives shared previously by the City's other boards and commissions, the Council would like to amend the eligibility requirements for the Citizens' Housing Commission; now therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Subsection 3.A of Resolution 1427, entitled "Qualifications," is hereby amended to read as follows (new text shown in underline): A. Qualifications. Commission applicants must be current residents of Edmonds, PROVIDED THAT, an applicant shall not be eligible for appointment to the Citizens' Housing Commission if that applicant currently holds a position on a City board or commission codified in Title 10 ECC, or if that applicant has held such a position at any time in the two years prior to the date of their application to the Citizens' Housing Commission. RESOLVED this 7th day of May, 2019. CITY OF EDMONDS MAY R, DAVt EARLING ATTEST: Packet Pg. 272 9.1.b FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: May 3, 2019 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: May 7, 2019 RESOLUTION NO. 1428 Packet Pg. 273 January 2021 9.1.c From its inception, a driving focus of the Citizens' Housing Commission was to provide more opportunities for the public to engage in the process of developing recommendations for the future of housing in Edmonds. This section provides a summary of the community engagement efforts of the Citizens' Housing Commission. Throughout the process, several public engagement activities and information outlets were provided, including: Citizens' Housing Commission Website A special project website (citizenshousingcommission.org) was created to provide the public with easy access to up -to -the -date information regarding the Housing Commission. The website included information on the following topics: • background information on how/why the Housing Commission was formed; • upcoming events; • project timeline; • survey summaries; • quarterly reports; • housing news memos; • frequently asked questions; • presentations from Housing Commission meetings; • draft policy recommendations; • contact links for staff and Housing Commissioners; • contact forms to submit public comments; • and an opportunity to sign up for updates through the Housing Commission listserv. Housing News Memos FIRMICIT17ENS' "III HOUSING E1,1MCOMMISSION H. 16..1 n 11 1.1k........ d.li. n....— .".. Cnn[a�i I;PLn1nA'G El'EVSS Commission Sleetine; Commission \leetina Between October 2019 and January 2021, nineteen housing news memos were emailed subscribers of the Housing Commission listsery (currently 660 subscribers) and posted on the project website. These housing memos covered a range of topics, including: • key milestones; • announcements on events (e.g. open houses and surveys); • information on committee groups; • local housing production statistics; • updates on how the City was managing the COVID response; • regional housing news; • and state legislative actions. Packet Pg. 274 9.1.c January 2021 Meeting Agenda Portal As with all formal city boards, commissions, and City Council, agendas and materials for Housing Commission meetings were posted on the city's meeting agenda portal prior to each meeting. Open House Events Four open house events were held throughout the process of developing policy recommendations. These events provide an opportunity for the community to learn about the process and direction of the Housing Commission. Only the first open house was in -person due to Gov. Jay Inslee's "Stay Home, Stay Healthy" order, issued in response to COVID-19. The first open house was held at Edmonds-Woodway High School in February 2020. This event provided an opportunity for the community to meet Housing Commissioner members and attend three rotating stations, each discussing a different housing -related topic: • Zoning and housing types; • Housing data and demographic; • Housing programs and incentives. These stations included a brief presentation and a lively discussion with between attendees, Housing Commission members, and City of Edmonds staff. Approximately 100 residents attended the open house along with local news outlets, My Edmonds News and Edmonds Beacon. As the Housing Commission developed each round of their policy ideas, an online open house was scheduled so the Housing Commission could receive feedback and either keep, discard, or refine their proposals. Commissioner members recorded presentations to explain any pertinent background information and the intent behind their proposals. An accompanying survey provided online attendees to respond to the survey questions. Online open houses greatly increased the number of persons (a total of 3700 unique visitors) who were able to engage in the process compared to the in -person open house (approximately 70). Surveys Community surveys provided an opportunity for the Housing Commission to hear feedback from the public at various stages of their progress. Four community surveys were conducted over the course of a year. Each survey was administered through SurveyMonkey and available in English, Spanish, traditional Chinese, and Korean. They were marketed via local news outlets, social media (Twitter and Facebook), housing memos, posters at local businesses and community Packet Pg. 275 9.1.c January 2021 centers, and direct emails to community groups and past applicants to the Housing Commission. Additionally, postcard notifications were sent to a randomized sample of 3,825 Edmonds addresses and paper surveys mailed to 600 randomized addresses. While online surveys were not conducted using methods to produce statistically valid results, they are useful tools for getting a sense of public opinion. Topics Considered Duration Survey 1 Introductory housing related topics to gauge public values Survey 2 Round 1 policy ideas Survey 3 Round 2 policy ideas Survey 4 Draft recommendations Media Releases # of Responses January 29 — February 21 907 July 22 —August 16 684 October 2-23 515 December 18, 2020— 303 January 11, 2021 Fourteen media releases were sent to local media outlets, My Edmonds News and Edmonds Beacon, and published on the City of Edmonds website between April 2019 and January 2021. The media releases contained information pertinent to the Housing Commission process, including: information on how to live stream Housing Commission meetings, summary of survey results, opportunities for public engagement, and announcement as key milestones were achieved. Advertising Open house events and surveys were advertised in My Edmonds News and Edmonds Beacon. Additionally, 120 posters were placed at Edmonds businesses in various commercial locations to advertise the first community survey and A -frame pedestrian signage was placed on Main St. during the seasonal Walkable Edmonds activities. Community Groups Emails were sent to 56 community groups in the local area to encourage them to share with their organization links to each open house and survey as they became available. Community groups help provide a trusted point of contact, especially for residents that might be hard to reach otherwise. Packet Pg. 276 9.1.d ■ CITIZENS' HOUSING ,,COMMISSION POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE EDMONDS CITIZENS' HOUSING COMMISSION Date: January 29, 2021 Corrected: February 1, 2021 Acknowledgements: Citizens' Housing Commissioners Alena Nelson-Vietmeier Bob Throndson George Keefe Greg Long James Ogonowski Jess Blanch Judi Gladstone Karen Haase Herrick Keith Soltner Michael McMurray Nichole Franko Tana Axtelle Tanya Kataria Weijia Wu Will Chen Citizens' Housing Commission Alternates Eva -Denise Miller Jean Salls Kenneth Sund Leif Warren Rick Nishino Wendy Wyatt City Council Liaisons Luke Distelhorst Vivian Olson City Staff Shane Hope Amber Groll Brad Shipley Debbie Rothfus Jerrie Bevington Scott Passey Consultant Support Cascadia Consulting Group, Inc. Gretchen Mueller Jasmine Beverly Packet Pg. 277 9.1.d January 29, 2021 To: Edmonds City Council and Mayor Mike Nelson From: The Edmonds Citizens' Housing Commission RE: Submittal of Final Housing Policy Recommendations from the Edmonds Citizens' Housing Commission Council members and Mayor Nelson, you gave the Edmonds Citizens Housing Commission this mission: "Develop diverse housingpolicy options for (City) Council consideration designed to expand the range of housing (including rental and owned) available in Edmonds; options that are irrespective of age, gender, race, religious affiliation, physical disability or sexual orientation " — City Council Resolution No. 1427 Our mission has set this Commission on extraordinary path. Our community has been through a pandemic and the Housing Commission has suffered the loss of one of our members. For the past 17-months, Commissioners have solicited public input from diverse communities throughout Edmonds; researched current, and future population growth and housing needs; examined city codes and state law; studied what works and why; and worked to create new opportunities for all residents. We believe our ideas can enhance our unique city to keep Edmonds a vibrant, diverse and welcoming community for all. Community engagement has been a top priority. Early outreach included `in -person' events. After COVID- 19 struck, most events happened online. We live -streamed all our meetings and community outreach seminars with diverse groups city-wide. We have conducted online community surveys; sent out extensive news releases updating the community and flyers encouraging public involvement, as well as hundreds of post card notifications and survey invitations. The Commission believes that the set of policy ideas we are submitting is consistent with your Resolution #1427. Additional support material is outlined in each proposal and the Commission would be happy to provide any further input required. Each Commission member appreciates the opportunity to serve the people of Edmonds. Each member brought commitment, passion and vision to this process. We had frank and robust discussions among Commissioners that reflected our wide range of opinions. Our considerations included whether proposed ideas fit with our mission and whether they could achieve the intended results. We offer opportunities to a broad section of diverse groups. We believe this city and our city leaders can fulfill these proposals to benefit all of Edmonds. Attached to our report is a short list of proposals the Commission feels strongly about, but that we agreed did not seem to fit the mission we were given. We hope you give them the close scrutiny they deserve for the people of Edmonds. We profoundly appreciate the expertise, the insight and the patience of Development Services Director Shane Hope, Associate Planner Brad Shipley, Planner Amber Groll and so many others on city staff who helped us navigate the complexities of Edmonds housing needs. Our grateful thanks to Councilmembers Vivian Olson and Luke Distelhorst, our Council liaisons, for their commitment and support. To Gretchen Muller and her colleagues at Cascadia Consulting, we are grateful you were our guides and helped to keep us on task and moving forward. Packet Pg. 278 9.1.d Our final Commission report is dedicated to the memory and public service of Commission member John Reed who passed away during his tenure on the Housing Commission. John was a friend and a public servant who gave himself, his ideas and his hard work to the efforts of this Commission. He cared passionately about the people of Edmonds and the city's future. The Housing Commission voted on each draft recommendation we developed. Those with majority approval are now brought together for your consideration. There remain many other ideas worthy of future discussion. Submitted by all members of the Edmonds Citizens Housing Commission Packet Pg. 279 9.1.d Recommended Policies of the Edmonds Citizens' Housing Commission The following is a list (by title) of the policies recommended by the Citizens' Housing Commission at its January 28, 2021 public meeting. Each policy recommendation is included in its full form in this section.* 1. MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING in SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS 2. EQUITY HOUSING INCENTIVES 3. MEDIUM -DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING (SR -MD) 4. NEIGHBORHOOD VILLAGE SUBAREA PLANNING 5. CLUSTER/COTTAGE HOUSING 6. DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS 7. MULTI -FAMILY TAX EXEMPTION (MFTE) 8. INCLUSIONARY ZONING 9. USE of EXISTING SALES TAX REVENUE FOR AFFORDABLE AND SUPPORTIVE HOUSING 10. COUNTY IMPLEMENTATION OF SALES AND USE TAX FOR HOUSING AND RELATED SERVICES 11. EDMONDS-HASCO 1NTERLOCAL AGREEMENT 12. DEVELOP COMMUNITY HOUSING PARTNERS 13. MULTI -FAMILY DESIGN STANDARDS 14. UPDATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCLUDE "PARKING SOLUTIONS" AS A GOAL IN TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT SECTION 15. ELIMINATE DISCRIMINATORY PROVISIONS IN COVENANTS AND DEEDS *The Additional Information language for each policy was provided by the committee that initially developed the policy. Packet Pg. 280 Policy Recommendation 9.1.d Short Name of Policy: MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING IN SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS Policy: Develop design requirements and zoning changes that allow for home -ownership of two attached single family homes (duplex or two -unit townhouses) in single family residential areas and are compatible with those neighborhoods. Neighborhoods with significant tree canopy (pocket forest) should be considered exempt from being included in SF zone augmentation (Pocket Forest could be identified by the Tree Board with help from the local Sierra Club and assimilated into this zoning recommendation). Additional Information: Two attached single family homes, otherwise known as duplexes or two -unit townhomes, offer an alternative to typical detached single family homes. They help to address the need for smaller, more affordable housing choices in neighborhoods characterized by single-family homes. Over the past fifty years, the median square footage of new single family units has increased from about 1600 to 3100. This policy would allow two units within the same square footage. Structures containing two dwelling units designed to look like a detached single family home can have the exact same footprint as one single family home, and isn't much different than having a single family home with an attached accessory dwelling unit. More and more cities across the country are allowing two attached single family houses in traditional single family residential areas to address the need for more affordable housing. One example locally is the City of Kirkland. This policy also helps to balance out the housing unit types available with the household size need. Data provided to the Housing Commission in its early days showed that one or two person households' account for 69% of the households in the city, yet only 37% of the housing is one or two bedrooms. At the same time, four person households make up 12% of the households and 21% of the housing are four bedroom units. Only 2% of the available housing is duplexes. Scaling housing to the demographics offers more affordable options for those who want to own a smaller house, such as seniors who want to downsize and first time homeowners. Allowing two attached single family homes in single family areas would be considered up zoning. That term, however, is often associated with the image of allowing large apartment buildings. The Housing Type Committee considered the possibility of including triplex and four-plexes in earlier versions of this policy, but we narrowed it to two units based on feedback from the commissioners and the community This policy does not include more than two attached single family units like the ones in the photos below located in the Edmonds/Lynnwood area. Allowing smaller homes in our single family neighborhoods makes them more affordable and accessible to middle income households that are seeking the amenities that we enjoy in Edmonds, i.e. excellent public schools and low crime. Not allowing smaller homes into our neighborhoods helps to create housing scarcity which in turn contributes to the continued high cost of housing. Packet Pg. 281 9.1.d This policy represents incremental change to increase the stock of missing middle housing in our city to more closely align housing needs with household size. With appropriate design requirements we can increase housiig availability and help stabilize housing prices with changing the character of single family neighborhoods. (See graphics below.) In addition, in Years 1 through 5 only 25% of Single-family zones in Edmonds receive augmentation. Years 5-10, another 25% of Single-family zones receive augmentation. Each 5 year milestones public engagement anbd assessment is revisited, facilitated by City Council, Planning Department and maybe also the Planning Board to see if policy change has been well received by our community, successful and/ or if adjustments or expansions of policy need to be made at those milestones. Packet Pg. 282 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: EQUITY HOUSING INCENTIVES Policy: Develop incentives that apply to "missing middle" housing types city-wide that allow home -ownership for those at or below average median family income. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 1. "Missing Middle Housing" types provide diverse housing options such as duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and cottage courts. These house -scale buildings fit seamlessly into existing residential neighborhoods. 2. This policy is designed to promote homeownership of smaller homes for people who would not otherwise be able to afford purchasing a home in Edmonds. 3. The policy encourages racial equity housing options by allowing ownership of smaller type housing in neighborhoods where households that may occupy those homes were excluded from in the past. Additional material to be made available. Packet Pg. 283 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: MEDIUM -DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING (SR -MD) Policy: Establish a new zoning type of single-family housing that allows for construction of zero -lot line duplexes, triplexes, and quadruplexes of only 1- or 2-story height located in specified areas of Edmonds that are: • Contiguous to or along high -volume transit routes, or • Sited next to Neighborhood Business (BN) zoning districts, or • Close to schools or medical complexes ADDITIONAL INFORMATION This policy acknowledges the value of single-family housing in Edmonds and recognizes a lack of attainable single-family housing options across the city. By providing additional single-family housing types the policy aims to increase housing opportunities for a more diverse group of individuals and families within the community, while preserving the existing neighborhood characteristics. • SR -MD Key Facts: o Opportunity for smaller attached single-family housing by removing side setbacks. o Houses would be on a separate lot with a zero -lot line construction but sharing a common wall o Each individual home would have a front and back yard SR -MD Key Features: o Locates single-family housing in a manner that increases access to essential services o Would create housing at a lower cost per square foot than an individual single-family home and likely at a lower expense than larger multi -family buildings. o Encourage new residents to utilize nearby transit options. o Level -entry single story homes increase the opportunity for active mobile seniors. o The combination of attached and individual single -story homes provides visual interest by modulation and flexibility for seniors and people with special needs. o An important purpose for attached single-family homes is to specifically offer "missing middle" housing options that foster community cohesion, livability, and character. Packet Pg. 284 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: NEIGHBORHOOD VILLAGE SUBAREA PLANNING Policy: Develop subarea plans to rethink areas zoned 'Business Neighborhood" such as 5 Corners, Perrinville, etc. The subarea plans should create unique, thriving neighborhoods and social gathering points with the surrounding properties to integrate community values including missing middle housing, business opportunity and environmental stewardship in these areas. Additional areas that could be intentionally rethought are Westgate area and Downtown Business (BD) areas. Additional Information: The Neighborhood Village [NV] concept includes key features: 1. A focal point of the village should be a plaza for socializing and promoting local community activities, creating a path to grow the city economically, environmentally, and residentially. 2. The NV concept includes small commercial and mixed -use [live -work] buildings, in designated neighborhoods, often in the current BN zoning. 3. NVs are accessible by vehicular traffic, bike lanes and connected walkways. 4. These NVs would offer unique areas of Edmonds that are on or close to transit lines. 5. NV areas would include a variety of housing option segments, such as Medium Density Single - Family, cluster housing and artist housing, apartments, or condominiums, creating diverse housing and business opportunities. Development of these segments could be incentivized so that nearby single-family neighborhoods have separation from thriving business hubs. 6. These NVs would have comprehensive design guidelines to ensure they are developed in a planned and disciplined manner to enhance and reinvigorate the surrounding communities. 7. Businesses should be clustered independently and on the ground floor of multiple residential buildings, with the following features: a. Multiple residential buildings may include duplex, triplex and four-plex buildings which would be limited to two stories above commercial spaces. b. Multiple residential units of larger capacity, not to exceed 20 units in two stories above commercial spaces could also be a part of the NV. Modulation of these buildings should meet current and revised design standards.' c. Parking should be landscaped at the perimeter and between rows of parking. Capacity could be determined by a percentage of the total lot area. Parking for NVs could be separate from, but integrated into, the residential parking area. d. NV development should accommodate site conditions such as but not limited to site contours, existing natural vegetation such as large trees. 1 Revised design standards are developed by the zoning committee as a separate standard summary. Packet Pg. 285 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: CLUSTER/COTTAGE HOUSING Policy: Add Cluster/Cottage housing as an option within single-family or multi -family housing in Edmonds. Additional Information: Cluster/Cottage housing is a flexible approach to land development that can provide more affordable homes, especially to those in middle -income ranges. Currently, for Edmonds, clustered or clustering of housing is mentioned primarily in ECDC 20.35 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT [PRD]. The policy idea being proposed would allow Cluster/Cottage housing options within single-family or multi -family zones for certain Edmonds areas where site conditions permit. 1. Small homes are clustered together in ways that can maximize open space, create common areas, limit traffic flow to ensure safe play areas for children, and encourage the walkways through the cluster development. These walkways can link to off -site trails and walkways and to off -site activity centers. Cluster housing offers an alternative to conventional lot -by - lot development that is achieved by allowing departures from lot dimension and setback requirements. 2. Housing units are often one-story units, but can be two-story units, and are smaller in size (650 to 1500 sq. ft.). One-story units can also be developed in ways to support independent living for seniors or individuals with unique mobility needs. 3. Allowing site development in clusters may also allow for less infrastructure development thus lowering costs. This will minimize stormwater run-off and erosion which also lessens the burden on the City Storm Sewer system. 4. Offering the Cluster/Cottage housing option would allow developers a more direct permitting process rather than solely through the more costly PRD process. This may lower overall costs for the housing. Density bonuses could incentivize builders by allowing them to build more small and affordable homes in these cluster communities. 5. Additionally, cluster housing could be used in proximity to Neighborhood Villages to increase the housing capacity, enhance the livability, and encourage walking between the housing and the Neighborhood Village. As an example, cluster housing could be developed near Swedish Edmonds medical complex to offer smaller, relatively more affordable housing for seniors and/or employees. Packet Pg. 286 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS Policy: Allow either one attached or detached accessory unit on a property in the SFR area, with clear and definitive development requirements such as size, ownership, and parking, under the standard permitting process and not require a conditional use permit. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 1. This policy does not limit the detached accessory dwelling to any specific zone(s) within the City. 2. This policy allows the City to generate its own development and design requirements, and codes. These can be guided by existing standard for ADU's in Edmonds and may reference the standards already adopted by other neighboring cities and reclined as needed speciifcally for the current needs of Edmonds based upon on favorable community feedback. Examples of requirements include: limitations on floor area based on lot size, yard setbacks, height limitations, and off street parking specifications, and ownership stipulations are some of the requirements the City should consider. 3. This policy makes it possible to develop detached accessory dwelling units without the added expense and trouble of a conditional use permit. Additional material to be made available. Packet Pg. 287 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Draft Policy: MULTI -FAMILY TAX EXEMPTION (MFTE) Policy: Make significant changes to the MFTE as it currently exists to: • Create a third low income eligible category for tenants whose income is 60% of MFI or less* • Mandate that developers set aside 25% of all units in a project for MFTE (currently it is 20%) • Construction incentives for additional units/floors, if builders reserve 25% of units for MFTE tenants* • Require MFTE eligible projects to include some two -bedroom and larger units* • Increase the number of 'residential target/urban center areas' for MFTE developments* • Create incentives for developers to renovate existing multi -family apartments to become MFTE eligible* • Ask the Legislature to extend the current MFTE limits beyond 12 years, to preserve affordable housing* ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Increase affordable rental housing opportunities for low/moderate income tenants • MFTE can increase low/moderate/missing-middle/senior and special needs housing in Edmonds • This can increase housing options for people discriminated against in the past. • It will not reduce property values in the long term. • It may or may not increase tax burden on residential and property owners for the term of the exemption. • It may reduce tax revenues for the city for the period of years a property is certified as MFTE. • It may increase business opportunity as commercial space (taxable) may be built on ground floors. • These units, built in 'residential target/urban zone areas' take into account accessibility to transit, shopping, parks, the environment, parking and other services. • In properly zoned areas, MFTE will not affect community livability or neighborhood character. • The city has authority to offer MFTE to smaller developments (less than the 20 minimum now set.) • Lynnwood, Shoreline, Mountlake Terrace, Everett have MFTE programs. • Affordable housing research urges that rental costs exceed 30% of a tenant's monthly income. • There are no 2-3-bedroom units in Edmonds only MFTE property at Westgate. • 75% of all MFTE units built in the state are studios or 1-bedroom. • Only two areas in Edmond (Westgate and the Highway 99 subareas) are designated for MFTE properties. • State law already allows Edmonds to create incentives for renovation of existing properties for M FTE. *For additional information on the citations above, please see these research reports: ■ The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee — 2019 report on MFTE. ■ The Puget Sound Regional Council — Housing Innovations Report. Packet Pg. 288 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: INCLUSIONARY ZONING Policy: Require new developments (above a certain size) in Edmonds to provide a percentage of affordable housing units or require in lieu of fees that will go towards funding affordable housing elsewhere in the city. Additional Information: Overall purpose of policy is to leverage profitability of new developments to increase supply of affordable housing units and funding for affordable housing development; to create more inclusive and economically diverse communities. Specific policy proposal includes: • Applicable to residential developments with more than 10 units and commercial spaces larger than 4,000 sf (chargeable at 5-10% of floor area based on location, zoning, etc.). • Developments must provide 10-20% affordable units on site or pay an in lieu of fees. • Rental units must serve households that earn below 60% AMI. Ownership units must serve households that earn 80-100% AMI. Units must remain affordable for 50 years. • Projects that do not build affordable units on site must pay 'In Lieu of fees that will go towards an Affordable housing fund. The 'In Lieu of fees will be calculated based on the use and square footage of the building. The 'in lieu of fees should be set high enough that motivates developers to build units on site. • The Affordable Housing Fund can be used to build new affordable housing, renovate existing units, offer landlord protection or assurance, or used by the city to sub -contract with housing agencies, social service or religious agencies, or Community Land Trusts to build new affordable housing. • Participation in this program would be mandatory and can be offered along with incentives such as density bonus increase, parking ratio reduction and expedited processing. It can be applied to geographically targeted areas within Edmonds, such as areas where zoning increase is proposed, or in transit -oriented areas. • Inclusionary Zoning is a great tool to provide housing for the missing middle in Edmonds. • Research shows that inclusion of mixed income housing can provide for increased community livability or neighborhood character and provide better outcomes for children and families. • There are over 900 inclusionary housing programs in 25 states. Several of our neighboring cities such as Federal way, Redmond, Issaquah, Sammamish, Seattle and Portland utilize this program. Packet Pg. 289 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: USE OF EXISTING SALES TAX REVENUE FOR AFFORDABLE AND SUPPORTIVE HOUSING Policy: Per RCW 82.14.540, use the City of Edmonds' share of the existing state sales tax that is reserved for affordable housing: a. In the short term, to provide rental assistance to low-income households in Edmonds that have been impacted by the coronavirus b. In the longer term, to contribute to a regional organization, which could be the County, the Alliance for Housing Affordability (AHA), or a partnership of cities in southwest Snohomish County with the goal of the revenue going toward affordable housing in the sub -region. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Under RCW 82.14.540, housing and services may be provided only to persons whose income is at or below 60% of the median income of the city or county utilizing the tax revenue. Counties over 400,000 population and cities over 100,000 population may use the revenue for only: a. Acquiring, rehabilitating, or constructing affordable housing, which may include new units within an existing structure or facilities providing supportive housing services under RCW 71.24.385 (behavioral health organizations); b. Funding the operations and maintenance costs of new units of affordable or supportive housing. For counties under 400,000 population and cities under 100,000 population, the revenue may be used for the purposes above AND for providing rental assistance to tenants. The estimated population is over 800,000 for Snohomish County, and 42,000 for City of Edmonds. The bill sets a maximum tax rate of 0.0146%. The County is eligible to receive the maximum tax rate of the taxable retail sales (TRS) in unincorporated Snohomish County and could potentially receive 0.0073% or 0.0146% of TRS in individual Cities. The amount the County could potentially receive through TRS in Cities is dependent on each individual City and if they choose to participate or not. WA Department of Revenue currently sets maximum annual capacity at $1,343,274.79 for Snohomish County, and $71,931.05 for City of Edmonds. Jurisdictions may bond against the revenue that would be produced over a period of 20 years to provide an up -front investment. Under this revenue source, Edmonds' 20-year bond revenue would be $1,438,621. Packet Pg. 290 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: COUNTY IMPLEMENTATION OF SALES AND USE TAX FOR HOUSING AND RELATED SERVICES Policy: Advocate for Snohomish County Council to adopt the optional 0.1% sales tax as allowed by state law to provide affordable and supportive housing for low-income households. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RCW 82.14.530 (otherwise known as HB 1590) allows cities and counties to adopt a 0.1% sales tax (or 10 cents for every $100) for affordable and supportive housing, facilities, and services that benefit people earning less than 60% of the area median income of the county, and who are persons with behavioral disabilities, veterans, senior citizens, families who are homeless or at -risk of being homeless, unaccompanied homeless youth or young adults, persons with disabilities, or domestic violence survivors. The Metropolitan King County Council voted on October 13, 2020 to implement a 0.1% sales tax to fund housing for people who have been chronically homeless. Packet Pg. 291 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: EDMONDS-HASCO INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT Policy: Execute an interlocal agreement (ILA) with the Housing Authority of Snohomish County (HASCO) allowing HASCO to operate within Edmonds geographic boundaries. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The Housing Authority of Snohomish County is the public housing agency of Snohomish County and receives federal funding to acquire, develop, and operate low-income housing. To do so, HASCO must have an agreement with each city in which it operates. HASCO owns three properties in Edmonds. Some areas of the city are not currently covered by an agreement with HASCO, so the agency cannot acquire property there without an extensive process involving the City Council. This policy would allow HASCO to better compete in the market to purchase property to build and preserve affordable homes in Edmonds. While an ILA would reduce red tape and timelines for property acquisition, HASCO would still be required to meet all permitting and development requirements. Packet Pg. 292 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: DEVELOP COMMUNITY HOUSING PARTNERS Policy: • Edmonds needs more affordable housing options for: o low/moderate income residents (especially those who earn less than 50% of AML) o special needs residents o seniors o veterans • Construction and land costs make building low income housing economically challenging. • This policy establishes community partnerships with for-profit/non-profits to build affordable housing: o public agencies o neighboring communities o housing/for-profit/non-profit groups o community care providers (transitional housing for patients with 'no safe place to go' while recovering from hospitalization) o Edmonds would establish regulations for these partnerships o The city contract would contract with those partners to manage this housing ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Edmonds should develop community partners throughout South Snohomish County to create/build affordable housing options for low/moderate income residents. • Potential partnerships already exist in South Snohomish County. o The cities of Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, Brier o 'Homes & Hope' Community Land Trust in Lynnwood o Housing Authority of Snohomish County o The Alliance for Housing Affordability o Habitat for Humanity • Partnerships can seek private grants/state/federal funding. • Create incentive opportunities for land donation from private owners. • Explore 'surplus' property of the School District, PUD, other entities. • Existing agencies can be contracted to manage projects. • Apply for Washington State Housing Trust Fund monies. • Some funding from existing sales tax revenue is already dedicated for low income housing. • Work with the county to create additional sales tax revenue as authorized by state law. • Satisfy all zoning criteria for housing/apartments/MFTE renovation properties. • Meet needs for services, parking, access to transit, green space, environmental impacts. • Additional community resources available from Appendix E. Edmonds Housing Strategy (2018) • Our Community I Verdant — representing Public Hospital District #2/Swedish-Edmonds Packet Pg. 293 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: MULTI -FAMILY DESIGN STANDARDS Policy: Enhance current design standards of new multi -family dwellings to maintain and enhance the unique characteristics of the Edmonds community. Building types would include mixed use buildings, small multi -family buildings and larger multi -family buildings. Additional Information: This policy creates design standards to achieve an end solution that is visually appealing and reflects a human scale, resulting in compatibility with the City of Edmonds neighborhoods. This summary is a supplement to current zoning design standards. 1. Building visual interest: a. Vertical and horizontal modulation. This condition is important for larger scale buildings b. Site and building landscaping, ground level: At entry and in courtyards. c. Landscaping integrated into the building where stepped modulation on decks of units and common area decks occur shall be enhanced with free-standing or hanging pots and/or built-in platforms or planters. d. In common areas, roof decks and modulation step -back decks enhance livability. 2. Step-backs/Incentives: Street and alley sides a. Maintain the current 3-story height limit. Step -back the upper floors. Stepping back the 3rd Floor provides the developer the opportunity to increase income from creative use of space that may increase building costs. The higher income from the use of creative space will help offset affordable housing income on the lower floors. b. Further incentives would include a partial 4th Floor (not within view corridors). Step -back all sides to provide a combination of common and private areas for the 4th Floor. This 4th Floor reward provides a developer another opportunity to increase income from the above items that will result in building cost increases and to offset affordable housing loss of income. c. Height exception: Elevators and Stairwells d. Color and material variations should be used to complement modulation. Packet Pg. 294 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: UPDATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCLUDE "PARKING SOLUTIONS" AS A GOAL IN TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT SECTION Policy: Adopt LANGUAGE that includes Parking Solutions as a goal defined in our Transportation Element under the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Current traffic impact fees assessed by the City to new traffic contributing developments to our community currently do not allow these fees to be allocated to solve parking solutions in our community. The Irony of imposing fees calculated on the anticipated traffic impact to our community by newly established development then consequently not allowing parking solutions to be one of current possible uses of these funds collected is a flawed policy. Simply updating language in our Comprehensive plan would allow flexibility for some of these traffic impact fees to be allocated for parking solutions more efficiently (examples of parking solutions: leasing parking lots, shuttle services, trolley services, purchasing land for parking lots, and low profile parking structures). Packet Pg. 295 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: ELIMINATE DISCRIMINATORY PROVISIONS IN CONVENANTS AND DEEDS Policy: Prior to the sale or transfer of any property in Edmonds, all discriminatory language in any associated covenants and/or deeds must be legally removed from said documents. ADDTIONAL INFORMATION Historically, many parcels of property in Edmonds had legally binding language prohibiting the sale of said property to individuals based on their race, religion, sex or other discriminatory provisions. Covenants restricting ownership by race were ruled unenforceable by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1948, and housing discrimination was made illegal by Congress in 1968 under the Fair Housing Law. While today enforcing these documents is illegal, none -the -less they still exist and are passed down to successive property owners at the time of sale. This policy is targeted to break that cycle. State legislation (SHB 2514) has recently been enacted with provisions to modify these documents through a "restrictive covenant modification" document filed with the county that legally strikes and voids the unenforceable provisions from the deed. This policy would mandate that property owners file a restrictive covenant modification document with the county (at no cost) prior to the sale or transfer of said property. While this doesn't erase history, it does provide a means to state our values for future Edmonds residents and property owners. Packet Pg. 296 9.1.d SUPPLEMENTAL SET OF POLICY PROPOSALS This section provides a set of seven policy proposals that the Edmonds Citizens' Housing Commission found worthy of the City Council's consideration but that did not necessarily fit within the Commission's specific mission, as identified in Resolution # 1427. The policy ideas in this section have the following short titles: • IMPROVED TENANT PROTECTIONS • CHILDCARE VOUCHER PROGRAM • RENTER'S CHOICE SECURITY DEPOSIT • LOW-INCOME EMERGENCY REPAIR PROGRAM • PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS • SIMPLIFY ZONING CODE LANGUAGE • STREAMLINE PERMITTING PROCESS The City Council is encouraged to explore this supplemental set of policy ideas at the appropriate time. Packet Pg. 297 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: IMPROVED TENANT PROTECTIONS Policy: Adopt measures to improve residential tenant protections, such as: • Just Cause Eviction Ordinance: limiting the grounds upon which a landlord may evict a tenant to a "just cause" or valid business reason • Prohibiting arbitrary of retaliatory evictions • Prohibiting evictions based upon the tenant's status as a member of the military, first responder, senior, family member, health care provider, or educator • Prohibiting retaliation and discrimination in lease renewal actions • Adopting penalties for violation and procedures to protect the rights of landlords and tenants ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Seattle has had a Just Cause Eviction Ordinance since 1980. Federal Way and Burien have more recently enacted eviction protection legislation, and a statewide bill was proposed in the 2019-2020 legislative session. More information about just cause eviction protections can be found at Local Housing Solutions and PolicyLink's All -In Cities Initiative The City must determine what types of rental properties and landlords (e.g. small vs. large) should be regulated in this way. The City must also determine what reasons would constitute a just cause eviction. Examples can be found in the links to other communities' approaches, above. Packet Pg. 298 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: CHILDCARE VOUCHER PROGRAM UNDER THE DIRECTION OF NEWLY ESTABLISHED HUMAN SERVICE MANAGER Policy: Recommend Council explores Childcare Voucher program for people who work and/or live in Edmonds under the direction of the City's newly established Human Services manager. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Not everyone who works in Edmonds can afford to live in Edmonds, that's just the facts of life, and the geography constraints of a small seaside town of just 8 square miles. We as a community can be more creative and make Edmonds more desirable to work in and perhaps make it more achievable to afford to live in for some in Edmonds by offering Childcare subsidize voucher program. Packet Pg. 299 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Title of Policy Proposal: RENTER'S CHOICE SECURITY DEPOSIT Specific Policy Proposal: Reduce the up -front cost of security deposits for renters while keeping landlords whole for costs that are normally covered by such deposits. The policy may be implemented through the following steps: • Allow tenants of all income levels choices in how to pay those security deposits. • Allow tenant applicants to pay by: o Buying rental security insurance o Installment payment of security deposits - at least six equal monthly payments. o Pay 'reduced' security deposit of no more than 50% of one months' rent. • All rental properties of 25 or more units will offer the Renter's Choice program. • Before signing a rental agreement, the landlord provides tenant written notice of the Choice plan. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Purpose of policy proposal: remove a rental barrier for all tenants regardless of income. Key Factors Considered: • Landlords charge prospective tenants security deposits which may be as high as two months' rent. • Renter's Choice eliminates a barrier to rentals for all tenants regardless of income. • It is likely to increase housing options for people who have been discriminated against in the past. • Changing the way security deposit fees are paid can save significant money for all tenants. • That puts money back into the local economy. • Security Deposit insurance is available from a number of companies. • The proposal is based on a unique policy developed for the city of Cincinnati, Ohio in 2020. • Cincinnati got 'buy in' from landlords who helped develop the policy. • It provides landlords with protection for any damage to their property. • There are also legal remedies for landlords, if tenants violate the terms of the agreement. • The policy can be expanded to cover all landlords, regardless of the number of units they control. • Edmonds has the authority to regulate rental fees, though it has not done so in the past. • State law recognizes that "...certain tenant application fees should be prohibited". * • State law recognizes that "...guidelines should be established for the imposition of other tenant fees" * Contained in findings to Washington State law - RCW 59.18.253. Additional research Information: • Hard copy attached of City of Cincinnati Renter's Choice Law. • Hard copies attached of media articles on the Cincinnati Renter's Choice Law. • Virginia, New Hampshire, New York City and Atlanta are considering this policy. Packet Pg. 300 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: LOW-INCOME EMERGENCY HOME REPAIR PROGRAM Policy: Fund a program, or contribute funding to an existing program such as Homage, to assist low-income homeowners with emergency home repairs. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Emergency home repair programs correct housing conditions that threaten low-income homeowners' safety, such as failing plumbing or heating systems, rotten floors, or a leaking roof. Beyond home insurance coverage, home repair costs can typically be covered by a bank -issued home equity loan or line of credit. However, banks may reject loan applications due to bad credit or lack of income. With the assistance of these repairs, residents are better able to remain safely housed for as long as possible. Other emergency home repair models offer financial assistance, in grants or below -market -rate loans, for emergency home repairs to low-income homeowners. Homage's Minor Home Repair program serves low- and moderate -income elderly and special needs homeowners in Snohomish County. Funding for this program is provided by the Snohomish County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, the City of Everett CDBG Program, the City of Marysville CDBG Program, city funding from City of Bothell, and other private donations. Edmonds' participation could better fund this program, or potentially help expand it to serve more low-income homeowners. Other local example programs imay be seen in the following webpages: • Sound Generations • City of Renton • Rebuilding Together • City of Seattle Packet Pg. 301 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS Policy: Extend the property tax exemption program currently available to seniors and the disabled to low income households. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION This policy would mirror the current property tax exemption available to qualifying seniors and disabled households. Those homeowners with an AMI below TBD would be eligible subject to a qualifying criteria similar to what's currently defined in: https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1387/Senior-Citizen-Disabled-Person- Exemption-Program-Publication?bidld= This policy results in a direct benefit to qualifying households, thus fostering home ownership with its associated wealth creating opportunities. Packet Pg. 302 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: SIMPLIFY ZONING CODE LANGUAGE Policy: Use diagrams, pictures, and tables in place of text where applicable. Use plain language where text is necessary. Packet Pg. 303 9.1.d Policy Recommendation Short Name of Policy: STREAMLINE PERMITTING PROCESS Policy: Reduce the number of conditional uses to streamline the permit process. Packet Pg. 304 MEN 9.1.e ■ 1 1 1 1 1 11 son III ril1711 111111 "'1 Edmonds Citizens' Housing Commission Information: Q&A March 2021 The Edmonds Citizens' Housing Commission was created in 2019 by the Edmonds City Council to recommend policy options to expand the range of housing available in Edmonds. Staff has received many questions about the Housing Commission and has developed this Q&A to respond to the most frequently asked questions. Where can I learn more about the Housing Commission's recommendations? F1 For an overview of Housing Commission's recommendations, join live or listen to the recordin of the March 16 Edmonds City Council meeting. F1 To view the Housing Commission's full set of recommendations, additional information, and community resources, visit CitizensHousingCommission.org. How was the Commission selected? The Commission is made of up of Edmonds residents from across the City, representing a diversity of ideas and opinions. For the appointment process in 2019, the City was divided into seven zones based on U.S. Census areas. All Edmonds households were sent a postcard about the opportunity to be involved. Each City Council member was assigned a zone and appointed two Commissioners and one alternate from a pool of applications received for that zone. The Mayor appointed one 'at -large' Commissioner and one alternate from the same pool. To view the list of Commission members and a map of the appointment zones, visit our Online Open House. You can also visit the Commission homepage. What role did City staff play in developing the recommendations? Did City staff decide what recommendations should be discussed and/or developed? Commission members selected and prioritized the housing topics they worked on. Once Commissioners developed a list of priority topics, they divided up into smaller committees by Commissioners' interest areas. Each committee separately developed draft policy ideas for full Commission discussion and refinement. City staff were available to support the Committees with research when asked by committee members, but did not propose or direct the Commission's housing recommendations. At several stages of the process, the Commission voted on which policy ideas from the committees to move forward with or to refine. Packet Pg. 305 9.1.e 7 111, 1� 0010 son m z; r7 How was the community engaged through this process? Some community engagement opportunities were ongoing, such as the following examples: • A dedicated website with information updated regularly; • Numerous public comments that were provided electronically to every Commissioner; • Monthly (sometimes twice -monthly) public meetings that were open to the public and included options for public comment. (Early on, this was in -person. After COVID, the public comments were submitted online. All Commission meetings were live -streamed and video -recorded, accessible from the City's agenda webpage.) In addition, four specific rounds of public engagement occurred from January 2020 to January 2021: • In early 2020, consultants hosted an online survey (based on Commission input) and an in - person open house to hear housing priorities and concerns from Edmonds community members. The feedback helped shape the ideas being explored by the Commission. • Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, community engagement efforts shifted from in -person to virtual platforms, supplemented by press releases, emails, mailings and flyers. This included o In summer 2020, an online open house (featuring videos of Commissioners talking about their work) and an online survey (along with a random sample of paper surveys via mail) regarding the Commission's first set of policy ideas. o In fall 2020, another online open house (again with Commissioners explaining their work) and a survey regarding the Commission's second set of policy ideas; o In early 2021, a final round of community engagement (online survey, open house, and workshop) to gather feedback on the Commission's draft set of policy recommendations. The Commission took this feedback into consideration before voting on its final set of recommendations for City Council consideration. How did the Commission determine its final set of recommendations? In early 2020, the Commission identified general topics that might relate to potential policy recommendations. As feedback came in from the first round of community engagement efforts, the Commission began to refine these topics. Commissioners created five policy committees based on members' interest areas. Then each committee worked separately to develop policy ideas at the committee level. While developing initial ideas, members conducted much of their own research and asked some questions to City staff to help inform the proposals they would make to the full Commission. From spring through fall 2020, the committees worked on drafting policy ideas via written proposals that explained each idea, sometimes with supplemental materials, which were discussed and considered at Commission meetings. Members also discussed feedback from community engagement efforts in the summer and fall as they refined the policy ideas and presented proposals at Commission meetings. At these meetings, Commissioners discussed and shared feedback together about policy ideas for committees to work on further. 'lie. 189'j Packet Pg. 306 9.1.e 7 111, 1� 0010 son !mv;r 7 After collecting feedback from policy committees and community members on the many policy ideas, the Commission discussed the committees' refined policy proposals and decided on a set of draft recommendations for which another round of community input was sought in early January 2021. The Commission took this additional feedback into consideration before voting in late January 2021 on a final set of recommendations (including amendments from the prior draft version) for City Council consideration. Are the policy recommendations from the Commission now included in Edmonds housing policy? What did the Commission's end product to City Council look like? The Commission was tasked with drafting a set of high-level policy recommendations, based on what they learned during the year -and -a -half long process, for City Council consideration. These recommendations will be considered by the City Council over the next year, or longer, as the Council continues to discuss and set the path and vision for Edmonds housing strategy. The specific details on how, and if, any of the Commission recommendations might be applied to City codes or programs will be determined by the City Council over the next year or so. During the consideration process, the City Council may assign city staff and other city boards, such as the planning board, to conduct further research, receive more public input, and develop detailed recommendations, strategies, or options. The Council could also choose to not move forward with one or more of the policy recommendations. Throughout this process, there will be additional opportunities for community input and engagement. Are the Commission recommendations going to "Ballardize" Edmonds? Through public engagement, people brought up the importance of maintaining the character of Edmonds and that Edmonds is a unique and beautiful city. Many community members also expressed interest in having more accessible and affordable housing for a variety of evolving needs. In thinking about these points, the Commission noted that one of the critical things about whether or how a particular type of building fits into a community is its design. Good locally -based design standards can make a big difference in how a building looks or fits into a neighborhood or community. This observation was reflected by a Commission recommendation that the City's design standards be developed or updated to accomplish key design objectives, as part of considering other zoning changes. 'lie. 189'J Packet Pg. 307 IN 1 1 ■■■L 1I1 9.1.e PRE 1 1 1 11 How will the Commission recommendations impact housing availability for Edmonds residents? In its policy recommendations, the Commission — comprised entirely of local residents — worked to ensure there's a place for all residents, young and old, families with children and those aging in place on a fixed income, those with an RV in the garage and those who only take the bus, those who prefer condominiums or apartments, and those who want larger housing sites. Clearly, Edmonds residents — children, grandparents, teachers, first responders, and co-workers — require a range of housing options to meet their needs. The Commission's mission was to explore and expand the range of housing options available to meet a variety community needs, not just for the next few years but over the longer term. The Housing Commission recommendations point to more opportunities for housing in Edmonds. In the next stages of City Council consideration, the Housing Commission's ideas will be further explored and refined. That combination will better reveal specific options to increase future housing availability for a range of incomes, ages, family sizes, and other needs. OV EDP h�. 1890 Packet Pg. 308 10.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 03/16/2021 Public Comments on Tree Code Staff Lead: Council Department: City Council Preparer: Maureen Judge Background/History The City Council received an introduction to the draft tree regulations recommended by the Planning Board at the Council's January 26, 2021 meeting, held a public hearing on February 2, 2021, had further discussion on February 16, 2021. The Conservation Subdivision Design Flexibility code was adopted on March 2, 2012 and was further amended on March 9, 2012. The public has submitted numerous emailed comments on the tree code. Staff Recommendation N/A Narrative Councilmember Kristiana Johnson asked that emailed Public Comments submitted during this review period be included in the packet. Attachments: Public Comment emails on Tree Code for 316 Packet Pg. 309 10.1.a Public Comment regarding the Tree Code Update through 3/9/21: From: cdfarmen Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 3:33 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Tree Code Dear Council Members, I am submitting the following recommendations to be considered in your deliberation on the "updated tree code". The tree code title would be more appropriately named as the " Tree Preservation Code" or the " Tree Retention and Protection code". The use of those terms in lieu of generic wording gives more emphasis on the intent of the code. It raises an altogether different awareness. We need a vigorous tree code that will be properly managed and justly applied. The current tree board needs to be changed into a true tree board with 4 or 5 professional board members, that would include an arborist and others with some forestry and LID knowledge. The current tree board would then become an advisory committee to the board. The new Tree board should be included in the approval process of any subdivision development with a tree plan. They would be responsible to conduct the initial review of the plan and make recommendations to the Director. They could assist the director with the onsite pre -development inspection and offer a recommendation to the director which subdivision plan should be presented to the developer. Additionally, they could conduct on -site monitoring of the tree removal, retention and protection measures of the plan and, do on -site monitoring during construction and post -development. They could also assist the city in any citywide canopy assessment, review any tree permits, do post - construction on -site tree replanting areas to assure they are being taken care of, and have oversight on any off -site replanting areas. The Tree board members with LID experience could monitor construction activities on a regular basis to assure plan requirements are being met. What I have mentioned may not be all the activities they could participate in, but whatever their responsibilities are, they will relieve the Director in many ways so that person can do other job -related duties and remove some of the "one person" discretion regarding the application of the overall tree code. Thank you for your diligent consideration of my recommendations. Duane Farmen Seaview resident Packet Pg. 310 10.1.a From: Richard Senderoff Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 2:32 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Hope, Shane <Shane.Hope@edmondswa.gov>; Lien, Kernen <Kernen.Lien @edmondswa.gov>; Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov> Subject: About the Tree Code Focused on New Development Dear Councilmembers, I am unable to watch or speak at tonight's Council meeting due to another commitment. But wanted to share my thoughts on the Tree Code. First, I understand the Council's interest in moving a Tree Code forward. But simply checking the box with something entitled "Tree Code" won't cut it. While I can't speak for the entire Edmonds environmental contingency, I am aware that many are concerned about the process and the current product. In fact, the Legacy Tree ordinance (which I support) is more restrictive for private property owners, than the current Tree Code focused on new development is for developers; this is primarily due to the extensive number of "exceptions". As such, the code is very complicated & confusing. And for this reason it will ultimately be subject to interpretation by the Hearing Examiner, regardless of Mr. Lien's interpretation or the apparent "spirit" of the exceptions. Furthermore, the fines for violations are much too small to have any impact on developers. The homes being built in Edmonds currently are mostly multimillion dollar McMansions; not exactly affordable housing, but that's a different issue. Anything that complicates or lengthens the building process will simply be perceived as a nuisance and the fines will be regarded as the cost of doing business and meaningless relative to the value of the homes being built... "Time is money." Second, it should be recognized that tree management, stormwater handling, and housing plans are all related and each of these elements need to be addressed holistically. And a holistic process should have begun with Council holding study sessions or a retreat to collectively assign congruent goals/objectives for each of the aforementioned elements. Only then could Council evaluate/amend the draft codes against a common set of objectives/goals. Finally, I understand that Mr. Lien (and others) has spent a great deal of time on this code. But my recommendation is to postpone/table the current Tree Code, until Council can collectively and holistically identify objectives/goals that provide a basis for assessment/measurement. Sincerely, Rich Packet Pg. 311 10.1.a From: cdfarmen Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 2021 7:16 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Tree code and Wildlife corridors Dear Council Members, The discussion about wildlife corridors struck a nerve with me. I totally disagree with the supposition that wildlife corridors primarily are located in critical areas. Here are some excerpts from my online research: There are two distinct types of Wildlife Corridors —either water or land. Water corridors are called riparian ribbons and usually come in the form of rivers and streams. Land corridors come on a scale as large as wooded strips connecting larger woodland areas. There was another type of wildlife corridor listed called Migration corridors. "Some species need to migrate for survival, depending on various seasons. Through corridors, such species can move back and forth safely and effectively when it does not interfere with human development barriers". Other important comments about wildlife corridors: Wildlife corridors are also known as habitat corridors or green corridors. They serve as significant and essential linkage areas that allow animals to move through the increasingly human -dominated landscapes. Corridors play an extremely important role in the maintenance of biodiversity, but they can only partly compensate for the overall habitat loss produced by the fragmentation of the natural landscape. A wildlife corridor is a link of wildlife habitat, generally native vegetation, which joins two or more larger areas of similar wildlife habitat. Corridors are critical for the maintenance of ecological processes including allowing for the movement of animals and the continuation of viable populations. The tree code needs to include a definition of what is considered a wildlife corridor. It should recognizes that there are both land and water wildlife corridors. The Seaview/Perrinville woods serves both as a land wildlife corridor and a migration corridor. And, if you really think about it, the east side of the woods is only 50 feet or so from the Perrinville creek riparian zone which is a critical area by definition in the tree code. I know personally how vital this issue is. Twenty years ago my property was certified as a wildlife habitat. I have always had an abundance of wildlife in my yard. That abruptly ended last week with the clear -cutting of the woods that were connected to my landscape. Most all my birds have left including three species of woodpeckers including the Pileated woodpecker, Stellar jays, Wrens, Townsend Packet Pg. 312 10.1.a warblers, Bushtits, Chickadees, Spotted towhees, Nuthatches, and even the hummingbirds. I don't even have those pestering squirrels coming into my yard. Please do what is right to protect our wildlife and follow through on an amendment to add and broaden the use of the term wildlife corridor. Thank you, Duane Farmen Seaview resident From: cdfarmen Sent: Tuesday, March 2, 2021 9:17 AM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Prposed Tree code Dear Council Members, Amending the proposed tree code to meet the expectations of retention and no -net -canopy loss will be no easy task. The terminology used throughout the proposed code is not restrictive enough to prevent the unabated cutting of the trees the city wants and needs to protect. Initially, I was under the impression the 35% tree retention was a requirement. But, what I came to find out it was not a precondition nor an obligation on the developer to retain 35% of the trees on the property. When I asked Mr. Lien about that, he said the intent expressed by the Planning Board, was to make the 35% retention the first effort (or step) in tree retention. That being the case, if the developer chooses not to meet that level of retention, the next option becomes cut and replace followed by a third option of cut and pay. No matter how you perceive the proposed tree code, clear -cutting is still a viable option for the developer. Without some true retention requirements, how do you achieve a goal of no -net -loss of canopy or anything ecologically related? The statement at the top of page 7 where it says "significant trees on lots proposed for development or redevelopment shall be retained as follows". That clearly is a misrepresentation of reality. Doesn't the definition of "shall be" indicate that there is an obligation to preserve rather than an option? There are parts of the tree code where the term prohibited is used such as in the case of certain situations within described critical areas or in the case of "protected trees". Why not prohibit the cutting of a specified percentage of all viable trees on the property? Why not make the applicant be a responsible partner in tree retention? There needs to be a " stop limit" required so that, at a minimum, for example, 20% of all existing viable/significant trees must be preserved. Such a required retention limit is needed so the developer cannot clear-cut the entire subdivision site and "buy their way out" of any tree retention measures. Packet Pg. 313 10.1.a The other weakness in the proposed code is that the Director has far too much discretion in deciding how to apply the tree code. There are more than 12 cases where the director reserves the right to take certain discretionary actions. How can the tree code be appropriately applied under those circumstances? It is very important that you develop a vigorous tree protection code, one that can prevail in its first real test of its effectiveness when applied to the development of the Seaview Woods subdivision. Respectively submitted, Duane Farmen Seaview resident From: Bonnie Kirby Sent: Tuesday, March 2, 20218:23 AM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Tree issue Hello! I want to second the email sent to you from Johanna Malloy, my neighbor. She has stated exactly what I would have sent to you. New tree issues really need to be addressed. Thank you. Bonnie Kirby From: Johanna Molloy Sent: Tuesday, March 2, 2021 7:33 AM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: New Tree Code Dear Edmonds City Council, Thank you for all you do to maintain our beautiful town of Edmonds. As you are reviewing the new Tree Code, we would like to call your attention to a few issues that we feel are of vital importance: 1) Safety issues for pedestrians and vehicles around street corners that are extremely dangerous because of overgrown trees, bushes and out of control vegetation. This includes not only visual impairments as people approach an intersection (both walking and driving), but potential dangers from falling trees and limbs -especially during stormy weather. 2) Trees that infringe on PUD, cable and/or other communication wires that can cause potential fires, lack of quality in communication lines and repeated trimming trips to the same location to try and keep Packet Pg. 314 10.1.a areas clear. This can cause aesthetically negative outcomes, as well as rising costs for consumers. (See pictures below -facing both directions and directly from across the street.) 3) Real Estate Values on "View" properties that decline because of neighbors that do not honor other's views and financial investment by keeping the trees on their property maintained/trimmed. 4) Please make sure that there is reasonable consideration for individual situations that may need extra attention because of extenuating circumstances. For example, the measurements used to address whether or not a tree is an issue in the pictures below, may not reflect the fact that during non-Covid lockdowns, many children cross that intersection on field trips to the water, which is one block away. There are also many joggers, parents with strollers and dog walkers that make visiting 2nd and Edmonds their daily routine. One can clearly see that these limbs (that now spread almost completely across the entire street since these pictures were taken) are a danger and annoyance as people try to avoid them, regardless of the actual measurements. We hope that you will consider these community concerns. We know that MANY neighbors where we live on 2nd Ave N, have complained over the years regarding the overgrown trees on the NW corner of 2nd and Edmonds Street. PUD has approached the owner of the property there (121 Edmonds St) and offered to remove the trees at no cost to the owner and even provide a voucher for new trees, but the owner refused. We love the trees here in the Pacific Northwest. However, we also love being civically pro -active regarding safety in our community, preserving our exceptional views and keeping our financial investments secure. Thank you again for all your hard work. We appreciate your time and attention to these concerns, Johanna and Bill Molloy PS Please forward this email to any parties that may be helpful to addressing our topics and concerns. From: Katy Bigelow Sent: Monday, March 1, 20214:31 PM To: Lien, Kernen <Kernen.Lien @edmondswa.gov>; Dill, Debra <Debra.Dill @edmondswa.gov>; Spellman, Jana <Jana.Spellman@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Notes to consider for the tree code Packet Pg. 315 10.1.a Basic edits are needed: 1. Revise: 2. Tree Risk Assessment Qualification (TRAQ) as established by the ISA Track to read "TRAQ" not "Track" 2. Should be noted that development which contains a Critical Area are held to different standards .. and those standards locations need to be referenced. Questions: 1. How are 30% or 25% retention requirements determined? Is it by total tree diameters? By best looking trees according to the developer/tree professional? By canopy cover? 2. B. No tree replacement is required in the following cases: 8.3.e Packet Pg. 386 Attachment: Attachment 5: Tree Ordinance (Draft Tree Regulations and Subdivision Code Amendment) 15 1. The tree is hazardous, dead, diseased, injured, or in a declining condition with no reasonable assurance of regaining vigor - By determination of a tree professional? 3. Under civil penalties, "If illegal tree topping has occurred, the property owner shall be required to have a certified arborist develop and implement a five (5) year pruning schedule in addition to monetary fines and required tree replacement. " what if the tree professional determines that pruning is not the best course of corrective action or can not be completed as the tree is close to a total loss? Final thought: The City would benefit from having an actual arborist on the Tree Board. This is a strong recommendation that could yield better advice in future rounds of edits. Katy Bigelow ISA Board Certified Master Arborist® International Society of Arboriculture Certified Arborist PN-6039B PNW ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Registered Consulting Arborist° #490 Member - American Society of Consulting Arborists From: joe scordino Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 1:35 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov>; Lien, Kernen <Kernen.Lien@edmondswa.gov>; Hope, Shane <Shane.Hope@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Wippel, Teresa (My Edmonds News) <myedmondsnews@gmail.com> Subject: Draft tree code needs major rewrite Packet Pg. 316 10.1.a I would like to recommend that the City Council consider the following in giving advice to City staff for amending/rewriting the draft tree code. The draft is in serious need of rewrite because of its lack of focus on BIG trees (i.e., 8" diameter or more) and unnecessary complexity and exceptions that create HUGE loopholes in the City's effort to preserve its tree canopy. [NOTE: I didn't provide the below as a public comment at last night's Council meeting because many in the public are feeling more and more that the Mayor, the Council, and City staff are not acknowledging "informed" public comments). PROTECTION: Focus the tree code regulation on protecting BIG trees and preventing them from being cut down to the maximum extent possible with due consideration for public safety and residential development where/when it is possible without reducing existing tree canopy and wildlife corridors in Edmonds. City should not be involved if someone wants to cut down an apple tree or prune small trees and shrubs on private property (unless they are in critical areas). Focus should be on reducing/stopping the cutting of BIG trees throughout the City regardless of type of parcel. BIG trees should be clearly defined in the tree code (e.g., those with 8" diameter or greater) and the tree code should pertain only to BIG trees. REPLACEMENT: Require replacement of every BIG tree removed with "ecologically equivalent" number of same or similar species of BIG trees. Evergreen trees must be replaced with same or similar species of evergreen trees. One approach for REPLACEMENT is to have the sum of the diameters of the replacement trees equal the diameter of the BIG tree removed. The replacement trees should be planted on same parcel or in same watershed and contribute to the existing tree canopy in that watershed except for watersheds where "views" are an established priority for that watershed (e.g. the Edmonds Bowl in the Shellabarger watershed). TRACKING and ENFORCEMENT: To enforce prevention of BIG tree removal and allow for tracking of the existing tree canopy in Edmonds, a permit system must be implemented for all BIG tree removals. Removal of BIG trees should be prohibited without a permit issued by the City of Edmonds. Permit application fees should NOT apply to developed parcels requesting a permit for removal of trees for public safety purposes or instances where trees are impacting utilities. The tree code should establish conditions for permit issuance based on purpose and locations of proposed tree cutting. Packet Pg. 317 10.1.a The tree code should allow discretion by the City Development Director on permit conditions but only for discouraging BIG tree removal. Permits should not be issued for removal of BIG trees on developed parcels except in instances of public safety or where trees are impacting utilities. Undeveloped or subdivided lots proposed for development should be limited on the percentage (e.g., 50%) of BIG trees that can removed from that lot. INCENTIVES: The tree code should include economic incentives to discourage the removal of BIG trees. A BIG tree removal fee (e.g., $3,000 to $5,000 per tree) should be established for undeveloped or subdivided lots as an incentive to developers to retain as many BIG trees on the lot as possible. Tree removal fees should be placed in a Tree Fund that is used by the City to improve the existing tree canopy. From: cdfarmen@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 3:59 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Tree code Dear Council Members, After following your diligent effort to update the tree code, it is clear to me that it will take a herculean effort to come up with an ideal tree code that not only results in a no -net -ecological loss but an ecological gain before the moratorium expires. My suggestion at this point is to focus on the aspects that relate specifically to subdivisions and leave the other changes for a later date. I think trying to update the entire code within a limited time period, would prove to result in a long drawn out effort and a less than effective tree code. Why get caught up in discussing things like developed properties, heritage trees, use of tree funds, size of replacement trees, incentives for established homeowners to retain trees, civil penalties on non subdivision properties, views, when there is a 14 unit wooded subdivision, a "here and now"development that begs you full attentiveness. Another reason to focus specifically on subdivisions has to do with the patience of the developer. How long can you delay the proposed project here in the Seaview area? If you extend the moratorium even for two more months, the city could be inviting legal problems. Doesn't the city have an obligation to act in good faith with respect to allowing the landowner to develop his property? Packet Pg. 318 10.1.a Even though I have always wanted the woods preserved in some fashion, I know the best alternative at this point is to have a solid tree code that will retain and protect as many of the mature Douglas fir trees that stand tall on the property and preserve as much of the Perrinville Creek watershed as possible. Please do your very best to accomplish that goal. Respectfully submitted, Duane Farmen Seaview resident From: Bill Phipps Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 2:02 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Hope, Shane <Shane.Hope@edmondswa.gov>; Lien, Kernen <Kernen.Lien @edmondswa.gov> Subject: tree code Greetings City Council and Mayor Nelson; The proposed tree code is a good start. But it needs attention to where most of the trees are... which is the already developed residential lots. I would encourage you to ask The Development Department to finish their work. Or hire it out to a consulting group that knows how to write tree code; such as Forterra. If you or the planning Department are unable to finish the tree code now, then I would set a firm timeline and deadline for getting the necessary work done. One thing we need now is a new snapshot of where we are. A new aerial image and forest canopy analysis needs to be done now. The last one we have is from 2015. We have lost a lot of large conifers since then. In order to move forward, we need current up to date data. Hopefully, the facts of decreasing forest canopy will propel you to move forward on solving this problem now, rather than later. Thank you for your attention to this important matter. Bill Phipps Edmonds resident Packet Pg. 319 10.1.a From: cdfarmen Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 11:16 AM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Tree code update Dear City Council Members In order to have an effective overall tree code, special emphasis needs to be placed on sites that are unique in topography, have steep slopes, deep ravines, wetlands, and more importantly are the headwaters and drainage system of a local stream. With that in mind, my focus was to review the proposed code in that context. The following is a summary of conclusions with respect to the proposed Tree code update. 1. The "Conservation Subdivision Design" regulation on page 13, references 20.075, the ECDC chapter on Subdivisions. As currently written, there are no provisions indicating that the 30% tree retention limit and all other tree -related regulations in the proposed tree code are applicable to this section. The Conservation Subdivision should be included with other subdivisions on page 7 where retention requirements are listed. 2. The tree code also needs to incorporate a process to determine what subdivision plan is most appropriate on any given development site. It is important to identify areas of any development property for conservation purposes. To do that there needs to be a complete environmental inventory to identify areas that may be ecologically important. At the pre -application meeting, the applicant needs to provide a preliminary development plan, a tree inventory, a contour map, and a written statement describing the property in detail. Any unbuildable areas should also be noted. If the proposed development has any one of the following areas, an onsite inspection needs to be conducted by the city planner, a stormwater engineer, and an arborist. Wooded areas Areas of unique natural features. Steep slopes (15% or greater) Wetland Watershed/drainage basin Upon completion of the onsite inspection, a determination shall be made by the site assessment team on whether one of the conservation subdivision plans is the best alternative to a traditional subdivision plan. Packet Pg. 320 10.1.a If a CSP is the most appropriate plan to employ, a joint meeting with the developer and assessment team should be held to explain the city's recommendation and potential incentives that would be beneficial to the developer in adopting such a plan. Part of the discussion could also include a discussion about areas that might be considered for an ecological/conservation easement. The team approach is important to determine the best development plan, especially on larger development sites that are of ecological importance. The principle of no -net ecological loss should not be left up to the discretion of any one individual. 3. There are no provisions for any of the following monitoring plans that are necessary to verify compliance with the tree -related regulations. a. Construction phase monitoring to assure all tree retention and protection plans are being followed. b. Tree replacement monitoring plan to assure compliance with the tree replacement plan. c. Post -development inspection plan to assure the replants are being properly maintained by the applicant and to check for trees that have not survived and need replacement. Semiannual monitoring should be conducted for at least the first two years after planting occurs. 4. The monitoring of the construction site, pre -development, during development, and post - development need to be done by a qualified professional. 5. Monitoring by a licensed arborist is warranted for any development requiring a tree plan. An arborist should be on -site during construction to make certain all the tree -related regulations are being followed 6. Any Tree Replacement Plan needs to include the number of replacement trees, size, and species being planted, and a " tree spacing" requirement to avoid overplanting. If the replant site is overplanted the survival rate will be adversely affected. The size of the replacement tree at maturity is an important spacing factor. Tree replacements should be of the same species removed. 7. Item 4 "Property lines" of the Tree Protection Measures should include the statement that the applicant shall be required to install a fence barrier along the adjoining property line to cordon off and protect those trees on the adjoining property. Verification of this protective measure needs to be included in the pre -construction site meeting. Respectively submitted, Duane Farmen Seaview resident Packet Pg. 321 10.1.a From: joe scordino Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2021 7:32 PM To: Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov> Cc: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Draft Tree Code is ineffective Mayor Nelson - Please do not waste valuable City Council time trying to fix an ineffective tree code developed by your staff. Please request/require City staff (that work for you) to rewrite the draft to: 1. simplify it, 2. focus it on 'actually' protecting large trees, tree canopy and wildlife corridors, 3. eliminate exceptions & loopholes, 4. And THEN, present it to City Council for approval The re -write should be based on the UFMP objectives with the following guidance: 1) Requiring a permit to cut down any significant tree in Edmonds. 2) Differential application fees with no fee for permits to remove a hazard tree. 3) Requiring replacement of every significant tree removed for whatever purpose. 4) Require replacement trees to be an "ecologically equivalent" number of same or similar species of trees that will fully replicate the environmental services provided by the removed trees in the watershed of removal taking into account predicted survival of replacement trees to same age/size of the removed tree. 5) In setting tree retention limits for development, take into account the location of the parcel with parcels in the Perrinville, Northstream, Shell and Willow Creek Watersheds requiring upwards of 50-70% significant tree retention while parcels in the Edmonds Bowl (Shellabarger Watershed) having less tree retention requirements. 6) Assess a $5,000.00 to $10,000.00 fee for every significant tree removed under a development permit with fees going into a tree fund. [no fee for hazard trees] 7) A monitoring requirement with annual reporting by City staff to Council and public on condition of Edmonds Tree Canopy. Lastly, City staff should be required to consult with the Edmonds Tree Board on the revised draft tree code before it is presented to the City Council for approval (and further amendments as the Council may determine). Packet Pg. 322 10.1.a From: cdfarmen Sent: Sunday, February 7, 2021 12:06 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Tree code Dear Council Members, I was very glad to hear that UFMP and the term ecological were mentioned in your last meeting. I am hopeful such a conversation will lead to a good tree code that provides tree retention and protection over "cut and pay". I understood that when the moratorium on subdivisions was approved, the primary motivation was to protect as many trees as possible with respect to the proposed development of the wooded property between Seaview Park and Perrinville. The new Conservation Subdivision plan seems to have been added to the tree code to address that situation. However, the new subdivision plan does not account for the unique nature of that property. Based on Mr. Lien's case examples, it's application seems more appropriate for the usual relatively level building site with a small cluster of trees. I do not see how that plan would deal with a 5-acre wooded site consisting of two deep ravines, several steep slopes ranging from 83% to 134%, and a high plateau? The slope data is from the Geotechnical report found in the 2005 Angler's Crossing PRD files.) This is a "one of a kind" like no other, privately owned property in the city. In addition, this is a major part of the headwaters and drainage of Perinnville Creek that needs to be protected. A separate flexible development plan needs to be created to preserve as much as the natural features, ecology, and tree canopy as possible. Possibly the Conservation Subdivision plan can be built upon allowing for the clustering of homes where the topography and tree groves dictate where the building sites are located. Without significant modifications to that plan, the direction of the new plan will do very little for Seaview/Perinnville woods. There are specific aspects of the city's Comprehensive Plan that apply to such unique terrain properties and needs the council's serious consideration. Residential Goal A.6 Require that new residential development be compatible with the natural constraints of slopes, soils, geology, drainage, vegetation and habitat. Open Space Goal. A.2. All feasible means should be used to preserve the following open spaces: A.2.d. Areas that have steep slopes or are in major stream drainage ways, particularly those areas which have significance to Edmonds residents as watersheds or natural drainage ways. Similar statements are found in the UFMP under the section titled "Private Land Clearing". It references Chapter 18.45.00 "Purposes" section of the Land and Clearing and Tree Cutting code. There are also other alternatives being employed by different townships, such as the "cluster developments" designed to maintain the unique character of a site, maintain and conserve larger open Packet Pg. 323 10.1.a space areas, and protects and/or enhances sensitive environmental and wildlife areas. Some require as much as 50% open space. I understand it's not an easy task to decide how areas with special topography, hydrology, ecology, and an established tree canopy are allowed to be developed. But, it's not an impossible task either as seen with other communities that have been faced with similar challenges. The following article discusses the concept of conservation subdivisions. Terrain.org: "Cultivating Natural and Cultural Landscapes through Conservation Subdivision Design" February 10, 2008, NorthAssocAdmin "Terrain.org is an online journal devoted to smart growth that's integrated with the natural environment. It won a 1999 Media Award for Sustainable Development and has an entire category devoted to UnSprawl. Randall Arendt's article, "Cultivating Natural and Cultural Landscapes through Conservation Subdivision Design", is a good example of increasing sensitivity among Smart Growth advocates for development that respects existing natural features and key elements of neighborhood character. Some excerpts: If you have ever driven by a development site both before and after construction, you will probably have noticed how drastically the pre-existing landscape, both natural and cultural, has been altered, sometimes almost beyond recognition. Very typically, woodlands have been felled, hedgerows have been pulled up and cleared away, the natural contours of the terrain have been ironed out into dead - flat building platforms, drainages have been relocated, old houses and barns have been razed. Usually, not as obvious is the lack of necessity for many of those changes, which forever impoverish the community by permanently erasing special features that are often impossible to replace or replicate. The loss of habitat, familiar landscapes, and character -defining buildings are often the result of indifference by developers and their engineering consultants, and ignorance of practical alternatives by local planning staffs and officials who approve such proposals, based on outdated zoning and subdivision codes which legitimize this kind of corporate and municipal misbehavior... At the heart of ["conservation planning"] is the idea that the residential subdivision design process can be reformed so that such developments become a major tool for achieving a community's conservation objectives, at no additional cost to developers. In fact, studies have shown they save money on expensive site grading and street construction, and that the lots tend to sell more quickly and at premium prices... The critically -important first step consists of inventorying resources worth designing around and preserving, either because they represent daunting obstacles to development (such as wetlands, floodplains, and steep slopes), or because they encompass special value -adding natural or cultural features that are extremely vulnerable because they are NOT located in [ designated] unbuildable areas... " My hope is that a good tree code in conjunction with a flexible subdivision plan can be developed to preserve any ecologically sensitive site within the city of Edmonds. A code that limits accommodations to the developer and boldly stands tall for the trees that make up the city's canopy. Packet Pg. 324 10.1.a Respectively submitted, Duane Farmen Seaview resident From: Richard Senderoff Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 9:11 AM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Lien, Kernen <Kernen.Lien @edmondswa.gov>; Hope, Shane <Shane.Hope@edmondswa.gov>; Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov>; Johnson, Pat <Pat.Johnson@edmondswa.gov>; Richardson, Zachary <Zachary.Richardson @edmondswa.gov>; Williams, Phil <Phil.Wllliams@edmondswa.gov> Subject: RE: Public Comment- Perspectives on Draft Tree Code Dear Councilmembers, Mayor, and Staff, It is incomprehensible that it does not appear that stormwater impacts were addressed in the current draft (developer) Tree Code and that Public Works/stormwater engineers did not participate in the drafting of the code or be available to answer Council questions. As previously stated, "It's as if the Planning Department and Public Works aren't working in a coordinated manner. In other words, the Planning Department works on behalf of developers to facilitate development proposals and leaves it up to Public Works stormwater engineers to deal with the consequences, with a stormwater handling system that currently is insufficient!" Removal of trees, especially large trees, puts further stress on our currently inadequate stormwater handling systems (especially in the Seaview/Perrinville watershed). As such, we continue to play whack a mole with our stormwater management. Please read this recent article, Local Developers Discuss Their Experiences Preserving Large Trees and Suggest How to Make It Easier & view the accompanying Trees for Life Webinar. You will find concepts including education, carrots (i.e. incentives), and sticks (i.e. fees) to work with developers to preserve trees. These concepts should be incorporated into the current draft (developer) Tree Code. In fact, many of these concepts are also relevant to preserving trees on previously developed properties. Respectfully, Rich From: Richard Senderoff Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2021 4:01 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Lien, Kernen <Kernen.Lien @edmondswa.gov>; Hope, Shane <Shane.Hope@edmondswa.gov>; Packet Pg. 325 10.1.a Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov> Subject: Public Comment- Perspectives on Draft Tree Code Dear Councilmembers, I'm writing to address some overall perspectives regarding the draft tree code and then further elaborate on the relationship between development, storm water, and trees. First, some overall draft tree code perspectives: There are way too many exemptions! The KISS (Keep It Simple Silly) principle needs to be followed. The exemptions are subjective and will be subject to "interpretation" by the Planning Department and, subsequently, the Hearing Examiner/Superior Court. Exemptions should be few and far between, not the rule. Developers will look for "loopholes" in the code, which will lead to "band -aids" and a messy code. Keep It Simple! The requirements to replace significant trees or charge developers per tree removed is much too lenient! The number of replacement trees should be doubled if not tripled. And the charges per tree removed should be at least 2-3 times (if not up to 5-10 times) higher. Developers will just see these "costs" as the price of doing business. o There should also be requirements for replacement based on the number of trees removed per sq. ft. regardless of size/type; trees removed beyond a specified number per sq.ft. need to be replaced or the developer charged. This is the only way to protect pocket forests and to dissuade developers from their current practice of essentially clearcutting prior to construction. The Tree Fund needs to be better described in terms of how it will be managed and this should include tree vouchers provided for free on a first come basis to citizens who want to plant trees on their properties (as per Lynnwood). More than three (3) tree code violations should result in a developer/contractor being banned from working in Edmonds, as should have happened during Point Edwards construction years ago. Developers/contractors need to understand the City is serious. Again, developers will just view charges for violations as the price of doing business. Carrots won't work for tree preservation; sticks are required! It's insufficient to focus on code ONLY pertaining to new development. We need a comprehensive tree code and this includes currently developed property, etc. o If we approve only a tree code pertaining to new development, Council will simply believe they have "checked the box" and move on, without completing a more comprehensive code. And the tree code will be left unfinished for a long time (if not forever). o I don't believe current developed property owners should be charged for permits. But they should be required to obtain a free permit, allowing the City to document the number of allowable trees being removed for tracking purposes. And at this time, they could also be encouraged to donate to the tree fund based on the cost of a tree voucher/removed tree that could be provided to other citizens (as described above). Developers should also need to document the number of trees being removed during construction. Packet Pg. 326 10.1.a Finally, we can't make decisions regarding tree preservation in a vacuum that doesn't consider the impact on the environment and utility/stormwater requirements. I shouldn't need to remind you of the importance of trees regarding stormwater handling, purifying water draining into our salmon streams, and cleansing the air (in addition to providing wildlife habitat). I previously was a Steering Committee member on the Edmonds Backyard Wildlife Project. The objective of this project was to enhance the wildlife corridors within neighborhoods that connect to pocket forests, parks, and other open spaces. The speed at which we achieved Community Wildlife Habitat designation for Edmonds from the National Wildlife Federation is a testament to the concern and interest that Edmonds citizens have for maintaining and enhancing our environment. In fact, we were achieving the specified requirements so quickly (e.g., record time) that the National Wildlife Federation seemed to keep changing the rules in terms of how they calculated "points" which extended the time for us to achieve the designation. My point being that the Edmonds community has much interest and concern regarding our natural areas and tree canopy. As such, the environment, including tree canopy preservation must be seriously considered when adopting any development proposals. And the impact of tree removal and development on our existing stormwater issues MUST be given serious consideration; flooding that results increases both the City's liability and disrupts the lives of families. For instance, ALL of our current storm water systems throughout the City failed during recent rain events, especially in the Perrinville watershed. This included issues on my street in the Seaview neighborhood, in which stormwater ultimately drains into the Perrinville watershed. In trying to address these issues with both the Snohomish Conservation District and Public Works it was stated clearly to me that the Perrinville watershed is the most challenging stormwater handling area in the City and the current system is insufficient. Yet, the Planning Department continues to advocate for zoning changes to allow development in Perrinville Woods. It's as if the Planning Department and Public Works aren't working in a coordinated manner. In other words, the Planning Department works on behalf of developers to facilitate development proposals and leaves it up to Public Works stormwater engineers to deal with the consequences, with a stormwater handling system that currently is insufficient! Don't get me wrong. As a scientist, I have great respect for engineers. But frankly, they are not always right and there are many examples of this. And when stormwater systems do not adequately keep pace with development, solutions become even more challenging and expensive. Yes, I'm aware of the "excuse" that this was a historic storm. But to offer this excuse is to deny that climate change (and global warming) is real and the frequency and extent of these events won't continue to increase. Remember, it's not about temperature. Rather, it's about energy. And when more energy (e.g., heat) is put into a system the frequency and extent of the subsequent reaction is increased. Packet Pg. 327 10.1.a We MUST keep these factors in mind when considering development projects; otherwise, current and future taxpaying residents will suffer the consequences. There should be NO more development within the Perrinville watershed, especially Perrinville Woods, until the current stormwater issues there are sufficiently addressed. To allow otherwise, is legislative malpractice! Respectfully, Rich From: joe scordino Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2021 2:18 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Lien, Kernen <Kernen.Lien @edmondswa.gov>; Hope, Shane <Shane.Hope@edmondswa.gov>; Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov> Subject: Public Comment for Public Hearing on Tree Code Council Members; The draft Tree Code needs substantive revisions!!!! The draft Tree Code does NOT even come close to achieving the goals and objectives of the Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) of 2019. Why did the City go through the whole process of developing and the Council approving a UFMP, if it only results in an ineffective Tree Code? There is no apparent scientific basis for what appears to be arbitrary numbers, percentages, and provisions in the draft. Further, the draft lacks acknowledgment of the functions and ecological values of different species of trees and the conditions of the watersheds that these trees occur in. The Council NEEDS TO REQUEST the City's Tree Board, which consists of citizens knowledgeable on trees, to provide recommendations based on the "best available science" on each of the metrics (diameters, numbers, percentages, etc.) in the draft Tree Code. As a starting point to fixing the draft code, attached (and below) are suggested changes to definitions, exemptions, permit requirements, and other sections that need to be made to the draft Tree Code to start making it more consistent with the UFMP. Section 23.10.020 Definitions Change definition of part F. Hazard tree to read as follows: "A significant tree that is dead, dying, diseased, damaged, structurally defective as determined by a qualified tree professional, or causing significant physical damage to a private or public structure, sidewalk, curb, road, water or sewer or stormwater utilities, driveway, or parking lot." Delete F. Nuisance Tree and change all references of Nuisance tree to "Hazard tree". Packet Pg. 328 10.1.a (see revised definition of Hazard tree above. There is no reason to separately distinguish trees that are causing significant damage to property - they are a "hazard") Delete K. Protected Tree and change all references of Protected Tree to "Significant Tree". (This makes it clear that primary purpose of this code is to protect and retain trees with 6" or more diameter) Section 23.10.030 Permits Change A. Applicability: to read as follows: "No person shall remove, excessively prune, or top any significant tree without a permit except for removal of trees, with notification to the Planning Department, by the Public Works Department, Parks Department, Fire Department and or franchised utilities for one of the following purposes: 1. Installation and maintenance of public utilities. 2. In response to situations involving public safety, substantial fire hazards, or interruption of services provided by a utility." Delete part B. (Not needed with above change to part A) Add new part B. "B. Fees. Permit application fees will be assessed for each significant tree proposed to be removed, except no fees will be charged for permits solely for removal of trees on an improved single-family lot that is not suitable for subdivision." Section 23.10.040 Exemptions Delete entire Section 23.10.040 Exemptions. (Exemptions should only apply in specific and necessary situations such as permit requirements and fees, and be noted in the applicable sections of the code) Section 23.10.050 Tree Removal Prohibited Change/simplify this section to read as follows: "Removal or alteration of a significant tree is prohibited except as provided in a permit issued by the City of Edmonds." Section 23.10.080 Tree Replacement Change/simplify this section to read as follows: "Every significant tree removed or altered must be replaced with "an ecologically equivalent number of same species trees (taking into account the growth and survival of replacement trees) in the parcel where removed, or in another parcel or park in the same watershed." Packet Pg. 329 10.1.a Subsequent Sections Revise subsequent sections of the draft tree code to be consistent with the changes noted above. From: Clara Cleve Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 3:42 PM To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Tree Code Dear Edmonds City Council, I am a residence here in Edmonds. I am alarmed at the fact that we allow building lots to be completely stripped of any trees especially old growth trees. It will take years to replace the carbon reducing element of those trees. The sheer beauty of our tree canopy needs to be maintained and enlarged. We need to preserve our existing tree canopy and make it better, plant more trees and stop cutting down trees. We need to have a Tree Code that does not allow builders to strip lots of trees! The Tree Code needs to only allow trees to be cut down that are in the way of the Actual Building! The Code needs to not allow exceptions, period! "No net loss" is a weak policy. We need to have a strong tree replacement within the Code. There were two other areas that makes this version of the tree code rather ineffective. There are too many exemptions in the code that circumvent a good tree retention plan and too many situations included where administrative decisions can be made to accommodate the landowner. I would like to see the council send the Tree Code update back to the Planning Board to come up with a strong and more effective tree code. You need to rid some of the exceptions and administrative accommodating sections of the code and strengthen the no net loss policy. Thank you for the work you are doing to improve our community. Sincerely, Clara Cleve From: Gayla Shoemake <gaylashoemake@yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2021 10:36 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Tree Code Public Hearing Packet Pg. 330 10.1.a Dear City Council, In this time when the world, the US, the state, and Edmonds City are all taking climate change and saving the planet, exceedingly seriously, and because our time is down to 9 years before it is too late, it is critical for us to look at every possible way to reduce our carbon and increase our carbon sequestration. As I understand, the Mayor's Climate Protection Committee is in the process of preparing the framework for a new Climate Action Plan for the City of Edmonds, and one of the items to be included will be increasing the number of trees in our home town to assist with carbon sequestration. Clearly, not only are trees essential for our canopy to protect us from the increased heat of the sun, but they sequester carbon in miraculous ways, over 48 pounds per tree per year; that's over 1 ton during a 40 year lifetime times the number of trees. Once a tree is lost or gained, the impact on our communitiy is immense. While Edmonds is looking for ways to sequester the carbon we keep generating, one fairly easy way to sequester a lot of that carbon is to increase the number of trees in the city, by 1) Maintaining the ones we have and 2) Planting more. The current TreeCode being presented simply does NOT do either to a sufficient extent. Changes are needed: First, there must be attention paid to current, healthy trees on private property since MOST of the trees in Edmonds are on private propery. Those healthy trees must remain on that private land, and incentives devised to make it easy for property owners to keep the trees. Various incentives have been suggested and they should be enacted. Second change, additional trees on private land must be encouraged, and on public land and new to-be-devoped land must be required. Again, incentives for private land, requirements for public land, and increased requirements for land to be developed. These changes are not difficult, and they can be a win -win for everyone, especially our children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren. We are the adults who can make a difference now, please take action now to save and increase the trees in Edmonds, which can help save our city and planet. Sincerely, Gayla Shoemake From: Sally Barringer Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2020 11:28 PM To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Public Hearing on Ordinance #4200 Public Hearing on Ordinance #4201 Hello Council Members, I encourage the council approve a 4 month moratorium that will effectively delay any action on any new subdivision applications until the completion of the update of the city's Tree Code. It is important the city council approves the moratorium to allow sufficient time to work through the tree code update before the Seaview Woods development is submitted so it will conform to the new tree code. Packet Pg. 331 10.1.a Since I have large trees above and close to the city's proposed 184th street I am very concerned they will be further damaged. In the past the proposed 184th street was bulldozed up to the toe of my 20 to 30 foot bank and this has caused the bank to slide and is undercut. Sally Barringer Edmonds, WA 98026 Packet Pg. 332