Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2022-09-27 City Council - Full Agenda-3275
o Agenda Edmonds City Council tn.. ISLP REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 SEPTEMBER 27, 2022, 7:00 PM PERSONS WISHING TO JOIN THIS MEETING VIRTUALLY IN LIEU OF IN -PERSON ATTENDANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING AUDIENCE COMMENTS CAN CLICK ON OR PASTE THE FOLLOWING ZOOM MEETING LINK INTO A WEB BROWSER USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE: HTTPS://ZOOM. US/J/95798484261 OR COMMENT BY PHONE: US: +1 253 215 8782 WEBINAR ID: 957 9848 4261 THOSE COMMENTING 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. WHEN YOUR COMMENTS ARE CONCLUDED, PLEASE LEAVE THE ZOOM MEETING AND OBSERVE THE REMAINDER OF THE MEETING ON THE COUNCIL MEETINGS WEB PAGE. 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. PRESENTATIONS 1. Arbor Day Proclamation (5 min) 2. National Arts & Humanities Month Proclamation (5 min) 3. Edmonds Waterfront Center Welcoming Figure (10 min) 4. Edmonds Arts Commission annual report (20 min) 5. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Edmonds City Council Agenda September 27, 2022 Page 1 THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT REGARDING ANY MATTER NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA AS CLOSED RECORD REVIEW OR AS A PUBLIC HEARING. SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. PLEASE STATE CLEARLY YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE. 7. RECEIVED FOR FILING 1. Outside Boards and Committee Reports (0 min) 8. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes of September 20, 2022 2. Approval of Council Regular Meeting Minutes of September 20, 2022 3. Approval of claim checks. 4. Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments. 5. Approve Right of Entry and Maintenance Agreement between City of Edmonds and Lynnwood for Highway 99 Revitalization and Gateway Project - Stage 2 6. Approve Interlocal Agreement with Community Transit 7. Confirmation of Diversity Commission Appointee Jeanett Quintanilla 9. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Public Hearing on Disposition of Sewer -Storm Easements — Apollo Apartments (20 min) 10. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. Development Code Rewrite Work Plan (20 min) 2. Salmon -Safe Certification Report 3. ARPA Program Status Report (20 min) 11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS ADJOURN Edmonds City Council Agenda September 27, 2022 Page 2 4.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 Arbor Day Proclamation Staff Lead: Deb Powers Department: Mayor's Office Preparer: Carolyn LaFave Background/History Staff Recommendation Narrative Mayor Nelson will read a proclamation recognizing Arbor Day in Edmonds. Attachments: 2022 Arbor Day Proclamation Packet Pg. 3 O City of Edmonds • Office of the Mayor ARBOR DAY 2022 IE 2 WHEREAS, in 1872, J. Sterling Morton proposed that a special day be designated for the E purpose of planting trees, and this holiday, now called Arbor Day, is observed o throughout the nation and the world, and in ninety-one communities throughout a Washington State; and o WHEREAS, 2022 commemorates the 150th anniversary of Arbor Day and by reciting an official L O Q Arbor Day proclamation, public officials demonstrate their support in completing the annual requirements for maintaining Edmonds' Tree City USA status; and 0 WHEREAS, our urban forest, consisting of trees in parks, natural areas, downtown, in yards and along streets, contributes to community character, fosters civic pride, provides recreational opportunities, and enhances the economic vitality of business areas, making Edmonds a desirable place to live, work, play and visit; and WHEREAS, trees lessen the impacts of urbanization, provide calming and inspiring surroundings and contribute many environmental and human health benefits through carbon sequestration, improved air quality, stormwater mitigation, moderated temperatures and by providing wildlife habitat; and WHEREAS, because fall is an ideal time to plant trees, the Citizens' Tree Board is distributing about 70 trees in a variety of sizes and species at the Edmonds Museum Farmer's Market on October 1; NOW, THEREFORE, I, Mike Nelson, Mayor, do hereby proclaim October 1, 2022 as Arbor Day in Edmonds and urge all citizens to plant, maintain, and preserve trees throughout our community as an investment in a healthy and sustainable future for all of us. Mike Nelson, Mayor — September 27, 2022 Packet Pg. 4 4.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 National Arts & Humanities Month Proclamation Staff Lead: Frances Chapin Department: Mayor's Office Preparer: Carolyn LaFave Background/History National Arts & Humanities Month was established in 1993 and is celebrated every October in the United States. It was initiated to encourage Americans to explore new facets of the arts and humanities in their lives, and to begin a lifelong habit of participation in the arts and humanities. It has become the nation's largest collective annual celebration. Staff Recommendation Narrative Mayor Nelson will read a proclamation in recognition of National Arts and Humanities Month. Attachments: National Arts & Humanities Month 2022 Packet Pg. 5 O City of Edmonds * Office of the Mayor NATIONAL ARTS AND HUMANITIES MONTH - OCTOBER 2022 WHEREAS, cities and states - through their local and state arts agencies, which represent thousands of cultural organizations - have celebrated the value and importance of culture in the lives of Americans and the health of thriving communities during National Arts and Humanities Month for nearly 30 years, and WHEREAS, the arts and humanities embody much of the accumulated wisdom, intellect, and imagination of humankind, helping communities explore their history and culture, and WHEREAS, the arts and humanities play a unique role enhancing and enriching the lives of our families, our communities, and our country, and WHEREAS, despite significant losses due to the coronavirus pandemic, the creative industries remain among the most vital sectors of the American economy - providing new opportunities, creating jobs and economic activity within their own industry and across sectors, and making communities attractive to business development, and WHEREAS, the nation's arts and culture sector, which includes nonprofit, commercial, and education, is an $877 billion industry that supports 4.6 million jobs representing 4.2% of the nation's economy, a larger share of GDP than sectors such as agriculture, transportation, and utilities, and WHEREAS, the nonprofit arts industry generates significant revenue and economic activity annually, making the arts a vital income source for local businesses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that I Michael Nelson, Mayor of Edmonds WA, which prides itself on its long and rich history in the arts, do hereby proclaim October as National Arts and Humanities Month, and call upon our community members to celebrate and promote arts and culture in our nation, and in our community. Buy tickets to a play or concert, attend a writers' conference, make art, or enjoy an exhibit; support our local artists and cultural organizations who make Edmonds the unique creative center, that earned its certification as a State Creative District. r Mike Nelson, Mayor - September 27, 2022 Packet Pg. 6 4.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 Edmonds Waterfront Center Welcoming Figure Staff Lead: Frances Chapin Department: Arts Commission Preparer: Laurie Rose Background/History The Edmonds Waterfront Center opened in 2021 and the building, owned by the nonprofit Edmonds Senior Center and built on City land, is used in partnership with the City's Parks & Recreation Department which offers a range of programs in the late afternoon and evening hours. One of the goals of the City was to restore the beach front at this site and create the Edmonds Waterfront Walkway Park for community use. The Edmonds Waterfront Center (EWC) is a gathering place for citizens of all ages, cultural backgrounds, and interests. An additional focus of the EWC building is to include indigenous artwork in recognition of the long history of Coast Salish use of the lands and waterfront where the building and park are located. Staff Recommendation No action required Narrative The Edmonds Waterfront Center and the adjoining City Waterfront Walkway Park are a key part of the arts and culture of the community and the Edmonds Downtown Creative District. Introduced by Frances Chapin, Arts Manager, Daniel Johnson, CEO of the EWC will give a brief update on the story of acquiring, and the meaning of, new indigenous artwork which will be added to the exterior of the building. Packet Pg. 7 4.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 Edmonds Arts Commission annual report Staff Lead: Frances Chapin Department: Arts Commission Preparer: Laurie Rose Background/History The Edmonds Arts Commission (EAC) was established by City Council in 1975 (Ordinance 1765). The seven -member, volunteer commission is appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by City Council. The Commission is charged with advising and making recommendations to the Mayor and City Council, and as appropriate, to other boards and commissions of the City on areas pertaining to the arts, including representing the City in art matters, encouraging and aiding programs for cultural enrichment, and providing advice and assistance in the field of art, aesthetics and beautification. The mission of the Arts Commission is to ensure that the arts are integral to our community's quality of life, economic vitality, and central identity. Staff Recommendation No action required Narrative The presentation by Arts Commission Chair Rhonda Soikowski includes highlights from EAC activities in 2021 and 2022 as the cultural community works with ongoing impacts of the pandemic and creation of a new normal. The Arts Commission is managed by the Cultural Services Division which is now part of the Community Services and Economic Development Department. Attachments: 2020-2022 combined EAC annual report Packet Pg. 8 J � l r gb�l I * -?OR ft moo ml- • � v wr w r � 41 �edmonds ARTS COMMISSION 1020 - 2022 rogram Review \I IN 'rV J r' Founded in 1975, the mission of the City of Edmonds Arts Commission is to ensure that the arts are integral to our Icommunity's quality of life, economic vitality, and central identity. 7--,C)ET'S PERSPECTIVE POET'S PERSPECTIVE � A PROGRAM OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS ARTS COMMISSION 0 N E E O U N L Q O E W r C O .N d L O Q L R U Q W O C 2022 — EAC's new literary program celebrates poetry. Six posters with o poems are located in the windows of the City Hall Neighborhood Office N 0 and outside Edmonds Sno-Isle Library and Plaza Room. The poems wer" N 0 selected through a competitive process that asked writers of all ages and writing/publishing experience to submit up to two poems that create a E sense of place in the Edmonds region. Over 80 poems were submitted fc Q consideration. Selected writers were awarded an honorarium. Packet Pg. 10 Walkable Main Uptown Evening Market EDMONDS 2 COMMISSIO � Hazel Miller Plaza Concerts Hickman Park Concert�� '* City Park Concerts W F11 A I Online City Park 2020 5 concerts streaming & on -demand online 1_ U 1 4. Q Hazel Miller Plaza r_ O r_ W O N 0 rL T .. L. W Hickman Park E O N N O N O N O N r 2021 13 concerts at Hazel Miller Plaza, 23 Walkable Main, 6 Uptown Evening Market E 2022 6 concerts at City Park,1 Hickman Park; 14 Hazel Miller Plaza; 4 Uptown Evening Market Packet Pg. 11 TEMPORARY PUBLIC ART INSTALLATIONS r-a-f 1WHU I lww I + t + + -K 1 1+ + I + + + + + + -11 01 Af# + + 1++ 1 1++ 1 f1t, 11 + + + I 1#44il If+ J& I I II+�++ + + + + + + + + + + + J, + +++ + +1 It ni 4.4.a R _ _ 0 cascadia - lifeboat and seawall N E E 0 Artist Clark Wiegman, selected in 2020 through N competitive process, is fabricating an installation _ that includes a boat form suspended under the E W shade structure, and a graphic wall in the background. Lifeboat is "an archetype, a cross cultural universal symbol of human -powered water transport". Seawall is a graphic representation of a "cognitive landscape or mythical map of Cascadia... an aerial view of watersheds, mountains, & forests that signifies a gathering place for families, friends, and neighbors" Wiegman welcomes suggestions/ ideas about local flora and fauna which he may incorporate it the final designs for the graphics. 0 N 0 rL _ _ U Q W _ 0 N N O N 0 N O N r _ Q Packet Pg. 13 4.4.a ■ 2022 — Selections from the City of Edmonds Hekinan Art Collection in the Edmonds Arts Festival Gallery 2022 — Puget Sound Bird Fest tribute to wildlife photographer Bill Anderson wir J� *41 2021 & 2022 — Edmonds Arts Festival Foundation's gift of artworks to the City of Edmonds Public Art Collection rf Edmonds Library Art wall was unavailable for exhibits 2020-2022. The EA exhibit schedule will resume when the library re -opens. Packet Pg. 14 R _ _ O E E O U N Q N _ O W _ O N d 0 CL _ _ U Q W _ 0 N N O N O N O N r- O E M Q Best Book Iver Read Poster Exhibit Partner: Friends of the Library 2021 & 22 - How To MAKE o 0 on Online video art instruction . OSTERI 2021 & 22 - _ Online Poster Gallery SNO-ISLE::�131I 2021 - On the Fence exhibit 2022 - Digital Neighborhood City Hall exhibit & Frances Anderson Center exhibit byH—A 'uy KathcineT I Survive T-b 'ryl'tm or mam sr. ti,nIWM 11,08id bl: yT a {/f1�J R.6.M no by Madelyn Z BC�K IS ATTAc \ —v,. 946Tr c-AT S,- iDy Dylan M i l mil.. by Kalea L Tkc �clt� I 4.4.a I by Everett B w I r7 7 a C%. I!► �A fC 3 C C R C 0 2 E E 0 U rn rn c 0 n C Packet Pg. 15 2020, 21 & 22 Online • Average online attendance of 125, all three years • Presenters & Attendees from all across the U.S., Canada, Mexico, UK, and Switzerland . Twenty sessions each year WOTS will return to an in -person event in the Frances Anderson Center in 2023 R c c c O N E E O U N L Q O E W C O N d C t� L U Q W E O N N O N N O N Packet Pg. 16 2021 & 2022 CREATE GRANTS EAC one-time grant program to assist with impact of the pandemic on local artists and cultural non -profits, and to expand access to arts and culture for the Edmonds community. A total of $50,000 was awarded to 14 organizations and artists. Funding supported: original and diverse music compositions, cultural mural/exhibits/artist presentations, creative COVID-safe performances, art classes for elementary students, art supplies for all abilities, arts access for senior care facilities, innovative choreography and performance, high school theater, live stream technology, virtual writing workshops for youth, and local filmmaking. C rm I r 2020-2022 TOURISM PROMOTION AWARDS The pandemic impacted arts organizations' ability to hold in -person events. Some organizations were not able to use awarded Tourism Promotion funds in 2020 & 2021 because these Lodging Tax Funds are restricted to attracting in -person visitors. The resiliency of our local organizations and audiences is evidenced by organizations once again being able to more fully utilize awards for 2022. Packet Pg. 17 COMMUNITY, CULTURE & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT The Cultural Services Division, including the Edmonds Arts Commission, recently became part of the Community Services & Economic Development Department. City of Edmonds - .. Community and Government Sponsored Ready to connect, create, and inspire? Join the creative business buzz in Edmonds Creative District and take your craft to the next levell 2021-202' — Highway 99 Gateways 4.4.a R _ _ 0 N E E 0 U rn Q This organizational change in the City highlights the key role that arts and o culture has long played in the economic vitality of Edmonds. W r • The -dmonds Creative District, certified by the State at the end of o N 2018, is managed by Economic Development and Cultural Services and wi now be under one department with citywide impact. L 0 • The major capital project identified in the Creative District work plan ru approved by the State is the 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor. In 2022 the City received a matching grant from ArtsWA to assist with W completion of the concept design. This public engagement process in partnership with the adjacent property owner, Edmonds Center for the Arts, o will be conducted in 2022-23. EAC and Cultural Services participated in the public process to develop visually interesting and for new gateway signs on Highway 99 to be installed in 2023. E artistic design elements Q Packet Pg. 18 - - —• ...ilk 7 V/ -. f V I JPF V -.. V —. r rw -- . - q- r - - - n- _.. - 47 edmonds - - - E - N 4 _ .i -�� c ARTS COMMISSION ° U N L Q 2020 - 2022 COMMISSIONERS Current E Richard Chung W Lesly Kaplan r Harry Kirchner .N Lisa Palmatier ' Tanya Sharp .. " o Rhonda Soikowski, Chair Ashley Song, Vice Chair Past Marni Muir - a W Pat O'Neill Georgia Livesey, Student Rep ° STAFF N N Frances White Chapin, Arts & Culture Manager _ N Laurie Rose, Arts Program Specialist N r CITY OF EDMONDS ARTS COMMISSION ` E Frances Anderson Center 700 Main St I Edmonds WA 98020 425-771-0228 1 eac@edmondswa.gov www.edmondsartscommission.orgF Packet Pg. 19 a' 7.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 Outside Boards and Committee Reports Staff Lead: Council Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History Outside Boards and Committee Reports will be submitted to the Received for Filing portion of the agenda for last meeting of the month. Staff Recommendation N/A Narrative The Council is asked to review the attached committee reports/minutes from the following organizations: Community Transit Board of Directors Lake Ballinger/ McAleer Creek Watershed Forum Port of Edmonds Snohomish County 911 Board of Directors Snohomish County Tomorrow Steering Committee Attachments: Community Transit Board 07.07.22 Draft Meeting Minutes 7.19.2022 Ballinger forum Port Of Edmonds _ Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 Port of Edmonds MINUTES-8-29-22 SNO911-Board-Agenda-20220915 Snohomish County Tomorrow 6.15.2022 Packet Pg. 20 7.1.a MELco umm nitytranMinutes Board of Directors' Meeting Thursday, July 7, 2022 Hybrid Meeting 3:00 p.m. Board Members Present Council Member Kim Daughtry City of Lake Stevens Mayor Christine Frizzell* City of Lynnwood Mayor Joe Marine City of Mukilteo Council Member Jared Mead* Snohomish County Council Member Tom Merrill City of Snohomish Council Member Nate Nehring* Snohomish County Mayor Jon Nehring* City of Marysville Lance Norton* Labor Representative, non -voting Mayor Sid Roberts City of Stanwood Council Member Jan Schuette City of Arlington Board Members Absent Council Member Stephanie Wright Snohomish County Others Present** Sabina Araya* Self Roland Behee CT -Director of Planning & Development Trent Botham CT -Assistant Transportation Manager Tim Chrobuck CT -Chief Technology Officer Lillian Elmer* Self Veralee Estes HR Manager Strategic Partner Lori Fox CT -Controller Carla Freeman CT-HR Manager Mike Gallagher City of Brier, Alternate Al Hendricks CT -Legal Counsel John Holdsworth CT- Asst. Mgr. of Emergency Management Ric Ilgenfritz CT -CEO Treva Kosloki CT -Manager of Training & Staff Development Joe Kunzler* Self Mary Beth Lowell CT -Director of Comm. & Public Affairs Molly Marsicek CT -Director of Customer Experience Peter Majkut CT -Coach Operator Deb Osborne CT -Chief of Staff Susan Paine* City of Edmonds, Board Alternate Jacob Peltier CT -Mgr of Security & Emergency Mgmt Cesar Portillo CT -Director of Employee Engagement Shelly Schweigert* Self Juanita Shuler* CT -Exec. Support/Records Mgmt. Specialist Chris Simmons CT -Manager of System Planning Shelly Schweigert* Self Greg Stamatiou CT -Capital Development Program Manager Barb Taylor Transit Police Unit *Attended meeting remotely **Names of those who were confirmed as attendees are included, others who attended remotely without submitting their names a Packet Pg. 21 7.1.a Board of Directors' Meeting July 7, 2022 Page 2 Thomas Tumola Jim Williams Rachel Woods Call to Order CT -Manager of Planning CT -Deputy Director of Transportation CT -Executive Board Administrator Chair Marine called the July 7, 2022, Board of Directors' meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. The meeting was held in -person at 2312 W Casino Road, Everett, WA 98204 and by Zoom. The Chair noted the meeting was recorded and livestreamed. Roll Call of Members The Executive Board Administrator called roll. Attendance was as noted above. Council Member Nehring filled in for Council Member Wright. A quorum was present. Public Comment A written comment from Joe Kunzler was received and provided to the Board in advance of the meeting. Sabina Araya commented regarding transparency, service reductions, and the vaccine policy. Shelly Schweigert commented that service should be restored, and the vaccine policy should be rescinded. Lillian Elmer commented that the agency vaccine mandate should be rescinded. Peter Majkut, Coach Operator, commented on his observations including driver morale, lost bus trips, and staffing levels needed to support future bus lines. Joe Kunzler commented in support of the vaccine mandate and the safety of employees. Mayor Nehring commented. Presentations Employee Service Awards CEO Ilgenfritz recognized Trent Botham, Assistant Transportation Manager, for 30 years of service. He was known for being dedicated, professional, and passionate about his role at the agency. Youth Fare/Free Youth Transit Pass Chris Simmons, Manager of System Planning, presented on the Free Youth Fare Policy. The policy would need to be approved by October 1, 2022 to qualify for eligible funding. Grants would more than cover the estimated lost revenue. The policy proposal and implementation considerations were presented. A public hearing was scheduled for July 21, 2022 at 3:00 pm and the item was expected to go to the Board for approval at the August 4, 2022 meeting with the program going live on September 1, 2022. The Board asked questions. Draft 2022-2027 Transit Development Plan Thomas Tumola, Manager of Planning, shared that the Transit Development Plan (TDP) was a 6-year plan required by state law. TDP priorities and finances were reviewed. The plan included a robust capital program, strong reserves, reliable service, service growth and service innovation. The schedule included a Packet Pg. 22 7.1.a Board of Directors' Meeting July 7, 2022 Page 3 public hearing at the August 4, 2022 Board meeting and was expected to go to the Board for approval at the September 1, 2022 Board meeting. Chief Executive Officer's Report CEO Ilgenfritz provided an update on the Zero -Emission Technology Project, employee recruitment and staffing, COVID-19, as well as ridership and service. Safety and security projects included a demonstration project on driver doors, an air quality study with the University of Washington, and efforts to maintain a presence of security staff and transit police on service for the long term. The agency was awarded the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award from the Government Finance Officers Association for the fourth consecutive year. Committee Reports Executive Committee Chair Marine reported on the June 16, 2022, meeting. The Committee reviewed and forwarded one action item to the Board: Resolution No. 12-22, Emergency Authorization. An executive session was held for a labor update and the Committee asked that the Boards' interest in attending the October 2022 APTA TRANSform Conference be collected by the Board Administrator. The next Executive Committee meeting was scheduled for July 21, 2022, at 11:30 a.m. Strategic Alignment and Capital Development Committee Council Member Merrill reported on the June 15, 2022, meeting. The Committee reviewed and forwarded two action items to the Board: Award of ITB #2022-055—Vehicle Storage & Training Facility Construction, and Award of RFQ #2017-079—Task Order for Merrill Creek Maintenance Building Improvements — Facilities Master Plan Phase 3B Design. The Committee reviewed and forwarded two information items to the Board: Free Youth Transit Pass, and The Draft 2022-2027 Transit Development Plan. The Committee was briefed on the Zero Emission Technology project. The next meeting was scheduled for July 27, 2022, at 2:00 p.m. Finance, Performance, and Oversight Committee Mayor Roberts reported on the June 16, 2022, meeting. The Committee reviewed and forwarded the May 2022 monthly expenditures & payroll to the consent agenda and one item, Resolution No. 14-22, Tuition Reimbursement Program to the action agenda. The Committee received briefings on the May 2022 sales tax, May 2022 diesel fuel reports, and agency Safety & Security. The next meeting was scheduled for July 21, 2022, at 2:00 p.m. Consent Calendar Council Member Daughtry moved to approve items A through F on the consent calendar. a. Approve minutes of the June 2, 2022, Board of Directors' Meeting b. Approve vouchers dated May 06, 2022 in the amount of $3,983,045.00. C. Approve vouchers dated May 13, 2022 in the amount of $2,914,692.45. d. Approve vouchers dated May 20, 2022 in the amount of $2,075,027.52. e. Approve vouchers dated May 27, 2022 in the amount of $4,126,881.45. f. Approve May 2022 Payroll: N r L 0 a aD a� a� r E E 0 U c CU U) L 0 m a� .N Packet Pg. 23 7.1.a Board of Directors' Meeting July 7, 2022 Page 4 i. Direct Deposits Issued, #414640-416053 in the amount of $3,351,385.41. ii. Paychecks Issued, #108472-108515 in the amount of $50,815.70. iii. Employer Payroll Tax Deposits in the amount of $381,507.95. iv. Employer Deferred Compensation for IAM in the amount of $7,648.86. The motion was seconded by Mayor Roberts and passed unanimously. Action Items Resolution No. 14-22, Tuition Reimbursement Program Treva Kosloski, Manager of Training and Staff Development, presented. Tuition reimbursement was a tool in attracting and retaining quality employees. Updates to the program policy included adopting a 3-tier model for reimbursement, allowing the CEO or their designee to make an exception to the policy and allowing part time employees to participate. The revised program cost was estimated to increase from $30,000 to $50,000 annually. The Board asked questions. Council Member Schuette moved that the Board of Directors approve Resolution No. 14-22, adopting revisions to the Tuition Reimbursement policy as part of Section 6.5 of the Personnel Policy Manual. The motion was seconded by Council Member Merrill and passed unanimously. Resolution No. 12-22, Emergency Management John Holdsworth, Assistant Manager of Emergency Management and Business Continuity provided an updated emergency management resolution that built upon lessons learned from COVID-19 and provided a long-term structure for CEO emergency authorization. The Board of Directors held a discussion regarding the Board's role in emergency management and requested this item return to the Executive Committee with revisions. Council Member Daughtry moved Resolution No. 12-22 return to the Executive Committee for further adjustments prior to Board approval. The motion was seconded by Council Member Schuette and passed unanimously. Award ITB #2022-055, Vehicle Storage & Training Facility Construction Greg Stamatiou, Capital Development Program Manager, provided an overview of the Facilities Master Plan. He reported that the first invitation to bid was canceled and was rebid. The results from the second bid were successful and Faber Construction was the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. The Board asked questions. Mayor Roberts moved that the Board of Directors authorize the Chief Executive Officer to execute a contract with Faber Construction Corporation for construction of FMP Phase 5, Vehicle Storage and Training Facility, for a not -to -exceed amount of $7,777,000.00. The motion was seconded by Council Member Merrill and passed unanimously. Award RFQ #2017-079, Task Order for Merrill Creek Maintenance Building Improvements Facilities Master Plan Phase 3B Design Greg Stamatiou reported that KPFF Consulting Engineers was selected as the firm most qualified to design Phase 3B of the Merrill Creek Maintenance Building Improvements project under the Facilities Master Plan. KPFF was selected because of their experience with transit maintenance facilities and their experience gained from previous projects at the Merrill Creek base. The cost was fair and reasonable. 11 Packet Pg. 24 7.1.a Board of Directors' Meeting July 7, 2022 Page 5 Council Member Daughtry moved that the Board of Directors authorize the Chief Executive Officer to execute a Task Order with KPFF Consulting Engineers for a not -to -exceed amount of $1,735,202.96 for the 100% design of the Merrill Creek Maintenance Building Improvements Project under Facilities Master Plan Phase 3B. The motion was seconded by Mayor Roberts and passed unanimously. Chair's Report Chair Marine reported that there would be a public hearing on Free Youth Fare on July 21 at 3:00 pm and that meeting would replace the Board Workshop previously scheduled for the same time. He would be absent for the August 4, 2022, Board Meeting Board Communication Mayor Nehring would be absent for the August 4, 2022, Board meeting. Mayor Frizzell and Council Member Mead would be present for the meeting. Other Business The next regular Board meeting was scheduled for August 4, 2022, at 3:00 p.m. Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 5:21 p.m. Rachel Woods Executive Board Administrator Packet Pg. 25 7.1.b LAKE BALLINGER/MCALEER CREEK WATERSHED FORUM MINUTES Remote Meeting via Video Conference (Zoom) July 19, 2022 2PM to 3:30 PM Call to Order Steve Woodard called the Lake Ballinger Forum Meeting to order at 2:OOpm I. Roll Call - Welcome and Introductions a. Approval/updates today's agenda b. Approval of minutes from May 17, 2022 meeting Attendees: • Diane Buckshnis — Councilmember, Edmonds • Donnelle Dayao — Parks Project Manager, Mountlake Terrace • Hal Diamond — Resident • John Featherstone — Surface Water Utility Manager, Shoreline • Don Fiene — Former City Council Member, Lake Forest Park • Rikki Fruichantie — Community Relations Specialist, Mountlake Terrace • Tracy Furutani — Councilmember, Lake Forest Park • Patrick Johnson — Stormwater Technician, Edmonds • Gail Meyerson — Lake Resident, Edmonds • Warren McAndrews — President, Lake Ballinger Residents Association • Dale Newman — President & CEO, Nile Shriners Club • Mark Philips — Former Councilmember, Lake Forest Park • Kari Quaas — Community Engagement Manager, Snohomish Conservation District • Laura Reed — Stormwater Program Manager, Mountlake Terrace • Zack Richardson — Surface Water Engineer II, Shoreline • Julie Rose — Resident, Edmonds • Barbara Sharkey — Resident, Lake Forest Park • Bernadette Taylor -Moses — Administrative Assistant, Mountlake Terrace • Keith Scully — Mayor, City of Shoreline • Andrew Silvia — Project Manager, Lake Forest Park Public Works • Bob White — Resident, Lynnwood • Steve Woodard — Councilmember, City of Mountlake Terrace II. Staff Proposal On Forum input to WSDOT on McAleer Creek Culvert Replacement Creek John Featherstone (Shoreline Surface Water Utility Manager) began the meeting with an update to the Forum regarding the response to WSDOT regarding the planned replacement by WSDOT of the McAleer Creek culvert underneath I-5. As the downstream jurisdictions, the City of Shoreline and the City of Lake Forest Park Packet Pg. 26 7.1.b would like to get an understanding of what impacts might result downstream of this WSDOT culvert replacement (without getting into the nuts and bolts of the hydraulics.) Currently, the culvert is smaller than the future culvert will be and a larger culvert usually correlates with larger downstream flows during storm events. As we know, this is a fairly urbanized well developed area given to urban hydrology "flash flooding" where you see a high increase of flows of during large rain events. Large peak flow events are primary concerns for Shoreline and Lake Forest Park. As Forum members, City of Shoreline proposed to work further with WSDOT regarding this concern. Some of the history behind this Forum was to try to balance flooding around Lake Ballinger with development, and not to send flooding down to McAleer Creek (one of the founding principles of the Forum.) Staff would like to make sure that WSDOT understands the history of the Forums' concerns. The primary concern is whether or not WSDOT understands and evaluates what is going on upstream and downstream, so that they can account for potential impacts to these areas in their design. Staff proposes to provide a review of existing available data to WSDOT (since this issue has been studied before), covering the history of the concerns about downstream and upstream flooding. Andrew Silvia (Lake Forest Park Project Manager) detailed his concerns on how the WSDOT project will unfold, and on the timing of the coordination (how the project is taking shape.) He reached out to Tim Nau (WSDOT Project Manager for this project) to get a better idea of exactly where WSDOT is in their project development process. At the last Forum meeting, the presentation by WSDOT described their project steps in broad strokes. Andrew didn't hear a lot of specifics, or time frames associated with those steps. One thing concerning him was that WSDOT would be planning to complete the project using a design/build concept. This marketed appeal of design/build is that it allows you to get the work done a lot faster, which Andrew reads as "Let's not miss an opportunity." The headline news is that we are in better shape now. WSDOT has an extensive process, and they are at the starting gate right now. WSDOT mentioned at their presentation that they are currently working to develop a preliminary hydraulic design of this site which they define as the culvert project footprint plus some distance upstream and downstream. During their conversation Tim Nau (WSDOT) shared with Andrew that procurement would not be complete until next spring (April 2023 is the likely target for this milestone) and that this step represents the starting point of WSDOT procurement for the design/build contract (a two -stage process.) WSDOT starts with an RFQ to develop a short list of design/build contractors. As they undertake this first stage of the procurement, they are starting to develop a 30% design, which would become a part of an RFP issued to the design/builders, when they are short-listed through the RFQ process. WSDOT issues the RFQ, gets their list of qualified contractors down to a small number, and then they issue the RFP. The RFQ will have the 30% design, an important milestone in terms of setting the key requirements of the project (including requirements developed in coordination with local officials.) This will help the design/build contractors to understand what is going to be required. Packet Pg. 27 7.1.b It will take approximately a year to get through procurement, and 9 months from April 2023 until the 30% design is ready. There is a good amount of time for us to work with WSDOT in reviewing the analysis, and communicating other concerns. It was conveyed by Tim Nan (WSDOT) that this exact concern (upstream and downstream impacts) is common on the culvert projects, and WSDOT has developed a process of working with local officials with weekly meetings once they are at the RFP stage to ensure that local voices are heard. John Featherstone (Surface Water Utility Manager) stated that Shoreline and Lake Forest Park will lead the coordination with WSDOT on behalf of the downstream jurisdictions. They will be working with Forum staff partners, and potentially returning to the Forum with updates. If we have a need to get the full voice of the Forum behind some responses to WSDOT, we will be coming back - so this topic will continue. Steve Woodard (Councilmember) then opened the Forum's floor for questions to relay to WSDOT or consider as part of the process. Q. Barbara Sharkey (Resident) commented (since she had a previous experience at the golf course years ago with the Forum) that she was under the impression that the culvert under I-5 was holding back the water from the lake, and that it was part of the flooding problem at Lake Ballinger. She asked if her understanding was correct. A. Laura Reed (Stormwater Manager) responded with a comment that there are two studies, one by NW Hydraulic Consultants and the other by the Army Corp of Engineers that both indicated that the culvert was a flow restrictor for the lake, which is why this key information needs to be relayed to WSDOT (so that they are aware.) Don Fiene — (Former Councilmember) Commented that one of the purposes of the Forum was that it gave all the jurisdictions sharing the watershed a way to work together, and to bring up some common problems. He stated that the other big function of the Forum was that it gave us the ability to go back to Washington with four or five jurisdictions looking for money to solve common problems, and the Forum has been pretty successful in getting money to help solve problems common to the watershed. The culvert under I-5 has always been an issue. In a sense, it was the only real control point for how much water comes downstream. Lake Ballinger is under Snohomish court order for maximum lake levels. And the weir at the golf course originally was undersized, and so in large rain storm events, the outflow of Lake Ballinger would overwhelm that device, and the only controlling factor became the culvert underneath I-5. Lake Forest Park has been working on some of its downstream culverts. We use (as a rule of thumb) the maximum outflow through culverts we are replacing to size the work that we've done. There are two or three culverts on McAleer Creek that have the potential of being overwhelmed, if the flow out of Lake Ballinger is increased. I think going back to the history, documentation, and hydrology reports will clearly illuminate that. Q. Diane Buckshnis, (Councilmember) commented that if Chinook salmon are coming up the stream, we can look for WRIA 8 Grant funding. She is concerned about downstream, Packet Pg. 28 7.1.b because if you don't fix everything upstream, having culverts downstream, you will continue to get flooding. Barbara Sharkey (Resident) clarified that there was only one fish whose GPS probably was off and that it took a wrong turn to get to Lake Ballinger. Diane Buckshnis, (Councilmember) commented that although this fish took a wrong turn, we are trying to restore the creeks, so they can be salmon -productive. Q. Julie Rose (Resident) asked if there will be any representation from Edmonds with the communication with the WSDOT project. Don Fiene (Former Councilmember) Commented to staff working with WSDOT, that WSDOT needs to be aware of downstream impacts of their actions. And as a result they should put in their budget some funds to help alleviate the effects of downstream impacts. Edmonds is a valuable member of the Forum and should be supported. A. John Featherstone (Surface Water Utility Manager) responded stating that at the staff level, we do have our Forums staff meetings, and Patrick Johnson as our primary representative from Edmonds, so Edmonds will be represented. The thought behind Shoreline and Lake Forest Park being the primary leads on coordinating with WSDOT is the downstream impact; part of that is making WSDOT aware what is going on both upstream and downstream of this culvert, and how the culvert impacts both areas. He further stated (informally) that he had a hard time imagining a scenario under which the lake does not flood less frequently. It would be surprising if WSDOT is either able to (or is compelled to) restrict flows to the point of being equivalent to restriction of the existing culvert. It is mostly about mitigating downstream impacts. There will be an improvement of conditions upstream no matter what you do, just because you are opening up the size of the culvert. Also, City of Shoreline has Zack Richardson, who is intimately familiar with the Edmonds side of things. Pat Johnson stated he will continue to be a representative for Edmonds, he will be connected to the process with all the jurisdictions' interests in mind. Q. Keith Scully (Mayor of Shoreline) inquired to confirm his understanding that the Forum is approaching this process through the lens of "How do we help WSDOT make this happen, in a way that makes as little impact as possible for folks in my city and in Lake Forest Park?" He continued stating that he has a hard time seeing this project being anything but a good thing for both flood control and fish passage. He expressed that he does not want to see the Forum become an obstacle. He asked if his understanding of the Forum being an organization that would be considering all the impacts and data was correct. A. John Featherstone (Surface Water Utility Manager) responded that there will be consideration of multiple factors. He stated "This is a long-term improvement, we want to make sure WSDOT is aware of all impacts, and are able to use our input to help them weigh their decisions. Ultimately, WSDOT will be able to move forward with their project, we will not be obstructing it. We want to make sure they are working with the Packet Pg. 29 7.1.b best available information and that we are doing our part in making sure they have that information." Q. Gail Meyerson (Edmonds Resident) stated that she was an original member of the Forum's association, and the reason for the collaboration was because of the flooding. She stated she believes this approach with the state has been considered already, and asked what the next steps are when dealing with the state? A. Laura Reed (Mountlake Terrace Stormwater Manager) responded to clarify - Gail was referring to the restrictive culverts on the Nile golf course that were removed and replaced with bridges a few years ago? Laura confirmed the culvert replacement inside the Nile has been completed, and noted that the current discussion with the state is with WSDOT, the agency that is intending to remove the existing culverts to make more fish - passable culverts on McAleer Creek (and that the project is not intended to alleviate flooding on Lake Ballinger.) Diane Buckshnis (Edmonds Councilmember) stated: "I want to see this project go forward, I am no scientist, but I know a lot about how grant funding works. We need to get WSDOT to cooperate with us, and get something started. We have the State Route 104 culverts in Edmonds, and I have seen a lot of culvert replacements happening elsewhere. I just want to get started, so that we have at least a precedent. Everything flows downstream; and we have serious issues here in Edmonds. We want them to move forward, but keep them in the know, so that they are aware that there are issues. My understanding is that they have a very strict window and can only work within that window. It is important that we get things started, get this partnership started, and then we can probably try and expand it. But I really felt that the presentation they presented last time was good, and I learned a lot." Ill. Update on Lake Ballinger water quality summer 2022 (Julie Rose, Edmonds resident) Water quality monitoring is going well. Because of the cold air this spring, things are not looking quite as bad (in terms of water quality for the lake) as they have during past years. Julie updated the Forum that she goes out every other week for water quality testing, and once a month she takes samples which are then sent to a lab for analysis. Snohomish County keeps those records, and the information helps Snohomish County to know to know how well the lake is doing form a water quality standpoint. The information will also hopefully help the Forum make great decisions. Julie looks at the weather condition, water clarity, whether or not there is algae, water color, dissolved oxygen, and water temperature. Thus far this season there has been no blue/green or surface algae bloom, a sign that the lake is in balance. Q. Tracy Furutani (Lake Forest Park Councilmember) asked if the lake turns over seasonally. A. Julie responded that the lake does turn over (de -stratify) in the spring and the fall. Packet Pg. 30 7.1.b In the hot time of year, sometimes the band where the fish are living is deeper than. It is a relatively shallow lake, and is affected by the ambient air temperature. Q. Tracy asked if copies of the Lake Ballinger water quality reports were accessible. A. Patrick Johnson (Edmonds Stormwater Technician) stated that if it's not posted on the Snohomish County Lake Ballinger website already, the Forum can look into making that information more publically available. Kari Quaas (Snohomish Conservation District Community Engagement Manager) mentioned that there was a total of 70 people in attendance at the Youth Day event at Lake Ballinger (34 kids and 36 adults.) The adults had just as much fun because they were able to get involved in activities with their children. The kids were able to participate in water quality testing, the poop toss game (to teach about proper pet waste disposal), learn about infiltration, make seed balls, play with a watershed model, and make salmon art. MLT News sent a photographer and covered the story. This was a summer event, based on the success of the Orca Recovery Day event last fall. We thought: "Why not have something in the summer when the weather is nice?" The families love it. Steve Woodard expressed a thank you to Snohomish Conservation District. Mark Philips (Former Councilmember) commented he does water testing on McAleer Creek and Lyons Creek downstream form Lake Ballinger, and that this major effort to encourage fish to migrate into Lake Ballinger and out. The kind of data that Julie is collecting is extremely important to understanding what kind of environment in the lake are we creating for fish. We would like to see, for me a gold standard would be tc have a Kokanee salmon (land -locked sockeye) population that could use the lake. I have a sense that water testing we do for streams is quite different from water quality testing for lakes. It would be helpful to have a fish biologist work with the Forum, to understand how conducive the lake environment is to increasing populations of fish in the lake. There are things that we can do to effect the lake temperature stratification. I would like to hear a biologist talk about how these kind of lakes compare to Lake Ballinger (maybe in more pristine areas), and what realistically we might expect if we did as much as we could to increase fish population in the lake. IV. Overview of Ballinger Park Hall Creek Restoration (Laura Reed) McAleer Creek maintenance update: Only one partially constructed beaver dam was found this summer. Crews attempted to trap the beaver, but it was a young one which appears to have instead moved on somewhere else. The MLT O&M crews continue to patrol for other potential obstructions in McAleer Creek. Ballinger Park Hall Creek Restoration Project. This is a highly ambitious large scale habitat restoration project, a partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Costs for the project construction will be paid 65% by the Army Corps and 35% by Packet Pg. 31 7.1.b Mountlake Terrace. The preparation for this project (scheduled to break ground in 2023) has been almost ten years in the making, starting with the 2015 master plan for Ballinger Park, where folks from around the lake came together to determine what they wanted to see in the new park. The feasibility study for the restoration project was completed in 2019. The project improvements include: • Flood plain reconnection, with the removal of a defunct tennis court and the addition of large woody debris and native plant species. • For the downstream section along the playfields, removal of invasive species and planting out with native plants. • Within the main body of Ballinger Park, a new creek channel with laid back slope will be dug and established as the new channel. The old channel will be blocked with an earthen plug, then creek water will be diverted into the new channel. • Fly -over boardwalk that connects the east and west sides of the park and also to prevent folks from trampling new plantings. • Total replanting area will be 16.4 acres • Views from the trail so people can see from the trail to community center. Q. Tracy Furutani asked if are there any expected changes to the sedimentation in the lake from the project. A. Laura Reed replied that this is strictly habitat restoration project, not related to flood control. Q. Bob White (Resident) asked: How does this tie into the trail that is being constructed this summer? A. Laura Reed affirmed that the plan is to designate areas where no planting will be done. These are the areas where future paths will be put in by the Parks department, connecting at the boardwalk. Q. Bob White: Will the restoration project include the trail construction on the west side and tie into Edmonds? A. Laura Reed: No, that is not part of this project. The trails are to be built by the Parks department at a later date. Q. Bob White: What is the status of the trail program on the east side, I understand there was a bid opening yesterday? A. Donnelle Dayao (MLT Parks Project Manager) replied that yes, there was a bid opening yesterday for a north to south connector on the east side of the park. It will connect the MLT Senior Center parking lot with the parking lot for the boat launch. The process started yesterday. We are going through our verification process to get a Packet Pg. 32 7.1.b contractor on board, and hopefully will start construction will start in the next few weeks or so. We should have someone mobilized out there soon, you can look for that in August. Q. Gail Meyerson asked: How do you keep the ponds from becoming stagnant? A. Laura Reed replied that the ponds are groundwater -fed. We are not actively doing anything to change the way the park ponds function as part of this project. Steve Woodard stated the universal design playground is only one of the forthcoming changes around the lake, and that the fly -over boardwalk sounds exciting. Bob White commented that this is a regional park, and the west side trail is critical for the folks on the west side to get to the park and enjoy the amenities. He is concerned that the trail being constructed on the east side with the fishing pier and boat launch ties into the trails on the west side. V. Announcements & Updates Stormwater Management Action Plan (SMAP) update from city staff Laura Reed (Stormwater Program Manager, Mountlake Terrace) indicated that as a result of the watershed inventory and public input, Mountlake Terrace will focus on Hall Creek as the drainage basin of interest for their SMAP. This means that the city will be writing a plan over the next year to improve water quality in the Hall Creek basin, look for retrofit opportunities, and explore other opportunities to make the lake cleaner and Hall Creek healthier. John Featherstone (Surface Water Utility Manager, Shoreline) said the criteria for Ecology requirements and Shoreline's prioritization process identified the Boeing Creek drainage basin as Shoreline's top priority. Boeing Creek basin is the city's second largest basin, and the basin closest to Puget Sound. It is also exclusively within the Shoreline city limits, and that fact ended up being the probably the most single decisive factor in determining which basin was selected. Ecology wants cities to look at how much influence they will have over a basin as part of the prioritization process, and that was a big part of why Shoreline selected Boeing Creek. Patrick Johnson (Stormwater Technician, Edmonds) shared that the watershed selection in Edmonds came down to how much of our selected basins fell within our city. While the Lake Ballinger and Halls Creek did rank very high (in the top three), Perrinville Creek was selected as the priority basin. This is due to different problems we are facing as the creek has shut itself off from Puget Sound and has serious issues with erosion and sediment deposition. He also mentioned that moving forward, if the Department of Ecology choses to revisit this basin selection process in another permit cycle, he can see Lake Ballinger scoring very highly. Packet Pg. 33 7.1.b Andrew Silva (Lake Forest Park Project Manager) said that Lake Forest Park has made a basin selection. Our initial work to prioritize a basin for the SMAP has led us to select the Lyon Creek basin. Ecology has acknowledged that it is okay to make adjustments in prioritization as you go through third and final phase of this plan development process (stormwater management and action identification and planning.) The interesting thing about what happened in Lake Forest Park is that there are strategies for achieving your water quality goals which Ecology states you must consider in developing this plan. They don't say you have to use them, but you must consider them. We learned in prioritization process that depending on which tool you select to make water quality improvements, different basins benefit to different extents. So in this final phase, we will be doing a lot more public engagement to try and identify what types of tools are most palatable to stakeholders (internal and external to city government) and it may lead to us revisiting that selection, but right now, Lyon Creek has been selected. Andrew also provided a plug for website tool that provides feedback and helps Lake Forest Park make these type of decisions: https://www.cityoflfp.com/656/Stormwater -Management-Action-Plan. This page on our city website provides an overview of the city's Stormwater Management Action Plan (SMAP), including purpose, why we're developing it, how long it will take to complete, and key milestones along the way. The overall goal of the plan is to identify actions the city will take to achieve our water quality goals in at least one of the city's surface water basins over the next 20 years. As we develop plan documents, we are posting them to this page, which visitors can access by clicking the links on the right side of the page. For instance, we completed a "Receiving Water Assessment" in March and the report is posted on this page. We have also developed a "StoryMap" tool that residents and others can use to learn more about the plan and share feedback, and this is also linked on the right side of the page along with a video of a presentation our planning team gave last month that helps explain how to use the tool. As a shortcut, interested parties can visit htt,ps:Hstorymaps.arcgis.com/stories/07bceb383a274fl6875la9033d2aa52d and scroll through the page all the way to the bottom to access the feedback collection map. We're seeking any feedback people think is relevant to stormwater and surface water management. I encourage everyone to use this tool, it might surprise you how many types of work or phenomena we observe in our surrounding environments which are related to storm/surface water management. My request of anyone using the tool is to cast a wide net in the types of feedback they offer, as you never know what might be useful for our team to consider. Packet Pg. 34 7.1.b Results of annual aquatic plant survey on Lake Ballinger (Laura Reed) • Eurasian watermilfoil — was dominant previously, current populations are not large and the lake will be treated again to control the milfoil spread in 2023 • Fragrant water lilies are dominant in the lake • Curly leaf pondweed is a new threat to the lake. Suggest the Ballinger Invasives Committee convene to discuss because this in aggressive weed. A strategy to manage this invasive in the lake is needed. • A display of invasive plant signage about water lilies for Lake Ballinger was presented to the Forum. VI. Public Comment Q. Warren McAndrews (President, Lake Ballinger Residents Association) inquired if there are any updates on the abandoned house on the south end of the lake. A. Patrick Johnson (Stormwater Technician) responded that there are no current updates. The process is moving along. We're waiting for funding to demolish the house, it's been quiet but in a positive way, and I will follow up. Mark Phillip (Former Councilmember) commented that he is impressed with the level of technical staff activities supporting this Forum, it's amazing and great! He further commented that really in a venture like this, the staff level is where things get done. Kari Quaas (Community Engagement Manager) commented that the Snohomish Conservation District has just posted a position for Habitat Restoration Project Manager or Sr. Project Manager, so if the Forum is aware of anyone interested, please direct them to https:Hsnohomishcd.or /g employment VII. Topics for next meeting_ • Fireworks over Lake Ballinger for all jurisdictions sponsorship • MLT Park and viewing platform VIII. Date and location of next meeting The next meeting will take place on Oct 18, 2022 at 2:00 pm, hopefully in Mountlake Terrace's new City Hall. IX. Adjourn — 3:31p.m. Packet Pg. 35 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 (https://www.portofedmonds.org/author/adminre/) 7.1.c PORT COMMISSION OF THE PORT OF EDMONDS MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING (Via Zoom) August 8, 2022 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT David Preston, President Steve Johnston, Vice President Jim Orvis, Secretary Jay Grant Angela Harris STAFF PRESENT Bob McChesney, Executive Director Brandon Baker, Director of Marina Operations Tina Drennan, Manager of Finance and Accounting OTHERS PRESENT Jordan Stephens, Port Attorney Neil Tibbott, Edmonds City Council CALL TO ORDER President Preston called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. FLAG SALUTE All those in attendance participated in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag. CONSENT AGENDA COMMISSIONER ORVIS MOVED THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA BE APPROVED TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: A. APPROVAL OF AGENDA B. APPROVAL OF JULY 11, 2022 MEETING MINUTES, AS SUBMITTED C. APPROVAL OF PAYMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,524,003.86 FOR JULY 27, 2022 AND 0 a m as as r E E 0 U c 0 0 m a� .y r 7 0 ':�RRR 177 Q7 F-np AI 1(,'I IST R gngq https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ Packet Pg. 36 9/13/22, 12:02 PM v v " v"Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 D. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22-02, AUTHORIZING THE DECREASE OF PORT IMPREST FUNDS COMMISSIONER GRANT SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ECONOMIC FORECAST PRESENTATION BY PAUL SORENSEN, BST ASSOCIATES Mr. McChesney introduced Paul Sorensen, a principal with BST Associates, and shared information about his background and expertise. Paul Sorensen, Principal, BST Associates, reviewed that in 2013, the Commission adopted a moorage and dry storage rate increase of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) plus 1%, and this decision was reaffirmed in 2021. Because CPI has been very low for a long time, the rate increases in recent years were not significant. However, CPI for the year ending June 30, 2022 is 10.1%, which equates to a much higher rate increase. He suggested that a better approach might be to have a more even flow of rate increases that are tied into a Cash Flow Model, especially with the additional funding needed for the seawall replacement and other marina improvements. Mr. Sorensen reviewed that boating is a discretionary expenditure. When the economy is good it grows, but when the economy is bad it declines. He shared a graph to illustrate how boat sales have fluctuated over the past 20 years based on the economy, specifically noting that larger boat sales were down 2.9% in 2022 vs. 2021. Sales of boats smaller than 26 feet declined at a much greater rate. He also shared a graph showing the number of registered boats in the state over the past 20 years, noting that the number of boats per 1,000 people in Washington State has declined from 4.0 in 2000 to 3.2 in 2020. While fewer people per thousand are purchasing boats, there are more people so the number of registered boats in the state has remained stable at about 25,000. He said he doesn't anticipate a significant downturn in the largest boat sales (40 feet or greater) in the coming months, as that is where most of the growth over the past few years has occurred. However, some decrease in boat sales, in general, is possible due to aging boaters, growth in boat sharing/clubs, and the ability to retain new boaters. Moorage supply has not grown, and with the exception of facilities for very larqe boats, no marinas are being developed. He said he anticipates that https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ I Packet Pg. 37 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 slip supply will remain steady or start to decline as older, marginal marinas close. A number of marinas are providing more dry storage opportunities. He noted that private equity firms or real estate investment trust (REIT) companies are purchasing marinas as an investment. Commissioner Johnston asked for data on the average length of ownership per boat. Mr. Sorensen said BST Associates has been doing some work on behalf of the Recreational Boating Association of Washington and the Northwest Marine Trade Association (NMTA) looking at that issue. The Department of Revenue is of the opinion that people don't keep their boats very long, but all of the data indicates that is not the case. Depreciation depends on how many years the value declines, and then there is a flat rate after that. He advised that BST Associates has done a lot of rate studies and financial plans using the following three models: • Base rates on competitive marina rates. Due to competition, several ports in Kitsap County have charged 25% of what is being charged on the east side of Puget Sound. This has hampered their ability to do capital improvements, and deferred maintenance is a problem, too. Recent work for the Port of Des Moines, concluded that their rates were well below average compared to other marinas in Puget Sound. The recommendation was that the rates needed be within 90% of the average in order have funding to rebuild. • Increase rates based on CPI or some other index. A number of marinas use this approach. • Set rates to recover costs and return on investment. This hybrid approach looks at both competitive marina rates and indexes, but also what is needed to generate a proforma that pays for necessary capital improvements. Commissioner Grant asked if Mr. Sorensen has any data from the last time inflation was so high. Mr. Sorensen said he read an article from The Christian Science Monitor from the early 1980s when inflation was high. It noted that high interest rates didn't deter people from purchasing boats. Commissioner Johnston observed that incomes rise based on CPI, as does the amount of money available, so tracking rate increases with CPI in some way seems reasonable. Mr. McChesney noted that when CPI increases, operating and capital costs associated with the marina also rise. Commissioner Grant commented that a rate increase of CPI plus 1% is a good formula, but he questioned if inflation could exceed the true cost of operating and maintaining the marina at some point. Commissioner Johnston noted that construction costs have already exceeded CPI. Commissioner Preston pointed out that the method for measuring CPI can also come into question. While the Federal Government provides a number, other factors can come into play. Commissioner Orvis advised that the CPI the Port https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ I Packet Pg. 38 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 uses simply provides something to work from, as well as some predictability and consistency. Commissioner Grant noted that while customers know the Port's formula for establishing rate increases, a significantly higher CPI will likely raise more concern. Mr. Sorensen said another question to consider is how much of the Port's market is people who live within the Port District. Mr. McChesney said the last data available indicated that about 24% of the Port's customers were residents of the Port District. Mr. Sorensen explained that, if you aren't raising rates as much as needed to fund the capital improvement plan then the taxpayers end up subsidizing the boaters. He commented that the Port is in a good position to draw people from surrounding communities. Commissioner Grant asked what the Port's turnover rate is. Mr. McChesney answered that the turnover ratio is very low, and the Director of Marina Operations will provide a more specific number as part of a future report. Mr. Sorensen summarized that the Port is in a good position if the marina is full and there is a robust waiting list. Mr. Sorensen shared a graph to illustrate the Port's rate increases from 2015 through 2022, noting that rate increases were low from 2015 through 2021. While rates increased significantly in 2022, it is important for boaters to recognize the benefits they received in previous years when rate increases were less than what occurred at many other marinas in the area. The formula of CPI plus 1% worked well for a number of years, but the Port's operating and capital costs have increased to a greater degree over the past year or two. Commissioner Johnston commented that the Port is ahead of the game when it comes to funding operating and capital improvements, and the customers understand the costs associated with operating a 5-star marina. Mr. McChesney agreed and added that, while no one wants rate increases, it is important for customers to see that the Port is using the money to reinvest in the facilities and maintain quality service. Mr. Sorensen shared a graph illustrating the results of a survey of about 25 marinas in the Puget Sound area from 2015 through 2020. The average rate increase over the 6-year period was 3.5% compared to the Port's average rate increase of 3.1%. Mr. Sorensen advised that Southern Marinas Holdings II acquired the Elliott Bay Marina in 2021 for $80.5 million. This marina is one of the largest facilities on the west coast, with more than 1,200 slips for vessels up to 200 feet long, repair facilities, two restaurants, a Freedom Boat Club, and more. In 2022, the 10% loyalty rate was eliminated and raised rates by 9% to 15% for a total increase of 14% to 20%. He shared a chart showing how the Port's 2022 rate increase of 6.5% compared to other marinas, pointing out that the Port's rate increases were lower than competitors. https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ I Packet Pg. 39 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 Mr. Sorensen expressed his belief that the Port has the most metrics of any of the marinas he works with, and they are publicly available. The Port also has a great cash flow model, which identifies what is needed to fund the Capital Improvement Plan. He summarized that, going forward, marina rates need to be sufficient to fund capital repair and replacement of the marina, as well as other capital requirements (seawall, breakwater, dredging, replacement and upgrade of restrooms and other dock improvements). It is important to keep in mind that operating expenses will increase as the facility ages. In -water work and permitting takes longer and costs more, and environmental mitigation is required. The current waitlists demonstrate that there is more demand than supply and occupancy is high. Mr. Sorensen advised that the proposed rate increases of 11.1%, 10% and 7.6% would increase the long-term average (2014-2023) to between 3.8% and 4.2%. When looked at in a historical context, the Port's rates rose too slowly from 2014 through 2021 (3.4%), and an increase of CPI plus 1% would help to balance earlier rate increases. Mr. McChesney clarified that they are not asking the Commission to vote on moorage rates. The discussion is advisory to establish 2023 rates for the budget, but we are recommending to stay with the CPI + 1% plan. The numbers were discussed in a Finance Committee based on the formula of CPI plus 1% and wouldn't cause Edmonds to exceed market rates. Commissioner Johnston summarized that, when you look at the bottom line, the marina is still doing well. While they may have raised rates too slowly, the current formula appears to be working for now. Commissioner Orvis agreed that the marina is doing well from a cash flow standpoint, but looking long term, it may be just about enough to cover all of the capital costs going forward. Commissioner Orvis recalled that, years ago, when the Commission adopted the formula of increasing rates by CPI plus 1%, there was significant consternation about how much CPI could fluctuate. It was determined that, while CPI is not predictable, at least customers can know what is coming. Mr. Sorensen agreed that it is important to give boat owners as much certainty as possible. RESOLUTION NO. 22-03, APPROVING EMERGENCY REPAIRS OF MID MARINA ELECTRICAL SYSTEM AND WAIVING COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENTS Mr. McChesney advised that a liveaboard tenant on N Dock has been expressing concern about some electrical issues he is experiencing on his boat. Mr. Menard, the Port's Director of Facilities and Maintenance, has been working with the tenant, and on Thursday, August 4th, he was able to observe the issues himself. The issues affect N Dock extension, as well as the https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ I Packet Pg. 40 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 Port's navigation lights at the entrance to the marina. On August 5th, the Port hired a diver to inspect the main feeder cable, which was found to be corroded and defective and likely the source of the intermittent problem. As the situation needs to be repaired immediately and meets Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 39.04.280's definition of an emergency, he declared an emergency. Mr. McChesney advised that Valley Electrical will be on site on August 9th to assess the situation and determine what needs to be done. At this time, the total cost of the project is unknown, but it could exceed $100,000. With the current infrastructure, everything is connected and multiple feeders may need to be replaced. Resolution No. 22-03 would approve the emergency repairs of the mid marina electrical system and waive the competitive bidding requirements. Approval of the resolution would allow the Port to enter into a contract with a total cost not to exceed $100,000 plus sales tax without having to go through the public works bid process. The Port's 2022 budget included $30,000 for repair or replacement of electrical feeders between the esplanade and the docks, and the good news is that the work will already be done when the Port proceeds with the North Portwalk and Seawall Project. Mr. McChesney recommended the Commission approve the resolution as presented. Commissioner Johnston asked if the Port has any contingency for the breakwater lights. Mr McChesney answered that the lights are still working, and tenants on N Dock have been asked to unplug so they don't damage their boats. Commissioner Preston asked if it would be appropriate to increase the amount of the emergency resolution in case the cost of the work exceeds $100,000. Mr. McChesney responded that, if the costs were to exceed that amount, he would bring the resolution back to the Commission for reauthorization. COMMISSIONER GRANT MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 22-03, APPROVING EMERGENCY REPAIRS OF MID -MARINA ELECTRICAL SYSTEM AND WAIVING COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS WORK IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $100,000 PLUS SALES TAX. COMMISSIONER ORVIS SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Commissioner Grant asked how old the electrical system is, and Mr. McChesney answered that it was installed when the marina was rebuilt in the late 1990s. He advised that the electrical systems on each of the docks would be inspected in the near future. He commented that the Port has a good maintenance staff, and Mr. Menard stays on top of the maintenance neerJs. narticularly the electrical elements_ https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ Packet Pg. 41 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 7.1.c Commissioner Grant asked how many liveaboard tenants there are in the marina. Ms. Drennan answered that the maximum number of liveaboard tenants is 15, and the Port maintains a waitlist when we reach the maximum. Commissioner Orvis asked if the current regulations pertaining to eviction applies to liveaboard tenants. Mr. McChesney answered that liveaboard tenants are protected by the Landlord/Tenant Act. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT CONTRACT CG Engineering Mr. McChesney reviewed that CG Engineering has provided civil and structural design support for the new Administration/Maintenance Building, and they are technically qualified to provide construction services and management during the build out phase to completion. Their proposed scope of work includes overall construction management, general contractor points of contact, project coordination, documentation and quality control, as well as civil construction oversight and structural engineering support to ensure contract compliance and quality control. Mr. McChesney recommended the Commission approve the scope of work and budget proposal by CG Engineering and authorize him to enter into a contract as presented. The total amount of the contract would be $97,000. Commissioner Grant asked if the contract was anticipated as part of the total cost of the project, and Mr. McChesney answered affirmatively. He said staff did a calculation of all of the consultants working on the project. Relative to the value of the contract, they are at about 8.9% of the total cost of the project, which is within the range of what would typically be expected. COMMISSIONER GRANT MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ENGAGE A CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AND MANAGEMENT FOR THE NEW ADMINISTRATION/MAINTENANCE BUILDING WITH CG ENGINEERING IN THE FIRM AMOUNT OF $97,000, AS PRESENTED. COMMISSIONER JOHNSTON SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Landau Associates, Geotech https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ I Packet Pg. 42 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 7.1.c Mr. McChesney reviewed that the new Administration/Maintenance Building is being constructed on loose sandy fill material, and a pre -construction geotech analysis by Landau Associates characterized the structural load bearing capacity of the underlying soils as needing additional foundation support. They recommended the design to include engineered soil improvements in the form of compacted ram aggregate to compensate for unstable below -grade soil conditions. While they always anticipated that Landau Associates would have some oversight, Mr. McChesney advised that the International Building Code (IBC) Section 1705.6 Soils, requires that the geotech engineer be present during fill placement. It further stipulates that "the special inspector shall verify that proper materials and procedures are used in accordance with the provisions of the approved geotechnical report." In addition, IBC 1705.7 specifies requirements for special inspections and tests of deep -driven foundation elements. In other words, the geotech engineer must be on site the entire time the ram aggregate procedure is being done, and Landau Associates doesn't know how long it will take the contractor to do the work. The contract amount of $67,000 is a not to exceed, and it may turn out to be less. He recommended the Commission authorize him to enter into a contract with Landau Associates for geotechnical and oversite during construction of the new Administration/Maintenance Building in the amount of $67,000, as presented. Commissioner Grant said he was standing on the project site when a train went by, and he hopes that the foundation of the new building will be extremely stable. Mr. McChesney said vibration from the train was taken into consideration during the design phase. COMMISSIONER GRANT MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH LANDAU ASSOCIATES FOR GEOTECH ENGINEERING SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $67,000.00, AS PRESENTED. COMMISSIONER HARRIS SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2023 BUDGET BASELINE CONDITIONS — CONSUMER PRICE INDEX (CPI) Ms. Drennan said staff is currently working on the 2023 Preliminary budget. She reviewed that the Commission approves the budget on an annual basis. The budget is a plan that identifies the resources for operations and capital projects, communicates the sources of revenue and costs of services, and allows the Commission and staff to review and prioritize repairs, improvements and other projects. Actual results may differ from the budget due to changed facilities or equipment conditions, changed priorities and changed economic https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ 1 Packet Pg. 43 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 environment. Facilities or equipment may break unexpectedly, and funds may need to be 7.1.c reallocated to pay for the fixes. Ms. Drennan reviewed that the Cash Flow Model estimates future cash and investments based upon projected revenues and expenses and known major capital improvements, and 2022 is the 11th year of using the model. The CPI for June 2022 for All Urban Consumers for All Items in Seattle -Tacoma -Bellevue was 10.1%. The Port historically raises moorage and dry storage rates by CPI plus 1% annually. She provided a graph to illustrate the CPI increases vs rate increases over the previous 10 years, and requested guidance from the Commission for the 2023 budget process. The Finance Committee met on July 18th to discuss moorage and dry storage rates and requested that staff bring proposed rate increases of CPI plus 1% (11.1%), 10% and 75% of CPI to the full Commission for feedback. Ms. Drennan referred to Exhibits A and B, which show the Port's open and covered moorage rate options. It includes the 2022 rates, as well as the three rate options listed above for 2023. It also notes the difference between each of the three options and the current 2022 rates. She also referred to Exhibit C, which shows how the three options would be applied to dry storage. Mr. McChesney emphasized that the three options are intended to serve as benchmarks to take measure of what the rate increases would mean from the customer's point of view. Ms. Drennan explained that the Port operates and prices its slips based on square footage as opposed lineal footage. For example, the moorage rate for a 28' x 9' foot slip should be less than a 28'x 13' foot slip. Commissioner Preston asked if any other marinas have changed to a square foot basis, and Ms. Drennan answered she doesn't think so. Ms. Drennan referred to Exhibit D, which compares the Port's increase of CPI plus 1% to what Elliott Bay (CPI) and Shilshole (10%) are currently discussing. Exhibit E shows the same calculations, but with the Port of Edmonds' rates increasing at 10%. For example, in the 36- foot category, the Port's narrowest width at an 11.1% increase would be $469.61 and the widest slip would be $541.88. At their proposed increase, Elliott Bay's rate would be $698.34, a difference of $228.73 greater than the Port's narrowest slip and $156.46 greater than the widest slip. Shilshole's proposed rate would be $609.84, a difference of $140.23 greater than the Port's narrowest width and $67.96 greater than the widest width. In all categories, with the exception of the Port's 50-foot slips, the rates at both of the other marinas would be higher. Ms. Drennan provided a chart showing the trend in Port financial occupancy for the first half of each year. Moorage occupancy has increased from 95% in 2018 to 100% in 2022. Dry https://www. portofed monds.org/com mission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ Packet Pg. 44 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 7.1.c storage financial occupancy has increased from 81% in 2018 to 90% in 2022. The budgeted occupancies are 98% and 87% respectively. She said she prefers to measure based on financial occupancy rather than physical occupancy, and she briefly explained how financial occupancy is calculated. Ms. Drennan also provided a chart outlining the waitlist statistics. She summarized that between June 2021 and June 2022, the number of people on the waitlist increased by 32%. The waitlist normally drops a little in June, as the Port sends out waitlist renewals and some people decide not to continue on the list. A $200 fee is required to join a wait list, and the amount is applied to the security deposit when a slip is accepted. The fee to stay on the wait list is $25 per year. Ms. Drennan said she is planning to use CPI plus 1% (11.1%) as the rate increase unless directed otherwise by the Commission. Mr. McChesney added that he is also recommending that they continue to use the formula of increasing rates by CPI plus 1% for the 2023 budget. Commissioner Harris said she found the numbers provided by staff to be helpful and cautioned against going against the current policy of CPI plus 1%. Doing otherwise would require the adoption of other policies upon which to base their decision. Ms. Drennan pointed out that the CPI number is easy to verify and goes along with what people are expecting. The Finance Committee considered other options, such as a rolling 5% average but felt it would create other problems. For example, the rate increases would be low when inflation is high and high when inflation is low. This would not really reflect actual costs and would require a lot more explanation. After testing a 5-year rolling average, the results were not favorable and the Port would have been shy over $1 million. This analysis guided the Finance Committee back to the current policy of CPI plus 1%. Commissioner Orvis commented that inflation has a significant impact on the Port, and there is a good chance that inflation will exceed CPI again next year. He said he also supports rate increases based on CPI plus 1%. For budgeting purposes, the Commission directed staff to use the current policy for rate increases. SECOND QUARTER 2022 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Ms. Drennan presented the 2nd Quarter 2022 Financial Statements, noting that revenues generally trended up from $4.5 million in 2018 to $5.5 million in 2022 and expenses ranged from $3.2 million to $3.6 million. As inflation dramatically increased from the same time last year, the graph at the top of Page 2 shows the Port's revenues and net income adjusted b https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ I Packet Pg. 45 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 the Consumer Price Index (CPI), using 2018 as the base period. CPI increased by about 18.8% from June 2018 to June 2022. Adjusting for CPI, revenues averaged $4.5 million and expenses ranged between $2.9 million and $3.4 million. In real numbers, net income generally trended up, ranging from $1.3 million to $1.8 million. Adjusted for CPI, net income ranged from $1.3 million to $1.5 million. Ms. Drennan advised that, actual to budget, revenues were $336,000 greater than budget and expenses were $211,000 less than budget, but she doesn't expect that to continue. As they get into the busy season, they have higher usage that sometimes requires additional maintenance and repairs. Gross profit for the 6-month period was $4.5 million, which is $149,000 greater than budget. Net income for the same period was $1.8 million. She highlighted the following items: Marina Operations Revenue Actual to Budget • Net fuel Sales revenue was $125,549, or $14,451 less than budget or a variance of 10%. As fuel prices go up, the Port typically does well. As they start to drop, the Port ends up with higher priced fuel in the tank. The Port adjusted its fuel pricing model so that the prices are consistent with the current rack price. • Net Guest Moorage revenue was $77,575, which was $33,575 or 76% greater than budget. • Permanent Moorage revenue was $2.1 million, which was $48,000 or 2% greater than budget. • Dry Storage revenue was $395,000, which was about $12,858 or 3% greater than budget. • Workyard revenue was $80,746, which was $21,000 or 37% greater than budget. • Financial occupancy for Permanent Moorage was 100%, and 98% was budgeted. Financial occupancy for Dry Storage was 90% and 87% was budgeted. This is the highest occupancy since 2008. Rental Properties Revenue Actual to Budget • Total Rental Property revenue to date was $1,382,774, which is $48,000 or 4% greater than budget. Operating Expenses Actual to Budget • Operating expenses before depreciation for the 6-month period were about $2.4 million, which was approximately $387,000 or 14% less than budget. • Audit expenses were zero, as the audit has not yet started. The budgeted amount is $38,000. • Employee Benefits were $347,761, which is about $32,000 or 8% less than budget. This is primarily a timing situation. https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ Packet Pg. 46 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 7.1.c • Payroll Taxes were $128,724, which is $27,000 or 17% less than budget, again because of a timing issue. • Repair and Maintenance expenses were $146,304, which is $46,000 or 24% less than budget. • Salaries and wages were $1,072,074, which is $134,000 or 11% less than budget. • Supplies were $125,404, which is $38,000 or 23% less than budget. Net Income • Net income after depreciation for the 6 months ending June 30th was 1.8 million, which is $547,000 greater than budget Marina Actual to Budget • Revenues ranged between $2.8 million and $3.6 million and expenses ranged between $2 million and $2.4 million. • Net income is trending upwards to $1.2 million in 2022. • Operating revenues were $295,000 greater than budget and expenses were $163,000 less than budget. The higher revenue was related to fuel. • Operating revenues were $3.6 million, which was $295,000 or 9% greater than budget. • Operating expenses before depreciation and overhead were about $1.3 million, which was $254,000 or 16% less than budget. • Net income was about $1.2 million, or about $457,000 greater than budget. Rental Property Actual to Budget • Rental property revenues ranged from about $1.3 million to $1.4 million and expenses ranged from $675,000 to $760,000. The Port subsidized Harbor Square with property taxes from 2007 to 2019, when the Port made its final bond payment on the loan. For comparison purposes, property tax revenue for 2018 and 209 have been removed from the calculations • Revenues were $48,000 greater than budget, and expenses were $72,000 less than budget. • Operating revenues were approximately $1.4 million, which is $47,000 or 4% greater than budget. • Operating expenses before depreciation and overhead were $341,000, which is about $20,000 or 6% less than budget. • Net income was $624,000 or $120,000 (24%) greater than budget. Investing Summary • As of June 30th, the Port had 20 long-term investments. • A $520,000 US Treasury STRIP that matured on May 15, 2022 was matched with anoth https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ I Packet Pg. 47 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 US Treasury note that matured on July 15th to make a new $1 million investment. The additional $20,000 was retained in the Port's interest -bearing savings account. • The Capital Replacement Reserve is current $19,015,000. • The Environmental Reserve is currently $1,067,000. • The Public Amenities Reserve is current $269,000. • As bonds are being called or maturing in 2022, the Port is continuing to invest using the laddering method, with each investment at $1 million. 2023 BUDGET MEETING SCHEDULE Ms. Drennan shared the 2023 Budget Meeting Schedule, noting that staff met on July 13th to discuss the 2023 Operating and Capital Budget expectations, the Finance Committee met on July 18th to discuss budget baseline conditions, and the Commission held its first workshop earlier in the meeting to discuss 2023 moorage and dry storage rates. The schedule going forward is as follows: August 15-19 Staff meeting to discuss proposed new budget items August 26 Approved operating and capital items are due August 29 Commission workshop to discuss property taxes and economic development budget September 9 Draft budget to Executive Director September 26-30 Finance Committee meeting to discuss 2023 Preliminary Budgets October 3-7 Prepare ads for public hearing as per RCW 53.35.020, published once a week for two consecutive weeks, first publication not less than nine and no more than 20 days before meeting. October 10 Commission workshop to discuss 2023 Preliminary Budget and take public comments October 31 Discuss 2023 Preliminary Budget and conduct a public hearing November 14 Approve 2023 Tax Levy, 2023 Budget, and 2023 moorage rates, dry storage rates and marina operations fees November 15-18 Certify to County Assessor amount of taxes levied, publish final budget and prepare 2023 rates and fees for publication November 30 Tax levy resolutions due to Snohomish County Commissioner Harris noted that the public hearing is scheduled for October 31st, which is Halloween. This might make it hard for some people to participate. Mr. McChesney agreed to take the concern under advisement and get back to the Commission. https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ I Packet Pg. 48 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 CITY OF EDMONDS REPORT Council Member Tibbott was no longer present at the meeting to provide comment. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT Mr. McChesney reported that a boater at the fuel dock inadvertently pumped 60 gallons of gasoline into their fishing rod holder. Security and Marina Operations Staff did an excellent job managing the situation, and the boat was pumped out by 7:00 p.m. The fuel dock was closed for a time. Mr. McChesney reported that the new Administration/Maintenance Building Project is in a 2- week delay because the ram -aggregate subcontractor can't be on site until August 22nd. The delay won't affect the overall schedule, but it did take up some slack the contractor had worked in. He further reported that, after talking to the consultant from Jackson Main Architecture and the Leadership in Environmental Engineering and Design (LEED) subconsultant, it appears that the cost of obtaining LEED Gold Certification is now prohibitive because certain elements were not designed into the project. He recalled that the Port had anticipated that the energy modeling, which cost about $9,000, would get the project to Gold Certification, but that was not the case. You get points from being within 1/4 mile from mass transit, but the project did not qualify even though it is within close proximity to bus, train and ferry service. These points are intended for developers in high -density, urban areas. He summarized that the standards are opaque and overcomplicate the project, and it is really hard to define the net benefit. Commissioner Grant commented that State law requires projects to meet nearly all the LEED Silver Certification requirements, and he isn't supportive of spending $100,000 of taxpayer money just to get a certificate. Mr. McChesney agreed the Commission could make that decision, but it would mean walking away from some sunk costs. Commissioner Harris said she would like to have more information about the costs associated with LEED Silver Certification and what has been spent so far before making a final decision. She asked if the review board provided any recommendations for what the Port could do to get the points needed for certification. Mr. McChesney answered that they haven't provided any specific direction. He suggested they forge on with the current design, which will meet LEED Silver Certification. The question is whether it is worth the cost of certification if the -- L..... - _..-- -- _r.L---.._...-..—__....._.-...... I ____ _-1 - _..11--_.L...- _....__ https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ Packet Pg. 49 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 NrujecL nds w ineeL 111u5L ui uie ieyuiienienLs diiywdy. ne dyreeu w Puii wyeuier inure UUbL information for the Commission's continued discussion. 7.1.c COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS Commissioner Johnston reported that he attended the Washington Public Port Association (WPPA) Commissioner's Seminar, along with Commissioners Grant, Harris and Preston. He participated in the following: • A discussion about the WPPAs future. The WPPA appears to be satisfied looking forward rather than back without any explanation as to what happened. There was a lot of expression of faith and trust in Patsy Martin's ability to move the association forward. They are in the process of staffing, with positions open for a full-time executive director, a lobbyist focusing on environmental issues, a communications manager, and a member services manager. They recognize the need for greater transparency but didn't have a lot of suggestions about how that might take place. They talked briefly about membership dues, and the Dues Committee continues to maintain it is a good investment for the WPPA and its member ports. They decided to keep the dues formula and strategy in place but cap the amount dues can be increased over the course of a year to 10%. • He learned that the Port is doing reasonably well in all areas compared to a lot of other ports that have significant issues. • There was discussion about how to effectively evaluate the value of a port to the community. While there is always room for improvement, Ms. Williams and the Communications Committee is doing a good job for the Port. • They covered the fiduciary responsibilities of commissioners. Thanks to Ms. Drennan, the Finance Committee and the Port Attorney, the Port is in good shape as far as reporting and monitoring, etc. • There was discussion about port auditors, and the Port has a very effective and accurate port auditor in Ms. Drennan. • They learned how to handle contentious commission meetings, which there haven't been a lot of at the Port of Edmonds Commissioner Harris said she also attended the WPPA Commissioners Seminar, and it was interesting to hear the conversation about how the WPPA plans to move forward. They are collecting information and ideas, but they don't have the staff right now to start anything new. Commissioner Orvis said he recently read in the paper that there is discussion about a passenger ferry from Des Moines to Seattle. https://www. portofed monds.org/com mission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ Packet Pg. 50 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 Commissioner Grant said he continues to attend Edmonds City Council meetings. At the last meeting, the Council reviewed the City's Capital Improvement and Capital Facilities Plans. They include $357,000 for ferry storage improvements from Pine Street to Dayton Street in 2025, and this could impact the Port. They agreed to change the job description of the Public Information Officer, reviewed the Waterfront Study, and the Development Services Director advised that there is a Request for Proposals for a $400,000 Vision Plan. He commented that it will be important for the Port and other key players to be involved in the visioning work so the outcomes are good. The discussions he has had with the Development Services Director have been very positive, and she has excellent and practical experience. They talked about doing a shadow study of the waterfront, as well. Commissioner Grant announced that the City held the first of two Climate Action Plan meetings. They are currently behind on their 2030 plan, and the U.S. Senate recently passed a bill that includes over $300 billion for climate control. It also includes $126 billion for the Internal Revenue Service, as well as a minimum 15% tax on corporations. Commissioner Grant reported he agreed to help with the WPPAs Cyber effort, and a survey was completed that showed that ports need a way of communicating with each other. They need more peer -to -peer and intermediary information that is easy for others to understand. It is also important to make sure people know about and have access to the resources. He has found a few other commissioners who want to help, and the goal is to put together a program, but the WPPA really needs a systems information person to handle coordination. Commissioner Grant said he recently started talking with Senator Cantwell's office, as she is the current chair of the Commerce Committee. Her local representative will visit the Port at 9 a.m. on August 12th. He will continue to work with her office and others regarding grant opportunities for the Port's North Portwalk and Seawall Project. Mr. McChesney advised that the Port is also in the process of submitting grant applications under the State's Aquatic Land Enhancement Program, but the maximum grant amount is $1 million. Commissioner Grant said he is also looking at potential State grant opportunities. Mr. McChesney commented that Commissioner Grant has been very effective in providing leadership in this effort. Commissioner Grant reported that he attended a Communication Committee meeting recently, and he also met with Commissioner Johnston to finalize updates on the draft Port Mission Statement, which is now ready for the Commission's review. Mr. McChesney agreed to include this item on the next meeting agenda. Commissioner Preston asked that Mr. McChesney to present some potential internship https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ 1 Packet Pg. 51 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 opportunities for discussion at the next meeting. 7.1.c Commissioner Preston reported that he also attended the WPPA Commissioners Seminar. One thing that stood out to him is that ports are public economic development agencies. There was a great presentation on the Snake River dams, and he doesn't see how any human being could think it would be good to tear down the dams. These same people also want to take down all of the Columbia River dams. This year was the biggest Sockeye Salmon run since the 1960s, and there are so many other variables that play into the situation. Commissioner Preston announced that he would attend the Economic Alliance of Snohomish County (EASC) meeting on August 9th. ADJOURNMENT The Commission meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jim Orvis, Port Commission Secretary TAGS: 2023 Budget Baseline Conditions (https://www.portofedmonds.org/tag/2023-budget-baseline-conditions/), 2023 Budget Meeting Schedule (https://www.portofedmonds.org/tag/2023-budget- meeting-schedule/), 2nd Quarter Financial Statements Report (https://www.portofedmonds.org/tag/2nd-quarter-financial-statements-report/), Construction Management Contract (https://www.portofedmonds.org/tag/construction-management-contract/), CPI (https://www.portofedmonds.org/tag/cpi/), Economic Forecast; BST and Assoc. Paul Sorensen (https://www.portofedmonds.org/tag/economic-forecast-bst-and- assoc-paul-sorensen/), Landau . Geo Tech (https://www.portofedmonds.org/tag/landau-geo-tech/), Port of Edmonds 2022 Commission Meeting Minutes (https://www.portofedmonds.org/tag/port-of- edmonds-2022-commission-meeting-minutes/), Resolution 22-03 Approving Emergency Repairs of Mid Marina Electrical System and Waiving Competitive Bidding Requirements (https://www.portofedmonds.org/tag/resolution-22-03- approving -emergency-repairs-of- mid -marina-electrical-system-and-waiving- competitive-bidding-requirements/), WPPA https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ Packet Pg. 52 9/13/22, 12:02 PM Port Of Edmonds I Commission Meeting Minutes 8-8-22 (https://www.portotedmonds.org/tag/wppa/) https://www.portofedmonds.org/commission-meeting-minutes-8-8-22/ I Packet Pg. 53 DocuSign Envelope ID: 2C3AF8C2-BDE9-49D2-AF30-B2413F9A6DC4 7.1.d PORT OF EDMONDS PORT COMMISSION OF THE PORT OF EDMONDS MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING (Via Zoom& In Person) COMMISSIONERS PRESENT David Preston, President Steve Johnston, Vice President Jim Orvis, Secretary Jay Grant Angela Harris CALL TO ORDER August 29, 2022 STAFF PRESENT Bob McChesney, Executive Director Tina Drennan, Manager of Finance and Accounting Brittany Williams, Manager of Properties and Economic Development Glenn Merryman, Security Supervisor OTHERS PRESENT Jordan Stephens, Port Attorney President Preston called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. FLAG SALUTE All those in attendance participated in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag. CONSENT AGENDA ITEM D (APPROVAL OF BEACH PLACE EDMONDS AGREEMENT TO COVER AGREEMENT, EASEMENTS AND TSUNAMI SIREN) WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA. COMMISSIONER ORVIS MOVED THAT THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA BE APPROVED TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: A. APPROVAL OF AGENDA B. APPROVAL OF AUGUST 8, 2022 MEETING MINUTES, AS SUBMITTED C. APPROVAL OF PAYMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $728,928.53 COMMISSIONER JOHNSTON SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Regarding Item D (Approval of Beach Place Edmonds Agreement to Cover Agreement, Easements, and Tsunami Siren), Chuck Wallace, Edmonds Safety and Disaster Coordinator, advised that, with the exception of the electric power and batteries, the siren is maintained by the State of Washington. The City wants to have an agreement in place to make it clear who owns and is responsible for the siren. Mr. McChesney added that he sees the agreement as a housekeeping formality. Commissioner Preston asked how the City could ensure that the siren is in working order, and Mr. Wallace answered that a test is done each morning by the State, and he receives a report via email. If the Port wants to receive the daily report, as well, he could forward their information to the State. Packet Pg. 54 DocuSign Envelope ID: 2C3AF8C2-BDE9-49D2-AF30-B2413F9A6DC4 7.1.d COMMISSIONER ORVIS MOVED TO MOVE ITEM D TO THE REGULAR AGENDA AS AN ACTION ITEM. COMMISSIONER GRANT SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. McChesney read the following email submittal from Gary Ostlund, a Port tenant: "I understand that it may be time for a review of moorage rates. In the past, the Commission has used the CPI as the basis of a moorage rate increase. With the CPI at 9.1 %, the possible rate increase does not make sense. The recent publication of the financial state of the Port is looking very positive. Asa tenant of the Port for about 40 years, I have seen just about everything and can say that you all are doing good work. If I were there tonight, I would ask the Commissioners how many of you have a boat in the Port as a tenant. I hope most of you do. I can tell you, the expense of ownership never goes down, even when the season for salmon fishing grows less and less each year. My request is this, consider no rate increase this year; give us boaters and the residents a chance to recover from the financial mess we deal with every day. " There were no other public comments. PRESENTATION BY CHIEF MICHELLE BENNETT, EDMONDS POLICE DEPARTMENT Mr. McChesney introduced Michelle Bennett, City of Edmonds Police Chief, and shared information about her education, training, work experience, etc. Chief Bennett advised that she started her current career in 1989 as an Edmonds Police Cadet, and was sworn in as the City's Police Chief in September of 2021. It is a great department with a fantastic crew of people. She has had an opportunity to meet with a variety of citizens to learn what is important to the residents, and she was present to answer the Port's questions. Mr. McChesney advised that the Port relies on the Edmonds Police Department to assist its security team on public safety issues. He invited the Port's Security Supervisor to share his thoughts and questions. Mr. Merryman commented that homelessness is becoming a growing concern at the Port and asked the status of an ordinance that was before the City Council regarding camping overnight in the City. Chief Bennett said the No Camping Ordinance was adopted by the City Council. It does not criminalize homelessness, but it does prohibit overnight camping in public spaces. She noted that it has always been a misdemeanor to camp overnight in the City's parks without a permit, so the new ordinance is a natural extension to other areas of the City. She emphasized that the ordinance cannot be enforced unless available shelter is offered. Mr. McChesney asked if the Police Department will be responsible for helping homeless people find the services they need or if the work would be done by another City entity. Chief Bennett expressed her belief that too much has been tasked to police, who are not certified mental health counselors or addiction specialists. However, the Police and Human Services Departments can work as a team, with the police serving as a conduit to get people services. Commissioner Preston asked if everyone who has been offered a place to stay has accepted or if they have simply left the City. Chief Bennett answered that people have accepted hotel vouchers. She noted that Snohomish County is in the process of purchasing a hotel in Edmonds that can house 46 people and offer human services, as well. She summarized that the goal is for people to have healthy housing and to protect the community from a public safety standpoint. The City Council has done a great job of supporting this goal, and the officers are very compassionate about helping people. Commissioner Orvis asked who would be responsible for managing the hotel, and Chief Bennett answered that the County has an agreement with a non-profit organization that will manage the hotel. However, the Edmonds Police Department will respond if there is a problem. MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING Port Commission August 29, 2022 Page 2 Packet Pg. 55 DocuSign Envelope ID: 2C3AF8C2-BDE9-49D2-AF30-B2413F9A6DC4 7.1.d Commissioner Orvis asked if the Port is still responsible for locking the gate to Marina Beach Park at night, and Mr. Merryman answered affirmatively. Commissioner Orvis asked who is responsible to address issues with drug use, etc. on the fishing pier, and Chief Bennett responded that the police will respond if called. Chief Bennett advised that the City Council allocated funding in 2022 to purchase dive equipment to reinstate the dive team, and she has requested funding for a 3-person marine unit, as well. She sees this as a collaborative effort with Washington State Ferries, Port of Edmonds, State Patrol, Fire District 1 and Edmonds Police Department. She hopes to have a fully -staffed marine unit on board within the next year or two to serve the shoreline area in Edmonds. She expressed her belief that the City would be remiss if it did not take some action towards a collaborative emergency management plan and training related to the waterways, ferries and port, which are potential domestic or international terrorism targets. The proposed new marine unit could help facilitate this work. Commissioner Grant reported that he met with a representative from the U.S. Coast Guard, who advised that the largest number of incidents occur in the water near Edmonds. If the incident is human -involved, it is important to understand that they can't be on site within 10 minutes. Chief Bennett reminded them of the plane that went down near the marina, which illustrates the need for collaboration to provide the equipment, facilities and personnel needed to effectively address potential issues. Commissioner Orvis noted the significant increase in the number of people kayaking, canoeing, windsurfing, paddleboarding, etc. in the waters near Edmonds. Commissioner Preston summarized that Chief Bennett would continue to work with the Assistant Police Chief, the City's Safety and Disaster Coordinator, and Commissioner Grant to solidify a plan and move it forward. Commissioner Orvis requested a report on the City's satellite office on Highway 99. Chief Bennett responded that a community service officer is currently stationed at the site Monday through Friday, and the building is open with a person at the front desk. The initial thought was that the office would be used for permitting, planning, etc., but it became clear early on that most of the needs involve criminal justice issues. In her 2023 budget request, she is asking for a full-time commissioned officer who would be stationed there full time to service the Highway 99 area. They are waiting for some security enhancements to occur to the front area before the satellite office can be fully opened up. Mr. McChesney thanked Chief Bennett for taking the time to meet with the Commission, and said he looks forward to continuing the conversation. He said the Port appreciates everything the Edmonds Police Department does to support the Port. PRESENTATION BY CHARLES WALLACE, CITY OF EDMONDS SAFETY AND DISASTER COORDINATOR, REGARDING EMERGENCY AND DISASTER PLANNING Mr. McChesney introduced Chuck Wallace, Edmonds Safety and Disaster Coordinator, and shared information about his background and experience. Mr. Wallace stressed the importance of a heavy planning environment and coordinating and cooperating with neighboring jurisdictions to create plans so they can be implemented when funding opportunities become available. He complimented Chief Bennett and her staff for their work in this regard. Mr. Wallace advised that, previously, the Emergency Service Coordinating Agency (ESCA) controlled emergency disaster processes in coordination with a variety of jurisdictions, but the agency no longer exists. One of his goals is to make more connections with surrounding jurisdictions and public agencies like the Port. While reviewing the City's current plans, he noticed there is very little mention of the Port. Because both the Port and the City will be impacted if a disaster were to occur, they need to improve communication and collaborate in planning efforts. He shared that the City needs the following plans: • Tsunami Plan. The tsunami siren is a good start, but they need to have a tsunami plan in place. • Oil Spill Response Plan. The Port and City should collaborate together on this plan, which should include the capabilities the Port has if a major oil spill were to occur. • Evacuation and Movement Plan. • Disaster Recovery Plan. • Communication Plan. MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING Port Commission August 29, 2022 Page 3 Packet Pg. 56 DocuSign Envelope ID: 2C3AF8C2-BDE9-49D2-AF30-B2413F9A6DC4 7.1.d Damage Assessment Plan. Continuity of Operation Plan. Besides knowing who is in charge of each City department in the event of an emergency or disaster, it is important to know what each one needs in order to function effectively. It is also important to coordinate with the Port and other jurisdictions and agencies to create a plan that identifies and prioritizes what functions need to take place first in order to reduce the impact of an emergency or disaster. Mr. Wallace advised that he has invited the Port's Director of Marina Operations to sit on a variety of committees that are working to create and/or update the City's plans. When it comes to an emergency or disaster, both the City and the Port will be impacted. The goal is to work together to understand the prioritization outlined in the plans and why decisions are made. Mr. Wallace announced that the City will host an Emergency Preparedness Expo at the Frances Anderson Center on September 171 from 11 am to 3 pm. He has invited people from a variety of State agencies to discuss the situations that affect the Edmonds community specifically. Members of the public will be invited to speak directly with the people who wrote some of the plans and are aware of the modeling that will be occurring going forward. Educating the public is an important part of emergency preparedness. Commissioner Harris agreed that the Port should partner with the City and be part of the solution. Commissioner Grant asked if Mr. Wallace will be including the Town of Woodway in any of the planning discussions. Mr. Wallace answered that the goal is to get everyone together to start discussions. They each need to understand their capabilities, where they are dependent on each other, and how they can assist each other in the event of an emergency or disaster. Commissioner Preston asked if it would be possible to start the discussions on a local level and then bring in others. He commented that ESCA was really intended to address the radio communication aspect of emergency preparedness. The Snohomish County Department of Emergency Management was supposed to take over this responsibility, but they don't have the same resources for radio. Mr. Wallace agreed that the best approach would be to start locally, first by establishing an Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) and then holding meetings with representatives from the business district, Port, police, fire, school district, citizens, etc. to discuss what is going in the communities and what they could do better. Commissioner Preston agreed that the effort should start locally and then pull in other jurisdictions and agencies into the discussions. Once people see that something is being organized, it will pull other people in to participate in things like CERT. Mr. Wallace said CERT will be on the agenda at the Emergency Preparedness Expo. He already has people who are willing to provide the training, and he will be looking for volunteers to participate. Once trained, it will be important to utilize the volunteers to the benefit of the community. Commissioner Preston thanked Mr. Wallace for his presentation and advised that representatives from the Port would likely attend the Emergency Preparedness Expo on September 17'. Mr. McChesney added that he looks forward to the Port being involved with Mr. Wallace regarding emergency management. APPROVAL OF BEACH PLACE EDMONDS AGREEMENT TO COVER AGREEMENT, EASEMENTS AND TSUNAMI SIREN (Item D on the Consent Agenda) Mr. McChesney said the proposed agreement pertains to the Fishing Pier parking lot, which the City and Port co-own. The ownership is equal and undifferentiated, and the obligations of each party are stipulated in the Parking Lot Agreement dated February 4, 1982. Subsequently, the City has added various utilities (Attachment B) and appurtenances to support the Fishing Pier and other local infrastructure such as a Tsunami Warning Siren (Attachment C) and the electrical vault for the pump station. Since the parking lot is jointly owned without differentiation, the requirement for specific easements to support these physical improvements may not be strictly necessary. However, it is necessary for the good order and management of this property to obtain some type of written documentation to memorialize these arrangements. The proposed agreement was drafted by the City at their request. It has been reviewed by the Port Attorney, but the Commission has not had an opportunity to discuss it. MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING Port Commission August 29, 2022 Page 4 Packet Pg. 57 DocuSign Envelope ID: 2C3AF8C2-BDE9-49D2-AF30-B2413F9A6DC4 7.1.d Commissioner Grant observed that the agreement references a 1982 agreement and not the original agreement of 1977. Port Attorney Stephens explained that the 1982 amendment completely replaced the original agreement. Commissioner Grant asked if the proposed agreement is common when two entities jointly own a piece of property. Mr. McChesney answered that, in his view, the agreement is atypical, but the ownership is atypical, too. When he was first approached by Mr. Wallace to discuss whether or not an easement would be required for the Tsunami Warning Siren, it was determined that it probably wouldn't be necessary. However, the City later decided that it should be memorialized via an agreement. In response to a question by Commissioner Grant, Commissioner Johnston explained that the Tsunami Warning Siren is part of a statewide system and is owned and operated by the state. Commissioner Orvis added that the state monitors and tests the siren on a daily basis. The City's only responsibility is to replace the batteries as needed. The Port has no responsibility for the siren. Commissioner Harris asked for clarification as to why the agreement was pulled from the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Grant said he requested that the item be pulled to make sure that the agreement would not affect other elements of the original agreement. Mr. McChesney said it should not, and Port Attorney Stephens agreed. Questions were raised about why the City didn't ask the Port before installing the siren, and Commissioner Orvis suggested it is partially the Port's fault because they have never cared about the parking lot, and the City staff assumes it is owned by the City. He noted that the Waterfront Center recently published that the Fishing Pier parking lot is free for their patrons to use, even though that is not part of their agreement. Mr. McChesney commented that the Commission could decline action on the agreement at this time to allow staff to double check to ensure it wouldn't impact any other part of the agreement. Commissioner Johnston noted that the Port Attorney has already indicated it would not. COMMISSIONER HARRIS MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVE THE AGREEMENT TITLED CITY OF EDMONDS AND PORT OF EDMONDS AGREEMENT REGARDING THE JOINTLY -OWNED PARKING LOT. COMMISSIONER JOHNSTON SECONDED THE MOTION. Commissioner Grant suggested that the motion should make specific reference to the Tsunami Siren. Port Attorney Stephens responded that the agreement is not limited to the tsunami siren. It also references other similar utilities that have been on the property in which the City would be indemnifying the Port. Commissioner Grant asked if the agreement would give the City the right to put other utilities within the parking lot. Ms. Drennan referred to Item LC of the agreement, which states that the agreement would cover the three currently installed utilities and any and all future utilities installed by the City on the property. Commissioner Grant noted that the original contract says it must be done by mutual consent. He doesn't want the agreement to allow the City to add anything else without mutual consent. Commissioner Orvis suggested the problem is not what the agreement says, but the fact that the City didn't fulfill the requirement of the agreement to obtain mutual consent. Port Attorney Stephens pointed out that Item LC says other utilities will be covered by the agreement, which primarily addresses responsibility for maintaining and future indemnification, if needed. It doesn't actually give consent to future utilities. Regardless, because this has been an issue with the City, the Port could propose an amendment to Item LC that adds a second sentence that requires the City to obtain consent from the Port before adding any utilities or other improvements beyond the three that are currently installed. Commissioner Orvis agreed to the amendment, but noted that mutual consent is already included in the original agreement. If they haven't followed the requirement in the original agreement, why would adding a sentence make any difference at all. Port Attorney Stephens responded that the amendment would clarify that Item LC doesn't mean the City no longer has to get the Port's consent. Commissioner Johnston asked if there is a history of the City doing the right thing at this location in the past. Mr. McChesney answered affirmatively, noting that they sought agreement from the Port when the electrical vault was installed to support the new pump station. Commissioner Johnston suggested it is a matter of City staff not knowing what the agreement requires, which is a communication issue rather than an agreement issue. Commissioner Grant expressed his belief that Item LC is too open. Mr. McChesney suggested they pull the motion and allow staff to revise the provision and bring it back to the Commission as an action item. MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING Port Commission August 29, 2022 Page 5 Packet Pg. 58 DocuSign Envelope ID: 2C3AF8C2-BDE9-49D2-AF30-B2413F9A6DC4 7.1.d COMMISSIONER HARRIS WITHDREW HER MOTION, AND COMMISSIONER JOHNSTON, THE SECONDER OF THE MOTION AGREED. PORT OF EDMONDS MISSION STATEMENT Commissioner Johnston explained that he and Commissioner Grant reviewed the current Mission Statement and drafted an amended version for the Commission's consideration. Commissioner Preston said he liked the Mission Statement that was adopted in 1992, which was attached to the Staff Report. Commissioner Johnston agreed, but added that the new Mission Statement should also address the environment. Commissioner Grant suggested they send the draft back to the committee to discuss further. Mr. McChesney pointed out that the Mission Statement is intended to be a preamble to the Strategic Plan, which is reviewed during the budget process. He suggested that the 2023 Commission/Staff Retreat could focus in on the Strategic Plan. In anticipation of that discussion, they could reenergize a Planning Committee to vet various initiatives and ideas and provide input at the retreat. Commissioner Harris agreed that would be a good idea. Commissioner Harris suggested that they need to think ahead from a planning standpoint and identify some goals and intent for the next five to ten years. They could consider the various ideas that have come up previously and discuss how they might fit with the Port's Mission Statement. They need really clear prioritization because staff time and funding are limited and they have some major projects in the works. The process could start with the Planning Committee followed by Commission discussion at the upcoming retreat. Commissioner Orvis said he also likes the Mission Statement that was adopted in 1992, except for the word equitable. He isn't clear on what that means anymore. Commissioner Grant felt that the 1992 version was too specific. All of the Commissioners agreed that the Mission Statement should be short and concise. Commissioners Grant and Johnston agreed to rework the Mission Statement to incorporate the suggestions put forward by the Commissioners. Mr. McChesney summarized that the Commission is interested in using the 1992 version from a conceptual standpoint, but it could be modernized and updated. Commissioners Grant and Johnston invited additional feedback from the Commissioners. The Commissioners supported the formation of a Planning Committee to prepare for the 2023 retreat by focusing in on long-range planning and other initiatives that have been discussed. Commissioners Grant and Johnston agreed to serve on the committee, and Mr. McChesney would participate, as well. They plan to have their initial meeting in September. 2023 BUDGET — PROPERTY TAX LEVY Ms. Drennan advised that this item is on the agenda to allow the Commissioners to discuss property taxes and provide guidance for the 2023 Budget. The Finance Committee met on August 11, 2021 to review the funding options for the Administration/Maintenance Building and the Portwalk and Seawall. To pay for the public portion of the Portwalk and Seawall, the Finance Committee recommended increasing the property tax to the maximum levy amount. She reviewed that Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 53.36.020 limits the Port's property tax to $0.45 per thousand of property value. Washington State Initiative 747 caps the property tax increase to 1% per year plus new construction. During the 2022 budget process, the Commission chose to increase the annual tax levy from $400,000 to the maximum regular property tax level plus 1%, new construction and refunds, which adds up to $610,000. A 1% increase over this amount would equate to approximately $616,000. The Port won't know the amount of new construction and refunds until after the budget is passed and the County completes the calculation. Ms. Drennan advised that Port staff is proposing to allocate the 2023 property tax funds as follows: Launcher Subsidy ($25,000), Portwalk and Seawall Project ($441,000), Commissioners ($140,000), and Public Records Requests, Tools and Training ($10,000). Amounts collected from new construction and refunds will be allocated to the Portwalk and Seawall Project. MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING Port Commission August 29, 2022 Page 6 Packet Pg. 59 DocuSign Envelope ID: 2C3AF8C2-BDE9-49D2-AF30-B2413F9A6DC4 7.1.d Ms. Drennan referred to the Tax Levy History (Page 3), which shows the Port's taxable assessed value, actual tax levy amount and actual tax levy rate (millage rate) from 1990 to proposed 2023. The millage rate for 2022 was approximately $.081. The property tax valuation is based on the Snohomish County Assessor's Office preliminary values at the beginning of August. They are projecting an average increase of 25% to all properties in the Port District. If the 2023 tax levy is $616,000, the milage rate would be approximately $.066 due to the increase in property values. The maximum levy amount available in 2022 was $609,880, and the highest millage rate was in 1991 at $.31 per thousand. Commissioner Preston noted that only 4 years out of the past 33 years had a millage rate less than what is currently proposed. Twelve years were over, and some years were over by four times what is being proposed. Ms. Drennan referred to Page 4, noting that Figure 1 shows the Edmonds Port District Assessed Value from 1990 to 2023, which has increased from about $1 billion to over $9 billion. Figure 2 shows the Port of Edmonds Tax Levy Amount from 1990 to 2023, and Figure 3 shows the Port of Edmonds Tax Levy Rate from 1990 to 2023. The information on Page 6 shows a sample of what a tax bill might look like for Port District residents. Ms. Drennan referred to Pages 7 and 8, noting that Figure 5 shows total property tax history from 2017 to 2022 for an $800,000 house in the Port District, a $1 million home, and a $1.4 million home. Figure 5 shows Port property taxes for those same three homes. As the scale can be misleading, Figure 6 shows the total property taxes for an $800,000 home versus the Port property taxes for that same home. Unless tonight's discussion indicates otherwise, Ms. Drennan said staff would include $616,000 for the property tax levy in the Preliminary 2023 Budget, with allocations of $25,000 to the public launcher, $441,000 to the Portwalk and Seawall Project and $150,000 to overhead. 2023 BUDGET — ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TOURISM EXPENSE BUDGET Ms. Drennan advised that staff has been reviewing programs while preparing the 2023 Preliminary Budget, and tonight they are presenting the proposed 2023 Economic Development and Tourism Expense Budget to the Commission for review. She referred to the Economic Development and Tourism Expense spreadsheet showing actual results from 2018 to 2021, 2022 projected and the proposed budget for 2023. She noted that activity was reduced in 2020 and 2021 due to the pandemic and its associated restrictions. Ms. Drennan reviewed that the spreadsheet shows the different economic development and tourism expense items and where they are located in the budget and financial statements. She reminded them that the Port participates in economic development and tourism through the Economic Alliance of Snohomish County (EASC), Destination Port of Edmonds (DPOE), Sea Notes, the Edmonds Arts Festival, and the Edmonds Bird Fest. The Port invites guests to the Port via advertising in publications and through the Seattle Boat Show. It promotes tourism through participation in the Washington Tourism Alliance (WTA). In response to Commissioner Preston's question, Mr. McChesney advised that the WTA was formed as a result of the legislature's failure to fund tourism. Its purpose is to lobby the legislature to finance tourism promotion. The Port has been a member of the alliance for the past few years. Ms. Williams added that the alliance also sponsors programs and lectures that she attends to get updates on how the state is doing with tourism. Ms. Drennan advised that for 2023, the Marketing committee is proposing the following: Economic Development and Tourism • Economic Alliance of Snohomish County -- $5,000 • Destination Port of Edmonds -- $5,000 • Sea Notes -- $3,000 • Edmonds Arts Festival -- $2,000 • Edmonds Bird Fest -- $1,000 • Tourism and Marketing -- $5,000 • Other Economic Development Opportunities -- $5,000 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING Port Commission August 29, 2022 Page 7 Packet Pg. 60 DocuSign Envelope ID: 2C3AF8C2-BDE9-49D2-AF30-B2413F9A6DC4 7.1.d Advertising • Marina Advertising -- $5,000 • Port/Event Advertising -- $3,000 Marketing • Seattle Boat Show -- $8,000 • Family Day at the Port -- $4,000 • Holiday Event at the Marina -- $3,000 • Scarecrow Contest -- $200 • Canva Pro -- $200 • Other -- $1,000 Membership Dues • Washington Tourism Alliance -- $500 Promotional Hosting • Promotional Hosting -- $2,500 Ms. Drennan summarized that the total proposed Economic Development and Tourism Budget is $53,400. None of the items include staff time, which is recorded as a Salaries and Wage Expense. Commissioner Orvis asked if "Other Economic Development Opportunities" would include things like advertising in cruise guides, etc. Ms. Williams responded that it could. She explained that advertising expenses have been separated out for events and the marina, but other opportunities might come along throughout the year. Commissioner Preston pointed out that 2023 is the Port's 75' Anniversary. It was suggested that perhaps the anniversary could be celebrated at the Family Day at the Port event and in conjunction with the ribbon cutting for the new Administration/Maintenance Building. Commissioner Preston said he would support additional funding for the event. Mr. McChesney noted that there are contingency funds that can be allocated for this purpose as appropriate. Commissioner Harris asked if there are restrictions associated with adjusting the budget once it has been approved. Ms. Drennan said it is possible to amend the budget, but a public hearing is required each time. However, the Commission can move the funds in the Economic Development and Tourism Budget around as needed to accomplish the desired tasks. Commissioner Harris asked why the budget for the boat show was substantially increased. Ms. Williams said $8,000 has been budgeted for the past several years, and the numbers shown for previous years are actual expenses. There has been some discussion about replacing the backdrop for the display. Mr. McChesney commented that, at this time, it is not clear whether the Seattle Boat show will resume in its format prior to the pandemic, so no decision has been made as to the Port's participation in 2023. Commissioner Preston suggested that if the ribbon cutting event for the new Administration/Maintenance Building is postponed until later in the year, he would still like to do a Family Day at the Port event in June or July. Ms. Williams said it is important to remember that the summer months are very busy at the Port and that events take months to plan. Traditionally, they have had Family Day at the Port on the weekend after Memorial Day, and they would need to commit to that by the start of the year. Mr. McChesney said he would prefer to do the event in conjunction with an open house for the new building, and the Commissioners generally agreed. Commissioner Preston asked for additional information regarding the interpretive signage that will be included as part of the Portwalk Redevelopment Project. Ms. Drennan explained that this expenditure would be included in the Capital Budget and not in the Economic Development and Tourism Budget. HARBOR SQUARE 2ND QUARTERLY REPORT Ms. Williams presented the 21 Quarter 2022 Harbor Square Report, highlighting the following: MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING Port Commission August 29, 2022 Page 8 Packet Pg. 61 DocuSign Envelope ID: 2C3AF8C2-BDE9-49D2-AF30-B2413F9A6DC4 • Gross projected revenue was up 7.49% or roughly $37,000 over the same period in 2021. • The occupancy rate at the end of the 2nd Quarter was 91.2%, up from the occupancy rate of 90.33% in 2nd Quarter 2021. • No leases ended in Quarter 2, and there were no new leases. There were three lease extensions, with one tenant in Building 3 extending for 24 months for a value of over $122,000. • Major projects included painting touchups at Building 4, irrigation repairs, drain sock replacements, and asphalt patch repair between Buildings 4 and 5 and outside of Building 2. • Two incidences occurred at Harbor Square in May. The first was a mailbox break-in at Building 1, and the entire mailbox has since been replaced. There was a busted drain pipe at Building 4, which occurred when a tenant was installing a fence. The drain pipe has been repaired. Commissioner Preston asked what the current occupancy rate is, and Ms. Williams answered that the occupancy rate in August is just a bit higher at about 92%. Commissioner Preston asked if this high occupancy rate is similar to other commercial spaces in downtown Edmonds and on Highway 99. Ms. Williams responded that, for the most part, commercial spaces haven't been hit as hard as anticipated at the beginning of the pandemic. Currently, there are two spaces available at Harbor Square, in Buildings 1 and 4. Commissioner Johnston asked how often the drain socks are replaced, and Ms. Williams answered that it is done quarterly. The Port started the parking lot sweeping program at the beginning of 2022, and that is also done quarterly. Commissioner Orvis asked when the atrium windows at Harbor Square would be replaced, and Ms. Williams answered that staff is proposing funding for this project in 2023. Mr. McChesney added that final design has not yet been done. Commissioner Johnston asked if anything could be done to make the signage at Harbor Square more conforming. Mr. McChesney said the Port has been more accommodative to the street -side signs in recent years, but tenants have been put on notice to remove them. Commissioner Johnston noted that even some of the fixed signs are unsightly. The Commissioners agreed to discuss this issue at a future meeting. Ms. Williams announced that this is the final week of Sea Notes at the Marina. This week there will be performances on Tuesday through Saturday, as well as Labor Day (Monday). All of the information is on the Port's events page. Commissioner Johnston asked if there is a trend of what kind of music attracts the biggest crowds. Ms. Williams said she has received a lot of good feedback about the greater variety of music that has been offered this year. Commissioner Grant pointed out that the plaque at the Mary Lou Block Plaza is a safety hazard that needs to be addressed. He saw kids playing on it, and it appears to be fairly dangerous. CITY OF EDMONDS REPORT There was no City of Edmonds Report. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT Mr. McChesney didn't have any items to report. COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS Commissioner Johnston reported that he met with a number of Commissioners and staff on a variety of topics over the past two weeks. Everything is being resolved to his satisfaction at this point. Commissioner Orvis reported that he attended an Economic Alliance of Snohomish County (EASC) Coffee Chat where the topic of discussion was "second chances" and found it to be very interesting. He learned that when you hire a second -chance person, you know all of the information you are not allowed to ask. People who have participated in the program have generally got good employees who work hard. Many of them come with training, but some of them have some special needs that you have to work around, such as a requirement to check in with a probation officer. Commissioner Preston noted that, at the end of the meeting, the facilitator announced that he had previously served MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING Port Commission August 29, 2022 Page 9 Packet Pg. 62 DocuSign Envelope ID: 2C3AF8C2-BDE9-49D2-AF30-B2413F9A6DC4 7.1.d time in prison. Commissioner Johnston added that the presenters also stressed how loyal the second -chance employees were, in general. Commissioner Harris observed that a public hearing on the 2023 Budget is scheduled for October 31 st, which is Halloween. After some discussion, they agreed to reschedule the October 31st meeting to November 1st at 7:00 p.m. Commissioner Preston announced that he toured the Boeing Factory as part of Boeing Family Day. They are doing some amazing things with composites for wings and fuselages. Commissioner Preston said he volunteered to serve at the information booth at the Taste of Edmonds where he heard complimentary things about Ms. Williams, who serves as a Chamber Board Member. Commissioner Preston advised that he and Commissioners Orvis, Grant and Johnston attended the memorial service for former Council Member Kristiana Johnson at City Park. It was well attended and very well done. Commissioner Grant reported that he had lunch with Susan McLaughlin, City of Edmonds Development Services Director. She recognized the importance of the Port on the waterfront, and she has a lot of good ideas. Commissioner Grant also reported that he submitted a proposal to the Washington Public Ports Association related to cyber security and received a nice note back from the interim executive director who indicated she would call him soon. They asked him to attend a government meeting on September 71 and 8t1i that will include representatives from a number of governmental organizations to discuss cyber security. Commissioner Grant advised that he has attended a number of Edmonds City Council meetings, as well as his first Woodway Town Council meeting. At the Town Council's next meeting, the fire chief from the City of Shoreline will provide a briefing. ADJOURNMENT The Commission meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Ree_spect/fullll�y', submitted, �oo.q. sei�g.e lie ivlsoa_. Port Commission Secretary MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING Port Commission August 29, 2022 Page 10 Packet Pg. 63 SNOHOMISH COUNTY SNOHOMISH COUNTY 911 BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA September 15, 2022 at 8:30 a.m. Web Conference — Join Zoom Meeting https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86000466014?pwd=YWxBbE9HMIJuT2ZXMmtYVU8rSnBkUT09 Meeting ID: 860 0046 6014, Passcode: 195881 or dial +1 253 215 8782 Physical location: Everett Police South Precinct, 1121 SE Everett Mall Way, Everett, WA L 0 Please note that most Board members and staff attend the meeting remotely. However, pursuant to RCW 42.30, a physical location is also provided. E E 1. Call to Order 0 A. Roll Call c N B. Announcements 2. Public Comments 0 °0 a� 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Consent Agenda 0 A. Minutes from the August 18, 2022 Board Meeting B. August 2022 Blanket Voucher & Payroll Approval Form: 0 N i. Checks 16333-16446, for a total of $1,599,596.71 0 ii. Payroll Direct Deposit, in the amount of $1,253,025.68 5. Old Business a� a A. 2023 Budget c B. Discussion/Direction on Continuing 100% Remote Board Meetings m 6. New Business p A. Resolution 2022-05 z B. APF - Amendment to Purchase & Sale Agreement for Future Facility E C. APF - RRP Change Order 12 - Remove Alphanumeric Paging D. APF - Surplus and Transfer of Old Radios to Snohomish County DEM Q E. APF - RRP Residual Radio Installation Parts F. APF - SN0911/SNOPUD Master Site Agreement 7. Reports A. Agency Report B. Future Facility Project i. Timeline Updates Packet Pg. 64 7.1.e C. Radio Replacement Project (RRP) i. Funding Expenditure & Ear Mark Summary ii. Lake Roesiger Recovered Radios D. Police TAC (meeting held 9/13) E. Fire TAC 8. Committee Reports A. Finance Committee B. Personnel Committee C. County EESCS Committee (formerly County E911 Office) D. County ECSF Program Advisory Board E. Future Facility Committee F. Board Technical Leadership (No meeting) 9. Executive Session (if needed) 10. Good of the Order 11. Adjourn Packet Pg. 65 Stanwood Barrington I 7.1.f I Snohomish County Tomorrow A GROWTH MANAGEMENT AD VISORY COUNCIL 2 3 4 5 9 8 12 13 19 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2g7 29 330 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING Wednesday, June 15, 2022 Via Zoom 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. MEETING MINUTES Participatinq Jurisdictions/Members Tulalip Arlington Tribes / Marysville Granite Falls Everett Lake Stevens Mill Creek Lynnwood Snohomish Edmonds Mountlake Monroe Terrace Sultan Gold Index Noodway Brier Bothell Bar Gold Bar Chuck Lie Monroe Heather Fulcher Mountlake Terrace Bryan Wahl Snohomish Karen Guzak Snohomish County Council Nate Nehring Snohomish County Executive Josh Dugan, County Executive's office Town of Woodway Rajeev Thakur CAB Representative Phil Lovell CAB Representative Michelle Stewart Other Attendees/Presenters: Regional Apprenticeship Program Anne Carnell Snohomish County PDS Mike McCrary Snohomish County Public Works Doug McCormick SCT Coordinator Cynthia Pruitt 1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 6:02 p.m. by Co -Chair Nate Nehring. 1.a. Introductions/Roll Call Roll call was taken (as listed above). 1.b. Citizen Comments No comments. 2. Approval of Meeting Minutes (5-25-22) Bryan Wahl moved to approve the minutes of May 25, 2022, as written. Heather Fulcher seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 3. Update Items a. Summary of PSRC Board Actions and Activities Members were referred to the report in their packet. b. Economic Alliance Snohomish County No report. 4. Action Items a. Agenda Bill: STP/CMAQ Countywide projects Doug McCormick reported that Snohomish County did well on the Regional competition. He noted that the ICC met on June 3rd and recommended the projects found in the Steering Committee's packet. After the Steering Committee makes its recommendation, the projects will be forwarded to PSRC. Bryan Wahl moved to approve the ICC recommended project list for STP/CMAQ federal funding projects. Karen Guzak seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Page 1 of 2 Packet Pg. 66 7.1.f 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1g8 20 21 22 23 244 26 27 H 330 32 33 34 b. Agenda Bill: SCT 2023 Dues Assessment Cynthia Pruitt described the projected 2023 SCT expenses and the dues rate needed to balance those expenses. Ms. Pruitt and Mr. Nehring had heard from four members unable to attend who reported that their councils supported the dues increase. Bryan Wahl moved preliminary approval of the proposed 2023 dues increase of 19.5%. Karen Guzak seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 5. Briefings, Discussion Items a. Regional Apprenticeship Program Anne Carnell described this program that prepares Everett Community College and high school students for apprenticeships in the trades. Committee members asked if the program eased students into actual apprenticeships, how other school districts could be part of the program, whether companies could have students trained "on -demand," and if there is potential for the program to expand. b. Coordinator's Report Ms. Pruitt brought the committees' report to the attention of members. 6. Future Agenda Items No additions. 7. Go -Round Not discussed. 8. Next Meeting Date July 27, 2022; 6:00 pm - 8:00 pm. 9. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:38 p.m. by Co -Chair Nate Nehring. All presentations given, discussions held, and actions taken at this meeting are kept on file (via recording) in PDS until six years from December 3111 of this year. Page 2 of 2 Packet Pg. 67 8.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes of September 20, 2022 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: E092022 Special Packet Pg. 68 8.1.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES DRAFT MINUTES September 20, 2022 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Nelson, Mayor Vivian Olson, Council President Will Chen, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL STAFF PRESENT Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator The special Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:15 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the Council Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. 2. EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(I) At 6:15 p.m., the council convened in executive session for approximately 15 minutes to discuss pending or potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). The executive session concluded at 6:30 p.m. 3. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION The council reconvened in open session at 6:31 p.m. 4. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. ESTABLISH PROCESS FOR FILLING COUNCIL VACANCY - POSITION #7 Council President Olson recalled the council was notified of a council vacancy effective September 13, 2022. The process used previously is outlined in the council packet with some modifications to reflect the desire to move forward quickly. There is value to the process described in the agenda packet as everything is still fresh in councilmembers' minds and it is not unusual with personnel hiring to have a few months between interviews and the next steps in the process. There was a great pool of candidates for the first vacancy which provides an opportunity for those who are interested to reapply for this vacancy as well as opening it to members of the public who did not apply for the vacancy in position #1. Council President Olson continued, the proposal is to ask applicants the same questions to keep things balanced and fair. Although the agenda memo reflects the desire to move quickly, the council has a window of 90 days to fill a vacancy due to the need at times to prioritize other business. The council has a Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 1 Packet Pg. 69 lot on its agenda in the short term because it is budget season. Alternatively the council can consider filling the vacancy after the budget is adopted. The proposal is to move quickly and appoint a councilmember who can participate in the budget process. Council President Olson recommended deleting the request for date of birth that was added to the application for position #7. The intent was to assist with checking whether applicants were registered voters, but for other reasons, the inclusion of that information was determined not to be a good idea. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO DELETE THE DATE OF BIRTH ADDED TO THE POSITION #7 APPLICATION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Paine asked Council President Olson to comment on background conversations that have occurred and emails that were sent. She heard from people in the community that an email was sent to the prior candidates before this meeting. Council President Olson responded the email was very brief and did not commit to any process. It said there would be another process and if the person was interested in being considered, they would receive an extra communication from the City once the process was determined. As someone who recently went through this process, Councilmember Teitzel commented the interviews with the 17 applicants to fill position #1 were conducted less than one month ago and are still very fresh in everyone's minds. Out of respect for the process and for the applicants, he suggested reusing the existing applications and interviews and simply interviewing new candidates who apply. That would allow the council to move expeditiously and fairly and get a new councilmember seated so they can participate in the budget process in a meaningful way. If the council waits 90 days, that will be near the end of the year and would preclude the new councilmember's participation in the budget which he did not think would be good. Councilmember Buckshnis said she also did not want to wait to appoint a new councilmember. She spent her vacation reviewing the council candidate applications. She suggested requesting a new, timestamped letter from the applicants who applied previously for position #1 as she was aware some did not plan to reapply. She recognized the interviews were conducted less than 30 days ago and although she would like to ask different questions, she supported moving forward pragmatically as the interviews were fresh in councilmembers' minds. This is the process the City uses when candidates for positions in the City backs out; another candidate selection pool is provided. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, THAT THE TIMESTAMP CAN BE PROVIDED BE VIA EMAIL THAT SOMEONE WANTS TO REAPPLY FOR THE POSITION #7 PROCESS. Council President Olson commented that would be an efficient method for those who have gone through the effort of completing an application and she did not want to require them go through hoops that were just busywork. The email stating they wanted to be considered for the position #7 vacancy could be printed out. Councilmember Paine asked whether the intent was applicants would reuse their original submission or could they freshen up their application if they wished. She suggested informing applicants to resubmit their application which would give them the choice of freshening up their application if they wished. Council President Olson offered to expand the motion to include the option to submit their application if they wished. As it has only been a month, she did not anticipate much would have changed and most people likely would say use their original application. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 2 Packet Pg. 70 8.1.a COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, THAT THE TIMESTAMP COULD BE ACCEPTED BY EMAIL AND THE APPLICANT COULD DECIDE WHETHER THEY WANTED THEIR ORIGINAL APPLICATION TO COUNT OR IF THEY WANTED TO SUBMIT SOMETHING NEW. AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Chen suggested also allowing drop off at the council office in case some applicants wanted to do that. Mayor Nelson relayed Council President Olson's comment that that was already included. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE PROCESS IN THE PACKET AS AMENDED BY THE PREVIOUS MOTIONS AND AMENDMENTS. Councilmember Paine asked if the motion was to accept the dates that are included in the agenda memo. The council did not talk about dates but having dates identified would be very helpful. Council President Olson said the packet included windows of time; if the council was willing to accept those windows, motions could be made after this motion to select dates that work for everyone. Councilmember Buckshnis was unsure motions needed to be made to approve dates for interviews. She preferred to have the motion restated in its entirety instead of referencing the agenda memo so citizens who do not have the agenda memo know what the council is voting on. Council President Olson commented there is quite a bit of detail regarding the process in the agenda memo and the motion was to accept the process as stated. She asked if Councilmember Buckshnis wanted her to read the process. Councilmember Buckshnis answered she did. Council President Olson explained the process would be to allow people who had previously applied for the position #1 vacancy to reapply by email saying that they wanted to be considered for position #7. Alternatively, they would have the option of submitting a new application. Interviews from the first round would stand and applicants would not have the option of reinterviewing. The interview process would be made available as well as new applications taken from candidates for position #7 who had not expressed an interest in position #1. The same interview questions used in the last process would be asked of the new candidates. The interviews of candidates who applied for position #1 are available to the public and councilmembers including Councilmember Teitzel who was not initially involved in the interviews. In addition, councilmembers can reach out to any of the candidates. The selection process will occur during the week of October 17-21. When a candidate receives four council votes, a new councilmember is selected and will serve until the end of that term and a new councilmember elected in November 2023. She suggested the council discuss and choose dates after passing this motion. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED TO AMEND TO HAVE THE INTERVIEW DATES FROM OCTOBER 17-19. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Councilmember Paine said she is planning to take her mom to a family wedding in Michigan and she had hoped to participate in the interview process. Council President Olson asked if councilmembers and staff were available on Monday, October 17t1i. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO AMEND TO HAVE INTERVIEWS ON OCTOBER 17TH Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 3 Packet Pg. 71 8.1.a Councilmember Teitzel pointed out the agenda memo states the selection for appointment to position #7 will take place during a special meeting between October 17-21, not the interviews. He asked if that was what Councilmember Paine meant to say in her motion. Councilmember Paine restated her motion: FOR THE SELECTION TO OCCUR ON OCTOBER 17T1' AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Council President Olson asked if the council wanted to discuss dates for interviews, noting there was a window identified in the agenda memo. Alternatively, the council could decide on dates once the applications for position #7 are submitted. [No vote was taken on the main motion as amended.] 5. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 6:48 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 4 Packet Pg. 72 8.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 Approval of Council Regular Meeting Minutes of September 20, 2022 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: E092022 Packet Pg. 73 8.2.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES September 20, 2022 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Nelson, Mayor Vivian Olson, Council President Will Chen, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Dave Turley, Administrative Services Director Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., Human Serv. Dir. Susan McLaughlin, Dev. Serv. Director Rob English, Interim Public Works Director Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Mgr. Mike Clugston, Senior Planner Michele Szafran, Associate Planner Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the Council Chambers, 250 5t1i Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember Teitzel read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "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." 3. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. PRESENTATIONS 1. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO COUNCILMEMBER LAURA JOHNSON Councilmember Paine read a resolution thanking Councilmember Laura Johnson for her service to the Edmonds City Council. Former Councilmember L. Johnson thanked the council for the resolution, finding it humbling. She said serving on Edmonds City Council was one of her more challenging endeavors and she learned quite a bit about Edmonds. She has a deep appreciation for the City's professional staff, Edmonds would not function without their knowledge and dedication and they are often in challenging situations and should hear the council's appreciation more often. Serving on council, she was most proud of the collective work Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 1 Packet Pg. 74 8.2.a undertaken to assist the most vulnerable residents. The dedicated work and efforts of the human services division is changing lives for the better, possibly even saving lives. She hoped council will work to make all that Edmonds has to offer more assessable to everyone who calls Edmonds home. 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO ADD THE FINAL VOTE ON THE COUNCIL VACANCY APPOINTMENT PROCESS TO THE AGENDA AS ITEM 10.1 AND RENUMBER THE REMAINING ITEMS. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Mayor Nelson described procedures for in -person audience comments. Eric Bidstrup, Edmonds, spoke regarding the process the council uses to select members to fill vacancies on the council. Memories of the September 7t' special meeting are still fresh in councilmembers minds as they are about to repeat that process for the position that Laura Johnson vacated. In the last 8 years, over 40 ballots have been necessary on 3 separate occasions to fill council vacancies, requiring a lot of time and effort on behalf of the council. He has deep respect and appreciation for the hard work all councilmembers put in to meet the needs of the City and to lead the community. He encouraged the council to consider making the process of filling vacancies more efficient than it has been historically. He proposed the use of ranked choice voting (RCV) as one possible way to improve the process. In the last two years, city councils in both Olympia and Bellingham adopted RCV to fill council vacancies. A key benefit of adopting this process is that each councilmember can openly express not only their first choice, but their second, third choices and so on in terms of how they view the candidates that have applied. Putting that information out for the public and other councilmember's consideration will lead to a more informed process that can help expedite filling open positions. He acknowledged this was not a perfect process for filling vacancies; any process that involves the six remaining councilmembers to vote will inherently have the possibility of 3-3 deadlocks and ties such as occurred during the most recent process. He challenged each councilmember to consider whether they had the top candidates they supported in mind when they came to the September 7t' meeting and suggested making that information more readily available would allow the process to move more quickly than it has historically. When filling vacancies, via any process, the goal is to find four or more supporting votes for a candidate to fill the vacant position. He was simply proposing a more efficient process to reach that goal by surfacing a larger and richer set of information for councilmembers to consider before going through the voting process. This is not a radical change, it is simply an alternate method of getting four or more votes. Joan Longstaff, Edmonds, said she was pleased and was sure the late Councilmember K. Johnson was pleased with Councilmember Teitzel's appointment to the council. She thanked former Councilmember L. Johnson for her service and wished her good luck in her future endeavors. She thanked the City for trimming the shrubbery on Sunset Avenue after a disabled friend of hers spoke to the council suggesting the shrubbery be trimmed. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, said City Attorney Jeff Taraday represented to the Parks & Public Works Committee last week that there are non -right-of-way easements. Mr. Taraday's mention of this term has the potential to be of value to the council's constituents. He posed several questions, 1) what qualifies as a non -right-of-way easement? Mr. Taraday has represented that a utility easement is a non -right-of-way easement and that a utility easement is a proprietary property interest held and owned by the City's utility. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 2 Packet Pg. 75 8.2.a He was unsure whether Mr. Taraday was correct, but hoped the city council would request further explanation. Mr. Taraday's representation opens the door to related questions. Are the following non - right -of -way easements: a side -sewer easement, a native growth protection easement, a slope easement, an easement of lateral and subjacent support, a temporary construction easement? 2) Can City staff issue use permits to anybody including third parties to make use of a non -right-of-way easement? For example, can City staff issue a right-of-way construction permit to a third party to make private use of a utility easement? Does City staff have the ability and/or authority to issue a right-of-way construction permit to a third party to make private use of a temporary construction easement? How about a native growth protection easement? Constituents can be dramatically impacted if the City issues permits to third parties to use non -right-of-way easements. Constituents can also be dramatically impacted if City staff issues permits to third parties to use unopened rights -of -way. 3) Is an easement reserved by city council during a street vacation legislative process for construction, repair and maintenance of public utilities and services a non -right-of-way easement? If so, can City staff issue a permit to anyone including third parties to make use of such an easement reserved during a street vacation legislative process? He requested the council give this much attention and do all they can to prevent those who own property burdened by any type of City of Edmonds easement from being exposed to harm. Mayor Nelson described procedures for virtual audience comments. Cynthia Sjoblom, Edmonds, commented Councilmember Laura Johnson pushed the homeless hotel agenda and with her leaving the council, it felt like a hit and run. Anyone supporting this is not representing their constituency. There have been two unreported deaths in the homeless hotel in Everett which she viewed as a coverup and has reported to a news station. She found a councilmember's suggestion to her about giving this a try unconscionable and appalling and throwing their constituents under the bus in favor of a minority view. She questioned why they cannot be put somewhere they are away from the drug traffic on Highway 99. She suggested councilmembers who think this is a good idea are in denial. In speaking to councilmembers in other cities, what is occurring in the Renton hotel is appalling. She questioned giving this a try when history shows what goes on in these places. The person who owns the Everett hotel has not been paid $65,000. People enter into these contracts thinking it is a good idea and a way to help, and later realize they cannot have people dying in their hotel. She wanted to know the cause of those deaths, and how many aid cars, fire department and police personnel are going to those hotels. She urged everyone listening to contact the Edmonds City Council as well as the Snohomish County Council. She pointed out once a homeless hotel is opened, it will be like pulling teeth or worse to get it closed. Buses from Highway 99 travel into downtown Edmonds, and even though loitering is illegal, people can still hang out and do drugs on the City's beaches and leave their needles. She urged the council to take action because this is wrong. Gemma [no last name given] thanked the city council for everything they have done in the community. The council shows great leadership for her and her friends. 7. RECEIVED FOR FILING CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM ALLAN GOURLIE, CHRISTOPHER HERNANDEZ AND ANTHONY SALDANA 2. JULY 2022 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT 8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. Council President Olson requested Item 8.1 be removed from the Consent Agenda. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 3 Packet Pg. 76 8.2.a Councilmember Teitzel requested Item 8.12 be removed from the Consent Agenda. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 6, 2022 3. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL COMMITTEE MINUTES 4. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS. 5. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO COUNCILMEMBER LAURA JOHNSON 6. OPIOID SETTLEMENT ALLOCATION AGREEMENT 7. CHANGES TO FINANCE MANAGER JOB DESCRIPTION 8. APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH KPG PSOMAS FOR 76TH AVE AND 220TH ST. INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 9. APPROVE VACATION ACCRUAL FOR RETURNING EMPLOYEE 10. APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH LANDAU ASSOCIATES FOR THE CIVIC CENTER PLAYFIELD PROJECT 11. APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH HERRERA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS FOR THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN (SMAP) 13. APPROVE RESOLUTION DECLARING UTILITY EASEMENTS AS SURPLUS AT 23610 HIGHWAY 99 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 6, 2022 (Previously Consent Agenda Item 8.1) Council President Olson requested the following amendment to the minutes: Revise her comment on Page 2 regarding her nomination of Jenna Nand to read, "...similar to N4r-. Teitzel former Councilmember K. Johnson... COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO APPROVE THE COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 6, 2022 AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH HKA GLOBAL, INC FOR THE CARBON RECOVERY PROJECT (Previously Consent Agenda Item 8.12) Councilmember Teitzel commented this $21 million project is one of the largest capital project the City has ever undertaken and it was his understanding it will have very good environmental outcomes. He noted the project was a fair distance behind schedule and asked about the original completion date and the expected completion date. Acting Public Works Director Rob English responded the current completion date is early December which will be followed by a three month start up period, taking final completion Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 4 Packet Pg. 77 8.2.a into February. He would need to check with WWTP Manager Pam Randolph regarding the original completion date. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO APPROVE THE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH HKA GLOBAL, INC FOR THE CARBON RECOVERY PROJECT. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. PUBLIC HEARING PERMANENT DESIGN STANDARDS FOR MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS IN THE BD2 ZONE Senior Planner Mike Clugston explained this public hearing is the result of a long process that began in February/March 2022 with the adoption of interim design standards for BD2 multifamily only buildings. That led to the creation of an interim ordinance with several design standards for those building types. Since the interim ordinance was adopted, work began on permanent standards to meet the six-month deadline to replace the interim standards which is October 21, 2022. The interim as well as the permanent standards are intended to fill a narrow gap in the BD zone design standards, not the larger design standard issues in the comprehensive plan or multifamily design standards. The permanent standards were reviewed by the architectural design board (ADB) who developed a recommendation. The planning board reviewed the permanent standards and made a recommendation to council. This is the public hearing on the proposed permanent standards. Mr. Clugston continued, because the interim standards expire October 21, 2022, council action is necessary by October 4, 2022 so that the permanent standards go into effect before the interim standards expire. If the interim standards expire before the permanent standards are adopted, there would be a time period after October 21, 2022 where a new multifamily only building in the BD2 zone would not have to meet the design standards; until October 21, 2022, a developer would need to meet the interim design standards that are in place. Mr. Clugston explained at the same time the design standard work was being done, the designated street front also became an issue. The designated street front was related to the blue line on the map in the BD2 zoning code. The interim ordinance related to extension of the existing designated street front is valid through December 1, 2022. The planning board will hold a hearing on a permanent max next week and that issue will come to council for review and adoption in October and November. The interim designated street front standards slightly extended some of the BD2 designated street front areas. He posed a hypothetical question, what if the designated street front is extended to all BD2 zoned parcels? In that case, multifamily only buildings would no longer be allowed in the BD2 zone because the blue line would touch all the BD2 zoned parcels and multifamily only uses would not be allowed on the ground floor, there would need to be some sort of commercial in all buildings in BD2. If the council's work eventually leads to that over the next couple months after the planning board holds their hearing, a permanent designated street front ordinance could repeal the BD2 multifamily design standards. Mr. Clugston noted there were four permanent design standards initially and a fifth that the ADB and planning board wanted to add. The initial proposed permanent design standards were related to materials, private amenity space, street -side amenity space, and roof modulation/stepdown. Rooftop decks had been discussed but were not included in the interim standards, but the ADB and planning wanted to include language regarding rooftop decks in the permanent standards. He reviewed: • Materials o Breaks up massing; strengthens identity o Preferred exterior materials: natural stone, wood, architectural metal, brick, and glass o Alternatives okay if contribute to cohesive design theme Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 5 Packet Pg. 78 8.2.a Private Amenity Space o Improves livability for smaller residential units o Allows for architectural discretion to design amenity space to align with building character, orientation and style o Provides additional articulation of massing, adds interest to the fagade, and increases `eyes on the street' 0 10% of the project area o Balconies, decks, patios, and yards ■ Together with a dwelling unit or grouped for resident use ■ If with individual units, > 40 sf o Balconies can project 6' into setback from R-zone property ■ Interim allow 5' projection, ADB referenced 6' for ADA compliance o Decks and patios can project into setback 10' Street -side amenity space o Results in a setback from the sidewalk to serve as amenity space o Activates street front to improve the pedestrian experience o Strengthens pedestrian access and site identity 0 5% of lot area must be provided o Must be between building and sidewalk only and open to sky o Must include landscaping, seating, art, etc. o Street -side amenity space area excludes any private amenity space area that is provided at the front of the building o Canopy/awnings required and does not impact amount of street -side amenity area Roof Modulation/Step Downs o Interim: "Some roof modulation is required with preference for step-downs that follow the slope when slope exists." o Proposed permanent: "Roof treatment and modulation. In order to provide the appearance of a well -modulated roof, three types of roof modulation are required and can include differing heights, projections, slopes, materials, step downs, step setback or a similar expression. Rooftop deck o Optional but desired amenity o Allowed above height limit o Transparent railing, no permanent structures allowed o Railings set back 5-feet from R-zoned properties Next steps o Action needed by October 4 to replace interim standards by October 21 o Take testimony during public hearing o Provide final direction for staff to include in permanent ordinance Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Ordinance 3918, the ECDC code related to the development regulations and design standards for the downtown BD zones. She asked how the BD2 interim standards would be integrated with existing standards that state building fagade should echo historic building patterns, reduction of mass, etc. or if they would be added to another chapter. Mr. Clugston answered the intent is to add Section 22.43.080 to the design standards for buildings in the BD zones. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if changes would be made to Ordinance 3918 because the interim standards are not the same as the BD design standards. In fact, BD4 is very restrictive compared to what has been done to BD2. Mr. Clugston answered the interim standards the council adopted only applied to multifamily buildings in the BD2 zone and that is what the permanent standards are for as well. The other sections in Section 22.43 stand alone and will remain. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 6 Packet Pg. 79 8.2.a Councilmember Buckshnis commented the BD2 definition has nothing to do with residential and the current standards which are very strict about ground level details, tile work, historic, awnings, etc., everything that is seen today in the downtown area. Mr. Clugston answered the existing standards in 22.43 do not apply to buildings that are not in the designated street front area. That is why this special set of standards was created to apply to multifamily only buildings in those areas that did not have a designated street front. Where the designated street front exists, there could be a mixed use building with 12' floor -to -floor heights, commercial depths, etc.; all the existing standards would apply. These standards only apply to multifamily only buildings where the designated street front does not apply. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why this was being addressed first when the council voted long ago to extend the designated street front. If the designated street front standards were adopted, this would be a moot point. Mr. Clugston answered it may end up that way, but due to the way both interims standards came about, this one came first and the interim designated street front map came second. These interim standards expire October 21s1; after that there are no interim design standards for multifamily only buildings in the BD2 zone. The planning board is holding a public hearing next week on extending the designated street front; the interim standards the council adopted in June extended the map slightly in some areas but there are still a dozen or so parcels that do not have the designated street front requirement yet. If the planning board decides after their public hearing to extend the designated street front to all BD2 zoned parcels and council also makes that change, then this section essentially becomes moot and with the adoption of a new designated street front map, the council could repeal this section. He summarized due to how and when the interim standards were adopted, this one came first and the designated street front interim standards came second. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled the council also voted not to allow rooftop decks but it is included again. If the council adopts the interim standards tonight, a developer could be vested between now and next Wednesday. Mr. Clugston answered yes, they would be vested to the interim standards that currently exist. Councilmember Teitzel observed rooftop decks are very popular in new construction in the Puget Sound. He referred to the ADB's recommended language regarding rooftop decks, (page 275 of the council packet), "No permanent structures are allowed within the roof deck area." He asked how no permanent structures was defined, whether it included elevator housings, stairwell housings, cellular transmission equipment, etc. Mr. Clugston answered the intent is not to have permanent structures in areas that would be used as part of the amenity space. Elevator penthouses and similar features are already allowed to extend above the height limit and could be located in that area and although he did not know why it would be needed, he assumed a cellular antenna could be on a rooftop deck. The intent for the rooftop deck space is not to allow any permanent roofed enclosures, etc. where people could congregate. Elevator penthouses, which are already allowed, would continue to be allowed. Councilmember Teitzel referred to the somewhat permanent triangular sail -type shades/umbrellas that are seen on some decks and asked if that would be considered a permanent structure. Mr. Clugston answered by definition, it would probably be a temporary structure but the intent is that those would not be allowed. If people wanted to bring them up for day or two or an afternoon, he suspected they could, but the intent is not to have permanent structures that require a building permit. Councilmember Tibbott asked if stairwells would be allowed. Mr. Clugston answered stairwells are currently not allowed to exceed the height limit. Councilmember Tibbott asked how high they would extend on the roofline. Mr. Clugston anticipated not very far, a covered stairwell would be similar to an elevator penthouse. The height of exterior stairs to a roof deck might be the height of the exterior railing. Again, the intent is not to have extra height on the building that is not already allowed. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 7 Packet Pg. 80 8.2.a Councilmember Tibbott said in reading the ADB and planning board's notes, there seems to be some concurrency that it would be a good idea to allow a stairwell on the roof He asked if that was being considered. Mr. Clugston answered it was not included in the proposed permanent standards, but the council could add that if they wished. Councilmember Tibbott said it seemed like a good idea for a number of reasons including making the rooftop amenity more accessible. Councilmember Tibbott commented he has seen shade sails attached to permanent poles and asked if that would be considered a permanent structure. Mr. Clugston answered yes. Councilmember Tibbott observed a shade sail would need to be attached to a temporary structure and taken down. Mr. Clugston agreed. If rooftop decks were allowed and elevators were installed to provide access including ADA access, Councilmember Teitzel asked how that would work for emergency egress. For example, in the event of a fire, how would people on the deck escape without a stairwell and if they could not access the elevator. Mr. Clugston answered that was a building code question and he would need to research it. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the design standards in Ordinance 3918 related to rooftop HVAC equipment, elevators and other rooftop features shall be designed to fit into the material and colors of the overall building design. She asked if the detail in the ordinance would be included in the interim standards. Mr. Clugston answered the interim and permanent design standards include language regarding building materials as well as language stating rooftop railings and guardrails need to be transparent. Other design elements could be added. He reiterated the interim standards expire October 21; if the council does not adopt permanent standards by then, the interim standards expires. Councilmember Buckshnis said she understands that and in her opinion it should have never gotten this far. She summarized she was not in favor of the roof top decks as they created an undesirable environment. Mayor Nelson opened the public hearing and described the procedures for in -person comments. Jack Malek, Shoreline, a former Shoreline planning commissioner and a realtor representing Karen Wiggins in the sale of the Sound View Plaza building on the corner of 2' & James in the BD2 zone, explained the building has been on the market for approximately two years. Another broker attempted to sell it for about 1'/2 years and he has had it for 4-5 months with no sales. That is partially due to the commercial lending climate during COVID, but that climate has changed and commercial lending is aggressive, as low as 4% and SBA lending is phenomenal right now. The building is 18,439 square feet on the ground and street level and another 3,740 square foot penthouse, far more square footage than most people need or want. It would be difficult to break that up into 400-1200 square foot increments and to find that many tenants in this changing market. The large, successful engineering firm Landau and Associates occupied the building for 23 years. When COVID hit, they moved much of their administrative staff remote and to smaller offices near the Northgate light rail station and one 7,000 square foot laboratory. The footprint and demand for office and even retail is limited. The City has done a great job fostering development of the stretch of Highway 99 in Edmonds, but that's not where everyone goes. There need to be people living in the downtown area to patronize and benefit the businesses. Without the ability to do more residential in this building, he feared it would remain vacant. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, commented this issue is a reminder of the challenges and difficulty of this legislative process. It is extreme complex and difficult to follow as a citizen. He tries to stay on top of this type of legislative process, but gave up on this one a while ago. There were multiple moratoriums, multiple interim zoning ordinances, introduction of a concept that moratoriums could be extended without a public hearing, emergency actions mixed into the process so that sometimes things were effective immediately and other times they were not and things were treated as emergencies when there was no mention of an emergency in the motion. He summarized this has been a tough process, one he hoped the City would learn from. It is a shame staff and city council have been so burdened with this issue because Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 8 Packet Pg. 81 8.2.a it should never have come to this. The code should have been updated and rewritten years ago. A lot of money was budgeted for the code rewrite in 2006 and 2007 and the number one priority in 2007 according to the city attorney's annual report was the code rewrite. The City should not have gotten to a point where a zone category titled commercial would ever be argued by someone that no commercial was required. BD2 has commercial in its title; how did it ever get to the point where someone thought they could build a multifamily only property in a commercially labeled zone? He encouraged the council to use this as an example of the mess the code is in and to include resources in the budget for the code rewrite. Joan Longstaff, Edmonds, commented she worked with Karen Wiggins and Jack Malek for many years and their project is very different than what is being considered, a big box with residential only and no store frontage. Jay Grant, Edmonds, recalled an exemption was allowed for solar panels and suggested using the term "environmental improvement" due to changing technology. The Port planned to put HVAC equipment on the roof and would have been Gold LEED, but that was denied. He concurred with the point made by Councilmember Teitzel regarding egress from the rooftop in the event of a fire without any stairs. He encouraged the council to think broadly rather than narrowly. Mayor Nelson described the procedures for virtual public comments. Michelle Dotsch, Edmonds, said her primary concern was separating the street front from the design standards. The design standards apply some of the things developers have looked for in downtown Edmonds in the past such as increased height, less setbacks and actually increase the bulk of the building over what previously existed. Eighty people attended an ADB meeting to oppose the proposed building; one was in support, a former councilmember. If citizens were told heights were going to be increased in the bowl and one of the lots that a neighbor described on the backside of the alley would be a 40-foot wall with a rooftop deck, that was essentially raising heights in the bowl. That is a big discussion that is sliding in through the backdoor. Having 80 people attend an ADB meeting is pretty remarkable. The public doesn't know what is going on with this proposal including the lack of any open space. She referred to the presentation regarding design standards by former City staff Eric Engmann that clearly referred to lot coverage. Most of the multifamily zoning has a percentage of lot coverage, she recalled it was 40-45%, but the proposed building is about 90-95%, the amenity space is paved and there is no green space or open space. She felt this was the wrong way to go about design standards. She understood the time limitation, but pairing them and then separating them was a mistake. The planning board and the ADB agreed that the street front should dictate and it was nearly unanimous that the blue line should be extended to all of the BD2 zone which would make this obsolete. Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, relayed his surprise with the rooftop deck amenity coming up at the last minute. Some councilmember already addressed his questions/concerns with rooftop decks related to access and elevator shafts, walkways or stairways leading to the deck extending above the allowed building height. He envisioned looking up and seeing things extend 8-9 feet or more above the rooftop as well as awning or umbrellas which de facto extend the building height. He recognized the time restrictions, but did not support the council approving the rooftop deck amenity recommendation at this time. He anticipated this may sort itself out eventually during the BD2 zone discussion, but if it doesn't, he did not support the rooftop deck amenity recommendation made by the planning board and the ADB. Deborah Arthur, Edmonds, said she does not live in the bowl, but if the issue is blocking views, she has two heavy iron stands in her yard with umbrellas that someone could easily bring up the stairs or in an elevator to a rooftop deck. Her umbrellas, although they are very sturdy and expensive, wind can be lifted by the wind and fly like a sword which could be an issue on a rooftop deck. She suggested instead of a rooftop deck, designing the building with covered decks on each unit. She noted a rooftop deck will be Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 9 Packet Pg. 82 8.2.a hot and will need an umbrella. Rooftop decks are a great place to sit and watch parades which she has done with friends who live in apartments in downtown Seattle. She cautioned against building too much because it is getting pretty crowded in downtown Edmonds. Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing. Mr. Clugston advised he will research the building code question. The proposed permanent design standards are in Exhibit A on page 277 of the council packet. It would be good to know if the council wants to change those standards so staff can return with an ordinance that incorporates that change. Otherwise, the ordinance presented on October 4' will essentially reflect what is on pages 277-278. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether staff was seeking a motion from council tonight. Mr. Clugston answered he was interested in council guidance whether to change the language in the packet. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the council already provided guidance that they did not want rooftop decks, yet they are proposed again. Edmonds is not Seattle and she was not in favor of rooftop decks and she hoped her fellow councilmembers agreed. She preferred to wait and pragmatically review all the BD zones. The entire downtown area should be considered and a determination made whether rooftop decks are desired and if so, add them pragmatically in the future. Council President Olson clarified the rooftop decks were not included in the interim design standards, but the proposed permanent standards are based on input from the ADB and planning board. She suggested Councilmember Buckshnis may want to make motion to remove rooftop decks from the proposed permanent standards. Councilmember Teitzel said he tends to favor rooftop decks because of the expert opinions from the ADB and because they are a nice amenity. However, due to questions and concerns have been raised tonight, he agreed with removing rooftop decks for now and revisiting it later, not just for 13132 zones but for other zones as well. For example, some restaurants downtown may potentially want to have a rooftop deck. He recommended getting further input and making a cohesive decision. Mr. Clugston summarized the rooftop deck appears to be the main issue; he will check on the building code issue and return on October 4' with two ordinances, one with and one without rooftop decks. Councilmember Chen observed the focus seems to be rooftop decks and building height. He asked if there was discussion about increasing building height as allowing an elevator on the rooftop already exceeds the building height. Mr. Clugston answered no, the building height remains the same, a maximum of 30 feet. There are existing exceptions for elevator penthouses and similar features on top of building; there is no proposal to change that. The only change is to allow a rooftop deck. Councilmember Chen understood that views are very important to people living in bowl, if exceptions are already allowed for elevators, stairways and semi -permanent structures like umbrellas to exceed the 30- foot building height, would it be a smart business idea to increase the minimum height to allow a business on the first floor and two floors residential stories so the building is truly mixed use. Mr. Clugston said that was definitely a question that could be asked, but he was uncertain now was the time for it. The comprehensive plan will be updated over the next couple years and those larger policy questions like heights, setback, etc. are probably better discussed once the council makes its policy decisions in the comprehensive plan. There may be a desire to increase heights slightly via the comprehensive plan process to make a three-story building attainable. The height limit is currently 30 feet and there is no intent to change that as part of this effort. Councilmember Paine said she was curious about accessibility and challenges with reaching the rooftop, recalling the abundant discussion the last time this was presented to council. She is familiar with the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 10 Packet Pg. 83 8.2.a Sound View Plaza building and other buildings in the BD3 and other zones that have rooftop amenities for penthouse condominiums. If something is done comprehensively, she wanted it to be more equitably designed so if there is rooftop amenity space, it is equal for all and considers safe ingress/egress. She looked forward to the discussion on October 4tn COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO REMOVE SECTION F, ROOFTOP DECKS. Councilmember Buckshnis concurred with Councilmember Teitzel that the entire BD area needed to be considered comprehensively. Including rooftop decks now is forcing something that needs to be looked at pragmatically. She supported the concept of rooftop decks, but due to the slope, she assume the people living in condominiums would not want to look down on rooftop decks. Council President Olson said the issue for her is the elevator and access. If there is nothing on the roof, there is no extra height associated with the elevator shaft on the roof. The issue of view infringement requires a more thoughtful process. These standards may be repealed if the designated street front is extended to the entire BD2 zone so it is cleaner to remove it now that and include it in the comprehensive plan discussion. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Clugston summarized staff will bring back an ordinance on October 4t' that is substantially similar to Exhibit A on pages 277-278 of tonight's packet without Section F regarding rooftop decks. 2. PUBLIC HEARING FOR STREET VACATION PLN2022-0045 Associate Planner Michele Szafran presented the Street Vacation Petition Adjacent to 838 Fir Street & 1108 9t1i Avenue South, identifying the vacation request area on an aerial map and a street view of the primarily vegetated site. She reviewed: • Initiation of proceedings ECDC 20.70.050 o By City council or by property owners abutting the portion of ROW to be vacated. o Vacation request has been initiated by abutting owners ■ A petition of owners of more than two-thirds of property abutting the portion of street or alley to be vacated is included as an attachment in the staff report. o According to ECDC 20.70.070 a future public hearing must be set by resolution o On August 2nd 2022, Resolution No. 1501 was passed by Council setting the public hearing for tonight • Survey map of unopened alley row, approximately 17' wide and 120' in length, located south of Fir Street • ECDC 20.70.020 — Criteria for Vacation o City council may vacate a ROW if found that: 1. The vacation is in the public interest ■ Removal of maintenance concerns for the City and/or liability from potential issues with any existing or future vegetation ■ No public purpose is provided by the ROW, so returning the property to the tax rolls would be in the interest of the public. 2. No property will be denied direct access as a result of the vacation • ECDC 20.70.140 Final Decision o Following the public hearing, the city council shall by motion: 1. Adopt an ordinance granting the vacation; or 2. Adopt a motion denying the vacation; or 3. Adopt a resolution of intent with specific conditions that must be met within 90 days Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 11 Packet Pg. 84 8.2.a a. Either i. Monetary compensation up to one-half the fair market value ii. Grant of substitute public right-of-way iii. Any combination of the above (i or ii) totaling no more than one-half fair market value Or b. Grant an easement to the City in exchange for easement vacated Utilities and Easements o No existing public utilities and no future need ■ No need for easements to City Monetary compensation recommended consistent with ECDC 20.70.140.A.3.a.i o Appraisal based on single-family use o Pre -vacation ■ 838 Fir Street = $1,000,000 o Post Vacation ■ 838 Fir Street = $1,035,000 o Difference in appraised value of $35,000 o One-half of appraised value = $17,500 Staff recommendation o Adopt Resolution of Intent to Vacate with the proposed condition in the staff report to require payment by the petitioners of one-half the appraised value Councilmember Paine commented it sounds like all the easements will be removed when the alley is vacated. Ms. Szafran answered there are no easements. Councilmember Paine asked if there was any guidance for the appraisal regarding the use of comparables. She noted the comparables (page 38 of the report and 374 of the council packet) are in many areas including Esperance, Lake Ballinger, etc. She asked how comparables are determined in a situation like this. In her experience in Seattle, they looked at neighboring property values and valued the property per square foot. This seems to be choosing properties that are most favorable to the property owner. Engineering Program Manager Jeanie McConnell answered there is no specific language in the code regarding how appraisals are conduced other than the appraisal is to be prepared by a qualified land appraiser with an MAI designation establishing the fair market value of the area to be vacated. Councilmember Paine expressed concern the appraisal favors the property owner who will absorb the unopened alley. Council President Olson agreed with Councilmember Paine, commenting she knew where this property was located and it was a high value view area. Comparing it to the other properties was not apples to apples and there were plenty of properties that have been sold in that area. She questioned the comparables that were used and requested properties in the exact vicinity be considered. Councilmember Buckshnis commented she has seen a lot of vacations, sometimes the property owner is charged and sometimes they aren't. She asked if the intent of the vacation was to do a lot line adjustment to design a larger house. Ms. McConnell said staff has had conversations with the applicant to get a better understanding and that is not their intent. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why they want to have the property vacated. Ms. McConnell answered it is to have additional property, but it does not provide enough more land for an individual lot to do a subdivision; they would have to work together, houses would potentially need to be demolished, the lot lines realigned, etc. to do a subdivision. She summarized there is another process involved that is not part of this street vacation and that intent has not been made apparent to the City. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if each party would pay half the appraised value. Ms. McConnell answered the City does not get involved in how the compensation is made to the City. Staff s recommendation is up to one half the appraised value, $17,500. Councilmember Buckshnis agreed there Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 12 Packet Pg. 85 8.2.a should be other comparables and this seems to be extremely generous to the people applying for the vacation. Council President Olson added other than property valuation, the street vacation is pretty straightforward. She was interested in hearing public comments. Councilmember Teitzel recalled public comment regarding the definition of non -right-of-way easement. He clarified this was vacation of a right-of-way, not an easement. Ms. McConnell agreed, it is the vacation of alley/street right-of-way. Councilmember Teitzel clarified it is basically City -owned property being vacated in exchange for compensation. Ms. McConnell agreed. Mayor Nelson opened the public hearing and described procedures for in -person comments. Kent Scudder, Edmonds, one of the property owners that abut the right-of-way, described the purpose of the vacation request. They are trying to do a backyard makeover and found make site improvements in proximity to a right-of-way very restrictive with regard to wall heights, setbacks, etc. The primary motivation is to remove the right-of-way restrictions as well as improve the utility of their property by adding lot area. With regard to the appraisal process, he has been a commercial real estate appraiser for the last 35 years, primarily a dirt appraiser, similar to the ones who did the appraisal for this vacation. He understood the difficulty finding comparables in a City that is essentially built out. Comparables have to be vacant land so the appraiser finds them wherever they can. Vacant land won't be next door or down the block because the bowl is built out so they had to look far and wide to find comparables. The rules for appraisals are dictated by the Appraisal Institute. Finding vacant land comparables requires going broader than one might expect; properties closest to the subject property are given the most weight in the appraiser's analysis. He felt the appraiser did a good job, recognizing the disparity of the data and reaching a reasonable conclusion. He discussed it with the appraiser and they were persuasive in their argument as well as in their appraisal. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, said a right-of-way is an easement, it is not property possessed by the City. The City has a right to use the land; the title belongs to Mr. Scudder and others. He wished the council understood that critical concept; Mr. Scudder is the fee title owner, the City only has an easement right. When the City vacates an easement, requiring compensation is optional, there is nothing in the law requiring compensation. The vacation is in the public interest as it eliminates maintenance responsibility and liability exposure. He requested the council vacate this unused, unneeded easement without requiring any compensation and if any councilmembers disagreed, requested they explain why. This vacation is in the public interest without requiring compensation. If councilmembers disagreed, he suggested treating the applicants like the abutting property owners at 174t' Street SW who paid less than 10% of the appraised value for property that the City owned the fee title to, a much different situation than tonight's vacation where Mr. Scudder and his neighbors own the fee title. The council can read about the vacation that charged less than 10% in Ordinance 3250. He questioned why the applicant in tonight's vacation should pay 50% of appraised value for property they already own the fee title to. The title is not transferring; tonight's applicant owns the fee title already. As requiring compensation is permissive, Mr. Reidy questioned why appraisals were required before it was known whether the council would require compensation. He questioned whether tonight's applicants would be required to pay for the appraisal if City staff had done what the 2019 city council directed, initiate a 2-step process to resolve the differences between the planning board and staff recommendations and add a second public hearing. The city attorney was asked to help staff with drafting the related ordinance, but that was never done. He questioned why the council would allow staff to put forward a recommendation that differed from the recommendation made by the public hearing after a lengthy public process. At the October 15, 2019 meeting, then -Mayor Earling assumed this would be done by the end of the year or the process would need to start over. As the appraisal in tonight's packet was required, he Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 13 Packet Pg. 86 8.2.a suggested refunding the appraisal costs to the applicants. He referred to pages 212-215 in the council packet, Resolution 1145 which provides an example of how the appraisal fee was refunded. Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing. Ms. McConnell asked council for direction regarding the appraisal. If the council agrees with payment of one half of the appraised value, the resolution in the packet could brought back on the consent agenda. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why the City charges for some street vacation and does not charge for others. Ms. McConnell answered there are specific circumstances outlined in code when the City does not seek compensation for the street vacation which usually relates to the reservation of an easement to the City. There are other historic factors when compensation was not collected such as critical areas on the property that decreased the value so compensation was less than one half the appraised value, an instance where it was part of a City property sale, a cemetery expansion, or the council felt during its deliberation there was enough public benefit from the vacation not to require compensation. Councilmember Buckshnis observed this is an unopened right-of-way, no one can walk through it and it is part of their property. Ms. McConnell answered it is unopened and looks like it is part of their property, there is no representation of it being open to the public such as a trail. To the south of the property is a developed plat where the houses take access off Sea Vista Place that connects to 9tn Avenue S. Councilmember Chen observed the City has right-of-way through this property being vacated. He asked whether this vacation cost the City anything, any repairs needed to be made, etc. Ms. McConnell said if it is vacated, it would be vacated as is. Councilmember Chen asked is the vacation would impact public access. Ms. McConnell answered there are no permit applications from the property owner or any indication regarding how that property may be utilized. If a permit was required for anything the property owner wanted to do, they would need to obtain one from the City. She was unable to speak to the property owners' potential use or rehabilitation of the property or whether it could all be done onsite or if it would impact the public. Councilmember Chen concluded with that information, since it would not cost the City anything or inconvenience the public, he was okay with not charging the property owner for the vacation. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO WAIVE THE $17,500 VACATION FEE FOR THIS PROPOSAL. Council President Olson said staff s recommendation for payment of one half the appraised value is consistent with the examples in the packet. However, there is still a question about the market value which is a separate issue. For consistency's sake, as well as the exceptions cited in the code which did not apply in this instance, she supported following staffs recommendation to require payment of one half the appraised value. She did not support the motion. Councilmember Paine agreed with Council President Olson, it appeared everything in the code was followed. Amendments may need to be made to the code in the future, but that does not apply to this action. She did not support the motion. Councilmember Tibbott did not support the motion. Staff s recommendation conforms with previous presentations on the same topic. The vacation adds value to the property owners who receive the additional property and it was his understanding the City was not allowed to give away property without just compensation. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 14 Packet Pg. 87 UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (1-5), COUNCILMEMBER CHEN VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, TIBBOTT, BUCKSHNIS, AND PAINE AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING NO. Council President Olson commented in lieu of going forward with the action, she would like to have staff look at the valuation based on price per square foot from the tax assessor's office versus the vacant parcels used in the appraisal. That differential would provide more information regarding whether the appraisal should be questioned. Ms. McConnell said that could be done if it was the overall direction from the council. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED TO GET MORE INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING THE APPRAISAL BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH ACTION. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. Councilmember Teitzel referred to the point made by Mr. Reidy, the City is requiring compensation for property the City does not legally own; the City holds the right to a right-of-way across the property so arguably the City could put a street or alley on that right-of-way. If the City opened that right-of-way and installed a street or right-of-way, he asked if the City would owe any money to the property owner for use of that fee title property. Ms. McConnell answered no. City Attorney Jeff Taraday relayed the question is whether the City would owe compensation in the absence of a street vacation if the City wanted to put an alley in that location. Councilmember Teitzel clarified since the City has rights to the right-of-way, if the City wanted put a street or alley in that location, since the City is not the fee title owner of the property, would the City owe any compensation to the property owner in that even. Mr. Taraday asked if the question presumed there was no street vacation. Councilmember Teitzel said if the City retained the right-of-way and eventually put in a street or alley in the right-of-way but were not the legal owner of the property. Mr. Taraday answered the City owns a right-of-way which entitles it to improve the right-of-way with an alley and would not need to pay the property owner any compensation. When that plat was recorded, all the streets and alleys in the plat were dedicated to the public and the City basically holds those in trust for the public. It may be many years or in some cases not foreseeable when the right-of-way would be improved. Councilmember Tibbott said his understanding from a previous meeting was that the public could use a right-of-way like that. For example, children in the neighborhood could play in the hedge because it is a City right-of-way. Mr. Taraday answered that is his understanding. He did not think the property owner had a right to exclude the public from the right-of-way as long as it remained right-of-way. In most cases, that is unenforced and people look the other way. While the speaker was correct that the underlying fee is owned by the property owner, the fee is subject to dedication of the right-of-way which carries with it a substantial burden on the property. He would need to research whether there was any case law that addressed the facts the councilmember mentioned, but his hunch was it would be inappropriate for a property owner to completely exclude the public from the right-of-way. It could be an unimproved pedestrian path that the City did not spend money improving, but that would be an informal pedestrian thoroughfare in a neighborhood which would still be a proper use of a right-of-way. If there was a path through the hedge, Councilmember Tibbott asked if it would be available for anyone in the City to use. Mr. Taraday answered the definition of right-of-way dedicated to the public is that the public can use it for travel. Councilmember Tibbott relayed vacating the right-of-way essentially removed the rights of citizens to use that land and it becomes completely available to the property owner who receives the vacated property. Mr. Taraday answered yes. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 15 Packet Pg. 88 8.2.a Councilmember Tibbott commented in that case it makes sense there would be some compensation for removing the public's rights. Mr. Taraday said another reason that cities charge for street vacations is the council is stewards of public funds and one of their responsibilities is to look out for the taxpayers' resources and not give away property that has value. It would be one thing if everybody in Edmonds could get a street vacation and the city council decided it did not want to charge anyone for street vacations. The reality is not everyone gets a street vacation, they only exist in a few pockets of the City so it creates a benefit for a certain class of citizens who happen to abut an unopened right-of-way. Councilmember Tibbott said he was uncomfortable micromanaging or examining a property valuation done by a certified commercial appraiser. He did not disagree it sounded like a low valuation, but these professionals work hard at their craft and what has been provided is their best effort. He had some unease attempting to change what a professional evaluator determined for this property. Councilmember Paine recalled the City has defended its rights to access unopened right-of-way used by the public that lead to the water and if there are encroachments. Mr. Taraday answered the City requires encroachment permits when someone builds a structure in a right-of-way. He was unable to speak to how commonly the City defends its unopened rights -of -way or requires encroachment permits, but it was his sense encroachment permits were fairly common. Councilmember Paine clarified extra steps were required to do things in a right-of-way. She agreed with Councilmember Tibbott, this appraisal was done in accordance with the requirements in the code and she did not want to change the appraisal. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess. There was unanimous consent from the council to postpone Item 10.3, Development Code Rewrite Work Plan. 10. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. RECONSIDERATION OF FINAL VOTE TAKEN AT TODAY'S SPECIAL MEETING REGARDING THE PROCESS FOR FILLING COUNCIL VACANCY — POSITION #7 COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO PASS THE PROCESS IN THE PACKET AS AMENDED AT THE EARLIER SPECIAL MEETING. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. PARK LAND ACQUISITION REPORT Parks, Recreation and Human Services Director Angie Feser explained a high priority was established by the mayor for acquisition of land for conservation of natural resources in the community. Tonight's presentation is a report related to that work over the last couple years. She reviewed: • Parks, Recreation & Open Space (PROS) Plan Recommendations 1. Acquisition to fill park system gaps — secure additional land for neighborhood parks to address gaps 2. Open space and conservation acquisitions — pursue acquisitions that adjoin city properties or conserve unique natural areas 5. Trail connections — needed to help link destinations across community Acquisitions that occurred in 2021 o DNR Tidelands Address: Shoreline between Casper and north end of Cary Street (approx.. 1,100' feet of shoreline) Size: 20 acres Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 16 Packet Pg. 89 8.2.a ■ Assessed value: N/A ■ Highlights - State of WA Dept Natural Resources - City has 1968 Use Deed (discovered by staff) - Confirmed with the State that members of the public have access to the tideland beach and water. o Shirley Johnson Property Donation ■ Address: 9309 Bowdoin Way ■ Size: 0.9 acre ■ Appraised value: $350,000 (due to condition remain in open space) if sold on open market value over $1 million ■ Expenditures: $46,500 ■ "Purposes of being used as a park and/or community garden ... for the citizens of Edmonds and for the local community as the City of Edmonds deems best in their discretion." ■ Next Steps: - Security site/demolition ($200,000) - Master Plan (long term) City -Approached Possible Donations 0 75t' PI W/Meadowdale Road ■ Size: 1.28 acres ■ Undeveloped, treed parcel ■ Outcome: owner conditions not aligned with City goals 0 232" d St W/Edmonds Way ■ Size: 0.5 acre ■ Developed with small house and outbuilding ■ Outcome: owner changed mind Possible Transfer: Southwest Snohomish County Park o Address: Olympic View Drive o Size: 120 acres 0 2021 Assessed Value: $12,495,500 o Highlights: ■ Largest single parcel of open space in Edmonds ■ Passive/sensitive wildlife preserve (no bikes allowed) ■ Perrinville Creek (2 branches) ■ Possible transfer of property 2022 ■ Site improvements needed ■ Impacts to park maintenance o Esperance County Park ■ Address: 7830 224t' SW, unincorporated Snohomish County ■ Size: 9.6 acres ■ 2021 Assessed value: $5 million ■ Highlights - Within unincorporated Snohomish County - Active and passive use developed park - Impacts to park maintenance Non -Active Negotiation: o Perrinville Woods ■ Address: 7794 Olympic View Drive ■ Size: 4.69 acres total (4 parcels) ■ Assessed Value: $2,487,700 ■ Appraised Value: $2,500,000 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 17 Packet Pg. 90 8.2.a Owner sale price: $4,700,000 Highlights - Four parcels, two with dwellings - Does not have Perrinville stream onsite - Near other large parks Southwest County Park (120 acres) Lynndale Park (22 acres) - Adjacent to city owned properties • Open space Seaview Park o Main Street Property ■ Address: 9XX Main Street ■ Size: 0.15 ■ Listed Price: $299,050 then $175,000 ■ Appraised value: $60,000 ■ City Offer: $55,000 ■ Owner sale price: $150,000 ■ Highlights - Undeveloped - Surrounded by city -owned open space - Shell Creek not on -site - Contains wetlands and critical area buffers which constrains development Negotiations Ongoing o Unocal Property ■ Size: 21.13 acres ■ 2017-2023 cleanup/DOE ■ 2025 clean-up complete ■ Then title goes to state ■ State - market value ■ Highlights - Expansion of marsh - Connection of existing city properties of Marsh and Marina Beach Park - Decontamination in process, possible hot spots - City granted first right of purchase in 2021, valid through 2023 o Highway 99 Parcels ■ Highlights - PROS Plan Recommendations/Goals - Various parcels - Continuous research Council President Olson referred to the quote on the slide regarding the Shirley Johnson donation and asked if those were the exact words in the bequest. Ms. Feser answered yes. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if Snohomish County wanted to gift the City the two parks. Ms. Feser answered preliminary conversations, especially regarding Southwest County Park, were a straight transfer of property. Councilmember Buckshnis observed in addition to an increase in park staff, there would also need to be an increase in police staff. She also noted Southwest County Park was a key part of Perrinville Creek. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled a presentation at the Lake Ballinger Forum regarding the old golf course in Mountlake Terrace and asked if Edmonds planned to do an ILA with Mountlake Terrace to put a park on the Edmonds side of property. Ms. Feser said at this time she does not have direction from the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 18 Packet Pg. 91 8.2.a council to talk to Mountlake Terrace about an ILA for shared development. It would be worth a conversation during the CIP/CFP budget process and if council wants to make that a priority, it would be a project worth pursuing. She anticipated Mountlake Terrace would be a willing partner in preliminary discussions. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the designs are fabulous and include a fishing pier. Councilmember Chen liked the idea of an ILA with Mountlake Terrace for the former golf course property. He referred to the Plum Street Plaza property on Highway 99 that has been vacant for over year after a fire on September 11, 2021. He has not seen any movement on that property and suggested it had the potential for acquisition. He asked if that was one of the properties on Highway 99 that were listed on the spreadsheet in the presentation. Ms. Feser answered no, the spreadsheet primarily identifies undeveloped/underdeveloped parcels. She could look into the Plum Street Plaza if the council desires. Councilmember Chen suggested looking into possibilities for that parcel, finding out the owners' intent, and expressing the City's interest. Councilmember Teitzel commented acquiring additional space for citizens' enjoyment is exciting. He observed the two county parks are already within the City's boundaries, so use by residents and visitors would not change, but the responsibility for maintenance would shift from Snohomish County to the City of Edmonds. He asked if Snohomish County would be willing to provide funds to Edmonds to help defray maintenance costs. Ms. Feser answered as part of a transfer, it would be worth discussing maintenance operations and/or improvements with Snohomish County. Councilmember Teitzel referred to the Unocal property, commenting it would be great if that property could be retained in a natural state for wildlife purposes, fish recovery, etc. He asked if there have been any discussion with the State about transferring the property to the City instead of selling it as long as it supported enviromnental goals related to wildlife preservation and salmon restoration. Ms. Feser answered conversations began with the State in late 2020/early 2021 about being creative such as would WSDOT be willing transfer to the property to other department like DNR or Fish and Wildlife and the City lease it from them. Those conversations did not get very far. There is some concern by WSDOT that they have spent $8 million to purchase the property and they need to get value back out of it. There are some RCWs that dictate that they may need to be made whole. The City is waiting for the site to be cleaned and transferred to WSDOT before having those conversations. The City should retain the first right of refusal so it is first in line when WSDOT decides to sell it. There are various forms of acquisition such as easements, dedications, donations, WSDOT retains ownership and the City develops it, etc.; it does not have to be fee purchase. Councilmember Teitzel commented it seems like the cleanup is taking a long time. He visits the area frequently and does not see any work happening. Ms. Feser answered the physical cleanup was completed; they are monitoring the site via numerous small wells. There is a period of time those have to sit and have certain readings before they can be cleared. Even when that is done, it has to sit for another year to maintain the readings. The property is in that final stage of the process now. Councilmember Paine commented Esperance Park does not touch Edmonds. Ms. Feser agreed it was currently in unincorporated Snohomish County and technically not within the City of Edmonds. Councilmember Paine referred to a very thin strip of undeveloped land, noting if that was acquired, it would touch Edmonds. She asked if that property was part of the land acquisition under consideration. Ms. Feser said she was not aware of that parcel but could research it. Councilmember Paine suggested informing the public that the City can accept property donations if it is a good match for all parties. Ms. Feser commented there are many forms of donation, such as partial lifetime estates (the donor can live on the property until they choose to leave), conservation easements, etc. and City staff is more than willing to talk to property owners about those. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 19 Packet Pg. 92 8.2.a With regard to SW Snohomish County Park, Councilmember Tibbott said some of his neighbors are involved with cleanup in the park and would like to improve the trail system in park, but they are not allowed to because it is not an Edmonds park. Acquiring that park would speak volumes to the people who want to be more actively involved. Councilmember Tibbott recalled approximately a decade ago when uses of the Unocal property were considered, one of possibilities if there was not a ferry terminal, was developing it with condominiums. He asked about the zoning of the Unocal property. Ms. Feser answered it is general commercial and/or master plan; it is not currently zoned open space. In light of the fact that it borders natural habitat and is used by many animals, Councilmember Tibbott said there may be a better zoning designation for that property. He asked if the possibility of rezoning it to something more compatible with the current condition versus a commercial use had been considered. Ms. Feser answered it has been considered a little, but the current owner, Unocal as well as WSDOT, may have concerns because rezoning the property to open space may change the value of the land. Councilmember Tibbott said that should at least be explored, because it has become much more natural habitat over the years versus a commercial/industrial space and that might be a way to recognize what has happened on the property over those decades. With regard to Esperance, Council President Olson said the prospect of investing in an area that is not in Edmonds is a con. There is opportunity for economic development in that area, connecting to the Highway 99 International District right at the hub, doing an International Art Corridor that connects to the park, etc. She was glad there were conversations occurring even though it gives her pause. Councilmember Buckshnis said the Unocal property is zoned CW, Commercial Waterfront. Uses for the property were considered during the time Joan Bloom and Lora Petso were councilmembers. The environment has changed so it's possible Unocal may be more receptive to rezoning the property. It would be great to downzone the property because the cleanup may be different. She supported extending the first right of refusal. Councilmember Chen commented Esperance Park is very nice and it is close to Highway 99, but it is the only park Esperance residents use. If the City acquired that park, it would take green space away from the Esperance residents which he was hesitant to do. Alternatively, he suggested talking with the residents about annexing Esperance along with the park. 3. DEVELOPMENT CODE REWRITE WORK PLAN This item was removed from the agenda. 4. 2022 SEPTEMBER BUDGET AMENDMENT Administrative Services Director Dave Turley reviewed the proposed amendments: • Temporary staffing to cover a vacancy in admin services. The position has been posted but has not yet been filled. • Under OPMA, the City is required to provide a physical location for the public to attend meetings, even those held remotely. Using the Waterfront Center is no longer feasible. This amendment convert a room on the first floor of city hall. Councilmember Tibbott asked whether the space would be available for community meetings when not used for virtual meetings. Mr. Turley said there would need to be a staff person there for any meeting. The intent is to install a door to the sidewalk in an office on the southeast corner of the first floor of city hall to make it easy to access. Once people are in that room, they would have access to city hall so it Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 20 Packet Pg. 93 8.2.a could not simply be made available for use without a staff member or councilmember. Councilmember Tibbott recalled looking for space for committee meetings and this seemed like an ideal location. • Moves the cost of software for public records requests between departments. GovQA historically charged to different departments will be paid by Information Services and charged back to Departments. This is an accounting change with a net -zero cost. • Increases in Microsoft Office 365 license counts and costs • Endpoint protection — implement tools to enhance security by better protecting workstations and providing visibility into network activity • Ebb Tide trial expenses • Park maintenance overtime exceeded budget due to lack of seasonal staff • State grant to assist with funding consultants for the comprehensive plan update • Professional services for outside consultant plan review of building permits which has exceeded existing budget • Provide budget authority up to $25,000 annually for small claims to be paid from the risk fund • Additional work required by PUD at City Park odor unit • Funds to cover flood damage at the WWTP January 2022 • Funds to cover the extension of the carbon recovery project • Increased costs due to high fuel prices • Move designated ARPA budget to accounts from which expenditures will be made through end of 2022 • Provide budget authority to spend up to $450,000 in ARPA funds that the council authorized on September 7, 2022 to construct the 96t' Avenue Stormwater Mitigation Project Mr. Turley relayed staff s recommendation is to approve the September budget amendment as included in the packet. Councilmember Chen inquired about status of OpenGov. Mr. Turley answered it is ongoing but is not progressing as quickly as hoped. He had hoped to have it completed in 2022, but the current ETA is approximately March 2022. Staff meets with OpenGov every week where OpenGov asks questions and shows the progress they have made and staff learns how to use the package. Staff has given OpenGov data for 2022 and will be giving them data from prior years as well as budget info for 2023. He summarized it was still in the process of development. Councilmember Tibbott referred to the payment of small claims from the risk fund and asked for examples of small claims that would paid from that fund. Mr. Turley answered HR Director Jessica Neill Hoyson is managing the risk function for the City. She has a lot of experience from previous workplaces that had a fund to pay small claims. For example if Parks was mowing and threw a rock that broke a windshield, rather than going through the process of putting it on the consent agenda and to WCIA, Ms. Neill Hoyson would have the discretion to pay the claim from the risk fund. The City receives a fair number of small claims like that. The Finance Committee reviewed a policy that Ms. Neill Hoyson developed that puts structure around when that is appropriate. It essentially streamlines the process and reduces the amount of time spent with WCIA on small items. Councilmember Tibbott referred to the amendment to move designated ARPA budget to the accounts from which expenditures will be made through the end of 2022, recalling the council removed green streets from the budget and now the amendment includes funds for green streets conceptual design. Mr. Turley suggested talking to Community Services/Economic Development Director Todd Tatum for more details. He recalled during the budget amendments process in February 2023, money was taken out of the budget designated for green streets. When the council passed the ordinance regarding ARPA spending in Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 21 Packet Pg. 94 8.2.a May, it included money for green streets. Councilmember Tibbott suggested removing the $89,250 amendment for green streets conceptual design until there is further clarification. COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO REMOVE GREEN STREETS CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FROM THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT. Councilmember Tibbott recalled the council removed that decision package. If there is interest in moving forward with that, he wanted to hear the details instead of burying it in a budget amendment. Mr. Turley recalled most or some of the funds were removed during the February budget amendments. Councilmember Tibbott suggested bringing back with additional information. Councilmember Paine did not support the motion, recalling there was $600,000 in the budget and $400,000 was removed, leaving $200,000. She always likes to talk about green streets and other systems that would make the City a little greener and more environmentally friendly. She requested these funds remain, there are ARPA funds to cover it and it is specifically allowed via the federal legislation. She encouraged councilmembers to support retaining the funds in the budget amendment and to have a presentation about green streets, noting it is more than just pervious pavement. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed support for the amendment. She clarified the funding was $1 million, $600,000 is in the 2023 CIP, and $400,000 was removed from 2022. The funds in 2022 were removed because there is no policy that defines a green street. She does not know enough to support a design and preferred to work on the code and the comprehensive plan to define what a green street is. Councilmember Chen agreed $400,000 was removed but there is still $600,000 in the ARPA funding for green streets. He would like to learn more about the concept of green streets and what could be done to beautify the City even more. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-3); COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, TIBBOTT AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN AND PAINE AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING NO. Councilmember Teitzel referred to the amendment that moves designated ARPA budget to the accounts from which expenditures will be made, and asked what an ARPA grant contractor is or does. Mr. Turley answered rather than hiring a full-time employee, the City hired a consultant to handle ARPA grant management. In 2020 when the CARES grants came out, Edmonds, like a majority of cities Edmonds' size, had very little experience handling that type of federal grant. There are a lot of rules about how the funds are distributed and how the funds can be spent and the City did not have that expertise. A lot of cities have hired a full-time person, Edmonds hired a consultant to manage the grants to ensure when funds are distributed to individuals and small businesses for example, they are eligible to receive the funds. Without hiring an employee, the City did not have the capacity or experience to manage that size of a fund; the CARES and ARPA funds combined is over $13 million. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO EXTEND TO 10:45. COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO AMEND TO 10:30. AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO ACCEPT THE 2022 SEPTEMBER BUDGET AMENDMENT. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 22 Packet Pg. 95 8.2.a Council President Olson said she would like to reconsider the motion on the amendment regarding green streets. Mr. Taraday said reconsideration can be done during the same meeting as long as the motion is made by someone on the prevailing side. Council President Olson said she wanted to reconsider the motion regarding the green streets conceptual design because she wanted to get more information about which streets would be designed in that way. She voted against the motion to remove it from the budget amendment but now wants to remove it which would change the vote to 4-2. Mr. Taraday advised there would need to be motion that passed to reconsider that vote. Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, there is no main motion. Mr. Taraday said the question was whether Council President Olson can bring a motion for reconsideration on a previously adopted motion. Councilmember Buckshnis reiterated there needs to be a main motion first and then an amendment. She suggested having a main motion and then a motion to reconsider the amendment. Mr. Taraday responded in a perfect world yes, but this council frequently does not do it that way. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO RECONSIDER THE MOTION TO REMOVE GREEN STREETS CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FROM THE BUDGET AMENDMENT. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-2), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, TIBBOTT, AND BUCKSHNIS AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN AND PAINE VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO REMOVE THE GREEN STREETS CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FROM THE BUDGET AMENDMENT. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-2), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL, TIBBOTT, AND BUCKSHNIS AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN AND PAINE VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO ACCEPT THE 3" QUARTER BUDGET AMENDMENT AS AMENDED. Council President Olson offered a friendly amendment to move the ordinance in the packet as amended. Councilmember Paine was agreeable to that amendment. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The ordinance approved is Ordinance No. 4275. 5. AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE SEAVIEW PARK INFILTRATION FACILITY PHASE 2 PROJECT Acting Public Works Director Rob English advised when this was presented to the PPW Committee last week, they requested a 5-minute presentation to make the public aware of this upcoming stormwater infiltration project. The scope of work is to expand the phase 1 improvements which included four injection wells for infiltrating stormwater and pull flows from the Perrinville Creek system in an effort to reduce flows and eroding velocities during higher storm events. The project was identified in 2015 study Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 23 Packet Pg. 96 8.2.a done by Tetra Tech to identify projects in the Perrinville system to mitigate erosion and high flow problem in Perrinville Creek. Mr. English continued, the project was bid project in the summer, but due to issues with the bids and information provided, it was rebid in August. Three bids were received on September 6ti'; the low bid was provided by WSB Excavation & Utilities at $373,941; the engineer's estimate was $344,555. He reviewed: • Proposed construction budget Description Amount Contract Award $373,941 Contract Award Mgmt. Reserve (20%) $74,788 Construction Mgmt., Insp., & Testing 20% $74,788 1% Arts (non -grant portion of project) $935 Total $524,452 Funding Amount Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $160,252 Grant — Department of Ecology $364,200 Total Funds Available $542,452 Mr. English explained if the management reserve isn't needed, the stormwater utility fund contribution would be reduced. Staff s recommendation is to proceed with the award to WSB Excavation and Utilities and authorize a 20% management reserve for changes and unforeseen conditions in the field. COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO WSB AND AUTHORIZE THE MANAGEMENT RESERVE OF $74,788. Councilmember Teitzel recalled when he was on the council previously, this project was just the Seaview infiltration facility and it did not include phasing. He asked why it was being done in two phases. Mr. English explained the potential for increased capacity at this location was identified in later states of design for phase 1. Staff approached Ecology about expanding project, but because the grant had already been issued for the specific scope of phase 1, Ecology did not agree to expand the project and recommended applying for a grant for phase 2 which staff did. Councilmember Chen asked about the process for sourcing contractors. Mr. English answered there are different thresholds; for a project of this size, it is advertised for construction bids in the DJC and the Everett Herald and depending on the project size, contractors are given 2-3 weeks to submit bids. A pre - bid meeting was offered for this project in an effort to help contractors complete the paperwork. Bids were due on September 6'; typically bids are received right before 2:00 p.m.. They are opened by the city clerk, read aloud, a process that is open to the public. The City received three bids; staff reviews the documentation to ensure they are responsive and responsible which in this case all three were. On smaller projects, there is a small works process that is quicker and requires less documentation. Job Order Contracting is a new process that the council approved earlier this year. Councilmember Chen asked if the City or Snohomish County have resources to assist smaller contractors with the process. Mr. English answered the City does not offer resources; a pre -bid meeting was held for this project to help contractors fill out the paperwork correctly, especially the prequalification paperwork. Larger cities and agencies like Seattle or Snohomish County may have specific divisions that offer assistance to contractors; Edmonds does not have those resources. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 24 Packet Pg. 97 8.2.a Council President Olson commended public works for the good job they do going after grants for projects, especially going back to Ecology for another project to increase capacity. From her former life, she noted the SBA offers assistance to small contractors with completing bid documentation. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. EDMONDS CITY ATTORNEY CONTRACT EXTENSION Council President Olson referred to the background/history in the agenda packet that it would be difficult to do a thorough evaluation and other steps that are required to either renew the city attorney's contract or do an RFP. Therefore, she proposed extending the city attorney's contract for one year to allow for a more robust process. She invited Councilmember Teitzel to speak to this item. Councilmember Teitzel explained he was involved in the last city attorney review in 2019 which resulted in the current three year contract with Lighthouse. He recalled it that was a substantial amount of work and a rigorous process to get internal client input regarding the quality of service Lighthouse provided. He recommended that be done again as there have been mixed informal responses where some people are very pleased with Lighthouse and some are not. There needs to be a rigorous process to ensure everyone Lighthouse serves has an opportunity to have input into the quality of work they receive. Extending the contract would allow time to compile those results and report to council. Councilmember Teitzel recalled during Mr. Taraday's presentation on August 23rd, he reported Lighthouse worked 1,855 hours for Edmonds during the first six months of 2022 and earned a flat monthly fee of $323,718 for that six month period. Dividing those equates to an average hourly rate of $175. Lighthouse charges the City of Maple Valley an average of $310/hour. If Edmonds paid the rate Maple Valley is charged, the cost would be substantially more, $575,000 for the first six months of 2022 rather than $323,000. He verified the hours Mr. Taraday reported via backup documentation Mr. Taraday provided which he shared with council. He concluded Edmonds was receiving a very attractive deal from a price perspective. Councilmember Teitzel continued, the more difficult consideration is the quality which will take time to investigate. There have also been questions raised about the terms of the contract extension including a look back clause. He explained if the City terminated Lighthouse during 2023, Lighthouse would refund what the City paid and rebill based on the higher hourly rate. This same look back clause exists in the City's current 3-year contract with Lighthouse. In 2019, on a 5-2 vote, council found those terms reasonable, providing some precedent for it. Councilmember Teitzel explained in the private business world, there is a termination liability agreement (TLA); the look back clause is much like a TLA which protects both parties in the event of an early termination. In an effort to have an independent legal review of the terms of the 12-month extension contract, he contacted MSRC, AWC and WCIA; all three declined, saying the City would need to obtain its own independent legal counsel. If the council wishes, he will seek independent legal counsel to provide an opinion. He asked for council authorization to spend up to $600 from the council contingency to have outside legal analysis done to, 1) ensure it is legal, and 2) ensure it is within ethical legal bounds. He expected that analysis would not take more than 1-2 hours of an attorney's time for up to $600. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, THAT THE COUNCIL GIVE HIM AUTHORIZATION TO SPEND UP TO $600 FOR AN INDEPENDENT LEGAL REVIEW OF THE 12-MONTH EXTENSION OF THE LIGHTHOUSE CONTRACT. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO AMEND THE MOTION AND BRING IT UP TO $1000. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 25 Packet Pg. 98 8.2.a Councilmember Paine anticipated it would take time for research and to provide an opinion to council. She anticipated $300/hour for 3 hours of work. AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Teitzel said he spoke with a principal at the law firm of Foster Garvey in downtown Seattle, an attorney recommended to him by Marysville's city attorney. He would be willing to do the analysis but charges $700/hour. He will continuing pursuing other attorneys and has a call into an attorney at Lane Powell, another very reputable firm. He assured the intent is to get a good, unbiased opinion on the contract. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed concern with the 9% increase when historically increases have been 4%. With this increase, the City will be paying $705,708 or $58,809/month, about a 9% increase over the $647,436 that was paid in 2022. She said a 9% increase seemed high even in an inflationary year. She was unsure who negotiated the increase and recommended going back to the drawing board. She suggested looking at that aspect of the contract as well. Councilmember Paine concurred with Councilmember Buckshnis' questions about the 9% increase, especially since it is unknown whether the current rate of inflation will be sustained for the remainder of this year and into next year. She was also concerned with the look back due to instability it offers in budget planning and puts the City over a barrel with regard to city attorney costs and if the council terminates the contract, it end up costing a lot more than anticipated. She preferred to have a honest rate from the start. She recommended forming a taskforce of three councilmembers to put this together. Mayor Nelson suggested discussion focus on the motion to hire an independent attorney to analyze the contract. Councilmember Teitzel said the 9% increase is based on CPI-U for Seattle -Tacoma -Bellevue for 2022. He agreed it seemed high in terms of an increase, but there is a foundation for it. MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO EXTEND TO 10:45. MOTION CARRIED (5-1), COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT VOTING NO. Council President Olson requested any councilmembers interested in being on a taskforce email her tomorrow and she will put something together. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested looking at the proposed 9% increase. She noted the CPI-U for Seattle -Tacoma -Bellevue has already dipped to 8%. Councilmember Paine recommended the taskforce start now; it should have been done three years ago when the three-year contract started. 11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Nelson thanked City staff including the disaster coordinator and everyone who attended the Emergency Preparedness Expo on Saturday. The expo included the American Red Cross, ham radio operators, Snohomish County Search & Rescue, Snohomish County Department of Emergency Management, and others. He relayed the American Red Cross provides smoke protectors and will install them as well as change batteries for those unable to do so. 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 26 Packet Pg. 99 8.2.a Councilmember Paine commented tonight was a good meeting with a lot of interesting topics. This weekend's Oktoberfest will include volunteers demonstrating electric leaf blowers, the Great Oktober Blowout, sponsored in part by Ace Hardware. There will be fun games using the blowers and a chance for the public to checkout electric leaf blowers. Councilmember Tibbott advised September is Suicide Prevention Month. He reached out to a local Edmonds author, Dr. Gregory Jantz, for resources related to suicide prevention. Dr. Jantz wrote a book in 2021, a resource for families dealing with loved ones who have suicidal thoughts. Dr. Jantz donated several books to the City which are available in the council office. The book lists a number of myths related to suicide, myth #1 is suicide is a result of mental illness. The truth is many people who suffer with mental illness never consider suicide. And while it is true suicidal thinking can be related to mental illnesses such as depression or addiction, just as often it isn't. Councilmember Tibbott summarized there are valuable insights in the book. Council President Olson said she was excited about the leaf blower demo. She thanked the community for their support for the many late summer/early fall fundraisers. The MAE Harvest Moon event was sold out, tomorrow night's food bank fundraiser is sold out, and there is still time to sell out the Edmonds Center for the Arts GALA on Friday, September 23". The ECA has been an excellent, generous community partner who does a lot for the community for free as well as fee based. It takes generous donors and the support of the community to keep the ECA in operation and enriching the community with arts and culture. Further information is available at ec4arts.org. Councilmember Buckshnis said for anyone unable to attend the ECA GALA, they can bid on packages at their website, ec4arts.org. She encouraged the community to attend the Rotary Oktoberfest on Friday and Saturday which will include a dog parade and costume contest where she is a judge. She thanked everyone who continues to contact her about the late-Councilmember K. Johnson. Donations can be made to the City of Edmonds with an indication the funds are for her memorial. Plans for using the funds are being discussed. Councilmember Chen expressed his appreciation to the City's employees. In addition to the appreciation luncheon, he wanted to add the council's appreciation for their good work. Councilmember Teitzel complimented the parks department and contractor working on Civic Park. He lives near Civic Field and sees the great progress being made. He encouraged the public to drive by, assuring they would be excited by what they see. Turf has been installed on the soccer field, the light standards are up, the walking path concrete has been installed, and the skate park is essentially done. It will be a very attractive amenity for the entire City when it is finished. 13. ADJOURN With no further business, the council meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 20, 2022 Page 27 Packet Pg. 100 8.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 Approval of claim checks. Staff Lead: Dave Turley Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Lori Palmer Background/History Approval of claim checks #254188 through #254268 dated September 22, 2022 for $2,683,413.95 and wire payment of $9,028.03 dated September 22, 2022. Staff Recommendation Approval of claim checks. 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: voucher list FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers Packet Pg. 101 8.3.a vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account 38 9/22/2022 062693 US BANK 1937 FLEET - CC 9/6/2022 PRESTIGE WINDOW TINTING - UNIT 71 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 PRESTIGE WINDOW TINTING - UNIT 19 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 EMERALD CITY HARLEY - GASKET 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 GOOD TO GO - TOLL FEES 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 AMAZON - PHONE CASE & SCREEN PF 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 EMERALD CITY HARLEY - UNIT 928/ PA 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 AMAZON - SUPPLIES/ OIL CHANGE RE 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 PRESTIGE WINDOW TINTING - UNIT 77 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 PRESTIGE WINDOW TINTING - UNIT 58 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 GOOD TO GO - TOLL FEES 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 AMAZON - FUEL ISLAND PARTS 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 UNIT 665 - JUMP BOX 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 AMAZON - FUEL ISLAND SUPPLIES 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 PRESTIGE WINDOW TINTING - UNIT 19 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 GOOD TO GO - TOLL FEES 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 2969 COUNCIL VISA FOR SUPPLIES AND MI: Seagate One Touch 5TB hard drive for C� 001.000.11.511.60.31.00 Page: Page: 1 Packet Pg. 102 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor 38 9/22/2022 062693 US BANK Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 2 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) Rental of 100 chairs for CM Kristiana 001.000.11.511.60.45.00 165.7! Office Supplies for council office 001.000.11.511.60.31.00 25.6£ �. Name Badge for CM Chen Y 001.000.11.511.60.31.00 15.4E Flowers for CM Johnson Public Memorial 001.000.11.511.60.49.00 33.1 ! E Registration for Elected Officials 001.000.11.511.60.49.00 250.0( Stadium Flowers - Delivery of Floral 0 001.000.11.511.60.49.00 403.3' > Registration for Snohomish County 0- 001.000.11.511.60.49.00 241.3E Q 4171 MCCLURE 4171 09-06-22 Q UNDERWATER SPORTS N 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 19.8E = L APPLE CLOUD STORAGE - REOCCURII 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 0.9E MYRON MANUFACTURING - FLASHLIG 0 001.000.41.521.40.41.40 96.1 , 4929 US BANK - DEV SVCS d Adobe Creative Cloud-- E 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 91.1 £ Print2Mail— r 001.000.62.558.60.41.40 94.0E Q USPS- 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 350.8, 85`C Bakery- 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 53.3( VistaPrint- 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 951.7E Bitly, Inc.- 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 106.0£ Page: 2 Packet Pg. 103 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor 38 9/22/2022 062693 US BANK Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 3 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) Starbucks-- 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 44.2( USPS Direct Mail- 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 684.0! �. The Beacon (Beacon Publishing)— Y 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 59.9! Stickermule- 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 285.0( E Amazon— ca 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 49.6( Event Making/CVent— O 001.000.62.558.60.49.00 40.0( > WSAPT-- 0- 001.000.62.524.20.49.00 200.0( Q Amazon- Q 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 338.5, N International Code Council— _ L 001.000.62.524.20.49.00 105.0( The Seattle Times- 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 67.5( 0 Adobe- r 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 117.1( d Survey Monkey— E 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 t 424.3, Top Pot Edmonds— r Q 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 35.4£ Caffe Ladro- 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 28.2, Speedy Buttons- 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 132.3, 6309 US BANK-SMCLAUGHLIN California Newsreel- 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 304.0( Click2Mail— Page: 3 Packet Pg. 104 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 4 Bank code: Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 38 9/22/2022 062693 US BANK (Continued) 001.000.62.558.60.41.40 142.0', 6654 SULLIVAN CC - 9/6/2022 SPECIALTY DOOR - FIRE STATION 16 - 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 258.8( 9644 OXG CC AUG '22 PASSPORT POSTAGE 001.000.23.512.51.42.00 8.9`. NCSC COURSES - PERF STANDARDS 001.000.23.512.51.49.00 990.0( PASSPORT POSTAGE 001.000.23.512.51.42.00 8.9! COMMUNITY COURT OPEN HOUSE SU 001.000.23.523.30.31.00 69.5f Total : 9,028.0: 254188 9/22/2022 070322 A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC 15-97608 INTERPRETER XZ0817470 CAMBODIAI` INTERPRETER XZ0817470 CAMBODIAP 001.000.23.512.51.41.01 180.0( Total : 180.01 254189 9/22/2022 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 62002 MEADOWDALE CC PEST CONTROL CL MEADOWDALE CC PEST CONTROL CL 001.000.64.576.80.41.00 94.0( 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.41.00 9.8, Total : 103.8 , 254190 9/22/2022 061029 ABSOLUTE GRAPHIX 922185 P&R LEAGUE SHIRTS P&R LEAGUE SHIRTS 001.000.63.557.20.31.00 323.0( 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.25.31.00 33.9, Total: 356.9' 254191 9/22/2022 064088 ADT COMMERCIAL 146934863 ALARM MONITORING CITY HALL Page: 4 Packet Pg. 105 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 5 Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254191 9/22/2022 064088 ADT COMMERCIAL (Continued) ALARM MONITORING CITY HALL 121 5" 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 140.8' 146934864 ALARM MONITORING CITY HALL ALARM MONITORING CITY HALL 121 5- 001.000.66.518.30.41.00 92.5, 147118012 ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 55.5, ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 55.5: ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 50.0! ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 63.9' ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS 511.000.77.548.68.42.00 27.8, ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS 001.000.65.518.20.42.00 25.0: 147118013 FIRE INSPECTION PUBLIC WORKS OM ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 35.& ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 35.& ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 32.3( ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 41.2i ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 17.9! ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 16.1 147133180 ALARM MONITORING ANDERSON CEN ALARM MONITORING FRANCESANDEI 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 202.1 " Page: 5 Packet Pg. 106 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 6 Bank code: Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254191 9/22/2022 064088 ADT COMMERCIAL (Continued) FIRE MONITORING - FRANCES ANDER 001.000.66.518.30.41.00 111.8, 147133181 FIRE INSPECTION ANDERSON CENTEI ALARM MONITORING FRANCESANDEI 001.000.66.518.30.41.00 302.9 , Total: 1,307.6d 254192 9/22/2022 077610 ALBA PAINTING & COATINGS 9/16/2022 FIRE STATION 16 - PAINT FULL EXTERI FIRE STATION 16 - PAINT FULL EXTERI 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 38,000.0( 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 3,990.0( 9/16/22 PW PW - PREP & PAINTALL EXTRERIORX PW - PREP & PAINTALL EXTRERIORX 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 18,500.0( 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 1,942.5( Total : 62,432.5( 254193 9/22/2022 066415 ALLIED BODY WORKS INC 68463 UNIT 36 - PARTS/ FLOORING UNIT 36 - PARTS/ FLOORING 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 912.0( 10.1 % Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 92.1' Total : 1,004.1 254194 9/22/2022 071634 ALLSTREAM 18783412 C/A 768328 PR1-1 & 2 City Phone Service 512.000.31.518.88.42.00 1,357.0( Tourism Toll free lines 877.775.6929; 001.000.61.558.70.42.00 11.0! Econ Devlpmnt Toll free lines 001.000.61.558.70.42.00 11.0! Total: 1.379.11 Page: 6 Packet Pg. 107 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 7 Bank code: Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254195 9/22/2022 001528 AM TEST INC 129384 WWTP: SAMPLE #S 22-AO014713-14714 SAMPLE #S 22-AO014713-14714 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 50.0( Total : 50.0( 254196 9/22/2022 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 65600065536 FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 27.9' 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 2.9: 65600067824 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 1.6' PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 6.1 , PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 6.1' PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 6.1' PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 6.1' 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 0.3' 10.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.6, 10.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.6, 10.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.6, 10.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.6, 10.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.5� PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 6.0£ Page: 7 Packet Pg. 108 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor 254196 9/22/2022 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 254197 9/22/2022 076260 BELAIR, ROGER 254198 9/22/2022 028050 BILL PIERRE FORD INC Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account (Continued) 65600067825 FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MATS FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 FLEET DIVISION MATS 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 10.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 10.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 65600069649 FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 6560069640 WWTP: 9/14/22 UNIFORMS,TOWELS+M Mats/Towels $52.68 + $5.53 tax @ 10.50/ 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 Rentals & Prep Charges $43.88+$4.61 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 6560069649 FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 Total 11159 PICKLEBALL 11159 PICKLEBALL CLINIC INSTRUCTIC 11159 PICKLEBALL CLINIC INSTRUCTIC 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 Total 830065 UNIT 282 - PARTS/ GEAR & CORE UNIT 282 - PARTS/ GEAR & CORE 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.25% Sales Tax 8.3.a Page: 8 Page: 8 Packet Pg. 109 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 9 Bank code: Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254198 9/22/2022 028050 BILL PIERRE FORD INC (Continued) 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 158.3, 831556 UNIT 285 - PARTS/ SWITCH UNIT 285 - PARTS/ SWITCH 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 101.9E 10.25% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.4! Total : 1,815.4, 254199 9/22/2022 073760 BLUELINE GROUP LLC 24324 E22CA/CM SVCS THRU 8.27.22 E22CA/CM SVCS THRU 8.27.22 112.000.68.542.30.41.00 266.3! E22CA/CM SVCS THRU 8.27.22 125.000.68.542.30.41.00 308.9E E22CA/CM SVCS THRU 8.27.22 126.000.68.542.30.41.00 297.6E E21 FD/CM SVCS THRU 8.27.22 422.000.72.594.31.41.00 27,446.2! Total: 28,319.2! 254200 9/22/2022 078841 BRAUN CONSULTING GROUP 2289 CONSULTING SERVICES MAY RETAINER 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 4,000.0( 2305 CONSULTING SERVICES AUGUST RETAINER 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 4,000.0( Total: 8,000.0( 254201 9/22/2022 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 29163967 C2501F contract charge 9/1 - 9/30/2022 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 26.4� 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 2.7E 29163968 PW ADMIN COPIER PW Office Copier for 9/1 /22 - 9/30/22 001.000.65.518.20.45.00 66.1( Page: 9 Packet Pg. 110 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor 254201 9/22/2022 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 254202 9/22/2022 079115 CARAVAGLIO, CHRISTINA 254203 9/22/2022 074537 CITY OF BELLEVUE Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 10 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) PW Office Copier for 9/1 /22 - 9/30/22 111.000.68.542.90.45.00 37.4E PW Office Copier for 9/1/22 - 9/30/22 422.000.72.531.90.45.00 37.4E �. PW Office Copier for 9/1 /22 - 9/30/22 Y 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 26.4E PW Office Copier for 9/1 /22 - 9/30/22 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 26.4E E PW Office Copier for 9/1 /22 - 9/30/22 ca 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 26.4E 10.5% Sales Tax O 001.000.65.518.20.45.00 6.9E j 10.5% Sales Tax 0- 111.000.68.542.90.45.00 3.9, Q 10.5% Sales Tax Q 422.000.72.531.90.45.00 3.9, N 10.5% Sales Tax = L 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 2.7E 10.5% Sales Tax 3 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 2.7E 0 10.5% Sales Tax r 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 2.7E d 29163978 CITY CLERKS CONTRACT CHARGES E Contract Charge 09/01/2022-09/30/2022- 001.000.31.514.31.45.00 302.8, r 10.5% Sales Tax Q 001.000.31.514.31.45.00 31.8( Total : 607.5; 02162022 OTF TEMP ARTWORK (TITLE TBA) OTF TEMP ARTWORK (TITLE TBA) 117.100.64.573.20.41.00 1,000.0( Total : 1,000.0( 43380 BUILDING - SUBSCRIPTION Page: 10 Packet Pg. 111 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 11 Bank code: Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254203 9/22/2022 074537 CITY OF BELLEVUE (Continued) Q3 2022 MBP Subscription 001.000.62.524.20.41.00 5,900.9! Total : 5,900.9! 254204 9/22/2022 072786 CTS LANGUAGE LINK 221766 INTERPRETER SERVICES AUG '22 INTERPRETER SERVICES AUG '22 001.000.23.512.51.41.01 34.9`. Total: 34.9! 254205 9/22/2022 072174 DEMIERO JAZZ FESTIVAL TPA DeMiero Jazz TPA DEMIERO JAZZ FESTIVAL TPA DEMIERO JAZZ FESTIVAL 123.000.64.573.20.41.40 2,600.0( Total: 2,600.0( 254206 9/22/2022 006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGY OPCert2-DLawrence WWTP: DLAWRENCE OPERATOR 2 CEI DLAWRENCE OPERATOR 2 CERTIFICA 423.000.76.535.80.49.71 67.0( Total: 67.0( 254207 9/22/2022 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 22-4184 COUNCIL & COMMITTEE MEETING MIN City Council Meeting minutes 09/06/22, 001.000.31.514.31.41.00 752.4( Total : 752.4( 254208 9/22/2022 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 00010129158 PM SUPPLIES: OIL AND AIR FILTERS PM SUPPLIES: OIL AND AIR FILTERS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 97.2E 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.2' Total : 107.4, 254209 9/22/2022 076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE 3268 PM: NUTS, BOLTS, SCREWS PM: NUTS, BOLTS, SCREWS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 13.3E 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 1.4( Page: 11 Packet Pg. 112 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account 254209 9/22/2022 076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE (Continued) 3277 PM: LIGHTBULB, MAGNIFIER PM: LIGHTBULB, MAGNIFIER 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 3282 PM: SPRING HOOKS PM: SPRING HOOKS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 3283 PM: DUST PANS PM: DUST PANS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 3284 LIBRARY - SPRAY PAINT LIBRARY - SPRAY PAINT 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 3288 PM: CLAMPS PM: CLAMPS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 3290 PM: PRUNERS PM:PRUNERS 001.000.64.576.81.31.00 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.81.31.00 3292 PM: PAINT PM: PAINT 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 STATE PAINTCARE GALLON FEE 8.3.a Page: 12 Page: 12 Packet Pg. 113 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 13 Bank code: Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254209 9/22/2022 076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE (Continued) 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 0.9E 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 3.3E 3293 LIBRARY - SUPPLIES LIBRARY - SUPPLIES 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 59.9£ 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 6.3( Total : 351.1 , 254210 9/22/2022 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 6-00025 MARINA BEACH PARK SPRINKLER MARINA BEACH PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 2,332.0, 6-00200 FISHING PIER & RESTROOMS FISHING PIER & RESTROOMS 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 1,675.8, 6-00410 BRACKETT'S LANDING SOUTH SPRINk BRACKETT'S LANDING SOUTH SPRINI< 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 1,139.5£ 6-00475 ANWAY PARK RESTROOMS ANWAY PARK RESTROOMS 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 2,691.5' 6-01250 CITY PARK BALLFIELD SPRINKLER CITY PARK BALLFIELD SPRINKLER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 3,095.4( 6-01275 CITY PARK PARKING LOT CITY PARK PARKING LOT 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 3,049.1 , 6-01280 CITY PARK SPRAY PARK CITY PARK SPRAY PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 5,229.5E 6-02125 PINE STREET PLAYFIELD SPRINKLER PINE STREET PLAYFIELD SPRINKLER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 1, 330.9� 6-02730 CIVIC CENTER PLAYFIELD SKATE PAR Page: 13 Packet Pg. 114 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 14 Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254210 9/22/2022 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION (Continued) CIVIC CENTER PLAYFIELD SKATE PAR 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 323.5 , 6-02735 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX 250 5TH AV PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX 250 5TH AV 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 2,826.21 6-02736 FIRE STATION #17 FIRE 275 6TH AVE N FIRE STATION #17 FIRE 275 6TH AVE N 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 13.5 , 6-02737 FIRE STATION #17 275 6TH AVE N / ME - FIRE STATION #17 275 6TH AVE N / ME' 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 480.4 , 6-02738 PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX IRRIGATIOI PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX IRRIGATIOI 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 1, 004.2! 6-02745 VETERANS PLAZA VETERANS PLAZA 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 275.1 , 6-02825 SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / MET SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / MET 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 5,157.1, 6-02875 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER FIRE 7 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER FIRE 7 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 23.7! 6-02885 DOWNTOWN RESTROOM DOWNTOWN RESTROOM 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 690.2, 6-02900 FAC SPRINKLER FAC SPRINKLER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 1, 942.6, 6-02925 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 700 M/ FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 700 M/ 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 2,953.2i 6-03000 CIVIC CENTER PARKING LOT SPRINKL CIVIC CENTER PARKING LOT SPRINKL 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 707.9! Page: 14 Packet Pg. 115 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account 254210 9/22/2022 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION (Continued) 6-03275 HUMMINGBIRD HILL PARK SPRINKLER HUMMINGBIRD HILL PARK SPRINKLER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 6-03575 MAPLEWOOD PARK SPRINKLER MAPLEWOOD PARK SPRINKLER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 6-04127 FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST SW / FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST SW / 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 6-04128 FIRE STATION #16 FIRE 8429 196TH ST FIRE STATION #16 FIRE 8429 196TH ST 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 6-04425 SEAVIEW PARK SEAVIEW PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 6-04450 SIERRA PARK SPRINKLER SIERRA PARK SPRINKLER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 6-05155 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST S PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST S 001.000.65.518.20.47.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST S 111.000.68.542.90.47.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST S 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST S 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST S 511.000.77.548.68.47.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST S 422.000.72.531.90.47.00 6-05156 PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE 7110 210TH PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE 7110 210TH 001.000.65.518.20.47.00 8.3.a Page: 15 Page: 15 Packet Pg. 116 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor 254210 9/22/2022 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 254211 9/22/2022 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 16 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE 7110 210TH 111.000.68.542.90.47.00 6.4, PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE 7110 210TH 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 6.4, �. PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE 7110 210TH N Y 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 6.4� PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE 7110 210TH 511.000.77.548.68.47.00 6.4: E PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE 7110 210TH ca 422.000.72.531.90.47.00 6.4, 6-06040 5 CORNERS ROUNDABOUT IRRIGATIO O 5 CORNERS ROUNDABOUT IRRIGATIO 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 192.5' OL 6-07775 MATHAY BALLINGER SPRINKLER Q" MATHAY BALLINGER SPRINKLER Q 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 439.8E N 6-08500 YOST PARK SPRINKLER = YOST PARK SPRINKLER L 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 2,234.01 6-08525 YOST POOL O YOST POOL > r 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 336.2( 7-05276 CEMETERY SEWER & STORM 820 15TI E CEMETERY SEWER & STORM 820 15TI v 130.000.64.536.50.47.00 288.01 +� Total: r 49,637.1: Q AR227481 HS C2571F COPIER: S/N 3CE09644 HS C2571F COPIER: S/N 3CE09644 001.000.63.557.20.45.00 17.7: 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.63.557.20.45.00 1.8E AR228510 COPIERS 6/1/22-8/31/22 COPIERS 6/1/22-8/31/22 001.000.23.512.51.45.00 285.2! Page: 16 Packet Pg. 117 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor 254211 9/22/2022 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account (Continued) 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.23.512.51.45.00 AR229121 MK5610-A10013 PW COPIER USAGE PW Copy Use 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 10.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 PW Copy Use 111.000.68.542.90.31.00 PW Copy Use 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 PW Copy Use 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 PW Copy Use 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 PW Copy Use 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 10.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.31.00 10.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 10.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 10.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 AR229573 C57501 OVERAGE bw overage 8/16 - 9/15/2022 001.000.22.518.10.45.00 dr overage 8/16 - 9/15/2022 001.000.22.518.10.45.00 dr overage 8/16 - 9/15/2022 001.000.61.557.20.45.00 8.3.a Page: 17 Page: 17 Packet Pg. 118 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor 254211 9/22/2022 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 18 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) clr overage 8/16 - 9/15/2022 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 12.9( 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.22.518.10.45.00 2.2( �. 10.5% Sales Tax Y 001.000.61.557.20.45.00 1.3! 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 1.3E E AR229574 WWTP: 8/16-9/15/22 OVERAGE CHARG 8/16-9/15/22 OVERAGE CHARGE v 4" 423.000.76.535.80.45.00 104.1' O 10.5% Sales Tax j 423.000.76.535.80.45.00 10.91 0- AR229851 PM COPIER USAGE: C2571F: S/N 3CEOi Q PM COPIER USAGE: C2571F: Account Q 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 88.6' N 10.5% Sales Tax = 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 L 9.3( AR229852 P&R COPIER USAGE: C2571F: S/N 3CE( P&R COPIER USAGE: C2571F: Account O 001.000.64.571.22.45.00 30.6' r 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.22.45.00 3.2' E AR229902 ACCT#MK5648 CONTRACT 2600-02 PR 10.5% Sales Tax :a 512.000.31.518.88.48.00 r 32.2E Q Maintenance 09/21/22 - 10/20/22 Canon 512.000.31.518.88.48.00 307.2( ARZ229583 P&R COPIER USAGE: C57501: S/N 3APC P&R COPIER USAGE: C57501: account 001.000.64.571.22.45.00 123.0, 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.22.45.00 12.9, Total : 1,179.91 Page: 18 Packet Pg. 119 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 19 Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254212 9/22/2022 079116 FANG, SOPHIA 02162022 OTF TEMP ARTWORK (TITLE TBA) OTF TEMP ARTWORK (TITLE TBA) 117.100.64.573.20.41.00 1,000.0( Total : 1,000.0( 254213 9/22/2022 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 1049677 WATER - SUPPLIES/ OMNI REG WATER - SUPPLIES/ OMNI REG 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 344.8! 10.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 36.2' 1049677-1 WATER - SUPPLIES/ OMNI REG WATER - SUPPLIES/ OMNI REG 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 689.7( 10.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 72.4, 1067015 WATER - SUPPLIES/ OMNI REG WATER - SUPPLIES/ OMNI REG 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 689.7( 10.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 72.4, Total : 1,905.3( 254214 9/22/2022 072493 FIRSTLINE COMMUNICATIONS INC 174868 SEPT-2022 SUPPORT SERVICES Sept-2022 Support Services 512.000.31.518.88.48.00 265.0( 10.5% Sales Tax 512.000.31.518.88.48.00 27.8: Total : 292.8, 254215 9/22/2022 063137 GOODYEARAUTO SERVICE CENTER 0000035549 FLEET - TIRES FLEET - TIRES 511.000.77.548.68.34.30 146.4( WA STATE TIRE TAX FEE 511.000.77.548.68.34.30 2.0( 10.6% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.34.30 15.5: Page: 19 Packet Pg. 120 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 20 Bank code: Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254215 9/22/2022 063137 063137 GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTER (Continued) Total : 163.9: 254216 9/22/2022 012199 GRAINGER 9432443555 FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES/ BATTERIES & I FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES/ BATTERIES & 1 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 200.3: 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 21.0: Total: 221.3! 254217 9/22/2022 074722 GUARDIAN SECURITY SYSTEMS 1279010 OLD PW - SECURITY OLD PW - SECURITY 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 60.5( 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 6.3! Total : 66.8! 254218 9/22/2022 079012 HARLOWE & FALK LLP 57646 MEBT FEES MEBT TRUST LEGAL 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 1,280.0( 57850 MEBT TRUST FEES MEBT TRUST LEGAL 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 1,360.0( Total : 2,640.01 254219 9/22/2022 074966 HIATT CONSULTING LLC 2019-352 TOURISM PROMOTION & MARKETING, TOURISM PROMOTION & MARKETING, 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 2,851.6' CONTRACT WRITING - CAROL WEBER 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 100.0( CALENDAR UPDATES - GRACE HIATT 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 45.0( Total : 2,996.6' 254220 9/22/2022 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 1073481 LIBRARY - SUPPLIES LIBRARY - SUPPLIES 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 75.0: Page: 20 Packet Pg. 121 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 21 Bank code: Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254220 9/22/2022 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued) 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 7.7, Total : 82.7E 254221 9/22/2022 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 3593113 ENG DESK CHAIR - PAT JOHNSON ENG DESK CHAIR - PAT JOHNSON 001.000.67.518.21.49.00 638.E , 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.67.518.21.49.00 67.0E 3595450 P&R SUPPLIES: COPY PAPER P&R SUPPLIES: COPY PAPER 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 135.7£ 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 14.2E Total : 855.7, 254222 9/22/2022 078965 KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN 3870063 POLICE PHYSICALS GERRARD, SEIFERT, FRENCH 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 2,606.0( Total : 2,606.01 254223 9/22/2022 078250 KAUFER DMC LLC 2766 BUSINESS BOOSTER WEB HOSTING/S BUSINESS BOOSTER WEB HOSTING/S 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 300.0( Total : 300.01 254224 9/22/2022 071137 KIDZ LOVE SOCCER 10725 10726 SOCCER 10725 10726 KIDZ LOVE SOCCER INST 10725 KIDZ LOVE SOCCER INSTRUCTI 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 555.3E 10726 KIDZ LOVE SOCCER INSTRUCTI 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 509.0£ 10727 10728 SOCCER 10727 10728 KIDZ LOVE SOCCER INST 10727 KIDZ LOVE SOCCER INSTRUCTI 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 555.3E 10728 KIDZ LOVE SOCCER INSTRUCTI Page: 21 Packet Pg. 122 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 22 Bank code: Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254224 9/22/2022 071137 KIDZ LOVE SOCCER (Continued) 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 555.3E 10729 SOCCER 10729 KIDZ LOVE SOCCER INSTRUCTI 10729 KIDZ LOVE SOCCER INSTRUCTI 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 416.5: Total: 2,591.6E 254225 9/22/2022 074417 LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTIAN SMITH 09082022 CONFLICT COUNSEL 2A0562115 CONFLICT COUNSEL 2A0562115 001.000.39.515.93.41.00 750.0( 09162022 CONFLICT COUNSEL 20A562115 CONFLICT COUNSEL 20A562115 001.000.39.515.93.41.00 750.0( Total: 1,500.0E 254226 9/22/2022 075159 LIFE INSURANCE CO OF NO AMER October 2022 OCTOBER 2022 CIGNA INSURANCE PF October CIGNA Premiums 811.000.231.550 13,748.9: Total: 13,748.9: 254227 9/22/2022 073603 LIGHTHOUSE LAW GROUP PLLC Sept-2022 09-2022 LEGALS FEES 09-2022 Legal fees 001.000.36.515.41.41.00 53,953.0( Total : 53,953.0E 254228 9/22/2022 075716 MALLORY PAINT STORE INC E0158659 LOG CABIN - PAINT LOG CABIN - PAINT 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 17.9E ECO FEES 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 0.4! 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1.9, Total : 20.3E 254229 9/22/2022 061900 MARC 0771437-IN WWTP: PO 887 CLEANER & IND. SOLVE PO 887 CLEANER & IND. SOLVENT 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 1,757.0( Page: 22 Packet Pg. 123 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 23 Bank code: Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254229 9/22/2022 061900 MARC (Continued) Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 376.1( 10.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 223.9£ Total : 2,357.0£ 254230 9/22/2022 077253 MAYES TESTING ENGINEERS INC TH35791 EOMA/SERVICES THRU 8.20.22 EOMA/SERVICES THRU 8.20.22 332.000.64.594.76.41.00 445.8: EOMA/SERVICES THRU 8.20.22 125.000.64.594.76.41.00 133.1 , Total : 579.0( 254231 9/22/2022 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 84501074 WWTP: PO 890 HOSE COUPLINGS & PI PO 890 HOSE COUPLINGS & PIPE FITT 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 186.0, Freight 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 11.1 1 10.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 20.7' Total : 217.9; 254232 9/22/2022 072746 MURRAYSMITH INC 20-2775.01-17 E21GA/SERVICES THRU 8.31.22 E21GA/SERVICES THRU 8.31.22 423.000.75.594.35.41.00 570.0( 20-2967.00-15 EOJB/SERVICES THRU 8.31.22 EOJB/SERVICES THRU 8.31.22 421.000.74.594.34.41.00 5,841.1 £ 22-3356.00-2 E22JA/SERVICES THRU 8.31.22 E22JA/SERVICES THRU 8.31.22 421.000.74.594.34.41.00 4,341.0( Total: 10,752.11 254233 9/22/2022 070855 NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS 10511969 AUGUST FSA FEE GOCOMMUTERFEE-AUGUST Page: 23 Packet Pg. 124 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 24 Bank code: Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254233 9/22/2022 070855 NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS (Continued) 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 25.0( 10511970 FSA FEES - AUGUST PARTICIPANT FEE -AUGUST 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 215.8( Total : 240.8( 254234 9/22/2022 075542 NORTHWEST LANDSCAPE SUPPLY 6492 PM: DRAIN ROCK PM: DRAIN ROCK 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 69.0( 10.6% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 7.3' Total : 76.3' 254235 9/22/2022 074866 NORTHWEST PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT 50278 BENCHES AND PLAQUES BENCHES AND PLAQUES 127.000.64.575.50.31.00 6,120.0( 10.5% Sales Tax 127.000.64.575.50.31.00 642.6( Total : 6,762.6( 254236 9/22/2022 079118 OLD REPUBLIC SURETY COMPANY EBCC.Final Pmt EBCC/SERVICES THRU 8.31.22 EBCC/SERVICES THRU 8.31.22 112.000.68.595.61.65.00 13,106.7( EBCC/SERVICES THRU 8.31.22 126.000.68.595.61.65.00 2,045.5( EBCC/SERVICES THRU 8.31.22 422.000.72.594.31.65.20 810.4( Total : 15,962.6f 254237 9/22/2022 063750 ORCA PACIFIC INC INV0600917 YOST POOL SUPPLIES YOST POOL SUPPLIES: CHEMICALS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 1,859.5( 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 195.2! Total : 2,054.7! Page: 24 Packet Pg. 125 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 25 Bank code: Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254238 9/22/2022 072739 O'REILLYAUTO PARTS 3685-229792 UNIT 102 - OIL FILTER UNIT 102 - OIL FILTER 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.5£ 10.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 1.1' 3685-229895 UNIT 57 - OIL FILTER UNIT 57 - OIL FILTER 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.8£ 10.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 1.0, Total : 22.6' 254239 9/22/2022 002203 OWEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY 00107750 UNIT 121 - PARTS/ CASING UNIT 121 - PARTS/ CASING 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 812.91 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 28.7! 10.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 88.31 Total : 930.0 , 254240 9/22/2022 079117 PACIFIC PARKAPARTMENTS E20CE.Pacific Park E20CE/UTE TCE-PACIFIC PARK APTS E20CE/UTE TCE-PACIFIC PARK APTS 112.000.68.595.20.61.00 2,800.0( Total: 2,800.0( 254241 9/22/2022 074830 PERFORMANCE SYSTEMS INTEG 12480663 F.A.C. - FIRE ALARM SERVICE F.A.C. - FIRE ALARM SERVICE 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 830.0( 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 87.1( Total: 917.1( 254242 9/22/2022 029117 PORT OF EDMONDS 03870 PORT RIGHT-OF-WAY LEASE FOR CIT`r PORT RIGHT-OF-WAY LEASE FOR CITI 422.000.72.531.90.41.50 4,392.3! Page: 25 Packet Pg. 126 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 26 Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254242 9/22/2022 029117 029117 PORT OF EDMONDS (Continued) Total : 4,392.3! 254243 9/22/2022 071559 PUBLIC SAFETY PSYCHOLOGICAL SV 2653 POST-COE PSYCH EVAL FRENCH,J 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 410.0( Total : 410.01 254244 9/22/2022 030780 QUIRING MONUMENTS INC 43641 MARKER/INSCRIPTION-PIERCE MARKER/INSCRIPTION- 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 291.0( 43642 INSCRIPTION SHUTTER/NICHE-SAXBY INSCRIPTION SHUTTER/NICHE- 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 225.0( 43643 INSCRIPTION SHUTTER/NICHE-ORVIS INSCRIPTION SHUTTER/NICHE-ORVIS 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 225.0( 43644 INSCRIPTION SHUTTER/NICHE-MCGIB INSCRIPTION SHUTTER/NICHE- 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 225.0( 43645 INSCRIPTION SHUTTER/NICHE-STEELI INSCRIPTION SHUTTER/NICHE-STEELI 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 225.0( Total : 1,191.01 254245 9/22/2022 066786 RELIABLE SECURITY SOUND & DATA 23913 FAC MAINT - REPLACEMENT OF TWO FAC MAINT - REPLACEMENT OF TWO 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 833.0( 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 87.4" Total: 920X 254246 9/22/2022 068657 ROBERT HALF 60721678 TEMP HELP W/E 9/9/22 - OGSTON W/E 9/9 - OGSTON 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 1,848.0( 60723778 TEMPORARY HELP WEEK ENDING 09/( Temp Position at Customer: Bookkeeper Page: 26 Packet Pg. 127 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 27 Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254246 9/22/2022 068657 ROBERT HALF (Continued) 001.000.31.514.23.41.00 1,952.0( 60737422 TEMPORARY HELP WEEK ENDING 09P Temp Position at Customer: Bookkeeper 001.000.31.514.23.41.00 2,440.0( Total: 6,240.01 254247 9/22/2022 074256 RYDIN DECAL 397352 2023 DOWNTOWN EMPLOYEE DECAL 2023 Downtown Parking Decals 121.000.25.542.65.31.00 669.6, Total : 669.6d 254248 9/22/2022 072440 SCORDINO, JOE 35 E7FG/SCORDINO REIMBURSEMENTT1 E7FG/SCORDINO REIMBURSEMENTT1 001.000.39.554.90.49.00 1, 710.9£ Total: 1,710.91 254249 9/22/2022 066918 SEDOR, NORMAN 45 REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT 009.000.39.517.20.29.00 6,000.0( Total : 6,000.01 254250 9/22/2022 068132 SHORELINE CONSTRUCTION CO E21FD.Pmt 1 E21FD/STORM SVCS THRU 8.31.22 E21 FD/STORM SVCS THRU 8.31.22 422.000.72.594.31.41.00 955,161.6! Total : 955,161.6! 254251 9/22/2022 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 200260271 YOST POOL YOST POOL 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 1, 521.0, 200398956 FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST SW / FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST SW / 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 844.8, 200496834 LIFT STATION #10 17526 TALBOT RD / LIFT STATION #10 17526 TALBOT RD / 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 66.9! 200611317 LIFT STATION #9 19300 80TH AVE W / IV Page: 27 Packet Pg. 128 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 28 Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254251 9/22/2022 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) LIFT STATION #9 19300 80TH AVE W / 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 122.3£ 200714038 SEAVIEW PARK SEAVIEW PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 22.5' 200723021 TRAFFIC LIGHT 961 PUGET DR / METE TRAFFIC LIGHT 961 PUGET DR / METE 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 33.2( 201184538 HICKMAN PARK HICKMAN PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 32.9( 201197084 SEAVIEW PARK SEAVIEW PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 30.4( 201431236 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9110 OLYMPI, PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9110 OLYMPI, 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 24.4� 201431244 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9301 PUGET PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9301 PUGET 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 23.0( 201441755 TRAFFIC LIGHT 21531 HWY 99 / METEF TRAFFIC LIGHT 21531 HWY 99 / METEF 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 197.4( 201790003 ALDERWOOD INTERIE 6130 168TH ST ALDERWOOD INTERIE 6130 168TH ST 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 35.4£ 202250627 9TH/CASPER LANDSCAPED BED 9TH/CASPER LANDSCAPED BED 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 25.2, 202289450 TRAFFIC LIGHT 21931 HWY 99 / METEF TRAFFIC LIGHT 21931 HWY 99 / METEF 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 87.5' 202540647 SIERRA PARK IRRIGATION 8100 190TH SIERRA PARK IRRIGATION 8100 190TH 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 23.7, Page: 28 Packet Pg. 129 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code: Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account 254251 9/22/2022 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) 203652151 FIVE CORNERS RESERVOIR 8519 BOV FIVE CORNERS RESERVOIR 8519 BOV 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 204425847 LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN / ME - LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN / ME- 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 205184385 LIFT STATION #5 432 3RD AVE S / METE LIFT STATION #5 432 3RD AVE S / METE 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 220216386 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHTS 8410 MAIN PEDEST CAUTION LIGHTS 8410 MAIN 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 220547574 TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 236TH ST SV1 TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 236TH ST SV1 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 222704280 WWTP: 8/17-9/15/22 METER 100013538 8/17-9/15/22 200 2ND AVE S / METER 423.000.76.535.80.47.61 223283185 UPTOWN CITY HALL - 23632 HIGHWAY Uptown City Hall - 23632 Highway 99, 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 Total 254252 9/22/2022 037303 SO SNOHOMISH CO FIRE & RESCUE Oct-22 OCT-2022 FIRE SERVICES CONTRACT Oct-2022 Fire Services Contract Payment 001.000.39.522.20.41.50 Total 254253 9/22/2022 076114 SOUND SALMON SOLUTIONS 1609 EDMONDS FOREST STEWARDS SUPPi EDMONDS FOREST STEWARDS SUPP, 001.000.64.571.21.41.00 1610 EDMONDS FOREST STEWARDS SUPPi EDMONDS FOREST STEWARDS SUPPi 001.000.64.571.21.41.00 8.3.a Page: 29 Page: 29 Packet Pg. 130 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 30 Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254253 9/22/2022 076114 076114 SOUND SALMON SOLUTIONS (Continued) Total : 5,000.01 254254 9/22/2022 074167 SOURCE NORTH AMERICA CORP 2154185 WWTP: PO 889 THERMAL PRINTER PAI PO 889 THERMAL PRINTER PAPER 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 39.6( Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 14.9: 10.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 5.7: Total : 60.21 254255 9/22/2022 072319 SUNSET BAY RESORT 10659 10660 BEACH 10659 10660 BEACH CAMP 10659 BEACH CAMP 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 9,438.5( 10660 BEACH CAMP 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 10,922.0( Total: 20,360.51 254256 9/22/2022 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 180048315-00 FLEET - SUPPLIES/ LOCK NUTS FLEET - SUPPLIES/ LOCK NUTS 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 33.9( 10.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 3.5E Total : 37.41 254257 9/22/2022 075587 THE UPS STORE #6392 0034 WWTP: 8/18/22 SHIP CHG 8/18/22 SHIP CHG 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 25.0, Total : 25.0, 254258 9/22/2022 072649 THE WIDE FORMAT COMPANY 137793 DEV SERVICES SUPPLIES Glossy paper for wide format plotter- 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 310.7! 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 32.6: Total: 343.31 Page: 30 Packet Pg. 131 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 31 Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254259 9/22/2022 072800 TOYOTA LIFT NORTHWEST 24155879 WWTP: REPAIR FORKLIFT REPAIR FORKLIFT 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 1,974.4: 10.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 207.3: Total : 2,181.7! 254260 9/22/2022 077070 UNITED RECYCLING & CONTAINER 277555 WATER - 3 WAY TOP SOIL WATER - 3 WAY TOP SOIL 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 205.9: Total: 205.9: 254261 9/22/2022 044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR 2080148 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATION UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATION 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 116.6, UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATION 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 116.6, UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATION 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 120.1 Q Total: 353.41 254262 9/22/2022 075155 WALKER MACY LLC P3282.04-52 EOMA/SERVICES THRU 8.25.22 EOMA/SERVICES THRU 8.25.22 332.000.64.594.76.41.00 14,050.9! EOMA/SERVICES THRU 8.25.22 125.000.64.594.76.41.00 4,197.0, Total : 18,247.91 254263 9/22/2022 067195 WASHINGTON TREE EXPERTS 122-838 TREE REMOVAL - 20026 88TH AVE W - TREE REMOVAL - 20026 88TH AVE W - 111.000.68.542.71.48.00 975.0( 10.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.71.48.00 102.3t Total : 1,077.31 254264 9/22/2022 075635 WCP SOLUTIONS 12800011 WATER - SUPPLIES Page: 31 Packet Pg. 132 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 32 Bank code: Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 254264 9/22/2022 075635 WCP SOLUTIONS (Continued) WATER - SUPPLIES 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 299.6( 10.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 31.4E 12924025 PARKS FACILITY MAINT SUPPLIES PARKS FACILITY MAINT SUPPLIES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 240.8( 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 25.2£ 12924026 PARKS FACILITY MAINT SUPPLIES PARKS FACILITY MAINT SUPPLIES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 1,857.5( 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 195.0, 12927991 PARKS FACILITY MAINT SUPPLIES PARKS FACILITY MAINT SUPPLIES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 651.0( 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 68.3E Total : 3,369.0, 254265 9/22/2022 078302 WEBER, CAROL 20 VISIT EDMONDS WEBSITE SUPPORT F VISIT EDMONDS WEBSITE SUPPORT F 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 500.0( Total: 500.01 254266 9/22/2022 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 8267 P&R: BUSINESS CARDS P&R: BUSINESS CARDS: KYLE WOOD 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 50.6£ 10.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 5.3, Total: 56.01 254267 9/22/2022 079083 WESTWATER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY E20CE.Pmt 2 E20CE/SERVICES THRU 8.31.22 E20CE/SERVICES THRU 8.31.22 Page: 32 Packet Pg. 133 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 254267 9/22/2022 079083 WESTWATER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (Continued) E20CE.Ret Release 254268 9/22/2022 011900 ZIPLY FIBER 206-188-0247 253-011-1177 425-697-6502 425-712-0417 425-712-8251 PO # Description/Account 112.000.68.595.33.65.00 E20CE/RETAINAGE RELEASE E20CE/PMT 1 RETAINAGE RELEASE 112.000.223.400 Total TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY ACC( TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY ACCC 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY ACCC 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO F 001.000.65.518.20.42.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO F 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO F 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO F 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO F 511.000.77.548.68.42.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO F 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 MUSEUM ALARM LINES - 118 5TH AVE I Museum Alarm Lines - 118 5th Ave N 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 PUBLIC WORKS OMC ALARM, FAX, SP) PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRU 001.000.65.518.20.42.00 8.3.a Page: 33 Page: 33 Packet Pg. 134 vchlist 09/22/2 022 12: 56: 38 P M Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor 254268 9/22/2022 011900 ZIPLY FIBER 82 Vouchers for bank code : usbank 82 Vouchers in this report Voucher List City of Edmonds 8.3.a Page: 34 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRU 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 92.0, PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRU 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 77.3( �. PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRU N Y 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 77.3( PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRU 511.000.77.548.68.42.00 103.0! E 425-745-4313 CLUBHOUSE ALARM LINES 6801 MEAE ca CLUBHOUSE FIRE AND INTRUSION ALL v 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 150.0, G 425-775-1344 425-775-1344 RANGER STATION > 425-775-1344 RANGER STATION 0 001.000.64.571.23.42.00 118.6! Q 425-775-2455 CIVIC CENTER ALARM LINES 250 5TH ) Q CIVIC CENTER FIRE AND INTRUSION A N 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 73.0' = 425-775-7865 UTILITY BILLING RADIO LINE L a� UTILITY BILLING RADIO LINE TO FIVE 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 77.2( o 425-776-2742 LIFT STATION #7 VG SPECIALACCESS r LIFT STATION #7 V/G SPECIALACCES£ m 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 26.4! E Total: 1,692.1! cv .r Bank total : 2,692,441.91 Q Total vouchers : 2,692,441.91 Page: 34 Packet Pg. 135 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Title 175th St. SW Slope StabilizatiopA& 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project 2019 MIN 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Khimhor Khimhor E21FB c560 EBGA c516 SW R EBFC EBJA c523 WTR 2019 Utilitv Rate & GFC Update EBJB s020 UTILITIES 19 Waterline Overlay 2019 Waterline Replacement E7JA c498 WTR IW20 Guardrail Installations Y 2020 Overlay Program EOCA i042 STR R2020 Pedestria EODB Sm EU 2020 Pedestrian Task Force EODA s024 STR ffic Calming C 2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades EOAB i047 STR c r020 Waterline Overlay i053 a a 2021 Guardrail Installations E21AB i057 STR TR L 2021 Pedestrian Task Force E21 DB i062 STR E a1 Seweriverlay Program o 2021 Stormwater Overlay Program E21CD i061 STM affic Calming � 2, 2021 Waterline Overlay Program E21CB i059 WTR c 1022 Guardrail Program a� a aD 2022 Overlay Program E22CA i063 STR Li n Safety _ m 2022 Sewerline Overlay Program E22CC i065 STR s 2022 Stormwater Overla, 622 Traffic Calming Program E22CD i066 STR 'VSTR 2022 Utility Rate and GFC Study E22NB s030 UTILITIES k022 Waterline Overlay Program 2023 Overlay Program E23CA i074 STR 1023 Sewer2verla 076 2023 Stormwater Waterline Overlay 220th Adaptive 6th Ave Overlay (196th St. to OVD) E23CD i077 STM _ i075 EBAB i028 STR a Revised 8/23/2022 Packet Pg. 136 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) 8.3.b Project Title 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th aCurb Ramps Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossinq Ilinger Regional Facility PrdVesign Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project Ltywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase III Engineering Project Khimhor EBCA E 1 CA Project Accounting Funding Number i029 STR c368 STR EBCC i031 STR E9DA i040 STR EODC i050 STR E6GB c488 ASWM Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements E7DC i026 STR Y tvwiclP PrntPc tPcl/PPrmissivP Traffic Signal Conversio Civic Center Playfield (Construction) EOMA c551 PRK E yfield (Desig r EOMA Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) ESJB c482 WTR C Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station E4 c455 ONWIRM c L Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab E4MB c443 FAC a a Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Project E21 FE c564 Elm St. Waterline Replacement E21JB c561 WTR L 10 E 1 D i058 TR z Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating ESKA c473 WTR o wy 99 Gateway Revitalizati Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 3 (244th-238th) E22CE i067 STR 21 wy 99 Revitalization Stage 4 (224th-220th) STR c Lake Ballinger Associated Projects E4FD c436 STM a� a a� Lake Ballinaer Trunk Sewer Studv WR Ui Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study E4GC c461 SWR = le Creek Restoration S� m t Minor Sidewalk Program E6DD i017 STR Q PDES (Students Saving Salmon) Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan Update IrVD Slope Repair & Stabilization 1W EONA Perrinville Creek Flow Reduction Improvements E20FC Perrinville Creek Recovery Stud IIIIIIIII.E21 FC Phase 10 Sewerline Replacement Prof �nnual Water Utility Replace s025 GF m105 STM c552 STM s028 STM E22GA c566 SW R Phase 12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project E21JA c558 hase 13 Waterline Replacement Project Phase 2 Annual Storm Utility Replacement Project EOFB c547 WTR WTR STM Revised 8/23/2022 Packet Pg. 137 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Engineering Project Project Title Project Accounting Funding Number Number Phase 3 Storm Utility ReplacemeWroject E21 FD c563 Phase 4 Storm Utility Replacement Project E22FA c567 STM 6se 8 Annual OGA Phase 9 Annual Sewer Replacement Project E21 GA c559 SWR JfW Concrete Regrade & Drainage Sou Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater Pipe Rating Services E21 GB c562 SW R eaview Park Infiltration Facility Phase 2 SR-104 Adaptive System 236th-226th E22CG i069 STR SR Revitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Si nal STR Standard Details Updates ESNA solo UTILITIES water S� Sunset Walkway Improvements tility Funds reserve Policies Study Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction) Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design) 1W Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design) Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration Yost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment Yost & Seaview Reservoir Repairs and Upgrades Yost Park Infiltration Facility E1 DA c354 STR E7MA c544 PRK RK E7MA m103 PRK E4F STM EOJB s026 WTR E22JB m160 WTR E21 FA c556 PRK a Revised 8/23/2022 Packet Pg. 138 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering #) Engineering Project Title Project Number L020 Guardrail Installations 2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades 2020 Overlay Program 12020 Waterline Ova 2020 Pedestrian Task Force 020 Pedestrian Safety Program Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project Seaview Park Infiltration Facility PhasE Phase 2 Annual Storm Utilitv Replacer al Sewer Replace Phase 11 Annual Water Utility Replacement P ost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment Project Accounting Funding Number i046 EOAB i047 STR i048 EOCA i042 STR EODA s024 STR EODC i05O STR M EOFB c547 STM R EOJA c549 WTR Civic Center Playfield (Design) EOMA c536 PRK rvic Center Playfield (Construction EOMA c551 Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan Update EONA s025 GF at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements 1C c368 IWSTR Sunset Walkway Improvements E1 DA c354 STR a Ave Overlay (196 AMi SR Revitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Signal) E20CE i055 STR rrinville Creek Flow Reduction Improvements 2021 Traffic Calming 1021 Guardrail Installations 2021 Overlay Program t021 Waterline Overlay Program E21 AA E21 CA 21CB c552 i056 STR i051 STR WTR 2021 Sewer Overlay Program E21 CC i06O SW R j?021 Stormwater Overlay Progra- Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave to 9th Ave E21 DA i058 STR F-021 Pedestrian Task Force Yost Park Infiltration Facility E21 FA c556 PRK 175th St. SW Slope Stabilization wow E21 FB Perrinville Creek Recovery Study E21 FC s028 STM t Replacemel qW1FD Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Project E21 FE c564 STM I Sewer Replacement Project E21GA c559 Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater Pipe Rating Services E21 GB c562 SW R 12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project E21JA =MWhase WT Q Revised 8/23/2022 Packet Pg. 139 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering #) 8.3.b Engineering Project Project Title Project Accounting Funding Number Number Elm St. Waterline Replacement E21JB c561 WTR 2022 Signal Upgrades E22AA i070 STIR 2022 Traffic Calming Program E22AB i071 STIR 2022 Guardrail Program E22AC i073 STIR 2022 Overlay Program E22CA i063 STIR 2022 Waterline Overlay Program E22CB i064 STIR 2022 Sewerline Overlay Program E22CC i065 STIR 2022 Stormwater Overlay Program E22CD i066 STIR Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 3 (244th-238th) E22CE i067 STIR Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 4 (224th-220th) E22CF i068 STIR SR-104 Adaptive System 236th-226th E22CG i069 STIR 2022 Pedestrian Safety program E22DA i072 STIR Phase 4 Storm Utility Replacement Project E22FA c567 STM Lower Perrinville Creek Restoration E22FB a157 STM Phase 10 Sewerline Replacement Project E22GA c566 SWR Phase 13 Waterline Replacement Project E22JA c565 WTR Yost & Seaview Reservoir Repairs and Upgrades E22JB m160 WTR Utility Funds reserve Policies Study E22NA s029 UTILITIES 2022 Utility Rate and GFC Study E22NB s030 UTILITIES 2023 Overlay Program E23CA i074 STIR 2023 Waterline Overlay Program E23CB i075 WTR 2023 Sewer Overlay Program E23CC i076 SWR 2023 Stormwater Overlay Program E23CD i077 STM Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration E4FC c435 STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects E4FD c436 STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station E4FE c455 STM Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study E4GC c461 SWR Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab E4MB c443 FAC Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study E5GB sol l SWR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) E5J13 c482 WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating E5KA c473 WTR Standard Details Updates E5NA solo UTILITIES Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization E6AA s014 STIR Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion E6AB i015 STIR Minor Sidewalk Program E6DD i017 STIR Stormwater Comp Plan Update E6FD s017 STM Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase III E6GB c488 SWR N m U E 0 Ta 0 L Q 0- a U) L a� E z 'o L m c a� 0 a CD L LL r c a� E ca Q Revised 8/23/2022 Packet Pg. 140 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering #) Project Title Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Khimhor Khimhor E7DC i026 OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization E7FA m105 STM NPDES (Stude ) G 2019 Waterline Replacement E7JA c498 WTR elopment & Restoration (Design) E7MA c496 Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction) E7MA c544 PRK aterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design) E71VIA m103 220th Adaptive L6th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th 2019 Storm Maintenance Project 019 Sewerline Replacement Project 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement 19 Utility Rate & GFC Update 2019 Traffic Calmi Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing F Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South E8AB i028 STR E8CC i031 STR U STR E E8FC c525 STM SWR C E8JA c523 WTR 0 UTILITIES a a E9AA i038 STR L as E9CB i043 E9DA i040 STR z E91FA s022 STM o E9MA c502 FAC a d U) I 2, c a� a a� L U_ Q Revised 8/23/2022 Packet Pg. 141 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Accounting #) 8.3.b Engineering Project Project Title Project Accounting Number Number Lower Perrinville Creek Restoration E22FB a157 Sunset Walkway Improvements E1 DA c354 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements E1 CA c368 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration E4FC c435 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects E4FD c436 Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab E4MB c443 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station E4FE c455 Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study E4GC c461 Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating ESKA c473 Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) ESJB c482 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase III E6GB c488 Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design) E7MA c496 2019 Waterline Replacement E7JA c498 PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South E9MA c502 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project EBGA c516 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement EBJA c523 2019 Storm Maintenance Project EBFC c525 Civic Center Playfield (Design) EOMA c536 Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction) E7MA c544 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility Phase 2 EOFA c546 Phase 2 Annual Storm Utility Replacement Project EOFB c547 Phase 8 Annual Sewer Replacement Project EOGA c548 Phase 11 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project EOJA c549 Civic Center Playfield (Construction) EOMA c551 Perrinville Creek Flow Reduction Improvements E20FC c552 Yost Park Infiltration Facility E21 FA c556 Phase 12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project E21JA c558 Phase 9 Annual Sewer Replacement Project E21 GA c559 175th St. SW Slope Stabilization E21 FB c560 Elm St. Waterline Replacement E21JB c561 Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater Pipe Rating Services E21 GB c562 Phase 3 Storm Utility Replacement Project E21 FD c563 Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Project E21 FE c564 Phase 13 Waterline Replacement Project E22JA c565 Phase 10 Sewerline Replacement Project E22GA c566 Phase 4 Storm Utility Replacement Project E22FA c567 Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion E6AB i015 Funding STM STR STR STM STM FAC STM SWR WTR WTR SWR PRK WTR FAC SWR WTR STM PRK PRK STM STM SWR WTR PRK STM PRK WTR SWR STM WTR SWR STM STM WTR SWR STM STR N m U E 0 Ta 0 L Q 0_ a L a� E 3 Z 0 L m c a� 0 a CD L LL r c a� E ca Q Revised 8/23/2022 Packet Pg. 142 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Accounting #) 8.3.b Engineering Project Project Title Project Accounting Number Number Minor Sidewalk Program E6DD i017 Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements E7DC i026 220th Adaptive EBAB i028 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements EBCA i029 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th EBCC i031 ADA Curb Ramps EBDB i033 2019 Traffic Calming E9AA i038 Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing E9DA i040 2020 Overlay Program EOCA i042 2019 Waterline Overlay E9CB i043 2020 Guardrail Installations EOAA i046 2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades EOAB i047 2020 Traffic Calming EOAC i048 2020 Pedestrian Safety Program EODB i049 Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project EODC i050 2021 Overlay Program E21 CA i051 76th Ave Overlay (196th St. to OVD) E20CB i052 2020 Waterline Overlay EOCC i053 SR Revitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Signal) E20CE i055 2021 Traffic Calming E21 AA i056 2021 Guardrail Installations E21 AB i057 Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave to 9th Ave E21 DA i058 2021 Waterline Overlay Program E21 CB i059 2021 Sewer Overlay Program E21 CC i060 2021 Stormwater Overlay Program E21 CD i061 2021 Pedestrian Task Force E21 DB i061 2022 Overlay Program E22CA i063 2022 Waterline Overlay Program E22CB i064 2022 Sewerline Overlay Program E22CC i065 2022 Stormwater Overlay Program E22CD i066 Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 3 (244th-238th) E22CE i067 Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 4 (224th-220th) E22CF i068 SR-104 Adaptive System 236th-226th E22CG i069 2022 Signal Upgrades E22AA i070 2022 Traffic Calming Program E22AB i071 2022 Pedestrian Safety program E22DA i072 2022 Guardrail Program E22AC i073 Funding STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR WTR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR WTR SWR STM STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR N m U E 0 Ta 0 L Q 0_ a L a� E 3 Z 0 L m c a� 0 a CD L U- r c a) E 0 M Q Revised 8/23/2022 Packet Pg. 143 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Accounting #) 8.3.b Engineering Project Project Title Project Accounting Funding Number Number 2023 Overlay Program E23CA i074 STIR 2023 Waterline Overlay Program E23CB i075 WTR 2023 Sewer Overlay Program E23CC i076 SWR 2023 Stormwater Overlay Program E23CD i077 STM NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) E7FG m013 STM Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design) E7MA m103 PRK OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization E7FA m105 STM Yost & Seaview Reservoir Repairs and Upgrades E22JB m160 WTR Standard Details Updates ESNA solo UTILITIES Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study ESGB sol l SWR Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization E6AA s014 STIR Stormwater Comp Plan Update E6FD s017 STM 2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update EBJB s02O UTILITIES Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design E9FA s022 STM 2020 Pedestrian Task Force EODA s024 STIR Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan Update EONA s025 GF Yost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment EOJB s026 WTR Perrinville Creek Recovery Study E21 FC s028 STM Utility Funds reserve Policies Study E22NA s029 UTILITIES 2022 Utility Rate and GFC Study E22NB s03O UTILITIES N m t U E 0 Ta 0 L Q 0- a U) L a� E z 0 L m c a� 0 a CD L LL d E L ci Q Revised 8/23/2022 Packet Pg. 144 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding) 8.3.b Engineering Project Project Title Project Accounting Number Number Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab E4MB c443 PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South E9MA c502 Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan Update EONA s025 Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design) E7MA c496 Civic Center Playfield (Design) EOMA c536 Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction) E7MA c544 Civic Center Playfield (Construction) EOMA c551 Yost Park Infiltration Facility E21 FA c556 Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design) E7MA m103 Lower Perrinville Creek Restoration E22FB a157 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration E4FC c435 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects E4FD c436 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station E4FE c455 2019 Storm Maintenance Project EBFC c525 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility Phase 2 EOFA c546 Phase 2 Annual Storm Utility Replacement Project EOFB c547 Perrinville Creek Flow Reduction Improvements E20FC c552 175th St. SW Slope Stabilization E21 FB c560 Phase 3 Storm Utility Replacement Project E21 FD c563 Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Project E21 FE c564 Phase 4 Storm Utility Replacement Project E22FA c567 2021 Stormwater Overlay Program E21 CD i061 2023 Stormwater Overlay Program E23CD i077 NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) E7FG m013 OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization E7FA m105 Stormwater Comp Plan Update E6FD s017 Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design E9FA s022 Perrinville Creek Recovery Study E21 FC s028 Sunset Walkway Improvements E1DA c354 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements E1CA c368 Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion E6AB i015 Minor Sidewalk Program E6DD i017 Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements E7DC i026 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements EBCA i029 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th EBCC i031 ADA Curb Ramps EBDB i033 2019 Traffic Calming E9AA i038 Funding FAC FAC GF PRK PRK PRK PRK PRK PRK STM STM STM STM STM STM STM STM STM STM STM STM STM STM STM STM STM STM STM STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR Q Revised 8/23/2022 Packet Pg. 145 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding) 8.3.b Engineering Project Project Title Project Accounting Number Number Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing E91DA i040 2020 Overlay Program EOCA i042 2020 Guardrail Installations EOAA i046 2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades EOAB i047 2020 Traffic Calming EOAC i048 2020 Pedestrian Safety Program EODB i049 Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project EODC i050 2021 Overlay Program E21 CA i051 76th Ave Overlay (196th St. to OVD) E20CB i052 SR Revitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Signal) E20CE i055 2021 Traffic Calming E21 AA i056 2021 Guardrail Installations E21 AB i057 Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave to 9th Ave E21 DA i058 2021 Pedestrian Task Force E21 DB i061 2022 Overlay Program E22CA i063 2022 Waterline Overlay Program E22CB i064 2022 Sewerline Overlay Program E22CC i065 2022 Stormwater Overlay Program E22CD i066 Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 3 (244th-238th) E22CE i067 Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 4 (224th-220th) E22CF i068 SR-104 Adaptive System 236th-226th E22CG i069 2022 Signal Upgrades E22AA i070 2022 Traffic Calming Program E22AB i071 2022 Pedestrian Safety program E22DA i072 2022 Guardrail Program E22AC i073 2023 Overlay Program E23CA i074 Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization E6AA s014 2020 Pedestrian Task Force EODA s024 220th Adaptive EBAB i028 2020 Waterline Overlay EOCC i053 Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study E4GC c461 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase III E6GB c488 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project EBGA c516 Phase 8 Annual Sewer Replacement Project EOGA c548 Phase 9 Annual Sewer Replacement Project E21 GA c559 Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater Pipe Rating Services E21 GB c562 Phase 10 Sewerline Replacement Project E22GA c566 Funding STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR SWR SWR SWR SWR SWR SWR SWR N m U E 0 Ta 0 L Q 0_ a L a� E 3 Z 0 L m c a� 0 a CD L U- r c a) E 0 M Q Revised 8/23/2022 Packet Pg. 146 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding) 8.3.b Engineering Project Project Title Project Accounting Funding Number Number 2021 Sewer Overlay Program E21CC i060 SWR 2023 Sewer Overlay Program E23CC i076 SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study ESGB sol l SWR Standard Details Updates ESNA solo UTILITIES 2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update EBJB s02O UTILITIES Utility Funds reserve Policies Study E22NA s029 UTILITIES 2022 Utility Rate and GFC Study E22NB s03O UTILITIES Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating ESKA c473 WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) ESJB c482 WTR 2019 Waterline Replacement E7JA c498 WTR 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement EBJA c523 WTR Phase 11 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project EOJA c549 WTR Phase 12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project E21JA c558 WTR Elm St. Waterline Replacement E21JB c561 WTR Phase 13 Waterline Replacement Project E22JA c565 WTR 2019 Waterline Overlay E9CB i043 WTR 2021 Waterline Overlay Program E21CB i059 WTR 2023 Waterline Overlay Program E23CB i075 WTR Yost & Seaview Reservoir Repairs and Upgrades E22JB m160 WTR Yost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment EOJB s026 WTR N m t U E 0 Ta 0 L Q 0_ a U) L a� E 3 Z 0 L m c a� 0 a CD L LL d E L ci Q Revised 8/23/2022 Packet Pg. 147 8.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments. Staff Lead: Dave Turley Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Lori Palmer Background/History Approval of payroll check #65213 for $138.00 dated September 2, 2022, payroll checks #65214 to #65221 dated September 20, 2022 for $11,364.95, payroll direct deposit for $661,691.72, benefit checks #65222 through #65227 and wire payments for $652,028.79 for the pay period September 1, 2022 through September 15, 2022. Staff Recommendation Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments. 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: 09-01-2022 payroll earnings summary report 09-01-2022 to 09-15-2022 payroll earnings summary report 09-01-22 to 09-15-22 benefit checks summary report Packet Pg. 148 Hour Type Hour Class 190 REGULAR HOURS Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 1,114 (09/01/2022 to 09/01/2022) Description REGULAR HOURS Hours M Amount 150.00 1.00 $150.00 Total Net Pay: $138.00 8.4.a 09/19/2022 Packet Pg. 149 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 1,055 (09/01/2022 to 09/15/2022) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount 111 ABSENT NO PAY LEAVE 86.75 0.00 121 SICK SICK LEAVE 325.50 13,855.87 122 VACATION VACATION 1,668.00 75,574.25 123 HOLIDAY HOLIDAY HOURS 116.00 4,869.55 124 HOLIDAY FLOATER HOLIDAY 9.00 309.44 125 COMP HOURS COMPENSATORY TIME 185.25 8,210.44 131 MILITARY MILITARY LEAVE 40.00 2,261.11 132 JURY DUTY JURY DUTY 46.50 1,911.62 134 MILITARY MILITARY LEAVE -UNPAID 88.00 0.00 135 SICK WASHINGTON STATE SICK LEAVE 5.00 116.25 141 BEREAVEMENT BEREAVEMENT 26.00 666.81 150 REGULAR HOURS Kellv Day Used 72.00 2,921.64 155 COMP HOURS COMPTIME AUTO PAY 309.39 16,502.70 160 VACATION MANAGEMENT LEAVE 21.00 1,818.63 190 REGULAR HOURS REGULAR HOURS 16,710.00 710,123.73 194 SICK Emergency Sick Leave 72.00 2,503.63 195 REGULAR HOURS ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE 80.00 5,169.84 210 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME -STRAIGHT 139.25 6,731.89 215 OVERTIME HOURS WATER WATCH STANDBY 72.00 3,987.06 216 MISCELLANEOUS STANDBY TREATMENT PLANT 13.00 1,148.02 220 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME 1.5 451.25 33,369.11 225 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME -DOUBLE 14.00 1,000.02 410 MISCELLANEOUS WORKING OUT OF CLASS 0.00 381.05 411 SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL 0.00 1,061.95 602 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP 1.0 146.50 0.00 603 COMP HOURS Holidav Comp 1.0 38.00 0.00 604 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP TIME 1.5 286.15 0.00 606 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP 2.0 3.00 0.00 902 MISCELLANEOUS BOOT ALLOWANCE 0.00 245.25 acc MISCELLANEOUS ACCREDITATION PAY 0.00 142.92 acs MISCELLANEOUS ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORT 0.00 148.12 colre MISCELLANEOUS Collision Reconstruction ist 0.00 93.65 cpl MISCELLANEOUS TRAINING CORPORAL 0.00 187.30 crt MISCELLANEOUS CERTIFICATION III PAY 0.00 431.16 ctr MISCELLANEOUS CTR INCENTIVES PROGRAM 0.00 260.00 09/19/2022 Packet Pg. 550 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 1,055 (09/01/2022 to 09/15/2022) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount deftat MISCELLANEOUS DEFENSE TATICS INSTRUCTOR 0.00 128.50 det4 MISCELLANEOUS Detective 4% 0.00 1,075.04 ed1 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 2% 0.00 730.42 ed2 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 4% 0.00 554.18 ed3 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 6% 0.00 6,421.53 firear MISCELLANEOUS FIREARMS INSTRUCTOR 0.00 409.49 fmla ABSENT FAMILY MEDICAL/NON PAID 105.00 0.00 fmis SICK FAMILY MEDICAL/SICK 24.00 2,078.44 hol HOLIDAY HOLIDAY 1,366.16 58,034.28 k9 MISCELLANEOUS K-9 PAY 0.00 275.80 less MISCELLANEOUS LESS LETHAL INSTRUCTOR 0.00 89.60 Iq1 LONGEVITY LONGEVITY PAY 2% 0.00 1,009.87 Ig11 LONGEVITY LONGEVITY PAY 2.5% 0.00 532.28 Ig12 LONGEVITY Longevity 9% 0.00 3,829.14 Ig13 LONGEVITY Longevity 7% 0.00 954.85 Ig14 LONGEVITY Longevity 5% 0.00 968.42 Iq2 LONGEVITY PAY LONGEVITY PAY 4% 0.00 259.00 Iq4 LONGEVITY Longevity 1 % 0.00 317.43 Iq5 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 3% 0.00 1,461.31 Iq6 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv .5% 0.00 336.76 Iq7 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 1.5% 0.00 417.94 Iq8 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 8% 0.00 252.04 mtc MISCELLANEOUS MOTORCYCLE PAY 0.00 128.30 pds MISCELLANEOUS Public Disclosure Specialist 0.00 103.70 pfml ABSENT Paid Familv Medical Leave 30.00 0.00 pfmp ABSENT Paid Familv Medical Unpaid/Sup 58.50 0.00 pfms SICK Paid FAMILY MEDICAL/SICK 12.00 519.92 pfmv VACATION Paid Familv Medical Vacation 17.50 758.22 phv MISCELLANEOUS PHYSICAL FITNESS PAY 0.00 2,656.50 prof MISCELLANEOUS PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS SER 0.00 203.50 sdp MISCELLANEOUS SPECIAL DUTY PAY 0.00 329.16 sqt MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE SERGEANT 0.00 203.50 st REGULAR HOURS Serqeant Pay 0.00 152.63 traf MISCELLANEOUS TRAFFIC 0.00 240.13 vap VACATION Vacation Premium 85.00 3,848.83 09/19/2022 Packet Pg. 151 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 1,055 (09/01/2022 to 09/15/2022) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours 22, 721.70 Total Net Pay: Amount $985,283.72 $673,056.67 8.4.b 09/19/2022 Packet Pg. 152 Benefit Checks Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 1,055 - 09/01/2022 to 09/15/2022 Bank: usbank - US Bank Check # Date Payee # Name Check Amt 65222 09/20/2022 bpas BPAS 5,499.26 65223 09/20/2022 epoa2 EPOA-POLICE 6,088.50 65224 09/20/2022 epoa3 EPOA-POLICE SUPPORT 698.26 65225 09/20/2022 flex NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS 3,566.85 65226 09/20/2022 teams TEAMSTERS LOCAL 763 4,514.00 65227 09/20/2022 icma VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS 304884 7,112.40 27,479.27 Bank: wire - US BANK Check # Date Payee # Name Check Amt 3416 09/20/2022 awc AWC 349,792.15 3419 09/20/2022 us US BANK 123,968.49 3420 09/20/2022 wadc WASHINGTON STATE TREASURER 29,174.90 3421 09/20/2022 mebt WTRISC FBO #N317761 115,875.19 3423 09/20/2022 pb NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION 5,409.79 3425 09/20/2022 oe OFFICE OF SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT 329.00 624,549.52 Grand Totals: 652,028.79 9/19/2022 8.4.c vi Y a� v r m Direct Deposit m 0.00 0.00 cv 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 C a 0.00 0 M 0.00 0 o. o. Q Direct Deposit o Q. 0.00 a� L 0.00 0.00 E 0.00 E 0.00 u3i 0.00 N Y V N 0.00 v .r 0.00 c m N N u7 r O O O r N N O Cn O r C d E L V R r r Q Packet Pg. 153 8.5 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 Approve Right of Entry and Maintenance Agreement between City of Edmonds and Lynnwood for Highway 99 Revitalization and Gateway Project - Stage 2 Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Emiko Rodarte Background/History On August 9, 2022 staff presented this item to the Parks and Public Works Committee and it was forwarded to the consent agenda for approval. Staff Recommendation Approve Right of Entry and Maintenance Agreement between City of Edmonds and Lynnwood. Narrative As part of the Hwy 99 Revitalization and Gateway Project - Stage 2, the City is proposing the installation of a raised landscaped center median throughout the entire corridor from 244th St. SW to 2101h St. SW. The portion of Hwy 99 from 21701 Hwy 99 to the northern end of the corridor are shared with Lynnwood (east side of centerline within City of Lynnwood / west side within City of Edmonds). Since the landscaped raised median and the north gateway sign are being installed to replace the center two- way left turn lane, half of the improvements will be within Lynnwood right of way. The agreement will provide the City of Edmonds access to maintain the portion of median improvements within Lynnwood's right of way. Attachments: Attachment A - Interlocal Agreement with Lynnwood Packet Pg. 154 DocuSign Envelope ID: 524819D4-42D7-4762-9D96-1A756C6440F5 8.5.a CITY OF EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 REVITALIZATION & GATEWAY PROJECT — STAGE 2 RIGHT OF ENTRY AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT This Right of Entry and Maintenance Agreement ("Agreement") is made effective this day of 2022 between the City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Edmonds" and the City of Lynnwood, a Washington municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Lynnwood." WHEREAS, as part of the City of Edmonds' Highway 99 Revitalization and Gateway Project — Stage 2, Edmonds intends to install a raised median that will straddle the Edmonds / Lynnwood border along the corridor from 244"' Street SW to 2101h Street SW; and WHEREAS, the right-of-way line on Highway 99 runs along the centerline of the roadway and delineates Edmonds on the west side of the roadway and Lynnwood on the east side of the roadway from 21701 Highway 99 to the north end of the corridor, which is north of 2121h Street SW; and WHEREAS, Edmonds' entry onto the Lynnwood side of the median, the exact location of which is described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (hereinafter referred to as the "Property") is necessary to install and maintain certain landscaping and a "Welcome To Edmonds" gateway sign, as described and depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Work"); and WHEREAS, Lynnwood desires to permit Edmonds to enter the Property to undertake the Work; and WHEREAS, Lynnwood has agreed to the installation of the median, landscaping and sign, and Edmonds has agreed to undertake the maintenance of the median, landscaping and sign during and after the plant establishment period (hereinafter referred to as the "Maintenance"); and WHEREAS, Edmonds and Lynnwood desire to memorialize their understanding of the rights and responsibilities of each with regard to the Work and the Maintenance; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions herein stated, Edmonds and Lynnwood agree as follows: 1. Grant of License / Right of Entry. Lynnwood hereby grants to Edmonds a non-exclusive license of reasonable access to the Property for the purposes of performing the Work and activities reasonably related thereto. The right of entry authorized by this Agreement is subject to all valid rights existing in the Property as of the effective date of this Agreement. Lynnwood reserves the right to grant others the privilege to use the Property, and the parties specifically Packet Pg. 155 DocuSign Envelope ID: 524819D4-42D7-4762-9D96-1A756C6440F5 8.5.a agree that this Agreement is not exclusive. Edmonds will not permit any other party, except Edmonds' duly authorized representatives, employees, agents and independent contractors (collectively "Representatives") to enter or use the Property. 2. Contacts. Prior to entry, Edmonds and/or its designated Representative(s) will contact the following representative(s) of Lynnwood to provide notice of access to the Property: Public Works Director 19100 44th Ave W Lynnwood, WA 98036 425-670-5200 3. Liability. While on the Property, Edmonds will comply, and will cause all of its Representatives to comply, with all applicable government laws, ordinances, rules and regulations during the exercise of its rights herein. Edmonds and its Representatives will be responsible for any damage done to the Property by Edmonds or its Representatives during the performance of the above -described Work and will pay the costs of repairing and restoring the Property to substantially the same condition as existed before Edmonds' its Representative(s)' entry onto the Property. 4. Maintenance. Edmonds agrees to undertake the perpetual maintenance of the entire median, including curbs, low -profile barrier curbs, concrete surfaces within the median, and the landscaping and sign to be installed in the median as set forth in Exhibit A and Exhibit B. Maintenance may include, but not be limited to the regular weeding, mulching and edging of the ground around the plantings; the regular trimming and other tasks required to maintain the health of the plants; the necessary maintenance of curbs and concrete surfaces; and the necessary maintenance of the sign. 5. Governiny, LawNenue. The validity, meaning, and effect of this Agreement will be determined in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. In the event any legal proceeding is initiated involving this Agreement, it will be brought in Snohomish County Superior Court. 6. No Third Party Rights. Nothing in this Agreement, express or implied, is intended to confer any rights or remedies upon any person, other than the parties and their respective employees and representatives. 2 Packet Pg. 156 DocuSign Envelope ID: 524819D4-42D7-4762-9D96-lA756C6440F5 8.5.a 7. Indemnification/Hold Harmless. To the extent authorized by law, Edmonds and Lynnwood will each indemnify and hold the other, including its officers, employees, and representatives, harmless from and will process and defend at its own expense all claims, demands, loss, costs or suits at law or equity arising in whole or in part from that party's negligence or breach of any of its obligations under this Agreement; provided that nothing herein will require either party to indemnify the other party against and hold harmless the other party from claims, demands, loss, costs or suits at law or equity based solely upon the conduct of the other party, its officers, employees, and representatives; and provided further that if the claims or suits are caused by or result from the concurrent negligence of: (a) Edmonds, its officers, employees, or representatives; and (b) Lynnwood, its officers, employees, or representatives, this indemnity provision with respect to: (1) claims or suits based upon such negligence; and (2) the costs to any party of defending such claims and suits, will be valid and enforceable only to the extent of that party's negligence or the negligence of that party's officers, employees, or representatives. The provisions of this section will survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 8. Termination. This Agreement will commence on the effective date set forth above. Edmonds's right of entry onto the Property for the Work and the Maintenance will continue in perpetuity. This Agreement will terminate in the event the Property is redeveloped in a manner that necessitates the removal of the median, landscaping and sign described in Exhibit A and Exhibit B. 9. Notice. Any notice to be given or any documents to be delivered by either party to the other party herein will be mailed by certified post and addressed to Edmonds or Lynnwood at the following address: City of Edmonds_ City of Lynnwood Public Works & Utilities Director Public Works Director 121 5`h Avenue 19100 44th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98020 Lynnwood, WA 98036 425-771-0220 425-670-5200 Either party may, with written notice to the other, designate a different contact name, address and/or telephone number. DATED THIS DAY OF CITY OF EDMONDS Mike Nelson, Mayor 2022. CITY OF LYNNWOOD �[,DOcu3lgged hy: Lyishvo_ �Vi,]` to — L SEoa�ooa2�Dease.�._, .._»,"or EV DS 3 � 9/15/2022 Packet Pg. 157 DocuSign Envelope ID: 524819D4-42D7-4762-9D96-1A756C6440F5 J M 0 0 D ON" `PUN`# J L7-1 I QL a t�aa 0 M 3AV H199 i� f! M JAV H191 Ln Ln 0 ry N LA v O Z a O „ % � u a l~J m o d z C C t n m O u E N E ' O l0 a > Z Q E N Z E5�, C O W � E � cY O ` c o O W W O co �q o R$ od Z "Y a� O m O = c a N d E `d y co N 0 R T �} ^NDS o �Nr- DrL r;i wrL W Packet Pg. 158 8.5.a OW -Lu - Q jt Lu W z I_ N C6 N Z U LU U) i i s a- ZVIV JMO 33S 09+90Z V V1S 66 21S 3NI1 H010 -� Z ----- - --------------- O O $ L' 1. A sa �z o !f U �s a ! T � ! •, i w i 1 I � I �^ I z x ❑ 7 3 ! w * 1 I + 12 � I 1 O i II---------- 0 , W O ~•~ i ~ Z 2 `\ 1 o= �z << L L I cn I ?i x 1 L L I L l zl \ L ¢I I rn I I' oe � I 1 0[-IV UMO 33S 00+LS V V1S 66 HS 3N11 HO1VW U Q Packet Pg. 159 85a � - El - ■, §{!!;@!,m § �§ `■,■ E. g &&_!;@+%@ !_);!;lE;;,■ w.6(,l�se,, § §;a5§§§ �)%§&)\)�\� ear a §§;q»e!!2;! ee R«m ear Aa |!|| CD .|| \\ §) _ _� \k� --�- � - � - \ � � \ ?� } k � Ld ®^ !ƒ ' \ � � z C14 { c3i, cli � � $ d z.»\ ' } !� ; \ ± \ r •� \ � 8- 0 e \ , \ �� \\ - ! [� � mmm 3NII Aa \ k 0 E w 0 q � f k 3 � � LU 0 � � > 0 CL LO � 0 \ w 0 ■ k / � k E w Q 0 / « 2 E / 2 k E / Packet Pg. 160 8.5.a ~ ��o�3e.I3¢ u _-ova p�1955ri g a w ` yz v'Sm a 0I# �� Ri o w z LLI Lu CD Lu o= 461V9M033S�'�_ a o ry py�gii tl'JSS Sfi 8S 3Nll MV o w Iz p s o� rn�u�i a oo p'+T m 3c> ; ❑yv O 2 x l N w N o o o i V L m wo a ox q - f/J Uo � �=s y `. r + O �" m % Fx- Ld W qq o N Ijl U N • I o- U LLI _who U:) Z s1 o r w < U - Z U O Z �\ 7 \ I O O o O pPpi y p >> O 0 o U U a a S W � U m� \ \ \ &IV JMO33S w pS+g LZ tl tl1S fib iJS 34I1 HO1tl Packet Pg. 161 85a _ §;|_; .y� _ ■ ! / (\����/�\ §� eel; ,.■ `` � � r§ o a=-,-®•§: - \\!«� ! § ||!; -0§ § I G2»:;§§2)S <e f \\§ §\ \ § §$E r g \\\ a2 k§\ � * ! w ; \ ' Ld Z CN g U B ;! in ! 0 . � 2E)e §\� d§§§ !§} 'p ® .«E � a2~ a \ y d* � � � { e' !, \ j \ _! \� \ E j / [) | \\ [® E a DMO 7 09+9ZZVViS668S3NII HOiVW Packet Pg. 162 8.5.a WHO NOMO 33S t 00+W6 V V1S 66 HS 3NIl HOiVW u I � I J F U i C a rn x O Y G r O N = H K w i it an ran--------------------------------- r w 1 o cn � QoN I ❑}v N N r r 4s dJmm � Fsm v o I k 5 O I II J I of Ld ry I ] =. z t I I ' a 3ms CT< LU co II F I I I =w= cRFp.�' rr .r n' It r <e [ o m a£ LVHO NOW 33S 00+981 V V1S 66 bS 3NIl HOIVW 13 ? c 3 _ is zw E sx� •b .rKw.. ww � a�.r*wek.r.en n�nn•...a • ..�+x�+d. rcp.l.a. H+aa .R.» r, �.,.,.�....� . ,::. ".:.. "-... Packet Pg. 163 8.5.a w 1 z ti N I w tis p U }� s N LLI = i i i I I I I l vzlll I- �S�S�S�1 OZ-HO NOW 33S 00+L61 V V1S 66 B 3NIl HDiVW -212 1 I I I I � I I II C i I r l l I a Cd 4 o 9L-HO NOM0 33S 00+W1 V V1S 66 MS 3NIl HOAN m I U U W K Q Q ,N O } v N LL l Y 0 o O m U W m M \ \ \ li LLL i o L m L, - --------------. __----- `a V� O� z o "< Packet Pg. 164 8.5.a U 2 9 �33 � U ` w O a w N rn � � Z LZ-HO NOMO 338 o 09+WVV1S66JS3NIlHOiM w = nw] 1 � � t I 1 w W S I I [ rj)C� W I I 11 YC) N C) 19 N Lu o I o # < ° m U W I IIn I I I ' �IS I I I I w us a y 3ma Cn Z o� in Lu .1, x� Ill a :1 R t I f g a I '- Z I ,3 > I l n L I " R-HO NOW 336 00+M L V V1S 66 aS 3NIl HOIVIN � a o a O� V� = Zo QS Packet Pg. 165 i W 2' Z ti N 6:T N Z O U LU Q- 5 ZZ•HO NJMO 33S 09+90Z V V1S 66?IS 3NIl HOBN f • � - �.. v � �r it --------------------- e� a m x LL fOf H w LL & * z � IJI N e� 51 $� <�r 4 s� zo �g z w w 4 suw-a eu�nv.v rn.. nnr-�ww r. �.wor.--e....•.arwro• ��rr.a..,.:w r. �..w 8.5.a C7 cn o ao� C3 >- N Lll CN CN J � O ULL m m Packet Pg. 166 00+� 2 V V1S 66 US 3NIl HOBN � x 1 LLi a IaB $ i i \ \ z N 8 _� O U e w Lu m 8 x+� g�N1 t.r an ran r n I v n• �' rr rr i V-HO N9M4 33S 09+90Z V V1S 66 US 3NIl HO VW R -,p ray ev��ywv Ta f svMeErm aa:wvnaa -gym. rL�itYil4tnYr 8.5.a U � U w w� �Z oNz z o 0 Q aO O¢¢ E W = N N cd T z � O y � w tz Packet Pg. 167 8.5.a M-HO NJMO 33S 05+92 VV1S 66 8S 3N11 HOiVW g Iu i 9 eif I., •Lf n! w - pp 0 I � I _Sp o� I k 0 Q FF5 I R� I I 1f1 Z N I Q o s.e �r I TNT I INWN 1Sa nS ul' ++! Rl W J 0 -j o tom. 1 I v 1 4 " U w I uiw $ �QS Ld a � V� - Z�4 04 z i I in o k� I I o ui U I I I o H U)_wow o fw U ew 11 i.l y Q 3 1 k F ZZ-HO NOMO 33S 00+V V V1S 66 NS 3NIl HODIN s i= O CW7 '�aawnw �+«. se•rs.e�,•v tin �.w...n-.ew•+im�tae..nnw�a....:n «... �..�..•�,•�e.c�;,°,n:.'w'.: Packet Pg. 168 8.5.a j 3 U W O a W V, Q Zr rn � 9Z-HO NJMa 33S o } o 09+OZZ V ViS 66 US 3NIl HOAN 0 G W U• W H Z c� U r 6 •, o I I I '` Z uy I IM M1C I� } ��r i•�' �T� 1 r.f CD I � Q 0 I? �W� I I �mm II f3 Ili I I o �� U cr j i u o 0 LU w w U'•, I i 03 VRL M Y% uV I orss '�. +x sb I r rn r r s ro .A r i" O !R CZ-HO NBMO 33S J 09+91Z V V1S 66 NS 3NIl HOIVW `a 0 u •� i . Nw oz O Zo �< k�b euF1�+„.xwf a�ex�nvR4��M:nA.uv+••�ruatvCuffrein+wa��Ks�a «n.no- �'wl�i.r�r'��wx� f.�.. .�1 -r .. Packet Pg. 169 i W IY Z N O N 64 N Lu (n N�.�NE�ti'\2j�sjs\Nl 9Z-H0 NOMO 99S 09+9ZZ V ViS 66 HS 3NI1 HOAN Hai ggs t a T4. i 1 a6 nC H�' nC nr iio' r Hr a s.r 6Z-HO NOW 336 09+OZZ V V1S 66 M 3NI1 HOAN 8.5.a 66 � �_ w o� �y N� w ee ws ro-xw sc.,.•ac Fr. !7!: .. Packet Pg. 170 85a § ! _ �& k\\ \ ( \ k � �| \ ; | 2 _§ j(\ \j\ _\ \ { \ k[9 /§ \ |Ld q � §| � - � . u■Q r z . -| \§ /■/j � ® ■ � �§ g| q ; N ( \ / / � � q )!§2 3 )))2 ¥n;) § 2s i i .» 2 _ -� ■■ , < � i § � � � � i q kf ° ■ 4 )° � � ` � ; ■ � / GZ-H , _ate o;,me@ 3NII mn ! ; )) / Packet Pg. 171 & R C) ƒ B ■ ] / . R � ] ( ) / 1} ) / CD } k / o CD EE \ \ \\ \j §\ j \j \/ ; § ]� /e 9 S }- } ED El]L F� / ° k\\ m \ k\)co er1334m@a a e¥m m @ 3NII HDIVA »YIaaENS 33S »=Vma« 3NII mm Id P 85a Packet Pg. 172 85a eYl maw m a o e¥mea 3NII mm ) § | $ �§ \| § )( \( -o .o B.o §� ]| § a■ �! } | | )2 , \ Li ❑ \ E \ \ � & j § § , § . 2 =\6 \ ��§ . \§ ;) ) : /\ / - / & / - !; < | )\ �/ ` �- \ M. \ h . R g 2 2 2 / O 2 � _ } eVlmam4a o !¥m ear HOIVVI 0 0 3 0 e2) � k/ LU LU c2� Packet Pg. 173 ,y Z O L U i � t ti 1 O 1 � o Z , LL LL L , z U w cn r --I a 0 w z - o a � U � W > N s w CD rn � w w �W LL LL 6t W Z>- s� x sw 1. oLs gz10 = m as 2w Z'N j of of W Jz- 0 QoT i N N W J � O U OW m W m SZ-VI133HS 133HS 33S OS+OZZ V V1S 66?IS 3NIl HOiM OZ-V1133HS 133HS 33S 09+92 MS 66 HS 3NIl HO1VW w � cnUJ Z g Z w E Q x � 2 0 w m LUzH 8.5.a Packet Pg. 174 85a � 0 C) ƒ 2 --, , , � \� \ �\ r& ,mew _ o =¥m e« 3NII HOIVA ~ ( o. /.§ / ( ;«! z _! § N lo, §! § Packet Pg. 175 DocuSign Envelope ID: 524819D4-42D7-4762-9D96-1A756C6440F5 8.5.a EXHIBIT B Gateway Sign Details General Description: Pylon Sign- LED Internally illuminated, single face. 1 _ The 'Welcome to' letters are routed thru the cabinet face metal to allow only the letter faces to be Illuminated with the background cabinet remaining opaque. 2. The word 'Edmonds" tD be Individual channel letterforms, each to be front lit. 3, The vertical wave shape consists of two parts. The front one is 'halo lit", fabricated as a reverse channel to allow light to shine out the back and reflect off the surface of the backerwhleh Is a flat art out wave. The lighting design Intent here Is to create an even glow of light. (without hot spots), as a means to highlight the perimeter edge of the front wave 5 Packet Pg. 176 8.6 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 Approve Interlocal Agreement with Community Transit Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Emiko Rodarte Background/History On May 10, 2022 staff presented this item to the Parks and Public Works Committee and it was forwarded to the consent agenda for approval with a recommendation to include the City Arborist in the tree evaluation. This addition was made to section 2.2 of the agreement. The delay in placing this item on the consent agenda was due to staff availability. Staff Recommendation Approve Interlocal Agreement with Community Transit. Narrative Community Transit provides transit service throughout the city limits with connections to adjacent jurisdictions. They have brought up to the City's attention the need for tree branches to be cut back at certain locations along Route 416. This commuter route connects Downtown Edmonds to Downtown Seattle, using Dayton St. 51" Ave. S, SR-104, and 2381" St. SW with double tall buses. Community Transit has informed the City that those buses are having difficulties along this route due to overgrown vegetation (at 11 bus stops specifically). CT has agreed to a one-time agreement only in 2022 to pay for a tree trimming company to cut back the vegetation in order to provide the required 14' vertical clearance for those buses. The City arborist will help evaluate the scope of work for all tree trimming. City staff will be responsible for obtaining approval from the different property owners prior to completing tree trimming (since most of those trees in question are on private property) as well as all the coordination with the tree trimming company during the entire process of the work. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Interlocal Agreement Community Transit Packet Pg. 177 8.6.a INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF EDMONDS AND COMMUNITY TRANSIT FOR SERVICE ROUTE TREE TRIMMING THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR TRANSIT SERVICE ROUTE TREE TRIMMING ("Agreement") is made and entered into by and between the City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation (hereafter "the City") and Community Transit, a public transit authority of Snohomish County, Washington (hereafter "CT"), collectively referred to herein as the "Parties" and individually as a "Party" pursuant to Chapter 39.34 RCW. RECITALS A. The Interlocal Cooperation Act, Chapter 39.34 RCW, allows public agencies to enter into cooperative agreements to more efficiently provide services within their jurisdictions. B. CT provides community transit services within the city limits of the City of Edmonds and has brought to the City's attention the need for trees to be trimmed in certain locations along its transit service routes. C. The City has agreed to contract for the provision of the necessary tree trimming services in such locations and CT has agreed to pay for those services in 2022 (serving as one time agreement only). D. The Parties desire to enter into this Agreement to document the Parties' rights and responsibilities to obtain and finance the necessary tree trimming services for the benefit of both CT and the citizens of the City of Edmonds. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, which are incorporated herein by reference, and the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the Parties agree as follows: PURPOSE. The purpose of this Agreement is to provide for the joint and cooperative undertaking of the Parties to obtain and finance the necessary tree trimming services along CT's transit services routes within the city limits of the City of Edmonds, identify those persons responsible for administering the combined undertaking, and define the Parties' rights and responsibilities as contemplated in RCW 39.34.030. The Parties do not intend to enter into a partnership or joint venture, nor to create through this Agreement a separate legal or administrative entity subject to suit. 2. CITY RESPONSIBILITIES. 2.1 The City will, following all bidding and contracting requirements applicable to the City and its own procurement and contracting policies and procedures, select and enter into a contract with a contractor to provide tree trimming services at the Packet Pg. 178 8.6.a following CT bus stops located within the City of Edmonds: • Stop #1704 — 238th Street SW & 84th Avenue W (WB movement/east of intersection) • Stop #1851 — Edmonds Way & 238th Street (WB movement on SR-104) • Stop #1853 — Edmonds Way & 95th Place (WB movement/west of intersection) • Stop # 493 — Edmonds Way & 951h Place W (WB movement/east of intersection) • Stop #1849 — Edmonds Way & 100th Avenue W (WB movement/west of intersection) • Stop #1848 — Edmonds Way & Paradise Lane (WB movement/at intersection) • Stop # 682 — 5th Avenue S & Holly Drive (NB movement/north of intersection) • Stop # 1774 — Dayton Street & 5th Avenue S (WB movement/west of intersection) • Stop # 1778 — Dayton Street & Sunset Avenue (WB movement/east of intersection) • Stop # 606 — Northbound 3rd Avenue & Bell Street (NB movement/north of intersection) (This stop does not require 14' of vertical clearance / only branches impeding into the roadway) 2.2 The City's contract with the contractor will specify that, with the exception of Stop # 606, tree trimming will be to a minimum vertical clearance of fourteen feet (14'). The contractor is also responsible for providing traffic control as needed for entire duration of this work at all locations. The contract will include provisions reasonably necessary to ensure the contractor's compliance with all applicable laws and regulations relating to these services. The City arborist will help evaluate the scope of work for all tree trimming. 2.3 The City will be responsible for reaching out to the property owners on which the trees are located to inform them of the up -coming work or to see if possibly the property owner wanted to address this trimming work themselves. 2.4 The City will communicate with CT as necessary prior to the signature of the contract agreement with the contractor (to guarantee CT agrees with the total amount to be paid to the contractor) and during the provision of the tree trimming services to help ensure satisfactory completion of these services. 2.5 The City will provide an invoice to CT for the full cost of these services within thirty (30) calendar days of the completion of the services. 3. CT RESPONSIBILITIES. 3.1 CT will communicate with the City as necessary during the provision of the tree trimming services to help ensure the satisfactory completion of these services. Packet Pg. 179 8.6.a 3.2 CT bears full responsibility for the payment of all the contractor's fees in providing the tree trimming services and will pay the invoice for the services in full within thirty (30) calendar days of its receipt of the invoice from the City. 4. ADMINISTRATORS. The Transportation Engineer or designee and the CT Transit Facilities Planner or designee will function as the administrators of this Agreement. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE AND DURATION. This Agreement will go into effect on the date of execution by the Parties and will continue through December 31, 2022. This Agreement may be extended or renewed by the mutual agreement of the Parties by amendment hereto. 6. DEFAULT AND TERMINATION. If either Parry fails to perform any act or obligation required to be performed by it hereunder, the other Party will deliver written notice of such failure to the non -performing Party. The non -performing Party will have twenty (20) calendar days after its receipt of such notice in which to correct its failure to perform, after which time it will be in default under this Agreement; provided, however, that if the non- performance is of a type that could not reasonably be cured within said twenty (20) calendar day period, then the non -performing Party will not be in default if it commences cure within said twenty (20) calendar day period and thereafter diligently pursues cure to completion. Except as provided herein, either Party may terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, upon not less than thirty (30) calendar days prior written notice to the other Party. The termination notice will specify the date on which the Agreement will terminate. Provided, however, that in the event the City has executed the contract with the contractor required by this Agreement by the time the City receives notice of termination, CT agrees to bear the full financial responsibility associated with the termination of said contract. 7. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE. Each Parry will save, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the other Parry, and the other Party's officers, employees, and agents, from and against any allegations, claims, and complaints, including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, by third parties for any or all injuries to persons, damage to property, or disclosure of confidential information of such third parties, which claim arises from intentional, reckless, or negligent acts or omissions of the Parry, its officers, employees, or agents. A Parry's obligation to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the other Party will not be eliminated or reduced by any alleged concurrent negligence by the other Parry. Any damages allowed will be levied in proportion to the percentage of fault attributable to each Party, and each Party will have the right to seek contribution from the other Party in proportion to the percentage of fault attributable to that Party. Moreover, the Parties agree to cooperate and jointly defend any such matter to the fullest extent allowed by law. Each Parry will obtain and maintain in full force and effect public liability and property damage insurance or self-insurance coverage in the amount of at least $1 Million per occurrence to cover claims for injury to persons or damage to property arising from the performance of this Agreement. Insurance coverage will not be cancelled by either parry except upon thirty (30) calendar days' prior written notice by certified mail to the other Parry. The Parties will, to the best of their ability, coordinate their liability insurance Packet Pg. 180 8.6.a coverages and/or self -insured coverages to the extent possible to fully implement and follow the Agreement set forth herein. However, the consent of any liability insurance carrier or self -insured pool or organization is not required to make this Agreement effective as between the Parties, and the failure of any insurance carrier or self -insured pool or organization to agree or follow the terms of this provision on liability will not relieve either Party from its obligations under this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement will be interpreted to create third party rights. The provisions of this Section 7 will survive for three (3) years after the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 8. PROPERTY. The Parties do not anticipate the acquisition of property for the performance of this Agreement and any property acquired by a Party using this Agreement will be held by the acquiring Parry. 9. NONDISCRIMINATION. The Parties will not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, age, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, veteran status, disability, or other circumstance prohibited by federal, state, or local law, and will comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, P.L. 88-354 and Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 in the performance of this Agreement. 10. GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE. This Agreement is made under, construed in accordance with, and governed by the laws of the State of Washington. Any action arising out of, related to or in connection with this Agreement will be instituted and maintained only in a court of competent jurisdiction in Snohomish County, Washington. This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. 11. EFFECTIVE DATE/FILING. This Agreement will take effect when executed by both Parties. Prior to its entry into force, this Agreement will be filed with the Snohomish County Auditor's Office or, alternatively, listed by subject on the web site or other electronically retrievable public source in compliance with RCW 39.34.040. 12. NOTICE. All notices under this Agreement may be delivered or mailed to the City of Edmonds Transportation Engineer or the CT Transit Facilities Planner. All notices mailed by regular post (including first class) will be deemed to have been given on the second business day following the date of mailing, if properly mailed and addressed. Notices sent by certified or registered mail will be deemed to have been given on the day next following the date of mailing, if properly mailed and addressed. For all types of mail, the postmark affixed by the United States Postal Service will be conclusive evidence of the date of mailing. 13. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. The Parties will comply with all applicable laws, rules and regulations pertaining to them in connection with the matters covered herein. 14. IMPLIED CONTRACT TERMS. Each provision of law and any terms required by law to be in the Agreement are made a part of the Agreement as if fully stated in it. Packet Pg. 181 8.6.a 15. COUNTERPARTS. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, all such counterparts will be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument, with each counterpart deemed an original. 16. INDEPENDENT CAPACITY. The employees and agents of the Parties who are engaged in the performance of this Agreement will continue to be the employees or agents of that Parry and will not be considered, for any purpose, to be employees or agents of the other Parry to this Agreement. Neither Parry will have the authority to bind the other Party nor control the employees, agents or contractors of the other Party to this Agreement. All rights, duties and obligations of a Parry will remain with that Party. 17. CHANGES, MODIFICATIONS, AND AMENDMENTS. Either Party may request changes, modifications or amendments to this Agreement; however, no change, modification or amendment to this Agreement will be valid or binding upon the other Party unless it is reduced to writing and executed by the Parties hereto. 18. ASSIGNMENT. The rights or obligations under this Agreement, and any claims arising thereunder, are not assignable or delegable by a Parry in whole or in part, without the express prior written consent of the other Party. 19. WAIVER. A failure by either Party to exercise its rights under this Agreement will not preclude that Party from subsequent exercise of such rights and will not constitute a waiver of any other rights under this Agreement unless stated to be such in a writing signed by an authorized representative of the Party. 20. SEVERABILITY. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. Any term or condition of this Agreement or application thereof deemed to be illegal, invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, will not affect any other term or condition of the Agreement and the Parties' rights and obligations will be construed and enforced as if the Agreement did not contain the particular provision. 21. SURVIVAL. Those provisions of this Agreement that by their sense and purpose should survive expiration or termination of the Agreement will so survive. Those provisions include, without limitation, Sections 2 and 3 (Responsibilities of the Parties), Section 7 (Indemnification and Insurance), and Section 10 (Governing Law and Venue). 22. HEADINGS. Headings of this Agreement are for convenience only and will not affect the interpretation of this Agreement. 23. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding of the Parties and supersedes any other agreement or understanding of the Parties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement. 24. AUTHORIZATION. Any authorizations, actions required or permitted to be taken, and any document required or permitted to be executed under this Agreement will be taken or executed only by a duly authorized representative of the Party. Each Party warrants and represents to the other that the person signing below has been properly authorized and empowered to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Party for whom they sign. Packet Pg. 182 8.6.a Approved and executed this day of CITY OF EDMONDS Mike Nelson, Mayor ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Scott Passey, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney 2022. COMMUNITY TRANSIT Ric Ilgenfritz, Chief Executive Officer Packet Pg. 183 8.7 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 Confirmation of Diversity Commission Appointee Jeanett Quintanilla Staff Lead: Todd Tatum Department: Community Services Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History The nine Edmonds Diversity Commission members were originally appointed on October 27, 2015 for staggered 1-, 2- and 3-year terms. As of 7/29/22 Position 4 became available for the remainder of the term that runs until December 31, 2023. The position opening was advertised via local media. Two applications were received, reviewed and interviewed by the Commission at their regular meeting on September 7, 2022. Pursuant to ECC 10.65.020(B), new appointments to the Diversity Commission shall be made by the seated Commissioners, subject to confirmation by the City Council. Staff Recommendation Approve appointment of Jeanett Quintanilla to Position 4 of the Edmonds Diversity Commission for the remainder of a term scheduled to expire 12/31/23. Narrative Both applicants were interviewed by the Diversity Commissioners. The Commission voted to appoint Jeanett Quintanilla for the remainder of the Position 4 term scheduled to expire 12/31/23, subject to City Council confirmation. Jeanett's application is attached here. Attachments: Jeanett Quintanilla Application Packet Pg. 184 I 8.7.a I Edmonds Citizen Board and Commission Application (PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE) NOTE: This form is a public record and maybe subject to disclosure upon request Diversity Commission (Board or Commission) Name. Jeanett Quintanilla Address: Edmonds, WA 98026 Date: 08/2312022 Day Phone: Evening Phone: Cell: E-mail: Occupational status and background: I am a licensed lawyer from Peru, and I am fascinated with the law and my Latina community in VITA State. My passion for serving others continued once I moved to the US and volunteers+ at the Latinola Bar Association of Washington legal clinic then I become a certificate bilingual Paralegz Organizational affiliations: Member of the Latinola Washington Bar Association - Judicial Evaluation Committee Member of the Northwest Translators & Interpreter Society Edmonds College -Paralegal -Alumni & Snohomish County Legal Services - Volunteer Family law clinic Why are you seeking this appointment? I am a first generation law school gratuate in my family, Latina, Immigrant from Peru, and moved to Edmonds, WA. My legal work experience in WA tells me that I should serve commission and help my Latino community in Edmonds. I am a passionate with social justice and the law What skills and knowledge do you have to meet the selection criteria? My international and local legal knowledl made me a great candidate. In addition, using my bilingual skills Spanish - English in my legal career. Please list any other Board, Commission, Committee, or official positions you currently hold with the City of Edmonds:, None Additional comments: Please return this completed farm to: Edmonds City Hall 121 51h Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 carolyn.lafave 0edmondswa.gov Phone:425.771.0247 1 Fax:425.771.0252 Q Signature Revised 4130114 c c� c Cl r r as c ca a� a� a� c 0 0. Q. Q a 0 .N T) E E 0 U as 0 4- 0 a 0 M E L c_ 0 U c 0 .Q 0_ a c .E CY a� 0 m r c am E t 0 .r a Packet Pg. 185 9.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 Public Hearing on Disposition of Sewer -Storm Easements — Apollo Apartments Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Emiko Rodarte Background/History On August 9, 2022 the Parks and Public Works Committee approved release of easement for presentation at a public hearing. On September 13, 2022 the Parks and Public Works Committee forwarded resolution establishing easement as surplus to the September 20th consent agenda. On September 20, 2022 City Council approved Resolution 1505 on consent agenda. Staff Recommendation Approve release of sewer -storm easements. Narrative The City is currently reviewing a building permit application for a 225 unit apartment complex at the southeast corner of 236th St SW and Highway 99, addressed as 23601 Highway 99. The development proposal includes release of the existing 5-ft wide public sewer -storm easements located along the western property line. The existing public sanitary sewer main is proposed to be replaced by the developer with a new privately owned and maintained sewer main located slightly west of the existing. There is no public storm system within the subject easement areas. There is no future use for the public sanitary sewer and storm easements and pursuant to Resolution 1505, the easements have been declared as surplus. The attached staff report and attachments includes a detailed analysis on the disposition of the sewer - storm easement and provides a recommendation to the City Council. Attachments: Staff Report - Disposition of Easement Presentation - Disposition of Easement Resolution for disposition of utility easement Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map Attachment 2 - Survey of Sewer -Storm Easement Attachment 3 - AFN 1588234 Easement Attachment 4 - AFN 1588238 Easement ATTACHMENT 5 - APPRAISAL RELEASE OF EASEMENT Packet Pg. 186 9.1 Attachment 6 - Project Owner Letter Attachment 7 - Site Plan - Proposed Easements Attachment 8 - Hwy 99 Cross Sections Attachment 9 - Resolution 1505 Easement Surplus Attachment 10 - MRSC Article Releasing Easement Packet Pg. 187 9.1.a '11c. 1 S9 V CITY OF EDMONDS 121 51" Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT • ENGINEERING DIVISION REPORT & RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL Project: Disposition of sanitary sewer and storm easements along east property line of 23601 Highway 99 Date of Report: September 21, 2022 Staff: Rob English, City Engineer Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL AND PROCESS The City is currently reviewing a building permit application for a 225 unit apartment complex at the southeast corner of 2Vh St SW and Highway 99, addressed as 23601 Highway 99. The development proposal includes release of the existing 5-ft wide public sewer -storm easements located along the western property line. RCW 35.94.040 addresses the release of surplus lands or property that were originally acquired for public utility purposes but are no longer required for providing continued public utility service. The City Council may, by resolution and pursuant to a public hearing, release or otherwise sell, the surplus lands or property at its fair market value or the rent or consideration to be paid. Municipal Research Services Center (MRSC) of Washington, a publication that provides discussion topics and opinion to municipal professionals, published an article on releasing an easement (Attachment 10). This article reports that releasing an easement that was granted independent of a plat is to be done in accordance with RCW 35.94.040 and that releasing a right-of-way can only be accomplished through a street or road vacation. This is consistent with the City's position that RCW 35.94.040 is the correct process for the subject release of easement. Resolution No. 1505 (Attachment 9), establishing the sewer -storm easements as surplus, was approved by Council on September 20, 2022. Following is staff s evaluation of the disposition of easement. Apollo — Disposition of Easement Page 1 of 3 Packet Pg. 188 9.1.a II. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Location: The subject disposition is for the sewer -storm easements located along the east property line of the proposed development addressed as 23601 Highway 99. Refer to Attachments 1 and 2 for vicinity map and survey of easement area. 2. Size: The easement proposed to be released is 5-ft wide by 200-ft in length with a total easement area of 1000 square feet. 3. Existing Use: The existing sewer -storm easements are currently used for a public sanitary sewer main. III. NOTICE Notice of the Public Hearing was published in the Everett Herald on September 11, 2022. In addition, the hearing notice was posted online on the city calendar and at City Hall and in the Public Safety building. IV. TECHNICAL REVIEW The property proposed for development contains 5-ft wide sanitary sewer and stormwater easements to the City of Edmonds along the east property line. There is an existing sanitary sewer main within the easement, however, no stormwater mains exist. The existing building structures on the development site will be demolished in their entirety and are currently the only structures connected to the City's public sewer system located within the easements. With the proposed development, the existing public sanitary sewer main will be replaced by the developer with a new privately owned and maintained sewer main located west of the existing sewer system. The existing sewer main will be abandoned in the process. In compliance with RCW 35.94.040, an appraisal was completed indicating a fair market value of $86,250 for the subject sewer -storm easement area (Attachment 5). In assessing whether compensation should be made to the City for release of the easements, staff reviewed the appraisal, the letter received from a project owner representative (Attachment 6) and in addition gave consideration to the public benefits thought to be derived with completion of the proposed development project. The proposed development will provide 225 additional housing units within the City. The apartment complex qualifies for the Multi -family tax exemption and as such, 10% of the units will be provided at low income and 10% of the units will be provided at moderate income. Abandonment of the existing public sewer main and release of the easements relieves the City of any future responsibility to maintain the utility infrastructure located on private property. The project will replace the existing sidewalk along Highway 99 with a new, wider public sidewalk and landscape area. In addition, new public sidewalks and street trees will be provided along 236th St SW where none currently exist. A public Apollo — Disposition of Easement Page 2 of 3 Packet Pg. 189 9.1.a pedestrian easement will be granted to the City for that portion of the sidewalk to be constructed on private property. A public water meter vault easement will also be provided on private property along the Highway 99 property frontage. Please refer to Attachments 7 and 8 for location of improvements and proposed easements. As a comparison of easement areas, the sewer -storm easement areas proposed for release equate to 1000 square feet. The pedestrian easement and water meter vault easements to be granted to the City equate to approximately 2876 square feet. V. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis in and the attachments to this report, staff recommends approval of the release of the sewer -storm easements (Attachments 3 and 4). For the reasons stated, staff recommends not seeking compensation for release of the easement. VI. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Survey of Sewer -Storm Easement 3. Sewer -Storm Easement (1) 4. Sewer -Storm Easement (2) 5. Appraisal Release of Easement 6. Project Owner Letter 7. Site Plan — Proposed Easements 8. Highway 99 Cross Sections 9. Resolution 1505 Easement Surplus 10. MRSC Article Releasing an Easement Apollo — Disposition of Easement Page 3 of 3 Packet Pg. 190 U Disposition of Sewer - Storm Easements Apollo Apartments-236oi- Highway gg City Council Public Hearing September 27, 2022 9.1. b :A'A1�1Q�;Ja1: lug J jE -236TH ST SW 23617 23619 7 ONS029 ; e+o+� a►A � � a 23� ■ WA .. 23508 K 2311, P_ yy zn71 a `----------t------- �— — — — — — 3 — —— �— 236TH ST SW l — —t— — 10. —� — —1' 9,• $N / i iY -auxs \ j � I I � I I '.,�, I alim rwwce a iz•ary[J-ten � \ MdxtSIaKMIAIF b I �� ntxm,ee i � / ,wmn } uk BJi4 a5ow I I II j 99 ✓ % atwi� I I �9 I i m \ tm s S SEWER -STORM - j EASEMENTS PROPOSED FOR RELEASE 1 I a n uaa' e raP•r..za I do i a I G a AFN 1588234 and 2 j� Ems° i'' «mwr fe uaa—j AFN 1588238 �� / § ♦�\ PARCEL B n'zra I 'cwu I ; y / t� � /• ! noon I � I 1 I � 1 1 � j h: i COT 6 LOT 5 I � I 11 I ----- _ TRACT 998j' isysin sr mec� O N c O C EASEMENTS ENCUMBER a EAST 5-ft of C a) PROPERTY W O O Z000 sf o EASEMENT N 0 AREA O (5' x zoo') d N L a as z a Packet Pg. 193 I 9.1.b I saw aid iijA — m S rvda6a..-�_•_IIN11777 APOLLO APARTMENTS • NEW FRONTAGE MPROVEMENTS • SIDEWALKAND LANDSCAPING • 236T" ST SW and HWY gg Packet Pg. 194 9.1. b ...7' �I ; 236TH ST SW �m ,PROPERTY ; LINE / rf LSE PWTEROAPOSRED `fVAULT ION 8 t CROSS SECTI EASEMENT I (ATTACHMENT 8) �o �,„n�RfFSMR,a� PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN Q ROSS SECTION 7.,!' EASEMENTS FOR (ATTACHMENT 8) SIDEWALKS ON z a.utA PRIVATE PRO PERTY ,. � e./ . �,wt �/ cdulaun ex 1� h--'`Y q 0. o - -T ��-- --�� -- - t ---- ----- \-----------'--- —r------- 4ND STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN i .y O Q N • EXISTING PUBLIC SEWER IN C EASEMENT ONLY SERVES SUBJECT PROPERTY .- a. • EXISTING PUBLIC SEWERTO BE ABANDONED WITH PROJECT W • NEW PRIVATE SEWER WITH 0 .2 NEW CONNECTION ON N 236TH ST SW 8 O • PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT L a • PUBLIC WATER VAULT c EASEMENT a Packet Pg. 195 I 9.1.b I 1 C O O C N N N L IL c m E z u a r r Q Packet Pg. 196 I 9.1.b I 1 C O O C N N N L IL c m E z u a r r Q Packet Pg. 197 1 r Q Packet Pg. 198 9.1.c RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING DISPOSITION OF STORM AND SEWER UTILITY EASEMENTS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 236TH STREET SW, APPROXIMATELY 176 FEET EAST OF HIGHWAY 99 IN EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds is reviewing a development application for property located at the southeast corner of Highway 99 and 236th Street SW, consisting of tax parcel numbers 00451900100201, -202, -203, and -204 (collectively the "Subject Property"); and WHEREAS, in 1962, the city acquired storm and sewer utility easements, recorded under auditor's file numbers 1588234 and 1588238 (collectively the "Utility Easements"); and WHEREAS, the Utility Easements were declared surplus with Resolution 1505; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.94.040 provides a process for disposing of surplus utility property; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.94.040 requires the disposition resolution to state the fair market value or the rent or consideration to be paid and such other terms and conditions for such disposition as the legislative authority deems to be in the best public interest; and WHEREAS, the appraised value of the 1000 square foot area encumbered by the Utility Easements is $86,250; and WHEREAS, the project proposed for development on the subject property will provide the following new easements to the City: 1) a public pedestrian easement will be granted to the City for that portion of the sidewalk to be constructed on private property; and 2) a public water meter vault easement will also be provided on private property along the Highway 99 property frontage; and WHEREAS, the new easements being provided to the city amount to 2876 square feet, which is substantially more area than the 1000 square foot Utility Easements proposed for disposition; and WHEREAS, staff is recommending that the new easements provide sufficient consideration for the disposition of the Utility Easements and that no other money should be required as a condition of the disposition; and WHEREAS, on September 27, 2022, a public hearing was held on the proposed disposition of the Utility Easements; and 1 Packet Pg. 199 9.1.c WHEREAS, the city council, after hearing the staff presentation and the testimony provided at the public hearing would like to dispose of the Utility Easements in the manner described below; now therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The administration is hereby authorized to dispose of the Utility Easements described above by releasing and reconveying them to the property owner in exchange for, and after receipt of, the new easements described above. RESOLVED this 27th day of September, 2022. CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR, MIKE NELSON ATTEST: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. Packet Pg. 200 9.1d " City of Edmonds 36! 00 L 3 23 706 23720 m �81 2380 * 23904 73914 IOWA N 8215 =a 23525 v ■ APOLLO APTS VICINITY MAP 23625 3711' 23711M 238TH ST SW 723821■ 23 ,qw 23 904 i 2341A 2342211 234 ■ 235G� 23508 , 5 fps 235141 JE je f 23635 ry. 3 n # t 23637 237 237 � Amer 23639 8029 � a1o1 0) �P a sow 0 6 �z BIN 2382� 1� 0� I� cr'Ii Irv: 238061 2 7 23804 5 23811 8 23815 aft 238121 23® 1 r;827� 238 23 _ _ 1: 3,031 Oj 0 252.60 505.2 Feet 376.2 This ma is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is 1 4,514 P B P PP B reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accural WGS 1984 Web Mercator_ Auxiliary -Sphere current, or otherwise reliab © City of Edmonds THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTIC U L Legend o do Sections Boundary i lv Sections Edmonds Boundary Cl) O ArcSDE.GIS.PROPERTY BUILDIP - C ArcSDE.GIS.STREET_CENTERLIN O — <all other values> N O - Interstate 1Z to Principal Arterial C Minor Arterial; Collector O Local Street; On Ramp C State Highways CU — <all other values> _ - - 0 .2 1 3 d 2 1Z County Boundary Parks ArcSDE.GIS.PROPERTY WASHII ArcSDE.GIS.PROPERTY_CITIES i ArcSDE.GIS.PROPERTY -CITIES r City of Edmonds City of Lynnwood City of Mountlake Terrace t Unincorporated King Co; Unincor City of Woodway Citv of Arlinaton: Citv of Bothell: d E Notes R a Packet Pg. 201 9.1.e 0 EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES METHOD OF SURVEY: SURVEY PERFORMED BY FIELD TRAVERSE INSTRUMENTATION: LEICA TS15 ROBOTIC ELECTRONIC TOTAL STATION PRECISION: MEETS OR EXCEEDS STATE STANDARDS WAC 332-130-090 BASIS OF BEARING. THE MONUMENTED CENTERLINE OF 236TH ST. S.W., - - - - - -- - - - - - - - AS THE BEARING OF N 88'3651 " W. �- VERTICAL DATUM Im I CB RIM=412.12 IE 12" CMP(E)=409.42 IE 12" CMP(W)=409.42 91 \ I 1 I II II I I I I \ 0 o -- N o d -- I I--,--- I----L-- j u. a Diu 11J1 CB RIM=415.91 I i i i IE 10" CMP(N)=413.26 SD fib IE 12" CMP(E)=413.16 FOUND REBAR AND CAP ° E 12" CMP(S)=413.16 STAMPED "WEBB 16230" i ANCHOR EASEMENT , 0.1 '(W) OF CORNER - , AFN 8405210087 I N 88'36'51 " ' W 181.43' v lilt, CB RIM=437.01 `� \ I I \` I `` 6C h 1 o'�c I I IE 12" DI(NE)=433.65 `, 1 8' q 1 I C�� cn i I 24• IE 12" DI(SW)=433.65 F i �� GN C I PARCEL A I INGRESS, EGRESS I 1 ' W I AND PARKING 11s• Sp' \ BbUNDARI' LIN v ' AFN 7812060189 I F �Q (ADJUSTMENT `'-- AFYV 9810.12500 W I . I I SDMH RIM=418.35 NA VD 88 , CB RIM=437.17 I I � s• I IE 12" CMP(N)=415.50 I I 14• IE 4" PVC(E)=436.02 Sp Od451900100201 IE 12" CMP(S)=415.50 1 F FOUND CONC. POST W1 INVERTED NAIL i IE 6" PVC(SW)=435.9EX. / I o V� � l 11,389 SF c� I I I I I I I AT THE INTERSECTION OF 116TH ST, S.E. COMMERICAL ��; °4 1 0.26 AC s• AND 2ND AVE. S.E. ELEV = 462.55' BUILDING 12' cn # 23601 C I 1 P I m BOL° ii a' I 1 00451900100204 440 I I I C I20 I j o i , 1, 1 5' SEWER & STORM °111 EASEMENTS AFN 1588234 AND AFN 1588238 ,1911�11'STONE WALL \ o I A I � I I I i Fg•I ---7--- ----� --�--- `� {-- I �7 f-SD ❑ I I II I, � I 1 \ I 1 I 20' INGRESS, EGRESS SD i \\ AND PARKING EASEMENT "r' ' I I I i AFN 7812060189 \\ ��p i I 1 \ ` Sp CB RIM=418.20 I i1F II I �/ / IE 12" CMP N-415.70 REFERENCES i , - NEI WALL N I �� i INGRESS, EGRESS O- \\��---------XS�O _ �- T - / --------------� I ---' 1 I AND PARKING IE 12" CMP(S)=415.70 ta• 1. RECORD OF SURVEY - AFN 200111195005 v ' _ "� -?�T/ %L1%? /7T - I - I 1--- i - - AFN 7812060189 IE 6" CMP(W)=415.66 F � a /Tl7T/T/� �- SDMH RIM=429.65 1 I L5)( 2. RECORD OF SURVEY - AFN 9810125004 ' % I I I I �' Q CB RIM=442.16 a I r// IE 6 CMP E=426.70 co I o ',"�/ IE 4" PVC(N)=426.95 I /I I N- CB RIM=424.69 tic o 1 F r 3. PLAT OF WILLOWBROOK DIV. NO. 2 - VOL. 34, PG. 59 IE 12" DI(NE)=439.16 CB RIM=439.03 <J I % I I IE 6" CMP(E)=422 54 LEGEND IE 6" PVC(NE)=436.88 s• I I/ IE 6 CMP(W)=426.55 \B 2" C z IE 6" CMP(W)=426.64 1 �I I IE 6" PVC(W)=422.81 15' STORM WATER -18• \ IE 6" PVC(N)=427.18 I /' I IE 6" CMP(SW)=422.88 EASEMENT AFN 200201160241 �• / ° M j m m I> PARCEL B I I I I I4 �. 1 BOUNDARY LINE I � I ; � 1 v1 � I 5 ° 4c- I / ADJUSTMENT I% I 1 1 I zo 14' i AFN 9810125004 I II - li I i o I u 14 ' `S 25' F SSMH RIM= 411.96' INV. 8" PVC(E)=406.71 INV. 8" PVC(W)=406.96' INV. 8" PVC(S)=406.76' i I , 1 , r X JND 2" BRASS DISK IV "wc FOUND CONCRETE MON IN CASE WITH ISH WITH PAVEMENT. 1 o 1 112" BRASS CAP WITH 'X'; ITED AUGUST 201&111, 1 °' DOWN 0.5' VISITED AUGUST 2018. / l N 88'3651 " W 475.34' (BASIS OF BEARING) SURVEY CONTROL POINT ID J 18556 '------ ;----- ;------r------ CONCRETE CURB I 1 I I � 1 I I ; I I I I , I I I � I � jl \ I \ 1 -\�---- --- ------------------------------------------ --------------- FOUND REBAR AN CAP CB RIM=407.48 i STAMPED "WEBB 1�230" IE 12 CMP(W)=405.83 0.1'(E) OF CORNE IF 12" CMP(E)=405.78 �I I I � I I� 24' EASEMENT PER PLAT OF \ I WILLOWBROOK DIV. NO. 2 LOT 8 ----------------------------------------------- I ---------- 1 \ I PLAT OF 1 I WILLOWBROOK DIV. NO. 2 VOL. 34, PG. 59 11 i LOT 7 I I --------------- I ELECTRICAL 0045190010020J I/ I I I I I 1 i I I EASEMENT ASPHALT i 34,881 SF I I 1 I 1 2- I i /� AFN 7905180203 I I I �• ,� i a I I j 0.80 AC CB RIM 418.59 I I F� IE 12" CMP(N)= 16.39 IE 12" I CMP(S)=� 16.39 j7 I V 1 A,, SUNSET BUILDING I I I J o IE 6" IMP(SW)=1416.89 °o I I LOT # 23607 1 I I I 1 II 1 • SET 1/2" X 24" REBAR W/CAP STAMPED "PCS 37536" �/ 35' ELECTRICAL i jI i ; ; I I I i 1 1 �i O EXISTING REBAR W/CAP, AS NOTED EASEMENT l / AFN 7903280295 I f� co c I I I 16• X SET NAIL AND WASHER STAMPED 'PCS 37536" 12" / I 6 COL M , ° \ EXISTING NAIL AND WASHER AS NOTED l P CONCRETE CURB I \ FOUND CONCRETE MONUMENT AS NOTED , ®--�-�-' RIGHT OF WAY CENTERLINE ,� - ------- i 10 M 1_ L/1LlL/1- ---1_/1_Ll1/1_/1_l11/�_/1_L!1/1Llf/1/1Ll 1_/1L11/1_/1 1 1 I 30• I, - - - - -� - 1 r------------------F (a_ STORM DRAIN MANHOLE --------- , \ / J / _\---=--r- S ----- i INVERT�CULVERT ---' i i \ i �'� i- ---------------------- �-------------------- SSMH RIM= 417.45' 1 `I I I CATCH BASIN P i i 6' i INV. 8 WATER VALVE " PVC �_410.05' \ \ vy 1 / INV. 8„ PVC S =412.35'SM FIRE HYDRANT \ i ; 1 I ; f ; ; l INV. 8" PVC(SW)=41235' CAPPED( I I1 M I E ICV IRRIGATION CONTROL VALVE ` _ J QS SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE ,\ as• a F ` v A 2E•I\ ,' ; I ; 1 / 10' SANITARY SEWER-+-•�1� I o MAILBOX I F &UTILITY EASEMENT o C1 SIGN POST ,/ a ' - i ' i PARCEL Ii i / AFN 20020116024211 1 1I� I II -0-UTILITYIPOWER POLE i 12� i CITY OF EDMQNO l ' LAWN i S-25-88 15' STORM WATER I 1 GUY ANCHOR AFN 88092104 1 ' 10• EASEMENT ° 1 / I 1 i i / AFN 20020116024 © POWER VAULT BOL ' ,' -' / � u l l 0045190010020211 GRAVEL I Y ,r ;1 0 POWER TRANSFORMER 30,546 SF 0.70 AC i i i A . i liF� ' GAS VALVE GAS METER i 28• CB RIM-- 447.56 ° / IE 12" DI(SW)=445.46 ' / �' i i i i \ / I I 1 1 I I CLUSTO? 1 � BOLLARD l l 1 \ l 1 I BOL ° 10' SANITARY SEWER I I1 �; M LS LITE STANDARD ; ° / BOL & UTILITY EASEMENT a 10' STORM WATER ESM'T. I� I1 CONIFEROUS TREE / �� %�' AFN 200201160241 , AFN 200201160242 LOT 5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL A: PARCEL A, CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT NO. S-23-88, RECORDED SEPTEMBER 21, 1988 UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8809210451, BEING A PORTION OF LOTS 2, 3 AND 4, BLOCK 1, FRUITLAND ACRES TO LAKE BALLINGER, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 47, IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL B: PARCEL B, CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT NO. S-23-88, RECORDED SEPTEMBER 21, 1988 UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8809210451, BEING A PORTION OF LOTS 2, 3 AND 4, BLOCK 1, FRUITLAND ACRES TO LAKE BALLINGER, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 47, IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL C: THE SOUTH 100 FEET OF LOTS 2 AND 3, AND THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH 100 FEET OF LOT 4, LYING EAST OF STATE HIGHWAY #1, ALL IN BLOCK 1, FRUITLAND ACRES TO LAKE BALLINGER, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 47, IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON, NOTES 1.) THIS SURVEY HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF PARTIES WHOSE NAMES APPEAR HEREON ONLY, AND DOES NOT EXTEND TO ANY UNNAMED THIRD PARTIES WITHOUT EXPRESS RECERTIFICATION BY THE LAND SURVEYOR. `r ; ' - - - - �- - - _ _ -�_ - - - _ - _ _ � _ _ - _ - 1- 1 I -� ® 2.) BOUNDARY LINES SHOWN AND CORNERS SET REPRESENT DEED LOCATIONS, / / ° ° \\ \\ i � -1 - - - - - - + - - - - - - i I i I � - - - � - 1 OWNERSHIP LINES MAY VARY. NO GUARANTEE OF OWNERSHIP IS EXPRESSED OR / \ \ I / I--1-----L-- -rt--�- �_ ---� DECIDUOUS TREE t- �l r----------- --- �s• aM IMPLIED. Sp. i I' 1 �. M i M M 30•/ C CEDAR �; / FOUND REBAR CAP � • 12• 1 � AA8" . F ' M 10"M G� UNREADABLE AT CORN \ \ N 88'3T03" W, 331.0T FOUND REBAR NO C W / � u l I 1 ' I F FIR VOA Ap Iz , I ----------------------------------- ' c� I CHAIN/LINK FENCE //', ,__------- -----'---------L- sz• \ 'I I ; WOOD F ----- M MAPLE / '/'/ I --_- --------------------------------- � 0.2 N OF LINE ' �� 15' UTILITY MAI TENCANCE ' l �� CHAIN LINK FENCE SEO SEQUOIA / FENCE END 0.1 '(S). 1 o EASEMENT (NOT II N RECORD) ' TRACT 9 9 8 1.0'(S) OF SET CORNER. / �- U UNKNOWN / c A CHAIN .INK FENCE START 1 - - - - - - - - - 0.1 (S) OF PROPERTY LINE I �� J • Rj� / LOT 7 q� of wasyr�dl a 30' INGRESS &EGRESS ; PLAT OF ; ti 0 / PLAT OF' ESMT. AFN 200201160240 , VIKING HEIGHTS FRUITLAND ACRES TO 0045L�,O�I�AA05'GFR 1 AFN 200505030114 VOL. 10, PG. 47 SCALE: 1 " = 20' 0 20 40 01023000000700 oC 4��336 S T S T E4'� LAZ`� / Pacifica Coast Surveys, Inc. LAND SURVEYING &MAPPING TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY FOR: TODD MADISON P.O. BOX 13619 MILL CREEK, WA 98082 NW 1 4, SE 114, SEC.311 T.27N.1 R.4E., W.M. PH. 425•512.7099 FAX 425.357.3577 DRAWN BY DATE I DRAWING FILE NAME SCALE JOB NO. www.PCSurveys.net DP 12.21.20 181553top. DWG 1" = 20' Packet Pg. 202 1 f, CL r Hy m j Q N rn � w o c v E M co c CDM F na 4 o X-) z c C o 'V). W ! —< -T'1 C CD M C M M Ul _ t,1 om x C-) <n a C wl .� � d z r^ E w S M co co Z ' LL Q N CT C N E r c a� E Q 9.1.h Appraisal of: Sewer/Storm Easement - Proposed Apollo Apartments Site S. Side 236t" ST. SW., approx., 171' feet east of Highway 99 Edmonds, WA 98026 Prepared By: O'Connor Consulting Group, LLC 12345 Lake City Way NE No. 214 Seattle, WA 98125 Brian O'Connor, MAI, CRE Prepared For: Johnny Vong Blackfish Capital 2422 NW Market St., Ste 562 Seattle, WA 98107-4137 Date of Report: July 21, 2022 Effective Date: July 1, 2022 OCG # 22-161 Packet Pg. 205 July 21st, 2022 OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Johnny Vong Blackfish Capital 2422 NW Market St., Ste 562 Seattle, WA 98107-4137 RE: Sewer and Storm Easement - Proposed Apollo Apartments Site S. Side 236t" ST. S.W., approximately 171' feet east of Highway 99 Edmonds, WA 98026 Dear Mr. Vong, In accordance with your request, we have written an appraisal report and formed an opinion of the Fair Market Value of a 5' by 200' sewer and storm easement as further designated along the eastern border of the proposed Apollo Apartment site. The easement is currently used as underground transmission line. The accompanying appraisal report identifies the subject property, describes the market for this type of property, and presents the specific market data and analysis leading to our estimate of the Fee Simple value, specific to the underlying raw unimproved value. The Apollo apartment site, also identified as the Parent or Larger Parcel, represents an assemblage of four parcels totaling 76,816 square feet located at the southeast corner of Pacific Highway and 2361" Street SW in Edmonds. Parcel No. 00451900100201 is improved with a 2,300 square foot, one-story with basement retail trade building completed in 1968. Parcel No. 00451900100203 is improved with a 23,790 square foot, two-story plus basement office building completed in 1979. Parcel No. 00451900100202 represents the southernmost parcel, is partially improved as a parking area but is generally largely unimproved. Parcel No. 00451900100204 represents the northeastern parcel and is improved as a parking lot. Per the scope of the assignment, the physical characteristics of the designated sewer and storm easement represent a 5' wide by 200' long strip located along the S' Side of 236t" St. S.W., approximately 171' feet east of Highway 99. The sewer and storm easement exists along the eastern boundaries of Parcel Nos., 3 & 4. Total easement area is 1,000 square feet. Currently, the area serves as a landscape berm between the subject east parking lot and the Willowbrook apartments. 12345 LAKE CITY WAY NE #214, SEATTLE, WA 98125 • TEL: 206-622-5100 • EMAIL: BRIANO@OCGP.COM Packet Pg. 206 ZfIVONNUR '40 ill' P As a result of the inspection, investigation, and analysis, it is our opinion that the Fair Market Value of the Fee Simple interest for the aforementioned easement recognizing the assumptions and limiting conditions contained in the following report, is: EIGHTY-SIX THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS $86,250 $86.00/SF This appraisal and analyses, opinions and conclusions are to be developed based on, and in compliance with, the guidelines and recommendations set forth in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), and the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute. It also conforms to Title XI Regulations and the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA) updated in 1994 and further updated by the Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines promulgated in 2010. This appraisal is intended to comply with the OCC's amended Appraisal Rule, effective June 7, 1994, as published in the Federal Register, Volume 59, No. 108, and with the Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines, dated October 27, 1994, and updated December 2010. Thank you for the opportunity to work with you on this assignment. Sincerely, O'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC W -, e�__ Brian R. O'Connor, MAI, CRE Washington State License #1100529 9.1.h 12345 LAKE CITY WAY NE #214, SEATTLE, WA 98125 • TEL: 206-622-5100 • EMAIL: BRIANO@OCGP.COM Packet Pg. 207 9.1.h TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS.......................................................... 1 SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS....................................................................................................... 7 FIRREA/USPAP COMPLIANCE AND PREMISES OF APPRAISAL ................................................ 12 REGIONAL & NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION....................................................................... 19 SITE & PROPERTY DESCRIPTION........................................................................................... 22 HIGHEST AND BEST USE....................................................................................................... 27 VALUATION METHODOLOGY............................................................................................... 28 RECONCILIATION................................................................................................................. 47 CERTIFICATION.................................................................................................................... 48 ADDENDA........................................................................................................................... 49 Packet Pg. 208 SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS Subject Identification Name: Sewer & Storm Easement (Underground Transmission) Portion of the proposed Apollo Apartments Site Street Address: S' Side 23611 ST. S.W., approx.., 171' feet east of Highway 99 Edmonds, WA 98026 Census Tract: 509.00 Client Information Johnny Vong Blackfish Capital 2422 NW Market St., Ste 562 Seattle, WA 98107-4137 Tax Parcel Nos.: Parent/Larger Parcel Nos: 00451900100201, -202, -203, and -204 Subject Easement: Easternmost 5' X 200' consisting of 00451900100203 & 204 Site Description Gross Site Area Shape: Access: Topography Utilities: Zoning: Easements: Flood Zone: Hazardous Materials O'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC Parent/Larger Parcel: 76,816 square feet, or 1.76 acres Subject Easement Area: 1,000 s.f. Parent/Larger Parcel: Trapezoidal in shape Subject Easement: Long and narrow Directly from Highway 99 and/or 236t" Street SW Generally, level All Available GC, General Commercial, City of Edmonds. None were reported 53061C1315F 6/19/2020. Located in Zone X. None known; Refer to discussion in Site Description 1 1 P a g e Q OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 209 9.1.h Current Improvements Description Parcel 00451900100201 is improved with a one-story plus basement retail trade building completed in 1968 and contains 2,500 square feet of gross area. Parcel 00451900100202 is vacant. Parcel 00451900100203 is improved with a 23,790 square foot, two-story plus basement office building completed in 1979. Parcel 00451900100204 is vacant. Highest and Best Use: For multi -family apartment development. Fair Market Value Conclusions Income Approach Cost Approach Sales Comparison Approach Fair Market Value Conclusion -Subject Easement Area - Appraisal Information Effective Date: Date of Report: Appraisers: OCG File No. July 1, 2022 July 21, 2022 Brian R. O'Connor, MAI, CRE 22-161 Not Applicable Not Applicable $86,250 $86,250 ,40'CONNOR CONSULTING 2 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 210 Renfrew '� t .r!Anacortes •Sedro-Woolley JtiIF ..-�' - - Y w : � ,� inthrop t�Q VefnOrl ISP i . _ Or - lsequim r - •Nlaiysvilie _ HIV ' w •r-�-.. � �'� �: •Everett (Subject Property r-- h lk Redmon +K. �' . ;�"�, r.y ate- •� f � � _ •Se the - - - ►. e8'rtfi .y AL � *Renton RESERVATION - • .� �i a a 1 - 'PShellan - 9° i *' '�•� .d u ailu -r - �•j, •yi �f - � it - _ - - .. •�O lympla - - � �Ellersnurg ` `O Mt RalniTe'Nat Onal P rk ; �� 1 _ *Centralia ti Ha-i'Drt !Chehalis Data SIO. NCAA. U_5..�1 vy. ryGA E- CB D �® Image LandsaCoper'ieuS WESTjGAT'E: . • - - • � : - � + - r �' _. 228thtSh8.lrLl may.- • # -} � t �.t- L •' `��i . �` I_ Ballinger '• ' �,i I -- Sub'ect Property i r II DALE111'LLAGE` -a Bread .� - - t 244t:SNS}Il '1 ' q ' LL low f 9 _ ! e f a Malyroad Ceene 1 _ + ` • -The Home De pot r.Y .i ` t • ' •:..�.,... ice:'' _ ( ms[co Wholesale ` � . - i� a �' —! '' - '. a � I • r...�. '•��.. yy_'.5� _. -�'I -zl -. H .. r v"Ityfk`e*R.::';.'i-N2'0C1thSt '�- Atiticl_^.i • 's:' .>>. r_. 71 '- th -Cade Video Games - 1mm i+ .% IL w*+ w - - -+• MAessonAcademy* - • ! rf a.. _ �� _ v' S • L �• . tFtashian Images ` ... Edmonds Lutheran Church - Park Edna tmen- ! --.^7s2361h st sSN�T�� - - k *CT ,130 Sd - � • � - � � �iii236tht�[aS'' - t� r aDollarT _ ~' -- -# `. T.�. Maxx x Family PencakeHouse Edmond=_ '= �. _ ro� .._.__ ..____ 238tn St S'dJ8th SE SW ff 238th St.SWA CD r. • I r ! y _ a' . ri - Hosoonyl Koreas Llnited Preshytenar Church�o' Seattic � - - ,�` • - � � f,. - r •-• - � - *Travelodge by.+Plyndham Seattle North;Edmonds ` '� r ;} a Subject Aerial *Please note outlined areas are approximate and are for visualization purposes only. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 6 1 P a g e GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 214 9.1.h SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS frM Interior view of Parent/Larger Parcel looking northwest. Subject easement is to the right. ,40'CONNOR CONSULTING 7 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 215 9.1.h 236th Street SW looking east; subject easement right before Stop sign on right 236th Street SW looking west, subject easement is the landscape berm on left ,40'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC 8 1 P a g e OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 216 9.1.h View looking south along eastern site boundary of Parent/Larger Parcel. The tree line and landscape berm on the left represents the subject's easement to a depth of 200 feet. Note: location is approximate. -.dM F.A.W,: sir.. 1 1 1' M. r•3'.i,'.. i-A :1 ¢ r,"M_=ir".:i•. Close-up view of the subject easement. Note, subject easement only extends 200 feet which is directly across from the far wall of the office building. ,40'CONNOR CONSULTING 9 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 217 View looking north along subject easement; location is approximate. The Willowbrook apartments are immediately to the right. Viewing north along the approximate location of the subject easement. Picture is taken from the adjacent Willowbrook apartment complex O'CONNOR CONSULTING 10 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 218 Highway 99 looking north, Parent/Larger Parcel immediately on right Highway 99 looking south; Parent/Larger Parcel on left O'CONNOR CONSULTING 11 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 219 FIRREA/USPAP COMPLIANCE AND PREMISES OF APPRAISAL FIRREA Compliance 12 C.F.R. Part 564 - Appraisal of Real Estate: This regulation implements Title XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA). It applies to all real estate appraisals for federally related transactions under OCC jurisdiction that occurred on or after August 9, 1990. As revised effective March 31, 1999, it provides five Minimum Appraisal Standards, as follows: Appraisals shall conform to generally accepted standards as evidenced by the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation. We believe this appraisal conforms to USPAP standards. These standards are addressed specifically and individually in the next subsection and Premises of the Appraisal. Appraisals shall be written and contain sufficient information and analysis to support the institution's decision to engage in the transaction; An appraisal may contain an income, cost, and/or sales approach to value. The scope of work determines which approaches to value are appropriate. The appraisal report may be a restricted report or standard appraisal report that is similar to what was known as a summary report. The standard format is an appraisal report that summarizes the appraisal process and may reference outside information or documentation. A restricted format is an appraisal, which contains virtually no descriptions, reasoning, or analyses. The agreed upon scope of work may include a written report that is more similar to the format that was known as a self-contained report, but this would need to be clearly communicated between the client and O'Connor Consulting Group. Appraisals shall analyze and report appropriate deductions and discounts for proposed construction or renovation, partially leased buildings, non -market lease terms, and tract developments with unsold units. No deductions were required. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 12 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 220 Appraisals for permanent acquisitions shall be based on the definition of Fair Market Value as set forth from the Washington Pattern Jury Instruction 150.08 as follows; Fair market value means the amount in cash that a well-informed buyer, willing but not obligated to buy the property would pay, and that a well-informed seller, willing but not obligated to sell it, would accept, taking into consideration all uses to which the property is adapted or may be reasonably adaptable. A state -licensed or certified appraiser shall perform appraisals. Brian R. O'Connor, MAI, CRE is a certified General Appraiser in the State of Washington. Certification No. 1100529 (expires June 15, 2023). As of the date of this report Brian R. O'Connor, MAI, CRE has completed the requirements under the continuing education program for designated members of the Appraisal Institute. USPAP Compliance Members or affiliates of the Appraisal Institute are required to adhere to professional standards set forth by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation. Selected standards are noted below; additional standards are noted in the Premises of the Appraisal. Prohibited Influence (Ethics Provision) This appraisal was prepared without pressure from anyone desiring a specific value. Certification The appraiser's certification is found following the Reconciliation and Final Value Estimate section of this report. Premises of the Appraisal Identification of the Property The subject easement represents a 5' x 200' sewer and storm easement located along the S' side of 236th ST. S.W., approx.., 171' feet east of Highway 99. It is located along the eastern boundary of the Parent/Larger Parcel totaling 1.76-acres which will be developed with the Apollo Apartments, a proposed 255-unit apartment project. Parent/Larger Parcel As consistent practice in condemnation, the parent or larger parcel is the portion of a property that has unity of ownership, contiguity, and unity of use, the three conditions that establish the O'CONNOR CONSULTING 13 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 221 larger parcel for consideration of severance damages. The larger parcel is also often referred to as the "parent parcel." For this analysis and appraisal report, the larger parcel consists of four legal parcels that have been assembled for the proposed Apollo Apartments. The parcels are identified by the Snohomish County Assessor's Office as Parcel Numbers 00451900100201, -202, -203 and -204. Again, the subject easement represents a 5' x 200' strip totaling 1,000 square feet located along the eastern boundary of Parcel Numbers 00451900100203 & 204. The valuation methodology employed is to assess and value the entire larger parcel based on comparables sales by using the price per square foot of site area and then applying the resulting price per square foot to the subject easement area. Highest and Best Use Multi -family development consistent with the developer's proposal. The various criteria leading to this conclusion are outlined in the Highest and Best Use section of this report. Appraisal Procedures The introductory page to each of the approaches to value outlines the general appraisal procedures followed in each of the approaches if applicable. Revenues, Expenses and Vacancy Not applicable Marketing Period & Exposure Time We have spoken with knowledgeable brokers with experience in the subject's area in order to determine how long it would take to sell the subject property. Based upon market activity, the estimated marketing period is estimated to be less than 60 days. As a jurisdictional exception to USPAP, we have not linked the Fair Market Value conclusion to a specific exposure time. Exclusion of Valuation Approaches Due to the specific scope of the assignment, we have used the Sales Comparison Approach to value in estimating the subject's Fair Market Value. In the case at hand, the Income and Cost Approaches are generally not applied by marketplace participants when valuing raw unimproved land such as the subject easement. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 14 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 222 Legal Description — Parent/Larger Parcel The subject's legal description is as follows: LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL A, CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT NO. S-23-88, RECORDED SEPTEMBER 21, 1988 UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8809210451, BEING A PORTION OF LOTS 2, 3 AND 4, BLOCK 1, FRUITLAND ACRES TO LAKE BALLINGER, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 47, IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL B: PARCEL B, CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT NO. S-23-88, RECORDED SEPTEMBER 21, 1988 UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8809210451, BEING A PORTION OF LOTS 2, 3 AND 4, BLOCK 1, FRUITLAND ACRES TO LAKE BALLINGER, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 47, IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL C: THE SOUTH 100 FEET OF LOTS 2 AND 3, AND THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH 100 FEET OF LOT 4, LYING EAST OF STATE HIGHWAY #1, ALL IN BLOCK 1, FRUITLAND ACRES TO LAKE BALLINGER, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 47, IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Current Ownership and Property History — Parent/Larger Parcel On September 25, 2018, 234 Edmonds JTM LLC and 234 Edmonds JCV LLC purchased the four subject parcels for $3,950,000. On March 22, 2021, 234 Edmonds JTM LLC transferred its 50% undivided interest in the four parcels to 234 Edmonds JVC LLC for $1,550,000. No sales or leasing activity has occurred specific to the subject easement which is part of the appraisal. Real Estate Taxes & Assessments — Parent/Larger Parcel The table below illustrates the 2021 assessed values and 2022 taxes for the Parent/Larger Parcel. Larger Parcel Tax Assessment & Taxes Parcel 2021 Assessed 2021 Assessed 2021 Total Assessed Millage 2022 Fees Total Billed Number Land Values Bldg Values Values Rate Property Taxes 00451900100201 $271,800 $125,200 $397,000 8.27020 $3,283.27 $8.02 $3,291.29 00451900100202 $752,100 $0 $752,100 8.27020 $6,220.02 $8.06 $6,228.08 00451900100203 $754,900 $1,951,100 $2,706,000 8.27020 $22,379.17 $8.05 $22,387.22 00451900100204 $219,700 $0 $219,700 8.27019 $1,816.96 $8.02 $1,824.98 $1,998,500 $2,076,300 $4,074,800 8.27020 $33,699.42 $32.15 $33,731.57 Taxes are current. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 15 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 223 Property Interest Appraised This assignment is an appraisal of the Fee Simple interest of the Fair Market Value of the easement area. Purpose of the Appraisal The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the Fair Market Value. Intended Use and User (s) The intended use of this appraisal is for valuation of the easement for purposes of a negotiating a potential settlement with the city of Edmonds. There are no other intended uses. The intended user(s) of the appraisal are Johnny Vong, Blackfish Capital, and city of Edmonds employees. There are no other intended users as of the date of the report. Date of Values/Date of Report The date of the report is July 21, 2022. The effective date is July 1, 2022. Scope of the Appraisal This appraisal is intended to conform with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, and to the legal requirements and standards for eminent domain acquisition appraisals in Washington State. The scope of this appraisal includes research and analysis of a wide range and variety of information. In the course of this appraisal, we inspected the subject property as detailed herein. We also researched and developed an understanding of the subject property by using a variety of sources. These sources included: • Snohomish and King County Assessor's Offices • Snohomish and King County Recorder • Cities of Bothell, Edmonds, Shoreline, Mountlake Terrace, Shoreline, • CoStar • Current Property Owner • O'Connor Consulting Group existing database • WSDOT • Metroscan, CBA and NWMLS databases • Marshall/Swift Cost Manual O'CONNOR CONSULTING 16 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 224 The value opinions reported in this appraisal were arrived at first through analysis of the market that encompasses the subject. This view discusses the economic and demographic forces that influence real estate values. Focus was placed on the subject's neighborhood area, along with corresponding submarkets. A neighborhood description where the subject is located is discussed to convey locational influences, including districts and access to and from them, local zoning ordinances, and surrounding land uses. A physical inspection of the subject property was performed. A site analysis of the subject property is described to offer a conclusion of the physical utility of the site for existing and/or proposed improvements. An improvement description, including building area, construction materials, age and condition, and parking ratios are presented if pertinent to the scope of the assignment. A Highest and Best Use analysis was performed on the subject property. This analysis was done both "As Vacant" and "As Improved." Discussions concerning physical possibilities, legal permissible uses, and financially feasible uses are presented to indicate the maximally productive use of the subject property. The Income Approach and the Cost Approaches to value are not applicable to estimating the land value of the Larger Parcel as raw and unimproved. Rather the Sales Comparison Approach was the appropriate method employed. Using this approach, we have reflected the actual price investors/developers in the marketplace are paying to indicate what the subject should sell for. We have utilized five land sales whose Highest and Best Use matches the subject site. Those land sale comparison properties were physically inspected, and all data confirmed with buyers, and/or sellers (or their representatives) of each property by employees of O'Connor Consulting Group. If necessary, adjustments were made to these comparables as necessary to reflect differences in financing terms, condition of sale, market conditions, and location as well as physical differences relative to the subject property to indicate the Fair Market Value. Brian R. O'Connor, MAI, CRE, a State certified appraiser and the principal of O'Connor Consulting Group, oversaw and supervised all data collection and analysis. Brian R. O'Connor, MAI, CRE reviewed and critiqued the analysis and concluded to the market value. Robert Mitchell, a researcher at O'Connor Consulting Group collected and organized the market data and confirmed the data with market participants. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 17 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 225 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions A complete set of standard Assumptions and Limiting Conditions is found near the end of this report. Extraordinary Assumption The term Extraordinary Assumption is defined in Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, 2021-2023 Edition as "an assumption, directly related to a specific assignment, as of the effective date of the assignment results, which, if found to be false, could alter the appraiser's opinions or conclusions." Hypothetical Condition The term Hypothetical Condition is defined in Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, 2021-2023 Edition as "a condition, directly related to a specific assignment, which is contrary to what is known by the appraiser to exist on the effective date of the assignment results but is used for the purpose of analysis." This assignment did not warrant any Hypothetical Condition (s). Prior Appraisal or Professional Services Previous professional services were conducted which included an appraisal of the proposed Apollo Apartments dated May 16, 2022. The appraisal was prepared for Parkview Financial REIT, LP, on May 24, 2022. The report is identified by the O'Connor Consulting Group as OCG Ref. No., 22-143. The report was prepared for the owner for asset valuation for purposes of a construction loan. We have not provided any other prior services relating to the subject property. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 18 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 226 REGIONAL & NEIGHBORHOOD OVERVIEW Overview The Seattle Metropolitan Area is composed of three primary counties: King County, which is the largest and includes the City of Seattle; Snohomish County, which is immediately to the North and has Everett as its principal city; and Pierce County, immediately to the South, with Tacoma as its principal city. As of April 1, 2021, these three counties have a combined population of 4,054,800. This is an increase of 62,800 people, between April 151, 2020, and April 151, 2021. A complete description of the Seattle SMSA is contained in the Addenda. Neighborhood Overview The subject property is located less than one mile north of the King -Snohomish County line in the southeast quadrant of Edmonds. It is surrounded by Woodway to the south and west, Mountlake Terrace to the east, Shoreline directly south and Lynnwood to the north. The city of Edmonds has several distinctive neighborhoods with downtown Edmonds located in the westernmost section of the city with Puget Sound serving as the western boundary. The Edmonds/Kingston ferry is accessed from Highway 104 and through the western portion of Downtown Edmonds. The eastern portion of the neighborhood is in large contrast to downtown Edmonds. It is bordered by Highway 99, a six -lane major thoroughfare improved with a variety of commercial, retail and multi -family uses. The surrounding area is mainly commercial with some apartments along Highway 99 with single family and multifamily housing located off of the main thoroughfare. Access Access to the neighborhood is provided mainly by Highway 99, State Route 104, 2051" Street SW and 228t" Street SW. State Route 104, 205t" Street SW and 228t" Street SW provide direct access to Interstate 5. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 19 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 227 Zoning The subject is zoned CG, General Commercial Zone by the City of Edmonds. The CG zone has the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for business and commercial zones including: • a). Encourage economic vitality through businesses, investment, redevelopment, and efficient use of land; • b). Encourage safe and comfortable access for pedestrians, transit, and motorists; • c). Encourage attractive mixed -use development, affordable housing, and a variety of commercial uses; and • d). Recognize the district's evolving identity and sense of place, including distinctions between parts of the district, and be sensitive to adjacent residential zones. Minimum Minimum Lot Minimum Lot Minimum SidefRear Maximum Maximum Area Width Street Setback Setback Height Floor Area cc No'le \_ne 5'i1-T2 q, 5" 75' cne Existing Developments Properties in the subject's neighborhood are predominantly commercial, retail or multifamily. The surrounding areas are mainly single family and multifamily housing. Locational Desirability The subject has good access to Hwy 99 and 1-5, which provide access to neighborhood shopping centers, employment centers throughout the Seattle area, public transportations, and recreation facilities. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 20 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 228 Neighborhood Map I Meadowdale I ., Beverly Ac 17{,th St SW. ? - s 120th St SW _ L it Perrinvi.!:& imth SL 5W Lynnwood Recreation Ce 3 1 [244 EDMONDS BOWL -s � w SL Yovicedar Va' Edmonds __1204th Main St 2coth:SL SW y- � # 6j 211 th Sc St:' - �' � • ate^" w P-re S- � � ' MELODY HILL CASCA 22J.h_St, h VWood aj f1o4) t � Subji irdale 6 LOTONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC 1EP° ACRES 99� Ir I s - L7 L U m 1% } Mountlake Terrace 211 Page Q OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 229 SITE & PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Location The proposed Apollo Apartment site is located at the southeast corner of Highway 99/Pacific Highway and 2361" Street SW in Edmonds. Per the owner, the Parent/Larger Parcel consists of four parcels that total 76,816 square feet or 1.76 acres. The property is improved with office and retail buildings having street addresses of 23601, 23611 and 23635 Highway 99, Edmonds, WA 98026. Parcel No. 00451900100201 is improved with a 2,300 square foot, one-story with basement retail trade building completed in 1968. Parcel No. 00451900100203 is improved with a 23,790 square foot, two-story plus basement office building completed in 1979. Parcel No. 00451900100202 represents the southernmost parcel, is partially improved as a parking area but is generally largely unimproved. Parcel No. 00451900100204 represents the northeastern parcel and is improved as a parking lot. The designated subject sewer and storm easement represents a 5' wide by 200' long strip located along the S' Side of 2361" St. S.W., approximately 171' feet east of Highway 99. The easement exists only along Parcel Nos. 00451900100-203 & 204. Total easement area is 1,000 square feet. Currently, the area serves as a landscape berm between the subject east parking lot and the Willowbrook apartments. Viewing south along the easement, the landscaped berm on the left (location approximate). Viewing north along the easement, the landscaped berm (location approximate). The reader is referred to various photos, exhibits and maps throughout the report for visual reference. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 22 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 230 Adjacent Land Uses North: South Edmonds Crest, a 40-unit mobile home park. East: Willowbrook, a 52-unit multifamily project completed in 1976. South: Family Pancake House Edmonds, a restaurant building completed in West: Aurora Marketplace, a neighborhood center containing 106,921 square feet completed in 1981. Shape and Area Parent/Larger Parcel - Consists of four parcels that combined are trapezoidal in shape and include a total of 76,816 square feet or 1.76 acres, according to the plans provided (county records indicate 77,972 square feet). Subject Sewer & Storm Easement - Long, narrow strip measuring 5' wide by 200' long strip totaling 1,000 square feet. Access Direct access is obtained from Highway 99 and 236t" Street SW. Subject easement only fronts 236t" Street SW. Topography Generally, level. Soil Conditions Based upon our inspection of the site, it appears the site has adequate soils with normal drainage patterns and sufficient soil -bearing qualities to support any improvements. This statement, however, carries with it no expressed or implied warranty as to soils conditions or structure - supporting capabilities. Any questions as to such should be answered by a competent soils engineer. Environmental Audit/Hazardous Waste No other hazardous waste study has been provided for our review. As such, the presence or absence of hazardous wastes is unknown at this time. As appraisers, we have no expertise in the detection or identification of hazardous waste, or in determining its impact on the property. This appraisal assumes there is no hazardous waste contamination. If the sites, or its improvements, are found to be contaminated, our appraisal conclusions are invalid. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 23 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 231 Floodplain According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) No. 53061C1315F, dated June 19, 2020, the subject site is located in Zone "X", outside the 500-year floodplain. Earthquake Zone The subject is located in Seismic Design Category (SDC) D2. This category is characterized as "could experience very strong shaking." The potential effects of the shaking are "very strong shaking — damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable damage in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse. Damage great in poorly built structures." Utilities Utilities available to the site are public water and sewer, electricity, natural gas, cable TV and telephone. LID/Easements Upon review of the ALTA survey and the developer's plans, we are not aware of the presence of LID assessments or easements that would negatively affect property value. Zoning The subject is zoned CG, General Commercial by the City of Edmonds. Multifamily development is allowed in this zone. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 24 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 232 Topographic Survey- Subject Easement Highlighted •_SITE � / / -f S W. 14 ywrr�ww f _ I 1 1^ 1 i ,40'CONNOR CONSULTING Z GROUP, LLC 251 Page OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 233 9.1.h h4�+S'�4 YhtiS'.$ F ACRES TO 8 (4519) LAKE 7 BALLINGER 01 Subject v „ 02 15 16 17 =.0 8 2� 02 19 c 0 Tax Map — Larger Parcel = •L 01 09 02 P13 w = 21D005 B t„ , 01 /RAILER 03=018 A,�,r 01 LANE : � 019 02 12 = ,�,,Y,17ILE PARK = 08DD-122 - 0110 02 t1 10 fn 07 t -- -23�-T-H-ST S�f----T- �--- 0 WOOD --- --- A 2 > O $ O A 01 04 O o 1 =7 (COND {6967 ! 9� -4-009 8 1 -002 of 7 r 2 CO LA Q I 1 '1'cl+ H 9 a a, F- N CONDO) 2 3 P -23�88 O sa3a 1 4-OQ5 = a ci ++HYAr --� 02 5 4 3 i ...........3.. 6 02 5 4 lilA"CL't WB 00K 4-016 10 998 99` UIV NO 1 (4244)1 E 997 20 FRUO LAN01 MELSON'SADD (5148) it 4-Q35,..r� 'RQBE H =fi= 8- 19 �- 21 r:,w+a,- 6 $ 4 h+7 a j 9 1B A03 02 3 4-037 �0 14 +* w 7 SP S-9 U-142 20 4 _ io n ao 6 -7+ - 78 T LOWELL GARp.EN 4•.srrr.� 3 - 11 16- 4 DI 0 0 2QU� 01 -'� 2 1 22 26— ' LAKE BALLINGE --, Q 8 r SP S 9 141 aj 3 93 74 = 26 01 f B 8 1 A 5 38TM-S� (4520 5A SQS� 78 ! a-025 q 'SW— -'� - - - - - - - L TR 100 (91(76)$ SP JUj 00( I 1 00 cn Y. Ak 01 LS7 03 it 4:�rrerr rl� C _ LIJ 2 2 2 ALL h= 1 -86 Q 7---, 03 02 � ADD N 0 17 ! 4-004 8 9 01 g 9 ..7 4-012 � = 10 = 1fi 7 \ 1. 4-013 Lu > fi 11.. r~ 15 a _ 3 EKtI lE 5 16 18 17 �y 19 13 �� 20 n 12 1 21 10 11 22 ,40'CONNOR CONSULTING 26 1 P a g e ZBGROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 234 HIGHEST AND BEST USE Highest and Best Use is defined as: "The reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property that is physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value. The four criteria the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximum productivity. Alternatively, the probable use of land or improved property -specific with respect to the user and timing of the use -that is adequately supported and results in the highest present value."1 Highest and Best Use "As Vacant" The Parent parcel has an area of 76,816 square feet, or 1.76 acres. The site does not appear to have stability or drainage problems. Considering the subject's size and physical characteristics, we believe that the subject could be developed with a multi -family development, or any number of uses. The subject is currently zoned CG, General Commercial limit by the City of Edmonds. This zoning allows for building height up to 75 feet. This zoning code generally allows for residential or mixed - use buildings. Multi -family use consists of apartments and condominiums. During this development cycle the vast majority of new multifamily housing has been apartment development. Considering the subject's location and current market conditions, we believe that apartment development is more attractive than a condominium development. Therefore, we concluded that the financially feasible use of the subject's site would be for a multifamily apartment development. Based on the subject's physically possible, legally permissible, and financially feasible use, we concluded that the maximally productive use of the subject's site "As Vacant" would be for a mid - rise, multi -family development. Highest and Best Use "As Improved" The Parent parcel consists of four tax lots of which three have been improved with older retail and office buildings at the end of their economic lives. Based upon building and market conditions, the subject's Highest and Best Use "As Improved" is to demolish the obsolete improvements and to improve the subject site with a multi -family residential building per the developer's proposal. 'The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fifth Edition, Appraisal Institute, 2010, page 93. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 27 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 235 VALUATION METHODOLOGY Overview As easement is "the right to use another's land for a stated purpose: where there is a conveyance of certain rights but not ownership of a parcel of real estate. As a result, all easement acquisitions are partial acquisitions since some residual rights remain with the fee owner. The market value of an easement is generally measure by the decrease in market value of the property encumbered by the easement that results from the easement. A determination of the decrease in market value requires an analysis of both the land physically encumbered by the easement and the contiguous property in the same ownership and devoted to the same use. This decrease is typically measure as a percentage of fee value for the encumbered land area. When use of the easement area would be considered inconsistent or is anticipated to interfere with economic use of contiguous property in the same ownership and devoted to the same use, a conclusion of severance damages may be appropriate. As the easement rights acquired represent only a proportion of the whole, the total value of all encumbrances for a particular area should not exceed the fee simple value of the same area (theoretically the sum of the value of the various encumbrances and residual rights would be equal to the value of the fee in whole). In the case of permanent easements, our research found that from under 1% to virtually all of the underlying fee value may be taken by the acquisition of easement rights. However, transactions consistent with the definition of market value involving easement rights such as those to be acquired from the subject are not common as they are not typically openly marketed, and the transactions generally involve one seller/lessor and one buyer/lessee where one party has leverage over the other (essentially a forced transaction). As a result, very limited market data exists that would allow for direct comparison of easement transactions. To account for the subject sewer and storm easement, we have analyzed sales of properties encumbered by various easement rights; analyzed sales of properties with diminished utility stemming from a variety of sources; analyzed arm's length transactions involving easement rights (where available); interviewed developers, land use planners, architects, and other parties frequently involved in the land development process; and interviewed representatives of various agencies regarding the percentage of fee value paid to landowners for acquisitions of various rights. In addition, OCG has been directly involved in the analysis of valuation of various easement rights for a wide variety of property types and uses. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 28 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 236 From the above -mentioned primary and secondary sources, it is clear that the market reaction to the encumbrance of property with easement rights can vary widely depending on the circumstances of each case. The most important factors are generally the level of impact to existing or future uses of a property (Highest and Best Use) and remaining utility the encumbered area provides to the remainder property. In cases where there would be little to no discernible impact on the utility or use of a property, the diminution in value to the encumbered area may so small that is cannot be reasonably measurable in the marketplace. Alternatively, easements that impact Highest and Best Use can result in damages to the remainder well in excess of the fee value of the encumbered area. Valuation steps to reach a value conclusion for the subject property are summarized below Valuation Methodology As previously stated, the Income and Cost Approaches to value are not applicable in the valuation of the subject Parent Parcel and the subject sewer and storm easement. In order to determine the value of the subject easement, the first step is to determine the overall value of the Parent/Larger Parcel. Given the uniqueness of the type and location of the easement, it is standard valuation methodology to value the Parent/Larger parcel using the price per square foot of site area as the unit of comparison. The concluded price per square foot is then applied to the applicable easement area to determine the overall value. The Sales Comparison Approach provides an indication of property value in what is perhaps the most direct manner possible: it measures what someone is willing to pay for it. An essential premise of the Sales Comparison Approach is that the market will determine the price of the property being appraised in the same manner it determines the price for comparable, competitive properties. Essentially, the Sales Comparison Approach is a systematic procedure for carrying out comparative shopping. Valuation Procedures — Parent/Larger Parcel The procedures used in the Sales Comparison Approach are to research the surrounding market to obtain sales and listing information on comparable properties. Relevant measures of comparison are then made between the sale comparables and the appraised property. These units of comparison are then adjusted to the appraised property using market -derived adjustment data. The result of this process is typically expressed as a value price per square foot and is then used to derive an estimated value for the Parent Parcel and subject easement areas. Comparable Sales Data Comparable Analysis and Conclusion O'CONNOR CONSULTING 29 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 237 Subject Property overview — Parent/Larger Parcel According to the owner/developer, the Parent/Larger parcel consists of 76,816 square feet and the subject sewer and storm easement is 1,000 square feet. The subject easement area is largely a tree -lined landscape berm. Comparable Sales Data In this section of the report, we will value the subject to its Highest and Best Use. Per the developer's proposal, the site will be developed with 255 residential units which is an example of Highest and Best Use. Five closed sales were uncovered in our search for comparably zoned land proposed for multifamily development. Comparable Sales 1, 2, 3 and 4 are located proximate to the proposed Shoreline South Light Link Rail Station. Sale 5 is located in Bothell. We have conducted the analysis using the price per square foot of site area as the unit value which is consistent with marketplace participants when evaluating the valuation of easements. Our search revealed five land sales deemed appropriate for this analysis. After adjustments for demolition, these sales indicate an adjusted range of prices per square foot of site area from $112 to $167. These sales are summarized in the following table: O'CONNOR CONSULTING 30 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 238 Parent Larger Parcel Land Sales Comparables Summary - Mixed -Use Sites No. Property Zoning Sale Date Transaction Land S.F. Sale Price/S.F. Analysis $/S.F. Density Contract Date Adjustments Acre(s) Proposed Units Price/Unit Price/Unit Sbj Parent/Larger Parcel 23601-23635 Highway 99 GC 76,816 Edmonds 1.76 145 Proposed - 255 apt., units 255 1 Paramount Phase II MUR-70 November 9, 2021 Sale Price $3,398,810 305, 311 & 317 NE 152nd Street Demolition $75,000 24,132 $141 $166 208 Shoreline, WA 98155 Entitlements -$70,000 0.55 $29,555 $34,888 263450-0040, -0045 and -0050 Assignment Fee $608,300 115 115 apartment units Analysis Price $4,012,110 2 Shoreline TOD Multifamily MUR-70 April 30, 2021 Sale Price $18,440,311 108 NE 145th and others Demolition $375,000 113,692 $162 $165 210 Shoreline, WA 98155 Entitlements $0 2.61 $33,712 $34,397 288170-0361 and others Analysis Price $18,815,311 547 547 apartment units 3 Evergreen Point Shorline LLC MUR-70 May 4, 2021 Sale Price $1,850,000 132 NE 145th Street Demolition $25,000 11,250 $164 $167 170 Shoreline Entitlements $0 0.26 $42,045 $42,614 288170-0366 Analysis Price $1,875,000 44 Estimated at 44 based on 170 units per acre 4 Shoreline 145th TOD Partners MUR-70 December 8, 2021 Sale Price $5,868,295 14802-12 5th Ave NE/14803-15 6th Ave NE Demolition $150,000 40,496 $145 $149 170 Shoreline, WA 98155 Entitlements $0 0.93 $37,141 $38,090 756870-0340 -0345, -0346, -0355, -0360 & -0365 Analysis Price $6,018,295 158 Estimated at 158 based on 170 units per acre 5 Bothell Apartments, L.L.C.-Trammell Crow Res. DN and DC September 13, 2021 Sale Price $12,750,000 Bothell Way NE between 98th Avenue NE and SR 527 Demolition $0 114,062 $112 $112 145 Bothell, WA 98011 Entitlements $0 2.62 $33,641 $33,641 945720-0050 and 237420-0065 Analysis Price $12,750,000 379 369 apartments and 9,800 s.f. retail, or 379 equivalent units O'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC 31 1 OCG Ref. No Page . 22-161 Packet Pg. 239 I;�°7k'aeach Rd ECHO LAKE Nin110 e i N 185rh Sti LAND SALES COMPARABLE # 2 Shoreline TOD Multifamily 108 NE 145th St. Shoreline, WA 98155 HIGHLAAI TERRACE b m Land Sales Comparable Map LAND SALES COMPARABLE # 1 Paramount Phase II 305, 311 & 317 NE 152nd St. Shoreline, WA 98155 ;w. I kop I �E 168th St E 1 Now 745th St N 745th S1 .ram GI. Im 1p M 0 F 2!uiik v m i�In1"!''-' ro Y M HALLER LAKE aonnn�riFur -rr ��� m Y m OLYMPIC HILLS m rier m � 240tn s<;e cn LAND SALES COMPARABLE # 5 Bothell Apartments, LLC—Trammell Crow Res. Bothell Way NE between 98th Ave. NE & SR 527 Bothell, WA 98011 1 'r V othell Kenmore �E�7ath St spa LAND SALES COMPARABLE # 4 Shoreline 145th TOD Partners 14802-12 51h Ave. NE & 14803-15 6th Ave. NE Shoreline, WA 98155 LAND SALES COMPARABLE # 3 �Ja Evergreen Point Shoreline LLC m 132nd NE 1451h St. Shoreline, WA 98155 NE 145111 St NE 145th � S A 7 O NE 147, t St m A a � � z z M M ,40'CONNOR CONSULTING 32 1 P a g e ZBGROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 240 Land Sale Comparable No. 1 Address: Paramount Phase II 305, 311 and 317 NE 152nd Street Shoreline, WA 98155 Location Summary: This site is located at the southeast corner of NE 152nd Street and 3rd Avenue NE in Shoreline. The surrounding land uses are mix of residential (multifamily and single-family) and commercial developments. Sale Data: Sale Date: November 9, 2021 Sale Price: $3,398,810 Demolition: +$75,000 Entitlements: -$70,000 Assignment Fee: + 608 300 Analysis Price: $4,012,110 Seller: Brian and Rebecca Nobach (Parcel 263450-0050) $944,400 Paramount 2 LLC (Parcel 263450-0045) $1,560,000 Merceded B. Trokey-Moudy (Parcel 263450-0040) $894,410 Buyer: WZL Enterprises (All Parcels) Terms: All cash APN: 263450-0050, -0045 and -0040 Confirmation: Ronald Smith, Buyers Representative — First Financial Services Corporation (425) 260-4123 Site Data: Land Area: 24,132 square feet, or 0.55 acres (total combined). Zoning: MUR-70 Proposed Use: This site is proposed for 115 residential units. Utilities: All available. Description: Rectangularly shaped corner site. Was improved with three obsolete single-family residences at the time of sale. The estimated demolition cost is $70,000. Density: Comparative Data: Analysis Price/S.F. Analysis Price/Unit. O'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC 115 Units - 0.55 Acres = 208 Units/Acre. $4,012,110 _ 24,132 square feet = $166/S.F. $4,012,110 - 115 Units = $34,888 331 Page Q OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 241 Land Sale 1— Tax Map [EFIRAKLIN 26 nasi .............. NE 152NO 5— i 34W . H. STIRTA 220 ! ' .. _._... I _ —.—._.—._._ v r:1E s o,im 32 FR mn 220 .•.., -� ADD B E. ❑ PRE€ Land Sale 1— Paramount Phase II O'CONNOR CONSULTING 34 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 242 Land Sale Comparable No. 2 Address: Shoreline TOD Multifamily 108 NE 145th and others Shoreline, WA 98155 Location Summary: This site is located at the northeast corner of NE 145th Street and 15t Avenue NE in Shoreline. The surrounding land uses are mix of residential (multifamily and single-family) and commercial developments. Sale Data: Sale Date: April 30,2021 Sale Price: $18,440,311 Demolition: +$375,000 Analysis Price: $18,815,311 Comments: On April 30, 2021, Shoreline TOD purchased 15 parcels including a total of 2.88 acres for $20,472,311. Subsequently, they sold off one of the parcels including 11,250 square feet (Land Sale Comparable 3) on May 4, 2021, for $1,850,000. On August 9, 2021, they purchased an additional parcel containing 8,400 square feet for $1,400,000. In a right-of-way transaction, they sold off a portion of the site for $1,582,000. In the end, the site includes a total square footage of 2.61 acres, or 113,692 square feet. The comparable is zoned MUR-70. This project is proposed for 547 units. Seller: 108 NE 145th Street 288170-0361 MUR-70 6,000 SFR 4/30/2021 $978,000 Sarathy, Rajiv and Priya 114 NE 145th Street 288170-0364 MUR-70 12,000 SFR 4/30/2021 $1,956,000 Hill, Darwin and Lori 122 NE 145th Street 288170-0359 MUR-70 8,400 SFR 4/30/2021 $1,369,200 Huynh, Kien Ba and Nghiman 14512 1st Avenue NE 288170-0376 MUR-70 6,183 SFR 4/30/2021 $1,007,829 Li, Shawn and Koh, Andrea 123 NE 146th Court 288170-0360 MUR-70 9,681 SFR 4/30/2021 $1,578,003 Correos, Charlie and Florence 104 NE 145th Street 288170-0362 MUR-70 6,344 SFR 5/1/2021 $1,034,072 Fawcett, Jason and Erin 126 NE 145th Street 288170-0372 MUR-70 8,400 SFR 8/9/2021 $1,400,000 Kaur, Kuljit and Bhutto Amir 14516 1st Avenue NE 288170-0368 MUR-70 6,182 SFR 4/30/2021 $1,007,666 Lido Properties, LLC 14526 1st Avenue NE 288170-0369 MUR-70 18,636 SFR 5/1/2021 $3,037,668 Nguyen, Thanh Huu 125 NE 146th Court 288170-0363 MUR-70 9,681 SFR 5/1/2021 $1,578,003 Truong Nguyen Hoang 103 NE 147th Street 440810-0100 MUR-70 6,551 SFR 5/1/2021 $1,067,813 Young, Ellie and Eric 109 NE 147th Street 440810-0095 MUR-70 6,174 SFR 5/3/2021 $1,006,362 Rockman, Christine 115 NE 147th Street 440810-0090 MUR-70 6,173 SFR 4/30/2021 $1,006,199 Lee, Adam 121 NE 147th Street 440810-0085 MUR-70 6,172 SFR 4/30/2021 $1,006,036 Franklin, Richard and Sabrina 127 NE 147th Street 440810-0080 MUR-70 6,170 SFR 4/30/2021 $1,005,710 Myers Jessica and Goodman Buyer: Shoreline TOD Multifamily LLC (All Parcels) Terms: All cash APN: See above Confirmation: Vince Lee, Shea Properties (949) 389-7061 O'CONNOR CONSULTING 35 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 243 Site Data: Land Area: 113,692 square feet, or 2.61 acres (total combined). Zoning: MUR-70 Proposed Use: This site is proposed for 547 residential units. Utilities: All available. Description: "L" shaped corner site. Was improved with fifteen obsolete single- family residences at the time of sale. The estimated demolition cost is $375,000. Density: 547 Units - 2.61 Acres = 210 Units/Acre. Comparative Data: Analysis Price/S.F. $18,815,311= 113,692 square feet = $165/S.F. Analysis Price/Unit. $18,815,311= 547 Units = $34,397 Land Sale 2 —Tax Map L�11�L1 ''.1`�µ•- - ORRj�INEn"v ... . NE W I H ST .'�� ._._._ .... row>us ON 145TH Goode ADD .eiu .• -• • _a ... t - HrzPoe iaeze;r i serr!o .. - ...4.-.....-- ...... ...... .... ............... .... r ome a Y86rvo 3n .:. .:.. rrW aQ-26� ..;i F' ••.,-• N6 1j�3T 1 Gist Land Sale 2 — Shoreline TOD Multifamily O'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC 361 Page Q OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 244 Land Sale Comparable No. 3 Address: Evergreen Point Shoreline LLC 132 NE 1451h Shoreline, WA 98155 Location Summary: This site is located on the north side of NE 145t" Street, between 15t Avenue NE and Interstate 5 in Shoreline. The surrounding land uses are mix of residential (multifamily and single-family) and commercial developments. Sale Data: Sale Date: May 4,2021 Sale Price: $1,850,000 Demolition: +$25,000 Analysis Price: $1,875,000 Comments: This comparable consists of one legal parcel with a total square footage of 11,250 square feet, or 0.26 acres. The comparable is zoned MUR-70. Based on the subject's density of 170 units per acre, this site could potentially be improved with 44 units. Seller: Shoreline TOD Multifamily LLC Buyer: Evergreen Point Shoreline 145 LLC Terms: All cash APN: See above Confirmation: Ronald Smith, Buyers Representative — First Financial Services Corporation (425) 260-4123 Site Data: Land Area: 11,250 square feet, or 0.26 acres. Zoning: MUR-70 Proposed Use: Estimated at 44 residential units based on 170 units per acre density. Utilities: All available. Description: Rectangularly shaped interior site. Was improved with one obsolete single-family residence at the time of sale. The estimated demolition cost is $25,000. Density: Comparative Data: Analysis Price/S.F. Analysis Price/Unit O'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC 44 Units - 0.26 Acres = 170 Units/Acre. $1,875,000 _ 11,250 square feet = $167/S.F. $1,875,000 - 44 Units = $42,614 371 Page Q OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 245 Land Sale 3 —Tax Map INE'S y NE y1411H ST j MGM HBI.A a 70-019B 201903 8E869i _.-,,,._.-. _ _ _ _ _ ' r : Vpy rr . 29230 9 "uoaiu A60 'E .am' rsocami,�. aw \1N �� �a, S 28Cx70 w � i i �•R i 1 Ml � ........................... - NW:c-2snd n Land Sale 3, Evergreen Point Shoreline 0 L i> 7 O'CONNOR CONSULTING 38 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 246 Land Sale Comparable No. 4 Address: Shoreline 145 TOD Partners 14802-12 5th Avenue/14803-15 6th Avenue Shoreline, WA 98155 Location Summary: This site is located along the northern block -front of NE 148th Street between 5th and 6th Avenues NE in Shoreline. The surrounding land uses are mix of residential (multifamily and single-family) and commercial developments. Sale Data: Sale Date: December 8, 2021 Sale Price: $5,868,295 Demolition: +$150,000 Analysis Price: $6,018,295 Comments: This comparable consists of six legal parcels with a total square footage of 40,496 square feet, or 0.93 acres. The comparable is zoned MUR-70. We estimate this site could accommodate 158 residential units based on a proposed density of 170 units per acre. Seller: Shoreline 145 TOD Partners 14802 5th Avenue NE 756870-0355 MUR-70 6,371 SFR 12/8/2021 $922,345 Walgamott, Andrew and Amy 14812 5th Avenue NE 756870-0365 MUR-70 7,440 SFR 12/9/2021 $1,078,220 Ledoux, William and Kristin 14808 5th Avenue NE 756870-0360 MUR-70 6,448 SFR 12/9/2021 $934,380 McKean, Breck and Cornish 14803 6th Avenue NE 756870-0346 MUR-70 6,142 SFR 12/10/2021 $897,115 Keyes, Steve and Denise 14815 6th Avenue NE 756870-0340 MUR-70 7,440 SFR 12/9/2021 $1,078,220 Phillips, Erin and Kyle 14809 6th Avenue NE 756870-0345 MUR-70 6,655 SFR 1/20/2022 $958,015 Chang, Yee Ping Buyer: Shoreline 145 TOD Partners Terms: All cash APN: See above Confirmation: Michael Lawrence, Broker —Marcus and Millichap (206) 826-5808 Site Data: Land Area: 40,496 square feet, or 0.93 acres. Zoning: MUR-70 Proposed Use: Estimated at 158 residential units based on 170 units per acre density. Utilities: All available. Description: Rectangularly shaped corner site. Was improved with six obsolete single-family residences at the time of sale. The estimated demolition cost is $150,000. Density: 158 Units - 0.93 Acres = 170 Units/Acre. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 39 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 247 Comparative Data: Analysis Price/S.F. Analysis Price/Unit $6,018,295 - 40,496 square feet $6,018,295 _ 158 Units Land Sale 4 — Tax Map Land Sale 4, Shoreline 1451" TOD Partners = $149/S.F. = $38,090 O'CONNOR CONSULTING 40 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 248 Land Sale Comparable No. 5 Address: Bothell Apartments LLC—Trammell Crow Residential Bothell Way NE between 98th Avenue NE and SR 527 Bothell, WA 98011 Location Summary: This site is the entire block north of Bothell Way NE/SR 522 between 98t" Avenue NE and SR 527, south of Main Street in Bothell. The surrounding land uses are mix of residential (multifamily and single- family) and commercial developments. Sale Data: Sale Date: September 13, 2021 Sale Price: $12,750,000 Demolition: -0- Analysis Price: $12,750,000 Comments: This comparable consists of two legal parcels with a total square footage of 114,062 square feet, or 2.62 acres. The comparable is zoned DN and DC. This site is proposed for 369 apartments and 9,800 square feet of retail space, or 379 equivalent units. Seller: City of Bothell Buyer: Bothell Apartments LLC Terms: All cash APN: 945720-0050 and 237420-0065 Confirmation: Ross Klinger, Broker— Kidder Mathews (425) 450-1146 Site Data: Land Area: 114,062 square feet, or 2.62 acres. Zoning: DN and DC Proposed Use: This site is proposed for 369 apartments and 9,800 square feet of retail space, or 379 equivalent units. Utilities: All available. Description: Rectangularly shaped corner site. Vacant at the time of sale Density: 379 Equivalent Units _ 2.62 Acres = 145 Units/Acre. Comparative Data: Analysis Price/S.F. $12,750,000 - 114,062 square feet = $112/S.F. Analysis Price/Unit. $12,750,000 - 379 Units = $33,641 O'CONNOR CONSULTING 41 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 249 Land Sale 5 — Tax Map Land Sale 5, Bothell Apartments LLC — Trammell Crow Residential O'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC 421 Page Q OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 250 Comparable Analysis and Conclusion — Parent/Larger Parcel The land sale comparables are utilized to derive a value estimate for the subject's site through a process of comparative adjustments. We have chosen to analyze the sale comparables and make adjustments towards the comparables sales price per square foot of site area. The adjustments made are typically to account for differences in property rights conveyed, financing terms, conditions of sale, date of sale or market conditions, location, and differences in physical characteristics such as zoning, terrain, view potential, etc. Adjustments for Time of Sale / Market Conditions: According to the opinion of knowledgeable brokers with expertise in apartment properties in the Seattle Metropolitan area, sale price growth of apartment properties from 2014 to mid-2017 was at an annual rate of 10% to 15%. The apartment market has since leveled off, there are supply constraints and inflation is rampant. We have made an annual increase of 5% for time of sale/market conditions. Adjustments for Location: Comparable Sales 1, 2 and 3 are located proximate to the proposed Shoreline South Light Link Rail Station and were each adjusted downward by 15%. Sale No. 4 is located across the street from the Shoreline South Light Link Rail Station and has been adjusted downward by 20%% for this superior characteristic. Sale 5 is located in downtown Bothell and is considered superior to the subject in terms of location. A downward adjustment of 15% is warranted. Land Sale Comparable No. 1 is the Paramount Phase II site located at 305, 311 and 317 NE 152nd Street. This site is located at the southeast corner of NE 152nd Street and 3rd Avenue NE in Shoreline. The comparable consists of three legal parcels with a total square footage of 24,132 square feet, or 0.55 acres. The comparable is zoned MUR-70 and 115 residential units are proposed. The comparable closed in November 2021 for $3,398,810 for $141 per square foot. After adjustments for demolition, entitlements included and assignment fees have been taken into consideration, the effective sales price indicates a price of $166 per square foot of site area. This sale was adjusted for market conditions (+3.2%) and location (-15%). After the adjustments have been applied, this comparable indicates a value for the subject at $146 per square foot of site area. Land Sale Comparable No. 2 is the Shoreline TOD Multifamily site located at 108 NE 145t" Street. This site is located at the northeast corner of NE 145t" Street and 1st Avenue NE in Shoreline. On April 30, 2021, Shoreline TOD purchased 15 parcels including a total of 2.88 acres for $20,472,311. Subsequently, they sold off one of the parcels including 11,250 square feet (Land Sale Comparable 3) on May 4, 2021, for $1,850,000. On August 9, 2021, they purchased an additional parcel containing 8,400 square feet for $1,400,000. In a right-of-way transaction, they sold off a portion of the site for $1,582,00. In the end, the site includes a total square footage of 2.61 acres, or 113,692 square feet. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 43 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 251 The comparable is zoned MUR-70. This project is proposed for 547 units. The net purchase price was $18,440,311 for the 2.61-acre site indicating a price of $162 per square foot. After adjustments for demolition have been taken into consideration, the effective sales price indicates a price of $165 per square foot of site area. This sale was adjusted for market conditions (+5.8%) and location (-15.0%). After the adjustments have been applied, this comparable indicates a value for the subject at $149 per square foot of site area. Land Sale Comparable No. 3 is the Evergreen Point Shoreline LLC site located at 132 NE 1451h Street. This site is located on the north side of NE 145th Street, between 1st Avenue NE and Interstate 5 in Shoreline. This comparable consists of one legal parcel with a total square footage of 11,250 square feet, or 0.26 acres. The comparable is zoned MUR-70. Based on the density of 170 units per acre, this site could potentially be improved with 44 units. The comparable closed in May 2021 for $1,850,000 or $164 per square foot. After adjustments for demolition have been taken into consideration, the effective sales price indicates a price of $167 per square foot of site area. This sale was adjusted for market conditions (+5.8%) and location (-15.0%). After the adjustments have been applied, this comparable indicates a value for the subject at $150 per square foot of site area. Land Sale Comparable No. 4 is the Shoreline 145th TOD Partners site located at 14802 5th Avenue NE. This site is located along the northern block -front of NE 148th Street between 5th and 6th Avenues NE in Shoreline. This comparable consists of six legal parcels with a total square footage of 40,496 square feet, or 0.93 acres. The comparable is zoned MUR-70. We estimate this site could accommodate 158 residential units based on the subject's density of 170 units per acre. The comparable closed in December 2021 for $5,868,295 or $145 per square foot. After adjustments for demolition have been taken into consideration, the effective sales price indicates a price of $149 per square foot of site area. This sale was adjusted for market conditions (+2.8%) and location (-20.0%). After the adjustments have been applied this comparable indicates a value for the subject at $122 per square foot of site area. Land Sale Comparable No. 5 is the Bothell Apartments, LLC — Trammell Crow Residential site located on Bothell Way NE between 98th Avenue NE and State Route 527 in Bothell. This comparable consists of two legal parcels with a total square footage of 114,062 square feet, or 2.62 acres. The comparable is zoned DN and DC. This site is proposed for 369 residential units and 9,800 square feet of retail, or 379 equivalent units. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 44 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 252 This sale closed in September 2021 at $12,750,000 or $112 per square foot. The site was vacant at the time of sale, so the sales price indicates a unit price of $112 per square foot of site area. This sale was adjusted for market conditions (4.0%) and location (-15%). After the adjustments have been applied this comparable indicates a value for the subject at $99 per square foot of site area. "As If" Vacant Value Per Square Foot Conclusion: After all of the adjustments have been made, the comparables suggest a price per square foot of site area in the range of $99 to $150. We have placed the most weight on Comparable Sales 4 and 5 tempered somewhat by the remaining sales and reconcile to a unit value of $115 per square foot as of the effective date of the report of July 1, 2022. Subject Easement Final Value Estimate As summarized above, we have analyzed the Fair Market Value of the Parent/Larger Parcel at $115 per square foot of site area. After taking into consideration typical investment requirements and other factors reasonably affecting value, it is our opinion as of July 1, 2022, that a unit value of $115 per square foot is applicable to the 1,000 square foot easement as a reflection of its value contribution to the 76,816 square foot Parent/Larger Parcel. As previously mentioned, the subject sewer and storm easement represents an underground transmission line beginning at the extreme northeast corner of the Apollo apartment site and then extending 200 feet south along the eastern boundary. The easement is five feet wide and generally constitutes the existing landscape berm as seen in previous photos. During construction of the Apollo apartments, the developer stated that trees, shrubs, landscaping, and other materials will be removed, and the area will be relandscaped. There are a few factors that support a decrease in market value for the encumbered area which are summarized below: 1). Development is not allowed within the easement area because of existing buffer and building setbacks required per code. 2). The easement is in an existing landscaping buffer area but will be exposed and subjected to construction activity. 3). The easement abuts the Willowbrook apartment complex to the east and is exposed to users of the Willowbrook apartment complex. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 45 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 253 To account for overall risk and the encumbrances of the above, we believe that a diminution in value would be recognized by marketplace participants. Based upon our primary and secondary data sources including published articles, studies and other appraisal literature, a diminishment in fee value specifically quoted for underground transmission lines of natural gas, water, sewer, petroleum, and slurry ranges from 70% in rural areas to 80% in urban areas). In our opinion, a diminution in fee value of 75% is reasonable for the area as encumbered by the sewer and storm easement. Therefore, the adjustment calculates to (1,000 sf x $115/sf x 75%) or a total value of: $86,250 $86/SF of Easement Site Area An adjustment grid detailing the adjustments which were applied to the comparables is located on the following table. Parent/Larger Parcel Land Adjustments Summary - Mixed -Use Sites Subject NO.1 NO.2 NO.3 NO.4 NO.5 NAME Shoreline TOD Evergreen Point Shoreline 145th TOD Bothell Apartments, Parent/Larger Parcel Paramount Phase II L.L.C.-Trammell Crow Multifamily Shorline LLC Partners Res. Contract Price/Sales Price $3,398,810 $18,440,311 $1,850,000 $5,868,295 $12,750,000 Adjustments - Demo $75,000 $375,000 $25,000 $150,000 $0 Adjustments - Entitlements -$70,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Analysis Price $4,012,110 $18,815,311 $1,875,000 $6,018,295 $12,750,000 Location Edmonds Shoreline Shoreline Shoreline Shoreline Bothell Contract Date 7/1/2022 November 9, 2021 April 30, 2021 May 4, 2021 December 8, 2021 September 13, 2021 No. of Units 255 115 547 44 158 379 Density 144.6 208 210 170 170 145 Land Size (Net SF) 76,816 24,132 113,692 11,250 40,496 114,062 Land Size (Net Acres) 1.76 0.55 2.61 0.26 0.93 2.62 No. of Proposed Units 255 115 547 44 158 379 Adjusted Price/Total Land SF $165 $167 Transactional Adjustments Property Rights Conveyed 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Condition of Sale 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Market Conditions 3.2% 5.8% 5.8% 2.8% 4.0% Subtotal Price/Total Land SF $172 $175 $176 $153 $116 Physical Differences Size 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% View 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Location/Exposure -15.0% -15.0% -15.0% -20.0% -15.0% Zoning/FAR 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Corner 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Shape 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Physical Differences (Adj. Total) -15.0% -15.0% -15.0% -20.0% -15.0% Adjusted Price/Land SF $146 $149 $150 $122 $99 Avg. Value Indication per SF Land $133 Subject's Reconciled Value Indication Price Indication Per Square Foot $115 SUBJECT EASEMENT AREA - 1,000 s.f. Easement Area Reconciled Value Indication (As If Vacant) $115,000 Diminution Percentage Factor: 75% Fair Market Value Subtotal: $86,250 Fair Market Value Easement Area Value Indication (As Is Rounded) $86,250 Value/SF $86 O'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC 461 Page Q OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 254 RECONCILIATION Only the Sales Comparison Approach was used in the subject's easement valuation. The Sales Comparison Approach is considered an important indicator of value since it is a direct reflection of market and investment activity and is reflective of valuation methodology used by marketplace participants in easement valuation. In the case at hand, we were able to utilize five multi -family housing sites in our analysis, which we believe offers an excellent indication of value. We have reconciled the subject's Fair Market Value as of the effective date of this appraisal at EIGHTY-SIX THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS $86,250 $86.00/SF O'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC 471 Page Q OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 255 CERTIFICATION I certify that, to the best of our knowledge and belief: • The statements of facts contained in this report are true and correct. • The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are personal, unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. • The appraisal assignment was not based on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, or the approval of a loan. • 1 have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. • Compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value estimate, the attainment of a stipulated result,or the occurrence of a subsequent event. • The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared in conformity with the standards and reporting requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Institute, and also the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. • The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. • As of the date of this report, Brian R. O'Connor has completed the requirements under the continuing education program for designated members of the Appraisal Institute. • Brian R. O'Connor, MAI, CRE did inspect the subject site. • Associate Brian Mitchell made a personal inspection of the subject property. • Associate Brian Mitchell provided significant professional assistance to the appraiser. • We have provided prior professional services concerning this property within the last three years Leaz, Brian R. O'Connor, MAI, CRE O'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC 481 Page Q OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 256 9.1.h Tune 16th, 2022 Tolanny Vong Blackfish Capital P= (206) 403-8043 E, tohnny(@,b1acicfishcapnta1=us RE' Appraisal of Land Value for. Apollo Apartments Easement 23601-07 Highwsv 99 D ear Mr. Vong, I_ I O ► T711 This is our proposal to furnish appraisal services regarding the property noted above. Weare to appraise the "As -Is" Fee -Simple value of t$e land parcel aLd determine the value of the sewer/storm line easement. This appraisal is .to bereported in a standard format. The report will be prepared with the intent to comply with the Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Institute and the. 1Tniform Standards of Professional Appraimi Practice of the Appraisal Foundation. It will contain thedescriptions, comparative data, analysis, and conclusions generally considered essential to a report that is incorporated as part of a brief financial presentation. The report will be completed within three weeks from when we are authorized to proceed. When all fieldworkis completed, and preliminary conclusions are reached, you will be contacted. This provides an opportunity to review the progress to date and the reasoning leading to the value 06nclusion. The fee for this projeGtWi11 be$5,W Ris our custom to obtain a 50% ($2,500) retainer before we begin work on the assignment, This fee Goes not tuclgde shipping or courier charges. The assignment is considered to be a complete report. If the assignment is discontinued, the fee will be proportionate to the ramount of work completed. At the stated fee,. you will receive one! high -quality, color electronicPD-V7ersi on. Th95 costforhard Copies of this report size usually ranges from $75 per copy to $100 per copy, depending on the number of pages and photographs. Please indicate your copy needs on the return letter. The fee is payable at the time of delivery afthe report and is not contingent upon the ualuation r-amdusions, success in arrangigg financing, or ultimate decisions regarding disposition of the praperty. The client assumes the cost of attorney's fees and otherancillary expenses of collection if the fee is not paid. 2.2345 LAKE CITY WAY NL*214,SEATTL`E W9,48125•TEL 206622`5100 •EMAIL: BRWN040CGP.00M ZO'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC 491Page Q OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 257 9.1.h If the above general terms are satisfactory. you may so indicate by signing and dating your acceptance on the enclosed copy of this letter. Our ability to provide good service is greatly enhaneed i f all accessary data is available when work commences. We are looking rorward to providing assistance in this matter. If you have any questions, please feel face to call. Sincerely, O'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC �ZA2Z- Brian R. O'Connor- MAI- CRL Principal Blackf sh Capita! Accepted by: t1 Name: Johnny Vong Title: Managing Member f )ate: 0611612022 1234S LAKE CITY WAY NE N214, SEATTLE, WA 48125 • TEL: 206-622-S160 • EMAIL: BRIAN0@0CGP.COM ZO'CONNOR CONSULTING 50 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 258 O'Connor Consulting Group, LLC Client List Lenders AEA Bank AmeriSphere Bank of America Bank of Everett Bank One Berkshire Mortgage Banner Bank BBCN Berkadia Commercial Builders Capital California Bank and Trust Cascade Bank Cathay Bank Charter bank Commerce Bank Common Ground Continental Savings Corporation Eastside Commercial Bank O'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC The Farmers Bank of China First Boston Bank First Horizon Construction Lending First Interstate Bank First Mutual Bank First Republic Bank First Savings Bank of Washington First Savings Bank Northwest First Security Bank of Washington GE Capital Corporation Home Street Bank JP Morgan Chase Key Bank M & T Bank National Bank of Canada National Cooperative Ban k North American Savings Pacific Bank Pacific Continental Bank Pacific Coast Investment Pyatt Broadmark Management LLC Company Plaza Bank PNC Bank Seattle Bank Silvergate Thrift and Loan St. Paul Federal Bank Sterling Bank Taiwan Cooperative Bank Umpqua Bank UniBank US Bancorp Wachovia 511 Page Q OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 259 Walker & Dunlop Washington Trust Bank Wells Fargo Bank Washington First International Bank Weyerhaeuser Realty Investors/ Development Companies Alamo Manhattan Allegra Properties Balfour Company Beckes Homes Bentall Kennedy Bosa Properties Burkheimer Management Company CBRE Capital Markets ConAm Development Citigroup Create World America Construction Company Crossbeam Properties Continental Properties ConocoPhillips Daniels Real Estate FIR McAbee Genoa Pacific Corporation Geonerco.inc GID Development Group Goodman Real Estate Greystar Grosvenor Associates Guardian Real Estate Holland Partner Group O'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC Hydra LLC Interpac Development Corporation Intracorp Investco Properties JC Mueller John Stone Development Kahne Corporation Kauri Investments Kemper Freeman Laconia Development Lear Capital, LLC Lennar Homes Lincoln Investments Lindstrom Development Lorax Partners MacFarlane Partners Mack Urban Macquire Real Estate Martin Selig Martin Smith Mitsui Fudosan America Mosaic Homes Murray Franklin Oliver McMillan Pacific West Hotel Parkstone Investments Whidbey Island Bank Pinnacle Development Prometheus Pryde Johnson Robertson Capital Consultants The Rush Companies Schnitzer Northwest Seattle Properties SECO Development Security Properties Shea Homes Sierra Construction Company Simpson Housing Corporation Sound Investments Starwood Capital SU Development The Stratford Company T. Jones, Inc Tarragon Trigny Corporation Tyee International, LLC Unico Properties UDR Vance Corporation Vance Properties 521 Page Q OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 260 Vander Hoek Corporation Vulcan Real Estate Government Agencies City of Bellevue City of Kenmore City of Kent City of Kirkland City of Redmond City of Seattle City of Tukwila King County King County Library System Puget sound Regional Council Port of Everett Port of Seattle REITS Bay Apartment Communities BRE properties Equity Residential Security Capital O'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC Wathen and Associates Westward Real Estate Attorneys Adolph Law Group Bo Barket Clausen Law Firm Floyd and Pfleuger GordonDerr .Joseph Pucket Karr Tuttle Campbell Levin and Stein Scheer and Zehnder Schwabe, Williamson and Wyatt Short, Cressman, & Burgess Steichen and Martin Stein, Flanagan, Sudweeks & Hauser Stokes Lawrence Ryan Swanson Keesal, Young & Logan United Dominion Realty Trust Insurance Companies The Unity Group Signature Insurance Group Wells & Company Property Management Companies CWD Group, Inc AAMC CDC Management Services, Inc AAMC Greystar Kappes Miller Management The Copeland Group, LLC Lorig Management EMB Management. Inc AAMC Pacific Rim Investments & Management Yates Wood Phillips Real Estate Services, LLC 531 Page Q OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 261 MacFarlane Partners Greystar References for O'Connor Consulting Group, LLC ZOTONNOR CONSULTING 54 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 262 Charles P. Wathen Wathen and Associates 926 Kealoolu Avenue Honolulu, HI 96816 (303) 810-4599 Pete DeLeuw Murray Franklin Family of Companies 14410 Bel -Red Road Bellevue, WA 98007 (425) 644-2323 Rob Karlinsey City Manager City of Kenmore 1 81 20 681" Ave NE Kenmore, WA 98028 (425) 398-8900 Martha Barkman Development Manager Mack Urban 1 41 1 Fourth Avenue, Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98101 -2296 (206) 753-2414 Kevin Daniels Daniels Real Estate 2401 Utah Avenue South, Suite 305 Seattle, WA 98134 (206) 382-4600 Monte Badziong Appraisal Ad min istrator/Real Estate Analyst First Savings Bank Northwest (425) 687-4255 O'CONNOR CONSULTING 55 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 263 Claudio Guincher Continental Properties 1380 1 1 2th Avenue NE, Suite 307 Bellevue, WA 98004 (425) 462-0700 George Petrie Goodman Real Estate 2801 Alaskan Way, Suite 310 Seattle, WA 98121 (206) 21 5-9789 Kitsap Bank Appraisal Review Analyst 619 Bay Street, P.O Box 9 Port Orchard, WA 98366 (360) 876-7834 Dean Emanuels Vice President/Chief Appraiser Washington Trust Bank 717 West Sprague Avenue Spokane, WA 99210 (509) 353-2284 Gary Hague Meridian Real Estate 215 First Avenue West, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98119-4253 (206) 284-0077 Philip Pinkstaff U.S. H.U.D Economic and Market Analysis Division 909 1 st Avenue, Suite 200 O'CONNOR CONSULTING 56 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 264 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 220-511 2 Bryan Graf Pyatt Broadmark Management 600 University Street, Suite 1800 Seattle, WA 98101 (206) 971-8699 Davejunghyun Oh Credit Officer UniBank 16929 Hwy99, Suite 110 Lynnwood, WA 98037 (425) 275-971 3 Larry Costich Attorney Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt 1420 Sch Avenue, Suite 3400 Seattle, WA 98101 -4010 (206) 407-1 541 O'Connor Consulting Group LLC HUD work since Nov. 2008 Seneca Tower, Seattle, WA 2008 Market Study and Pre -Application ZO'CONNOR CONSULTING 57 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 265 2,1,1 and Bell, Seattle, WA 2009 Market Study and Firm Commitment 6th Avenue Apartments, Seattle, WA 2009 Market Study and Firm Commitment Bally's Apartments, Federal Way, WA 2009 Market Study and Pre -Application Barrett Park, Seattle, WA 2009 Market Study and Firm Commitment Point Ruston Apartments, Tacoma, WA 2009 Pre -Application Stone Way Village Apartments, Seattle, WA 2009, Market Study Azure Ridge, Renton, WA, 2010 Market Study and Pre -Application Ballard Apartments, Seattle, WA 2010 Market Study and Pre -Application Beardslee Apartments, Bothell, WA 2010 Market Study and Pre -Application Coleman Tower, Seattle, WA 2010 Market Study and Pre -Application Elks on Broadway, Tacoma, WA 2010 Pre -Application Good Pasture Island Apartments, Eugene, OR 2010, Market Study Ivanhoe Apartments, Portland, OR 2010 Market Study Packard Building, Seattle, WA 2010 Market Study Pine and Belmont, Seattle, WA 2010 Market Study Regency Park, Richland, WA 2010 Market Study and Pre -Application River Club, Richland, WA, 2010, Market Study and Pre -Application O'CONNOR CONSULTING 58 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 266 Seneca Tower, Seattle, WA 2010 Market Study and Pre -Application Smith Tower, Seattle, WA 2010 Market Study Salpare Bay, Portland, OR 2011 Market Study Totem Station, Kirkland, WA 2011 Appraisal 2511, & McClellan St Apartments, Seattle, WA 2012, Market Study The Baylor Apartments, Seattle, WA 2012 Market Study Carnegie Square Apartments, Spokane, WA 2012, Market Study Cathedral Apartments, Portland, OR 2012 Market Study Michael Apartments, Spokane, WA 2012 Market Study Ridpath Apartments, Spokane, WA 2012 Market Study Spyglass Hill, Bremerton, WA 2012 Market Study NW 1711, and Front St., Portland, OR 2012 Market Study Oasis Village Apartments, Caldwell, ID 2013 Market Study Junction Flats, Seattle, WA 2013 Market Study Asheville Apartments, Boise, ID 2013 Market Study O'CONNOR CONSULTING 59 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 267 Cantabria Apartments, Boise, 1D 2013 Market Study Ridgecrest Commons, Nampa, ID 2013 Market Study Silver Oakes Apartments, Meridian, ID 2013 Market Study Cordillera Apartments, Boise, ID 2013 Market Study 725 Broadway, Tacoma, WA 2014 Market Study Boise MSA Apartment Market, ID 2014 Market Study Central Park Apartments, Moses Lake, WA 2014, Market Study Ridpath Club Apartments, Spokane, WA 2014, Market Study Sullivan's Gulch, Portland, OR 2014 Market Study Old City Hall Apartments, Tacoma, WA 2014 Market Study Chapel Hill, Pimlico Drive, Pasco, WA 2014 Market Study Post Falls Apartments, Post Falls, ID 2014 Market Study 725 Broadway, Tacoma, WA 2015 Market Study 219 1 sr Avenue North, Seattle, WA 2015 Market Study Sullivan's Gulch, Portland, WA 201 5 Market Study O'CONNOR CONSULTING 60 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 268 Proposed 2912 Beacon Ave, South Apartments, Seattle, WA 201 5 Preliminary Market Study The Alexis Apartments, Portland, OR 2015 Market Study Central Park Apartments, Moses Lake, WA 2015 Market Study 402 NW 51r1 Avenue, Portland, OR 2015 Preliminary Market Study 511, & Idaho Apartments, Boise, ID 2015 Market Study Ridgecrest Commons, Nampa, ID 2015 Market Study Chapel Hill, Pimlico Drive, Pasco, WA 2015 Market Study Post Falls Apartments, Post Fails, ID 2015 Market Study Sonata East, Seattle, WA 2015 Market Study Silver Oakes, Phase II, Meridian, ID 2015 Market Study Proposed 2501 & McClellan Apartments, Seattle, WA 2015 Market Study Avalon Apartments, Seattle, WA 2016 Market Study Mt. Baker Station Apartments, Seattle, WA 2016 Market Study Marysville Senior Apartments, Marysville, WA 2016 Brief Market Study Park Place Apartments, Bellingham, WA 2016 Market Study O'CONNOR CONSULTING 61 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 269 Chapel Hill, Pimlico Drive, Pasco, WA 2016 Market Study Evergreen Pointe Apartments, Bremerton, WA 2016 Market Study Sonata East, Seattle, WA 2016 Market Study 511, & Idaho Apartments, Boise, ID 2016 Market Study Update Mt, Baker Station Apartments, Seattle, WA 2017 Market Study 320 Queen Anne Apartments, Seattle, WA 2017 Market Study Park Place Apartments, Bellingham, WA 2017 Market Study Beacon Station Apartments, Seattle, WA 2017 Market Study 123 Third Apartments, Seattle, WA 2017 Market Study Admiral Station Apartments, Seattle, WA 2017 Market Study Junction Landing Apartments, Seattle, WA 2017 Market Study Tahoma Vista Village, Tacoma, WA 2017 Appraisal MLK Apartments, Tacoma, WA 2017 Market Study Beacon Station Apartments, Seattle, WA 2017 Updated Market Study Esterra Park Apartments, Redmond, WA 2017 Market Study Junction Landing Apartments, Seattle, WA 2017 O'CONNOR CONSULTING 62 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 270 Updated Market Study Mickelberry Apartments, Silverdale, WA 2017 Market Study HUD 223 PROGRAMS: Highlander Apartments, Portland, OR 2009 Shangri La Apartments, Klamath Falls, OR 2009 Tahoma Terrace Apartments, Tacoma, WA 2009 Glenridge Place Apartments, Klamath Falls, OR 2010 Heatherwood/Ladera Apartments, Tukwila, WA 2010 Kently Pointe Apartments, Kent, WA 2010 Packard Building, Seattle, WA 2010 Plaza 44 Apartments, Lynnwood, WA 2010 Pyramid Pointe Apartments, Tukwila, WA 2010 Rainier Pointe Apartments, Fife, WA 2010 Veranda Green, Seattle, WA 2010 Kawabe House, Seattle, WA 2011 Lake City Senior Apartments, Seattle, WA 2011 Mahle Swan Manor, Yakima, WA 2011 The Parker Apartments, Portland, OR 2011 Stillaguamish Apartments, Seattle, WA 2011 Brittany Lane Apartments, Lacey, WA 2012 Creekside Apartments, Clackamas, OR 2012 College Glen Apartments, Lacey, WA 2012 Davis Pointe Apartments, Boise, ID 2012 Executive Estates, Fairbanks, AK 2012 Four Freedoms Apartments, Seattle, WA 2012 O'CONNOR CONSULTING 63 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 271 Greentree Apartments, Seattle, WA 2012 Heritage Woods Apartments, Seattle, WA 2012 Hill Crest Apartments, Seattle, WA 2012 Lake City Senior Apartments, Seattle, WA 2012 Marion Court Apartments, Bremerton, WA 2012 Northwest Pointe Apartments, Boise, ID 2012 Rivergreen Apartments, Gladstone, OR 2012 Swiss Gable Apartments, Kent, WA 2012 Westridge Apartments, Bellevue, WA 2012 Willows Court Apartments, Seattle, WA 2012 Abbey Rowe Apartments, Olympia, WA 2013 Arabella Apartments, Shoreline, WA 2013 Balfour Place, Seattle, WA 2013 Illumina Apartments, Seattle, WA 2013 Loyal Heights Manor, Seattle, WA 2013 Marion Court Apartments, Bremerton, WA 2013 True Vine Senior Center, Tacoma, WA 2013 Ventana Apartments, Seattle, WA 2013 Zachary Park Apartments, Portland, OR 2013 Burke -Gilman Place, Seattle, WA 2013 Rent Comparability Study Lake City Senior Apartments, Seattle, WA 2013 Pre -Application Section 231 Lowman Building Apartments, Seattle, WA 2013 Kenyon House Apartments, Buckley, WA 2014 Rent Comparability Study Willina Ranch Apartments, Bothell, WA 2014 Appraisal English Village, Coeur d'Alene, ID 2014 Rent Comparability Study Stonebrook Apartments, Renton, WA 2014 O'CONNOR CONSULTING 64 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 272 Appraisal Village Green Apartments, Port Orchard, WA 2015 Rent Comparability Study Mountain View Apartments, Bozeman, ID 2015 Appraisal Minerva Plaza Apartments, Portland, OR 2015 Rent Comparability Study McKinley Apartments, Portland, OR 2015 Rent Comparability Study Hutchison House, Issaquah, WA 2016 Appraisal Heritage Apartments, Bremerton, WA 2016 Rent Comparability Study Homestead Apartments, Kent, WA 2016 Rent Comparability Study Benson East Duplexes, Kent, WA 2016 Rent Comparability Study Tahoma Vista Village, Tacoma, WA 2016 Appraisal Provail Burke Gilman, Seattle, WA 2017 Rent Comparability Study River Terrace Apartments, Auburn, WA 2017 Rent Comparability Study Loyal Heights Manor, Seattle, WA 2017 Rent Comparability Study Loyal Heights Manor, Seattle, WA 2017 Appraisal O'CONNOR CONSULTING 65 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 273 HUD 231 PROGRAMS: Lake City Senior Apartments, Seattle, WA 2015 Appraisal Marysville Senior Apartments, Marysville, WA 2015, Market Study HUD 241 PROGRAMS: Westridge Apartments, Bellevue, WA 2015 Market Study Westridge Apartments, Bellevue, WA 2016 Market Study ZOTONNOR CONSULTING 66 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 274 Brian R. O'Connor, MAI, CRE O'Connor Consulting Group, LLC 1234S Lake City Way NE #21 4 Seattle, WA 98125 Phone: 206.622.S100 Professional Designation Brian R. O'Connor received his MAI designation in May 1996 and is certified as a General Real Estate Appraiser for the State of Washington, License No. 270-1 1 1 100 529. He is also a Certified General Appraiser for the State of Idaho (License No. CGA-331 5). Brian R. O'Connor has been inducted into the membership of The Counselors of Real Estate and has been awarded the CRE designation as of November 2014. Experience Thirty-six years' experience as Market Analyst and Fee Appraiser. Market study experience is concentrated in evaluating local economic conditions and forecasting future demand for multifamily housing and commercial space. Principal author of the Seattle Metropolitan Area Apartment Market Report. Since 1985, the majority of his appraisal experience has been concerned with commercial mixed use and urban residential buildings in Seattle, Bellevue, and Everett, Washington. Mr. O'Connor, with support from his associates, has provided a wide variety of development feasibility analysis that was intended to solve for equity requirements, financial returns and land residual values. Mr. O'Connor has also developed an extensive expertise in performing complex feasibility and investment analysis for multiple types of commercial properties. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 67 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 275 Examples of the more complex properties analyzed are mixed -use rental housing, high rise condominiums, marinas, retail, and office properties, as well as historical preservation easements. Mr. O'Connor is the only MAI Appraiser in Washington State that is listed in the National Certificate Registry by the Appraisal Institute for "Appraising Historic Preservation Easements." Since 2008, Mr. O'Connor has appraised four historic preservation properties within the tri-county region. Mr. O'Connor has been qualified as an expert witness concerning various commercial property developments in King, Pierce, and Thurston counties. Education University of Washington, Seattle; Two Years Graduate Studies, Economic Geography, 1984-85. University of Washington, Seattle; Bachelor of Arts in Economic Geography. Graduated 1983 with distinction, Cum Laude and Phi Beta Kappa. Continuing Education Courses Conference, Appraisal Institute, Fall Real Estate Conference, 2017 Conference, Counselors of Real Estate, Midyear Meetings, 2017 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Critical Thinking in Appraisals, 2016 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Corridor Valuations, 2016 Conference, Appraisal Institute, Fall Real Estate Conference, 2016 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Point Ruston, The Asarco Copper Smelter & the Appraiser's Role in Litigation Involving Contaminated Properties, 2016 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Extreme Appraising, 2016 Course, Appraisal Institute, Supervisory Appraiser/Trainee Appraiser Course, 2016 Course, Appraisal Institute, National USPAP Update Course, 2016 O'CONNOR CONSULTING 68 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 276 Conference, Counselors of Real Estate, Midyear Meetings, 2015 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, The Emerging Marijuana Industry and its Impact on Real Estate, 2015 Course, Appraisal Institute, Supervisory Appraiser/Trainee Appraiser Course, 2015 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, `Perspectives on Tax Appeals' with Chapter Receptions, 2014 Conference, Appraisal Institute, Fall Real Estate Conference, 2014 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Going Concerns and Multidisciplinary Appraisals, 2014 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Extreme Appraising, 2014 Course, Appraisal Institute, National USPAP Update Course, 2014 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Hotel Valuation Topics and Real World Analysis Case Studies, 2013 Course, Appraisal Institute, Washington Real Estate Law for Appraisers, 2013 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Business Practices and Ethics, 2013 Course, Appraisal Institute, National USPAP Update Course, 2013 Fall Real Estate Conference, Appraisal Institute, 2012 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Appraising for Lenders in the New Economy, 2 012 Course, Appraisal Institute, National USPAP Update Course. 2012 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Fundamentals of Separating Real Property, Personal Property, 20T 1 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Business Practices and Ethics, 2011 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Regulatory Takings: Legislative &Judicial Overview, 2010 Seminar, American Bankers Association, Distressed and Depressed Values, 2010 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Fall RE Conference 2010 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Lending World in Crisis -What Clients Need, 2010 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Multi -Family & Single Family Update, 2010 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Regulatory Takings: Legislative & Judicial Overview, 2010 Course, Appraisal Institute, National USPAP Update, 2010 O'CONNOR CONSULTING 69 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 277 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Appraising Distressed Properties, 2009 Seminar, Am. Bankers Assoc, Appraisals of Real Property in Distressed Markets, 2009 Course, Appraisal Institute, Appraising Historical Preservation Easements, 2009 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Construction Seminar, 2008 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, USPAP Update Course, 2006 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Mathematical Modeling, 2005 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, The Role of Technology in Commercial Real Estate, 2005 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, 7—Hour National USPAP Update course, 2005 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Current and Emerging Trend in the PS Office Market, 2005 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Mortgage Fraud Case Studies, 2005 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Current and Emerging Trends in the PS Ind. Market, 2004 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Security and Confidentiality for Appraisers, 2003 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, USPAP part B, 2003 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Appraisal Consulting, 2003 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Appraising the Tough Ones, 2002 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Attacking & Defending an Appraisal in Litigation, 2001 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Partial Interest, Divided and Undivided, 2001 SSP—A, Appraisal Institute, Standards of Professional Practice, Part A, 2001 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Land Use and Planning, 2000 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Washington Landlord —Tenant Act Overview, 1999 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Commercial Lease Fundamentals and Applications, 1999 Course 430, Standards of Professional Practice, Part C, 1999 Course 720, Appraisal Institute, (Condemnation Advanced Principles), 1999 Course 710, Appraisal Institute, (Condemnation Basic Principles), 1999 O'CONNOR CONSULTING 70 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 278 Rockwell Institute, Real Estate Law, 1997 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, (Appraising Retail Properties), 1996 Seminar, Appraisal Institute, (Understanding Limited Appraisals), 1996 Course 11, Appraisal Institute, (Report Writing and Valuation Analysis), 1993 SSP—B, Appraisal Institute (Standards of Professional Practice, Part B), 1993 SSP—A, Appraisal Institute, (Standards of Professional Practice, Part A), 1991 Course 10, Appraisal Institute, (Market Analysis of Real Estate), 1989 Course 2-1, Appraisal Institute, (Case Studies in Real Estate Valuation), 1989 Course IB—B, Appraisal Institute, (Capitalization Theory and Techniques, Part B), 1988 Course IB—A, Appraisal Institute, (Capitalization Theory and Techniques, Part A), 1988 Course IA-2, Appraisal Institute, (Basic Appraisal Principles and Techniques), 1986 Course IA-1, Appraisal Institute, (Real Estate Appraisal Principles), 1986 Volunteer Associations Second Vice President of the North Seattle Baseball Association Our Lady of the Lake School Finance Committee Member Four years as CYO youth soccer coach Five years as CYO youth basketball coach O'CONNOR CONSULTING 71 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 279 O'Connor Consulting Group, LLC Company Profile The firm O'Connor Consulting Group, LLC was originally established in May 1994 as Pacific Real Estate Advisors. Originally founded as a Partnership, the firm became a Limited Liability Company in July 1997 when Brian O'Connor, MAI, CRE became the sole principal and managing member of the firm. While O'Connor Consulting Group, LLC is generally considered to be an appraisal firm, much of our business consists of providing market and feasibility studies for our clients. Over the last ten years, the portion of consulting services vis-a-vis appraisal services has become approximately 50% of our work product. Although we believe appraisal services are the foundation of our firm, we are striving to provide our clients with a higher level of market research, analyses and insight. In order to provide our clients with sophisticated market analyses and valuations, O'Connor Consulting Group, LLC has assembled a team of senior analysts, consisting of eleven appraisers, five of whom have between 10 to 20 years of experience, including Jennifer Forschler, MAI. Their expertise ranges from complex property valuations to complicated economic modeling of investment properties. Our areas of expertise range from urban mixed -use and feasibility modeling to commercial, subdivision, retail, industrial/office, condominium and apartment appraising. We have developed a specialty of appraising or performing feasibility studies on downtown high-rise developments. We have performed major market studies in King, Pierce and Snohomish counties as well as Lewis and Kitsap counties, and the Tri-Cities area. Outside of Washington State we have performed appraisal and consulting work in the states of Oregon, Idaho, Alaska and Arizona. Services Provided O'CONNOR CONSULTING 72 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 280 Appraisals Valuation estimates provided for various property types including apartments, condominiums, subdivisions, office/retail, industrial, and specialty properties such as independent and assisted living facilities, senior housing, hotels, motels, gas stations and marinas. Services also include appraisal reviews. HUD/US Department of O'Connor Consulting Group, LLC has worked on over 75 HUD projects Housing and Urban since 2008 throughout Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Alaska, making Development them recognized as one of the leading firms performing HUD 221(d)(4) market studies/appraisals and HUD 223(f) appraisals. Market & Feasibility Studies Studies concentrate on evaluating the local economic conditions and forecasting future supply/demand equilibrium for multifamily housing and commercial space. Feasibility studies focus on analyzing probable profit margins and various measures of return on investment. We have performed numerous market and feasibility studies on special use properties. These include age -restricted housing, assisted living, in -patient treatment centers, memory care, and private schools. Insurance Appraisals O'Connor Consulting Group is the leading firm within the Puget Sound area providing Insurance Appraisals to home owner associations and insurance companies. Consultation Consultation services include participation with development teams, individual product evaluations, feasibility reviews, and general discussion of current market conditions as well as possible development opportunities. O'CONNOR CONSULTING 73 1 P a g e Q GROUP, LLC OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 281 Court Testimonies O'CONNOR CONSULTING GROUP, LLC Our consulting services also include assisting buyers and sellers with due diligence in regards to pricing, risk, and tenant evaluation. Mi. O'Connor is qualified as an expert witness concerning a diversity of property types in King. Pierce, and Thurston Counties. He also provides his expertise for mediation and arbitration cases. 741 Page Q OCG Ref. No. 22-161 Packet Pg. 282 Blackfish Capital 9.1.i Re: BLD2021-1653 Apollo Apartments Storm/Sewer and Pedestrian Easements Dear Ms. McConnell: I wanted to write this letter regarding the Apollo Apartments and Sewer and Pedestrian Easements for the project. As the owner/developer of the project, I have requested the release of the Storm/Sewer easements (AF# 1588234 and AF# 1588238). These easements were signed in 1962 for the sole purpose of installation and maintenance of a storm/sewer line. At the time, no money was exchanged for this easement area. This area is not used for any public use or enjoyment. Per your request, we submitted a full summary appraisal report completed by an MAI appraiser for your review and consideration. The appraisal dated 7/19a/2022 by O'Connor Consulting Group, LLC places a value of the easement area at $86,250 for the 1,000 square foot storm/sewer easement area. As you do your review, please keep in mind that as a part of this project, the City of Edmonds is requiring a Pedestrian easement of 2,628 square feet along Highway 99. In essence, you are asking me to give the City of Edmonds 2,628 square feet of street frontage without compensation. Based on my previous experiences working on similar projects, the release and granting of easements is a collaborative process between the owner and City. Paying for a 1,000 square feet easement area seems odd when I am also giving away 2,628 square feet for an easement area on the same project. I would ask that both easements are taken into consideration as you make your recommendation to City Council. I am excited to start this project and work on revitalizing this area of Highway 99 in Edmonds. Feel free to reach out to me if you have any questions. Sincerely, �.LBfGZ1ZG/� l/B/LQ- Johnny Vong 2442 Market St NW #562 Seattle WA 98107 206-552-9053 www.blackfishcapitat.us Packet Pg. 283 9.1.j SDMH RIM=439.20 NO MID / / I /I I / I / I / =44 .4-4 45.15 SDMH RIM=435.62 NO MID i / SSMHIIM NO /D I / S/ 74- - - y / Aw / 1 NEW CONCRETE CURB C5.3 AND GUTTER CB M=<" IE 2" DI(I / I 12" DI(! B=437.61 IE " DI(NE)=43 I 2" DI(SW)�4' / S A NE 1 /4, SE DRAIN M E / WATER LINE GAS � LINE 1 0Np / q I / NE CONCRETI AND C -) NEW CURB RAMP 1 /4, SECTION 31, / I I I nn�n�Trn rr�i^� in�r WOOD F� CE END D.1 '(S). I EASEMENT (NOT IN RECORD) CHAIN FINK FENCE/ START IIN 0.1 '(S) OF PROPERTY LINE. I LOT 7 I TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE PAINTED CENTERLINE SIDEWALK SHALL BE HELD HIGH THROUGH j I HA 199b I � � i 4 EAST, W . M . SITE AND STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN NOTES: 1. SUBGRADE MUST BE COMPACTED TO 95% OF MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY FOR ALL STREET IMPROVEMENTS. 2. A RIGHT-OF-WAY (ROW) PERMIT IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO ANY USE OF AND/OR WORK IN THE PUBLIC ROW OR REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY. 3. ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, SIGNING, STRIPING AND OTHER PAVEMENT DELINEATION SHALL CONFORM TO THE MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MUTCD). 4. WHEN TRENCHING THROUGH EXISTING PAVEMENT, THE OPEN CUT SHALL BE A NEAT LINE MADE BY SAW CUTTING A CONTINUOUS LINE. SAW CUTTING WILL BE REQUIRED UNLESS THE CUT IS MADE PRIOR TO RECONSTRUCTION OR AN OVERLAY. / T 5. PERMANENT PAVEMENT PATCH SHALL BE AS SPECIFIED ON DETAIL 2. 7. WHERE TRENCH EXCAVATION EQUALS OR EXCEEDS A DEPTH OF FOUR FEET, THE DEVELOPER/CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE, CONSTRUCT, MAINTAIN, AND 9 BRA DISK REMOVE, AS REQUIRED, SAFETY SYSTEMS THAT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE WASHINGTON INDUSTRIAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT, RCW 49.17, INCLUDING J ITH PA EMENT. WAC 296-155. THE TRENCH SAFETY SYSTEMS SHALL BE DESIGNED BY A QUALIFIED PERSON, AND MEET ACCEPTED ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS (SEE WAC DD37-2 _ _ _ -rl I 296-155-660). _ t 8. THE DEVELOPER/CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH, INSTALL, AND OPERATE ALL NECESSARY EQUIPMENT TO KEEP EXCAVATIONS ABOVE THE FOUNDATION LEVEL FREE __ / I / FROM WATER DURING CONSTRUCTION, AND SHALL DEWATER AND DISPOSE OF THE WATER SO AS NOT TO CAUSE INJURY TO PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROPERTY OR / NUISANCE TO THE PUBLIC. SUFFICIENT PUMPING EQUIPMENT IN GOOD WORKING CONDITION SHALL BE AVAILABLE AT ALL TIMES FOR ALL EMERGENCIES, INCLUDING POWER OUTAGE, AND SHALL HAVE AVAILABLE AT ALL TIMES COMPETENT WORKMEN FOR THE OPERATION OF THE PUMPING EQUIPMENT. 9. COMPACTION TESTS SHALL BE PERFORMED TO ENSURE ADEQUATE COMPACTION ON ALL LIFTS. ALL COMPACTION TESTS SHALL BE CONDUCTED BY A LICENSED TESTING LABORATORY AT THE EXPENSE OF THE DEVELOPER/CONTRACTOR. SEE SECTION 3-9.4 OF THESE SPECIFICATIONS. 7 00 - r - II 10. ROOF SHALL BE COATED WITH AN INERT, NON -LEACHABLE ENAMEL COATING. I I --------- I J I LOT � Li ED 0 4jF __-_--L----------- CHAIN LINK FENCE I ` 1.0'(S) OF SET CORNER. SITE AND STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN 1 SCALE: 1" = 20' 20 0 10 20 40 11. WSDOT ROAD RESTORATION GUIDELINES SHALL BE FOLLOWED FOR UTILITY WORK IN HWY 99. FULL CONCRETE PANEL REPLACEMENT IS REQUIRED IF CUTTING INTO EXISTING PANELS. 12. CITY PARKS DEPARTMENT SHALL INSPECT ROOT BALL OF TREE PRIOR TO TREE PLANTING - 425.771.0230. 13. RESTRIPE PAINTED CENTERLINE(S) AND FOGLINE(S) AS NEEDED PRIOR TO PROJECT COMPLETION. 14. ANY VAULTS OR UNDERGROUND RETENTION WILL NEED TO MEET OR EXCEED HS20 STANDARDS FOR A POINT LOAD OF 45,000 LBS. PAVING LEGEND NEW ASPHALT OVERLAY EXISTING ASPHALT/UTILITY SAWCUT NEW CONCRETE FINAL JOINT SHALL BE A NEAT SAW CUT STRAIGHT LINE. ALL EXPOSED VERTICAL HMA CLASS 1/2" EDGES SHALL BE TACKED NEATLY PER PG 58H-22 WSDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS 5-04.3(4) (SEE NOTES 4 do 5) 1' APPROVED TACK OR APPROVED EQUAL AND SEALED PER WSDOT STD 5-04.3(4)A. 1' in SLOPE EXCAVATION TO AVOID UNDERMINING EXISTING PAVEMENT. IMPORT &4CKFILL SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 95% MAXIMUM DENSITY (SEE NOTE 2) TRENCH WIDTH NOTES: 1. SEE CITY OF EDMONDS MODIFICATIONS TO DIVISION 9 OF THE CURRENT WSDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR BACKFILLING REQUIREMENTS. 2, SUBMIT PROCTOR AND DENSITY TESTS FROM CERTIFIED TESTING COMPANIES DOCUMENTING THAT THE BACKFILL MEETS A MINIMUM OF 95% DENSITY PER ASTM ❑ 1557, 3. CSBC DEPTH SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 6", AND SHALL BE INSTALLED IN MULTIPLE EQUAL THICKNESS LIFTS NOT EXCEEDING 6". 4. ROADWAY HMA DEPTH SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4" FOR RESIDENTIAL ROADS AND 6" FOR COLLECTORS/ARTERIALS. 5. ALLEY HMA DEPTH SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 2" THICK. UNLESS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER, ANY DEPTH GREATER THAN 2" SHALL MATCH EXISTING. 6. UNLESS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER, THE HMA SHALL BE INSTALLED IN MULTIPLE EQUAL THICKNESS LIFTS NOT EXCEEDING 2". 7. FINAL PAVEMENT JOINTS SHALL BE NEATLY SAW CUT AND UNIFORMILY SEALED WITH WSDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS 5-04.3(4)A APPROVED JOINT SEALANT OR APPROVED EQUAL. REVISION DATE TYPICAL HMA AND APRIL 2a21 CITY OF EDMONDS UTILITY PATCH PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD DEPARTMENT DETAIL APPROVED BY: R. ENGLISH UU - 41 C CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD DETAIL J SCALE: NTS �/ ASPHALT CONCRETE WEARING COURSE N HMA CLASS 1/2" PG 64-22 (WSDOT STD SPEC 9-02.1(4)) 0 in 6 000 o`b °00 o`b °00 0� 000 0 00 0.0 00 0.0 00 0, 0 00 a Oro 00 Oro 00 Oro 00 Oro 0O COO 00 00 00 0.069 069 I 1-III-III=1 -III-III-III-III-I -I 11-I I M CRUSHED SURFACING BASE COURSE (WSDOT STD SPEC 9-03.9(3)) SUITABLE NATIVE MATERIAL FILL; TOP 12" COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 95% RELATIVE COMPACTION USING AASHTO T-180 (ASTM D1557). UNSUITABLE NATIVE MATERIAL SHALL BE REPLACED TYPICAL PAVEMENT SECTION SCALE: 1" = V-0" APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION CITY OF EDMONDS DATE: IIty,0 CITY ENGINEERING DIVISION O C ENGINEERING 250 4TH AVE. S., SUITE 200 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 PHONE (425) 778-8500 FAX (425) 778-5536 GUI LL 4, of WA$� ct' E� • 25385 �Q 1 STEg i 0 08/ 31 / 22 J Q J Q Q m m J J J J m Q Q Q Q N J J w Q Q w H H H H z w w H m m m o>> m m Ln Ln Ln V) oC oC to cn w c0 V) 7 7 W w w w w w w w w w O O r-I r-I N N N N CV cV cV cV cV cV cV cV cV (V I- rl cV 00 Ol rl 00 lz:3- Ln r_-I Q cV cV cV r-I O cV cV cV m Ol cV Ln r-I lz:3- q:1- l0 00 00 o rH o rH o 0 0 0 0 Q DESIGN: TAF DRAWN: ATD CHECK: JPU JOB NO: 20261.20 DATE: 09/21 /2020 co ~ O cj O z rn 00 w � � Q Q CL N O 0 J z J O O CL M o Q N LEI SHEET: Z W W O 0:L IL V) F- W Q W F_ Ofw I- p � 0 Z Z Q Z W w V / 0- 05.1 Packet Pg. 284 9.1.k c a� E d w E L 0 L d 3 a� U) T 0 c 0 r 0 Q. 0 a Packet Pg. 285 9.1.1 RESOLUTION NO. 1505 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DECLARING AS SURPLUS SEWER AND STORM UTILITY EASEMENTS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 236TH STREET SW, APPROXIMATELY 176 FEET EAST OF HIGHWAY 99 IN EDMONDS, WASHSINGTON. WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds is reviewing a development application for property located at the southeast corner of Highway 99 and 2361h Street SW, consisting of tax parcel numbers 00451900100201, -202, -203, and -204 (collectively the "Subject Property"); and WHEREAS, in 1962, the city acquired storm utility and sewer utility easements, respectively recorded under auditor's file numbers 1588234 and 1588238 (collectively the "Utility Easements"); and WHEREAS, the Utility Easements encumber the Subject Property; and WHEREAS, the city has determined that it no longer needs the Utility Easements to provide continued public utility service to the Subject Property or any other property in the vicinity; and WHEREAS, the city has determined that it has no foreseeable future need for the Utility Easements; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.94.040 provides a process for disposing of surplus utility property; now therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Utility Easements described above are hereby determined to be surplus to the city's needs and are not required for providing continued public utility service. Section 2. Any disposition of the Utility Easements should proceed in accordance with RCW 35.94.040. RESOLVED this 20' day of September, 2022. CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR, MIKE NELSON 1 Packet Pg. 286 9.1.1 ATTEST: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. September 16, 2022 September 20, 2022 1505 Packet Pg. 287 9.1.m MRSC - Easements X -j (j L https-./imrsc.org/Home/Explore-Topics/Legal/Planning/Easements.aspx#releasing © City of Edmonds Releasing an Easement If the local government no longer needs an easement, the process for releasing (extinguishing/vacating) the easement will depend on whether it was dedicated on the face of the plat (i.e., the map showing the decision of land into lots and the streets, alleys, dedications, easements, etc.) or if it was granted through a stand-alone document. Our Subdivisions topic page offers more information on plats. A local government is required to follow the process for plat alteration pursuant to RCW 64.04.175 to release an easement dedicated on the face of a plat. See M.K.K.I., Inc. v. Krueger (2006), which held that an easement depicted on a short plat could only be extinguished by formally amending the plat. To release an easement granted independent of a plat, the legislative body will simply take action to extinguish the easement. One option is for the local government to follow its surplus property procedures, although this is not required. Note, however, RCW 35.94.040 provides that a city can only release a utility easement after it holds a public hearing and adopts a resolution declaring the easement surplus to the city's needs and no longer required for public utility purposes. For more information on surplus requirements, see our pages Surplus City or Town Property and Surplus County Property. Regardless of whether the easement was released by altering the plat, by simple action of the legislative body, or after a public hearing and adoption of a resolution, the local government should record a release of easement with the county to provide a clear chain of title. Releasing right-of-way can only be accomplished through the street or road vacation process. Packet Pg. 288 10.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 Development Code Rewrite Work Plan Staff Lead: Mike Clugston Department: Planning Division Preparer: Michael Clugston Background/History This is a new item. Staff Recommendation Staff will present the proposed work plan for the development code modernization work. Staff is proposing a three phase approach, which would result in a modern, legible and adaptive development code. See attached presentation. Attachments: Exhibit 1- Development code modernization slides Packet Pg. 289 10.1.a Development Code Modernization Work Plan Mike Clugston AICP, Senior Planner Edmonds City Council September 20, 2022 m O U r c d E CL O 0 .y O M N L O E O E CL O 0 x W a O E 0 M a Packet Pg. 290 10.1.a Presentation Objective 1. Provide briefing on proposed work plan 2. Identify staff resources 3. Define "code rewrite" 4. Describe phased approach to process 5. Present timeline Packet Pg. 291 10.1.a Purpose of Development Codes • Comply with the GMA • Implement the Comprehensive Plan • Evolve to meet changing municipal, state & federal requirements Packet Pg. 292 tory • 1959: First zoning ordinance • 1980: Code reorganized to current ECDC format • Hundreds of zoning and development code amendments since • Some previous consultant efforts have been done in "fits and starts" due to lack of dedicated staff ability to support extensive legislative changes Packet Pg. 293 10.1.a staff Resources • Dedicated FTE to manage code (issue identification, process improvements, etc), lead legislation and work with consultants, as needed • In house subject matter experts • Budget for on -call services O U r C d E CL O W 0 .N C M N C L O E d O O E Om O 0 r L X W C 0) E t v R 10.1.a �efinin� "�ode Rewrite" • A continuous process of improvement to the Edmonds development codes • Includes changes to both structure and content Code Work Growth Management Act Council/Administration Issue Identification Shoreline State Management Stormwater Act Mandates State Building Code Packet Pg. 295 10.1.a Structural Changes • Reorganize Titles 15 - 24 to be more accessible and usable • Improve search and interactive functions (Code Publishing) • Complete during 2022 - 2023, prior to adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in 2024 O U r c d E CL O 0 .N 0 N O O E Om O 0 r L X W C t v R 10.1.a Con' -` Change New amendment process types: minor and major • Council (and staff) want a responsive process that responds to policy decisions • Implemented through changes to ECDC 20.80 Overall changes: • Use plain language • Replace words with graphics and illustrations • Eliminate unnecessary code Major v Packet Pg. 297 10.1.a rpquent Minor Amendments • Create streamlined process for minor updates • Promote clarity, eliminate redundancy, streamline processes, better align with best practices • Correct inconsistencies and scrivener's errors • Would be presented directly to Council on asemi-annual basis (December/June) or more frequently as needed !99-1agoo 0 U r c d E CL O 0 TY O E 0. 0 Major Amendment;,, • These take time • Need to be thorough with detailed data/analysis • Inclusive public engagement • Required process through GMA and our own code 10.1.a 0 U r C d E CL 0 N C 0 N C i O E d O v C O E Q O d O a .r C d E t v R al Packet Pg. 299 10.1.a Examples Minor Majo Remove references to "CG2" code • Zoning district no longer exists • No policy impact; not controversial EV charging infrastructure requirements (ECDC 17.115) • Large policy impact, important to the development community Development Code Modernization Snapshot Comprehensive Plan Update Minor Code Amendment Minor Code Minor Code Om nibus #2, nibus Minor Code Provision Omnibus #1, 1 3 Omnibus #3, Adopted, 6/30/23(PLN) (pLN} 6/30/24(PLN) CompPlan Start 12/31/22 Comp Plan Adopted 6/1/22 V ♦ V 12/31/24 7/23/21 12119122 1 1 8/2 22 3 5/23 10/1/23 esign Standards Timeline BD Designated D Street Frontl(PLN) Wireless (ENG/PLN) Bike Parking (PLN) Minor Code Amend Process (PLN) Structural Reorganization (PLN) Trees(minor/major) (PLN) 'MMM= ROW Permits/Utility Wiring Building Code Update Street/Sidewalk Stds (ENG/PLN) Critical Aquifer Recharge (PLN) 4/18/24 11/4/24 5/23/25 Q Packet Pg. 301 10.1.a Image Credits • Washington by Tyler Gobberdiel from thenounproject.com • Buffer by Creative Stall from thenounproject.com 10.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 Salmon -Safe Certification Report Staff Lead: Angie Feser Department: Parks, Recreation & Human Services Prepared By: Angie Feser Narrative Salmon -Safe is a certification program oriented towards reducing impacts on water quality and fish habitat from urban land and water management practices. The certification process for watershed and Salmon habitat is completed through assessment of city policies, planning, operation and development related to Puget Sound water quality. The certification program consists of an initial assessment and then ongoing monitoring of recommended changes and related impacts. Salmon -Safe Draft Report The Salmon -Safe Draft Report (Attachment #1) recommends that the City of Edmonds be certified subject to a number of conditions. There are three pre -conditions, required to be completed before the certification is awarded and 12 additional conditions also requiring completion within five years to retain the certification. The conditions address topics ranging from habitat protection and restoration to stormwater management and generate changes in city operations including work within departments managing water quality, stormwater, environmental engineering and parks and landscape maintenance. Although the certification does not make the City eligible for additional grant funding, it can be may be in grant applications to demonstrate the City's commitment to water quality related to salmon. Parks & Planning Board Review and Recommendation The Parks & Planning Board was presented the draft Salmon -Safe certification report on May 25, 2022 and the Board requested additional information. On July 27, 2022 staff returned with more details including a prioritization of the certification conditions as ranked by the Salmon -Safe organization and one-time cost estimates as well as on -going staffing commitment allocations related to implementation. In addition, staff also provided recommendations for revisions to five of the conditions for more manageable implementation of the certification requirements. (See Attachment #2 - Planning Board Memo titled "Salmon -Safe Certification Additional Information, dated July 21, 2022) The Parks & Planning Board's recommendation to the City Council is "that the planning board advance this for council consideration, underscoring the importance of looking at the financial tradeoffs of implementing this versus the impacts on the rest of the budget and ensuring that there are good milestones or benchmarks for making sure that there is value in the work that is being done." Motion passed unanimously. The approved minutes from both Parks & Planning Board meetings are included as Attachments #3 and #4. Certification Conditions and Ranking The certification has three pre -conditions with completion required prior to City Council adoption of the certification. The third one would require a few months to complete. Packet Pg. 303 10.2 Pre -Condition 1: Ensure environmental regulatory compliance Pre -Condition 2: Commitment to adhere to Salmon -Safe standards for expansion or redevelopment Pre -Condition 3: Phase out use of high hazard pesticides (updated and approved Integrated Pest Management Plan) Certification Condition Prioritization and Ranking At the request of the Parks & Planning Board, Salmon -Safe's Science Team developed a scoring system for the City's Salmon -Safe certification conditions. The criteria are somewhat analogous to what was done by the consulting firm Herrera recently for the Edmonds Receiving Water Conditions Assessment. There are four criteria including benefit to aquatic habitat/species (qualitative, based on best professional judgment); direct vs indirect; action vs plan; and area. The following is a summary of ranking of Conditions provided by Salmon -Safe using the criteria. Rank Condition 1 Condition 11: Develop prioritization strategy for removing fish passage barriers 1 Condition 12: Develop comprehensive habitat restoration plans 3 Condition 4: Develop water conservation plan and track irrigation water usage 3 Condition 7: Create an Integrated Pest Management, Nutrient, and Chemical Management Plan 5 Condition 2: Improve inventory of stormwater infrastructure 5 Condition 10: Update Snow and Ice Control SOP document 7 Condition 1: Verify that stormwater discharged from the Parks maintenance yard does not flow on the surface into Edmonds Marsh 7 Condition 9: Upgrade containment for waste oil tank at Public Works yard 9 Condition 5: Adopt Salmon -Safe construction standards 10 Condition 3: Improve outdoor storage areas at Public Works yard 10 Condition 8: Upgrade storage areas at Parks maintenance yard 12 Condition 6: Document pesticide applicator licensing status for all Parks employees The details of these conditions are found in the draft report (Attachment #1) The top five ranking conditions have the most impact to city operations in re -allocation of staff time, new consultant services and management. Staff has provided revision recommendations to a number of the conditions, mostly the top ranked ones and those can be found in the Parks & Planning Board attached memo. Staff Recommendation City Council consider support and continued work of the Salmon -Safe Certification prior to the completion of the Pre -Conditions required before certification acceptance. History In 2020, the Mayor directed staff to pursue a Salmon -Safe Certification after a recommendation from the Mayor's Conservation Advisory Committee. The Council approved the $38,800 expenditure in the 2021 budget. The project started in the fall of 2021 and continued through to the submittal of the draft report to the City earlier this year. The draft report was presented to the Planning Board for review and consideration of recommendation to the City Council for adoption. It was also reviewed by city staff and Packet Pg. 304 10.2 City Attorney. Salmon -Safe Program Salmon -Safe is a leading regional U.S. certification program oriented towards reducing impacts on water quality and fish habitat from urban land and water management practices. Since being founded by Pacific Rivers in 1997, Salmon -Safe has worked collaboratively with more than 900 urban and agricultural landowners and certified approximately 100,000 acres in key salmon watersheds. In recent years, Salmon -Safe has expanded beyond single sites, campuses, and developments to certify jurisdictions on a system -wide basis across municipal sites, developments, and operations, including the City of Portland, Oregon, in 2016 and the City of Shoreline, Washington, in 2019. The City of Edmonds is the second Washington municipality to seek Salmon -Safe citywide certification. Assessment Process The Salmon -Safe assessment process consisted of a series of interviews with 15 key personnel, extensive document and policy review, and field visits to 16 different City parks and facilities. The assessment process culminated in a certification report (Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification of the City of Edmonds, Washington). These tasks were conducted by Salmon -Safe staff and an interdisciplinary team of scientists (the Science Team) with expertise in fisheries, salmon habitat requirements, aquatic ecosystems, innovative stormwater management, land management, and integrated pest management (IPM). Certification Draft Report At the completion of the field visits, the Science Team, supported by Salmon -Safe staff, met to discuss observations made during the site visits and identified additional questions for City staff. The Science Team also identified several additional documents that were needed for them to complete the site assessment. The Science Team and Salmon -Safe staff met again to review the additional information provided and discuss conditions for certification. Following this, the Science Team and Salmon -Safe staff finalized conditions for certification and reached a final unanimous decision on certification, recommending that the City of Edmonds be certified as Salmon -Safe subject to 3 pre -conditions and 12 conditions listed in the report, addressing topics ranging from habitat protection and restoration to stormwater management. Attachments: Salmon Safe Certification -City of Edmonds DRAFT V2 Salmon -Safe Memo Parks & Planning Board Minutes 2022-05-25 Parks & Planning Board Minutes 2022-07-27 Packet Pg. 305 10.2.a SALMON -SAFE INC. SALMON Salmon -Safe Inc. 1001 SE Water Ave, Suite 450 Portland, Oregon 97214 (503)232-3750 info@salmonsafe.org SAFEwww.salmonsafe.org May 9, 2022 M7 0 Q. as c 0 `17C. 199, U Packet Pg. 306 10.2.a CONTENTS Recommendation Summary .................................................... 1 Background..................................................................... 1 Overview of City of Edmonds Facilities and Policies ............................... 1 The Assessment Process....................................................... 3 0 Science Team................................................................... 3 a � Interviews...................................................................... 5 c 0 Table 1. Staff Interviewed 5 .................................................... Document Reviews.............................................................. 5 Table 2. Documents Reviewed ............................................... 5 V FieldReviews................................................................... 6 Table 3. Sites Visited during Field Review ..................................... 7 JT y c 0 General Observations......................................................... 9 E M W Certification Conditions....................................................... 14 N Certification Recommendation.................................................. 14 Certification Preconditions 1-3.............................................. 14 u_ Q Certification Conditions 1-12................................................ 15 C Continuing Improvement Recommendations ..................................... 23 Conclusions.................................................................. 24 APPENDIX A Model Stormwater Management Guidelines for Ultra -Urban Redevelopment ......... 26 Introduction................................................................ 26 Goal & Objectives........................................................... 27 PlanElements............................................................... 28 Considerations for Salmon -Safe Certification .................................. 30 APPENDIX B Pesticide Storage Management Checklist ........................................... 32 Packet Pg. 307 10.2.a 0 RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY The Salmon -Safe Science Team is pleased to recommend that the City of Edmonds, Washington, be certified Salmon -Safe, subject to the conditions detailed in this report. Background In 2000, Salmon -Safe expanded beyond agricultural land certification to apply the Salmon -Safe assessment and certification process to land and water manage- ment within the urban realm. This initiative significantly advanced restoration efforts in urbanized watersheds by developing urban aquatic protection guidelines and a citizen education campaign throughout the Pacific Northwest. Working closely with independent scientists and technical experts, Salmon -Safe developed a comprehensive certification framework oriented towards reducing impacts on water quality and fish habitat from urban land and water management practices? Since 2005, more than 60 urban sites have received Salmon -Safe certifica- tion in Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia. While Salmon -Safe standards are designed as a stand-alone program, they can also complement other leading certifi- cation standards (e.g., LEED, Sustainable Sites, Envision, and Earth Advantage). As an overlay certification, Salmon -Safe certifies project activities that specifically address ecological function and the quality of habitat for fish, wildlife, and people. In recent years, Salmon -Safe has expanded beyond single sites or developments to certify jurisdictions on a system -wide basis across municipal sites, developments, and operations, including the City of Portland, Oregon, in 2016 and the City of Shore- line, Washington, in 2019. The City of Edmonds is the second Washington municipality to seek Salmon -Safe citywide certification. 0 OVERVIEW OF CITY OF EDMONDS FACILITIES AND POLICIES The City of Edmonds covers 10.01 square miles at the southwestern corner of Snohomish County and includes more than 42,000 residents. Edmonds is generally bounded by the cities of Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace to the east, the City of Shoreline to the south, the Town of Woodway and Puget Sound to the west, and unincorporated Snohomish County to the north. Edmonds is approximately 94% built -out with the vast majority of the land use as single-family or multi -family residential homes. The City of Edmonds operates as a mayor —council government, with an elected mayor and a seven -member City Council. Departments that oversee activities and facilities that pertain to Salmon -Safe include Parks, Cultural Arts & Human Services; Development Services; and Public Works and Utilities. ' Salmon -Safe standards for Urban Development can be found at https://solmonsafe.org/certification/urban-development. The current version of these standards is 3.0, but this assessment was conducted under version 2.0 because the new standards did not come into effect until after the certification assessment began. Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification Page 1 of the City of Edmonds, Washington May 9, 7N7 Packet Pg. 308 10.2.a Edmonds has five miles of shoreline along Puget Sound, which is crossed by several streams, including Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek, which flow into Edmonds Marsh, Shell Creek, Northstream Creek, Fruitdale Creek, Perrinville Creek, Terrace Creek, Outfall Creek, Stilthouse Creek, and Lund's Gulch Creek. The City consists of 26 local sub -basins, with 24 of those basins eventually draining into Puget Sound. The remaining two basins are part of the greater Lake Ballinger watershed which discharges into Lake Washington. Edmonds has 47 parks with 230 acres of open and preserved space. Downtown Edmonds has several major parks, including the public beach at Brackett's Landing on both sides of the ferry terminal, City Park overlooking Edmonds Marsh, Marina Beach Park, and the future Civic Field, which is currently under construction just north of downtown. A view of Edmonds Marsh with Washington state map and location of the City of Edmonds The City also has several urban forests and natural reserves, which preserve some of the original vegetation of the area and provide hiking and walking trails. Edmonds Marsh Park, on 22 acres south of downtown, is one of the few remaining saltwater marshes in the state and is home to 225 species of bird and several walking trails. The largest wooded space in the City is the county -owned and -maintained Southwest Snohomish County Park, with 120 acres of land along Olympic View Drive at the north end of the City. Yost Park is another large natural area that contains one of the few large areas of native forest that remain in Edmonds. The park is situated along Shell Creek and the deep ravine its waters carved over time. Edmonds' Stormwater System Utility is responsible for managing stormwater drainage and protecting surface water quality through adherence with their Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit administered by the Washington State Department of Ecology. Drinking water is purchased from the Alderwood Water Wastewater District who in turn sources their water from the Spada Reservoir managed by the City of Everett. Wastewater services are provided by the Edmonds Wastewater Treatment Plant located in downtown Edmonds. This is a regional facility that also provides services to Mountlake Terrace, Ronald Sewer District, and the Olympic View Water and Sewer District. The City of Edmonds' 2015 Strategic Action Plan includes as one of its primary objectives to "maintain, enhance, and create a sustainable environment." Several specific action items were identified under this objective that are particularly relevant to Salmon -Safe: • 2a.3 — Reroute Shellabarger Creek back to Edmonds Marsh by creating new channels that will allow drainage through the deposited sediments • 2a.4 —Plant street trees, restore native habitat in disturbed areas, remove invasive species to promote use of native and drought resistant plants and restoration of wildlife habitat Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification of the City of Edmonds, Washington Page 2 May 9, 70)7 Packet Pg. 309 10.2.a • 2a.5 —Resolve on -going flooding and water quality issues in Lake Ballinger • 2a.8 — Daylight Willow Creek to help with restoring saltwater access to Edmonds Marsh • 2a.9 —Continue to encourage the development of rain gardens, green roofs and walls, bio-filtration swales, and other green develop- ment features in Edmonds' projects and development codes The City has made progress on these action items, as discussed below in the General Observations and Conclusions section. The City has also adopted a Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) plan that estab- lished a goal of preserving, protecting, and enhancing critical habitat and ecosystems The latest version of the PROS plan was adopted in 2016. The plan has been revised and will be considered for adoption by the City Council in 2022. MTHE ASSESSMENT PROCESS The Salmon -Safe assessment process consisted of interviews with key management personnel (see Table 1), document and policy review (see Table 2), and field reviews of specific parks and facilities (see Table 3). The assessment process culminated in a certification report (this document). These tasks were conducted by Salmon -Safe staff and an interdisciplinary team of scientists (the Science Team) with expertise in fisheries, salmon habitat requirements, aquatic ecosystems, innovative stormwater management, land management, and integrated pest management (IPM), as summa- rized below. Science Team The Science Team for this project was composed of Tad Deshler, Dr. Richard Horner, Jose Carrasquero, and Barbara DeCaro. Tad Deshler: Environmental Scientist, Coho Environmental Mr. Deshler's practice focuses on environmental assessment and impact a, with particular focus on the interaction between built and natural environments. Much of his project work has centered around aquatic sites, or at the interface between aquatic sites and the adjacent upland environments, where understanding the transport mechanisms that connect upland and in -water environments is paramount. Tad earned a BA degree in Aquatic Biology from the University of California at Santa Barbara and an MS degree in Animal Science from the University of California at Davis. Tad also has specialized expertise in sediment assessment and management, risk assessment, and chemical transport and fate studies. Dr. Richard Horner: Stormwater Management Expert, University of Washington Dr. Horner received engineering BS and MS degrees from the University of Pennsylvania and a PhD in civil and environmental engineering from the University of Washington in 1978. Following 13 years of college teaching and professional practice, he joined the University of Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification Page 3 of the City of Edmonds, Washington May 9, 2022 Packet Pg. 310 10.2.a The Sammc Washington research faculty in 1981, where he held appointments in Civil and Environmental Engineering, Landscape Architecture, and the Center for Urban Horticulture. His principal research interests involve analyzing the effects of human activities, especially in urban areas, on freshwater ecosystems and solutions that protect these resources. Dr. Horner founded the Center for Urban Water Resources Management in 1990 to advance applied research and education in these areas. He is now emeritus research associate professor and splits his time between private practice and some continuing university research. Jose Carrasquero: Fisheries and Marine Biologist Wiith a BA and a MS degree from the University of Washington, Jose brings 30 years of experience to his work. He performs feasibility assessments and alternative analyses for instream, riparian, and floodplain salmon habitat projects. He participates in the design of fish passage projects and reviews construction projects to assess whether they comply with local, state, and federal laws. Through these project reviews, he evaluates construction plans and recommends best management practices and mitigation measures. As a technical expert, Jose has participated in the development of guidance and technical documents sup- porting planning and regulation under the Growth Management and Shoreline Management Acts. He has also reviewed and scored projects submitted for funding through the Puget Sound Acquisition and Restoration program, and the Recovery Funding Board. Barbara DeCaro is a retired Senior Environmental Analyst, and an active Horticulturist and Continuing Education Instructor. Her professional work centers on public landscape management focused on education and training of best management practices for landscapes, horticulture, urban forestry, and design, development and implementation of environmental policies and programs, including water conservation, integrated pest management, urban wildlife management, and Green Stormwater Infrastructure. She holds a bachelor's degree in Botany from the University of Washington, Seattle and enjoyed a 32-year career in Seattle Parks and Recreation, Natural Resources. Barbara also spent 6 years as a Horticulture instructor for South Seattle College, Landscape Horticulture Program, and Lake Washington Institute of Technology's Environmental Horticulture program and continues to work with the ecoPRO Certified Sustainable Landscape Professional training program, managed by Washington State Nursery & Landscape Association. Tad Deshler Richard Horner Jose Carrasquero Barbara DeCaro Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification of the City of Edmonds, Washington Page 4 May 9, 2022 Packet Pg. 311 10.2.a Interviews For the first step in the assessment process, Salmon -Safe staff conducted interviews with key management and facility staff (Table 1). The purposes of these interviews were to obtain an understanding of ongoing activities relevant to Salmon -Safe and to identify specific opportunities for improvement, as identified by individual City staff. Table 1. Staff interviewed Pamela Randolph I Wastewater Treatment Plant Manager Tod Moles I Street/Storm Manager); Chuck Hiatt I Street Leadworker Mike Adams I Fleet Manager Zack Richardson Stormwater Engineer); Pat Johnson I Stormwater Technician Kris Kuhnhausen Water/Sewer—Water Leadworker Jeff Kobylk Water/Sewer—Water Quality Technician Angie Feser Parks Director; Jesse Curran I Parks Maintenance Lead Thom Sullivan I Facilities Manager Rob Chave I Planning Manager; Kemen Lien I Environmental Programs Manager Mike Delilla I Senior Utilities Engineer; Henry Schroder I Capital Projects Manager �Mllll Am Document Reviews 11.30.2021 12.1.2021 12.1.2021 12.2.2021 12.2.2021 12.2.2021 12.2.2021 12.2.2021 12.6.2021 The Science Team was provided with multiple documents and websites to review prior to conducting field reviews (Table 2). The intent of this document review task was for the Science Team to become familiar with applicable codes, policies, and plans adopted by the City of Edmonds. The Science Team continued to identify and review additional documents throughout the assessment process that are not listed on Table 1. These documents were typically related to specific projects and locations. Table 2. Documents reviewed Long-range planning web page Comprehensive Plan (2020) Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) Plan (2016) Tablet continues nextpage > Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification Page 5 of the City of Edmonds, Washington May 9, 10) ) Packet Pg. 312 10.2.a Long-range plans, continued Streetscape and Street Tree Plan (2015) Shoreline Master Program (2021) Urban Forest Management Plan (2019) Highway 99 Sub -area Plan (2017) W Operations Stormwater: NPDES Program Plan and 2020 Report Maps, GIS Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in Parks Snow and Ice Standard Operating Procedures (Snow & ICE SOP) Project plans for current capital projects Lake Ballinger I Willow Creek I Perrinville Creek Codes Stormwater code and reference documents Critical Areas regulations Sustainability Mayor's Climate Protection Committee web page Climate Action Plan web page Sustainability web pages Comprehensive Plan, Sustainability Element (2020) Strategic Action Plan (2015) Low -Impact Development web pages Field Reviews The Science Team conducted field reviews of selected sites throughout the City. The sites were intended to represent a variety of land use types, including both natural areas and infrastructure. Throughout the site visits, the Science Team asked many questions of the City staff accompanying them about specific locations and also about City-wide practices. Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification Page 6 of the City of Edmonds, Washington May 9, 10) ) Packet Pg. 313 10.2.a Table 3. Sites visited during field review Site Type Park (under Civic Center Playfield construction) 12.21.2021 Jenn Leach, Henry Schroder Seaview Park Park 12.21.2021 Jenn Leach Marina Beach Park Park 12.21.2021 Jenn Leach, Jesse Curran Brackett's Landing Park Park 12.21.2021 Jenn Leach, Jesse Curran Edmonds Waterfront Center Park/ Building 12.21.2021 Jenn Leach, Jesse Curran Hickman Park Park 12.21.2021 Jenn Leach City Hall Building 12.21.2021 Jenn Leach Green 81st & 83rd Ave rain gardens stormwater 12.21.2021 Jenn Leach, Pat Johnson infrastructure Yost Park/Upper Shell Creek Park/Natural 1.28.2022 Jenn Leach, Joe Scordino*, Area/Creek Greg Ferguson* Willow Creek Hatchery Hatchery/ 1.28.2022 Jenn Leach, Joe Scordino*, Natural Area Greg Ferguson* Edmonds Marsh Natural Area 1.28.2022 Jenn Leach, Joe Scordino*, ' Greg Ferguson* Perrinville Creek Creek 1.28.2022 Jenn Leach, Pat Johnson Lower Shell Creek Creek/Natural 1.28.2022 Jenn Leach, Pat Johnson Area Wastewater Treatment Plant Infrastructure 3.3.2022 Pamela Randolph Parks & Facilities Operations Maintenance Yard yard 3.4.2022 Jenn Leach, Jesse Curran & City Park Public Works Operations Operations 3.4.2022 Jenn Leach, Tod Moles, and Maintenance Center yard Mike Johnson, Pat Johnson * citizen volunteer At the completion of the field visits, the Science Team, supported by Salmon -Safe staff, met to discuss observations made during the site visits and identified additional questions for City staff. The Science Team also identified several additional documents that were needed for them to complete the site assessment. The Science Team and Salmon -Safe staff met again on April 19, 2022, to review the additional information provided and discuss conditions for certification. On May 9, 2022, the Science Team and Salmon -Safe staff finalized conditions for certification and reached a final unani- mous decision on certification. 0 a as c 0 m U m R c 0 M U) Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification Page 7 of the City of Edmonds, Washington May 9, 2022 Packet Pg. 314 10.2.a Salmon -Safe staff meets virtually with City of Edmonds staff to kick off the certifi- cation process, dis- cussing a work plan and the goals of each phase of the assessment. Above: Members of the Salmon -Safe Science Team convene to share their views and observations across various disciplines and areas of expertise. Left: Fish biologist and Salmon -Safe Science Team member, Jose Carras- ^�^� quero, reviews the City's response to habitat restoration -related questions. .sw.wwrr.ru..w....�r..rr....w.. 'r`r. r"r.rwrir..r..w.r..�.rr..r.rr-.....�..... �.......r. Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification of the City of Edmonds, Washington Page 8 Packet Pg. 315 10.2.a 0 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS The Science Team took note of a strong organizational motivation and enthusiasm for environmentally sustainable policies and practices, as evidenced by the sustain - ability elements in the 2015 Strategic Action Plan, 2020 Comprehensive Plan, and the draft 2022 PROS Plan. These plans and policies are largely consistent with Salmon -Safe standards, although the inclusion of additional environmental commitments may be warranted, as discussed below in the Certification Conditions section. An ongoing volunteer -led water quality monitoring program (Edmonds Stream Team) has been in place since 2015. Under this program, water quality and habitat conditions data are collected monthly at Shell, Willow, Shellabarger, Hindley, Perrinville, and Lund's Gulch Creeks, and from the Edmonds and Shellabarger Marshes. High school student volunteers in Students Saving Salmon have also conducted salmon and habitat enhance- ment activities. Water quality has generally been good in the creeks, but temperature and dissolved oxygen frequently do not meet state standards in Edmonds Marsh. In addition, toxic hydrocarbons have been detected at concentrations above state standards in water from Edmonds Marsh. Restoration of Edmonds Marsh, including daylighting of Willow Creek, is a high priority for the City. Multiple studies have been conducted in recent years to collect the neces- sary baseline data and study restoration alternatives. The Parks Master Plan referred to in the draft PROS plan would be the appropriate planning document to provide details on the funding mechanisms and schedule for implementing any of the alternatives identified in the studies. The Science Team supports the preparation of this document, and any project -specific master plans. Data collected by the Edmonds Stream Team, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW),Z and others have contributed to a solid understanding of salmonid use and fish passage barriers in City streams. This information has been recently organized for the City as part of watershed planning required by the Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit. However, this watershed planning does not appear to have considered the feasibility and benefits of removing fish passage barriers, many of which have been mapped by WDFW.3 Additional planning and coordination with the state on removal of fish passage barriers is warranted, as discussed below in the Certification Conditions section. The City has a comprehensive and well -organized stormwater management program. The program responds thoroughly to the requirements of its Ecology -issued municipal stormwater permit and goes beyond those requirements in a number of ways. The City has produced a detailed addendum to the Ecology Stormwater Management Manual z WDFW maintains an online mapping tool called SalmonScape https.//apps.wdfw.wo.gov/solmonscope/mop.html that documents fish presence and fish passage barriers. 'Washington State Fish Passage https.Ilgeodatoservices. wd fw. wo.govlhplfishpossagelindex.html Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification Page 9 of the City of Edmonds, Washington May 9, 7077 Packet Pg. 316 10.2.a Water outlet from Willow Creek Hatchery Fence covered in nightshade at Edmonds Marsh, removed Winter 2022 Remnants of an old water supply system at Shell Creek for Western Washington to cover local conditions. The City also has a relatively ambitious capital projects program related to stormwater. The City offers extensive and clear guidance to practitioners implementing the stormwater management program, such as: • The best management practices (BMP) infeasibility criteria document leaves no ambiguity in an area often characterized by vagueness. It sets out at length, BMP-by-BMP, the conditions that must exist for a practice to be rejected as infeasible. • Another document provides extensive guidance for determining infiltra- tion rates. • There are exceptionally complete checklists to guide stormwater manage- ment planning and the selection and specification of common green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) BMPs. • Draft covenant forms increase the likelihood that GSI BMPs will be used properly. • Construction -phase stormwater specifications are consistent with impor- tant elements of the Salmon -Safe guidelines, emphasizing strategic site management (e.g., seasonal work limitations, limiting ground disturbance). The City has undertaken, or is in the process of developing, a number of large GSI projects. A regional stormwater facility is planned for Mathay-Ballinger Park. The project will provide water quality treatment and some flow control for a major portion of the City's Lake Ballinger basin, which includes the highly urbanized Highway 99 corridor. The project would signifi- cantly benefit the lake ecology and habitat conditions, and provide mitigation opportunities associated with the future Highway 99 Revitalization project. Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification of the City of Edmonds, Washington Page 10 q , n Packet Pg. 317 10.2.a Rain garden at the corner of 238th St & 104th Ave W Perrinville Creek: Looking upstream at Talbot Road Rain garden at the Edmonds Waterfront Center Neighborhood rain gardens have been constructed within the City rights -of -way in the upper portion of the Perrinville Creek watershed. Coupled with the infiltration facility at Seaview Park, these projects have reduced the severity of scouring flows within Perrinville Creek during heavy rain, thereby reducing streambank erosion that requires significant City maintenance efforts to address. Phase 2 of the Seaview Park infiltration project is scheduled for late summer 2022. In spite of these efforts to reduce uncontrolled flow in Perrinville Creek, significant challenges remain. Planning for a restoration project on the lower portion of the creek is underway. The project will include short-term solutions to maintain flow and prevent further loss of fish life and longer -term solutions to restore fish habitat and populations The City's Snow and Ice Control standard operating procedures (SOP) document is divided into four phases. Phase 1 describes the application of calcium magnesium acetate (CMA), which Salmon -Safe favors. However, the definition of "designated areas" for application of CMA during Phase 1 is not clear. Deicers for Phases 2-4 are not specifically identified. Additional clarification of procedures within each phase is warranted, as discussed below in the Certification Conditions section. The City's irrigation systems are generally efficient and include rain sensors that are monitored weekly to reduce the likelihood of over watering. New construction, such as the rain gardens at the Edmonds Waterfront Center, include irrigation controllers. Tracking the amount of water used for irrigation at City parks and facilities is theoreti- cally possible, but it has not been done. Such tracking is warranted as part of an overall water management plan, as described below in the Certification Conditions section. The City's Parks Department is committed to reducing pesticide use in its parks and has achieved a 60% reduction since 2008 by using Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach to park maintenance. With a few exceptions, only natural and organic Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification Pag( of the City of Edmonds, Washington Packet Pg. 318 10.2.a Parking lot catch basin at Brackett's North, Brackett's Landing Park Parks & Facilities Maintenance Yard & City Park: wash area for herbicide applications drains to sewer system A problematic construction entrance at Civic Park Wastewater Treatment Plant: drains in north end plaza drain into city stormwater system Waste -oil tank with no secondary containment at Public Works Operations & Maintenance Center (see Certification Condition 9, p. 20) Diversion structures at Perrinville Creek pesticide products are used, such as Avenger', which is a citrus -based, nontoxic herbicide. These exceptions include Crossbow', which is used sparingly for removal of some invasive species, and Snapshot', which is used in ornamental planting areas. Crossbow contains two compounds (2,4-D and triclopyr BEE) that are on Salmon Safe's list of high hazard pesticides and Snapshot contains one (trifluralin). Use of these high hazard pesticides by the City should be curtailed, unless a variance request is submitted to Salmon -Safe, as described in more detail below in the Certification Conditions section. 0 0 U m R U) c O E M U) Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification of the City of Edmonds, Washington Pag( Packet Pg. 319 10.2.a Although the City appears to be committed to IPM in practice, the only IPM docu- mentation appears to be a City website4 that describes the City's pest management practices. While the website is appropriate for public education, it is not sufficient documentation for internal use. Additional documentation of the City's IPM program should be prepared, as discussed below in the Certification Conditions section. The Parks & Facilities maintenance yard at City Park is reasonably well -organized and generally follows practices that are consistent with Salmon -Safe standards, although some improvements are warranted. For example, the fertilizer storage area is over- crowded, and equipment is stored on top of fertilizer is some places. Since fertilizers contain oxidizers (e.g., nitrates) that could increase fire danger, they should be stored separately from all equipment and Personal Protective Equipment within fire -proof containment. The Public Works Operations and Maintenance Center includes acceptable facilities related to fueling, but is in need of upgrades related to stormwater manage- ment, as discussed below in the Certification Conditions section. 4https./7www.edmondswo.gov/croslone.aspx?portalld=16495016&pageld-77269338 Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification Page 13 of the City of Edmonds, Washington May 9, 7077 Packet Pg. 320 10.2.a 0 CERTIFICATION CONDITIONS Certification Recommendation: The Science Team recommends that the City of Edmonds be certified as Salmon -Safe subject to three pre -conditions and twelve conditions listed below. The conditions are organized by certification standard categories. All conditions are subject to annual verification by Salmon -Safe. Timelines for accomplishing objectives are measured from the official date of this Salmon -Safe conditional certification, when adopted by City Council. Within the pre -conditions and conditions below there are refer- ences to General Standards, standards, and appendices, which can be found in the Urban Standards at https://salmonsafe.org/certification/urban-development. EPre -Condition 1: Ensure environmental regulatory compliance The City of Edmonds shall provide a signed statement to Salmon -Safe stating that it is not in violation of national, state or local environmental laws, or associated administrative rules or requirements as determined by a regulatory agency in an enforcement action, per General Standard 1. Compliance is apre-condition of certification, then subject to annual verification by Salmon -Safe. Pre -Condition 2: Commitment to adhere to Salmon -Safe standards for expansion or redevelopment While acknowledging the City's Sustainable Building Policy (Resolution No. 1168) that requires all renovations and new construction > 5,000 square feet to pursue a minimum of LEED Silver rating, the City of Edmonds shall provide a signed letter to Salmon -Safe confirming that it has a mechanism in place to ensure that Salmon -Safe standards, including model permanent (see Appendix A) and construction -phase (see Appendix F of the Urban Standards v2.0) stormwater guidelines, are adhered to for construction, expansion or redevelopment of city -owned properties. f1'�li1i� Compliance is a pre -condition of certification, then subject to annual verification by Salmon -Safe. Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification Page 14 of the City of Edmonds, Washington May 9, 7O)7 Packet Pg. 321 10.2.a 17 Pre -Condition 3: Phaseout use of high hazard pesticides The City of Edmonds shall not allow use of pesticides with ingredients listed on Salmon -Safe's "high hazard" pesticide list unless such use is justi- fied in a written variance request approved by Salmon -Safe or as part of an IPM plan approved by Salmon Safe. Justification for use of a "high hazard" pesticide includes demonstrating a clear need for use of the pesticide, that no safer alternatives exist, and that the method of application (such as timing, location, and amount used) represent a negligible risk to water quality and fish habitat. Compliance is a pre -condition of certification, then subject to annual ' verification by Salmon -Safe. Stormwater Management As described above, water quality in the ecologically important Edmonds Marsh is often poor. Accordingly, stormwater inputs from potentially pollution - generating surfaces should be avoided or minimized to the maximum feasible extent. Stormwater from the Parks & Facilities operation yard drains toward the marsh through a series of ditches and swales adjacent to Highway 104. In accordance with Standards U.1.3 and U.1.4, the City shall verify that stormwater discharged from this yard does not flow on the surface into Edmonds Marsh. Verification shall be accomplished by observing and photographing the channel in WSDOT property alongside Highway 104 during a range of rainfall conditions, including relatively large total quantities (at least three storms > 0.5 inch, with at least one > 1 inch), high intensities (qualitatively judged by observation and comparison to routine conditions), and extended durations (at least three storms lasting > 12 hours with total gaps < 1 hour). Meteorological conditions and visual observations should be documented, along with representative photographs or videos, in a report. A report documenting the observations described above shall be completed and submitted to Salmon -Safe for review within two years 6L of certification. Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification of the City of Edmonds, Washington Page 15 May 9, 2022 Packet Pg. 322 10.2.a The City has done a good job creating a GIS inventory of stormwater infrastructure, primarily related to hard structures, such as catch basins, manholes, and pipes. However, it does not appear that GIS information is being collected on GSI elements such as rain gardens, swales, and perme- able pavement. In addition, the GIS data do not include spatial data that would allow calculations of the drainage areas being managed by various stormwater management techniques. The collection and analysis of such data is important for tracking improvements in stormwater management and prioritizing stormwater management projects. Per one of the performance requirements of Standard U.1.1, the City shall document GSI elements within the stormwater layer of their GIS. The City shall also incorporate a drainage area assessment into the existing GIS layer, thereby making it possible to determine what fraction of a given drainage area is being managed by each stormwater management technique in that area. Coupled with basin -wide objectives, this assessment would enable a demonstration of the degree to which capital projects are reducing water- shed impacts over time. � T TIMELINE The City s a update the existing GIS layer and submit it to Salmon - Safe for review within two years of certification. The City has installed several canopies over outdoor storage areas at the Public Works yard to prevent stormwater from contacting bulk materials. The City shall extend this commendable practice by installing canopies over all outdoor storage areas at the yard not already so equipped, including areas for maintenance materials and metal picked up and held for recycling. The canopies should be large enough to cover the maximum quantities expected to be stored, including the cover for winter road sand. It is not necessary to pipe the areas under these storage canopies to the sanitary sewer. Instead, berms ("speed bumps") should be constructed that prevent water from running into or out of them. T e City s all install canopies within two years of certification. i a in Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification of the City of Edmonds, Washington Page 16 May 9, 2022 Packet Pg. 323 10.2.a Water Use Management The City has put practices in place to limit the amount of water used for irrigation, as described above under General Observations. However, to ensure that Salmon -Safe practices are maintained over time, the City shall prepare a water conservation plan in accordance with Standard U.2.9 and Appendix G of the Urban Standards, which is focused on reducing the use of potable water for irrigation. The plan shall include a description of the existing site water infrastructure inventory (Standard U.2.1), an evaluation of the feasibility of various water use reduction strategies (Standard U.2.3), and documentation of water conservation practices used during site main- tenance (Standard U.2.6). The plan should also describe water conservation strategies that will be implemented under drought conditions. Developing strategies for reducing irrigation water usage will require data on the amount of water currently being used for irrigation. Accordingly, the City shall use available resources such as water billing records to establish a baseline against which future improvements can be measured. Given the variability in water usage in response to climate and status of landscaping at each park, it may be necessary to retrieve data for several previous years to establish such a baseline. The water conservation plan should include strategies and procedures for tracking irrigation water usage in the future. A water conservation plan, including baseline data for irrigation water usage, shall be submitted to Salmon -Safe for review and implemented within one year of certification, then subject to annual verification by Salmon -Safe. Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification Page 17 of the City of Edmonds, Washington May 9, 2022 Packet Pg. 324 10.2.a Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control The City's Stormwater Management Program (SWMP) plan includes specific elements that are generally protective of water quality, but improvements are warranted. Specifically, it should be updated to specifically state a goal of avoiding the discharge of sediments and other pollutants from construc- tion sites, and provide a hierarchy of practices as a means to pursue the goal (see Appendix F of the Urban Standards). The SWMP plan shall be updated as described above and submitted to Salmon -Safe for review before the annual update is submitted to Ecology in 2023. Pesticide Reduction and Water Quality Protection It is the Science Team's understanding that Parks personnel are required to be licensed pesticide applicators within one year of employment. Accordingly, the City shall provide a list of the license status for all Parks employees, including license number and any specific endorsements for any of the state -defined categories of pest control they undertake. The license status of all Parks employees shall be provided to Salmon -Safe for review within three months of certification. Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification Page 18 of the City of Edmonds, Washington May 9, 2022 Packet Pg. 325 10.2.a The pest management philosophy that is followed by the Parks Depart- ment, as described on the City's website, appears to be largely consistent with Salmon -Safe standards. However, this "outward -facing" documenta- tion is insufficiently detailed to be utilized by Parks staff in their day-to- day operations. Accordingly, the City shall develop an IPM, nutrient, and chemical management plan according to Salmon -Safe standards (see Appendix D of the Urban Certification Standards) so that consistency can be confirmed. In addition to herbicides and other pesticides, the chemicals to be addressed in the plan are those that are commonly used to maintain urban infrastructure, such as solvents, deicers, and sealants. The plan shall include records of all applications of herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizer. It shall also include a schedule for periodic soil testing to determine the need for nutrient amendments such as fertilizer or compost. This plan will benefit Parks staff responsible for these maintenance activities by providing written documentation of appropriate procedures. Such documentation will be particularly useful for training new staff. To be effective in that regard, the plan shall be site -specific and be regularly updated when changes in procedures, equipment, or materials are made. The IPM, nutrient, and chemical management plan shall be submitted to Salmon -Safe for review within one year of certification. Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification of the City of Edmonds, Washington Page 19 May 9, 2022 Packet Pg. 326 10.2.a The Parks & Facilities maintenance yard at City Park includes storage areas for small fuel containers, pesticides, and fertilizers. While these storage areas are reasonably well organized, they do not meet Washington State regulations for storage of such materials. The City shall upgrade these storage areas to conform with the regulations. Pesticide storage regulations are provided at WAC 16-228-1200 and WAC 16-228-1220 and are summarized in a booklet published by the Washington State Department of Agriculture.' An example pesticide storage management checklist is also provided in Appendix B. Fertilizers shall be stored within fire -proof containment. Regulations for storage of flammable materials are provided at WAC 296-155-270. The City shall adhere specifically to regulations associated with secondary containment. �**:Iffln MkIMM I The storage areas at the Parks & Facilities maintenance yard shall be upgraded within one year of certification. The waste oil tank at the Public Works yard is a single -walled tank placed next to a catch basin. This configuration does not comply with Washington State regulations for above -ground storage tanks (WAC 173-180-320). Therefore, the City shall replace this tank with a double -walled tank or place the existing tank within secondary containment sufficient to hold 110% of the tank contents. The containment system for the waste oil tank shall be upgraded within six months of certification. 5 https://cros.agr.wa.gov/WSDAKentico/Documents/Pubs/079-PesticideLawsRulesHandoutBooklet.pdf Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification Page 20 of the City of Edmonds, Washington May 9, 2022 Packet Pg. 327 10.2.a The City's Snow and Ice Control SOP document is not in alignment with Salmon -Safe standards. The document shall be updated to more completely describe procedures and to take into consideration impacts on aquatic life, including: • specify deicers to be used at each phase • specifically assessing existing or potential salmon habitat in relation to snow and ice control • encouraging caution to carefully use the minimum needed with any deicer in the drainage of any water body or ground- water recharge area • avoiding chloride -based deicers where runoff can flow to a headwaters (third -order or smaller) salmon spawning or rearing stream, unless runoff passes through green storm - water infrastructure The updated Snow and Ice Control SOP document shall be submitted Lto Salmon -Safe for review within one year of certification. Instream Habitat Protection and Restoration The City, in cooperation with WDFW and the Edmonds Stream Team, has completed what appears to be a reasonably complete inventory of fish passage barriers, which is consistent with Standard U.6.1. The City has not, however, created a prioritization strategy for removing those barriers, as required by Standard U.6.9. Accordingly, the City shall create such a plan. The plan shall evaluate each barrier with respect to feasi- bility of removal and potential benefits to be achieved from removal. The plan shall then establish a priority ranking scheme and apply it each fish passage barrier. Ideally, the prioritization scheme should follow a watershed approach similar to that used by the City for its recently completed report of C11 continues next page > Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification of the City of Edmonds, Washington Page 21 May 9, 2022 Packet Pg. 328 10.2.a Receiving Water Conditions and Stormwater Management Influence Assessment.' That report includes useful information about baseline conditions that could be incorporated into the analysis of fish passage barrier removal. King County has recently completed a similar exercise' that might also provide a useful model for comparison. Although the prioritization plan need not include specific design plans for each barrier, conceptual designs shall be developed that are sufficient to inform the prioritization framework. The conceptual designs of the fish passage structures shall incorporate current climate change criteria in determining the type and size of the structures. In 2022, the City shall include a commitment to conduct the fish barrier removal prioritization project in one or more of the follow- ing planning documents: PROS plan, Comprehensive Plan, Strategic Action Plan. Additionally, the City shall complete a report that priori- tizes and ranks the feasibility and benefits of fish passage barrier removal and submit to Salmon -Safe for review within three years of certification. The City shall develop a comprehensive habitat restoration plan for each of the salmon -bearing creeks in Edmonds. Such plans shall also be devel- oped for creeks that may not currently support salmon, but would likely become salmon -bearing creeks once the lowest (in relation to Puget Sound) fish passage barrier in the creek is removed. The comprehensive habitat restoration plans should be multi -objective, and address topics such as aquatic, floodplain, and riparian habitat improvements; flooding; water quality improvements; and education (to foster environmental stewardship among residents and visitors). In 2022, the City shall include a commitment to develop the compre- hensive habitat restoration plans in one or more of the following planning documents: PROS plan, Comprehensive Plan, Strategic 6 https://p7cdn4stGtic.civiclive.com/U`serFiles/Servers/Server 76494932/File/Edmonds_TM_RWAssessment 20220327.pdf https✓/your.kingcounty.gov/dnrp/library/water-and-land/habitat-restoration/fish-passage-restoration/remedies-to- existing-fish-passage-barriers-report. pdf Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification Page 22 of the City of Edmonds, Washington May 9, 2022 Packet Pg. 329 10.2.a Action Plan. Additionally, the City shall complete the comprehensive habitat restoration plans for current salmon -bearing creeks and submit to Salmon -Safe for review within three years of certification. Habitat restoration plans for any additional creeks that may become salmon -bearing because of planned (within 5 years) removal of fish passage barriers shall also be completed and submitted to Salmon - Safe within the 5-year certification cycle. 4 Continuing Improvement Recommendations In addition to the conditions for certification listed above, Salmon -Safe offers the following continuing improvement recommendations, the adoption of which is not mandatory to achieve certification, but is considered Salmon -Safe best practice: 1. Consult with tribes to assess historical use of Edmonds streams by salmonids. The availability of grant money for salmonid habitat restoration is often predicated on the presence (or potential presence) of species that are listed as threatened under Federal or State law (e.g., Chinook salmon) or are otherwise important to tribes in the region (due to fisheries rights and cultural significance). Streams in the City are likely too small in their current configuration to support Chinook salmon, but they could potentially support, or may have supported in the past, other species of interest to tribes, such as cutthroat trout and steelhead. Consulting with the tribes may provide valuable information that could help support future applications for grant funding to support habitat restoration projects. 2. Amend City of Edmonds code for shoreline armoring. Current City of Edmonds code (Chapter 23.90 Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas and Chapter 24.30 Shoreline Environments) provides guidance for shoreline armoring. In 2021, the Washington State Senate passed a bill that provided updated guidance for replacing shoreline armoring. The intent of this bill was to promote shoreline restoration practices that are beneficial to fish.' The City should consider updating its code to reflect the new guidance contained in the Senate bill. 3. Investigate the impacts of 6PPD-quinone. In light of more recent science concerning the negative impacts of car tires, specifically 6PPD-quinone, on salmonids', conduct testing for 6PPD-quinone as part of ongoing water quality monitoring. $ https://legiscan.com/WA/text/SB527`3/2027 9 https✓/pubs.ocs.org/doi/10.2027/0cs.est/ett.1c00970 https.-IlpubS.GCS.org/do/`/10.2021/Gcs.est/ett.2cOOO5O Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification Page 23 of the City of Edmonds, Washington May 9, 2022 Packet Pg. 330 10.2.a 4. Incorporate results from Edmonds Stream Team into habitat restoration planning. The City should use the monitoring results for water quality and habitat conditions that are being collected by the Edmonds Stream Team to inform habitat restoration planning, if it is not already doing so. 5. Develop a priority point system for Salmon -Safe accredited contractors. Salmon -Safe's contractor accreditation program is the nation's first independent accreditation program to recognize construction professionals' excellence in water quality protection practices. Contractors accredited under this program have adopted a goal of zero sediment runoff across their entire operations. The City should consider adopting a priority point system that incentivizes Salmon -Safe contractors to bid on Edmonds projects, including capital projects and any public partnership investments such as future public housing and transportation -oriented developments. 6. Create educational signage. The City of Edmonds contains many green stormwater infrastructure features and water use reduction elements that are consistent with Salmon -Safe standards. These elements should be highlighted and publicized to foster environmental stewardship among residents and visitors. Salmon -Safe can assist the City by providing examples of appropriate signage. 0 CONCLUSIONS Salmon -Safe and the Science Team commend the City of Edmonds for their com- mitment to implement the conditions listed in this report, and to manage the City to continue to improve water quality and urban habitat over the next five years. We extend appreciation and congratulations to the City of Edmonds team for their work in preparing for the certification assessment and assisting the Science Team in its assessment. Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification Page 24 of the City of Edmonds, Washington May 9, 2022 Packet Pg. 331 10.2.a APPENDIX A Model Stormwater Management Guidelines for Ultra -Urban Redevelopment May 2018 0 a as c 0 m U m cv c O Cu Cn N a_ Q 0 N c O E w 4- 0 r U c O v m U m Cn c O E Cu Cn c m E t v a r r Q Packet Pg. 332 SALMON -SAFE INC. MODEL STORMWATER MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES FOR ULTRA -URBAN REDEVELOPMENT MAY 2018 Introduction Polluted stormwater is the largest threat to the health of the Pacific Northwest's urban watersheds. Pollutants targeted by Salmon -Safe's urban initiative such as heavy metals, petroleum products, pesticide runoff and construction sediment have an adverse impact on the watershed and severely compromise downstream marine health. With the goal of inspiring design that has a positive impact in our watersheds, Salmon -Safe offers stormwater design guidance for ultra -urban areas, which we define as typically those densely developed "downtown" locations mostly covered by structures and pavement. Generally first developed long ago, many such areas are brownfields now undergoing redevelopment, mostly for commercial and residential purposes. The very extensive impervious surfaces in ultra -urban spaces create a hydrologic environment dominated by surface runoff, with little of the soil infiltration and evapotranspiration predominating in a natural landscape. Vehicle traffic drawn to such areas and the activities occurring there deposit contaminants like heavy metals, oils and other petroleum derivatives, pesticides and fertilizers (nutrients). These pollutants wash off of the surfaces with the stormwater runoff and drain into the piping typically installed to convey water away rapidly. If the piping network is a combined sanitary -storm sewer system, the large stormwater runoff volumes draining from an ultra -urban area exceed the capacity of the wastewater treatment plant at the end of the line in some storms, resulting in releases of untreated, mixed sewage and stormwater to a water body. If the piping network is a separated storm sewer system, the runoff and the pollutants it carries enter a receiving water body without treatment, to the detriment of water quality and the aquatic life there. Although salmon -spawning and rearing streams are rarely present in an ultra -urban location, if they are, the elevated runoff quantity itself is damaging to the downstream habitat that salmon and their food sources rely on and directly to the fish themselves. Many of the pollutants conveyed by stormwater runoff are toxic to salmon and their invertebrate food sources. The toxicity of heavy metals like copper and zinc to aquatic life has been well studied. However, salmon face many more potentially toxic pollutants in both their freshwater and saltwater life stages. These contaminants include other heavy metals; petroleum products; combustion by-products; and industrial, commercial, and household chemicals. Emerging science from NOAA Fisheries shows that these agents collectively create both lethal and non -lethal impacts, the latter negatively affecting salmon life -sustaining functions to the detriment of their migration, repro- duction, feeding, growth and avoidance of predators. Salmon -Safe Inc. 1001 SE Water Ave, Suite z Portland, OR 97214 (503) 232-3750 info@salmonsafe.org www.salmolnsaTe.org Packet Pg. 333 10.2.a Despite these challenges, an array of options exists to reduce, or even in the utmost application, eliminate the negative impacts of ultra -urban development stemming from the large quantities of contaminated stormwater runoff potentially generated there. This management category addresses practices to control ultra -urban stormwater runoff to reduce both water quantity and water quality impacts with the following goal. Goal Any development or redevelopment project with a footprint that exceeds 5,000 square feet shall use low -impact site planning, design, and operational strategies' for the property to maintain or restore, to the maximum extent technically feasible, the predevelopment hydrology of the property with regard to the water quality, rate, volume, and duration of flow. Objectives 1. Prime objective Implement low -impact practices, especially runoff retention practices,addressing both water quantity and water quality control to the maximum extent technically feasible in redeveloping ultra -urban parcels to achieve the stated goal of restoring the predevelopment hydrology. Provide documentation of how the objective will be achieved. If full achievement of the goal is technically infeasible, assemble documentation demonstrating why it is not and proceed to consider Objective 2A and/or 213, as appropriate to the site. 2. Alternative objectives Assess if achieving Objective 1 is documented to be technically infeasible. 2A Alternative water quantity control objective when the site discharges to a combined sanitary -storm sewer or a stream —Start with the low -impact practices identified in the assessment pursuant to Objective 1. To the extent that they cannot prevent the generation of stormwater runoff peak flow rates and volumes greater than in the predeveloped condi- tion3,4, implement effective alternative measures to diminish and/or slow the release of runoff to the maximum extent technically feasible, with the minimum objective of reducing the quantity discharged to comply with any applicable water quantity control requirements and, in any case, below the amount released in the preceding developed condition.6 ' Collectively termed "low -impact practices" in the following points. 'Retention means keeping runoff from flowing off the site on the surface by preventing its generation in the first place, capturing it for a water supply purpose, releasing it via infiltration to the soil or evapotranspiration to the atmosphere, or some combination of these mechanisms. 3A predeveloped condition is the natural state of the site as it typically would be for the area prior to any modification of vegetation or soil. 'As determined through hydrologic modeling of the previously developed and modified conditions. 5 Specified for discharges to combined sewers by the municipal jurisdiction; specified for discharges to Western Washington streams by the Washington Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, Minimum Technical Requirement #7. 'As determined through hydrologic modeling of the previously developed and modified conditions. Model Stormwater Management Guidelines May 2018 2 for Ultra -Urban Redevelopment Packet Pg. 334 10.2.a 2B Alternative water quality control objective when the site discharges to a water body or a separate storm sewer leading to a water body —Start with the low -impact practices identified in the assessment pursuant to Objective 1. To the extent that they cannot prevent the generation of stormwater runoff containing pollutants, implement alternative effec- tive measures to reduce contaminants in stormwater to the maximum extent technically feasible, with the minimum objective of complying with the regulatory requirements for water quality control applying to the location! Plan Elements 1. Inventory and analysis —Narrative, mapping, data, and quantitative results that summarize: (1) site land uses and land covers in the redeveloped and preceding developed conditions; (2) results of hydrologic modeling of the undeveloped, previously developed and modified conditions, as the basis for pursuing quantity control objectives; and (3) stormwater drainage sub -basins, conveyance routes, and locations of receiving stormwater drains and natural water bodies in the redeveloped state. 2. Low -impact practices —Low -impact practices are systematic methods intended to reduce the quantity of stormwater runoff produced and improve the quality of the remaining runoff by controlling pollutants at their sources, collecting precipitation and putting it to a beneficial use, and utilizing or mimicking the hydrologic functioning of natural vegetation and soil in designing drainage systems. The following low -impact practices are particularly relevant to ultra -urban sites: • source control practices V minimizing pollutant introduction by building materials (especially zinc - and copper -bearing) and activities conducted on the site J isolating pollutants from contact with rainfall or runoff by segregating, covering, containing, and/or enclosing pollutant -generating materials, wastes and activities V conserving water to reduce non-stormwater discharges constructing vehicle travel ways, sidewalks and uncovered parking lot aisles to the minimum widths necessary, provided that public safety and a walkable environ- ment for pedestrians are not compromised • harvesting precipitation and putting it to a use such as irrigation, toilet flushing, vehicle or surface washing, or cooling system make-up water • constructing low -traffic areas with permeable surfaces, such as porous asphalt, open -graded Portland cement concrete, coarse granular materials, concrete or plastic unit pavers, and plastic grid systems (Areas particularly suited for permeable surfaces 'In Western Washington, specified by the Washington Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, Minimum Technical Requirement #6, which is equivalent to the City of Seattle's SMC, Section 22.805.090.B.1.a. Model Stormwater Management Guidelines May 2018 3 for Ultra -Urban Redevelopment Packet Pg. 335 10.2.a are driveways, walkways and sidewalks, alleys, and overflow or otherwise lightly -used uncovered parking lots not subject to much leaf fall or other deposition.) • draining runoff from roofs, pavements, other impervious surfaces, and landscaped areas into one or more of the following green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) systems: V bioretention area* (also known as a rain garden)8 J planter box*, tree pit* (bioretention areas on a relatively small scale) vegetated swale9* J vegetated filter strip* J infiltration trench V green roof * signifies compost -amended soils as needed to maximize soil storage and infiltration The following low -impact practices are of limited applicability to ultra -urban sites but may contribute to meeting objectives in some circumstances: • conserving natural areas including existing trees, other vegetation and soils • minimizing soil excavation and compaction and vegetation disturbance • minimizing impervious rooftops and building footprints • designing drainage paths to increase the time before runoff leaves the site by empha- sizing sheet instead of concentrated flow, increasing the number and lengths of flow paths, maximizing non -hardened drainage conveyances and maximizing vegetation in areas that generate and convey runoff 3. Alternatives —When on -site low -impact practices alone cannot achieve Objectives 2A and/or 213, implement one or more of the following strategies to meet at least the minimum water quantity and quality control objectives stated above: • For runoff quantity and/or quality control— V contribute materially to a neighborhood project using low -impact practices and serving the stormwater control needs of multiple properties in the same receiving water drainage basin, with the contribution commensurate with the shortfall in meeting objectives on the site itself. V implement low -impact practices on -site to manage the quantity and quality of stormwater generated in a location off the redevelopment site but in the same receiving water drainage basin, with the scope of the project commensurate with the shortfall in meeting objectives using practices applied to stormwater generated by the site itself. 89Preferably with an open bottom for the fullest infiltration, but with a liner and underdrain if the opportunity for deep infiltration is highly limited or prohibited for some specific reason, e.g., bedrock or seasonal high-water table near the surface, very restrictive soil (e.g., clay, silty clay) that cannot be adequately amended to permit effective infiltration, non -remediable contamination below ground in the percolating water pathway. Model Stormwater Management Guidelines May 2018 4 for Ultra -Urban Redevelopment Packet Pg. 336 10.2.a • For runoff quantity control —install a vault or tank10 to store water for delayed release after storms to help avoid combined sewer overflows or high flows damaging to a stream. For runoff quality control —install an advanced engineered treatment system suitable for an ultra -urban site." Considerations for Salmon -Safe Certification Fulfilling the stormwater component of the Salmon -Safe certification process requires submission of documentation of how Objective 1 will be achieved based on the inventory and analysis conducted for the site. On the other hand, if Objective 1 has been judged to be unachievable, pursuing certifica- tion requires documentation establishing the technical infeasibility of doing so. Relevant documenta- tion includes, but is not necessarily limited to, site data, calculations, modeling results, and qualitative reasoning. If achieving Objective 1 is demonstrably technically infeasible, the certification process then requires similar documentation of how Objectives 2A and/or 213, as appropriate to the site, will be achieved. Prepared for Salmon -Safe Inc. by Dr. Richard Horner, et. al. 10 While useful for runoff quantity control, passive vaults and tanks provide very little water quality benefit. The most effective candidate treatment systems now available are chitosan-enhanced sand filtration and advanced media filtration coupled with ion exchange and/or carbon adsorption. Basic sand filtration is another option suitable to an ultra -urban site but is less effective than the more advanced alternatives. Model Stormwater Management Guidelines May 2018 5 for Ultra -Urban Redevelopment Packet Pg. 337 10.2.a APPENDIX B Pesticide Storage Management Checklist r Q Packet Pg. 338 10.2.a APPENDIX B: Pesticide Storage Management Checklist .. 1 Annual staff training Create an ongoing training program for staff in pesticide storage and who use pesticides and perform storage management practices procedures and practices to include: (1) rules and regulations; and (2) practicing procedures. Clean and organized Sweeping/cleaning floors. Containment storage areas of contaminants. Boot cleaning stations at entrances/exits. Sequester/identify/map hazards, products and supplies. Secondary containment Tasks and training to prevent/stop contamina- of pesticide products tion within facility and runoff from facility. Up-to-date Assign facility monitor(s) in conduct monthly facility inspections inspections. Up-to-date Assign pesticide inventory monitor(s) and pesticide product update inventory as needed. Maintain records inventory of pesticide purchases and disposals. Prevention by design Monitor and review spill incidents and make for spills within procedural changes as needed. or outside the facility Safety Map/identify locations of facility components and safety hazards. Establish eye wash maintenance and other PPE maintenance and replacement cycles. Appendix B I Report of the Science Team Regarding Salmon -Safe Certification of the City of Edmonds, Washington Packet Pg. 339 10.2.a Additional Credits Report design & production: Jay Tracy Studios Project Site, Virtual Meeting & Science Team member photos © Salmon -Safe Inc. Edmonds Marsh photo (Pages 2 & 9): Bill Anderson Packet Pg. 340 10.2.a SALMON SAFE www.salmonsafe.org 0 a as c 0 m U m cv U) c O m U) N H LL Q N C O E W 4- 0 U c O v m U m U) c O E m U) c m E t v a r r Q SS-2022-C-EW Packet Pg. 341 10.2.b v EDMONDSPARKS, RECREATION & CULTURAL SERVICES To: City of Edmonds Parks & Planning Board From: Angie Feser, Director, Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Date: July 21, 2022 Re: Salmon -Safe Certification Additional Information During the May 25, 2022 Parks & Planning Board presentation of Salmon -Safe Certification, the Board requested the following information for their next review. 1. Prioritization of the 12 conditions along with criteria used to prioritize them 2. Estimation of costs for each of the conditions, including staff commitments 3. Time estimates that would be required 4. Any private landowner requirements that would be necessary to meet the standards 5. Confirmation that the city would meet Pre -Conditions 1 and 2 1. Certification Condition Prioritization and Ranking Salmon -Safe's Science Team developed a scoring system for the City's Salmon -Safe certification conditions as requested by the City of Edmonds Planning Board. The criteria is somewhat analogous to what was done by Herrera recently for the Edmonds Receiving Water Conditions Assessment. There are four criteria including benefit to aquatic habitat/species (qualitative, based on best professional judgment); direct vs indirect; action vs plan; and area. The following is a summary of ranking of Conditions provided by Salmon -Safe using the criteria. Rank Condition 1 Condition 11: Develop prioritization strategy for removing fish passage barriers 1 Condition 12: Develop comprehensive habitat restoration plans 3 Condition 4: Develop water conservation plan and track irrigation water usage 3 Condition 7: Create an IPM, nutrient, and chemical management plan 5 Condition 2: Improve inventory of stormwater infrastructure 5 Condition 10: Update Snow and Ice Control SOP document 7 Condition 1: Verify that stormwater discharged from the Parks maintenance yard does not flow on the surface into Edmonds Marsh 7 Condition 9: Upgrade containment for waste oil tank at Public Works yard 9 Condition 5: Adopt Salmon -Safe construction standards Packet Pg. 342 10.2.b 10 Condition 3: Improve outdoor storage areas at Public Works yard 10 Condition 8: Upgrade storage areas at Parks maintenance yard 12 Condition 6: Document pesticide applicator licensing status for all Parks employees 2. Estimate of costs for each of the conditions, including staff commitments and 3. Time estimates that would be required The following are conditions that would require significant commitments in both one- time consultant costs and ongoing staff time. The remaining conditions, although somewhat impactful to city resources, are not as significant as the highlighted ones found below. Attachment #1 is a Table detailing the Parks, Recreation, Cultural Arts & Human Services (Parks) and Public Works Departments' Considerations for work required to meet the more impactful conditions. Following is Attachment #2 City Public Works Department - Salmon Safe Certification Conditions Considerations City Resource Impact Considerations Summary City Cost Estimate Staff Condition City Dept (one-time) (annual) Condition 2: Improve Inventory of PW $50,000 0.1 FTE Stormwater Infrastructure Condition 4: Develop water conservation plan PRCAHS $35,000 0.2 FTE and track irrigation water usage Condition 7: Create an IPM, nutrient, and PRCAHS $40,000 0.2 FTE chemical management plan Condition 11: Develop Prioritization Strategy PW $100,000 - $325,000 0.2 FTE for Removing Fish Passage Barriers Condition 12: Develop Comprehensive PW $100,000 - $300,000 0.2 FTE Habitat Restoration Plans 4. Any private landowner requirements that would be necessary to meet the standards The Salmon -Safe assessment of the City of Edmonds encompasses City sites and operations only. It is not a city-wide assessment and private property or public lands not owned by the City are not included in the scope of this assessment. PA Packet Pg. 343 10.2.b 5. Confirmation that the city would meet Pre -Conditions 1 and 2 This document was reviewed by the City legal department with no concerns stated, so the City should be able to meet the first two Pre -Conditions. However, in preliminary review by Departmental staff, it was communicated there is a need to conduct some additional research the ability for the City to meet Pre -Conditions 1 and 2. Pre -Condition 3, responsibility of the Parks Department would take several months to complete as well. This would create a timeline of late Fall to complete all three Pre -Conditions before presenting to Council for acceptance of the Salmon -Safe Certification. Packet Pg. 344 10.2. b Salmon Safe Certification Attachment #1 Table - City Resource Impact Considerations City City Staff Condition Dept City Comments City Recommendation Cost Estimate (annual) Condition 2: Improve PW The requested information is not Add "if funding is available' as this task is not $50,000 0.1 FTE Inventory of Stormwater required to be collected/mapped by the currently included in the City budget. Infrastructure City's NPDES Municipal Stormwater Permit requirements, so this would be an additional requirement imposed on the City's stormwater and surface water management program. There are currently approximately 210 public and private stormwater BMPs/facilities in the City (as of the 2021 Annual Report submittal to the Department of Ecology in March 2022). The City will consider requesting information on contributing drainage areas draining to stormwater BMP/facilities as part of the drainage report submittal to facilitate future data collection for private stormwater Condition 4: Develop water Parks City's existing irrigation system has Water conservation plan completed by consultant. $35,000 0.2 FTE conservation plan and track manual control systems without online irrigation access. Monitoring water consumption Add "if funding is available' as this task is not water usage would be through reviewing utility bills currently included in the City budget. managed in another department. Propose a two-year timeline due to impact on limited narks maintenance staff. Condition 7: Create an IPM, Parks City does not currently conducte soil Consultant hired to develop site -specific IPM, $40,000 0.2 FTE nutrient, and chemical testing. nutrient and chemical management plan. management plan Plan to address new practices tailored Propose a two-year timeline due to impact on each Dark site. limited Darks maintenance staff. Condition 11: Develop PW A majority of the fish passage barriers Focus on the conceptual design City -owned fish $100,000 - $325,000 0.2 FTE Prioritization Strategy for located in the City are not owned by the passage barriers for this study; the privately owned Removing Fish Passage City (e.g., BNSF, WSDOT, private barriers could be mentioned in the report along with Barriers properties) potential policy updates and funding opportunities. Propose focusing on two drainage basins within the proposed 3-year timeline and adding two additional drainage basins every 3 years. Add "if funding is available' as this task is not au—tly inrinrlari in thw Rite h A—f Condition 12: Develop PW chase 1 - prioritize salmon -Dearing basins and $100,000 - $300,000 0.2 FTE Comprehensive Habitat complete two basins first within the proposed 3-year Restoration Plans timeline and the two remaining within the next 3 years. (Perrinville Creek, Shell Creek, Shellabarger Creek, and Willow Creek) Phase 2 - focus on six potential salmon -bearing basins that could be evaluated on the two basin every 3-years cycle. (Northstream Creek, Fruitdale Creek, Hindley Creek, Stilthouse Creek, Terrace Creek, and Outfall Creek) Propose removing the following creeks from the list since the stream channels are located outside of the City limits: Hall Creek, McAleer Creek and Lyon Creek. Propose removing the following creeks from the list since there are no fish passage barriers located in the City limits and the creeks are not salmon - bearing: Deer Creek and Lund's Gulch. Add "if funding is available' as this task is not curdy inrinrlari in thw city h-1—f Packet Pg. 345 Attachment #2 10.2.b City Public Works Department - Salmon Safe Certification Conditions Considerations Condition 2: Improve Inventory of Stormwater Infrastructure Text from Draft Certification Report The City has done a good job creating a GIS inventory of stormwater infrastructure, primarily related to hard structures, such as catch basins, manholes, and pipes. However, it does not appear that GIS information is being collected on GSI elements such as rain gardens, swales, and perme- able pavement. In addition, the GIS data do not include spatial data that would allow calculations ofthe drainage areas being managed by various stormwater management techniques_ The collection and analysis of such data is important for tracking improvements in stormwater management and prioritizing stormwater management projects_ Per one of the performance requirements of Standard U_l_l, the City shall document GSI elements within the stormwater layer of their GIS. The City shall also incorporate a drainage area assessment into the existing GIS layer, thereby making it possible to determine what fraction of a given drainage area is being managed by each stormwater managementtechnique in that area_ Coupled with basin-wvide objectives, this assessment would enable a demonstration of the degree to which capital projects are reducing water- shed impacts overtime_ .+ {1 The City shall update the existing GIS layer and submit it to Salmon - Safe for review within two years of certification- Recommendations/Comments for Salmon -Safe Team • The requested information is not required to be collected/mapped by the City's NPDES Municipal Stormwater Permit requirements, so this would be an additional requirement imposed on the City's stormwater and surface water management program. • There are currently approximately 210 public and private stormwater BMPs/facilities in the City (as of the 2021 Annual Report submittal to the Department of Ecology in March 2022). • Since this mapping task is not currently included in the City budget, the City would like to add a caveat (similar to what was included in the City of Shoreline Salmon -Safe conditions) for "if funding becomes available." • The City will also consider requesting information on contributing drainage areas draining to stormwater BMP/facilities as part of the drainage report submittal to facilitate future data collection for private stormwater facilities. Packet Pg. 346 Attachment #2 10.2.b Background Information for Level of Effort Estimate # of Citywide BMPs/Facilities City -owned stormwater BMPs/facilities 81 Private stormwater BMPs/facilities 96 (inspected annually as required by the NPDES Municipal Stormwater permit) Private stormwater BMPs/facilities 33 (older facilities that are not required to be inspected annually by the NPDES Municipal Stormwater permit) Total 210 Planning Level Cost Estimates for City Consideration Phase 1 Phase 2 Citywide Delineations Ongoing Maintenance/Data Updates Planning Level $50,000 Not applicable Cost Estimate City Staff Support • Gathering and providing available 0.1 FTE drainage reports, model files, and/or as-builts for existing public and private BMPs/facilities (-16 hours) • Project management and deliverable review (-2-4 hours per month) Consultant Yes No Support Needed? Assumptions • Desktop exercise only; no field • Assumes 70-80 new private BMPs/ verification facilities per year • Assumes 210 public and private • Assumes 3 new public BMPs/ facilities facilities per year • Assumes some, but not all BMPs/ • Assumes 2 hours for delineating facilities have drainage reports, drainage areas and updating model files, or as-builts mapping per new BMP/facility • Includes a short tech memo • Assumes ongoing refinement of documenting the process and 10% of the original BMPs/facilities providing guidance for ongoing per year for retrofits, changes in updates drainage patterns, field • Assumes 1-year timeline for observations, etc. completing the work 2 Packet Pg. 347 Attachment #2 10.2.b Condition 11: Develop Prioritization Strategy for Removing Fish Passage Barriers Text from Draft Certification Report The City, in cooperation with WDFW and the Edmonds Stream Team, has completed what appears to be a reasonably complete inventory of fish passage barriers, which is consistent with Standard U_6_1. The City has not, however, created a prioritization strategy for removing those barriers, as required by Standard U.6.9. Accordingly, the City shall create such a plan- The plan shall evaluate each barrier with respect to feasi- bility of removal and potential benefits to be achieved from removal_ The plan shall then establish a priority ranking scheme and apply it each fish passage barrier. Ideally, the prioritization scheme should follow a watershed approach similar to that used by the City for its recently completed report of Receiving Water Conditions and Storm water Managemem Influence Assessment.6 Th at report includes useful information about baseline conditions that could be incorporated into the analysis offish passage barrier removal_ King County has recently completed a similar er€erdse7 that might also provide a useful model for comparison. Although the prioritization plan need not include specific design plans for each barrier conceptual designs shall be developed that are sufficient to inform the prioritization framework_ The conceptual designs of the fish passage Structures shall incorporate current climate change criteria in determining the type and size of the Structures. In 2022, the City shall includes commitment to conduct the fish barrier removal prioritization project in one or more of the follow- ing planning documents: PROS plan, Comprehensive Plan, Strategic Action Plan, Additionally, the City shall complete a report that priori- tfzes and ranks the feasibility and benefits of fish passage barrier removal and submit to Salmon -Safe for review within three years of certification. Recommendations/Comments for Salmon -Safe Team • A majority of the fish passage barriers located in the City are not owned by the City (e.g., BNSF, WSDOT, private properties) • We would like to focus on the City owned fish passage barriers for this study; the privately owned barriers could be mentioned in the report along with potential policy updates and funding opportunities, but conceptual design would be focused on City -owned barriers • While we see value in completing this evaluation, we would like to propose focusing on two drainage basins within the proposed 3-year timeline and adding two additional drainage basins every 3 years • Since this task is not currently included in the City budget, the City would like to add a caveat (similar to what was included in the City of Shoreline Salmon -Safe conditions) for "if funding becomes available." 3 Packet Pg. 348 Attachment #2 10.2.b Background Information for Level of Effort Estimate Stream # of Barriers within the City Limits (All Barrier Types)* # of City Owned Barriers (All Barrier Types)** # of City Owned Complete Barriers Deer Creek 0 0 0 Hall Creek 0 0 0 McAleer Creek 0 0 0 Lund's Gulch 0 0 0 Northstream Creek 6 5 3 Fruitdale Creek 5 4 3 Perrinville Creek 4 2 1 Shell Creek 6 5 3 Hindley Creek 4 4 1 Stilthouse Creek 3 2 2 Terrace Creek 3 2 2 Outfall Creek 3 2 2 Shellabarger Creek 14 6 5 Willow Creek 4 3 1 Unknown Waterway 2 1 0 Total 54 36 23 *Additional barriers maybe present in the City that are not mapped by WDFW. Will need to conduct additional field reconnaissance (possibly through Condition 12) to develop a more complete culvert inventory. **Several City -owned barriers are located near highway crossings. Will need to confirm ownership with WSDOT, but these barriers were included in this planning level cost evaluation. Planning Level Cost Estimates for City Consideration Option 3 Citywide Prioritization Option 2 Plan (including Option 1 Citywide Prioritization Policy/Funding options Prioritization Plan for Plan (without non -City for non -City owned Two Priority Basins owned barriers) barriers) Planning Level $100,000 $300,000 $325,000 Cost Estimate City Staff Support • City staff will coordinate access on private property for non -city culvert assessments • Project management and deliverable review (0.2 FTE for duration of project) Consultant Yes Yes Yes Support Needed? 4 Packet Pg. 349 Attachment #2 10.2.b Option 1 Prioritization Plan for Two Priority Basins Option 2 Citywide Prioritization Plan (without non -City owned barriers) Option 3 Citywide Prioritization Plan (including Policy/Funding options for non -City owned barriers) Assumptions • Assumes conceptual • Assumes conceptual • Assumes Option 2 design for 7 City -owned design for 36 City- (Citywide Prioritization barriers owned barriers Plan) with additional • Field reconnaissance • Field reconnaissance research/discussion limited to 2 hours per limited to 2 hours per related to policy and/or culvert plus travel time culvert plus travel time funding for addressing • Assumes no CAD work; • Assumes no CAD work; non -City owned conceptual design conceptual design barriers presented in graphical presented in graphical rendering rendering • Assumes no hydraulic • Assumes no hydraulic or hydrologic modeling or hydrologic modeling to be required for each to be required for each culvert culvert • Assumes no PLS survey • Assumes no PLS survey will be required will be required Condition 12: Develop Comprehensive Habitat Restoration Plans Text from Draft Certification Report The City shall develop a comprehensive habitat restoration plan for each of the salmon -bearing creeks in Edmonds_ Such plans shall also be devel- oped for creeks that may not currently support salmon, but would likely become salmon -bearing creeks once the lowest (in relation to Puget Sound) fish passage barrier in the creek is removed_ The comprehensive habitat restoration plans should be multi -objective, and address topics such as aquatic, fIoodplain, and riparian habitat irnprovernents; flooding; water quality improvements; and education (to foster environmental stewardship among residents and visitors)_ In 2022, the City shall include a commitment to develop the compre- hensive habitat restoration plans in one or more of thefolIowing planning documents: PROS plan, Comprehensive Plan, Strategic Action Plan, Additionally, the City shall complete the comprehensive habitat restoration plans for current salmon -bearing cre-eks and submit to Salmon -Safe for review within three years of certification. Habitat restoration pIansfor any additional creeks that may become salmon -bearing because of planned (within S years) removal of fish passage barriers shall also be completed and submitted to Salmon - Safe within the S-year certification cycle. 5 Packet Pg. 350 Attachment #2 10.2.b Recommendations/Comments for Salmon -Safe Team • While we see value in completing this evaluation, the City would like to propose focusing on two priority basins first within the proposed 3-year timeline and the two remaining salmon -bearing basins within the next 3 years. There are also six potential salmon -bearing basins that could be evaluated on a two basin every 3-year cycle after these initial salmon -bearing basins have been evaluated. • Since this task is not currently included in the City budget, it would be helpful to add a caveat (similar to what was included in the City of Shoreline Salmon -Safe conditions) for "if funding becomes available." • There are four salmon -bearing creeks located in the City o Perrinville Creek o Shell Creek o Shellabarger Creek o Willow Creek • Future potential salmon -bearing creeks in the City may include: o Northstream Creek o Fruitdale Creek o Hindley Creek o Stilthouse Creek o Terrace Creek o Outfall Creek • The City would like to propose removing the following creeks from the list since the stream channels are located outside of the City limits: o Hall Creek o McAleer Creek o Lyon Creek • The City would also like to propose removing the following creeks from the list since there are no fish passage barriers located in the City limits and the creeks are not salmon -bearing: o Deer Creek o Lund's Gulch Background Information for Level of Effort Estimate Drainage Basin/Creek Total Stream Length (feet)* Total Stream Length within the City Limits (feet) Total Stream Length for Habitat Assessment (feet) Deer Creek 4,405 204 0 Hall Creek 11,311 0 (no channel in the City limits) 0 McAleer Creek 23,304 0 (no channel in the City limits) 0 Lund's Gulch 11,836 1,189 0 Northstream Creek 3,417 3,417 3,417 Fruitdale Creek 3,960 3,960 3,960 Perrinville Creek 14,566 5,306 5,306 Shell Creek 8,650 8,650 8,650 0 Packet Pg. 351 10.2.b Attachment #2 Drainage Basin/Creek Total Stream Length (feet)* Total Stream Length within the City Limits (feet) Total Stream Length for Habitat Assessment (feet) Hindley Creek 4,565 4,565 4,565 Southwest Edmonds Not calculated 0 (no channel in the City limits) 0 Stilthouse Creek 31257 3,257 3,257 Terrace Creek 2,170 2,170 2,170 Outfall Creek 2,522 1,998 1,998 Shellabarger Creek 7,478 7,478 7,478 Willow Creek 4,130 2,432 2,432 Total 89,855 44,422 43,233 *Mainstem only Planning Level Cost Estimates for City Consideration Option 3 Option 2 Citywide Basin Habitat Citywide Basin Habitat Restoration for All 10 Restoration Plan for All 10 Salmon -Bearing or Option 1 Salmon -Bearing or Potential Salmon - Habitat Restoration Plan Potential Salmon -Bearing Bearing Basins for Two Priority Basins Basins (Desktop only) Planning Level $150,000 $300,000 $100,000 Cost Estimate City Staff Support • City staff will coordinate access on private property for habitat assessments • Project management and deliverable review (0.2 FTE for duration of project) Consultant Yes Yes Yes Support Needed? Assumptions • Assumes a total stream • Assumes a total stream • Assumes no field length of—14,000 feet length of—43,000 feet for work; desktop exercise for two drainage basins) 10 drainage basins only • Assumes average of • Assumes average of • GIS analysis to 2,000 feet of channel 2,000 feet of channel per evaluate factors per day for field day for field investigation influencing habitat investigation • Assumes minor quality, including fish • Assumes minor calculations in addition to barriers, riparian calculations in addition SMAP canopy, land to SMAP • Assume data analysis ownership, floodplain • Assume data analysis does not include connectivity, channel does not include generation of graphics in sinuosity, channel generation of graphics in R Studio and all graphics confinement, R Studio and all graphics will be produced in GIS impervious surface, will be produced in GIS slope O O_ N 0 r m U m c 0 E O E m a� c O E M U) c W E z U 2 Q Packet Pg. 352 10.2.c CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Minutes of Webinar Meeting May 25, 2022 Chair Crank called the virtual meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES Board Member Rosen read the Land Acknowledgement. Board Members Present Alicia Crank, Chair Roger Pence, Vice Chair Matt Cheung Todd Cloutier Judi Gladstone Richard Kuehn Mike Rosen Beth Tragus-Campbell (alternate) Lily Distelhorst (student rep) Board Members Absent None Staff Present Kernen Lien, Planning Division Manager Angie Feser, Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Director Jen Leach, Environmental Education and Sustainability Coordinator Michelle Szafran, Associate Planner Anna Huttel, Certification Director, Salmon -Safe Dan Kent, Executive Director, Salmon -Safe READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES Board Member Rosen referred to packet page 6 and asked if Redefining Streets and Public Spaces is the same as Reimagining Neighborhoods and Streets. Mr. Lien stated he would verify the name of the project. MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR PENCE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MAY 11 AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED (5-2) WITH BOARD MEMBERS CLOUTIER AND KUEHN ABSTAINING. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Planning Board Meeting Minutes May 25, 2022 Pagel of 6 Packet Pg. 353 10.2.c Margie Fields was pleased that the Board would be hearing about Salmon -Safe tonight and was interested in hearing their thoughts about it. She appreciated the numerous detailed recommendations and timelines. She noted, however, that she did not see what specific results they expected from the recommendations. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A. Salmon -Safe Certification Report Director Feser introduced this project. She acknowledged Jen Leach, Environmental Education and Sustainability Coordinator, who helped with a lot of this project. Salmon -Safe consultants Anna Huttel and Dan Kent made the presentation. Mr. Kent gave an overview of Salmon -Safe and discussed their work with various parks systems and municipalities. Ms. Huttel discussed the City of Edmonds' certification process and provided an overview of the Salmon -Safe certification report which gives a system -wide evaluation of watershed impacts. This includes an analysis of programming, a series of site assessments, a report of team findings and recommendations, certification upon acceptance of recommendations, and an annual review of project activity. The Salmon -Safe Science Team has recommended that the City of Edmonds be certified as Salmon -Safe subject to 3 preconditions, 12 conditions, and 6 recommendations that address topics ranging from habitat protection and restoration to stormwater management, integrated pest management, and de-icing products. Board Comments and Questions: Board Member Campbell commended the team for this work and the report. She asked for a clarification about how the term pesticide is used. Ms. Huttel explained that it includes pesticides and also herbicides and fungicides. Board Member Campbell referred to Precondition 3 and the recommendation to phase out High Hazard Pesticides. She asked for clarification about what level of communication is needed in terms of the justification memos and requests and if these needs to happen for each instance. Ms. Huttel replied that they provide variances typically as part of the Integrated Pest Management plan. These can be provided on an ongoing basis for targeted use on a specific species. Board Member Gladstone was very pleased that the City is pursuing this certification. She asked about the difference between preconditions and conditions. Ms. Huttel explained that preconditions are items that have to be addressed before certification can be finalized. Conditions are things that the City works on after the certification cycle has started. Board Member Gladstone asked where the City is at in meeting the preconditions. Director Feser stated that the City does have an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) plan but it could use some updating which will include some public process. Board Member Gladstone asked about the impact of the conditions on the budget. Director Feser replied that this is part of the work that is being done with staff members from other departments before taking this report to Council. Board Member Rosen asked about expected results. Mr. Kent stated it is very difficult to quantify the outcome of the conditions. They have seen significant improvement over the years of working with the City of Portland in terms of water quality and fish presence. Board Member Rosen asked about prioritizing the conditions and recommendations. Ms. Huttel thought that was a possibility with the involvement of the Science Team. Board Member Rosen asked if there are any other benefits to having this certification aside from the environmental benefits. Director Feser thought it was another way to demonstrate community support for a project. It helps with grant applications and funding requests. Planning Board Meeting Minutes May 25, 2022 Page 2 of 6 Packet Pg. 354 10.2.c Board Member Cheung asked if the recommendations and conditions all have equal weight. He also wondered about the impacts on the budget. Board Member Cloutier asked if there is a funding source required and if there is a fiscal ability to actually do this. Director Feser thought this was manageable through Parks. Public Works and Engineering is having some questions about the scope of the work and what it may cost. This is still being evaluated; it will then go before Council who will have to decide if they are willing to commit the resources. Board Member Cloutier suggested a chart showing what can reasonably be done versus what they would like to get done. Board Member Campbell referred to Condition 9 regarding upgrading containment for the waste oil tank. She recommended expanding the timeframe to attempt to do this due to supply chain issues. She then referred to Recommendation 6 related to educational signage. She supported this but suggested more development on how the public can become involved because most of the land in the City is not held by the City. Mr. Kent commented that the scope of this project is assessing the City's impact on the watershed. They are not looking at private land or individual citizen actions but are very interested in any opportunities to influence public behavior. Board Member Gladstone asked how the list of conditions compares to what Shoreline had, both in the type and number. Ms. Huttel thought that it was similar but noted it was hard to compare. She offered to follow up on this if desired. Mr. Kent commented that there was a lot of consistency between the cities in terms of application of standards. Board Member Gladstone wondered if Salmon -Safe has any sort alliances with funding partners. Mr. Kent replied there are not any direct connections, but many government agencies have reviewed and been supportive of Salmon -Safe standards and even funded Salmon -Safe. He was not sure about private funding sources. Board Member Gladstone commented that there is a mention in the report of coordinating with Ronald Sewer, but they don't exist anymore. Board Member Rosen stated he was not ready to move this on to the Council. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER ROSEN, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER CHEUNG, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD GET A SECOND PRESENTATION THAT WOULD REFLECT: 1. PRIORITIZATION OF THE 12 CONDITIONS ALONG WITH CRITERIA USED TO PRIORITIZE THEM 2. ESTIMATION OF COSTS FOR EACH OF THE CONDITIONS, INCLUDING STAFF COMMITMENTS 3. TIME ESTIMATES THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED 4. ANY PRIVATE LANDOWNER REQUIREMENTS THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO MEET THE STANDARDS 5. CONFIRMATION THAT THE CITY WOULD MEET PRECONDITIONS 1 AND 2 THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLN2022-0009 Rezone 9516 & 9530 Edmonds Way Chair Crank opened the hearing and read the script for the quasi-judicial hearing reviewing the purpose and procedures of the hearing. She asked if any member of the Board had engaged in communications with Planning Board Meeting Minutes May 25, 2022 Page 3 of 6 Packet Pg. 355 10.2.c opponents or proponents regarding the issues of this rezone application outside of the hearing process. Board members stated they had not. She asked if there were any Board Members who had conflict of interest issues in this matter. There were none. She asked if there was anyone in the audience who objected to her participation or any Board Member's participation as a decision maker in this hearing. No one objected. Chair Crank swore in those intending to testify. Staff Presentation: Associate Planner Michelle Szafran made the staff presentation regarding the rezone application. She gave an overview of the request from Multiple Residential (RM 1.5) to Multiple Residential — Edmonds Way (RM-EW) including site context, rezone criteria and staff recommendation. Staff concluded that the rezone is consistent with ECDC. 20.40.010. The rezone would allow the option for a height increase from 30-35 feet for any building fronting on Edmonds Way provided that sustainability, low impact development and/or inclusion of affordable housing are provided. Design standards and development regulations will ensure that public health, safety, and welfare are protected. Staff proposed that the Planning Board make a recommendation to City Council to approve the rezone from RM 1.5 to RM-EW. Applicant Testimony: Matt Driscoll concurred with staff s presentation. He explained the reason they asked for the rezone was because it would give more flexibility with the roofline. The benefit to the City would be affordable housing and sustainability by through LEED and Low Impact Development (LID). Public Comments: Luke Distelhorst, Edmonds, commented on the lack of multifamily housing and affordable housing in the City He spoke in support of this rezone. Shaun Leiser, developer for the project, stated he was looking forward to doing another development on Edmonds Way. He clarified that the rezone only allows additional height, not more density. The unit count stays the same. They are looking forward to building affordable units and a low impact development. It is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Map, and the development standards. He added that this future development would be a great addition to the community. Board Questions: Board Member Pence asked if this would be considered a spot rezone. Mr. Lien replied that this is a site -specific rezone, not a spot rezone. Spot rezones are illegal and would not be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Board Member Rosen had the following questions: • Is access to 9520 between the two parcels? Jake Lyon, one of the applicants, replied that there is a 20- foot easement access through his parcel, 9516. • By doing this zoning, would there be any other properties on Edmonds Way that would now be eligible for a height increase. Ms. Szafran explained they would have to go through the rezone as well. • Will there be anybody whose view would be impacted by this? Ms. Szafran noted there is quite a bit of elevation change between the proposed rezone and other properties up on hillside. Mr. Driscoll added that there is a property that was rezoned RM-EW further down to the east of the site. The property across the street was rezoned BN-EW. Because of the steep slope towards the back, the building would be Planning Board Meeting Minutes May 25, 2022 Page 4 of 6 Packet Pg. 356 10.2.c located more towards Edmonds Way. Right now, it is heavily wooded towards the back; several trees will be retained which are already in front of the houses. The applicant will also be adding more landscaping. He believes that the view would be relatively unchanged. In meeting two of the three criteria, are there minimum standards? The applicant referred to code section 16.30.030 which gives site development standards along with specific criteria as to how the RM-EW is to be developed. Board Member Rosen pointed out that the requirements don't specify size relationship between the units and other units in the building. Mr. Driscoll added that Snohomish County has standards as to what is affordable. They would be subject to those standards. Board Member Campbell asked for clarification about how much the height would be changing. The packet mentions a change to 35 from 25 feet, but the staff report mentioned a change to 35 feet from 30 feet. Ms. Szafran replied that the current maximum height in the RM 1.5 would allow up to 30 feet with the portion above 25 feet required to have a roof slope pitch requirement. The RM-EW would allow the applicant to go to 35 feet without the roof pitch requirement but with the other requirements. Mr. Driscoll added that increasing the height to 35 feet allows them to bring the building a little further out of the ground and be more generous with the floor -to -floor distance. The public testimony portion of the public hearing was closed at 8:30 p.m. MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR PENCE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER, TO FORWARD THIS TO CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA Mr. Lien reviewed the extended agenda. The Board made comments about various upcoming topics and scheduling of items. Director Feser indicated she would send out a survey regarding availability for the upcoming park tour. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Board Member Gladstone said she went to the public meeting on streets and public spaces. It was interesting to see what they are thinking about and to hear what the public had to say. Vice Chair Pence expressed concerned about the magnitude of the upcoming Comprehensive Plan work which necessarily includes work beyond the normal scope of the Planning Board. He hopes that the Planning Board can be put in the loop on some of those projects so they are prepared for discussion. Board Member Rosen also participated in the streets meeting and was confused that it took place. The Board has been talking a lot about the Comprehensive Plan and that it would be driven by a vision and values. It seemed that things were done out of order, but there were a lot of participants. He also expressed concern that they asked participants about barriers to success since they haven't defined success yet. He felt this set up an unnecessary push-pull dynamic. He cautioned staff to be careful about how they word questions. He thanked Chair Crank for giving them the opportunity to weigh in on how they feel about meeting in person. He also started he really enjoyed the parliamentary procedures meeting and found it very useful. Vice Chair Pence concurred. Planning Board Meeting Minutes May 25, 2022 Page 5 of 6 Packet Pg. 357 10.2.c Board Member Kuehn also appreciated being able to give input on meeting in person. Board Member Cloutier asked about the BD2 summary that Mr. Lien gave to Council last night. Mr. Lien stated they would be required to go back to in -person meetings in June. The City doesn't have the capacity to do a hybrid option for all the boards and commissions like they do for Council. Chair Crank asked if the public would be notified that they would not have access to the virtual meetings anymore. Mr. Lien thought they would be doing a press release. Board Member Rosen asked if the meetings would still be broadcast live on Channel 21. Mr. Lien stated that was his intent to broadcast the meeting as they had done in the past. Chair Crank stated she was concerned about losing the level of accessibility they have had with the public. She noted there may be some members who have health concerns and are not ready to meet in person yet. She also wondered about the equity factor of which boards and commissions are able to be broadcast and which are not. She expressed concern about what would happen for those who do not feel comfortable returning to in -person meetings. Board Member Rosen asked who has the authority to allocate the resources to provide hybrid meetings and suggested they talk with them. Vice Chair Pence concurred and noted that the quality of the video also needs to be upgraded. Board Member Gladstone asked about health protocols such as adequate spacing, masking, and testing prior to meetings. Board Member Campbell asked for statistics about participation changes with the different forums. Mr. Lien did not think they had any statistics but informally observed that there are more people via Zoom than when they met in person. Chair Crank encouraged Board members to share their thoughts by responding to her email and cc'ing Mr. Lien. Board Member Kuehn noted that having the option to participate online played a big part in his decision to participate on the Board. IWW.101►1lot" :Tl7_\s17I1:/\ItKIII7ulUIDOOM Chair Crank noted it had been a hard week and encouraged everyone to be kind and patient with one another. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:06 p.m. Planning Board Meeting Minutes May 25, 2022 Page 6 of 6 Packet Pg. 358 10.2.d CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Minutes of Webinar Meeting July 27, 2022 Chair Crank called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The Land Acknowledgement was read by Lily Distelhorst. Board Members Present Staff Present Alicia Crank, Chair Susan McLaughlin, Development Services Director Roger Pence, Vice Chair Kernen Lien, Interim Planning Division Manager Matt Cheung Angie Feser, Parks, Recreation, Cultural Arts, and Human Svcs. Director Judi Gladstone Leif Bjorback, Chief Building Official Richard Kuehn Mike De Lilla, Senior Utilities Engineer Mike Rosen Mike Clugston, Senior Planner Beth Tragus-Campbell (alternate) Lily Distelhorst (student rep) Board Members Absent Todd Cloutier (excused) READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER CHEUNG, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER ROSEN, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JULY 13 AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Larry Williamson asked about engagement activities related to the Comprehensive Plan Update process. Mr. Lien explained he would give an update at the end of the meeting. Marjorie Fields made comments regarding the Salmon -Safe Certification process. She strongly urged the City to move ahead with problems mentioned in the report such as removing blockages to salmon in the streams and stabilizing stream breaks, especially in Perrinville Creek and Shell Creek. Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 27, 2022 Page 1 of 9 Packet Pg. 359 10.2.d Greg Fer_ug son commented on the Salmon -Safe Certification process. He urged the Planning Board not to recommend that the certification be allowed. He expressed concern about the certification and the need for improvements to the certification. The climate change issue needs to be taken seriously, and it is not adequately addressed in the report. He stated that there are blockages on all the salmon -bearing streams. These are acknowledged in the report, but there is no requirement to fix the blockages. Similarly, there are habitat issues identified in the report, but there is no requirement for the City to fix them. He urged the Planning Board to reject the report and send it back to the Science Team to add actions that will help the situation. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A. Development Services Activity Report Development Services Director McLaughlin and Chief Building Official Bjorback made a presentation regarding 2022 Development Activities focusing on COVID response, permit activity, key development, and Comprehensive Plan performance measures. COVID Response forced the department to move to electronic permitting activities. MyBuildingPermit.com is the online portal for managing permit applications. Pre -application meetings continue over Zoom. Customer feedback on electronic processes has been positive. City Hall reopened to the public in March with reduced hours. The majority of staff are utilizing a hybrid work model. Customer assistance is provided in -person, virtual, or over the phone and/or email. Chair Crank asked about staffing levels. Director McLaughlin reported that they just hired their second new planner after some reshuffling. Now, they are nearly fully staffed with the exception of one associate planner. Director McLaughlin reported on the numbers and types of permits issued and the corresponding revenue. There is an upward trend of the annual number of building permits. She reviewed impact fees and general facility charges, solar permits, and building inspections. Mr. Bjorback reviewed a map of the key projects in Edmonds. Most are located near the Highway 99 corridor, along Edmonds Way, or in the bowl. Projects highlighted included: • Wastewater Treatment Plant — Carbon Recovery, 200 - 2nd Avenue S. - issued • GRE Apartments —192 new residential Units, 23400 Highway 99 — nearing completion • Anthology of Edmonds —127 new senior living units, 21200 — 72nd Avenue W. - issued • Bell Street Apartments — 4 new residential units, 650 Bell Street — nearing completion • Main Street Commons — retail, restaurant, and event space, 550/558 Main Street - issued • Edmonds Crossing —10 new residential units, 23830 Edmonds Way — in the framing stages • Kisan Townhomes —18 new residential units, 22810 Edmonds Way - issued • Ford Hunter Townhomes — 4-unit townhomes, 7528 — 215d' Street SW — open for occupancy • Paradise Heights —12 new residential units, 550 Paradise Lane - issued • Edmonds Townhomes — 4-unit townhome, 8029 — 238d' Street SW — wrapping up permit review • Civic Field — park updates, 300 — 6d' Avenue N — estimated to open mid -winter • Apollo Apartments — 252 new residential units, 23601 Highway 99 — nearing issuance • Port Office Building — 6650 sf new commercial, 471 Admiral Way - applied • Westgate Station — 4700 sf commercial + 20 residential units, 9601 Edmonds Way - applied • Pine Park — 6 live/work + 8-unit townhome, 614/616 — 5d' Avenue S. - applied Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 27, 2022 Page 2 of 9 Packet Pg. 360 10.2.d • Sunde Townhomes — 5-unit townhome, 8629-238"' Street SW — in design review • Greenhill Townhomes — 6-unit townhome, 7103 — 210t' Street SW — in design review • GBH Holdings — 24-unit townhome, 627 Dayton — in design review • Housing Hope — 52 new residential units + services, 8215- 236t' Street SW — in design reviews • Glacier Environmental Services — new commercial office + warehouse, 7509 — 212t' Street SW, in design review • Terrace Place — 260 new residential units, 23625 — 84t' Avenue W — pre -application • Brass Tack Investments — 7 new residential units, 9516 Edmonds Way — rezone • Edmonds Way PRD — 16-lot Planned Residential Development, 5401550 Edmonds Way — pre - application Director McLaughlin reported on the City's Comprehensive Plan Performance Measures as articulated in the Comprehensive Plan. These measurements reflect city-wide and city government energy use; the number of residential units permitted; the average number of jobs within the city; the lineal feet of water, sewer, and stormwater mains replaced or rehabilitated; the Capital Facilities Plan project delivery results; and lineal feet of sidewalk renovated or rehabilitated. Comments/Questions: Board Member Rosen asked if new sidewalks were included in the "renovated or rehabilitated" numbers. Director McLaughlin affirmed that the new sidewalks were included in the calculations even though they weren't necessarily spelled out. Board Member Rosen suggested highlighting that since it is such a high priority for residents. He then referred to the increase in residential electricity consumption. He pointed out that they have been strongly encouraging load increase behavior such as electric vehicles and switching from gas to electric. Director McLaughlin agreed. Board Member Rosen asked for more information about the goals for the average number of residential units permitted. Ms. McLaughlin thought that if they met that target, they were on track for meeting the number of units needed. Mr. Lien added that the targets are from the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Update and the previous growth targets that the City was assigned. There will be new targets with the new update. The City is on track to meet the 2035 targets, but, per the Buildable Lands Report, beyond 2035 they are short. Board Member Campbell thanked staff for the information. She commended staff she has worked with on the permitting and inspection process. Board Member Gladstone asked about the height of Terrace Place. It seems tall and out of place for the area. Director McLaughlin noted that the area was recently rezoned. There is currently a 75-foot maximum, and the proposal is going up to the maximum height. Mr. Lien added that this property is in the General Commercial (CG) zone along the Highway 99 corridor. Board Member Gladstone expressed concern about the huge number of units this will have and the resulting increase in pedestrian and car traffic. Mr. Lien explained there are extensive frontage improvements required in the CG zone including new sidewalks. The Housing Hope project is on the same block so the whole area will get frontage improvements. This area is also being considered for the Green Streets project. Board Member Gladstone expressed concern about the impact on the neighborhood and encouraged robust community engagement. She also spoked to the importance of considering where and how the sidewalks are installed so they are useful. Director McLaughlin agreed and discussed how the development of street typologies fits into that. This will ensure that each development has consistent application of sidewalk standards. This will also involve a sidewalk code update. Board Member Gladstone referred to the Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 27, 2022 Page 3 of 9 Packet Pg. 361 10.2.d utility replacement metrics and suggested that a more meaningful metric might be the number of miles being replaced each year and the term of replacement for the whole system. Vice Chair Pence noted that they have seen some of these projects in previous years. He asked for clarification about how the annual counts are done. Director McLaughlin noted that for the purposes of Comprehensive Plan measurements, they are only counted one time, but staff is including them each year in the presentations because they are in different phases of development. Vice Chair Pence referred to the live/work units and asked if this is a requirement. Director McLaughlin replied that the live/work component is not required, but ground floor commercial is. Vice Chair Pence asked if the City would require residents to have a business license. Director McLaughlin indicated they would. Board Member Cheung said he appreciated the maps used in the presentation as a visual representation of where the projects are. He referred to the increase in residential energy consumption and asked if there was monthly data for 2021. He wondered how that compares to 2022. Director McLaughlin indicated she could look into that. Board Member Kuehn thanked staff for the presentation and for the maps. Regarding sidewalks, he encouraged attention to the areas where they are needed the most. He stressed that they need to be usable. Director McLaughlin commented that as part of the Reimagining Neighborhoods and Streets project, they will be doing a pedestrian prioritization investment network which will inform where they need to invest. They will also be looking at including in -lieu programs. Regarding the energy usage, Board Member Kuehn said he was also interested in seeing the monthly data. He thought that perhaps people really ramped up their work -at-home efforts in 2021 rather than 2020. Student Representative Distelhorst said she was excited to see more multifamily housing in Edmonds but asked if areas like Highway 99 will be prioritized to be safer for pedestrians. She spoke to the importance of improving the area completely to provide equitable development. Director McLaughlin agreed. She noted that it makes sense to put this density along Highway 99 where they have the high quality Bus Rapid Transit. Along with that will be the prioritization of pedestrian safety where the development is going and where the people will be. She spoke to the importance of involving the community in this and of focusing on quality of life for those areas. She commented on how the Green Streets project could fit in with this goal and beautify the area. Board Member Campbell spoke to the need for sidewalks on 80 and on 236th Streets and noted that the sidewalk on 238d' will be even more utilized with the opening of the Mountlake Terrace Transit Center. She commented on Community Transit's proposed bus route from Edmonds Ferry directly to the Mountlake Terrace Transit Center going up 238t'. She recommended that one of the conditions of the Terrace Place project be a stoplight at 238th Street and Highway 104 to help with the traffic situation there. Director McLaughlin indicated that a traffic analysis would be done. B. Equitable Engagement Framework Director McLaughlin explained the goal is to create a framework for engaging and building meaningful relationships with communities who have historically been underrepresented in planning for public infrastructure and other city projects. She reviewed the tasks involved in creating the draft framework including a team kickoff meeting, demographic data review, interviews, developing a criteria map, community champions list, and compiling the draft framework. The demographic review aims to provide a demographic profile of Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 27, 2022 Page 4 of 9 Packet Pg. 362 10.2.d communities in the city based on factors such as age, sex, race, ethnicity, income, internet access, and language spoken at home. Ten different census tracts were reviewed. She discussed detailed results of the demographic review and discussed deliverables: demographic analysis, criteria mapping, scales of engagement, and the Equitable Engagement Framework. Board Member Gladstone asked if the numbers in area 9 included the people of Esperance and if they would be included in communications. Director McLaughlin was not sure if they were included in the numbers but indicated she could find out. She explained that if they are talking about a physical project, it would be relevant to include the residents of Esperance in communications. Board Member Gladstone asked why the population of black people was not specifically listed. Chair Crank commented that it is only 1-2% of the population and was included in persons of color. She noted that persons of color numbers may actually be higher because many people are mixed race but must choose one "box" on the census form. She spoke to the importance of considering the different races and cultures and the perspectives and values within those communities. Director McLaughlin concurred. Vice Chair Pence agreed with the challenge of having to check one box for race. He requested a full copy of the report when it is done. Finally, he wondered how this will work in practice; for example, with the Unocal property. Director McLaughlin explained how the tools could be used to make decisions. Vice Chair Pence said he hopes that the underrepresented residents and overrepresented residents will be brought together. Director McLaughlin noted that this may take extra time as the goal is to nurture relationships, educate, build confidence, increase comfort levels, and level the playing field for underrepresented community members. Board Member Cheung expressed appreciation for this work. He is looking forward to seeing the rest of the report. Board Member Rosen said he loves this data. He spoke to the importance of different approaches for different needs. He asked about the stunning number of 27% Hispanic/Latino and asked why the census says it is only 7.9%. Director McLaughlin said she would look into it. Board Member Kuehn also said he really likes this focus. He looks forward to hearing more about this. Chair Crank commented on the difficulty of mixing the overrepresented groups with the underrepresented groups initially. She noted that this project will create the opportunity to have uncomfortable but important conversations. She stated that the outreach will need to be community -minded to be successful. She commented on the importance of being mindful of how they approach underrepresented people. She is proud of Edmonds for taking on this challenging work. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Salmon -Safe Certification Director Feser introduced this item and Senior Utilities Engineer Mike De Lilla. She explained that the City ended up the Salmon -Safe evaluation with 12 condition items that need to be met within five years and three pre -certification items. The Planning Board had requested additional information on May 25 regarding prioritization and criteria of the 12 conditions, resources needed in terms of costs and staff commitments, time estimations, private landowner requirements, and pre -conditions 1 and 2 confirmation by the City. Additionally, Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 27, 2022 Page 5 of 9 Packet Pg. 363 10.2.d staff has come up with a couple requests they would like the Council to consider when they are reviewing certification and contemplating adoption. Director Feser reviewed the prioritization of the conditions and the four criteria used to prioritize them (benefit to aquatic habitat/species; direct vs. indirect; action vs. plan; and area). The five conditions that ended up at the top are also the ones that staff is bringing forward with some considerations for the Council to extend time or allocate budget dollars for to make them happen. The most impactful items and the ones that require the most resources are identified as priorities by both staff and Salmon -Safe. Director Feser also reviewed resource estimation for the various conditions in terms of cost estimate and city staff time required to sustain the project. Regarding private landowner requirements, the assessment done by Salmon -Safe was only for city -owned sites so that isn't an issue. Regarding the pre -conditions, she received confirmation that Pre -Condition 1 might have one follow-up piece. Pre -Condition 2 is good to go. Pre -Condition 3 applies to Parks and will take approximately three months. She thinks all three will be completed before this is adopted by Council. She reviewed staff requests/revisions related to the five top conditions. Board Member Cheung suggested that one additional metric that might be helpful is the length of time it will take for each of those categories. Director Feser concurred. She stated that the conditions have timeframes associated with each one of them. By agreeing to the certification, the City agrees to the timeframe. Board Member Cheung explained that more detail about how long the City expects each one to take would be helpful. Board Member Gladstone thanked staff for the presentation. She asked Director Feser about the driver and the value of the certification. Director Feser reviewed some of the history of the Salmon -Safe certification. She acknowledged that members of the public would like to see a little more action, but staff realizes that to do this type of work they need to develop permits, plans, and put a lot of things in place. Mr. De Lilla concurred and spoke to the importance of having an accurate assessment of all the issues at hand before taking action. Board Member Rosen thanked staff for responding to the Board's questions. He asked if staff s salaries are included in the cost allocation. Director Feser replied that they are not, and neither are the consultant costs. Board Member Rosen asked if things like climate change and emerging science are being taken into consideration. Director Feser discussed the Parks response to the water situation. The Conservation Plan will respond to climate -related issues and describe how the City will adapt. Mr. De Lilla agreed that they are doing their best to keep up with the data as it is updated. He discussed how they updated the Stormwater Code to decrease the flashiness of Perrinville Creek. This is more than what is required by the State for drainage standards and factors in impervious surfaces that actually exist. Board Member Rosen asked about the projected impact on salmon runs related to each condition. Director Feser replied that Salmon -Safe said it was hard to quantify, but they have seen results in other cities where these plans have been implemented. Board Member Rosen noted that since they have a baseline, they could implement some milestones to see if they are making a difference. This could build in some opportunities to course correct if things are not working or double down if they are. He referred to Condition 4 which relates to water conservation plans and irrigation and asked how this rose so high to the top in terms of its impact on salmon. Director Feser said she would follow up with Salmon -Safe on this. Board Member Campbell asked if there are other projects that have been tabled that are potentially more actionable than these items. If they don't support the Salmon -Safe framework, are there other alternatives they are looking at? Mr. De Lilla explained that the Department of Ecology is requiring that all the Phase 2 cities put Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 27, 2022 Page 6 of 9 Packet Pg. 364 10.2.d together a Stormwater Management Action Plan. In some ways the Salmon -Safe certification will supplement other things; in other ways, it will not. He reviewed other work the City is also doing. Board Member Campbell asked about the impact that focusing on this is having on staff time and other projects. Director Feser replied that some of these items would not have been on the work plan. By committing to the certification, they have to put off other things. Board Member Campbell asked what those things are. Director Feser indicated she would need to follow up on that. This is part of why they want to go to Council to make sure Council understands the price tag and the time commitment required. Ultimately, this will be the Council's decision. Mr. De Lilla concurred. The preference would be to get additional staffing and funds so they can continue to deal with all the other issues. Board Member Gladstone commented that the tradeoff issue is an important one that the Council should consider seriously given the demands on the budget. She thinks it would also be important for Council to consider what those milestones will be. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER CHEUNG, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD ADVANCE THIS FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION, UNDERSCORING THE IMPORTANCE OF LOOKING AT THE FINANCIAL TRADEOFFS OF IMPLEMENTING THIS VERSUS THE IMPACTS ON THE REST OF THE BUDGET AND ENSURING THAT THERE ARE GOOD MILESTONES OR BENCHMARKS FOR MAKING SURE THAT THERE IS VALUE IN THE WORK THAT IS BEING DONE. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. NEW BUSINESS A. Permanent Design Standards for Multifamily Buildings in the BD2 Zone Senior Planner Clugston reviewed a PowerPoint presentation regarding Permanent Design Standards for multifamily -only buildings in the BD2 zone. Council adopted interim design standards a couple months ago. Staff is in the process of developing permanent design standards for these same buildings. He reviewed the timeline for the adoption process and the moratorium process. These standards are intended to apply to the areas in the BD2 zone that do not have the Designated Street Front requirements. Council also adopted an interim map during the design standard discussion which changed the Street Front map. As a result, only a handful of non -Designated Street Front parcels remain in the BD2 zone at the edges of the downtown area. The interim design standards targeted these particular sites and addressed materials, private amenity space, street -side amenity space, and roof modulation/stepdown regulations. Materials: • Breaks up massing; strengthens identity • Preferred exterior materials: natural stone, wood, architectural metal, brick, and glass • Man-made is acceptable if made to look like preferred materials Private Amenity Space: • Intended to improve livability for smaller residential units • Allows for architectural discretion to design amenity space to align with building character, orientation, and style • Provides additional articulation of massing, adds interest to the facade, and increases `eyes on the street' Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 27, 2022 Page 7 of 9 Packet Pg. 365 10.2.d • Standards: 0 10% of project area o can be made by balconies, decks, patios, yards o can be grouped together with a dwelling unit or grouped for resident use o if with individual units must be greater than 40 square feet o balconies can project 5' into setback from R-zone property o decks and patios can project up to 10' in the setback area Street -side AmenitySpace: • Results in a setback from the sidewalk to serve as amenity space • Activates street front to improve the pedestrian experience • Strengthens pedestrian access and site identity • Standards: o Must be 5% of lot area o Must be between the building front and sidewalk only and open to sky o Must include landscaping, seating, art, etc. o Street -side amenity space area excludes any private amenity space area that is provided at the front of the building o Canopy/awnings are required and do not impact the amount of street -side amenity area. Roof Modulation/Stepdown: The language added to the interim standards stated that "some roof modulation is required with preference for stepdowns that follow the slope when slope exists." The intent was to provide a variation in roof plane and reduced the bulk of the building. The Architectural Design Board asked staff to pick up more on the roof modulation aspect and provide a menu of options that a developer could use to meet the additional roof modulation requirements. Staff will be working on this for next week. Private Amenity pace — Rooftop Deck: There was some concern that if the required private amenity space was allowed on the rooftop, it might all go there. The Architectural Design Board wanted the rooftop option to be available after the 10% of private amenity space is achieved for individual units. They also would allow that to be above the height limit with certain conditions. Mr. Clugston stated that staff would be going back to the ADB next week to further refine the language for permanent standards and then be back before the Planning Board in two weeks for a public hearing on those standards. Comments/Questions: None PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA Mr. Lien reviewed the extended agenda and solicited feedback on the length of the agenda/meeting tonight. Chair Crank stated she did not like late meetings. She thinks the length of agenda tonight was good, but the members need to self -monitor the amount of questions and comments. She reminded board members that staff welcomes questions between meetings also. Board Member Gladstone thought there was too much on the agenda tonight. It's not necessarily the number of items on the list, but how long each one takes. She appreciates Chair Crank's comments about being judicious Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 27, 2022 Page 8 of 9 Packet Pg. 366 10.2.d about commentary, she thinks they need to make sure that they have the time to really understand the issues well enough to make informed recommendations. Chair Crank agreed and recommended, when possible, asking staff questions ahead of time. Vice Chair Pence reminded folks that he had suggested not taking a break in mid -August which might have helped. Chair Crank did not think that would have made that much of a difference. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS None. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Mr. Lien gave an update on public engagement activities related to the Comprehensive Plan update process. He commented on the very positive response staff had from the public about having a table set up at the market and noted they will likely continue this to some degree. Board Member Gladstone thanked Mr. Lien for giving her a mini tour of the BD2 zone. This was very helpful for her to better understand the situation. Board Member Campbell thanked staff for all the work put in for tonight's meeting. Although it was a long meeting, it was full of important information. Vice Chair Pence commented that he will try to make a practice of asking questions ahead of meetings when possible. He asked that the Board be kept apprised of the status of the code rewrite which Mr. Clugston will be working on. Mr. Lien replied that would be coming to the Board as soon as possible. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 10:03 p.m. Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 27, 2022 Page 9 of 9 Packet Pg. 367 10.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 09/27/2022 ARPA Program Status Report Staff Lead: Todd Tatum Department: Community Services Preparer: Todd Tatum Background/History American Rescue Plan Act funding was allocated to specific programmatic elements in Ordinance 4229 in July 2021, and further amended by Ordinances 4237 and 4259. These elements are: A. City Expenditure Reimbursement B. Edmonds Rescue Plan Household Support C. Edmonds Rescue Plan Business Support D. Edmonds Rescue Plan Nonprofit Support E. Edmonds Rescue Plan Job Retraining Program F. Edmonds Rescue Plan City Green Infrastructure Staff Recommendation None. This is a report only. Narrative This agenda item gives a recap of the efforts to establish programs in each of the six established areas. A break down of accomplishments by program will be given, highlighting the successes and opportunities in each. Attachments: 1) ARPA Funding Status Graphs Attachments: FINAL ARPA Council Meeting Sept 27 2022 Packet Pg. 368 f 12C. 10,9V City of Edmonds City Council Meeting. Sep 27, 2022 Discussions for this agenda item: 1) Program overview 2) Program status by category 3) Remaining budget Packet Pg. 369 10.3.a REVIEW: SUBDIVISION OF FUNDS BY ORDINANCE r- O 0. *City Expenditure Reimbursements: $7503,000 y •Edmonds Rescue Plan Household Support: $4,150,000 CIO •Household Support •Utility Bill Support Q •Housing Repair Q *Edmonds Rescue Plan Business Support: $1,125,000 -General Business Support -Tourism Support -Small Business Support ,,Edmonds Rescue Plan Nonprofit Support: $500,000 ,,Edmonds Rescue Plan Job Retraining Program: $600,000 •City Green Infrastructure: $4,7681099 •Edmonds Marsh •Lower Perrinville Creek Realignment -Green Streets and Rain Gardens •96t" ROW Packet Pg. 370 10.3.a B - Household Support - 34.9% C - Business Support - 9.5% D - Nonprofit Support - 4.2% E - Job Retraining - 5.0N F - Green Infrastructure - 40.1% Total ARPA Funds - $11,893,099 A - City Expenditures - 6.3% $7 7,785 � $2,O5O,O0O $216144,525 $608, S3 $1,125,000 $420,5T $420,5 $500 00 00 $10,526 $$.9,250 $394,74a $�4a,sa9 � $�5a,aaa �199,999 $fi00, $600, $4,150,000 $0 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 S pent by 9/6%22 Cornmitme nts 0 9 f 6 f 22 Allocated Funds Q $5,000,00O Packet Pg. 371 10.3.a Household Support Subcategories - $41150,000 $0 Housing Repair - 24.1% $0 $5,443 Utility Support - 3.6% $50,000 Household Grants - 72.3% $150,000 $1,000,000 $772,343 $2,000,000 ................................................................. $0 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 5pent by 9f 6j22 Corr mitme nts @ 9f 6f 22 ■ Allocated Funds 0 CL d CO 2 L L IL Q a Q Packet Pg. 372 Business Support Subcategories - 11125,000 Small Business Support Grants - 55.6% Tourism Support- 26.7% General Business Support -17.B% $0 $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000 $700,00 ■ Spent by 9/6/22 Commitments @ 9/6/22 Allocated Funds N N O N r- N m U) 0� c r a� m U c 0 U Q d Q J a z U- c m E z a a Packet Pg. 373 Nonprofit Support: • 15 total grantees • All in 2021 • Ranged from $8,000-$50,000 D - Nonprofit Support - 4.2% ML $0 $4200500 $4200500 5oo+000 i Spent by 8f 22/22 ■ Commitments @ 8f 22/22 $1+000+000 Allocated Funds Packet Pg. 374 Job Retraining: • Edmonds College: $325,000 over three years • Shoreline CC: $275,000 over three years E - Job Retraining - 5.0 Spent by 8/22/22 $1991999 $6001 00 $6001 00 $0 Commitments @ 8/22/22 $110001000 Allocated Funds Packet Pg. 375 10.3.a Green Infrastructure: • Edmonds Marsh Water Quality &t Flood Control • Lower Perrinville Creek Realignment • Green Streets • 96t" Right of Way Infiltration F- Green Infrastructure -40.1% so .$U�OOI" $2,000,000 ■ S pent by 9 f 6/22 Cc mm itmen is @ 9/6/22 SUM 000 1 $ 750, 000* $31500,000* $ 600,000 $ 450, 000 ■Allocated Fj-ids $4, 000, 000 $5,000,000 E 0 a m w c� E L Im O L IL a W Packet Pg. 376 What is a green street.? Improves the Environment • Infiltrates, slows and/or treats stormwater; • provide opportunities for supportive habitat; • Mitigates heat island impacts • Expands pedestrian realm Fosters Walkability • Calms traffic by narrowing width, providing visual interest and verticality along street edge. • Encourages walking with safer streets, ADA compliant with visual interest. • Streets trees and landscape have been proven to improve mental health • Enhances neighborhood aesthetic 10.3.a 0 ® N' a Packet Pg. 377 10.3.a What is our scope of work for the current green streets project? ► Work with Reimagining Neighborhoods Et Streets to create a green streets overlay network ► This will guide future green stormwater infrastructure investments ► Develop 100% Design for 236t" Ave SW between 84t" Ave W ► Develop 100% Design for Dayton Street between SR104 and 2nd Ave S AO O CL E 2 L IM O L IL a Q Packet Pg. 378 Dayton Street - green street el �ments: • Roadway narrow (vehicular capacity retained) • Sidewalks and planting strips expanded • Bioretention planter collecting runoff from the road • Standard landscape beds adjacent bioretention planter picking up sidewalk runoff, overflows to bioretention planter. i i r N I � I � G L - i L i a N N N f. Q. a CL ® Z LL C E a l RrW Packet Pg. 379 10.3.a 2361h Street SW - green street elements: • Roadway narrow (vehicular capacity retained) • Sidewalks and planting strips added • Bioretention cells collect runoff from the road through curb cuts • Bioretention cells collect runoff directly from sidewalks • Public private partnership potential with Housing Hope and Terrace Place developments. M 0 0. CD - 0 - - -- a aIL I I I I I i e N N O N ti N r IM 0 U Q d Q J - LLLL C 0 L �• r Q r j Packet Pg. 380 I Discussion a to Packet Pg. 381