Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2017-08-15 City Council - Full Agenda-1955
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8 9. o Agenda Edmonds City Council snl. ,nyo COUNCIL CHAMBERS 250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 AUGUST 15, 2017, 7:00 PM CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA PRESENTATIONS 1. 2017 Legislative Session Wrap -Up (25 min) 2. June Quarterly Financial Report (10 min.) AUDIENCE COMMENTS (3-MINUTE LIMIT PER PERSON) - REGARDING MATTERS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA AS CLOSED RECORD REVIEW OR AS PUBLIC HEARINGS APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes of August 8, 2017 2. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of August 8, 2017 3. Approval of claim checks. 4. Amendments to Downtown Business Improvement District By -Laws PUBLIC HEARING 1. Resolution to Designate Highway 99 Subarea as Residential Targeted Area (10 min) ACTION ITEMS 1. Proposed Resolution supporting merger of SNOCOM and SNOPAC (30 min.) 2. Adoption of Subarea Plan Zone Map Amendments, Development Regulations, and Planned Action for Highway 99 area (30 min.) 3. Amendments to Multi -Family Tax Exemption Code Provisions (15 min) 4. Amendments to Chapter 3.75, Business Improvement District (10 min) 5. Pine Street Lighting Discussion (20 min.) 6. Sunset Ave Parking (20 min.) COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. Council Committee Reports (10 min.) 10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS 11. COUNCIL COMMENTS 12. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(1). Edmonds City Council Agenda August 15, 2017 Page 1 13. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. ADJOURN Edmonds City Council Agenda August 15, 2017 Page 2 4.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/15/2017 2017 Legislative Session Wrap -Up (25 min) Staff Lead: Patrick Doherty Department: Community Services Preparer: Patrick Doherty Background/History Jennifer Ziegler is the City's contracted lobbyist/government affairs specialist in Olympia who provides a wrap-up report to City Council about each year's completed Legislative Session. Staff Recommendation No action required. Narrative Jennifer Ziegler will provide a report to City Council summarizing the key legislation passed, legislation attempted but not passed, key budget -related developments, and the status of work yet to be done by the Legislature, especially regarding the capita budget. Packet Pg. 3 4.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/15/2017 June Quarterly Financial Report (10 min.) Staff Lead: Dave Turley Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Sarah Mager Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation No action needed; informational only. Narrative June Quarterly Financial Report Attachments: Complete June Quarterly Financial Report Packet Pg. 4 4.2.a AT A GLANCE: Overall our local economy re- mains strong. The unemployment rate for Seattle/Bellevue/Everett was at 3.4% in June. Home sales continue at a high rate. Accord- ing to NWMLS "We are at 0.9 months of home supply 1 in Snohomish County — less than 6 is considered a Seller's Market." INSIDE THIS ISSUE: Revenues By Fund Summary Expenditures By Fund Summary General Fund Revenues Expenditures By Fund Details General Fund Expenditure Detail Investment Portfolio Fund Balance Overview Below: Summer is time for flower baskets J Summary of All Operating Funds: Revenue The Financial Management Report is a summary report of the City's 2nd Quarter 201 7financial results with a comparison to 2nd Quarter 201 c Notable Revenue Highlights: • General Fund revenues are lagging slightly behind the first six months of 2016, by $54,319 (or 0.27%) • 2017 tax revenues are $215,160 higher than 2016. This increase is led by: ♦ Real/Personal Property taxes $142,492 ♦ Sales taxes $229,651 6 Specific Revenue Highlights by Fund: 13 General Fund revenues for the first half of 2017 are higher than the same period in 2016 in the catego- 32 ries of Taxes, Licenses and Per- mits, Charges for Goods and Ser- vices, and in other Miscellaneous 34 revenues. General Fund revenues are falling behind 2016 for the same period in Intergovernmental revenues (primarily grant rev- enues) and in Fines and For- feitures. A more detailed breakdown of General Fund revenues can be found begin- ning on page 3, with sales tax performance displayed on page 18. • Special Revenue Funds 2017 year-to-date revenues are $3,849,719 or 49% lower than last year. The 2017 revenue decrease is pri- marily due to a $2.9 million decrease in revenues in the Combined Street Con- struction/Improvement Fund and a $813,637 decrease in the Parks Con- struction Fund. These decreases are largely due to the timing of grant billings for various projects. The de- crease in revenue in this fund was off- set somewhat by: o The Street Fund revenues increased by $92,440 compared to 2016 o REET revenues for 2017 have in- creased by $132,275 compared to 2016. • but Enterprise Fund (Water, Storm, Sewer) revenues for 2017 have de- creased by $11,876 compared to 2016 • Did you Know: The Snohomish PUD is working with the City to upgrade nearly 1,600 streetlights with energy efficient LED lighting. LED lighting cuts energy use by up to 60% and lasts three to four times longer than tradi- tional lights, reducing maintenance work for replacing the lights. The LED upgrades will begin this summer and the project is expected to be completed by early 2019. Financial Management Report as of June 30 Packet Pg. 5 -Dr — — — — — — — ummary of All Operating Funds: Expenditures Above: The Ed- monds Police Dept. participated in the Law Enforcement Torch Run for Special Olympics on June 2 • General Fund expenditures ended the quarter with 49% of the budg- et expended, at a nearly identi- cal spending pace compared to last year. General Fund expense by catego- ries are on page 6 and depart- mental expenses are on pages 13- 16. More General Fund expenditures information in graphical form can be found on pages 23-31. • Special Revenue Fund expendi- tures decreased $1.36 million in the first half of 2017 compared to the first half of 2016. The majori- ty of this decrease comes from a reduction in construction outlays, with Combined Street Construc- tion/Improvement fund expenses being $588,639 lower than last year. Additional Special Revenue Fund expenditure information can be found on pages 6-8. • Through June 30 the Enterprise Fund (the Water fund, Storm fund, and Sewer fund) expenses in- creased by $1,014,915 over last Below: New Band , year, primarily due to increased shell at the Frances capital expenses in the sewer fund. Anderson Center Additional Utility Fund expense information can be found on pages 9-10. • The City's overall end - mg fund balance remained stable, with an increase of $1.7 million since Decem- ber 31, representing a 2% increase. �OF EDMOND1 101l 0RMAIN REPLICEMEN1 PROJECT SPRING -SUMMER 2017 C0910,10 SIRREL 425.111-0220 Investment Portfolio • The City's investment earnings contin- ue to increase over 2016 earnings due to further diversification of the City's investment portfolio. More investment information can be found on pages 32- 33. Other Notable Highlights • During the second quarter of 2017 the City invested an additional $3 million in Federally backed bonds, bringing total investments to $31.1 million. During the second quarter of 2017 the City substantially completed the con- struction of a new Veteran's Plaza next to the Public Safety Complex. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Financial Management Report as of June 30 Packet Pg. 6 I 4.2.a I Page 1 of 1 CITY OF EDMONDS REVENUES BY FUND - SUMMARY Fund 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount No. Title Budget Revenues Revenues Remaining %Received 001 GENERAL FUND $ 37,753,480 $ 20,334,355 $ 20,280,036 $ 17,473,444 540/ 009 LEOFF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE 278,630 139,584 142,324 136,306 5101 011 RISK MANAGEMENT FUND 6,800 4,200 9,467 (2,667) 1390/ 012 CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND 44,650 7,283 41,154 3,496 920/ 013 MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION FUND - 233 - - 00/ 014 HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND 5,030 2,526 79 4,951 20/ .-. 1 O 016 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 452,000 591,195 275,452 176,548 610/ CL 104 DRUG ENFORCEMENT FUND 130,000 68,661 27,074 102,926 210/ 0) III STREET FUND 1,784,200 989,658 1,082,098 702,102 610/ 112 COMBINED STREET CONST/IMPROVE 2 6,397,932 3,779,444 866,481 5,531,451 140/ M 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS ACQUIS. FUND 137,200 29,531 29,049 108,151 210/ LL 118 MEMORIAL STREET TREE 110 74 188 (78) 1710/ 120 HOTEL/MOTEL TAX REVENUE FUND 91,200 34,503 34,388 56,812 L 380/ 121 EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND 24,600 8,119 11,519 13,081 470/ 7 122 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND 1,800 71 530 1,270 290/ Cy 123 TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS 30,450 11,649 12,002 18,448 390/ 125 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 2 1,311,900 625,801 691,522 620,378 530/ 126 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 1, PARKS ACQ FUND 1,314,400 626,412 692,966 621,434 530/ O 127 GIFTS CATALOG FUND 50,390 28,386 27,756 22,634 iZ 5501 129 SPECIAL PROJECTS FUND 280 158 402 (122) 1445 � 130 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE/IMPROVEMT 177,820 94,494 128,475 49,345 720/ Z 132 PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND 3 2,616,940 1,079,454 265,817 2,351,123 100/ _ 136 PARKS TRUST FUND 1,070 628 1,594 (524) 1490/ 137 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE TRUST FD 22,880 12,086 21,426 1,454 940/ d 138 SISTER CITY COMMISSION 10,010 5,772 2,179 7,831 220/ M 7 139 TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT 350,193 00/ Cy 140 BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 51,256 51,165 (51,165) 00/ C 7 211 L.I.D. FUND CONTROL 14,400 773 14,400 00/ 231 2012 LT GO DEBT SERVICE FUND 695,830 70,301 64,938 630,892 90/ 232 2014 DEBT SERVICE FUND - 936,429 00/ E 411 COMBINED UTILITY OPERATION 83,251 78,885 (78,885) 00/ V 421 WATER UTILITY FUND 8 469 570 4 041 301 3 769 220 4 700 350 4501 +_' 422 STORM UTILITY FUND 4,789,173 1,946,923 2,084,829 2,704,344 440i 423 SEWER/WWTP UTILITY FUND 4 12,179,879 5,321,028 5,447,693 6,732,186 450/ 424 BOND RESERVE FUND 1,988,720 667,446 654,345 1,334,375 330i 511 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND 1,628,910 831,427 976,796 652,114 600i 512 TECHNOLOGY RENTAL FUND 946,040 - 498,396 447,644 530i 617 FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND 66,000 57,418 59,782 6,218 910i $ 83,422,294 $ 42,832,027 $ 38,330,028 $ 45,092,266 460i Difference between 2016 and 2017 is due to grant invoicing for Fishing Pier Rehab. 2 Difference between 2016 and 2017 is due to grant invoicing for various projects. 3 Differences between 2016 and 2017 are due to parks donations and park impact fees. 4 Difference between 2016 and 2017 is primarily due to invoicing timing difference. 1 Packet Pg. 7 4.2.a Page 1 of 1 CPI'Y OF EDMONDS EXPENDTITURES BY FUND - SUMMARY Fund 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount No. Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent 001 GENERAL FUND $ 40,069,055 $ 19,669,418 $ 19,674,034 $ 20,395,021 49°/ 009 LEOFF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE 293,460 126,411 143,466 149,994 49°/ 011 RISK MANAGEMENT RESERVE FUND 100,000 80,601 19,399 810/c 014 HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND 5,400 - 5,400 0°/ 016 BUILDING MAINTENANCES 545,500 757,714 133,383 412,117 240/( 104 DRUG ENFORCEMENT FUND 76,030 27,780 16,531 59,499 22°/ III STREET FUND 1,935,260 947,462 852,831 1,082,429 44°/ C 112 COMBINED STREET CONST/IMPROVE 6 6,427,332 2,394,938 1,806,299 4,621,033 28°/ CL (Y 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS ACQUIS. FUND 181,880 25,274 17,345 164,535 10°/ 120 HOTEL/MOTEL TAX REVENUE FUND 99,600 26,145 37,257 62,343 37°/ 121 EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND 26,880 - - 26,880 00/( 122 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND 2,000 835 587 1,413 29°/ LL 123 TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS 61,700 9,543 9,047 52,653 15°/ 125 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 2 2,962,566 258,888 475,890 2,486,676 160/( 126 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 1, PARKS ACQ FUND 2,395,021 498,915 18,348 2,376,673 1°/ 7 (J 127 GIFTS CATALOG FUND 51,220 33,140 28,297 22,923 55°/ 7 130 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE/IMPROVEMT 217,020 77,712 81,563 135,457 38°/ 132 PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND 2 2,955,000 584,177 515,732 2,439,268 17°/ O 138 SISTER CITY COMMISSION 10,500 2,636 137 10,363 1% 139 TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT - 350,193 - - 0°/ 140 BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT - 14,219 31,008 (31,008) 0°/ 'v C 211 L.I.D. FUND CONTROL 16,450 - 16,450 - 100°/ 231 2012 LT GO DEBT SERVICE FUND 695,830 70,301 64,938 630,892 9°/ li 232 2014 DEBT SERVICE FUND - 936,429 - - 0°/ i N 421 WATER UTILITY FUND 13,257,452 3,656,305 3,377,086 9,880,366 25°/ i� 422 STORM UTILITY FUND 8,351,547 1,557,839 1,769,781 6,581,766 21°/ CY 423 SEWER/WWTP UTILITY FUND 8 16,714,828 4,202,354 5,284,546 11,430,282 32°/ C 424 BOND RESERVE FUND 1,989,720 667,442 654,342 1,335,378 33°/ 511 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND 1,886,000 928,227 1,107,367 778,633 59°/ 512 TECHNOLOGY RENTAL FUND 890,430 373,016 517,414 42°/ 617 FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND 72,070 21,351 33,336 38,734 46°/ O V $ 102,289,751 $ 37,845,648 $ 36,603,218 $ 65,686,533 361% 4.; 5 Differences between 2016 and 2017 are primarily due to Fishing Pier Rehabilitation Project. 6 Differences between 2016 and 2017 are due to construction projects expenses in 2016. 7 Differences between 2016 and 2017 are due to purchase of Civic Field in 2016. 8 Differences between 2016 and 2017 are due to construction projects in 2017. 2 Packet Pg. 8 1 4.2.a Page 1 of 3 CITY OF EDMONDS REVENUES - GENERAL FUND 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount Title Budget Revenues Revenues Remaining %Received TAXES: REAL PERSONAL / PROPERTY TAX 9 $ 10,221,670 $ 5,343,422 $ 5,485,914 $ 4,735,756 54% EMS PROPERTY TAX 10 3,911,080 1,955,463 2,120,943 1,790,137 54% VOTED PROPERTY TAX 10,000 504,076 13,395 (3,395) 134% LOCAL RETAIL SALES/USE TAX 11 6,875,000 3,295,015 3,524,666 3,350,334 51% NATURAL GAS USE TAX 7,040 3,365 6,030 1,010 86% 1/10 SALES TAX LOCAL CRIM JUST 687,500 327,165 338,872 348,628 49% ELECTRIC UTILITY TAX 1,604,000 913,790 991,566 612,434 62% GAS UTILITY TAX 608,000 385,669 475,324 132,676 78% SOLID WASTE UTILITY TAX 313,600 162,220 150,403 163,197 48% WATER UTILITY TAX 1,235,300 540,263 529,472 705,828 43% SEWER UTILITY TAX 632,300 311,566 342,031 290,269 54% STORM WATER UTILITY TAX 331,300 164,329 181,546 149,754 55% T.V. CABLE UTILITY TAX 857,600 425,407 433,642 423,958 51% TELEPHONE UTILITY TAX 1,263,200 633,125 582,703 680,497 46% PULLTABS TAX 52,000 25,643 27,488 24,512 53% AMUSEMENT GAMES 40 141 - 40 0% LEASEHOLD EXCISE TAX 262,300 126,667 128,490 133,810 49% 28,871,930 15,117,325 15,332,485 13,539,446 53% LICENSES AND PERMITS: FIRE PERMITS -SPECIAL USE 250 190 90 160 36% POLICE - FINGERPRINTING 300 200 408 (108) 136% PROF AND OCC LICENSE -TAXI 330 - - 330 0% AMUSEMENTS 4,740 - 6,325 (1,585) 133% VENDING MACHINE/CONCESSION 50,000 2,769 13,731 36,269 27% FRANCHISE AGREEMENT-COM CAST 716,800 358,427 364,826 351,974 51% FRANCHISE FEE-EDUCATION/GOVERNM ENT 42,100 21,148 21,155 20,945 50% FRANCHISE AGREEMENT-VERIZON/FRONTIER 102,300 50,705 54,268 48,032 53% FRANCHISE AGREEMENT-BLACKROCK 16,600 8,172 7,511 9,089 45% OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT FRANCHISE 298,200 138,558 148,736 149,464 50% GENERAL BUSINESS LICENSE 116,600 76,241 61,106 55,494 52% DEV SERV PERMIT SURCHARGE 44,940 26,515 37,627 7,314 84% NON-RESIDENT BUS LICENSE 67,800 42,900 43,950 23,850 65% RIGHT OF WAY FRANCHISE FEE 10,700 44,623 11,880 (1,180) 111% BUILDING STRUCTURE PERMITS 620,600 402,155 419,255 201,345 68% ANIMAL LICENSES 35,090 9,792 11,465 23,625 33% STREET AND CURB PERMIT 48,150 21,432 19,921 28,229 41% OTR NON -BUS LIC/PERMITS 13,200 8,987 8,641 4,559 65% 2,188,700 1,212,813 1,230,893 957,807 56% INTERGOVERNMENTAL: DOI 15-0404-0-1-754 - BULLET PROOF VEST 7,930 6,920 5,949 1,981 75% WAASSOC OF SHERIFFS TRAFFIC GRANT - 995 - - 0% TARGET ZERO TEAMS GRANT 4,000 2,273 1,030 2,970 26% HIGH VISIBILITY ENFORCEMENT 7,100 2,663 4,767 2,333 67% DOCKSIDE DRILLS GRANT REIMBURSE - 614 1,399 (1,399) 0% WATERFRONT ANALYSIS GRANT - 251,859 10,000 (10,000) 0% PUD PRIVILEDGE TAX 195,500 - - 195,500 0% MVET/SPECIAL DISTRIBUTION 12,680 5,441 5,657 7,023 45% JUDICIAL SALARY CONTRIBUTION -STATE 18,000 9,150 4,179 13,821 23% CRIMINAL JUSTICE -SPECIAL PROGRAMS 42,500 19,893 20,581 21,919 48% MARIJUANA ENFORCEMENT 23,700 - - 23,700 0% DUI - CITIES 3,000 3,166 3,119 (119) 104% LIQUOR EXCISE TAX 191,000 96,625 100,033 90,967 52% LIQUOR BOARD PROFITS 345,600 174,541 172,712 172,888 50% MISCELLANEOUS INTERLOCAL REVENUE - 75,757 - - 0% INTERLOCAL GRANTS - - 35,000 (35,000) 0% VERDANT INTERLOCAL GRANTS 2,000 2,000 2,000 - 100% POLICE TRAINING CLASSES - - 300 (300) 0% 853,010 651,896 366,725 486,285 43% 2017 Real Personal/Property Tax revenues are $142,492 higher than 2016 revenues. 10 2017 EMS PropertyTax revenues are $165,480 higher than 2016 revenues. 11 2017 Local Retail Sales/Use Tax revenues are $229,651 higher than 2016 revenues. Please also see pages pages 18 & 19. 3 1 Packet Pg. 9 1 I 4.2.a I Page 2 of 3 CITY OF EDMONDS REVENUES - GENERAL FUND Title 2017 Amended Budget 6/30/2016 Revenues 6/30/2017 Revenues Amount Remaining %Received CHARGES FOR GOODS AND SERVICES: RECORD/LEGAL INSTRUMTS 2,000 1,251 2,169 (169) 108% ATM SURCHARGE FEES 300 86 145 155 48% CREDIT CARD FEES 15,000 - 5,230 9,770 35% D/M COURT REC SER 10 7 195 (185) 1955% MUNIC.-DIST. COURT CURR EXPEN 600 284 147 453 25% SALE MAPS & BOOKS 100 - 23 77 23% CLERKS TIME FOR SALE OF PARKING PERMITS 25,100 - 25,100 0% BID SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 600 - - 600 0% PHOTOCOPIES 2,000 540 343 1,657 17% POLICE DISCLOSURE REQUESTS ENGINEERING FEES AND CHARGES 12 SNO-ISLE PASSPORTS AND NATURALIZATION FEES POLICE SERVICES SPECIAL EVENTS CAMPUS SAFETY-EDM. SCH. DIST. WOODWAY-LAW PROTECTION MISCELLANEOUS POLICE SERVICES DUI EMERGENCY FIRE SERVICES FIRE PROTECTION & EM S FOR DUI FIRE DISTRICT #1 STATION BILLINGS LEGAL SERVICES ADULT PROBATION SERVICE CHARGE BOOKING FEES FIRE CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION FEES EMERGENCY SERVICE FEES EMS TRANSPORT USER FEE FIBER SERVICES INTERGOVERNMENTAL FIBER SERVICES FLEX FUEL PAYMENTS FROM STATIONS ANIMAL CONTROL SHELTER ZONING/SUBDIVISION FEE PLAN CHECKING FEES FIRE PLAN CHECK FEES PLANNING 1% INSPECTION FEE S.E.P.A. REVIEW CRITICAL AREA STUDY DV COORDINATOR SERVICES GYM AND WEIGHTROOM FEES LOCKER FEES PROGRAM FEES TAXABLE RECREATION ACTIVITIES WINTER MARKET REGISTRATION FEES BIRD FEST REGISTRATION FEES INTERFUND REIMBURSEMENT -CONTRACT SVCS 4,000 1,772 1,674 2,326 42% 200,000 139,289 259,226 (59,226) 130% 58,000 33,996 43,937 14,063 76% 17,000 11,100 13,400 3,600 79% 30,000 8,757 8,495 21,505 28% 66,280 2,873 3,161 63,119 5% 42,000 20,907 34,067 7,933 81% 1,500 - - 1,500 0% 300 - - 300 0% - 31 32 (32) 0% 45,000 28,234 30,505 14,495 68% - 159 - - 0% 56,000 36,610 24,291 31,709 43% 4,200 2,081 1,477 2,723 35% 8,560 14,119 9,012 (452) 105% 8,000 4,460 2,222 5,778 28% 824,200 487,513 423,461 400,739 51% - 6,095 - - 0% - 3,600 - - 0% 1,800 876 1,198 602 67% 250 184 50 200 20% 80,250 47,321 44,193 36,057 55% 428,000 231,123 202,618 225,382 47% 3,210 6,255 4,540 (1,330) 141% 1,600 1,740 633 967 40% 2,140 1,220 5,360 (3,220) 250% 18,190 10,590 8,190 10,000 45% 11,460 5,560 5,729 5,731 50% 12,000 6,578 7,549 4,451 63% - - 15 (15) 0% 910,100 596,167 528,729 381,371 58% 1,300 881 907 393 70% 5,000 25 150 4,850 3% 750 190 - 750 0% 2,044,540 1,107,179 1,157,729 886,811 57% 4,931,340 2,819,651 2,830,801 2,100,539 57% 12 2017 Engineering Fees and Charges are $119,937 higher than 2016 revenues. 4 Packet Pg. 10 1 I 4.2.a I Page 3 of 3 CITY OF EDMONDS REVENUES - GENERAL FUND 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount Title Budget Revenues Revenues Remaining %Received FINES AND FORFEITURES: PROOF OF VEHICLE INS PENALTY 7,200 3,632 2,689 4,511 37% TRAFFIC INFRACTION PENALTIES 32,800 99,153 107,673 (74,873) 328% NC TRAFFIC INFRACTION 232,500 31,109 17,079 215,421 7% CRT COST FEE CODE LEG ASSESSMENT (LGA) 20,700 10,353 10,093 10,607 49% NON -TRAFFIC INFRACTION PENALTIES - 38,628 400 (400) 0% OTHERINFRACTIONS'04 2,100 1,068 1,764 336 84% PARKING INFRACTION PENALTIES 25,300 12,645 24,014 1,286 95% PARK/INDDISZONE 3,600 1,820 1,339 2,261 37% DWI PENALTIES 8,000 14,581 3,078 4,922 38% DUI - DP ACCT 2,800 1,420 1,049 1,751 37% CRIM CNV FEE DUI 500 274 96 404 19% OTHER CRIMINAL TRAF MISDEM PEN - - 135 (135) 0% CRIMINAL TRAFFIC MISDEMEANOR 8/03 33,600 16,805 18,457 15,143 55% CRIMINAL CONVICTION FEE CT 2,000 1,396 1,388 612 69% CRIM CONV FEE CT 2,000 962 851 1,149 43% OTHER NON-TRAF M ISDEM EANOR PEN - - 32 (32) 0% OTHER NON TRAFFIC MISD. 8/03 9,300 4,659 4,961 4,339 53% COURT DV PENALTY ASSESSMENT 600 283 401 199 67% CRIMINAL CONVICTION FEE CN 1,900 939 582 1,318 31% CRIM CONV FEE CN 500 267 204 296 41% CRIMINAL COST S-RECOUPM ENTS 30,900 15,430 5,193 25,707 17% PUBLIC DEFENSE RECOUPM ENT 25,600 12,823 9,229 16,371 36% BANK CHARGE FOR CONY. DEFENDANT 6,000 2,935 4,452 1,548 74% COURT INTERPRETER COSTS 100 65 188 (88) 188% BUS. LICENSE PERMIT PENALTY 11,000 10,050 8,480 2,520 77% MISC FINES AND PENALTIES 1,400 240 1,440 (40) 103% 460,400 281,536 225,267 235,133 49% MISCELLANEOUS: INVESTMENT INTEREST INTEREST ON COUNTY TAXES INTEREST - COURT COLLECTIONS PARKING SPACE/FACILITIES RENTALS BRACKET ROOM RENTAL LEASES LONG-TERM OTHER RENTS & USE CHARGES PARKS DONATIONS BIRD FEST CONTRIBUTIONS VOLUNTEER PICNIC CONTRIBUTIONS POLICE CONTRIBUTIONS FROM PRIV SOURCES SALE OF JUNK/SALVAGE SALES OF UNCLAIM PROPERTY CONFISCATED AND FORFEITED PROPERTY OTHER JUDGEMENT/SETTLEMENT POLICE JUDGMENTS/RESTITUTION CASHIER'S OVERAGES/SHORTAGES OTHER MISC REVENUES SMALL OVERPAYMENT NSF FEES - PARKS & REC NSF FEES - MUNICIPAL COURT NSF FEES - POLICE US BANK REBATE 40,400 24,758 65,522 (25,122) 162% 5,700 3,332 5,419 281 95% 5,400 2,697 2,874 2,526 53% 15,600 7,899 9,027 6,573 58% 147,000 65,334 59,332 87,668 40% 5,000 3,160 2,760 2,240 55% 175,000 90,087 91,852 83,148 52% 2,400 1,800 1,500 900 63% 4,350 4,250 3,650 700 84% 1,500 700 890 610 59% 1,000 1,201 - 1,000 0% 1,000 - - 1,000 0% 300 324 5,303 (5,003) 1768% 3,000 4,770 1,595 1,405 53% 2,000 - - 2,000 0% 2,000 3,801 7 1,993 0% 200 276 86 114 43% - 161 136 (136) 0% 2,000 6,439 5,477 (3,477) 274% 30 16 18 12 60% 120 - - 120 0% 300 140 254 46 85% - - 60 (60) 0% 7,500 4,153 4,659 2,841 62% 421,800 225,299 260,422 161,378 62% TRANS FERS -IN: INSURANCE RECOVERIES - - 7,143 (7,143) 0% TRANSFER FROM FUND 127 26,300 25,835 26,300 100% 26,300 25,835 33,443 (7,143) 127% TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE $ 37,753,480 $ 20,334,355 $ 20,280,036 $ 17,473,444 54% 5 Packet Pg. 11 I 4.2.a I Page 1 of 6 CITY OF EDMONDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES (001) SALARIES AND WAGES $ 14,718,310 $ 6,703,094 $ 6,913,119 $ 7,805,191 47% OVERTIME 485,880 232,475 240,712 245,168 50% HOLIDAY BUY BACK 226,420 2,349 1,324 225,096 1% BENEFITS 5,496,060 2,543,636 2,669,977 2,826,083 49% UNIFORMS 85,110 43,398 31,458 53,652 37% SUPPLIES 376,509 161,232 160,497 216,012 43% SMALL EQUIPMENT 50,040 57,399 33,288 16,752 67% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,677,883 1,294,297 1,197,869 2,480,014 33% COMMUNICATIONS 182,180 74,771 67,244 114,936 37% TRAVEL 50,430 15,499 24,562 25,868 49% EXCISE TAXES 6,500 - 1,956 4,544 30% ADVERTISING - 1,699 - - 0% RENTAL/LEASE 1,707,550 456,537 845,894 861,656 50% INSURANCE 609,550 538,732 616,495 (6,945) 101% UTILITIES 457,800 201,160 216,253 241,547 47% REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 223,800 123,090 156,534 67,266 70% MISCELLANEOUS 395,500 210,608 159,077 236,423 40% INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES 9,823,140 5,246,967 5,831,961 3,991,179 59% INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 135,000 - - 135,000 0% INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 1,080,200 1,739,021 482,130 598,070 45% BUILDINGS 18,323 - - 18,323 0% MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 58,000 - 9,694 48,306 17% GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PRINCIPAL 164,790 - - 164,790 0% OTHER DEBT 500 - - 500 0% INTEREST ON LONG-TERM EXTERNAL DEBT 39,580 23,454 13,990 25,591 35% $ 40,069,055 $ 19,669,418 $ 19,674,034 $ 20,395,021 49% LEOFF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE (009) BENEFITS INHOME LTC CLAIMS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TRAVEL MISCELLANEOUS RISK MANAGEMENT RESERVE FUND (011) MISCELLANEOUS HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND (014) SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MISCELLANEOUS BUILDING MAINTENANCE SUBFUND (016) SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REPAIRS & MAINTENANENCE MISCELLANEOUS MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS DRUG ENFORCEMENT FUND (104) FUEL CONSUMED SMALL EQUIPMENT COMMUNICATIONS REPAIR/M AINT MISCELLANEOUS INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES $ 183,190 $ 80,462 $ 87,704 $ 95,486 48% 102,990 43,491 55,362 47,628 54% 7,000 1,286 - 7,000 0% - 447 - - 0% 280 725 400 (120) 143% $ 293,460 $ 126,411 $ 143,466 $ 149,994 49% $ 100,000 $ - $ 80,601 $ 19,399 81% 100,000 s - 80,601 19,399 81% $ 100 $ - $ $ 100 0% 200 - 200 0% 5,100 - 5,100 0% $ 5,400 $ - $ $ 5,400 0% $ - $ 1,756 $ - $ 0% 2,000 161,272 23,979 (21,979) 1199% 193,500 35,390 50,764 142,736 26% - 546 - - 0% - 169,691 - - 0% 350,000 389,059 58,640 291,360 17% 545,500 757,714 $ 133,383 $ 412,117 24% $ 3,000 $ 647 $ 817 $ 2,183 27% 5,000 - - 5,000 0% 2,230 877 675 1,555 30% 800 - - 800 0% 20,000 5,000 5,000 15,000 25% 45,000 21,257 10,038 34,962 22% 76,030 $ 27,780 $ 16,531 $ 59,499 22% 6 Packet Pg. 12 I 4.2.a I Page 2 of 6 CITY OF EDMONDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent STREET FUND (111) SALARIES AND WAGES $ 555,070 $ 291,347 $ 269,870 $ 285,200 49% OVERTIME 18,400 10,757 15,315 3,085 83% BENEFITS 318,720 149,949 135,556 183,164 43% UNIFORMS 6,000 3,745 3,711 2,289 62% SUPPLIES 350,000 167,167 85,545 264,455 24% SMALL EQUIPMENT 24,000 545 1,223 22,777 5% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 15,050 4,146 8,699 6,351 58% COMMUNICATIONS 3,500 1,850 3,820 (320) 109% TRAVEL 1,000 - - 1,000 0% RENTAL/LEASE 181,020 94,581 89,669 91,351 50% INSURANCE 113,230 97,912 110,508 2,722 98% UTILITIES 270,170 113,801 114,054 156,116 42% REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 44,000 8,470 11,974 32,026 27% MISCELLANEOUS 25,000 1,430 1,007 23,993 4% INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES 5,000 896 1,527 3,474 31% GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PRINCIPAL 3,490 - - 3,490 0% INTEREST ON LONG-TERM EXTERNAL DEBT 1,610 865 354 1,256 22% $ 1,935,260 $ 947,462 $ 852,831 $ 1,082,429 44% COMBINED STREET CONS T/IMPROVE (112) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE INTERFUND SUBSIDIES LAND MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOANS INTEREST MUNICIPALARTS ACQUIS. FUND (117) SUPPLIES SMALL EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TRAVEL RENTAL/LEASE REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS HOTEUMOTEL TAX REVENUE FUND (120) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MISCELLANEOUS INTERFUND SUBSIDIES EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND (121) SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND (122) MISCELLANEOUS TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS (123) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MISCELLANEOUS $ 2,380,040 $ 654,883 $ 586,925 $ 1,793,115 25% - - 34,602 (34,602) 0% 328,100 40,908 40,711 287,389 12% - 132,896 - - 0% - - 8,166 (8,166) 0% 3,643,922 1,490,654 1,060,658 2,583,264 29% 72,220 72,201 72,201 19 100% 3,050 3,396 3,035 15 100% $ 6,427,332 $ 2,394,938 $ 1,806,299 $ 4,621,033 28% $ 4,700 $ 132 $ 617 $ 4,083 13% 1,700 150 762 938 45% 166,500 22,232 12,867 153,633 8% 80 11 11 70 13% 2,000 - - 2,000 0% 300 - - 300 0% 6,600 2,750 3,088 3,512 47% $ 181,880 $ 25,274 $ 17,345 $ 164,535 10% $ 83,400 $ 24,080 $ 35,257 $ 48,143 42% 12,200 65 - 12,200 0% 4,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 50% $ 99,600 $ 26,145 $ 37,257 $ 62,343 37% $ 1,790 $ - $ $ 1,790 0% 25,090 - 25,090 0% $ 26,880 $ - $ $ 26,880 0% $ 2,000 $ 835 $ 587 $ 1,413 29% $ 2,000 $ 835 $ 587 $ 1,413 29% $ 57,200 $ 8,282 $ 7,674 $ 49,526 13% 4,500 1,260 1,374 3,126 31% $ 61,700 $ 9,543 $ 9,047 $ 52,653 15% 7 Packet Pg. 13 I 4.2.a I Page 3 of 6 CITY OF EDMONDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 2 (125) SUPPLIES $ 21,000 $ 42,366 $ 48,050 $ (27,050) 229% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150,000 47,575 71,241 78,760 47% RENTAL/LEASE - 2,790 - - 0% UTILITIES - - 1,649 (1,649) 0% REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 140,000 12,605 - 140,000 0% MISCELLANEOUS - 181 - - 0% CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 2,651,566 153,371 354,951 2,296,615 13% $ 2,962,566 $ 258,888 $ 475,890 $ 2,486,676 16% REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 1, PARKS ACQ (126) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INTERFUND SUBSIDIES LAND CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS INTEREST GIFTS CATALOG FUND (127) SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MISCELLANEOUS INTERFUND SUBSIDIES CEMETERY MAINTENANCE/IMPROVEMENT (130) SALARIES AND WAGES OVERTIME BENEFITS UNIFORMS SUPPLIES SUPPLIES PURCHASED FOR INVENTORY/RESALE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS TRAVEL RENTAL/LEASE UTILITIES REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (132) SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LAND CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS S IS TER CITY COMMIS S ION (138) SUPPLIES TRAVEL MISCELLANEOUS TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT (139) INSURANCE INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES $ 101,855 $ - $ 123 $ 101,732 0% 142,330 17,213 16,163 126,168 11 % 200,000 476,669 - 200,000 0% 1,921,206 - 1,921,206 0% 20,280 - - 20,280 0% 9,350 5,033 2,062 7,288 22% $ 2,395,021 $ 498,915 $ 18,348 $ 2,376,673 1% $ 17,820 $ 1,005 $ 1,997 $ 15,823 11% 6,500 6,300 - 6,500 0% 600 - - 600 0% 26,300 25,835 26,300 - 100% $ 51,220 $ 33,140 $ 28,297 $ 22,923 55% $ 124,410 $ 40,451 $ 37,443 $ 86,967 30% 3,500 963 2,747 753 78% 35,910 17,524 17,635 18,275 49% 1,000 - - 1,000 0% 7,000 745 1,044 5,956 15% 20,000 9,096 6,621 13,379 33% 4,200 594 5,287 (1,087) 126% 1,410 499 668 742 47% 500 - - 500 0% 10,790 5,775 5,395 5,395 50% 3,800 300 2,175 1,625 57% 500 - - 500 0% 4,000 1,765 2,548 1,452 64% $ 217,020 $ 77,712 $ 81,563 $ 135,457 38% $ 20,000 $ - $ - $ 20,000 0% 600,000 30,809 91,977 508,023 15% - 475,710 - - 0% 2,335,000 77,659 423,754 1,911,246 18% $ 2,955,000 $ 594,177 $ 515,732 $ 2,439,269 17% $ 1,500 $ 98 $ 137 $ 1,363 9% 4,500 2,515 - 4,500 0% 4,500 23 - 4,500 0% $ 10,500 $ 2,636 $ 137 $ 10,363 1% $ $ 2,500 $ $ 0% 347,693 0% $ $ 350,193 $ $ 0% 8 Packet Pg. 14 I 4.2.a I Page 4 of 6 CITY OF EDMONDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FUND (140) SUPPLIES $ $ 789 $ 842 $ (842) 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 12,536 29,031 (29,031) 0% MISCELLANEOUS 894 1,136 (1,136) 0% $ $ 14,219 $ 31,008 $ (31,008) 0% LID FUND CONTROL(211) INTERFUND SUBSIDIES $ 16,450 $ - $ 16,450 $ 100% $ 16,450 $ $ 16,450 $ - 100% 2012 LTGO DEBT SERVIC FUND (231) GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND $ 565,450 $ $ - $ 565,450 0% INTEREST 129,880 70,301 64,938 64,942 50% OTHER INTEREST & DEBT SERVICE COSTS 500 - - 500 0% $ 695,830 $ 70,301 $ 64,938 $ 630,892 9% 2014 DEBT SERVICE FUND (232) 2014 PRINCIPAL PAYMENT INTEREST WATER FUND (421) SALARIES AND WAGES OVERTIME BENEFITS UNIFORMS SUPPLIES WATER PURCHASED FOR RESALE SUPPLIES PURCHASED FOR INVENTORY/RESALE SMALL EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS TRAVEL EXCISE TAXES RENTAL/LEASE INSURANCE UTILITIES REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES INTERFUND TAXES INTERFUND SUBSIDIES MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS REVENUE BONDS INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOANS INTEREST $ $ 933,208 $ $ 0% 3,221 0% $ $ 936,429 $ $ 0% $ 844,510 $ 387,645 $ 377,846 $ 466,664 45% 24,000 11,046 10,630 13,370 44% 405,720 181,285 170,910 234,810 42% 4,000 1,517 4,727 (727) 118% 150,000 52,790 78,257 71,743 52% 1,667,500 695,668 648,352 1,019,148 39% 143,000 48,285 105,442 37,558 74% 19,730 2,087 2,074 17,656 11% 2,181,281 532,814 665,840 1,515,441 31% 30,000 14,523 15,778 14,222 53% 200 - - 200 0% 340,000 189,240 183,062 156,938 54% 146,130 49,367 71,704 74,426 49% 56,050 52,335 58,214 (2,164) 104% 35,000 11,502 13,096 21,904 37% 17,500 5,328 20,691 (3,191) 118% 83,500 34,332 43,211 40,289 52% 30,000 18,423 12,948 17,052 43% 1,229,110 540,263 529,472 699,638 43% 725,820 219,326 215,315 510,505 30% 25,000 - - 25,000 0% 4,488,771 453,681 4,488,771 0% 2,340 - 2,340 0% 335,510 - - 335,510 0% 25,840 25,839 25,839 1 100% 246,940 129,008 123,678 123,262 50% $ 13,257,452 $ 3,656,305 $ 3,377,086 $ 9,880,366 25% 9 Packet Pg. 15 I 4.2.a I Page 5 of 6 CITY OF EDMONDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent STORM FUND (422) SALARIES AND WAGES $ 523,320 $ 263,505 $ 312,555 $ 210,765 60% OVERTIME 6,000 6,750 6,549 (549) 109% BENEFITS 262,680 130,472 150,438 112,242 57% UNIFORMS 6,500 5,210 4,238 2,262 65% SUPPLIES 46,000 10,382 21,753 24,247 47% SMALL EQUIPMENT 5,730 23 5,880 (150) 103% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,185,624 414,875 509,541 1,676,083 23% COMMUNICATIONS 3,200 1,276 2,879 321 90% TRAVEL 4,300 300 - 4,300 0% EXCISE TAXES 55,000 27,043 29,598 25,402 54% RENTAL/LEASE 264,970 124,000 130,031 134,939 49% INSURANCE 71,540 63,187 72,028 (488) 101% UTILITES 10,500 4,691 5,228 5,272 50% REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 13,000 2,266 13,729 (729) 106% MISCELLANEOUS 101,000 25,800 45,328 55,672 45% INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES 150,000 83,369 56,131 93,869 37% INTERFUND TAXES AND OPERATING ASSESSMENT 330,430 164,329 181,546 148,884 55% INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 411,950 91,782 84,737 327,213 21% CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 3,459,813 22,583 36,649 3,423,164 1% GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS 85,440 - - 85,440 0% REVENUE BONDS 164,000 - - 164,000 0% INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOANS 32,070 32,063 32,063 8 100% INTEREST 158,480 83,932 68,881 89,599 43% SEWER FUND (423) SALARIES AND WAGES OVERTIME BENEFITS UNIFORMS SUPPLIES FUEL CONSUMED SUPPLIES PURCHASED FOR INV OR RESALE SMALL EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS TRAVEL EXCISE TAXES RENTAL/LEASE INSURANCE UTILITIES REPAIR & MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES INTERFUND TAXES AND OPERATING ASSESSMENT INTERFUND SUBSIDIES MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS REVENUE BONDS INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOANS INTEREST OTHER INTEREST & DEBT SERVICE COSTS BOND RESERVE FUND (424) REVENUE BONDS INTEREST OTHER INTEREST & DEBT SERVICE COSTS $ 8,351,547 $ 1,557,839 $ 1,769,781 $ 6,581,766 21% $ 1,783,120 $ 857,530 $ 841,907 $ 941,213 47% 95,000 39,997 51,628 43,372 54% 784,430 385,485 384,194 400,236 49% 9,500 4,717 7,313 2,187 77% 417,200 125,809 89,340 327,860 21% 80,000 21,000 39,535 40,465 49% 4,000 - - 4,000 0% 62,730 19,596 14,180 48,550 23% 1,837,472 735,582 931,379 906,093 51% 43,000 19,231 18,740 24,260 44% 5,000 1,097 - 5,000 0% 170,000 96,745 105,124 64,876 62% 306,650 89,518 152,080 154,570 50% 109,270 105,637 115,442 (6,172) 106% 1,217,860 344,354 363,566 854,294 30% 340,000 139,778 107,476 232,524 32% 117,950 28,195 61,965 55,985 53% 178,000 82,285 44,725 133,275 25% 629,140 311,566 342,031 287,109 54% 2,065,570 518,760 354,290 1,711,280 17% 110,000 - 76,604 33,396 70% 5,854,736 54,182 978,980 4,875,756 17% 132,950 - - 132,950 0% 75,510 - - 75,510 0% 171,240 157,034 157,346 13,894 92% 114,500 61,299 43,880 70,620 38% - 2,955 2,821 (2,821) 0% $ 16,714,828 $ 4,202,354 $ 5,284,546 $ 11,430,282 32% $ 680,020 $ - $ - $ 680,020 0% 1,308,700 667,442 654,342 654,358 50% 1,000 - - 1,000 0% $ 1,989,720 $ 667,442 $ 654,342 $ 1,335,378 33% 10 Packet Pg. 16 I 4.2.a I Page 6 of 6 CITY OF EDMONDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND (511) SALARIES AND WAGES $ 238,360 $ 110,075 $ 118,888 $ 119,472 50% OVERTIME 2,000 - 53 1,947 3% BENEFITS 103,580 48,651 52,275 51,305 50% UNIFORMS 1,000 600 544 456 54% SUPPLIES 110,000 46,214 35,649 74,351 32% FUEL CONSUMED 1,000 - - 1,000 0% SUPPLIES PURCHASED FOR INVENTORY/RESALE 294,200 55,716 89,397 204,803 30% SMALL EQUIPMENT 58,000 4,462 52,788 5,212 91% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 44,000 696 1,313 42,687 3% COMMUNICATIONS 3,000 1,194 1,097 1,903 37% TRAVEL 1,000 1,000 - 1,000 0% RENTAL/LEASE 15,350 9,786 7,473 7,877 49% INSURANCE 29,010 29,967 26,351 2,659 91% UTILITIES 14,000 6,175 7,051 6,949 50% REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 60,000 31,687 28,248 31,752 47% MISCELLANEOUS 12,000 6,711 4,717 7,283 39% INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES 2,500 249 13 2,487 1% MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 897,000 575,043 681,511 215,489 76% $ 1,886,000 $ 928,227 $ 1,107,367 $ 778,633 590/. TECHNOLOGY RENTAL FUND (512) SALARIES AND WAGES $ 277,270 $ - $ 138,561 $ 138,709 50% OVERTIME 2,000 - 30 1,970 2% BENEFITS 92,150 - 45,601 46,549 49% SUPPLIES 5,000 - 11,582 (6,582) 232% SMALL EQUIPMENT 23,000 - 26,308 (3,308) 114% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 114,000 - 16,422 97,578 14% COMMUNICATIONS 65,270 - 22,090 43,180 34% TRAVEL 1,500 - 983 517 66% RENTAL/LEASE 7,850 - 2,743 5,107 35% REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 241,390 - 100,470 140,920 42% MISCELLANEOUS 5,000 - 8,226 (3,226) 165% MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 56,000 - - 56,000 0% $ 890,430 $ - $ 373,016 $ 517,414 42% FHU EPPS PENSION FUND (617) BENEFITS $ 22,550 $ 9,024 $ 10,041 $ 12,509 45% PENSION AND DISABILITY PAYMENTS 48,320 12,112 23,296 25,024 48% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,200 214 - 1,200 0% $ 72,070 $ 21,351 $ 33,336 $ 38,734 46% TOTAL EXPENDITURE ALL FUNDS $ 102,289,751 $ 37,845,648 $ 36,603,218 $ 65,686,533 36% O CL O is C C M 21 L t ev 7 C'J O C 7 11 Packet Pg. 17 4.2.a Page 1 of 1 CITY OF EDMONDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN S UMMARY 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent CITY COUNCIL OFFICE OF MAYOR HUMAN RESOURCES MUNICIPAL COURT CITY CLERK FINANCE CITY ATTORNEY NON -DEPARTMENTAL POLICE SERVICES COMMUNITY SERVICES/ECONOMIC DEV. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PARKS & RECREATION PUBLIC WORKS FACILITIES MAINTENANCE $ 376,120 $ 98,095 $ 147,770 $ 228,350 39% 276,700 127,277 135,664 141,036 49% 456,490 175,479 177,689 278,801 39% 994,140 435,326 488,007 506,133 49% 639,670 281,026 328,184 311,486 51% .-. 1,049,560 717,364 543,908 505,652 52% 0 CL 818,780 347,078 397,194 421,586 49% 0) W 12,713,920 7,828,525 7,243,467 5,470,453 57% .5 C 10,527,420 4,596,670 4,792,427 5,734,993 46% C 568,230 232,729 252,311 315,919 44% LL 3,056,387 1,183,128 1,291,724 1,764,663 42% d 1= 4,116,740 1,609,632 1,763,105 2,353,635 43% 7 CY 2,879,870 1,339,534 1,319,723 1,560,147 46% C 1,595,028 697,556 792,861 802,167 50% 7 $ 40,069,055 $ 19,669,418 $ 19,674,034 $ 20,395,021 49% CITY OF EDMONDS EXPENDITURES - UTILITY- BY FUND IN SUMMARY 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent WATER UTILITY FUND $ 13,257,452 $ 3,656,305 $ 3,377,086 $ 9,880,366 25% STORM UTILITY FUND 8,351,547 1,557,839 1,769,781 6,581,766 21% SEWER/WWTP UTILITY FUND 16,714,828 4,202,354 5,284,546 11,430,282 32% BOND RESERVE FUND 1,989,720 667,442 654,342 1,335,378 33% $ 40,313,547 $ 10,083,940 $ 11,085,755 $ 29,227,792 27% 12 Packet Pg. 18 I 4.2.a I Page 1 of 4 CITY OF EDMONDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN DETAIL 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent CITY COUNCIL SALARIES $ 158,170 $ 51,510 $ 84,642 $ 73,528 54% OVERTIME 1,000 - - 1,000 0% BENEFITS 108,520 40,257 51,591 56,929 48% SUPPLIES 2,000 885 615 1,385 31% SMALL EQUIPMENT - - 285 (285) 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 62,160 1,432 1,644 60,516 3% COMMUNICATIONS 3,000 1,501 1,801 1,199 60% TRAVEL 6,700 1,277 87 6,613 1% RENTAL/LEASE 9,070 219 4,290 4,780 47% REPAIRS/MAINTENANCE 500 15 - 500 0% MISCELLANEOUS 25,000 1,000 2,815 22,185 11% $ 376,120 $ 98,095 $ 147,770 $ 228,350 39% OFFICE OF MAYOR SALARIES $ 202,230 $ 98,741 $ 101,159 $ 101,071 50% BENEFITS 49,670 24,042 24,575 25,095 49% SUPPLIES 1,500 635 270 1,230 18% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,000 1,191 1,582 418 79% COMMUNICATION 1,400 599 697 703 50% TRAVEL 4,000 538 529 3,471 13% RENTAL/LEASE 11,450 720 5,572 5,878 49% MISCELLANEOUS 4,450 813 1,279 3,171 29% $ 276,700 $ 127,277 $ 135,664 $ 141,036 49% HUMAN RESOURCES SALARIES $ 249,980 $ 107,092 $ 107,186 $ 142,794 43% OVERTIME - 43 369 (369) 0% BENEFITS 79,390 36,467 36,485 42,905 46% SUPPLIES 2,300 2,306 393 1,907 17% SMALL EQUIPMENT 300 - 110 190 37% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 78,000 24,266 11,129 66,871 14% COMMUNICATIONS 700 485 605 95 86% TRAVEL 1,000 416 305 695 31% RENTAL/LEASE 19,790 646 11,011 8,779 56% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 7,850 - 7,056 794 90% MISCELLANEOUS 17,180 3,759 3,040 14,140 18% $ 456,490 $ 175,479 $ 177,689 $ 278,801 39% MUNICIPAL COURT SALARIES $ 609,690 $ 282,245 $ 296,262 $ 313,428 49% OVERTIME 600 419 434 166 72% BENEFITS 222,520 101,792 113,302 109,218 51% SUPPLIES 6,700 4,263 4,051 2,649 60% SMALL EQUIPMENT 900 262 232 668 26% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 73,000 35,884 40,962 32,038 56% COMMUNICATIONS 2,100 1,272 1,297 803 62% TRAVEL 4,500 1,040 1,473 3,027 33% RENTAL/LEASE 39,280 467 19,752 19,528 50% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 1,250 794 537 713 43% MISCELLANEOUS 33,600 6,886 9,705 23,895 29% $ 994,140 $ 435,326 $ 488,007 $ 506,133 49% 13 Packet Pg. 19 I 4.2.a I Page 2 of 4 CITY OF EDMONDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN DETAIL 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining °/ Spent CITY CLERK SALARIES AND WAGES $ 326,390 $ 172,246 $ 163,275 $ 163,115 50% OVERTIME 1,000 1,509 - 1,000 0% BENEFITS 140,440 63,634 73,321 67,119 52% SUPPLIES 10,240 2,626 2,475 7,765 24% SMALL EQUIPMENT - 610 - - 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 28,310 11,331 15,057 13,253 53% COMMUNICATIONS 50,000 7,093 12,951 37,049 26% TRAVEL 1,000 - 315 685 31% RENTAL/LEASE 50,810 8,337 26,155 24,655 51% REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 27,480 10,448 30,422 (2,942) 111% MISCELLANEOUS 4,000 3,193 4,214 (214) 105% $ 639,670 $ 281,026 $ 328,184 $ 311,486 51% FINANCE SALARIES $ 696,560 $ 410,852 $ 338,586 $ 357,974 49% OVERTIME 4,500 1,308 - 4,500 0% BENEFITS 223,910 139,652 111,689 112,221 50% SUPPLIES 7,350 2,538 2,608 4,742 35% SMALL EQUIPMENT 2,650 28,760 906 1,744 34% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 32,800 17,762 30,270 2,530 92% COMMUNICATIONS 2,000 26,068 940 1,060 47% TRAVEL 2,600 833 940 1,660 36% RENTAL/LEASE 30,340 3,555 15,832 14,508 52% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 38,500 34,479 40,372 (1,872) 105% MISCELLANEOUS 8,350 51,555 1,765 6,585 21% $ 1,049,560 $ 717,364 $ 543,908 $ 505,652 52% CITY ATTORNEY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $ 818,780 $ 344,942 $ 397,194 $ 421,586 49% MISCELLANEOUS - 2,137 - - 0% $ 818,780 $ 347,078 $ 397,194 $ 421,586 49% NON -DEPARTMENTAL SALARIES $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ 100,000 0% BENEFITS - UNEMPLOYMENT 25,000 1,037 811 24,189 3% SUPPLIES 5,000 2,089 804 4,196 16% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 726,430 233,976 247,152 479,278 34% EXCISE TAXES 6,500 1,699 1,956 4,544 30% RENTAL/LEASE 10,480 3,600 7,040 3,440 67% INSURANCE 609,550 538,732 616,495 (6,945) 101% MISCELLANEOUS 69,000 48,223 49,206 19,794 71% INTERGOVT SERVICES 13 9,741,890 5,236,693 5,823,883 3,918,007 60% ECA LOAN PAYMENT 135,000 - - 135,000 0% INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 14 1,080,200 1,739,021 482,130 598,070 45% GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND 164,790 - - 164,790 0% INTEREST ON LONG-TERM DEBT 39,580 23,454 13,990 25,591 35% FISCAL AGENT FEES 500 500 0% $ 12,713,920 $ 7,828,525 $ 7,243,467 $ 5,470,453 57% 13 Difference between 2016 and 2017 is due to completion of Fire District One Retro Payments in 2016. 14 Differences between 2016 and 2017 are primarily due to final payment of 2014 debt. 14 Packet Pg. 20 1 I 4.2.a I Page 3 of 4 CITY OF EDMONDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN DETAIL 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent POLICE SERVICES SALARIES $ 6,209,630 $ 2,812,687 $ 2,846,270 $ 3,363,360 46% OVERTIME 454,780 211,860 219,956 234,824 48% HOLIDAY BUYBACK 226,420 2,349 1,324 225,096 1% BENEFITS 2,332,980 1,090,825 1,113,870 1,219,110 48% UNIFORMS 75,450 39,223 25,763 49,687 34% SUPPLIES 88,500 33,652 30,698 57,802 35% SMALL EQUIPMENT 28,210 16,103 12,724 15,486 45% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 117,670 45,981 45,896 71,774 39% COMMUNICATIONS 50,820 12,897 18,810 32,010 37% TRAVEL 17,310 6,674 12,874 4,436 74% RENTAL/LEASE 842,630 294,955 419,497 423,133 50% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 15,120 6,065 3,090 12,030 20% MISCELLANEOUS 46,350 18,124 23,884 22,466 52% INTERGOVTL SERVICES 10,550 5,274 8,078 2,473 77% MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 11,000 - 9,694 1,306 88% $ 10,527,420 $ 4,596,670 $ 4,792,427 $ 5,734,993 46% COMM-UNITY SERVICES/ECON DEV. SALARIES $ 230,850 $ 112,969 $ 115,564 $ 115,286 50% BENEFITS 69,230 34,424 35,422 33,808 51% SUPPLIES 7,000 280 7,064 (64) 101% SMALL EQUIPMENT 800 125 - 800 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 238,400 82,038 86,497 151,903 36% COMMUNICATIONS 1,490 486 594 896 40% TRAVEL 2,000 - 529 1,472 26% RENTAL/LEASE 10,960 955 4,820 6,140 44% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 500 - - 500 0% MISCELLANEOUS 7,000 1,453 1,821 5,179 26% $ 568,230 $ 232,729 $ 252311 $ 315,919 44% DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/PLANNING SALARIES $ 1,547,970 $ 718,769 $ 723,279 $ 824,691 47% OVERTIME 1,300 6,052 5,850 (4,550) 450% BENEFITS 568,060 261,658 263,108 304,952 46% UNIFORMS 500 - - 500 0% SUPPLIES 16,100 6,513 6,178 9,922 38% SMALL EQUIPMENT 6,000 2,745 4,268 1,732 71% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 694,567 145,991 193,538 501,029 28% COMMUNICATIONS 8,700 2,523 4,086 4,614 47% TRAVEL 4,750 3,945 3,921 829 83% RENTAL/LEASE 147,580 10,699 74,605 72,975 51% REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 6,800 1,177 - 6,800 0% MISCELLANEOUS 54,060 23,056 12,891 41,169 24% $ 3,056,387 $ 1,183,128 $ 1,291,724 $ 1,764,663 42% ENGINEERING SALARIES $ 1,462,570 $ 624,922 $ 715,572 $ 746,998 49% OVERTIME 5,000 2,890 104 4,896 2% BENEFITS 572,030 249,286 291,067 280,963 51% UNIFORMS 360 - - 360 0% SUPPLIES - 79 - - 0% SMALL EQUIPMENT 3,930 1,952 2,016 1,914 51% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 231,080 252,650 17,453 213,627 8% COMMUNICATIONS 14,700 4,691 6,380 8,320 43% TRAVEL 600 296 - 600 0% RENTAL/LEASE 93,250 11,717 45,177 48,073 48% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 2,600 - 587 2,013 23% MISCELLANEOUS 23,000 12,630 9,349 13,651 41% $ 2,409,120 $ 1,161,113 $ 1,087,704 $ 1,321,416 45% 15 Packet Pg. 21 I 4.2.a I Page 4 of 4 CITY OF EDMONDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN DETAIL 2017 Amended 6/30/2016 6/30/2017 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining °/, Spent PARKS & RECREATION SALARIES $ 1,958,290 $ 861,110 $ 940,762 $ 1,017,528 48% OVERTIME 10,000 4,928 9,982 18 100% BENEFITS 724,810 328,840 362,783 362,027 50% UNIFORMS 5,800 2,643 2,394 3,406 41% SUPPLIES 117,390 71,171 62,416 54,974 53% SMALL EQUIPMENT 3,250 6,645 12,330 (9,080) 379% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 556,240 96,739 96,252 459,988 17% COMMUNICATIONS 29,920 9,492 10,223 19,697 34% TRAVEL 4,470 468 3,589 881 80% RENTAL/LEASE 283,560 90,716 136,122 147,438 48% PUBLIC UTILITY 175,000 67,472 66,381 108,619 38% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 37,700 31,337 23,374 14,326 62% MISCELLANEOUS 92,610 33,069 36,498 56,112 39% MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 47,000 - - 47,000 0% INTERGOVTL SERVICES 70,700 5,000 70,700 0% $ 4,116,740 $ 1,609,632 S 1,763,105 $ 2353,635 43% PUBLIC WORKS SALARIES $ 270,330 $ 130,896 $ 137,870 $ 132,460 51% OVERTIME 200 - - 200 0% BENEFITS 83,880 41,455 43,412 40,468 52% SUPPLIES 9,600 1,410 2,595 7,005 27% SMALL EQUIPMENT 1,000 - - 1,000 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 200 39 48 152 24% COMMUNICATIONS 1,350 315 360 990 27% TRAVEL 500 - - 500 0% RENTAL/LEASE 93,990 3,072 46,341 47,649 49% PUBLIC UTILITY 2,800 1,235 1,335 1,465 48% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 1,000 - - 1,000 0% MISCELLANEOUS 5,900 60 5,840 1% $ 470,750 $ 178,420 S 232,019 $ 238,731 49% FACILITIES MAINTENANCE SALARIES 695,650 319,055 342,692 352,958 49% OVERTIME 7,500 3,465 4,017 3,483 54% BENEFITS 295,620 130,267 148,542 147,078 50% UNIFORMS 3,000 1,531 3,302 (302) 110% SUPPLIES 102,829 32,786 40,330 62,499 39% SMALL EQUIPMENT 3,000 197 417 2,583 14% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 18,246 76 13,195 5,051 72% COMMUNICATIONS 16,000 7,350 8,502 7,498 53% TRAVEL 1,000 12 - 1,000 0% RENTAL/LEASE 64,360 26,878 29,680 34,680 46% PUBLIC UTILITY 280,000 132,454 148,537 131,463 53% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 84,500 38,775 51,098 33,402 60% MISCELLANEOUS 5,000 4,711 2,549 2,451 51% BUILDINGS 18,323 18,323 0% $ 1,595,028 $ 697,556 $ 792,861 $ 802,167 50% TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES $ 40,069,055 $ 19,669,418 $ 19,674,034 S 20,395,021 49% 16 Packet Pg. 22 I 4.2.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -General Fund 2017 General Fund Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 1,842,486 $ 1,842,486 $ 2,222,449 20.62% February 4,475,711 2,633,225 4,590,134 2.56% March 6,692,908 2,217,197 7,111,840 6.26% April 10,325,016 3,632,108 10,413,847 0.86% May 17,601,140 7,276,124 18,087,809 2.76% June 19,548,720 1,947,581 20,280,036 3.74% July 21,505,534 1,956,814 August 23,701,818 2,196,284 September 25,619,471 1,917,652 October 28,368,775 2,749,305 November 35,742,399 7,373,624 December 37,753,480 2,011,081 City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Real Estate Excise Tax 2017 Real Estate Excise Tax 1 & 2 Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 207,208 $ 207,208 $ 214,967 3.74% February 377,258 170,050 425,156 12.70% March 561,933 184,674 517,163 -7.97% April 738,924 176,991 759,746 2.82% May 921,191 182,267 1,057,416 14.79% June 1,156,829 235,638 1,336,234 15.51% July 1,491,329 334,500 August 1,747,148 255,819 September 1,998,654 251,505 October 2,216,068 217,414 November 2,456,999 240,931 December 2,600,000 143,001 *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. O CIL M C M C M L M M CY O C 7 17 Packet Pg. 23 1 I 4.2.a I Sales Tax Analysis By Category Current Period: June 2017 Year -to -Date Total $3,524,666 Health & Personal Construction Trade,Care, $116,405 Accommodation, $543,159 I $17,898 Clothing and Accessories, $115,859 Communications, $108,431 Wholesale Ti $162,031 Misc Retail, J - T $460,058 Others, $18,780 Total Retail Automotive Construction Trade Wholesale Trade Eating & Drinking Misc Retail Health & Personal Care Amusement & Recreation Clothing and Accessories Business Services Automotive Repair Retail Food Stores Gasoline Others Accommodation Manufacturing Communications Automotive Repair, $86,448 Amusement & Recreation, $43,451 Business Services, $285,097 Gasoline, $16,839 Retail Food Stores, $134,782 I Manufacturing, Eating & Drinking, $45,755 $439,034 Change in Sales Tax Revenue: June 2017 compared to June 2016 Retail Automotive, $930,638 ($40,000) $0 $40,000 $80,000 $120,000 $160,000 $200,000 $240,000 18 Packet Pg. 24 I 4.2.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Sales and Use Tax 2017 Sales and Use Tax Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast ActuaIs % January $ 528,142 $ 528,142 $ 554,719 5.03% February 1,179,855 651,712 1,307,546 10.82% March 1,679,874 500,020 1,829,850 8.93% April 2,159,477 479,603 2,327,446 7.78% May 2,755,486 596,009 2,970,761 7.81% June 3,293,571 538,085 3,524,666 7.02% July 3,847,001 553,430 August 4,458,173 611,171 September 5,050,960 592,787 October 5,666,829 615,869 November 6,303,607 636,779 December 6,875,000 571,393 Sales and Use Tax 7,000,000 0 i I JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC t Current Year -Budget -b- Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Gas Utility Tax 2017 Gas Utility Tax Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast ActuaIs % January $ 86,887 $ 86,887 $ 93,550 7.67% February 183,529 96,642 203,652 10.96% March 260,361 76,832 294,027 12.93% April 328,823 68,462 372,490 13.28% May 381,147 52,324 429,203 12.61% June 416,950 35,802 475,324 14.00% July 446,516 29,566 August 469,952 23,437 September 491,313 21,360 October 515,645 24,332 November 552,451 36,806 December 608,000 55,549 Gas Utility Tax 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,00011 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC t Current Year -Budget -A-- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 19 Packet Pg. 25 I 4.2.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Telephone Utility Tax 2017 Telephone Utility Tax Cumulative Budget Forecast Monthly Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 114,426 $ 114,426 $ 105,424 -7.87% February 223,803 109,377 199,068 -11.05% March 330,274 106,471 290,145 -12.15% April 436,772 106,497 403,189 -7.69% May 549,330 112,558 492,059 -10.43% June 651,204 101,874 582,703 -10.52% July 754,077 102,873 August 855,646 101,570 September 961,054 105,407 October 1,062,454 101,400 November 1,159,179 96,725 December 1,263,200 104,021 Telephone Utility Tax 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 �- 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Year -Budget -*-- Prior Year City ofEdmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Electric Utility Tax 2017 Electric Utility Tax Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 171,830 $ 171,830 $ 175,773 2.29% February 347,448 175,618 382,822 10.18% March 515,770 168,322 549,954 6.63% April 678,100 162,330 729,784 7.62% May 824,207 146,107 863,230 4.73% June 937,922 113,715 991,566 5.72% July 1,049,475 111,553 August 1,155,197 105,722 September 1,260,458 105,261 October 1,368,262 107,804 November 1,486,788 118,526 December 1,604,000 117,212 Electric Utility Tax 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC t Current Year -Budget -dp-- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. O CL O M C M C LL L O M CY O C 7 20 Packet Pg. 26 I 4.2.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Meter Water Sales 2017 Meter Water Sales Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 573,159 $ 573,159 $ 599,648 4.62% February 966,145 392,986 1,027,975 6.40% March 1,529,375 563,229 1,658,808 8.46% April 1,906,725 377,350 2,057,951 7.93% May 2,464,794 558,070 2,660,519 7.94% June 2,900,426 435,631 3,101,835 6.94% July 3,585,922 685,496 August 4,167,341 581,419 September 4,962,652 795,311 October 5,517,073 554,421 November 6,167,530 650,457 December 6,572,750 405,220 City ofEdmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Storm Water Sales 2017 S torm Wate r S ale s Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 245,291 $ 245,291 $ 261,646 2.29% February 773,850 528,559 828,655 10.18% March 1,018,952 245,102 1,089,708 6.63% April 1,236,230 217,279 1,322,203 7.62% May 1,481,659 245,428 1,583,130 4.73% June 1,699,683 218,024 1,815,097 5.72% July 1,946,434 246,751 August 2,474,151 527,717 September 2,718,865 244,714 October 2,936,691 217,826 November 3,181,934 245,242 December 3,400,000 218,066 Storm Water Sales 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC t Current Year -Budget -4-- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 21 O CL O ra C M C LL L O M CY O C 7 Packet Pg. 27 1 t 4.2.a City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary-Unmeter Sewer Sales 2017 Unmeter Sewer Sales Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast ActuaIs January $ 572,309 $ 572,309 $ 623,336 8.92% February 1,034,805 462,496 1,135,356 9.72% March 1,603,135 568,330 1,767,521 10.25% April 2,067,863 464,728 2,277,537 10.14% May 2,638,929 571,065 2,905,981 10.12% June 3,109,116 470,187 3,422,308 10.07% July 3,696,739 587,623 August 4,167,756 471,017 September 4,763,468 595,712 October 5,237,994 474,526 November 5,818,870 580,876 December 6,291,410 472,540 Unmeter Sewer Sales 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 0 i I JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC + Current Year —Budget —*-- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. O CIL M C M C ILL L M M CY C 7 7 22 Packet Pg. 28 I 4.2.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -General Fund 2017 General Fund Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 4,409,595 $ 4,409,595 $ 4,856,792 10.14% February 7,042,288 2,632,692 7,118,110 1.08% March 10,151,670 3,109,383 11,124,815 9.59% April 14,001,703 3,850,033 13,496,549 -3.61% May 16,128,455 2,126,752 15,723,883 -2.51% June 19,812,535 3,684,080 19,674,034 -0.70% July 22,947,235 3,134,700 August 26,870,574 3,923,339 September 29,983,441 3,112,867 October 32,535,825 2,552,384 November 36,144,968 3,609,144 December 40,069,055 3,924,087 O CL O C M C LL L O M CY O C 7 City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Non -Departmental 2017 Non -Departmental Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 2,146,531 $ 2,146,531 $ 2,867,736 33.60% February 2,697,696 551,165 2,992,431 10.93% March 3,672,424 974,728 4,967,917 35.28% April 5,229,897 1,557,473 5,263,262 0.64% May 5,372,743 142,846 5,385,911 0.25% June 6,788,429 1,415,687 7,243,467 6.70% July 7,638,067 849,638 August 9,076,194 1,438,127 September 9,979,289 903,095 October 10,369,720 390,431 November 11,451,431 1,081,711 December 12,713,920 1,262,489 Non -Departmental 16,000,000 14,000,000 12,000,000 — 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC +Current Year —Budget—4-- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 23 Packet Pg. 29 I 4.2.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -City Council 2017 City Council Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 24,382 $ 24,382 $ 22,742 -6.73% February 52,318 27,936 44,954 -14.07% March 83,798 31,480 70,026 -16.43% April 111,661 27,864 93,544 -16.23% May 142,110 30,449 118,441 -16.66% June 179,407 37,297 147,770 -17.63% July 211,248 31,841 August 243,636 32,388 September 280,710 37,075 October 307,316 26,606 November 340,142 32,826 December 376,120 35,978 City of'Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Office of Mayor 2017 Office of Mayor Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 23,100 $ 23,100 $ 22,135 -4.18% February 46,663 23,563 46,116 -1.17% March 69,540 22,877 68,939 -0.87% April 92,124 22,584 91,090 -1.12% May 114,857 22,733 113,581 -1.11% June 137,580 22,723 135,664 -1.39% July 160,958 23,378 August 184,229 23,271 September 207,064 22,834 October 230,074 23,010 November 252,731 22,657 December 276,700 23,969 Office of Mayor 300,000.00 250,000.00 200,000.00 150,000.00 100,000.00 50,000.00 0.00 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC t Current Year -Budget t Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 24 Packet Pg. 30 1 4.2.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Human Resources 2017 Human Resources Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast ActuaIs January $ 33,336 $ 33,336 $ 35,109 5.32% February 71,046 37,709 63,054 -11.25% March 115,092 44,047 93,670 -18.61% April 148,861 33,769 122,632 -17.62% May 188,582 39,721 152,171 -19.31% June 226,982 38,400 177,689 -21.72% July 266,054 39,073 August 302,670 36,616 September 336,201 33,531 October 375,053 38,852 November 408,108 33,055 December 456,490 48,382 Human Resources 500,000 450,000 400,000 350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCr NOV DEC --$-- Current Year -Budget -*-Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Municipal Court 2017 Municipal Court Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast ActuaIs January $ 74,527 $ 74,527 $ 76,438 2.56% February 157,040 82,513 170,699 8.70% March 242,535 85,495 249,970 3.07% April 321,521 78,987 330,859 2.90% May 402,116 80,595 407,638 1.37% June 482,636 80,519 488,007 1.11% July 564,050 81,414 August 649,652 85,602 September 733,470 83,818 October 821,328 87,857 November 906,841 85,513 December 994,140 87,299 Municipal Court 1,000,000 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC t Current Year -Budget -*-- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 25 Packet Pg. 31 I 4.2.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Community Services/Economic Development 2017 Community Services/Economic Development Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 31,803 $ 31,803 $ 41,399 30.17% February 74,567 42,764 82,958 11.25% March 117,487 42,920 124,227 5.74% April 176,878 59,391 168,847 -4.54% May 217,526 40,649 213,705 -1.76% June 259,704 42,178 252,311 -2.85% July 305,867 46,163 August 354,338 48,470 September 402,092 47,754 October 449,860 47,768 November 502,009 52,150 December 568,230 66,221 City Clerk Community Services/Economic Development 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 i!�_� JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC + Current Year -Budget -*-- Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -City Clerk 2017 Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 53,698 $ 53,698 $ 63,151 17.60% February 104,118 50,421 115,829 11.25% March 156,948 52,830 165,932 5.72% April 206,989 50,041 232,085 12.12% May 256,099 49,110 282,468 10.30% June 307,065 50,966 328,184 6.88% July 358,855 51,790 August 412,651 53,796 September 465,765 53,115 October 529,589 63,824 November 585,495 55,906 December 639,670 54,175 City Clerk 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCr NOV DEC +Current Year Budget-gir,- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 26 O CL O C M C LL L M M CY O C 7 Packet Pg. 32 1 I 4.2.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Technology Rental Fund 2017 Technology Rental Fund Cumulative Budget Forecast Monthly Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 89,050 $ 89,050 $ 68,612 -22.95% February 177,771 88,721 177,236 -0.30% March 237,540 59,769 225,779 -4.95% April 291,722 54,182 277,784 -4.78% May 338,118 46,396 327,297 -3.20% June 387,726 49,608 373,016 -3.79% July 453,064 65,338 August 528,249 75,186 September 598,969 70,720 October 660,256 61,287 November 738,213 77,957 December 890,430 152,217 Prior Year amounts are from the Information Services Budget City ofEdmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Finance 2017 Finance Cumulative Budget Forecast Monthly Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 102,207 $ 102,207 $ 122,581 19.93% February 189,948 87,740 199,380 4.97% March 271,844 81,896 281,459 3.54% April 361,256 89,412 364,229 0.82% May 442,527 81,271 453,448 2.47% June 522,997 80,470 543,908 4.00% July 603,839 80,842 August 687,233 83,394 September 781,183 93,949 October 871,230 90,048 November 956,025 84,794 December 1,049,560 93,535 Finance 1,100,000 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC + Current Year - Budget -6- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 27 Packet Pg. 33 I 4.2.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -City Attorney 2017 City Attorney Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 68,232 $ 68,232 $ 44,346 -35.01% February 136,463 68,232 133,495 -2.18% March 204,695 68,232 199,483 -2.55% April 272,927 68,232 265,386 -2.76% May 341,158 68,232 331,290 -2.89% June 409,390 68,232 397,194 -2.98% July 477,621 68,232 August 545,853 68,232 September 614,085 68,232 October 682,316 68,232 November 750,548 68,232 December 818,780 68,232 Police City Attorney 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC + Current Year - Budget -4-- Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Police 2017 Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 829,943 $ 829,943 $ 780,892 -5.91% February 1,662,470 832,528 1,625,589 -2.22% March 2,505,809 843,339 2,399,391 -4.25% April 3,339,581 833,772 3,219,838 -3.59% May 4,168,368 828,787 4,002,270 -3.98% June 5,053,459 885,092 4,792,427 -5.17% July 5,891,147 837,688 August 6,741,701 850,554 September 7,584,219 842,517 October 8,462,646 878,427 November 9,638,182 1,175,536 December 10,527,420 889,238 Police 11,000,000 9,000,000 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OC"r NOV DEC t Current Year -Budget -*-- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 28 Packet Pg. 34 0 4.2.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Development Services 2017 Development Services Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 230,681 $ 230,681 $ 177,820 -22.92% February 471,547 240,866 416,189 -11.74% March 736,403 264,856 613,958 -16.63% April 972,117 235,714 831,603 -14.45% May 1,226,401 254,284 1,076,107 -12.25% June 1,468,275 241,874 1,291,724 -12.02% July 1,721,583 253,308 August 1,989,604 268,020 September 2,242,988 253,384 October 2,519,625 276,636 November 2,770,925 251,300 December 3,056,387 285,462 Development Services 3,000,000 2,750,000 2,500,000 2,250,000 2,000,000 1,750,000 1,500,000 1,250,000 1,000,000 750,000 500,000 250,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCr NOV DEC +Current Year - Budget -11r- Prior Year City ofEdmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Parks & Recreation 2017 Parks & Recreation Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 274,212 $ 274,212 $ 260,128 -5.14% February 559,410 285,198 525,411 -6.08% March 859,833 300,423 828,782 -3.61% April 1,163,949 304,116 1,110,332 -4.61% May 1,496,601 332,653 1,417,439 -5.29% June 1,827,076 330,474 1,763,105 -3.50% July 2,294,141 467,065 August 2,797,570 503,430 September 3,153,190 355,619 October 3,474,134 320,944 November 3,754,468 280,335 December 4,116,740 362,272 Parks & Recreation 4,500,000 4,000,000 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Year - Budget -*,,- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 29 Packet Pg. 35 I 4.2.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Public Works 2017 Public Works Cumulative Budget Forecast Monthly Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 38,606 $ 38,606 $ 37,599 -2.61% February 77,835 39,229 79,084 1.61% March 117,100 39,265 117,357 0.22% April 156,588 39,488 155,173 -0.90% May 196,390 39,802 193,212 -1.62% June 235,491 39,101 232,019 -1.47% July 275,204 39,712 August 314,352 39,148 September 352,464 38,113 October 393,232 40,768 November 429,298 36,066 December 470,750 41,452 Public Works 500,000 450,000 400,000 350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCr NOV DEC -*-- Current Year -Budget -ih-- Prior Year City ofEdmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Facilities Maintenance 2017 Facilities Maintenance Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 127,054 $ 127,054 $ 128,273 0.96% February 257,275 130,221 264,009 2.62% March 393,296 136,021 404,318 2.80% April 523,097 129,801 528,660 1.06 % May 653,776 130,679 672,777 2.91% June 769,798 116,022 792,861 3.00% July 920,705 150,908 August 1,041,207 120,502 September 1,179,252 138,045 October 1,302,136 122,884 November 1,442,204 140,068 December 1,595,028 152,824 Facilities Maintenance 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCF NOV DEC -'0'- Current Year - Budget -*-- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. O iL O M C M C LL L M M CY C 7 7 30 Packet Pg. 36 I 4.2.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Engineering 2017 Engineering Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 186,081 $ 186,081 $ 176,444 -5.18% February 368,560 182,479 358,913 -2.62% March 568,196 199,636 539,386 -5.07% April 770,455 202,259 719,010 -6.68% May 962,858 192,403 903,426 -6.17% June 1,167,015 204,157 1,087,704 -6.80% July 1,360,802 193,788 August 1,570,747 209,945 September 1,772,816 202,069 October 1,985,415 212,599 November 2,181,969 196,554 December 2,409,120 227,151 *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 31 Packet Pg. 37 I 4.2.a I INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO SUMMARY City of Edmonds Investment Portfolio Detail As of June 30, 2017 Years Agency/ Investment Purchase to Par Market Maturity Coupon Issuer Type Price Maturity Value Value Date Rate FHLMC Bonds FFCB Bonds FFCB Bonds FFCB Bonds FHLMC Bonds FNMA Bonds FNMA Bonds FHLB Bonds FNMA Bonds FHLMC Bonds FNMA Bonds FNMA Bonds FHLB Bonds RFCS Bonds FHLB Bonds FNMA Bonds FNMA Bonds FHLMC Bonds FNMA Bonds FHLMC Bonds TOTAL SECURITIES 1,000,000 0.50 1,000,000 999,002 12/28/17 0.90% 995,820 1.05 1,000,000 994,327 07/18/18 0.75% 2,010,790 1.50 2,000,000 1,998,222 12/28/18 1.42% 2,000,000 1.57 2,000,000 1,994,080 01 /25/19 1.23% 995,970 2.26 1,000,000 994,881 10/02/19 1.25% 1,994,310 2.33 2,000,000 1,989,264 10/28/19 1.35% 997,300 2.75 1,000,000 992,378 03/30/20 1.38% 2,003,780 2.75 2,000,000 1,981,862 03/30/20 1.45% 2,000,000 2.75 2,000,000 1,994,114 03/30/20 1.65% 2,003,868 2.83 2,000,000 1,976,688 04/28/20 1.35% 1,000,000 3.00 1,000,000 980,869 06/30/20 1.38% 1,000,000 3.00 1,000,000 980,869 06/30/20 1.38% 3,000,000 3.04 3,000,000 2,952,897 07/13/20 1.20% 1,999,698 3.04 2,120,000 2,010,856 07/15/20 1.60% 2,000,000 3.08 2,000,000 2,000,534 07/30/20 1.75% 1,000,000 3.16 1,000,000 997,198 08/28/20 1.40% 1,000,000 3.16 1,000,000 997,198 08/28/20 1.40% 999,500 3.50 1,000,000 996,816 12/30/20 1.75% 2,005,474 3.56 2,000,000 1,943,766 01 /19/21 1.50% 999,400 4.50 1,000,000 996,110 12/30/21 2.00% 31,005,910 2.7 31,120,000 30,771,931 Washington State Local Godt Investment Pool Snohomish County Local Gott Investment Pool Issuer Diversification W� RFCS,7% FHLMC, 19% F N MA, 35% FFCB,16% FHLB, 22% 10,986,941 10,986,941 Demand 0.98% 16,735,633 16,735,633 Demand 1.11% $ 58,842,574 $ 58,494,505 Cash and Investment Balances (in$ Millions) Checking, $6.6 Bonds, State LGIP, $31.1 $11.0 County LGIP, $16.7 1r 32 Packet Pg. 38 1 ■ 4.2.a I INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO SUMMARY Annual Interest Income $500,000 77W $423,816 $400,000 $326,613 $300,000 $200,000 $100,000 557,334 $74,830 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 Edmonds Rate of Return Compared to Benchmark (Rolling 12 months) 6 Month Treasury Rate (Benchmark) City Blended Rate Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan II Feb March April May June Maturity Distribution and Rate of Return $12,000,000 2.50% $10,000,000 2.00% $8,000,000 1.50% $6,000,000 $4,000,000 1.00% $2,000,000 0.50% $- - 0.00% 0-6 Mo 6-12 Mo 12-18 Mo 18-24 Mo 24-30 Mo 30-36 Mo 36-42 Mo 42-48 Mo 48-54 Mo 54-60 Mo 4 ON 33 I Packet Pg. 39 4.2.a GENERAL FUND OVERVIEW CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES GENERAL FUND FUND BALANCES & SUBFUNDS ---- ACTUAL ---- ---- ACTUAL ---- 12/31/2016 3/31/2017 6/30/2017 Q2 YTD 001-General Fund $ 9,841,719 $ 5,828,744 $ 10,447,721 $ 4,618,977 $ 606,002 0 009-Leoff-Medical Ins. Reserve 540,255 454,233 539,113 84,881 (1,141; 011-Risk Management Fund 963,025 886,927 891,891 4,964 (71,134; 012-Contingency Reserve Fund 5,367,841 5,379,266 5,408,995 29,729 41,154 014-Historic Preservation Gift Fund 7,646 7,683 7,726 43 c� 79 u_ 016-Building Maintenance 98,436 252,144 240,505 (11,639) 142,069 >, Total General Fund & Subfunds $ 16,818,922 $ 12,808,996 $ 17,535,951 $ 4,726,955 L_ $ 717,029 1` CY m c 3 1` 0 Q. a� General Fund & Subfunds c ca 20 $16.82 $17.54 u_ , L 16 0 $12.81 12 0 CY c 0 c 0 8 � +: a� 4 Q. E 0 U Dec 2016 March 2017 June 2017 c °' E t U r r Q *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. 34 Packet Pg. 40 4.2.a GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS OVERVIEW CHANGE IN FUND FUND BALANCES BALANCES GOVERNMENTAL ---- ACTUAL ---- ---- ACTUAL ---- FUNDS 12/31/2016 3/31/2017 6/30/2017 Q2 YTD General Fund & Subfunds $ 16,818,922 $ 12,808,997 $ 17,535,951 $ 4,726,955 $ 717,02 Special Revenue 8,664,438 9,195,889 8,720,198 (475,692) 55,75 Debt Service 20,262 20,262 3,812 (16,450) (16,45 p CL Total Governmental Funds $ 25,503,622 $ 22,025,147 $ 26,259,960 $ 4,234,813 $ 756,33 Ag .v c M c ii Governmental Fund Balances -By Fund Group Governmental Fund L Balances- Combined 3 CJ c 20 30 $17.54 $26.26 $25.50 0 Q. $16.82 a� 16 General 24 22.03 W 75- Fund & Subfunds ca $12.81 12 c 18 u_ tSpecial 2 >+ — Revenue $8.72 M 3 8 12 Cy Debt c Service 4 6 a E O V - $0.02 $0.02 $0.00 c Dec 2016 March 2017 June 2017 Dec 2016 March 2017 June 2017 E z c� r a *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. 35 Packet Pg. 41 4.2.a SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS OVERVIEW GOVERNMENTAL FUND BALANCES CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES ---- ACTUAL ---- ---- ACTUAL ---- SPECIAL REVENUE 12/31/2016 3/31/2017 6/30/2017 Q2 YrD 104 - Drug Enforcement Fund $ 34,632 $ 45,657 $ 45,175 $ (481) $ 10,544 111 - Street Fund 790,429 752,425 1,019,696 267,271 229,267 112 - Combined Street Const/Improve 91,960 316,710 (847,858) (1,164,569) (939,818) 117 - Municipal Arts Acquis. Fund 493,080 500,685 504,784 4,099 11,704 118 - Memorial Street Tree 18,101 18,188 18,288 101 188 0 0 120 - Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Fund 94,468 104,017 91,599 (12,418) (2,868) 121 - Employee Parking Permit Fund 63,704 73,600 75,223 1,623 11,519 122 - Youth Scholarship Fund 14,931 14,788 14,873 85 (57) 'U 123 - Tourism Promotional Fund/Arts 84,371 86,772 87,326 554 2,955 cr-a 125 - Real Estate Tax 2 2,259,949 2,192,767 2,475,580 282,813 215,632 ii 126 - Real Estate Excise Tax 1 1,977,485 2,247,796 2,652,104 404,308 674,619 >+ 127 - Gifts Catalog Fund 263,544 287,029 263,003 (24,026) (541) 1` 129 - Special Projects Fund 38,782 38,968 39,184 216 402 130 - Cemetery Maintenance/Improvement 142,339 162,058 189,250 27,192 46,911 Cy 132 - Parks Construction Fund 1,185,145 1,196,669 935,231 (261,438) (249,914) c 136 - Parks Trust Fund 153,793 154,530 155,387 857 1,594 3 137 - Cemetery Maintenance Trust Fund 901,172 912,496 922,598 10,102 21,426 138 - Sister City Commission 6,416 8,176 8,457 281 2,042 Q. 140 - Business Improvement Disrict 50,137 82,556 70,294 (12,262) 20,157 W Total Special Revenue $ 8,664,438 $ 9,195,889 $ 8,720,198 $ (475,692) $ 55,759 Fa c c Special Revenue Funds u_ 21 15 a� 12 CJ $8.66 $9.20 $8.72 o ■ Special +; 6 Revenue Q. 0 3 U c m _ E Dec 2016 March 2017 June 2017 U r r Q *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. 36 Packet Pg. 42 4.2.a ENTERPRISE FUNDS OVERVIEW ENTERPRISE FUND BALANCES CHANGE IN FUND ---- ACTUAL ---- ---- ACTUAL ---- FUNDS 12/31/2016 3/31/2017 6/30/2017 Q2 YTD 421 - Water Utility Fund $ 17,869,638 $ 18,428,595 $ 18,261,772 $ (166,824) $ 392,134 422 - Storm Utility Fund 10,246,573 10,707,276 10,561,621 (145,655) 315,048 423 - Sewer/WWTP Utility Fund 42,695,396 43,337,637 42,858,543 (479,094) 163,147 0 424 - Bond Reserve Fund 843,960 843,961 843,963 2 3 411 - Combined Utility Operation - 42,151 78,885 36,734 78,885 2 U Total Enterprise Funds $ 71,655,566 $ 73,359,621 $ 72,604,784 $ (754,837) $ 949,217 cm c ii 21 a� CY m c 3 Enterprise and Agency Fund Balances as of June 30, 2017 0 Q' 45,000,000 <42, RSR, 543 � 40,000,000 35,000,000 .v 30,000,000 ii 25,000,000 L 20,000,000 15,000,000 $10,561,621 Cy 10,000,000 c 5,000,000 $78 885 $843,963 $251,143 +; 0 Combined Utility Water Storm Sewer/WWTP Bond Reserve Firemen's Pension E Fund 0 U c m E t v 0 r r Q *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. 37 Packet Pg. 43 SUMMARY OVERVIEW I 4.2.a I CITY-WIDE Governmental Funds Enterprise Funds Internal Services Fund Agency Funds Total City-wide Total FUND BALANCES ---- ACTUAL ---- $ 25, 503, 622 $ 22, 025,147 $ 26, 259, 960 $ 71, 655, 566 73, 359, 621 72, 604, 784 8,311,631 8,350,207 8,306,440 224,697 205,908 251,143 $ 105, 695, 516 $ 103, 940, 884 $ 107,422, 327 $ CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES ---- ACTUAL ---- 4,234,813 $ (754,837) (43,767) 45,235 3,481,443 $ Governmental Fund Balances (Excluding General Fund) as of June 30, 2017 Drug Enforcement Fund Street Fund Combined Street Const/Improve Fund Municipal Arts Acquis. Fund Memorial Street Fund Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Fund Employee Parking Permit Fund Youth Scholarship Fund Tourism Promotional Fund/Arts Real Estate Excise Tax 2 Real Estate Excise Tax 1, Parks Acq Gifts Catalog Fund Special Projects Fund Cemetery Maintenance/Improvement Parks Construction Fund Parks Trust Fund Cemetery Maintenance Trust Fund Sister City Commission Business Improvement District L.I.D. Fund Control 756,338 949,217 (5,191) 26,446 Q. 1,726,811 IY .v c M c ii L $45,175 $1, 019, 696 $(847,858) $504,784 $18,288 $91, 599 $75, 223 $14,873 $87, 326 $2,475,580 ,104 $263 003 $2,65 $39,184 $189,2 0 $935,231 $155,38 $922, 598 $8,457 $70,294 $3, 812 $- $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. 38 Packet Pg. 44 4.2.a INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS OVERVIEW FUND BALANCES CHANGE IN FUND INTERNAL SERVICE BALANCES ---- ACTUAL ---- ---- ACTUAL ---- FUNDS 12/31/2016 3/31/2017 6/30/2017 Q2 yTD a 511 - Equipment Rental Fund $ 8,311,631 $ 8,303,230 $ 8,181,060 $ (122,170) $ (130,571) W 2 512 - Technology Rental Fund - 46,978 125,380 78,402 125,380 m Total Internal Service Funds $ 8,311,631 $ 8,350,207 $ 8,306,440 $ (43,767) $ (5,191) LL M y7 V Internal Service Fund Balances 10,000,000 $8, 311, 631 $8, 303, 230 $8,181, 060 8,000,000 c� c ii 6,000,000 511- Equipment Rental Fund a� r 512 - Technology Rental Fund 'M 4,000,000 m c 2,000, 000 146,978 m M125,380 a E $0 O Dec 2016 March 2017 June 2017 d E z c� r a *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. 39 Packet Pg. 45 6.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/15/2017 Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes of August 8, 2017 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: 08-08-2017 Draft Council Special Meeting Minutes Packet Pg. 46 6.1.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES AUGUST 8, 2017 Elected Officials Present Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Tom Mesaros, Council President Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Mayor Dave Earling Elected Officials Absent Mike Nelson, Councilmember Staff Present Mary Ann Hardie, HR Director Al Compaan, Police Chief Jeff Taraday, City Attorney 1. CALL TO ORDER/CONVENE IN JURY MEETING ROOM At 6:40 p.m., the City Council Special Meeting was called to order by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5t' Avenue North, Edmonds. 2. EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PER RCW 42.30.140(1)(A) The City Council then adjourned to the Jury Meeting Room in executive session to discuss collective bargaining. The executive session concluded at 7:00 p.m. ADJOURN At 7:00 p.m., the meeting was adjourned. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes August 8, 2017 Page 1 Packet Pg. 47 6.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/15/2017 Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of August 8, 2017 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: 08-08-2017 Draft Council Meeting Minutes Packet Pg. 48 6.2.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES August 8, 2017 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Thomas Mesaros, Council President Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Michael Nelson, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Phil Williams, Public Works Director Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir Scott James, Finance Director Dave Turley, Assistant Finance Director Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Andrew Pierce, Legislative/Council Assistant Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5t1i Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. PRESENTATIONS - None 5. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 31, 2017 2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM, PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE PAYMENTS 6. ADJOURN TO COMMITTEE MEETINGS With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned to committee meetings at 7:03 p.m. (Parks, Planning & Public Works Committee in the Jury Meeting Room, Finance Committee in Council Chambers and Public Safety & Personnel Committee in the Police Training Room.) Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes August 8, 2017 Page 1 Packet Pg. 49 6.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/15/2017 Approval of claim checks. Staff Lead: Scott James Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Nori Jacobson Background/History Approval of claim checks #226832 through #226953 dated August 10, 2017 for $356,823.80. Staff Recommendation Approval of claim checks. Fiscal Impact Claims $356,823.80 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: claim cks 08-10-17 FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 08-10-17 Packet Pg. 50 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 1 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226832 8/4/2017 071816 CARLSON, JESSICA 5823 ART CAMP 5823 ART CAMP INSTRUCTION 5823 ART CAMP INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 875.0( Total: 875.0( 226833 8/10/2017 076040 911 SUPPLY INC 52157 INV#52157 - ROUSSEAU - EDMONE 5.11 BIKE PATROL S/S SHIRT 001.000.41.521.70.24.00 49.9� BLAUER 8567 PANTS 001.000.41.521.70.24.00 269.9 1 BLAUER L/S SHIRT - CLASS A 001.000.41.521.70.24.00 74.9� BLAUER 4670 SOFT SHELL JACKE- 001.000.41.521.70.24.00 129.9� EMBROIDE NAME ON JACKET 001.000.41.521.70.24.00 8.0( EMBORIDER NAME ON S/S SHIRT 001.000.41.521.70.24.00 8.0( HEAT STAMP PARKING ENFORCEIV 001.000.41.521.70.24.00 20.0( 10.0% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.70.24.00 56.0� 52460 CR FOR INCORRECT PRICE ON #5; SHIRT CHGD $74.99/S/B $69.99 001.000.41.521.70.24.00 -5.0( 10.0% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.70.24.00 -0.5( 52487 INV#52487 - PAULSON - EDMONDS BLAUER 8567 PANTS 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 89.9� 10.0% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 9.0( 52488 INV#52488 - ROUSSEAU - EDMONE 5.11 BIKE PATROL SHIRTS Page: 1 Packet Pg. 51 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 2 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226833 8/10/2017 076040 911 SUPPLY INC (Continued) 001.000.41.521.70.24.00 99.9E EMBROIDER NAME ON SHIRTS 001.000.41.521.70.24.00 16.0( 10.0% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.70.24.00 11.6( Total: 838.1( 226834 8/10/2017 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 386150 PM & SENIOR CENTER PEST CONI PM & SENIOR CENTER PEST CONI 001.000.64.576.80.41.00 137.8E Total: 137.8E 226835 8/10/2017 061029 ABSOLUTE GRAPHIX 817516 SUMMER ADULT SOFTBALL SHIRT; SUMMER ADULT SOFTBALL SHIRT! 001.000.64.571.25.31.00 535.5( 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.25.31.00 55.6� 226836 8/10/2017 072189 ACCESS INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 2148160 226837 8/10/2017 063863 ADVANCED TRAFFIC PRODUCTS 18402 226838 8/10/2017 065568 ALLWATER INC 080117065 Total : STORAGE OF DOCUMENTS 08/01/� STORAGE OF DOCUMENTS 08/01/2 001.000.25.514.30.41.00 Total E7AB.TRAFFIC AUDIO CABINET/CC E7AB.TRAFFIC AUDIO CABINET/CC 112.000.68.595.33.65.00 10.3% Sales Tax 112.000.68.595.33.65.00 Total WWTP: 8/2/17 DRINKING WATER S Water services (plus rental/supplies 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 Total Page: 2 Packet Pg. 52 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 3 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226839 8/10/2017 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 1990286466 WWTP: 8/2/17 UNIFORMS, TOWEL; wwtp uniforms 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 5.1( wwtp mats & towels vi 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 115.9£ 10.3% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 0.5: 10.3% Sales Tax E 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 11.9z 1990286467 PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE o PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE E 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 57.3z o Total: 190.8t a a 226840 8/10/2017 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 95595 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS Q UB Outsourcing area #300 Printing ti 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 r 149.8E c UB Outsourcing area #300 Printing 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 149.8E c UB Outsourcing area #300 Printing Y 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 154.3E E UB Outsourcing area #300 Postage 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 533.9E UB Outsourcing area #300 Postage 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 533.9z 10.1 % Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 15.1: 10.1 % Sales Tax Q 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 15.1: 10.1 % Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 15.6( Total: 1,567.81 226841 8/10/2017 001801 AUTOMATIC WILBERT VAULT CO 50282 ROUGH BOX - WHARTON ROUGH BOX - WHARTON 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 474.0( Page: 3 Packet Pg. 53 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 4 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226841 8/10/2017 001801 001801 AUTOMATIC WILBERT VAULT CO (Continued) Total: 474.0( 226842 8/10/2017 069076 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS INC COE0717 JULY 2017 BACKGROUND CHECKS PRE -EMPLOYMENT BACKGROUND 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 420.0( PARKS OVERAGE 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 211.0( Total: 631.0( 226843 8/10/2017 061659 BAILEY'S TRADITIONAL TAEKWON 5735 TAEKWON-DO 5735 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTION, 5735 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 1,020.2z 5739 TAEKWON-DO 5739 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTION 5739 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 38.0( 5743 TAEKWON-DO 5743 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTION, 5743 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTION, 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 156.0( Total: 1,214.21 226844 8/10/2017 002170 BARTON, RONALD 57 LEOFF 1 REIMBURSEMENT LEOFF 1 REIMBURSEMENT 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 199.2, Total : 199.2, 226845 8/10/2017 066891 BEACON PUBLISHING INC 27084 226846 8/10/2017 002300 BEAVER EQUIPMENT SPECALITY CO 170651 CEMETERY AD CEMETERY AD 130.000.64.536.20.41.40 Total WWTP: ROTORK ACTUATOR ROTORK ACTUATOR 423.000.76.594.35.64.00 10,142.0( 10.3% Sales Tax 423.000.76.594.35.64.00 1,044.6: Total : 11,186.61 Page: 4 Packet Pg. 54 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 5 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226847 8/10/2017 069226 BHC CONSULTANTS LLC 8825 E6GA.SERVICES THRU 7/21/17 E6GA.SERVICES THRU 7/21/17 423.200.75.594.35.41.00 493.3( 9021 ESJB.SERVICES THRU 7/21/17 vi ESJB.SERVICES THRU 7/21/17 421.000.74.594.34.41.10 7,789.0( Total: 8,282.3E E 226848 8/10/2017 075342 BORUCHOW ITZ, ROBERT 073117 MAY - JUL 2017 PUBLIC DEFENSE MAY 2017 COSTS ,- 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 362.5( JUNE 2017 COSTS > 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 891.6 , a JULY 2017 COSTS a 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 1,641.61 Q Total: 2,895.81 ti r 226849 8/10/2017 072005 BROCKMANN, KERRY 5749 YOGA 5749 YOGA INSTRUCTION 5749 YOGA INSTRUCTION 00 0 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 443.5: Y Total: 443.5E E 226850 8/10/2017 072177 BROOKS PRODUCTS & SERVICE 1318 INV#1318 - CLERKS - EDMONDS P[ 3/4 SLEEVED SHIRTS (LG) - DIEHL, r 001.000.41.521.11.24.00 65.9z r- 3/4 SLEEVED SHIRTS- (XL)-COLLII` E 001.000.41.521.11.24.00 65.9z 3/4 SLEEVED SHIRTS -(3XL) -BROry r 001.000.41.521.11.24.00 139.9( Q S/S POLO (LG) - DIEHL, SCHEELE, 001.000.41.521.11.24.00 89.8E S/S POLO - (3XL) - MANDEVILLE 001.000.41.521.11.24.00 20.9E ONE TIME SET UP CHARGE 001.000.41.521.11.24.00 20.0( EMBROIDER NAMES ON 18 SHIRT: Page: 5 Packet Pg. 55 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 6 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226850 8/10/2017 072177 BROOKS PRODUCTS & SERVICE (Continued) 001.000.41.521.11.24.00 144.0( EMBROIDER BADGE ON 18 SHIRTr 001.000.41.521.11.24.00 216.0( 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.11.24.00 78.5E Total: 841.1 S 226851 8/10/2017 074776 BUCKSHNIS, DIANE DB072017 REIMBURSEMENT - TRAVEL WRIA8 Travel — 001.000.11.511.60.43.00 29.5� Tolls 001.000.11.511.60.43.00 8.2E Total: 37.81 226852 8/10/2017 075023 CAROLYN DOUGLAS COMMUNICATION 68 COMMUNICATIONS/COMMUNITY O Communications/community outreacl• 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 2,500.0( Total: 2,500.0( 226853 8/10/2017 075092 CASCADE BICYCLE CLUB ED FNDN 40234 E3DD.SERVICES THRU JULY 2017 E3DD.SERVICES THRU JULY 2017 112.000.68.595.33.41.00 204.7( Total: 204.7E 226854 8/10/2017 069813 CDW GOVERNMENT INC JPF5075 NIMBLE STORAGE MAINTENANCE Nimble Storage Maintenance Suppori 512.000.31.518.88.48.00 9,300.0( 10.3% Sales Tax 512.000.31.518.88.48.00 957.9( Total: 10,257.9( 226855 8/10/2017 068484 CEMEX LLC 9435987523 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 1,989.7( Total: 1,989.7( Page: 6 Packet Pg. 56 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 7 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226856 8/10/2017 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY 249830 SPRAY PARK CARBON DIOXIDE SPRAY PARK CARBON DIOXIDE 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 93.7� 10.3% Sales Tax vi 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9.6E LY 249933 SPRAY PARK CARBON DIOXIDE t SPRAY PARK CARBON DIOXIDE 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 93.7� . 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9.61 o RN07170998 SPRAY PARK CARBON DIOXIDE, G' 'E GYMNASTICS HELIUM o 001.000.64.571.28.45.00 10.7: a 10.3% Sales Tax C 001.000.64.571.28.45.00 1.1' " RN07170999 WWTP: CYLINDER RENTAL+ HAZI ~ r nitrogen, oxygen, carbon monoxide o 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 r 64.5( ao 10.3% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 N 6.6z --.e Total: 289.8$ E 226857 8/10/2017 076176 CHRISTIAN, JOHN 8/2-8/4 FIELD ATTEND 8/2-8/4/17 SOFTBALL FIELD ATTENI 8/2-8/4/17 SOFTBALL FIELD ATTENI r 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 c 132.0( Total: E 132.0( E 226858 8/10/2017 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 13320 E6AB.TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINTENAI r E6AB.TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINTENAI Q 112.000.68.595.33.65.00 1,798.8� Total: 1,798.8$ 226859 8/10/2017 065519 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 13322 INV#13322 1/2 NARCOTICS SGT- 21' 1/2 NARC SGT SAL & BEN - 2ND Q7 104.100.41.521.21.51.00 15,508.4E Page: 7 Packet Pg. 57 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 8 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226859 8/10/2017 065519 065519 CITY OF LYNNWOOD (Continued) Total: 15,508.41 226860 8/10/2017 003801 CITY WIDE FENCE CO INC 33482 PM: FENCE PARTS PM: FENCE PARTS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 261.8, 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 27.Z Total: 289.0E 226861 8/10/2017 073135 COGENT COMMUNICATIONS INC AUG-17 C/A CITYOFED00001 Aug-17 Fiber Optics Internet Connect 512.000.31.518.87.42.00 406.1( Total: 406.1( 226862 8/10/2017 075925 CROSSROADS STRATEGIES LLC 1012240 FEDERAL LOBBYIST JULY 2017 Federal lobbyist July 2017 001.000.61.511.70.41.00 5,000.0( Total: 5,000.0( 226863 8/10/2017 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 3327931 BUSINESS RECRUITMENT ADS FOI Business recruitment ads for July 201 001.000.61.558.70.41.40 540.0( Total: 540.0( 226864 8/10/2017 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 17-3783 7/25/17 & 7/31/17 CITY COUNCIL &', 7/25/17 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MI 001.000.25.514.30.41.00 418.2( Total: 418.2( 226865 8/10/2017 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 1-76381 PM: 10W30, TRI-FLOW PM: 10W30, TRI-FLOW 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 61.9E 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 6.3£ Total: 68.X 226866 8/10/2017 074302 EDMONDS HARDWARE & PAINT LLC 002330 PM: AERO COATING, PAINT Page: 8 Packet Pg. 58 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 226866 8/10/2017 074302 EDMONDS HARDWARE & PAINT LLC (Continued) 226867 226868 226869 226870 002332 8/10/2017 069523 EDMONDS P&R YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP 6078 RAPIPOUR 8/10/2017 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 8/10/2017 065331 EMD MILLIPORE CORPORATION 6079 JACOBS 8-40000 8125336 8/10/2017 074437 EMPLOYERS HEALTH COALITION WA 080417 6.3.a Page: 9 PO # Description/Account Amoun PM: AERO COATING, PAINT 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 12.9E 10.3% Sales Tax vi 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 1.3z PM: MULTIMETER t PM: MULTIMETER 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 23.9E . 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 2.4 , o Total: 40.7E 6078 SURI RAPIPOUR YOUTH SCHi o 6078 SURI RAPIPOUR YOUTH SCH, a 122.000.64.571.20.49.00 75.0( Q 6079 GIDGET JACOBS YOUTH SCH r 6079 GIDGET JACOBS YOUTH SCH c 122.000.64.571.20.49.00 75.0( r Total : 00 150.0( o N Y HICKMAN PARK STORM DRAIN & U HICKMAN PARK STORM DRAIN & U E 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 1,088.6E Total: 1,088.6E c WWTP: ZRQSVP3US LAB EQUIPME E E ZRQSVP3US LAB EQUIPMENT. The 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 2,990.4E r Freight Q 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 45.0( 10.3% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 312.6E Total : 3,348.1: 2017 Q3 EHCW RETIREE MGMT FE 3 X FIRE RETIREE MEDICAL PROGI Page: 9 Packet Pg. 59 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 10 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226870 8/10/2017 074437 EMPLOYERS HEALTH COALITION WA (Continued) 617.000.51.517.20.23.10 270.0( 2017 Q3 EHCW RETIREE MEDICAL 009.000.39.517.20.41.00 1,800.0( Total: 2,070.0( 226871 8/10/2017 008975 ENTENMANN ROVIN CO 0128545-IN INV#0128545-IN ACCT#0011847 - E( OFFICER RETIRED BADGES 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 196.0( PLAIN BADGE CASES 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 54.0( PACKAGEINSURANCE 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 6.0( PACKAGING & HANDLING FEES 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 4.5( Freight 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 16.0( Total : 276.5( 226872 8/10/2017 009410 EVERETT STEEL INC 185832 PM: TUBES PM: TUBES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 747.4( 9.7% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 72.5( Total : 819.9E 226873 8/10/2017 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU45219 WATER SUPPLIES Water Supplies 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 24.1, 10.3% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 2.4£ Total : 26.6( 226874 8/10/2017 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0561039 WATER METER INVENTORY #2027 Water Meter Inventory #2027 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 3,056.0( Page: 10 Packet Pg. 60 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 11 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226874 8/10/2017 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC (Continued) #0577 W-RADIO-01-010 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 4,209.3( 10.3% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 314.71 10.3% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 433.5( Total: 8,013.6$ 226875 8/10/2017 075536 FREGON ESE ASSOCIATES 450-019 PROF SERV. HIGHWAY 99 SUBARE Prof Serv. Highway 99 Subarea 001.000.62.524.10.41.00 3,410.0( Total: 3,410.0( 226876 8/10/2017 075970 FRIEDMAN, JAMES 8/3 HMP FRIEDMAN 8/3 HMP FRIEDMAN 8/3 HMP FRIEDMAN 117.100.64.573.20.41.00 450.0( Total: 450.0( 226877 8/10/2017 011900 FRONTIER 206-188-0247 TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY A, TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 264.1 z TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY A, 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 264.1 z 425-745-5055 MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL PHOI` MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL PHOI` 001.000.64.571.29.42.00 126.Z FAC MAINT IP LINE (10 + TAX) 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 11.01 425-774-1031 LIFT STATION #8 VG SPECIAL ACCI LIFT STATION #8 TWO VOICE GRAI 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 47.4E 425-776-1281 SNO-ISLE LIBRARY ELEVATOR PH( SNO-ISLE LIBRARY ELEVATOR PH( 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 54.9, 425-776-5316 425-776-5316 PARKS MAINT FAX LII Page: 11 Packet Pg. 61 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 12 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226877 8/10/2017 011900 FRONTIER (Continued) 425-776-5316 PARKS MAINT FAX LII 001.000.64.576.80.42.00 101.2( Total: 869.1 , 226878 8/10/2017 075725 GIRLS ROCK MATH 5653 GIRLS ROCK MATH 5653 GIRLS ROCK MATH INSTRUC- 5653 GIRLS ROCK MATH INSTRUC- 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 2,870.4( Total: 2,870.4( 226879 8/10/2017 070437 HARDIE, MARYANN 051817 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 518.0( Total: 518.0( 226880 8/10/2017 013140 HENDERSON, BRIAN 58 LEOFF 1 REIMBURSEMENT LEOFF 1 REIMBURSEMENT 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 83.3� Total: 83.3� 226881 8/10/2017 072647 HERRERA ENVIRONMENTAL 40627B PERMITTING SVCS FOR WATERFR PERMITTING SVCS FOR WATERFR 132.000.64.594.76.41.00 15,668.5z 40758 PERMITTING SVCS FOR WATERFR PERMITTING SVCS FOR WATERFR 132.000.64.594.76.41.00 10,945.4( Total: 26,613.9� 226882 8/10/2017 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 4054855 WWTP: FANS/SHEETINGS/CLR GAI fans picked up at Shoreline Store 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 37.9, sheeting, clr gallons picked up at 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 196.9' 10.0% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 3.7� 10.0% Sales Tax Page: 12 Packet Pg. 62 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 13 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226882 8/10/2017 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued) 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 19.6� Total: 258.3' 226883 8/10/2017 075966 HULBERT, CARRIE BID-005 BID/ED! ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE BID/Ed! administrative services July 140.000.61.558.70.41.00 1,200.0( Total: 1,200.0( 226884 8/10/2017 060165 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC 27585 E6GA.SERVICES THRU 7/23/17 E6GA.SERVICES THRU 7/23/17 423.200.75.594.35.41.00 5,759.0( Total: 5,759.0E 226885 8/10/2017 072891 HYDRO FLOW PRODUCTS 127344 WATER - HYDRANT METER HOSE Water - Hydrant Meter Hose 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 198.0( Freight 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 18.1 z Total: 216.11 226886 8/10/2017 076159 IMS INFRASTRUCTURE MGMT SVCS 11317-2 E7CA SERVICES THRU JULY 2017 E7CA SERVICES THRU JUILY 2017 112.000.68.595.33.41.00 1,545.0( Total: 1,545.0( 226887 8/10/2017 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2983147 COLORED COPY PAPER FOR DSD Colored copy paper for DSD 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 18.4, 2988791 WWTP: TOILET PAPER Toilet paper 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 69.5E 10.3% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 7.1 , 2989085 DSD COPY PAPPER DSD Copy Papper 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 138.1 E Page: 13 Packet Pg. 63 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 14 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226887 8/10/2017 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED (Continued) 2989501 RETURN OF COPY PAPER - WRON Return of copy paper - wrong color 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 -18.4, vi 2990351 DSD - OFFICE SUPPLIES DSD - Office supplies 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 18.8z Total: 233.7E ,E cC 226888 8/10/2017 014940 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS 300-10027488 UNIT E138SO - PARTS 4- Unit E138SO - Parts O 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 41.9E > 10.3% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 4.3. a 300-10027511 UNITS E143,144,146RE - PARTS Q Units E143,144,146RE - Parts ti 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 r 64.4z c 10.3% Sales Tax00 r 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 6.6z o 300-10027702 UNIT E134PO - PARTS y Unit E134PO - Parts 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 91.9( . 10.3% Sales Tax f° 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 9.41 r 300-10027807 UNIT E143RE - SUPPLIES Unit E143RE - Supplies E t 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 109.8E 10.3% Sales Tax r Q 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 11.3' Total: 339.8i 226889 8/10/2017 075062 JAMESTOWN NETWORKS 4547 FIBER OPTICS INTERNET CONNEC Aug-17 Fiber Optics Internet Connect 512.000.31.518.87.42.00 500.0( 10.3% Sales Tax 512.000.31.518.87.42.00 51.5( Page: 14 Packet Pg. 64 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # 226889 8/10/2017 075062 075062 JAMESTOWN NETWORKS (Continued) 226890 8/10/2017 075661 JANET MAPLES DESIGN /IZZY GIRL BID-07312017 226891 8/10/2017 074888 JOYOUS NOISE LLC 5694 KINDERMUSIK 5698 KINDERMUSIK 226892 8/10/2017 075378 JUMPIN J'S JUMP ROPE CHAMPS 5791 JUMP ROPE CAMP 226893 8/10/2017 075646 K-A GENERAL CONST CONTRACTOR E6MA.Pmt 5 E6MB.Pmt 7 226894 8/10/2017 072650 KCDA PURCHASING COOPERATIVE 300180428 Description/Account Total: SOCIAL MEDIA MANAGEMENT FOR BID/Ed! social media management fo 140.000.61.558.70.41.00 Total 5694 KINDERMUSIK INSTRUCTION 5694 KINDERMUSIK INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 5698 KINDERMUSIK INSTRUCTION 5698 KINDERMUSIK INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 Total 5791 JUMP ROPE CAMP 5791 JUMP ROPE CAMP 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 E6MA.PMT 5 THRU 6/30/17 E6MA.PMT 5 THRU 6/30/17 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 E6MA.RET 5 132.000.223.400 E6MB.PMT 7 THRU 6/30/17 E6MB.PMT 7 THRU 6/30/17 125.000.64.594.75.65.00 E6MB.RET 7 125.000.223.400 Total : Total: INV#300180428 ACCT#100828 - EDI 10 CASES MULTI USE COPY PAPEF 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 HANDLING FEE 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 6.3.a Page: 15 Page: 15 Packet Pg. 65 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 16 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226894 8/10/2017 072650 KCDA PURCHASING COOPERATIVE (Continued) 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 23.6: Total: 320.2E 226895 8/10/2017 016600 KROESENS INC 45866 INV#45866 ACCT#1320 - EDMONDE CHAMBERS BASKETWEAVE BELT 001.000.41.521.11.24.00 24.0( 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.11.24.00 2.4 1 Total: 26.4 , 226896 8/10/2017 066231 LINCOLN AQUATICS S1322349 YOST WEDGE ASSEMBLY YOST WEDGE ASSEMBLY 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 58.9� 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 6.0£ Total: 65.0 , 226897 8/10/2017 074263 LYNNWOOD WINSUPPLY CO 019216 00 PM: IRRIGATION SUPPLIES PM: IRRIGATION SUPPLIES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 185.6( 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 19.11 Total: 204.7, 226898 8/10/2017 075769 MAILFINANCE INC N6668925 E-CERTIFIED 08/29/2017 - 11/28/201 N16073501 E-CERTIFIED 08/29/201' 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 192.0( 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 19.7E Total: 211.71 226899 8/10/2017 019920 MCCANN, MARIAN 55 LEOFF 1 REIMBURSEMENT LEOFF 1 REIMBURSEMENT 009.000.39.517.20.29.00 8.281.5( Page: 16 Packet Pg. 66 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 226899 8/10/2017 019920 019920 MCCANN, MARIAN (Continued) 226900 8/10/2017 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 41047984 226901 8/10/2017 075746 MCMURRAY, LAURA 5858 FELDENKRAIS 5861 FELDENKRAIS 226902 8/10/2017 076179 MELISSA MORGAN 1-06330 226903 8/10/2017 063773 MICROFLEX 00022639 226904 8/10/2017 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENTALL INC 263363 263958 PO # Description/Account Total ; WWTP: WK GLOVES, PUMP, EYES,: WK GLOVES, PUMP,EYES,SAFETY 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 Total 5858 FELDENKRAIS INSTRUCTION 5858 FELDENKRAIS INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 5861 FELDENKRAIS INSTRUCTION 5861 FELDENKRAIS INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 Total #1012057AL UTILITY REFUND #1012057AL Utility refund due to 411.000.233.000 Total 06-17 TAX AUDIT PROGRAM TAX AUDIT PROGRAM 001.000.31.514.23.41.00 Total PM: DIAMOND WHEEL, DRIVE SHA PM: DIAMOND WHEEL, DRIVE SHA 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 SEWER - REPAIRS AT SENIOR CEI\ Sewer - Repairs at Senior Center - 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 10.3% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 6.3.a Page: 17 Page: 17 Packet Pg. 67 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 226904 8/10/2017 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENTALL INC MI-RIIF 226906 226907 Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) 263991 264444 264710 8/10/2017 074556 MOORE, IACOFANO & GOLTSMAN INC 49673 PO # Description/Account WATER/SEWER - 2 CYCLE OIL Water/Sewer - 2 cycle Oil 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 Water/Sewer - 2 cycle Oil 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 10.3% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 10.3% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 PM: CHAIN, BLADE CLEANER PM: CHAIN, BLADE CLEANER 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 PM: AUTOCUT SPOOL, BLADES PM: AUTOCUT SPOOL, BLADES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 Total E6DB.SERVICES THRU 6/30/2017 E6DB.SERVICES THRU 6/30/2017 112.000.68.595.33.41.00 Total 8/10/2017 072746 MURRAYSMITH 15-1715-20 ESKA.SERVICES THRU 6/30/2017 ESKA.SERVICES THRU 6/30/2017 421.000.74.594.34.41.10 Total 8/10/2017 074356 NAVAS-RIVAS, HERNAN 21579 SPANISH INTERPRETER COURT OE SPANISH INTERPRETER COURT OE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 6.3.a Page: 18 Amoun 33.9( vi Y V 33.9( 3.4E E 3.4� o Ta 0 76.1 E a a Q 7.8z •� ti r 0 r 38.8E 0 N 4.0( 721.2 j E c 2,579.2� m 2,579.25 E R .r a 13, 967.2: 13,967.2E 103.0( Page: 18 Packet Pg. 68 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 19 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226907 8/10/2017 074356 074356 NAVAS-RIVAS, HERNAN (Continued) Total: 103.0( 226908 8/10/2017 070855 NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS 10095543 NAVIAAUGUST 2017 FEES PARTICIPANT FEE AND MONTHLY 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 100.0( Total: 100.0( 226909 8/10/2017 063034 NCL 393262 WWTP: B-12D BOD STANDARD B-12D BOD STANDARD 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 180.0( Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 26.1 Total: 206.1$ 226910 8/10/2017 074724 NEWMAN-BURROW LLC 141041 FALL 2017 REC DIGITAL GUIDE CRi FALL 2017 REC DIGITAL GUIDE CRW 001.000.64.571.22.49.00 514.0( 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.22.49.00 52.91 Total: 566.9� 226911 8/10/2017 025217 NORTH SOUND HOSE & FITTINGS 83585 WWTP: FIRE HOSE,SEALANT,TAPE FIRE HOSE, SEALANT, TAPE, COUP 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 583.8( 9.7% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 56.6: Total: 640.4$ 226912 8/10/2017 025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 755 PLANNING BOARD 7/26/17 AND - Planning Board 7/26/17 and - 001.000.62.558.60.41.00 455.0( 000 00 758 ADB MINUTES 8/2/17 ADB Minutes 8/2/17 001.000.62.558.60.41.00 245.0( Total: 700.0( 226913 8/10/2017 065720 OFFICE DEPOT 9464755450001 PW OFFICE SUPPLIES Page: 19 Packet Pg. 69 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 226913 8/10/2017 065720 OFFICE DEPOT Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) 946876316001 947809442001 226914 8/10/2017 070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER July, 2017 6.3.a Page: 20 PO # Description/Account Amoun PW Office Supplies 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 34.1 10.3% Sales Tax vi 00 1.000.65.518.20.3 1.00 3.5. PW OFFICE SUPPLIES t PW Office Supplies 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 17.5 - .E 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 1.8' o PW OFFICE SUPPLIES PW Office Supplies E o 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 45.0E "a- 10.3% Sales Tax C 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 4.6z " Total : 106.75 r 0 COURT, BLDG CODE & JIS TRANSI r Emergency Medical Services & Traun o 001.000.237.120 1,315.1, Y PSEA 1, 2 & 3 Account V 001.000.237.130 26,300.4< E Building Code Fee Account 001.000.237.150 171.0( State Patrol Death Investigation m 001.000.237.330 32.6. Judicial Information Systems Account 001.000.237.180 6,625.7( Q School Zone Safety Account 001.000.237.200 357.5( Washington Auto Theft Prevention 001.000.237.250 2,603.6z Traumatic Brain Injury 001.000.237.260 516.4( Hwy Safety Acct Page: 20 Packet Pg. 70 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 21 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226914 8/10/2017 070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER (Continued) 001.000.237.320 51.7( Crime Lab Blood Breath Analysis 001.000.237.170 31.9E WSP Hwy Acct 001.000.237.340 185.2 , Total: 38,191.4( 226915 8/10/2017 026200 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT 0054671 HICKMAN PARK IRRIGATION HICKMAN PARK IRRIGATION 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 3,778.0< 0060860 HICKMAN PARK DRINKING FOUNT/ HICKMAN PARK DRINKING FOUNT/ 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 107.5� Total: 3,885.6, 226916 8/10/2017 063750 ORCA PACIFIC INC 28740 CHEMICALS YOST POOL CHEMICALS YOST POOL 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 832.5E 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 85.7E Total: 918.3( 226917 8/10/2017 027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS 18-T1018497 PM YARD WASTE DUMP CUST # 51 PM YARD WASTE DUMP 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 96.0( 18-T1018515 PM YARD WASTE DUMP CUST # 51 PM YARD WASTE DUMP 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 96.0( Total: 192.0( 226918 8/10/2017 065051 PARAMETRIX INC 21-21654 WWTP:5/28-7/1/17 PLC&SCADA PH 5/28-7/1/17 PLC&SCADA PH4 TSK1! 423.100.76.594.39.41.10 59,620.4( Total: 59,620.4( 226919 8/10/2017 065787 PATRIOT DIAMOND INC A07558 WATER - 18" ASPHALT BLADE Page: 21 Packet Pg. 71 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 22 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226919 8/10/2017 065787 PATRIOT DIAMOND INC (Continued) Water - 18" Asphalt Blade 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 234.0( Freight 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 14.0( Total : 226920 8/10/2017 069633 PET PROS 0014966-IN INV#0014966-IN CUST#07-EDMONI SALES TAX ON FREE BAG OF DOG 001.000.41.521.26.31.00 0015133-IN INV#0015133-IN CUST #07-EDMONI NUTRI CHKN/RICE DOG FOOD 001.000.41.521.26.31.00 NUTRI LAMB/RICE DOG FOOD 001.000.41.521.26.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.26.31.00 Total 226921 8/10/2017 072384 PLAY-WELLTEKNOLOGIES 5681 PLAY WELL 5681 PLAY WELL INSTRUCTION 5681 PLAY WELL INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 5683 PLAY WELL 5683 PLAY WELL INSTRUCTION 5683 PLAY WELL INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 Total 226922 8/10/2017 070160 POETS & WRITERS INC 2017-18942 WOTS ADVERTISING WOTS ADVERTISING 123.000.64.573.20.41.40 Total 226923 8/10/2017 064088 PROTECTION ONE 31146525 ALARM MONITORING CITY HALL ALARM MONITORING CITY HALL 12 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 Total Page: 22 Packet Pg. 72 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 23 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226924 8/10/2017 070809 PUGET SOUND EXECUTIVE 17-2011 COURT SECURITY 07/17/2017-07/3' COURT SECURITY 07/17/2017-07/3' 001.000.23.512.50.41.00 2,392.5( Total: 2,392.5( vi Y 226925 8/10/2017 061540 REPUBLIC SERVICES #197 3-0197-0800478 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 155.5' E 3-0197-0800897 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; ,- 001.000.65.518.20.47.00 31.1 < PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH : > 111.000.68.542.90.47.00 118.3( a PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; a 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 118.3( Q PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; ti 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 r 118.3( c PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH : r 511.000.77.548.68.47.00 118.3( c PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH : Y 422.000.72.531.90.47.00 118.2E 3-0197-0801132 FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST ; 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 165.6( 3-0197-0829729 CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDAL m CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDAL E t 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 71.9E R Total: 1,015.61, Q 226926 8/10/2017 076002 RODRIGUEZ, ARTURO 8/1 HMP RODRIGUEZ 8/1 HMP RODRIGUEZ 8/1 HMP RODRIGUEZ 117.100.64.573.20.41.00 700.0( Total: 700.0( 226927 8/10/2017 071467 S MORRIS COMPANY JULY 2017 INVOICE DATED 7/31/17 ACCT#700 #23425 1 NPC - 7/13/17 Page: 23 Packet Pg. 73 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 24 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226927 8/10/2017 071467 S MORRIS COMPANY (Continued) 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 12.1' #23450 3 NPC - 7/27/17 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 36.3: Tota I : 48.4: 226928 8/10/2017 066806 SANDERS, BILL 073117 SICK LEAVE BUY BACK SICK LEAVE BUY BACK FOR 7/1/17 111.000.68.544.70.11.00 111.4 1 Total: 111.4, 226929 8/10/2017 074431 SEATTLE ASBESTOS TEST LLC 201712847 CIVIC FIELD CIVIC FIELD 001.000.64.576.80.41.00 1,250.0( Total: 1,250.0( 226930 8/10/2017 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC S3-2334608 UNIT 105 - TRANS FLUID Unit 105 - Trans Fluid 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 51.4E 10.3% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 5.3' Total: 56.7$ 226931 8/10/2017 074997 SEITEL SYSTEMS, LLC 41512 REMOTE COMPUTER SUPPORT Remote computer support 7/18/17 512.000.31.518.88.41.00 620.0( 41524 WWTP SHAREPOINT MIGRATION C WWTP Sharepoint migration remote, 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 481.2E Total: 1,101.2! 226932 8/10/2017 063306 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 5847-1 PM: PAINT PM: PAINT 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 53.4E 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 5.5' Page: 24 Packet Pg. 74 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # 226932 8/10/2017 063306 063306 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS (Continued) 226933 8/10/2017 068489 SIRENNET.COM 0217726-IN 226934 8/10/2017 036955 SKY NURSERY 0217816-IN T-0990633 226935 8/10/2017 075543 SNO CO PUBLIC DEFENDER ASSOC 1886 226936 8/10/2017 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2002-0255-4 2003-2646-0 2004-9315-3 Description/Account Total : UNIT E140SO - SOLO LINEAR SURF Unit E140SO - Solo Linear Surfa 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 10.3% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 UNIT E135,136PO - CONSOLE, ANC Unit El35,136PO - Console, and Sup 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 Freight 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 10.3% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 Total PM: SAFER ENDALL INSECT PM: SAFER ENDALL INSECT 001.000.64.576.81.31.00 10.0% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.81.31.00 Total JULY 2017 PUBLIC DEFENSE CONI JULY 2017 PUBLIC DEFENSE CONI 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 Total WWTP: 7/6-8/3/17 FLOW METER 24 7/6-8/3/17 FLOW METER 2400 HIGF 423.000.76.535.80.47.62 HUMMINGBIRD PARK 1000 EDMON HUMMINGBIRD PARK 1000 EDMON 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 76TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 76TH AVE W 6.3.a Page: 25 Page: 25 Packet Pg. 75 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 26 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226936 8/10/2017 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 28.2' 2006-6395-3 ANWAY PARK 131 SUNSET AVE / M ANWAY PARK 131 SUNSET AVE / M 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 vi 136.6: 2010-5432-7 BRACKETT'S LANDING NORTH 50 f BRACKETT'S LANDING NORTH 50 f 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 37.0E E 2011-0356-1 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23800 FIRDALE AVI f° TRAFFIC LIGHT 23800 FIRDALE AVI 4- 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 32.3: 2011-8789-5 TRAFFIC LIGHT 21132 76TH AVE W > TRAFFIC LIGHT 21132 76TH AVE W a 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 50.3( C 2015-0127-7 LIFT STATION #14 7905 1/2 211TH F LIFT STATION #14 7905 1/2 211TH F ti 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 r 18.8: c 2015-5730-3 CEMETERY BUILDING CEMETERY BUILDING c 130.000.64.536.50.47.00 34.8' 2019-2991-6 WWTP: 6/23-7/21/17 FLOW METER WWTP: 6/23-7/21/17 FLOW METER E 423.000.76.535.80.47.62 16.6( Z 2021-3965-5 BRACKETT'S LANDING SOUTH 100 r BRACKETT'S LANDING SOUTH 100 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 17.1- E 2021-6153-5 CEMETERY WELL PUMP R CEMETERY WELL PUMP r Q 130.000.64.536.50.47.00 342.1( 2021-9128-4 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 7801 212- PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 7801 212' 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 17.1 2022-5063-5 9TH/CASPER LANDSCAPE BED / M 9TH/CASPER LANDSCAPE BED / M 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 18.8� 2025-2920-2 STREET LIGHTING (13 LIGHTS @ 4 Page: 26 Packet Pg. 76 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 226936 8/10/2017 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 226937 8/10/2017 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 27 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) STREET LIGHTING (13 LIGHTS @ 4 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 123.8� 2025-7615-3 STREET LIGHTING (2029 LIGHTS C v; STREET LIGHTING (2029 LIGHTS C 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 15,477.7( 2025-7948-8 STREET LIGHTING (58 LIGHTS @ 2 STREET LIGHTING (58 LIGHTS @ 2 E 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 360.Z 2025-7952-0 WWTP: 7/1-7/31/17 ENERGY MGMT 7/1-7/31/17 WWTP ENERGY MANA( o 423.000.76.535.80.47.61 9.7( 2047-1489-3 STREET LIGHTING (1 LIGHT @ 150' o a STREET LIGHTING (1 LIGHT @ 150' a Q 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 4.9E 2047-1492-7 STREET LIGHTING (18 LIGHTS @ 2 ti r STREET LIGHTING (18 LIGHTS @ 2 c 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 116.8' 2047-1493-5 STREET LIGHTING (5 LIGHTS @ 40 c STREET LIGHTING (5 LIGHTS @ 40 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 58.3: E 2047-1494-3 STREET LIGHTING (2 LIGHTS @ 10 STREET LIGHTING (2 LIGHTS @ 10 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 14.8z 2047-1495-0 STREET LIGHTING (26 LIGHTS @ 2 STREET LIGHTING (26 LIGHTS @ 2 E 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 92.9E 2053-0758-0 DECORATIVE & STREET LIGHTING Q DECORATIVE & STREET LIGHTING 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 116.6( Total: 17,161.21 103587 PARKS MAINT GARBAGE AND REC PARKS MAINT GARBAGE AND REC 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 1,089.6E Page: 27 Packet Pg. 77 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 28 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226937 8/10/2017 038300 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO (Continued) Total: 1,089.6! 226938 8/10/2017 076086 STATEHOOD MEDIA LLC 2017ci-134 WOTS AD W OTS AD 123.000.64.573.20.41.40 800.0( Total: 800.0( 226939 8/10/2017 075971 STEEL MAGIC NORTHWEST 8/6 CP STEEL 8/6 CP STEEL 8/6 CP STEEL 117.100.64.573.20.41.00 600.0( Total: 600.0( 226940 8/10/2017 074406 STUVERUD, ROBERT 8/8 HMP STUVERUD 8/8 HMP STUVERUD 8/8 HMP STUVERUD 117.100.64.573.20.41.00 600.0( Total: 600.0( 226941 8/10/2017 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 18160371 STORM -MARKING PAINT Storm -Marking Paint 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 159.6� 10.3% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 16.4E 18169202 PM: SUPPLIES YOST PM: SUPPLIES YOST 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 19.7� 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 2.01 Tota I : 197.9 226942 8/10/2017 013007 THE ESTATE OF EZRA J HASNER 56 LEOFF 1 REIMBURSEMENT LEOFF 1 REIMBURSEMENT 009.000.39.517.20.29.00 4,400.5' Total: 4,400.5' 226943 8/10/2017 027269 THE PART WORKS INC INV15528 PM: YOST SHOWER HEAD PM: YOST SHOWER HEAD 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 84.4i Page: 28 Packet Pg. 78 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 29 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226943 8/10/2017 027269 THE PART WORKS INC (Continued) 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 8.7( Total: 93.11 226944 8/10/2017 075691 TIBBOTT, NEIL TIB052017 REIMBURSEMENT - TRAVEL CNU Conference Milage:- 001.000.11.511.60.43.00 56.3 1 Parking 001.000.11.511.60.43.00 48.0( Total: 104.3 , 226945 8/10/2017 072800 TOYOTA LIFT NORTHWEST 24112245 WWTP: ANNUAL FORKLIFT WARR/ ANNUAL FORKLIFT WARRANTY IN; 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 187.5( 10.3% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 19.3' 24833948 WWTP: ANNUAL HAND TRUCK WA ANNUAL HAND TRUCK WARRANTI 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 85.0( 10.3% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 8.7( Tota I : 300.5 , 226946 8/10/2017 074800 TURNSTYLE INC BID-4302 BID/ED! CROSSWALK DESIGN BID/Ed! design work for crosswalk 140.000.61.558.70.41.00 1,750.0( Total: 1,750.0( 226947 8/10/2017 074494 UK SOCCER ELITE 5682 UK ELITE 5682 UK ELITE SOCCER INSTRUCT 5682 UK ELITE SOCCER INSTRUCT 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 2,970.0( Total: 2,970.0( 226948 8/10/2017 068724 US HEALTHWORKS MED GROUP OF WF 0735685-WA HEP B VACCINE EMPLOYMENT HEP B VACCINE FOI Page: 29 Packet Pg. 79 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 226948 8/10/2017 068724 US HEALTHWORKS MED GROUP OF WA (Continued) 0736700-WA 226949 226950 226951 8/10/2017 067086 WASHINGTON CRANE AND HOIST CO 0033454-IN PO # Description/Account 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 US HEALTHWORKS TESTING/VACC HEP B VACCINE 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 DOT TESTING 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 Total WWTP: HOIST VFD SERVICE CALL HOIST VFD SERVICE CALL 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 10.3% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 Total 8/10/2017 066238 WASHINGTON TRACTOR 1355656 UNIT 116 - SWITCH Unit 116 - Switch 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.1 % Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 Total 8/10/2017 074609 WEST COASTARMORY NORTH JUL-17 INV#JUL-17 CUST ID - EDMONDS P RANGE USAGE - SAUNDERS 71111-1 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 RANGE USAGE - GAGNER 7/11/17 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 RANGE USAGE - BRUGGMAN 7/16/ 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 RANGE USAGE - SWARTZ 7/16/17 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 RANGE USAGE - GAGNER 7/21/17 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 RANGE USAGE - SAUNDERS 7/27/1 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 6.3.a Page: 30 Amoun 94.0( vi 94.0( m t 99.0( 287.0( ,E c� 4- 0 1,373.0' > 0 L 141.4. a 1,514.4: Q ti 0 r 54.9< c N Y 5.0( 59.9: E v r c m 13.6( E t 13.6( :° 13.6( 13.6( 13.6( Page: 30 Packet Pg. 80 vchlist 08/10/2017 7:58:21 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 6.3.a Page: 31 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 226951 8/10/2017 074609 WEST COAST ARMORY NORTH (Continued) 10.3% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 8.4( JUN-17 INV#JUN-17 CUST ID - EDMONDS F vi RANGE USAGE - SAUNDERS 61411-1 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 13.6( RANGE USAGE - MEHL 6/22/17 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 13.6( . RANGE USAGE - HAUGHIAN 6/29/1 c° 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 13.6( o 10.3% Sales Tax 'E 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 4.2( o Total: 135.0( a a 226952 8/10/2017 072627 WEST SAFETY SERVICES INC 7003494 MONTHLY 911 DATABASE MAINT Q Monthly 911 database maint ti 512.000.31.518.88.48.00 r 100.0( c Total: 100.0( 0 226953 8/10/2017 064213 WSSUATREASURER 461 UMPS FOR ADULT SOFTBALL LEAC Y UMPS FOR ADULT SOFTBALL LEAC 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 840.0( . 465 UMPS FOR ADULT SUMMER SOFTE f° UMPS FOR ADULT SUMMER SOFTE 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 1,085.0( Total: 1,925.0( E 122 Vouchers for bank code : usbank Bank total : 356,823.8( r Q 122 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 356,823.8( Page: 31 Packet Pg. 81 6.3.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number STM 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements c484 E51FE STR 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) c424 E3DC STM 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs c491 E61FE SWR 2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA STR 2014 Chip Seals c451 E4CB _ STM 2014 Drainage Improvements c433 E41FA ui m STM 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD STR 2014 Overlay Program c438 E4CA WTR 2014 Waterline Overlays c452 E4CC - 0 STM 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects c466 E51FA STR 2015 Overlay Program c463 E5CA ° a a SWR 2015 Sewerline Overlays i007 E5CC Q SWR 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project c441 E4GA STR 2015 Traffic Calming c471 E5AB WTR 2015 Waterline Overlays c475 E5CB L WTR 2015 Waterline Replacement Program c440 E4J13 E STR 2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades i016 E6DC z STR 2016 Overlay Program i008 E6CA ° a SWR 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 E5GA SWR 2016 Sewerline Overlays i010 E6CC �, WTR 2016 Water Comp Plan Update c460 E4JC 0 WTR 2016 Waterline Overlays i009 E6CB L WTR 2016 Waterline Replacement Projects c468 E5JA L` STR 2017 Curb Ramp Upgrades i022 E7DA c a) E STR 2017 Minor Sidewalk Program i023 E7DB STR 2017 Overlay Program i018 E7CA Q SWR 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project i013 E6GA SWR 2017 Sewerline Overlays i020 E7CC STR 2017 Traffic Calming i021 E7AA WTR 2017 Waterline Overlays i019 E7CB WTR 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects i014 E6J13 SWR 2018/19 Sewerline Replacement Project c492 E6GC WTR 2018/19 Waterline Replacement Project c493 E6JC STR 220th Street Overlay Project c462 E4CD STM 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements c486 E6FB Revised 7/27/2017 Packet Pg. 82 6.3.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Project Title Number Number WTR 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) c418 E3J13 STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STR 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) c425 E3DD STR 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) c423 E3DB STR 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) c485 E6DA STM 3rd Ave Rain Gardens i012 E6FC STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA ui m STR 89th PI W Retaining Wall i025 E7CD STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB FAC AN Upgrades - Council Chambers c476 E5LA ° 0 STR ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S c426 E3DE STR ADA Transition Plan s016 E6DB ° a STR Audible Pedestrian Signals i024 E7AB a Q STR Bikelink Project c474 E5DA PRK City Spray Park c417 E4MA SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB L SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II c488 E6GB E STR Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements i026 E7DC 3 z STR Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion i015 E6AB ° a WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) c482 E5J13 STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1 FM �, PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA 0 STM Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) c472 E5FC L STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E4FE; LL c FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB W E STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC General Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis c478 E5DB Q FAC ESCO III Project c419 E3LB PRK FAC Band Shell Replacement c477 E6MB WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating c473 E5KA STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) c342 E1AA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA STR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) c405 E2AD STR Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization s014 E6AA SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study s011 E5GB STM LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin c434 E4FB Revised 7/27/2017 Packet Pg. 83 6.3.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Project Title Number Number SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC STIR Minor Sidewalk Program i017 E6DD STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA STM Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive i011 E61FA STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 E3FE STM NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) m013 E7FG STM OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization m105 E71FA STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1 FN STM Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study c408 E3FC FAC Public Safety Controls System Upgrades c444 E41LA STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 E5FD WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA STIR SR104 Corridor Transportation Study c427 E3AB STIR SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing c454 E4DB UTILITIES Standard Details Updates solo E5NA STM Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW c495 E7FB STM Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th c429 E3FG STM Stormwater Comp Plan Update s017 E6FD STIR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1DA STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c430 E3FH STIR Trackside Warning System c470 E5AA STIR Train Trench - Concept c453 E4DA STIR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA STM Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects c467 E5FB UTILITIES Utility Rate Update s013 E6JA PRK Veteran's Plaza c480 E6MA STM Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines c459 E4FF PRK Waterfront Restoration m103 E7MA STM Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 E5HA PRK Yost Park Spa c494 E6MC Q Revised 7/27/2017 Packet Pg. 84 6.3.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Protect Protect Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title STIR E1AA c342 Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) STIR E1CA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements STM E1 FM c374 Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives 7. Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement STIR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update .-. E2AB c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project vi STIR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) d Awalbot Road Drainage Improvements E STM E2FB c379 SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System 0 c380 Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIq SWR E2GB c390 2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation Q. Q. SR104 Corridor Transportation Study Q STIR E3DB c423 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) 15th St. SW Walkway dmonds Way to 8t STIRE3DD c425 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) 00 c ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave STM E3FC c408 Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study 3 z orthstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive ° a STM E3FG c429 Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th 0 c430 SW Edmonds-105 torm Improvements N D, SWR E3GA c398 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) 0 L FAC E3LB c419 ESCO III Project 0 014 Overlay Program ■ E STIR E4CB c451 2014 Chip Seals 2014 Waterline Overla Q STIR E4CD c462 220th Street Overlay Project �Trairj STIR E4DB c454 SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing 2014 Drainage Improvemen STM E4FB c434 LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin low Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration STM E4FD c436 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station STM E4FF c459 Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines Revised 7/27/2017 Packet Pg. 85 6.3.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Protect Protect Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title SWR E4GA ' c441 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project SWR E4GB c456 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study WWTP E4HA c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitorin WTR 2015 Waterline Replacement Program WTR E4JC c460 2016 Water Comp Plan Update Public Safety Controls System Upgrades PRK E4MA c417 City Spray Park Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab STR E5AA c470 Trackside Warnina Svstem 2015 Traffic Calming STR E5CA c463 2015 Overlay Program 2015 Waterline Overlays SWR E5CC i007 2015 Sewerline Overlays General E5DB c478 Edmonds Waterfront Access vi d z E 0 0 a 0. g c466 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects L E STM E5FB c467 Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects 3 z c472 Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) ° a STM E5FD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility aa) E5FE mprover N � �, SWR E5GA c469 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects Lake Ballinger Trunk Se Study 0 WWTP E5HA c481 WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications LL 2016 Waterline Replacement Projects — E WTR E5JB c482 Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) rners Reservoir Re -coati Q FAC E5LA c476 AN Upgrades - Council Chambers s010 Standard Details Updates STR E6AA s014 Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion STR E6CA i008 2016 Overlay Program 16 Watermmmiil" SWR E6CC i010 2016 Sewerline Overlays 6DA 85 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) STR E6DB s016 ADA Transition Plan Revised 7/27/2017 Packet Pg. 86 6.3.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Protect Protect Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title STIR E6DC ' i016 2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades STIR E6DD i017 Minor Sidewalk Program i011 Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive STM E6FB c486 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements 3rd Ave Rain Garden STM E6FD s017 Stormwater Comp Plan Update STM E6FE c491 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs SWR E6GA i013 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project idekIPP Sewer Rehab Phase SWR E6GC c492 2018/19 Sewerline Replacement Project Utility Rate Updat WTR E6J13 i014 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects 2018/19 Waterline Replacement Project PRK E6MA c480 Veteran's Plaza Band Shell Replacement PRK E6MC c494 Yost Park Spa E7AA i021 2017 Traffic Calming STIR E7AB i024 Audible Pedestrian Signals i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements STIR E7CA i018 2017 Overlay Program SWR E7CC i020 2017 Sewerline Overlays 89th PI W Retaining Wall STIR E7DA i022 2017 Curb Ramp Upgrades E7DB i023 2017 Minor Sidewalk Program STIR E7DC i026 Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements QkD Slope Repair & Stabilization STM E7FB c495 Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) PM E7MA c276 Dayton Street Plaza Waterfront Restoration PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor vi d z E M 0 M 0 a 0. g Revised 7/27/2017 Packet Pg. 87 6.3.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Project Title PM E7MA c276 Dayton Street Plaza PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor STIR E1AA c342 Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) STIR E1 DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements STIR E1CA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements STM E1 FM c374 Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives STM E1 FN c376 Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement STM E2FA c378 North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements STM E2FB c379 SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System STM E2FC c380 Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study SWR E2GB c390 2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation STIR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update STIR E2AB c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project SWR E3GA c398 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project STIR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) STM E3FC c408 Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study STM EYE c410 Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive PRK E4MA c417 City Spray Park WTR E3J13 c418 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) FAC E3LB c419 ESCO III Project STIR E3DB c423 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) STIR E3DC c424 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) STIR E3DD c425 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) STIR E3DE c426 ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S STIR E3AB c427 SR104 Corridor Transportation Study STM E3FG c429 Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th STM E3FH c430 SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements STM E4FA c433 2014 Drainage Improvements STM E4FB c434 LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin STM E4FC c435 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration STM E4FD c436 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects STIR E4CA c438 2014 Overlay Program WTR E4J13 c440 2015 Waterline Replacement Program SWR E4GA c441 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project FAC E4MB c443 Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab FAC E41LA c444 Public Safety Controls System Upgrades Q Revised 7/27/2017 Packet Pg. 88 6.3.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title WWTP E4HA c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring STIR E4CB c451 2014 Chip Seals WTR E4CC c452 2014 Waterline Overlays STIR E4DA c453 Train Trench - Concept STIR E4DB c454 SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing STM E4FE c455 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station SWR E4GB c456 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I STM E4FF c459 Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines WTR E4JC c460 2016 Water Comp Plan Update SWR E4GC c461 Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study STIR E4CD c462 220th Street Overlay Project STIR E5CA c463 2015 Overlay Program STM E5FA c466 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects STM E5FB c467 Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects WTR E5JA c468 2016 Waterline Replacement Projects SWR E5GA c469 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects STIR E5AA c470 Trackside Warning System STIR E5AB c471 2015 Traffic Calming STM E5FC c472 Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) WTR E5KA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating STIR E5DA c474 Bikelink Project WTR E5CB c475 2015 Waterline Overlays FAC E5LA c476 AN Upgrades - Council Chambers PRK E6MB c477 FAC Band Shell Replacement General E5DB c478 Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis STM E5FD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility PRK E6MA c480 Veteran's Plaza WWTP E5HA c481 WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications WTR E5J13 c482 Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) STM E5FE c484 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements STIR E6DA c485 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) STM E6FB c486 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements SWR E6GB c488 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II STM E6FE c491 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs SWR E6GC c492 2018/19 Sewerline Replacement Project WTR E6JC c493 2018/19 Waterline Replacement Project ui m z U E .2 U 0 R 0 a a Q Revised 7/27/2017 Packet Pg. 89 6.3.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title PRK E61VIC c494 Yost Park Spa STM E7FB c495 Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW STIR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements SWR E5CC i007 2015 Sewerline Overlays STIR E6CA i008 2016 Overlay Program WTR E6CB i009 2016 Waterline Overlays SWR E6CC iolo 2016 Sewerline Overlays ui m STM E6FA i011 Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive STM E61FC i012 3rd Ave Rain Gardens E .2 SWR E6GA i013 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project - 0 WTR E6JB i014 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects STIR E6AB i015 Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion a a STIR E6DC i016 2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades Q STIR E6DD i017 Minor Sidewalk Program STIR E7CA i018 2017 Overlay Program 0 WTR E7CB i019 2017 Waterline Overlays N L SWR E7CC i02o 2017 Sewerline Overlays E STIR E7AA i021 2017 Traffic Calming z STIRE7DA i022 2017 Curb Ramp Upgrades a STIR E7DB i023 2017 Minor Sidewalk Program N STIRE7AB i024 Audible Pedestrian Signals >, STIR E7CD i025 89th PI W Retaining Wall STIR E7DC i026 Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements m STM E71FG m013 NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) LL }; c PRK E7MA m103 Waterfront Restoration E STM E7FA m105 OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization ca UTILITIES E5NA solo Standard Details Updates Q SWR E5GB s011 Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study UTILITIES E6JA s013 Utility Rate Update STIR E6AA s014 Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization STIR E6DB s016 ADA Transition Plan STM E6FD s017 Stormwater Comp Plan Update Revised 7/27/2017 Packet Pg. 90 6.3.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number FAC A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers c476 E5LA FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB FAC ESCO III Project c419 E3LB FAC Public Safety Controls System Upgrades c444 E41-A General Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis c478 E5DB PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA PRK City Spray Park c417 E4MA PRK FAC Band Shell Replacement c477 E6MB PRK Veteran's Plaza c480 E6MA PRK Waterfront Restoration m103 E7MA PRK Yost Park Spa c494 E6MC STM 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements c484 E5FE STM 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs c491 E6FE STM 2014 Drainage Improvements c433 E4FA STM 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD STM 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects c466 E5FA STM 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements c486 E6FB STM 3rd Ave Rain Gardens i012 E6FC STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1 FM STM Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) c472 E5FC STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E4FE STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC STM LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin c434 E4FB STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA STM Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive i011 E6FA STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 E3FE STM NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) m013 E7FG STM OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization m105 E7FA STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1 FN STM Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study c408 E3FC STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 E5FD STM Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW c495 E7FB STM Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th c429 E3FG STM Stormwater Comp Plan Update s017 E6FD ui m z U E U 0 R 0 L a a Q Revised 7/27/2017 Packet Pg. 91 6.3.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Project Title Number Number STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c430 E3FH STM Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects c467 E5FB STM Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines c459 E4FF STM Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC STIR 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) c424 E3DC STIR 2014 Chip Seals c451 E4CB STIR 2014 Overlay Program c438 E4CA STIR 2015 Overlay Program c463 E5CA STIR 2015 Traffic Calming c471 E5AB STIR 2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades i016 E6DC STIR 2016 Overlay Program i008 E6CA STIR 2017 Curb Ramp Upgrades i022 E7DA STIR 2017 Minor Sidewalk Program i023 E7DB STIR 2017 Overlay Program i018 E7CA STIR 2017 Traffic Calming i021 E7AA STIR 220th Street Overlay Project c462 E4CD STIR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STIR 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) c425 E3DD STIR 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) c423 E3DB STIR 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) c485 E6DA STIR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA STIR 89th PI W Retaining Wall i025 E7CD STIR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB STIR ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S c426 E3DE STIR ADA Transition Plan s016 E6DB STIR Audible Pedestrian Signals i024 E7AB STIR Bikelink Project c474 E5DA STIR Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements i026 E7DC STIR Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion i015 E6AB STIR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) c342 E1AA STIR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) c405 E2AD STIR Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization s014 E6AA STIR Minor Sidewalk Program i017 E6DD STIR SR104 Corridor Transportation Study c427 E3AB ui m z U E U 0 R 0 L a a Q Revised 7/27/2017 Packet Pg. 92 6.3.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number STR SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing c454 E4DB STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1DA STR Trackside Warning System c470 E5AA STR Train Trench - Concept c453 E4DA STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA SWR 2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA SWR 2015 Sewerline Overlays i007 E5CC SWR 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project c441 E4GA SWR 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 E5GA SWR 2016 Sewerline Overlays i010 E6CC SWR 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project i013 E6GA SWR 2017 Sewerline Overlays i020 E7CC SWR 2018/19 Sewerline Replacement Project c492 E6GC SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II c488 E6GB SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study s011 E5GB SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC UTILITIES Standard Details Updates solo E5NA UTILITIES Utility Rate Update s013 E6JA WTR 2014 Waterline Overlays c452 E4CC WTR 2015 Waterline Overlays c475 E5CB WTR 2015 Waterline Replacement Program c440 E4JB WTR 2016 Water Comp Plan Update c460 E4JC WTR 2016 Waterline Overlays i009 E6CB WTR 2016 Waterline Replacement Projects c468 E5JA WTR 2017 Waterline Overlays i019 E7CB WTR 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects i014 E6JB WTR 2018/19 Waterline Replacement Project c493 E6JC WTR 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) c418 E3JB WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) c482 E5JB WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating c473 E51KA WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 E5HA Q Revised 7/27/2017 Packet Pg. 93 6.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/15/2017 Amendments to Downtown Business Improvement District By -Laws Staff Lead: Patrick Doherty Department: Economic Development Preparer: Patrick Doherty Background/History After over four years since their inception in 2013, it is appropriate to update the by-laws of the Edmonds Downtown Improvement Direct (dba "Edmonds Downtown Alliance" and hereinafter referred to as "Alliance") Board that govern the conduct of the Alliance Board, purposes and programs, membership, purchasing, meeting requirements, etc. The purpose of these proposed amendments is to align the code provisions more closely with the evolution of the month -to -month conduct of business over the past four years and to conform more closely with the Edmonds City Code provisions at 3.75, as also proposed to be amended. Staff Recommendation Approve on 8/15/17 Council Consent Agenda. Narrative Here is a brief summary of the most salient amendments proposed, as approved by the Edmonds Downtown Alliance Board at its July 13, 2017 meeting: Sec. 3.1- The names "Edmonds Downtown Alliance," aka "the Alliance" and "Ed!", are hereby included. "The Alliance" is used throughout the by-laws. Sec. 3.2 - Purpose statement is updated slightly to rename "organization" to "administration." Sec. 5.2 - Powers and duties of the Secretary are clarified to note that it is his/her duty to ensure that the Alliance administrator (if hired) execute all or part of the responsibility of maintaining meeting minutes, etc. A subsection (c) is added regarding purchasing that authorizes the President, Treasurer and Alliance Administrator to make purchases pursuant to Board approvals. The President and Treasurer only are allowed to make purchases not to exceed $250 without prior Board approval so long as such purchases are directly related to Board -approved work plan programs, projects or activities. Sec. 5.4 - Verbiage is clarified regarding the responsibilities of each working committee with regard to overseeing the programs and projects under its purview, with the default that the Board president, vice president or other designee may provide such oversight in their absence. Packet Pg. 94 6.4 Committee names are updated to reflect the latest Council -approved work plan and current practice. Sec. 8.3 - Clarification is added that governmental entities, public utilities and nonprofits shall be exempt from assessment, yet may voluntarily become Alliance members if they choose to pay the corresponding assessment fees. Sec. 9.2 - Proposal to send draft minutes of prior meetings to the Board three working days (not five) before a subsequent meeting. Clarification is added that notice of regular Board meetings will follow state statutory provisions. Sec. 9.3 - Proposal that special meetings may be called only upon request of 3 or more Board members, not just the president, and requiring applicable special -meeting notice per state law and city code provisions. Council Finance Committee reviewed these proposed by-law amendments at its 8/8/17 meeting and voted to move the proposed amendments to the 8/15/17 Council Consent Agenda for approval. Attachments: Ed —BY -LAWS —draft —amend Packet Pg. 95 6.4.a PROPOSED AMENDMENTS BY-LAWS OF THE EDMONDS DOWNTOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT MEMBERS ADVISORY BOARD (Approved by the Alliance Board on July 2313, 2GI32017) ARTICLE I Section 1.1 Definitions. As used in these Bylaws, the following terms shall have the following meanings: (a) "Board" means the Edmonds Downtown Business Improvement District Members Advisory Board (b) "RCW" means the Revised Code of Washington. (c) "ECC" means the City of Edmonds Code. ARTICLE II PURPOSE OF THE BOARD C Section 2.1 Advisory Capacity. The Board shall serve in advisory capacity regarding the uses E of Business Improvement District assessments collected under ECC Chapter 3.75.020 and 3.75.040 which MI shall include recommending annual business plans pursuant to ECC 3.75.120 L ARTICLE III NAME AND PURPOSE OF THE EDMONDS DOWNTOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT Q J Section 3.1. Name of Business Improvement District. The name of the Edmonds Downtown m Business Improvement District isle Ed! - Edmonds Downtown Business kn^reye, e. ni .r; 4Alliance I (the "Alliance" €$BID). Th^ hard. e f the EDBID may deeide by . rity . ete to utirz an W L. a for business and ^ r-.ti. ns P t Section 3.2. Purpose of Edmonds Downtown Business Improvement District. The purpose — Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5" of the €DBIDAlliance as an economic unit shall be to encourage, promote, and participate in activities Q 1 Packet Pg. 96 6.4.a enhancing the general economic conditions of the EDBIDwithin the Alliance boundaries by en�a�in� in activities related to the following: A. Marketing & Hospitality: may include maps/brochures/kiosks/directories, web site, social media, marketing/advertising campaigns, holiday decorations, street performers/artists, historic education/heritage advocacy, special public events B. Safety & Cleanliness: may include maintenance, security, pedestrian environment enhancements C. Appearance & Environment: may include design enhancements, neighborhood advocacy & communication, streetscapes/lighting/furniture D. Transportation: may include transportation alternatives, directional signage, parking management & mitigation E. Business Recruitment & Retention: may include education/seminars, market research, business recruitment F. Qfgaflizaa Administration: may include contract staff & professional services, administration costs ARTICLE IV ESTABLISHMENT OF EDMONDS DOWNTOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT Section 4.1. Composition of €D=the Alliance. City of Edmonds Ordinance 3909, adopted on January 15, 2013, added a new Chapter to the Edmonds City Code Titled Chapter 3.75, Business Improvement District, thus establishing the Edmonds Downtown Business Improvement District. The Business Improvement District consists of rate paying members of the business community within a defined EDB'DA"manceBID boundary (see Attachment A). Governmental entities, public utilities, nonprofits operating under Internal Revenue Code section 501(c)(3) will not be assessed. ECC 3.75.120 calls for the establishment of a Board to direct the affairs of the €DBIDAIIiance. ARTICLE V OFFICERS AND BOARD MEMBERSHIP Section 5.1. €DRIDAlliance Board a. Composition: The €DBIDAlliance Board shall consist of seven to eleven €DBIDAIIiance members. To the best possible degree, members of the €DBIDAlliance Board will be composed of both open door and by appointment €DBIDAIIiance members in rough proportion to the dollar value of assessments to be levied on each classification of businesses. Additionally, €DBIDAIIiance members strive for Board makeup that represents distribution by district location and types of service, retail, and size of business. Per ECC 3.75.120, the City of Edmonds Finance and Community Services/Economic Development Directors, -shall serve as non -voting ex officio members of the Board.. Packet Pg. 97 6.4.a b. Eligibility: All members, in good standing and having fulfilled the requirements of membership, of the €BBIBAIIiance shall be eligible to serve on the Board. Each Board member will serve a term of three (3) years. Approximately one-third (1/3) of the authorized number of board members shall be elected each year at an annual meeting of €BBIDAlliance members for terms of three (3) years each, from and after election, by a majority vote of €BBIBAIIiance members in attendance at the annual meeting, or by absentee ballot. After the completion of two (2) consecutive three (3) year terms, one (1) year must elapse before the member is again eligible for re- election to the Board. c. Annual Election: Members will be notified of the time and place of the Annual Meeting of Members in an announcement accompanying the solicitation of nominees to the Board for the following year. This notification shall also go to the City of Edmonds. This notification must be sent at least 30 days prior to the Annual Meeting and shall require that all board nominations be received at least 14 days prior to the date of the annual meeting. The membership committee of the €BBISAIIiance Board shall compile all nominations received and shall provide nominations, as necessary, in addition to those received from €BBIBthe Alliance members. A second notice of the Annual Meeting, along with a list of candidates, and an absentee ballot, will be sent to all members at least seven (7) calendar days prior to the Annual Meeting (see Article VIII, Section 8.1). The absentee ballot may be returned no later than the date of the Annual Meeting. An agenda of business to be conducted will also be included. This agenda must include the item of annual election of Board members. The Annual Meeting must shall be held in the month of April, or as determined by the €BBIBAIIiance Board. d. Vacancies: If for any reason a place on the €BBIBAIIiance-Board becomes vacant before a term of membership expires, the vacancy shall be filled by appointment by the president of the EDBIDALLIANGEAlliance Board with the majority approval of the €DB4sAlliance Board at the time of the appointment. e. Attendance at Meetings. Attendance at all meetings is expected of Board members. Any member of the Board anticipating an absence from a scheduled meeting shall notify the President of the Board or Secretary in advance of the meeting. f. Removal of Members. (a) If a member of the Board is absent from three (3) consecutive regular meetings of the Board without reasonable cause as determined by the Board, such member may be considered to have tendered his or her resignation to the Members Advisory Board, and may be notified in writing by the Secretary of that fact. The Beard Board has discretion to waive such resignation for reasons deemed valid. (b) Members of the Board may be removed by the Edmonds City Council for misfeasance or for other reasons pursuant to general removal provisions enacted by the Edmonds City Council for boards and commissions. g. Conflicts of Interest. Packet Pg. 98 6.4.a (a) No Board member shall be beneficially interested, directly or indirectly, in any contract which may be made by, through or under the supervision of the Board, in whole or in part, or which may be made for the benefit of his or her office, or accept, directly or indirectly, any compensation, gratuity or reward in connection with such contract from any other person beneficially interested therein, except as provided by paragraph (b) below. (b)A Board member is not interested in a contract, within the meaning of paragraph (a) above and RCW 42.23.030, if (i) he or she has only a remote interest in the contract (as that term is defined in RCW 42.23.040), (ii) the extent of his or her interest is disclosed to the Board and noted in the official minutes of the Board prior to the formation of the contract, and (iii) thereafter the Board authorizes, approves or ratifies the contract in good faith by a vote of its membership sufficient for the purpose without counting the vote of the member having the remote interest. (34(c) Alliance Board members shall serve without compensation. Section 5.2. Officers. The Officers of the €DB'DAlliance Board shall be a President, Vice President, Secretary, and Treasurer. a. Election and Terms of Officers. The officers of the Board shall be elected from among its members at the first regular Annual Meeting following the Annual Meeting of Members held in each calendar year. Officers may be elected to successive terms, provided, however, that no person shall serve as an officer for more than two (2) consecutive terms. b. Powers and Duties. The officers of the Board shall have the following duties: a. President: The president shall preside over the Annual Meeting of the €DRIDAlliance members and all Board meetings. The president shall prepare meeting agendas in consultation with the Secretary or €DBIDthe Alliance administrator (if hired) as deemed appropriate by the president. The president shall appoint members to fill any unexpired term of the €DBIDAlliance Board as described under Article V, Section 5.1 (d) Vacancies. The president shall be responsible for the overall governance and direction of the €DBIDAlliance. b. Vice -President: The vice-president shall fulfill all the functions of the president in his/her absence. The vice-president shall ensure that either he/she or the €DBIDAlliance administrator (if hired) maintains a current membership roster as set forth in Article VI I, Section 4 and sends it, semi- annually, to the Program Coordinator of the City's Economic Development Department. c. Secretary: The secretary shall have the responsibility to record and verify all minutes of the Board meetings and prepare and send agendas for board meetings and annual meetings of members in addition to posting Alliance Packet Pg. 99 6.4.a meeting minutes on the €DB+D Alliance website or ensure that the Alliance administrator (if hired) execute all or part of this responsibility.. d. Treasurer: The treasurer shall have the responsibility to oversee the finances of the €DBIDAlliance and provide the Board and City of Edmonds with quarterly financial statements and the EDBIDAIIiance members with an annual financial statement. He/she shall serve as liaison to the City of Edmonds on all matters of mutual financial concern. He/she will work with the EDBIDAIIiance administrator or board contracted agent on all employee, state and federal tax reporting. c. Purchasing. The President and Treasurer and Alliance Administrator (if hired) are authorized to make purchases pursuant to Board approvals. The President and Treasurer may make purchases not to exceed two hundred fifty dollars ($250) without prior Board approval so lone as such purchases are directly related to Board -approved work plan programs, projects or activities. Section 5.3. €DRIDAlliance Officer Nominations. The nomination and election of the officers of the €DBIDAIIiance shall be done at the start of the first Board meeting following the Annual Meeting [see Article VIII, Section 8.2(a)] with the nominating and electing process as follows. a. The floor shall be opened to nominations and closed when all nominations have been made. Nominees must be present, or have submitted a letter of intent. b. The nominees for each office shall be announced. c. An election by secret and written ballot shall be made by those members in attendance at the AllianceEDBID Board meeting. Each office will be voted on separately. d. The €DBIDAIIiance administrator (if hired) shall tally the votes and announce the winners. In the event of a tie, an election will be conducted between the two individuals and the process repeated until a winner is proclaimed. In the event of no €DBIDAlliance administrator, the heard President shall appoint a board member to tally the votes and announce a winner. Section 5.4. Standing Committees. During the third quarter of each year, the €DBIDAIIiance Board shall develop an operational budget and form standing committees. At EDBIDAlliance Board discretion, committees may be added or removed, but the following requirements will apply: (1) Each non -officer Board member will participate on a committee. (2) The president may be a non -voting ex-officio member of all committees. (3) Committee membership may include member volunteers and others with a tangible interest in the welfare of the EDBIDAlliance as determined by the Board. Packet Pg. 100 6.4.a (4) Committee members shall annually, during the P-third quarter, recommend a schedule of future action and activities for the following years work plan and budgeting purposes. Once the budget is approved by the Alliance Board and Edmonds City Council, each committee shall oversee the schedule of projects, with the assistance of the Alliance administrator (if hired). In the absence of committee oversight of the schedule of proiects, the Alliance Board president, vice president or other designated Board member may provide such oversight. (5) Each committee shall Fecommend a adequate schedule of projects to the C flQlfl Al I Innl /"CAII�-... �.. RARF J tend ;;d FRWr#RteF IR the P ..t 4 R PDRI lAlll-.nep „t.r.i..irtrat,.r r.,hedulerwill be r ed byth.. FDRWA'"ARCe Beard PFes.dent, Vice PFesident, or designated Board AAP-Mbe.r eF EDBIDA"FaRee R;PR;h•• a. Marketing a^-'TCommittee The committee shall direct activities toward stimulation of general commerce, promotion and creation of the €BBIBAIIiance's image and creation of marketing strategies in order to attract targeted groups. b. Appearance and Capital I FRO Feven+enUEnvironment (includes beautification and maintenance) Committee In coordination with other local efforts, the committee shall plan for possible capital, beautification and maintenance projects as appropriate within and extending to the boundaries of the €BB+BAlliance. The committee shall recommend an adequate schedule for pedestrian amenities, street areas and €BB19Alliance parking enhancements, signage improvements, and any other beautification or maintenance projects as may be approved by the €BB+BAlliance Board. In the event of no € &DAlliance administrator, the schedule will be supervised by the €BB+BAlliance Board President, Vice President, or designated Board Member or €PR'DAlliance member. c. Professional Business €dueagGaResources, Recruitment and Retention Committee The committee shall research and make recommendations for coordinating business education/training classes/seminars, helping recruit businesses, and market research. The committee may also develop a list of product categories and services currently available in the area.. -The most desirable mix of products and services Packet Pg. 101 6.4.a shall be reviewed and recommended by this committee based on market research. The committee shall make recommendations to the EDBIDAlliance Board for how to best utilize information and research for the good of the EDBIDAlliance. d. ""^,..�.,,-F&hi;rCommunications and Outreach Committee The committee shall be responsible for overall communications with EDBIDAlliance members and the nomination process for EDBIDAlliance Board members. The committee shall be alert during the year to identify those members who have shown an interest and desire to serve on the EDBIDAlliance Board and its committees, in order to provide assistance to the EDBIDAlliance in selection of EDBIDAlliance Board members. This committee will assure that officers carry out the requirements of the Annual Meeting (see Article V, Section 5.1(c) and Article VIII, Section 8.1) and shall be responsible for general communications with members (via mail, email, website or any other form of communication). ARTICLE VI PROGRAM MANAGEMENT Pursuant to ECC.3.75.140, the €DB'DAlliance--Board w4Day create a separate organization or entity, incorporated with the State of Washington, responsible for the management of EDBIDAlliance administration and programs. This entity will enter into an agency agreement with the City of Edmonds. ARTICLE VII EDMONDS BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT CONSULTANT SERVICES The €DRIDAlliance Board may contract for consultant services under the direction of the president with the concurrence of the Board. Such consultants' remuneration and duties may be governed by a contract or employment and description of job duties. For services outside of the purchasing threshold, as identified in the City of Edmonds purchasing policy adopted by the EDBIDAlliance Board, a proposal process will be required. All eligible proposers, including BI�-Alliance members or associates, shall have the option to propose. To make the selection procedure as transparent as possible, the instructions to consultants shall specify the evaluation criteria and the period of validity of submittals. The EDBIDAlliance Board will review and process all proposals based on pre -determined criteria and overall value (economic and otherwise) to the EDBIDAlliance. F13114M9111 MEMBERSHIP Packet Pg. 102 6.4.a Section 8.1. Membership shall consist of all business owners located within the boundaries of the Edmonds Downtown Business Improvement District as detailed in Attachment A and Ordinance 3909. Section 8.2. In the case of corporations or partnerships, the business shall designate an individual and his/her alternate to represent it officially. There shall be no duplication or expansion of membership by reason of the internal organization of any member company Section 8.3. nie stet;, er sharper- in fhe liance rii he issued, and the interest ,.f ch amber ;n the EBID shell be equal Membership shall consist of all rate --paving persons, partnerships or business owners who maintain a place of business within the boundaries of the €DBIDAIIiance. Governmental entities, public utilities, nonprofits operating under Internal Revenue Code section 501(c)(3) shall net h�vrve assessed be exempt from assessment and membership. However, voluntary payment of the appFepriate-corresponding assessment amounts per ECC3.75.040 by an exempt entity, shall constitute membership in the €DBIDAIIiance. Section 8.4. The €DBIDAIIiance vice president, with the assistance of the Alliance administrator (if hired) shall be responsible for the preparation of a membership list setting forth the names and addresses of members and the official representative and alternate representative of each. A representative once designated shall be conclusively presumed to continue in the capacity until the receipt of written notice, from an officer of the member firm, naming a replacement. Section 8.5. No stock or shares in the Alliance will be issued. ARTICLE IX MEETINGS OF THE EDMONDS DOWNTOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT Section 9.1. Annual Meeting of Members. The Annual Meeting of Members of the €DRIDAlliance shall be held in the month of April for the purpose of electing members of the €DBiDAlliance Board of Directors. Other business shall include any appropriate items. Notice of the Annual Meeting shall accompany the solicitation of nominees sent at least thirty (30) days prior to the Annual Meeting. It is the responsibility of members to notify the €DBIDAlliance and City of Edmonds of any change of address or ownership. Section 9.2. Meetings of EP"Alliance Board. a. At the next regularly scheduled €DBIDAIIiance Board meeting following the Annual Meeting of Members, the Board will elect the officers of the €DBiDAlliance Board. (See Article V, Section 5.3) b. The €DRIDAlliance Board shall meet no less frequently than once a quarter, on the second Thursday of the first month of each quarter at 8:00 am, except that no meeting is required in December. Draft minutes of the previous €DBIOAIIiance Board meeting and any Packet Pg. 103 6.4.a communications from standing committees will be delivered to each member of the €DBIDAlliance Board 4ve-three (4i3) days prior to the meeting. Notice of the regular Board meetings will be provided as required by state statutory provisions. c. The €DB+DAlliance's secretary, or designee, shall keep accurate minutes of the proceedings and decisions of the €DBIDAIIiance Board meetings. The €DBIDAlliance's secretary shall verifyies the Board minutes prior to them being deli efed delivery to the €DRDAlliance Board prior to the following meeting, in addition to posting Board -approved Alliance€D-B&D meeting minutes on the €DBID Alliance website. d. Any member may attend any meeting of the €DBIDAlliance Board and this policy shall be posted on the €DBIDAIIiance website. Upon request, a member may speak to an item before the €DBIDAlliance Board for a period of time as determined by the Board. Upon request, a member may raise issues for discussion by the Board, but notification to Board members must precede the discussion. Non -Board member Alliance members may not vote at Board Meetings. e. For the purposes of conducting business, a majority gathering of €) DAlliance Board Members will be considered a quorum of the €DRIPAlliance. f. A majority of those voting, if quorum is present, shall constitute a deciding vote by the €DRIDAI I is nce. g. The president OF designee declare emergency Board meetings and waive required notice pursuant to RCW 42.30.070; heweveF, an effect st L...Made t,..neet all if p sible h. ThFPP (j) OF FnOre EDBInn.'16ance Hea F.J . .. beFS can set spy eial�Tt° ff of the EDBP lle..nEe l3GaFGl .i.ded allrequirements of notification a et Section 9.3. Special Meetings. Special meetings of the €DRIDAlliance may be held any time upon the request of three (3) or more Alliance Board members the-pFe&WeaTwho may desire to call such a meeting, providing that these PFesider4-Board members first "etifies notify the community services/economic development director, who shall se444 provide notice according to the public notice requirements for special meetings set out by state statutory and city code provisions. te eaeh EDBID FnembeF at least teR (10) dayS PFieF tA thP tiMP fixed fer such special meeting. ARTICLE X SEAL The €DRIDAlliance shall have no seal until such a time as the €DRIPAlliance-Board and president of the E-DBIDAIIiance may adopt one as part of an appropriate resolution. ARTICLE XI AMENDMENT OF BY-LAWS Packet Pg. 104 6.4.a These by-laws may be altered, supplemented, amended or repealed at any regular or special meeting of the EDBIDAlliance Board as designated in board quorum, Article VIII, section 2 (f), provided notice of the proposed change has been mailed to all members at least ten (10) days prior to the meeting at which such proposed change is to be considered. ARTICLE XII ASSESSMENT No member of the EDBIDAlliance shall be personally liable for the debts or liabilities of the €D Alliance, except to the extent of any unpaid portion of dues or assessments or signed contracts with the EDBIDAlliance. Dues or assessments shall be established per City of Edmonds Ordinance 3909. It is expressly provided that, without limiting the generality of this provision, no assessment, charge or levy shall ever be made by any receiver, trustee in bankruptcy, assignee for the benefit of creditors, court or judgment creditor. ARTICLE XIII PROCEDURE The rules contained in the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, and more specifically, the modified rules for small boards and committees, shall govern the EDR+DAlliance in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with these bylaws and any special rules of order the EDBIDAlliance may adopt. 10 Packet Pg. 105 7.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/15/2017 Resolution to Designate Highway 99 Subarea as Residential Targeted Area (10 min) Staff Lead: Patrick Doherty Department: Economic Development Preparer: Patrick Doherty Background/History In order to implement the Multi -Family Tax Exemption Program (MFTE) in the Highway 99 Subarea as a means of encouraging redevelopment that contains market -rate and affordable -housing units, the City Council approved a Resolution of Intent on July 18, 2017 to designate the Highway 99 Subarea as a residential targeted area, pursuant to RCW 84.14. The Resolution of Intent gave notice of the time and place of a hearing to be held by the governing authority to consider the designation of the residential targeted area as 7:00 pm, August 15, 2017 in Edmonds City Council Chambers. In accordance with RCW 84.14.040(2), publication of the notice of the August 15, 2017 public hearing was provided in a newspaper of general circulation for at least two consecutive weeks, no less than 7 and no more than 30 days prior to the hearing, on July 30, 2017 and August 6, 2017. Staff Recommendation Upon conclusion of the Public Hearing at the 8/15/17 Council Regular Meeting, consider for approval. Narrative Upon conclusion of the scheduled public hearing at the regular Council meeting of August 15, 2017, the City Council may adopt the attached Resolution to designate the Highway 99 Subarea as a residential targeted area for purposes of implementing the MFTE in the Highway 99 Subarea. The MFTE is a tool intended to encourage development in the Subarea of projects that include market - rate and affordable housing units. The accompanying proposed minor code amendments to ECC Chapter 3.38 will serve to implement the MFTE program in the newly designated residential targeted area. At its 8/8/17 meeting, the Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee voted to forward this item to the 8/15/17 Council Regular meeting for potential action after the Public Hearing. Attachments: DRAFT RESO to DESIGNATE MFTE - HWY 99 Packet Pg. 106 7.1.a �YI]�iy�[17�VCIa A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, TO DESIGNATE THE HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA AS A RESIDENTIAL TARGETED AREA FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING A MULTIFAMILY TAX EXEMPTION PROGRAM WHEREAS Chapter 84.14 of the Revised Code of Washington provides for temporary special valuations for eligible improvements associated with multifamily housing, especially within urban centers deficient in planned residential development; and WHEREAS, the Edmonds City Council adopted a new Subarea Plan and related zoning code amendments for the Highway 99 Corridor on August 15, 2017, designating the Corridor as an urban center whose purpose includes fostering development of a full range of commercial and residential uses, including market -rate and affordable housing in stand-alone and mixed -use developments; and WHEREAS, multifamily residential development is lagging in the Highway 99 Subarea, while commercial development there and residential development elsewhere in the City is occurring; and WHEREAS, implementation of the Multi -Family Tax Exemption program, authorized by 84.14 RCW, may provide sufficient incentive to encourage residential development in the Highway 99 Subarea; and WHEREAS, in order to establish a Multifamily Tax Exemption Program, the City must designate one or more residential targeted areas within which the temporary special valuation may be granted to qualifying residential improvements; and WHEREAS, RCW 84.14.040(2) states that a governing authority may adopt a resolution of intent to designate one or more residential targeted areas; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the requirements stipulated at RCW 84.14.040(2), the Edmonds City Council passed a Resolution of Intent on July 18, 2017 to designate the Highway 99 Subarea as a residential targeted area; and WHEREAS, in accordance with RCW 84.14.040(2), the Resolution of Intent gave notice of the time and place of a hearing to be held by the governing authority to consider the designation of the residential targeted area as 7:000 pm, August 15, 2017 in Edmonds City Council Chambers; and WHEREAS, in accordance with RCW 84.14.040(2), publication of the notice of the August 15, 2017 public hearing was provided in a newspaper of general circulation for at least two consecutive weeks, no less than 7 and no more than 30 days prior to the hearing, on July 30, 2017 and August 6, 2017; and Packet Pg. 107 7.1.a WHEREAS, the hearing on the proposed residential targeted area was held as scheduled on August 15, 2017; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Edmonds finds as follows: (a) The Highway 99 Subarea, as identified in the Council -approved Highway 99 Subarea Plan, constitutes an urban center; (b) The Highway 99 Subarea lacks sufficient available, desirable, and convenient residential housing, including affordable housing, to meet the needs of the public who would be likely to live in the Highway 99 Subarea, if the affordable, desirable, attractive, and livable places to live were available; and (c) The designation of the Highway 99 Subarea as a residential targeted area will stimulate the construction of new multifamily housing, including affordable housing. Section 2. In light of the above findings, the City Council of the City of Edmonds designates the Highway 99 Subarea, as identified in the Highway 99 Subarea Plan approved by City Council on August 15, 2017, as a residential targeted area for the purposes of establishing a Multifamily Tax Exemption Program. RESOLVED this 15th day of August 2017. APPROVED: DAVID O. EARLING, MAYOR ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. Packet Pg. 108 8.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/15/2017 Proposed Resolution supporting merger of SNOCOM and SNOPAC (30 min.) Staff Lead: Al Compaan and Tom Mesaros Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History A task force has been working over the past 7 months discussing the potential merger of the two PSAPs. This presentation is designed to bring the Council up to date on those discussions and also to discuss a potential resolution for the council to consider. The resolution is not an approval of the merger, but it would voice support that the merger is important for improved public safety. Both Kurt Mills, executive director of SNOPAC, and Terry Peterson, executive director of SNOCOM, will be presenting to the full council. Staff Recommendation This is for council discussion in anticipation of a resolution calling for the support of the proposed merger. Narrative Opportunity to voice support for the proposed merger as the boards of SNOCOM and SNOPAC finalize the merger agreement for member cities, the county and the county's various public safety entities to consider. Attachments: Resolution to Support Consolidation of PSAPs 8.10.17 Resolution to Support Consolidation of PSAPs (Unanimous) 8.10.17 JTF Update for Stakeholders 20170809 - Edmonds Packet Pg. 109 8.1.a RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, TO SUPPORT THE CONSOLIDATION OF SNOPAC AND SNOCOM PUBLIC SAFETY ANSWERING POINTS (PSAPs). WHEREAS, SNOCOM and SNOPAC are separate PSAP agencies created by interlocal agreement which provide 911-call answering, fire/police and emergency medical dispatch, and ancillary services, including administration of public safety communication systems in Snohomish County; and WHEREAS, the service area boundaries of SNOCOM and SNOPAC do not coincide with the jurisdictional boundaries of local agencies served by SNOCOM and SNOPAC, and also result in a Jointly Served Area (JSA) within Snohomish County where more than 40,000 911 calls are transferred from the PSAP to the other each year, with the potential to delay or complicate emergency response; and WHEREAS, continued operation of SNOCOM and SNOPAC as separate entities would preclude elimination of the JSA, and forestall opportunities for operational efficiencies and savings; and WHEREAS, following objective analysis by an expert consultant, and after extensive and inclusive examination and discourse by the SNOCOM Board of Directors, SNOPAC Board of Directors, the Joint Task Force created by SNOCOM and SNOPAC, the Joint SNOCOM-SNOPAC Board Meetings, and the staff thereof, it has become evident that consolidation of the two PSAPs offers new opportunities to advance the health, safety, and welfare of the public and first responders, which is the paramount purpose of the government agencies involved; and WHEREAS, the examination referenced above also confirmed that consolidating the two PSAPs into one entity will allow for new economies of scale and a potential cost savings of $1.1 million annually, as well as support future opportunities for cost avoidance; and WHEREAS, the combined SNOCOM and SNOPAC boards have passed resolutions in favor of proposals put forth by the Joint Task Force, and the Edmonds City Council supports those proposals and the desire to have a consolidation effective January 1, 2018; and WHEREAS, the primary goal of consolidation is to eliminate call transfers and any delay to the public when calling 911 in Snohomish County; and Packet Pg. 110 8.1.a WHEREAS, after careful consideration of the implications of consolidating SNOCOM and SNOPAC, the Edmonds City Council wishes to express its support for the consolidation of SNOCOM and SNOPAC, NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Edmonds City Council proclaims its support for the consolidation of SNOCOM and SNOPAC, and its intent to ratify the interlocal agreements needed to achieve this consolidation. Section 2. The Edmonds City Council encourages each of the agencies served by SNOCOM or SNOPAC to actively support the consolidation of SNOCOM and SNOPAC. RESOLVED this day of , 2017. APPROVED: MAYOR, DAVID O. EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. Packet Pg. 111 8.1.b RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, TO SUPPORT THE CONSOLIDATION OF SNOPAC AND SNOCOM PUBLIC SAFETY ANSWERING POINTS (PSAPs). WHEREAS, SNOCOM and SNOPAC are separate PSAP agencies created by interlocal agreement which provide 911-call answering, fire/police and emergency medical dispatch, and ancillary services, including administration of public safety communication systems in Snohomish County; and WHEREAS, the service area boundaries of SNOCOM and SNOPAC do not coincide with the jurisdictional boundaries of local agencies served by SNOCOM and SNOPAC, and also result in a Jointly Served Area (JSA) within Snohomish County where more than 40,000 911 calls are transferred from the PSAP to the other each year, with the potential to delay or complicate emergency response; and WHEREAS, continued operation of SNOCOM and SNOPAC as separate entities would preclude elimination of the JSA, and forestall opportunities for operational efficiencies and savings; and WHEREAS, following objective analysis by an expert consultant, and after extensive and inclusive examination and discourse by the SNOCOM Board of Directors, SNOPAC Board of Directors, the Joint Task Force created by SNOCOM and SNOPAC, the Joint SNOCOM-SNOPAC Board Meetings, and the staff thereof, it has become evident that consolidation of the two PSAPs offers new opportunities to advance the health, safety, and welfare of the public and first responders, which is the paramount purpose of the government agencies involved; and WHEREAS, the examination referenced above also confirmed that consolidating the two PSAPs into one entity will allow for new economies of scale and a potential cost savings of $1.1 million annually, as well as support future opportunities for cost avoidance; and WHEREAS, the combined SNOCOM and SNOPAC boards have passed resolutions in favor of proposals put forth by the Joint Task Force, and the Edmonds City Council supports those proposals and the desire to have a consolidation effective January 1, 2018; and WHEREAS, the primary goal of consolidation is to eliminate call transfers and any delay to the public when calling 911 in Snohomish County; and Packet Pg. 112 8.1.b WHEREAS, after careful consideration of the implications of consolidating SNOCOM and SNOPAC, the Edmonds City Council wishes to express its support for the consolidation of SNOCOM and SNOPAC, NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. By unanimous vote, the Edmonds City Council proclaims its support for the consolidation of SNOCOM and SNOPAC, and its intent to ratify the interlocal agreements needed to achieve this consolidation. Section 2. By unanimous vote, the Edmonds City Council encourages each of the agencies served by SNOCOM or SNOPAC to actively support the consolidation of SNOCOM and SNOPAC. RESOLVED this day of , 2017. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. APPROVED: MAYOR, DAVID O. EARLING 2 Packet Pg. 113 9-1-1 Consolidation Presentation for Edmonds City Council PREPARED BY: KURT MILLS, TERRY PETERSON AUGUST 2017 Background Three separate entities: SNOPAC PSAP - Formed in the 70's, located in Everett, a consolidated 9-1-1 Center serving roughly 70% of Snohomish County's population. SNOCOM PSAP - Formed in the 70's, located in Mountlake Terrace, consolidated 9-1-1 Center serving roughly 30% of Snohomish County's population. SERS - Formed in the 90's, Emergency Radio System, group responsible for the voice radio system used by police, fire and 911 countywide. Legend 8.1.c P SA P 5 JOINT SNOCOM Q. Q. SNOPAC n c 0 1� WOODDARTON`,� r_ . f •t 'a ARLING 10� E W MA1 YSV GRAUPGVALLS 0 0 00 r ' a} N {_.i TRiEHS EVERETT I Sta 11 *SH { M IL —5 c to wI c %L N WO ON INDEX iUNTLAFS OEe I { wo %T}IEL r r{ CL �_. LL H c 1.3 2C `r11es a) E a Packet Pg. 116 Background A serious service deficiency exists within a Jointly Served Area (JSA) covered by FD1 /SNOCOM and SCSO/SNOPAC Excessive 9-1-1 transfers resulting in delays to emergencies Includes an imbalance of funding in relation to workload County E91 1 funded a three-part study completed in March 2015 which concluded "...significant opportunity for efficiency and effectiveness gains through consolidation..." and would address the existing 9-1-1 transfers issue. It included several other options including virtual consolidation and co -location A Snohomish County Joint Task Force (JTF) was formed to further consider these options 8.1.c Legend P$AP JOINT SNOCOM NOPA MW SGSO L FD1 t €0MONDs - �11 iWO DWAY may. BFWER - 0 2 4 8mks I I I I I I I i ML CREEx 1- P LAKE sFEVEN5 k � c 0 CL Q. 0 c 0 0 d 0 E W 0 Co CD N fn L 0 m 0 r m c� a D U- c u 0 r a Packet Pg. 118 Joint Task Force (JTF) Includes Operational and Board Representatives from SNOCOM, SNOPAC & SERS and an independent facilitator with consolidation experience Formed in early 2016 at direction of SNOCOM & SNOPAC Boards Multiple process check -points through Joint (SNOCOM/SNOPAC) Board Meetings to validate process and direction SERS is ex-officio until PSAPs make a decision about consolidation Open transparent process with regular updates to stakeholders including sharing documents online Primary Decision Points o Service Levels: Goal of eliminating SNOPAC/SNOCOM Transfers. o Costs: Consider opportunities for cost savings. Labor savings over time through attrition. o Resiliency/Redundancy: Current two PSAP model offers important resilience and goal not to lose this. o Governance: Structure which ensures a fair voice for diverse group including police/fire, large/medium/small agency Multiple Solutions Evaluated Evaluated a number of options focused on service levels and resolve SNOPAC/SNOCOM 9-1-1 Transfer problem Includes two other options that attempt to address transfers through routing and procedural changes Concluded that both options have significant operational and fiscal impacts to the PSAPs Status of Primary Decision Points Excessive 9-• Annual 9-1-1 transfers of 45,000-50,000 is a serious problem • SNOCOM/SNOPAC Transfers are completely eliminated through consolidation • Maintain or improve service levels and eliminate other operational inefficiencies present in a two-PSAP setting • Both Boards sought ways to decrease costs • Projected savings of just under $1 MM annually • Labor savings recognized over time through attrition (estimated within 2 years) Resiliency/Redundancy_.iCurrent two-PSAP environment provides good resiliency • Maintain existing fully -equipped SNOCOM • Prepaid rent through 2023 Governance facility as warm backup (secondary location) • Consensus reached on board make-up and general set of rules. Estimated One -Time Transition Costs , Low Estimate High Estimate Office space Renovation $ 500,000 $ 750,000 Organizational/Team Building/Reorganization $ 30,000 $ 50,000 Phone system (reconfigure as Multi -Node) $ 30,000 $ 50,000 Contract Negotiations $ 90,000 $ 120,000 Recorder Modifications $ 51000 $ 10,000 New ILA Development $ 151000 $ 301000 Corporate Structure Legal Review $ 41000 $ 61000 Technology Transition (reconfiguration) $ 301000 $ 1251000 Contingency $ 50,000 $ 100,000 Radio Console Reorganization (MCC7500) $ 15,000 $ 20,000 Parking Needs at SNOPAC $ 50,000 $ 250,000 Total $ 819,000 $ 1,511,000 * Matrix Consulting Study estimated transition costs at between $229,500 & $372,500 Governance Consensus on majority of governance issues The County and all local governments which are police or fire service providers, or which contract for service, can join. 15 member board 10 Police Seats 5 Fire seats Board members selected by caucuses of large, medium & small agencies Plus 1 non -voting board member selected by contract agencies Elected and operational staff serve on board Supermajority vote on key decisions: 70% and at least 1 fire vote 1 year of "rate smoothing" for those significantly impacted by new assessment formula Supermajority Vote Items Adding a new member Terminating a member Amending the ILA (unless unanimous consent required by law) Amendments to bylaws Approving the budget if it exceeds last year's budget by a rate over CPI-U + 4% Capital expenditures exceeding $500,000 Dissolution or merger/consolidation of the agency Hiring the Executive Director of the Agency. Rate Smoothing New assessment formula projected to provide savings for most. One agency expected to see 30+% increase Rate smoothing used to reduce the "pain" associated with change of assessment formula Those agencies seeing 9% or greater savings will contribute up to 30% of that savings in 2019 to those agencies seeing 9% or great cost increase. Next Steps in Process Detailed financial reviews (completed) May thru July -Individual agency briefings (mostly completed) Over the summer- Work on new Interlocal Agreement, transition budget, timeline Sept -Joint Board review and advisory position on new ILA Oct thru Dec -Depending on Joint Board Action, Individual agencies re -briefed and have decision whether to sign on to new ILA New Agency could start work as early as Jan 2018, operating out of two physical locations (SNOPAC & SNOCOM's existing facilities) Jan 2019 merging of operations into single facility with existing SNOCOM facility transitioning into a warm backup. Questions? Comments? Information and regular updates available: http://www.snopac9l1.us/Consolidation Discussion.html http://www.snocom.org/public-records-request/snocom-snopac-consolidation-documents Reference Slides Will the call transfer issue go away with Next -Gen 911 Technology? Next Gen 911 Will have NO impact on 911 call transfers in the SCSO/FDl Jointly Served Area Next-gen technologies cannot discern a Police call from a Fire/EMS call and automatically route the call based on the needs of the caller Next Gen 911 WILL reduce some 911 call transfers along border areas Requires new ESI network currently underway Requires carrier adoption (not mandated) Requires device compatibility, some legacy devices not supported SNOCO Unique ID Call Count SNOCOM SNOPAC Calls 818 SNOCOM Calls 1155 Original PSAP Recom. PSAP Coverage Area SNOPAC SNOPACArea 24964838 SNOCOM Area 19924133 SNO-3726 SNOCOM SNOPAC Population SNOPAC SNOPAC Pap. 619 SNOCOM Pop. 376 8.1.c c 0 Q. Q. 0 c 0 0 0 d w Packet Pg. 131 8.1.c win ,0lH 10]MW \9l51�11Vv 0I►7iI0Z0l11iL�� O � I o • • • I N _ � y • I � 4 for `o I E EVERETr w Clinton Cell Tower ,r 1� r MUKILTEO I (' I FV _ FE4— p1d Jointly Served C OfFa1 Packet Pg. 132 Proposed Assessment Formula Hybrid of SNOCOM & SNOPAC's existing formulas Uses SNOPAC's cost -center approach to assign costs appropriately (Police/Fire, Shared/Dedicated Dispatch) Uses SNOCOM's ratio of Calls for Service, Population and Assessed Value Adheres to assessment framework principles approved in January 8.1.c c\ssessmenr rormuic DRAFT Develop Four Cost Centers =o4 Police D•Lspa[rh .,mso les 3a. Direct Cost 3b. All Agency 3c. Shared PD for Dedimted Shared PD Console Cost Consoles Center Center Billed Directly 54% 54% CaltsfGrService Cal is for 5ervice 23% 23% Assessed Assessed Valuation Valuation r 23%Population 231APopuiation I Bated on Rad—F PDtc, FD Dispatch consoles Step 1. Determine total budget and apply E911 Revenue Step 2. Deter m in e P er Con so le/Ty pe Cost Step 3. Determine Shared PD/FD, Dedicated Cost Step4. Determine PD/FDSplit of A d m i n/IT/S u pe rvi so r/ M&O Cost Center Consolidated Cost Centers Cost Center FTEs Sub Total Revenues Ass essmentTotal Police 45.5 $ 4,64-4,012 $ 53,539 $ 4,590,473 Fire 28.5 $ 2,902,507 $ 12,810 $ 2,899,697 Call -Taking 22.0 $ 2,243,560 $ 2,243,560 $ - Supervision 16.0 $ 2,034,688 $ - $ 2,034,688 Admin/Tech 32.0 $ 41609,745 $ - $ 4,609,745 M&O N/A 1 $ 2,902,016 $ 3,013,393 $ (111,376) Total I 144.Dl $ 19,336,529 $ 5,323,302 $ 14,013,227 Console Type I Consoles# I Consoles% Police 1 81 62% Fire 1 51 38% Console Assignment Consoles # Console $ Everett 2 $ 1,147,618 Marysville 1 $ 573,809 Shared Police 5 $ 2,869,046 Shared Fire 5 $ 2,899,697 Cost Center Consoles% I Ad/IT/Sup/M&O $ Police 62% $ 4,020,343 Fire 38% $ 2,512,714 Total 1 $ 6,533,057 eucsrs:=,n�• 's Step 5a. Determine Dedicated Console Assessment = (Dedicated Console $)+(PD Share of Ad/It/Sup/M&O $) Step 5b. Determine Shared PD Console Assessment = (Sharred PD Console $) + (PD Share of Ad/It/Sup/M&O $) Step 5c. Determine Shared FD Console Assessment = (Shared FD Console $) +(FD Share of Ad/It/Sup/M&O $) Step 6. Apply Individul Agency Percentage based on CFS, AV, and Population. Packet Pg. 134 Option 4 - Attrition & "Right Size" Based on historical attrition trends we can expect call taker and dispatch staff will be "right -sized" within the first year Turnover of supervisory staff is less frequent and reasonable to expect right -sizing within two years Pro -Forma Options Requested Option 1 -Status Quo Option 2A - Reroute JSA calls to SNOPAC Option 2B - Reroute JSA calls to SNOCOM Option 3 - Aggressive Cross PSAP Call Entry Option 4A & 4B - Consolidated Agency Option 4A - one facility (SNOPAC's current facility) Option 4B - maintaining SNOCOM's facility as a "warm back-up" Fiscal I 0-Yr Pro Forma Budgets were developed Compare status quo (two separate PSAPs) against several alternative models including consolidation Stand-alone options resulted in operational and fiscal impacts Consolidated Option resulted in annual cost reductions of $1 M+ with equal or improved staffing and service levels 8.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/15/2017 Adoption of Subarea Plan Zone Map Amendments, Development Regulations, and Planned Action for Highway 99 area (30 min.) Staff Lead: Shane Hope Department: Planning Division Preparer: Diane Cunningham Background/History Revitalizing the Highway 99 area has been a goal of the City Council and the public for years. Over time, various studies were prepared and several transportation safety projects were planned. However, a clear vision and a broad -reaching strategy for the future had not been articulated. In early 2016, based on a budget allocation approved by the City Council, work began on a new Highway 99 Subarea Plan, planned action EIS, and implementing development regulations. Significant public information and input were provided. (An overview of the public process has been noted in previous reports to the Council.) The first major product being considered by the City Council is the Draft Highway 99 Subarea Plan. (See Attachment 1 for the ordinance that contains the Subarea Plan.) The second major product being considered by the Council has two components - the Zoning Map amendments and the Development Regulations consisting of a major update to the General Commercial Chapter and minor amendments to the Sign Code. (See Attachments 2 and 3 for two slightly different versions of ordinance language, but with each including the some Zoning Map, General Commercial code chapter, and Sign Code amendment.) The final major product is the Planned Action Ordinance (see Attachment 4). More explanation about these items is contained in the Narrative section of this memo. Between January 1 and August 1, 2017, the City Council held eight meeting sessions on the plan or related code changes for the Highway 99 area. Of these meetings, the minutes from the Council's three public hearings (held Feb. 21 for the Subarea Plan, June 20 for the Zoning Map and Development Regulations, and July 31 for the Planned Action ordinance) are provided here, along with the Council's July 31 minutes for review of the Subarea Plan and Development Regulations (See Attachments 5, 6, 7, and 8, respectively.) Also, draft minutes from the Planning Board's July 26 meeting are attached here(Attachment 9). Staff Recommendation Take action to adopt the following: 1. The Subarea Plan ordinance (Attachment 1); 2. The "Code Changes" ordinance (Attachment 2)--or if Council prefers --Attachment 3 that has the narrow applicability exception. 3. The Planned Action ordinance (Attachment 4). Packet Pg. 138 8.2 NOTE: These could be directly adopted August 15 or placed on the next Consent Agenda. Narrative Subarea Plan The proposed Subarea Plan (see Attachment 1) has evolved through the public process. It builds on values identified at community meetings, especially: Connectivity, Walkability, Safety, Enhancement of destinations, Healthy businesses, Affordable housing, and Beautification. The Plan provides a vision for land uses and development over the long-term. It calls for more housing, especially affordable housing, and identifies needed transportation improvements. It includes implementation strategies, policies, and action steps. Zoning Map and Development Regulations Two slightly different "code changes" ordinances have been prepared for adopting the Highway 99 area development regulations. They are alike in every way, except that one ordinance (Attachment 2) uses standard language that would mean the date for vesting under the existing (not new) regulations ends five days after publication of the adopted ordinance (typically 7-10 days after actual adoption). Thus, any building permit submitted after that effective date would be subject to the new regulations. The alternative "code changes" ordinance (Attachment 3) adds a special Section 5 that would allow a limited opportunity for a building permit application to not be subject to the new regulations if the project had design review approval between July 1, 2017 and August 15, 2017. This option relates to a particular development proposal that, as of August 9, had design review approval but for which a building permit had not been submitted. (The vesting period is typically tied to the date of a complete building permit application.) Meanwhile, the project applicant has noted an intent to submit a building permit application during the week of August 14--which would be ahead of the effective date of the ordinance. Both versions of the ordinance (i.e., the one with the standard language and the one with language that allows a narrow exception for applicability) are part of this packet. The Council may choose which one to move forward for adoption. The proposed General Commercial (CG) development regulations (Exhibit 1 of Attachments 2 and 3) and the proposed minor Sign Code amendment (Exhibit 2 of Attachments 2 and 3) are the same as reviewed at the City Council's July 31 meeting, The CG regulations provide for site development standards and building design standards, consistent with the Subarea Plan. The sign code amendment limits new pole signs in the CG district to a14-foot height. This is also consistent with the Sbuarea Plan. Exhibit 3 of Attachments 2 and 3 provide for the zoning map changes that have been discussed. The changes consolidate the CG and CG 2 zones and convert several multifamily sites within the CG corridor to CG. This is consistent with the current Comprehensive Plan and with the proposed Subarea Plan. The following Question -and- Answer section addresses several key issues discussed at recent Council meetings regarding the code changes. Question: How does the City's proposed code for the CG district prevent "oppressive" building design, specifically regarding tall, flat walls (such as have been observed in some other cities)? Answer: This question came up from a Council member at the July 31 meeting and a response was promised for the next meeting. The straightforward answer is that the proposed CG Code has building design standards that address this issue. For example, 16.60.030.D requires the following: 1. General. To provide variety and interest in appearance, the following design elements should Packet Pg. 139 8.2 be considered, and a project shall demonstrate how at least four of the elements will be used to vary the design of the site: a. Building massing and unit layout, b. Placement of structures and setbacks, c. Location of pedestrian and vehicular facilities, d. Composition and character of open space, plant materials and street trees, e. Variety in architectural elements, fagade articulation, and/or building materials, Roof variation in slope, height and/or materials. 2. Building Design and Massing. a. Buildings shall convey a visually distinct "base" and "top, which may be achieved through differences in massing elements and/or architectural details. b. The bulk and scale of buildings of over 3,000 square feet in footprint shall be mitigated through the use of massing and design elements such as facade articulation and modulation, setbacks, step -backs, distinctive roof lines or forms, and other design details. Primary Frontage: On the primary frontage, to provide visual connection between activities inside and outside the building, 50% of the building facade between 2 and 10 feet in height, as measured from the adjacent sidewalk, shall be comprised of windows or doors that are transparent, the bottom of which may not be more than 4 feet above the adjacent sidewalk ■ 50% Min Transparency (may include all windows and glass doors, but not mirrored finishes) A departure from this standard may be approved when the fagade will not be visible from the public street due to the placement of other buildings on the site, provided that the requirements of subsection "e " in this section shall apply. On the primary frontage, no vehicle parking shall be located within the first 20 feet of the first level of a building facing the street except where such parking is underground. d. All Other Building Frontages: All street -facing facades within 30 feet of a public street, other than for the primary frontage or those facing an alley or the last block of a dead-end street, shall comply with the standard below. i. Thirty percent (30%) of the building fa4ade between 2 and 10 feet in height shall be made of windows or doors that are transparent, the bottom of which may not be more than four feet above the adjacent sidewalk. Windows shall not be mirrored or have glass tinted darker than 40% in order to meet this requirement. e. Wall treatment: Building facades not subject to all requirements of ECDC 16.60.030.D.2.c or ECDC 16.60.030.D.2.d are intended to not display blank, Packet Pg. 140 8.2 unattractive walls to the public or to other building tenants. To accomplish this, walls greater than 30 feet in length shall have architectural treatment that incorporates at least four of the following elements into the design of the facade: i. Masonry (except for flat concrete block). ii. Concrete or masonry plinth at the base of the wall. iii. Belt courses of a different texture and color. iv. Projecting cornice. v. Projecting metal or wood canopy. vi. Decorative tilework. vii. Trellis containing planting. viii. Medallions. ix. Artwork or wall graphics. x. Vertical differentiation. xi. Decorative lighting fixtures. xii. Glazing xiii. An architectural element not listed above that is approved by the director to meet the intent of this subsection. Question: How are pedestrian areas treated in the draft CG regulations, compared to the existing CG regulations? Answer: In the proposed regulations, a pedestrian area is required. It must include a streetscape zone next to the curb of at least 5 feet, a clear pedestrian zone of at least 5-10 feet and a pedestrian activity area behind that, which may include walkways, benches, and other pedestrian amenities. However, under existing regulations, no specific requirements are provided for a pedestrian area. Question: How are amenity spaces treated in the draft CG regulations, compared to the existing CG regulations? Answer: The draft regulations require amenity space equaling at least five percent of the building footprint. (Note: The language also recognizes that amenity space may be shared by more than one property owner.) Amenity spaces must include pedestrian -oriented features, such as seating, paths, gazebos, and artwork. This compares to the existing CG regulations, which require no amenity space. Question: How are heights, setbacks, and stepbacks treated in the draft CG regulations compared to the existing CG regulations? Answer: The proposed regulations are stricter for some aspects and the same for other aspects. Attachment 10 shows two information tables for comparison. One table shows the dimensional requirements copied from the proposed regulations; the other table shows the dimensional requirements copied from the existing regulations. Comparing tables reveals that: The height limits would remain the same (except that CG and CG2 would be consolidated) The minimum street setback would be increased under the new regulations from 4 feet to 10 feet (except that vehicle sales use would be allowed a minimum street setback of 5 feet) Packet Pg. 141 8.2 The minimum side and rear setbacks would remain the same, meaning no minimum except 15 feet is required adjacent to single-family zones, same as now. In addition, the draft regulations require an additional 10-foot "stepback" for all CG buildings greater than 25 feet in height when the building is adjacent to a single-family zone. Any portion of a building above 55 feet in height, adjacent to a single-family zone, must be stepped back 20 feet from the required setback (which means at least 35 feet total-i.e., a 15-foot setback plus a 20-foot "stepback"- from the single-family zoned property). This is in contrast with the existing regulations, which require NO additional stepbacks from single-family zones for buildings greater than 25 feet in height. Clearly, the proposed new requirements for setbacks and stepbacks are, in some aspects, the same but, in other aspects, stricter than the existing code for this area. Question: Do the vehicle parking standards provide incentives to favor transit -oriented development? Answer: The proposed parking standards require a minimum 0.75 vehicle parking spaces for each residential unit that is less than 700 square feet; 1.25 spaces for residential units between 700 and 1100 square feet, and otherwise, 1.75 parking spaces for each unit. (Note: Additional guest parking must be provided too.) However„ the applicant has several options for a reduced number of parking spaces related to transit -oriented development --for example, if the project is within 1/4 mile from a bus rapid transit station or provides car -share or bike -share facilities on site. Question: Is vehicle parking allowed on the first floor facing the street? Answer: A specific limitation was added last month to the proposed code. The limitation prohibits vehicle parking within the first 20 feet of a building where the building faces a primary street, unless the parking is underground. Question: How do the proposed regulations encourage or incentivize "green" and sustainable development? Answer: The proposed regulations: Require bicycle storage for most multifamily housing (this is not required anywhere else in Edmonds) Require electric vehicle charging infrastructure for all new development that includes housing (this is not required anywhere else in Edmonds and exceeds the standard of most other cities in our region) Establish a walkable and transit -friendly character in multiple ways (which recognizes that reducing vehicle usage will result in less carbon emissions and that people who walk more have a better chance of being healthy) Require amenity space that promotes sustainability-for example, having places for people to play and socialize, places for trees and vegetation (while specifically encouraging native plant species). In addition, new development will be encouraged to take advantage of solar programs and other renewable energy. One way that the City could incentivize solar is to allow a fee reduction in the permit fee schedule for projects that use solar. This approach could be considered as part of an update to the permit fee resolution. Alternatively, projects with solar components could be Packet Pg. 142 8.2 prioritized for plan review. (The downside of the latter is that other plans that were submitted first would be bumped back in the qeue.) Planned Action Code The Growth Management Act and the State Environmental Policy Act provide for a "planned action" process that jurisdictions can use to streamline the environmental review process for projects that have already been covered by an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) developed for a subarea. This is, in part, because the EIS will have analyzed impacts of development and identified mitigation measures to address the impacts. To memorialize the EIS work for the subarea, cities may adopt a "planned action ordinance" or code that specifies the type and amount of development that may be allowed to proceed in the subarea without additional SEPA review. Submittal of a SEPA checklist and all other applicable laws and regulations would still apply. In Edmonds, an EIS was prepared for the Highway 99 subarea. The draft was issued June 2 and a public comment period, including a public open house, followed. The final EIS was issued an d posted online August 3. This is the first time in Edmonds that this level of environmental analysis for a large area where development is planned over the long-term, has been undertaken. A planned action ordinance (see Attachment 4) has been prepared. It reflects findings from the Highway 99 Subarea EIS (which is currently available online at http://www.edmondshwy99.org/), especially for mitigation and for tracking key development impacts The Planning Board held a public hearing on the draft planned action code on July 26 and recommended Council adoption. (See Attachment9, Planning Board minutes). The City Council held its public hearing on the planned action code on July 31(see Attachment 8, City Council minutes). Note: The public comments at the planned action hearing generally related to the CG development regulations, not the planned action proposal.) Next Steps Next steps include: August 15 - City Council meeting for potential action to adopt the Subarea Plan, the zoning map and development regulations, and the planned action. This may be done by voting to adopt the ordinances on August 15 or placing some or all of the ordinances on the next Consent Agenda. After ordinance adoption, other steps may be taken, such as considering a multifamily tax exemption program and beginning detailed design work for Highway 99 improvements. Attachments: Attachment 1: Subarea Plan Ordinance_2017-08-09 Attachment 2: Code Changes Attachment 3: Code Changes with Exception Attachment 4: HWY99 PAO DRAFT Attachment 5: Council Hearing Minutes _170221 Attachment 6: Council Hearing Minutes _170620 Attachment 7: Council Hearing Minutes PAO_170731 Attachment 8: Council Minutes Subarea_170731 Attachment 9: PB DRAFT Hearing Minutes _170726 Attachment 10: CG Comparison Tables Packet Pg. 143 8.2.a ORDINANCE NO. �a AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, a WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA Ca PLAN AS AN ELEMENT OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE U' a� as PLAN. W WHEREAS, planning for the Highway 99 subarea has been actively underway since the beginning of 2016; and WHEREAS, revitalization of this area (including highway corridor improvements) has been a high priority for the City Council; and WHEREAS, public outreach for the Highway 99 subarea planning project has been extensive; and WHEREAS, a draft Highway 99 Subarea Plan was recommended by the Planning Board and presented at a City Council public hearing on February 21, 2017; and WHEREAS, the City Council had further review and discussion at its March 21, 2017 meeting, which was followed by minor clean-up and clarification of the draft plan; and WHEREAS, on June 6, 2017 the Council again reviewed and discussed the plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed Highway 99 Subarea Plan (see Attachment A) presents a vision and strategy for revitalizing and enhancing the Highway 99 area in Edmonds; and WHEREAS, it has been prepared in consultation with state and regional transportation agencies, as well as with adjacent jurisdictions, and in a manner consistent with the state Growth Management Act; and WHEREAS, the Subarea Plan, upon adoption, becomes an element of the City's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, a Planned Action Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Highway 99 Subarea Plan was issued on June 2, 2017 with a public comment period running through July 3, 2017; and Packet Pg. 144 8.2.a WHEREAS, the Planned Action Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Highway c 99 Subarea Plan was issued on August 4, 2017 with an appeal period ending on August 18, 2017; a and, Ca N al d WHEREAS, no appeals on the adequacy of the Planned Action Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Highway 99 Subarea Plan were received; and, WHEREAS, under the GMA, a subarea plan may be initially adopted independently of the regular Comprehensive Plan amendment cycle; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council hereby makes the following findings as required by ECDC 20.00.050: A. The City Council finds that the proposed Subarea Plan is consistent with the provisions of the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan and is in the public interest. B. The City Council finds that the proposed Subarea Plan would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety or welfare of the city. C. The City Council finds that the proposed Subarea Plan would maintain the appropriate balance of land uses within the city. D. The City Council finds that the property shown in Attachment B hereto is physically suitable for the proposed Subarea Plan and the anticipated land use development, including, but not limited to, access, provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses and absence of physical constraints. Section 2. The Edmonds Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended to incorporate the Highway 99 Subarea Plan as set forth in Attachment A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and that the plan is hereby adopted. Packet Pg. 145 8.2.a Section 3. The Edmonds Comprehensive Plan and, specifically, the map designating land uses is hereby amended to redesignate the area shown in Attachment B as the Highway 99 Subarea. The Development Services Director is hereby authorized to reflect this redesignation on all current land use maps of the City. Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR DAVE EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: M. JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 146 8.2.a SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2017, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN AS AN ELEMENT OF THE CITY' S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2017. 4840-7251-8158,v. 1 Arl CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY as c �a a Ca N al d Packet Pg. 147 8.2.a E MONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUB"EA PLAN DRAFT JUNE 2017 Packet Pg. 148 8.2.a ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS m c c a 06 ui a� 0 E E a O N c d d L Cu 3 N O C O Q O Q O 00 C ti O N d I c C EL O r_ CL m L Cu vJ r c� i ci r Q E :.i Q Packet Pg. 149 8.2.a CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..... 2 Document Overview The Planning Context The Planning Process Past Planning Efforts Planned Action EIS Overview VISION + COMMUNITY VALUES ..... 8 Vision Goals Community Values BACKGROUND + EXISTING CONDITIONS ..... 12 The Study Area Unique Districts Existing Land Use Patterns Existing Transportation Existing Economic Conditions and Market Trends COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT ..... 26 Technical Advisory Committee Key Stakeholder Interviews Community Visioning Workshop Public Open House Online Survey and General Comments Web Outreach and Social Media Engagement Outcomes m c c c� FL 06 N al CONSTRAINTS + CHALLENGES ..... 34 Land Use Constraints + Challenges Economic Constraints + Challenges Transportation/Infrastructure Constraints & Challenges OPPORTUNITIES ..... 38 Land Use Opportunities Economic Opportunities Transportation/Infrastructure Opportunities ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS ..... 44 Land Use and Transportation Scenarios Scenario Building Blocks Development Capacity Analysis IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES, POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS + ACTIONS ..... 50 Zoning and Development Affordable Housing Signage and Wayfinding Transit Transportation Infrastructure APPENDIX ..... 99 A. Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement Packet Pg. 150 m c �a IL oa N al d N N C N C N a CL m 0 N c cv IL 0 m L co 4- 0 C 0 rt+ 0 a v O co O ti T 0 N d I 0 C t0 C :a L 0 C CL R L T cd C t ci f+ a a 8.2.a INTRODUCTION The Subarea Plan is a vision and action plan to enhance the Highway 99 area, support prolonged economic prosperity in the corridor area, and build a more attractive place for the Edmonds community to live, work, and play. The City of Edmonds initiated the Edmonds Highway 99 Subarea Plan to address future land use and transportation needs on and around the Highway 99 corridor. The plan acts as a guide for future development of the corridor area, and includes specific actions and investments designed to bring positive changes to the community. DOCUMENT OVERVIEW This document provides guidance for how the corridor should grow and change in the future and sets forth the opportunities and actions needed to address the challenges on Highway 99. The Plan identifies the constraints and opportunities for land use, transportation, and economic development. It describes two alternative scenarios representing different intensities of investment and redevelopment in the short- and long-term future. The accompanying Implementation Strategy lays out the investments, policy changes, and short-, medium-, and long-term actions to transform the Highway 99 area into a vibrant, mixed -use, transit - oriented corridor. THE PLANNING CONTEXT As part of the ten-year state transportation budget adopted in 2015, $10 million was allocated for improvements to Highway 99 in Edmonds. The first $1 million will be available in the early years of planning for the corridor. The Subarea Plan helps make the case for obtaining significant additional federal, state, and regional grant funds to implement the policies and strategies set forth in this plan. Successful implementation of the plan will depend on a secure source of funding and collaborative decision -making from state legislators and city officials. Neighboring directly south of Highway 99 in Edmonds, the City of Shoreline has embarked on significant improvements to Aurora Avenue within its boundaries, emphasizing improvements for transit and pedestrian use. Continuing this momentum in Edmonds will benefit the Edmonds community as well as the broader region creating a livable, vibrant community around high -capacity transit that visitors, businesses, and residents can take full advantage of. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 152 INTRODUCTION 8.2.a THE PLANNING PROCESS L,f x�ft EDMONDS99 HIGHWAY (70, , � Understanding Existing Conditions • Review previous studies of the Highway 99 corridor and input from the community. • Analyze and visualize current conditions of the highway area such as land uses, transportation, real estate trends, housing and business needs, and potential opportunities and barriers for development and place -making. Hands-on community visioning workshop and live polling exercise. Polling questions were also available in a survey format on the project website for those unable to attend the workshop. (07, � � Develop Land Use and Transportation Scenarios • Understand different land use and transportation impacts to the corridor area, and develop feasible alternative scenarios based on current market trends. • Evaluate and document land use and transportation alternative scenarios. Scenario results were revealed at a public open house in May. The scenario results were also available on the website to collect additional feedback from the public R (70, , � SEPA & Planned Action Environmental Impact Assessment • Prepare a Planned Action EIS to ensure that environmental impacts are considered and mitigated holistically. • Document the evaluation process, findings and recommendations. The scope of the Planned Action EIS was also revealed at the May public open house and available on the website to collect additional feedback from the public. �Y (70, Develop Sub- area Draft Plan i Final Sub- area Plan • Create a preferred • Present the sub -area strategy based on plan to the Planning evaluation and feedback Board and City of alternative scenarios. Council. • Develop an action plan to implement the vision for the Highway 99 area and prioritize preferred improvements. • Identify major development code - related barriers to implementation and recommend alternatives. An overview of the draft plan, and recommendations were revealed at a public open house in November. The public had the opportunity to provide feedback on the recommendations via the website. • Finalize the draft sub- area plan and recommendations. The public was invited to attend a presentation to the Planning Board and City Council. The draft sub -area plan was also available on the website for the public to review and provide final comments. 3 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 153 8.2.a INTROD PAST PLANNING EFFORTS During a City Council retreat in 2002, the Highway 99 corridor was identified as one of the areas of greatest potential for generating tax revenue for the city. Subsequently, the Highway 99 Task Force was formed at the City Council retreat in 2003 to study and make recommendations on how to maximize economic growth along the Highway 99 corridor. As a result, the City of Edmonds Highway 99 Enhancement project began engaging neighborhood representatives and business and property owners in 2004 to identify key local objectives and IL recommendations along the corridor. This subarea plan is intended to augment the work started in 2004 and set forth concrete actions steps to move towards implementing land use and transportation improvements on Highway 99. The Highway 99 Subarea Plan is a result of many years of study and -EEE careful planning. Liryol Edmonds 2004 Highway 99 Enhancement Project ' t This report identifies local objectives and development opportunities for Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendments eventually adopted in T> HIGHWAY 99 2004. The plan outlined concepts for ENHANCEMENT PRE RRT. four focus areas along the corridor and made recommendations for furthering redevelopment efforts. 2004 Highway 99 Enhancement Project Market Assessment This report is a market feasibility assessment of commercial and °- residential development near Highway 99. The study identified enhancement ■ ................ scenarios, market factors, multifamily housing considerations, and short- term retail development opportunities. The report also identified barriers to further development, including the need to improve left turns and highway crossings. 2007 Highway 99 Traffic Safety and Circulation Study The Traffic Safety and Circulation Study HIGHWAY 99 TRAFFIC SAFETY AND evaluated the transportation system's CIRCULATION STUDY needs based on current and future traffic v.. and land use conditions, developed a prioritized list of multi -modal solutions to the transportation needs of the study area, and identified projects for early implementation and incorporation into the City's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). 2015 City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan ®Q■ The Comprehensive Plan identifies Highway 99 a major activity center 'intended to City of Edmonds encourage the development of a Comprehensive plan pedestrian and transit oriented area focused on two master planned developments, Swedish/ Edmonds medical center and Edmonds-Woodway High School, with a related high -intensity development corridor along Highway 99" 2014 City of Edmonds Comprehensive Transportation Plan The Transportation Plan serves as the transportation element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. It identifies transportation infrastructure and services needed to support projected land use within the city through the year 2035. Several intersections along Highway 99 were identified for transportation improvements to provide safer access management throughout the corridor and additional safety and urban design improvements. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 Su Packet Pg. 154 INTRODUCTION 8.2.a PLANNED ACTION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY (EIS) OVERVIEW A Planned Action EIS is an upfront assessment of environmental conditions, potential impacts, and mitigation measures for the Edmonds Highway 99 Subarea, rather than a piecemeal analysis on a project -by project basis. As such, the EIS provides developers certainty and predictability while streamlining the environmental review and permitting process and furthering the goals of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and the Growth Management Act (GMA). Planned actions still need to meet the City's development regulations and to obtain necessary permits. The alternatives considered in the Draft EIS for the Subarea Plan include No Action (Alternative 1) and the Preferred Alternative (Alternative 2). Under Alternative 1, future growth would continue based on existing development regulations and past development trends. Alternative 2 assumes future mixed use growth with an emphasis on residential, commercial, and office development and assumes a new vision for the area supported by transportation system improvements and updates to existing development regulations. See Appendix A for a more detailed description of impacts for each alternative. FIGURE 1: PLANNED ACTION EIS PROCESS ISSUE DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE R SCOPING NOTICE 1 CONDUCT SEPA SCOPING PREPARE DRAFT EIS ISSUE DRAFT EIS DRAFT EIS PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD PREPARE FINAL EIS ISSUE FINAL EIS S EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 155 8.2.a INTROD TABLE 1: KEY FEATURES OF EACH ALTERNATIVE IN THE EIS Cox== ALT. I NO ACTION ALT. 2 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE New Housing Units by 2035 1,224 3,325 New Jobs by 2035 2,317 3,013 New commercial sq.ft. by 2035 994,958 1,634,685 Proposed update to Highway 99 subarea maps and text to clearly identify three distinct districts in Comprehensive Plan No change the subarea anchored around majortransportation gateways and employment clusters (See Figure 2, page 14.) Rezone the CG2, RM-1.5, BIN, and portions of the RM- Zoning Designations No change 2.4 and BC zones throughout the study area to CG (see page 56). In summary, development code amendments include the following (For a more detailed description of code amendments, see the Recommendations chapter on page 50.) Existing development >> Building height and CG zone consolidation Development Code Amendments regulations would remain >> Transit -supportive parking standards unchanged >> Building frontage standards Building transparency standards Park lot location Pedestrian Activity Zone Ground floor setback Upper story stepbacks Transportation Improvements Future improvements would continue to occur on an incremental basis with new development and as planned by the City's Transportation Master Plan and WSDOT plans. Improvements to the Highway 99 Corridor and adjacent local streets would include measures to maintain level of service standards, increase east/west connectivity, provide greater bicycle and pedestrian mobility, and improve access to transit (see page 83 for a complete list of proposed improvements). EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 156 I 8.2.a I m c �a a Ca N al d N N C N E C N E a CL m 0 N c cv IL 0 m L Co 4- 0 C 0 rt+ 0 Q v O Co O ti T 0 N d I 0 C t0 C :a L 0 C CL R L T cd C t ci f+ Q Q Packet Pg. 157 8.2.a VISION + COMMUNITY VALUES The Vision for the Edmonds Highway 99 area establishes a framework for the Subarea Plan and describes an ideal snapshot of how the area could evolve in the future. The vision is based on the knowledge and ideas of Edmonds residents and stakeholders gathered during public workshops, stakeholder interviews, and through public surveys. The Edmonds community shared a wide -range of creative ideas for improvements that will enable people to enjoy safe and easy access to Highway 99's diverse services and amenities, better access to the area's robust transit system, and more opportunities for affordable housing, jobs, and destinations. THE VISION GOALS The Vision goals here represent the themes that surfaced throughout community discussions with Edmonds residents and stakeholders. They describe the qualities residents want to see in the Highway 99 corridor area. Economic Development Stimulate the economy by attracting and encouraging new businesses, investment, and redevelopment. Safety and Walkability Create a safe and comfortable place for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists to move along and get across Highway 99. Housing and Development Encourage and incentivize mixed use development, affordable housing, office/commercial and other types of development. Identity Establish a distinct identity along the corridor that supports existing cultural destinations and amenities and creates a welcoming and attractive environment for visitors and residents alike. Transportation Create more efficient and accessible connections between districts and destinations, and other transit centers/stations. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 158 8.2.a VISION + GUIDING PRINCIPLES COMMUNITY VALUES Dig CONNECTIVITY ' WALKABILITY V Better connections and access Create walkable neighborhoods CZ--> for pedestrians, bicyclists, and and commercial centers where transit riders to destinations visitors can walk safely and and amenities in the area. comfortably at all hours of the day. SAFETY HEALTHY access forter connections pedestrians, bicyclists, rand BUSINESSES transit riders to destinations Bring in new businesses and and amenities in the area. jobs to the area, encourage existing businesses to thrive, and provide good quality retail and shopping amenities. DESTINATIONS Enhance distinct districts in the area such as the Health District and the International BEAUTIFICATION District to create more vibrant Create a more attractive place destinations and an even 1=1 for residents and visitors through better sense of place. landscaping and urban design. AFFORDABLE HOUSING Encourage affordable housing options for a mix of income levels - low income, workforce, and moderate -income. 9 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 159 8.2.a VISION + GUIDING PRI This page is left intentionally blank. d C C cC a 06 N al d EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 160 EDMONDS ESPERANCE �w 12TH ST 3 W ..: Zero Q 1 � . �i MOUNTLAKE TERRACE - dr— -.—I I J T -j LTH .T• EDMONDS =� EDMONDS L-24 S 8.2.a BACKGROUND + EXISTING CONDITIONS THE STUDY AREA The Edmonds Highway 99 subarea is approximately 2 miles bordered by several jurisdictions — Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, Shoreline, and the Unincorporated Snohomish County neighborhood of Esperance. The subarea is a major urban center for Edmonds with professional services and retail amenities along the corridor. There are distinct subdistricts and is already a horizontal mixed -use district. However, buildings along HWY 99 are predominately highway -oriented, set far back from the road with large surface parking lots in front, which results in an unpleasant and unsafe environment for pedestrians. Many of the buildings are old and reaching the end of their natural life. As Edmonds contemplates where new growth and economic development can occur within the community, this stretch of HWY 99 has been identified for change and there is broad support for a reimagining of its historic role as just a high-speed highway. The study area currently has approximately 3,800 jobs and 1,600 housing units. There are about 2.4 jobs for every housing unit. As such, the subarea is currently an employment destination, with more than twice as many employees as households. Attracting more housing, especially affordable housing, to this jobs -rich area will increase walking and biking trips and reduce the need for more auto trips in the area EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 162 BACKGROUND + EXISTING CONDITIONS 8.2.a Key Assets in the Corridor Area: 1 Opportunity to build on the momentum of ongoing neighborhood improvements in Shoreline along Highway 99 while creating a mixed -use corridor that is distinctly Edmonds. 2 High -quality transit facilities already in place — Community Transit, Sound Transit, and Swift BRT — providing links to housing, employment and other amenities to the Seattle Metro region. 3 Distinct districts are already emerging along the corridor area — the International District and Health District — that provide core services and amenities for Edmonds' diversifying population. 4 Corridor area is already a major urban center and mixed -used district for Edmonds with retail uses adjacent to apartments and single- family neighborhoods. 50 The business and developer community and residents alike are ready to see positive changes in the area and are excited for the opportunity to create a pedestrian -friendly, transit -oriented environment. UNIQUE DISTRICTS The area has three distinct subdistricts with major local and regional destinations along the corridor. HEALTH CARE DISTRICT Located approximately between SW 208th St. to SW 220th St., the Health Care District is home to variety of health care facilities and offices, most notably the Swedish Hospital Edmonds Campus. The Edmonds campus includes 34 facilities and services, 217 beds, over 450 physicians and specialists and more than 1,400 staff members. The hospital provides medical and surgical services including Level IV Trauma emergency medicine, diagnostic, treatment and support services. There are many other medical clinics and offices across Highway 99 in Lynnwood as well as schools and higher education such as Edmonds Woodway High School, Mountlake Terrace High School, and Edmonds Community College, within approximately 1.5 miles from the Health Care District core on Highway 99. The Health Care District is not only a provider of vital health services for the region, but also a growing incubator for medical research, partnerships, health and wellness advocacy, and education opportunities. Edmonds Health Care District 13 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 163 8.2.a BACKGROUND + EXISTING CON FIGURE 2: DISTINCT DISTRICTS AND MAJOR DESTINATION WITHIN CORRIDOR AREA - ■� _ lr., i' ■ r i r ■,,■ ! =+n -ig i.- �ly220th St SWNo �•r110 212th St SW L .�� C'i �! f - al VAT ■ J -■-'�' .. ♦-�-- Edmonds { ..� 7 --•- ■''f '• -,+ i'�_- .ry :-i ;.,,=�- Woodway Aldercrest Health N ' �'- ■.._•1 �' "-"'r� ' •"--" "'-- High School &Rehab Center Health --1 �I LL .-+-I -+---'■ k ; Swedish District --�--1 r , �- / a�i -=- : ; `• _' f .I ��' ; >!k ■■ Hospital E NIZ �_ ,r■*.� — ,■■ r i .: r_.r! ,... r+__ . i L _I.J > UW Medicine ,� _. -, a �, :: : .. r- - ■� J Jh.■- -- -1 • - . i �l�egional Heart4. 1 • ■ ! L . 7 ■.^- ■ •r ■: i •■r 1 r ■ i T +. i ■1� r 1 �.r (�0 Center I� ■,..■l•.•. S` ■ .� 1 t•■ - ,.a a ■ r ■r ■_ �. 220th St SW Ll � i ■ ' 1 i : - 1 . - 1 . - ' ' - • --�_- t1Tr do ' -■•r wA4t St SW 4.". 7 Plum P azaee i International r _J _ ri.' j ' '" t' • ' •r r ■i ' 1 i- - trict . '■ •rl r d000 1 - i : i i i �_�■' ■r■..■ : ■ Dis '::' ,■ !r Public 99 Rauch �� _J.r. ♦'., ;' Q Mar t --` .■r.. :..1 „ ' ■ 143.� 1e : 1 7 _Storage L _ ■ . ■ 1 1 _ .a '■1 L 1J 1 .SEEN ook No Ob 1����--7 ^- , _ -� ,�. ■. B ft arket , gan J ■�� +:1-.1■w •aa� '- -i. ,• ~ y-��i 228th St SW i,r.• a +♦�a ' �•. "r c 230th St SW _ * �� �� x i ' t -+. �- N ,Now .._,,,,, , • - , 232nd St SW16 AL '----♦-�.1,-Fr_ 234th St SW a! + f- r`L 236th St SW •1 1 ��, , Aurora 1 1! • — -- = Lrketplace Gateway Lake 238th St SW Ballinger Aft District ,. 1 • 'F ! •r ~ 240th St SW T I j i i - ��+ ��ae 1 r'`■ 1 �- 1 ■.. lr. ■rrng,r ■� !' -1 �j! Major IN A r,' B in to - f '" ``"' Transportation 242nd St SW Coa act y 0 Gateway do 244th St SW v EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 164 BACKGROUND + EXISTING CONDITIONS 8.2.a INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT Located approximately between SW 224th St and SW 238th St, the International District is a major cluster of Asian -owned businesses, particularly Korean -American businesses, with diverse restaurants, grocers, and shops. The International District is already a regional destination for culture, food, and entertainment — but there is an opportunity to strengthen the identity of this district and help it thrive in the long term. The SR 99 International District Enhancement Project was a key recommendation identified in the 2004 Enhancement Study and the 2006 Market Analysis to build on the growing cluster of international businesses, largely anchored by the Ranch 99 Market, Boo Han Plaza, and other specialty plazas. In 2006, the City began efforts through federal grant funds to strengthen the International District identity by improving the area's visual identity and aesthetics, and implement pedestrian -oriented improvements with new gateway elements including a new pedestrian level lighting, new district identification signage on custom light poles, resurfacing of the island on 76th Avenue and a solar lit sculptural piece on the island as part of the gateway. A major transportation gateway on 228th and a Highway 99 is planned to create safe and easy access across the highway and connect to the IL recently completed bicycle lane that flows to Ca the future regional trail (Interurban Trail) and to the Mountlake Terrace Transit Center. These > transportation improvements will provide a critical a� connection for both local residents and regional transit riders to the International District. The a� E gateway design potential here will also help solidify the identity of the district. Q GATEWAY DISTRICT The Gateway District, located approximately between SW 234th and the 104 Interchange north of SW 205th St, is the first introduction to Edmonds on Highway 99. This area was identified in the Enhancement Study as "Residential Area Retail Center" and "Hotels Area Improvement". However, the Edmonds community expressed a strong desire for a "gateway' and distinct transition point in and out of Edmonds during a community workshop. A recognizable marker identifying the entry point to the city will help unify Edmonds as a place with rich history, arts, culture, food, and sense of place. International businesses along Highway 99. Left: Boo Han Plaza; right: Ranch 99 Market 15 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 165 8.2.a BACKGROUND + EXISTING CON EXISTING LAND USE PATTERNS The subarea today contains a mix of land uses including commercial, residential, industrial, public, and educational uses. Commercial uses make up the largest amount of square footage, which includes office, retail, services, and motels. Multi- family residential uses make up the second largest amount, most which are apartments but also townhomes or duplexes. Much of the surrounding areas to the east and west of the study area are developed as single family residential, and the residential uses on the edges of the study area help to provide transitions to these areas. There are vacant parcels located throughout the study area with a concentration in the south-central part of the study area. Existing development is generally low -intensity, with one- or two-story buildings and large surface parking areas. There are several plaza -type developments with larger scale grocers and marketplaces such as 99 Ranch Market, Boo Han Market, Aurora Marketplace, and Burlington Coat Factory. The Swedish Edmonds Campus is within a cluster of commercial uses including medical offices and clinics and some higher -intensity and higher -scale buildings. TABLE 2: DISTRIBUTION OF LAND USES WITHIN STUDY AREA ZONING ASSESSMENT The study area has many zoning designations applied within it, and often in odd configurations. The haphazard pattern reflects both zones inherited from the County when the area was annexed and a variety of zone changes in specific places over the past several decades. The Comprehensive Plan designates nearly all of the study area with a single Highway 99 Corridor designation. As of 2016, there are eight zoning designations CG and CG2: General Commercial NB: Neighborhood Business BC: Community Business MU: Medical Use RM-1.5: Mulifamily RM-2.4: Mulifamily RS-8: Single Family Residential Most the study area is zoned either General Commercial (CG or CG2) with Multifamily (RM-1.5) adjacent to the corridor. 65% of the study area is within CG and CG2 and 8% is within RM-1.5. The CG zone allows buildings up to 60 feet tall and the CG2 zone allows buildings up to 75 feet tall. Zoning for Commercial 5,729,924 50% Multi -Family Residential 3,070,474 27% Industrial 1,123,311 10% Single Family Residential 643,907 6% Public & Educational 808,607 7% TOTAL 11,376,223 100% EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 166 M u. BC M. C 8.2.a BACKGROUND + EXISTING CON the areas surrounding the study area is established by the cities of Edmonds, Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, Shoreline and Snohomish County. In general, areas to the south, west and northeast are zoned for a mix of commercial and residential uses; areas to the east, southeast and southwest are zoned primarily for single family residential uses; and areas to the north and northwest are zoned for a mix of residential and public uses. Specific zoning designations in the area surrounding the study area are shown in Table 3. TABLE 3: ZONING DESIGNATIONS IN THE STUDY AREA CG2 - General Commercial 2 32% CG - General Commercial 33% BN - Neighborhood Business 2% BC - Community Business 4% RS-8 - Single Family, 8,000 sq. ft. 2% RM-3 - Multi Family, 3,000 sq. ft. 1 % RM-2.4 - Multi Family, 2,400 sq. ft. 12% RM-1.5 - Multi Family, 1,500 sq. ft. 8% MU - Medical Use 5% EXISTING HOUSING For the greater metropolitan region in which Edmonds is located, housing supply has not been not keeping up with demand. Housing needs — along with housing costs —have been rising rapidly. In fact, data was recently obtained through the Alliance for Housing Affordability about the availability of affordable housing along Highway 99 in the Edmonds area. Research conducted in November 2016 showed that the number of rental units affordable to households below 80% of the area median income was very limited and little housing at all was available at rents affordable to households below 50% of the area median income The same can be said for those wanting to own a home. (Note: "Affordable" rent for this purpose is considered to be a rental amount that does not exceed 30% of the household income.) FIGURE 4: HOME SALE AFFORDABILITY GAP IN THE CITY OF EDMONDS 100% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% EXTREMELY VERY LOW LOW MODERATE MIDDLE LOW Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2008-2012 TABLE 4: DISTRIBUTION OF RENT AFFORDABILITY BY SIZE IN THE CITY OF EDMONDS Extremely Low RIF No No No No No Very Low Limited Limited Limited Limited No Low Yes Yes Yes Limited No Moderate Yes Yes Yes Yes Limited Middle Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Source: Dupre and Scott, 2073 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 168 BACKGROUND + EXISTING CONDITIONS 8.2.a EXISTING TRANSPORTATION REGIONAL ACCESS SR-99 is the highest -traffic carrying arterial in Edmonds and run north to Everett, and south through Shoreline to Seattle and the Tacoma metropolitan area. The subarea can be accessed through SR-104 which runs east -west through the southern -most border of the subarea between the Edmonds -Kingston Ferry dock in Downtown Edmonds to 1-5 east of Highway 99. 1-5 runs almost parallel to the east of Highway 99 providing regional access from surrounding cities to the north and south. FIGURE 5: REGIONAL CONTEXT I Lynnwood 4-- - i ` --- ---J ' Mountlake �I Terrace _ r1 L 3 � Shoreline t F- v I I I I � �elkwue Seattle STREET NETWORK Highway 99 serves as a principal arterial in Edmonds providing north -south mobility and IL Ca access to businesses and services along the corridor. Highway 99's diagonal orientation through a mostly gridded street pattern creates difficult and low visibility turns onto and from the highway for drivers and poses a major safety risk for bicyclists and pedestrians. The minor arterials in the subarea E are on 238th Street, 228th Street, 220th Street, and 212th Street providing through traffic east -west. Q Many local streets are broken and do not have complete connections to other local streets and arterials, which is typical of a more suburban street N network. A short portion of the right-of-way between 228th and 234th Street is located in Esperance, an a unincorporated township of Snohomish County. M TRANSIT SERVICE The subarea currently has a very robust transit network with enhancement and service frequency increases planned in the future. The subarea is served by Community Transit, Sound Transit, and Swift BRT lines. There are two Community Transit Swift Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) stops along the corridor and many local bus stops with several transit connections between transit providers. Edmonds sits at the intersection of two major transit providers. The Community Transit Swift BRT system serves Edmonds and areas north, while the King County Metro BRT system serves areas south of Edmonds. A transfer station is located just over the border in Shoreline adjacent to the large Costco and Home Depot shopping center. Transfers between transit providers can cause significant delay in travel times if arrival and departure times are not coordinated tightly. King County Metro and Community Transit are coordinating times to ensure efficient transfer times, but the City will continue to monitor this to ensure Edmonds has quick and efficient access to Seattle and other points south. 19 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 169 8.2.a BACKGROUND + EXISTING CON FIGURE 6: CURRENTTRANSIT SERVICE ti ter FIGURE 8: CURRENT TRANSIT FREQUENCY �T-A�� v� T---- ' t� Bus Trips on Weekdays 0-20 t- 21-40 • 41-60 61-80 81-100 • 100+ Highway 99 Subarea 0 City Boundaries \ FIGURE 7: EXISTING SIDEWALKS FIGURE 9: EXISTING BIKE AND TRAIL INFRASTRUCTURE L. _; Highway 99 Subarea i • _ 0 City Boundaries EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 170 BACKGROUND + EXISTING CONDITIONS 8.2.a PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES Most area roads have sidewalks, but certain key streets that provide access to and across HWY 99 currently lack sidewalks. Roads that form the border of Edmonds and other jurisdictions, such as 228th west of HWY 99, pose unique problems for improvement and cost sharing. Improvements to substandard streets have been explored and recommendations have been identified in this plan's project list. Bicycle facilities are limited in the study area, particularly protected bicycle lanes. The proximity to the Interurban Trail, a major regional trail connecting Edmonds to communities north and south, is east of HWY 99 and has limited access from the center of Edmonds to the west. This process examined improved and new bicycle connections through the study area and included several in the recommended project list. PLANNED TRANSIT SERVICE A new commuter rail station is planned for nearby Mountlake Terrace. 228th will connect Edmonds and the HWY 99 study area to this new regional transit option. The extension of the Link light rail is scheduled for completion in 2023. This plan has specific recommendations for how to improve linkages and wayfinding between the future rail station and the HWY 99 corridor. PLANNED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS The City of Edmonds identifies planned transportation improvements surrounding the Highway 99 subarea in their 2015 Comprehensive Plan and in studies conducted for specific operational and safety conditions within the corridor. The 2015 Comprehensive Plan develops a balanced multimodal transportation system to serve the anticipated growth throughout the City and region. Within the Edmonds Highway 99 subarea the planned transportation improvements emphasize access to Highway 99 and connections to the downtown, surrounding residential IL neighborhoods and major transportation nodes. Ca The improvements fall into several general areas including: > Traffic safety and access management improvements: This area of improvement involves installation of vehicular channelization and median devices between intersections to separate traffic flows and restrict turns to and from driveways. These devices are intended to reduce crashes by eliminating mid -block vehicular conflicts caused by multiple driveways, minor uncontrolled intersections, and the continuous two-way left turn lane comprising the majority of Highway 99. A recent example of the implementation of access management is the segment of Highway 99 between 224th Street SW and 228th Street SW where the center median of Highway is a combination of Type-C curbing ("c-curb") and a raised concrete barrier median. This installation prohibits all movements that would normally cross the centerline and provides bi-directionality by allowing u-turns at the signalized intersections at either end of the segment. Type-C curbing and raised concrete barrier median at intersection of 76th Avenue and Highway 99 between 224th Street and 228th Street 21 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 171 8.2.a BACKGROUND + EXISTING CON Expansion of the citywide bicycle network: The City's 2015 Comprehensive Transportation Plan includes proposed bicycle facilities that expand the coverage of the existing bikeway system and connect various parts of the City. Within the plan area the proposed bikeway network emphasizes new east -west crossings of Highway 99 with connections to the Interurban Trail as well as north -south facilities paralleling Highway 99. The proposed bikeway network in the plan area is a combination of bicycle lanes (exclusively marked lanes for bikes) and designated bicycle routes where bicyclists and motorists share travel lanes Bike facilities are frequently implemented in stages as part of other roadway improvement projects. For example, bike lanes were added to 220th Street SW between 84th Avenue W and 76th Avenue W as part of a recent pavement overlay improvement of 220th Street SW. In the next stage of bikeway implementation, bike lanes will be added to 76th Avenue W from 220th Street SW to Olympic View Drive. Example of exclusively marked bike lane Example of bicycle route shared with bicyclists and motorists Intersection improvements for vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle safety: This area of improvements focuses on closing gaps in the IL pedestrian system by constructing sidewalks Ca U; but also includes reconstructing intersection approaches on streets intersecting Highway 99 to delineate traffic lanes, improve traffic signal phasing, and add bike lanes —all of which are intended to improve safety and also a� E improve multimodal circulation for accessing and crossing Highway 99. These planned Q improvements are considered "Complete Streets" a projects since they emphasize improving conditions for all users. A recent example of this type of improvement was the extension of 228th Street SW from Highway 99 to 76th Avenue W—a short, but strategic, complete street segment that improves pedestrian and bicycle circulation, access to transit, and removes a substantial obstacle to a crucial complete street corridor-228th Street SW/Lakeview Drive —connecting the plan area to Sound Transit's Mountlake Terrace transit terminal and future light rail station. Recently complete intersection improvements on 228th and Highway 99 to 76th Ave. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 172 BACKGROUND + EXISTING CONDITIONS 8.2.a Priority Transit Corridors: Improvements that focus on improving the mobility of transit on key transit corridors, improving pedestrian and bicycle access to transit stops, and enhancing transit stop environments with pedestrian amenities to encourage ridership. Priority Transit Corridors include Highway 99, 220th Street SW, 228th Street SW, and 238th Street SW each of which are currently important routes for Community Transit's local and Swift Rapid routes. The types of improvements in this category such as Transit Signal Priority, improved bus service and route interconnection, accessibility, and improved stops and stations, are cooperative projects between multiple agencies. FIGURE 10: PRIORITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR r I <I 220TH ST _ 1� m 228TH ST L I I-5 r'J I I 236TH ST. J 238TH ST r — 1 1 p 4 I L- EXISTING ECONOMIC CONDITIONS & MARKET TRENDS In February 2016, an assessment of the development market and round of developer interviews was conducted. The results of the assessment and the interviews is summarized with the following five points. Further discussion of each is below. 1. Edmonds is a good location for development, but has its challenges. 2. Residential uses will likely be the primary driver of development along the corridor. 3. Parking is an important factor in development form and feasibility. 4. The impact of right-of-way improvements on development was mixed. 5. Development incentives and regulatory process can support (or hinder) redevelopment. 1. EDMONDS IS A GOOD LOCATION FOR DEVELOPMENT, BUT IT HAS CHALLENGES Edmonds has a positive impression. It's viewed as a desirable community that people want to live and as a place they would consider building. Highway 99 in Edmonds does have some specific challenges, specifically crime, vehicle access, and the lack of large developable sites. High parking requirements may impede new development 23 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 173 8.2.a BACKGROUND + EXISTING CON 2. RESIDENTIAL USES WILL LIKELY BE THE PRIMARY DRIVER OF DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE CORRIDOR Apartment projects will likely be the main driver of development along the corridor. Most developers are looking to do sizable projects of 150 units or more, which requires larger sites. Mixed use development is fairly likely although the retail portion may be a drag on the project financially initially. Office development is not likely in the near - term, and demand for medical office use is not clear. Mixed -use, residential development 3. PARKING IS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN DEVELOPMENT FORM AND FEASIBILITY Accommodating parking is an important factor in redevelopment, particularly in a suburban and auto -oriented environment transitioning to being more dense and walkable. Future projects along the corridor will likely need structured or underground parking to maximize the development potential of a site. The cost of different parking types and site size and characteristics are important variables for parking configuration (surface/tuck-under/ underground). The number of spots per unit desired will vary depending on the project, but high minimum requirements and/or inflexible standards can be a significant barrier to new development. 4. THE IMPACT OF RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT WAS MIXED The City of Shoreline has made significant improvements along Highway 99. One interviewee saw the improvements as critical to development. Several interviewees viewed them as nice to have, but not critical. Access, particularly for retail use, is viewed as important and something to be maintained if any improvements are made to Highway 99 in Edmonds. Right-of-way improvements, like improved sidewalks, will be a critical part of new development 5. DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES AND REGULATORY PROCESS CAN SUPPORT (OR HINDER) REDEVELOPMENT The multifamily tax exemption (MFTE) program has been used by a number of developers in communities around the region, and is considered an effective incentive. Permitting and timeliness of the permit process is also considered important for facilitating development. The permitting process is an important aspect of development. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 174 m c �a a oa N al d N N C N C N a CL m 0 N c cv IL 0 m L co 4- 0 C 0 rt+ 0 a v O co O ti T 0 N d I 0 C t0 C :a L 0 C CL R L T cd C t ci f+ a a 8.2.a COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT The Subarea Plan is representative of input gathered from the overall community as well as key stakeholders, and other interested parties throughout the planning process. The public involvement process involved stakeholder interviews, a Technical Advisory Committee, a community visioning workshop, polling, and two open houses as well as online outreach and surveys. The community's participation during the planning process helped shaped the overarching vision and community values for the Highway 99 area which ultimately guides the recommended strategies in the Plan. The process also helped build public support around the near and long-term approach towards growth and prosperity for the Highway 99 area. Workshop participants during a design exercise about where they prefer to see different types of improvements in the study area. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 176 COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT 8.2.a Members of the Technical Advisory Committee City of Edmonds Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer Community Transit Eric Goodman, Transportation Service Planner Carol Thompson, Director of IT Operations Sound Transit Patrice Hardy, Government Relations Manager Kathy Leotta, Senior Transportation Planner Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Annie Johnson, Transportation Planner Mike Swires, Traffic Engineer Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) Ben Bakkenta, Growth Management Planning Program Manager Outreach Activity Timeline » CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING T» MEETING WITH PROPERTY OWNERS TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC) The committee met 3 times during the planning process. This group consists of representatives from several transit agencies including the Washington State's Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Community Transit, Sound Transit. The TAC also included a representative from the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) and a transportation engineer from the City of Edmonds. In addition, representatives from Snohomish County and the Cities of Shoreline, Mountlake Terrace, and Lynnwood also participated in TAC meetings. KEY STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS Six focus -group style meetings were conducted, including a round of developer interviews, a meeting with property owners, non-profit organizations, and a representative from the Swedish Edmonds Campus. COMMUNITY VISIONING WORKSHOP Over 50 people participated in the visioning workshop in March 2016, which involved a fun and interactive map -based design workshop and live polling questions using keypads that display results from all participants after each question. » COMMUNITY WORKSHOP >> MAPPING EXERCISE >> LIVE POLLING » ONLINE SURVEY » TAC MEETING » OPEN HOUSE - SCENARIOS T>> ONLINE COMMENTING PERIOD » TAC MEETING 27 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 177 8.2.a COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGA Both activities asked participants to envision and share their ideas about what kinds of changes they would like to see in the future, such as commercial, housing, or mixed use development, new pedestrian crossing, safety improvements, new traffic signals, traffic calming measures, wider sidewalks and others. PUBLIC OPEN HOUSES Two public open houses were held in May and November 2016 and served as an opportunity to learn about the project, hear from elected leaders, and converse with the project team and share their thoughts on the project. The May open house revealed near and long-term development and transportation scenarios for the study area, and the proposed scope of the Planned Action EIS. The November open house unveiled the draft recommended implementation strategies and before and after visualizations of what life could be like in the Highway 99 area. ONLINE SURVEYAND GENERAL COMMENTS The polling questions presented at the visioning workshop were also available in a survey format on the project website. The survey collected 167 responses and asked participants to share their top » OPEN HOUSE - RECOMMENDATIONS » ONLINE COMMENTING PERIOD >> TAC MEETING priority of housing, business, and infrastructure. See pages 27-28 for combined results from live polling and survey responses. The public also had IL opportunities throughout the planning process Ca to share general comments about the near and long-term land use and transportation scenarios, a the scope of the Planned Action EIS, and key elements of the implementation strategies and recommendations for the subarea. E WEB OUTREACH AND SOCIAL MEDIA A dedicated project website was created to inform the public about the project and regularly updated with most recent project developments and event announcements throughout the planning process. The website provided an opportunity for those unable to attend the workshop or open houses to provide input and learn about the overall planning process, see results of workshops and surveys, and explore alternative scenarios and implementation strategies. Event announcements were also posted on the City of Edmonds Facebook page and on the City's official website including mailed announcements to over 2,100 addresses in the area. » PUBLIC HEARING AND PLANNING TBOARD PRESENTATION OF DRAFT PLAN 2017 » CITY COUNCIL REVIEW, RECOMMENDATION AND ADOPTION EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 178 8.2.a COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT d C C d 05 ,n WE ASKED EDMONDS... i3l d HOUSING DEVELOPMENT Widespread desire for housing, particularly in the south end. TRAFFIC CALMING I I I I I rl % I l I ENHANCED TRANSIT esire for traffic alming on high peed southern rea on HWY 99 104 interchange MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT � I I % I J I � I " I �� I Widespread desire for mixed use, particularly in the south and central end LANDSCAPED MEDIAN - Widespread desire for landscaped median enhancements 29 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 179 8.2.a COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGA PEDESTRIAN CROSSING / I � I I I -I I I r' I I U � I _I I I PEDESTRIAN REFUGE I � I I— I— I I r % I l I _ _ l I I I t I PEDESTRIAN ►A Pedestrian safety is a major concern throughout the corridor WAYFINDING Ft o / SIGNAGE I , I I�o I —ICI I —' I I I , ail • (� I r I— �— — — — — — E,,, xEaF. Ella..E.—I P. 1. —1 PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING I , I I I rl _I I I 1 l � I — — — — — E'„xEaF. E.,..e wEaEMEN, P. Ell-1 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 180 COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT 8.2.a 2%1 % 2% PARK WITHIN SIGHT OF EACH 0 WALK, BIKE OR BUS DESTINATION PARKING ONCE AND WALK OTHER / NOT SURE BETWEEN SHOPS RACE 74%, WHITE 1%, BLACK OR AFRICAN AMERICAN 1%, LATINO OR HISPANIC 5%, ASIAN OR PACIFIC ISLANDER 1%, MULTIRACIAL 3%, OTHER 15%, RATHER NOT SAY AGE 5%, 20-29 17%, 30-39 19%, 40-49 22%, 50-59 26%, 60-69 11%,70+ DRIVE MYSELF BIKE BUS OTHER WALK GENDER 51%, FEMALE 40%, MALE 1%, OTHER 9%, RATHER NOT SAY d C C cC a 06 N al d 31 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 181 COMMUNITY + STAKEHOLDER ENGA 8.2.a *vni fth6l \ 8% 8% / BUSINESS CATALYST DEVELOPMENT ON MAJOR SITES STOREFRONT IMPROVEMENTS BRING NEW BUSINESS AND JOBS TO THE AREA 21% d C C cC a 06 N al d HOUSING ADD MORE HOUSING ADD MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS BEAUTIFICATION, BLIGHT REMOVAL, CODEENFORCEMENT INVEST IN HOMEGROWN ENTREPRENEURS NO CHANGE f SOMETHING ELSE HOMEOWNERS ASSISTANCE FOR REHABILITATION NO CHANGE SOMETHING ELSE ?0 W* � 14% 18% INFRASTRUCTURE ADDRESS PARKING - MANAGEMENTAND SHARE PUBLIC SPACE IMPROVEMENTS AND BEAUTIFICATION 16% BETTER CONNECTIONS FOR BIKES AND PEDESTRIANS NO CHANGE SOMETHING ELSE SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS FOR BIKES OR PEDESTRIANS EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 182 8.2.a m c c a 06 ui a� m a� 0 vi c a� E c aD E Q a a� c O N c d d L Cu 3 N O C O Q O Q O 00 C ti O N d I c C EL O r_ CL m L Cu vJ r E ci r Q E :.i Q Packet Pg. 183 8.2.a CONSTRAINTS + CHALLENGES LAND USE CONSTRAINTS b CHALLENGES One issue the corridor needs to overcome is a public perception as being unsafe, unattractive and undesirable. It is sometimes viewed as a leftover area of the city and is not inspiring. Citizens often pass through the area on their way to somewhere else. There are misperceptions of what the corridor is and what it could eventually become. Highway 99 is a wide auto -oriented regional thoroughfare; this type of road design can be challenging when attempting to create a more walkable and safe area. There are also many land owners in the area and some of the parcels are oddly shaped or have poor access to Highway 99. On top of that, compared with other communities in the region, potentially restrictive land use and parking regulations complicated future opportunities. These challenges can make it more difficult to design and build a viable development project. Key Takeaways: Constraints + Challenges Land Use Public perception of Highway 99 as a "pass - through" area and an unsafe, unattractive, and undesirable area Wide, auto -oriented thoroughfare Oddly -shaped parcels with poor access Restricitve land use and parking regulations Economic Limited retail trade area Lack of diverse housing choice and commercial space Transportation and Infrastructure Commute patterns of resident and outside labor force can cause traffic and safety issues Poor or lack of safe pedestrian crossings, traffic lights, and sidewalks EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 184 CONSTRAINTS + CHALLENGES 8.2.a ECONOMIC CONSTRAINTS & CHALLENGES One challenge for the area is the limited retail trade area due to geographical constraints with Puget Sound to the west and Interstate 5 a short distance to the east. Several distinct major regional retail centers and lifestyle centers in nearby communities also compete with this area. Lack of housing choice can also be challenging. A wider variety of housing options and commercial space is available elsewhere in the region. The lack of housing variety has led to a shortage of affordable housing opportunities as well. The lack of commercial space may allow for retail "leakage," which is the loss of potential local sales activity to areas outside of the corridor and city. TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRAINTS b CHALLENGES A substantial portion of the resident labor force commutes away for work, while large number of workers commute into town for work. This can create traffic and safety issues along the corridor Safe pedestrian crossings are presently inadequate. Many places where pedestrians want to cross the highway have no marked pedestrian crossing. This is particularly occurring in the southern section of the corridor. There are also long segments without any street crossings or traffic lights. For example, the central section of the corridor requires a 10-minute walk to find a safely marked crossing. Finally, sidewalks are limited along the stretch on the corridor and are not present everywhere. 35 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 185 i r 7 219TH u o / x 1 21 ^m 213TH / 1 ■ _ r 215TH / 21sTH m 1 21' 1 i �ti 1 n MND 223 r 1 .o 224TH F i 1' � 22sTH 226T H 3 m 1 S 1 JF • 1 � � TIH 1 ■1 �z]H 229TH / 1 r � 2MTH ■ 1 HOLLY r — — r 1 1 n WIAPLE 71 W4TH N &M,DHA f � 1 236 r - — 238TFi yHighway9• Ir n 3g0 City Boundaries High:1 1 w 241 r t L 242N o m m_. * 243RD / 1 . IN n LAKE SALLINGER WAY 8.2.a m c c a 06 ui a� m a� 0 vi c a� E c aD E Q a a� c O N c d d L Cu 3 N O C O Q O Q O 00 C ti O N d I c C EL O r_ CL m L Cu vJ r E ci r Q E :.i Q Packet Pg. 187 8.2.a OPPORTUNITIES LAND USE OPPORTUNITIES Because of a long history of auto - oriented design along the Highway 99 corridor there are many opportunities for major land use changes. Three specific locations on the corridor already have reasonably good urban form and include the area east of Highway 99 between 238th and 240th, the area east of Highway 99 at 228th and the area just to the north of the Swedish Medical Center along 212th. These three areas are considered to have good urban form because they currently have well -marked crossings, are near frequent transit service, have city block and lot sizes that are conducive to walking, and have a large amount of employment activity. This area has a mix of uses, including retail, office, medical, and residential. It is an urban center of Edmonds and part of a larger regional hub. Key Takeaways: Opportunities Land Use Good urban form and a mix of uses already exist on the corridor Many opportunities exist for reinvestment, redevelopment, and increased density Transit -oriented development, including affordable housing, can complement the area's transit system Economic Strong health services sector and International District Existing and planned transit connections creates opportunities for transit -oriented development and a stronger business and employee base Retail uses, including auto sales, that provide tax revenue for public services Transportation and Infrastructure Providing a complete transportation system with efficient and cost-effective accessibilty and mobility Providing safe and convenient access all throughout the subarea especially for pedestrians EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 Su Packet Pg. 188 OPPORTUNITIES 8.2.a Although same areas have good urban form, there are also opportunities for better integrated land uses along the corridor. Many parcels are less than 25% covered with buildings, presenting an opportunity for redevelopment and increased density in the area. In addition, much of the few new buildings or historic buildings along the corridor are expected to remain the same for the foreseeable future. Furthermore, there are many IL low -to -moderate value buildings and just a few Ca new, higher value buildings in the area. This means that there is great potential for reinvestment and > buildings are between 25 and 60 years old and are redevelopment along the corridor. nearing the end of their functional lifespan. Just a FIGURE 12: URBAN FORM WITHIN STUDY AREA 39 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 189 8.2.a OPPORT ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES The service sector will continue to dominate the Edmonds employm ent base, with continued growth expected, especially in the health care sector. The burgeoning health services sector, anchored by Swedish -Edmonds Hospital is a perfect example. The Highway 99 corridor near the medical services node around the hospital offers opportunities for additional hospitality facilities. Other opportunities include leveraging the "International District" to provide culturally -specific goods and services. The corridor already has a strong international business community, offering diverse array of goods and services. A substantial number of jobs in Edmonds are occupied by residents of other outside communities. Additional housing variety in the area with a greater distribution along the affordability spectrum could help capture the latent housing demand of many Edmonds workers. FIGURE 13: LAND VALUE PER SQUARE FEET $0 - $20.00 $20.01- $40.00 $40.01- $60.00 $60.01- $80.00 - $80.01 - $100.00 $100 + , _ Highway 99 Subarea _ F-1 City Boundaries Existing and planned intermodal transit connections can leverage transit -oriented development. Also, additional population density in business districts can add market demand for goods and services and employee base for new and growing businesses. New business and job opportunities are largely brought to the corridor through new development and redevelopment. Appropriately sited and sized development and redevelopment projects will Increase: Property tax receipts through the new construction provision that captures new construction value -based property tax for the first year a project is brought on line and adds that value to the city's future property tax baseline. Sales tax revenue from construction materials and activity. Sales tax revenue from both personal and business spending accruing from new residents, workers and businesses within newly developed buildings. Utility tax revenue from a greater number of utility customers. FIGURE 14: FLOOR AREA RATIO Nvl k E_ 0.25-0.50 0.50 - 0.75 \a - 1.0 + _, Highway 99 Subarea City Boundaries EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 190 OPPORTUNITIES 8.2.a TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE OPPORTUNITIES The HWY 99 corridor is unique in that it is served by regional Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), local public transportation, and has access to commuter and express transit services to Seattle from the Mountlake Terrace 1-5 Station which will offer light rail transit service with the Lynwood Link Extension planned to open in the year 2023. The level of transit coverage within the Plan Area supports transit -oriented -development and attracts households with zero to low automobile ownership —a segment of the population that choose to reside near transit because they don't drive or don't want to encumber themselves with the cost of vehicle ownership. One of the characteristics of HWY 99 that helps BRT achieve its desirable rapidness —long distances between signal controlled intersections —is also one of the greatest impediments to pedestrian circulation. Despite the apparent conflict in functionality, the HWY 99 corridor presents opportunities to maintain the short travel times needed for an effective Swift rapid transit system while providing additional safe pedestrian crossings of HWY 99 and improving the overall multimodal connectivity of the Plan Area. Opportunities for maintaining a rapid transit system include: » Implementing a Transit Signal Priority system that allow BRT vehicles to trigger a change in traffic signal phasing in favor of the buses approaching a signalized intersection. » Strongly enforcing the corridor's BAT lanes and improving their effectiveness through better access management and their use as queue jumping lanes. Opportunities for improving pedestrian safety, circulation options, and access to transit include: » Transforming the approaches of streets intersecting HWY 99 into "Complete Streets" that improve the environment for all users to access and cross the corridor. Complete Street improvements might trade-off automobile travel lanes to create space for sidewalks and bike lanes, or might add a vehicular turning lane allowing for protected signal movements that eliminate conflicts with crossing pedestrians. » Strategic placement of new traffic signals and pedestrian crossings that break up the longest segments of HWY 99 without safe crosswalks. Reconfigure high-speed corners and ramps to slow traffic and install pedestrian -activated flashing beacons at uncontrolled crossings. FIGURE 15: BEFORE AND AFTER ILLUSTRATIONS OF EXAMPLE "COMPLETE STREET" IMPROVEMENTS Source: CityLab, The Atlantic 41 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 191 8.2.a OPPORT Transportation improvements within the Plan Area should take advantage of the opportunities provided by key assets within the Plan Area. The Interurban Trail is a key asset in the corridor. Improving access to the trail with short and strategically located pedestrian and bicycle -only connections from HWY 99 can increase the trail's usefulness for shorter trips as well as longer distance travel. Capitalize on the successful extension of 228th Street to break up large blocks and create more complete street connections to Edmond's designated Priority Transit Corridors to provide better pedestrian access to transit stops and improve overall mobility. Encourage transit use by enhancing transit stops in Priority Transit Corridors with amenities that make stops attractive, comfortable, and safe for waiting passengers. The Interurban Trail EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 192 8.2.a m c c a 06 ui a� m a� 0 vi c a� E c aD E Q a a� c O N c d d L Cu 3 N O C O Q O Q O 00 C ti O N d I c C EL O r_ CL m L Cu vJ r E ci r Q E :.i Q Packet Pg. 193 8.2.a ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION SCENARIOS Land use and transportation scenarios are an important part of the exploratory process in planning. Testing a range of policy options, development types and transportation improvements allows for a comparison of the relative strengths and weaknesses of virtual futures. Two separate land use and transportation scenarios were evaluated within the HWY 99 corridor before landing on a final preferred alternative. The scenarios were tested using the open source scenario planning platform Envision Tomorrow. Envision Tomorrow is a suite of planning tools that includes analysis and scenario design applications. The analysis tools allow users to analyze aspects of their current community using commonly accessible GIS data, such as tax assessor parcel data and Census data. The scenario design tools allow users to digitally map alternative future Sample scenario EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 194 8.2.a ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS development scenarios on the landscape, and compare scenario outcomes in real time for a range of measures from public health, fiscal resiliency and environmental sustainability. The location and styles of development that were tested came from public input through the workshop process and the existing conditions analysis of redevelopment potential. The transportation components of the scenarios were a combination of public input from the workshops, and existing projects in previous plans. SCENARIO BUILDING BLOCKS Each of the scenarios was constructed using a range of building types calibrated to the Edmonds market. Within a context such as the HWY 99 study area, a range of buildings could be anticipated. However, existing roadway conditions and regulatory requirements have precluded the TABLE 5: BUILDING TYPE CHARACTERISTICS Parking ratios 0.75 spaces per dwelling unit development of the mixed -use and residential building types desired by the public — predominantly three and four story apartments, and five and six story mixed -use buildings. Within the current context of the area, land developers are unable to achieve rents high enough to make these buildings feasible. However, with investments into roadway improvements and regulatory changes, such as a reduction in parking requirements, the market becomes much more desirable. More pedestrian -oriented road conditions and development make the area more attractive to potential tenants, resulting in higher achievable rents, and therefore greater market feasibility for the type of development under consideration. This relationship between transportation, land use and the development market is well documented in Reid Ewing and Keith Bartholomew's research into Hedonic Price effects of Pedestrian- and Transit - Oriented Development (2011). » 0.75 spaces per dwelling unit No parking required for first 2,000 sq ft. commercial » 2.0 spaces per 1,000 sqft above 2,000 No parking required for first 2,000 sq ft. » 2.0 spaces per 1,000 sqft above 2,000 » 0.75 spaces per dwelling unit No parking required for first 2,000 sq ft. commercial » 2.0 spaces per 1,000 sqft above 2,000 commercial Housing density 51.2 82.6 49.02 (dwelling units per acre) Employment density - 33.6 208.5 208.98 (jobs per acre) Average dwelling unit 850 759 - 759 size in square feet » $1,669 / unit » $22 / sqft retail Average rent $1,700 / unit $1,669 / unit » $22 / sqft retail » $26 / sqft office » $26 / sqft office Achievable land cost $41-$49 $80-$94 $36-$43 $70-$79 per square foot 45 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 195 8.2.a ALTERNATIVE SC Given the assumption that these investments and regulatory changes would take place, four primary building types came forward as the most likely to occur in the HWY 99 study area: three- story apartments, six -story mixed -use residential or office, six -story mixed -use office, and ten -story mixed -use office and residential in which the mixed - use buildings would include ground floor retail and service uses with either residential or office on the upper floors. These building types were used to construct the HWY 99 scenarios, and Table 5 summarizes the building characteristics of the four building types. SCENARIO ALTERNATIVES The power of scenario analysis lies in the ability to test out and compare different potential futures. The alternatives considered in the analysis include No Action (Alternative 1) and the Preferred Alternative (Alternative 2). SCENARIO ALTERNATIVE 1: NO ACTION Under Alternative 1, future growth would continue based on existing development regulations and past development trends. Operating under the assumption of existing roadway conditions and regulatory requirements, the development of higher intensity mixed -use and residential buildings proved unfeasible, resulting in the lowest potential for new housing and population growth in the corridor. Accordingly, commercial development would continue to be the primary use along the corridor. SCENARIO ALTERNATIVE 2: PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Public feedback expressed a desire for a dual emphasis of both housing and employment, resulting in an area characterized by mixed - use development with an increase in residential development, greater intensity of development, and street -frontage and pedestrian amenities. Higher building intensity was focused in the high-rise Three-story apartment building type Six story mixed -use building type with ground floor retail and residential above Ten -story mixed -use building type with ground floor office and residential above node surrounding the Swedish Edmonds Campus, bringing a broader range of uses to the district, and the highest growth potential. The Preferred Alternative assumes mixed use growth that is more balanced between residential, commercial, and office uses, an area -wide rezone, amendments to development regulations, and enhanced transportation improvements. Transportation improvements to the Highway 99 corridor and adjacent local streets would include measure to maintain level of service standards, increase east/west connectivity, provide greater bicycle and pedestrian mobility, and improve access to transit. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 196 ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS 8.2.a TABLE 6: EXISTING AND PLANNED ACTIVITY UNITS Existing 352.55 9669 27.4 5,872 16.65 3,797 10.77 1,579 4.47 Conditions Alternative 1 352.55 13,226 27.5 7,112 20.17 6,114 17.34 2,803 7.95 (No Action) Alternative 2 (Preferred 352.55 15,999 45.4 9,189 26.1 6,810 19.3 4,904 13.9 Alternative) FIGURE 16: ALTERNATIVE 1(NO ACTION) 2i2th St SW QI / 220th St SW I L r is 224th St SW _ IF —J I I �J 228th St SW L' rJl 230th St SW / I Alternative 1. Development Types 232nd sr w 411 Mixed Use Office 234th sS I 99 ref 3 _ 4/1 Mixed Use Residential 3Story Apartment 4 236th St S'� J 1 236th St SW i ; Balling ; 240th St SW I 242nd St SW 244tn St sw FIGURE 17: PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE (MIXED USE) �228 st swrr'� °!Ar. �1�1 L,11 2MtnsPsw. �? I ■ a�® I I I 220th 6t 6W 99 224th St SW — j �•FF+�" r 228th St SW L JI 230th St sw A Preferred Alternative: A I Development Types 232nd St SW , r 9/1 Mixed Use Tower 5/1 Mixed Use Residential 234th 5[ SW 99 35tory Apartment 236th St SW Lake 238th St SW i I,�J 5��llin9er 240th St SW r 242nd St SW <� ILt 244th St SW L w`.� �.f-- L•'�1, 47 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 197 8.2.a ALTERNATIVE SC DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY ANALYSIS As part of the subarea planning process, a maximum development capacity number was estimated by Fregonese Associates using the Envision Tomorrow model. In general, existing development does not fully utilize the development capacity available under current zoning, as much of the existing development in the study area is low -intensity and low -scale, with the medical uses surrounding the Swedish Edmonds Campus being the exception. Because current zoning in the study area allows for a mix of uses, maximum development capacity was estimated for two alternatives. Under the first alternative, future growth would continue based on existing development regulations and past development trends. Alternative 2, which is the preferred alternative, assumes future mixed TABLE 7: DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY ANALYSIS Maximum Development Capacity Existing Development 2035 GROWTH TARGETS (NEW JOBS & HOUSING) Alternative 1 (No Action) Preferred Alternative (Mixed Use, High - Rise Node) 2035 TOTAL DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATE Alternative 1 (No Action) Preferred Alternative (Mixed Use, High - Rise Node) use growth with a mix of residential, commercial, and office development, an area -wide rezone, amendments to development regulations, and transportation improvements. Table 7 shows the maximum development capacity numbers in comparison to existing development in the study area and the preferred alternative. Development capacity estimates are not a prediction that a certain amount of development will occur or when it may occur, but instead a measure of the maximum development that could occur in a given area. As Table 7 shows, estimated development capacity is significantly greater than the sum of existing and new growth planned under the alternatives and indicate sufficient development capacity in the study area to accommodate growth under the alternatives. 18,450 26,028 1,579 ■ 1,224 3,325 r m 4,904 RATIO OF MAX. DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY TO 2035 TOTAL DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATE Alternative 1 (No Action) 3,797 2,317 3,013 6,114 6,810 4.3 Preferred Alternative (Mixed Use, High- 3.8 3.8 Rise Node) 1: Assumes all parcels are developed to the maximum extent allowed under current zoning, with a relatively balanced mix of jobs and housing growth. It is not expected that the study area will completely redevelop to the maximum allowable extent. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 198 8.2.a m c c a 06 ui a� m a� 0 vi c a� E c aD E Q a a� c O N c d d L Cu 3 N O C O Q O Q O 00 C ti O N d I c C EL O r_ CL m L Cu vJ r E ci r Q E :.i Q Packet Pg. 199 8.2.a IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES, POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS + ACTIONS The most important part of a plan are the actions that are taken to achieve the vision identified by the plan. As this plan is very action -oriented and strategic, the implementation strategies focus generally on aligning the City's planning and regulatory structure to support the vision, and to identify those public and private investments that will lead to the vision's realization. The implementation strategies can be generally categorized as: Identification of actions to support public and Specific land use and transportation strategies, actions, policies and investments Specific recommended changes to zoning and development standards Timing and priority actions - organized into short, medium and long term action items Matrix of potential capital improvement projects along with preliminary costing and relevant private investment, including recommendations partner agencies to amend Edmonds land use and transportation policies and regulations for the entire 99 Subarea �-- Artist's rendering of what future development could potentially look like on the northwest corner of Highway 99 and 234th intersection. m c �a FL Ca N al d EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 200 IMPLEMENTATION 8.2.a d C C cC a 06 N al d 51 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 201 SIMPLEME 8.2.a V d C C STRENGTHEN ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY 0. RECOMMENDATION 1.1 Support the unique business clusters within the corridor such as the International District and the Health District which are major centers of employment and a regional draw. RECOMMENDATION 1.3 The City should proactively work to strengthen and continue support for business organizations such as the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce, the Edmonds Community College Small Business Development Center (SBDC) and Business Training Center, Sustainable Edmonds, and other organizations in the county and state. RECOMMENDATION 1.2 Major auto sales facilities are also important to the local economy. Design standards, specifically the pedestrian activity zone, will allow auto sales to continue use of this zone. RECOMMENDATION 1.4 Continue to pursue expanded broadband internet within the corridor to make the location attractive to high-tech business investment. RECOMMENDATION 1.5 Consider unique designs for streetscape improvements in the area, such as unique signage and lighting. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 202 IMPLEMENTATION 8.2.a d C ENCOURAGE SUSTAINABLE BUILDING PRACTICES Ca N i3l d RECOMMENDATION 2.1 Transit- and pedestrian -friendly development, with less reliance on individual automobile -driving, should be promoted through new design standards to increase sustainability. Recently adopted citywide requirements for new development to have greater energy -efficiency and more effective stormwater facilities will also contribute to sustainability. RECOMMENDATION 2.2 In addition, the City should consider requiring electric vehicle charging facilities, especially for new development with residential uses, and bicycle facilities, along with options for car -sharing. RECOMMENDATION 2.3 The use of solar panels and green building practices, even beyond current standards, should be encouraged and incentivized. J 9 L�7'� 11� 53 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 203 SIMPLEME 8.2.a d C MODIFY MAP IN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN a TO IDENTIFY DISTRICTS N d THE ISSUE TODAY: The HWY 99 area has had several plans and studies in the past that have designated unique subdistricts within the HWY 99 area. This process has affirmed two of those subareas and changed one other. The subareas include a Hospital District at the north end, an International district in the center and a Gateway District in the south. The current Comprehensive Plan includes a subdistrict map that designates four focus areas, but does not reflect the community's desire for a southern "gateway' district that defines the entry into Edmonds. 2201h St SW 1 1— — — — — — — 16 .- 212th St SW 1 ♦ s;t� �� 1 1 ♦ �` 1111 Hospital Community/ " 1 ' ./ r F Family Retail Center 220th st sw L 116 224th St SW International District 228th St SW - 230th St SW ♦ , JiP,. , �•:,. ... ♦ ~ , 232ntl 5[ S 1 - ' Residential Area 234th St SW I99 7 _ Retail Center 236th St SW r Ballinger 238th St SW , ' ~ Y ',Hotelsn area _e f , improvement 240tn St 6w 7 �� 1 242nd St SW ♦ ` 1 _ _ o. 0 0.1 0.2 0.4 Mlles 244th St SW 1 �0,—'I 1 i N RECOMMENDATION 3.1 Replace the current Comprehensive Plan maps and text with updated materials that clearly identify the three distinct districts anchored around major transportation gateways and employment clusters, such as the hospital and international businesses. 220th St SW I I .� �►c�7-i;i 1— — — — — — — 1♦ 1 212th St SWJI -4' -_ ' '�1W■.� is-,.1'' _ Health District 220thStSW 1 ti ' 224th St SW 1 International `•"; ; •:; -- ~ District - - ' 228th St SW !. i • �� 230th St SW ♦ ' -•1-�'' 232nd St y= ♦ J - `- 234tn St SW 236th St SW I� , f — ; Gateway .'' 238th St SW ' District 1 •�' 240th St SW 7 i •'�' , 1 Major Transportation 242rd St SW I J 1 Gateway 0 0.1 0.2 0.4 Miles a 244th 1 St SW EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 204 IMPLEMENTATION 8.2.a d C CONSOLIDATE CG AND CG-2 INTO A SINGLE CG ZONE Ca N i3l d THE ISSUE TODAY: The zoning in the planning area is unnecessarily complex and confusing. Most of the area is either zoned CG or CG2. The difference between them is a minor height difference of 15 feet. CG has a height allowance of 60 feet while CG2 has a height allowance of 75 feet. RECOMMENDATION 4.1 Consolidate the existing CG and CG2 into a single CG zone with height limit at 75 feet. This allows for a cost-effective 6 story mixed -use building to be constructed with comfortable floor to ceiling heights. The construction type of 5 wood framed floors over a ground floor, concrete podium (also known as a "5- over-1 building") is efficient and cost effective, and is also within the height capacity of fire truck ladders. SIMPLIFY ZONING DESIGNATIONS AND ALIGN ZONING WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THE ISSUE TODAY: Many of the current zones in the HWY 99 study area are remnants from the zones that were in place when this area of Edmonds was annexed from the County. The patchwork of zones is outdated and, in some cases, not consistent with parcel boundaries, meaning that some lots have more than one zone. RECOMMENDATION 5.1 Instead of having 6 or more zones, it is recommended that the new, consolidated CG zone be applied to most of the study area. Additional recommendations below, as well as a change to other multifamily properties in the subarea when zoning map amendments are being considered, will ensure new buildings transition in scale into the surrounding single family neighborhoods. These changes will better align the zoning with the Comprehensive Plan map. 55 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 205 CURRENT ZONING MAP RECOMMENDED ZONING MAP IMPLEMENTATION 8.2.a d C C MODIFY CURRENT DESIGN STANDARDS Ca The design standard recommendations in this plan are not regulatory changes. Rather, they are proposed modifications to be considered when the design standards are written during the implementation of the plan. Code changes will only occur after the Subarea Plan has been adopted. During the implementation phase of the Plan when the design standards are modified, consideration of special circumstances within the corridor will be made to ensure the standards are feasible. For instance, large parcels that would have multiple buildings if redeveloped and parcels with unique access or transportation challenges may require a modified approach to the design standards. ACCESS AND PARKING WHAT ARE THE CURRENT DESIGN STANDARDS IN CG AND CG2 ZONES? Current standards require that not more than 50 percent of a project's total parking spaces may be located between the building's front facade and the primary street. Parking lots may not be located on corner locations adjacent to public streets. THE ISSUE TODAY: This standard can allow too much parking on street fronts, which impacts pedestrian activity and hinders a vibrant urban street. This standard is attempting to encourage more parking in the rear of buildings, but it is regulating the location of a percentage of the parking rather than the amount of building front should be located towards the road. Depending on the project or lot size, the amount of parking in the front could still be very large with the existing standard. Regulating the percentage of the frontage that needs to be occupied by building instead of parking area is a more appropriate approach. 57 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 207 SIMPLEME 8.2.a RECOMMENDATION 6.1 PEDESTRIAN -ORIENTED DESIGN On a primary frontage, a minimum of 50% of the building facade should be within 20 feet of the property line where the primary frontage exists (at the edge of Pedestrian Activity Zone). RECOMMENDATION 6.3 ALTERNATIVE WALKABLE DESIGN AREA As an alternative to the pedestrian - oriented design, a minimum 50% of the building facade should be within 60 feet of the front property line (at the edge of Pedestrian Activity Zone). This alternative may be allowed if the City has found the site to have unique and significant constraints related to pedestrian acess RECOMMENDATION 6.2 GROUND FLOOR TRANSPARENCY 50% of primary frontage building faqade shall be made of transparent windows and doors. All other street -facing facades within 30 feet of a public street require 30% transparency. Pedestrian Building facade facing primary street shall be located within 60 feet of Primary street frontage EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 208 8.2.a IMPLEMENTATION SCREENING, BUFFERING, AND AMENITY SPACE WHAT ARE THE CURRENT DESIGN STANDARDS IN CG AND CG2 ZONES? a Currently the design standards require a dense Type IV landscaping buffer, a minimum of four feet wide, 06 N along all street frontages. Amenity space is not specifically required for development of a site. THE ISSUE TODAY: This standard creates landscaped barriers between pedestrians and buildings rather than enhancing a safe and comfortable pedestrian zone. RECOMMENDATION 6.5 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY ZONE Replace the 4-foot landscaped buffer with a required 10-foot Pedestrian Activity Zone setback on all primary frontages. Future design standards may consider special circumstances, such as auto dealer locations. RECOMMENDATION 6.6 AMENITY SPACE Outdoor amenity space, which may include landscaping, benches, or other amenities, should be required in conjunction with development. A portion of the required amenity space should be provided as common space and may include pedestrian activity areas. 59 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 209 SIMPLEME 8.2.a SETBACK AND BUFFERS FOR USES ADJACENT TO SINGLE-FAMILY ZONES WHAT ARE THE CURRENT DESIGN STANDARDS IN CG AND CG2 ZONES? Ground Floor Setback: Current front setback in RM-1.5 (the current multifamily zone near Highway 99) is 15' (ECDC 16.30.030). Where commercial, institutional, medical and multifamily uses are adjacent to residential zones, current standards require a 15' setback (ECDC 16.60.020). » Where commercial, institutional, medical uses are adjacent to residential zones, current standards require a dense 10' landscaping buffer (ECDC 16.60.030.A.1.f) Where office and multifamily uses are adjacent to single-family zones, current standards require a minimum 4' wide and 10' tall landscaping buffer (ECDC 16.60.030.A.1.h) Upper Floor Stepback: » No current standards exist for explicitly regulating the bulk and scale of buildings that are adjacent to single family zones. THE ISSUE TODAY: Current design standards do not ensure proper transition of higher density buildings adjacent to single-family neighborhoods. » The current Design Criteria seek to ensure d "buildings do not display blank, unattractive C walls to the abutting streets or residential a properties, walls or portions of walls 06 v; abutting streets or visible from residentially (D zoned properties" and suggests a variety of architectural treatments to mitigate impact, but does not explicitly require a stepback. » The Comprehensive Plan includes recommendations that should be considered 4) when developing uses adjacent to single family a areas. » From "City of Edmonds Comprehensive d c Plan (2015) — Medical/Highway 99 N c Activity Center and Highway 99 Corridor" c° a section, page 64: "New development should be allowed and encouraged to develop to the fullest extent possible while assuring that the design quality and amenities provided contribute to the overall character and quality of the corridor. Where intense development adjoins residential areas, site design (including buffers, landscaping, and the arrangement of uses) and building design should be used to minimize adverse impacts on residentially -zoned properties" EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 210 8.2.a IMPLEMENTATION d C C RECOMMENDATION 6.5 Ca Establish stepback and setback standards for multifamily and/or commercial buildings adjacent to single family zones and include these standards in the zoning code. RECOMMENDATION 6.7 0 GROUND FLOOR SETBACK For frontages facing Highway 99, require a front setback of 10 feet from the property line to E accommodate a Pedestrian Activity Zone. E Keep current 15 feet setback and 10' landscaping requirements for lot line adjacency with Q a single family zones. s RECOMMENDATION 6.8 UPPER FLOOR STEPBACK Zero upper floor stepback up to 25 feet in height (30 feet is the maximum height in RM 1.5, which is the predominant zone surrounding the commercial zones on Highway 99). Minimum 10 feet stepback above 25 feet in height on sides with lot line adjacency to single family zones. The portion of the building above 55 feet in height shall be stepped back at least 20 feet from a residential zone boundary. Stepback areas can be used for active outdoor space such as balconies. Upper stories stepback an additional 20' from property line above 55' in building height Upper stories stepback an additional 10' above 25' in building height 15' setback with dense 10' landscape buffer and/ or fence at property line 61 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 211 SIMPLEME 8.2.a ADOPT TRANSIT -SUPPORTIVE PARKING STANDARDS HWY 99 has many local and regional transit options as well as regional trails and bike routes, giving residents many travel options. In transit - rich areas, it is common for communities to reduce required on -site parking to encourage higher rents and reduced affordability. Current estimates for the cost of structured parking is anywhere from $20,000-25,000 per space, and underground parking can exceed $50,000 per space. Edmonds should adopt new, transit higher intensity and mixed -use development. supportive parking standards for the Highway 99 Parking is also expensive and high parking area. requirements can raise costs, which results in CURRENT PARKING STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL Studio apartment: 1.2 spaces 1-Bedroom: 1.5 spaces 2-Bedroom: 1.8 spaces 3-Bedroom: 2 spaces RECOMMENDATION 7.1 RESIDENTIAL Minimum average of 0.75 per unit for entire residential portion of each development. A different ratio may be approved if the City determines that development is near a transit station or is supported by a parking study. COMMERCIAL 2.5 per 1,000 square feet (1 per 400 square feet) RECOMMENDATION 7.2 COMMERCIAL 2 per 1,000 square feet (1 per 500 square feet) Exempt the first 3,000 square feet of commercial within mixed -use buildings that have a shared parking plan (parking study and management plan). This reduces the cost burden for small, local entrepreneurs. Compliance should be at the staff level to reduce administrative time and cost. Allow for project -specific studies to reflect special situations. V d C C a 06 N d W EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 212 IMPLEMENTATION 8.2.a 63 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 213 SIMPLEME 8.2.a d C ENACT MULTIFAMILY TAX EXEMPTION (MFTE) PROGRAM 06 RECOMMENDATION 8.1 The Cityof Edmonds should pass an ordinance to definethe HWY 99 area, which is an urban center, as a "target area" to allow MFTE projects. This would incentivize the construction of additional housing and mixed -use projects by enabling qualifying projects to take advantage of a tax exemption on the residential -portion of new buildings for 12 years in exchange for keeping 20% of units affordable during that period. Anthem on 12th: An award -winning workforce housing development in Seattle financed through a Multifamily Tax Exemption Program. CONTINUE OR ENHANCE FEE WAIVER PROGRAM FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING RECOMMENDATION 9.1 The City should continue or enhance its program to allow the reduction of transportation and park impact fees for projects that include affordable housing. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 214 IMPLEMENTATION 8.2.a d C FACILITATE A MIXED -USE, MIXED -INCOME DEMONSTRATION PROJECT Ca N i3l d RECOMMENDATION 10.1 Identify a site with a willing owner/partner, or purchase or secure a transferrable option on a site. RECOMMENDATION 10.2 The City can establish a special fund targeted at affordability and/or redevelopment, or make use of one or more of the tools listed on the next page to establish a special assessment district or direct state and federal funds towards a project. RECOMMENDATION 10.3 Actively recruit developers, both non-profit affordable housing builders like the Korean Women's Association or other developers familiar with public -private partnerships. This recruitment can also be done by a specialized consultant. RECOMMENDATION 10.4 Cultivate a champion who can motivate the development community and advocate for more affordable housing projects. This could be a local or state leader, such as an elected representative or a prominent local business leader. Make this project the pilot project for the newly adopted MFTE and fee waiver program to ensure they function well and iron out any issues before broader adoption ��uu ► �Lis 111.1 Consider using one or more of the special assessment districts, or programs listed in Recommendation 11.1 and locating this pilot project site within the Highway 99 area. This will enable the City to make use of special funds to assist with development and infrastructure costs or other subsidies. The first project or few projects will require more assistance than subsequent projects. RECOMMENDATION 10.7 Assign special staff to the pilot project to ensure it remains a City priority and keeps moving forward. This staff person will also track what works well or what does not, and make final modification recommendations to the various programs before final broader adoption. 65 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 215 IMPLEME 8.2.a d c ca EXPAND USE OF FINANCING TOOLS 06 RECOMMENDATION 11.1 The City should actively seek to make use of local, state and federal funds and funding mechanisms to expand the opportunities for affordable housing, redevelopment and economic development within the HWY 99 area. Below is a list of some key tools and funding sources that should be considered. City Fund for Redevelopment and Affordable Housing Community Renewal Area (CRA) — used in Shoreline Hospital Benefit Zone (HBZ) Financing Program Local Infrastructure Project Area (LIPA) Financing Landscape Conservation and Local Improvement Program (LCLIP) Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) HUD HOME Program HUD CDBG Program Enterprise Community Partners Regional Equitable Development Initiative (REDI) Fund Lovejoy Station in Portland, Oregon is a five -story apartment community that serves residents with incomes between 40% and 80% area median income. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 216 IMPLEMENTATION 8.2.a pw d C C cC a 06 N al d 67 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 217 SIMPLEME 8.2.a GATEWAY SIGNAGE AT HWY 99/ HWY 104 INTERCHANGE RECOMMENDATION 12.1 The public process identified the need to clearly establish the identify of Edmonds at the south end of the study area, through gateway features, such as signage and landscaping. The design treatments should clearly indicate an arrival into Edmonds and distinguish this stretch of HWY 99 from Shoreline. This could be accomplished in tandem with the realignment of the on and off ramps of HWY 104 proposed in the project list. TRANSIT GATEWAY SIGNAGE/STATION AT HWY 99/228TH RECOMMENDATION 13.1 Regional commuter rail to the Mountlake Terrace transit center is scheduled for completion in 2023 Edmonds to this new rail station is 228th. to identify this transit gateway at the intersection of HWY 99 and 228th, and strengthen east -west connections for transit riders, bicyclists and commuters. and clear wayfinding signage at this intersection will establish the clear link for visitors and residents alike. A future transit linkage, either in the form of a reroute of existing local transit to connect Edmonds to the Mountlake Terrace transit station should be considered. In addition, an additional or moved BRT station and location at the intersection of 228th should also be examined in the future. d C C 06 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 Su Packet Pg. 218 IMPLEMENTATION 8.2.a d C IMPROVE WAYFINDING SIGNAGE ALONG THE CORRIDOR Ca N i3l d RECOMMENDATION 14.1 Many amenities and community destinations exist near HWY 99, but the public process revealed that finding these amenities can be difficult, particularly for visitors. Wayfinding signage with a uniquely Edmonds identity should point out safe auto, bicycle and pedestrian routes to surrounding amenities. The amenities and destinations identified include downtown Edmonds, Lake Ballinger, the Interurban Trail, new regional rail at Mountlake Terrace, the International District, the Health District and hospital. DEVELOP A UNIQUE DISTRICT DESIGN IDENTITY RECOMMENDATION 15.1 The subdistricts identified in this process and previous processes highlight the existing nodes of similar business activity, such as international businesses and health and hospital related uses. The City should invest in signage, lighting and art to improve the vitality of these areas, and support business development organizations that build capacity within the private sector. Some ideas the City should pursue are unique branding for each district, public and local art, street furniture, unique bus shelter designs, pavement patterns, special lighting fixtures, colored crosswalks, and banners. 69 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 219 SIMPLEME 8.2.a C l06 PROHIBIT NEW POLE SIGNS RECOMMENDATION 15.1 As the HWY 99 area transitions from an auto -oriented highway to a more dynamic and mixed -use environment, new tall pole signs designed to capture the attention of fast moving traffic are no longer compatible. The City should prohibit new pole signs within the study area. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 220 8.2.a IMPLEMENTATION d C C cC a 06 N al d 71 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 221 IMPLEME 8.2.a IMPROVE TRANSIT TRANSFERS RECOMMENDATION 17.1 The public workshop and stakeholder engagement process revealed a few needed improvements in transit, particularly related to improving transit transfers. The City should work with Community Transit and other transit partners to ensure regional and local bus stops are close together and schedules are aligned to ensure convenient and efficient transfers. This can be accomplished by a consolidation or colocation of stations to reduce walking distances between routes. Specific improvements related to emphasizing a new transit hub at 228th and HWY 99 include: Consider a shuttle/transit service from HWY 99 to the Mountlake Terrace regional transit center Consider a consolidated transit stop at 228th Consider a new BRT station Provide clear signage Provide high -quality bike connection on 228th EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 222 IMPLEMENTATION 8.2.a d C INCENTIVIZE ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS Ca N i3l d RECOMMENDATION 18.1 A robust and resilient transit system offers a wide range of options to commuters and the community. This includes convenient access to regional transit and transportation facilities, but also the finer grained connections that allow for quick, short connections to be made. The City should consider impact fee reductions and on -site parking reduction allowances for development project that offer or accommodate alternative transportation options on -site. Examples of on - site alternative transportation options include subsidized transit passes for residents, on -site car share parking, bicycle parking, electric car charging stations and temporary parking for private ride sharing services, such as Uber and Lyft. 73 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 223 IMPLEME 8.2.a This page is left intentionally blank. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 224 IMPLEMENTATION 8.2.a lAN 5 PD RTfl IFRASTRUC ' tCOMMrnrlM • • 75 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 225 IMPLEME 8.2.a EXPAND USE OF GRANT PROGRAMS TO FUND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS AND 06 PEDESTRIAN FACILITIESUi RECOMMENDATION 19.1 The City should actively seek to make use of local, state and federal funds and funding mechanisms to expand opportunities for safety improvements and pedestrian and bike -friendly enhancements within the HWY 99 area. Below is a list of some key grant programs that should be considered: Safe Routes to School Program (Pedestrian & Bicycle projects within two miles of a school) Pedestrian and Bicycle Program Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Program (CMAQ) EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 226 8.2.a IMPLEMENTATION The following includes a detailed list of short term and long term r_ transportation improvements that include projects identified in previous plans and projects that have arisen as part of this process. Ca N i3l d The projects are designed to accommodate a The logical point within the gap for installation o range of transportation goals, including: of a traffic signal and pedestrian crossings is at 234th Street SW. While not the midpoint of the a Improve traffic flow and general safety and segment, there are other factors that strengthen 7 access management Improve pedestrian safety and access to/from HWY 99 corridor Improve pedestrian environment along HWY 99 corridor Create safe pedestrian crossings of HWY 99 and access to transit Improve transit mobility and transit stop environment Further, the projects build upon or enhance the planned transportation improvements described earlier. KEY TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS CLOSE THE MOST SIGNIFICANT GAP IN PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS WITHIN THE CORRIDOR The longest segment of Highway 99 in the Plan Area without a controlled pedestrian crossing is between 238th Street SW and 228th Street SW —a distance of about 3,700 feet. Prior to the completion of the 228th Street connection between 76th Avenue W and the new traffic signal at Highway 99, the longest segment without a controlled crossing was nearly a mile. The short- term recommendation to improve this major obstacle to pedestrian travel is to install a traffic signal on HWY 99 with pedestrian crossings on all approaches. the need for a pedestrian crossing at this location These include: This location is within a node having strong redevelopment potential creating increased demand for pedestrian travel. The Community Health Center is located 500 feet to the north of this intersection and Community Transit has bus stops on both sides of HWY 99 without a safe crossing to access the northbound bus stop. The signal will need to be installed concurrently with new development at the 234th Street node in order to help meet signal warrants. FIGURE 20: SAFETY HEAT MAP SHOWING GAP IN PEDESTRIAN CROSSING 77 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 227 SIMPLEME 8.2.a IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS FROM THE SOUTH AT THE SR 104 INTERCHANGE The present design of the SR 104 interchange with HWY 99 is automobile dominated partial cloverleaf with on and off -ramps designed for moderate speeds. Sidewalks exist on both sides of HWY 99 through the interchange but require pedestrians to cross an on and off -ramp in either direction. Most of these crossings are unmarked and located on curves where traffic is accelerating or decelerating from freeway speeds. Further, bridge structure and trees restrict motorist sight lines of pedestrians crossing the ramps. The conditions are daunting for pedestrians and likely discourage people from traversing the interchange on foot. The eastbound off -ramp at the southern end of the interchange is configured more favorably for pedestrians than the eastbound off -ramp at the northern end because the intersection is the terminus of a pedestrian pathway connecting the surrounding neighborhoods to HWY 99. The eastbound off -ramp is aligned at nearly a right angle to HWY 99, is controlled by a stop sign, and has a high visibility crosswalk crossing the ramp. In contrast, all of the remaining crossings are at uncontrolled and relatively high speed locations. The long-term recommendation is to reconfigure the ramps as conventional 90-degree stop control intersections with marked crossings similar to the eastbound off -ramp configuration. Trucks may be accommodated through the use of low -angle slip ramps and channelizing islands to keep crossing distances short. Reconfiguration in this manner improves visibility and slows turning traffic. As a short-term interim improvement, install pedestrian activated Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB's) with high -visibility crosswalk markings at the pedestrian crossings of the SR 104 on and off -ramps and provide new, or 0 redirect existing, safety lighting to illuminate the crosswalks. a 06 FIGURE 21: 90-DEGREE STOP CONTROL INTERSECTION TO AN OFF -RAMP CONFIGURATION FIGURE 22: RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACONS (RRFB'S) ENCOURAGE WALKING AND BICYCLING TO ACCESS PLAN AREA FROM SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS During the public workshop residents of the Plan Area expressed concern regarding the safety of walking and bicycling to the HWY 99 corridor from their neighborhoods. Their concerns focused on the rural nature of connecting streets which lack sidewalks and lighting, and have overgrown vegetation restricting sight distance. These concerns extended onto HWY 99 where there was EDMONDS HIGHWAY 91 SU Packet Pg. 228 IMPLEMENTATION 8.2.a a general consensus on the need for safety and street lighting on HWY 99 and on the residential streets feeding into the corridor, particularly pedestrian -scaled lighting. The conditions described above limit the resident's desire to access HWY 99 as a pedestrian or bicyclists particularly at night. Specific streets identified in the workshop include 240th Street SW between 84th Avenue W and 80th Way W and approach HWY 99 and 224th Street SW approaching 76th Avenue and HWY 99. The City of Edmonds 2015 Comprehensive Plan identifies several "complete streets" projects on streets providing access to HWY 99. The improvements —as described in the section on Planned Improvements —include sidewalk construction, drainage improvements, lighting, and reallocation of the street's traveled way to improve safety for all users. Expanding on these projects to include additional streets feeding into the corridor can alleviate the resident's concerns about safety and dramatically increase active modes of transportation. Improvements need not be extensive to create a more desirable pedestrian environment — sidewalks can be constructed on one side of narrow streets or paths of decomposed granite with asphalt berms may suffice to move pedestrians and bicyclists out of the street's traveled way. Regardless of the extensiveness of the improvements, lighting should be a high priority in all cases. Safety lighting (lighting that illuminates intersection corners where pedestrians are expected to cross) and street lighting (overhead lighting that generally illuminates the width of the street) as well as pedestrian -scaled lighting (lighting on 12-17-foot tall standards that illuminate the pedestrian walkway) are fundamental prerequisites for walkable areas. Streets that cannot be safely traveled by pedestrians and bicyclists at night, will experience limited travel during the day. IMPROVE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN TRANSIT AND MAJOR EMPLOYMENT CENTERS The extensive transit network serving the corridor is an opportunity to shift employee commute modes at the corridor's larger employment centers from driving to transit. Part of an effective strategy to change employee travel behavior is improving the physical connection between transit and the destination. The SWIFT stations at 216th Street SW serve the corridor's largest employment center --the Swedish Hospital campus and its associated medical offices. The SWIFT bus rapid transit system is an ideal opportunity for employees and patients/visitors to access the campus by transit. However, the connection between the stations and the various facilities in the campus require pedestrians to walk up steep grades and through parking lots to access building entrances. The lack of connections, direction and amenities discourages people from taking transit to the site. This Plan recommends improving the connection between the Swift Stations at 216th Street SW and the Swedish Hospital Campus by implementing a pedestrian walkway system (potentially covered) internal to the campus with wayfinding to direct pedestrians to the various campus facilities including future land uses that support hospital expansion such as hotels and medical office buildings within the Health Care District. 79 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 229 SIMPLEME 8.2.a FIGURE 23: PLANNED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS LEGEND ■ EXISTING SIGNALIZED ■ S16 ■ v ■ a ■ INTERSECTION AND PED XING ¢' L t ■ PROPOSED NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL ■ n ® AND PEDESTRIAN CROSSING 59 272th Street ■ r ■nw■n■nnnno■ IN INTERSECTION SAFETY 8 CAPACITY ❑ IMPROVEMENTS ■ ■ M FF■i NEW BIKE ROUTE DESIGNATION i a■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ NEW CLASS II BICYCLE LANES a ■ STREET IMPROVEMENTS FOR i ■� 0 PEDESTRIANS ■ ■� ACCESS MANAGEMENT (RAISED ■ ■ ■ MEDIANS) ■ "* W ® SWIFT RAPID STATION : S16 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ i S12M 220th Street ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ SIGNAL ■_ i COORDINATION L ■ S10 224th Street■ RMEM SEEM moo■ ■ ■■MEMEMEMEMEMEM= ■ :S16 r S11 228th Street■ * me ■ ■ ■ 230th Street i ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ i ■ 234th Stree i ■ i 236th Street■ 10010001000100010r 238th Street .. d■■ COMPLETESTREET IMPROVEMENTS( ) 240th Street IMPROVE SOUTHBOUND LOCAL BUS STOP '4 CONCURRENTWITH . NEW DEVELOPMENT ( ) �� 244th Street a■ Q�S17 a �■ L INTERSECTION CAPACITY ■ i & SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS i ■ii S F ACC ANAGEMENT(L13) INTERSECTION CAPACITY & SAFETY toe I IMPROVEMENTS(S37) S" i, ,i r®% ` SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION(S4) ACCESS MANAGEMENT (L1 2) ■ �—INTERSECTION IMPROVEME TSAPACIT(S36) &SAFETY _loop ACCESS MANAGEMENT (S28) ►YiE:? ACCESS MANAGEMENT( 1� COMPLETESTREET � ■ �� IMPROVEMENTS( ) ■ ■ i REGIONALLY COMMCENTER TYHEALTHACCESS MANAGEMENT SIGINIFICANTTRANSIT rrr MP ( ) EMPHASIS CORRIDOR CENTER A. � ( ) /v % , rF w �1� ACCESS MANAGEMENT(S26) j NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL PEDESTRIAN j CROSSWALKSON ALL APPROACHES(S29) ACC S MANAGEMENT (S25) SIDEWALDISTANCE KISBILTYCADAANDH�•�1 1■EMEMMINgoo■ LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS( ) L S13 SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION, SIGHT �■■■00050 0000DISTANCE VISIBILITY, ADA AND LIGHTING r IMPROVEMENTS(_ ) ACCESS MANAGEMENT (S24) IMPROVE NORTHBOUND LOCAL BUS STOP CONCURRENT WITH NEW DEVELOPMENT( ) NOTE: The identifiers in red (i.e. SXX) correspond with the list of improvements on pages 83- 98). The letters in front of each identifier indicate short or long- term improvements - "S" for short-term and "L' for long-term EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 230 IMPLEMENTATION 8.2.a FIGURE 24: PROJECT SUPPORTIVE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS LEGEND ®EXISTING SIGNALIZED o p INTERSECTION AND PEDXING ;I ®PROPOSED NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL , AND PEDXING �•��-� r PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS ® PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK 4> FLASHING BEACON h r ® SWIFT RAPID STATION r,3 ®, ENHANCED LOCAL r, :'"" TRANSIT STOPS ( ) IMPROVED INTERNALCONNE(TIONS j AND WAYFINDING BETWEEN SWIFT PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT STATIONS AND HOSPITAL CAMPUS NEW CONNECTION BETWEEN SR 99 ( ) AND INTERURBAN TRAIL(__.) PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS (SIDEWALK, SIGHT DISTANCE VISIBILITY, ADA, AND LIGHTING) ( ) CORRIDOR -WIDE PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT (WIDEN SIDEWALK, PLANTING STRIP BUFFER)( ) CORRIDOR -WIDE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS (SIGHT DISTANCE VISIBILITY AND LIGHTING)( ) COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER IMPROVED LOCAL BUS STOPS SERVING COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER (S30) HIGH -VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS + PEDESTRIAN -ACTIVATED RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACONS ON SR 104 ON AND OFF -RAMPS ( ) n z 00 W ■ NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND 0� �— PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS ON ALLA PROACHES(S22) 0000 Alt, NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL WITH NEW DEVELOPA PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS (SIDEWALK, SIGHT DISTANCE VISIBILITY, ADA AND LIGHTING)( ) RECONFIGURE OFF -RAMPS TO 90-DEGREE STOP CONTROL INTERSECTIONS( ) NOTE: The identifiers in red (i.e. SXX) correspond with the list of improvements on pages 83- 98). The letters in front of each identifier indicate short or long- term improvements - "S" for short-term and t for long-term 81 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 231 IMPLEME 8.2.a This page is left intentionally blank. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 232 8.2.a IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSED SHORT-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS S1 Pedestrian Safety Improve sidewalks, sight distance visibility, street and safety lighting on 240th from 84th Ave W to 80th Way W (primarily along commercial frontages) S2 Pedestrian Safety / Implement safety improvements at 224th and 76th Avenue W including constructing new or Ped Circulation improving existing sidewalks on both sides of 224th approaching 76th Ave and SR 99. Not Shown General Safety General need for safety and street lighting on residential streets surrounding SR 99, particularly pedestrian -scaled lighting. Workshop participants identified the need to widen sidewalks on 228th east of SR 99. In the Summer of 2016 a number of pedestrian improvements were completed in this regionally significant multimodal corridor (see notes). Where narrow sidewalks still remain within the corridor or on connecting residential streets, the following pedestrian improvements may be considered in -lieu of widening sidewalks: 1. Buffer pedestrians from moving traffic with street trees in tree wells constructed within Regionally parking lanes. S3 Significant Transit Emphasis Corridor 2. Consistent application of high visibility crosswalk markings at intersections. 3. Ensure street lighting illuminates entire width of street. Currently, street lights are located on one side of the street. Intersections with marked crosswalks should have safety lighting illuminating each end of crosswalks. 4. Install bus shelters at local bus stops with street lighting. Where right of way wont permit a shelter, use curb extensions to add width. Pedestrian and S4 Vehicular Safety / Sidewalk construction projects: 216th St. SW from 72nd Ave. W to SR 99 Ped Circulation Pedestrian and S5 Vehicular Safety / Sidewalk construction projects: 236th St. SW from HWY. 99 to 76th Ave. W Ped Circulation Pedestrian and S6 Vehicular Safety / Sidewalk construction projects: 238th St. SW from HWY. 99 to 76th Ave. W Ped Circulation S7 Complete Streets 238th Street SW, between SR 104 and SR 99. Widen to three lanes with curb, gutter, bike Impvts lanes, and sidewalk. S8 Complete Streets 228th Street SW, between SR 99 and 95th PI. W Widen to three lanes with curb, gutter, bike Impvts lanes and sidewalk, as well as intersection improvements at 228th @ 95th. 83 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 233 SIMPLEME 8.2.a PROJECT SUPPORTIVE PLANNED IMPROVEMENT OTHER This type of corridorwide frontage improvement typically occurs as a condition Workshop of approval when the fronting property redevelops. i 224th Street, as a route, provides access to a few destination such as the interurban trail, but is not a primary route to major generators. However, many residential neighborhoods feed into 224th and it may serve as a lower volume Workshop and lower speed alternative for pedestrians and bicyclists. Near SR 99 224th lacks sidewalks on one or both sides of the street. Many of the workshop participants commented on the lack of street lighting on streets intersecting or paralleling SR 99. Safety lighting (lighting that illuminates intersection corners where pedestrians are expected to cross) and street lighting (overhead lighting that generally illuminates the width of the street) Workshop as well as pedestrian -scaled lighting (lighting on 12-17-foot tall standards that illuminate the pedestrian walkway) are fundamental prerequisites for walkable areas. Streets that cannot be safely traveled by pedestrians and bicyclists at night, will experience limited travel during the day. 228th Street SW is one of the study area's only Complete Streets. It connects the SR 99 corridor to numerous destinations including Highway 104 into downtown, the interurban trail, parks and recreational facilities, and the Mountlake Terrace Transit Center where Sound Transit's extension of the Lynnwood LINK light rail will connect with local, commuter, and regional busses by the year 2023. 228th is also a local bus route. Class II bicycle lanes on 228th connect SR 99 to the interurban trail. The City recently extended 228th from 76th Avenue to complete its connection to SR 99. Other recent pedestrian Workshop improvements in the corridor include new ADA compliant ramps at corners, sidewalk repair, driveways moved to side streets, and an improved crosswalk at the Interurban Trail crossing with new curb extensions. The very narrow sidewalks on 228th that once connected to the Trail (two to three feet wide) have been augmented with a multi -use path parallel to the west side of the street extending to the Interstate 5. The pedestrian environment along some segments of 228th need improvement. Project identified as a high priority in the Comprehensive 2015 Transportation Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element Element - Recommended Roadway Capital Projects Project identified as a high priority in the Comprehensive 2015 Transportation Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element - Recommended Roadway Capital Element Projects Project identified as a high priority in the Comprehensive 2015 Transportation Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element Element - Recommended Roadway Capital Projects This project is recommended for inclusion in the City's Transportation Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) for 2022-2035. Element - Recommended Roadway Capital Projects This project is recommended for inclusion in the City's Transportation Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) for 2022-2035. Element - Recommended Roadway Capital Projects EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 234 8.2.a IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSED SHORT-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS S9 Bicycle Circulation Class II bike lanes on 212th Street from Main Street to 68th Avenue crossing SR 99. S10 Bicycle Circulation Bike route designation on 224th Street SW from 84th Avenue W across SR 99 to interurban trail. S11 Bicycle Circulation Class II bike lanes on 228th Street SW from SR 104 across SR 99 to existing Class 11 lanes on 76th Avenue W. S12 Bicycle Circulation Class II bike lanes on 76th Avenue W from 208th to 220th and bike route designation to 224th Street SW. S13 Bicycle Circulation Bike route designation on 238th Street SW from 84th Avenue W across SR 99 to existing Class II bike lanes on 76th Avenue W. S14 Bicycle Circulation Class 11 bike lanes on 84th Avenue W from 212th Street SW to 236th Street SW and bike route designation on 84th Avenue W south to 238th Street SW. S15 Bicycle Circulation Class II bike lanes on 236th Street SW from SR 104 to 84th Avenue W. S16 Bicycle Circulation Bike route designation on 80th Avenue W from 206th Street SW to 228th Street SW S17 Bicycle Circulation Bike route designation on 72nd Avenue W from 208th Street SW to 216th Street SW and continuing on 216th Street SW to SR 99. S18 Bicycle Circulation Bike route designation on 73rd PI W from 224th Street SW to 226th PI SW. 85 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 235 SIMPLEME 8.2.a PROJECT SUPPORTIVE PLANNED IMPROVEMENT OTHER City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element 72nd Avenue from 208th to 212th is a heavily utilized transit route. Because of the frequency of buses on this street, Community Transit City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive recommends providing bicycle lanes instead of a route designation, Plan 2015 Transportation Element or, if bicycle lanes cannot be provided, to relocate the route designation to an alternative parallel street. City of Edmonds Bicycle Master Plan & Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 236 8.2.a IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSED SHORT-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS Install pedestrian activated Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB's) with high -visibility S19 Pedestrian Safety crosswalk markings at the pedestrian crossings of the SR 104 on and off -ramps and provide safety lighting to illuminate the crosswalks. Pedestrian and Not Shown General Multimodal Implement corridorwide wayfinding signage to local districts and major multimodal facilities Circulation 87 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 237 SIMPLEME 8.2.a PROJECT SUPPORTIVE PLANNED IMPROVEMENT OTHER This is an interim improvement prior to the proposed reconfiguration DKS Associates of the ramp termini to eliminate high-speed movements. A corridorwide wayfinding system should be established providing signing at key intersections conecting to major destinations such as downtown, train station, SWIFT stops, nearest bicycle facilities, interurban trail access, parks and open space, local districts along the corridor, and freeway access. Workshop and DKS Associates EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 238 8.2.a IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSED SHORT-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS Improve connection between the Swedish Hospital Campus and the Swift Stations at Access to/from Transit and 216th Street SW by implementing a pedestrian walkway system (potentially covered) S20 Major Employment Center internal to the campus with wayfinding to direct pedestrians to the various campus facilities including future land uses that support hospital expansion such as hotels and medical office buildings within the Health Care District. Provide pedestrian and bicycle links that connect the Interurban Trail to the SWIFT Station S21 Access to/from Transit and and Community Transit bus stops serving the Health Care District. When the property on Interurban Trail the east side of SR 99 between 216th Street SW and 220th Street SW redevelops, require the development to dedicate an easement connecting the trail to SR 99. S22 Pedestrian Safety / Access "New pedestrian crossing at 234th Street which is the approximate mid -point of the large to Transit gap in crossings. This crossing may be achieved as shown in the notes column." "Traffic Safety Install raised median (with potential gateway features) between 240th and 238th. S24 Access Management / Channelize westbound traffic on 240th for right turns only. Allow u-turns at 238th. See not Safe Pedestrian Crossing" [1] below. S25 "Traffic Safety Access Management / 236th Street to 234th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SR 99. Restrict le " Safe Pedestrian Crossing turns from stop controlled 236th Street. S26 "Traffic Safety Access Management / 234th Street to 230th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SR 99. Restrict le " Safe Pedestrian Crossing turns from stop controlled 234th Street. S27 "Traffic Safety Access Management / 230th Street to 228th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SR 99. Restrict lei " Safe Pedestrian Crossing turns from stop controlled 234th Street. 89 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 239 SIMPLEME 8.2.a PROJECT SUPPORTIVE PLANNED IMPROVEMENT OTHER PROVIDE SAFE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING OF HIGHWAY 99 AND ACCESS TO TRANSIT The SWIFT stations at 216th Street SW serve corridor's largest employment center -- the Swedish Hospital campus and its associated medical offices. The SWIFT bus rapid transit system and these stations are an ideal opportunity for employees and patients/ visitors to access the campus by transit. However, the connection between the stations Community Transit and DKS and the various facilities in the campus are by 216th Street SW and SR 99 driveways Associates requiring pedestrians to walk up steep grades and through parking lots to access building entrances. The lack of connections, direction and amenities discourages people from taking transit to the site. The Interurban Trail generally parallels SR 99 and its alignment is closest to SR 99 between 216th Street SW and 220th Street SW --with only one parcel of land separation- -an opportunity to provide a more direct link to the SWIFT stations (via crosswalks) and Community Transit and DKS Community Transit bus stops located on the near and far sides of 216th Street SW. Associates When the under-utilized land separating the trail from SR 99 redevelops, a condition of approval should require the property owner to dedicate an easement for this connection. A. With significant high density development at 234th node, potentially intersection would warrant a traffic signal (see long-term improvements) B. Install a HAWK pedestrian activated signal C. Install a temporary two -stage unsignalized crossing in the interim timeframe befotre a signal is warranted. DKS Associates The crossing at this location should be a priority given it improves access to the community health facility from transit and closes a 3,500 foot gap in protected crossings within this segment of Highway 99 Improvements at 240th are geared towards obtaining a pedestrian crossing of SR 99 to close one of the crossing gaps in the corridor and to improve vehicular safety and access to the Burlington Coat Factory site. 240th Avenue at SR 99 is one of the highest SR 99 Access Management and vehicular collision locations in the corridor and it is not prudent to add an unsignalized Cross Section Focused Assessment crossing at thgis location. Current crossing demand is too low to warrant a short-term pedestrian crossing improvement. See long-term improvements. For long segments with numerous driveways, use intermittently placed medians to allow left turn in/out functions at key driveways. Access managed segments must permit SR 99 Access Management and u-turns at adjacent signalized intersections. Use median to restrict left turns from stop- Cross Section Focused Assessment controlled side streets with high collision histories unless the restriction conflicts with a short-term improvement or other proposed change in traffic control. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 240 8.2.a IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSED SHORT-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS PROVIDE SAFE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING OF HIGHWAY 99 AND ACCESS TO TRANSIT, CONT'D. "Traffic Safety Access S28 Management / 224th Street to 220th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SR 99. Safe Pedestrian Crossing" S29 Safe Pedestrian Crossing / Development Access Install traffic signal at SR 99 / 234th including pedestrian crosswalks on all approaches IMPROVE TRANSIT MOBILITY AND TRANSIT STOP ENVIRONMENT Not Shown Transit Mobility Access to Transit S30 / Transit Stop Environment Implement a Transit Signal Priority (TSP) system along SR 99 for the SWIFT Bus Rapid Transit system. Improve local bus stops between 234th and 230th that serve Community Health Center and new development within the International and Gateway Districts. Access to Transit S31 / Transit Stop Provide enhanced local transit stops near Swedish Hospital. Environment S32 Transit Service / Priority Transit Corridor: SR 99 from 208th to SR 104 (See Figure 10 on page 23 for Priority Ped Amenities Transit Corridors designations in the subarea) Priority Transit Corridor: 228th Street SW from SR 104 to 76th Avenue W continuing to the Q S33 Transit Service / Mountlake Terrace Transit Center. A new SWIFT station is proposed at SR 99 and 228th Ped Amenities Street SW. (See Figure 10 on page 23 for Priority Transit Corridors designations in the c subarea) °' E t r Q 91 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 241 SIMPLEME 8.2.a PROJECT SUPPORTIVE PLANNED IMPROVEMENT OTHER PROVIDE SAFE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING OF HIGHWAY 99 AND ACCESS TO TRANSIT, CONT-D. For long segments with numerous driveways, use intermittently placed medians to allow left turn in/out functions at key driveways. Access managed segments must permit SR 99 Access Management and u-turns at adjacent signalized intersections. Use median to restrict left turns from stop- Cross Section Focused Assessment controlled side streets with high collision histories unless the restriction conflicts with a short-term improvement or other proposed change in traffic control. This improvement may only be feasible with significantly high density development at 234th Street node and with access from 234th Street to meet signal warrants. New development fronting SR 99 adjacent to the intersection should be required to dedicate land to provide width for wider sidewalks. Workshop and DKS Associates IMPROVE TRANSIT MOBILITY AND TRANSIT STOP ENVIRONMENT Transit Signal Priority (TSP) systems allow BRT vehicles to trigger a change in traffic signal phasing in favor of the buses approaching a signalized intersection. TSP can either expedite a green light for buses passing through an intersection, or expedite buses DKS Associates stopping at far -side bus stops and using the traffic signal's following cycle to load / unload passengers thus avoiding the delay waiting to cross to the far -side stop. Provide shelters, benches, lighting, and buffer the stop from moving traffic. DKS Associates The Swift Rapid stations are excellent examples of Bus Rapid Transit stations with ample rider amenities. The nearby local bus stops are established some distance away and most have only signs, some have a bench and waste receptacle. Enhancements should be considered at local stops near major employment centers, major retail Workshop concentrations, or institutions where employees may commute by transit. Local bus stops enhanced with wider waiting areas with shelters, benches, shade, lighting, bike racks, etc. may help encourage transit ridership, particularly in combination with employer trip reduction programs. These priority corridors would emphasize good daily transit service and bus stop Comprehensive Plan 2015 amenities to make transit attractive. Transportation Element These priority corridors would emphasize good daily transit service and bus stop amenities to make transit attractive. Although the LINK light rail extension to the Mountlake Terrace Transit Center is still six years out (2023) implementing incremental Comprehensive Plan 2015 Priority Transit Corridor improvements on 228th is recommended in the short term to Transportation Element improve current bus service in the corridor as well as prepare the corridor for LRT service in 2023. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 242 8.2.a IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSED SHORT-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVE TRAFFIC FLOW AND GENERAL SAFETY WITH ACCESS MANAGEMENT Pedestrian and Vehicular Safety / Ped Circulation Safety improvements at the intersection of SR 99 / 224th Street SW and between 224th and 76th Avenues (particularly LT into Ranch 99 Market). Intersection SR 99 and 212th Street SW -widen 212th to add a westbound left turn lane for 200-foot S35 Capacity & Safety / storage length and an eastbound left turn lane for 300-foot storage length. Provide Ped Safety protected left turn phase for eastbound and westbound movements. Intersection SR 99 and 220th Street SW Widen 220th to add a 325-foot westbound right turn lane and a S36 Capacity & Safety / 300-foot eastbound right turn lane. Widen 220th to add a second westbound left turn lane. Ped Safety (This would add about 24 additional feet of croswalk distance). Intersection SR 99 at 216th Street SW Widen to allow one left turn lane, one through lane and one right S37 Capacity & Safety / turn lane in eastbound and westbound directions, with 100-foot storage length for turn Ped Safety lanes. Add eastbound right turn overlap with northbound protected left turn. S38 Intersection Capacity Signal Coordination on 220th St. SW from 76th Ave. W to SR 99. Access "Consideration of operational strategies to help SR 99 traffic flow optimization, including: Not Shown Management - U-turns (recommended at intersections in the access management memorandum). & Traffic Flow - Jug handle movement accommodations at intersections. Improvements - Use of adaptive traffic signals" NOTES: 1. From the southern border at the county line (MP 43.50) until approximately 114 mile to the north, just past the interchange area but before 240th Street SW (MP 43.72), SR 99 is designated as Limited Access Partially Controlled. This is defined as At -grade intersections are allowed for selected public roads and approaches for existing private driveways, no commercial approaches allowed, and no direct access if alternate public road access is available". 2. From the point just north of the SR 104 interchange (MP 43.72) northward through both Edmonds and Lynnwood (MP 43.72 - 48.92), the designation of SR 99 is Managed Access Class 4. 93 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 243 SIMPLEME 8.2.a PROJECT SUPPORTIVE PLANNED IMPROVEMENT OTHER IMPROVE TRAFFIC FLOW AND GENERAL SAFETY WITH ACCESS MANAGEMENT Revision of the side street channelization at 224th to avoid the need for a split phase. WSDOT suggests changing the shared thru/left and right -only lanes to a left -only and Workshop and WSDOT shared thru/right configuration. This project is recommended for inclusion in the City's Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) for 2016-2021. This project is recommended for inclusion in the City's Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) for 2016-2021. This project is recommended for inclusion in the City's Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) for 2016-2021. Should be implemented in coordination with a Transit Signal Priority system (see S37) U-turns will be extremely important with implementation of median access management. Thus, use of various and innovative measures to accommodate changes in traffic patterns is encouraged and might come as a result of site redevelopment. Note that 48-50 feet is the minimum U-turn diameter accepted in the past by the State, with justification. Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element - Recommended Roadway Capital Projects Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element - Recommended Roadway Capital Projects Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element - Recommended Roadway Capital Projects Comprehensive Plan 2015 Transportation Element ►��� *1Big]II 3. State of Washington Legal Requirements of M4 Highways. Class 4 Managed Access highways are designed to have a posted speed limit of 30 to 35 mph in urbanized areas and 35 to 45 mph in rural areas. In urban areas and developing areas where higher volumes are present or growth that will require a change in intersection control is expected in the foreseeable future, it is imperative that the location of any public access point be planned carefully to ensure adequate traffic progression. Where feasible, major intersecting roadways that might ultimately require intersection control changes are planned with a minimum of i-mile spacing. Private access connections to the highway are spaced 250 feet apart, only a single access for individual or contiguous parcels under the same owner, and variance permits may be allowed. 4. Within Incorporated Cities. Under PC 35.78.030 and RCW 47.50, incorporated cities and towns have jurisdiction over access permitting on streets designated as state highways. Accesses located within incorporated cities and towns are regulated by the city or town and no deviation by WSDOT will be required. Document decisions made on these accesses in the DDP. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 244 8.2.a IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSED LONG-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS Pedestrian Widen sidewalks on SR 99 from 212th street to 240th Street to include a minimum 4-foot L1 Circulation wide planting strip to buffer pedestrians from moving traffic. Use space for placement of appropriate street trees. L2 Vehicular / Install street lighting on SR 99 corridor to close gaps and to achieve uniform spacing and Pedestrian Safety illumination. Install safety lighting at intersections as part of this improvement. Pedestrian Install new signal at 240th (with crosswalks on all four legs) concurrent with new L3 Circulation development at 240th node. Consolidate and relocate driveways to 240th (helps meet signal warrants) Vehicular / Reconfigure off -ramps as conventional 90-degree stop control intersections. The L4 Pedestrian Safety Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB's) recommended as an interim short-term improvements (S19) may continue to be used with the reconfigured ramps. 95 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 245 SIMPLEME 8.2.a PROJECT SUPPORTIVE PLANNED IMPROVEMENT OTHER This improvement requires approximately 6-feet of right of way. The City should require dedication of right of way (or a permanent public access easement) from private "Highway 99 Traffic Safety and property when redeveloped. Dedication or easement may also be used when properties Circulation Study (2007) adjacent to local bus stops redevelop in order to obtain width for ADA compliance and DKS Associates" bus shelters. This improvement may also be implemented in conjuction with district identity, streetscape, or themed urban design projects. "Highway 99 Traffic Safety and Circulation Study (2007) DKS Associates" I his improvement requires approximately 6-teet of right of way. I he City should require dedication of right of way (or a permanent public access easement) from private "Highway 99 Traffic Safety and property when redeveloped. Dedication or easement may also be used when properties Circulation Study (2007) adjacent to local bus stops redevelop in order to obtain width for ADA compliance and DKS Associates" bus shelters. This improvement may also be implemented in conjuction with district identity, streetscape, or themed urban design projects. "Highway 99 Traffic Safety and Circulation Study (2007) DKS Associates" EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 246 IMPLEMENTATION 8.2.a PROPOSED LONG-TERM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS The following Priority Transit Corridor improvement designations are included in Edmond's Comprehensive Plan. Improvements specific to Priority Transit Corridors are not specifically defined but generally include frequent and reliable service, and bus stop amenities which can include wider waiting areas, shelters, seating, shade, good illunination, accessibility for the disabled, and buffers from moving traffic. Transit Service / Priority Transit Corridor: 220th Street SW from 76th Avenue W to proposed light rail L5 Ped Amenities transit station at 1-5 interchange. (See Figure 10 on page 23 for Priority Transit Corridors designations in the subarea) L6 Transit Service / Ped Amenities L7 Transit Service / Ped Amenities L8 Transit Service / Ped Amenities L9 L10 L11 Priority Transit Corridor: 238th Street SW from SR 104 to SR 99. (See Figure 10 on page 23 for Priority Transit Corridors designations in the subarea) Improve local bus stop northbound at 240th (provide seating, shelter, refuge can, lighting, etc.) concurrent with new development at 240th Street node. Improve local bus stop southbound at 240th (provide seating, shelter, refuge can, lighting, etc.) concurrent with new development at 240th Street node. Transit Service Extend BAT lanes on SR 99 onto overcrossing of SR 104 and continuing to 244th Street. Efficiency IMPROVE TRAFFIC FLOW AND GENERAL SAFETY WITH ACCESS MANAGEMENT Access 238th Street to 236th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SR 99. Management Access 228th Street to 224th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SR 99. Management L12 Access Management L13 Access Management 220th Street to 216th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SR 99. 216th Street to 212th Street. Install raised median and limited c-curb on SR 99. 97 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN I Packet Pg. 247 SIMPLEME 8.2.a PROJECT SUPPORTIVE PLANNED IMPROVEMENT OTHER IMPROVE TRANSIT MOBILITY AND TRANSIT STOP ENVIRONMENT 0 SOURCE These priority corridors would emphasize good daily transit service and bus stop Comprehensive Plan 2015 amenities to make transit attractive. Transportation Element These priority corridors would emphasize good daily transit service and bus stop Comprehensive Plan 2015 amenities to make transit attractive. Transportation Element This improvement most likely needed when higher intensity redevelopment occurs within Workshop the 240th node. This improvement would best benefit from the installation of a traffic signal at SR 99 / Workshop and DKS Associates 240th Street. Extension of the BAT lanes through the bottleneck created by the four -lane overcrossing provides additional efficiency for SWIFT service which has experienced a drop in reliability Community Transit due to congestion within the corridor. IMPROVE TRAFFIC FLOW AND GENERAL SAFETY WITH ACCESS MANAGEMENT OUR For long segments with numerous driveways, use intermittently placed medians to allow SR 99 Access Management and left turn in/out functions at key driveways. Access managed segments must permit Cross Section Focused Assessment u-turns at adjacent signalized intersections. Use median to restrict left turns from stop- (2015) and controlled side streets with high collision histories unless the restriction conflicts with a Workshop short-term improvement or other proposed change in traffic control. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 248 8.2.a m c c c� 11 APPENDIX A: PLANNED ACTION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 99 EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Packet Pg. 249 8.2.a EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SU Packet Pg. 250 8.2.a Edmonds Highway 99 Subarea Plan JUNE 2017 Packet Pg. 251 8.2.a Attachment 6 t }Il 1 1 ■_r �'■�i 1 " 1, .. +..■ � � •�■ 1 11 � ••! .w• s '� �. ..'■ + ww -ate I �[ lidila. 220th St SW 't d *r ru " r 1•i� f■�rrlt� s` " r.■� AI 1 . •1■ L. 212thstSW ■��r.[ _L rL to.06 t ^ I 7 * "'' �■t T 1 �,.Li~- � . ■ f-r rla illr � r �11 �'�� 1�!'• d ` %- - ■ .■ � � -y: r1 y r 7,+--•ter• .. Edmonds T � � � ■ _ � Woodwa Aldercrest Health > �`: I, ■� _■_rr� 1 __ -" =`- y Health • � .. rr,. • � ■ I -!� �, �" ' "-- High School f1 Rehett' ` p ■ ■ " �1/■L f 1 tr111._w^1 ■ 1_1 Iwr-■.__J. F Vl L 1 L 1 t _p►_r_ti • • a� . z..•r �w �1 �a-_■_i_; .•..�.. �, i Swedish District ■�..... 1 T ; :rl"`Ll`y' ; :_ t ■, ., 3' Hospital E f IF -_rr■_-� . - or: r_-P . r._, : '1 ,•1. Q lfW Medicine • ^■ E .. k.-�� ,": ..r-■ �,,,., _.,,. �onal Heart _ - "-- .1 - : �,. sRegi�• / f Q •■yw~e `�:.'".: _.�; �.��: rl■ , Center IL.�.■-■,. �- •r 1 F■___ Jest. 6•Y r_rrt 220th St SW y K� .-' i ■' y 1ti""- ; i_,'� "1 a t� I �i r ' ` , +r 1 i �L�"ti r N � • '�._ ■ [ rw r R - �Z■-. Sir"t . w`� r t.. ! � rl. ■1rl ��� --F fa Plum Tree - ' • :IN `�';-. : _. _i■ �4- �-� Plaza International rl -� 2 . ■Y••`•- }..rr�-�L �; ■err_._" ai " ��,■il -rrw r J a_►_,Kf�� 3 1 ■ t (/� .� ■ .----..: L : L 3 District -----:; f 1 ■ ■ L [ ` _"� r.. ` 't , ■ �r 'Y �r=- 99 Ra4ch : _r_r- ►. 1! 1 1 Y " ■ ■ ■ 1 �■ _ ■ . 1 . r. r r ^, • PU�lIc ^ s■Y.. ice•_ ..• O ' 1 1 • ■ ■ r r 711"r Stora EMarkEt+i �"��'�I uS1l,�� i �,rl.g ■■-�,� ri---`�■_■.f i F^-sl eil 1 '� I B an"- ��. ' -a 1-"�� _�tl ■n 1= arket 228thStSW �_. r,■, s� _ �� ■---'•1 r-i, r-••,. -• . � 4 � :1 � ; I"1 r'1 - .. _ � .=ta..�i �j i � sf ��r f�� ..■♦.--- - + +_ `.r_ O a t+-71 � 1- 1 i r ■jll _r ... ■ . "C � � ._«,r' ' x K i� �-.1 f l - ■ ■ _ O --• 7 ■ .r 1 Irk : �■ r . ~ ` _r [ r .•�I jl 1 • i �� .� 00 ���..•� ti_.�"` `� 1 t .*'•. 230th St Bre O- r y i ,•f .!I♦ L , Y-r_ ' O ■IIT `-_ - 1 s ,-[ [a_. �CW ,♦I ? I «III 'F ,w •+� ---.,f ■ Plaz4 [ 1-. _s _.■� a r I• k r i ;,' " t •i.r�L..^•■ 1 c ■ r■ j ■rr.y 1 i' ;� dl ]■ W■ y71 a 1 ;:.■w■q L i 232nd St SW ■ ~�I 01141 • ■, 1 , ' ,' • • c L. Imo• _ J _ a r ■ —� r Las _r_■e_r r►F �nn .. • 1 ■ � � "L � f • J ■ � 1 f ■ L r--■r_..■y�rr_F„ 234th St SW � r . , � . :,�,r- " r " : r,-_L■�L■�rrr�rq 1 r] 1-1 r_ QJ �.i --I .��■� r■,■_a ` I C ` - L 'L rL ir 236th St SWr,r ' ..rr ■• :� t'+�. 1' �•1 r ■■■■r■LrJ•y i y■ 1• Aurora — - Marketplace Gateway Lake 238th St SW Ballinger -■= _ 1 District r• ~r 1 240t11 St SW �� 11._ir•" ;,�; ��:. MajorIr r B in tan *' r 1' `"' ti Transportation Q ' 242nd 5t 5W Caa actory ' ' t ; '; ' ' Gateway ' - -� . ■ ..I - � ■ .,... (D Fc, ■■��a, E VI QS ++ 244th St 5W •■_ ; � � Q Packet Pg. 252 8.2.b ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE, AMENDING CHAPTER 16.60 ENTITLED "CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE," AND ECDC 20.60.045 ENTITLED "FREESTANDING SIGNS — REGULATIONS," REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY TO CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, on May 10, 2017, the Planning Board held a public hearing on the draft regulations and, after discussion, recommended their adoption by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Board also held a supplemental public hearing on June 14, 2017 and, after formally considering the factors required for zoning map (rezone) amendments, recommended approval by the Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the recommended development regulations and zoning map changes on June 6, 2017; and WHEREAS, on June 20, 2017 the City Council held a public hearing on the Highway 99 Area development regulations and zoning map amendments; and WHEREAS, the City Council again reviewed the draft development regulations on July 18, 2017 and July 31, 2017; and WHEREAS, this proposal constitutes an area -wide rezone due to the size of the affected area and the number of different parcels and ownerships involved; and WHEREAS, the proposed development regulations for the CG chapter of the city code (see Attachment 1) implement the Highway 99 Subarea Plan and establish new standards, including new requirements to require electric vehicle charging stations, encourage transit use -1- Packet Pg. 253 8.2.b and pedestrian activity, and add clear design requirements, including for site layout, landscaping, amenity space, and building design; and WHEREAS, pursuant to ECDC 20.40.010, at least the following factors shall be considered in reviewing a proposed rezone: A. Comprehensive Plan. Whether the proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan; B. Zoning Ordinance. Whether the proposal is consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance, and whether the proposal is consistent with the purposes of the proposed zone district; C. Surrounding Area. The relationship of the proposed zoning change to the existing land uses and zoning of surrounding or nearby property; D. Changes. Whether there has been sufficient change in the character of the immediate or surrounding area or in city policy to justify the rezone; E. Suitability. Whether the property is economically and physically suitable for the uses allowed under the existing zoning, and under the proposed zoning. One factor could be the length of time the property has remained undeveloped compared to the surrounding area, and parcels elsewhere with the same zoning; F. Value. The relative gain to the public health, safety and welfare compared to the potential increase or decrease in value to the property owners; and WHEREAS, the city council finds, after considering the above factors and the Planning Board's recommendation, particularly including the proposed findings that were accepted by the Planning Board on June 14, 2017, that the proposal should be approved; NOW, THEREFORE, -2- Packet Pg. 254 8.2.b THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 16.60 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Attachment 1, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 2. Section 20.60.045 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Freestanding signs -- Regulations," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit 2, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 3. That certain real property depicted on Exhibit 3, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full, is hereby rezoned to CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE. Section 4. The Development Services Director or her designee is hereby authorized and directed to make appropriate amendments to the Edmonds Zoning Map in order to properly designate the rezoned property as "CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE" pursuant to Section 3 of this ordinance. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi- cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the chapter. APPROVED: MAYOR DAVID O. FARLING -3- Packet Pg. 255 8.2.b ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: Im JEFFREY B. TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 256 8.2.b SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2017, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE, AMENDING CHAPTER 16.60 ENTITLED "CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE," AND ECDC 20.60.045 ENTITLED "FREESTANDING SIGNS — REGULATIONS," REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY TO CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of ,2017. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY -5- Packet Pg. 257 8.2.b Chapter 16.60 EXHIBIT 1 CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE Sections: 16.60.000 CG zone. 16.60.005 Purposes. 16.60.010 Uses. 16.60.015 Location standards for sexually oriented businesses. 16.60.020 Site development standards — General. 16.60.030 Site development standards — Design. 16.60.040 Operating restrictions. 16.60.000 CG zone. A. This chapter establishes the general commercial zoning district. B. Definitions. For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions apply. 1. Amenity space: outdoor space for uses that are considered to provide an amenity or benefit to people 2. Auto sales use: facilities for the commercial sale of motor vehicles, including buildings and areas typically associated with auto sales use, such as areas for the display and storage of automobiles that are sold or serviced as part of the overall auto sales use. 3. Frontage: the front part of a property or building adjacent to a street 4. Primary frontage (or "primary street frontage"): the frontage for a property that is adjacent to only one street or, for a property that is adjacent to more than one street, the frontage that is adjacent to the street that is considered primary over any other streets to which the property is adjacent. 5. Stepback: The upper portion of a building that is required to be set (or stepped) further back than the minimum setback otherwise required by ECDC 16.60.020.A. C. Where this chapter conflicts with any other, this chapter shall prevail for the general commercial district. 16.60.005 Purposes. The CG zone has the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for business and commercial zones listed in Chapter 16.40 ECDC: A. Encourage economic vitality through businesses, investment, redevelopment, and efficient use of r land; B. Encourage safe and comfortable access for pedestrians, transit, and motorists; E a 2017.05.05 Page 1 Packet Pg. 258 8.2.b 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 different parts of the district, and be sensitive to adjacent residential zones. 16.60.010 Uses. A. Permitted Primary Uses. 1. All permitted or conditional uses in any other zone in this title, except as specifically prohibited by subsection (C) of this section or limited by subsections (B) and (D) of this section; 2. Halfway houses; m 3. Sexually oriented businesses, which shall comply with the location standards set forth in ECDC 16.60.015, the development regulations set forth in Chapter 17.50 ECDC, and the licensing regulations set forth in Chapter 4.52 ECC. B. Permitted Secondary Uses. 1. Off street parking and loading areas to serve a permitted use. 2. Indoor storage facilities that either comprise less than 40% of a permitted primary use of the building in which they are located or are in a separate accessory building or buildings comprising less than 40% of the total leasable building space used for the parcel's permitted primary use(s). 3. Outdoor storage areas that are integral to a permitted primary use, such as storage or display areas for automobile sales, building materials or building supply sales, or garden/nursery sales, provided that such outdoor uses are screened from adjacent residential zoning districts. C. Prohibited Uses 1. Mobile home parks. 2. Storage facilities or outdoor storage areas intended as a primary use, not secondary to a permitted use. Automobile wrecking yards, junk yards, or businesses primarily devoted to storage or mini storage are examples of this type of prohibited use. D. Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit. 1. Aircraft landings as regulated by Chapter 4.80 ECC. [Ord. 3981 § 1 (Att. A), 2014; Ord. 3635 § 1, 2007]. 16.60.015 Location standards for sexually oriented businesses: All sexually oriented businesses shall comply with the requirements of this section, the development regulations set forth in Chapter 17.50 ECDC, and Chapter 4.52 ECC. The standards established in this section shall not be construed to restrict or prohibit the following activities or products: (1) expressive dance; (2) plays, operas, musicals, or other dramatic works; (3) classes, seminars, or lectures conducted for a scientific or educational purpose; (4) printed materials or visual representations intended for educational or scientific purposes; (5) nudity within a locker room or other similar facility used for changing clothing in connection with athletic or exercise activities; (6) nudity within a hospital, clinic, or other similar medical facility for health -related 2017.05.05 Page 2 Packet Pg. 259 8.2.b purposes; and (7) all movies and videos that are rated G, PG, PG13, R, and NC17 by the Motion Picture Association of America. A. Separation Requirements. A sexually oriented business shall only be allowed to locate where specifically permitted and only if the following separation requirements are met: 1. No sexually oriented business shall be located closer than 300 feet to any of the following protected zones, whether such protected zone is located within or outside the city limits: a. A residential zone as defined in Chapter 16.10 ECDC; b. A public use zone as defined in Chapter 16.80 ECDC. 2. No sexually oriented business shall be located closer than 300 feet to any of the following ui protected uses, whether such protected use is located within or outside the city limits: m a. A public park; b. A public library; c. A nursery school or preschool; d. A public or private primary or secondary school; e. A church, temple, mosque, synagogue, or other similar facility used primarily for religious worship; f. A community center such as an amusement park, public swimming pool, public playground, or other facility of similar size and scope used primarily by children and families for recreational or entertainment purposes; g. A permitted residential use located in a commercial zone; h. A museum; and i. A public hospital or hospital district. 3. No sexually oriented business shall be located closer than 500 feet to any bar or tavern within or outside the city limits. B. Measurement. The separation requirements shall be measured by following a straight line from the nearest boundary line of a protected zone specified in subsection (A) of this section or nearest physical point of the structure housing a protected use specified in subsection (A) of this section to the nearest physical point of the tenant space occupied by a sexually oriented business. C. Variance from Separation Requirements. Variances may be granted from the separation requirements in subsection (A) of this section if the applicant demonstrates that the following criteria are met: 1. The natural physical features of the land would result in an effective separation between the proposed sexually oriented business and the protected zone or use in terms of visibility and access; 2. The proposed sexually oriented business complies with the goals and policies of the community development code; 2017.05.05 Page 3 Packet Pg. 260 8.2.b 3. The proposed sexually oriented business is otherwise compatible with adjacent and surrounding land uses; 4. There is a lack of alternative locations for the proposed sexually oriented business; and 5. The applicant has proposed conditions which would minimize the adverse secondary effects of the proposed sexually oriented business. D. Application of Separation Requirements to Existing Sexually Oriented Businesses. The separation requirements of this section shall not apply to a sexually oriented business once it has located within the city in accordance with the requirements of this section. [Ord. 3981 § 1 (Att. A), 2014; Ord. 3635 § 1, 2007]. 16.60.020 Site development standards — General. m A. Table. Except as hereinafter provided, development requirements shall be as follows: Dimensional Requirements Table Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width Minimum Street Setback Minimum Side/Rear Setback Maximum Height Maximum Floor Area CG None None 51/1012 0/15 ' 75" None 1 Fifteen feet from all lot lines adjacent to RM or RS zoned property; otherwise no setback is required by this subsection.. z The 5' minimum width applies only to permitted outdoor auto sales use; otherwise the minimum is 10'. a None for structures located within an area designated as a high-rise node on the comprehensive plan map. B. Maximum height for purposes of this chapter need not include railings, chimneys, mechanical equipment or other exterior building appurtenances that do not provide interior livable space. In no case shall building appurtenances together comprise more than 20 percent of the building surface area above the maximum height. C. Pedestrian area. 1. For purposes of this chapter, the pedestrian area described herein is the area adjacent to the street that encompasses the public right of way from the edge of the curb (or, if no curb, from the edge of pavement) and the street setback area, as identified in Table A of this section. 2. The pedestrian area is composed of three zones: the activity zone, the pedestrian zone, and the streetscape zone. Providing improvements to the pedestrian area, as needed to be consistent with this subsection on at least the primary street, is required as part of development projects, excluding development that would not add a new building or that consists of building improvements that do not add floor area equaling more than 10% of the building's existing floor area or that consists of additional parking stalls that comprise less than 10% of the existing parking stalls or that consists of development otherwise exempted under this chapter. a. Activity Zone. The activity zone shall be the open-air pedestrian area from the building front to the edge of the pedestrian zone. The activity zone is the section of the pedestrian area that is reserved for activities that commonly occur immediately adjacent to the building facade. Typical amenities or activities included in the activity 2017.05.05 Page 4 Packet Pg. 261 8.2.b zone include, but are not limited to, sidewalks, benches, potted plants, outdoor dining and shopping. The area shall be paved to connect with the pedestrian zone in an ADA- accessible manner. Stairs, stoops and raised decks or porches may be constructed in a portion of the activity zone. b. Pedestrian Zone. The pedestrian zone is located between the activity zone and the streetscape zone. The pedestrian zone consists of a minimum 5-foot clear and unobstructed path for safe and efficient through -traffic for pedestrians. Architectural projections and outdoor dining may be permitted to encroach into the pedestrian zone only where a minimum 5-foot clear path and 7-foot vertical clearance is maintained within the pedestrian zone. c. Streetscape Zone. The streetscape zone is located between the curb or pavement edge to the edge of the pedestrian zone and shall be a minimum of 5 feet wide. The streetscape zone is the section that is reserved for pedestrian use and for amenities and facilities that commonly occur between the adjacent curb or pavement edge and 0 pedestrian through -traffic. Typical amenities and facilities in the streetscape zone include, but are not limited to, street trees, street lights, benches, bus stops, and bike C racks. Street trees shall be required in conformance with the Edmonds Street Tree Plan. E v Q c Ln VI v� 5 aJ a Q N 5'min. � 5'-1o'+d18"-2'+,4c Note: Numerical Ranges for the Pedestrian Zone and the Activity Zone are typical but do riot control over other requirements of this chapter. (Illustration: Pedestrian Area) 2017.05.05 Page 5 Packet Pg. 262 8.2.b B. Building stepback when adjacent to IRS Zones 1. The portion of the buildings above 25 feet in height shall step back no less than 10 feet from the required setback to an adjacent IRS zone. That portion of the building over 55 feet in height shall be step back no less than 20 feet from the required setback to an adjacent IRS Zone. 2. Balconies, railings, parapets and similar features that do not enclose an interior space may extend into the stepback area in order to encourage more human activity and architectural features. Height Umit!75' — — — — — — — 1 I - I I � 1° � Q I � I S I � I ro 4 3 01 .. -1 1 S setback with 101 I—k-p, NA . K (Illustration: Setback and "Stepback" of building adjacent to IRS Zones) 16.60.030 Site development standards — Design. Design review by the architectural design board is required for any project that includes buildings exceeding 75 feet in height as identified in ECDC 16.70.020. Projects not exceeding this height may be reviewed by staff as a Type I decision. Regardless of what review process is required, all projects proposed in the CG zone must meet the design standards contained in this section. A. Screening and Buffering. 1. General. a. Retaining walls facing adjacent property or public rights of way shall not exceed 7 feet in height. A minimum of 4 feet of planted terrace is required between stepped wall segments. b. Tree landscaping may be clustered to soften the view of a building or parking lot, yet allow visibility to signage and building entry. 2017.05.05 Page 6 Packet Pg. 263 8.2.b c. Stormwater facilities shall be designed to minimize visual impacts and integrate landscaping into the design. d. All parking lots are required to provide Type V interior landscaping, consistent with Chapter 20.13 ECDC e. Type I landscaping is required for commercial, institutional and medical uses adjacent to single family or multifamily zones. The buffer shall be a minimum of 10 feet in width and continuous in length. f. Type I landscaping is required for residential parking areas adjacent to single family zones. The buffer shall be a minimum of 4 feet in width and continuous in length. g. Type I landscaping is required for commercial and multifamily uses adjacent to single family zones. The buffer shall be a minimum of four feet in width and 10 feet a in height and continuous in length. 06 h. If there is a loading zone and/or trash compactor area next to a single family or ui m multifamily zone, there shall be a minimum of a six -foot -high masonry wall plus a minimum width of 5 feet of Type I landscaping. Trash and utility storage elements shall not be permitted to encroach within street setbacks or within setbacks adjacent to single family zones. Mechanical equipment, including heat pumps and vi other mechanical elements, shall not be placed in the setbacks. E i. Landscape buffers, Type I, shall be used along the edge of parking areas adjacent to c single family zones. E j. Outdoor storage areas for commercial uses must be screened from adjacent RS Q a zones. � 2. Parking Lots Abutting Streets. m c 0 a. Type IV landscaping, minimum 5 feet wide, is required along all street frontages N where parking lots, excluding for auto sales use, abut the street right-of-way. b. For parking lots where auto sales uses are located, the minimum setback area must a - be landscaped to include a combination of vegetation and paved pedestrian areas. L c. All parking located under the building shall be completely screened from the public street by one of the following methods: i. Walls that have architectural treatment meeting at least three of the elements 4- 0 listed in ECDC 16.60.030.D.2.e; o ii. Type III planting and a grill that is 25 percent opaque; or r a -00 a iii. Grill work that is at least 80 percent opaque. Parking, Access, and Bicycle Storage Standards. a� 1. Parking requirements. Vehicle parking shall be provided as follows: U a. Nonresidential uses, one space per 500 square feet of leasable building space; and b. Residential uses, an average of 0.75 space per unit that is less than 700 square feet, 0 U an average of 1.25 parking spaces per unit that is between 700 and 1,100 square N feet, and otherwise 1.75 spaces per unit. c. In addition, guest parking for residential uses at a minimum ratio of one guest space E for every twenty required parking spaces. d. For mixed use development, a portion of the parking spaces may be shared f° between residential and commercial uses provided the director finds that the a r proposal is supported by a parking study and/or nationally recognized parking standards and that the site plan assures access for all shared parking uses. E 2017.05.05 Page 7 Packet Pg. 264 8.2.b e. Parking meeting the non-residential parking requirements shall be open to the public throughout business operating hours. 2. The first 3,000 square feet of commercial space in a mixed -use development with a shared parking plan is exempt from off street parking requirements. 3. The development services director may approve a different ratio for the vehicle parking required by standards of subsection B.1 of this section when an applicant submits parking data illustrating that the standards do not accurately apply to a specific development. The data submitted for an alternative parking ratio shall include, at a minimum, the size and type of the proposed development, and the anticipated peak and average parking loads of all uses. The director may approve a parking ratio that is based on the specific type of development and its primary users in relationship to: An analysis conducted using nationally recognized standards or methodology, such ui as is contained in the Urban Land Institute's most recent version of the publication m "Shared Parking" or the latest version of the Institute of Transportation Engineers publication "Parking Generation"; or A site -specific parking study that includes data and analysis for one or more of the vi following: as i. 1/4 mile proximity to a bus rapid transit station and methodology that takes E into account transit -oriented development; c ii. Use of transportation demand management policies, including but not limited to free or subsidized transit passes for residents and workers; iii. On -site car -share and bike -share facilities: or iv. Uses that serve patients, clients, or tenants who do not have the same vehicle parking needs as the general population. V. Other methods that reduce the need for vehicle parking. 4. All off-street surface parking shall be located to the side or rear of the primary building, except as otherwise allowed by this chapter, and shall be screened from the sidewalk by a wall or plantings between 2 to 4 feet in height. Outdoor parking areas shall comprise 40% or less of the public street frontage area within 100 feet of the primary street for the lot or tract and, on corner lots, may not be located at the corner. The requirements of this subsection do not apply to permitted auto sales uses. 5. Electric vehicle charging stations: One or more electric vehicle charging stations must be provided for all new development that includes housing. Required charging stations shall be installed to serve at least 10% of the required residential parking stalls. In addition, either additional stations or planned capacity (or a combination thereof) that can double the amount of initially required stations shall be provided. For this subsection, "planned capacity" means site design and construction that includes electrical wiring connection and ventilation, compliant with the City's building codes, to support potential or actual future electric vehicle charging stations. 6. Bicycle storage spaces: Bicycle storage spaces for multifamily housing, excluding housing for assisted living or other specialized facilities where the development services director finds that the targeted population is not likely to use bicycles, shall be provided for residents at a ratio of 1 bicycle storage space for each residential unit under 700 square feet and 2 bicycle storage spaces for each residential unit greater than 700 square feet. Bicycle storage spaces shall consist of storage racks, lockers, or other secure space to accommodate sheltered, safe, and 2017.05.05 Page 8 Packet Pg. 265 8.2.b convenient bicycle storage for building residents. Such space may be in a vehicle parking garage or another appropriate location but shall not be provided as open storage on a deck or balcony. Where sheltered bicycle storage is being provided within a dedicated common space of the building, the total number of required bicycle storage spaces may be reduced by up to 50% from that which is otherwise required, provided that one or more secure bicycle racks, useable by visitors, for at least four bicycles is provided within the front setback of the property. 7. Driveways accessing Highway 99: All driveway connections to Highway 99 must meet the applicable requirements of the Washington State Department of Transportation, including minimum requirements for distance between driveway access connections, which may be up to 250 feet to help promote traffic safety and minimize pedestrian -vehicle conflicts. 8. Paths within Parking Lots. Pedestrian paths in parking lots shall be delineated by separate paved routes that meet federal accessibility requirements and that use a variation in textures and/or colors and may include landscape barriers and landscape islands. Pedestrian paths shall be provided at least every 180 feet within parking lots. These shall be designed to provide access to onsite buildings as well as to pedestrian walkways that border the development. c. Pedestrian paths shall be a minimum of six feet in width and shall be separated from the parking area either horizontally or vertically (e.g. with curbs). Where paths cross vehicular lanes, raised traffic tables should be considered if feasible. d. Parking lots shall have pedestrian connections to the main sidewalk at a minimum of every 100 feet. 9. Bonus for Parking Below or Above Ground Floor. a. For projects where at least 50 percent of the parking is below or above the ground floor of the building, the following standards may be applied regardless of any ECDC standards that otherwise conflict: i. The minimum drive aisle width may be reduced to 22 feet. ii. The maximum ramp slope may be increased to 20 percent. iii. A mixture of full and reduced width parking stalls may be provided without demonstrating the stalls could also be provided at full width dimensions. 10. Drive —through facilities. Drive -through facilities such as, but not limited to, banks, cleaners, fast food, drug stores, and espresso stands, shall comply with the following: a. Drive -through windows and stacking lanes shall not be located along the facades of the building that face a street. b. No more than one direct entrance or exit from the drive -through shall be allowed as a separate curb cut onto an adjoining street. 11. Pedestrian and Transit Access. a. Pedestrian building entries must connect directly to the public sidewalk and to 2017.05.05 Page 9 Packet Pg. 266 8.2.b adjacent developments if feasible. b. Internal pedestrian routes shall extend to the property line and connect to existing pedestrian routes where applicable. Potential future connections shall also be identified such that pedestrian access between developments can occur without walking in the parking or access areas. c. Where a transit station or bus stop is located in front of or adjacent to a parcel, pedestrian connections linking the station or stop directly to the development are required. d. Pedestrian routes shall connect buildings on the same site to each other. C. Site Design and Layout: Overall, the design and use of each site shall be based on the building/street 06 relationship and on the integration of pedestrian features. This will take the form of either a Pedestrian Oriented Design Area or an Alternative Walkable Design Area, as described below in subsections 1 and 2 of this section, provided that an exceptions process, pursuant to Subsection 3 below, may be allowed under the provisions of this section. Additional site design and layout standards in this section must also 0 be met. v; 1. Pedestrian Oriented Design Area: Unless otherwise permitted under subsections 2 or 3 of this section, development must meet the requirements of this subsection for a pedestrian -oriented design area. Primary Frontage. At least 50% of a building's fagade facing the primary public street shall be located within 20 feet of the property line where the primary street frontage exists. The illustration below provides an example of this concept. The requirement does not apply to buildings that are behind another building on the same lot when the other building has a footprint of at least 3000 square feet and has met the requirement. Where site constraints preclude strict compliance with the requirement, the building line shall be measured one foot behind the line created by that constraint. On a corner lot or a lot with frontages on multiple streets, the development services director shall determine the primary street frontage considering the following: i. The street classification of the adjacent streets; ii. The prevailing orientation of other buildings in the area; iii. The length of the block face on which the building is located; or iv. Unique characteristics of the lot or street. The building must include a prominent pedestrian entry on the primary frontage. Vehicle parking, other than where permitted for vehicle sales use, shall not be located within the first 20 feet of the primary street frontage. The first 20 feet of the primary street frontage may include building space, landscaping, artwork, seating areas, outdoor displays, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities. 2017.05.05 Page 10 Packet Pg. 267 8.2.b 2. Alternative Walkable Design Area Option: An alternative to the pedestrian -oriented design area requirements of subsection 1 in this section may be allowed by the development services director only for sites that the director has found to have unique and significant constraints related to pedestrian access and for which a phased design plan to increase pedestrian access and connectivity has been submitted to the development services department. While they currently may be largely auto -oriented, Walkable Design Areas have a high potential for walking, bicycling and transit service. If a development is allowed to use this standard, it shall be subject to the requirements of this subsection. Building Placement: For any new building permitted on a property after August 1, a� 2017, a minimum of 50% of the building's fa4ade facing the primary street shall be located within 60 feet of the front property line or within 65 feet where a 5-foot > a� landscaping area is provided between the parking lot and the sidewalk. When site constraints preclude strict compliance with this requirement, the building line shall c be measured one foot behind the line created by that constraint. °' E On a corner lot or a lot with frontages on multiple streets, the development services -0 c director shall determine the primary street frontage considering the following: °' E i. The street classification of the adjacent streets; Q ii. The prevailing orientation of other buildings in thearea; iii. The length of the block face on which the building is located; iv. The location of any alley or parking areas; or c V. Unique characteristics of the lot or street. N c. No more than one double —sided row of parking spaces shall be allowed in the front of a building on its primary frontage. d. A pedestrian entrance must be located on the primary frontage. Building facade facing primary street shall be Pedestrian entrance located within 60 feet of the front property line C moo? u IT I T] '� �fa am am Primary street frontage e. Required Amenity spaces, under subsection 4 below, shall be located to connect the building to the street as much as practicable, provided that amenity space may also be located between buildings where the space will be used in common. 2017.05.05 Page 11 Packet Pg. 268 8.2.b 3. Exceptions Process for Pedestrian or Walkable Design: An exception to the exact requirements of subsections 1 or 2 of this section may be allowed by the hearing examiner under a Type IIIA decision process to provide for design flexibility that still encourages pedestrian orientation and efficient land uses when the following criteria are met: a. The property is located within 300 feet of a highway interchange and has unique pedestrian access constraints or is primarily used for motor vehicle sales; b. The development provides business and pedestrian areas that are near the primary street frontage and likely to be active throughout the day and evening; -" ui c. The development features a prominent building entry for pedestrian use that m is highly visible and connected by a well -lit walkway from the primary street frontage; d. At least 25% of the required amenity space shall be located to connect the building to the street in a manner that encourages pedestrian use and include vi c seating, landscaping, and artwork E e. Where a site has multiple buildings (excluding accessory utility buildings), 50% c or more of the required amenity space shall be located between buildings to E allow for shared use. Q f. No more than 50% of vehicle parking, other than that associated with a permitted vehicle sales facility use, may be located within 20 feet of the front property line. g. One or more buildings on the site must have at least two stories of useable space. 4. Amenity space. Amenity space is intended to provide residents, employees, and visitors with places for a variety of outdoor activities. a. An area equivalent to at least 5% of the building footprint shall be provided as amenity space. If a vehicle parking area is being added to the site without the concurrent development of a building of at least 2,000 square feet, amenity space must be provided to equal at least 5% of the additional parking area. b. The amenity space shall be outdoor space that incorporates pedestrian - oriented features, such as, but not limited to, seating, paths, gazebos, dining tables, pedestrian -scale lighting, and artwork. A minimum of 10% of the required amenity space shall be comprised of plantings, which may include tree canopy areas and other shade or screening features. Native vegetation is encouraged. c. The majority of the required amenity space must be provided in one or more of the following forms: i. Recreation areas: an open space available for recreation. The area may be spatially defined by landscaping rather than building frontages. Its surface shall consist primarily of hardy groundcover or a material conducive to playground or recreational use. Decorative landscape features, such as flower 2017.05.05 Page 12 Packet Pg. 269 8.2.b beds, shall not comprise more than 15% of the total area. Plazas: an open space available for community gathering and commercial activities. A plaza shall be spatially defined primarily by either building facades, with strong connections to interior uses, or close proximity to the public sidewalk, especially at the intersection of streets. Its surface shall be primarily hardscape, provided that trees, shade canopies, and other landscaping, as well as water features and artwork, may add visual or environmental features to the space. Squares or courtyards: an open space available for unstructured R recreation or community gathering purposes. A square is (L 06 spatially defined by building facades with strong connections to ui interior uses. Its surface shall be primarily hardscape, supplemented by trees and other landscaping. Water features and artwork are optional. o iv. Exception: A community garden may comprise a portion of any amenity space, provided that it: 1) is located more than 20 feet from a primary street E frontage; 2) is dedicated to ongoing use by residents of the site, including for growing edible produce; and 3) includes facilities for watering the garden and storing garden supplies. Lighting: All lighting shall be shielded and directed downward and away from adjacent parcels. This may be achieved through lower poles at the property lines and/or full "cut off' fixtures. a. Parking lots shall have lighting poles that are a maximum of 25 feet in height. Pedestrian paths or walkways and outdoor steps shall have pedestrian -scaled lighting focused on the travel path. Pole height shall be a maximum of 14 feet, although lighting bollards are preferred. b. For pedestrian paths and walkways on internal portions of the site, solar -powered lighting may be sufficient. c. Entries shall have lighting for safety and visibility integrated with the building/canopy. D. Building Design Standards 1. General. To provide variety and interest in appearance, the following design elements should be considered, and a project shall demonstrate how at least four of the elements will be used to vary the design of the site: a. Building massing and unit layout, b. Placement of structures and setbacks, c. Location of pedestrian and vehicular facilities, d. Composition and character of open space, plant materials and street trees, e. Variety in architectural elements, fagade articulation, and/or building materials, f. Roof variation in slope, height and/or materials. 2017.05.05 Page 13 Packet Pg. 270 8.2.b 2. Building Design and Massing. Buildings shall convey a visually distinct "base" and "top, which may be achieved through differences in massing elements and/or architectural details. The bulk and scale of buildings of over 3,000 square feet in footprint shall be mitigated through the use of massing and design elements such as facade articulation and modulation, setbacks, step -backs, distinctive roof lines or forms, and other design details. c. Primary Frontage: On the primary frontage, to provide visual connection between R activities inside and outside the building, 50% of the building facade between 2 and a 08 10 feet in height, as measured from the adjacent sidewalk, shall be comprised of a� m a� 0 c E r � - E !r Q ■ SM Min Transparency (may include all windows and glass doors, but not mirrored finishes) windows or doors that are transparent, the bottom of which may not be more than 4 feet above the adjacent sidewalk. A departure from this standard may be approved when the facade will not be visible from the public street due to the placement of other buildings on the site, provided that the requirements of subsection "e " in this section shall apply. i. On the primary frontage, no vehicle parking shall be located within the first 20 feet of the first level of a building facing the street except where such parking is underground. d. All Other Building Frontages: All street -facing facades within 30 feet of a public street, other than for the primary frontage or those facing an alley or the last block of a dead-end street, shall comply with the standard below. i. Thirty percent (30%) of the building facade between 2 and 10 feet in height shall be made of windows or doors that are transparent, the bottom of which may not be more than four feet above the adjacent sidewalk. Windows shall not be mirrored or have glass tinted darker than 40% in order to meet this requirement. e. Wall treatment: Building facades not subject to all requirements of ECDC 16.60.030.D.2.c or ECDC 16.60.030.D.2.d are intended to not display blank, unattractive walls to the public or to other building tenants. To accomplish this, walls greater than 30 feet in length shall have architectural treatment that incorporates at least four of the following elements into the design of the facade: i. Masonry (except for flat concrete block). ii. Concrete or masonry plinth at the base of the wall. 2017.05.05 Page 14 Packet Pg. 271 8.2.b iii. Belt courses of a different texture and color. iv. Projecting cornice. V. Projecting metal or wood canopy. vi. Decorative tilework. vii. Trellis containing planting. viii. Medallions. ix. Artwork or wall graphics. X. Vertical differentiation. xi. Decorative lighting fixtures. xii. Glazing xiii. An architectural element not listed above that is approved by the director to meet the intent of this subsection. 16.60.040 Operating restrictions. A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be carried on entirely within a completely enclosed building, except the following: 1. Public utilities; 2. Off street parking and loading areas; 3. Drive-in business; 4. Secondary uses permitted under ECDC 16.60.010(B); 5. Limited outdoor display of merchandise meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.65 ECDC; 6. Public markets; provided, that when located next to a single family residential zone, the market shall be entirely within a completely enclosed building; 7. Outdoor dining meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.75 ECDC; 8. Motorized and nonmotorized mobile vending units meeting the criteria of Chapter 4.12 ECC B. Interim Use Status — Public Markets. 1. Unless a public market is identified on a business license as a year-round market within the city of Edmonds, a premise licensed as a public market shall be considered a temporary use. As a temporary activity, any signs or structures used in accordance with the market do not require design review. When a location is utilized for a business use in addition to a public market, the public market use shall not decrease the required available parking for the other business use below the standards established in this chapter. C. Ongoing Uses. 1. Audio equipment at drive -through facilities shall not be audible off site. 2. Development subject to the standards of this chapter shall continue to meet the standards of this chapter except as specifically permitted otherwise. 2017.05.05 Page 15 Packet Pg. 272 8.2.b ` Formatted: Header 20.60.045 Freestanding signs — Regulations. A. Regulation. Permanent freestanding signs are discouraged. Freestanding signs shall be approved only where the applicant demonstrates by substantial evidence that there are no reasonable and feasible alternative signage methods to provide for adequate identification and/or advertisement. B. Maximum Area. The maximum area of a freestanding sign shall be as follows: Zone Maximum Area of Sign RS, RM 10 square feet (subdivision, PRD, multifamily) 4 square feet (individual residence sign BN, BP 24 square feet (single) 48 square feet (group) BC, BD, WMU, FVMU 32 square feet (single) 48 square feet (group) CW 32 square feet (single) 48 square feet (group) CG Sign area shall be governed by subsection (C) of this section C. Allowable Sign Area for Freestanding Signs — CG Zone. The total allowable sign area for freestanding signs on general commercial sites shall be 56 square feet or one-half square foot of sign area for each lineal foot of street frontage, whichever is greater, up to a maximum of 160 square feet of freestanding sign area. Freestanding signs count against the overall allowable permanent sign area. Multiple business or tenant sites shall further be allowed an additional 24 square feet of freestanding sign area for each commercial tenant or Formatted: Footer Page 1 Packet Pg. 273 8.2.b occupant in excess of one up to a maximum sign area of 160 square feet. Corner lots choosing to accumulate sign area under the provisions of subsection (E) of this section shall be limited to 160 square feet. D. Maximum Height. The maximum sign height of freestanding signs shall be as follows: Maximum Height of Zone Sign RS, RM 16 feet BN, BP, BC, BD, CG, CW, 114 feet WMU, FVMU Page 2 Formatted: Header Deleted: CG Formatted Table Deleted: 25 feet Formatted: Footer Packet Pg. 274 VY 8.2.c L O a O ORDINANCE NO. Q AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE, a AMENDING CHAPTER 16.60 ENTITLED "CG — GENERAL 0a N COMMERCIAL ZONE," AND ECDC 20.60.045 ENTITLED "FREESTANDING SIGNS — REGULATIONS," REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY TO CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL o ZONE, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, on May 10, 2017, the Planning Board held a public hearing on the draft regulations and, after discussion, recommended their adoption by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Board also held a supplemental public hearing on June 14, 2017 and, after formally considering the factors required for zoning map (rezone) amendments, recommended approval by the Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the recommended development regulations and zoning map changes on June 6, 2017; and WHEREAS, on June 20, 2017 the City Council held a public hearing on the Highway 99 Area development regulations and zoning map amendments; and WHEREAS, the City Council again reviewed the draft development regulations on July 18, 2017 and July 31, 2017; and WHEREAS, this proposal constitutes an area -wide rezone due to the size of the affected area and the number of different parcels and ownerships involved; and WHEREAS, the proposed development regulations for the CG chapter of the city code (see Attachment 1) implement the Highway 99 Subarea Plan and establish new standards, including new requirements to require electric vehicle charging stations, encourage transit use -1- Packet Pg. 276 8.2.c L O and pedestrian activity, and add clear design requirements, including for site layout, landscaping, .2 amenity space, and building design; and Q d c WHEREAS, pursuant to ECDC 20.40.010, at least the following factors shall be o a considered in reviewing a proposed rezone: A. Comprehensive Plan. Whether the proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan; B. Zoning Ordinance. Whether the proposal is consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance, and whether the proposal is consistent with the purposes of the proposed zone district; C. Surrounding Area. The relationship of the proposed zoning change to the existing land uses and zoning of surrounding or nearby property; D. Changes. Whether there has been sufficient change in the character of the immediate or surrounding area or in city policy to justify the rezone; E. Suitability. Whether the property is economically and physically suitable for the uses allowed under the existing zoning, and under the proposed zoning. One factor could be the length of time the property has remained undeveloped compared to the surrounding area, and parcels elsewhere with the same zoning; F. Value. The relative gain to the public health, safety and welfare compared to the potential increase or decrease in value to the property owners; and WHEREAS, the city council finds, after considering the above factors and the Planning Board's recommendation, particularly including the proposed findings that were accepted by the Planning Board on June 14, 2017, that the proposal should be approved; NOW, THEREFORE, -2- Packet Pg. 277 8.2.c L O THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO c ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: a d c Section 1. Chapter 16.60 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, W a entitled "CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE," is hereby amended to read as set forth in 0a bi Attachment 1, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 2. Section 20.60.045 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Freestanding signs -- Regulations," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit 2, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 3. That certain real property depicted on Exhibit 3, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full, is hereby rezoned to CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE. Section 4. The Development Services Director or her designee is hereby authorized and directed to make appropriate amendments to the Edmonds Zoning Map in order to properly designate the rezoned property as "CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE" pursuant to Section 3 of this ordinance. Section 5. Applicability. This ordinance shall not apply to applications for building permits on property within the area shown on Exhibit 3 where the building permit applicant obtained a design review approval for the same property between July 1, 2017 and August 15, 2017, PROVIDED THAT after September 30, 2017, this ordinance shall apply to all properties regardless of when a building permit applicant obtained design review approval. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi- cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect -3- Packet Pg. 278 8.2.c L O five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the .2 chapter. Q d c APPROVED: MAYOR DAVID O. EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: M. JEFFREY B. TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. a ca Packet Pg. 279 8.2.c SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2017, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE, AMENDING CHAPTER 16.60 ENTITLED "CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE," AND ECDC 20.60.045 ENTITLED "FREESTANDING SIGNS — REGULATIONS," REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY TO CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of ,2017. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY a ca -5- Packet Pg. 280 8.2.c L O a O c.i Q Chapter 16.60 EXHIBIT 1 CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE a Cd Sections: N a� 16.60.000 CG zone. 16.60.005 Purposes. 16.60.010 Uses. 16.60.015 Location standards for sexually oriented businesses. 16.60.020 Site development standards — General. 16.60.030 Site development standards — Design. 16.60.040 Operating restrictions. 16.60.000 CG zone. A. This chapter establishes the general commercial zoning district. B. Definitions. For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions apply. 1. Amenity space: outdoor space for uses that are considered to provide an amenity or benefit to people 2. Auto sales use: facilities for the commercial sale of motor vehicles, including buildings and areas typically associated with auto sales use, such as areas for the display and storage of automobiles that are sold or serviced as part of the overall auto sales use. 3. Frontage: the front part of a property or building adjacent to a street 4. Primary frontage (or "primary street frontage"): the frontage for a property that is adjacent to only one street or, for a property that is adjacent to more than one street, the frontage that is adjacent to the street that is considered primary over any other streets to which the property is adjacent. 5. Stepback: The upper portion of a building that is required to be set (or stepped) further back than the minimum setback otherwise required by ECDC 16.60.020.A. C. Where this chapter conflicts with any other, this chapter shall prevail for the general commercial district. 16.60.005 Purposes. The CG zone has the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for business and commercial zones listed in Chapter 16.40 ECDC: A. Encourage economic vitality through businesses, investment, redevelopment, and efficient use of Q land; B. Encourage safe and comfortable access for pedestrians, transit, and motorists; E 2017.05.05 Page 1 Packet Pg. 281 8.2.c L 0 C. Encourage attractive mixed use development, affordable housing, and a variety of commercial uses; o and D. Recognize the district's evolving identity and sense of place, including distinctions between different Q parts of the district, and be sensitive to adjacent residential zones. c a- 16.60.010 Uses. Cd A. Permitted Primary Uses. 1. All permitted or conditional uses in any other zone in this title, except as specifically m prohibited by subsection (C) of this section or limited by subsections (B) and (D) of this section; o N 2. Halfway houses; r.+ E 3. Sexually oriented businesses, which shall comply with the location standards set forth in ECDC 16.60.015, the development regulations set forth in Chapter 17.50 ECDC, and the licensing E E regulations set forth in Chapter 4.52 ECC. Q a B. Permitted Secondary Uses. 1. Off street parking and loading areas to serve a permitted use. m c 0 2. Indoor storage facilities that either comprise less than 40% of a permitted primary use of the c0a building in which they are located or are in a separate accessory building or buildings comprising a less than 40% of the total leasable building space used for the parcel's permitted primary use(s). M 3. Outdoor storage areas that are integral to a permitted primary use, such as storage or display ' cn areas for automobile sales, building materials or building supply sales, or garden/nursery sales, o provided that such outdoor uses are screened from adjacent residential zoning districts. r_ 0 C. Prohibited Uses. r o 1. Mobile home parks. 2. Storage facilities or outdoor storage areas intended as a primary use, not secondary to a permitted use. Automobile wrecking yards, junk yards, or businesses primarily devoted to storage or mini storage are examples of this type of prohibited use. D. Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit. 1. Aircraft landings as regulated by Chapter 4.80 ECC. [Ord. 3981 § 1 (Att. A), 2014; Ord. 3635 § 1, 2007]. 16.60.015 Location standards for sexually oriented businesses: All sexually oriented businesses shall comply with the requirements of this section, the development regulations set forth in Chapter 17.50 ECDC, and Chapter 4.52 ECC. The standards established in this section shall not be construed to restrict or prohibit the following activities or products: (1) expressive dance; (2) plays, operas, musicals, or other dramatic works; (3) classes, seminars, or lectures conducted for a scientific or educational purpose; (4) printed materials or visual representations intended for educational or scientific purposes; (5) nudity within a locker room or other similar facility used for changing clothing in connection with athletic or exercise activities; (6) nudity within a hospital, clinic, or other similar medical facility for health -related 2017.05.05 Page 2 Packet Pg. 282 8.2.c purposes; and (7) all movies and videos that are rated G, PG, PG13, R, and NC17 by the Motion Picture Association of America. A. Separation Requirements. A sexually oriented business shall only be allowed to locate where specifically permitted and only if the following separation requirements are met: 1. No sexually oriented business shall be located closer than 300 feet to any of the following protected zones, whether such protected zone is located within or outside the city limits: a. A residential zone as defined in Chapter 16.10 ECDC; b. A public use zone as defined in Chapter 16.80 ECDC. 2. No sexually oriented business shall be located closer than 300 feet to any of the following protected uses, whether such protected use is located within or outside the city limits: a. A public park; b. A public library; c. A nursery school or preschool; d. A public or private primary or secondary school; e. A church, temple, mosque, synagogue, or other similar facility used primarily for religious worship; f. A community center such as an amusement park, public swimming pool, public playground, or other facility of similar size and scope used primarily by children and families for recreational or entertainment purposes; g. A permitted residential use located in a commercial zone; h. A museum; and i. A public hospital or hospital district. No sexually oriented business shall be located closer than 500 feet to any bar or tavern within or outside the city limits. B. Measurement. The separation requirements shall be measured by following a straight line from the nearest boundary line of a protected zone specified in subsection (A) of this section or nearest physical point of the structure housing a protected use specified in subsection (A) of this section to the nearest physical point of the tenant space occupied by a sexually oriented business. C. Variance from Separation Requirements. Variances may be granted from the separation requirements in subsection (A) of this section if the applicant demonstrates that the following criteria are met: 1. The natural physical features of the land would result in an effective separation between the proposed sexually oriented business and the protected zone or use in terms of visibility and access; 2. The proposed sexually oriented business complies with the goals and policies of the community development code; 2017.05.05 Page 3 Packet Pg. 283 8.2.c 3. The proposed sexually oriented business is otherwise compatible with adjacent and surrounding land uses; 4. There is a lack of alternative locations for the proposed sexually oriented business; and The applicant has proposed conditions which would minimize the adverse secondary effects of the proposed sexually oriented business. D. Application of Separation Requirements to Existing Sexually Oriented Businesses. The separation requirements of this section shall not apply to a sexually oriented business once it has located within the city in accordance with the requirements of this section. [Ord. 3981 § 1 (Att. A), 2014; Ord. 3635 § 1, 2007]. 16.60.020 Site development standards — General. A. Table. Except as hereinafter provided, development requirements shall be as follows: Dimensional Requirements Table Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width Minimum Street Setback Minimum Side/Rear Setback Maximum Height Maximum Floor Area CG None None 51/1012 0/15 ' 75" None 1 Fifteen feet from all lot lines adjacent to RM or RS zoned property; otherwise no setback is required by this subsection.. z The 5' minimum width applies only to permitted outdoor auto sales use; otherwise the minimum is 10'. a None for structures located within an area designated as a high-rise node on the comprehensive plan map. B. Maximum height for purposes of this chapter need not include railings, chimneys, mechanical equipment or other exterior building appurtenances that do not provide interior livable space. In no case shall building appurtenances together comprise more than 20 percent of the building surface area above the maximum height. C. Pedestrian area. 1. For purposes of this chapter, the pedestrian area described herein is the area adjacent to the street that encompasses the public right of way from the edge of the curb (or, if no curb, from the edge of pavement) and the street setback area, as identified in Table A of this section. 2. The pedestrian area is composed of three zones: the activity zone, the pedestrian zone, and the streetscape zone. Providing improvements to the pedestrian area, as needed to be consistent with this subsection on at least the primary street, is required as part of development projects, excluding development that would not add a new building or that consists of building improvements that do not add floor area equaling more than 10% of the building's existing floor area or that consists of additional parking stalls that comprise less than 10% of the existing parking stalls or that consists of development otherwise exempted under this chapter. a. Activity Zone. The activity zone shall be the open-air pedestrian area from the building front to the edge of the pedestrian zone. The activity zone is the section of the pedestrian area that is reserved for activities that commonly occur immediately adjacent to the building facade. Typical amenities or activities included in the activity 2017.05.05 Page 4 Packet Pg. 284 8.2.c L O zone include, but are not limited to, sidewalks, benches, potted plants, outdoor dining o and shopping. The area shall be paved to connect with the pedestrian zone in an ADA- accessible manner. Stairs, stoops and raised decks or porches may be constructed in a Q portion of the activity zone. c b. Pedestrian Zone. The pedestrian zone is located between the activity zone and the a streetscape zone. The pedestrian zone consists of a minimum 5-foot clear and Ca unobstructed path for safe and efficient through -traffic for pedestrians. Architectural a� projections and outdoor dining may be permitted to encroach into the pedestrian zone only where a minimum 5-foot clear path and 7-foot vertical clearance is maintained within the pedestrian zone. p c. Streetscape Zone. The streetscape zone is located between the curb or pavement edge to the edge of the pedestrian zone and shall be a minimum of 5 feet wide. The streetscape zone is the section that is reserved for pedestrian use and for amenities and facilities that commonly occur between the adjacent curb or pavement edge and pedestrian through -traffic. Typical amenities and facilities in the streetscape zone include, but are not limited to, street trees, street lights, benches, bus stops, and bike racks. Street trees shall be required in conformance with the Edmonds Street Tree Plan. v Q c Ln VI v� 5 aJ a Q N 5'min. � 5'-1o'+d18"-2'+,4c Note: Numerical Ranges for the Pedestrian Zone and the Activity Zone are typical but do riot control over other requirements of this chapter. (Illustration: Pedestrian Area) 2017.05.05 Page 5 Packet Pg. 285 8.2.c L O a O B. Building stepback when adjacent to IRS Zones Q 1. The portion of the buildings above 25 feet in height shall step back no less than 10 feet from the required setback to an adjacent IRS zone. That portion of the building over 55 feet in height shall be step back no less than 20 feet from the required setback to an adjacent IRS Zone. a Ca 2. Balconies, railings, parapets and similar features that do not enclose an interior space may an extend into the stepback area in order to encourage more human activity and architectural W features. > Height Umit!75' — — — — — — — 1 I - I I � 1° � Q I � I S I � I ro 4 3 01 .. -1 1 S setback with 101 I—k-p, NA . K (Illustration: Setback and "Stepback" of building adjacent to IRS Zones) 16.60.030 Site development standards — Design. Design review by the architectural design board is required for any project that includes buildings exceeding 75 feet in height as identified in ECDC 16.70.020. Projects not exceeding this height may be reviewed by staff as a Type I decision. Regardless of what review process is required, all projects proposed in the CG zone must meet the design standards contained in this section. A. Screening and Buffering. 1. General. a. Retaining walls facing adjacent property or public rights of way shall not exceed 7 feet in height. A minimum of 4 feet of planted terrace is required between stepped wall segments. b. Tree landscaping may be clustered to soften the view of a building or parking lot, yet allow visibility to signage and building entry. 2017.05.05 Page 6 Packet Pg. 286 8.2.c c. Stormwater facilities shall be designed to minimize visual impacts and integrate landscaping into the design. d. All parking lots are required to provide Type V interior landscaping, consistent with Chapter 20.13 ECDC e. Type I landscaping is required for commercial, institutional and medical uses adjacent to single family or multifamily zones. The buffer shall be a minimum of 10 feet in width and continuous in length. f. Type I landscaping is required for residential parking areas adjacent to single family zones. The buffer shall be a minimum of 4 feet in width and continuous in length. g. Type I landscaping is required for commercial and multifamily uses adjacent to single family zones. The buffer shall be a minimum of four feet in width and 10 feet in height and continuous in length. h. If there is a loading zone and/or trash compactor area next to a single family or multifamily zone, there shall be a minimum of a six -foot -high masonry wall plus a minimum width of 5 feet of Type I landscaping. Trash and utility storage elements shall not be permitted to encroach within street setbacks or within setbacks adjacent to single family zones. Mechanical equipment, including heat pumps and other mechanical elements, shall not be placed in the setbacks. i. Landscape buffers, Type I, shall be used along the edge of parking areas adjacent to single family zones. j. Outdoor storage areas for commercial uses must be screened from adjacent RS zones. 2. Parking Lots Abutting Streets. a. Type IV landscaping, minimum 5 feet wide, is required along all street frontages where parking lots, excluding for auto sales use, abut the street right-of-way. b. For parking lots where auto sales uses are located, the minimum setback area must be landscaped to include a combination of vegetation and paved pedestrian areas. c. All parking located under the building shall be completely screened from the public street by one of the following methods: i. Walls that have architectural treatment meeting at least three of the elements listed in ECDC 16.60.030.D.2.e; ii. Type III planting and a grill that is 25 percent opaque; or iii. Grill work that is at least 80 percent opaque. Parking, Access, and Bicycle Storage Standards. 1. Parking requirements. Vehicle parking shall be provided as follows: a. Nonresidential uses, one space per 500 square feet of leasable building space; and b. Residential uses, an average of 0.75 space per unit that is less than 700 square feet, an average of 1.25 parking spaces per unit that is between 700 and 1,100 square feet, and otherwise 1.75 spaces per unit. c. In addition, guest parking for residential uses at a minimum ratio of one guest space for every twenty required parking spaces. d. For mixed use development, a portion of the parking spaces may be shared between residential and commercial uses provided the director finds that the proposal is supported by a parking study and/or nationally recognized parking standards and that the site plan assures access for all shared parking uses. 2017.05.05 Page 7 Packet Pg. 287 8.2.c L O e. Parking meeting the non-residential parking requirements shall be open to the o public throughout business operating hours. 2. The first 3,000 square feet of commercial space in a mixed -use development with a shared Q parking plan is exempt from off street parking requirements. 3. The development services director may approve a different ratio for the vehicle parking required by standards of subsection B.1 of this section when an applicant submits parking a data illustrating that the standards do not accurately apply to a specific development. The Cd data submitted for an alternative parking ratio shall include, at a minimum, the size and type of the proposed development, and the anticipated peak and average parking loads of all uses. The director may approve a parking ratio that is based on the specific type of m development and its primary users in relationship to: An analysis conducted using nationally recognized standards or methodology, such as is contained in the Urban Land Institute's most recent version of the publication "Shared Parking" or the latest version of the Institute of Transportation Engineers publication "Parking Generation"; or A site -specific parking study that includes data and analysis for one or more of the following: i. 1/4 mile proximity to a bus rapid transit station and methodology that takes into account transit -oriented development; ii. Use of transportation demand management policies, including but not limited to free or subsidized transit passes for residents and workers; iii. On -site car -share and bike -share facilities: or iv. Uses that serve patients, clients, or tenants who do not have the same vehicle parking needs as the general population. V. Other methods that reduce the need for vehicle parking. 4. All off-street surface parking shall be located to the side or rear of the primary building, except as otherwise allowed by this chapter, and shall be screened from the sidewalk by a wall or plantings between 2 to 4 feet in height. Outdoor parking areas shall comprise 40% or less of the public street frontage area within 100 feet of the primary street for the lot or tract and, on corner lots, may not be located at the corner. The requirements of this subsection do not apply to permitted auto sales uses. 5. Electric vehicle charging stations: One or more electric vehicle charging stations must be provided for all new development that includes housing. Required charging stations shall be installed to serve at least 10% of the required residential parking stalls. In addition, either additional stations or planned capacity (or a combination thereof) that can double the amount of initially required stations shall be provided. For this subsection, "planned capacity" means site design and construction that includes electrical wiring connection and ventilation, compliant with the City's building codes, to support potential or actual future electric vehicle charging stations. 6. Bicycle storage spaces: Bicycle storage spaces for multifamily housing, excluding housing for assisted living or other specialized facilities where the development services director finds that the targeted population is not likely to use bicycles, shall be provided for residents at a ratio of 1 bicycle storage space for each residential unit under 700 square feet and 2 bicycle storage spaces for each residential unit greater than 700 square feet. Bicycle storage spaces shall consist of storage racks, lockers, or other secure space to accommodate sheltered, safe, and 2017.05.05 Page 8 Packet Pg. 288 8.2.c L O convenient bicycle storage for building residents. Such space may be in a vehicle parking garage o or another appropriate location but shall not be provided as open storage on a deck or balcony. Where sheltered bicycle storage is being provided within a dedicated common space of the Q building, the total number of required bicycle storage spaces may be reduced by up to 50% from that which is otherwise required, provided that one or more secure bicycle racks, useable by C visitors, for at least four bicycles is provided within the front setback of the property. a Ca 7. Driveways accessing Highway 99: All driveway connections to Highway 99 must meet the a� applicable requirements of the Washington State Department of Transportation, including minimum requirements for distance between driveway access connections, which may be up to 250 feet to help promote traffic safety and minimize pedestrian -vehicle conflicts. p 8. Paths within Parking Lots. Pedestrian paths in parking lots shall be delineated by separate paved routes that meet federal accessibility requirements and that use a variation in textures and/or colors and may include landscape barriers and landscape islands. Pedestrian paths shall be provided at least every 180 feet within parking lots. These shall be designed to provide access to onsite buildings as well as to pedestrian walkways that border the development. c. Pedestrian paths shall be a minimum of six feet in width and shall be separated from the parking area either horizontally or vertically (e.g. with curbs). Where paths cross vehicular lanes, raised traffic tables should be considered if feasible. d. Parking lots shall have pedestrian connections to the main sidewalk at a minimum of every 100 feet. 9. Bonus for Parking Below or Above Ground Floor. a. For projects where at least 50 percent of the parking is below or above the ground floor of the building, the following standards may be applied regardless of any ECDC standards that otherwise conflict: i. The minimum drive aisle width may be reduced to 22 feet. ii. The maximum ramp slope may be increased to 20 percent. iii. A mixture of full and reduced width parking stalls may be provided without demonstrating the stalls could also be provided at full width dimensions. 10. Drive —through facilities. Drive -through facilities such as, but not limited to, banks, cleaners, fast food, drug stores, and espresso stands, shall comply with the following: a. Drive -through windows and stacking lanes shall not be located along the facades of the building that face a street. b. No more than one direct entrance or exit from the drive -through shall be allowed as a separate curb cut onto an adjoining street. 11. Pedestrian and Transit Access. a. Pedestrian building entries must connect directly to the public sidewalk and to 2017.05.05 Page 9 Packet Pg. 289 8.2.c adjacent developments if feasible. b. Internal pedestrian routes shall extend to the property line and connect to existing pedestrian routes where applicable. Potential future connections shall also be identified such that pedestrian access between developments can occur without walking in the parking or access areas. c. Where a transit station or bus stop is located in front of or adjacent to a parcel, pedestrian connections linking the station or stop directly to the development are required. d. Pedestrian routes shall connect buildings on the same site to each other. C. Site Design and Layout: Overall, the design and use of each site shall be based on the building/street relationship and on the integration of pedestrian features. This will take the form of either a Pedestrian Oriented Design Area or an Alternative Walkable Design Area, as described below in subsections 1 and 2 of this section, provided that an exceptions process, pursuant to Subsection 3 below, may be allowed under the provisions of this section. Additional site design and layout standards in this section must also be met. 1. Pedestrian Oriented Design Area: Unless otherwise permitted under subsections 2 or 3 of this section, development must meet the requirements of this subsection for a pedestrian -oriented design area. Primary Frontage. At least 50% of a building's fagade facing the primary public street shall be located within 20 feet of the property line where the primary street frontage exists. The illustration below provides an example of this concept. The requirement does not apply to buildings that are behind another building on the same lot when the other building has a footprint of at least 3000 square feet and has met the requirement. Where site constraints preclude strict compliance with the requirement, the building line shall be measured one foot behind the line created by that constraint. On a corner lot or a lot with frontages on multiple streets, the development services director shall determine the primary street frontage considering the following: i. The street classification of the adjacent streets; ii. The prevailing orientation of other buildings in the area; iii. The length of the block face on which the building is located; or iv. Unique characteristics of the lot or street. The building must include a prominent pedestrian entry on the primary frontage. Vehicle parking, other than where permitted for vehicle sales use, shall not be located within the first 20 feet of the primary street frontage. The first 20 feet of the primary street frontage may include building space, landscaping, artwork, seating areas, outdoor displays, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities. 2017.05.05 Page 10 Packet Pg. 290 8.2.c L O a O c.i Q 2. Alternative Walkable Design Area Option: An alternative to the pedestrian -oriented design area requirements of subsection 1 in this section may be allowed by the development services M director only for sites that the director has found to have unique and significant constraints a related to pedestrian access and for which a phased design plan to increase pedestrian access Cato and connectivity has been submitted to the development services department. While they currently may be largely auto -oriented, Walkable Design Areas have a high potential for walking, bicycling and transit service. If a development is allowed to use this standard, it shall be subject o to the requirements of this subsection. Building Placement: For any new building permitted on a property after August 1, 2017, a minimum of 50% of the building's fa4ade facing the primary street shall be located within 60 feet of the front property line or within 65 feet where a 5-foot landscaping area is provided between the parking lot and the sidewalk. When site constraints preclude strict compliance with this requirement, the building line shall be measured one foot behind the line created by that constraint. On a corner lot or a lot with frontages on multiple streets, the development services director shall determine the primary street frontage considering the following: i. The street classification of the adjacent streets; ii. The prevailing orientation of other buildings in thearea; iii. The length of the block face on which the building is located; iv. The location of any alley or parking areas; or V. Unique characteristics of the lot or street. c. No more than one double —sided row of parking spaces shall be allowed in the front of a building on its primary frontage. d. A pedestrian entrance must be located on the primary frontage. Building facade facing primary street shall be Pedestrian entrance located within 60 feet of the front property line C moo? u IT I T] '� �fa am am Primary street frontage e. Required Amenity spaces, under subsection 4 below, shall be located to connect the building to the street as much as practicable, provided that amenity space may also be located between buildings where the space will be used in common. 2017.05.05 Page 11 Packet Pg. 291 8.2.c L O 3. Exceptions Process for Pedestrian or Walkable Design: An exception to the exact a requirements of subsections 1 or 2 of this section may be allowed by the hearing examiner under a Type IIIA decision process to provide for design flexibility that still Q encourages pedestrian orientation and efficient land uses when the following criteria are met: C a a. The property is located within 300 feet of a highway interchange and has Ca unique pedestrian access constraints or is primarily used for motor vehicle sales; W b. The development provides business and pedestrian areas that are near the m primary street frontage and likely to be active throughout the day and evening; c. The development features a prominent building entry for pedestrian use that is highly visible and connected by a well -lit walkway from the primary street frontage; d. At least 25% of the required amenity space shall be located to connect the building to the street in a manner that encourages pedestrian use and include seating, landscaping, and artwork e. Where a site has multiple buildings (excluding accessory utility buildings), 50% or more of the required amenity space shall be located between buildings to allow for shared use. f. No more than 50% of vehicle parking, other than that associated with a permitted vehicle sales facility use, may be located within 20 feet of the front property line. g. One or more buildings on the site must have at least two stories of useable space. 4. Amenity space. Amenity space is intended to provide residents, employees, and visitors with places for a variety of outdoor activities. a. An area equivalent to at least 5% of the building footprint shall be provided as amenity space. If a vehicle parking area is being added to the site without the concurrent development of a building of at least 2,000 square feet, amenity space must be provided to equal at least 5% of the additional parking area. b. The amenity space shall be outdoor space that incorporates pedestrian - oriented features, such as, but not limited to, seating, paths, gazebos, dining tables, pedestrian -scale lighting, and artwork. A minimum of 10% of the required amenity space shall be comprised of plantings, which may include tree canopy areas and other shade or screening features. Native vegetation is encouraged. c. The majority of the required amenity space must be provided in one or more of the following forms: i. Recreation areas: an open space available for recreation. The area may be spatially defined by landscaping rather than building frontages. Its surface shall consist primarily of hardy groundcover or a material conducive to playground or recreational use. Decorative landscape features, such as flower 2017.05.05 Page 12 Packet Pg. 292 8.2.c L O beds, shall not comprise more than 15% of the total area. o Plazas: an open space available for community gathering and commercial activities. A plaza shall be spatially defined primarily a by either building facades, with strong connections to interior c uses, or close proximity to the public sidewalk, especially at the intersection of streets. Its surface shall be primarily hardscape, a provided that trees, shade canopies, and other landscaping, as °d vi well as water features and artwork, may add visual or environmental features to the space. iii. Squares or courtyards: an open space available for unstructured recreation or community gathering purposes. A square is spatially defined by building facades with strong connections to interior uses. Its surface shall be primarily hardscape, supplemented by trees and other landscaping. Water features and artwork are optional. iv. Exception: A community garden may comprise a portion of any amenity space, provided that it: 1) is located more than 20 feet from a primary street frontage; 2) is dedicated to ongoing use by residents of the site, including for growing edible produce; and 3) includes facilities for watering the garden and storing garden supplies. Lighting: All lighting shall be shielded and directed downward and away from adjacent parcels. This may be achieved through lower poles at the property lines and/or full "cut off' fixtures. a. Parking lots shall have lighting poles that are a maximum of 25 feet in height. Pedestrian paths or walkways and outdoor steps shall have pedestrian -scaled lighting focused on the travel path. Pole height shall be a maximum of 14 feet, although lighting bollards are preferred. b. For pedestrian paths and walkways on internal portions of the site, solar -powered lighting may be sufficient. c. Entries shall have lighting for safety and visibility integrated with the building/canopy. D. Building Design Standards 1. General. To provide variety and interest in appearance, the following design elements should be considered, and a project shall demonstrate how at least four of the elements will be used to vary the design of the site: a. Building massing and unit layout, b. Placement of structures and setbacks, c. Location of pedestrian and vehicular facilities, d. Composition and character of open space, plant materials and street trees, e. Variety in architectural elements, fagade articulation, and/or building materials, f. Roof variation in slope, height and/or materials. 2017.05.05 Page 13 Packet Pg. 293 8.2.c L O C O 2. Building Design and Massing. Q a. Buildings shall convey a visually distinct "base" and "top, which may be achieved through differences in massing elements and/or architectural details. b. The bulk and scale of buildings of over 3,000 square feet in footprint shall be a mitigated through the use of massing and design elements such as facade od tf articulation and modulation, setbacks, step -backs, distinctive roof lines or forms, and other design details. c. Primary Frontage: On the primary frontage, to provide visual connection between o activities inside and outside the building, 50% of the building facade between 2 and vi 10 feet in height, as measured from the adjacent sidewalk, shall be comprised of c ■ SM Min Transparency (may include all windows and glass doors, but not mirrored finishes) windows or doors that are transparent, the bottom of which may not be more than 4 feet above the adjacent sidewalk. A departure from this standard may be approved when the facade will not be visible from the public street due to the placement of other buildings on the site, provided that the requirements of subsection "e " in this section shall apply. i. On the primary frontage, no vehicle parking shall be located within the first 20 feet of the first level of a building facing the street except where such parking is underground. d. All Other Building Frontages: All street -facing facades within 30 feet of a public street, other than for the primary frontage or those facing an alley or the last block of a dead-end street, shall comply with the standard below. i. Thirty percent (30%) of the building facade between 2 and 10 feet in height shall be made of windows or doors that are transparent, the bottom of which may not be more than four feet above the adjacent sidewalk. Windows shall not be mirrored or have glass tinted darker than 40% in order to meet this requirement. e. Wall treatment: Building facades not subject to all requirements of ECDC 16.60.030.D.2.c or ECDC 16.60.030.D.2.d are intended to not display blank, unattractive walls to the public or to other building tenants. To accomplish this, walls greater than 30 feet in length shall have architectural treatment that incorporates at least four of the following elements into the design of the facade: i. Masonry (except for flat concrete block). ii. Concrete or masonry plinth at the base of the wall. 2017.05.05 Page 14 Packet Pg. 294 8.2.c L 0 iii. Belt courses of a different texture and color. c 0 iv. Projecting cornice. V. Projecting metal or wood canopy. Q vi. Decorative tilework. vii. Trellis containing planting. viii. Medallions. a otf ix. Artwork or wall graphics. vi X. Vertical differentiation. xi. Decorative lighting fixtures. xii. Glazing m xiii. An architectural element not listed above that is approved by the director to meet the intent of this subsection. 16.60.040 Operating restrictions. A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be carried on entirely within a completely enclosed building, except the following: 1. Public utilities; 2. Off street parking and loading areas; 3. Drive-in business; 4. Secondary uses permitted under ECDC 16.60.010(B); 5. Limited outdoor display of merchandise meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.65 ECDC; 6. Public markets; provided, that when located next to a single family residential zone, the market shall be entirely within a completely enclosed building; 7. Outdoor dining meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.75 ECDC; 8. Motorized and nonmotorized mobile vending units meeting the criteria of Chapter 4.12 ECC B. Interim Use Status — Public Markets. 1. Unless a public market is identified on a business license as a year-round market within the city of Edmonds, a premise licensed as a public market shall be considered a temporary use. As a temporary activity, any signs or structures used in accordance with the market do not require design review. When a location is utilized for a business use in addition to a public market, the public market use shall not decrease the required available parking for the other business use below the standards established in this chapter. C. Ongoing Uses. 1. Audio equipment at drive -through facilities shall not be audible off site. 2. Development subject to the standards of this chapter shall continue to meet the standards of this chapter except as specifically permitted otherwise. 2017.05.05 Page 15 Packet Pg. 295 8.2.c ` Formatted: Header 20.60.045 Freestanding signs — Regulations. A. Regulation. Permanent freestanding signs are discouraged. Freestanding signs shall be approved only where the applicant demonstrates by substantial evidence that there are no reasonable and feasible alternative signage methods to provide for adequate identification and/or advertisement. B. Maximum Area. The maximum area of a freestanding sign shall be as follows: Zone Maximum Area of Sign RS, RM 10 square feet (subdivision, PRD, multifamily) 4 square feet (individual residence sign BN, BP 24 square feet (single) 48 square feet (group) BC, BD, WMU, FVMU 32 square feet (single) 48 square feet (group) CW 32 square feet (single) 48 square feet (group) CG Sign area shall be governed by subsection (C) of this section C. Allowable Sign Area for Freestanding Signs — CG Zone. The total allowable sign area for freestanding signs on general commercial sites shall be 56 square feet or one-half square foot of sign area for each lineal foot of street frontage, whichever is greater, up to a maximum of 160 square feet of freestanding sign area. Freestanding signs count against the overall allowable permanent sign area. Multiple business or tenant sites shall further be allowed an additional 24 square feet of freestanding sign area for each commercial tenant or Formatted: Footer Page 1 Packet Pg. 296 8.2.c occupant in excess of one up to a maximum sign area of 160 square feet. Corner lots choosing to accumulate sign area under the provisions of subsection (E) of this section shall be limited to 160 square feet. D. Maximum Height. The maximum sign height of freestanding signs shall be as follows: Maximum Height of Zone Sign RS, RM 16 feet BN, BP, BC, BD, CG, CW, 114 feet WMU, FVMU Page 2 Formatted: Header Deleted: CG Formatted Table Deleted: 25 feet Formatted: Footer Packet Pg. 297 VY 8.2.d ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING A PLANNED ACTION FOR THE HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA, PURSUANT TO THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT WHEREAS, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and implementing rules provide for the a� integration of environmental review with land use planning and project review through designation of Planned Actions by jurisdictions planning under the Growth Management Act "GMA); and m WHEREAS, the City has adopted a Comprehensive Plan complying with the GMA; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted development regulations providing for planned actions; WHEREAS, the City has prepared a subarea plan and development regulations for the Highway 99 Subarea; and WHEREAS, designation of a Planned Action expedites the permitting process for subsequent, implementing projects whose impacts have been previously addressed in a Planned Action environmental impact statement (EIS), and thereby encourages desired growth and economic development; and WHEREAS, the Highway 99 Planned Action EIS identifies impacts and mitigation measures associated with planned development in the subarea; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted development regulations which will help protect the environment, and is adopting zoning regulations specific to the sub -area which will guide the amount, location, form, and quality of desired development; Action; WHEREAS, the Highway 99 Subarea is deemed to be appropriate for designation of a Planned WHEREAS, the Edmonds Planning Board held an open record public hearing on May 10, 2017 to consider Highway 99 Subarea development regulations and on July 26, 2017 to consider the proposed planned action ordinance; WHEREAS, the Edmonds City Council held an open record public hearing on June 20, 2017 to consider Highway 99 Subarea development regulations and on July 31, 2017, to consider the proposed planned action ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: -1- Packet Pg. 299 8.2.d SECTION 1. Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are hereby adopted and incorporated by reference. The City Council bases its findings and conclusions on the entire record of testimony and exhibits, including all written and oral testimony before the Planning Board and City Council. SECTION 2. Purpose. The City Council declares that the purpose of this ordinance is to: A. Combine analysis of environmental impacts with the City's development of plans and regulations; B. Designate the Highway 99 Subarea as a Planned Action for purposes of environmental review and permitting of subsequent, implementing projects pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act ui (SEPA), RCW 43.21C.031; a� C. Determine that the EIS prepared for the sub -area plan meets the requirements of a Planned Action EIS pursuant to SEPA; D. Establish criteria and procedures, consistent with state law, that will determine whether subsequent, implementing projects qualify as Planned Actions; E. Provide the public with information about planned actions and how the City will process applications for implementing projects; F. Streamline and expedite the land use review and approval process for qualifying projects by relying on the EIS completed for the Planned Action; and G. Apply the City's development regulations together with the mitigation measures described in the Planned Action EIS and this Ordinance to address the impacts of future development contemplated by the Planned Action. SECTION 3. Findings. The City Council finds as follows: A. The City is subject to the requirements of the Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A, and is located within an Urban Growth Area; B. The City has adopted a Comprehensive Plan complying with the GMA, and is amending the Comprehensive Plan by adopting a subarea element specific to the Highway 99 Subarea; C. The City is adopting development regulations to implement the Highway 99 Subarea Plan to implement said Plan; D. The City has prepared an EIS for the Highway 99 subarea (Planned Action EIS) and finds that this EIS adequately addresses the probable significant environmental impacts associated with the type and amount of development planned to occur in the designated Planned Action area; E. The mitigation measures identified in the Planned Action EIS and attached to this ordinance as Exhibit B, together with adopted City development regulations, will adequately mitigate significant impacts from development within the Planned Action area; F. The Subarea Plan and Planned Action EIS identify the location, type and amount of development that is contemplated by the Planned Action; -2- Packet Pg. 300 8.2.d G. Future projects that are implemented consistent with the Planned Action will protect the environment, benefit the public and enhance economic development; H. The City has provided numerous opportunities for meaningful public involvement in the proposed Planned Action; has considered all comments received; and, as appropriate, has modified the proposal or mitigation measures in response to comments; I. The Highway 99 Subarea Plan is not an essential public facility as defined by RCW 36.70A.200(1), and any future projects which meet the definition of an essential public facility will not qualify as Planned Actions; J. The Planned Action applies to a defined area that is smaller than the overall City boundaries; a� and K. Public services and facilities are adequate to serve the proposed Planned Action, with implementation of mitigation measures identified in the EIS. SECTION 4. Procedures and Criteria for Evaluating and Determining Projects as Planned Actions. A. Planned Action Area. The Planned Action designation shall apply to the area shown in Exhibit 0 B. Environmental Document. A Planned Action determination for a site -specific implementing project application shall be based on the environmental analysis contained in the Draft EIS issued by the City on June 2, 2017, and the Final EIS published on August 4, 2017. The Draft and Final EISs shall comprise the Planned Action EIS. The mitigation measures contained in Exhibit B are based upon the findings of the Planned Action EIS and shall, along with adopted City regulations, provide the framework that the City will use to impose appropriate conditions on qualifying Planned Action projects. C. Planned Action Designated. Land uses and activities described in the Planned Action EIS, subject to the thresholds described in subsection 3.D, below, and the mitigation measures contained in Exhibit B, are designated Planned Actions or Planned Action Projects pursuant to RCW 43.21C.031. A development application for a site -specific Planned Action project located within the Highway 99 Subarea Planned Action Area shall be designated as a Planned Action if it meets the criteria set forth in subsection 3.D of this ordinance and applicable laws, codes, development regulations and standards of the City. D. Planned Action Qualifications. The following thresholds shall be used to determine if a site - specific development proposed within the Highway 99 Planned Action Area is contemplated by the Planned Action and has had its environmental impacts evaluated in the Planned Action EIS: (1) Land Use. The following general categories/types of land uses, which are permitted or conditionally permitted in zoning districts applicable to the Highway 99 Planned Action Area, and subject to any limitations in size contained in the applicable zoning districts, are considered Planned Actions: Anticipated land uses are further identified below: (a) Multiple dwellings; -3- Packet Pg. 301 8.2.d (b) Office uses, including but not limited to medical office; (c) Retail and service uses; (d) Medical and health care uses; (e) Mixed use development; (e) Utilities and capital facilities. To be considered Planned Actions proposed projects shall only include those uses specifically a listed in development regulations applicable to the zoning classifications applied to properties within the 06 Planned Action Area. o, a� (2) Development Thresholds. a) The following amount of various new development are contemplated by the Planned Action: Land Use Development Amount Non-residential uses, including 1,634,685 square feet of building office, retail, service and area medical/health care uses Residential 3,325 dwelling units (b) If future development proposals in the Highway 99 Planned Action Area would contribute enough new square footage and/or dwelling units to the square footage and/or dwelling units generated from earlier planned action projects to cause either of the above thresholds for cumulative development to be exceeded, that development proposal and all subsequent proposed projects will require additional SEPA review, pursuant to WAC 197-11-172. Furthermore, if proposed development would alter the assumptions and analysis in the Planned Action EIS, further environmental review may be required. Shifting the development amount between categories of uses may be permitted so long as the total build -out does not exceed the aggregate amount of development and trip generation reviewed in the EIS, and so long as the impacts of that development have been identified in the Planned Action EIS and are mitigated consistent with Exhibit B. (c). Building Heights. Building heights shall be as established in the applicable zoning classification and as evaluated in the Planned Action EIS. (3) Transportation. (a) Trip Ranges & Thresholds. The Planned Action EIS analyzed and identified mitigation for 2,755 new pm peak hour trips to be generated from cumulative development occurring in the Planned M Packet Pg. 302 8.2.d Action area. If a proposed project would contribute enough new pm peak hour trips to the trips generated from earlier planned action projects to cause this threshold for cumulative development to be exceeded, that proposed projects and all subsequent proposed projects will require additional SEPA review. (b) Concurrency. The determination of transportation impacts shall be based on the City's concurrency management program and the level of service standards in the Comprehensive Plan. (c) Traffic Impact Mitigation. All planned action projects shall pay, as a condition of approval, their proportionate share of local street improvements according to the schedule in Edmonds City Code 06 3.36.125. Impact fees will be determined according to the methodology contained in Chapter 3.36. ui (d) Director Discretion. The Development Services Director, in consultation with the City a� Engineer, shall have discretion to determine incremental and total trip generation, consistent with the 0 Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (latest edition) or an alternative manual r accepted by the Director at his or her sole discretion, for each project permit application proposed under this Planned Action. -2 (4) Elements of the Environment and Degree of Impacts. A proposed project that would result in a significant change in the type or degree of impacts to any of the elements of the environment analyzed in the Planned Action EIS, would not qualify as a Planned Action. (5) Changed Conditions. Should environmental conditions change significantly from those analyzed in the Planned Action EIS, the City's SEPA Responsible Official may determine that the Planned Action designation is no longer applicable until supplemental environmental review is conducted. E. Planned Action Review Criteria. (1) The City's SEPA Responsible Official may designate as planned actions, pursuant to RCW 43.21C.030, applications that meet all of the following conditions: (a) the proposal is located within the Planned Action area identified in Exhibit A of this ordinance; (b) the proposed uses and activities are consistent with those described in the Planned Action EIS and Section 4.D of this ordinance; (c) the proposal does not cause the Planned Action thresholds and other criteria of Section 4.D of this ordinance to be exceeded; (d) the proposal is consistent with the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan and the Highway 99 Subarea Plan; (e) the proposal's significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified in the Planned Action EIS; (f) the proposal's significant impacts have been mitigated by application of the measures identified in Exhibit B, and other applicable city regulations, together with any modifications or variances or special permits that may be required; -5- Packet Pg. 303 8.2.d (g) the proposal complies with all applicable local, state and/or federal laws and regulations, and the Responsible Official determines that these constitute adequate mitigation; and (h) the proposal is not an essential public facility as defined by RCW 36.70A.200(1). (2) The City shall base its decision on review of a SEPA checklist, or an alternative form approved by the Department of Ecology, and review of the application and supporting documentation. (3) A proposal that meets the criteria of this section shall be considered to qualify and be designated as a Planned Action, consistent with the requirements or RCW 43.21C.030, WAC 197-11-164 et seq, and this ordinance. F. Effect of Planned Action (1) Designation as a Planned Action project means that a qualifying proposal has been reviewed in accordance with this ordinance and found to be consistent with its development parameters and thresholds, and with the environmental analysis contained in the Planned Action EIS. (2) Upon determination by the City's SEPA Responsible Official that the proposal meets the criteria of Section 4.D and qualifies as a Planned Action, the proposal shall not require a SEPA threshold determination, preparation of an EIS, or be subject to further review pursuant to SEPA. G. Planned Action Permit Process. Applications for Planned Actions shall be reviewed pursuant to the following process. (1) Development applications shall meet all applicable requirements of the Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code. Applications for Planned Actions shall be made on forms provided by the City and shall include a SEPA checklist, or an approved Planned Action checklist. (2) The City's Director of Development Services or designee shall determine whether the application is complete as provided in Edmonds City Code 20.02.003. (3) If the application is for a project within the Planned Action Area defined in Exhibit A, the application will be reviewed to determine if it is consistent with the criteria of this ordinance and thereby qualifies as a Planned Action project. The SEPA Responsible Official shall notify the applicant of his/her decision. If the project is determined to qualify as a Planned Action, it shall proceed in accordance with the applicable permit review procedures specified in Edmonds City Code Chapter 20.02, except that no SEPA threshold determination, EIS or additional SEPA review shall be required. The decision of the SEPA Responsible Official regarding qualification as a Planned Action shall be final. (4) Public notice and review for projects that qualify as Planned Actions shall be tied to the underlying permit and shall follow the procedures set forth in Edmonds City Code Chapter 20.03. If notice is otherwise required for the underlying permit, the notice shall state that the project has qualified as a Planned Action. If notice is not otherwise required for the underlying permit, no special notice is required by this ordinance. (5) Development Agreement. To provide additional certainty about applicable requirements, the City or an applicant may request consideration and execution of a development agreement, as allowed M Packet Pg. 304 8.2.d in Ch. 20.08 ECDC of Edmond's city code, for a Planned Action project. The development agreement may address review procedures applicable to a Planned Action project, permitted uses, mitigation measures, payment of impact fees or provision of improvements through other methods, design standards, phasing, vesting of development rights, or any other topic that may properly be considered in a development agreement consistent with RCW 36.70B.170 et seq. (6) If a project is determined to not qualify as a Planned Action, the SEPA Responsible Official shall so notify the applicant and prescribe a SEPA review procedure consistent with the City's SEPA regulations and the requirements of state law. The notice shall describe the elements of the application a- 06 that result in failure to qualify as a Planned Action. (7) Projects that fail to qualify as Planned Actions may incorporate or otherwise use relevant elements of the Planned Action EIS, as well as other relevant SEPA documents, to meet their SEPA requirements. The SEPA Responsible Official may limit the scope of SEPA review for the non -qualifying project to those issues and environmental impacts not previously addressed in the Planned Action EIS. SECTION 5. Monitoring and Review. A. The City shall monitor the progress of development in the designated Planned Action Sub- area to ensure that it is consistent with the assumptions of this ordinance and the Planned Action EIS regarding the type and amount of development and associated impacts, and with the mitigation measures and improvements planned for the Highway 99 Planned Action Area. B. This Planned Action Ordinance shall be reviewed no later than five years from its effective date by the SEPA Responsible Official to determine the continuing relevance of its assumptions and findings with respect to environmental conditions in the Planned Action area, the impacts of development, and required mitigation measures. Based upon this review, the City may propose amendments to this ordinance or may supplement or revise the Planned Action EIS. SECTION 6. Conflict. In the event of a conflict between this Ordinance or any mitigation measure imposed thereto, and any ordinance or regulation of the City, the provisions of this ordinance shall control EXCEPT that the provision of any International Code shall supersede. SECTION 7. Severability. Should any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or its application be declared to be unconstitutional or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the constitutionality or validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. SECTION 8. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. -7- Packet Pg. 305 8.2.d APPROVED: MAYOR DAVID O. EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: :• JEFFREY B. TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 306 8.2.d SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2017, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. . A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Edmonds, Washington, establishing a Planned Action for the Highway 99 Subarea, pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of ,2017. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Highway 99 Subarea Plan — Planned Action Ordinance 0 Packet Pg. 307 8.2.d EXHIBIT A PLANNED ACTION AREA W —.— ._—.—.---• 220THSTSW i 2?•irri$T5W `--- r. FS43ERANCF x Q 230TH Si 5W i I 2 T5W 6. ----- �- lill�•_f EDMONDS :gND ST "jW . _,. Highway 9! ' YNNWOOD . n (� o � a ❑ a LJ �u d fgUL�JI+ r o 0 r' 1 J MOUNTLAXE TERRACE r t t a *4 5 i5 5 Packet Pg. 308 8.2.d EXHIBIT B Highway 99 Subarea Plan PLANNED ACTION EIS MITIGATION DOCUMENT The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires environmental review for project and non- M project proposals that may have adverse impacts on the environment. a- 06 In order to meet SEPA requirements, the City of Edmonds issued the Draft Highway 99 Planned a, Action Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on June 2, 2017 and the Final Highway 99 Planned W Action EIS on August 4, 2017. The Draft and Final EIS are referenced collectively herein as the m "EIS." The EIS has identified probably significant impacts that would occur with future 0 v; development in the Planned Action area, together with a number of potential measures to r mitigate those significant impacts. The purpose of this Mitigation Document is to establish specific mitigation measure for qualified c E planned action development proposals, based on significant impacts identified in the EIS. The a mitigation measures would apply to future development proposals that are consistent with the planned action development envelope reviewed in the EIS and that are located within the o Planned Action area (see Exhibit A). N USE OF TERMS c c� a Brief definitions of terms used in this Mitigation Document are provided below. c� 0 SEPA Terms cn The discussion of mitigation measures may refer to the word's action, planned action or 0 c proposal and for reference, these terms are defined below: 0 a • "Artinn" maanc nrniartc nr nrnaramc finnnrarl lirancarl raaulatarl rnnrliirtarl nr 0 or approved by an agency. "Project actions" involve decisions on a specific project such as U_ a construction or management activity for a defined geographic area. "Non -project" actions involve decisions about policies, plans or programs (WAC 197-11-704) O • "Planned Action" refers to types of project actions that are designated by ordinance for a a specific geographic area and addressed in an EIS in conjunction with a comprehensive Cn plan or subarea plan, a fully contained community, a master planned resort, a master _ planned development or phased project (WAC 197-11-164). • "Proposal" means a proposed action that may be an action or regulatory decision of an agency, or any action proposed by applicants (WAC 197-11-784) Other Terms Highway 99 Subarea Plan — Planned Action Ordinance 11 Packet Pg. 309 8.2.d The Planned Action area may be referred to as the Highway 99 Planned Action Area, Highway 99 Subarea, project area or project site in this document. General Interpretation Where a mitigation measure includes the words "shall" or "will," inclusion of that measure is a mandatory in order to qualify a project as a Planned Action. Where "should" or "would" appear, the mitigation measures may be considered by the project applicant as a source of additional o a mitigation, as feasible or necessary, to ensure that a project qualifies as a planned action and/or 06 to reduce or avoid impacts. a� Unless stated specifically otherwise, the mitigation measures that require preparation of plans, conduct of studies, construction of improvements, conduct of maintenance activities, etc., are 0 the responsibility of the applicant or designee to fund and/or perform. vi DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED UNDER THE PLANNED ACTION The proposal reviewed in this EIS include designation of the Highway 99 Subarea (see Exhibit A) as a Planned Acton area for the purpose of SEPA compliance, pursuant to RCW 43.21C.440 and WAC 197-11-164, adoption of comprehensive plan amendments for the Highway 99 Subarea, and adoption of zoning code amendments addressing zoning classifications, design standards, parking standards. The planned action designation would encourage redevelopment in the Highway 99 Subarea to create increased housing choices and an attractive pedestrian -oriented streetscape, provide opportunities for medical services growth, provide for enhanced multi - modal mobility, and provide for a greater mix of uses in the subarea. Under this Planned Action, redevelopment would add about 3,013 new jobs and 3,325 new housing units through 2035. MITIGATION Based on the EIS, which is incorporated by reference, this Mitigation Document summarizes significant adverse environmental impacts that are anticipated to occur in conjunction with the development of planned action projects. Mitigation measures, identified in the EIS, are reiterated here for inclusion in conjunction with proposed projects to mitigate related impacts and to qualify as planned action projects. Consistency review under the Planned Action, site plan review, and other permit approvals will be required for specific development actions proposed under the Planned Action designation (WAC 197-11-172). Additional project conditions may be imposed on planned action projects based upon the analysis of the Planned Action in relationship to independent requirements of the City, state or federal requirements or review criteria. Any applicant for a project within the planned action area may propose alternative mitigation measures, if appropriate and/or as a result of changed circumstance, in order to allow an equivalent substitute mitigation for identified impacts. Such modifications would be evaluated by the City SEPA Responsible Official prior to any project approvals by the City. Highway 99 Subarea Plan — Planned Action Ordinance 12 Packet Pg. 310 8.2.d As permitted by WAC 197-11-660, there may be some adverse impacts that are unavoidable =' because reasonable or feasible mitigation cannot be achieved for the Planned Action `o 0 The combination of regulations applicable to each element of the environment and mitigation o measures identified in the EIS and documented in this Mitigation Document that are applied to Q any planned action proposal will adequately mitigate all significant environmental impacts associated with planned action proposals, except for those impacts that are identified as significant unavoidable adverse impacts. a 06 Mitigation measures are provided below for each element of the environment considered in the EIS. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES The EIS identifies significant impacts, unavoidable adverse impacts, and mitigation measures for 0 potential impacts associated with land use, plans and policies, aesthetics, transportation, and E E public services and utilities. Please refer to the Draft and Final EIS for complete text associated with each element of the environment. The following lists all mitigation measures applicable to E Q impacts for each element of the environment. Land Use Mitigation Measures 0 Incorporated Plan Features N The zoning code includes provisions to minimize the impacts associated with increases in c c� a building height and changes in land use patterns under the Planned Action. The proposed Subarea Plan includes policy language in support of the proposed stepback development regulations, which are intended to help mitigate for potential land use conflicts around the edges of the subarea. 0 Applicable Regulations and Commitments c Zoning designations provide sufficient capacity to accommodate the City's growth targets for a the subarea. When combined with the City's remaining existing development and design U- standards, the Planned Action stepback standards will mitigate for land use incompatibilities in areas where the updated CG zone abuts single family zones. O Q Additionally, existing development and design standards require site design to be compatible a with existing and planned character of the nearby area. Applicable site development standards rn Cn include those for setbacks, screening and buffering, site design, lighting, building design and x massing, and others. Other Mitigation Measures c E No additional mitigation measures are recommended. U 0 r r Q c a� Highway 99 Subarea Plan — Planned Action Ordinance E 13 Packet Pg. 311 8.2.d Plans and Policies Incorporated Plan Features The locally -designated role of the Highway 99 Corridor will continue to be maintained and reinforced through the plan vision for a high density, walkable mixed -use neighborhood with urban amenities. Within the Planned Action, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan clearly identify three a distinct districts anchored around major transportation gateways and employment clusters, 06 such as the hospital and international businesses (Recommendation 3.1, February 2017 Draft Highway 99 Subarea Plan). These amendments will bring the Comprehensive Plan and recommended Highway 99 Subarea Plan into alignment. Regulations and Commitments As required by the Growth Management Act (GMA), the draft Subarea Plan and regulations have been submitted to the Washington Department of Commerce for review and comment prior to final adoption. Other Mitigation Measures No additional mitigation measures are recommended. Aesthetics Mitigation Measures Incorporated Plan Features The City's Highway 99 Corridor and Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Comprehensive Plan Map designations within the Comprehensive Plan will guide aesthetic improvements under the planned action. Such improvements shall make the area more attractive and pedestrian friendly by: • ensuring that the design of new development contributes to the quality and character of the area • encouraging a variety of building types • using landscaping and buffering to soften street fronts and to provide transitions between more and less intensive uses • fostering distinct sub -district identities consistent with the Highway 99 Corridor Vision. Additionally, the Planned Action contains policy guidance and recommended transportation improvement projects that are intended to enhance the aesthetics and urban design of the study area and support the community's vision for the future neighborhood character of the corridor. The policy guidance calls for improvements in signage and wayfinding, using design to strengthen business opportunity, development of a unique district design identity, supporting building types and uses typical of vibrant urban corridors, and making code updates to support more pedestrian- and transit -friendly building forms and streetscapes. Highway 99 Subarea Plan — Planned Action Ordinance 14 Packet Pg. 312 8.2.d Regulations and Commitments Development under the Planned Action will be required to comply with existing development and design standards including those for setbacks, screening and buffering, site design, lighting, building design and massing, and others. These standards require site design to be compatible with existing and planned character of the nearby area. Additionally, the Planned Action stepback standards provide for transitions in building height FU a - and bulk between portions of the subarea zoned for the highest intensity uses and adjacent 06 single family zoned areas. W Other Mitigation Measures No additional mitigation measures are recommended. Transportation Incorporated Plan Features The City of Edmond's existing planned transportation improvements will help to mitigate for traffic impacts. The near -term and long-term transportation improvements in the Subarea Plan will contribute to the underlying infrastructure that creates transit, pedestrian, and bicycle - friendly places and will indirectly help to mitigate for traffic impacts. Regulations and Commitments Near -term and long-term transportation improvements identified in the proposed Subarea Plan will be incorporated into the Comprehensive Transportation Plan's capital improvement projects. The current Comprehensive Transportation Plan process (updating the Plan in a cycle approximately every six years) will be the mechanism for monitoring the LOS at impacted intersections. The City's current six year Transportation Improvement Program will be used to prioritize projects and identifying funding. Flexibility will be built into each cycle of this program to modify the priority and funding of the capital projects serving the study area as new development occurs and creates opportunities for matching funds from private development; redirecting project priorities and timing to coincide with major developments. The City will leverage the proposed Subarea Plan and Planned Action Ordinance to request early distribution of state funds ($10,000,000) earmarked for Highway 99 within Edmonds in the State's Ten Year Transportation Investment Plan. Additionally, the City will continue to compete for funding from state and federal grants and continue to watch for potential new funding sources. Other Mitigation Measures Highway 99 Subarea Plan — Planned Action Ordinance 15 Packet Pg. 313 8.2.d The EIS analysis indicates that mitigation for traffic impacts of improvement projects under the Planned Action would occur in two stages. Stage 1 a a� The City will work with Community Transit to identify and help implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) mitigation measures to potentially reduce intersection level of a service impacts under the No Action and Preferred Alternatives. The City may also consult with 06 Sound Transit and the Washington State Department of Transportation on this subject. Residential (any size), commercial (under 25 employees), and mixed -use developments may select from a menu of TDM measures specifically assembled for these types of land uses. The m o City will work with Community Transit and, if appropriate, other agencies, to develop guidelines r and worksheets for property owners or tenants of new developments to formulate a trip E reduction plan, provided that where the proposed development already incorporates measures that encourage vehicle trip reduction or transportation demand as part of its proposal . Where E Q specific trip reductions plans are required, plans must be submitted to the Development Services Department prior of building permit application unless a different schedule has been approved by the Development Services Director. The Department will consult with Community m o Transit on the commute trip reduction plans and recommend any changes.. N c c� Developments comprised of larger employers are required to develop and implement TDM a plans tailored to their workforce. Employers with 25 to 100 employees are required to develop a c� ;v TDM plan selecting from the menu of TDM measures described above, or customize their own plan. TDM plans for employers with 100 employees or more must conform to the requirements o of the Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) law that is part of the Washington Clean Air Act (RCW o 70.94). a Menus of TDM strategies should include tiers of measures that have varying levels of 0 a effectiveness and cost including but not limited to measures within the following broad categories and associated example measures: a • Financial incentives, amenities and perks: o Fully or partially subsidized transit passes o Carpool/vanpool subsidies such as fuel vouchers, provision of vehicles, full or partial coverage of vehicle lease, fuel, insurance and maintenance o Car share membership for use by registered carpool and transit commuters o Emergency ride home program o Company vehicle available for employees who commute by alternative modes o Prize drawings to employees or residents who commute by alternative modes o Subsidized off -site services such as fitness center, daycare, dry cleaning, bicycle repair and maintenance, etc. Highway 99 Subarea Plan — Planned Action Ordinance 16 Packet Pg. 314 8.2.d 3 o Service provided, or delivered, on -site such as dry cleaning pickup and delivery, a' x ATM machine, fitness center, daycare, etc. `o 0 • Parking Management Strategies o o Charge market rate for employee parking U Q o Parking cashout program o Preferential parking for carpool/vanpools c c a o Restrictions or limited on -site parking 06 o Unbundled parking ui o On -site bike share and/or car share facilities m • Support Strategies and Assistance o Part or full-time on -site TDM coordinator o Commute options package for new employees and/or residents o Commute alternative information kiosk or website o Rideshare matching program o Discounts on purchasing bicycles and accessories o Sponsored events promoting alternative commute options Note: Except where required by law or as a condition of approval, monitoring, refinement, and maintenance of individual TDM plans by new development is voluntary after the initial submittal for plan approval. Stage 2 The City will implement new capacity -enhancing mitigation measures for intersection impacts under the Preferred Alternative. The following new intersection capacity -enhancing mitigation measures will be incorporated into the City's standardized six -year Transportation Improvement Program process for funding and prioritizing transportation projects: • State Route 99 / 220th Street SW — Widen State Route 99 to add a second southbound left turn lane. This intersection is projected to operate at LOS F under buildout of the Preferred Alternative, exceeding the standard of LOS E even with implementation of the improvement called for in the 2015 Comprehensive Transportation Plan to widen 220th to add a westbound right turn lane and a second westbound left turn lane, and an eastbound right turn lane. • State Route 99 / 224th Street SW — Convert the eastbound approach of 224th Street SW to provide an exclusive right turn lane, a shared through/right turn lane, and an exclusive left turn lane, or an alternate design as confirmed by further study. This Highway 99 Subarea Plan — Planned Action Ordinance 17 Packet Pg. 315 8.2.d intersection would operate at a LOS F under buildout of the Preferred Alternative. This intersection was not studied in the 2015 update to the Comprehensive Transportation Plan and, therefore, does not currently have any planned improvements. Additionally, the City will take steps to enable the new capacity -enhancing mitigation measures when and if monitoring shows that the measures are required, and implement the improvements, as the following opportunities arise: • Require any new development, redevelopment or site improvements requiring a 06 building permit on the properties adjacent to the impacted intersections to not ui construct any form of structure or infrastructure (except landscaping or other W streetscape improvements) on, under, or above the right of way potentially needed to m be acquired for the intersection capacity improvements. • Coordinate with WSDOT and adjacent municipalities on the potential land acquisitions needed for the intersection capacity improvements located within their jurisdictions and, if possible, request the adjacent municipalities to apply the same building restrictions. • As funds become available through the City's Transportation Improvement Program process, construct the capacity improvements. This may include acquiring the necessary right of way from adjacent property owners through purchase or negotiated dedication. Public Services Incorporated Plan Features Proposed transportation projects under the sub -area plan would improve pedestrian and bicycle character, access, and mobility within the study area, particularly crossing Highway 99. As such, east -west access across Highway 99 to park and recreation facilities would improve. The sub -area plan provides greater incentive for mixed -use and commercial development in proximity to existing infrastructure on SR-99, making more efficient use of available stormwater capacity. Additionally, planned streetscape improvements under the Action Alternative would increase landscaping along the street — trees and other landscaping provide a natural ability to absorb stormwater and release it slowly to the atmosphere. The City will continue to pursue energy efficiency measures to reduce energy consumption, thereby reducing stress on Snohomish County PUD as residential and jobs growth occurs. The sub -area plan encourages sustainable building practices, including considering requiring electric vehicle charging facilities and encouraging solar panels (Recommendation 2.2 and 2.3, February 2017 Draft Highway 99 Subarea Plan). Regulations and Commitments Police Highway 99 Subarea Plan — Planned Action Ordinance 18 Packet Pg. 316 8.2.d The Police Department will implement the 2016 agency goals to the extent feasible in its 2016- 2021 Multiyear Strategic Plan. These goals include: • bringing the Street Crimes Unit and second K-9 team back on line • partnering with City Council and the Edmonds School District to secure funding for a School Resource Officer for Edmonds-Woodway High School • establishing by policy the Peer Support Team to assist Department members and their families in time of need • working with SNOCOM and Bair Analytics to secure a crime analysis workstation which U; interfaces with records management and helps bring a public crime mapping portal on- line As recommended in the 2016-2021 Multiyear Strategic Plan, the Police Department should maintain, at a minimum, the current staffing ratio of 1.35 commissioned officers per 1,000 residents. Additionally, the Police Department should continue looking to future budget cycles and preparing to pursue and justify the addition of commissioned staff as the economic climate allows. As recommended in the 2016-2021 Multiyear Strategic Plan, the Police Department should restore the Crime Prevention Officer position to aid the Department's ability to conduct crime prevention training and strategies for businesses, apartment management, various concerned groups, and individuals. Fire and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Ongoing capital facilities improvement, budgeting, and operational planning by Fire District 1 and the City of Edmonds are anticipated to address incremental increases and other changes in demand for fire services, including the need for additional personnel, additional apparatus, and facility improvements. Fire District 1 recently completed the first Phase of a Capital Facilities Plan which evaluates existing conditions, including an inventory and assessment of existing facilities. Phase 1 of the plan indicated a need for minor near and mid-term maintenance and repairs at Stations 16 and 17, as well as potential seismic or safety upgrades. Station 20 is identified as one of 5-6 stations throughout the district which should be considered for replacement to support operation needs and code deficiencies (Fire District 2016c, 46, 48, C114-C145). Phase 2 will forecast future needs and phase 3 will provide an estimate of capital facility funding necessary to execute the plan, an implementation timeline and a recommended funding approach. All potential development in the study area will be constructed in compliance with the City's current Fire Code (ECDC 19.25), which is comprised of the 2015 International Fire Code with Edmonds Amendments. Adequate fire flow to serve potential development will be provided as required by the Fire Code. Potential development will Highway 99 Subarea Plan — Planned Action Ordinance 19 Packet Pg. 317 8.2.d also be required to comply with code requirements for emergency access to structures. z' The Department of Fire Prevention also reviews proposed street improvements on a `o project by -project basis to identify potential negative impacts on response times and o ensure street improvements are consistent with the City's Fire Code. a A portion of the tax revenue generated from potential redevelopment in the study area would accrue to the City and Fire District 1 to help fund additional fire and emergency medical services. a Cd Schools Ongoing capital facilities improvements, budgeting, and operational planning by the a� District, in conjunction with the City of Edmonds, are anticipated to accommodate o projected student enrollment at acceptable levels of service over the next twenty years. The School District will continue to replace, expand, modernize, and upgrade District as E facilities as approved by voters in the 2014 Capital Construction Bond and should implement the goals identified in Edmonds School District's Strategic Direction (ESD Q 2014). Parks and Open Space o The City will, to the extent feasible, implement goals identified in the 2014 Parks, N Recreation, and Open Space Plan which improve the park system within or near the a study area to address geographic gaps in service (Edmonds 2014, 4-1 — 4-11). a Specifically, impacts identified in the EIS should be mitigated by: • Expanding the partnership with the Edmonds School District, including negotiating an agreement for expanded, year-round public use of school grounds, sports fields and gyms for recreation purposes (Goal 1.A). • Exploring property acquisition and development with partners, including the School District, Snohomish County and other public and private entities — continue to partner with neighboring and overlapping jurisdictions (cities, counties, school districts) as well as private entities (i.e. churches) to expand recreation opportunities for the community; continue discussions for possible acquisition of Esperance Park from Snohomish County for annexation and redevelopment into a community park with sports fields, community gardens, picnic shelters, and other recreation features; and consider acquisition of County park land within or adjacent to Edmonds (if made available), such as Chase Lake (Goal 2.C). • Acquiring park land in the Highway 99/SR 104 areas to provide adequate park service in redeveloping areas. Create new civic spaces to enhance investment and revitalization while meeting recreation needs, especially where service gaps exist, or higher residential impact is planned (Goal 2.G). Highway 99 Subarea Plan — Planned Action Ordinance 20 Packet Pg. 318 8.2.d • Defining the best routes for and treatments to create central north -south and east -west pedestrian and bicycle corridors, incorporate these into the City's transportation plans, and implement improvements (Goal 2.N). • Increasing connections to the Interurban Trail, using signage, sidewalks, curb extensions, and other pedestrian/bicycle enhancements, especially focusing on crossing Highway 99 (Goal 2.0). • Strongly considering the formation of a Metropolitan Park District in order to sustain the level of quality expected by the community while growing to meet future needs °a (Edmonds 2014, 5-5). Electricity Ongoing capital facilities improvements, budgeting, and operational planning by m v; Snohomish County PUD are anticipated to address incremental increases and other r changes in demand for electricity. Depending on the level of development and associated new loads, feasibility studies should be conducted for individual projects as part of the development review process. System capital projects should be developed to meet the Q demands of future loading if capacity improvements are necessary (Ha pers. com). a Stormwater as 0 N Any redevelopment or new development under both alternatives would be subject to today's stricter regulations governing stormwater. Green design and construction a- methods should be employed in buildings, streetscapes, and drainage features to detain W Iv and treat stormwater (Ecology 2014, 8-10). M 0 The City's Storm and Surface Water Management Comprehensive Plan (2010) will guide o infrastructure improvements. Specific elements of the stormwater improvements will be o defined by the requirements of the State -mandated NPDES Western Washington Phase H r 0 Municipal Stormwater Permit. Under this set of regulations, the City maintains measures Q to protect and improve runoff conditions in relation to the receiving waters. The City of Edmond's stormwater management requirements and ongoing efforts are included in: • Edmonds Community Development Code 18.30 and Stormwater Code Supplement to 18.30 (Edmonds 2010b; Edmonds 2016c) — the City is nearly finished updating the Stormwater Code and Supplement, anticipated to be adopted January 1, 2017 (Cawrsepers. com) • Storm and Surface Water Management Comprehensive Plan (Edmonds 2010a) • Stormwater Management Program Plan (Edmonds 2016f) Other Mitigation Measures Police Highway 99 Subarea Plan — Planned Action Ordinance 21 Packet Pg. 319 8.2.d The City will monitor growth and demand for police services in the study area in order to determine if/when additional personnel are needed and will regularly review trends to ensure the Police Department has enough advance time to address the needs. New development under the Planned Action will employ Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) techniques - incorporation of design features into development that would help reduce criminal activity and calls for service, including orienting buildings toward the sidewalk and public spaces, providing connections between buildings, and providing adequate lighting and visibility. Fire and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) The City will monitor growth and demand for fire and emergency medical services in the study area in order to determine if/when additional personnel, equipment, or facilities are needed and will regularly review trends to ensure the City and Fire District 1 have enough advance time to address the needs. The City and Fire District 1 should work together to plan for pedestrian improvements, such as wider sidewalks, to ensure that the opportunity for emergency vehicle maneuvering is maintained. Additionally, the City should continue efforts to find sufficient resources to retain and improve Fire District 1's current level of services provided. Efforts include exploring additional funding sources — such as a Fire Benefit Charge or Levy Lid Lift; pursuing ways to reduce unnecessary costs/eliminate redundancy, including potential opportunities to partner with neighboring cities, Fire District 7, and other Fire Protection agencies through regional consolidation; and planning for the possible formation of a Regional Fire Authority in South Snohomish County. Schools The Edmonds School District tracks information on growth in enrollment and demand for educational programs offering across all grade spans in the region, including the study area, as part of its determination about if/when additional personnel or facilities are 0 0 needed. The City will periodically review trends and information from the Edmonds a School District, to ensure the City and the Edmonds School District have enough advance time to address the needs, including grade configuration, optimum facility size, educational program offerings, classroom utilization, scheduling requirements, and the = use of temporary classroom facilities. Additionally, the Edmonds School District will continue to evaluate both condition and capacity of existing facilities at Westgate and Sherwood Elementary Schools to determine if capital improvements are needed. Highway 99 Subarea Plan — Planned Action Ordinance 22 Packet Pg. 320 8.2.d Parks and Open Space The following steps should be taken to mitigate for impacts to Parks and Open Space under the Planned Action: • Require on -site open space as a residential amenity for new development. • Encourage and promote public open spaces through public/private partnerships where possible. • Implement pedestrian and bicycle transportation improvements to provide greater 06 access to existing facilities within one-half mile of the study area, with a focus on a, a� removing Highway 99 as a physical barrier. • Existing recreational programs may see increased enrollment and increased revenue as people living in the study area enroll in more programs. This increased enrollment may marginally help offset the costs of providing additional facilities Electricity The following steps should be taken to mitigate for impacts to the electrical grid under the Planned Action: • Evaluate and identify future service system needs through coordinated electricity demand planning between the City Development Services Department and Snohomish County PUD. • The PUD is currently undergoing smart grid infrastructure modernization of its electrical distribution system to improve reliability and increase efficiencies for its customers. • Where feasible, reduce the use of power in building heating and cooling through passive systems and modern power saving units. Stormwater No additional mitigation measures are recommended. Highway 99 Subarea Plan — Planned Action Ordinance 23 Packet Pg. 321 8.2.e to call each Councilmember individually or send an email that may or may not be read. He recommended retaining the opportunity for public comment at committee meetings and having the meetings video - recorded and available on the City's website to achieve the goal of transparency. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS PUBLIC HEARING ON HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN Development Services Director Shane Hope introduced the Highway 99 Subarea Plan. Materials in packet including draft plan, Planning Board minutes and other materials and public comments online. she introduced John Fregonese, Principal, Fregonese Associates. Mr. Fregonese provided an aerial of the project area on Highway 99. He reviewed: • Planning Process o March - April 2016: Understanding existing conditions o April - June 2016: o April - Nov 2016: Develop land use and transportation scenarios o Oct - Dec 2016: Develop Sub -Area Draft plan o Dec - Feb 2017: Final Sub -Area Plan • March 2016 Public Workshop o Identified opportunities for new housing and business, community centers and services, and infrastructure upgrades o What did the public want? • May 2016 Open House o Revealed near and long-term development and transportation opportunities and its impacts • November 2016 Open House o Revealed implementation strategies and policy recommendations o Public had opportunity to review the recommendations at the Open House and online and provide feedback o Community values: ■ Connectivity ■ Destinations ■ Beautification ■ Safety ■ Walkability ■ Affordable housing ■ Healthy businesses Distinct Subdistricts o Major local and regional destinations on Hwy 99 ■ International District - Diverse restaurants, grocers and shops; major Korean business cluster Health District - Swedish Hospital and medical offices Gateway District - Identified by the community during workshop - Desire for "gateway" and distinct transition point in and out of Edmonds Long segments without crossings o Central area requires 10-minute walk to find safe crossing Housing development o Widespread desire for housing, particularly in south Mixed Use Development o Widespread desire for mixed use, particularly in south and central Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q February 21, 2017 Page 6 Packet Pg. 322 8.2.e Pedestrian Crossing o More mid -block crossings throughout Key Assets in Corridor Area o Opportunity to build on the momentum of ongoing improvements in Shoreline along Hwy 99 o High -quality transit facilities already in place providing links to housing, jobs and amenities in the region o Distinct districts already emerging — International and Health Districts — that provide core services and o amenities o Already a mixed -use district with retail uses adjacent to single- and multi -family housing o Business, developer community and residents are ready to see positive changes to create a safe, walkable, healthy place Mr. Fregonese reviewed Implementation Strategies, Policy Recommendations + Actions • Draft Zoning & Development Recommendations o Strengthen Economic Opportunity ■ Support unique business clusters such as International District and Health District ■ Major auto sales facilities remain important to the local economy. Pedestrian Activity Zone standard will allow auto sales to continue business as usual ■ Strengthen and continue support for business orgs. in county and state ■ Pursue broadband internet throughout corridor to attract high-tech business investment ■ Consider unique designs for streetscape improvements such as signage and lighting o Encourage Sustainable Building Practices ■ Transit and pedestrian -friendly development with less reliance on automobile trips, should be promoted through new design standards ■ Consider requiring electric vehicle charging facilities especially within new residential developments and bicycle facilities ■ Encourage use of solar panels and green building practices o Map of proposed update to Comprehensive Plan designations ■ Health District ■ International District ■ Gateway District o Current Zoning Map ■ The only difference between CG and CG2 is the height limit (CG = 60' and CG2 = 75') ■ Many current zones are remnants from the counties antiquated zoning ■ Many zones do not match with the parcel boundaries o Proposed Zoning Map ■ The proposal is to change these zones to the consolidated CG zone ■ Incorporate design standards directly into zones to ensure scale transition into neighborhoods ■ More predictable outcomes for community o Comprehensive Plan Map ■ New zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan map o Strengthen current design standards ■ Incorporate them directly into the zoning code ■ Consideration of special circumstances within the corridor will be made to ensure the standards are feasible, such as large parcels that would have multiple buildings if redeveloped and parcels with unique access or transportation challenges may require a modified approach to the design standards. o Changes to Access and Parking Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q February 21, 2017 Page 7 Packet Pg. 323 8.2.e ■ Issue Today: current standards allow too much parking in the front of buildings, which negatively effects the pedestrian environment and hinders redevelopment potential o Existing District -based Design Standards Hwy 99 Corridor CG/CG2 - criteria ■ Access and Parking - Not more than 50 percent of total project parking spaces may be located between the building's front facade and the primary street. Parking lots may not be located on corner locations adjacent to public streets o Recommended Design Standards for Urban Areas ■ Parking Predominately on Side or Rear - Parking areas may comprise 40% or less of street frontage - Better design than current standard: no more than 50% of total project parking spaces may be located between building's front facade and the primary street ■ Buildings on the Street Frontage - Primary Frontage - min. 50% of primary street frontage should have buildings within 10 feet of front property line (at the edge of Pedestrian Activity Zone) - All Other Frontages - 50% of side and rear street frontages to have buildings, walls, or hedges at least 4 feet in height, within 10 ft of property line ■ Ground Floor Transparency - 50% of Primary Frontage building facade within 10 feet of frontage lot line be made of transparent windows and doors. All other building frontages require 30% transparency. o Current Standards ■ Screening and Buffering - Parking lots - Type IV landscaping, minimum four feet wide, is required along all street frontages. ➢ This standard creates landscaped barriers between pedestrians and buildings rather than enhancing a safe and comfortable pedestrian zone o Changes to Screening and Buffering "Pedestrian Activity Zone" ■ Replace with required 10-foot Pedestrian Activity Zone - Allows for a range of active uses like sidewalk cafes and amenities such as public art, street furniture, street trees, bus shelters, pavement patterns, lighting, etc. - Expanded Sidewalk Width ■ Amenity Space - Outdoor amenity space, such as landscaping, benches, etc. should be required in conjunction with development - A portion of the required amenity space should be provided as common space and may include pedestrian areas o New Stepback Design Standards ■ No current stepback regulations exist ■ Purpose: Ensure a transition in height and bulk between multifamily/mixed-use buildings in commercial zones and adjacent single family zones, while enabling more housing options to be built adjacent to Hwy 99 o Recommended Front Setback for Multifamily and Mixed -Use Adjacent to Single Family Zones ■ GROUND FLOOR SETBACK - For frontages on Highway 99, require a front setback of 10 feet to accommodate a Pedestrian Activity Zone. - For frontages not on Highway 99, reduce frontage setbacks to 5 foot and encourage enhanced pedestrian realm (larger sidewalks, useable landscaping, etc.). - Keep current 15 feet setback and 10' landscaping requirements for lot line adjacency with single family zones. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q February 21, 2017 Page 8 Packet Pg. 324 8.2.e o Recommended Front Stepback for Multifamily and Mixed -Use Adjacent to Single Family Zones UPPER FLOOR SETBACK - Zero setback up to 25 feet in height (30 feet is the maximum height in RM 1.5, which is the predominant zone surrounding the commercial zones on Highway 99). - 10 foot setback beyond 25 feet in height on sides with lot line adjacency to single family zones - 20 foot setback beyond 55 feet in height on sides with lot line adjacency to single family zones - 8 foot stepback beyond 30 feet in height on sides across a street from single family zones - Stepback areas can be used for active outdoor space such as balconies. o Recommended Transit -Supportive Parking Standards ■ Reduce minimums; follow market demand for parking - Residential ➢ Current: Studio: 1.2 / 1-Bedroom: 1.5 / 2-Bedroom: 1.8 / 3-Bedroom: 2 ➢ Recommended: One space per unit that is less than 700 sq. ft. - Commercial ➢ Current: 2.5 per 1,000 square feet (1 per 400 sq ft) ➢ Recommended: 2 per 1,000 square feet - Exempt first 3,000 sq ft of commercial uses within mixed -use buildings that have a shared parking plan (parking study and management plan) ➢ Reduces cost burden for small, local entrepreneurs ➢ Staff decision on compliance Mr. Fregonese continued his review: • Draft Affordable Housing Recommendations o Define Hwy 99 area as a "target area" to allow Multi -Family Tax Exemption (MFTE) projects ■ Pass ordinance to enable MFTE project in Hwy 99 area ■ All residential -portion of building value tax exempt for 12 years with at least 20% affordable units o Continue to enhance fee waiver program for affordable housing ■ Enhance its City program to allow the reduction of transportation and park impact fees for projects that include affordable housing o Mixed -Use, Mixed -Income Demonstration Project ■ Identify site with willing owner or City purchase/transferrable option ■ Actively recruit developers (non-profit; public -private) ■ Pilot project for new MFTE and fee waiver programs, and other possible special assessment districts o Other Affordable Housing and Infrastructure Finance Recommendations ■ Key Financing Tools and Funding Sources to Pursue - City Fund for Redevelopment and Affordable Housing - Community Renewal Area (CRA) - used in Shoreline - Hospital Benefit Zone (HBZ) Financing Program - Local Infrastructure Project Area (LIPA) Financing - Landscape Conservation and Local Improvement Program (LCLIP) - Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) - HUD HOME Program Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q February 21, 2017 Page 9 Packet Pg. 325 8.2.e - HUD CDBG Program - Enterprise Community Partiers Regional Equitable Development Initiative Draft Signage & Wayfinding Recommendations o Gateway Signage at Hwy 99/Hwy 104 interchange o Transit Gateway Signage/Station at Hwy 99/228th o Improve wayfinding signage along corridor ■ Identify downtown, Lake Ballinger, multiuse path (Interurban Trail), new regional rail, International District, Health District, other activity nodes o Unique District Design Identity ■ Branding, public/local art, street furniture, unique bus shelter designs, pavement patterns, special lighting fixtures, colored crosswalks, banners, etc. o Prohibit new pole signs Draft Transportation Recommendations o Improve Transit Transfers: ■ Unify/consolidate BRT and local transit stops to reduce walking distance for transfers o Hwy 99 and 228th will be Key Intersection ■ 228th will connect Edmonds to regional rail in Mountlake Terrace. ■ Shuttle/transit service from Hwy 99 to regional rail station ■ Consolidated transit stop at 228th ■ New BRT station ■ Clear signage ■ High quality bike connection on 228th o Incentivize Alternative Transportation Options: ■ Car Share/Bike Share ■ On -site bike parking ■ Ride sharing services (Uber, Lyft) ■ Electric car charging stations ■ Incentives: Impact fee reductions and parking requirement offsets for providing dedicated accommodating alternative transportation options on -site Draft Transportation Infrastructure Recommendations o Expand use of grant programs to fund safety improvements and pedestrian facilities ■ Safe Route to School Program ■ Pedestrian and Bicycle Program ■ Highway Safety Improvements Program (HSIP) ■ Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Program (CMAQ) o Proposed Short & Long -Term Transportation Improvements ■ Transportation Goals: - Improve pedestrian safety and access to/from Hwy 99 corridor - Improve pedestrian environment along Hwy 99 corridor - Safe pedestrian crossing of Hwy 99 and access to transit - Improved transit mobility and transit stop environment - Improved traffic flow and general safety with access management ■ Key Recommended Transportation Improvements - Close the most significant gap in the pedestrian crossings within the corridor - 238th to 228th - a distance of 3,700 ft. - has no controlled pedestrian crossing - Improve pedestrian access from the south at the SR 104 interchange - Long-term recommendation: Reconfigure ramps to conventional 90-degree stop control intersections - Short-term recommendation: Install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB's) with high visibility crosswalk Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q February 21, 2017 Page 10 Packet Pg. 326 8.2.e - Encourage walking and biking to access plan Highway 99 from surrounding neighborhoods - "Complete Streets" - sidewalks, safety lighting, street lighting, pedestrian -scaled lighting, drainage improvements, etc. - Streets that can be safely traveled by pedestrians and bicyclists experience travel during the day - Improve connections between transit and major employment centers ➢ Swift Stations at 216th and the Swedish Hospital Campus: pedestrian walkway system within campus with wayfinding o Maps of Planned Transportation Improvements and Project Supportive Improvements, identifying the location of: ■ Improvement Index Number ■ Existing Signalized Intersection and Ped Xing ■ Proposed New Traffic Signal and Pedestrian Crossing ■ Intersection Safety & Capacity Improvements ■ New Bike Route Designation ■ New Class II Bicycle Lanes ■ Street Improvements for Pedestrians ■ Access Management (Raised Medians) ■ Pedestrian Hybrid Signal (HAWK) o Photographs of: ■ Health District Gateway - Today - With initial public investments - With corresponding private investments ■ SW 234t' - Today - With initial public investments - With corresponding private investment at night will Implement a Transportation Next Steps: o March 21 - City Council Hearing of Subarea Plan o March 22 - Open House for Planned Action EIS o April 12 - Planning Board public hearing on Development Code Amendments and Planned Action Ordinance (PAO) o May 9 - City Council public hearing on Dev. Code and PAO o June 5 - Subarea Plan, Dev. Code Amendments and PAO Adoption Further information such as project updates, workshop results, upcoming events and more are available at www. EdmondsHWY99. ors. Councilmember Buckshnis said the packet is very thorough and well done and can address any questions the public has. Councilmember Teitzel referred to the Burlington Coat Factory property in the Gateway District and the Ranch Market in the International District, recalling Mr. Fregonese saying it may not be possible to redevelop certain areas like those in close proximity to the street. He asked what was envisioned for properties like those. Mr. Fregonese said in those situations, they recommend a functional slip lane where there is a major road with a smaller road for parking. A 1-2 lane parking lot with good crossings could be located in front of the building with pedestrian aspects to buffer pedestrians from the road. There may be places where the building could be located close to the road but have parking in front in areas where it is not feasible to walk along the road. Ms. Hope said the details would be specified in the code. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q February 21, 2017 Page 11 Packet Pg. 327 8.2.e c Councilmember Nelson recognized this is a very ambitious plan that will provide more housing and more affordable housing. He requested Recommendation 2.3, the use of solar panels and green building Q practices even beyond current standards should be encouraged, be emphasized. If the goal is new development, it needs to be done in an environmentally sensitive way and provide opportunities for solar c power and renewable energy sources. Mr. Fregonese agreed, commenting solar is becoming one of the (L cheapest sources new of new power, and is much more feasible than it was five years ago. 08 Councilmember Tibbott referred to the commercial district around the medical center, a service industry that provides some commercial. He asked what kind of tax base those services provide the City and what other services were envisioned that would create economic development for the City. Mr. Fregonese answered uses that occur around a medical facility such as Swedish Hospital include medical offices, pharmacies, medical devices, imaging, etc. as well as uses that serve employees and customers of the hospital such as restaurants, coffee shops, personal services, etc. He summarized uses would include a mixture of those found in any employment concentrated area plus specific medical services. Councilmember Tibbott asked if his studies found opportunity for additional services in that area that justify making it a designated area on Highway 99. Mr. Fregonese answered yes, noting Swedish Hospital is not done expanding. The area is underserved now; there is a campus but not a lot of the services found around a more mature hospital to serve the hospital's customers and employees. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed the presentation did not identify specific types of affordable housing such as low income or senior housing. Mr. Fregonese answered there is a variety of housing, it is all feasible and these types of buildings are great for senior housing and low income housing but they have not specified a target. Ms. Hope said some market rate housing is also expected. Affordable housing is a range of housing that includes low income, moderate income, workforce housing, etc. Market rate housing would help ensure it is a viable, lively neighborhood. Mr. Fregonese said proformas were done on all the redevelopment sites and designed at or slightly below the median market rate without assistance/subsidy that 45% of median income could afford to rent. Market rate housing is not luxury housing; it is affordable to working incomes without a subsidy. The density and lack of parking means projects can be at lower, more competitive rates which allows the subsidy to go further for the affordable component. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented affordable housing is not necessarily affordable for low income or seniors on a fixed income such as on Social Security. She relayed her understanding that that would all be possible, but it would depend on the interest of the property owners. Mr. Fregonese answered it will depend on the interest of the property owner and the advocacy of the lower income housing community to partner. He referred to the recommendation to do a mixed income housing demonstration project, an area where the City can provide leadership on a private -public partnership that will provide market rate housing and affordable housing of some type. A demonstration project will put in place a path forward to catalyze other development. That cannot be regulated; the City will need to be opportunistic and look for partners to put that together. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about the plans for 238th near Safeway where the primary crossings are located and where people congregate to catch SWIFT. Mr. Fregonese referred to the map, identifying a bike path, pedestrian enhance, SWIFT stops on both sides, access controls, and a pedestrian crossing in that area. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if there were plans for any housing in that area. Mr. Fregonese pointed out properties (purple on the map) where redevelopment was most feasible. He assured that was just a guess, it could happen anywhere but newer buildings or properties with an active business were unlikely to redevelop. Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q February 21, 2017 Page 12 Packet Pg. 328 8.2.e Wendy Kendall, Edmonds, referred to the photograph of the SW 234th intersection on Highway 99 where it appeared lanes were lost. She expressed concern with the existing traffic on Highway 99 and feared additional signals would further affect traffic flow. She asked if there was any prediction on property tax increases for residences within a couple blocks of Highway 99. Rich Senderoff, Edmonds, recalled when he served on a previous Economic Development Commission, there was often discussion about the concept of a hotel on Highway 99, especially one near the hospital. When Swedish first acquired Stevens, representatives making a presentation to the EDC also talked about the need for hotel for people visiting patients that could also serve players and patrons of the nearby ice rink where Pac-12 hockey is played. In addition to residential, he suggested including concepts that would attract a hotel group and possibly involving Swedish Hospital in that effort. Marjory Green, Edmonds, asked whether the new buildings would be higher. She has heard there will be major changes at Mill Park Condominiums at 2241h & Highway 99 and asked if there were any plans for changes in that area. Rebecca Wolfe, Edmonds, suggested the City contact American Council for an Energy -Efficient Economy, ACEEE.org who has stated through more conservation and clean renewable energy such as wind and solar, the United States can be completely off fossil fuels by 2030. She encouraged the Council to think of every possibility to save energy for renters. Robert Siew, owner of the property where Burlington Coat Factory is currently located, said the design requirement to have building close to the road works great if the traffic is slow and there is parking on both sides but it is difficult to achieve on all parcels on Highway 99 and imposing a uniform requirement may impede the design for specific developers. His property is a classic example; he has attended all the Highway 99 Subarea Plan meetings and has been in contact with Ms. Hope and the design consultant who are aware of his concerns. There are only a few large parcels on Highway 99 like theirs such as Aurora Marketplace and Ranch Market. For large parcels, especially those with existing buildings with tenants, it is difficult to develop the entire parcel at once because a new building at the street will block the existing business' visibility. They are anxious to try a mixed -use development on the former McFinster's site with retail on the bottom floor and residential above. They have a 30-year lease with Burlington who does not want anything further west than their building that would block their visibility. With that requirement, they will not be able to redevelop the restaurant property. He encouraged the Council to allow as much flexibility as possible to address issues on specific parcels to avoid impeding development. Imad Bahbah, Principal, IHB Architects, Kent, said he represents a developer who has been through the pre -application process for a housing mixed use project off 238th. He expressed support for the Council's approval of the Highway 99 Subarea Plan in hopes of gaining developer incentives. The initial proposal was .75 stalls per unit and was increased to 1.0 for 700 square feet. He encouraged the Council to reduce that to stay competitive particularly in a transit -oriented zone and inquired about the parking ratio for units over 700 square feet. They postponed their project to see how the plan develops and in hopes of better incentives including the MFTE. He encouraged Council to approve the Subarea Plan so they can proceed with development of their project, 7 stories, approximately 68 units if the parking ratios work, and about 4500 square feet of retail on the first level, pedestrian oriented, etc. He was glad to hear the community and citizens in the area were supportive of housing in the area and suggested publicizing that on the City's website attract to development. Susie Schaefer, Edmonds, suggested including incentives for native plants in the plan. She saw this as a great opportunity because native plants have a better chance for survival, plants and trees makes it more Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q February 21, 2017 Page 13 Packet Pg. 329 8.2.e of a neighborhood and make an area more inviting. She pointed out Shoreline is looking a lot better and a native plants give a place class. W Q Bee Wilson, Edmonds, said she lives downtown but has grandchildren and great-grandchildren growing up near 228"' & 80t'`. She thanked the Council for the study. As the plan will lead to more people, roof c space, etc. she suggested including raingardens and bioswales in the plan as well as considering pervious a pavement. 08 Stanley Piha, Edmonds, a member of the former Highway 99 Task Force, acknowledged the work done by staff and the consultant on the plan. He supported blanketing the subarea with the General Commercial Zone including parcels that are currently zoned RM2.4. Glenda Smith, Edmonds, said she lives close to Ranch Market and is very worried about the proposed plan. At a recent Mill Park Condominium HOA meeting, the Board informed her that half their building is residential and the other half is commercial. She lives in the half that is zoned commercial and is worried they may be bought out. She asked whether that was a possibility. Patrick Doherty, speaking on behalf of the Economic Development Commission, summarized a memo the Commission emailed to the Council: • Commercial development is important within the corridor. Would like to see a commercial component in mixed use building • It is important that the Council act quickly on plan. There is interest from the development community, want to capitalize on the current economic climate. • Once the plan and zoning are approved, an open house or event should be held to attract developers to the community. • Supportive of any incentives for development • Supportive of proposal to find a way to create a catalyst project • Interested in more specificity regarding how to enhance the sense of the International District as a special place Seth Hale, Seattle, an architect, recommended the Council adopt a plan that will provide a lot of design flexibility, and give architects an opportunity to provide design alternatives and create unique environments. With regard to the stepbacks, he observed the proposal for an 8-foot stepback for property across the street from residential at 30 feet above the street. He suggested the height be coordinated with the stepback for properties adjacent to single family so that the stepback for a building on a corner would occur at the same location. He pointed out 30 feet is an awkward elevation for that change as typically the first floor would be 15 feet and upper residential floors 10 feet. Bruce Witenberg, Edmonds, congratulated the Development Services Department on the public process for the Highway 99 Subarea Plan. The public meetings were well attended and included thoughtful questions and commentary. Despite the long process, he echoed the concerns of some citizens that the draft plan has only been available to the public for a week. The breadth of this plan is unlike anything the City has contemplated recently, affecting several square miles and residents need additional time to absorb the complexities presented in the plan and to continue to offer input. He was glad the schedule offers these opportunities. After a brief review, he offered the following comments: ➢ Would like to see further discussion of the transportation study and hoped the study would take into account the plan's effect on some of the most affordable housing in Edmonds, the single family residences in and beyond the proposed zoning in the plan. ➢ The plan identifies Gateway, International and Hospital Districts but he could not visualize where additional housing necessary to help the City achieve its GMA targets would be located in the Gateway District. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q February 21, 2017 Page 14 Packet Pg. 330 8.2.e ➢ Shaded areas (packet page 257) identifying housing development, do not show the number units or c residents and he recommended providing more specificity. W ➢ Strongly support transit oriented development including limited parking for multi -family residential Q units off the Highway 99 corridor. Limiting the amount of parking, perhaps even more than the plans suggests, is a good method for accomplishing the goal of transit oriented affordable housing. c He looked forward to having additional opportunities to comment on the plan. He agreed with Mr. (L Senderoff's comments about a hotel on Highway 99 and summarized the redevelopment plan for the 08 highway was generally quite exciting and if brought to fruition would greatly enhance Edmonds' portion Ui of Highway 99. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Earling closed the public hearing. Mayor Earling advised another public hearing is scheduled on March 21. Ms. Hope said there will be several more opportunities for public input. This is the first public hearing before the City Council; the Planning Board held a public hearing and an earlier draft of the plan was available to the public. No decisions are requested tonight. She offered to develop a Q&A response for the questions that arose during the public hearing as well as talk to individuals with specific questions. The EIS will also answer some questions. Mayor Earling summarized this a work in progress; this is the first step as far as the Council having an opportunity to ask questions and hear public comment. 7. ACTION ITEMS 1. ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE REPORTING OF LOST OR STOLEN FIREARMS Councilmember Nelson reported since the Council last considered this ordinance, he spoke with Beth Ford, Lighthouse Law Group, and Seattle's City Attorney as well as Seattle Councilmember Tim Burgess, the author of Seattle's ordinance. Ms. Ford was satisfied with information she received from Seattle's City Attorney regarding the ordinance. Councilmember Nelson pointed out the Department of Justice views lost and stolen firearms as posing a substantial threat to public safety and law enforcement. He believed the proposed ordinance would, 1) promote public safety by enabling law enforcement to better track illegal guns used in the commission of crimes, 2) help return lost guns to their rightful owners, and 3) protect gun owners from being wrongly implicated in crimes committed with their lost or stolen guns. As a gun owner, he did not take anything to do with firearms lightly. The Pledge of Alliance says liberty and justice for all; he asked where was the justice for the thousands of victims who have are killed every year by guns that citizens fail to report as stolen or missing. Councilmember Buckshnis explained she raised this with Councilmember Nelson last October. She was shocked by the number of guns that are stolen, used in crimes and the number of children killed by guns that were not stored safely. She offered to provide the data she had collected, noting a great deal of information was available from Everytown for Gun Safety. She expressed her support for the ordinance. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 4060, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REQUIRING THE REPORTING OF LOST AND STOLEN FIREARMS. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. CITY COUNCIL MEETING FORMAT AND POTENTIAL COMMITTEE STRUCTURE Council President Mesaros explained the proposal is for three committees; the key issue is the format of the meetings. The proposal is for committees to meet on the ls` and P Tuesdays from 7:15 — 8:15 p.m., Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q February 21, 2017 Page 15 Packet Pg. 331 8.2.f c Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to incentives for smaller units and lower rents for those units and asked how the lower cost could be guaranteed. She asked whether the incentive included putting a cap on Q the rent. Chair Nordling Rubenkonig relayed the development team indicated there are ways of reducing the cost of the construction. With regard to the Westgate project, it will be subsidized and 19% of the units c will be at the affordable housing rate. Vice Chair Monroe recalled the team indicating it was market driven; a a certain amount can be charged per square foot for apartments in the area, less square footage equals a 08 lower price. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas concluded the rents would be market rate but lower due to the size. Council President Mesaros asked what the developers of the Westgate characterized as incentives. Vice Chair Monroe said they suggested starting with a 2-story box as the base and then providing items such as public meeting areas, artwork or other features could quality for additional stories. Councilmember Nelson referred to the comment about long term investor and the importance of that distinction. This is the first time the developer has done a project outside of Seattle but they are referencing standard incentives. He wanted to be certain the developer's first project in Snohomish County had Edmonds appeal and not Seattle's. Vice Chair Monroe asked if Councilmember Nelson was interested in ensuing the project was not cookie cutter, commenting the City's Planning Department will work with the development team. At the meeting the Planning Board had, he felt they were very vested in the project and the area. Chair Nordling Rubenkonig said the development team praised City staff for working with them to create a project they are proud of. She noted Edmonds is urban and the Westgate project is similar to projects in Seattle. Councilmember Teitzel said he reads the Planning Board minutes and is impressed with the work they do. He relayed the Council hears from the public at Council meetings, emails, phone calls, etc. and asked how the Planning Board engages with citizens. Chair Nordling Rubenkonig commented the tree ordinance generated significant public input; there was also a good turnout for the sign code. Planning Board meetings are televised. The Council setup is very formal; the Planning Board is more relaxed. She acknowledged the Planning Board did not have the amount of public participation the members would like. Councilmember Teitzel commented it would be great to see more people engaged at the Planning Board level before issues come to the City Council. 8. PUBLIC HEARING 1. PUBLIC HEARING ON HIGHWAY 99 AREA-: CG REZONE (MAP) & DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Development Services Director Shane Hope introduced John Fregonese, Principal, Fregonese Associates, explained tonight's public hearing follows public open houses, news releases, meetings by the Planning Board and City Council and other outreach. He displayed a map of the project area, primarily the commercial zones around Highway 99 in Edmonds. The City Council last discussed Highway 99 Area Zone and Code Changes on June 6: Discussion included: • Comparison with existing zone map and development ode • Review of proposed CG site and building design standards • Question about additional incentives for "green buildings" • Question about vehicle parking within buildings at street level The focus of tonight's public hearing is the Planning Board's recommendation for Zoning Map and Development Code. No action is requested at this time. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q June 20, 2017 Page 4 Packet Pg. 332 8.2.f He displayed the proposed Zoning Map and explained the proposal: • Change these zones to the consolidated CG Zone Incorporate design standards directly into zones to ensure scale transition into neighborhoods More predicable outcomes for community He displayed the Comprehensive Plan Map, advising the new zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan map. He reviewed: • Draft Zoning and Development Recommendations o Strengthen current design standards o Incorporate them directly into the zoning code o Consideration of special circumstances within the corridor will be made to ensure the standards are feasible, such as large parcels that would have multiple buildings if redeveloped and parcels with unique access or transportation challenges. • Site development standards General 16.60.020 o The pedestrian area adjacent to the street is composed of three zones: the streetscape zone, the pedestrian zone, and the streetscape zone (Section 16.60.020.C.2) ■ Changed "amenity zone" to "streetscape zone" ■ Added dimensions o Additional building stepback when adjacent to RS zones ■ Upper stories stepback 10' for 25' of building height; and 20' for 55' of building height • Site development standards —design standards 16.60.030.A. LE o 15' setback with 10' landscape buffer • A minimum five feet wide type IV landscaping is required along all street frontages where parking lots about the street. Section 16.60.030.A.1 • Access and vehicle parking o All off-street surface parking shall be located to the side or rear of the primary building, except as otherwise specifically allowed by this chapter, and shall be screened from the sidewalk by a wall or plantings between 2 to 4 feet in height. o Outdoor parking areas shall comprise 40% or less of the public street frontage area within 100 feet of the primary street for the lot or tract and, on corner lots, may not be located at the corner. The requirements of this subsection do not apply to permitted auto sales uses. • Required electric vehicle charging stations (Section 16.60.030.B.5) o One or more electric vehicle charging stations must be provided for all new development that includes housing. • Bicycle storage spaces (Section 16.60.030.B.6) o Bicycle storage spaces for multifamily housing, excluding housing for assisted living or other specialized facilities, shall be provided for residents 0 1 bicycle storage space for each residential unit under 700 square feet and 2 bicycle storage spaces for each residential unit greater than 700 square feet • Paths within parking lots (Section 16.60.030.B.8) o Pedestrian walkways in parking lots shall be delineated by separate paved routes that meet federal accessibility requirements and that use a variation in textures and/or colors and may include landscape barriers and landscape islands • Pedestrian and transit access (Section 16.60.030.B.11) o Where a transit station or bus stop is located in front of or adjacent to a parcel, pedestrian connections linking the station or stop directly to the development are required. o Pedestrians routes shall connect buildings on the same site to each other • Site Development Standards — Site Design and Layout 16.60.030.0 1. Pedestrian Oriented Design (Section 16.60.030.C.1) ■ At least 50% of a building's fagade facing the primary public street shall be located within 20 feet of the property line where the primary street frontage exists. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q June 20, 2017 Page 5 Packet Pg. 333 8.2.f ■ Building must include a prominent pedestrian entry on the primary frontage ■ Vehicle parking shall not be located within the first 20 feet of the primary street frontage, other than as allowed for vehicle sales use. 2. Alternative Walkable Design Area Option ■ For sites with unique constraints. ■ At least 50% of the building's facade facing the primary street shall be located within 60 feet of the front property line 3. Exceptions Process for Pedestrian and Walkable Design Options ■ Exemptions may be allowed by hearing examiner to provide for design flexibility that still encourages pedestrian orientation and efficient land uses under following criteria: - Property is located within 300 feet of highway interchange or has unique pedestrian access constraints - One or more buildings are located facing the primary street frontage - The development provides business and pedestrian areas near the primary street frontage and likely to be active through the day/evening. - At least 25% of required amenity space is located to connect building to the street - Where a site has multiple buildings, amenity space should be located between buildings to allow shared use - One or more buildings on the site must have at least two stories of usable space o Amenity space (Section 16.60.030.C.4) ■ An area equivalent to at least 5% of the building footprint shall be provided as amenity space. ■ If a vehicle parking area is being added to the site without the concurrent development of a building of at least 2,000 square feet, amenity space must be provided to equal at least 5% of the additional parking area. ■ Example of amenity space in Costa Mesa, California o Building Design and Massing (Section 16.60.030.D.2) ■ On the primary frontage, 50% of the building facade between two and 10 feet in height shall be comprised of windows or doors that are transparent Mr. Fregonese reviewed examples of amenity space and building design and massing: • New Seasons building on N Williams Street in Portland • Safeway on Hawthorne Boulevard in Portland • Safeway on Hwy 99Barbur Boulevard in Portland • Fred Meyer on Interstate Avenue, • Auto dealers Mr. Fregonese reviewed photographs illustrating the Health District Gateway and SW 234th today and with corresponding private investment. He reviewed the proposed changes to the sign code • Revisions to 20.65.045: o Limit freestanding signs (such as monument signs) to maximum height of 14 feet in this district o Require freestanding signs to be counted as part of total maximum sign area for this district Mr. Fregonese described next steps: • Council's next meeting on this topic July 18 • Council action scheduled August 15 Councilmember Teitzel referred to the use of stepbacks to preclude a large wall facing a neighbor, providing a friendly transition. He asked if the use of the stepback would be restricted, for example would decks, tall trees, awnings, etc. be allowed, commenting allowing a 20-foot tree in the stepback would defeat the purpose of the stepback. Mr. Fregonese answered stepbacks are typically used for outdoor areas that would Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q June 20, 2017 Page 6 Packet Pg. 334 8.2.f include furniture, trees in pots, etc. The intent would be for the stepbacks to be used as outdoor space, an amenity for the building. If desired, tree height could be limited to 10-12 feet. Councilmember Teitzel concluded there would not be a restriction on what was allowed in the stepback. Mr. Fregonese agreed it is typically patio furniture and trees in pots. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the amenity space was private or public. Mr. Fregonese answered it is privately owned intended to be open for public use as part of the pedestrian environment. Ms. Hope commented there is also opportunity for an internal plaza or courtyard for the tenants/residents/owners in addition to the required public space that is typically at the sidewalk level. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled at least one project where the interpretation was it was not for the public's use but for the tenants' use. Ms. Hope anticipated it could be a mixture, some public space near the sidewalk as well as some private space for residents; the mix will depend on the use. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas concluded the plans for each project would specify whether the space was public or private use. Ms. Hope agreed. Councilmember Tibbott said he liked the architectural features in the renderings but there is a minimal list of suggested building items. He asked whether more detail, perhaps pictures or illustration to help developers understand what the City is looking for with regard to architectural design standards. Mr. Fregonese answered there is typically a brochure or illustrations of how to implement the design standards. Compared to other codes implemented at the staff level, this code has both building transparency and building fagade requirements. With creativity, that will lead to the type of buildings in the illustrations. Quality can never be guaranteed via the code but it can guarantee it won't be a white elephant. Ms. Hope said the draft code includes some illustrations which maybe supplemented. Typically, commercial projects include professionals who are used to these design terms, but the intent is for the code to be understandable to the average person. Councilmember Tibbott recalled the Westgate plan included an adaptation of form based code, recalling the intent was to lower the risk to a developer by illustrating what the City was looking for which saves time for the developer and for the City. Ms. Hope said this is a type of form based code as well, it addresses uses that are allowed/not allowed uses but focuses on the building shape, bulk, glazing, as well as the site design and building articulation. Councilmember Tibbott recalled he expressed concern during the last presentation about the possibility of a 75-foot building across the street from single family residences. In areas of city where that would be allowed, it may not pencil out but it could happen. If a proposal like that were submitted to the City, he how it would be handled. Ms. Hope answered the code currently allows a 75-foot height next to single family housing in some instances with no requirement for stepback or building setback. This code strengthens and respects the neighborhood more than the existing zoning. Councilmember Tibbott expressed concern that the proposed zoning eliminates the transition areas. When driving around Shoreline and Edmonds today, he saw taller buildings on Hwy 99 with nearby residential areas. In one location, there was the interurban trail and vegetation between single family and the 75-foot tall building. He appreciated there would be landscaping between the curb and the building, but that does not break up the bulk of the building. He asked what would be done when a use adjacent to another use may not be compatible. Mr. Fregonese answered there would be 15-foot side and rear yards setback in addition to the stepback. In the case of across the street, there is a 10-20-foot setback in front, the 60-foot right-of-way, and the 20-foot single family setback, providing approximately a 100-foot separation between the structures. Although stepback could be required, a 75-foot tall building 100 feet away is beyond the ratio where it would be beneficial. Councilmember Tibbott commented parking would provide additional distance. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q June 20, 2017 Page 7 Packet Pg. 335 8.2.f Councilmember Nelson thanked Mr. Fregonese for the requirement for electrical vehicle charging station c and the description of amenity space. He referred to the sample photograph of the car dealership, remarking W when he thought of amenity space, he was not thinking it would look like that. Mr. Fregonese recalled the Q Council's concern with retaining car dealerships. He reviewed the car dealership examples, and the intent to do something useful with the space in front that is not just parking. Councilmember Nelson suggested c not using that photograph as an example. a 08 Councilmember Nelson asked if the amenity spaces for multiple properties could be combined and collectively create a park. Ms. Hope answered that was possible. Mr. Fregonese said he lives next to a Fred Meyer whose amenity space ended up being a corner park. Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Dean Phillips, Council President, Edmonds Lutheran Church, referred to the church's letter expressing support for the Highway 99 Subarea Plan. Ann Wermus, Edmonds recognized the work the City has accomplished in the plan for Highway 99. It promises to be a greatly revitalized area. She expressed support for the concept in the plan and stressed the need for continued work on providing permanent low income housing. Under the current plan, if a developer took advantage of the tax exemption option, a limited amount of low income housing could be supplied. In the GMA, the goal is to encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population and encourages the use of innovative techniques to meet the housing needs of all economic segments of the population and requires the city to provide opportunity for a range of housing types. The Highway 99 subarea plan offers a unique opportunity for housing that could be affordable for workforce housing as well as low income, potentially relieving the pressure on low income families. She urged the Council to develop and employ innovative strategies to promote all efforts as way to increase housing opportunity for all economic segments of the population. Bea Wilson, Edmonds, representing herself and her son who owns property on 2251 Place SW. She thanked the City Council and Planning Board for the proposed plan. She asked the definition of affordable housing. Mayor Earling suggested she speak with Ms. Hope. Ms. Wilson concluded the plan looks great. Robert Sieu, Edmonds, property owner on Highway 99, said he spoke at the Planning Board May 10 public hearing regarding the exception on design standards. He also spoke with Ms. Hope and the consultant and both agreed some language needed to be change. The Planning Board approved the plan on the condition those changes would be made but at the June 6 Council meeting, the language had not been changed. The changes are related to exceptions for car dealerships and property 300 feet from an interchange. Seth Hale, Seattle, also representing Stan Piha, Edmonds, expressed their support for the Planning Board's recommendation to approve the ordinance as proposed. The consultant has made the appropriate recommendations regarding setbacks, stepbacks and activity zones to ensure protection for properties adjacent to and across from CG zoned parcels within the corridor. Speaking as an architected, he commended the City on the flexibility in the code, providing a unique opportunity for great design in the corridor instead of code driven design. Alvin Rutledge, Edmonds, asked about the affect the zoning changes would have on adult entertainment. He recalled a Snohomish County levy in 1995-1999 that did not pass. Bruce Witenberg, Edmonds, said the plan works well on Highway 99 frontage where none of the parcels are across street or abut single family residences but more attention needs to be paid to the transition zone. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q June 20, 2017 Page 8 Packet Pg. 336 8.2.f Single family residences in close proximity to the Highway 99 corridor represent some of the least expensive housing in the City. Among the purposes of the CG zone in 16.60.005, it recognizes the evolving identity and sense of place including distinctions between different parts of the district and to be sensitive to adjacent resident zones. He suggested using "adjacent and neighboring" instead of "adjacent" to clarify consideration of residents next to and across the street from CG zones. The table in 16.60.020.A is not sympathetic to adjacent and neighboring residential zones. The minimum street, side and rear setback of 10-15 feet may be more adequately sensitive to neighboring residential zones if each was increased by a minimum of 10 feet. With regard to 16.60.020.D regarding stepbacks adjacent to RS zones, he suggested using "adjacent to and across the street from RS zones" instead of "adjacent." He recommended surface parking lots adjacent to or across the street from residential zones be prohibited and that residential parking requirements in 16.60.030.1 be further reduced from a minimum of .75 cars for units 700 square feet or less and 1.75 cars for units above 750 square feet to encourage use of public transportation. Adopting these recommendations would more clearly demonstrate the Council's commitment to being sensitive to neighboring RS zones while allowing for needed development. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Earling closed the public hearing. He relayed staff is seeking Council input for consideration on July 18. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked for clarification whether the zoning change would allow adult entertainment. Ms. Hope answered nothing had changed with regard to adult entertainment. Councilmember Tibbott expressed interest in staff s suggestions to address the issue he raised regarding multi -family directly across street from single family. Admittedly those streets were quieter and there would be parking on the street, yet the possibility existed for a 75-foot tall building across the street. He was open to considering options such as a parking buffer, reduced heights, stepback, etc. Councilmember Johnson commented TOD is very conducive to bicycles. She expressed interest in ways to accommodate bicycles in the Highway 99 corridor and consider the corridor as whole as a linear park as there are not a lot of parks in the area. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how to ensure people are not parking in the neighborhoods. Although the hope is fewer cars in a TOD, parking could be an issue if residents of the TOD parked in residential neighborhoods adjacent to the corridor. Ms. Hope said that is a legitimate issue and it is a balancing act. If too much parking is required, the result will not be TOD, yet enough parking needs to be required. The code tries to strike that balance between what is enough so there is some required parking but not so much that the TOD is lost or development of the site is so expensive that nothing happens. She described a development in Redmond where initially the city had fairly hefty parking standards and after the project was built, they found only about half the parking was being used because residents were using transit due to the location. If the need arose, parking programs could be considered. 9. ACTION ITEMS 1. PROPOSED NOISE ORDINANCE Public Works Director Phil Williams explained this is in response to the current need which will continue so staff is recommending a change to the code. He reviewed: • Current Noise Ordinance ECC 5.30 o Written 1981 — last modified 1985 (32 years ago) o Sets standards for noise generation by limiting sound pressure levels at receiving property lines o Establishes two standards ■ Daytime (7 am— 10 pm) ■ Night time (10 pm — 7 am) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q June 20, 2017 Page 9 Packet Pg. 337 8.2.g afternoon of July 18 due to a blockage that caused a sewer backup. The center remained closed the next day and porta-potties were delivered for planned weekend events. The center has a combination of many old sewer lines, some cement, some cast iron and the blockage occurred where those join. The center was able to reopen with porta-potties and two operating restrooms. A City team arrived at 6 a.m. July 25, determined the problem by 9 a.m., were laying gravel by 2 p.m. and the system was again operational by the next morning, hopefully for an extended period or at least another year. He commended the effective, hardworking, good-natured City staff, particularly Facilities Manager Tom Sullivan, Facilities Maintenance Worker Patrick Cleveland, Sewer Lead Worker Tim Harris, Senior Sewer Maintenance Workers Jim Clemens, Don Crofton and Rick Wickers. He requested staff be recognized for their work. 5. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 25, 2017 2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM AND PAYROLL CHECKS. 3. ACKNOWLEDGE THE RECEIPT OF A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM RICHARD MILLER ($169.99). 4. ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE TIMING OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S ANNUAL REPORT 5. HISTORIC INFORMATIONAL PANELS FOR YOST PARK AND WATERFRONT MILLS 6. SOCIAL WORKER INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT 6. PUBLIC HEARING 1. PUBLIC HEARING ON HIGHWAY 99 PLANNED ACTION ORDINANCE Development Services Director Shane Hope introduced Anna Snyder Kelly, 3 Square Blocks, who worked on the environmental impact statement (EIS) as well as the Planned Action Ordinance. Ms. Snyder Kelly explained a Planned Action Ordinance regulates the projects covered by the environment analysis done in an EIS, deemed to be "planned actions" under the Planned Action Ordinance. A Planned Action Ordinance also regulates what must be done to mitigate the environmental impacts. The Planned Action Ordinance does not just permit developments because they are within the EIS; it requires environmental impacts created by a project to be mitigated. The benefit of a Planned Action Ordinance is it speeds up the SEPA process for developers which encourages the kind of growth and economic development the City has stated it desires, creating benefit for all parties. Ms. Snyder Kelly explained there are three basic steps in preparing a Planned Action Ordinance, 1) prepare an EIS that analyzes the environment impacts that various types of development might have on an area, 2) develop and adopt a Planned Action Ordinance, and 3) review individual development projects to determine if they are a planned action under the Planned Action Ordinance. She provided an analogy; if a development process is a trip on a plane, a Planned Action Ordinance is the equivalent of TSA precheck. A Planned Action Ordinance does not just let development occur because it happened to have been described in the EIS, but it speeds up the line and requires development to mitigate for the environmental impacts it has on Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q July 31, 2017 Page 2 Packet Pg. 338 8.2.g an area. More specifically, a Planned Action Ordinance is procedural in the sense that it does not change the underlying codes and standards; each development considered under a Planned Action Ordinance still must follow the underlying plans and codes. The City determines if a project is a planned action and can be considered under the Planned Action Ordinance. Ms. Snyder Kelly explained the proposed Planned Action Ordinance outlines five thresholds used to determine if a project qualifies: 1. Land Use • Meets land uses allowed by the code and described in the EIS 2. Development threshold (for entire study area) • 3,325 dwelling units • 1,634,685 square feet of building area 3. Transportation • Not more than 2,755 new evening peak hour trips (for entire study area). 4. Elements of the Environment and Degree of Impacts • A proposed project that would result in a significant change in the type or degree of impacts to any of the elements of the environment analyzed in the Planned Action EIS would not qualify as a planned action Changed Conditions • Should environmental conditions change significantly from those analyzed in the Planned Action EIS, the City's SEPA Responsible Official may determine that the Planned Action designation is no longer applicable until supplemental environmental review is conducted. Council President Mesaros asked how the thresholds were determined. Ms. Snyder Kelly responded the transportation thresholds were calculated based on level of service (LOS) in the City's code and requirements for concurrence. The development thresholds are also related to concurrency. Council President Mesaros relayed his understanding there was no change to those. Ms. Snyder Kelly agreed. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether this was the first time the City has considered a Planned Action Ordinance. Ms. Hope answered yes, this is the first time the City has undertaken a Planned Action Ordinance and an EIS for a subarea. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why the City wanted to speed up the SEPA process, observing SEPA is extremely important. Ms. Hope clarified the real value is not that it makes the SEPA process a few days faster; the value is having an EIS that has assessed the impacts of development which helps assure the community that impacts of development have been considered and the Planned Action Ordinance memorializes that. A SEPA Checklist is still required for each project. Councilmember Nelson asked how much time is saved. Ms. Hope answered for a developer it may be a few days or a couple weeks, it is not a huge amount of time unless a huge project is proposed which could potentially save a developer several weeks. Councilmember Nelson observed the time savings was also a cost savings. Ms. Hope agreed. Councilmember Johnson asked whether the EIS had been published. Ms. Hope advised the draft EIS is available online and the final EIS will be posted tomorrow; there was little change between the two. Ms. Snyder Kelly advised the final EIS incorporates a number of public comments which were used to make a few tweaks such as incorporating things Community Transit is doing. Councilmember Johnson referred to G5 in the Planned Action Ordinance related to development agreements which states the City or an applicant may request consideration and execution of a development agreement as allowed in Chapter 20.08 ECDC for a Planned Action project. She recalled the Council had a robust discussion regarding development agreements 3-5 years ago but the discussion was never concluded. That discussion included types of incentives and tradeoffs for development agreements. She Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q July 31, 2017 Page 3 Packet Pg. 339 8.2.g asked the status of the development agreement process. Ms. Hope answered development agreements are allowed under the existing code; if a project doesn't meet certain aspect of the code but meets the intent, the Council can consider a development agreement that binds the developer to certain conditions. A development agreement requires a decision by the City Council. A number of cities allow for development agreements and Ms. Hope acknowledged there are pros and cons to their use but there are occasions when they are useful. She felt it was worthwhile to again consider the chapter related to development agreements, but that was a different process; this ordinance simply references the existing code regarding development agreements and does not change anything. Councilmember Johnson relayed her understanding the Council would work with a developer on case -by - case basis. Ms. Hope answered yes. She was not expecting requests for a development agreement and she has not heard anything that would likely lead to a development agreement; the ordinance simply leaves that option open. Councilmember Johnson observed the Development Services Director or designee determines if an application is complete and that the decision of the SEPA Responsible Official regarding qualification as a planned action shall be final. She asked who is the SEPA Responsible Official Ms. Hope advised the Planning Manager is the SEPA Responsible Official, currently Rob Chave. Councilmember Johnson observed there was no way to challenge that decision. Ms. Hope answered that is typically considered an administrative decision. Councilmember Johnson observed the Planned Action Ordinance would be reviewed in five years. Ms. Hope agreed. Councilmember Johnson observed the ordinances takes effect 5 days after passage and asked whether the Planned Action Ordinance could be adopted prior to the Comprehensive Plan when it was related to the Hwy 99 subarea plan. Ms. Hope answered subarea plans can be adopted outside the normal Comprehensive Plan amendment process. Once the Council approves the Hwy 99 subarea plan, which is considered part of the Comprehensive Plan, the Planned Action Ordinance could go forward. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding that development could go forward unless there were significant impacts and asked for examples of impacts that would disallow development. Ms. Hope answered an obvious example would be the traffic proposed at an intersection would cause the intersection's LOS to fail; specific mitigation and additional study would be required. Councilmember Tibbott asked for other examples. Ms. Hope answered traffic would be the mostly likely as there are no wetlands in this area. Ms. Snyder Kelly pointed out if a project does not meet the qualifications to be considered a planned action, it automatically reverts to the original SEPA process. Councilmember Tibbott asked for an example of changed conditions. Ms. Hope answered the most likely would be if traffic patterns did not occur in the way the modeling indicates. Ms. Snyder Kelly answered another example would be an unexpected increase in population and the utilities no longer support the development that would allowed, the environmental impact of the project would need to be considered. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding there were conditions that could require further study or deeper analysis. He asked who decides when the impact or changed conditions required further analysis. Ms. Hope answered that would typically be the SEPA official or it could be raised by others. Councilmember Tibbott concluded the involvement of the SEPA Official provides additional objectivity. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why the public hearing was being held tonight when the Council has not seen the EIS which should have been included in the packet and it had not been reviewed by the Planning Board. Ms. Hope clarified it did go through the Planning Board; the Planning Board held at least two meetings including a public hearing and recommended adoption. The Planning Board minutes were sent to Council today. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q July 31, 2017 Page 4 Packet Pg. 340 8.2.g Councilmember Buckshnis echoed Councilmember Johnson's concern that the Council never completed its discussion about development agreements and according to the 20.08.050, the attorney does everything and the Council is not involved. Ms. Hope assured a development agreement requires Council approval. Mr. Taraday pointed out 20.08.040 states a development agreement is a Type V development project permit application which is a Council decision. Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her support for Hwy 99 but she had not received all the documents necessary to fully understand. Ms. Hope said the development agreement reference is not essential to this Planned Action Ordinance; it simply references the existing chapter. If the Council chose not to include that provision, that would be okay. Mayor Earling opened the public participation of the public hearing. Seth Hale, Seattle, offered suggestions to enhance the goals of the proposed code language with regard to required parking and alternative transportation modes for transit oriented development (TOD) within '/4 mile of BRT stations. Characteristics of TODs include multiple transportation choices and reduced parking. Studies have shown that increased transportation choices and reduced parking benefit the environment and reduce auto congestion. Incentivizing development to provide additional transportation choices in exchange for reduced parking only increases these benefits. Examples of incentives include charging stations. Incentivizing charging stations within TODs would provide a higher number of charging stations or capacity. For example, for every 4 additional charging stations or capacity, the number of standard vehicle stalls could be reduced by 1 stall, up to a maximum of 5% of required parking. This is a good trade with regard to cost, each charging station costs $4,000 to $6,000; structured parking stalls range from $10,000 to $30,000. Reducing one parking stall offsets the cost of an EV station. Under the proposed code, a charging station shall be installed to serve at least 10% of the required residential parking stalls. While Washington is a leader in the number of electrical vehicles they account for less than 1% of the registered vehicles. Mr. Hale relayed concern that as technology advances, charging stations will also likely advance and today's equipment may become obsolete. He suggested an initial lower percentage of functioning charging stations with a potential for increasing or exceeding capacity. Another example is car sharing; car sharing users tend to be millennials and there are significantly more renters under 30 than homeowners. He has seen car sharing used successfully in Seattle where car sharing spaces reduced the required parking by 3 stalls to a maximum of 15% of the required parking stalls. He acknowledged the cost to provide additional transportation modes such as bicycle parking charging stations, car sharing, subsidized transit passes, etc. adds to the overall project costs. A reduction in required parking stalls helps offset these costs and ensures TODs can compete with typical development to provide affordable housing with alternative transportation modes close to BRT stations. Alvin Rutledge, Edmonds, referred to casinos in neighboring cities and adult entertainment in Shoreline that are used by Edmonds residents. As more businesses locate on Highway 99, the traffic increases. He questioned the existing zoning and the proposed zoning, recalling the reason development has not occurred in Edmonds is the cost. He provided a Seattle Times article from 1987 regarding the Council considering a topless -bar law. Mark Tekin and Dominic Rambes, Tekin & Associates, owners of the Denny's property on Highway 99, explained a year ago they got the space back as it was no longer financial feasible for Denny's. They have proposed a project with 4 tenants, 2 restaurants tenants and 2 retail tenants that would provide daytime and evening services to the community. They submitted a land use application which was approved on July 14, 2017. Five days after approval, they were informed by City staff it was no longer valid due to the new development guidelines under consideration. He relayed they spent a lot of time and energy on the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q July 31, 2017 Page 5 Packet Pg. 341 8.2.g redevelopment project and although they had interest from fast food, they have proposed a nice, modern redevelopment with no drive throughs. Eric Nielsen, Area Architecture, representing the project on 212th St SW & 72ndAve W, referred to the proposed increase in the building setback from 4 feet to 10 feet, relaying a preference for more flexibility in the code language to allow for site specific solutions as a blanket 10-foot setback may not provide the desired solution on every site. He referred to images he provided the Council, first an example of a 4-foot setback or other minimal dimension that allows the developer opportunity to setback the building higher up, essentially transition the building to the street level. He referred to sections in the images, an example of an elevation with a 10-foot setback and a vertical building along the sidewalk. The second elevation provides a more pedestrian scale on the sidewalk with setback above and opportunity for landscaping above the street. He recommended the Council consider more flexible in the code with two options, 1) the 10 foot setback and 2) reduced setbacks as long as the building is setback above by 10 feet. With regard to the proposal to not allow parking within 20 feet of the building wall, he pointed out this pressures building owners to provide commercial and residential uses on the ground floor; however, not all sites are suitable for residential or commercial uses, potentially resulting in vacant space on the ground floor. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Earling closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked Ms. Hope to comment on the Denny's site. Ms. Hope said she would need to research the particulars of the site. It was her understanding if a building permit was approved, it would not be invalidated based on a code that was not yet adopted. City Attorney Jeff Taraday relayed he was contacted by their attorney; the issue is they have approved design review but not an approved building permit so the project is not yet vested. The attorney's request was for the Council to consider a delayed effective date that would allow the applicant to submit a building permit application before the ordinance is effective. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how the new code would prohibit the owners of the Denny's site from developing. Ms. Hope answered it was related to the specifics of development, not whether they could develop. For example, the setbacks may be different; basically, the design standards would change for the site and the building. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested if they were interested in developing with their original plan, they should apply for a permit sooner rather than later. Ms. Hope agreed, advising the other option, if City Council wanted to permit this project, specific language could be included in the code or the effective date could be changed. If a building permit is submitted as a complete application prior to a new code taking effect, the project is vested. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed that corner has had its challenges and it would be nice to see it redeveloped. Councilmember Johnson asked about the effective date of new ordinance. Ms. Hope said their concern was not related to the Planned Action Ordinance but rather the underlying development regulations. If the development regulations were adopted on August 15, they are effective 5 days after publication. If the Council chose to forward approval to the Consent Agenda, there would be a slight delay. Another option would be for her to research and provide more information at the Council's next meeting and determine if the Council wants to craft language related to that project given that a lot of work has been done it. 7. STUDY ITEMS REVIEW OF PROPOSED HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Development Services Director Shane Hope recalled the Council last reviewed Highway 99 Area zone and code changes on July 18. At that time discussion included comparison with existing zone map and development code, review of proposed CG site & building design standards and specific questions and Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q July 31, 2017 Page 6 Packet Pg. 342 8.2.h redevelopment project and although they had interest from fast food, they have proposed a nice, modern redevelopment with no drive throughs. Eric Nielsen, Area Architecture, representing the project on 212th St SW & 72ndAve W, referred to the proposed increase in the building setback from 4 feet to 10 feet, relaying a preference for more flexibility in the code language to allow for site specific solutions as a blanket 10-foot setback may not provide the desired solution on every site. He referred to images he provided the Council, first an example of a 4-foot setback or other minimal dimension that allows the developer opportunity to setback the building higher up, essentially transition the building to the street level. He referred to sections in the images, an example of an elevation with a 10-foot setback and a vertical building along the sidewalk. The second elevation provides a more pedestrian scale on the sidewalk with setback above and opportunity for landscaping above the street. He recommended the Council consider more flexible in the code with two options, 1) the 10 foot setback and 2) reduced setbacks as long as the building is setback above by 10 feet. With regard to the proposal to not allow parking within 20 feet of the building wall, he pointed out this pressures building owners to provide commercial and residential uses on the ground floor; however, not all sites are suitable for residential or commercial uses, potentially resulting in vacant space on the ground floor. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Earling closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked Ms. Hope to comment on the Denny's site. Ms. Hope said she would need to research the particulars of the site. It was her understanding if a building permit was approved, it would not be invalidated based on a code that was not yet adopted. City Attorney Jeff Taraday relayed he was contacted by their attorney; the issue is they have approved design review but not an approved building permit so the project is not yet vested. The attorney's request was for the Council to consider a delayed effective date that would allow the applicant to submit a building permit application before the ordinance is effective. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how the new code would prohibit the owners of the Denny's site from developing. Ms. Hope answered it was related to the specifics of development, not whether they could develop. For example, the setbacks may be different; basically, the design standards would change for the site and the building. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested if they were interested in developing with their original plan, they should apply for a permit sooner rather than later. Ms. Hope agreed, advising the other option, if City Council wanted to permit this project, specific language could be included in the code or the effective date could be changed. If a building permit is submitted as a complete application prior to a new code taking effect, the project is vested. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed that corner has had its challenges and it would be nice to see it redeveloped. Councilmember Johnson asked about the effective date of new ordinance. Ms. Hope said their concern was not related to the Planned Action Ordinance but rather the underlying development regulations. If the development regulations were adopted on August 15, they are effective 5 days after publication. If the Council chose to forward approval to the Consent Agenda, there would be a slight delay. Another option would be for her to research and provide more information at the Council's next meeting and determine if the Council wants to craft language related to that project given that a lot of work has been done it. 7. STUDY ITEMS REVIEW OF PROPOSED HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Development Services Director Shane Hope recalled the Council last reviewed Highway 99 Area zone and code changes on July 18. At that time discussion included comparison with existing zone map and development code, review of proposed CG site & building design standards and specific questions and Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q July 31, 2017 Page 6 Packet Pg. 343 8.2.h comments. The focus of tonight's meeting is next steps for draft plan, zone map and development code. r- She sought Council direction to proceed with draft ordinances for the August 15 Council meeting. She displayed an aerial view of the project area (Highway 99 corridor and surrounding area) and reviewed: Q • Planning process and timeline d o Understanding existing conditions: March — April 2016 o Develop land use and transportation scenarios: April — June 2016 a o SEPA & Planned Action Environmental Impact Assessment: April — November 2017 ca o Develop subarea Draft Plan: October — December 2016 6 o Final Subarea Plan: January — June 2017 • Community Values o Connectivity o Designations o Beautification o Safety o Walkability o Affordable housing o Healthy businesses • Distinct Subdistricts o Major local and regional destinations on Hwy 99 ■ International District - Diverse restaurants, grocers and shops; major Korean business cluster ■ Health District - Swedish Hospital and medical offices ■ Gateway District - Identified by the community during workshop - Desire for "gateway" and distinct transition point in and out of Edmonds • Subarea Plan: implementation strategies, policy recommendations and actions o Zoning and development recommendations o Affordable housing recommendations o Signage and wayfinding recommendations o Transit recommendations o Transportation infrastructure recommendations ■ Map: Planned Transportation Improvements • Current Zoning Map o The only difference between CG and CG2 is the height limit (CG = 60' and CG2 = 75') o Many current zones are remnants from the county's antiquated zoning o Some zones do not match with the parcel boundaries • Proposed Zoning Map o The proposal is to change these zones to the consolidated CG zone o Incorporate design standards that will increase vitality and ensure transition into neighborhoods o More predictable outcomes for community • Zoning Map & Development Regulations — Goals o Vitality and livability o Sustainability o Consistency with subarea plan o Reasonable balance of requirements and options • Site development standards — General 16.60.020 o Pedestrian area - required adjacent to street ■ Composed of three zones: streetscape zone, pedestrian zone and activity zone ■ Comparison of pedestrian area requirements - Required in existing CG regulations? — no Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q July 31, 2017 Page 7 Packet Pg. 344 8.2.h - Required in proposed CG regulations? - yes o Comparison of dimensional requirements Existing CG Chapter Proposed CG Chapter Height 60-75' 75' max* Street setback 4' min. 5'110' Side/rear setback 0115 0115 Stepback No additional stepback required for upper stories Additional stepback required for upper stories adjacent to single family o Additional building stepback when adjacent to RS zones ■ Upper Stories stepback 10' for 25' of building height; and 20' for 55' of building height Site development standards -design standards 16.60.030.A. LE o Illustration of 15' setback with 10' landscape buffer o Additional building stepback with adjacent to RS zones o Illustration of upper stories stepback 10' for 25' of building height; and 20' for 55' of building height o Photo example of across -the -street transition illustrating streetscape zone separation provided by street and o Minimum 5 feet wide type IV landscaping is required along all street frontages where parking lots abut the street o Access and vehicle parking ■ All off-street surface parking shall be located to the side or rear of the primary building, except as otherwise specifically allowed by this chapter, and shall be screened from sidewalk by a wall or plantings between 2 to 4 feet in height ■ Outdoor parking areas shall comprise 40% or less of the public street frontage area within 100 feet of the primary street for the lot or tract and, on corner lots, may not be located at the corner. Requirements of this subsection do not apply to permitted auto sales uses ■ High parking requirements can impede development ■ Proposed regulations aimed to encourage transit -oriented development options - 0.75 parking spaces per residential unit less than 700 sq. ft. - 1.25 parking spaces per residential unit of 700-1100 sq. ft. - 1.75 parking spaces per residential units greater than 1100 sq. ft. - Guest parking: 1 space/per 20 units o Required electric vehicle charging stations ■ One or more electric vehicle charging stations must be provided for all new development that includes housing (to serve 10% of required parking spaces) ■ Each electric vehicle charging station typically serves two vehicles ■ 1 station/10 required residential stalls plus planned capacity to double that amount in the future o Required bicycle storage spaces ■ Bicycle storage spaces for multifamily housing, excluding housing for assisted living or other specialized facilities, shall be provided for residents ■ 1 bicycle storage space for each residential unit under 700 square feet and 2 bicycle storage spaces for each residential unit greater than 700 square feet - With 50% reduction for bikes stored in common spaces if additional racks are available for guests o Paths within parking lots ■ Pedestrian walkways in parking lots shall be delineated by separate paved routes that meet federal accessibility requirements and that use a variation in textures and/or colors and may include landscape barriers and landscape islands o Pedestrian and transit access Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q July 31, 2017 Page 8 Packet Pg. 345 8.2.h ■ Where a transit station or bus stop is located in front of or adjacent to a parcel, pedestrian connections linking the station or stop directly to the development are required. ■ Pedestrians routes shall connect buildings on the same site to each other Site Development Standards — Site Design and Layout 16.60.030.0 1) Pedestrian Oriented Design ■ At least 50% of a building's facade facing the primary public street shall be located within 20 feet of the property line where the primary street frontage exists. ■ Building must include a prominent pedestrian entry on the primary frontage ■ Vehicle parking shall not be located within the first 20 feet of the primary street frontage, other than as allowed for vehicle sales use. 2) Alternative walkable design area option ■ For sites with unique constraints. ■ At least 50% of the building's facade facing the primary street shall be located within 60 feet of the front property line 3) Exceptions process for pedestrian and walkable design options ■ Exemptions may be allowed by hearing examiner to provide for design flexibility that still encourages pedestrian orientation and efficient land uses under following criteria: - Property is located within 300 feet of highway interchange or has unique pedestrian access constraints - One or more buildings are located facing the primary street frontage - The development provides business and pedestrian areas near the primary street frontage and likely to be active through the day/evening. - Not more than 50% of required parking within first 20 feet of property - At least 25% of required amenity space is located to connect building to the street - Where a site has multiple buildings, amenity space should be located between buildings to allow shared use - One or more buildings on the site must have at least two stories of usable space o Amenity Space ■ An area equivalent to at least 5% of the building footprint shall be provided as amenity space. ■ If a vehicle parking area is being added to the site without concurrent development of a building of at least 2,000 square feet, amenity space must be provided to equal at least 5% of additional parking area. o Building Design and Massing - On the primary frontage, 50% of the building facade between 2 and 10 feet in height shall be comprised of windows or doors that are transparent o New standard for vehicle parking within buildings ■ On primary frontage, no vehicle parking within first 20 feet of building facing street How do proposed regulations encourage sustainable development? o Examples: ■ Bicycle storage ■ Electric vehicle charging ■ Wider pedestrian areas ■ Not excessive vehicle parking (transit friendly) ■ Amenity space ■ Stormwater mgmt. ■ Compact development ■ Landscaping and street trees o Concept illustration of possible redevelopment Proposed change to sign code o Revision to 20.65.045 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q July 31, 2017 Page 9 Packet Pg. 346 8.2.h - Limit freestanding signs (such as monument signs) to maximum height of 14 feet in this district - Require freestanding signs to be counted as part of total maximum sign area for this district Ms. Hope relayed tonight was an opportunity for Council review and direction to proceed with draft ordinances and final presentation and adoption of the ordinances on August 15. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled public comment tonight about the code, not the Planned Action Ordinance. She asked if the public hearings had been completed. Ms. Hope explained several public meetings and hearings have been held and there were no plans for more. There will be another presentation on August 15 and opportunity for public comment during Audience Comments. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the Planned Action Ordinance and the code had to be approved at the same time. Ms. Hope answered no, it would be ideal to approve the subarea plan and the code amendments at the same time. The Planned Action Ordinance can be adopted at the same time or a little later. Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her interest in reviewing the Planning Board minutes and the EIS. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled the Council also approved a resolution of intent to designate the Hwy 99 subarea as a Residential Targeted Area on July 18 and asked how that fit with these other regulations. Ms. Hope answered one of the recommendations in the subarea plan was to allow the Multifamily Tax Exemption (MFTE) in this area. The Council approved a resolution of intent to designate the Highway 99 Subarea as Residential Targeted Area for implementation of the MFTE program and will hold a public hearing on August 15. Councilmember Teitzel commended staff and the consultant on the Hwy 99 subarea plan, an excellent example of involving the public. He referred to Esperance on the west side of Hwy 99 which comprises approximately 10% of the Hwy 99 frontage and asked if Hwy 99 is rezoned to CG, will the zoning of Esperance be inconsistent if the City annexes it in the future. He asked if it would behoove the City to work with Snohomish County now to modify the zoning to be more consistent with the intent for that area. Ms. Hope answered staff has involved Snohomish County in the development of the plan and they have been very supportive. It may be some time before Esperance is annexed by the City but staff will continue working with Snohomish County. Councilmember Teitzel asked if Snohomish County was interested in CG-type zoning in that area. Ms. Hope said Snohomish County has had no objections but they would have to take action. Snohomish County has many unincorporated areas and have not looked at them individually; they expect cities to annex them and then it becomes a city issue. Councilmember Johnson referred to the new development on 196t' in Lynnwood near the convention center, relaying her objection to the six -story flat wall. She hoped something more architecturally interesting and less oppressive for pedestrians would be built on Hwy 99. Ms. Hope said she would consider that and address it at the next meeting. Councilmember Johnson asked if there was a roadway or profile design beyond the pedestrian area. Ms. Hope said a detailed corridor design is planned using State funds. The $1 million allocated by the State has been delayed due to delays at the legislature in approving the capital budget. Councilmember Johnson said in her conversations with WSDOT, bicycles are not excluded from Hwy 99 or SR-104. She expressed interested in not necessarily a bicycle lane but an opportunity to protect bicycle riders. She recalled this was an issue of right-of-way width on SR-104 but Hwy 99 is wider. Ms. Hope answered Hwy 99 is 100 feet wide. Councilmember Johnson suggested future planning include how to accommodate bicycles. She relayed her continued concern that the bicycle route on 212t' did not extend to the Interurban Trail. Councilmember Johnson suggested another issue she wants addressed in the Hwy 99 subarea plan is whether an urban interchange is needed for SR-104/Hwy 99 which is currently incomplete for all Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q July 31, 2017 Page 10 Packet Pg. 347 8.2.h movements. As this will be expensive, she suggested it be included in the plan so it can get on a list. That interchange would improve access to adjacent properties and improve movement on SR-104, a highway of statewide significance. She appreciated that the plan did not allow vehicle parking on the first level but pointed out the Everett Clinic has parking on the first and second levels that is visible from the street. She suggested consideration be given to how to better screen or eliminate visibility of parking. Ms. Hope agreed vehicle parking could occur on the second level, not just the first level, and the proposed code does not address that. Councilmember Johnson suggested consideration be given to expanding Park & Rides within the corridor. There are three Swift transit stations and it is assumed people will walk'/4 mile. She uses the Swift line but lives more than a '/4 mile away and typically parks in a Park & Ride lot. There is no parking for the Swift line, yet if Edmonds residents utilize it, they may need parking. Ms. Hope advised that was not in the current scope; Community Transit's policy is to not build Park & Ride lots on that valuable land. Councilmember Johnson suggested consideration be given to increasing size of existing Park & Ride lots or other options. To encourage people to ride the bus, the amount of parking is reduced; however, there is not a lot of on - street parking in the surrounding area. For example, she currently parks at Safeway but that extra parking may not exist in the future. Councilmember Tibbott recalled Ms. Hope stating two electrical vehicles could be charged in one parking space. Ms. Hope clarified each charging station has two outlets. Councilmember Tibbott asked about the requirement to provide future capacity for charging stations. Ms. Hope explained the wiring would be installed but not the stations themselves. Councilmember Tibbott asked about the percentage. Ms. Hope answered the requirement for future capacity is doubling the currently requirement. For example, if five stations are required, the developer would have to rough -in an additional five. Councilmember Tibbott was intrigued by parking for vehicle sharing or drop off zones. He asked what capacity could be added or provided in a residential development. Ms. Hope said that is identified in the code as one of the ways to offset some of the parking requirements; the developer would be required to demonstrate how that would be provided and the amount of parking it would offset. Councilmember Tibbott recognized not all future transportation forms could be anticipated and he was interested in providing some flexibility. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed Hwy 99 has no bike lanes, not in Seattle, Shoreline or Lynnwood, likely because it was deemed to be unsafe. Ms. Hope said given that Hwy 99 is a highway as well as the amount of traffic, alternative parallel routes have been provided. Councilmember Fraley- Monillas observed there are often bikes on 76th Avenue and on the Interurban Trail. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to Councilmember Johnson's comment about Park & Ride lots, pointing out the purpose of TOD is to increase the number of people using transit but they do not need a Park & Ride lot. Ms. Hope agreed residents in new development on Hwy 99 could walk to transit and they have parking on site. People who do not live in the Hwy 99 area who want to use transit may want a Park & Ride lot; however, that is not related to the Hwy 99 plan. The Swift line is the highest performing line Community Transit has, even without a Park & Ride lot. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented there is only one Park & Ride lot on the corridor in Edmonds. She questioned where Swift riders park now. Ms. Hope said she could check with Community Transit. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS, TO DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE THE PROPOSED HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS IN ORDINANCE FORMAT FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION ON AUGUST 15. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q July 31, 2017 Page 11 Packet Pg. 348 8.2.h 2. DISCUSSION ON DEVELOPING A PROCESS FOR ACTING ON BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL Council President Mesaros explained with the new committee system, a question arose regarding whether committees needed to review recommendations from boards and commissions. He asked for the Council's input. Councilmember Buckshnis said boards and commissions did not report to committees in the past unless it was an issue like the Harbor Square master planning process. She acknowledged it would depend, but annual/quarterly reports never went through committee before. Items like the recent climate change resolution should go through committee. Council President Mesaros clarified that was not from a board or commission. Councilmember Buckshnis concluded there may be special circumstances but she preferred to have boards and commissions report to the full Council. Council President Mesaros agreed boards and commissions should report directly to the full Council. He recalled the code states the Planning Board reports to the City Council and he anticipated other boards/committees would prefer to report directly to the full Council. Councilmember Johnson commented typically nothing from planning goes through the Parks, Planning & Public Works Committee but seems to go to the full Council. Council President Mesaros recalled Ms. Hope presented the change in the timing of the Hearing Examiner report to the Parks, Planning & Public Works Committee at their last meeting. Ms. Hope said her understanding and in reviewing past minutes and talking with staff who were here when the committees were in place previously, the Planning Board did not report to committees on items such as code amendments, those went to the entire Council. Nothing the Planning Board recommends to Council is a potential Consent Agenda item; Public Works projects can potentially be approved on the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Nelson agreed in general, it makes sense for boards and commissions to present to the full Council. He did not see any benefit to having recommendations presented to committee before presenting to the full Council. Councilmember Tibbott agreed items the Planning Board reviews and forwards should be presented to the full Council. However, there may be topics other boards and commissions are working on at the request of Council and they may want input from a committee before making a recommendation. Ms. Hope said if a board/commission wanted committee input, they could certainly seek it; the issue is whether the Council wants to require boards/commissions report to a committee first. In her experience, reports from the Economic Development Commission or Historic Preservation Commission typically go to full Council as any action is taken by the Council. Council President Mesaros agreed if a board/commission wanted input from a committee they could seek that but it would not be required. Councilmember Teitzel agreed an item that has been fully vetted by the Planning Board could/should come directly to full Council. However, two weeks ago a majority of Council opted to send the historic panels back to the Parks, Planning & Public Works Committee for review before approving it on the Consent Agenda tonight. That seems to be inconsistent with the direction Councilmembers are providing tonight. Council President Mesaros said that was what sparked this discussion. Council could still refer an item to committee for further discussion which was what happened with the historic panels. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the resolution regarding climate change was referred from the Mayor's Climate Protection Committee. She recalled a variety of issues reviewed by the Planning Board went to the Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee in the past. She asked if the intent was to codify this issue or establish a policy. Council President Mesaros anticipated a policy but he was looking for Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q July 31, 2017 Page 12 Packet Pg. 349 8.2.h Council input on the process. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the committees can be used to expedite things and ask questions of committee members who are assigned to committees based on their level of expertise. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled boards and commissions products never went to committees in the past, they always went to full Council. She commented this was much ado about nothing; the Council can refer an issue wherever they wish. Councilmember Johnson said if the Council has a committee system, it is not a bad policy to send things to committees such as the climate protection resolution or historic panels. Council President Mesaros summarized the direction from Council seemed to be that that would be an option but on the whole, boards and commissions would report directly to Council. Councilmember Johnson suggested if an individual has an idea he/she wants to bring forward, it could be channeled through the committee process. Council President Mesaros commented that was a different topic. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented it was almost impossible to determine what goes to committee, it depends on who is the Council President, etc. Council President Mesaros asked City Attorney Jeff Taraday whether the Council could establish policy rather than codify it. Mr. Taraday answered many of the Council processes that are codified do not have to be. It is simply a matter of whether the Council wants everything codified so there is more visibility, etc. Council President Mesaros offered to confer with Mr. Taraday and determine if this needed to be codified so the policy can be found in the future. 8. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Finance Committee Councilmember Buckshnis reported agenda topics included: 1. 2018 Budget Internal Procedures — information only 2. Paid Internship from UW via federal grant — approved on Consent Agenda 3. Work Plan for Developing Policies — staff will provide matrix of policies Public Safety & Personnel Committee Councilmember Nelson reported agenda topics included: 1. FD1 Fire Prevention Group introductions — information only 2. Social Worker Interlocal Agreement 67%/33% partnership between Lynnwood and Edmonds — approved on Consent Agenda Parks, Planning & Public Works Committee Councilmember Johnson reported agenda topics included: • Ordinance to Change the Timing of the Hearing Examiner's Annual Report — approved on Consent Agenda • Pine Street Lighting Discussion — further discussion at PPP Committee's August 8 meeting • Historic Informational Panels for Yost Park and Waterfront Mills — approved on Consent Agenda 9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling reported tomorrow he will announce and issue a press release regarding the membership of a Housing Strategy Task Force, led by Shane Hope. There are many people interested in housing strategies and many different ideas. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q July 31, 2017 Page 13 Packet Pg. 350 8.2.h Mayor Earling reminded the public to vote by tomorrow, August 1. 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Fraley-Monillas invited the Council and the public to a ribbon cutting tomorrow at the Edmonds Police Department at 1:30 p.m. for the drug takeback boxes that have been installed to deposit old medications, particular narcotics. She thanked Edmonds Family Medicine on 73rd and 212' and the Edmond QFC pharmacy for also installing boxes in their pharmacies. She encouraged other pharmacies in Edmonds to install drug takeback boxes. Councilmember Johnson provided Councilmembers and the Mayor copies of a Homelessness & Housing Tool Kit for Cities developed by MSRC and AWC. She also has copies for the members of the new Housing Strategy Task Force. Councilmember Johnson was glad to learn there would be medical takeback boxes in Edmonds; she has used the box in the Lynwood Walgreens and it was full last time. She was glad people were turning in their drugs and that there were three more locations in Edmonds. Councilmember Buckshnis reminded the public to be aware of their pets during the upcoming heat wave and to check on seniors. 11. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) At 8:55 p.m., Mayor Earling announced that the City Council would meet in executive session regarding pending litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). He stated that the executive session was scheduled to last approximately 15 minutes and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. Action was anticipated to occur as a result of meeting in executive session. Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Earling, and Councilmembers Johnson, Fraley-Monillas, Buckshnis, Teitzel, Tibbott, Mesaros and Nelson. Others present were City Attorney Jeff Taraday and Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite. The executive session concluded at 9:15 p.m. 12. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Earling reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 9:15 p.m. COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY TO INITIATE A DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACTION IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT TO RESOLVE THE DISPUTE OVER THE SCOPE OF THE PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT THAT THE CITY OWNS IN FRONT OF THE EBBTIDE CONDOMINIUMS. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 13. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q July 31, 2017 Page 14 Packet Pg. 351 JULY 31, 2017 PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC HEARING PAO Mr. Phipps noted the lack of trees in the downtown corridors. While there are nice trees on 5th Avenue and Main Street, there m are very few trees on the other downtown streets. When he thinks of a beautiful downtown, he thinks of tree -lined streets. c He suggested that a tree -planting program should be part of the UFMP, as well. Adding to the tree canopy would make the 2 a downtown area much more pleasant. He concluded his remarks by reminding the Board that once the open spaces are gone, they are gone for good. He encouraged them to be known for protecting the land. Tree canopy is extremely important when vi fighting climate change and global warming. He encouraged the Board to recommend approval of a strong UFMP and a strong tree ordinance. d DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT TO PLANNING BOARD N Chair Rubenkonig referred the Board to the written report that was provided by the Development Services Director. Board Member Lovell asked if there was any new information relative to the State Legislature's efforts relative to the capital E budget. Ms. Hope reported that, unfortunately, the Legislature dismissed without an agreement on the capital budget, and 13 c Governor Inslee has indicated he would not reconvene the Legislature unless it is known that they will come up with a capital E budget. This is very concerning to many, including the City of Edmonds, because they have some projects expected to be on Q the capital budget. Ca Board Member Lovell referred to the update from Snohomish County Tomorrow (SCT) relative to the Alliance for Housing c Affordability, and asked if they are getting close to issuing a report to the City Council. He reminded the Board that the Five N Corners Subarea Plan is on hold until the study has been completed. Ms. Hope said the Board's extended agenda includes meetings that will cover housing and the Five Corners Subarea Plan. In preparation for these discussions, staff is working with the Alliance for Housing Affordability to update the City's housing profile information. Staff will provide a report on a this effort to the Planning Board on September 13th. Board Member Lovell asked if the effort would result in the City L Council considering some type of tax incentive relative to low-income housing development on Highway 99. Ms. Hope answered that is a separate discussion, and the City Council recently approved having a public hearing on adding the y Highway 99 Subarea into the City's program for multi -family tax deductions. Theoretically, they could take action sometime o in August. 0 Chair Rubenkonig requested an explanation for how the Office of Financial Management (OFM) determined the City's p populations projections. Ms. Hope explained that the OFM does population projections every year. They look at a number Q of factors, including the population at the last determination and any new community data that has been gathered. They also consider the number of mailboxes, building permits, etc. She cautioned that the population projection is an estimate based on N an April 1" point in time. c ti PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED PLANNED ACTION CODE LANGUAGE FOR HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA w� PLAN °r c Ms. Hope advised that the Planned Action Ordinance (PAO) before the Board relates to the Highway 99 Subarea Plan. She provided a map of the subarea, which has been subject to study since the beginning of 2016. The intent was to create a plan that had vision and included action items that could be implemented. It recommended a set of Development Code amendments to better implement the Highway 99 Subarea Plan's vision. She cautioned that the PAO before the Board would = not change any of their previous work. She explained that the Growth Management Act (GMA) and the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) allow for a "planned action" process to streamline the environmental review process for projects that have Q already been covered by an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) developed for the subarea. This is, in part, because the EIS will have analyzed impacts of development and identified mitigation measures to address the impacts. To memorialize m the EIS work for the subarea, the City may adopt a PAO or code that specifies the type and amount of development that may a be allowed to proceed in the subarea without additional SEPA review. All other applicable laws and regulations would still of apply. If a project would exceed the thresholds identified in the PAO, additional environmental work would be required to make sure all impacts are considered. m E Ms. Hope referred the Board to the draft EIS that was prepared for the PAO and noted that the final EIS will be issued next week. She advised that the draft PAO assumes that the final EIS will be approved, and the final EIS will be done before the Q Board's recommendation is presented to the City Council. The City Council will have a work session and public hearing before the PAO is approved in its final form. d Planning Board Minutes July 26, 2017 Page 2 Packet Pg. 352 m Board Member Lovell clarified that the Board received two documents: a draft PAO ordinance and a PAO mitigation c document. Ms. Hope explained that the mitigation document is a supplement to the draft PAO and provides additional 2 a explanation. The draft EIS is available online, and has been available for public comment. Two comments were received. 06 One was from the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), which was generally supportive of the PAO. 6 Community Transit also issued a comment in support of the PAO. m Board Member Lovell asked if the concept of a multi -family tax exemption is entirely separate from the draft PAO, and Ms. Hope answered affirmatively. Ms. Hope advised that the Engineering Department has requested that the two transportation projects identified in the draft PAO (Page 17) should be added to the Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). One is improvements at SR-99 and 2201h Street, and the other is at SR-99 and 224`' Street. In addition, the Traffic Engineer has requested that the language describing the SR-99/224"Street Project be updated by adding after "left turn lane," the following phrase, `or an alternative design as confirmed by further study." She explained that there may be a better way to solve the issues at this intersection, and the proposed change would allow the City to consider other options. Chair Rubenkonig referred to Items 3a and 3b on Page 19 of the PAO. She noted that Item 3a identifies a threshold for when the additional trips associated with a project will trigger additional SEPA review. She shared an example of a project with 2,000 PM peak trips followed by another project with 1,000 PM peak trips. Although the total additional trips would be over the limit, neither project would be subject to additional SEPA review. However, it appears that the two projects would move the City into an issue with concurrency as described in Item 3b. Ms. Hope said the basic idea is that once the total limit of 2,755 is reached, any other projects, regardless of the number of trips, would have to be considered under a separate process that would require a regular SEPA review. She emphasized that 2,755 is considered a cumulative cap, and the count would be based on the type of use and the projected PM peak hour trips associated with each project that occurs. Regarding concurrency, Ms. Hope explained that when a proposed project exceeds the level of service standards adopted in the Comprehensive Plan, GMA requires the City to deny the application, require mitigation so that the level of service will not be exceeded, or allow another alternative that keeps the project from exceeding the level of service standards. Ms. Hope explained that when a project comes in for a permit, the applicant would still have to fill out a SEPA Checklist, which would be reviewed by staff to make sure the project fits within the parameters of the PAO. If so, no additional SEPA work would be required. Chair Rubenkonig opened the hearing for public testimony. No one in the audience indicated a desire to participate in the hearing, and the hearing was closed. Board Member Lovell commented that the draft PAO is a validation of the planning work that was done by the consultants relative to the Highway 99 Subarea Plan, which the Board previously moved on to the City Council with a recommendation of approval. He said he would support moving the PAO forward to the City Council with a recommendation of approval, including the changes proposed by the Traffic Engineer. BOARD MEMBER LOVELL MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE DRAFT PLANNED ACTION ORDINANCE FOR THE HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL AS PRESENTED, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE JULY 26, 2017 STAFF REPORT, WHICH REFLECTS THE BOARD'S MAY 10, 2017 REVIEW, WITH A CONCURRENT PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 26, 2017. HE FURTHER MOVED THAT THE BOARD RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL LANGUAGE PUT FORWARDED BY THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER IN THE STAGE 2 SECTION OF THE PLANNED ACTION EIS MIGITATION DOCUMENT (EXHIBIT B). BOARD MEMBER ROBLES SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Planning Board Minutes July 26, 2017 Page 3 Packet Pg. 353 COMPARISON TABLES Draft CG Regulations 16.60.020 Site development standards — General. Dimensional Requirements Table Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width Minimum Street Setback Minimum Side/Rear Setback Maximum Height Maximum Floor Area CG None None 5'/10" 0/151 75" None A. Table. Except as hereinafter provided, development requirements shall be as follows: 1 Fifteen feet from all lot lines adjacent to RM or RS zoned property; otherwise no setback is required by this subsection.. 2 The 5' minimum width applies only to permitted outdoor auto sales use; otherwise the minimum is 10'. 3 None for structures located within an area designated as a high-rise node on the comprehensive plan map. Existing Regulations 16.60.020 Site development standards — General. A. Table. Except as hereinafter provided, development requirements shall be as follows: Minimum Minimum Lot Minimum Lot Minimum Side/Rear Maximum Maximum Area Width Street Setback Setback Height Floor Area CG None None 4'2 None' 60'3 None CG2 None None 4'2 None' 75'3 None 1 Fifteen feet from all lot lines adjacent to RM or RS zoned property regardless of the setback provisions established by any other provision of this code. z Street setback area shall be fully landscaped. 3 None for structures located within an area designated as a high-rise node on the comprehensive plan map. Packet Pg. 354 8.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/15/2017 Amendments to Multi -Family Tax Exemption Code Provisions (15 min) Staff Lead: Patrick Doherty Department: Economic Development Preparer: Patrick Doherty Background/History On October 18, 2016 the Edmonds City Council approved addition of Chapter 3.38 to the Edmonds City Code, creating the Multi -Family Tax Exemption Program (MFTE). The initial "residential targeted area" where the MFTE was implemented was the Westgate Mixed -Use Zone, as identified in the new Chapter 3.38. Staff Recommendation Upon conclusion of the Public Hearing on the Highway 99 Subarea Residential Targeted Area and anticipated approval of the Resolution designating the Highway 99 Subarea as a residential targeted area, consider the proposed amendments to Chapter 3.38 for approval. Narrative At this time, with the approval of the Highway 99 Subarea Plan, the Highway 99 Subarea is proposed to be designated a residential targeted area for the purposes of implementing the MFTE in that district as well. This is intended to promote the redevelopment of the Highway 99 Subarea, especially including market -rate and affordable housing. For this reason, as well as to clarify two other provisions in the existing code language, minor amendments to ECC Chapter 3.38 are proposed. The attached proposed amendments to ECC Chapter 3.38 can be summarized as follows: Sec. 3.38.020 - Definitions. To clarify the definitions of "low-income households" and "moderate -income households" as provided in the applicable RCW 84.14.010, customized definitions more readily applicable to Edmonds and Snohomish County are proposed. Sec. 3.38.030 - Duration - Valuation - Exceptions. While per State law and existing ECC code, 20% of the multifamily housing units must be provided as low- and moderate -income households to qualify for the 12-year partial tax exemption, this proposal would specify that 10% of the units be made available to low-income households and 10% to moderate -income households. Sec. 3.38.040 - Residential targeted areas - Designation. This adds Highway 99 Subarea as the second residential targeted area in the City. At its meeting on 8/8/17, the Parks, Planning and Public Works Council Committee reviewed the proposal and voted to forward the proposed amendments to the 8/15/17 Council Regular meeting for Packet Pg. 355 8.3 discussion and approval. Attachments: 2017-08-03 Ordinance - MFTE code amendments Packet Pg. 356 8.3.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADDING AMENDING PORTIONS OF A NEW CHAPTER 3.38 TO -OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE, TOzSq ^ BL SH T4R -MULTI-FAMILY TAX EXEMPTION PROGRAM. WHEREAS, Chapter 84.14 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) provides for temporary special valuations for eligible improvements associated with multifamily housing, especially within urban centers deficient in planned residential development, and WHEREAS, in order to establish a Multifamily Tax Exemption Program, the City must designate one or more residential targeted areas within which the temporary special valuation may be granted to qualifying residential improvements; and WHEREAS, after complying with all the corresponding requirements set out in RCW 84.14.040, on August 15, 2017 the Edmonds City Council designated the Highway 99 Subarea, as identified in the Highway 99 Subarea Plan, as a residential targeted area for the purposes of establishing a Multifamily Tax Exemption Program; and WHEREAS, Edmonds City Code Chapter 3.38, Multi -Family Tax Exemption, must be amended to include mention of the Highway 99 Subarea as the City's second residential targeted area; and WHEREAS, other minor amendments to Edmonds City Code Chapter 3.38 are proposed to clarify the definitions of low- and moderate -income households for the purposes of including affordable housing; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Council find it to be in the public interest to promote redevelopment in the Highway 99 Subarea and Westgate Mixed -Use Zone District, especially including market -rate and affordable housing; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DOES C0 19 PYA I01 Packet Pg. 357 8.3.a c 0 A Section I. A new Chaptef Sections 3.38.020, 3.38.030, and 3.38.040 of the Edmonds o a City Code mareadded-hereby amended ,to read as follows new text D is shown inunderline;deleted text is shown in Formatted: Underline o V Formatted: Strikethrough C 3.38.020 Definitions 0. E Unless expressly provided for below, in construing the provisions of this chapter, definitions of k LLI key terms in this chapter shall follow the definitions as set out in RCW 84.14.010. K 0 F- A. "City" means the city of Edmonds, Washington. E B_"Director" means the director of the city's department of development services or authorized designee. 0 C. 'Low-income household" means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living together Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New R whose adjusted income is at or below eighty percent of the median family income adjusted E E for family size, as calculated using the United States census bureau's median family income m data for Snohomish County in conjunction withpthe median family income documentation Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New R E system published the United States department of housing and urban development _ _ _ \ Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New P N Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New r 1 B-D. "Moderate -income household" means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living_ Roman, Pattern: Clear E J Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New P 13c together whose adjusted income is more than eighty percent but is at or below one hundred m fifteen percent of the median family income adjusted for family size, as calculated using the E 0 United States census bureau's median family income data for Snohomish County in m 0 conjunction with median family income documentation system published by the United_ Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New R v 1 _the States department of housing and urban developments Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New R Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New P GE. "Residential targeted area" means any urban center so designated by the Edmonds city council in accordance with this chapter and Chapter 84.14 RCW, and which has been found M by the city council to be lacking sufficient available, convenient, attractive, livable, and S L desirable residential housing to meet the needs of the public. O M 0 DF. "Urban center" means any district or subarea of the City of Edmonds designated as a mixed- c use center through a subarea or comprehensive planning process, where urban residents may ti 0 obtain a variety of products and services including several business establishments, such as N c m E 0 Q Packet Pg. 358 8.3.a shops, offices, banks, restaurants, medical facilities, governmental agencies and a mixture of uses and activities that may include housing, recreation, and cultural activities in association with either commercial or office uses, or both uses. 3.38.030 Tax exemption — Duration — Valuation — Exceptions A. The value of new housing construction, conversion, and rehabilitation improvements qualifying under this chapter is exempt from ad valorem property taxation for 12 successive years beginning January 1st of the year immediately following the calendar year of issuance of the final certificate of tax exemption if the property otherwise qualifies for the exemption under this chapter and the applicants commits to renting or selling at least 20-10 percent of the multifamily housing units as affordable housing units to low-income households and 10 percent of the multifamily housing units as affordable housing units to moderate -income households, and the property must satisfy that commitment. B. The exemption does not apply to the value of land or to the value of nonhousing improvements not qualifying under ECC 3.38.050, nor does the exemption apply to increases in assessed valuation of land and nonqualifying improvements. This article also does not apply to increases in assessed valuation made by the assessor on nonqualifying portions of building and value of land, nor to increases made by lawful order of a county board of equalization, the Department of Revenue, or a county, to a class of property throughout the county or specific area of the county to achieve the uniformity of assessment or appraisal required by law. 3.38.040 Residential targeted areas — Designation A. The following area is designated by the City Council as a residential targeted area, consistent with the requirements of RCW 84.14.040:1. Westgate Mixed Use (WMU) Zoning District. 2. Highway 99 Subarea, as designated in the Highway 99 Subarea Plan B. If part of any legal lot is within a residential targeted area, the entire lot shall be deemed to lie within the residential targeted area. Packet Pg. 359 8.3.a C. The area(s) designated in subsection A of this section may be amended and other areas may be added by action of the City Council consistent with requirements of RCW 84.14.040. Any amendment to the residential targeted areas shall not affect the status of a project for which the City has received a complete application for property tax exemption under this chapter. Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR DAVE EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 360 8.3.a SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2017, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. . A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING PORTIONS OF CHAPTER 3.38 T-0-OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE, MULTI -FAMILY TAX EXEMPTION PROGRAM. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of 12017. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY 4840-7251-8158,v. 1 Packet Pg. 361 8.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/15/2017 Amendments to Chapter 3.75, Business Improvement District (10 min) Staff Lead: Patrick Doherty Department: Economic Development Preparer: Patrick Doherty Background/History After over four years since their inception in 2013, it is appropriate to update the Edmonds City Code provisions related to the Edmonds Downtown Business Improvement (hereinafter referred to as "EDBID," but also doing business as "Edmonds Downtown Alliance"). The purpose of these proposed amendments is to align the code provisions more closely with the evolution of the month -to -month conduct of business over the past four years. Staff Recommendation Approval at the 8/15/17 Regular Council meeting. Narrative Here is a brief summary of the most salient amendments proposed, as approved by the Edmonds Downtown Alliance Board at their July 13, 2017 meeting: 3.75.010 - Adds "modification of boundaries" to this section in recognition of the potential for the EDBID to expand. 3.75.040 - Expands the nomenclature for the second, lower -dues -paying classification of businesses previously denominated simply as "by appointment" businesses to include "and/or office -based" and adds new examples such as: professional service firms, assembly or production of goods, corporate offices, etc. 3.75.070 - Adds a clarification that assessments for members in newly expanded areas of the EDBID will pay their dues after the first full quarter after inclusion in the EDBID. 3.75.075 - Removes reference to the original effective date of the ordinance for the one-year exemption of new businesses from paying dues to a simple reference to "new businesses" on an on -going basis. 3.75.120 - Removes references to the initial Mayor and Council appointment/confirmation of EDBID Board members. Updates language regarding the required annual report and allows for submittal of the annual report by October 315Y of each year, rather than October 15t. This allows for more work to be accomplished in each year about which to report, as well as dovetail more closely to the City's annual budget process. Packet Pg. 362 8.4 3.75.130 - Adds reference to general support and advice on matters related to programs, projects, activities and administration provided by the community services/economic development director. 3.75.140 - Removes outdated reference to community services/economic development and/or finance director serving as administrators until administrative staff is brought on, which has since occurred and is on -going. Please see attached proposed code amendments for full detail. These amendments were reviewed by the Council Finance Committee at its 8/8/17 meeting, who moved to forward the amendments for discussion and approval at the Regular Council meeting of 8/15/17. Attachments: 2017-08-15 Ordinance - BID code amendments Packet Pg. 363 8.4.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING PORTIONS OF CHAPTER 3.75 OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE, BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. WHEREAS, Chapter 35.87A of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) provides for the establishment of business improvement districts in local municipalities "(t)o aid general economic development and neighborhood revitalization, and to facilitate the cooperation of merchants, businesses, and residential property owners which assists trade, economic viability, and liveability"; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance 3909, adopted on January 15, 2013, the Edmonds City Council added a new Chapter to the Edmonds City Code entitled Chapter 3.75, Business Improvement District, thus establishing the Edmonds Downtown Business Improvement District, aka "Edmonds Downtown Alliance"; and WHEREAS, over the passage of four years the Edmonds Downtown Alliance Members Advisory Board and City staff have identified the need for various, nonsubstantive changes to Chapter 3.75 to reflect current practice and conditions; and WHEREAS, on July 13, 2017 the Edmonds Downtown Alliance Members Board approved the amendments to Edmonds City Code Chapter 3.75, proposed herein; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Sections 3.75.010, 3.75.030, 3.75.040, 3.75.070, 3.75.075, 3.75.100, 3.75.120, 3.75.130, of the Edmonds City Code are hereby amended to read as follows (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in sal eugh): 3.75.010 Area established - Modification of boundaries. Packet Pg. 364 8.4.a A. As authorized by Chapter RCW, there is hereby established an Edmonds downtown business improvement district ("EDBID") within the following boundaries as shown on the map attached to the ordinance codified in this chapter as "Attachment A" (when a street or alley is named, the area boundary is the centerline of the right-of-way including vacated portions unless otherwise specified in the description). The EDBID includes the parcels with the tax ID numbers set forth in Attachment B to the ordinance codified in this chapter, which is incorporated herein as if set forth in full (for additional detail, please see the attached map). In case of a conflict between the list of parcels (Attachment B) and the map (Attachment A), the map shall control. [Ord. 3909 § 1, 2013]. B. Modification or expansion of the boundaries delineating the area that contains the EDBID shall be permissible in accordance with the criteria and reauirements set forth in RCW 35.87A.075. 3.75.030 Programs. Assessment revenues may be used for any combination of the following component programs, but not for any other purpose: A. Marketing and Hospitality. 1. Maps/brochures/kiosks/directories. 2. Web site. 3. Social media. 4. Marketing/advertising campaigns. 5. Holiday decorations. 6. Street performers/artists. 7. Historic education/heritage advocacy. 8. Special public events. B. Safety and Cleanliness. 1. Maintenance. Packet Pg. 365 8.4.a 2. Security. 3. Pedestrian environment enhancements. C. Appearance and Environment. 1. Design enhancements. 2. Neighborhood advocacy and communication. 3. Streetscapes/lighting/furniture. D. Transportation. 1. Transportation alternatives. 2. Directional signage. 3. Parking management and mitigation. E. Business Recruitment and Retention. 1. Education/seminars. 2. Market research. 3. Business recruitment. F. Organ izationAdministration. 1. Contract staff and professional services. 2. Administration costs. [Ord. 3909 § 1, 2013]. 3.75.040 Assessment methodology. ....................................................................................................................... The special assessment amount shall be based on the type of business multiplied by the square footage of a business. There shall be two business classifications for the purposes of calculating the assessment: `open door" businesses (e.g., restaurants, retailers, banks, etc.); and "by appointment and/or office -based" businesses (e.g., hair salons, doctors, lawyers, nail salons, insurance providers, counselors, financial advisors, Packet Pg. 366 8.4.a professional services firms, assembly or production of goods, corporate offices, etc.). Open—door establishments are assessed at a higher rate than by_ appointment/office-based businesses due to the relatively higher benefit that open_ door businesses are expected to receive from the programs. Table 1 shows the annual assessment for both classifications of businesses based on their square footage within the EDBID. Table 1 Assessment for "By Square Assessment for Appointment/Office- Footage "Open Door" Based" 0 — 499 $90 quarter $30 quarter ($10 per ($30 per month) month) 500 — $105 quarter $45 quarter ($15 per 999 ($35 per month) month) 1,000 — $120 quarter $60 quarter ($20 per 1,999 ($40 per month) month) 2,000 — $135 quarter $75 quarter ($25 per 4,999 ($45 per month) month) 5,000 $150 quarter $90 quarter ($30 per and over ($50 per month) month) The iRitial Aassessment calculations shall be based on the city of Edmonds' business license records for yeas 2012. Governmental entities, public utilities, nonprofits operating under Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3) shall not be assessed. [Ord. 3909 § 1, 2013]. 3.75.070 Collection schedule. A. Assessments shall be paid and collected on a quarterly basis; provided, that members may opt to pay the full yearly assessment at the time of the billing for the first quarter. [Ord. 3929 § 1 (Att. A), 2013; Ord. 3909 § 1, 2013]. B. Assessments for members located within expanded boundaries of the EDBID shall be collected- the first full quarter after inclusion in the EDBID. Packet Pg. 367 8.4.a 3.75.075 Exemption for new businesses. ............................................................................................................................................................................................. New bBusinesses established after the effective date ofApr'! 22 and located within the Edmonds downtown business improvement district shall be exempt from special assessments imposed pursuant to this chapter for a period of one year from the date a business license is issued by the city of Edmonds. [Ord. 3965 § 1, 2014] 3.75.100...Disputes...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Any member seeking to challenge the amount of an assessment or delinquency charge may submit additional information concerning the assessment classification and/or square footage of the business to the finance director or designee, who may adjust the assessment based on Table 1 if he determines that the original classification and/or square footage was erroneous. The finance director shall provide a written determination to the member, which may be appealed to the city's hearing examiner within 10 days of the finance director's determination by paying an appeal fee in the amount of $250.00 and filing a notice of appeal with the city clerk that sets forth the alleged error in the finance director's determination. The member has the burden of proof before the hearing examiner to show that the assessment or delinquency charge is incorrect. [Ord. 3929 § 1 (Att. A), 2013; Ord. 3909 § 1, 2013]. 3.75.120 Members advisory board. The EDBID shall be governed by a mayer shall appGoRt, sub{eGt W GGRfirmatiGR by the ,.,t„ GG61RGil iRtor;m members advisory board comprised of and odd number of at least seven andbut no more than 44eleven members from the EDBID membership within 60 days of the effeGti„e date Gf the .,r.J'RaRGe Ge difie d OR this members.Ghapter. The mayer shall appeiRt at least seveR and Re mere thaR 11 iRteFim beard The +ateFi Fn board shall be composed of both open --door and by--appointment/office-based EDBID members, respectively, in rough proportion to the dollar value of assessments to be levied on each classification of businesses. In addition, the finance director and the community services/economic development director shall be nonvoting, ex officio members of the 'board. The 'members advisory board shall be responsible for proposing any amendments to EDBID bylaws for city council approval and policy guidelines to the city council that will address, among other matters, the composition and method of appointing or electing fire board members. The initial member advis^r„ beard . ayer's iRitioi apPE)ORtF ,eR The iRterim members advisory board shall also provide advice and consultation to the finance director, and to any individual or agency, that may be hired to manage the day-to-day operations of the business improvement district program, on all matters related to the operation of the program. Packet Pg. 368 8.4.a Each year no later than October 31 st The -the interim members advisory board shall submit to the city council a proposed annual work program and budget for 2013 to the cif„ council within 90 days of the city c confirmation of the mayor's initial appointments and shall recommend a work program and for the following �°n ,ubsegaent_years no later than October 1 st of fheyear hoforo unless otherwise approved by the city council. The board shall address and discuss member concerns and questions regarding the EDBID and program; review all reports submitted to the finance department by the members advisory board or program administrator, if hired; and sponsor the initial annual members meeting. [Ord. 3941 § 1 (Att. A), 2013; Ord. 3914 § 1 (Att. A), 2013; Ord. 3909 § 1, 2013]. 3.75.130 Business improvement district fund oversight and programmatic suRRort. ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... The finance director shall administer the BID fund for the city with authority to: A. Consider adjusting the assessment amount based on an erroneous classification or square footage; B. Collect the assessments; refund assessments when overpaid or otherwise improperly collected; extend the deadline for payment; and waive delinquency charges and interest whenever the delinquency results from extenuating circumstances beyond the member's control, such as a casualty loss causing premature closure of the business, bankruptcy, or the total principal payment due to the city (exclusive of penalty and interest) is $10.00 or less; C. Calculate and collect the interest for late payments; and D. Accept and deposit advance payment of assessments by members; accept donations from governmental agencies, the public, and owners and operators of businesses. [Ord. 3909 § 1, 2013]. E. The community services/economic development director shall provide general support and advice on matters related to proarams, projects, activities and administration of the EDBID. Section 2. Section 3.75.140 of the Edmonds City Code is hereby repealed. Packet Pg. 369 8.4.a Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR DAVE EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: Im JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 370 8.4.a SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2017, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING PORTIONS OF CHAPTER 3.75 OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE, BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2017. 4840-7251-8158, v. 1 i CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Packet Pg. 371 8.5 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/15/2017 Pine Street Lighting Discussion (20 min.) Staff Lead: Phil Williams Department: Public Works & Utilities Preparer: Royce Napolitino Background/History Council authorized funding in the 2017 City budget for the installation of lights on Pine Street just west of SR104 to improve safety conditions for pedestrians. Work was initiated on the project in the Spring. Significant public comment was subsequently given to the Council regarding the project. Council placed the project on hold pending a review. Staff is prepared to discuss options and costs for the completion of the project. This issue was discussed with the PPP committee on July 25th & August 8th, with no decision made regarding staff recommendation. Council President Mesaros has called the item forward as a Presentation & Action item on this agenda. Staff Recommendation Presentation of lighting options & Council discussion for authorization to proceed. Narrative Concerns expressed about the street lights proposed on Pine Street were primarily related to any light that might impinge on the Wildlife Demonstration Garden immediately north of the Pine Street Right -of - Way. Staff will present two lighting options that will include illumination mapping to show the distribution of light from the individual luminaires, including mounting heights, wattage equivalents, and any shielding being proposed. After a discussion with Council staff is looking for a consensus direction on the project and authorization to proceed. Attachments: Pine Street Lighting P U D ATBS_pdf Packet Pg. 372 8.5.a flip 1009M Pine Street Lighting city Council 7/25/2017 PPP Committee Packet Pg. 373 Review '17c t g9" 2014/2015 Point Edwards residents express safety concerns regarding conflicts between cars and pedestrians as well as general security along Pine Street November, 2016 - Council authorizes $20,000 for street lighting on lower Pine Street west of SR104 Late 2016-early 2017 - City staff works with SnoPUD on a proposal to install street lights. May, 2017 PW staff begins installation of lights Packet Pg. 374 Review '17c t g9" May 2, 2017 Council puts project on "hold" pending further discussion and discussion of options. Last 60 days PW Staff has researched two different lighting options: a package from SnoPUD,, and a package from Sternberg Tonight begins a review of those options Packet Pg. 375 SnoPUD Option '17c t g9" • Three poles — 35' mounting height • 161' spacing • 50w LED Acuity Roadway Type II 3,000 deg. K • Equivalent to 118w HPS • Choice of house -side shield or light trespass shield (most aggressive) • City installs buried conduit (halted) • PUD install and maintain fiberglass direct -bury poles and luminaires • Monthly charge approx. $6.00@ Packet Pg. 376 SnoPUD Option ' ConsistentwithLEED'goah a Green Globes-c,iteria n NIGHTTIME for light pollution reducton FRIENDLY Applications: Resid a ntia I streets Parking lots General security lighting `17c. 189V Autobahn Series ATBS Roadway & Security Lighting Features: OPTICAL Same Light: Performance is comparable to 50W —150W HPS and up to 175W MercuryVapor roadway and security lighting luminaires, White Light Correlated color tem peratu re -4000K, 70 CRI minimum, 3000K, 70 CRI minimum or optional 5000K, 70 CRI minimum. IPbb rated borosiIicate glass optics ensure longevityand m i n inn ize d i rt depreciatio n. Unique I Pbb rated LED I ght engines provide 0% uptight and restri ct backiight to within sidewalk depth, providing optimal appiication coverage and optimal pole spacing. Available distributions areType II, III, and V roadway distributions. When used with the optional acrylic refractor the un it provides approximately 10% uptight and increased vertical foot-candles ELECTRICAL Expected Life: LED light engines are rated a100,000 hours at25°C, L70. Electronic driver has an expected life of 100,000 ho u r s at a 25°C ambient. Lower Energy: Saves an expected 40-6095 over corn para hle HID luminaires. Robust Surge Protection: Three different surge protection options provide a minimum of ANSI C136.210k1115kA protection. 20kV110kA surge protection is also available. 1 8.5.a I Q Packet Pg. 377 .!f y . »� \ � . ■\ - � �- . �• ,! � - .� ' � `- .. � . �.� •�•� \ � ��� §_ _ .:�f� ,-_ 7 a I Fla 8.5.a Series Performance Packages Voltage ATBS Autobahn LED A 2,500 lumens MVOLT Multi -volt, 120-277V Roadway & B 3,200 lumens Security C 3,800lumens E 4,700lurnens G 6,100lumens umens 1 8,500 lumens CoIorTom perature (CCT) (Blank) 4000K CCT, 7D CRI Min. 3K 3000K CCT, 7D CRI Min. 5K 5000K CCT, 7D CRI Min. Paint Blank Gray (Standard) BK Black WH White B2 Bronze Surge Protection Standard 10kV15kA SPD Blank Acuity SPD-1DkV15kA with inductive filter (Standard) 20 20kV110KA SPD MP MOV Pack IL SPD with Indicator Light XL Not CSA Certified Controls (Blank) 3 Pin NEMA Photocontrol Receptacle NR' No Photocontrol Receptacle DMI DV-10V Dimmable Driver P5 5 Pin Photocontrol Receptacle (dimmable driver included) P7 7 Pin Photocontrol Receptacle (dimmable driver included) PCSS' DTL DSS Photocontrol PCL1' DTL DLL Photocontrol 120-277V AO Field Adjustable Output SH Shorting Cap Install Packages PKGS DTL DSS Photocontrol I Optics 111112 Roadway Type II 1 its Hoaoway type iii R5 Roadway Type V D2 Type 11, Drop Refractor included D3 Type III, Drop Refractor included D5 Type V, Drop Refractor included Accessories ATBSREF Drop Refractorfor field installation ATBSHSS House Side Shield tar field installation ATBSLTS Light Trespass Shield for field installation Packet Pg. 379 LPEEA31 SNOHOMISH,COUNTY PUD ##1 8e a Consovabon .Sensation 2320 California Street PO BOX 1107 Everett, WA 98201 (425) 783-8272 Name and Address CITY OF EDMONDS ATTN: TOD MOLES Quote Date Quote Expires 5J10f2017 1 B/B/2017 Designer & Phone Eddie Hauaen (425-783-8276) Construction New Office Everett QUOTE Paid Date Cashier Office Paid Receipt Check 9 Payment Type Business Partner Contract Account Connection Object Property Address ST LTS 711ii 211ITH ST SW, ED Work Order Description Qty Acct unit Cost Total c] INSTL (3) FIBERGLASS SL POLES AND PED 1 ❑ 12,772.UO 12,772.00 Notes FEE COVERS INSTALLATION OF (3) FIBERGLASS ST LT POLES AND PED AT 7111) Total $ 12,772.00 21fMi ST SW, EDMONDS. PLEASE SEND PAYMENT OR PO TO PUD, ATTN: EDDIE HAUGEN, PO BOX 111)7, EVERETT, WA W2{16. 11 Q Packet Pg. 380 WVR Pine Street Lighting spacing for 35' Fiberglass poles installed by PUD 8.5.a Q Packet Pg. 382 Sternberg Option '17c t g9" • 5 poles - 13.5' mounting height • 82' spacing • 32w LED Roadway Type IV 3,000 deg. K • Equivalent to approx. 80w HPS • No additional house -side shield or cut-off available • City does entire installation including concrete bases • City owns and maintains system — buys power from PUD Packet Pg. 383 RSternbergLighting k%TA@LISNi@ i923 f FMFlLO4Ee 4wNen GENESIS Or, deroduslC-Niourater — CA tflog Number: 1A-191 OLEDRLM1 &1 Rl40WT4-M%- F LA14'.PFRr4614F P41@ICglj 41L0.+mar Al�rvwal- . Type: Conreplual assernely drawing, subject to Engineen ng verification by loMpry, g,_ Gate NUMBER OF ARMS: 1 ARIA ARM MOUNTED FIXTUF7_F_1 191OLEORLM1R The 1 BIORLIA Pyfk Rd4e aeries is a mmrahy [V7n,�llpht to-ture xfii:f� mnehsa of s dem:a:rn teat alurnnun Ater. Carl PrSafk tlg5t(yp aeaelrbry a Bp.Yi 91umi1um 51ax. anG lens. A ref 1RNo (261EDS, W W tt.) (IRNCp C 40f Temp 3SMI( 05) Gatrtuhm Trey 4(S4) pR— LIWl-VW axmwtW LOY Yugo Driver, 12a277Y (MOW Fm—S", FumLt 3w!1BIndrShnye(FL) (mil& 91WPM a1WPY POLE: LU4"d! Taw 19-1Z di&erWW f,M 95A alumnumall)lr ynw an4alumrrum"Itahelbya6m-pera mnshuetlan. The pale il-mt t.4.L yr E 7 L kV" In U.3. snd Cafndn At.W 45W 45s HoiGU 1A F1(14) SMA1 Type, FluNd Sk'odhL 4Inch. 9081•i9 A—ilum AWy LF! a] POLE GAP: IRCC 2' Bell Center C.p g:'C dp FINISH: BF( b Aea�r6ly aFaL to Qo..ti.r Ica U @lack Srno-am Aneh. Pfior n aGaung, vlr ar�arrGy sr>ar x drarJmlry b6>rlep era el�nec n e 5-aGge,.ax�+rC air urtrch u>y alkahna I Y d—gL nn9ng, phgephgn4 escaln . feMylaC a6mpaa Haler nnelrs�, fY'Itl flpniilydll0 MyliSp 9e erlwn—T7al7n WWArce q°' 180° 90° - -27C' l2 IW: J mr! 0° 9WfflM Solt Info: (4) 1 2' x 19' MCW eolns, 9' ML ❑rck_ Aarnprld Nttem Access Door Orietrtirtlom: 01 Sbeetswc ouen tluon; 1&0- Rev PeA7flRUan By Peie >'vu - city ar5ar—. Wa l e k4I.rrarW: fxenaq aa. 19744 or�.rr ar: rmfn were: oraet4 ei' OE a.mal dro: E E r Q Packet Pg. 384 8.5.a .Date: Jun 28, 2017 Marx LK*nu,a Project Pine Street Lighting 1.9satign Edmgndv, VGA Quote PL SWA17-3-8201-'1 To: Chuck I Had City of Edmonds WA Quote: PI-SWA17.38 Q1.1 Qllotp- Page 1 1 Pacific Lighting Systems � 6363 7th Ave. S. Ste. 100 Seattle WA 98108 Phone- (2 ) S23-2200 Fax, (2 ) 726-8315 From: PatrICK ArMgtran Quote r Ph: (206) 4 -88 0x, 8111 L Pal WilLS.UUFI Fui Bid Date Jury 28, 2017 Expires JwI2812017 QTY Type MFG Part Price UCI Ex1Prim 5 6TERNBERU IA-1910LEORLM1-1RND35T4-MDL0'Z-FU $2.06.04 t10,875 N 911NPW4514FP415=BK Nuke LEAD 771 I& AN E-5 TWA TED x2 WEEK6 NCrte FREIqlqT TEWS. FOLL FRE;GHTALLOKED FOR N STANDARD SHIPMENT +S VAN DELIVERY ON Al t MAR IM Pnf Fq A AM Ply-n rR;7.4� / PLA TPED ON STEEL POLES_ No'n ALL OPCEPS! S10.000AND 0VERAUQUIR4 APPROVED DRAWINeS PRIOiR TO RELEASE Hold ALL OUG TES SUBJECT TO STANDARD TERMS AIVE) CONDITIONS. SEE STERNBERG WEBSOTF FOR DETAILS. TsUla1�,875.0 Freight Minimum Mfg Tarmsa_ Ailrrwa► nia Qrd-Tr STERN Sternberg Lighting Inciuded I„ 0q o Q Packet Pg. 385 � '{ •tis'. it '• - t 1 do Pine Street Lighting `pro .Spacing for 5 1 7.5" Sternburg poles �! 9� Total: 328.E2 R mw- . ,� A • 1 - _ - Sternberg IES Patterns No house -side shield I I L 4 �•1 .$ ].�" i.= ...i] 1.9 '_.1 _ ... •1.3 1.3 1.4 ..._ _�. .. • _ •. ... ... _.. _. ..- - .. 9 - =.c ..4 :-.4 B 1.7 2.1 _._ ?.9 "; .5 !].9 .. . .. 2.4 2.3 1 5 _.: _.3 _.i ..5 �].5 _._ _._ .._ .... �7.3 �J.S •C�.c fJ.S ..s .... yam._ �].S ... n fJ.> >.5 •].:�^ .... L... ... ... .. _... .._ .y 7 t� N 0 C t J d d L d 'a 0) E V/ J d L yr d C 'a w c N E s m Q Packet Pg. 387 Discussion & Recommendation • Initial cost is similar, affordable • Choice between acity-owned and operated/maintained system vs. a system where SnoPUD is responsible for O&M and replacement • Concern regarding the IES footprint of the Sternberg Type IV fixture without an additional shield • Recommend SnoPUD Packet Pg. 388 W-5 NIGHTTIME FRIENDLY Consistent with LEED' goals & Green Globes""criteria for light pollution reduction r► E Applications: Residential streets Parking lots General security lighting r/%! bill, 23.75" Oil ].5" E Drop Refractor Effective Projected Area (EPA) The EPA forth e ATBS is 0.3 sq. ft., Approx. Wt.=12lbs. (5 kg) STANDARDS DesignLights Consortium° (DLC) qualified product. Not all versions of this product may be DLC qualified. Please check the DLC Qualified Products List at www.designlights.org/QPL to confirm which versions are qualified. Color temperatures of <— 3000K must be specified for International Dark - Sky Association certification. Rated for -40°C to 40°C ambient CSA Certified to U.S. and Canadian standards Complies with ANSI: C136.2, C136.10, C136.14, C136.31, C136.15, C136.37 Autobahn Series A Roadway & Security Lighting Features: OPTICAL Same Light: Performance is comparable to 50W —150W HPS and up to 175W Mercury Vapor roadway and security lighting luminaires. White Light: Correlated color temperature - 4000K, 70 CRI minimum, 3000K, 70 CRI minimum or optional 5000K, 70 CRI minimum. IP66 rated borosilicate glass optics ensure longevity and minimize dirt depreciation. Unique IP66 rated LED light engines provide 0% uplight and restrict backlight to within sidewalk depth, providing optimal application coverage and optimal pole spacing. Available distributions are Type II, III, and V roadway distributions. When used with the optional acrylic refractor the unit provides approximately 10% uplight and increased vertical foot-candles ELECTRICAL Expected Life: LED light engines are rated >100,000 hours at 25°C, L70. Electronic driver has an expected life of 100,000 hours at a 25°C ambient. Lower Energy: Saves an expected 40-60%over comparable HID luminaires. Robust Surge Protection: Three different surge protection options provide a minimum of ANSI C136.210kV/5kA protection. 20kV/IOkA surge protection is also available. MECHANICAL Includes standard AEL lineman -friendly features such as tool -less entry, 3 station terminal block and quick disconnects. Bubble level located inside the electrical compartment for easy leveling at installation. Rugged die-cast aluminum housing and door are polyester powder -coated for durability and corrosion resistance. Rigorous five -stage pre -treating and painting process yields a finish that achieves a scribe creepage rating of 8 (per ASTM D1654) after over 5000 hours exposure to salt fog chamber (operated per ASTM B117). Mast arm mount is adjustable for arms from 1-1/4"to 2" (1-5/8"to 2-3/8" O.D.) diameter. The 2 — bolt clamping mechanism provides 3G vibration rating per ANSI C136. The Wildlife shield is cast into the housing (not a separate piece) CONTROLS NEMA 3 pin photocontrol receptacle is standard, with the Acuity designed ANSI standard 5 pin and 7 pin receptacles optionally available. Premium solid state locking -style photocontrol — PCSS (10 year rated life) Extreme long life solid state locking -style photocontrol — PCH (20 year rated life) Optional onboard Adjustable Output module allows the light output and input wattage to be modified to meet site specific requirements, and also can allow a single fixture to be flexibly applied in many different applications. a Note: Actual performance may differ as a result of end -user environment and application. Specifications subjectto change without notice. © 2014-2017 Acuity Brands Lighting, Inc. 03/28/17 ATBS Packet Pg. 389 Autobahn Series AT 8.5.b Roadway & Security Lighting Example: ATBS A MVOLT R2 Series Performance Packages Voltage Optics ATBS Autobahn LED A 2,500 lumens MVOLT Multi-volt,120-277V R2 Roadway Type II Roadway & B 3,200 lumens R3 Roadway Type III Security C 3,800 lumens R5 Roadway Type V E 4,700 lumens D2 Type II, Drop Refractor F 5,400lumens included G 6,100 lumens D3 Type III, Drop Refractor H 7,100lumens included 1 8,500 lumens D5 Type V, Drop Refractor included Color Temperature (CCTI (Blank) 4000K CCT, 70 CRI Min. 3K 3000K CCT, 70 CRI Min. 5K 5000K CCT, 70 CRI Min. Paint Blank Gray (Standard) BK Black WH White BZ Bronze Surge Protection Standard 10kV/5kA SPD Blank Acuity SPD-10kV/5kA with inductive filter (Standard) 20 20kV/10KA SPD MP MOV Pack IL SPD with Indicator Light Misc. HSS House Side Shield NIL NEMA Label Notes 1. Not available with Install Packages. 2. Not available with AO option. XL Not CSA Certified Controls (Blank) 3 Pin NEMA Photocontrol Receptacle NR' No Photocontrol Receptacle DMz 0V-10V Dimmable Driver P5 5 Pin Photocontrol Receptacle (dimmable driver included) P7 7 Pin Photocontrol Receptacle (dimmable driver included) PCSS' DTL DSS Photocontrol PCLII DTL DLL Photocontrol 120-277V AO Field Adjustable Output SH Shorting Cap Install Packages PKGS DTL DSS Photocontrol PKGL DTL DLL Photocontrol Packages ship with selected photocontrol, 24", 1 1/4" diameter arm, 5' of prewire and mounting hardware American M L Electric Lighting AEL Headquarters, 3825 Columbus Road, Granville, OH 43023 www.americanelectriclighting.com © 2014-2017 Acuity Brands Lighting, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 03/28/17 ATBS Accessories ATBSREF Drop Refractor for field installation ATBSHSS House Side Shield for field installation ATBSLTS Light Trespass Shield for field installation Warranty Five-year limited warranty. Complete warranty terms located at: www.acuitybrands.com/CustomerResources/Terms_and_conditions.aspx Actual performance may differ as a result of end -user environment and application. All values are design or typical values, measured under laboratory conditions at 25'C. Specifications subject to change without notice. Please contact your sales representative for the latest product info Packet Pg. 390 Autobahn Series A Roadway & Security Lighting Performance Package A Distribution R2 Lumens 2,514 Input Watts 19 LPW 132 50K Hours 0.93 ' @ 25' C 75K Hours 0.89 1OOK Hours 0.85 R3 2,515 132 R5 2,649 139 D2 2,394 126 D3 2,372 125 D5 2,521 133 B R2 3,166 24 132 0.93 0.89 0.85 R3 3,167 132 R5 3,336 139 D2 3,015 126 D3 2,988 124 D5 3,175 132 C R2 3,784 31 122 0.93 0.89 0.85 R3 3,780 122 R5 4,029 130 D2 3,604 116 D3 3,566 115 D5 3,835 124 E R2 4,770 40 119 0.93 0.89 0.85 R3 4,704 118 R5 4,867 122 D2 4,543 114 D3 4,438 111 D5 4,650 116 F R2 5,392 47 115 0.93 0.89 0.85 R3 5,407 115 R5 5,175 110 D2 5,135 109 D3 5,101 109 D5 5,051 107 G R2 6,235 50 125 0.94 0.92 0.90 R3 6,101 122 R5 6,404 128 D2 5,938 119 D3 5,756 115 D5 6,193 124 H R2 7194 60 120 0.94 0.92 0.90 R3 7,141 119 R5 7,508 D2 6,8511 114125 D3 6,737 112 D5 7,150 119 j R2 8,653 76 114 0.94 0.92 0.90 R3 8,525 112 R5 9,003 118 D2 8,241 108 D3 1 8,042 106 D5 1 8,574 113 Note: Information shown above is based on 4000K nominal system data. Individual fixture performance may vary. Specifications subject to change without notice. American IX L Electric Lighting® AEL Headquarters, 3825 Columbus Road, Granville, OH 43023 www.americanelectriclighting.com © 2014-2017 Acuity Brands Lighting, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 03/28/17 ATBS Warranty Five-year limited warranty. Complete warranty terms located at: www.acuitvbrands.com/CustamerResources/Terms and conditions.asox Q Actual performance may differ as a result of end -user environment and application. All values are design or typical values, measured under laboratory conditions at 25'C. Specifications subject to change without notice. Please contact your sales representative for the latest prod Packet Pg. 391 8.6 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/15/2017 Sunset Ave Parking (20 min.) Staff Lead: Phil Williams Department: Engineering Preparer: Katie MacCaul Background/History On August 8, 2017, staff presented a plan to add more parallel parking on Sunset Avenue and reviewed the scope and cost of the proposed Decision Package. September 20, 2016. Council approved an Ordinance amending the parking provisions on Sunset Avenue. Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance change reducing the 4-hour on -street parking limit on Sunset Avenue to 2-hour parking. August 23, 2016. Council directed the removal of the angled parking on Sunset, the increase of parallel parking, where achievable, installation of a modified C-curb along the walkway, design of an interim solution for the 2nd Avenue/Caspers wrong -way driving issue, and the beginning of design for the pocket park at the south end of Sunset Avenue, the intersection table at Edmonds Street, and the design of Caspers Street from Sunset to 3rd Avenue N. Staff Recommendation Approve the parking changes and the Decision Package. Narrative Parking. In June,2017 City operations crews removed all angled parking on Sunset Avenue, and restriped the west end of the road for parallel parking. This resulted in the net loss of nine parking stalls. In an effort to make up the loss, staff looked at placing additional parking north of the former angled slots; to accomplish this, a turning study was conducted to determine where additional parking could be placed without compromising access to adjacent driveways. Possible parallel parking space placement has been determined by design realities only. To better understand the field impact of these parking placements, staff lightly painted where the initial parking could go. Subsequent conversations with adjacent residents indicated many felt the comfortable access to their homes would be impacted by the proposed parking. Many of the adjacent driveway approaches have substandard curb aprons at the road, which if improved, would in several cases allow both additional parking and easier ingress/egress of the residents. This solution is a portion of a forthcoming decision package. Decision Package. The August 23, 2016 Council meeting included a planning level estimate for: moving the angled parking westward; wrong -way driving reductions; a pedestrian separator, and miscellaneous striping and signage. Since moving the angled parking is no longer an question, it is proposed to shift that identified funding need to the task of improving driveway access. The estimate for the above directed improvements currently stands at $133,600. Staff has re -considered the timing of placing a Packet Pg. 392 8.6 pedestrian separator (modified C-curb) as an interim solution. Sunset Avenue will be impacted by a series of utility construction projects over the next several years. That utility work should be coordinated so the final Sunset Avenue surface improvements will not be affected. This utility work includes a new water main and individual service lines, a new gravity sewer main, demolition of the existing sewer pumping station, all new storm drainage infrastructure, and the new Waterfront Connector project. It is recommended that the cost of the pedestrian separator (est. $61,900) should be postponed until the final Sunset improvements are made. This would bring the cost for interim improvements down to $75,900. Attachments: Sunset Ave Walkway Packet Pg. 393 J Sunset venue AIP" =Awwq FIX alkway Parallel Parking Report August Sr", 2017 PPP Committee Packet Pg. 394 111�1,►11�I11�1, Sunset Av—enue Walkway .&"U 1 .■� + mot' Task: --Determine where additional parallel parking maybe located along the roadway. Challenge: --Additional Parking may impact adjacent driveways Method: --Conduct turning study at each driveway where additional parking is proposed. Packet Pg. 395 Sunset Avenue Walkway AV" # pill 'I I Example: Turning Radius Templates ra��r 0 5ft loft o ! m 2.5 m Scale r - Path of front - Path of left, r — ,r ~" overhang bon w ea ; r J ti ■ � f ua 1.83 m r3r ni (� %hb I v I i � R I ; w Q v 5ft 11)ft 1 4 1 m 2.5 m Path of right I scale rear oue ang . Assumed steering angle is 31.6 I i 2.43 m . CTR = Centerline taming radius at front ax+e , ' Exhibit 2-3. Minimum Turning Path for Passenger Car (P) Design Vehicle ....based on large passenger vehiclE Packet Pg. 396 M__w lug Sunset venue Example: dlkway lied to each driveway Y L a d -- Q d N C - 7 _ A R 3 N > Q d N 3 C d E t 0 N r r+ Q Packet Pg. 397 J Sunset venue dlkway JUT CITY OF EDMONDS LEGEND PARALLEL PARKING STUDY ©j Potential Parking Laid Out Possible Parking --Needs Closer Study L L No Parking Possible Without Driveway Apron Alterations Turning Radius Templates ...Site -wide. Packet Pg. 398 Sunset M—M16 lumurnas � *r� Identified potential parking Packet Pg. 399 J Sunset venue dOr .&"O I� ." dlkway Ingress/ Egress Issues Causes: 1. Substandard Driveway Widths 2. Substandard Driveway Aprons 3. Driver Expectations and Performance 4. Large Vehicles Solutions: 1. Upgrade Certain Driveway Aprons to better all Z. Limit Additional Parallel Parking to 7-9 new spaces Packet Pg. 400 City of Edmonds Suns -et -Avenue Walkway Ago AQ," 1 10 1. Interim Solutions — Planning Level Cost Estimate 1. Improve Driveway Access 2. Add Parallel Parking/misc. re -striping 3. Wrong - Way D 5. Miscellaneous 6. Estimate: %, riving Reduction a If ,�% - Signage $46,000 $ 1/100 $16,600 r +, ft.r .... 8,0000 III Questior Packet Pg. 402 9.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/15/2017 Council Committee Reports (10 min.) Staff Lead: Council Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation N/A Narrative This is an opportunity for the Council to report on items discussed in their committee meetings. The committee meeting minutes are attached. Attachments: FC080817 PPP080817 PSP080817 Packet Pg. 403 9.1.a FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING August 8, 2017 Elected Officials Present Councilmember Diane Buckshnis (Chair) Councilmember Dave Teitzel Staff Present Scott James, Finance Director Dave Turley, Assistant Finance Director Jeannie Dines, Recorder The meeting was called to order at 7:06 p.m. in Council Chambers. Committee members and staff briefly discussed action items at the last meeting. The Policy Matrix was added to the agenda. 1. June Quarterly Financial Report Mr. Turley highlighted the following on the June Quarterly Report: • The economy continues to do well • Fund 112 revenues through June are at 14%, staff is behind on billing grants • Fund 112 expenditures are only at 28% • Building maintenance expenditures only at 24% • REET 1 expenditures only at 1 % • REET 2 expenditures only at 16% • Water Fund expenditures only at 25% (investigate with Public Works staff) Mr. James and Mr. Turley responded to questions and discussion followed regarding establishing a e procedure related to billing grants, hiring an additional staff person in Finance and including the position in the 2018 budget, Fund 112 revenues versus expenditures, EMS Levy, increase in Woodway law protection revenue, fire/emergency services to Woodway, traffic infraction penalties and NC traffic c infraction revenue, effect the decrease in infractions has on revenue, increase in investment interest, v building maintenance expenditures, capital budgeting, and Councilmembers attending budget training, a_ and hiring staff versus contracting. Committee members commended staff on increased investment interest. Staff will provide job description for new Finance position at September 12 Finance Committee meeting. Q Action: Schedule on Full Council 2. Amendments to Chapter 3.75, Business Improvement District Mr. Doherty reviewed proposed amendments. He and Mr. James responded to questions regarding what category real estate offices are in, ability to appeal the business classification, maintenance projects the BID proposes via their budget, and payment collection schedule. Action: Schedule for short presentation to full Council on August 15 3. Amendments to Downtown Business Improvement District By -Laws Mr. Doherty reviewed proposed amendments and responded to questions regarding the number of board members and the number of BID members in collections for delinquent payments. Packet Pg. 404 9.1.a 08/08/17 Finance Committee Minutes, Page 2 Action: Schedule on Consent Agenda 4. NEW ITEM: Policy Matrix Mr. James distributed and reviewed a Finance Policy Matrix as of August 2017 and policy amendment and development schedule. The following Finance Committee review schedule was established: August 22 Contracting and Purchasing Policy September 12 Capital Asset Policy September 26 Facility Condition Report October 10 Street Condition Report October 10 Financial Reporting Policy and rescind Ordinance 3789 2018 Reserve Policy Action: See above schedule 4. NEW ITEM: Admiral Way Sidewalk Councilmember Teitzel provided a visual of the proposed location of a crossing on Admiral Way. The 4 next Port Commission meeting will include this as an agenda item. The Port has expressed willingness c to split the cost with the City. A brief discussion followed regarding the location and design of the 4) crossing. a� as r Action: Finance Committee agreed with this being a Council decision package r E 0 The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. U, ti r 00 O 00 O U U- r- CD E t v 2 Q Packet Pg. 405 9.1.b PARKS, PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING August 8, 2017 Elected Officials Present Staff Present Councilmember Neil Tibbott (Chair) Phil Williams, Public Works Director Councilmember Kristiana Johnson Rob English, City Engineer Council President Tom Mesaros Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev./Comm. Serv. Dir. Jerrie Bevington, Recorder The meeting was called to order at 7:10 p.m. in the Jury Meeting Room. Radar Feedback Signs was added as agenda item 5. Councilmember Johnson requested a future agenda (as soon as information is available and before the budget process begins) include 1) a presentation on changes the legislature made this year that allow REET to be used for housing, and 2) amount of REET revenue expected this year and how it is being spent. 2. Resolution to Designate Highway 99 Subarea as Residential Targeted Area Mr. Doherty reported on July 18 the Council passed a resolution of intent to designate the Hwy 99 subarea as a residential targeted area and setting a public hearing, the first step to implementing the Multi -Family Tax Exemption (MFTE) program in that area. Following the public hearing, the Council can adopt the resolution actually designating Hwy 99 subarea as a residential target area. Discussion followed regarding proceeding with a decision following the public hearing provided there are no substantial public comments at the hearing, previous designation of Westgate as a residential targeted area and updates to the code that will be addressed in the following agenda item. Action: Public hearing and potential action at the August 15 Council meeting, action potentially postponed if there is public comment the Council needs to consider. Amendments to Multi -Family Tax Exemption Code Provisions Mr. Doherty explained ECC Chapter 3.38 was developed and approved in late 2016 creating the MFTE program for the Westgate Mixed -Use Zone. He reviewed proposed amendments. Mr. Doherty suggested if the Council delays the designation of the Hwy 99 subarea as a residential target area, this item will also be delayed so they can be approved at the same time. Discussion followed regarding unit size for low- and moderate -income households, developer interest in Hwy 99, MFTE providing incentive for developers in Edmonds, availability of addition housing assisting with housing affordability, low and moderate area median income (AMI) for Snohomish County, designations below low income, efforts of the Mayor's Housing Strategy Task Force to address providing housing for lower income levels, opportunity on Hwy 99 to potentially provide housing for lower income levels and the State Housing Tax Credit Program for housing at 60% AMI. Committee members requested: • Next week's packet include the table regarding AMI (entire spectrum) and housing costs for those income levels. • Staff research whether the City could require MFTE program provide housing for 60% AMI and whether that would create a disincentive for developers Action: Schedule on full Council agenda for potentially approval following the public hearing on the Resolution to Designate Highway 99 Subarea as Residential Targeted Area Packet Pg. 406 08/08/17 PPP Committee Minutes, Page 2 3. Pine Street Lighting Discussion Mr. Williams provided background: in 2014/2015 Pt. Edwards' residents expressed safety concerns with lack of lighting, November 2016 Council authorized $20,000 for street lighting on lower Pine Street west of SR104, late 2016/early 2017 City staff worked with SnoPUD on proposal to install lights, May 2017 Public Works staff begins installation of lights, May 2017 Council puts project on hold pending further discussion of options. He displayed a photograph of the area of the demo garden affected by installation of the conduit. He reviewed the two options (SnoPUD and Sternberg) researched by staff during last 60 days. Mr. Williams relayed following his and Ms. Hite's meeting with the Pilchuck Audubon Society president, she submitted a letter questioning the necessity for lights but expressing a preference for the SnoPUD option due to the shields and asking for more time. Mr. Williams provided the following summary/recommendation: • Initial cost is similar, affordable • Choice between City -owned and operated/maintained system versus a system where SnoPUD is responsible for O&M and replacement • Concern with IES footprint of the Sternberg Type IV fixture without an additional shield • Staff recommends SnoPUD package Discussion followed regarding the color of the LED lights, distance between the proposed lighting and St. Edward's lighting, cost of maintaining/replacing the Sternberg lights, illumination pattern of SnoPUD lights, PUD's recommendation for the equivalent of a 200w bulb, moving the pole closest to demo garden further east, usual process for installing streetlights in the City, extending the sidewalk in that area, maintenance of streetlights on Main Street, and funding source for the lights. Councilmember Johnson displayed photographs of a third option, pedestrian level lights. Discussion followed regarding concern bollard lighting would not light the street, Pt. Edwards residents' concern with security due to darkness, the City's memorandum of understanding with the Audubon Society regarding the demo garden, providing safety in a way that minimizes secondary problems, installing motion activated lighting in the hatchery, potentially partnering with Pilchuck Audubon Society on pedestrian lighting, further investigation of the third option and seeking input from the Pt. Edwards community, bollard lighting does not meet engineering standards for street and sidewalk illumination, goal to install a solution by the end of daylight savings time (November 5) versus the Audubon Society's request for additional time, the Pt. Edwards HOA's disinterest in providing operation/maintenance of the lights and their agreement with installing standard streetlights in this area, and spacing of streetlights on Walnut. Action: Staff investigate pedestrian/bollard lighting including estimated cost. (Committee members disagreed whether this item should return to committee or proceed to full Council.) 4. Sunset Ave Parking Mr. Williams relayed as a result of replacing angle parking with parallel parking, spaces were reduced from 21 to 9. Staff's task was to determine where additional parallel parking can be located along the roadway without impacting adjacent driveways. Turning studies using turning radium templates were conducted at each driveway where additional parking is proposed based on a large passenger vehicle which identified 7-9 additional spaces with existing driveway configuration. Reasons for ingress/egress issues include substandard driveway widths and aprons, driver expectations and performance, and large vehicles. Solutions include 1) upgrading certain driveway aprons to allow better access, or 2) limit additional parallel parking to 7-9 new spaces. He provided planning level cost estimates for interim solutions: 1. Improve driveway access $46,000 Packet Pg. 407 9.1.b 08/08/17 PPP Committee Minutes, Page 3 2. Add parallel parking/misc restriping $ 1,100 3. Wrong -way driving reduction $16,600 4. Misc signage $ 8,000 Total (2018 decision package being prepared) $71,700 Discussion followed regarding where upgrades to driveway aprons would occur, concern residents on 211 Avenue would object to allowing drivers to turn left onto 211 Avenue, safety concerns with wrong - way drivers on Sunset Avenue, installing temporary blocks in no -parking areas, enforcement of 2-hour parking, and resident input after staff marked potential additional spaces. Action: Schedule for full Council discussion. (Committee members disagreed with scheduling for possible action.) 5. NEW ITEM: Radar Feedback Sians (RFS Councilmember Tibbott asked if additional RFS would be a Council or staff decision package. Discussion followed regarding the location of speed trailers and RFS, cost of the speed trailers, potential locations for additional RFS, funding of the Traffic Calming Program, speed studies staff conducts as a result of citizen requests to determine eligibility for traffic calming, being proactive related to traffic calming, pedestrian education being done by the Pedestrian Safety Committee, plans for an RFS on Olympic View Drive, and speed enforcement. Mr. Williams offered to provide additional information regarding RFS. Action: Information only. The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Packet Pg. 408 9.1.c PUBLIC SAFETY & PERSONNEL COMMITTEE MEETING August 8, 2017 Elected Officials Present Staff Present Councilmember Mike Nelson (Chair) Al Compaan, Police Chief Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas Andrew Pierce, Legislative/Council Assistant Council President Tom Mesaros The meeting was called to order at 7:06 p.m. in the Police Training Room. 1. Proaosed Resolution Suanortina Consolidation of SNOCOM and SNOPAC Council President Mesaros proposed consideration of a resolution supporting the consolidation of SNOCOM and SNOPAC. He clarified the resolution does not approve the merger only support for the merger; future steps will include approval of the interlocal agreement which may be available for Council consideration by October. Chief Compaan reviewed the background of SNOPAC, SNOCOM and SERS; map of service areas; service deficiency in a jointly served area covered by FD1/SNOCOM and SCSO/SNOPAC; call transfer issue and delay it causes; formation of a joint task force to consider consolidation; primary decision points (service levels, costs, resiliency/redundancy, and governance); evaluation of multiple solutions; status of primary decision points; estimated one-time transition costs; governance; supermajority vote items; and rate smoothing. He reviewed next steps in the process: • Summer 2017: work on new interlocal agreement, transition budget, timeline • September 2017: Joint Board review and advisory position on new ILA • October -December 2017: Depending on joint Board action, individual agencies re -briefed and decision whether to sign onto new ILA • January 2018: New agency could start work under consolidated governance • January 2019: Operations begin in physically consolidated center Chief Compaan commented on the effect of Next Gen 911, transfer of calls following the Mukilteo shooting, options considered and selection of Option 4B (consolidated agency and maintaining SNOCOM facility as a "warm backup"), composition of the new board, (15 members - 10 Police and 5 Fire, combination of elected and operational staff), hypothetical assessments and savings, and savings that would be applied to rate smoothing in the first year. Discussion followed regarding project timeline for consolidation, name of the new agency, larger consolidated center reducing potential for callers to receive a busy signal, how the governance model was determined, importance of a backup facility, reconfiguration of fire services provider seats on the board with approval of FD1/Lynnwood RFA, and the operational timeline. Action: Presentation to full Council August 15 and consideration of resolution supporting consolidation of SNOCOM and SNOPAC 2. NEW ITEM: Opioid Crisis Councilmember Fraley-Monillas distributed information regarding a survey that revealed 37 heroin overdoses during a 7-day period in Snohomish County including 3 deaths, 1 overdose in Edmonds, and 24 lives saved by the use of Naloxone. She and other elected officials plan to attend the National Packet Pg. 409 9.1.c 08/08/17 PSP Committee Minutes, Page 2 Overdose Awareness Candle Vigil at Thornton A. Sullivan Park in Silver Lake on August 31. Discussion followed regarding future surveys, difficulty collecting information, the new social worker position providing periodic reports to the PSP Committee and an annual report to the City Council, and increasing homelessness observed in downtown Edmonds. Action: Information only. The meeting was adjourned at 7:46 p.m. Packet Pg. 410