The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2016-05-03 City Council - Full Agenda-16540 p L D,yj °mod Agenda Edmonds City Council COUNCIL CHAMBERS 250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 MAY 3, 2016, 7:00 PM CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE 1. ROLL CALL 0 4 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 1. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2016 2. Approval of claim checks. 3. Resolution in Support of Sustainable Cities Partnership 4. Award of Tourism Grants to Edmonds Center for the Arts and Edmonds Waterfront Festival 5. 2016 1st Quarter Budget Amendment 6. Authorization to award a construction contract for the 2016 Waterline Replacement Program to D&G Backhoe 7. Authorization to award a construction contract for the 2016 Sanitary Sewerline Replacement Program to Kar-Vel Construction 8. Public Works Engineering Job Description Update & Reclassification 9. Removal of residence located at 820 Maple Street from the Edmonds Register of Historic Places PRESENTATIONS/REPORTS 1. Puget Sound Starts Here Proclamation (5 min.) 2. Edmonds Cemetery Board Presentation (5 min.) 3. Alliance for Housing Affordability Presentation (20 min.) 4. March 2016 Quarterly Financial Report (10 min.) AUDIENCE COMMENTS ACTION ITEMS 1. Critical Area Ordinance Update (30 min.) 2. Dayton Street Plaza Project Budget authorization (10 min.) MAYOR'S COMMENTS COUNCIL COMMENTS CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(1). RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. Edmonds City Council Agenda May 3, 2016 Page 1 ADJOURN Edmonds City Council Agenda May 3, 2016 Page 2 3.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/3/2016 Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2016 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: 04-26-16 Draft Council Meeting minutes Packet Pg. 3 3.1.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES April 26, 2016 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5t1i Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Kristiana Johnson, Council President Michael Nelson, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember ROLL CALL STAFF PRESENT N. Haughian, Police Officer Phil Williams, Public Works Director Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir. Shane Hope, Development Services Director Scott James, Finance Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Leif Bjorback, Building Official Rob English, City Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. APPROVAL OF DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 19, 2016 B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM, PAYROLL AND BENEFIT DIRECT DEPOSIT, CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS 4. PRESENTATIONS/BEPORTS A. YWCA STAND AGAINST RACISM DAY PROCLAMATION Mayor Earling read a proclamation declaring April 29, 2016 to be Stand Against Racism Day in Edmonds and calling upon all public officials, educators, business leaders and all people of Edmonds to observe this Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 1 Packet Pg. 4 3.1.a day and commit themselves going forward to fight against racism whenever and wherever it may appear. He presented the proclamation to Mary Anne Dillon, Regional Director, YWCA Snohomish County. Ms. Dillon expressed her appreciation for the City's Stand Against Racism again this year. The initiative began in 2008 by the YWCA in Trenton, New Jersey. This campaign is designed to build community among those who work for racial justice and to raise awareness about the negative impact of institutional and structural racism. The Stand Against Racism campaign is one part of the YWCA's larger national strategy to fulfill their mission of eliminating racism, empowering women and opening doors to opportunity for women and families facing poverty, violence and discrimination. The Stand Against Racism reminds there is still work to be done in the community and that together we can make a difference. 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS There were no audience comments. 6. STUDY ITEMS A. RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF SUSTAINABLE CITIES PARTNERSHIP Planning Manager Rob Chave recalled a previous presentation to Council, advising this was an update and decision point whether to proceed. The Council packet includes a draft resolution supporting the Sustainable Cities Partnership. Staff is ready to submit an application; the City's application along with other applications will be considered by Western Washington University (WWU). If WWU's program is successful there will be opportunities to apply in succeeding years. Staff is excited about the opportunity to pursue a number of smaller, well-defined projects, things that would not otherwise happen anytime soon. The project is a way to jumpstart these projects for a small investment of time and money. He did not view this as detracting from other projects because the projects fit within ongoing priorities. The list of possible projects identifies connections to the Comprehensive Plan, Strategic Action Plan as well as the Zero Waste Resolution. WWU is still reviewing projects; if Council is interested in adding a project for WWU to consider, that can be done. The projects on the list are ones the WWU has expressed interest in. Mayor Earling explained if Council approved the resolution, the City will still compete and if successful, will eventually enter into an interlocal agreement. Mr. Chave advised according to City Attorney Jeff Taraday's and David Davidson, Sustainable Cities Partnership, the City would sign a contract for services with WWU. If the Council approves the resolution, it is a commitment to include funds in the 2017 budget. The intent is to keep the Council in the loop regarding projects and funding, etc., understanding if the budget is approved, it is potentially within the Mayor's authority to sign the contract. If the Council approves the resolution and the City is selected by WWU, the list and contract will be presented to Council. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas relayed a citizen's question about the cost per item that WWU would work on. David Davidson, Sustainable Cities Partnership, answered as this is launch year for WWU, they do not have a track record. For the University of Oregon, who has 6 years of experience and 100+ projects, the average cost to have one university course work on one city project cost is about $7,000. Two other cities are applying; WWU will review the projects to determine what the faculty wants to work on. For example, if Edmonds were WWU's first choice, WWU would provide a budget and a list of projects that could be done for that budget before the final agreement is executed. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas assumed projects that could be done locally for less than $7,000 would not be included on the list. Mr. Chave responded the projects that are rising to the top are not ones that it Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 2 Packet Pg. 5 3.1.a would be affordable for the City to hire a consultant to accomplish. He was fairly confident the projects that are the most attractive are the ones that make the most sense. Councilmember Buckshnis asked when this would begin as it would be funded in the 2017 budget. Mr. Chave answered the academic year that begins fall 2016. WWU is flexible; if it is included in the City's 2017 budget, funds would not be due to WWU until 2017. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the cost in the resolution was a range from $65,000 to $85,000, basically 9-12 courses. Mr. Chave agreed. Councilmember Buckshnis said relayed comments she received from two citizens that they could do some of the items for less. Mr. Chave answered the scope is key. In additional conversation with Mr. Davidson and WWU, there may be things City staff can do such as going to WWU, remote meetings etc. Councilmember Buckshnis noted some of the items such as the Green Resource Room, staff is already working on. She observed some items would not be an entire course activity and asked whether some could be combined, noting some items had already been combined. Mr. Chave answered the combinations were based on feedback from WWU with regard to doing both in one course. That will be addressed in the detailed scope and budget. Council President Johnson expressed interest in using WWU's GIS students to do the cemetery inventory. She recalled the Cemetery Board estimated it would cost $100,000 to have a consultant map the existing burial plots. She requested that be added to the list of possible projects as well as any other GIS mapping projects such as Urban Forestry mapping. Mr. Chave agreed those could be added. Mr. Davidson agreed a team of students in a GIS lab could accomplish the cemetery mapping. Councilmember Teitzel commented this is an intriguing program and he was anxious to hear more about it. However, he was concern about shifting focus. The City is preparing to embark on a National Citizens Survey (NCS) at a cost of approximately $20,000 to help inform the City what citizens want to see accomplished which may also refine the projects the City is interested in having WWU pursue. The City has a lot of very talent people on its boards and commissions and he suggested in the near term asking them to address these projects which could be done at virtually at no cost. He preferred to do that and wait for the results of the NCS before engaging WWU. He would be happy to consider this idea next year once the survey information is available. In addition, the City is still catching up on roads and sidewalk maintenance; if there are discretionary funds available, in the near term he preferred to apply those funds to street and sidewalk maintenance. For those reasons, he will not support the proposal. It was the consensus of Council to forward this for approval on next week's Consent Agenda. B. AWARD OF TOURISM GRANTS TO EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS AND EDMONDS WATERFRONT FESTIVAL Councilmember Nelson, Chair of Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC), advised the LTAC reviewed the two grants and voted to recommend to Council approval of the two grant requests: 1. $2,500 for Edmonds Center for the Arts 10t' year anniversary birthday bash. Similar to KidStock with free performances inside and outside. 2. $1,000 for Community Transit bus wrap advertising for the Edmonds Noon Rotary Club's Waterfront Festival. It was the consensus of Council to forward this for approval on next week's Consent Agenda. C. 2016 1ST QUARTER BUDGET AMENDMENT Finance Director Scott James presented: • 19 Decision Packages Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 3 Packet Pg. 6 3.1.a • $313,200 in new revenues • $165,382 are carryforward expenditures • $192,500 are for expenditures previously discussed by Council • $597,078 are new Items for Council to consider expenditures Mr. James reviewed budget amendments: Carryforward, previously discussed by Council • Carryforward unexpended funds ($100,000) from 2016 for the Hwy 99 Subarea Plan • Carryforward unexpended funds ($11,183) to cover 2016 consultant costs to complete the CAO update • Carryforward $54,100 for the Development Code rewrite Previously discussed by Council • Additional $16,500 for the public defender • Additional $30,000 for Veterans Plaza planter beds benches and a seating area • Additional $16,000 for a cover for the propane dispenser at the Public Works yard • Additional $130,000 for construction of the downtown restroom New Items for Council Consideration • Prior to the close of 2015 the City received $16,254 from Washington State Department of Labor and Industry for their Stay at Work Program. Human Resources would like to use the reimbursement for accident prevention training • $2,100 for videotaping of Planning Board meetings • A Planning Division staff member will be on extended leave; the department is requesting $15,200 to backfill position due to high work volume. Permit revenue will cover the additional cost • $12,391 for environmental testing at Marina Beach Park • City received $10,000 to assist with the promotion of the Bird Fest and the Holiday Market • Replacement of Frances Anderson Center bandshell was planned in 2016. An $81,870 carryforward budget amendment was approved in February to help fund the replacement. At that time Council was informed an additional budget request would be made in the first quarter when costs were determined. An additional $30,000 is required to cover the cost of demolition • $31,913 used to pay water connection fees for the new spray park • $43,523 grant that will be used for Safe Routes to School to pay for education and enforcement • $90,000 TIB grant that will be used for the 238rh walkway from Hwy 99 to SR104 • $154,680 grant that will be used street overlays on 236t1i • $176,000 for sewer pipe relining. Funded by 2015 budget savings ($60,000 from Sewer Replacement project and the remainder from ending fund balance) • During 2016 budget development, staff submitted a budget request for $50,000. Further research led to a decision to purchase an entirely different software system which will result in significant savings in annual software license costs in 2017 and beyond but will be $15,000 higher in 2016. Mr. James summarized the budget amendment: • Revenues increased $312,200 • Expenditures increased $954,960 • Change in beginning balance +$165,382 • Ending fund balance deceased $476,378 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 4 Packet Pg. 7 3.1.a Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her understanding that Planning Board videotaping would be a permanent expenditure rather than a budget amendment. Mr. James explained when the 2016 budget was developed, this amount was not included; he anticipated it would be included in future budgets. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the replacement staff in the Planning Division and asked whether the person would be on long term disability. Parks & Recreation/Human Resources Reporting Director Carrie Hite advised extended leave is 3-5 months which is too short for a long term disability payout. The individual will be using vacation and sick leave and then unpaid. The vacation and sick leave are not included in budget and the department has no way to fund backfilling a position without a budget amendment. Council President Johnson referred to the replacement of the bandshell, observing the total cost was $191,870 but the item description refers to a $81,000 carryover and an additional $30,000. Ms. Hite answered there was originally $160,000 in the budget; the additional $30,000 will bring the budget to $191,000. Funds carried over at the beginning of the year were added to $80,000 budgeted in 2016. It was anticipated that project would begin in October/November 2015 but that was not possible as the construction documents were not complete. Councilmember Teitzel referred to the $2,200 for the canopy cover for the propane dispenser and asked why that was charged to the Equipment Rental Fund and not the General Fund. Mr. Williams explained it would be paid from the 511A Fund not 51113 which is used for vehicle replacement. Equipment Rental Funds was proposed as a funding source as it has general application across the fleet. It was the consensus of Council to forward this for approval on next week's Consent Agenda. D. REPORT ON BIDS FOR THE 2016 WATERLINE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM City Engineer Rob English reported on bids: • Advertised for bids in early April and bids opened April 21 • Four bidders responded • Low bid provided by D&G Backhoe with a bid of $1,147,000 • Total construction budget including soft costs: $1.4 million • Available funding: $1.9 million. • Contract has 90 working days, June -November construction period • Project scope: 5,000 feet watermain replacement on 7 sites • Most of the pipe being replaced is cast iron from the 1930-1940s Mr. English recommended approval on Consent Agenda. Councilmember Mesaros asked Public Works Director Phil Williams to share information he provided during their conversation earlier today regarding a hot topic in the news, lead in water. Mr. Williams agreed lead in water is very topical in Tacoma and Seattle and other places in the United States. Lead in water is related to age of the water infrastructure on both the city's and the customer's sides of the meter. Cities are required to do lead sampling every three years; it was last done in Edmonds in September 2015. At that time water in the oldest homes in the City were sampled in an effort to identify places where lead concentrations might be the highest. He reported there were no problems in any of the samples taken. Due to increased interest in this topic, he has asked the Water Division Manager to take additional samples which will be done in the next couple weeks. He will inform the Council of the results as well as make them available to the public. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 5 Packet Pg. 8 3.1.a Mr. Williams relayed in the last 17 years, the City has never exposed a lead gooseneck in any of the watermains that have been replaced. He explained lead goosenecks were used because galvanized pipes are rigid and the more flexible lead connects were used to connect to the main. Much of the City's infrastructure dates to the 1930s and earlier, about the time that technique was ceased. Another source of lead in water is leaded joints in cast iron watermains. As the City continues replacing pipes, more and more of those will be removed. In the meantime, sampling indicates suggests there are no issues in Edmonds related to lead. Councilmember Teitzel observed most newer homes have plastic or cooper water service inside the house. Mr. Williams agreed. Councilmember Teitzel commented at one point there was lead in the solder used to join copper pipes. He asked if residents should be concerned about lead in their water from that solder. Mr. Williams said his best advice for homeowners is to run the water in the morning for a couple minutes before use. It was the consensus of Council to forward this for approval on next week's Consent Agenda. E. REPORT ON BIDS FOR THE 2016 SANITARY SEWERLINE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM City Engineer English reported on bids: • Bids opened today, five bidders • Apparent low bidder is Carvel Construction with a bid of $1.5 million • Project scope: 2,000 linear feet of sewer main and 750 feet stormwater pipe Funded by sewer and stormwater funds Contract has 80 working days, June -October construction period Mr. English explained the sewerline replacement is to address maintenance issues where old concrete sewer pipe has settled or eroded creating operational issues for cleaning and maintaining flows. The stormwater portion is to correct a drainage issue on Sierra Place. That project was programmed in July 2015 but only design funds were included. It was later determined this stormwater project could be done with the sewermain project and realize economies of scale by bidding all the work together. A budget amendment will be required for award of this project. Assuming the bid review and checking of qualifications is completed satisfactorily, staff recommends approval on the Consent Agenda. Council President Johnson referred to the April to November construction period and asked if it was necessary to wait until the following spring to resurface the construction area. She recalled a large project done on Walnut last year had not yet been resurfaced. Mr. English answered several issues are considered in determining whether a street receives a full width overlay. In the case of Walnut, there will be full overlay as part of the overlay program. When utility work is done, a determination is made whether the damage caused by the utility is sufficient to require the road to be overlaid. Typically overlays are done the following year to allow any settling in the trench to occur. That determination is made based on the condition of streets and the impacts of the utility work. All utility projects require a permanent trench patch, HMA pavement, that is compacted in the trench so the street is restored at the end of project. That would be done on both the sewer and watermain projects. It was the consensus of Council to forward this for approval on next week's Consent Agenda. F. PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING JOB DESCRIPTION UPDATE City Engineer Rob English explained although the resignation of well qualified and experienced Stormwater Engineering Program Manager Jerry Shuster to take a position in Bellevue left a void in the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 6 Packet Pg. 9 3.1.a division, it also provided an opportunity to reevaluate how things are done in the division as well as existing staff and their qualifications. He reviewed the proposed reclassifications: Senior Utilities Engineer & Stormwater Engineer Reclassifications Mr. English recommended the Senior Utilities Engineer position, who current programs and budgets for capital projects related to water and sewer, take over long range planning for stormwater capital and infrastructure. The benefit is one person coordinating all three utilities. The current Senior Utility Engineer is a very qualified professional with many years of experience in the private sector designing stormwater infrastructure and has been with the City since 2011 doing an outstanding job. This proposal would add those duties as well as supervisory duties to the position. He proposed the Stormwater Engineer's supervisory responsibility be shifted to the Senior Utility Engineer position and the Stormwater Engineer and the Stormwater Engineering Technician position report to the Senior Utilities Engineer position. The salary range for the Senior Utilities Engineer would be increased from 14 to 16 and the salary range for the Stormwater Engineer position would be decreased from from 14 to 13. He anticipated it would be challenging to fill the position due to the high demand for engineers in the current economy. En ing eering Program Manager Reclassification Mr. English explained the previous City Engineer in the early 2000s instituted a career progression plan for the Engineer Technicians and Engineering Program Manager positions to help promote and retain employees. The current Engineering Program Manager 1 has been in the position since 2007. He recommended the job description be revised as well as the individual reclassified to the Program Manager 2 position. At the time the description was prepared, it included capital infrastructure work. Job duties and assignments have changed within the division since early 2000s and all capital work is managed by other engineering staff. The reclassification deletes that work from the job description and has the position focus on development work only. The salary range remains the same. Engineering Technician 3 Promotion The request is to reclassify an Engineering Technician 2 to Engineering Technician 3. Following the career progression plan, this individual has fulfilled the qualifications. Mr. English referred to the estimated salary/benefits table in the packet that reflects a salary savings in 2016 due to the vacant Stormwater Engineer position. The reclassification of the Engineer Technician 2 to Engineering Technician 3 is retroactive several months. The table reflects estimated salary/benefits increases through 2020. Over 90% would be funded by the Utility Fund and permit fees and a small portion by the General Fund. He acknowledged that could change year-to-year depending on permit activity. He requested the Council approve the three job descriptions on next week's Consent Agenda. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed concern there were things that needed to be done related to the stormwater code this year and next year that Mr. Shuster had begun working on. She relayed Mr. Williams' assurance that he and Mr. English will ensure that gets done. She asked who would do that work. Mr. English answered it would be under the Stormwater Engineer position which is a new position. The other two positions are already filled. Council President Johnson relayed her understanding that the senior level person would be doing the long range planning which would include the stormwater code. Mr. English said the Stormwater Engineer position would be working on that. Long range planning for capital infrastructure would be shifted to the Senior Utility Engineer position. Before Mr. Shuster left, he and the consultant did a substantial amount of work rewriting the stormwater section of the code. There is also a portion of the stormwater code related to development services. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 7 Packet Pg. 10 3.1.a Council President Johnson referred to the retroactive pay increase, asking how that could occur prior to Council approval. Mr. Williams explained staff researched how the progression of Tech 1, 2 and 3 had been implemented in past based on the union contract; it needs to be done the same in the future to avoid union issues. The last one was in 2010, the employee became eligible, competed the checklist and was certified by the City Engineer as meeting all the requirements to qualify as a Tech 3. Because of the time required for Council approval, the increase was retroactive. He recommended the same for this reclassification because of past practice and the policy. It was the consensus of Council to forward this for approval on next week's Consent Agenda. G. DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES UPDATE Development Services Director Shane Hope presented: • Photo of staff teamwork — building community — behind the scenes • Development Review Committee meetings • Graph of Development Services Permit History 1985-2015 — revenues versus number of building permits o 2015 highest year in history • Graph of building permits reviewed by Building, Planning and engineer 2014/2015 comparison by type of permit, number issued and valuation • Graph of land use permits (not a part of building permit reviews) including number of permits, number completed over 120 days and under 120 days, mean processing time and standard deviation. • Engineering Division (right-of-way, street use encroachment and side sewer activity) o Permits Issued 432 o Permit Revenue $35,347 o Inspection & Review Revenue $178,012 o Traffic Impact Fees $66,344 o Solar Permits Year Number of Permits # of Permits Applied for Online a �o Online kW 2012 3 0 0% 11 2013 6 5 83% 41 2014 39 35 90% 241 2015 32 29 91% 211 Total 1 80 1 86% 1 505 Graph of building permits per Development Services employee 1985-2015 Inspections o Over 8,000 field inspections were performed by Building, Engineering and Planning Division staff in 2015 Building Official Leif Bjorback displayed a map of key development projects and reviewed: • Residential Projects o Development Services Department currently has 44 active new single family residence permits o Shaw Lane Subdivision 6 lots o Woodvale 105th Place W— 26 lots o Edmonds Way 0 218th Street 0 7th Ave S Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 8 Packet Pg. 11 3.1.a o Maplewood Drive Commercial Projects o Prestige Care ■ 76th Ave W ■ Over 48,000 sq. ft. skilled nursing facility ■ Certificate of occupancy issued 10/29/15 o Swedish Hospital ■ 21601 76th Ave W ■ 77,000 sq. ft. hospital expansion, new emergency department o Post Office Mixed Use ■ Phase 1 — 43 new residential units and 4,800 square feet commercial space ■ Phase 2 — 28 new residential units and 7,600 square feet commercial space o Cedar Care Memory Care ■ 21006 72n Ave W ■ 70,9897 sq. ft. ■ 62 units with 80 beds o MGP Retail Shell Building (Wino Site) ■ 21940 Highway 99 ■ 6,162 sq. ft. ■ 4 tenant spaces o Point Edwards Building #10 (apartments) ■ 150 Pine Street ■ 58 residential units ■ Structured parking o Salish Crossing ■ New tenants include - Cascadia Art Museum - Spud Fish & Chips - Scratch Distillery - Brigid's Bottle Shop - 190 Sunset Restaurant - lst Financial Bank - Hunniwater - The Workshop fitness studio - Top Pot Donuts Madrona School o School District plans to build a new building on the vacant portion of the property and once the new building is complete, demolish the old building Tenant Improvement Projects o Krueger Clinic o Whirly Ball o City Projects ■ Frances Anderson Center bandshell ■ Fishing Pier Ms. Hope reviewed other Develop Services work: • Technology Update • Special projects examples: o Edmonds Community Development Code Update ■ Subdivisions ■ Signs Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 9 Packet Pg. 12 3.1.a ■ Stormwater Regulations ■ LID Integration o Critical Areas Ordinance o Street Tree Plan Update o Highway 99 Subarea Plan o Public Works Standard Details Update o Remodeled Permit Center and & Green Resource Center ■ Planning open house once completed o Building, Planning and Engineering Divisions are now available at Permit Counter daily ■ Hours: M, T, T, F: 8:30 am — 4:30 pm and Wednesdays 8:30 am -noon o Many resources can be found on City website — www.edmondswa.gov ■ City web map provides utility info, as-builts, zoning etc. — www.maps.edmondswa.gov Councilmember Nelson inquired about the number of residential versus commercial solar permits. Ms. Hope answered most are residential because they are simpler. Mr. Bjorback agreed residential are much simpler. The number of solar permits in 2014 and 2015 are high due to the Solarize campaign during those years. Solar permits have decreased in 2016. Councilmember Nelson asked if there were any plans to revitalize the solar program. Ms. Hope said staff will be considering options, perhaps there will be an opportunity with WWU to do some solar campaigning and outreach. Councilmember Tibbott referred to the comparison of land use permits, noting all are completed in under under 120 days. He asked how the mean processing time compared to other cities. Ms. Hope said she would need to research that; she anticipated Edmonds was not far out of line with other cities. Councilmember Tibbott asked how the 2015 mean processing time compare to slower years. Planning Manager Rob Chave answered it is generally similar. He recalled the mean times were fairly consistent year-to-year, but he could research and provide that information. Councilmember Tibbott said a developer needs to know how long it takes to get through the process in order to plan. Mr. Chave explained land use permits are somewhat unique and time intensive due to the extensive process that includes advertising, noticing, involvement of other agencies such as the State, etc. Developers are informed how long the review process will take. Mr. Chave commented that due to Council and staff interest in improving review times, a lot of things with process intensive permits were moved into the building permit process. For example, thresholds have changed with regard to what goes to the Architectural Design Board for review versus having standards in the code that enable staff to handle the design component which is a huge benefit. It retains the ability to look at design but having identified design parameters allows the review process to be compressed. Currently, most of the lengthy design review is for high level projects and smaller projects are reviewed via the building permit. Councilmember Tibbott commented it appeared the department was able to do more with the same number of staff and asked if that was due to technology. Mr. Chave responded it is due to process changes as well as a focus on technology. An example is online solar permitting and streamlining staff review that resulted in shortening of the overall process. The goal is to move more permitting online, electronic plan review to reduce paper, etc. He agreed technology is key. H. HIGHWAY 99 AREA PLANNING UPDATE Development Services Director Shane Hope reviewed: • Purpose o Create a vision for the corridor Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 10 Packet Pg. 13 3.1.a ■ Historically, the corridor developed with little planning guidance. ■ The result is what we are left with today: poor connections, unsafe streets, and general lack of cohesiveness between buildings. ■ Taking a more proactive approach will provide a "big picture" view of community goals such as transportation, land use, and safety. o Develop specific steps to accomplish community goals ■ Based on the vision and community goals, the subarea plan will identify action steps the City can take ■ Attract investment - Public funding - Private investment Map of Highway 99 subarea Background: Building on previous work o Highway 99 Task Force ■ Formed over 12 years ago ■ Helped provide insight for the 2004 report ■ The 2004 report held the City win $662,000 in federal grants for pedestrian safety and lighting improvements o Highway 99 Enhancement Project Report, Makers, 2004 o Highway 99 Enhancement Project Market Assessment, Berk & Associates, 2004 o Highway 99 Traffic Safety and Circulation Study, Perteet, Inc., 2007 o City of Shoreline Planning Recent Steps o Consultant team brought on board: Fregonese Associates ■ Reconnaissance/research o Public workshop - over 50 attendees ■ Instant polling - If you could do just one thing for the corridor, what would be your top priority for infrastructure? A. Address parking - management and shared parking - 9% B. Public space improvements and beautification - 42% C. Safety improvements for bikes and pedestrians - 12% D. Better connections for bikes and pedestrians - 33% - If you could do just one thing for the corridor, what would be your top priority for housing? A. Add more housing units - 24% B. Add more affordable housing units - 32% C. Beautification, blight removal, code enforcement - 39% D. Homeowner assistance for rehabilitation - 0% - If you could do just one thing for the corridor, what would be your top priority for business? A. Catalyst development on major sites - 39% B. Storefront improvements - 7% C. Bright new business and jobs to the area - 46% D. Invest in homegrown entrepreneurs - 7% Mapping exercise Ms. Hope reviewed key observations from the public workshop: • Improve safety o Add pedestrian scale lighting and wider sidewalks along key pedestrian corridors (e.g. Interurban Trail and neighborhood connections to Hwy 99). Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 11 Packet Pg. 14 3.1.a o Add more pedestrian crossings across Hwy 99. o Slow traffic turning off Hwy 99 onto side streets. Improve public space o Include more wayfinding signs. o Activate the street by bringing buildings to the sidewalks. o Include landscaping as buffer between street and sidewalk. o Concern expressed over the number of car lots. "Car lots do not make good neighborhoods." Attract new businesses o Diversify the business mix in the area o Focus on attracting catalyst developments Next steps include: • Use results from public workshop and online survey to draft alternative scenarios • Public Open house - Thursday May 19, 7:00 — 9:00 pm o Swedish Hospital Auditorium, 21601 76"' Ae W, 4t1' floor, main building Ways to participate include: • Periodically check City websites o www.edmondshwy99.org o www.edmondswa.gov/2011-07-27-22-31-43/highway-99-planning-project.html • Take the survey o www.edmondshma99.org/workshop-survey • Get on the City email list • Watch for announcements in local media and City newsletters • Send comments to brad. shipleykedmondwa.gov Ms. Hope reviewed the project timeline • March — April 2016: Understanding Existing Conditions • April — June 2016: Develop Land use and Transportation Scenarios • April — Oct 2016: SEPA & Planned Action Environmental Impact Assessment • July — Sept 2016: Develop Subarea Plan • Oct — Nov 2016: Final Sub -Area Plan Councilmember Nelson thanked Ms. Hope and the consultant for the public workshop. He commented the number of Councilmembers at the public workshop illustrates the Council's interest in Highway 99. He also commented on the public workshop attendees' interest and their participation in the mapping exercise. Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. I. UPDATE ON REVISING SIGN REGULATIONS AND OTHER PARTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE Development Services Director Shane Hope explained sign codes are complex and have many issues such as free speech, aesthetics, community character, public access, etc. Staff has has heard many different concerns with the sign code over the years such as things that were unclear, things that other cities doing such as replacing pole with monument signs, etc. The primary concern that has been expressed is temporary signs in the downtown area. Most downtown businesses believe the opportunity for signage is important, increases their business and keeps the area vital and lively. Conversely, signs can also get in pedestrians' way if not placed carefully and can be viewed negatively. There is also an issue related to Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 12 Packet Pg. 15 3.1.a enforcement; the code provides for limitations on signs but there is no permitting or tracking system and the City has only one code enforcement officer. Planning Manager Rob Chave explained the Planning Board is initially focusing on temporary signs. Sandwich/A-board signs are allowed downtown but not elsewhere in City. They are generally associated with pedestrian environments and it makes sense to regulate them that way because pedestrian signs are very different than other signs. Under the existing sign code temporary sign are allowed but only for 60 days; however, there is no permitting system to track those signs. The Planning Board is considering what signs need time limits and how sandwich board signs are used. Mr. Chave explained currently A -board signs are not used on a temporary basis for a specific number of days; the temporary nature is related to their removal when the businesses are closed. Many A -board signs are used for ongoing advertisement for things like menus, daily specials, or other temporary statements that inform patrons what is occurring in the business. One of the challenges is the sidewalk area downtown is limited, most downtown sidewalks are 8 feet wide. Although there is ample room, the issue is not having to many A -board signs so they are ubiquitous, identifying the best location on a case - by -case basis, determining a logical number based on number of storefronts, doorways, etc. Those details are not reflected in the current code. Mr. Chave said another issue under review with the assistance of the City Attorney is the recent Supreme Court case that limits the ability to regulate signage; regulations have to be content neutral. The basic rule is if a person has to read the sign to determine whether it's permitted, that is a problem Other jurisdictions' codes cannot be used as samples because most allow specific signs. For example, a menu sign; it would be necessary to read the sign to determine it was a menu sign. The City Attorney's office has been reviewing the City's sign code and have identified definition problems as well as other issues. Ms. Hope relayed the intent is for Planning Board to gather public input and provide a recommendation to the City Council. Councilmember Buckshnis recognized there are a lot of issues associated with the sign code. Many temporary signs are not actually temporary; they have been in place for a very long item. She was unclear why temporary signs are a freedom of speech issue. Other cities do not allow sandwich board signs; if the City has never tried not allowing sandwich board signs, how do businesses know they are helpful. She suggested not allowing A -board signs for a 30-60 day trial period. Ms. Hope anticipated options would be presented to the Council that could include no temporary signs allowed on the sidewalk or other regulations such as where and when they can be displayed. City Attorney Jeff Taraday said if the Council was interested in completely prohibiting temporary signs, he would need to research whether that was defensible. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether a permit for A -board signs had been considered. She wondered how many would be displayed if a permit were required. Ms. Hope answered consideration is being given to requiring a permit; most other sign types require a permit. A -board signs in Edmonds do not require a permit which makes them difficult to track. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas relayed she has been contacted by members of the disability community on more than one occasion with concerns about outdoor dining in the right-of-way blocking access; A- board signs adjacent to outdoor dining further block access. After measuring some sidewalks downtown, she found some are only 6 feet wide. Mr. Chave said the Planning Board is discussing the requirement for a permit especially for signs in the right-of-way. Requiring a permit would allow the sign location to be reviewed as well as whether there was a conflict with outdoor dining. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas remarked people without a disability often don't think about signs blocking access Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 13 Packet Pg. 16 3.1.a Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if a permit fee was required for blade signs. Mr. Chave answered no; a decision was made during Stephen Clifton's tenure not to require a permit. The signs are required to be mounted at a certain height but there is no fee for the permit. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas liked the blade signs and would like to see more. She remarked blade signs, A -frame, and signs in window can all be too much. Mr. Chave agreed that was the difficult part about the sign code; there were no objective studies that state what was more or less effective. There are only government ordinances regulating signs and publications from the sign industry that state more is better. That is why jurisdictions look at other jurisdictions' regulations; unfortunately, most are not in accordance with Supreme Court decision. Ms. Hope said another challenge is whether the business is located where it can display blade sign. Councilmember Teitzel said he attended a recent Edmonds Downtown Alliance meeting where the issue of signs was raised and there was a lot of emotion about A -board signs. Most business owners at that meeting believed it was the most cost effective sign method to attract customers. He agreed it would be important to find research that would inform business of other other options that may be as effective or more effective than an A -frame sign. Ms. Hope said it has been very difficult to find any academic research; most information is anecdotal. Council President Johnson recalled Natalie Shippen raising this issue in the past including the visual pollution in downtown Edmonds, the number of signs she observed and what they advertised. Council President Johnson said after a while, people become immune to what Ms. Shippen saw and she was unsure whether people actually read the signs. She agreed a range of options would be helpful, one of options should be a ban or a temporary ban and encouraged the City Attorney to work with the Planning Board and staff on a ban. She acknowledged a ban may not be popular but several Councilmembers have indicated they are not particularly supportive of sandwich -board signs. She recognized they are inexpensive and serve a purpose but questioned whether they were in the best interest of downtown Edmonds. Councilmember Nelson expressed support for temporary signs that were actually temporary; A -boards tend to be permanent. He supported options for temporary signs with regard to the type of signs, size, location, etc. He noted visitors may not walk by the A -board signs every day and may be informed by the information on the sign. He favored finding a balance to accommodate visitors, people with disabilities and pedestrians but did not support a temporary or permanent ban at this point. Councilmember Mesaros relayed as he was walking to tonight's meeting, the veterinarian was bringing in the sandwich -board sign at the Veterinary Clinic on 5`h. The sign appears to be very temporary as it is brought in every night. Councilmember Mesaros pointed out real estate sandwich boards are often displayed outside the downtown area, typically on the weekend to direct people to open houses. He anticipated regulating those would be difficult. Ms. Hope agreed that is an issue; staff is not proposing to address those signs at this time. Mr. Chave clarified only commercial A -board signs are allowed downtown; A -board signs are allowed in residential zones. The challenge with real estate sign is they are located off -premise. Councilmember Mesaros commented there are two types of real estate signs, the A - frame and the small arrow stake signs. 7. REPORTS OF OUTSIDE BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS Councilmember Buckshnis the WRIA 8's granting committee did two site visits for King County Flood Control grant program and two visits for the Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRFB) and submitted their recommendations to the WRIA 8 Board. The WRIA 8 Board will review the recommendations on May 19. She abstasined from voting on the recommendation related to the Edmonds Marsh. She reported the Tree Board is hosting Cass Turnbull on May 5, 7:00 — 9:00 p.m. in Council Chambers to speak on "The Seven Myths of Site, Selection and Care of Trees." Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 14 Packet Pg. 17 3.1.a Councilmember Nelson reported the Snohomish County Tomorrow Steering Committee had a presentation from the PSRC on upcoming activities, the City of Mukilteo's Comprehensive Plan and a briefing on the Alliance for Affordable Housing, He reported the US Corp of Engineer attended the Lake Ballinger Watershed Forum meeting where there was interest expressed in collaborating with US Corp of Engineer and shifting from flood mitigation to potentially improving Lake Ballinger's water quality in the future. Federal Lobbyist Jake Johnson made at presentation at the Forum meeting about potential federal legislation regarding a green stormwater tax credit that would provide residents a tax credit of up to 30% for activities such as installing a rain garden. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported on two Diversity Commission meetings she attended; at one, members of the public were invited to speak about groups they are involved in. At the second meeting, the Commission discussed participating in the 4th of July parade and prioritizing issues. She also attended three Health Board meetings. One of the primary issues the Board is addressing is drug -take back. Pharmacies have removed their drug take -back box; boxes are located in police departments including the Edmonds Police Department. The Board is working on a policy to put drug take -back containers in pharmacies, with funding from the drug manufacturers via a $0.02/prescription fee. In the meantime, containers are located in many police departments. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported the Disability Board is continuing to work on policy issues. Several police departments attended the Law and Justice Committee meeting, the primary issue was heroin overdose epidemic in Snohomish County. The Sheriff pointed out drug take -back boxes result in less opportunity to abuse drugs as kids do not go straight to heroin, they begin with medications taken from family/friend houses, eventually moving up to heroin. Heroin is a very inexpensive drug, making it economical for users but it is killing children. She attended several other meetings this month. Council President Johnson reported on an ECA reception she attended which was an opportunity to thank donors including a large donation from Snohomish County Lodging Tax Advisory Board. She reported on the Diversity Commission forum, an opportunity for the Commission to hear from community leaders on a number of topics. She also attended the ST3 presentation in Everett last night. Councilmember Mesaros reported the Seashore Transportation Forum had presentations regarding, 1) ST3 proposal where a questions was raised regarding the interaction with other transit authorities such Community Transit and Metro, and 2) King County Metro's Strategic Plan. He encouraged Metro to coordinate with Community Transit. Councilmember Mesaros reported the SnoCom Board meeting included discussion regarding a merger with SnoPac and hiring a facilitator to lead those discussions. The Board also evaluated the SnoCom Executive Director Terry Peterson who was hired on a temporary basis but with the potential merger, his contract likely will be extended until that issue is resolved. Councilmember Mesaros reported the Edmonds Public Facilities District meeting included a legislative update regarding issues affecting PFD throughout Washington including extension of the PFD legislation which was not passed. The meeting included routine finance items as well discussion of programming for the remainder of this year and programming options for the upcoming season. He summarized the ECA is very busy with its own programming as well as rentals. Councilmember Teitzel reported the Disability Board is working through policy issues related to how/when/if retirees should attend those meetings to plead their case. That occurred today and it was an awkward exchange. He plans to attend the Law Enforcement Officer Firefighter annual meeting in Lake Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 15 Packet Pg. 18 Chelan in May on behalf of the Disability Board to learn what other cities are doing to address new and changing requests for reimbursement. Councilmember Teitzel reported the Historic Preservation Commission meeting included a request from the owners of a home at 8"' & Maple for historic registration. Following significant debate, the request was denied due to major changes to upper floor windows that change the character of the house. He reported the Civic Field Advisory Committee, after interviewing Walker I Macy, MIG and Lewis Berger to prepare a master plan, selected Walker I Macy. They will begin an aggressive schedule of meetings; the first public meeting, an open house format, will be held in May to learn what the public would like to see at Civic Field. The master plan will be complete by the end of 2016 with a final plan forwarded to Council for review in January 2017. Councilmember Teitzel reported the Port of Edmonds meeting included reports on increased revenues, discussion regarding the Coho fishing season; due to warm weather and water, this year's run is very small and the fishery agencies are considering canceling the sport and commercial fishing season in this area of Puget Sound. New restrooms were installed at the Port; the same vendor who will be installing the downtown restrooms. Following a survey of tenants where most preferred ethanol free gasoline, the Port will be shifting from ethanol augmented gas to clear. Ethanol attracts water which damages carburetors especially in boats. The Sea Scouts are having an open house on April 30 from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. on V dock in front of Arnie's Restaurant. Councilmember Tibbott reported he represents the Council on the Affordable Housing Alliance and took a group interested citizens along with Ms. Hope and Councilmember Fraley-Monillas to look at a senior housing project on 196"' in Lynnwood, Shepherds Garden. This project was initiated with 2.2 acres of land gifted by a church which enabled them to attract another $10 million in grants. He displayed several photos illustrating the quality of affordable housing projects including the entryway, a mural commissioned for the lobby describing the history of Lynnwood, Pastor Chris Boyer whose church donated the property and who is also a Lynnwood Councilmember, the courtyard in back and parking shared with church. The donation of property increased the opportunity for federal, state and county grants; the City of Lynnwood did not provide any funding but did help with zoning considerations and land use accommodations. The building has 40 units as well as shared spaces; each unit is approximately 550 square feet with its own living space and kitchen. He found this to be a very exciting project and was hopeful citizens with 2-5 acre properties would consider working with the City on an affordable housing project. Councilmember Tibbott reported he also provided feedback to Snohomish County on their draft housing plan, voicing his concern that the plan was very Everett, Monroe and Marysville centric and included very little in south Snohomish County and very little data from Edmonds School District which encompasses five cities. Councilmember Tibbott reported the Economic Development Commission has held two meetings since his last report. Commissioners have diverse talents and a broad range experience. The Council can expect a report from the Commission in June with objectives for the coming year. Mayor Earling reported approximately 200-250 people attended the Sound Transit open house in Everett last night on the ST3 plan. As expected no one is happy with light rail not reaching Everett until 2041. The Snohomish County Sound Transit delegation identified ways to reduce costs and the timing to get light rail to Everett sooner than 2041. The Sound Transit Board meeting will make a final decision in June whether to proceed with a ballot measure. 8. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 16 Packet Pg. 19 3.1.a Mayor Earling relayed he received an email today from the Snohomish County Executive's office indicating his plans to recommend to the County Council a ballot measure to increase sales tax by $0.002 to further fund criminal justice and fire protection. If successful, that funding mechanism would generate $450,000-$480,000 in the first year in Edmonds. He offered to forward Councilmembers the information he received, commenting the Council may want to schedule discussion on a future agenda. The Snohomish County Council open house is May 13; placing it on the ballot would require Snohomish County Council action. Mayor Earling looked forward to the City's first daughter and son work day this Thursday at City Hall. 9. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Teitzel reported Councilmember Fraley-Monillas and he are working on the August Volunteer Appreciation Picnic to celebrate the City's volunteer boards and commission. They have solicited donations from businesses for food and beverages for families as the City cannot pay for families and he invited Councilmembers to donate. Council President Johnson invited the public to a kickoff for the Civic Field Master Planning process for the City Council on May 3 at a special meeting in the Brackett Room from 5:30 — 6;45 p.m. followed by the regular Council meeting at 7:00 p.m. Council President Johnson echoed Councilmember Fraley-Monillas' encouragement to put prescription medications in the take -back box in the Police Department. She cautioned the public not to flush medications as they cannot be removed at the treatment plant and enter Puget Sound, affecting aquatic life. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said medications can also be put into coffee grounds or kitty litter. She relayed the $0.002 sales tax increase was also discussed by the Law and Justice Committee; they anticipate the funds could be used for 63 new deputies in Snohomish County as well as a percentage going to the Health District. With regard to Councilmember Tibbott's report, Councilmember Fraley-Monillas pointed out affordable housing needs to be on a bus line and close to grocery stores, requires less parking as not everyone living in a senior living facility drives. The community was excited about the project in Lynnwood and she anticipated the same would be true in Edmonds. She pledged $50 to the Volunteer Picnic and challenged Councilmembers to each donate $50. Councilmembers Nelson and Buckshnis offered to contribute $50 each to the Volunteer Picnic and Councilmember Mesaros offered to contribute $51. 10. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) This item was not needed. 11. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION This item was not needed. 12. ADJOURN Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 17 Packet Pg. 20 3.1.a With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 26, 2016 Page 18 Packet Pg. 21 3.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/3/2016 Approval of claim checks. Staff Lead: Scott James Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Nori Jacobson Background/History Approval of claim checks #219634 through #219756 dated April 28, 2016 for $509,556.76. Financial Impact Claims $509,556.76 Staff Recommendation Approval of claim checks. Narrative In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance #2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or non -approval of expenditures. Attachments: claim cks 04-28-16 FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 04-28-16 Packet Pg. 22 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219634 4/28/2016 070322 A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC 219635 4/28/2016 069798 A.M. LEONARD INC 219636 4/28/2016 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice 15-37181 15-38636 C116027753 368550 219637 4/28/2016 074306 AMWINS GROUP BENEFITS INC 4183511 219638 4/28/2016 074718 AQUATIC SPECIALTY SERVICES INC 10638 219639 4/28/2016 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 1988550032 PO # Description/Account INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 Total PM: EXTRACTOR FOR INCREMEME PM: EXTRACTOR FOR INCREMEME 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 Total WWTP - PEST CONTROL April Service 423.000.76.535.80.41.23 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.23 Total : LEOFF 1 MEDICARE SUPPLEMENT, LEOFF 1 Medicare supplemental insL 009.000.39.517.20.23.10 LEOFF 1 Medicare supplemental inSL 617.000.51.517.20.23.10 Total CHLORINE, BRUSH, POLE CHLORINE, BRUSH, POLE 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 Total FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS 3.2.a Page: 1 Page: 1 Packet Pg. 23 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219639 4/28/2016 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 2 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 18.1, w 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 a� 1.7£ 1988554080 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: E PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 1.3: 6 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE o 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 5.0( 5 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE o L 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 5.0( 0- PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE Q 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 5.0( N PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 5.0( PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: m 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 5.0E 9.8% Sales Tax N 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 0.11 o 9.8% Sales Tax Y 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.5( 9.8% Sales Tax E 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.5( 9.8% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 c 0.5( 9.8% Sales Tax E E 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.5( um 9.8% Sales Tax Q 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.4£ 1988554081 FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MAT FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 5.2E FLEET DIVISION MATS 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 12.8, Page: 2 Packet Pg. 24 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219639 4/28/2016 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 3 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 0.5, w 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 a� 1.2E 1988560826 WWTP - UNIFORMS, MATS AND TO uniforms M 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 3.0z 6 mats and towels o 423.000.76.535.80.41.11 81.0z 5 9.8% Sales Tax o L 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 0.3( a 9.8% Sales Tax Q 423.000.76.535.80.41.11 7.9z N 1988560827 PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE, r PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE, 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 101.3E w PARKS MAINT MAT CLEANING 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 1.3� N 9.8% Sales Tax o 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 9.9< Y 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 0.1 z . 1988564848 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: ; 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 1.3: PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: E t 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 5.0E um PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: r Q 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 5.0( PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 5.0( PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 5.0E 9.8% Sales Tax Page: 3 Packet Pg. 25 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219639 4/28/2016 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 219640 219641 Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) 1988564849 4/28/2016 012005 BALLAND GILLESPIE POLYGRAPH 2O15-185 4/28/2016 072455 BEAR COMMUNICATIONS INC 4471266 3.2.a Page: 4 PO # Description/Account Amoun 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 0.1 < 9.8% Sales Tax vi 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.5( 9.8% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.5( E 9.8% Sales Tax CU 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.5( u 9.8% Sales Tax o 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.5( 5 9.8% Sales Tax o L 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.4£ 0- PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE Q 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 5.0( N FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MAT r FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 5.2£ w FLEET DIVISION MATS o 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 12.8. N 9.8% Sales Tax o 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 0.5, Y 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 1.21 . Total: 323Z INV 2015-185 EDMONDS PD - PRE-1 m PRE -EMPLOY EXAM - PERRY E 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 225.0( U PRE -EMPLOY EXAM - VANDELAAR r 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 225.0( Q Freight 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 7.0( Total : 457.0( PW RADIOS PW Radios Page: 4 Packet Pg. 26 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219641 4/28/2016 072455 BEAR COMMUNICATIONS INC 219642 4/28/2016 074307 BLUE STAR GAS 219643 4/28/2016 002800 BRAKE & CLUTCH SUPPLY Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account (Continued) 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 Freight 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 9.8% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 Total: 5866 FLEET AUTO PROPANE 500.3 GAL Fleet Auto Propane 500.3 Gal 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 5906 FLEET AUTO PROPANE 674.2 GAL Fleet Auto Propane 674.2 Gal 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 5945 FLEETAUTO PROPANE 604 GAL Fleet Auto Propane 604 Gal 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 Total: 560325 UNIT 11 -OIL SEALS Unit 11 - Oil Seals 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.6% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 560377 UNIT 37 - BRAKE SUPPLIES Unit 37 - Brake Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.6% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 560413 UNIT 37 - ROTOR TURN SVC Unit 37 - Rotor Turn Svc 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 9.6% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 560811 UNIT 138 - SUPPLIES Unit 138 - Supplies 3.2.a Page: 5 Page: 5 Packet Pg. 27 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher List City of Edmonds Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account 219643 4/28/2016 002800 BRAKE & CLUTCH SUPPLY (Continued) 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.6% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 560863 UNIT 106 - PARTS Unit 106 - Parts 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.6% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 219644 4/28/2016 067391 BRAT WEAR 219645 4/28/2016 067947 BROWNELLS INC 18542 12436692.00 Total: INV#18542 - EDMONDS PD - PECK DUTY BELT 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 Total INV#12436692.00 ACCT#00557761 - GRACE 8PC BRASS PUNCH SET 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 5.56 MAX HEADSPACE GAUGE 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 APEX POLYMER ARMORERS BLOC 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 MILITARIA BORELIGHT 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 2 1/2" COTTON SQUARES 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 ALIGNMENT PIN SET 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 T SHIRT SQUARES 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 FIRING PIN GUAGE 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 Freight 3.2.a Page: 6 Amoun 113.0E 0 10.8E C1 a� t 38.7E 3.7: o 892.4, 16- 0 L a Q 59.0( N am 5.7£ 64.71 N 31.5, N 22.3 1 E 26.4 , c 4.7E E t U 12.6z r 20.1 f Page: 6 Packet Pg. 28 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 7 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219645 4/28/2016 067947 BROWNELLS INC (Continued) 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 15.9E Total: 188.5: 219646 4/28/2016 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 15984715 RECEPTIONIST DESK CITY CLERK, RECEPTIONIST DESK COPIER LEA 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 20.1' 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 1.9 1 15984717 CONTRACT CHARGE-BLDG CONTRACT CHARGE 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 36.2E 15995115 FLEET COPIER Fleet Copier 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 33.0, 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 3.2z 15995116 PW ADMIN COPIER PW Office Copier 001.000.65.518.20.45.00 68.5E PW Office Copier 111.000.68.542.90.45.00 38.8E PW Office Copier 422.000.72.531.90.45.00 38.8E PW Office Copier 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 27.4. PW Office Copier 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 27.4, PW Office Copier 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 27.4' 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.65.518.20.45.00 6.7, 9.8% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.45.00 3.8' 9.8% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.45.00 3.8' Page: 7 Packet Pg. 29 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219646 4/28/2016 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 219647 219648 4/28/2016 071816 CARLSON, JESSICA Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) 15995117 15995120 15995121 20662 ADVENTURES IN 4/28/2016 075023 CAROLYN DOUGLAS COMMUNICATION 53 3.2.a Page: 8 PO # Description/Account Amoun 9.8% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 2.6t w 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 a� 2.6� 9.8% Sales Tax E 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 2.61 'M WATER SEWER COPIER 6 Water Sewer Copier o 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 70.6E Water Sewer Copier L 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 70.6E 0- 9.8% Sales Tax Q 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 6.9z N 9.8% Sales Tax rn 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 6.9, C/A572105 CONTRACT#3091/0521z m Finance dept copier contract charge o 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 209.6' N 9.8% Sales Tax o 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 20.5z Y CITY CLERKS COPIER LEASE CITY CLERKS COPIER LEASE 4/20' E 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 340.3� 9.8% Sales Tax ; 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 33.3E Total: 1,104.6, E U 20662 ADVENTURES IN DRAWING r 20662 ADVENTURES IN DRAWING Q 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 455.0( Total : 455.0( COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMUNI Communications and outreach for Ap 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 2,500.0( Page: 8 Packet Pg. 30 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # 219648 4/28/2016 075023 075023 CAROLYN DOUGLAS COMMUNICAT (Continued) 219649 4/28/2016 070144 CEDAR GROVE COMPOSTING INC 0000273763 219650 219651 219652 4/28/2016 067446 CEM CORPORATION 532075 4/28/2016 003710 CHEVRON AND TEXACO BUSINESS 47218526 4/28/2016 063902 CITY OF EVERETT 116000603 116000808 3.2.a Page: 9 Description/Account Amoun Total : 2,500.0( FAC MAINT - ECOSAFE BAGS vi Fac Maint - ECOSAFE Bags 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 153.7, Freight U 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 15.9( . 9.5% Sales Tax f° 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 16.1, c Total : 185.71 WWTP - SUPPLIES, OPERATIONS a IDP 3110 PRINTER RIBBON Q- Q 423.000.76.535.80.31.11 132.0( Freight N rn 423.000.76.535.80.31.11 24.1 9.8% Sales Tax .. 423.000.76.535.80.31.11 15.3' Total : 171.5( N INV#47218526 ACCT#7898305185 - FUEL FOR BREAK IN TRAFFIC BIKE 001.000.41.521.71.31.00 54.9 1 E FUEL FOR NARCS VEHICLE-POFF 104.000.41.521.21.32.00 141.9 1 TAX EXEMPT FILING FEE 001.000.41.521.71.31.00 0.5: TAX EXEMPT FILING FEE t 104.000.41.521.21.32.00 1.4, M r Total : 198.9' Q WATER QUALITY - LAB ANALYSIS Water Quality - Lab Analysis 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 615.6( WATER QUALITY - WATER LAB AN/ Water Quality - Water Lab Analysis Page: 9 Packet Pg. 31 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219652 4/28/2016 063902 CITY OF EVERETT 219653 4/28/2016 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) 12193 219654 4/28/2016 073573 CLARK SECURITY PRODUCTS INC 23K-109459 219655 4/28/2016 005965 CUES INC 23K-110723 452982 452990 PO # Description/Account 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 Total : E7AC.LYNNWOOD SIGNAL TECH E E7AC.Lynnwood Signal Tech Efforts 112.000.68.595.33.41.00 Total SPRAY PARK BUILDING KEYS 2 SPRAY PARK BUILDING KEYS 2 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 SPRAY PARK BUILDING KEYS SPRAY PARK BUILDING KEYS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 Total SEWER TRUCK CAMERA DIGITAL Sewer Truck Camera Digital Video 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 Handling Fees 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 Freight 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 SEWER TRUCK CAMERA- PCU Sewer Truck Camera - PCU 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 Freight 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 9.5% Sales Tax 3.2.a Page: 10 Page: 10 Packet Pg. 32 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 11 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219655 4/28/2016 005965 CUES INC (Continued) 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 6.2E _ 453835 SEWER TV TRUCK CAMERA - ADAI vi Sewer TV Truck Camera - Adapters A 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 535.1 , t Handling Fees 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 5.9E Freight 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 9.3E o 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 52.3( o 454051 SEWER TV TRUCK CAMERA REPAI L a Sewer TV Truck Camera Repair Kit Q 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 644.80 N Handling Fees 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 5.9E Freight 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 89.4E 9.5% Sales Tax N 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 70.3< o 454184 FREIGHT N Freight 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 38.8, . 9.5% Sales Tax c° 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 3.6� ; Total: 1,927.3: aa) E 219656 4/28/2016 067794 DALCO INC 88107 SEWER - PRESSURE WASHER SUI U Sewer - Pressure Washer Supplies r 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 172.2( Q 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 16.3 , Tota I : 188.6, 219657 4/28/2016 070864 DEX MEDIA 610026848511 C/A 730211599 Basic e-commerce hosting 04/02/16 - Page: 11 Packet Pg. 33 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 12 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219657 4/28/2016 070864 DEX MEDIA (Continued) 001.000.31.518.88.42.00 34.9E 610026848611 C/A 730211600 04/2016 Web Hosting for Internet 001.000.31.518.88.42.00 34.9E Total: 69.9( 219658 4/28/2016 073757 DEX MEDIA WEST INC 651150804 CEMETERY ADVERTISING CEMETERY ADVERTISING 130.000.64.536.20.41.40 37.7< Total: 37X 219659 4/28/2016 063064 DEZURIK WATER CONTROLS RPI/62005755 WWTP - REPAIR/REPLACE, MECH 4" PLUG LINDE CR (RS16) Cl 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 470.0( 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 46.0( Total: 516.0E 219660 4/28/2016 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 16-3650 ESDB.MINUTES THRU MARCH 201E ESDB.Minutes thru March 2016 001.000.67.518.21.41.00 471.9( 16-3654 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 4/19/16 04/19/16 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES P 001.000.25.514.30.41.00 330.0( Total: 801.9( 219661 4/28/2016 075153 DOPPS, MARIA 12570 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 100.8z 12606 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 100.8z Total: 201.6E 219662 4/28/2016 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 10059443 PM: BATTERY PM: BATTERY Page: 12 Packet Pg. 34 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219662 4/28/2016 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) 219663 4/28/2016 074302 EDMONDS HARDWARE & PAINT LLC 001484 219664 4/28/2016 069523 EDMONDS P&R YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP 21031 METZ JACKSON 219665 4/28/2016 038500 EDMONDS SENIOR CENTER 219666 4/28/2016 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 2016-04-01 1-00655 1-00925 1-01950 1-03950 1-05350 PO # Description/Account 130.000.64.536.50.31.00 9.8% Sales Tax 130.000.64.536.50.31.00 PM: BRAIDED ROPE 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 PM: BRAIDED ROPE 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 Total : Total 21031 METZ JACKSON YOUTH SCF 21031 METZ JACKSON YOUTH SCF 122.000.64.571.20.49.00 Total 04/16 RECREATION SERVICES COf 04/16 Recreation Services Contract F 001.000.39.569.10.41.00 Total LIFT STATION #7 71 W DAYTON ST LIFT STATION #7 71 W DAYTON ST 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 LIFT STATION #8 107 RAILROAD AV LIFT STATION #8 107 RAILROAD AV 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 LIFT STATION #1 450 SUNSET AVE, LIFT STATION #1 450 SUNSET AVE, 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 OLD PUBLIC WORKS (NORTH) 200 OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 OLD PUBLIC WORKS (SOUTH) 200 3.2.a Page: 13 Page: 13 Packet Pg. 35 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 14 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219666 4/28/2016 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION (Continued) OLD PUBLIC WORKS (SOUTH) 200 _ 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 92.1, vi 1-05705 LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / ME1 LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / MEl t 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 87.3E 1-13975 CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N / METER CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N / METER 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 626.9, o 1-14000 CITY HALL 115 5TH AVE N / METER CITY HALL 115 5TH AVE N / METER p L 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 101.3( 0- 2-25150 WEST PLANTER IRRIGATION 870 C Q' Q WEST PLANTER IRRIGATION 870 C 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 N 41.1 a� 2-25175 EAST PLANTER IRRIGATION 875 C) EAST PLANTER IRRIGATION 875 Ci m 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 41.1 2-26950 LIFT STATION #3 729 NORTHSTRE/ N LIFT STATION #3 729 NORTHSTRE/ 4 0 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 83.8( Y 2-28275 PLANTER IRRIGATION 1400 9TH AV PLANTER IRRIGATION 1400 9TH AV E 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 41.1 1 2-29118 LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN / LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN / m 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 44.7' E 2-37180 SAM STAMM OVERLOOK / METER £ U SAM STAMM OVERLOOK / METER £ r 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 55.6E Q 4-34080 LIFT STATION #14 7909 211TH PL S' LIFT STATION #14 7909 211TH PL S' 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 41.1 , Total: 2,010.71 219667 4/28/2016 075200 EDUARDO ZALDIBAR 12167 INTERPRETER FEE Page: 14 Packet Pg. 36 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 15 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219667 4/28/2016 075200 EDUARDO ZALDIBAR (Continued) INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 106.4E 219668 4/28/2016 031060 ELECSYS INTERNATIONAL CORP 148229 219669 4/28/2016 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES AR18391 219670 4/28/2016 008975 ENTENMANN ROVIN CO 0117113-IN 0117122-IN Total RADIX MONTHLY MAINTAGREEME Radix Monthly Maint Agreement - Ma 421.000.74.534.80.48.00 Total WWTP- OFFICE MACHINE USE 9/10/15 to 10/09/15 use overage 423.000.76.535.80.45.41 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.45.41 Total INN#0117113-IN ACCT#0011847 - EC 2015 OFFICER OF YR BADGE 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 2015 EMPLOYEE OF YR BADGE 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 TIE TACKS WITH ATTACHMENTS 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 PACKAGEINSURANCE 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 PACKAGING, MATERIALS FEES 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 Freight 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 INV#0117122-IN ACCT#0011847 - E[ 10 YEAR TIE TACK PINS 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 15 YEAR TIE TACK PINS 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 30 YEAR TIE TACK PIN Page: 15 Packet Pg. 37 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219670 4/28/2016 008975 ENTENMANN ROVIN CO 219671 4/28/2016 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 16 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 45.0( _ PACKAGE INSURANCE vi 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 8.0( PACKAGING, MATERIALS FEE t 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 4.5( Freight M 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 16.0( 6 0117264-IN INV#0117264-IN ACCT#0011847 - E[ o FLAT OFFICER BADGE -RETIRED 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 98.0( o PLAIN BADGE CASE L a Q. 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 27.0( Q SRANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER BA N 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 98.0( PACKAGEINSURANCE 77 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 0.6( co PACKAGING, MATERIALS FEE 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 4.5( N Freight o 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 16.0( Y Total : 977.1( E WAMOU39329 FLEET SHOP PARTS Fleet Shop Parts 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 48.4' y 9.8% Sales Tax E 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 4.7z U WAMOU39330 PM: HIT PINS r PM: HIT PINS Q 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.7( Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 1.01 WAMOU39332 WWTP - SUPPLIES, FACILITIES 20x20x1 M13 LEED FILTERS 423.000.76.535.80.31.23 116.6' Page: 16 Packet Pg. 38 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 17 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219671 4/28/2016 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY (Continued) 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.23 11.4< Total: 192.91 219672 4/28/2016 065427 FCS GROUP 2509-21604008 E6JA.SERVICES THRU 4/15/16 E6JA.Services thru 4/15/16 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 816.E 1 E6JA.Services thru 4/15/16 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 816.E 1 E6JA.Services thru 4/15/16 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 816.6( Total: 2,450.0( 219673 4/28/2016 009880 FEDEX 5-393-20638 STORM PLAN REVIEW - COURIER I Storm Plan Review - Courier for Plan: 001.000.67.518.21.49.00 27.8< Total: 27.& 219674 4/28/2016 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0501505 WATER METER INVENTORY -- Water Meter Inventory -- 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 1,478.0( #2031 M-MTRTRPL-0.625-010 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 830.4( 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 219.3( Total: 2,527.7( 219675 4/28/2016 011900 FRONTIER 253-007-4989 SEAVIEW RESERVOIR TELEMETR) SEAVIEW RESERVOIR TELEMETR) 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 30.9E 253-011-1177 PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE 001.000.65.518.20.42.00 6.3� PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 24.Z Page: 17 Packet Pg. 39 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219675 4/28/2016 011900 FRONTIER Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 18 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 24.2( w PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE' 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 a� 24.2� PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE' E 511.000.77.548.68.42.00 24.2( PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE' 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 24.3( o 253-012-9166 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES o L 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 161.7 1 Q TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES Q 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 300.4z N 253-014-8062 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 19.7E w TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 36.7( N 253-017-4360 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE o TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE N 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 46.7 , TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE E 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 86.8: 425-712-0417 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE ; TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE m 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 33.3( E TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE U 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 33.3( Q 425-712-8251 PUBLIC WORKS OMC ALARM, FAX, PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND IN' 001.000.65.518.20.42.00 16.3' PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND IN' 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 81.5( PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND IN' Page: 18 Packet Pg. 40 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 19 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219675 4/28/2016 011900 FRONTIER (Continued) 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 68.5' _ PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND IN' vi 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 68.5' PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND IN' t 511.000.77.548.68.42.00 91.3z 425-712-8347 CIVIC CENTER ELEVATOR PHONE CIVIC CENTER ELEVATOR PHONE 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 68.2< o 425-745-4313 CLUBHOUSE ALARM LINES 6801 M CLUBHOUSE FIRE AND INTRUSIOI` p L 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 131.3( 425-775-2455 CIVIC CENTER ALARM LINES 250 5 Q CIVIC CENTER FIRE AND INTRUSIC 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 N 62.4( a) 425-775-7865 UTILITY BILLING RADIO LINE UTILITY BILLING RADIO LINE TO FI' 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 66.4< 425-776-3896 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER ALj N FRANCESANDERSON CENTER FIF 4 0 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 131.3( u) Total: 1,663.61 V E 219676 4/28/2016 002500 GALLS LLC DBA BLUMENTHAL 005243078 1NV#005243078 ACCT#1 00 1074529 TRANSPORT HOODS 001.000.41.521.22.31.00 77.7( 9.8% Sales Tax E E 001.000.41.521.22.31.00 7.6' U Total: 85.3' +° r Q 219677 4/28/2016 075163 GARCIA-GARCIA, CESAR 12452 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 105.3, 12686 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 105.3, Page: 19 Packet Pg. 41 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 20 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219677 4/28/2016 075163 GARCIA-GARCIA, CESAR (Continued) 12789 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 105.3, Total: 315.9E 219678 4/28/2016 012199 GRAINGER 9076142174 FAC MAINT SUPPLIES Fac Maint Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 42.3( 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 4.1( Total: 46.5, 219679 4/28/2016 069733 H B JAEGER COMPANY LLC 169879/1 WATER - REPAIR SUPPLIES Water - Repair Supplies 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 899.4z 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 85.4( 170332/1 WATER - CUTTING BLADES Water - Cutting Blades 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 680.0( 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 64.6( 171199/1 WATER - VALVE EXTENSIONS Water - Valve Extensions 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 319.9: 9.8% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 31.3( 171200/1 WATER INVENTORY - #575 W-RES Water Inventory - #575 W-RESET-0' 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 746.5£ #382 W-RESET-01-012 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 582.9' Water Supplies, Resetters 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 2,906.2£ 9.8% Sales Tax Page: 20 Packet Pg. 42 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 21 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219679 4/28/2016 069733 H B JAEGER COMPANY LLC (Continued) 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 130.Z 9.8% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 284.8, Total: 6,731.7( 219680 4/28/2016 012560 HACH COMPANY 9873631 WWTP - REPAIR/MAINTENANCE, Li pH GEL PROBE, STD, w/1 m CABLE 423.000.76.535.80.48.31 259.0( Freight 423.000.76.535.80.48.31 30.8� 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.31 28.4, 9884787 WATER QUALITY - MAINT KITS Water Quality - Maint Kits 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 856.0( Freight 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 52.7 , 9.8% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 89.0( 9888313 WATER QUALITY CHLORINE TEST Water Quality Chlorine Test Kits 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 613.8( Freight 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 41.6 , 9.8% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 64.2E Total: 2,035.81 219681 4/28/2016 074428 HAMILTON PRINTING SYSTEMS 1031 EXPO TSHIRTS EXPO TSHIRTS 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 773.5( 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 75.8( Total: 849.3( Page: 21 Packet Pg. 43 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 22 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219682 4/28/2016 070437 HARDIE, MARYANN 04/27/16 TRAVEL TO NPELRA CONFERENCE Travel to NPELRA conference in Merr 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 274.7( Total: 274.7( 219683 4/28/2016 074804 HARLES, JANINE 197339 PHOTOGRAPHY FOR APRIL 2016 Photography for April 2016 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 200.0( Total: 200.0( 219684 4/28/2016 075615 HBD INC IN00002363 INV#IN00002363 CUST#EDM01-EDP EVIDRY 9X12 BAGS 001.000.41.521.80.31.00 24.0( EVIDRY 15X18 BAGS 001.000.41.521.80.31.00 29.9E EVIDRY 24X24 BAGS 001.000.41.521.80.31.00 36.0( EVIDRY 30X36 BAGS 001.000.41.521.80.31.00 54.0( Freight 001.000.41.521.80.31.00 23.2E Total: 167.2( 219685 4/28/2016 013140 HENDERSON, BRIAN 30 LEOFF 1 REIMBURSEMENT LEOFF 1 reimbursement 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 166.3, Total: 166.3, 219686 4/28/2016 074966 HIATT, ELLEN COE 2016 0426 TOURISM COMMUNICATIONS AND Tourism communications and marketi 120.000.31.575.42.41.00 1,500.0( Total: 1,500.0( 219687 4/28/2016 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 2021943 PM: DUCT TAPE, UTIL KNIF, SAW, C PM: DUCT TAPE, UTIL KNIF, SAW, C 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 473.4( Page: 22 Packet Pg. 44 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account 219687 4/28/2016 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 4053909 PM: RUBBER STRAP, MARKING WF PM: RUBBER STRAP, MARKING WF 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 6082543 PM: HOSE, HOSE REPAIR, SPLICEF PM: HOSE, HOSE REPAIR, SPLICEF 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 7253366 PM: STARTER FERTILIZER PM: STARTER FERTILIZER 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9021011 PM: PEAT, SUPER GLUE, SPRAY PP PM: PEAT, SUPER GLUE, SPRAY PP 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 Tota I : 219688 4/28/2016 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2783960 OFFICE SUPPLIES Office supplies 001.000.22.518.10.31.00 Copy paper 001.000.61.557.20.31.00 Copy paper 001.000.21.513.10.31.00 Copy paper 001.000.22.518.10.31.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.22.518.10.31.00 3.2.a Page: 23 Amoun 44.9E vi a� t 59.8E E 5.6� 4- 0 65.9z m 6.4E N 0 235.2: Y 22.3: . 1,035.5E c m E 187.5E U a r r 25.3, Q 25.3' 25.3, 20.8E Page: 23 Packet Pg. 45 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219688 4/28/2016 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 24 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.61.557.20.31.00 2.4£ Y 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.21.513.10.31.00 a� 2.4� 2783962 OFFICE SUPPLIES Office supplies M 001.000.22.518.10.31.00 34.9z 6 9.8% Sales Tax o 001.000.22.518.10.31.00 3.4, 2784659 OFFICE SUPPLIES o Office supplies L a 001.000.22.518.10.31.00 83.7z Q 9.8% Sales Tax N 001.000.22.518.10.31.00 8.2, r 2785095 RETURN OF OFFICE SUPPLIES Return of office supplies m 001.000.22.518.10.31.00 -137.81 9.8% Sales Tax N 001.000.22.518.10.31.00 -13.5' o 2785292 SUPPLIES -LEGAL PADS N SUPPLIES -LEGAL PADS 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 32.9, . 2786843 WWTP - SUPPLIES, FACILITIES c° W WTP SUPPLIES:- ; 423.000.76.535.80.31.23 59.6z y 9.8% Sales Tax E 423.000.76.535.80.31.23 t 5.8z u 2788682 PW CONF RM FOR EOC RADIO - DI r PW Conf Rm for EOC Radio - Desk Q 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 119.0( PW Conf Rm for EOC Radio - Desk 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 119.0( PW Conf Rm for EOC Radio - Desk 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 119.0( Page: 24 Packet Pg. 46 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 25 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219688 4/28/2016 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED (Continued) PW Conf Rm for EOC Radio - Desk _ 111.000.68.542.90.31.00 119.0( vi PW Conf Rm for EOC Radio - Desk 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 a� 119.0( 9.8% Sales Tax E 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 11.6E 9.8% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 11.6E o 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 11.6( 0- 9.8% Sales Tax a 111.000.68.542.90.31.00 11.6( Q 9.8% Sales Tax N 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 11.6( r 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 10.3( co PW Conf Rm for EOC Radio - Desk ao 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 104.9E N 2789337 SUPPLIES o SUPPLIES N 001.000.23.523.30.31.00 160.3� 2789415 OFFICE SUPPLIES -PAPER E OFFICE SUPPLIES -PAPER 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 128.4< Total: 1,424.1E aa) E 219689 4/28/2016 071634 INTEGRATELECOM 768328 C/A768328 U PR1-1 & 2 City Phone Service r 001.000.31.518.88.42.00 907.6( Q Tourism Toll free lines 877.775.6929; 001.000.61.558.70.42.00 8.4E Econ Devlpmnt Toll free lines 001.000.61.558.70.42.00 8.4E Total: 924.5E Page: 25 Packet Pg. 47 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 26 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219690 4/28/2016 014957 J B INSTANT LAWN 539474 CITY PARK TURF CITY PARK TURF 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 1,539.0( 9.8% Sales Tax 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 150.8. 539477 CITY PARK TURF CITY PARK TURF 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 1,539.0( 9.8% Sales Tax 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 150.8, 539550 CITY PARK TURF CITY PARK TURF 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 1,539.0( 9.8% Sales Tax 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 150.8, Total: 5,069.4E 219691 4/28/2016 074295 JAMESON BABBITT STITES&LOMBARD 82314 E1CA.ROW MEDIATION E1CA.ROW Mediation 112.000.68.595.20.61.00 1,267.5( Total: 1,267.5( 219692 4/28/2016 075356 JENNIFER ZIEGLER PUBLIC 009 STATE LOBBYIST MARCH 2O16 State lobbyist March 2016 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 3,358.0( 010 STATE LOBBYIST APRIL 2016 State lobbyist for April 2016 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 3,358.0( Total: 6,716.0( 219693 4/28/2016 064934 JOHN BARKER LANDSCAPE 4/20 RESTROOM FINAL 4/20/16 RESTROOM FINAL SITE DE 4/20/16 RESTROOM FINAL SITE DE 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 3,003.0( Total: 3,003.0( 219694 4/28/2016 075265 KBA INC 3002741 E7AC.SERVICES THRU 3/31/16 Page: 26 Packet Pg. 48 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 27 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219694 4/28/2016 075265 KBA INC (Continued) E7AC.Services thru 3/31/16 112.000.68.595.33.41.00 15,115.8, Total: 15,115.8; 219695 4/28/2016 074240 KNIGHT, KAREN 20655 FUN FACTORY 20655 FUN FACTORY INSTRUCTIOI 20655 FUN FACTORY INSTRUCTIOI 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 756.0( 20657 FUN FACTORY 20657 FUN FACTORY INSTRUCTIOI 20657 FUN FACTORY INSTRUCTIOI 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 756.0( Total: 1,512.0( 219696 4/28/2016 016850 KUKER RANKEN INC INV-019183 INV#INV-019183 ACCT#1005003 - E FLORESCENT ORANGE MARKING 1 001.000.41.521.22.31.00 53.6z 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.31.00 5.2( Total: 58.9( 219697 4/28/2016 017050 KWICK'N KLEEN CAR WASH 04052016-01 INV#04052016-01 - EDMONDS PD 21 CAR WASHES $5.03 (INCTX) 3/1, 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 105.6< Total: 105.6: 219698 4/28/2016 066522 LAKESIDE INDUSTRIES INC 3260940MB WATER - EZ STASPHALT Water - EZ ST Asphalt 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 1,421.8E 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 135.0E Total: 1,556.9E 219699 4/28/2016 074417 LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTIAN SMITH 129 PUBLIC DEFENDER PUBLIC DEFENDER 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 300.0( 130 PUBLIC DEFENDER Page: 27 Packet Pg. 49 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 28 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219699 4/28/2016 074417 LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTIAN SMITH (Continued) PUBLIC DEFENDER 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 300.0( 131 PUBLIC DEFENDER PUBLIC DEFENDER 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 300.0( 132 PUBLIC DEFENDER PUBLIC DEFENDER 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 300.0( Total: 1,200.0( 219700 4/28/2016 075159 LIFE INSURANCE CO OF NO AMER May Premiums MAY CIGNA PREMIUMS Life insurance premiums 811.000.231.550 11,099.3( Total: 11,099.3( 219701 4/28/2016 074388 LONE MOUNTAIN COMMUNICATIONS 17303 UNIT 452 RADIO REPAIRS Unit 452 Radio Repairs 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 332.0( 17304 UNIT 947 - REPAIRS Unit 947 - Repairs 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 135.0( Total: 467.0( 219702 4/28/2016 074263 LYNNWOOD WINSUPPLY CO 012074-00 PM: EXTENSION BODY, NIPPLES, F PM: EXTENSION BODY, NIPPLES, F 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 111.9� 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.9£ Tota I : 122.9 , 219703 4/28/2016 072886 MACDONALD-MILLER FAC.SOLUTIONS JC33367 PS - AIR COND SVC - TAX INCLUDE PS - Air Cond Svc - Tax included the 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 5,055.1 £ Total: 5,055.11 219704 4/28/2016 075480 MADATH, DONNA 20874 LITTLE FISHES 20874 LITTLE FISHES INSTRUCTIO Page: 28 Packet Pg. 50 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 29 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219704 4/28/2016 075480 MADATH, DONNA (Continued) 20874 LITTLE FISHES INSTRUCTIO 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 504.9( Total: 504.9( 219705 4/28/2016 069961 MAIN STREET ELECTRIC INC 16-1083 PS - COURTS - REPAIRS PS - Courts - Repairs 016.000.66.594.19.65.00 3,680.0( 9.8% Sales Tax 016.000.66.594.19.65.00 360.6z Total: 4,040.61 219706 4/28/2016 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 49471040 COBALT DRILL BITS cobalt drill bits 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 71.7, Freight 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 6.2E 54698315 WWTP - SUPPLIES, MECHANICAL Strut Channel, Solid, 304 Stainless 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 393.6E Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 29.2z Tota I : 500.9, 219707 4/28/2016 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENTALL INC 231084 WATER - 2 CYCLE OIL Water - 2 Cycle Oil 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 67.8( 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 6.4z 232657 MARINA BEACH PLAY EQUIPMENT MARINA BEACH PLAY EQUIPMENT 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 290.0( 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 28.4, 232789 PM: STIHL PART PM: STIHL PART Page: 29 Packet Pg. 51 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219707 4/28/2016 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENTALL INC 219708 4/28/2016 072746 MURRAY SMITH & ASSOCIATES Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) 15-1662-12 15-1695-9 219709 4/28/2016 067834 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTALS 4411261 219710 4/28/2016 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM PO # Description/Account 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 Total : E4JC.SERVICES THRU 3/31/16 E4JC.Services thru 3/31/16 421.200.74.594.34.41.00 E5JA.SERVICES THRU 3/31/16 E5JA.Services thru 3/31/16 421.200.74.594.34.41.00 Total CITY PARK SPRAY PARK FENCE RE CITY PARK SPRAY PARK FENCE RE 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 9.8% Sales Tax 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 Total 0580036-IN FLEET FILTER INVENTORY Fleet Filter Inventory 511.000.77.548.68.34.40 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.34.40 0580442-IN UNIT 57 - FILTERS Unit 57 - Filters 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 0580599-IN UNIT 138 - FILTERS Unit 138 - Filters 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 3.2.a Page: 30 Page: 30 Packet Pg. 52 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219710 4/28/2016 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 219711 4/28/2016 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 31 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) Unit 57 - Filter vi 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 46.6E 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 4.5 Total: 424.4E c� 2-1542945 SIERRA PARK HONEY BUCKET o SIERRA PARK HONEY BUCKET @ 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 113.8E p 2-1543787 MARINA BEACH HONEY BUCKET a MARINA BEACH HONEY BUCKET Q• Q 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 2,938.8E 2-1613821 SIERRA PARK HONEY BUCKET SIERRA PARK HONEY BUCKET 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 113.8E m 2-1615301 MARINA BEACH HONEY BUCKET MARINA BEACH HONEY BUCKET 00 N 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 2,938.8E c 2-1617317 CIVIC CENTER 6TH & EDMONDS F N CIVIC CENTER 6TH & EDMONDS F Y 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 113.8E E 2-1617941 PINE STREET PARK HONEY BUCK[ PINE STREET PARK HONEY BUCKE 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 113.8E 2-1620326 CIVIC FIELD 6TH & BELL HONEY Bl E E CIVIC FIELD 6TH & BELL HONEY Bt U 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 113.8E 2-1626057 HAINES WHARF PARK HONEY BUC r Q HAINES WHARF PARK HONEY BUC 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 218.7E 2-1627929 WILLOW CREEK HONEY BUCKET WILLOW CREEK HONEY BUCKET 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 113.8E Page: 31 Packet Pg. 53 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # 219711 4/28/2016 061013 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC (Continued) 219712 4/28/2016 025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 644 219713 219714 219715 000 00 645 4/28/2016 026560 PACIFIC AMERICAN COMMERCIAL CO RI-37156 4/28/2016 065051 PARAMETRIX INC 4/28/2016 070962 PAULSONS TOWING INC RI-37313 SI-30919 21-23825 110144 3.2.a Page: 32 Description/Account Amoun Total : 6,779.51 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES-4/13/1 vi PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Y 001.000.62.558.60.41.00 315.0( HISTORIC PRES MEETING MIN-4/1z HISTORIC PRES MEETING MIN E 001.000.62.558.60.41.00 192.5( u Total: 507.5( c WATER - EQUIPMENT RENTAL > Water - Equipment Rental a 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 58.2( 0- 9.5% Sales Tax Q 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 5.5< rn WATER - EQUIPMENT RENTAL Water - Equipment Rental 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 198.0( 9.5% Sales Tax N 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 18.8' 4 WATER - CHIPPER Water - Chipper N Y 421.000.74.534.80.35.00 653.2( E 9.6% Sales Tax c� 421.000.74.534.80.35.00 62.7' Total: 996.4! m W WTP - PLC AND SCADA SYSTEM E t Phase 04: PLC-301 Replacement Se U a 423.100.76.594.39.41.10 10,112.0z Q Phase 06: PLC-601 Replace 423.100.76.594.39.41.10 41,025.0( Total : 51,137.01 INV#110144 - EDMONDS PD TOW 2000 CHRY #ARG7220 Page: 32 Packet Pg. 54 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219715 4/28/2016 070962 PAULSONS TOWING INC 219716 4/28/2016 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account (Continued) 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 Tota I : J177212 CITY HALL PLANNING COUNTER EI City Hall Planning Counter Elect 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 J189163 WWTP- SUPPLIES, ELECTRICAL MEL 61-1a013-1 POLY HANDLE - H� 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 J201989 WWTP - SUPPLIES, ELECTRICAL ELECTRICAL STOCK 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 J227755 CITY HALL CAR CHARGING STATIC City Hall Car Charging Station Supplii 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 9.8% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 J236671 FAC - ELECT SUPPLIES FAC - Elect Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 J242179 CITY HALL CAR CHARGING STATIC City Hall Car Charging Station Supplii 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 9.8% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 3.2.a Page: 33 Page: 33 Packet Pg. 55 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 34 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219716 4/28/2016 028860 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC (Continued) Total: 894.5! 219717 4/28/2016 075547 PRO -LONG ROOF CARE & REPAIR 4676 WWTP - GUTTER REPLACEMENT vi Install 100' K6 Gutters on Gazebo Y 423.000.76.535.80.48.23 1,200.0( 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.23 114.0( . Total: 1,314.0( 219718 4/28/2016 064088 PROTECTION ONE 291104 ALARM MONITORING - PARKS MAII ALARM MONITORING FOR PARKS I > 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 21.3z a ALARM MONITORING FOR PARKS I Q- Q 001.000.64.576.80.42.00 21.3z ALARM MONITORING FOR FIRE ST, N rn 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 130.3E Total: 173.0E .. co 219719 4/28/2016 068697 PUBLIC SAFETY TESTING INC 2016-6664 1ST QUARTER 2016 POLICE TESTII a& 1st quarter 2016 Police testing fees N 001.000.22.521.10.41.00 721.0( Total: 721.0( Y 219720 4/28/2016 030780 QUIRING MONUMENTS INC 00000163275 SHUTTER/INSCRIPTION-MURPHY E SHUTTER/INSCRIPTION-MURPHY 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 105.0( 00000163514 MARKER/INSCRIPTION-LEE MARKER/INSCRIPTION-LEE E t 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 1,723.0( um Total: 1,828.0( Q 219721 4/28/2016 070955 R&R STAR TOWING 110973 INV#110973 - EDMONDS PD TOW 2006 VOLKSWAGON #ADE12: 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 166.0( 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 16.2 , 111114 INV#111114 - EDMONDS PD Page: 34 Packet Pg. 56 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 35 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219721 4/28/2016 070955 R&R STAR TOWING (Continued) TOW 2006 VOLKSWAGON #ADE12, _ 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 332.0( 6 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 a� 32.5z Total: 546.8, E 219722 4/28/2016 074156 RAZZ CONSTRUCTION INC E4MB.Pmt 1 E4MB.PMT 1 THRU 3/31/16 f° E4MB.Pmt 1 thru 3/31/16 c 016.000.66.594.19.65.00 107,695.8E Total: 107,695.8E p L Q 219723 4/28/2016 031600 RELIABLE FLOOR COVERINGS 124646 GREEN RESOURCE CENTER - ROF Q Green Resource Center - Roppe 016.000.66.518.30.31.00 856.4z N 9.5% Sales Tax 016.000.66.518.30.31.00 124655 GREEN RESOURCE CENTER - COL Green Resource Center - Counter Tol 00 N 016.000.66.518.30.48.00 7,178.8< 4 Total: 8,116.6: CD 219724 4/28/2016 073819 ROCK SOLID LEARNING LLC 20864 TERRARIUM 20864 EARTH DAY TERRARIUM INS E 20864 EARTH DAY TERRARIUM INS 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 33.0( Total: 33.0( m 219725 4/28/2016 064769 ROMAINE ELECTRIC 5-008569 UNIT 796 - BATTERY E t Unit 796 - Battery U 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 64.9� Q 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.3 1 Total: 71.3E 219726 4/28/2016 075601 RUSHWORKS EDMON040116 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS UPGRA City Council Chambers Upgrade HD � Page: 35 Packet Pg. 57 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 36 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219726 4/28/2016 075601 RUSHWORKS (Continued) 016.000.66.518.30.41.00 5,050.0( Total: 5,050.0( 219727 4/28/2016 074335 SAVAGE, LINDA 20784 ETIQUETTE 20784 ETIQUETTE INSTRUCTION 20784 ETIQUETTE INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 375.0( Total: 375.0( 219728 4/28/2016 072440 SCORDINO, JOE 1 E7FG.STUDENTS SAVING SALMON E7FG.Students Saving Salmon 001.000.39.554.90.49.00 117.3 1 Total: 117.3, 219729 4/28/2016 035250 SEATTLE LIGHTING FIXTURE CO S3413530.006 CITY HALL PLANNING COUNTER - I City Hall Planning Counter - Light 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 56.8E 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 5.51 219730 4/28/2016 067076 SEATTLE PUMP AND EQUIPMENT CO 16-1728 219731 4/28/2016 074472 SEP CONSULTING LLC 219732 4/28/2016 036955 SKY NURSERY EDMONDS 2016-1 T-0690031 Total : UNIT 106 & 47 - BRASS LEVER GAT Unit 106 & 47 - Brass Lever Gate Val) 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 Total EDMONDS 2016-1 EVIDENCE INVEI EVIDENCE INVENTORYAUDIT 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 COPY CHARGES RELATED TO AUC 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 Total CITY PARK PROJECT SOIL CITY PARK PROJECT SOIL Page: 36 Packet Pg. 58 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219732 4/28/2016 036955 SKY NURSERY 219733 4/28/2016 060889 SNAP -ON INDUSTRIAL 219735 4/28/2016 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account (Continued) 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 T-0690037 CITY PARK PROJECT SOIL CITY PARK PROJECT SOIL 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 9.8% Sales Tax 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 T-0696357 FLOWER PROGRAM: SEEDS, PERE FLOWER PROGRAM: SEEDS, PERE 001.000.64.576.81.31.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.81.31.00 T-0696387 FLOWER PROGRAM: PLANTING MI FLOWER PROGRAM: PLANTING MI 001.000.64.576.81.31.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.81.31.00 Total: ARV/ 28630648 PARKS - TOOL Parks - Tool 001.000.41.521.22.35.00 Freight 001.000.41.521.22.35.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.35.00 Total: 2002-0254-7 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 21930 95- PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 21930 95- 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 2002-0255-4 WWTP - FLOW METER 2400 HWY WWTP FLOW METER 2400 HWY 9� 423.000.76.535.80.47.62 2002-6027-1 YOST POOL YOST POOL 3.2.a Page: 37 Page: 37 Packet Pg. 59 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 38 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219735 4/28/2016 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 495.4( _ 2003-4823-3 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 84TH AVE W vi TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 84TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 41.1 t 2003-8645-6 CLUBHOUSE 6801 MEADOWDALE E CLUBHOUSE 6801 MEADOWDALE 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 51.2E 6 2003-9895-6 FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST E p FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 562.4' p 2004-6859-3 LIFT STATION #4 8311 TALBOT RD / a LIFT STATION #4 8311 TALBOT RD / Q' Q 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 232.4 1 2004-9683-4 LIFT STATION #10 17526 TALBOT R rn LIFT STATION #10 17526 TALBOT R 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 59.5, m 2005-9295-4 TRAFFIC LIGHT 101 9TH AVE S / ME TRAFFIC LIGHT 101 9TH AVE S / ME N 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 15.7< c 2006-1131-7 LIFT STATION #9 19300 80TH AVE V N LIFT STATION #9 19300 80TH AVE V cYi 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 158.3' E 2006-3860-9 OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON f° OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 219.9, y 2006-7801-9 TRAFFIC LIGHT 200 3RD AVE S / MI E TRAFFIC LIGHT 200 3RD AVE S / MI t 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 16.8E r 2007-1403-8 SEAVIEW PARK Q SEAVIEW PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 38.71 2007-2302-1 TRAFFIC LIGHT 961 PUGET DR / MI TRAFFIC LIGHT 961 PUGET DR / MI 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 25.5, 2007-3984-5 SEAVIEW RESERVOIR 18520 90TH Page: 38 Packet Pg. 60 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219735 4/28/2016 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 39 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) SEAVIEW RESERVOIR 18520 90TH 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 15.8E w 2008-6520-2 LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTRE LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTRE t 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 87.4 2011-9708-4 SEAVIEW PARK SEAVIEW PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 85.5E o 2012-3682-5 FISHING PIER RESTROOMS FISHING PIER RESTROOMS p L 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 334.E 1 a 2012-6598-0 LIFT STATION #12 16121 75TH PL Q' Q LIFT STATION #12 16121 75TH PL 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 N 162.1( M 2013-7496-4 LIFT STATION #11 6811 1/2 157TH P LIFT STATION #11 6811 1/2 157TH P 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 18.0< 2014-3123-6 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9110 OLY N PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9110 OLY 0 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 14.0E Y 2014-3124-4 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9301 PUC PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9301 PUC E 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 17.9E 2014-4175-5 TRAFFIC LIGHT 21531 HWY 99 / ME TRAFFIC LIGHT 21531 HWY 99 / ME m 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 366.0( E 2015-5174-4 SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / � U SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / � r 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 1.623.0E Q 2015-7289-8 TRAFFIC LIGHT 117 3RD AVE S / ME TRAFFIC LIGHT 117 3RD AVE S / ME 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 38.7. 2015-9448-8 LIFT STATION #15 7710 168TH PL S LIFT STATION #15 7710 168TH PL S 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 17.1( Page: 39 Packet Pg. 61 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219735 4/28/2016 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 40 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) 2016-1195-1 TRAFFIC LIGHT 20801 76TH AVE W _ TRAFFIC LIGHT 20801 76TH AVE W vi 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 28.0' 0 2016-5690-7 DECORATIVE LIGHTING 413 MAIN,' t DECORATIVE LIGHTING 413 MAIN,' U 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 91.5E •@ 2017-5147-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9932 220TH ST SW U TRAFFIC LIGHT 9932 220TH ST SW p 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 36.3' 2017-8264-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 901 WALNUT ST / � p TRAFFIC LIGHT 901 WALNUT ST / � a 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 15.7: Q 2017-9000-3 ALDERWOOD INTERIE 6130 168TH ALDERWOOD INTERIE 6130 168TH rn 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 r 17.6E 2019-0786-2 TRAFFIC LIGHT 7133 212TH ST SW m TRAFFIC LIGHT 7133 212TH ST SW 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 co 29.91 N 2019-2988-2 WWTP - FLOW METER 8421 244TF 0 WWTP FLOW METER 8421 244TH Y 423.000.76.535.80.47.62 16.8E u 2019-4248-9 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; E PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; f° 001.000.65.518.20.47.00 80.5� PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH : y 111.000.68.542.90.47.00 306.21 E PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH : U 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 306.2,1 r PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; Q 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 306.2E PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH 511.000.77.548.68.47.00 306.2E PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 422.000.72.531.90.47.00 306.2E 2020-8787-0 LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / MEl Page: 40 Packet Pg. 62 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 41 Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219735 4/28/2016 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / MEl 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 163.4, w 2022-8912-0 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23801 HWY 99 / ME TRAFFIC LIGHT 23801 HWY 99 / ME t 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 61.1E 2022-8945-0 TRAFFIC LIGHT 21931 HWY 99 / ME TRAFFIC LIGHT 21931 HWY 99 / ME 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 85.2 0 2022-9166-2 CIVIC CENTER & FIRE STATION #1 , CIVIC CENTER & FIRE STATION #1 1 p L 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 4,602.4' a 2023-8937-5 STREET LIGHT 7601 RIDGE WAY / I Q STREET LIGHT 7601 RIDGE WAY / I 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 8.0, N M 2024-2158-2 LOG CABIN & DECORATIVE LIGHTI LOG CABIN & DECORATIVE LIGHTI 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 75.4E 2024-3924-6 CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N / METER N CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N / METER 4 0 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 2,039.0E Y 2028-0763-2 TRAFFIC LIGHT 8429 196TH ST SW TRAFFIC LIGHT 8429 196TH ST SW E 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 18.2E 2036-5215-1 FIVE CORNERS RESERVOIR 85191 FIVE CORNERS RESERVOIR 85191 m 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 237.6: E 2044-2584-7 LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN / U LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN / r 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 71.9, Q 2202-1638-6 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHTS 8410 MF PEDEST CAUTION LIGHTS 8410 MF 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 69.8� 2205-4757-4 TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 236TH Sl TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 236TH Sl 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 71.9 Page: 41 Packet Pg. 63 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219735 4/28/2016 037375 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 219736 4/28/2016 037376 SNO CO PUD NO 1 219737 4/28/2016 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE 219738 4/28/2016 038100 SNO-KING STAMP 219739 4/28/2016 069844 SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS PLLC Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) 1900010115 2016-3056 2016-3056 PO # Description/Account Total ACCT #30000075 Advanced Contact fee on jointly owne 001.000.31.518.87.41.00 Total CREDIT #2016-3056 SNO CO JAIL-F 73 HOUSING $89.38-VARIOUS 1/20' 001.000.39.523.60.51.00 11 MED/SPEC @52.01/VARIOUS 1/2 001.000.39.523.60.51.00 5 MENTAL HEALTH @124.72/VAR 1/ 001.000.39.523.60.51.00 INV#2016-3056 - EDMONDS PD - FE 516.33 HOUSING @ $89.38 - 2/16 001.000.39.523.60.51.00 48.75 BOOKINGS @ $116.14 - 2/16 001.000.39.523.60.51.00 99 MED/SPEC @ $52.01- 2/16 001.000.39.523.60.51.00 42 MENTAL HEALTH @ $124.72-2/1E 001.000.39.523.60.51.00 11.25 VIDEO COURT @ $115.50 - 2/' 001.000.39.523.60.51.00 Total 59070 SEWER - STAMPS Sewer - Stamps 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 Total 1160415-1 WATER - TELEMETRY SUPPORT Water - Telemetry Support 3.2.a Page: 42 Page: 42 Packet Pg. 64 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219739 4/28/2016 069844 SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS PLLC 219740 4/28/2016 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 219741 4/28/2016 038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS 219742 4/28/2016 068439 SPECIALTY DOOR SERVICE 219743 4/28/2016 040250 STEUBER DISTRIBUTING Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account (Continued) 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 1160415-2 WATER - 5 CORNERS TELEMETRY Water - 5 Corners Telemetry Software 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 Total: 104757 WWTP - 200 2ND AVE SOUTH / ASI W WTP 200 2ND AVE S / ASH 423.000.76.535.80.47.65 Total: 13136/4 SEWER - WORK JEANS (5) R WICH Sewer - Work Jeans (5) R Wichers 423.000.75.535.80.24.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.24.00 15849/4 SEWER - WORK JEANS (5) D CRAV Sewer - Work Jeans (5) D Crawford 423.000.75.535.80.24.00 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.24.00 Total: 43305 FS 17 - DOOR REPAIRS FS 17 - Door Repairs 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 Total: 2818672 FLOWER BASKETS PROGRAM: PLi FLOWER BASKETS PROGRAM: PLi 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 9.8% Sales Tax 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 3.2.a Page: 43 Page: 43 Packet Pg. 65 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 44 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219743 4/28/2016 040250 040250 STEUBER DISTRIBUTING (Continued) Total: 854.5' 219744 4/28/2016 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY S101593978.001 CITY HALL CAR CHARGING STATIC City Hall Car Charging Station Supplii 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 7.91 9.8% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 0.7i Total: 8.7, 219745 4/28/2016 074797 SUPER CHARGE MARKETING LLC 2321 SOCIAL MEDIA SERVICES APRIL 2C Social media services April 2016 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 300.0( Total: 300.0( 219746 4/28/2016 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 18112290 FLEET SHOP SUPPLIES Fleet Shop Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 5.3f 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 0.5: Total: 5.9' 219747 4/28/2016 071666 TETRATECH INC 35009-513 ESDB.SERVICES THRU FEBRUARY ESDB.Services thru February 2016 001.000.67.518.21.41.00 22,297.0E 35009-613 ESDB.SERVICES THRU MARCH 201 ESDB.Services thru March 2016 001.000.67.518.21.41.00 65,784.9' Total: 88,081.9( 219748 4/28/2016 075610 TRUEIT, TRUDI 4/21 BEST BOOK 4/21/16 BEST BOOK PRESENTATIOI 4/21/16 BEST BOOK PRESENTATIOI 117.100.64.573.20.41.00 100.0( Total: 100.0( 219749 4/28/2016 043935 UPS 00002T4T13156 OUTBOUND DELIVERY-(BLD2016-( OUTBOUND DELIVERY BLD201604( 001.000.62.524.20.41.00 46.1( Page: 44 Packet Pg. 66 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219749 4/28/2016 043935 043935 UPS 219750 4/28/2016 062693 US BANK 219751 4/28/2016 064423 USA BLUE BOOK 219752 4/28/2016 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 45 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) Total : 46.1( 0017-8304 FACILITY ATTENDANT AD, #16-11 vi Facility Attendant ad, #16-11 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 90.0( Water/Sewer Maintenance Laborer a, U 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 45.0( . HR Assistant ad, #16-18 f° 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 90.0( o Senior Office Specialist ad, #16-19 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 90.0( p Accounting Manager, #16-01 ad a 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 109.2E Q 2985 WWTP - MARCH 2O16 CC WWTP - TRAINING TRAVEL/LODGI( 04 423.000.76.535.80.49.71 297.1 £ 3249 POSTAGE FOR PASSPORTS POSTAGE FOR PASSPORTS 001.000.23.512.50.42.00 64.5( N Total : 785.9: c 921974 WATER - SUPPLIES N Y Water - Supplies E 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 520.41 'M Freight 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 123.9z c 9.8% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 63.1E Total : 707.5' r Q 9763700446 C/A 671247844-00001 Cell Service -Bldg 001.000.62.524.20.42.00 18.4 , Cell Service-Eng 001.000.67.518.21.42.00 92.9E Cell Service Fac-Maint Page: 45 Packet Pg. 67 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 219752 4/28/2016 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account (Continued) 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 Cell Service -Parks Discovery Prograr 001.000.64.571.23.42.00 Cell Service Parks Maint 001.000.64.576.80.42.00 Cell Service-PD 001.000.41.521.22.42.00 Cell Service-PD 104 Fund 104.100.41.521.21.42.00 Cell Service-PW Street 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 Cell Service-PW Street/Storm 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 Cell Service-PW Street/Storm 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 Cell Service-PW Water 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 Cell Service-PW Water 421.000.74.534.80.35.00 Cell Service-PW Sewer 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 Cell Service-WWTP 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 Total: 219753 4/28/2016 068259 WA ST CRIMINAL JUSTICE 201126144 INV 201126144 EDMONDS PD - BLU BLUE COURAGE WORKSHOP - SPI 001.000.41.521.40.49.00 BLUE COURAGE WORKSHOP - TR` 001.000.41.521.40.49.00 BLUE COURAGE WORKSHOP - ME 001.000.41.521.40.49.00 Total 219754 4/28/2016 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 7018 INV#7018 - EDMONDS PD 3.2.a Page: 46 Amoun 94.7, 0 18.41 a� t 58.5. 290.9E 0 146.1 E 0 L 18.8E Q Q 28.Z N rn r 28.2. m 119.5E ao N 218.9� o 77.6' E I 37.1z 0 1,248.9, m E t U 65.0( r Q 65.0( 65.0( 195.0( Page: 46 Packet Pg. 68 vchlist 04/28/2016 8:21:19AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 3.2.a Page: 47 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 219754 4/28/2016 073552 WELCO SALES LLC (Continued) 500 SAFEKEEPING FORMS _ 001.000.41.521.11.31.00 141.5( 6 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.11.31.00 a� 13.8 , 7019 INV#7019 - EDMONDS PD E 1,000 FIR CARDS 001.000.41.521.11.31.00 60.0( 6 9.8% Sales Tax o 001.000.41.521.11.31.00 5.8£ 5 Total: 221.2! o L Q 219755 4/28/2016 072634 WHISTLE WORKWEAR TR-295990 PM: HARD HAT, BIB, VEST, JACKET Q- Q PM: HARD HAT, BIB, VEST, JACKET 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 312.2z rn 9.2% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 28.7: Total: 340.91 co N 219756 4/28/2016 065869 WSNLA 2016 CPH EDHOUSE 2016 CERTIFIED PROF HORTICULT 2016 CERTIFIED PROF HORTICULT c N 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 60.0( Total: 60.0( E M 122 Vouchers for bank code : usbank Bank total : 509,556.7E u 122 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : c 509,556.7E E t U a r r Q Page: 47 Packet Pg. 69 3.2.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number STM 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements c484 E5FE STR 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) c424 E3DC SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA STR 2014 Chip Seals c451 E4CB STM 2014 Drainage Improvements c433 E4FA STM 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD ui STR 2014 Overlay Program c438 E4CA t WTR 2014 Waterline Overlays c452 E4CC U E STM 2014 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC STM 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects c466 E5FA o STR 2015 Overlay Program c463 E5CA 0 SWR 2015 Sewerline Overlays i007 E5CC 0. a SWR 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project c441 E4GA Q STR 2015 Traffic Calming c471 E5AB rn WTR 2015 Waterline Overlays c475 E5CB Z. W WTR 2015 Waterline Replacement Program c440 E4J13 V- Ob STR 2016 Overlay Program i008 E6CA N v 0 SWR 2016 Sewerline Overlays i010 E6CC L WTR 2016 Water Comp Plan Update c460 E4JC a� WTR 2016 Waterline Overlays i009 E6CB Z_ SWR 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 E5GA ° a WTR 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Projects c468 E5JA STR 220th Street Overlay Project c462 E4CD D, STM 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements c486 E6FB a� 0 WTR 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) c418 E3JB a a� L STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC LL STR 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) c425 E3DD r E STR 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) c423 E3DB c� STR 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) c485 E6DA Q STM 3rd Ave Rain Gardens i012 E6FC STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1 CA STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB FAC A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers c476 E5LA STR ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S c426 E3DE STR Bikelink Project c474 E5DA PRK City Spray Park c417 E4MA SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) c482 E5J13 Revised 4/28/2016 Packet Pg. 70 3.2.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 ElFM PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA STM Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) c472 E5FC STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E4FE FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC ui General Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis c478 E5DB t FAC ESCO III Project c419 E3LB U E WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating c473 E5KA STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) c342 E1AA o PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA 0 0 STR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) c405 E2AD Q. a SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study s011 E5GB Q STM LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin c434 E4FB rn SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC Z. to STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA T_ Ob STM Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive i011 E6FA N v 0 STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 E3FE L STM NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) m013 E7FG a� STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1 FN Z_ STM Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study c408 E3FC ° a FAC Public Safety Controls System Upgrades c444 E4LA STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 E5FD D, WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA 0 STR SR104 Corridor Transportation Study c427 E3AB a a� L STR SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing c454 E4DB u_ STR SR99 Safety Improvements (224th to 216th) s014 E6AA r E UTILITIES Standard Details Updates solo E5NA c� STM Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th c429 E3FG Q STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1 DA STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB STM SW Edmonds-1 05th/l 06th Ave W Storm Improvements c430 E3FH STR Trackside Warning System c470 E5AA STR Train Trench - Concept c453 E4DA STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA STM Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects c467 E5FB UTILITIES Utility Rate Update s013 E6JA STM Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines c459 E4FF Revised 4/28/2016 Packet Pg. 71 3.2.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Protect Funding Protect Title Number Number WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 E5HA Revised 4/28/2016 Packet Pg. 72 3.2.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Project Title E1AA * c34" Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) STIR ElCA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c354 Sunset Walkway Improvement STM E1 FM c374 Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c376 Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement STIR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project STIR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) c378 North Talbot Road Drainage Improvement STM E2FB c379 SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study STIR E3AB c427 SR104 Corridor Transportation Study c423 W38th 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 STM E3FC c408 Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study STM E3FE c410 Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive STM E3FG c429 Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th STM E3FH c430 SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project WTR E3J13 c418 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) FAC STIR E4CA c438 2014 Overlay Program 2014 Chip Seals 91a" WTR E4CC c452 2014 Waterline Overlays 220th Street Overlay Project STIR E4DA c453 Train Trench - Concept c454 SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing STM E4FA c433 2014 Drainage Improvements LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basild STM E4FC c435 2014 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c436 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects STM E4FE c455 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station E4FF c459 Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines SWR E4GA c441 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project E4GB c456 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I SWR E4GC c461 Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study Revised 4/28/2016 Packet Pg. 73 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) 3.2.b Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Project Title - E4HA rddF Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring WTR E4JB c440 2015 Waterline Replacement Program 2016 Water Comp Plan Updat FAC E4LA c444 Public Safety Controls System Upgrades City Spray Park EFW FAC E4MB c443 Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab Trackside Warning System STIR E5AB c471 2015 Traffic Calming 2015 Overlay Progra WTR E5CB c475 2015 Waterline Overlays 2015 Sewerline Overlays STIR E5DA 0474 Bikelink Project Waterfront Access Analysis STM E5FA c466 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects STM E5FB c467 Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects STM E5FC c472 Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) STM E5FD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility STM E5FE c484 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements SWR E5GA c469 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Prod SWR E5GB s011 Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study �P Outfall Pipe Modificatio WTR E5JA c468 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Proiects Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) WTR E51KA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating EV Upgrades - Council Cham UTILITIES E5NA solo Standard Details Updates 2016 Overlay Program i WTR E6CB i009 2016 Waterline Overlays 2016 Sewerline Overlays STIR E6DA c485 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to E6FA Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive STM E6FB c486 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements UTILITIES E6JA s013 STIR E7AC i005 m013 PM E7MA c276 8MA c282 3rd Ave Rain Gardens Utility Rate Update SR99 Safety Improvements (224th to 216th) 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) Dayton Street Plaza Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor Revised 4/28/2016 Packet Pg. 74 3.2.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 STR E1AA c342 Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) STR E1 DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements STR E1 CA 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 STR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update STR E2AB c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project SWR E3GA c398 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project STR 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 E3JB c418 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) FAC E3LB c419 ESCO III Project STR E3DB c423 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) STR E3DC c424 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) STR E3DD c425 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) STR E3DE c426 ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S STR E3AB c427 SR104 Corridor Transportation Study STM E3FG c429 Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th STM E3FH c430 SW Edmonds-1 05th/1 06th Ave W Storm Improvements STM E41FA c433 2014 Drainage Improvements STM E4FB c434 LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin STM E4FC c435 2014 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration STM E4FD c436 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects STR E4CA c438 2014 Overlay Program WTR E4,113 c440 2015 Waterline Replacement Program SWR E4GA c441 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project FAC E4MB c443 Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab FAC E41-A c444 Public Safety Controls System Upgrades WWTP E4HA c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring STR E4CB c451 2014 Chip Seals WTR E4CC c452 2014 Waterline Overlays ui U m t v E 2 U 0 0 L Q a a N 6� r Revised 4/28/2016 Packet Pg. 75 3.2.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Project Title STIR E4DA c453 Train Trench - Concept STIR E4DB c454 SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing STM E41FE 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 ui U am STIR E4CD c462 220th Street Overlay Project STIR E5CA c463 2015 Overlay Program E 2 STM E5FA c466 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects STM E5FB c467 Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects WTR E5JA c468 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Projects o L SWR E5GA c469 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects C STIR E5AA c470 Trackside Warning System N STIR E5AB c471 2015 Traffic Calming CD r STM E5FC c472 Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) WTR E5KA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating ao N STIR E5DA c474 Bikelink Project V 0 WTR E5CB c475 2015 Waterline Overlays L a� FAC E5LA c476 AN Upgrades - Council Chambers E General E5DB c478 Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis 3 Z STM E5FD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility d WWTP E5HA c481 WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications WTR E5JB c482 Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) 2, STM E51FE c484 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements STIR E6DA c485 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) a a� STM E6FB c486 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements Li STIR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements SWR E5CC i007 2015 Sewerline Overlays E t STIR E6CA i008 2016 Overlay Program Q WTR E6CB i009 2016 Waterline Overlays SWR E6CC i010 2016 Sewerline Overlays STM E61FA iol 1 Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive STM E6FC i012 3rd Ave Rain Gardens STM E7FG m013 NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) UTILITIES E5NA solo Standard Details Updates SWR E5GB sol l Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study UTILITIES E6JA s013 Utility Rate Update STIR E6AA s014 SR99 Safety Improvements (224th to 216th) Revised 4/28/2016 Packet Pg. 76 3.2.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Project Title Number Number FAC AN 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 STM 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements c484 E5FE STM 2014 Drainage Improvements c433 E41FA STM 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD STM 2014 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC STM 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects c466 E51FA STM 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements c486 E6FB STM 3rd Ave Rain Gardens i012 E6FC STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 ElFM STM Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) c472 E5FC STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E41FE STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC STM LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin c434 E4FB STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E21FA STM Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive i011 E61FA STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 E31FE STM NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) m013 E7FG 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 Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th c429 E3FG 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 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 Overlay Program i008 E6CA ui U m t v E 2 U 0 0 L Q a a N 6� r Revised 4/28/2016 Packet Pg. 77 3.2.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Project Title Number Number STR 220th Street Overlay Project c462 E4CD STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i0o5 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 STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 ElCA STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB STR ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S c426 E3DE STR Bikelink Project c474 E5DA STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) c342 E1AA STR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) c405 E2AD STR SR104 Corridor Transportation Study c427 E3AB STR SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing c454 E4DB STR SR99 Safety Improvements (224th to 216th) s014 E6AA 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 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA SWR 2015 Sewerline Overlays i007 E5CC SWR 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project c441 E4GA SWR 2016 Sewerline Overlays i010 E6CC SWR 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 E5GA SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study sol l 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 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Projects c468 E5JA WTR 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) c418 E3JB WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) c482 E5J13 WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating c473 E5KA WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 E5HA ui U m t v E 2 U 0 0 L Q a a N 6� r Revised 4/28/2016 Packet Pg. 78 3.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/3/2016 Resolution in Support of Sustainable Cities Partnership Staff Lead: Rob Chave Department: Planning Division Preparer: Rob Chave Background/History A presentation on the Partnership was presented to the Council on April 12, 2016, with a follow-up discussion on April 26, 2016. Council moved the proposed resolution to the May 3, 2016, Consent agenda for action. Staff Recommendation Council to approve the proposed resolution in support of the Partnership (Exhibit 1). Narrative Exhibit 1 contains a draft Resolution in support of the Partnership. This has been placed on the Consent agenda for approval in response to the Council discussion on April 26th. The resolution will authorize staff to finalize and submit the application to the program, and will also commit the Council to supply funding for the program in the FY2017 budget (no funds need to be expended this year). As discussed with Council during the April 12 and April 26 meetings, the Sustainable Cities Partnership (SCP) is a yearlong partnership between Western Washington University's Office of Sustainability, AWC, and one partner city chosen through a competitive application process. The program engages Western's students and faculty on sustainability and livability projects chosen in collaboration with the partner city. The SCP faculty and students work through a variety of studio and service learning courses, thus providing students with experience tackling the city's real -world projects. Exhibit 2 contains the most recent list of projects being considered for partnering; this is the same list presented on April 26th. However, as a result of the Council's April 26th discussion, we are also including the City's Cemetery Mapping Project in the proposed project list: Project Description: Edmonds Memorial Cemetery was deeded to the City in 1982. The City has been operating the cemetery with no markings, rows, aisles, or surveyed mapping. It is essential that the City survey/map/and mark the cemetery so as to effectively manage the plots. As before, information on the program is attached in Exhibits 3 and 4 If selected for the program, a contract would be entered into between the City and WWU. Because a final set of projects would not be agreed to until that point in time, there will be an opportunity for staff to update the Council on selected projects and final details before the contract is signed. Packet Pg. 79 3.3 Attachments: Exhibit 1: Draft resolution supporting Sustainable Cities Partnership Exhibit 2: Current listing of Sustainable Cities Partnership projects for consideration Exhibit 3: Sustainable Cities Partnership FAQ Exhibit 4: SCP program RFP Packet Pg. 80 3.3.a RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DIRECTING STAFF TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR THE SUSTAINABLE CITIES PARTNERSHIP. WHEREAS, the Sustainable Cities Partnership (SCP) is a yearlong partnership between Western Washington University's Office of Sustainability, AWC, and one partner city chosen through a competitive application process; and WHEREAS, the program engages Western's students and faculty on sustainability and livability projects chosen in collaboration with the partner city; and WHEREAS, the SCP faculty and students work through a variety of studio and service learning courses, thus providing students with experience tackling the city's real -world projects; and WHEREAS, SCP's primary value derives from collaborations resulting in on -the -ground impact and forward movement for a community ready to transition to a more sustainable and livable future; and WHEREAS, applications for the SCP are due at the end of April; and WHEREAS, if selected, Edmonds would need to enter into a contract for services (within the Mayor's contracting authority) and would need to allocate funds through a 2016 budget amendment, which could be carried forward for an actual expenditure in 2017; and WHEREAS, the allocation would likely be in the range of $65,000-$85,000, depending on how many projects were included in the contract; now therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Staff should prepare and submit an application for participation in the Sustainable Cities Partnersihp. RESOLVED this day of April, 2016. CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR, DAVE EARLING ATTEST: Packet Pg. 81 3.3.a CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. 4851-5533-3898, v. 1 Packet Pg. 82 3.3.b Sustainable Cities Partnership Range of possible projects in Edmonds The following are projects with expressed interest from Western Washington University, organized by faculty/course program area. Also included are some references to the City's Comprehensive Plan (CP) or Strategic Action Plan (SAP) as they relate to each project. Disaster reduction planning: • Sea level rise mitigation/action plan Study the potential impacts of sea level rise in Edmonds. Could include scenarios and risk analysis, impacts on private property & development, public works & transportation facilities, parks, public safety, other infrastructure. Could provide valuable input to other planning activities. Related City Departments: Development Services; Parks & Rec; Public Works; Police & Fire; Finance/IS Waterfront master plan (CP Sustainability Implementation Action by 2017; CP Sustainability Climate Change Goal C; CP Sustainability Community Health Goal F) Web applications: • Art/History/Environment mobile application Creating an application to guide public in finding: public art installations, community history sites, and interpretive information for environmentally sensitive sites and certain City facilities (such as the wastewater treatment facility) (SAP #1b.7; 1d.1; 1e.1; 1e.5) Downtown business and way -finding application (Expandable to other parts of the city?) Mobile ap (possibly with companion website) identifying & promoting Edmonds businesses. Could identify, search for, help locate different businesses in the district. Should also have a 'browse' or 'discover' component. This could take the place of or be a supplement to signage or other ways of helping people find and explore downtown businesses. Should be able to be managed by the BID. Could also include arts & cultural locations. (SAP #1a.4; 1b.7) Tourism website or mobile application for all visitor information (restaurants, activities, etc.) (SAP references are as above) Environmental education: • Green Resource Room displays Ideas for and perhaps preparation of displays that could be used at the City Hall permitting center to demonstrate energy conservation, use of solar panels, use of other green building techniques, "low impact" stormwater management techniques, and showcasing of any other eco-friendly development ideas (whether through 3-D displays, videos, or other materials) (SAP #2a.9; 2a.10) 1 I Page Packet Pg. 83 3.3.b • New brochure for wastewater treatment process about what's been done to improve plant & what might be next for energy efficiency (CP Sustainability Community Health Goal E) PR campaign: • 4th Avenue Arts/Culture Corridor Plan City wants to promote an arts/culture corridor, just off the main downtown streets, linking to the performing arts center (SAP #1e.3; 1e.5) Energy studies: • Greenhouse Gas Inventory/Monitoring. Develop an updatable greenhouse gas inventory template for city operations. We've done one in the past, but used ICLEI model & input system which was very difficult to use. Would involve researching & developing a simple computer -based model, either internet-based or Excel or whatever. Inputs would be identified & factored. (SAP #5b.2; CP Sustainability Implementation Goal A) Sustainability planning studio: • Zero waste program Focus on materials management, esp. construction materials waste • Food waste policies, programs • Identify opportunities for "Smart City" approaches (e.g. sensors in garbage cans, auto locks for off -site locations) (For each of the above reference SAP #2a.1; CP Sustainability Community Health Goal E; CP Solid Waste Goal D for a Zero Waste Strategy; Council Resolution #1357 on "Zero Waste and Beyond Waste") Marketing analytics: • Green Business Program. City has established a 'pledge' and has initial businesses who have signed on, but limited staff time means little 'meat' to the program. The program needs to be fleshed out and marketed. What are the benefits to businesses? Information sharing? "Buy Local" program? Branding? What else? Related City Departments: Economic Development; Development Services. (SAP #1f.1) • Sustainability Metrics Management System. The 2015 Comprehensive Plan calls for and started to indicate various 'metrics' for measuring achievement city goals. These could be expanded and elaborated on, but need to be done thoughtfully and in a way that is easy to measure and update/track. Could be keyed to City sustainability. 2 1 P a g e Packet Pg. 84 3.3.b (SAP #5b.2; CP Sustainability Climate Change Goals A and B; CP Sustainability Implementation Goal A) The following projects might also be possible, but have less expressed interest at this point in time: [aI_l • Phase 1 environmental assessment for restoration of Stella's Landing area Project relates to private property adjacent to the Marsh, east of SR 104, which may soon be donated to the City. Need to identify restoration options and complete a Phase 1 environmental assessment. Public participation & ongoing community stewardship would be key aspects. Environmental restoration: • Marsh environmental enhancement The estuarine marsh ("Edmonds Marsh"), which is greatly loved but impacted by past & present urban uses, including adjacent development and stormwater runoff, could benefit from creation of "buffer" areas that feature new low impact stormwater management (raingardens or other techniques) while still allowing adjacent development. What conceptual designs should be considered? How would we know the approach would work? This project needs to be coordinated with environmental and business interests. Environmental education: • Public education training video about City's wastewater treatment plant to show how the plant works Computer science: • Paperless court records system: The court would like to go digital, which some courts are calling paperless. Each court case would have a digital file that contains all documents (Charges, pleadings, filings and orders). These files can be accessed by a clickable link allowing attorneys, judges, law enforcement, court staff and the public to access court records online from their own personal devices. The user will be able to file documents online, see upcoming court dates, fines, sentencing conditions and public records request. The system will need to interact with the Washington State judicial information system (JIS). In addition, the court will need to develop an efficient and cost effective way to scan in the current estimated 10,000 open criminal and infraction files. 3 1 P a g e Packet Pg. 85 3.3.c WESTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY What is SCP? Sustainable Cities Partnership Frequently Asked Questions The Sustainable Cities Partnership (SCP) is a one-year partnership between Western Washington University, the Association of Washington Cities, and a city in Washington State. The city provides a list of challenging sustainability projects/issues, which are tackled by creative, passionate students and faculty across multiple disciplines. While SCP is a new program at Western, it is based upon a successful model used for years at the University of Oregon. What happens during the year -long partnership? We expect that SCP will address 9-12 projects through 9-15 courses with 250+ students across several academic departments dedicating thousands of hours of student work. This work will focus on projects related to Urban Planning, Economics, Energy, Environmental Sciences, Environmental Studies, Design, Communications, Journalism, Management, Entrepreneurship, Computer Science, Marketing, Operations Management, Recreation, and Sociology, among others. Who can submit a proposal? SCP will be focused on cities within —2 hours driving time of Bellingham. Generally, one city is the lead applicant, enlisting co -applicants depending upon the nature of specific projects and upon the finances of the applicants. We highly encourage such partnerships as they help ensure that ideas generated from the university -community engagement get put into action. What types of projects can SCP address? Cities are encouraged to propose a wide range of projects and think of "sustainability" very broadly. Past projects at similar programs have included designs for open spaces, redevelopment planning and visioning, waste and stormwater management schemes, transportation connectivity analyses, civic engagement techniques, strategic communications strategies, bicycle transportation analysis and design, public art planning, transit -oriented development, industrial byproduct re -use, and master plan designs, among others. Projects can emanate from a wide variety of city departments, including planning and development, public works, economic development, parks and recreation, transportation, and public safety, among others. Examples of projects completed by Oregon's SCYP program can be seen at https://sci.uoregon.edu/sustainable-city-year-project-portfolio What are the community/agency benefits of SCP? New Ideas: Dozens of implementable ideas are generated over the course of the year by students who draw on a combination of their training, community expertise, and examples of excellence from around the globe. At the conclusion of each project, students can publicly present their recommendations to the city and community, and SCP compiles their ideas into a professional report that can be a resource for community decision making. Packet Pg. 86 3.3.c Expanded Conversations & Public Outreach: Students are able to put ideas into the public domain in politically neutral ways that help advance community conversations and spur the imagination of staff and the broader community. Because 250+ students are intimately involved in the community over an academic year, many private, neighborhood, and nonprofit stakeholders become engaged in projects alongside city and agency staff. Students are able to help `till the soil' and catalyze future sustainability- oriented projects, policies, and plans. How much does SCP cost? The cost of SCP will vary based on the number of city projects and the number of courses working on each project. At other similar programs, the average cost of a single academic -quarter course targeted at a single project has been about $7,000. With that as a guideline, expect to incur a total cost of $65,000 to $85,000 to support a yearlong program that includes 9-12 courses, 250+ students, and 16,000+ hours of effort. In programs elsewhere, cities have funded SCP through their general fund, urban renewal fund, utility funds, and state and federal grants, as well as with partnerships involving school districts, utility districts, and private businesses. How much staff time does SCP involve? The success of the SCP partnership relies in part on the engagement of the partner city. The city will need to provide a lead coordinator (typically 0.25 FTE for 15 months), as well as a city contact for each course, who typically would spend one day each two weeks (i.e., 0.1FTE) for the duration of the quarter -long course. SCP employs a dedicated project manager to coordinate among all the faculty and students and to act as a main point of contact for the city. What do people say about similar programs in other cities? "That project would not have happened without the students,' says Linda Norris, Salem's city manager.... `I was concerned about how we were going to achieve a number of goals we had set with the limited resources we had.' The students propelled them forward more than three years, she says, helping design new energy -efficient street lights, bicycle lanes, park signage and new uses for the wastewater treatment plant that saved the city $400,000. — Financial Times 09.12.2012 " `Students can stretch, be creative and generate ideas we might not think of to get the discussion going,' said Brian Martin, an associate planner for the City of Gresham. We want to take advantage of that brainpower.' " — Oregon Daily Emerald, 11.05.2009 SCYP is "perhaps the most comprehensive effort by a U.S. university to infuse sustainability into its curricula and community outreach." — New York Times 08.23.2010 How do we get started with our application? Let us know that you are interested! Contact the Sustainable Cities Partnership at 360-650-3824 or SCP@wwu.edu and we'll send application materials. Visit the website at www.wwu.edu/scp 2. Complete an application for the 2016-2017 SCP cycle. We'll work with you as you develop it. SCP staff can help describe the program to proposal teams, city decision makers, and co -applicants. We are available to help brainstorm interdisciplinary project ideas and answer questions about the program. SCP is about developing strong partnerships between universities and communities and the more we work together during the application process, the better the projects will be 3. Submit the completed application via email to SCP(a,wwu.edu by April 29, 2016. SCP will review applications and select the `16-` 17 partner by May 15, 2016. Packet Pg. 87 3.3.d Sustainable Cities AWC Partnership WESTERNIALAII!1i,� WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Application Instructions for 2016-17 Academic Year Summary The Sustainable Cities Partnership (SCP) at Western Washington University (Western) is now accepting applications from cities to be the partner for the academic year beginning September 2016, the inaugural year for SCP. The selected partner will benefit from thousands of hours of effort by Western students and faculty members, from a variety of disciplines, working to advance the city's sustainability projects. Additional benefits will be derived from the involvement of the Association of Washington Cities (AWC), Western's partner in the launch of the SCP program. While new at Western, our SCP program is based upon proven models at the University of Oregon, University of Michigan, and San Diego State, and is built on the academic strengths of Western, as well as the relationship with and involvement of AWC. The partner city must support the effort through staff time and the payment of a fee. The selection process is competitive, and the deadline for applications is April 29, 2016. Overview of Program SCP is a yearlong partnership between Western's Office of Sustainability, AWC, and one partner city in Washington. The program engages Western's students and faculty on sustainability and livability projects chosen in collaboration with the partner. The SCP faculty and students work through a variety of studio and service learning courses, thus providing students with experience tackling the city's real -world projects. Many courses/projects will involve fieldwork, so a partner city will typically be within a two-hour drive of Western. Students bring energy, enthusiasm, and innovative approaches to difficult, persistent problems. SCP's primary value derives from collaborations resulting in on -the -ground impact and forward movement for a community ready to transition to a more sustainable and livable future. AWC will be an active partner in the launch of SCP, helping to solicit partner cities and to communicate the value of this effort to other elected and appointed municipal officials throughout the state. AWC will also help with the ongoing communication needs of the partner city and can help draw upon resources and skills of other entities in the region. Potential SCP Projects The concept of sustainability applies not only to municipalities of all sizes, but also to a broad spectrum of disciplines. Urban planning is a discipline with a clear relationship to sustainability, and Western has years of experience collaborating with the City of Bellingham on urban projects. Our Urban Transitions Studio course has developed concepts for Bellingham since 2010 in the areas of planning and transportation. But many other disciplines taught at Western also relate to sustainability, as seen in the list below • Urban Planning Studios (4). Land use planning for neighborhood/district. Redevelopment planning. Transit -oriented planning. Open space planning. Transportation modal connectivity. Incorporation of principles of sustainability into land use plans. Incorporation of methods of disaster reduction into long range plans. • Spatial Analysis. Development of GIS datasets either from existing datasets or from GPS- based field data. Analysis of datasets (land cover, land use, critical areas buffers, etc.) Facility inventory (e.g., stormwater system) and mapping. • Environmental Policy. Investigation of issues related to environmental justice (e.g., noise or air pollution impacts correlated to social and economic class), food justice. Packet Pg. 88 3.3.d • CommunicationslJournalism. Development of materials for a public relations campaign (including survey research that underpins a campaign). Development of a video/film promoting a topic/program. • Computer science. Development of both user- and server -side portions of web -based database application that handles a specific need (e.g., compilation of public comments related to a proposal). Development of a mobile app (e.g., routes and times for a transit system). • Marketing. Use of analytics for program analysis or development (e.g., Is there a market for a swimming pool? Where should a new park be built?). Can include focus groups/surveys/ethnographic studies, in addition to analysis of existing data. • Sociology /Anthropology. Exploration of cultural issues via surveys, interviews, other methods. What are a community's attitudes regarding sustainability? Why does a given ethnic group not take advantage of a particular program? What are the needs of a subset of the city's population? • Community Health/Recreation. Analyze health of a population; gain an understanding of health dynamics. Promote health equity through advocacy. Analyze community assets/opportunities/barriers to improve recreation service provision to marginalized communities. • Environmental Science. Ecosystem restoration planning. Environmental impact assessment. • Design. Wayfinding signage. Interpretive signage. • Energy. Analysis of carbon footprint of an operation center or a geographic region. Analysis of building retrofit opportunities. Lifecycle net energy analysis. We've provided examples of projects possible within each discipline, but applicants should generalize from those examples, thinking first of the issues/problems facing the city, and then imagining how a given discipline/course could be brought to bear. Also, multiple disciplines/ courses can focus upon a single issue—e.g., a spatial analysis course can interact with a land use planning course; a sociology course that conducts a community survey can interact with a journalism course that designs a public relations campaign. In an appendix, please find a list of many projects completed by the University of Oregon's program of a type that could be undertaken by Western's SCP. The list shows the diverse ways in which a university can assist a city in the achievement of its goals, and it might help you develop project concepts that could be included in your application. Proposing Projects Partners are strongly encouraged to discuss their proposed projects with SCP during preparation of the application —this interaction helps produce a project list that best matches Western's capacity with the partner's goals. Successful development of a project list is a dialogue that includes: (1) the partner proposes a list of projects; (2) SCP and the partner discuss modifications to the proposed projects to match the projects' scope and scale with availability and interest of Western courses and faculty; and (3) SCP suggests additional projects, based on the university's capacity, that could meet the partner's sustainability and livability goals. We suspect that you are unfamiliar with the wide range of university faculty expertise available, so we encourage you to think creatively when developing project ideas. During development of your application, SCP staff can be reached by email at SCP(a,wwu.edu or at 360-650-3824 (Office Hours: 8:00—11:30, Mon — Fri) Packet Pg. 89 An SCP partner should have the staff and funding capacity to support at least nine selected projects, but an application should include a list of 15 to 20 proposed projects, since not all projects will be suitable for matching with university courses. An individual project's timeline must not exceed nine months and should ideally be compatible with Western's three 11-week academic terms: fall (September- December), winter (January -March), and spring (April -June). NOTE: Partners may collaborate with neighboring entities (e.g. cities, counties, special purpose districts, NGOs, business or professional organizations, private funders, or research or educational institutions) to formulate projects and share costs. Upon selection of the partner, SCP and the city will develop a scope of work for each project, detailing the problem statement, potential directions for student exploration, expected outcomes, deliverables, activities, and the corresponding financial obligation. Benefits of SCP to the City Partner: SCP provides numerous benefits for the partner. The partner can expect: • Concept plans and designs that can energize staff and community members around projects tied to partner goals. Students can explore and innovate in directions that are sometimes unavailable to partner staff or consultants due to constrained project budgets or political conditions. • A high rate of return on investment, with thousands of hours of student work on projects. • Increased energy and enthusiasm among residents and partner staff, and greater support from residents for proposed solutions, through student outreach in your area. • Robust proposals that can spark community and staff discussions, increase the breadth of conversations around projects, as well as help to get "stuck" projects moving. • Increased publicity and an improved reputation as a forward- thinking, sustainable organization. SCP project results can help you clarify, understand, and apply sustainability and livability principles. • An interdisciplinary group of faculty experts with first-hand knowledge of innovative research and practices. • Interested students, with on -the -ground knowledge of your area, who may serve as candidates for future internships and staff positions. • Students often turn out to be informal ambassadors for the partner, describing their successful collaborations with the partner in presentations, community meetings, future academic courses, and job interviews. • A student journalist who will generate press releases, project reports, human -interest stories, and related content on a bi-weekly basis for your local media and our news outlets. The regular, positive press coverage will help to frame your organization to your constituents as progressive and forward thinking. Expected Cost to a Partner City: Fee, Staff Involvement The fee for participation in SCP is designed to recover direct program costs —no indirect charges or overhead are included. The cost therefore varies based on the number of projects, number of academic courses, and level of student activity in each course. At other universities, the average cost of a single course working on a single project has been about $7,000. With that as a guideline, the partner should expect to pay roughly $65,000 to support a yearlong program including 9 projects, $85,000 to support a program of 12 projects, etc. We recognize that budgets are tight; at programs elsewhere in the U.S., cities have collaborated with other groups, including special purpose districts, private developers, business partners, and chambers of commerce, in order to defray costs. Packet Pg. 90 3.3.d Services covered by the fee include coordination support from SCP staff; student and faculty site visits to the city; compilation, printing, and distribution of high -quality final reports; publicity and hosting of events; student -created materials for display; coordination of contact with media (utilizing Western's Office of Communications); and electronic versions of reports produced by students (which will also be permanently availed via Western's Libraries). A key element of a successful SCP program is partner involvement—SCP projects will be successful only with city staff participation. Such participation falls into three categories: • The partner must have a program champion, preferably a person with sufficient seniority to direct and motivate city staff to actively engage in the partnership. For each chosen project, the partner must identify a specific person to serve as the Point of Contact (POC) for SCP faculty and students. Research from other universities' programs shows that during each academic quarter in which a project is ongoing, the POC spends about one full day every two weeks (about 0.1 FTE) preparing background materials, accompanying students on site visits, and participating in reviews and presentations of student work. Also, before the start of the academic year, the POC needs to compile and provide relevant documents, including but not limited to, prior concept plans, vision documents, architectural renderings, computer -aided drawings, GIS maps and layers, community datasets, and aerial photographs. The partner must also identify a staff person who will be its program coordinator, serving as main liaison between the city and SCP. The coordinator should be involved enough in each project to know the staff and faculty involved and to understand the project's scope and current status. The coordinator's time commitment will vary based upon the number of projects --data collected from Oregon's program in 2010-2011 showed that Salem's coordinator averaged 15-20 hours per week for about 15 months to coordinate 28 courses working on 16 projects. A smaller number of courses and projects would entail a smaller burden on a coordinator. Application Components Your SCP application should be emailed to SCP ,wwu.edu and should include the following: Organization Information. Provide the city's name and the name and contact information (e-mail, phone, mailing address, department, and staff role) of the primary contact person for your application. Please include a list of co -applicant organizations (if any) and briefly describe their roles in the partnership. Project Summary List. Provide a list of your proposed projects. This summary should briefly describe each project in a paragraph, including the project's sustainability impacts and the designated staff POC for the project. Example project summary: Plan and design environmentally friendly re -use and redevelopment of a public housing site in a way that integrates an adjacent affordable housing complex, a sustainable stormwater management system, infill development, and the community at large. Sustainability impact: economic development, active transportation, and water quality. Staff contact: Jane Doe, Economic Development Department. Letters of Support. Include letters of support from the city mayor / manager, the city council, the council and mayor / manager of co -applicant organizations (if any), and other funding partners, where applicable. If you have a sustainability action plan, strategic plan, or other adopted document showing the partner's commitment to sustainability, you should include or reference this document in your application. 4 Packet Pg. 91 3.3.d Appendix with Project Details. Provide details for each project in an appendix. We suggest including a map showing the project site (if applicable), a narrative description of the project's goals, sustainability issues addressed by the project, specific problems that students may be able to address, and suggested deliverables from the SCP courses. Also include information about the staff involved in the project, potential funding sources, and the role of partner organizations (if any). Application Evaluation Criteria SCP will evaluate applications based on the following criteria: • Top -Level Support: City Mayor / Manager and elected officials indicate willingness to direct staff to provide resources, devote time, and participate in SCP projects. • Sustainability: Projects include specific sustainability goals, such as (but not limited to) reducing greenhouse gas emissions, fostering active transportation, improving social equity, increasing housing density/mix, improving urban form, reducing energy use, or redeveloping existing structures or sites. • Financial Support: The partner's cost for SCP will range from $65,000 to $85,000 to support 9 to 12 projects. While we do not ask for a formal commitment of funds at this time, it would be helpful to include a statement in your application indicating expected sources of funding. • Real Impact: Projects directly relate to your goals and will have a measurable positive impact on the community. Describe how you will measure the success of SCP projects and monitor progress after the year is over. • Academic Calendar and Logistics: Projects are compatible with the Western academic calendar of three 11-week terms. Some projects may be complex enough to involve multiple courses over two or three terms. For partners more than two hours' travel time from Bellingham, describe any special arrangements to address issues of collaboration and coordination. • Faculty Match: Projects must be within the capability of SCP faculty and students. SCP will identify faculty who are able and willing to carry out projects based on curricular and research needs and interests. Coordinating with SCP as you develop your project list will help ensure a strong faculty match. • External Organization Support: Projects that involve other organizations, such as transportation districts, school districts, nonprofit organizations, business or professional organizations, or research or educational institutions, should indicate how these partnerships would function. Contact Information for Springfield, Salem, and Medford The coordinators for Oregon's SCYP partnerships with Springfield, Salem and Medford have generously offered to answer questions about their experience with SCYP, which is the model for Western's new SCP program. City of Springfield: Courtney Griesel, Senior Management Analyst. 541-736-7132, c rig iesel(a�springfield-or.gov • City of Salem: Courtney Knox Busch, Strategic Initiatives Manager. 503-540-2426, cknox(acityofsalem.net • City of Medford: Jim Huber, Planning Director. 541-774-2381, jim.huber(acityofinedford.org Packet Pg. 92 3.3.d Timeline: Application Process February 16, 2016: Application packet available. SCP opens the application process that will lead to selection of a partner for the 2016 — 2017 academic year. Read the packet and develop initial questions/thoughts to bring to an information session. March 2 and 3, 2016: SCP hosts information sessions to provide a general description of the program, field initial questions, and begin discussions of possible city projects. North session is on the Western campus in Bellingham at 10:00 a.m. on March 2. South session is in Everett at 1:30 p.m. on March 3. See our website for details of location/parking. March 1 to April 29, 2016: SCP staff available by phone, by email, and in person to discuss potential projects with applicants. SCP office hours are 8:00 to 11:30, Monday through Friday. Applicants are strongly encouraged to interact with SCP during the development of an application. SCP staff are also available for presentations to stakeholders at the city (e.g., city council, potential co -applicant entities). April 29, 2016: Applications due to SCP. An electronic version should be emailed to SCP(-,wwu.edu Timeline: SCP'16-'17 Program May 16, 2016: Partner chosen. SCP and the partner will coordinate media to announce the selection. May -June 2016: SCP and the partner match proposed projects with academic courses and faculty. SCP and partner develop and sign master contract. Summer 2016: SCP and partner develop scope of work documents (which become appendices to the master contract) for each project and course. SCP staff and faculty meet with partner staff and local professionals. City staff provide background information and documents for projects. Fall 2016: SCP kick-off event. Fall term classes work on SCP projects. Winter 2017: Winter term classes work on SCP projects. Fall term written reports delivered to the partner. Spring 2017: Spring term classes work on SCP projects. Winter term written reports delivered to the partner. May 2017: SCP 2016-17 wrap-up celebration, hand-off to the 2017-18 partner. Summer 2017: Spring term written reports delivered to the partner Additional Information For additional information about SCP and this application process, please refer to SCP's web site, www.wwu.edu/scp 6 Packet Pg. 93 3.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/3/2016 Award of Tourism Grants to Edmonds Center for the Arts and Edmonds Waterfront Festival Staff Lead: Patrick Doherty Department: Economic Development Preparer: Patrick Doherty Background/History The Council -approved 2016 budget and work plan for use of the General Tourism Promotion funds (Fund 120), as originally recommended by the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC), includes disbursement of funds to several organizations involved in events, programs or venues that bring visitors or promote visits to Edmonds. (See attached 2016 LTAC Budget Detail for reference.) City Council considered this item at its 4/26/16 regular meeting and forwarded it for approval as a Consent Agenda item on the 5/3/16 meeting. Staff Recommendation Approve grant of $2,500 to Edmonds Center for the Arts for promotion of the 10th Anniversary "Birthday Bash" and $1,000 to the Edmonds Noon Rotary Club for an advertising "bus wrap" to promote the 2016 Edmonds Waterfront Festival on Consent Agenda. Narrative In addition to the Council -approved budget and work plan cited above, this year two organizations submitted applications to the LTAC for smaller grants to help promote two specific events: the Edmonds Center for the Arts and the Edmonds Noon Rotary Club. The Edmonds Center for the Arts requests $2,500 to help fund marketing and advertising for their upcoming 10th Anniversary "Birthday Bash" on Saturday, July 30th. The Edmonds Noon Rotary Club requests $1,000 to help fund a CT advertising "bus wrap" to help promote the Edmonds Waterfront Festival, scheduled this year from Friday June 3rd through Sunday June 5th. After review and deliberation, the LTAC members voted to recommend to Council approval of the two grant requests, citing as justification the potential that enhanced advertising for both events would attract a greater number of visitors to Edmonds. Funds to cover these two expenditures, totaling $3,500, would come from a reappropriation of the $3,000 earmarked for support for the RevitalizeWA Conference (which was not awarded to Edmonds this year), plus an additional $500 from the ending fund balance, which is projected to total over $74,000 by the end of 2016. The full applications from both organizations, as well as the Council -approved 2016 Tourism Budget, are attached for your reference. Packet Pg. 94 3.4 Attachments: 2016 Tourism Grant Applications LTAC_ B u d get_Deta i I_2016_ Packet Pg. 95 3.4.a 1 I ff S/4f , i L' e(:a edmonds center for the arts March 4, 2016 Cindi Cruz - Lodging Tax Advisory Committee City of Edmonds 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Request for support — Edmonds Center for the Arts Birthday Bash! Dear Cindi, Edmonds Center for the Arts will launch our 2016-17 Season in September, 2016. The season represents our 10-year Anniversary: 10 years of celebrating the performing arts, ensuring access to the arts, and strengthening and inspiring our community both locally and regionally. Birthday Bash: Saturday, July 30, 2016, 3 — 9 pm ECA is planning an event to thank all those who have made our first 10 years so successful. The Birthday Bash will be a free, 6-hour event featuring performances, workshops, food, and fun for theater enthusiasts and supporters of all ages. Modeled after our proven KidStock! event which drew 3,000 children and family visitors this past January, we expect to welcome several thousand guests from Edmonds and beyond. Experience tells us that Edmonds Center for the Arts is a regional destination. We are confident that this birthday party will provide a strong draw for our many patrons and supporters as well as summer fun -seekers across the area. The event will be promoted through media, the ECA website and at the Edmonds July 4 Parade. We are requesting support from the lodging excise tax fund in the amount of $2500 for this event. As a reminder, the ECA Audience Profile is broad in scope and reach: • More than 65,000 people attend events at ECA annually. • ECA events draw 58% of attendees from outside the Greater Edmonds area; 17% are from the city of Seattle alone. • Our core audience is aged 35 and older. • Our Education and Outreach programs increase ECA's accessibility to individuals of diverse ages, abilities, and cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds. • ECA audiences and supporters include prominent business and community leaders, theater enthusiasts, subscribers, donors and active community volunteers. The required Lodging Tax Expenditure Appli � a-PemH- ; attached. We appreciate your consideration of this request and are happy t i e additional information if needed. I ly, DevWoment Director Edmonds Center for the Arts Direct: 425-275-9485 / Karen@ec4arts.org Edmonds Center for the Arts 410 Fourth Avenue North I Edmonds, WA 98020 tel 425.275.4485 1 fax 425.275.4487 edmondscenterforthearts.org Packet Pg. 96 3.4.a Lodging Tax Expenditure Application Form City of Edmonds Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) Estimated Event or Tourism Activity NOTE It is very important that you fill this application out as completely as possible to ensure you are eligible to receive Tourism Promotion Funds supported through Lodging Tax now and in the future! The City of Edmonds is required to provide the information below from your Final Report to the State. Please plan now how you will collect this information. Questions? Call 425- 775-7724 1, Organization: Edmonds Center for the Arts 2. ActivitylEvent Name: 10' Anniversary Birthday Bash 3. Activity Type(check one): Event/Festival x Marketing or Facility(acquisition, upkeep, renovation) 4, Start Date: July 30, 2016 End Date: July 30, 2016 S. Total Lodging Tax Funds Requested: $ 2,500 6. Total Activity/Event Estimated Cost: $15,000 Estimated Attendance Information 7. Overall Attendance: Enter the total number of people predicted to attend this activity and select the method used to determine the attendance. Predicted: 3500 Method: direct count____-, indirect count_ representative survey_____, informal survey-----, structured estimate xx, other______, N/A . Please explain: 8. Attendance, 50+ miles: Enter the number of people who travel greater than 50 miles predicted to attend this activity and select the method used to determine the attendance. Predicted: 700 (20%) Method: direct count___---, indirect count_ , representative survey______, informal survey------, structured estimate xx, other_ N/A . Please explain: 9. Attendance, Out of State, Out of Country: Enter the number of people from outside the state and country predicted to attend this activity and select the method used to determine the attendance. Predicted: 3S (1 %) Method: direct count-----, indirect count--, representative survey____, informal survey structured estimate xx, other—____, N/A . Please explain: 10. Attendance, Paid for Overnight Lodging: Enter the estimated number predicted to attend this activity and pay for overnight lodging and select the method used to determine the attendance. Predicted: 10 - IS Method: direct count . indirect count_ , representative survey____, informal survey----, structured estimate xx, other N/A . Please explain: 11. Attendance, Did not pay for overnight lodging: Enter the number predicted to attend this activity without paying for overnight lodging and select the method used to determine the attendance. Predicted: 3485 Packet Pg. 97 3.4.a Method: direct count , indirect count__, representative survey----, informal survey-----, structured estimate roc, other_ , N/A . Please explain: 12. Paid Lodging Nights: Total estimated number of paid lodging nights. One lodging night = one or more persons occupying one room for one night. Predicted: 5-7 Method: direct count . indirect count , representative survey______, informal survey__----, structured estimate roc, other_______, N/A . Please explain: Additional Notes: Please provide any additional information regarding the impact of the festival, events, or tourism -related facility using lodging tax funds: Please see attached letter for additional detail about this event and request. Submitted by: Karen Crowley, Development Director Date: March 4, 2015 E-mail: Karen@ec4arts.org Phone M 425-275-9485 Packet Pg. 98 3.4.a March 8, 2016 City of Edmonds Lodging Tax Advisory Committee RE: Edmonds Noon Rotary Club Grant Application Dear Committee, We represent the Edmonds Noon Rotary Club and are submitting the attached grant application requesting $1,000 to help purchase a "bus wrap" for one Community Transit bus for two weeks. The bus wrap would be used as a promotional tourism tool to attract tourist to the annual Edmonds Waterfront Festival. To give you an idea what a "bus wrap" is; the bus wrap is the advertising banner that Community Transit buses use for advertising and promoting locals events in the Puget Sound region. The Edmonds Noon Rotary Club promotes, produces and hosts the Waterfront Festival each year with the help of approximately 250 volunteers. The 29t" Annual Edmonds Waterfront Festival will run the weekend of June 3rd through June 5tn and is open to guests starting Friday the 3rd at 3:00 pm to 10:00 pm, Saturday 11:00 am — 10:00 pm and Sunday from 11:00 am to 7:00 pm. The Waterfront Festival attracts over 20,000 visitors to Edmonds each year. During last year's festival, we conducted an informal poll of arriving guest, and found that approximately 75% of the guests live outside the City of Edmonds. Additionally, the Festival is served by 175 vendors, of which 155 of them came from outside the City of Edmonds. Of the 155 vendors traveling to Edmonds, 70 came from over 50 miles away from Edmonds, and of these some vendors came from as far away as eastern Washington Oregon, Montana and Arizona. Lastly, the Waterfront festival benefits the Edmonds Noon Rotary Club by providing our clubs major source of income that help us fund several of our programs. Examples include College Scholarships, Edmonds Food Bank donations, and transitional housing that provides a safe home for women and children who are transitioning from a crisis situation. We appreciate your consideration. r Sincerely, Valerie Claypool Director of Waterfront Festival Packet Pg. 99 3.4.a Lodging Tax Expenditure Application Form City of Edmonds Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) Estimated Event or Tourism Activity NOTE: It is very important that you fill this application out as completely as possible to ensure you are eligible to receive Tourism Promotion Funds supported through Lodging Tax now and in the future! The City of Edmonds is required to provide the information below from your Final Report to the State. Please plan now how you will collect this information. Questions? Call 425- 775-7724 2. 3. Activity Type(check one): Event/Festival_,�Q--Marketing or Facility(acquisition, upkeep, renovation) 4. Start Date:��.. ZC��, la End Date:A S. Total Lodging Tax Funds Requested: $ t' 1 n - r(� - _ 6. Total Activity/Event Estimated Cost: Q Estimated Attendance Information 7. Overall Attendance: Enter the total number of people predicted to attend this activity and select the method used to determine the attendance. E Predicted: o Method: direct count , indirect count ��, representative survey informal survey structured t— estimateother N/A Please explain: J N l 8. Attendance, 50+ miles: Enter the number of people who travel greater than 50 miles predicted to attend this activity and select the c method used to determine the attendance. r Predicted: 5 �! Q Q Method: direct count , indirect count representative survey informal survey ,structured c estimate , other NIA Please explain: J t, C+jMA L 9. Attendance, Out of State, Out of Country: Enter the number of people from outside the state and country predicted to attend c this activity and select the method used to determine the attendance. H co Predicted: r Method: direct count , indirect count,, representative survey____, informal survey____, structured estimate other ,-, N/A Please explain: �\ t tJ��` J Q �\� W u r Q 10. Attendance, Paid for Overnight Lodging: Enter the estimated number predicted to attend this activity and pay for overnight lodging and select the method used to determine the attendance. S Predicted: j Method: direct countindirect count representative survey informal survey____, structured estimate , other N/A Please explain: 11. Attendance, Did not pay for overnight lodging: Enter the number predicted to attend this activity without paying for overnight lodging and select the method used to determine the attendance. Predicted:.: 7C5 Packet Pg. 100 3.4.a Method: direct count______, indirect count_ representative survey , informal survey , structured estimate , other N/A Please explain: 12. Paid Lodging Nights: Total estimated number of paid lodging nights. One lodging night = one or more persons occupying one room for one night Predicted: r cry-- Method: direct count , indirect coum CC representative survey____, informal survey_____, structured estimate , other , N/A . Please explain: Additional Notes: Please provide any additional information regarding the impact of the festival, events, or tourism -related facility using lodging tax funds: 1 r l Submitted by: ; ' 0,� Date: Y\V 1 C7,<Q—V-" U E-mail: 1 V 1JU , l . �_',p YY Phone Packet Pg. 101 3.4.b Approved 2014 Budget Approved 2015 Budget Year -to -Date 2015 Approved 2016 Budget Year -to -Date 2016 Revenue 75% Fund 120 - General Tourism Promotion $54,000 $67,500 $80,161 $81,750 $81,750 25% Fund 123 - Arts/Culture Tourism Promotion $18,000 Total Lodging Tax Reven 120 Fund Beginning Fund Balance $106,736 $22,500 $26,720 $27,2501 $106,881 $109,000 $27,250 $109,000 $112,841 $133,991 $142,461 $142,461 75% Fund 120 - General Tourism Promotion Revenue $54,000 $67.500 $80,161 $81,750 Interest $140 Total: $160,87 $175 $1, 090 $180,516 $215,242 $400 1 $224,611 1 $142,461 ON -GOING EXPENDITURES Contingency** $2,575 General Tourism Promotion (Fund 120): Printing/distribution of rack card $6,000 $6,000 $4,240 $7,500 $3,121 Promotion/support of Bird Fest $1,500 $2,500 $1,871 $1,500 Sno Co Tourism Bureau $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 Edmonds Visitor's Center $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 General Advertising $21,000 $21,000 $16,610 $25,000 Edmonds Center for the Arts Season Brochure Ad $12,500 $12,500 $12,500 $12,500 Miscellaneous - Design, photography, emerging opportunities $500 $500 $1,638 $2,575 Transfer to Fund 117 for arts promotion CRAZE etc. $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 Tourism Promotion/Website/Calendar Support Subtotal: Fund 120 Subtotal $12,000 $54,000 $67,000 $106,876 $113,516 $12,000 $18,000 $61,358 $82,150 $153,885 _d= $142,46 $3,000 $6,121 $136,340 ONE-TIME EXPENDITURES Support for Restroom Construction $60,000 Support for RevitalizeWA Conference $3,000 $3,000 Log Cabin Maintenance (2016) $4,500 **Note: To Account for less than projected revenue and/or minor additional expenditures in approved line items 61 $136, 340 0 0 N m E s a Packet Pg. 102 3.4.b Approved 2014 Budget Approved 2015 Budget Year -to -Date 2015 Approved 2016 Budget Year -to -Date 2016 123 Fund Beginning Fund Balance $70,429 $75,297 $77,645 $80,760 $80,760 25% Fund 123 - Arts/Culture Tourism Promotion $18,000 $22,500 $4,707 $27,250 Sale Maps/Books $100 $150 $14 $30 Interest $100 $250 $227 $250 Total: $88,629 $98,197 $82,593 $108,290 $80,760 On -going Expenditures: Art/Culture Tourism Promotion Grants: Cascade Symphony $1,700 $2,000 2000 $2,000 EAF for Art Studio Tour $800 $1,000 1000 $1,000 Edmonds Arts Festival $1,000 Sno-King Chorale $1,000 $1,500 1500 $1,500 DeMiero Jazz Festival $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 Olympic Ballet Theater $2,000 $2,000 2000 $2,000 Driftwood Theater $2,000 $2,000 2000 $2,000 Phoenix Theater $1,500 1500 $1,500 Art Walk $750 Cascadia Art Museum $750 Write on the Sound $5,000 $7,200 $1,715 $8,000 Cascade Symphony $1,500 Edmonds Historical Museum $1,500 Jazz Connection $2,000 Promotion of public art/brochure $2,000 $2,000 Concerts in the Park (new banner) $1,000 Subtotal tourism promotion grants: $14,500 $21,200 $13,715 $30,500 $0 Miscellaneous Ad's $250 1000 Subtotal: Expenditures $14,500 $21,200 $13,965 $31,500 $0 Fund 123 subtotal ONE-TIME EXPENDITURES ***Supplement of potental future events $4,250 0 0 N m E s a Packet Pg. 103 3.4.b Approved 2014 Budget Approved 2015 Approved 2016 Year -to -Date 2016 Budget Year -to -Date 2015 Budget 0 0 N a Packet Pg. 104 3.5 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/3/2016 2016 1st Quarter Budget Amendment Staff Lead: Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Debra Sharp Narrative There are a total of 19 budget amendments. Three of the amendments are carryforward requests from unexpended 2015 budgets. The carryforward budget amendments include the Highway 99 Subarea Plan, Critical Area Regulation Update and the Development Code Rewrite. There are three items that have previously been discussed by Council. They include the public defense contract, the Veterans Plaza and a canopy for the propane dispenser. There are eleven new budget amendments. There are five General Fund budget amendments. Four of the five amendments reduce the General Fund ending fund balance by $62,445. They include a decision package for the SAW reimbursement, the Planning Board videotaping services, back -fill for a planner's extended leave, and the Marina Beach Park environmental testing. The 5th decision package is an increase to the Economic Development professional services line item. This decision package is offset by contributions and fees received to cover the expenses. There are two park projects requesting additional dollars from REET in the amount of $91,933. There are three street construction projects that are offset by additional grant revenue and one request for the Sewer Fund. Two additional budget amendments have been added since the 1st Quarter Budget Amendment was submitted to Council. The first one is for additional funding for the Downtown Restroom and the second is for additional funding for the Asset Management Mobile Field Conversion. Staff recommends that Council adopt Ordinance No. XXXX approving the 2016 First Quarter Budget Amendment. Attachments: 1st Quarter Budget Amendment Ordinance Packet Pg. 105 3.5.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4019 AS A RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, previous actions taken by the City Council require Interfund Transfers and increases in appropriations; and WHEREAS, state law requires an ordinance be adopted whenever money is transferred from one fund to another; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the amended budget appropriations and information which was made available; and approves the appropriation of local, state, and federal funds and the increase or decrease from previously approved programs within the 2016 Budget; and THEREFORE, WHEREAS, the applications of funds have been identified; THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 1. of Ordinance No. 4019 adopting the final budget for the fiscal year 2016 is hereby amended to reflect the changes shown in Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, and F adopted herein by reference. Section 2. 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 I Packet Pg. 106 3.5.a effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATE: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: 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. APPROVED: MAYOR, DAVE EARLING 2 Packet Pg. 107 3.5.a SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2016, 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 ORDINANCE NO. 4019 AS A RESULT EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS, SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of ,2016. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY 3 Packet Pg. 108 EXHIBIT "A": Budget Amendment Summary (April 2016) 3.5.a FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION 2016 BEGINNING FUND BALANCE REVENUE EXPENDITURES 2016 ENDING FUND BALANCE 001 GENERAL FUND 6,601,702 39,276,670 40,929,107 4,949,265 009 LEOFF-MEDI CAL INS. RESERVE 538,960 278,770 279,480 538,250 011 RISK MANAGEMENT RESERVE FUND 951,820 6,660 - 958,480 012 CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND 4,680,340 28,110 800,000 3,908,450 013 MULTI MODAL TRANSPORTATION FD. 56,020 - - 56,020 014 HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND 970 5,000 5,400 570 016 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 229,850 2,005,000 2,175,000 59,850 104 DRUG ENFORCEMENT FUND 27,530 153,000 76,030 104,500 111 STREET FUND 516,350 1,760,500 1,716,120 560,730 112 COMBINED STREET CONST/I MP ROVE 242,450 8,314,697 8,327,792 229,355 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS ACQUIS. FUND 438,050 102,410 181,380 359,080 118 MEMORIAL STREETTREE 17,900 110 - 18,010 120 HOTEL/MOTEL TAX REVENUE FUND 131,670 82,150 149,650 64,170 121 EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND 59,430 21,390 26,880 53,940 122 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND 16,000 5,550 3,000 18,550 123 TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS 82,780 27,530 31,500 78,810 125 PARK ACQ/IMPROVEMENT 1,174,702 1,108,000 2,100,565 182,137 126 SPECIAL CAPITAL FUND 1,978,970 1,102,000 2,595,320 485,650 127 GIFTS CATALOG FUND 255,550 46,900 44,950 257,500 129 SPECIAL PROJECTS FUND 38,360 280 - 38,640 130 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE/IMPROV 121,770 177,260 210,370 88,660 132 PARKS CONSTRUCTION 1,286,050 2,552,240 2,775,770 1,062,520 136 PARKSTRUSTFUND 151,640 630 - 152,270 137 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE TRUSTFD 882,510 19,880 - 902,390 138 SISTER CITY COMMISSION 1,510 12,010 12,500 1,020 139 TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT - 682,500 682,500 - 211 LID FUND CONTROL - 14,400 14,400 - 213 LI D GUARANTY FUND 101,810 14,400 - 116,210 231 2012 LTGO DEBT SERVICE FUND - 677,380 677,380 - 232 2014 DEBT SERVICE FUND - 949,540 949,540 - 421 WATER 20,256,697 8,443,460 12,717,507 15,982,650 422 STORM 13,624,010 4,131,780 7,613,450 10,142,340 423 SEWER/TREATMENT PLANT 50,898,580 12,645,240 17,921,050 45,622,770 424 BOND RESERVE FUND 842,940 1,989,900 1,990,920 841,920 511 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND 7,099,240 1,579,570 1,971,820 6,706,990 617 FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND 196,490 64,840 59,610 201,720 Tota Is 113,502,651 88,279,757 107,038,991 94,743,417 It O N v C M C L O C N E C N E Q N i� 3 m L CD 3 cy 2 N r C N E t v cC Q Packet Pg. 109 EXHIBIT "B": Budget Amendments by Revenue (April 2016) 3.5.a FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION ORD. NO. 4014 12/18/2015 ORD. NO. 4019 2/19/2016 ORD. NO. April 2016 2016 Amended Budget 001 General Fund $ 39,266,670 $ $ 10,000 $ 39,276,670 009 Leoff-Medical Ins. Reserve 278,770 - 278,770 011 Risk Management Reserve Fund 6,660 6,660 012 Contingency Reserve Fund 28,110 28,110 014 Historic Preservation Gift Fund 5,000 5,000 016 Building Maintenance 1,680,000 325,000 2,005,000 104 Drug Enforcement Fund 153,000 - 153,000 111 Street Fund 1,760,500 - - 1,760,500 112 Combined Street Const/Improve 5,290,850 2,735,647 288,200 8,314,697 117 Municipal Arts Acquis. Fund 102,410 - - 102,410 118 Memorial Street Tree 110 110 120 Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Fund 82,150 82,150 121 Employee Parking Permit Fund 21,390 21,390 122 Youth Scholarship Fund 5,550 5,550 123 Tourism Promotional Fund/Arts 27,530 27,530 125 ParkAcq/Improvement 1,108,000 1,108,000 126 Special Capital Fund 1,102,000 1,102,000 127 Gifts Catalog Fund 46,900 46,900 129 Special Projects Fund 280 280 130 Cemetery Maintenance/Improv 177,260 - - 177,260 132 Parks Construction 2,037,240 500,000 15,000 2,552,240 136 Parks Trust Fund 630 - - 630 137 Cemetery Maintenance Trust I'd 19,880 19,880 138 Sister City Commission 12,010 12,010 139 Transportation Benefit District 682,500 682,500 211 Lid Fund Control 14,400 14,400 213 Lid Guaranty Fund 14,400 14,400 231 2012 LTGO Debt Service fund 677,380 677,380 232 2014 Debt Service Fund 949,540 - 949,540 421 Water 8,429,970 13,490 8,443,460 422 Storm 4,131,780 - 4,131,780 423 Sewer/Treatment Plant 12,414,120 231,120 12,645,240 424 Bond Reserve Fund 1,989,900 - 1,989,900 511 Equipment Rental Fund 1,579,570 1,579,570 617 Firemen's Pension Fund 64,840 64,840 Totals $ 84,161,300 1 $ 3,805,257 1 $ 313,200 1 $ 88,279,757 It 00 N v C M C O C N E C N E Q N i� 3 m N 3 CY r� to r C N E t V fC a+ Q Packet Pg. 110 EXHIBIT "C": Budget Amendments by Expenditure (April 2016) 3.5.a FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION ORD. NO. 4014 12/18/2015 ORD. NO. 4019 2/19/2016 ORD. NO. 0 April 2016 2016 Amended Budget 001 General Fund $ 39,733,780 $ 957,500 $ 237,827 $ 40,929,107 009 Leoff-Medical Ins. Reserve 279,480 - - 279,480 012 Contingency Reserve Fund 800,000 800,000 014 Historic Preservation Gift Fund 5,400 - 5,400 016 Building Maintenance 1,754,000 421,000 2,175,000 104 Drug Enforcement Fund 76,030 - 76,030 111 Street Fund 1,712,370 - 3,750 1,716,120 112 Combined Street Const/Improve 5,311,460 2,728,132 288,200 8,327,792 117 Municipal Arts Acquis. Fund 181,380 - - 181,380 120 Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Fund 149,650 149,650 121 Employee Parking Permit Fund 26,880 26,880 122 Youth Scholarship Fund 3,000 3,000 123 Tourism Promotional Fund/Arts 31,500 - - 31,500 125 ParkAcq/Improvement 1,523,650 484,982 91,933 2,100,565 126 Special Capital Fund 1,934,390 545,930 115,000 2,595,320 127 Gifts Catalog Fund 44,950 - - 44,950 130 Cemetery Maintenance/Improv 210,370 - - 210,370 132 Parks Construction 2,100,000 660,770 15,000 2,775,770 138 Sister City Commission 12,500 - - 12,500 139 Transportation Benefit District 682,500 682,500 211 Lid Fund Control 14,400 14,400 231 2012LTGO Debt Service Fund 677,380 677,380 232 2014 Debt Service Fund 949,540 - - 949,540 421 Water 12,323,960 389,797 3,750 12,717,507 422 Storm 6,612,170 997,530 3,750 7,613,450 423 Sewer/Treatment Plant 17,172,110 569,190 179,750 17,921,050 424 Bond Reserve Fund 1,990,920 - - 1,990,920 511 Equipment Rental Fund 1,955,820 16,000 1,971,820 617 Firemen's Pension Fund 59,610 - 59,610 Totals $98,329,200 $ 7,754,831 $ 954,960 $ 107,038,991 It 00 N v C M C L O C N E C N E Q N i� 3 m L CD V Y r C N E t V fC a+ Q Packet Pg. 111 EXHIBIT "D": Budget Amendments (April 2016) 3.5.a Fund Number Change in Beginning Fund Balance Revenue Expense Change in Ending Fund Balance 001 165,382 10,000 237,827 (62,445) 111 - - 3,750 (3,750) 112 288,200 288,200 125 - 91,933 (91,933) 126 - 115,000 (115,000) 132 15,000 15,000 421 - 3,750 (3,750) 422 3,750 (3,750) 423 179,750 (179,750) 511 16,000 (16,000) Total Change 165,382 313,200 954,960 (476,378) It 00 N V C M C L 0 E E Q tM m L CD V Y r C N E t V fC a+ Q Packet Pg. 112 3.5.a EXHIBIT "E": Budget Amendment Summary (April 2016) Fund BARS Category Debit Credit Pg# Description Carryforwards General Fund 001 000 62 558 60 41 00 Professional Services 100,000 9 Hwy 99Subarea Plan General Fund 001 0001 62 1 558 60 41 00 Professional Services 11,183 10 Critical Area Update General Fund 001 0001 62 1 524 10 41 00 Professional Services 54,199 �11 Code Rewrite General Fund 001 0001 1 308 00 0001 00 Beginning Fund Balance 165,382 Previously Discussed by Council General Fund 001 1 000 39 512 52 41 00 Professional Services 16,500 12 Public Defense General Fund 001 000 39 508 00 00 00 Endingfund Balance 16,500 Parks Construction 132 000 64 594 76 65 00 Construction 30,000 13 Veterans Plaza Parks Construction 132 000 64 594 76 65 91 Constr from other fund 30,000 REET 2 125 000 64 594 75 65 90 Const to other fund 30,000 REET2 125 000 64 508 30 00 00 Endingfund Balance 30,000 Equipment Rental 511 000 77 594 48 64 00 Equipment 16,000 14 Canopyfor propane dispenser Equipment Rental 5111 000 77 508 00 00 00 Endingfund Balance 16,000 Parks Construction 1321 000 64 594 76 65 00 Construction 130,000 15 Downtown Restroom Parks Construction 132 000 64 594 76 65 91 Constr from other fund 115,000 Parks Construction 132 000 367 00 000 00 Contributions 15,000 REET 1 126 000 68 595 33 65 90 Const to other fund 115,000 REET1 126 000 39 508 30 00 00 Endingfund Balance 115,000 New Items for Council General Fund 0011 000 22 518 10 49 00 Miscellaneous 16,254 16 SAW Reimbursement General Fund 001 000 62 524 10 41 00 Professional Services 2,100 17 Planning Board Videotaping General Fund 001 000 62 558 60 11 00 Salaries 10,800 18 Planning Staff Back -fill General Fund 001 000 62 558 60 23 00 Benefits 4,400 General Fund 001 000 64 571 21 41 00 Professional Services 12,391 19 Marina Beach General Fund 001 000 39 508 00 00 00 Ending Fund Balance 45,945 General Fund 001 000 61 558 70 41 00 Professional Services 10,000 20 Economic Dev. Professional Services General Fund 001 000 367 00 00 00 Bird Fest Contributions 5,000 General Fund 001 000 347 93 00 00 Winter Market Reg Fees 5,000 REET2 125 000 64 594 75 65 00 Construction 30,000 21 Bandshell for Frances Anderson Center REET2 125 000 64 508 30 00 00 Ending Fund Balance 30,000 Parks Construction 132 000 64 594 76 65 00 Construction 31,933 22 City Park Spray & Play Parks Construction 132 000 64 594 76 65 91 Constr from other fund 31,933 REET 2 1251 000 64 594 75 65 90 Const to other fund 31,933 REET2 125 000 64 508 30 00 00 Ending Fund Balance 31,933 Street Construction 112 000 68 595 33 41 00 Professional Services 33,520 23 15th STSW Walkway Street Construction 112 000 68 595 33 41 10 InterfundServices 10,000 Street Construction 112 000 334 03 600 05 Grant 43,520 Street Construction 112 000 68 595 33 41 00 Professional Services 75,000 24 238thStSW Walkway Street Construction 112 000 68 595 33 41 10 InterfundServices 15,000 Street Construction 112 Grant 90,000 Street Construction 112 000 68 595 33 41 00 Professional Services 80,360 25 236th STSW Walkway Street Construction 112 000 68 595 33 41 10 InterfundServices 22,150 Street Construction 112 000 68 595 33 65 00 Construction 52,170 Street Construction 112 000 333 20 205 16 Grant 154,680 Sewer Fund 423 200 75 594 35 41 00 Professional Services 20,000 26 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Sewer Fund 423 200 75 594 35 65 00 Construction 156,000 Sewer Fund 423 200 75 508 30 00 00 Ending Fund Balance 176,000 Street Fund 111 000 68 542 31 49 00 Miscellaneous 3,750 27 Asset Management MobileField Conversion Street Fund 111 000 68 508 30 00 00 Endingfund Balance 3,750 Water Fund 421 000 74 534 80 49 00 Miscellaneous 3,750 Water Fund 421 000 74 508 00 00 00 Endingfund Balance 3,750 Storm Fund 422 000 72 531 10 49 00 Miscellaneous 3,750 Storm Fund 422 000 72 508 00 00 00 Endingfund Balance 3,750 Sewer Fund 423 000 75 535 80 49 00 Miscellaneous 3,750 Sewer Fund 423 0001 75 1 5081 00 1 00 1 00 jEndingfund Balance 1 1 3,750 It O N v C M C L O C N E C N E Q N 3 m L N 7 CY r� N r C N E t V cC r� Q Packet Pg. 113 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: Carryforward Item Item Description: In 2015, the City Council budgeted $100,000 to start the Highway 99 Subarea Plan. In 2016, Council budgeted an additional $75,000 for additional work to complete the project. While the process began in late 2015 and consultants were selected, no 2015 funds were spent. The purpose of the budget amendment is to carry forward the unexpeneded funds from 2015 ($100,000). This will be added to the $75,000 approved for 2016. Department: Development Services Fund GENERAL Division: Administration Title: Highway 99 Subarea Plan and Planned Action Name: Preparer: Shane Hope Department Account Number: 621 Strategic Plan Task Action Item: 1a.7,1b.6, 3a.10, 4a7, 4a.14 Budget Amendment Type? I Carryforward If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Operating Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Plannin Pro . Svc. 62.558.60.41.00 75,000 100,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $75,000 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses I $175,000 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 Revenue and Endin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Carryforward 001.000.308.00 100,000 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Carryforward 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 PJ c m E c m Q m a� 00 L L CI co 0 N 0 a� U a M c �a L 0 a� E c M E Q a� aM 00 L 3 CY r a-: c M E t v c� Q Packet Pg. 114 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: Carryforward Item Item Description: The Council budgeted $40,000 in 2014 and another $40,000 in 2015 for the Critical Area Ordinance (CAO) Update. The purpose of this budget amendment is to carryforward the unexpended funds ($11,183.41) in order to cover 2016 consultant costs to complete the CAO update and associated work in 2016. Department: Development Services Fund Name: GENERAL Division: Planning Division Title: Critical Area Regulation Update Preparer: Kernen Lien Department Account Number: 620 Strategic Plan Task Action Item: Budget Amendment Type? I Carryforward If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Operating Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Plannin Pro . Svc. 62.558.60.41.00 0 11,183 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $0 $11,183 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses 1 $11,183 1 $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 Revenue and Fndin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Carryforward 001.000.308.00 11,183 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Carryforward 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $11,183 $0 $0 $0 $0 10 c m E c m Q m a� 00 L L CI co 0 N 0 a� U a M c �a L O a� E c w E Q a� aM 00 L 3 CY r a-: c M E t v c� Q Packet Pg. 115 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: Carryforward Item Item Description: The Council budgeted $110,000 in professional services funds in 2015 to move forward on the Development Code Update. The purpose of this budget amendment is to carry forward the unexpended funds budgeted in 2015 ($39,199) and supplement the project budget with an additional $15,000 in unanticipated savings from professional services that occurred in 2015 (savings from the Hearings Examiner professional services budget, not reflected in the year-end estimates). Department: Development Services Fund GENERAL Division: Development Services Title: Development Code Rewrite Name: Preparer: Shane Hope Department Account Number: 62 Strategic Plan Task Action Item: 5a.2, 2a.5-6 Budget Amendment Type? I Carryforward If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Operating Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 DSAdmin 62.524.10.41.00 (Pro Services) 0 54,199 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $0 $54,199 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses 1 $54,199 1 $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 Revenue and Endin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Carryforward 001.000.308.00 54,199 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Carryforward 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $54,199 $0 $0 $0 $0 11 c m E c m Q m a� 00 L L CI co 0 N 0 a� U a M c �a L 0 a� E c M E Q a� aM 00 L 3 CY r a-: c M E t v c� Q Packet Pg. 116 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: This budget adjustment is for the amendment to the Public Defense Professional Services contract with the Snohomish County Public Defense Association. Additional services were required due to a change in case load requirements and to transition from previous provider. Department: Human Resources Fund Name: GFNII2AL Division: Human Resources Title: Public Defense Preparer: Carrie Hite Department Account Number: 001.00.39.512.52.41.00 Strategic Plan Task Action Item: Budget Amendment Type? I Previously Discussed By Council If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: Feb 16 2016 What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Operating Fill In Item Description IsI Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Public Defense legal services 296,080 16,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $296,080 $16,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses I $312,580 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 Revenue and Fndin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 001.000.39.508. 16,500 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $16,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 12 c m E c m Q m a� 00 L L CI co 0 N 0 a� U a M c �a L O a� E c w E Q a� aM 00 L 3 CY r a-: c a� E t v c� Q Packet Pg. 117 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: An additional $30,000 spending allocation for Veterans Plaza was given by Council on 2/2/16. These fund are for plaza area development to include planter beds/benches and a seating area. This will be paid out of 132, but reimbursed REST. Department: Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Fund Name: PARKS CONSTRUCTION Division: Parks Title: Veterans Plaza Preparer: CCruz for Carrie Hite Department Account Number: 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 Strategic Plan Task Action Item: Action 3a.4 (35): Greenways and Parks Budget Amendment Type? I Previously Discussed By Council If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: Feb 2016 What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Capital Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 (Construction) 475,000 30,000 0 0 0 0 132.000.64.594.76.65.91 (Constfirom otherfind) 0 (30,000) 0 0 0 0 125.000.64.594.75.65.90 Const to other and 0 30,000 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $475,000 $30,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses I $505,000 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 Revenue and Fndin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 125.000.64.508.30 30,000 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $30,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 13 c m E c m Q m a� 00 L L CI co 0 N 0 a� U a M c �a L O a� E c w E Q a� aM 00 L 3 CY r a-: c M E t v c� Q Packet Pg. 118 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: In the 2016 budget $22,000 was approved to have a canopy built to cover the propane dispenser. After some thought, we would like to move the dispencer closer to the existing gas/diesel island and make the canopy larger (12'x24'x17') for better coverage. We will need $16,000 more to achieve this. Department: Public Works Fund Name: EQUIPMENT RENTAL Division: Fleet Maintenance Title: Canopy for propane dispencer Preparer: NEke Adams Department Account Number: 511.000.77.594.48.64.00 Strategic Plan Task Action Item: Budget Amendment Type? I Previously Discussed By Council If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: Dec 12015 What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Operating Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Propane dis encer canopy 52,000 16,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $52,000 $16,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses 1 $68,000 1 $0 I $0 I $0 1 $0 Revenue andEnding Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 511.000.77.508. 16,000 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $16,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 14 r c m E c m E Q m a� 00 L a� L CI co 0 N 00 a� U a M c �a L 0 c a� E c M E Q a� a� 00 L d 3 CY r c M E t c� Q Packet Pg. 119 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: Supplemental appropriation for Downtown Restroom - up to $115,000 from 2015 ending balance of REET 1 (Fund 126) plus expenditure of $15,000 from contributions from Edmonds Downtown Alliance ($10,000) and Edmonds Noon Rotary ($5,000). Council -approved $260,000 for this project as part of the 2016 Budget. With this supplemental appropriation, the total project budget will be $390,000. Department: Economic Development/Community Services Fund GENERAL Division: Economic Development Title: Downtown Restroom Name: Preparer: Patrick Doherty Department Account Number: 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 Strategic Plan Task Action Item: 3a.2 Budget Amendment Type? I Previously Discussed By Council If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: I Apr 19 2016 What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Capital Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 260,000 130,000 0 0 0 0 132.000.64.594.76.65.91 Contribution om REET 0 (115,000) 0 0 0 0 126.000.68.595.33.65.90 REET contribution 0 115,000 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $260,000 $130,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses I $390,000 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 Revenue and Endin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 126.000.39.508.30.00.00 115,000 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Carryforward 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 132.000.367.00.000.00 15,000 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $130,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 15 c m E c m Q m a� 00 L L CI co 0 N 0 a� U a M c �a L 0 a� E c M E Q a� aM 00 L 3 CY r a-: c M E t v c� Q Packet Pg. 120 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: There was an an additional $16,254 of revenues received in the department at the end of last year from the L & I SAW program which is needed for the 2016 City safety program and safety compliance. This money was received in 2015, but not spent. This money will be used for accident prevention including mandatory, necessary training programs and compliance initiatives for the City's Acccident Prevention Program that are not yet funded as well as a Safety consultant. Department: Human Resources Fund GFNII2AL Division: Human Resources Title: SAW Reimbursements Name: Preparer: Mary Ann Hardie Department Account Number: 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 Strategic Plan Task Action Item: Budget Amendment Type? I New Item For Council To Consider If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Operating Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 SAWReimbursements 0 16,254 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $0 $16,254 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses 1 $16,254 1 $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 Revenue and Fndin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 001.000.39.508. 16,254 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $16,254 $0 $0 $0 $0 16 c m E c m Q m a� 00 L L CI co 0 N 0 a� U a M c �a L 0 a� E c M E Q a� aM 00 L 3 CY r a-: c M E t v c� Q Packet Pg. 121 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: Planning Board meetings were videotaped in 2015 by a one-time City Council budget allocation of $2,000 included in the 2015 budget. Funding for this item needs to be reauthorized as an ongoing budget expense. Department: Development Services Fund Name: GFNII2AL Division: Administration Title: Planning Board videotaping Preparer: Shane Hope Department Account Number: 62.524 Strategic Plan Task Action Item: Budget Amendment Type? I New Item For Council To Consider If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: What is the nature of the expenditure? I On -Going Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Operating Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Dev. Services Prof Svc. 62.524.10.41.00 0 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $0 $2,100 $2,100 $2,100 $2,100 $2,100 Total Expenses 1 $2,100 1 $2,100 1 $2,100 1 $2,100 1 $2,100 Revenue and Fndin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 001.000.39.00 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $2,100 $2,100 $2,100 $2,100 $2,100 17 r c m E c m Q m a� 00 L L CI co 0 N 0 a� U a M c �a L 0 a� E c M E Q a� aM 00 L 3 CY r a-: c M E t v c� Q Packet Pg. 122 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: A member of the Planning Division staff will be on leave for an extended period of time during 2016. Given the elevated level of development activity being experienced and the significant planning and code work being done, it is important to make sure that staffing is maintained during this year. This proposal will fund additional hours of work for an existing part-time planner to provide coverage during this period. Department: Development Services Fund GENERAL Division: Planning Title: Planning Staff Back -fill Name: Preparer: Shane Hope Department Account Number: 62.558 Strategic Plan Task Action Item: Budget Amendment Type? I New Item For Council To Consider If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Operating Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Planning Salaries 62.558.60.11.00 565,910 10,800 0 0 0 0 Planning Benefits 62.558.60.23.00 218,570 4,400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $784,480 $15,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses I $799,680 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 Revenue and Fndin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 001.000.39.508 15,200 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $15,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 1M. c m E c m Q m a� 00 L L CI co 0 N 0 a� U a M c �a L 0 a� E c M E Q a� aM 00 L 3 CY r a-: c M E t v c� Q Packet Pg. 123 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: Phase II Environmental at Marina Beach Park. Landau Associates performed some soil and water sampling testing at Marina Beach Park. This was not originally in the 2016 budget. This request is for additional authorization for the Parks administrative professional services line item. Department: Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Fund Name: GFNII2AL Division: Parks Title: Marina Beach Park Environmental Testing Preparer: CCruz for Carrie Hite Department Account Number: 001.000.64.571.21.41.00 Strategic Plan Task Action Item: Action 3a.4 (35): Greenways and Parks Budget Amendment Type? I New Item For Council To Consider If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Operating Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Professional Services 38,600 12,391 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $38,600 $12,391 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses 1 $50,9911 $0 I $0 I $0 1 $0 Revenue and Ending Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 001.000.39.508. 12,391 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $12,391 $0 $0 $0 $0 19 c m E c m Q m a� 00 L L CI co 0 N 0 a� U a M c �a L 0 a� E c W E Q a� a� 00 L 3 CY r a-: c a� E t v c� Q Packet Pg. 124 3.5.a EXHIBIT "P: Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: Authorization request to expend funds received in association with the Holiday Market and Bird Fest. Holiday Market. Funds received derive principally from vendor booth fees, which with an enhanced holiday market for 2016, could run up to $5000. This authorization would allow for expenditure of up to the total funds received (maximum $5000) to pay for expenses related to producing, managing and promoting the holiday market. Bird Fest. Funds received derive principally from sponsorships and donations, which could run up to $5000. This authorization would allow for expenditure of up to the total funds received (maximum $5000) to pay for expenses related to producing, managing and promoting Bird Fest. Department: Community Svcs/Eton Development Fund GENERAL Division: Economic Development (61) Title: Professional Services Name: Preparer: Patrick Doherty Department Account Number: 001.000.61.558.70.41 Strategic Plan Task Action Item: I Year round Farmer's Market - 2a.2 Budget Amendment Type? I New Item For Council To Consider If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: What is the nature of the expenditure? I On -Going Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Operating Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budge 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Professional Services - 21,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $21,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 Total Expenses 1 $31,000 1 $31,000 1 $31,000 1 $31,000 1 $31,000 Revenue and Ending Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 001.000.367.00.200.00 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 001. 000.34 7.93.000.00 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 20 Q Packet Pg. 125 3.5.a EXHIBIT "P: Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: The replacement of the Bandshell at the Frances Anderson Center is scheduled for 2016. $81,870 was carriedforward from 2015 and an additional budget authority was requested at that time. Another $30,000 is now requested to cover costs for demolition. This was a " by owner" item, but we just don't have the capacity to perform this work. Department: Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Fund Name: PARKACQ/ 1WROVFIVIENT Division: Parks Title: Bands hell at Frances Anderson Preparer: CCruz for Carrie Hite Department Account Number: 125.000.64.594.75.65.00 Strategic Plan Task Action Item: Action 3a.4 (35): Greenways and Parks Budget Amendment Type? I New Item For Council To Consider If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Capital Fill In Item Description IsI Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Construction Projects 161,870 30,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $161,870 $30,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses I $191,870 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 Revenue and Fndin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 125.000.64.508.30 30,000 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $30,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 21 c m E c m Q m a� 00 L L CI co 0 N 0 a� U a M c �a L 0 a� E c M E Q a� aM 00 L 3 CY r a-: c a� E t v c� Q Packet Pg. 126 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: An additional $31,933 spending allocation is needed to pay for the water connection to the spray park. Water Meter Fee $6,390, Water Connection Fee $25,248, Permit Surcharge fee $25 and Sewer Permit fee $270. This is an interfund charge that wasn't orginally identified in the project budget. Department: Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Fund Name: PARKS CONSTRUCTION Division: Parks Title: City Park Spray & Play Preparer: CCruz for Carrie Hite Department Account Number: 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 Strategic Plan Task Action Item: Action 3a.4 (35): Greenways and Parks Budget Amendment Type? I New Item For Council To Consider If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Capital Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 (Construction) 160,872 31,933 0 0 0 0 132.000.64.594.76.65.91 (Constfirom otherfind) 0 (31,933) 0 0 0 0 125.000.64.594.75.65.90 Const to other and 0 31,933 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $160,872 $31,933 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses I $192,805 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 Revenue and Fndin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 125.000.64.508.30 31,933 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $31,933 $0 $0 $0 $0 22 Q Packet Pg. 127 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: Construction is complete but education and enforcement are ongoing and are expected to be complete by Summer, 2016. Education and enforcement funds were part of the original Safe Routes to School Grant awarded for this project. Department: Public Works Fund Name: STREET CONSTRUCTION Division: Engineering Title: E3DC-15th St SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) Preparer: Ryan Hague Department Account Number: Strategic Plan Task Action Item: 4a.3 Walkways Budget Amendment Type? I New Item For Council To Consider If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Capital Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 112.000.68.595.33.41.00 Professional Services 0 33,520 0 0 0 0 112.000.68.595.33.41.10 Interfund Services 0 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $0 $43,520 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses 1 $43,520 1 $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 Revenue and Endin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 112.000.334.03.600.05 43,520 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $43,520 $0 $0 $0 $0 23 r c m E c m Q m a� 00 L L CI co 0 N 0 a� U a M c �a L 0 a� E c M E Q a� aM 00 L 3 CY r a-: c M E t v c� Q Packet Pg. 128 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: The City was successful in securing a transportation grant for the 238th St. Walkway (Hwy 99 to SR104) from the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) in late Fall, 2015. The TIB grant agreement was approved by the City Council in early 2016. Design development is expected to begin Spring, 2016 Department: Public Works Fund Name: STREET CONSTRUCTION Division: Engineering Title: E6DA-238th St SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99 Preparer: Ryan Hague Department Account Number: Strategic Plan Task Action Item: 4a.3 Walkways Budget Amendment Type? I New Item For Council To Consider If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Capital Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 112.000.68.595.33.41.00 Professional Services 0 75,000 0 0 0 0 112.000.68.595.33.41.10 Interfund Services 0 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $0 $90,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses 1 $90,000 1 $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 Revenue and Fndin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions TIB Fuel Tax Grant 90,000 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $90,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 24 c m E c m Q m a� 00 L L CI co 0 N 0 a� U a M c �a L 0 a� E c M E Q a� aM 00 L 3 CY r a-: c M E t v c� Q Packet Pg. 129 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: Additional funds from the 2016 pavement preservation program are being programmed into the 236th St. Walkway project to fund an overlay of 236th within the project limits. Construction is expected to begin Summer, 2016. Department: Public Works Fund Name: STREET CONSTRUCTION Division: Engineering Title: 236th St SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona Scho Preparer: Ryan Hague Department Account Number: Strategic Plan Task Action Item: 4a.3 Walkways Budget Amendment Type? I New Item For Council To Consider If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Capital Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 112.000.68.595.33.41.00 Professional Services 74,337 80,360 0 0 0 0 112.000.68.595.33.41.10 Interfund Services 21,856 22,150 0 0 0 0 112.000.68.595.33.65.00 Construction 497,272 52,170 0 1 0 0 0 126.000.68.595.33.41.90 REST I Pro Sery to Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 126.000.68.595.33.41.19 REST I Inter and Sery to Od 0 0 0 0 0 0 126.000.68.595.33.65.90 REST I Const Pro ' to Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $593,465 $154,680 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses I $748,145 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 Revenue and Fndin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 112.000.333.20.205.16 154,680 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $154,680 $0 $0 $0 $0 25 r c m E c m Q m a� 00 L L CI co 0 N 0 a� U a M c �a L 0 a� E c M E Q a� aM 00 L 3 CY N r a-: c M E t v c� Q Packet Pg. 130 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: An additional site was added near the end of the design project, which requires the need of additional funding to allow for construction of the entire project. The additional funding is coming from: $75,000 from the 423 Sewer Utility Fund balance (2015 Sewer replacement project was under budget); $60,000 from the 2016 Sewer Replacement project (Estimated surplus of funds in 2016); and $41,000 from the 423 Sewer Utility Fund balance (2015 CIPP did not go to Department: Public Works Fund Name: SEWER/TREATMENT PLANT Division: Engineering Title: Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Preparer: Michele (Nlike) De Lilla Department Account Number: Strategic Plan Task Action Item: N/A Budget Amendment Type? I New Item For Council To Consider If previously discussed, date(s) of discussion: What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Capital Fill In Item Description[s] Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 0 0 0 0 0 0 Professional Services 423.200.75.594.35.41.00 0 20,000 0 0 0 0 Interfund Services 423.200.75.535.35.41.10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Construction 423.200.75.594.35.65.00 0 156,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $0 $176,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses I $176,000 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 Revenue and Endin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase 423.200.75.508.30.00.00 176,000 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue and Ending Cash $176,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 26 c m E c m Q m a� 00 L L CI co 0 N 0 a� U a M c �a L 0 a� E c W E Q a� a� 00 L 3 CY r c a� E t c� Q Packet Pg. 131 3.5.a EXHIBIT "F": Budget Amendments (April 2016) Budget Amendment for: First Quarter Item Description: During the 2016 Budget development, staff submitted a budget request for $50,000 for the transition to a web based operations management system that will allow staff to use mobile devices to assign, track, record and retrieve information while in the field. Further research led to a decision to purchase a different software system entirely which will savesignificantly on annual software license costs in 2017 and beyond but will be $15,000 higher in 2016. The additional $15,000 will be split evenly between the four funds listed below. Department: Public Works Pond Name: Street, water, Storm & Sewer Division: Street, Storm, Water & Sewer Title: Asset Management Mobile Field Conversion Preparer: Phil Williams Department Account Number: Funds 111, 421, 422, & 423 Strategic Plan Task Action Item: Budget Amendment Type? I New Item For Council To Consider Ifpreviously discussed, date(s) of discussion: What is the nature of the expenditure? I One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? I Operating Fill In Item Description [s I Baseline Budget 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 111.000.68.542.31.49.00 12,500 3,750 0 0 0 0 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 12,500 3,750 0 0 0 0 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 12,500 3,750 0 0 0 0 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 12,500 3,750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sub -Total $50,000 $15,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses 1 $65,000 1 $0 I $0 1 $0 $0 Revenue and Fndin Cash Comments 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Ending Cash: Decrease Increase Funds 111, 421, 422, 423 15,000 0 0 0 0 Ending Cash: Carr forward 0 0 0 0 0 Grants/Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 General Fund Subsidy 0 0 0 0 0 New Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 Total Revenue andFndin Cash $15,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 27 Q Packet Pg. 132 3.6 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/3/2016 Authorization to award a construction contract for the 2016 Waterline Replacement Program to D&G Backhoe Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History On April 26, 2016, staff presented this item to the City Council and it was forwarded to the May 3, 2016 consent agenda for approval. Staff Recommendation Award the construction contract to D&G Backhoe in the amount of $1,147,401.86 and authorize a $120,000 management reserve for changes and unforeseen conditions during construction. Narrative On April 21, 2016, the City received four bids for the 2016 Waterline Replacement Project. The bids ranged from a low of $1,147,401.86 to a high of $1,575,310.48. A summary of bid results is attached as Exhibit A. D&G Backhoe submitted the low responsive bid in the amount of $1,147,401.86. The engineer's estimate was $1,470,000. A review of the low bidder's record has been completed, and responses are positive. This project is part of the City's program to replace and upgrade existing waterlines at various locations around the City that are reaching the end of their useful service life, is undersized and unable to meet current requirements, or has some other existing system deficiency. The project will replace at various locations around the City approximately 4,850 linear feet of waterline piping with associated meters, and fire hydrants. The proposed construction budget and funding are shown on Exhibit B. The project costs are being funded by the 421 Water Fund and the General Funds available for fire protection costs. A 10% management reserve is proposed for the project. Attachments: Exhibit A - Bid Summary Exhibit B - Proposed Budget Vicinity Map Packet Pg. 133 3.6.a City of Edmonds 2016 Waterline Replacement Project Bid Summary April 2016 Site Engineer's Estimate D&G Laser Underground SRV Construction Kar-Vel Schedule A: 217th Street SW STA AO+00 to STA A7+80 $ 230,000.00 $ 177,204.90 $ 221,312.88 $ 236,133.68 $ 195,910.65 Schedule B: 12th Ave N, Sierra St $ 20,000.00 $ 9,827.10 $ 38,979.00 $ 30,485.97 $ 18,204.84 Schedule C: 87th Avenue W STA CO+00 to STA C5+30 $ 160,000.00 $ 121,944.21 $ 166,950.90 $ 150,978.29 $ 142,059.24 Schedule D: Northstream Lane STA DO+00 to STA D8+60) $ 250,000.00 $ 193,789.53 $ 251,991.00 $ 288,390.80 $ 225,100.98 Schedule E $ 150,000.00 $ 109,996.32 $ 163,958.85 $ 158,915.74 $ 132,070.19 Schedule F: Sierra Drive, 80th PI W, 81st PI W, STA FO+00 to STA F5+80 $ 510,000.00 $ 424,368.98 $ 537,481.98 $ 551,228.94 $ 450,687.83 Schedule G: 182nd Place SW STA GO+00 to STA G4+20 $ 150,000.00 $ 110,270.82 $ 149,778.18 $ 159,177.06 $ 132,934.86 Total $ 1,470,000.00 $ 1,147,401.86 $ 1,530,452.79 $ 1,575,310.48 $ 1,296,968.59 E 3 a ti 00 r f0 E E 7 E t K W C d E t V IC a+ Q Packet Pg. 134 3.6.b 2016 Waterline Replacement Project Proposed Construction Budget Description Amount Contract Award $1,147,402 Construction Management, Inspection & Testing $140,000 Management Reserve $120,000 Total = $1,407,402 Construction Funding Funding Amount Fire Protection $45,677 421 funds available for 2016 Water Replacement Project $1,900,000 Total = $1,945,677 Packet Pg. 135 3.6.c City of Edmonds Vicinity Map 2016 Waterline Replacement s n Project Site Locations: 1. 21711 St SW west of 88t1i Ave W 2. Easement From 520 12th Ave W, heading east to 9221 Sierra St. 3. 87th Ave W south of 202"d St SW. 4. Northstream Lane west of 9th Ave W. 5. 192"d St West east of 94th Ave W. 6. 80th Place West north of Sierra Drive, Sierra Drive Ibetween 80th Ave W and 815Y PI W and 815t Place W south of Sierra Dr. 7. 182"d Place east of 7211 Ave W. HWERq> 44 d _z Y II61H�i 160TH 5T S%%- qr 1 0 i. C t?PTH 4T SW S 196TH Sl SW qA K -•H 1 `T'-Jh 2 .?041 H %r •,W �C6iHS1 � h� �t �1M 4sr Win' 244TH STFW -N r 24411a a Packet Pg. 136 3.7 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/3/2016 Authorization to award a construction contract for the 2016 Sanitary Sewerline Replacement Program to Kar-Vel Construction Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History On April 26, 2016, staff presented this item to the City Council and it was forwarded to the May 3, 2016 consent agenda for approval. Staff Recommendation Award the construction contract to Kar-Vel Construction in the amount of $1,543,752.59 and authorize a $155,000 management reserve for changes and unforeseen conditions during construction. Narrative On April 26, 2016, the City received five bids for the 2016 Sanitary Sewer and Storm Replacement Project. The bids ranged from a low of $1,543,752.59 to a high of $2,342,399.63. Kar-Vel Construction submitted the low responsive bid in the amount of $1,543,752.59. The engineer's estimate was $1,454,145. A review of the low bidder's record has been completed, and responses are positive. This project is part of the City's program to replace/repair and upgrade existing sewerlines at various locations around the City that are reaching the end of their useful service life, are undersized and unable to meet current requirements, or has some other existing system deficiency. The project will replace at seven locations in the City approximately 2,000 linear feet of sewerline, associated manholes and services. In addition, the project will install approximately 750 linear feet of new stormwater piping and associated manholes. This portion of the project will construct a bypass to alleviate drainage issues downstream of 12th Ave and Sierra Place. The proposed construction budget and funding are shown in Exhibit B. The project costs are being funded by the 423 (Sewer) and 422 (Storm) Utility Funds. A $440,000 budget amendment is needed for the Stormwater portion of the project and it will be included in the second quarter budget amendments. A 10% management reserve is proposed for changes and unforeseen conditions during construction. Attachments: Exhibit A - Bid Summary Exhibit B - Proposed Budget Vicinity Map Packet Pg. 137 3.7.a City of Edmonds 2016 Sanitary and Storm Replacement Projects Bid Summary April 2016 Engineer's Estimate Shoreline Construction Co A-1 Landscaping and Laser Underground & Kar-Vel Construction Rodarte Construction Inc Construction Earthworks, Inc., SCHEDULE 1 - 75TH PL W and 162ND ST W SANITARY SEWER REPLACEMENT $ 125,448.70 $ 126,840.96 $ 223,359.55 $ 158,700.53 $ 116,054.21 $ 109,666.04 SCHEDULE 2 - 75TH PL W and 164TH ST W SANITARY SEWER REPLACEMENT $ 106,556.51 $ 98,092.03 $ 177,273.20 $ 149,638.73 $ 113,377.01 $ 99,258.10 SCHEDULE 3 - 76TH AVE W and BERTOLA RD SANITARY SEWER REPLACEMENT $ 203,669.12 $ 225,914.60 $ 326,626.45 $ 276,118.45 $ 220,552.24 $ 456,647.22 SCHEDULE 4 - 88TH AVE W and 196TH ST SW SANITARY SEWER REPLACEMENT $ 193,466.50 $ 243,508.95 $ 312,222.89 $ 258,171.64 $ 240,155.93 $ 240,234.71 SCHEDULE 5 - 6th AVE S and MAPLE ST SANITARY SEWER REPLACEMENT $ 243,707.69 $ 273,162.64 $ 434,206.30 $ 326,747.23 $ 265,999.83 $ 306,822.92 SCHEDULE 6 - BOWDOIN WAY and 92ND AVE W SANITARY SEWER REPLACEMENT $ 87,196.57 $ 87,446.92 $ 178,060.46 $ 118,652.08 $ 91,556.18 $ 106,837.60 SCHEDULE 7SS - SIERRA PLACE SANITARY SEWER REPLACEMENT $ 148,688.96 $ 188,673.73 $ 164,225.66 $ 222,841.30 $ 136,305.17 $ 136,863.50 IMPROVEMENTS $ 345,411.04 $ 460,015.88 $ 510,723.72 $ 375,937.63 $ 359,752.01 $ 359,496.18 TOTAL $ 1,454,145.08 $ 1,703,655.70 $ 2,326,698.23 $ 1,886,807.59 $ 1,543,752.59 $ 1,815,826.28 Packet Pg. 138 3.7.b 2016 Sewer and Storm Replacement Project Proposed Construction Budget Total Descriotion Amount Contract Award $1,543,753 Construction Management, Inspection & Testing $170,000 1% for the arts $3,598 Management Reserve $155,000 Total = $1,872,351 Construction Funding funding Amount 422 Stormwater Utility Funding $460,000 423 funds available for 2016 Sewer Replacement Project $1,800,000 Total = $2,260,000 Packet Pg. 139 3.7.c City of Edmonds Vicinity Map , Q 00 Site Locations: 1. 75th PI W near the intersection of 162nd 2. 75th PI W near the intersection of 164th 3. 76th Ave W near the intersection of Bertola Rd. 4. 88th Ave W north of the intersection of 196th St. 5. 6th Ave S and Maple St. 6. Bowdoin Way near the intersection of 92nd Ave West. 7. 12th Ave N south of the intersection with Vista Way and also Sierra Place east of Olympic Ave. lz�- pK O NvpYI%AAI O Q — �4 4n a+ • r; - r u, 5 O d +h K Y- z + I_ ¢ t 2016 Sanitary and Storm Replacement Project ISOTHST S)bv r' Q 1 T } ►,per 146TH }T SW A 01� I r a "- 2.7Gi1� x 7 3 f it, 04bs war } Il 4 } w a lil•f1'ST5;w r 244TH STIW -� 1-141 Packet Pg. 140 3.8 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/3/2016 Public Works Engineering Job Description Update & Reclassification Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History On April 26, 2016, staff presented this item to Council and it was forwarded to the May 3rd consent agenda for approval. Staff Recommendation Approve the revised job descriptions for the Senior Utilities Engineer, Stormwater Engineer and Engineering Program Manger 2. Narrative This agenda item addresses a promotion and proposal to reclassify three job descriptions within the Engineering Division. Two of the proposed job reclassifications (Senior Utilities Engineer and Stormwater Engineer) are in response to the vacancy created when Mr. Jerry Shuster accepted a position with the City of Bellevue. This change will improve the coordination and planning of capital utility projects for all three utilities, since one position will oversee this effort. In addition, the Senior Utilities Engineer position is being revised to add supervisor responsibilities and will supervise two positions. The Engineering Program Manager 2 reclassification and Engineering Technician III promotion are both opportunities for current staff to advance in their career path according to a previously established career progression plan. The Engineering Technician III promotion will provide more flexibility within the Engineering Division, since an Engineering Technician III can work on more complex projects and can independently review larger private development projects such as commercial, multi -family and short plats. The Engineering Program Manager 2 reclassification also revises the job description to eliminate capital construction job duties that are no longer appropriate for this positon. The Engineering Program Manager 2 position will supervise three employees who work together as a team to focus on the review and inspection of private development projects. Designating a supervisor for this team will provide workflow efficiency and improve communication and coordination within the group. Packet Pg. 141 3.8 The proposed reclassifications will also reduce the number of employees supervised by the City Engineer from 13 to 9. Refer to the organization chart, Attachment 5. This is a more appropriate span of control given the technical complexity and financial workload managed by the Division. Senior Utilities Engineer & Stormwater Engineer (Reclassifications): In January of this year, the Stormwater Engineer position became vacant after Mr. Jerry Shuster accepted a position with the City of Bellevue. The vacancy created an opportunity to evaluate job duties and the skill set of existing staff. Based on this review, staff is recommending the following changes and reclassification of the Senior Utilities Engineer and Stormwater Engineer positions: The supervisor responsibilities and long range planning of stormwater capital improvements would be eliminated from the Stormwater Engineer job description. The salary range would drop from 14 to 13. Shift the long range planning and programming of Stormwater capital improvements from the Stormwater Engineer position to the Senior Utilities Engineer positon. Prior to the vacancy, the planning and programming of capital improvements for utility projects was split between the Senior Utilities Engineer and the Stormwater Engineer. The Senior Utilities Engineer was responsible for water and sewer improvements and the Stormwater Engineer managed stormwater improvements. The coordination, planning and programming of all three utilities could be simplified and improved by moving this responsibility under the Senior Utilities Engineer position. Add supervisor duties to the Senior Utilities Engineer position and increase the salary range from 14 to 16. The Senior Utilities Engineer would supervise two employees, the Stormwater Engineer and the Stormwater Technician positions. Engineering Technician III Promotion: The City previously established three career progression positions for the Engineering Technician and Engineering Program Manager positions. One of the main goals of the career progression plan is to provide a career path for employees to gain increasing experience over time and become more productive and efficient in the service they provide. The progression plan helps to retain employees, expand the employee's qualifications and experience and provide flexibility to distribute private development reviews and inspections between multiple staff. To be eligible for promotion in the Engineering Technician series, an employee must complete the experience requirements in a qualifications checklist. A qualifications checklist is used to promote an Engineering Technician I to Engineering Technician II and an Engineering Technician II to Engineering Technician III. The employee must also receive an overall employee rating of "Commendable" on their performance evaluation. The Engineering Division currently has an employee who is an Engineering Technician II that has successfully completed the qualifications checklist and is now eligible for promotion. The employee, Ms. Jennifer Lambert, is responsible for completing reviews and inspections on private residential and minor Packet Pg. 142 3.8 commercial projects. She also reviews and approves right of way permits for utility improvements proposed by Puget Sound Energy, Snohomish County PUD, Comcast, Frontier and other utility providers. Staff is recommending the addition of an Engineering Technician III position to the 2016 budget to provide a promotion opportunity for Ms. Lambert. Once the Engineering Technician III position is filled, one of the two existing Engineering Technician II positions would be eliminated from the budget. Engineering Program Manager (Reclassification): A similar career progression is in place for the Engineering Program Manager series with an Engineering Program Manager 1, 2 and 3. The Engineering Program Manager is responsible for managing the private development reviews and inspections for the Division. The position also provides guidance to the Engineering Technicians who work on private development projects. Staff is recommending the reclassification of the Engineering Program Manager 1 to the Engineering Program Manager 2 position. The Engineering Program Manager 1 position is currently held by Ms. Jeanie McConnell, who has been employed with the City of Edmonds since 1994 and was hired into the Engineering Program Manager 1 position in 2007. The reclassification will increase Ms. McConnell's job duties by adding supervisor responsibilities and managing three engineering employees who work on private development reviews and inspections. In addition to the reclassification, staff is recommending the job description be updated and revised to reflect the job duties this position will be performing. The previous Engineering Program Manager 2 job description was created in 2001 and included job duties related to capital construction that is no longer required or appropriate for this position. The revised job descriptions for each position are attached for reference. Budget Impacts: The proposed reclassifications and promotion will result in an estimated decrease of approximately ($36,000) to salaries and benefits in 2016 due to the salary savings from the Stormwater Engineer vacancy. A four year estimate, from 2017 to 2020, shows an annual increase in salaries and benefits that ranges from $12,600 to $30,000. The calculations are based in today's dollars and extend to when all positions would be at the top step in the salary range. The Utility Funds will pay for approximately 55% of the increase and the remaining amount will be largely offset by permit revenue with some contribution by the General Fund. Refer to Attachment 4. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Engineering Program Manager Job Description Attachment 2 - Senior Utilities Engineer Job Description Attachment 3 - Stormwater Engineer Job Description Attachment 4 - Salary Table Attachment 5 - Engineering Organizational Chart Packet Pg. 143 3.8.a City of EDMONDS Washington ENGINEERING PROGRAM MANAGER 2 ' Formatted: Heading 3, Left, Space Aft Department: Public Works - Engineering Pay Grade: NR-12 Bargaining Unit: Non -Represented FLSA Status: Exempt Revised Date: November 201 April 2016 Reports To: City Engineer POSITION PURPOSE: Under administrative direction, manages private development and inspection responsibilities for the Engineering Division; manages staff including training and evaluation of assigned personnel; serves as the liaison between City staff, the general public, engineering consultants and other land development professionals to provide information regarding City codes and standards and permit requirements; reviews processes and inspection requirements; performs plan reviews and field inspections on private development projects to ensure code and permit compliance; reviews and recommends updates City codes, standards, policies and procedures as needed and to provide efficiency in the development process. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES: The following duties ARE NOT intended to serve as a comprehensive list of all duties performed by all employees in this classification, only a representative summary of the primary duties and responsibilities. Incumbent(s) may not be required to perform all duties listed and may be required to perform additional, position -specific duties. Private Development Services • Manages the Engineering Division responsibilities for private development reviews and inspections; coordinates and maintains an orderly review process for land development proposals submitted to the City and ensures compliance with the ECDC. • Supervises, coaches, trains and motivates staff and coordinates and/or provides staff training. • Manages the employment and hiring process and employee relations for assigned area. • Manages the workflow and prioritization of assigned projects, ,..hen necessary pre..iron adyine and nounspi to staff • Develops or assists with developmental work plans for staff and makes recommendations and/or implements corrective actions, discipline and termination procedures as appropriate/necessary or as directed. • Prepares and maintains a variety of records and�,�, ews related to assigned activities. • Reviews and makes recommendations to City codes or policy changes as appropriate and based on experience with daily operations and planning. • Develops, documents and publicizes Engineering Division processes and procedures; establishes documents; publicizes City design and construction standards. • Determines engineering requirements for subdivisions, commercial, multi -family and single family private development projects. • Reviews plats and designs for streets and utilities to be installed. • Reviews and approves permits for commercial, multi -family, single family and other private development projects for code compliance. • Conducts preconstruction conferences and explains permit conditions to applicants. • Reviews final subdivision records, verifying accuracy of legal descriptions and maps for conformance to ECDC and coordinates reviews with other divisions. Engineering Program Manager 2 April 2016NAvP" ~ 2012^' otf N pt N c c W U) Y L 0 7 3 a co 00 r Packet Pg. 144 3.8.a JOB DESCRIPTION Engineering Program Manager 2 • Calculates permit fees including performance bond amount and inspection fees;, prepares Engineering requirements for development. and submits to the City ERgiR88F for autheFized sigRa ,,.e • Conducts reviews and inspections and approves construction of subdivisions, commercial and multi- family building projects; provides guidance, training and oversight for other staff members on development reviews and inspection. • Monitors assigned staff performance and implements corrective action as appropriate. • Serves as liaison between City staff, the public, engineering consultants and other land development professionals. • Responds to engineering questions and provides information regarding engineering permits and land development to the public. • Communicates with internal and external contacts regarding project management, project coordination and general inquiries. • Attends hearings on subdivision and land developments and presents project requirements. • Provides information to public regarding permits and related engineering questions. •_Prepares and presents materials for City Council, Hearing Examiner, Planning Commission, Architectural Design Board and public meetings; prepares and maintains a variety of files, records and reports related to assigned activities. • Performs website design and maintenance for the Public Works Department and prepares and maintains a variety of files, records and reports related to assigned activities. Engineering Program Manager 2 April 2016November 2812 Packet Pg. 145 3.8.a JOB DESCRIPTION Engineering Program Manager 2 Required Knowledge of: • Civil engineering principles, practices and standards. • City standards, codes, regulations, local, state and federal laws including the Edmonds Community Development Code. • Review, inspection and approval processes and procedures related to subdivisions and commercial, multi -family and single family private developments. • WSDOT and APWA specifications and procedures. • Building, eleGtrinnl and plumbing , Gd4s ^Construction methods, materials, processes and procedures. • Field inspection practices, including surveying and material testing. • Property owners' rights and privileges. • Laws, regulations, ordinances and codes related to assigned activities. • Health and safety regulations. • Technical aspects of field of specialty. • Interpersonal skills using tact, patience and courtesy. • Structure, organization and interrelationships of city departments, agencies and related governmental agencies and offices affecting assigned functions. • Effective oral and written communication principles and practices to include public relations and public speaking. • Research methods and report preparation and presentation. • Modern office procedures, methods, and equipment including computers and computer applications such as: word processing, spreadsheets, and statistical databases. • English usage, spelling, grammar and punctuation. • Principles of business letter writing. • Oversight, technical review and advisement techniques, lead work principles, methods and techniques. Required Skill in: • Planning, designing, directing, coordinating and implementing construction of public facilities primarily related to streets and utilities. Providing project oversight for the develepment, bidding and GenstrUGtien management of City prejeGt-_. • Performing engineering and land survey calculations. • Reading, interpreting and understanding specifications, drawings and field surveys. • Reviewing and editing project plans and specifications. • Planning workload and prioritizing and scheduling work. • Representing the City effectively at public meetings and work with the public. • Interpreting, applying and explaining rules, regulations, policies and procedures. • Utilizing personal computer software programs and other relevant software affecting assigned work and in compiling and preparing spreadsheets. • Establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with staff, management, vendors, outside agencies, community groups and the general public. • Applying program/projeGt management techniques and prinG nlnc • Directing the maintenance of a variety of reports and files; preparing, maintaining and reviewing narratives and statistical reports. Engineering Program Manager 2 April 2016November —2812 Packet Pg. 146 3.8.a JOB DESCRIPTION Engineering Program Manager 2 • Determining or assisting with project budgets, resources and timelines to complete projects from conceptualization to finish. • Communicating effectively verbally and in writing, including public relations and public speaking. • Oversight, trainingand t8Ghn Gal review of ether's tasks • Supervising, leading, coaching and using best management practices to improve staff performance; delegating tasks and workload assignments. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Education and Experience: Bachelor's Degree in Civil Engineering, Construction Management or related field and four years of municipal engineering experience including review, inspection and approval of subdivisions and commercial, multi -family and single family private developments or ,--qRd—management and design evefsight of capital construction projects a.Rd G.fraGtr that in .Iud s eversigmf f .Bann, GGI;eduler Rd GE46; OR an equivalent combination of education, training and experience. Required Licenses or Certifications: Valid State of Washington Driver's License. Must be able to successfully complete and pass a background check. WORKING CONDITIONS: Environment: • Indoor and outdoor work environment. • Driving a vehicle to conduct work. Physical Abilities: • Hearing, speaking or otherwise communicating to exchange information in person or on the telephone. • Operating a computer keyboard and drafting materials. • Reading and understanding a variety of materials. • Sitting, standing or otherwise remaining in a stationary position for extended periods of time. • Ascending/descending from ladders and working from heights or depths. • Bending at the waist, kneeling or crouching reaching above shoulders and horizontally or otherwise positioning oneself to accomplish tasks. • Lifting/carrying or otherwise moving or transporting moderately heavy objects up to 40 lbs. • Ability to wear appropriate personal protective equipment based on required City Policy. Hazards: • Contact with angry and/or dissatisfied customers. • Working in and around moving traffic. • Occasional exposure to dangerous machinery. • Occasional extreme weather conditions. • Potential physical harm and hazardous chemicals when working in the field, conducting inspections and working around construction equipment and worksites. Incumbent Signature: Department Head: Engineering Program Manager 2 Date: Date: April 2016November '^" Packet Pg. 147 3.8.b City of EDMONDS Washington SENIOR UTILITIES ENGINEER Department: Public Works - Engineering Pay Grade: NR-16 Bargaining Unit: Non Represented FLSA Status: Exempt Revised Date: ^1nvPrnbP :2n12April 2016 Reports To: City Engineer POSITION PURPOSE: Under administrative direction, plans and manages the City's engineering programs for water, stormwater and sewer utilities; develops and manages water, sewer and storm drainage capital projects; plans, develops and prepares design drawings, specifications and cost estimates; designs contract drawings to ensure quality and cost effective construction; manages consultant and contractor contracts; performs reviews and inspections of utilities on private development projects and performs oversight and technical review on design drawings and specifications prepared by other City staff. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES: The following duties ARE NOT intended to serve as a comprehensive list of all duties performed by all employees in this classification, only a representative summary of the primary duties and responsibilities. Incumbent(s) may not be required to perform all duties listed and may be required to perform additional, position -specific duties. • Manages the City's engineering programs for water, stormwater and sewer utilities engineering programs; prepares technical studies and performs hydraulic analysis to size new systems with appropriate capacity. • Performs oversight and technical supervision of utilityies engineering/design work performed by other staff members; reviews, approves, stamps and signs utilityies engineering/design drawings prepared by other staff members. • Prepares and implements new City code, standards and specifications for utility improvement and conducts plan reviews and inspections on utility improvements for private development applications. • Prepares the annual water, stormwater and sewer capital improvement programs and updates the water and sewer elements of the Comprehensive Plan. • Manages assigned capital improvement projects and independently plans, develops and prepares water, sewer and storm drainage utility design drawings, contract specifications and cost estimates. • Uses AutoCAD and related engineering and graphics software to prepare detailed design drawings. • Coordinates project improvements with City Departments, private utilities, other public agencies and citizens; prepares and secures necessary easements for project construction. • Manages the advertisement, bid and award of water, sewer and storm drainage capital improvement projects; prepares advertisement notice and responses to bidder questions. • Reviews and analyzes bid documents for compliance with City, state and federal requirements; prepares award recommendation for City Council; oversees the execution and processing of construction contract documents. • Performs the construction management of assigned projects; implements the contract and maintains a project filing system. • Follows related City, state and federal standards, policies, guidelines and laws; processes, reviews and approves contractor submittals; processes, reviews and responds to requests for information. • Performs field inspection and documentation of construction activities; prepares and calculates progress pay estimates and negotiates and prepares change orders and field change directives. Senior Utilities Engineer April 2016Neve^ 'n 2 Style Definition: List Bullet 2: Font: P Indent: Left: 0.25" T, a to 00 Packet Pg. 148 3.8.b JOB DESCRIPTION Senior Utilities Engineer • Prepares daily inspection reports; calculates and prepares field notes records of contractor quantities and materials installed in the field; takes and files daily photos of assigned projects and monitors contractor operations and traffic control to ensure a safe work area. • Responds promptly to public questions and concerns; attends, runs or coordinates associated meetings and interacts with other public agencies; manages and tracks the close-out phase of construction contracts and the documentation required for final project approval. • Prepares and manages consultant contracts; develops and prepares Request for Qualifications (RFQ's). • Reviews and evaluates statement of qualifications; reviews and approves fee sheets, scopes, schedules and invoices; reviews and checks consultant drawings, specifications and estimates for accuracy and quality; monitors consultant progress and invoices to approved schedules. • Develops, prepares and monitors project budget; reviews and tracks project expenditures; prepares reports on cost overruns or budget amendments; prepares City, state and federal documents for administration of grants and loans and proposes alternate construction methods or materials to reduce project costs. • Assists with the development and issuance of utility revenue bonds to fund capital improvement projects. •_Prepares City Council agenda packets; attends City Council meetings and public hearings; makes presentations and responds to questions on issues as needed. • Manages, coordinates and reviews the work of assigned staff. • Assigns work activities; coordinates schedules, project and programs; provides constructive feedback; reviews and evaluates work and makes effective suggestions and recommendations. • Supervises, coaches, trains and motivates staff and coordinates and/or provides staff training. • Manages the employment and hiring process and employee relations for assigned area. • Manages the workflow and prioritization of assigned projects. • Develops or assists with developmental work plans for staff and makes recommendations and/or implements corrective actions including discipline and termination procedures as appropriate/necessary or as directed. Required Knowledge of: • Design and construction principles. • Construction field measurement and inspection methods and procedures. • City and industry (water, sewer and storm drainage) standard codes and regulations as well as local, state and federal laws relating to assigned work. • Surveying principles and use of survey equipment. • Engineering mathematics, standards, practices and principles. • Engineering calculators and modeling programs. • Drafting practices and standards, including operating AutoCAD to develop project drawings. • Technical aspects of field of specialty. • Interpersonal skills using tact, patience and courtesy. • Structure, organization and inter -relationships of city departments, agencies, and related governmental agencies and offices affecting assigned functions. • Effective oral and written communication principles and practices to include public relations and public speaking. • Program/project management techniques and principles. • Research methods and report preparation and presentation. • Modern office procedures, methods, and equipment including computers and computer applications such as: word processing, spreadsheets, and statistical databases. • English usage, spelling, grammar and punctuation. • Principles of business letter writing. Senior Utilities Engineer April 2016niPyAFnbAF 2012 Packet Pg. 149 3.8.b JOB DESCRIPTION Senior Utilities Engineer • Principles and practices of governmental budget preparation and administration related to capital projects budgets. • Supervisory and training principles, methods, best management practices and techniques. Required Skill in: • Planning, developing and prepares design drawings and specifications for water, sewer and storm' Formatted: Indent: Left: 0" drainage utilities projects. • Managing projects, resources, schedules and timelines. • Performing topographic and construction surveys. • Reading and understanding engineering drawings. • Understanding codes and specifications. • Prioritizing and scheduling work. • Representing the City effectively at public meetings and working with the public. • Interpreting, applying and explaining rules, regulations, policies and procedures. • Utilizing personal computer software programs and other relevant software affecting assigned work and in compiling and preparing spreadsheets including AutoCAD to develop project drawings. • Establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with staff, management, vendors, outside agencies, community groups and the general public. • Analyzing situations accurately and adopting an effective course of action. • Applying program/project management techniques and principles. • Directing the maintenance of a variety of reports and files; preparing, maintaining and reviewing narratives and statistical reports. • Determining project budgets, resources and timelines to complete projects from conceptualization to finish. • Communicating effectively verbally and in writing including public relations and public speaking. • Supe .i..iRg -RRd fnr-.h Rinnl rRviewing of other's }asks • Supervising, leading, coaching and using best management practices to improve staff performance: • - Formatted: List Bullet 2, Space After: delegating tasks and workload assignments. ' Formatted: List Bullet 2, Indent: Left: MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Space After: 0 pt Education and Experience: Bachelor's Degree in Civil Engineering or related field and four years of public works or construction related experience that includes project management experience in designing, managing or inspecting the construction of utilities projects; OR an equivalent combination of education, training and experience. Required Licenses or Certifications: Valid State of Washington Driver's License. Washington State Professional Civil Engineer (PE) license. Must be able to successfully complete and pass a background check. WORKING CONDITIONS: Environment: • Indoor and outdoor work environment. • Driving a vehicle to conduct work. Senior Utilities Engineer April 20161SIevernber 'n" Packet Pg. 150 3.8.b JOB DESCRIPTION Senior Utilities Engineer Physical Abilities: • Hearing, speaking or otherwise communicating to exchange information in person or on the telephone. • Operating a computer keyboard and drafting materials. • Reading and understanding a variety of materials. • Sitting, standing or otherwise remaining in a stationary position for extended periods of time. • Ascending/descending from ladders and working from heights or depths. • Bending at the waist, kneeling or crouching reaching above shoulders and horizontally or otherwise positioning oneself to accomplish tasks. • Lifting/carrying or otherwise moving or transporting moderately heavy objects up to 40 lbs. • Ability to wear appropriate personal protective equipment based on required City Policy. Hazards: • Contact with angry and/or dissatisfied customers. • Occasional exposure to dangerous machinery. • Occasional extreme weather conditions. • Potential physical harm and hazardous chemicals when working in the field, conducting inspections and working around construction equipment and worksites. Incumbent Signature: Date: Department Head: Date: Senior Utilities Engineer April 2016Nevernber 20" Packet Pg. 151 3.8.b JOB DESCRIPTION Senior Utilities Engineer Senior Utilities Engineer April 2016Ne rnber'^" Packet Pg. 152 3.8.c City of EDMONDS Washington STORMWATER ENGINEER Department: Public Works - Engineering Pay Grade: NR-13 Bargaining Unit: Non- Represented FLSA Status: Exempt Revised Date: November 201-2 ril 2016 Reports To: Senior Utilities Engineer POSITION PURPOSE: Under administrative direction, manages stormwater engineering and compliance program; prepares City stormwater code, standards and reports; prepares stormwater compliance reviews on private development projects and capital improvements projects; plats, develops and implements the stormwater capital improvement plan; manages assigned capital improvement projects and contracts; prepares stormwater design drawings, specifications and cost estimates; provides technical recommendations to stormwater maintenance personnel; and updates the Storm and Surface Water element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES: The following duties ARE NOT intended to serve as a comprehensive list of all duties performed by all employees in this classification, only a representative summary of the primary duties and responsibilities. Incumbent(s) may not be required to perform all duties listed and may be required to perform additional, position -specific duties. • Manages the City's stormwater engineering program; coordinates and oversees the City's compliance with the Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit (Phase II NPDES permit). • Prepares the City's annual report on the Phase II NPDES permit to the Department of Ecology and coordinates and conducts public education and outreach activities. • Prepares and implements the City's stormwater code for private development and permit applications; performs stormwater development review on larger sites and manages the inspection program to ensure all private stormwater facilities are properly maintained and operate as designed. • Directs the implementation of the entire program for controlling runoff for new development and redevelopment; applies all applicable City code and regulations to development submittals; performs development review of the more complex and larger sites for compliance; manages the inspection program to ensure all private stormwater facilities are properly maintained and operate as designed. • Manages basin plans and other documentation to identify and define priorities for repair and replacement of surface water infrastructure. • Manages coordinates and reviews the work of assignors staff • SupervisGS, GeaGhes, trains and metivates staff and GOOrdiRates and/Gr provides staff traiRiRg. reviews and evaluates work and makes effective suggestions and recommendations. Manages the workflow and prioritization of assigned projects and takes appropriate corrective action when nyi.ding a.dVir.e anrs r. el to staff • Develops or assists with developmental work plans for staff and makes recornmendations an or as d0rer.ted Stormwater Engineer AML2016NGfPacket Pg. 153 3.8.c JOB DESCRIPTION Stormwater Engineer • Develops and implo,,,othe Stormwater Capital Improvement Program plan to address flooding, water quality and aquatic habitat concerns throughout the City; performs hydraulic analysis and determines size of new systems to meet design flow requirements; performs field inspections of hydraulic and hydrology related work and develops and updates the City's stormwater standards, code and standard details including; project objects, cost estimates and Council briefings. • Manages assigned capital improvement projects; plans, develops and prepares stormwater design drawings, contract specifications and cost estimates. • Uses AutoCAD and related engineering and graphics software to prepare detailed design drawings. • Coordinates project improvements with City Departments, private utilities other public agencies and citizens. • Prepares and secures necessary easements for project construction. • Manages the advertisement, bid and award of stormwater capital improvement projects; prepares advertisement notices and responses to bidder questions; reviews and analyzes bid documents for compliance with city, state and federal requirements; prepares award recommendations for City Council and oversees the execution and processing of construction contract documents. • Performs the construction management of assigned stormwater projects; implements the contract and maintains project filing system. • Follows related city, state and federal standards, policies, guidelines, laws and processes. • Reviews and approves contractor submittals and reviews and responds to requests for information. • Performs field inspection and prepares daily inspection reports; calculates and prepares field note records of contractor quantities and materials installed in the field; takes and files daily photos of assigned projects and monitors contractor operations and traffic control to ensure a safe work area. • Prepares and calculates progress pay estimates for Contractor payments. • Negotiates and prepares change orders and field change directives. • Manages and tracks the close-out phase of construction contracts and the documentation required for final project approval. • Attends, runs or coordinates associated meetings and; interacts with other public agencies, • Prepares and manages consultant contracts; develops and prepares Request for Qualifications (RFQ's) and reviews and evaluates statement of qualifications. • Reviews and approves fee sheets, scopes, schedules and invoices; reviews and checks consultant drawings, specifications and estimates for accuracy and quality; monitors consultant progress and invoices to approved schedules; • Develops, prepares and monitors project budget; reviews and tracks project expenditures and prepares reports on cost overruns or budget amendments. • Prepares City, state and federal documents for administration of grants and loans. • Prepares City Council agenda packets for stormwater issues; attends City Council meetings and public hearings; makes presentations and responds to questions on issues as needed and responds to public concerns and complaints regarding stormwater management issues. Required Knowledge of: • Engineering principles related to stormwater collection, conveyance, best management practices cost estimating and construction. • Environmental regulations related to stormwater management, wetlands, fisheries and aquatic systems. • Hydrologic and hydraulic analysis. • -&Stormwater computer software applications and computer aided design. • City's Storm Water Management Ordinance and the Washington State Storm Water Management Manual. • Federal, state and local laws and regulations regarding drainage systems. • Technical aspects of field of speci-alty. • Interpersonal skills using tact, patience and courtesy. • Structure, organization and inter -relationships of city departments, agencies and related governmental agencies and offices affecting assigned functions. Stormwater Engineer Neaemb Packet Pg. 154 3.8.c JOB DESCRIPTION Stormwater Engineer • Effective oral and written communication principles and practices to include public relations and public speaking. • Program/project management techniques and principles. • Research methods and report preparation and presentation. • Modern office procedures, methods, and equipment including computers and computer applications such as: word processing, spreadsheets, and statistical databases. • English usage, spelling, grammar and punctuation. • Principles of business letter writing. • Principles and practices of governmental budget preparation and administration. Required Skill in: • Performing technical studies, designs and field inspections of hydraulic and hydrology -related work. • Performing hydraulic analysis of storm systems. • Interpretation of laws and regulations related to stormwater quality and quality and their effects on the environment. • Developing long term plans based on analysis developed. • Prioritizing projects based on cost and social benefit analysis. • Reviewing a variety of plans and providing guidance on deficiencies. • Represent the City effectively at public meetings and work with the public. • Meeting schedules and timelines. • Interpreting, applying and explaining rules, regulations, policies and procedures. • Utilizing personal computer software programs and other relevant software affecting assigned work and in compiling and preparing spreadsheets. • Establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with staff, management, vendors, outside agencies, community groups and the general public. • Analyzing situations accurately and adopting an effective course of action. • Applying program/project management techniques and principles. • Directing the maintenance of a variety of reports and files; preparing, maintaining and reviewing narrative and statistical reports. • Communicating effectively verbally and in writing including public relations and public speaking. '' delegating tacks anworkload assignments rl MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Education and Experience: Bachelor's Degree in Civil Engineering, Environmental Engineering or related field and four years of municipal engineering experience; preferably in stormwater design and environmental permitting in a public sector environment; OR an equivalent combination of education, training and experience. Required Licenses or Certifications: Valid State of Washington Driver's License. Current Washington State Professional Civil Engineer (PE) license. Must be able to successfully complete and pass a background check. WORKING CONDITIONS: Stormwater Engineer Nevemb Packet Pg. 155 3.8.c JOB DESCRIPTION Stormwater Engineer Environment: • Indoor and outdoor work environment. • Driving a vehicle to conduct work. Physical Abilities: • Hearing, speaking or otherwise communicating to exchange information in person or on the telephone • Operating a computer keyboard and drafting materials. • Reading and understanding a variety of materials. • Sitting, standing or otherwise remaining in a stationary position for extended periods of time. • Ascending/descending from ladders and working from heights or depths. • Bending at the waist, kneeling or crouching reaching above shoulders and horizontally or otherwise positioning oneself to accomplish tasks. • Lifting/carrying or otherwise moving or transporting moderately heavy objects up to 40 lbs. • Ability to wear appropriate personal protective equipment based on required City Policy. Hazards: • Contact with angry and/or dissatisfied customers. • Occasional exposure to dangerous machinery. • Occasional extreme weather conditions. • Potential physical harm and hazardous chemicals when working in the field, conducting inspections and working around construction equipment and worksites. Incumbent Signature: Department Head: Date: Date: Stormwater Engineer Neaemb Packet Pg. 156 Estimated Salary/Benefits Position 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Senior Utilities Engineer $4,354 $13,386 $13,386 $13,386 $13,386 Stormwater Engineer ($50,725) ($23,155) ($17,782) ($12,141) ($6,218) Engineering Prgm Mgr 2 $3,582 $11,014 $11,014 $11,014 $11,014 Engineering Tech 3 $6,673 $11,351 $11,351 $11,351 $11,351 ($36 1 1r` $12,596 $17,969 $23,610 $29,533 W PO Q Attachment: Attachment 4 - Salary Table (1186 : Public Works Engineering Job Description Update & Reclassification) 3.8.e EXISTING Administrative Assistant Engineering Program Manager RECOMMENDED Administrative Assistant Engineering Technician (3) Engineering Program Manager Engineering Technician (3) City Engineer Traffic Engineer Traffic Engineer Senior Utility Engineer City Engineer Stormwater Engineer Senior Utility Engineer Stormwater Engineer Stormwater Technician Capital Project Manager (4) Stormwater Technician Y L 0 ci Capital Senior a Project Construction co Manager Inspector (4) 1 Senior Construction Inspector Packet Pg. 158 3.9 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/3/2016 Removal of residence located at 820 Maple Street from the Edmonds Register of Historic Places Staff Lead: Kernen Lien Department: Planning Division Preparer: Kernen Lien Background/History The residence known as the Dr. Palmer House located at 820 Maple Street was placed on the Edmonds Register of Historic Places in 2010 under Ordinance No. 3811 (Exhibit 2). The property has since changed ownership and the new owners have submitted for building permits for alterations to the residence. Prior to the commencement of any work on a register property, the owner must receive a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Edmonds Historic Preservation Commission. The Historic Preservation Commission found some of the proposed work on the residence did not meet the criteria for a Certificate of Appropriateness. Staff Recommendation Adopt the ordinance included as Exhibit 1 to remove the residence from the Edmonds Register of Historic Places and remove the "HR" designation from the official zoning map. Narrative The property owner has recently submitted building permits for a new porch addition, detached garage, siding restoration and replacement of four windows on the third floor of the residence (BLD20160420 & BLD20160421). The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed the proposed changes at their April 14, 2016 meeting to consider the eligibility of the proposed work for a Certificate of Appropriateness (Exhibit 3). While the HPC found the porch addition, detached garage, and siding restoration work met the criteria for an issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness; the HPC found the proposed window replacements do not meet the criteria for the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness. Upon considering the HPC findings and reviewing potential alternatives to the window replacement, the property owners have requested the property be removed from the register. Chapter 20.45 ECDC, the code section governing Edmonds Register of Historic Places, is premised upon participation through owner consent. Given the building official cannot issue a building permit for a Register property without a Certificate of Appropriateness, the HPC findings that the proposed window replacement does not meet the criteria for a Certificate of Appropriateness and, the owner's request that the property be removed from the Register, the draft ordinance included as Exhibit 1 has been prepared for the Council's consideration to remove the property from the Edmonds Register of Historic Places. Attachments: Exhibit 1 - Proposed Ordiance to Remove 820 Maple Street from Historic Register Packet Pg. 159 3.9 Exhibit 2 - Ordinance No. 3811 Exhibit 3 - April 14, 2016 Historic Preservation Commission Draft Minutes Excerpt Packet Pg. 160 3.9.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE REMOVING THE RESIDENCE KNOWN AS THE DR. PALMER HOUSE LOCATED AT 820 MAPLE STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON FROM THE EDMONDS REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES, AND DIRECTING THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR OR HIS DESIGNEE TO REMOVE THE "HR" DESIGNATION FOR SITE FROM THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP WITH, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the residence known as the Dr. Palmer House located at 820 Maple Street, Edmonds, Washington, was placed on the Edmonds Register of Historic Places in 2010 under Ordinance No. 3 811; and WHEREAS, prior to the commencement of any work on a register property, the owner must request and receive a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Commission; and WHEREAS, for properties that are on the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, the City of Edmonds building official cannot issue a building permit without a Register property first receiving a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Historic Preservation Commission; and WHEREAS, the property owner of the Dr. Palmer House located at 820 Maple Street, Edmonds, Washington has proposed to add a new 44 square foot covered porch, a new 568 square foot detached garage, restore original siding, and replace four third -story windows to the Register property, and a -1- Packet Pg. 161 3.9.a WHEREAS, the Edmonds Historic Preservation Commission held a public meeting on April 14, 2016, to consider the eligibility of the proposed work for a Certificate of Appropriateness, and WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission found the porch addition, detached garage, and siding restoration work meets the criteria for an issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness, and WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission found the proposed window replacements do not meet the criteria for the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness, and WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission found the proposed window replacements would alter the Dr. Palmer residence at 820 Maple Street to such an extent that the property would no longer be eligible for listing on the Register of Historic Places, and WHEREAS, the owners have expressed their desire for the property be removed from the Edmonds Register of Historic Places; and WHEREAS, the chapter 20.45 ECDC, the chapter governing the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, is premised upon participation through owner consent, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The residence known at the Dr. Palmer House located at 820 Maple Street Edmonds, Washington 98020, is hereby removed from the Edmonds Register of Historic Places. Section 2. The Development Services Director, or his designee, is hereby x w authorized to remove the "HR" designation for the site from the Edmonds zoning map. This E a -2- Packet Pg. 162 3.9.a removal of the designation does not change or modify the underlying zone classification. Section 3. 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 title. APPROVED: MAYOR DAVID O. EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: JEFFREY B. TARADAY, CITY ATTORNEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. a -3- Packet Pg. 163 3.9.a SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the 3rd day of May, 2016, 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 REMOVING THE RESIDENCE KNOWN AS THE DR. PALMER HOUSE LOCATED AT 820 MAPLE STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON FROM THE EDMONDS REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES, AND DIRECTING THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR OR HIS DESIGNEE TO REMOVE THE "HR" DESIGNATION FOR SITE FROM THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP WITH, 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 May, 2016. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY a jrwci00006.900000i} Packet Pg. 164 3.9.b 0006.90000 kpl 09/20/2010 ORDINANCE NO.3811 AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING THE EXTERIOR OF THE RESIDENCE KNOWN AS THE DR. PALMER HOUSE LOCATED AT 820 MAPLE STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON FOR INCLUSION ON THE EDMONDS REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES, AND DIRECTING THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR OR HIS DESIGNEE TO DESIGNATE THE SITE ON THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP WITH AN "HR" DESIGNATION., AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the residence known as the Dr. Palmer House located at 820 Maple Street, Edmonds, Washington, is included on the Historic Survey of Downtown Edmonds prepared by BOLA Architecture in conjunction with the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in October, 2004, as a property that is potentially eligible for listing on the Edmonds Register of Historic Places; and WHEREAS, the Edmonds Historic Preservation Commission held a public hearing on August 12, 2010, to consider the eligibility of the residence for listing on the Edmonds Register of Historic Places; and WHEREAS, after consideration of the staff recommendation the Commission unanimously voted to recommend to the City Council that the residence be listed on the Edmonds Register of Historic Places; and and WHEREAS, the owner(s) have given their written consent for such designation; -1- Packet Pg. 165 3.9.b WHEREAS, the City Council has received the recommendation of the Historic Preservation Commission regarding the features of the site which contribute to its designation and finds that the application meets the criteria of the ordinance as contained in Chapter 20.45 of the ECDC, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO Section 1. The residence known as the Dr. Palmer House located at 820 Maple Street, Edmonds, Washington 98020, is hereby approved for designation to the Edmonds Historic Register. The exterior of the building is hereby designated as significant. Section 2. The Community Services Director, or his designee, is hereby authorized to designate the listed site on the Edmonds zoning map with an "HR" designation. This designation does not change or modify the underlying zone classification. Section 3. 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 title. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: � d � CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AST ORM: OFFICE OF W TY A O EY- BY W. SCOTT SNYDER APPROV D: % lam_. MAYOR MIKE COOP R -2- Packet Pg. 166 3.9.b FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: 10-01-2010 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: 10-05-2010 PUBLISHED: 10-10-2010 EFFECTIVE DATE: 10-15-2010 ORDINANCE NO. 3811 -3- Packet Pg. 167 3.9.b SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.3811 of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the 5`" day of October, 2010, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. 3811. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DESIGNATING THE EXTERIOR OF THE RESIDENCE KNOWN AS THE DR. PALMER HOUSE LOCATED AT 820 MAPLE STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON FOR INCLUSION ON THE EDMONDS REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES, DIRECTING THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR OR HIS DESIGNEE TO DESIGNATE THE SITE ON THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP WITH AN "HR" DESIGNATION, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this 6th day of October, 2010. ITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE {rwc/00006.900000/} - 4 - Packet Pg. 168 3.9.b Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WASHINGTON' COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH } S.S. µ The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says that she is Principal Clerk of THE HERALD, a daily newspaper printed and published in the City of Everett, County of Snohomish, and State of Washington; that said newspaper is a newspaper of general ono. 1 ae� circulation in said County and State; that said newspaper has been approved as a legal SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 3811 o the dyo'E mon s, ashington newspaper by order of the Superior Courtof Snohomish County and that the notice On the Sth day of October, 2010, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. 3811. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE. OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DESIGNATING THE EXTERIOR OF THE RESIDENCE KNOWN Summary of Ordinance NO. 3811 AS6THE DR. PALMER HOUSE LOCATED AT 820 MAPLE STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON FOR INCLUSION ON THE EDMONDS REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES, DIRECTING THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR OR HIS DESIGNEE Designating the Expterior of the Residence TO DESIGNATE..THE SITE ON THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP WITH AN'HR" DESIGNATION, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full teittof this Ordinance -will be mailed upon request. DATED this 6th day of October, 2010. Published: October 10, 2010. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE a printed copy of which is hereunto attached, was published in said newspaper proper and not in supplement form, in the regular and entire edition of said paper on the following days and times, namely: October 10, 2010 ,OCT 19 2010 s t s =r� ^✓i.;�_ Account Name: City of Edmonds and that said newser was regularly distributed to its -subscribers during all of said period. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of October, 2010i-1 Notary Public in and for a totoi-!ah)fi'�foir,res. County. Z D ..y Account Number. 101 �6 rz f ? . ,4 ` 11th Snohomish Number: 0001713760 Packet Pg. 169 3.9.c CITY OF EDMONDS HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Summary Minutes of Regular Meeting April 14, 2016 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Scott called the meeting of the Edmonds Historic Preservation Commission to order at 5:37 p.m. in the 3rd Floor Conference Room of City Hall, 121 — 5d' Avenue North. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Emily Scott, Chair Larry Vogel, Vice Chair (arrived at 5:35 p.m.) Sandra Allbery Chris Definer -Karr Tim Raetzloff Steve Waite Dave Teitzel, City Council Member COMMISSIONERS ABSENT Eric Livingston AGENDA ADDITIONS/CHANGES STAFF PRESENT Kernen Lien, Senior Planner Diane Cunningham, Administrative Assistant OTHERS PRESENT David Peterson Margaret Peterson The agenda was modified to place the Action Item (820 Maple Street) first on the agenda. ACTION ITEMS Certificate of Appropriateness or Removal from Historic Register for Dr. Palmer House at 820 Maple Street Mr. Lien advised that 820 Maple Street was placed on the Edmonds Register of Historic Places in 2010, and is one of the few properties the BOLA Report listed as qualifying for the National Register. The current owners have applied for a building permit for a garage addition, a porch addition, and replacement of four windows on the third floor. David and Margaret Peterson provided an overview of the proposed changes to both the inside and outside of the structure. Mr. Peterson explained that, in addition to replacing four windows on the third floor, they are proposing to remove the asbestos siding to reveal the home's original wood siding. The proposed garage will have a similar architectural detail as the home. Mr. Lien reminded the Board that the proposed modifications will require a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Commission. He referred to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Structures. He summarized that both the garage and porch additions appear to be consistent with the standards, but he has concerns about the windows. He specifically pointed out that: Packet Pg. 170 3.9.c Windows comprise a considerable amount of the historic fabric and wall plain, and thus, deserve special consideration in a rehabilitation project. The windows were identified in the BOLA Report as part of the defining historic character of the house. The standards do not allow property owners to remove or radically alter the windows, which are important in defining the historic character of the building, in such a way that diminishes the character. That is the big question the Commission must answer. The applicant is proposing to change both the size of the window openings and the style of the windows. Based on precedence set by the Schumacher Building, the Commission could approve the Certificate of Appropriateness as long as the size of the openings is not changed. The standards also recommend against adding false historic character to the building. In addition to changing the size and style of the window, the applicant is proposing to add a design element to the top of the windows. Mr. Lien advised that small additions that do not change the defining character of the building can be allowed. The porch addition will be located at the back corner of the building under the existing eaves, and the shed type roof will differentiate the addition from the sweeping eaves. The Commissioners all voiced support for the applicant's proposal to remove the asbestos siding and restore the original siding and shingles that lie underneath. They also voiced general support for the proposed changes to the south side of the structure (porch and garage), which will not be visible from the street. However, Commissioner Waite voiced concern that the proposed garage design is too much like the historic structure. He explained that the design is supposed to be influenced by the historic structure, but not replicated. Regarding the windows, the Commission discussed the following: Are the Secretary of the Interior's Standards recommendations or mandates? Some Commissioners felt that if the structure was being considered for the State or National Registers, the criteria should be interpreted strictly. However, there is more flexibility for local registers. On the other hand, Commissioner Waite pointed out that the Department of the Interior's Standards are clear and have been in place for a number of years. Disregarding the standards could raise questions about the credibility of the Edmonds Register of Historic Places. While he applauded the Petersons for restoring the original siding, which is an important characteristic of the building, he questioned if that should warrant the Commission's decision to disregard the criteria relative to windows. It was discussed that, although the proposed window alterations are inconsistent with some of the criteria, they would not prevent a future owner from changing the size and style back to the original design at some point in the future. Some felt that the proposed change would not irreparably change the structure and character of the building. The Petersons pointed out that the larger windows are needed to improve the lighting for the living space and to take advantage of the fabulous views. Commissioner Waite explained that the idea of reversibility is generally related to repair, and it is not likely that the original window style and size will be replaced at a future time. He suggested that a skylight could be an alternative to provide additional light. The Commissioners agreed that the structure is very important to the Edmonds Register and it is currently eligible to be included on the National Register, as well. Chair Scott suggested that the Commission consider whether or not the building would have still been added to the Register if the window modifications had occurred prior to listing it on the Register. It was discussed that retaining the structure on the Register would allow the Commission to work with the property owners to maintain the integrity of the building going forward. Commissioner Raetzloff said he believes the Commission would have approved the structure for the Register if the windows had already been changed, but he is still hesitant to support the application as proposed. Some Commissioners felt the preponderance of historic characteristics and attributes for keeping the structure on the Register far outweigh the windows. Commissioner Deiner-Karr said she does not believe that changing just four windows would have a significant impact on the historic integrity of the building, particularly in light of the applicant's proposal to restore the original siding. Commissioner Waite commented that although the window alterations may not be noticeable to those walking by, the Commission's responsibility is to maintain the historic integrity of structures. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 14, 2016 Page 2 Packet Pg. 171 3.9.c • The Commissioners referred to their earlier action relative to the Schumacher Building. It was pointed out that the current proposal is different in that it would replace iconic windows and the Schumacher Building windows were not original. It was also pointed out that the window openings on the Schumacher Building were not altered. • There was concern expressed that the proposed window design provides too much detail that does not match the windows below. If the details were eliminated, the windows would look more authentic. • The Commission discussed that fire safety requirements may need to be addressed if the upper story is used as bedroom space. It was noted that the windows would need to open, and they can be no higher than 48 inches from the floor. • Chair Scott pointed out that if the applicant replaces the four windows on the upper story as proposed, it is likely the home would no longer be eligible for the State and National Registers. It was explained that because the City is a Certified Local Government, it must follow the State's standards, which are based on the Department of the Interior's Standards. Again, it was suggested that the Department of the Interior's Standards could be interpreted to be recommendations and not mandates. VICE CHAIR VOGEL MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR REMOVAL OF THE ASBESTOS SIDING TO REVEAL AND RESTORE THE ORIGINAL FIR SIDING AND CEDAR SHINGLES. COMMISSIONER ALLBERY SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. VICE CHAIR VOGEL MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE PORCH ADDITION. COMMISSIONER ALLBERY SECONDED THE MOTION. Commissioner Waite pointed out that no design has been proposed for the porch addition. Mr. Lien said the porch will have a shed roof, which is different than the existing roof. The porch will be located under the eaves, and will not alter any of the significant features of the home. VICE CHAIR VOGEL MOVED TO AMEND HIS MOTION TO CLARIFY THAT THE PORCH ADDITION WOULD BE LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE STRUCTURE AND THE DESIGN WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH STAFF'S DESCRIPTION. COMMISSIONER DEINER-KARR SECONDED THE AMENDMENT. THE MOTION TO AMEND WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. VICE CHAIR VOGEL MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE GARAGE ADDITION AS DESCRIBED IN THE DRAWINGS. COMMISSIONER WAITE SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Commissioner Deiner-Karr pointed out that the applicant has not finalized the window design. She suggested that the Commission could approve the window modifications based on specific recommendations. For example, the upper windows could be redesigned to remove the embellishments and reflect the design of the existing first and second floor windows. VICE CHAIR VOGEL MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE THIRD FLOOR WINDOWS, WITH THE PROVISO THAT EVERY EFFORT BE MADE FOR THE WINDOWS TO REFLECT THE DESIGN AND CHARACTER OF THE EXISTING WINDOWS ON THE FIRST AND SECOND FLOORS. COMMISSIONER DEINER-KARR SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION FAILED 4-2, WITH COMMISSIONERS VOGEL AND DEINER- KARR VOTING IN FAVOR AND COMMISSIONERS RAETZLOFF, ALLBERY, SCOTT AND WAITE VOTING IN OPPOSITION. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 14, 2016 Page 3 Packet Pg. 172 3.9.c Mr. Lien agreed to notify the Peterson's of the Commission's decision and offer direction for how they can modify the proposed window alterations or request that the property be taken off the Register. After speaking with the Petersons, Mr. Lien would send an update to the Commissioners. Commissioner Raetzloff inquired if allowances could be made to accommodate the changing uses of a structure. Mr. Lien answered affirmatively and reviewed the Department of the Interior's Standards that apply to "Alterations and Additions for the New Use." The installation of additional windows on rear or other non -character -defining elevations would be allowed if required by the new use. While the design should be compatible with the overall design of the building, it should not duplicate the fenestration, pattern, detail or character of the defining elevation. READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES COMMISSIONER RAETZLOFF MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2016 AS SUBMITTED. COMMISSIONER DEINER-KARR SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. REOUESTS FROM THE AUDIENCE There were no audience comments. NEW BUSINESS Discussion and Recommendation on New HPC Schedule Ms. Cunningham suggested that this item be postponed until the Commission's May meeting. She explained that because the City must pay overtime for a staff person to monitor the door during Commission meetings, the City Council has proposed that the Commission change its meeting location and/or time. Staff is still working out the details and will report back to the Commission. Vice Chair Vogel voiced opposition to changing the meeting date to the third Thursday of each month, since that is the day the Arts Commission conducts the monthly Art Walk, which is a major event in Edmonds. Discussion on 2017 Calendar This item was postponed to the next meeting. Preservationist Uudate Chair Scott reported that Commissioner Raetzloff wrote some great copy that features the First Baptist Church, and she is working to get some different photographs. Civic Playfield Council Member Teitzel reported that the City recently purchased the Civic Playfield and the master plan process will start soon. There has been a lot of discussion about potentially demolishing the grandstands, which are not currently listed on the Register. Chair Scott clarified that the grandstands have been infested with worms, and restoration may no longer be possible. The Commission agreed to recommend that a structural assessment of the structure be done before a final decision is made. Prouerty at 232 Sunset Avenue Commissioner Allbery reported that the home at 232 Sunset Avenue has been sold. She agreed to contact the new owner to discuss adding the property to the Register. Changes to the Library Commissioners Waite and Allbery agreed to review the assessment of repairs and alterations that need to be done at the Library facility. The consultant who completed the assessment is interested in ensuring that the modifications are done in a way that preserves the historic quality and character of the building. Because the City owns the building, the Commission agreed that the City has a responsibility to take care of many of the items. Commissioner Waite suggested that the Commission should advise the City relative to the proposed changes to make sure the work is done correctly. The Commission concurred and agreed to review the list in more detail at their next meeting. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 14, 2016 Page 4 Packet Pg. 173 4.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/3/2016 Puget Sound Starts Here Proclamation (5 min.) Staff Lead: Carolyn LaFave Department: Mayor's Office Preparer: Carolyn LaFave Background/History Staff Recommendation Narrative Puget Sound Starts Here (PSSH) campaign seeks to increase awareness of the magnitude of Puget Sound's pollution problem and to motivate residents to adopt new behaviors that will decrease the amount of pollution entering the Sound through stormwater runoff and other sources of pollution. The tools developed to achieve these goals include a recognizable brand, television advertisements, a website designed to foster behavior change, and public outreach tools for use by PSSH partners at a local, grassroots level. For more information visit the website at www.pugetsoundstartshere.org <http://www.pugetsoundstartshere.org>. Attachments: PSSH_2016 Packet Pg. 174 O Abr Priarfamatijan C'i of Edmonds • Office of the Mayor PugetScund "Pu et Sound Starts Isere Monthg starts May 2016 WHEREAS, Puget Sound contributes in numerous ways to the City of Edmonds' economic infrastructure and to our unparalleled natural resource base; and WHEREAS, Puget Sound is an important part of the identity and character of the City; and WHEREAS, the water quality of Puget Sound and its tributaries is a priority for the safety, health, and welfare of the citizens of Edmonds; and WHEREAS, millions of pounds of pollutants enter Puget Sound every year as a result of rain washing yard chemicals, pet waste, oil, soaps, and other substances into storm drains and streams connected to Puget Sound; and WHEREAS, educational initiatives such as the regional "Puget Sound Starts Here" campaign serve ,Q to protect and improve local water quality; and r WHEREAS, "Puget Sound Starts Here Month" will bring attention and focus to the issue of local to and regional water quality and provide educational opportunities for the public to cm learn how they can help clean-up and protect Puget Sound and our local waterways; x and N a WHEREAS, all Puget Sound residents have the ability to take action to reduce their individual and CD cumulative impact on the water quality of Puget Sound and local waterways; E E z U NOW, THEREFORE, I, Dave Earling, Mayor, do hereby proclaim May 2016 as: Q "Puget Sound Starts Here Month "in Edmonds and encourage all citizens to take action by attending local and regional events and to adopt behaviors in their daily lives to help to protect and clean up Puget Sound and our local waterways. ,Z,), - � Z., 5;: 7 ,, -. - 0, , Nave- Earling, Mayor April 28, 2016 Packet Pg. 175 4.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/3/2016 Edmonds Cemetery Board Presentation (5 min.) Staff Lead: Carrie Hite Department: Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Preparer: Carrie Hite Background/History Each year the Cemetery board hosts an annual Memorial Day program at the Edmonds Memorial Cemetery and Columbarium. Staff Recommendation Presentation only. Narrative A Cemetery Board representative will be inviting the Council and general public to attend the annual Memorial Day program. Packet Pg. 176 4.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/3/2016 Alliance for Housing Affordability Presentation (20 min.) Staff Lead: Shane Hope Department: Development Services Preparer: Shane Hope Background/History The Alliance for Housing Affordability ("AHA") is a venue for Snohomish County jurisdictions to work together to understand local housing challenges and share resources to address these challenges. It is a membership organization, consisting of 13 cities (including Edmonds), Snohomish County, and the Housing Authority of Snohomish County. It was established in 2013 through an interlocal agreement. One full-time housing policy analyst serves as staff. AHA's work is guided by its Joint Board, which has representation from each member. Councilmember Diane Buckshnis was Edmonds' original City Council representative on the Joint Board; Councilmember Neil Tibbott is the current Edmonds City Council representative. Staff Recommendation Consider the information and provide any questions/comments. Narrative "Affordable housing" is a term that means different things to different people. AHA has always considered affordability to be a broad issue that includes meeting needs for people with a range of incomes and circumstances. In the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan, a chapter focuses on Housing. It includes information gleaned from a Housing Profile that AHA put together for Edmonds. One future "action item" identified in our Comprehensive Plan is to develop a Housing Strategy by 2019. AHA will probably be able to help with this effort. At the May 3 City Council meeting, AHA's policy analyst (Kristina Gallant) will make a presentation. She will address general housing affordability issues, along with AHA's role. Packet Pg. 177 4.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/3/2016 March 2016 Quarterly Financial Report (10 min.) Staff Lead: Scott James Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Sarah Mager No action needed; informational only. Attachments: Complete March 2016 Quarterly Financial Report 1st Qtr 2016 Financial Management Report PPT Packet Pg. 178 4.4.a bAt vX, OF E� O,� d u "J7 1 Rao AT A GLANCE: General Fund operating revenues are ahead of last year's revenues. 2016 sales tax revenue out performs 2015 (see page 18) 2016 Interest Earnings are higher than 2015.. (see page 32) INSIDE THIS ISSUE: Revenues By Fund Summary Expenditures By Fund Summary 2 General Fund Revenues W 0 0. d SummaryOperating of All Funds: Revenue c� The Financial Management Report is a summary report of the City's c U. 1 st Quarter 2016 financial results with a comparison to 1 st Quarter 2015L. 21 • Notable Revenue Highlights: Additional Special Revenue Fund CY => 2016 Investment earnings are Highlights: co $8,058 Higher than 2015 0 => 2016 tax revenues are $388,747 Street Fund 111 2016 Annual Vehicle higher than 2015 . These increases Fees (TBD) revenues are $5,881 high - are led by: er than 2015. *Property Taxes $47,29100 *Sales Taxes $88,186 Municipal Arts Acquisition Fund r *Real Estate Excise Tax $100,235 117 received an additional $2,182 in donations and contributions over 2015. ° Expenditures By Fund Specific Revenue Highlights by Fund: Details 6 • General Fund first quarter 2016 General Fund 4 operating revenue is $562,589 or Expenditure Detail 9.0 percent over last year, largely due to increased property tax and sales tax revenues. A detailed anal - Investment Portfolio 32 ysis of General Fund revenues can be found on page 4, with sales tax Fund Balance 33 performance discussed on page 18. Overview • Special Revenue Funds 2016 rev- enues are $3,766,395 or 224.5 per - Five Comers cent higher than 2015. The 2016 revenue increase is primarily due to: • During 2016 the Street Construc- tion Fund 112 billed grant agen- cies for $2.8 million more than in 2015. • Hotel/Motel Lodging tax revenues grew 4.9% over 2015. • Real Estate Excise Tax revenues in- creased $100,235 or 24.5% over 2015. • Park Construction Fund 132 Park grant revenues increased $490,935 over 2015. • Utility Funds: => Water sales increased by $157,312 or 11.5 percent over 2015. => Stormwater sales increased by $46,259 or 4.9 percent over 2015 => Sewer sales increased by $159,203 or 11.0 percent over 2015. Financial Management Report as of March 31, 2016 Packet Pg. 179 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — �ummary of All Operating Funds: Expenditures City of Edmonds Purchase of Civic Field completed with help of $1.4 I Driftwood Players "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum" Olympic Ballet • General Fund expenditures ended the quarter with 25% of the budget expended. Operating expenditures increased $1,283,713 or 14.2% over 2015. The majority of this - increase is due to paying $936,429 for the last payment to retire the Public Safety Bond debt. General Fund expense by catego- ries are on page 6 and departmental expenses are on pages 1316 Additional General Fund expendi- tures information can be found on pages 23-31. Special Revenue Fund expendi- tures increased $1,886,504 in 2016 over 2015. The majority of this increase comes from increased con- struction outlays, with street con- struction expenses being $929,680 higher than 2015. Additional Spe- cial Revenue Fund expenditure in- formation can be found on pages 68. • Utility Funds 2016 expenses in- creased $176,465 over 2015, pri- marily due to increase capital ex- penses for water line replacements Additional Utility Fund expense information can be found on pages 9 —10. The Water Fund expenditures for were $273,374 higher than 2015 mainly due to increased capital ex- penditures. (see page 11 for ex- penditure details.) Investment Portfolio • The City's investment earnings in- creased over 9.6% over 2015 earn- ings primarily due to diversifying the portfolio. (see page 32 for addition- al investment details) i I I Fund Balances • During the first quarters of 2016, the 1 General Fund balance decreased $3,40,446. The 2016 fund balance de- crease is primarily due to the timing of when the City receives its bi-annual property tax payments. • Additional fund balance information can 1 be found on pages 33-38. Other Notable Highlights I • In 2014, the City received a $1.67 mil- lion retroactive invoice from Fire Dis- trict 1 as the result of their settled labor agreement. Subsequently to receiving this invoice, the City negotiated a small 1 reduction and were able to pay the re- maining $1,603,000 over eight quarterly 1 payments. To date, the City has paid 1 $1,002,540 towards this settlement. 1 • During the Week of January 18th 2016, the City invested in another $5,000,000 of bonds. • City closed on purchase of Civic Field on February 9, 2016. • On February 12, 2016, the City made its 1 last Public Safety Bond payment early, saving the City approximately $13,000 in interest expense. I Sunset in Edmonds By Deb Sharp 1 Financial Management Report as of March 31, 2016 Packet Pg. 180 I 4.4.a I Page 1 of 1 C ITY O F EDMO NDS REVENUES BY FUND - SUMMARY Fund 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount No. Title Budget Revenues Revenues Remaining %Received 001 GENERAL FUND $ 39,266,670 $ 6,234,620 $ 6,797,209 $ 32,469,461 170 009 LEOFF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE 278,770 1,270 924 277,846 00, 011 RISK MANAGEMENT FUND 6,660 2,684 1,828 4,832 27' -r 012 CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND 28,110 14,247 3,164 24,946 110 Q. 013 MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION FUND - 147 107 (107) d 00 Q' 014 HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND 5,000 3 17 4,983 00 •V 016 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 2,005,000 45,235 33,918 1,971,082 20 C 104 DRUG ENFORCEMENT FUND 153,000 11,205 68,542 84,459 450 j,L 111 STREET FUND 1,760,500 324,473 358,400 1,402,100 20° i 112 COMBINED STREET CONST/IMPROVE t 8,026,497 573,506 3,398,849 4,627,648 420 IC 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS ACQUIS. FUND 102,410 10,664 17,826 84,584 170 CY 118 MEMORIAL STREET TREE 110 47 34 76 310, co 120 HOTEL/MOTEL TAX REVENUE FUND 82,150 16,034 16,745 65,405 200 N 121 EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND 21,390 7,135 7,284 14,106 340 v 122 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND 5,550 157 32 5,518 L 1° 123 TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS 27,530 5,443 5,656 21,874 210 00 125 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 2 2 1,108,000 229,844 280,037 827,963 250 126 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 1, PARKS ACQ FUND 2 1,102,000 228,977 279,885 822,115 250 127 GIFTSCATALOGFUND 46,900 27,899 25,243 21,657 540 Q 129 SPECIAL PROJECTS FUND 280 100 73 207 260 0 130 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE/IMPROVEMT 177,260 46,478 39,130 138,130 220 132 PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND 3 2,537,240 30,076 776,311 1,760,929 310, C 136 PARKS TRUST FUND 630 396 289 341 460 137 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE TRUST FD 19,880 7,393 6,001 13,879 300 138 SISTER CITY COMMISSION 12,010 4 7 12,003 00 139 TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT 682,500 157,885 163,766 518,734 240 140 BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT - 32,976 35,858 (35,858) 00 211 L.I.D. FUND CONTROL 14,400 9,718 773 13,627 50, 213 L.I.D. GUARANTY FUND 14,400 - - 14,400 00 231 2012 LT GO DEBT SERVICE FUND 677,380 - - 677,380 09 232 2014 DEBT SERVICE FUND 949,540 - 936,429 13,111 990 411 COMBINED UTILITY OPERATION - 83,625 47,129 (47,129) 00 421 WATER UTILITY FUND 4 8,443,460 1,704,798 2,170,332 6,273,128 260 422 STORM UTILITY FUND 4,131,780 1,329,403 1,140,955 2,990,825 280, 423 SEWER/WWTP UTILITY FUND 5 12,645,240 2,054,065 2,617,857 10,027,383 210, 424 BOND RESERVE FUND 1,989,900 2 3 1,989,897 00 511 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND 1,579,570 407,182 394,332 1,185,238 250 617 FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND 64,840 469 375 64,465 10, $ 87,966,557 $13,598,157 $ 19,625,321 $ 68,341,236 220, Difference between 2015 and 2016 is due to grant invoicing for various projects in 2016. 2 Real Estate Excise Tax revenues for both funds 125 and 126 is up a total of $100,235 from 2015. 3 Differences between 2015 and 2016 are due to a SnoCo grant, parks donations, and park impact fees 4 Difference between 2015 and 2016 islargely due to a substantial water connection fee and the 9%increase to water base rates 5 Difference between 2015 and 2016 is largely due to timing difference for invoicing in 2016 and 9.5%increase to sewer base rates 1 11__I__ .,_ 181 rac,ecei Pg. io i 4.4.a Page 1 of 1 C PTY O F IDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - SUMMARY Fund 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount No. Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent 001 GENERAL FUND 6 $ 40,691,280 $ 8,883,278 $ 10,217,655 $ 30,473,625 250/( 009 LEOFF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE 279,480 83,216 66,573 212,907 240/( 011 RISK MANAGEMENT RESERVE FUND - - - 0°/ 012 CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND 800,000 - 800,000 00/, Q. 014 HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND 5,400 - - 5,400 00/( 016 BUILDING MAINT ENANCE 2,175,000 52,764 18,743 2,156,257 1% t) 104 DRUG ENFORCEMENT FUND 76,030 910 16,742 59,288 220/( III STREET FUND 1,712,370 408,019 445,917 1,266,453 260/( LL 112 COMBINED STREET CONST/IMPROVE 7 8,039,592 159,883 1,089,563 6,950,029 140/( 2' 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS ACQUIS. FUND 181,380 13,771 4,212 177,168 L 20/( 118 MEMORIAL STREET TREE - - - - O 00/( 3 C'1 120 HOTEL/MOTEL TAX REVENUE FUND 149,650 3,552 6,121 143,529 4% �p 121 EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND 26,880 - - 26,880 00/( N 122 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND 3,000 890 327 2,673 11% v 123 TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS 31,500 1,715 3,737 27,763 L 120/, 125 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 2 2,008,632 50,695 35,314 1,973,318 20/( 126 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 1, PARKS ACQ FUND 8 2,480,320 - 476,669 2,003,651 00 19% 17, 127 GIFTS CATALOG FUND 44,950 1,178 6,553 38,397 1501( 129 SPECIAL PROJECTS FUND - - - - 00/( p 130 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE/IMPROVEMT 210,370 38,394 34,217 176,153 160/( 132 PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND 8 2,760,770 92,860 513,120 2,247,650 19% 136 PARKS TRUST FUND - - - - 00/( v C O 138 SISTER CITY COMMISSION 12,500 - - 12,500 00/( ,S LL 139 TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT 682,500 157,885 163,766 518,734 24% 140 BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT - 1,175 2,525 (2,525) L 00/( 211 L.I.D. FUND CONTROL 14,400 - 14,400 0% 213 L.I.D. GUARANTY FUND - - 00/( CY 231 2012 LT GO DEBT SERVICE FUND 677,380 54 677,380 0% p 232 2014 DEBT SERVICE FUND 6 949,540 - 936,429 13,111 cm 990/c t c� 421 WATER UTILITYFUND 12,713,757 1,384,585 1,657,959 11,055,798 130/, LLp 422 STORM UTILITY FUND 7,609,700 566,110 601,062 7,008,639 80/( d 423 SEWER/WWTP UTILITY FUND 17,741,300 1,926,894 1,795,089 15,946,211 100/( M 424 BOND RESERVE FUND 1,990,920 54 1,990,920 00/( E O 511 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND 1,955,820 226,996 287,269 1,668,551 1501( U 617 FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND 59,610 15,392 11,641 47,969 200/( C O S 106,084,031 $14,070,271 $ 18,391,200 $ 87,692,831 17% E 6 Differences between 2015 and 2016 are primarily due to final payment of 2014 debt. 7 Differences between 2015 and 2016 are due to invoices for construction projects in 2016. 8 Differences between 2015 and 2016 are due to purchase of Civic Field in 2016. 2 Packet Pg. 182 1 4.4.a Page 1 of 3 C ITY O F IDMO NDS REVENUES - GENERAL FUND 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount Title Budget Revenues Revenues Remaining %Received TAXES: REAL PERSONAL / PROPERTY TAX $ 10,068,020 $ 476,099 $ 499,287 $ 9,568,733 5% EMS PROPERTY TAX 3,688,090 160,514 181,856 3,506,234 5% VOTED PROPERTY TAX 949,540 44,285 47,046 902,494 5% LOCAL RETAIL SALES/USE TAX 9 6,144,400 1,605,365 1,693,551 4,450,849 28% NATURAL GAS USE TAX 9,800 2,332 2,095 7,705 21% ^ 1/10 SALES TAX LOCAL CRIM JUST 626,700 158,479 167,103 459,597 27% p ELECTRIC UTILITY TAX10 1,451,800 466,770 509,702 942,098 35% d GASUTILITYTAX 647,900 252,457 249,556 398,344 39% SOLID WASTE UTILITY TAX 306,500 84,461 88,341 218,159 29% io WAT ER UT ILIT Y T AX 1,229,110 256,539 285,967 943,143 23% SEWER UTILITYTAX 629,140 144,720 160,667 468,473 26% 03 ST ORMWAT ER UT ILIT Y T AX 330,430 94,185 98,791 231,639 30% C T.V. CABLE UTILITY TAX 846,000 209,946 214,403 631,597 25% L+ TELEPHONE UTILITY TAX 1,349,100 358,530 328,246 1,020,854 24% i PULLTABSTAX 60,600 14,128 12,510 48,090 21% AMUSEMENT GAMES 40 - 141 (101) 351% M LEASEHOLD EXCISE TAX 242,200 58,414 59,768 182,432 25% � 28,579,370 4,387,224 4,599,031 23,980,339 16% LICENSES AND PERNUTS: FIRE PERMITS -SPECIAL USE 250 145 120 130 48% N POLICE - FINGERPRINTING 300 - 45 255 15% t PROF AND OCC LICENSE -TAXI 630 - - 630 0% i AMUSEMENTS 4,740 4,325 - 4,740 0% FRANCHISE AGREEMENT -COMCAST 710,600 178,240 180,648 529,952 25% .. FRANCHISE FEE-EDUCATION/GOVERNMENT 44,900 11,899 10,613 34,287 24% 00 FRANCHISE AGREEMENT -VERIZON/FRONT IER 100,900 24,811 25,106 75,794 25% CY) FRANCHISE AGREEMENT -BLACKROCK 18,400 5,227 4,107 14,293 22% FRANCHISE AGREMENT-ZAYO - - - - 0% OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT FRANCHISE 268,000 57,968 60,666 207,334 23% O GENERAL BUSINESS LICENSE 116,000 77,079 63,785 52,215 55% DEV SERV PERMIT SURCHARGE 42,000 10,965 12,765 29,235 30% W NON-RESIDENT BUS LICENSE 70,400 19,550 34,250 36,150 49% RIGHT OF WAY FRANCHISE FEE 15,000 5,388 - 15,000 0% BUILDING STRUCTURE PERMITS 11 525,000 121,008 178,390 346,610 34% ANIMAL LICENSES 38,800 9,925 6,193 32,607 C 16% li STREET AND CURB PERMIT 42,100 3,613 12,112 29,988 29% OTRNON-BUSLIC/PERMITS 13,100 3,067 3,962 9,138 30% 2,011,120 533,210 592,763 1,418,357 29% INTERGOVERNMENTAL: c0 FEDERAL GRANT S-BUDGET ONLY - - - - 0% CY DOJ 15-0404-0-1-754 - BULLET PROOF VEST 11,970 - - 11,970 0% �p USDA FOREST SERVICE - - - - 0% C ROOFTOP SOLAR CHALLENGE GRANT - - - 0% N ROOFTOP SOLAR CHALLENGE II 6,000 5,250 - 6,000 0% V TARGET ZERO TEAMS GRANT 7,500 1,084 - 7,500 0% HIGH VISIBILITY ENFORCEMENT 3,000 - 1,139 1,861 38% 2 DOCKSIDE DRILLS GRANT REIMBURSE - - - - 0% y WA STATE ADMIN OFFICE COURTS GRANT 300 300 - 300 0% y 2014 COMMUNITY FORESTRY GRANT - - - - 0% Q. WATERFRONT ANALYSIS GRANT - - 89,893 (89,893) 0% E PUD PRIVILEDGE TAX 192,500 - - 192,500 0% V MVET/SPECIAL DISTRIBUTION 10,000 2,608 2,725 7,275 27% .. JUDICIAL SALARY CONTRIBUTION -SPATE 13,000 4,074 4,575 8,425 35% C CRIMINAL JUSTICE -SPECIAL PROGRAMS 36,980 9,581 9,961 27,019 27% 4) DUI - CITIES 7,240 1,756 1,593 5,647 22% t LIQUOR EXCISE TAX 65,200 19,873 42,903 22,297 66% LIQUOR BOARD PROFITS 357,800 87,538 87,409 270,392 24% MISCELLANEOUS INTERLOCAL REVENUE 12 - - 75,707 (75,707) 0% Q INTERLOCAL GRANTS 383,330 - - 383,330 0% VERDANT INTERLOCAL GRANTS - - - 0% 1,094,820 132,064 315,905 778,915 29% 9 2016 Local Retail Sales/Use Tax revenues are $70,070 higher than 2015 revenues. Please also see pages 18 & 19. 10 2016 Electric Utility Taxes are $42,932 higher than 2015 revenues. 11 2016 Building Structure Permit revenues are $57,382 higher than 2015 revenues. 12 Difference between 2015 and 2016 revenues is due to funds received for closure of ESCA in 2016. 3 Packet Pg. 183 I 4.4.a I Title CHARGES FOR GOODS AND SERVICES: RECORD/LEGAL INSTRUMTS ATM SURCHARGE FEES COURT RECORD SERVICES D/M COURT REC SER SHARED COURT COSTS MUNIC.-DIST. COURT CURREXPEN SALE MAPS & BOOKS CLERKS TIME FOR SALE OF PARKING PERMITS BID SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT PHOTOCOPIES POLICE DISCLOSURE REQUESTS ENGINEERING FEES AND CHARGES 13 ELECTION CANDIDATE FILING FEES SNO-ISLE PASSPORTS AND NATURALIZATION FEES POLICE SERVICES SPECIAL EVENTS OCDETF OVERTIME CAMPUS SAFETY-EDM. SCH. DIST. WOODWAY-LAW PROTECTION MISCELLANEOUS POLICE SERVICES DUI EMERGENCY FIRE SERVICES FIRE PROTECTION & EMS FORDUI FIRE DISTRICT #1 STATION BILLINGS ADULT PROBATION SERVICE CHARGE BOOKING FEES FIRE CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION FEES EMERGENCY SERVICE FEES EMS TRANSPORT USER FEE 14 CRIM CONV FEE CT CRIM CONV FEE CN 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 SWIM POOL ENTRANCE FEES GYM AND WEIGHT ROOM FEES LOCKER FEES SWIM CLASS FEES PROGRAM FEES TAXABLE RECREATION ACTIVITIES SWIM TEAM/DIVE TEAM WINTER MARKET REGISTRATION FEES BIRD FEST REGISTRATION FEES INTERFUND REIMBURSEMENT -CONTRACT SVCS Page 2 of 3 CITY OF EDMO NDS REVENUES - GENERAL FUND 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount Budget Revenues Revenues Remaining %Received 2,000 162 421 1,579 21% 250 - 13 237 5% - - - 0% 50 7 3 47 7% - - - - 0% .-. 400 173 202 198 50% G 100 - - 100 0% O. 25,100 25,100 0% 600 - - 600 0% 2,000 549 298 1,702 15% •v 4,000 1,323 911 3,089 23% O 180,350 23,666 56,787 123,563 31% M C - - - - 0% LL 58,000 14,361 16,084 41,916 28% 2' 15,000 6,410 6,075 8,925 41% G1 26,000 - - 26,000 0% 0% 3 12,300 605 - 12,300 0% 39,500 10,650 10,180 29,320 26% 1,500 - - 1,500 0% N 300 135 - 300 0% - - 16 (16) 0% 45,000 12,095 13,635 31,365 30% 60,000 16,083 18,850 41,150 31% 6,000 1,956 1,104 4,896 18% co 8,000 5,235 7,216 784 90% CY) 15,000 2,760 2,579 12,421 17% 822,100 197,671 231,033 591,067 28% - - - - 0% O - - - - 0% 0 9,200 2,295 2,295 6,905 25% 7,200 1,800 1,800 5,400 25% R 1,800 126 310 1,490 17% C1 6,000 759 55 5,945 1% 75,000 23,809 17,798 57,202 24% •S 425,000 168,223 74,671 350,329 18% u_ 3,000 3,060 3,375 (375) 113% L 1,250 - 1,588 (338) 127% 7,000 1,220 - 7,000 0% R 15,000 3,720 5,115 9,885 34% O CY 10,000 2,373 2,780 7,220 28% - - - - 0% r 7,800 2,417 3,639 4,161 47% N - - - - 0% _ 0% s' 861,700 212,377 322,426 539,274 37% M 19,130 35,629 581 18,549 3% - 0% - 25 (25) 0% 950 20 950 0% E 2,964,600 209,431 236,439 2,728,161 8% O 5,738,180 961,099 1,038,305 4,699,875 18% V 13 2016 Engineering Fees and Charges are $33,122 higher than 2015 revenues. 14 2016 EMS Transport User Fees are $33,362 higher than 2015 revenues. 4 Packet Pg. 184 1 4.4.a Page 3 of 3 C TTY O F EDMO NDS REVENUES - GENERAL FUND 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount Title Budget Revenues Revenues Remaining % Received FINES AND FO RFEITURES : PROOF OF VEHICLE INS PENALTY 8,000 1,565 1,680 6,320 21% TRAFFIC INFRACTION PENALTIES 25,000 6,574 46,757 (21,757) 187% NC TRAFFIC INFRACTION 260,000 67,692 16,200 243,800 6% CRT COST FEE CODE LEG ASSESSMENT (LGA) 24,600 5,139 4,889 19,711 20% SPEEDING DOUBLE - - - - 0% NON -TRAFFIC INFRACTION PENALTIES 1,300 (8,198) 38,250 (36,950) 2942% OTHERINFRACTIONS'04 1,000 232 276 724 28% P ARKING INFRACT ION P ENALT IES 43,000 10,845 8,040 34,960 19% PR -HANDICAPPED - - - - 0% PARK/INDDISZONE 1,300 1,064 908 392 70% DWI PENALTIES 6,000 1,214 12,615 (6,615) 210% DUI - DP ACCT 2,500 504 720 1,780 29% CRIM CNV FEE DUI 300 146 153 147 51% OTHER CRIMINAL TRAF MISDEM PEN - - - - 0% CRIMINAL TRAFFIC MISDEMEANOR 8/03 33,000 7,879 8,020 24,980 24% CRIMINAL CONVICTION FEE CT 1,900 529 589 1,311 31% CRIM CONV FEE CT 2,300 656 510 1,790 22% OT HER NON-T RAF MISDEMEANOR P EN 130 88 - 130 0% OTHER NON TRAFFIC MISD. 8/03 9,000 4,397 1,515 7,485 17% COURT DV PENALTY ASSESSMENT 900 370 52 848 6% CRIMINAL CONVICTION FEE CN 1,900 458 406 1,494 21% CRIM CONV FEE CN 900 149 176 724 20% CRIMINAL COST S-RECOUPMENTS 60,000 17,586 8,246 51,754 14% PUBLIC DEFENSE RECOUPMENT 33,000 7,139 6,710 26,290 20% BANK CHARGE FOR CONV. DEFENDANT - - 776 (776) 0% COURT INTERPRETER COSTS 100 186 60 40 60% BUS. LICENSE PERMIT PENALTY 5,000 8,780 6,550 (1,550) 131% MISC FINES AND PENALTIES 1,000 - - 1,000 0% 522,130 134,994 164,100 358,030 31% MISCELLANEOUS : INVESTMENT INTEREST 38,600 7,506 7,850 30,750 20% INTEREST ON COUNTY TAXES 5,700 429 674 5,026 12% INTEREST - COURT COLLECTIONS 5,000 1,623 1,508 3,492 30% PARKING 14,000 3,611 3,498 10,502 25% SPACE/FACILITIES RENTALS 128,000 10,775 14,352 113,648 11 % BRACKET ROOM RENTAL 5,000 1,440 640 4,360 13% LEASESLONG-TERM 218,100 43,137 45,408 172,692 21% VENDING MACHINE/CONCESS'ION 50,000 883 784 49,216 2% OTHER RENTS& USE CHARGES 4,500 1,500 - 4,500 0% PARKSDONATIONS 9,500 6,277 3,750 5,750 39% BIRD FEST CONTRIBUTIONS 950 200 - 950 0% 125TH ANNIVERSARY CONTRIBUTIONS - - - - 0% VOLUNTEER PICNIC CONTRIBUTIONS - - - - 0% POLICE CONT RIBUT IONS FROM PRIV SOURCES 1,000 - - 1,000 0% PARKS GRANTS- PRIVATE SOURCES - - - - 0% SALE OF JUNK/SALVAGE 150 - - 150 0% SALES OF UNCLAIM PROPERTY 2,000 4 2,481 (481) 124% CONFISCATED AND FORFEITED PROPERTY 2,000 - - 2,000 0% OT HER JUDGEMENT /SET T LEMENT 2,000 18 50 1,950 3% POLICE JUDGMENT S✓RESTITUTION 200 10 - 200 0% CASHIER'S OVERAGES/SHORTAGES - (0) 163 (163) 0% OTHER MISC REVENUES 1,000 8,375 4,368 (3,368) 437% SMALL OVERPAYMENT 50 1 11 39 23% NSF FEES - PARKS & REC 120 - - 120 0% NSF FEES - MUNICIPAL COURT 330 87 66 264 20% FLEX -PLAN SERVICES FORFEITURES 1,010 - - 1,010 0% US BANK REBATE 6,000 155 1,500 4,500 25% 495,210 86,030 87,105 408,105 18% TRANSFERS -IN: PROCEEDS OF REFUNDING DEBT - - - - 0% TRANSFER FROM FUND 012 800,000 - - 800,000 0% TRANSFER FROM FUND 127 25,840 - - 25,840 0% 825,840 - - 825,840 007a TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE $ 39,266,670 $ 6,234,620 $ 6,797,209 $ 32,469,461 17% 5 Packet Pg. 185 I 4.4.a I Page 1 of 6 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES (001) SALARIES AND WAGES $ 13,999,790 $ 3,185,665 $ 3,342,640 $ 10,657,150 24% OVERTIME 423,510 114,838 116,120 307,390 27% HOLIDAY BUY BACK 217,790 1,543 674 217,116 0% BENEFITS 5,352,060 1,179,663 1,265,354 4,086,706 24% UNIFORMS 89,290 20,952 23,281 66,009 26% SUPPLIES 393,950 83,197 67,109 326,841 17% SMALL EQUIPMENT 155,480 52,415 34,550 120,930 22% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,394,030 420,901 534,961 2,859,069 16% COMMUNICATIONS 211,890 31,088 27,222 184,668 13% TRAVEL 46,210 4,403 4,522 41,688 10% EXCISE TAXES 6,500 - 630 5,870 10% ADVERTISING - 634 - - 0% RENTAL/LEASE 916,390 224,703 232,240 684,150 25% INSURANCE 534,440 418,367 538,732 (4,292) 101% UTILITIES 457,800 104,689 109,037 348,763 24% REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 425,530 166,969 65,848 359,682 15% MISCELLANEOUS 383,840 148,976 145,454 238,386 38% INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES 10,384,010 2,709,466 2,772,851 7,611,159 27% INTERGOVERNMENTAL PAYMENTS 135,000 - - 135,000 0% INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 2,909,320 - 936,429 1,972,891 32% MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 40,000 14,777 - 40,000 0% GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PRINCIPAL 168,300 - 168,300 0% CAPITAL LEASES AND INSTALLMENT PURCHASES - - - 0% OTHER DEBT - 33 - 0% INTEREST ON LONG-TERM EXTERNAL DEBT 46,150 - 46,150 0% DEBT ISSUE COSTS - - - 0% INTERFUND SERVICES - - - - 0% 40,691,280 8,883,278 10,217,655 30,473,625 25% LEOFF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE(009) BENEFITS IN HOME LTC CLAIMS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MISCELLANEOUS RISK MANAGEMENT RESERVE FUND (011) MISCELLANEOUS CONTINGENCY RESERVEFUND (012) INTERFUND LOAN INTERFUND SUBSIDIES HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND (014) SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MISCELLANEOUS BUILDING MAINTENANCE SUBFUND (016) SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REPAIRS & MAINTENANENCE MISCELLANEOUS MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT DRUG INFO RCEM NTFUND (104) FUEL CONSUMED SMALL EQUIPMENT COMMUNICATIONS REPAIR/MAINT MISCELLANEOUS INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES $ 178,720 $ 58,879 $ 49,815 $ 128,905 28% 100,480 24,062 16,407 84,073 16% - - - - 0% 280 275 350 (70) 125% 279,480 83,216 $ 66,573 212,907 24% 0% $ - $ $ $ - 0% 800,000 $ 800,000 0% 800,000 - 800,000 0% $ 100 $ - $ $ 100 0% 200 - 200 0% 5,100 - 5,100 0% 5,400 - 5,400 0% $ - $ 1,834 $ - $ - 0% 80,000 50,929 17,912 62,088 22% 2,062,000 - - 2,062,000 0% - - 546 (546) 0% 33,000 - 286 32,714 1% 2,175,000 52,764 18,743 2,156,257 1% $ 3,000 $ 344 $ 269 $ 2,731 9% 5,000 - - 5,000 0% 2,230 567 438 1,792 20% 800 - - 800 0% 20,000 5,000 15,000 25% 45,000 11,035 33,965 25% 76,030 S 910 16,742 S 59,288 22% 6 Packet Pg. 186 I 4.4.a I Page 2 of 6 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent STREEI'FUND (111) SALARIES AND WAGES $ 515,160 $ 125,308 $ 127,495 $ 387,665 25% OVERTIME 18,400 3,374 4,926 13,475 27% BENEFITS 265,870 60,051 67,331 198,539 25% UNIFORMS 6,000 4,615 3,629 2,372 60% SUPPLIES 240,000 17,144 42,074 197,926 18% SMALL EQUIPMENT 26,000 - 545 25,455 2% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 14,050 4,539 3,927 10,123 28% COMMUNICATIONS 3,500 752 824 2,676 24% TRAVEL 1,000 300 - 1,000 0% RENTAL/LEASE 190,950 47,363 47,290 143,660 25% INSURANCE 87,620 81,386 97,912 (10,292) 112% UTILITIES 270,170 60,694 47,218 222,952 17% REPAIRS& MAINTENANCE 45,000 2,493 1,643 43,358 4% MISCELLANEOUS 20,500 - 350 20,150 2% INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES 3,000 - 754 2,246 25% INTERFUND SUBSIDIES - - - - 0% MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT - - - 0% GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PRINCIPAL 3,420 - 3,420 0% OTHER INTEREST & DEBT SERIVCE COSTS - - - 0% INTEREST ON LONG-TERM EXTERNAL DEBT 1,730 - 1,730 0% COMBINED STREETCONST/IMPROVE(112) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INTERFUND SUBSIDIES LAND CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOANS INTEREST INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES MUNIC IPAL ARTS AC Q UIS. FUND (1 l 7) SUPPLIES SMALL EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TRAVEL ADVERTISING RENT AL/LEASE REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS HO TEL/MO TEL TAX REVENUE FUND (120) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADVERTISING MISCELLANEOUS INTERFUND SUBSIDIES CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND (121) SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND (122) MISCELLANEOUS TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS (123) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADVERTISING MISCELLANEOUS $ 1,712,370 $ 408,019 $ 445,917 $ 1,266,453 26% $ 1,614,390 $ 100,550 $ 164,089 $ 1,450,301 10% 358,240 - - 358,240 0% 438,000 5,628 23,189 414,811 5% 5,553,332 53,705 902,285 4,651,047 16% 72,220 - - 72,220 0% 3,410 3,410 0% - - - - 0% $ 8,039,592 $ 159,883 $ 1,089,563 $ 6,950,029 14% $ 4,400 $ 432 $ 18 $ 4,382 0% 1,500 - - 1,500 0% 166,500 12,560 3,178 163,322 2% 80 - 11 70 13% - - - 0% 2,000 2,000 0% 300 - - 300 0% 6,600 779 1,005 5,595 15% $ 181,380 $ 13,771 $ 4,212 $ 177,168 2% $ 77,500 $ 3,470 $ 6,121 $ 71,379 8% - - - - 0% 8,150 82 8,150 0% 4,000 - 4,000 0% 60,000 - - 60,000 0% $ 149,650 $ 3,552 $ 6,121 $ 143,529 4% $ 1,790 $ - $ $ 1,790 0% 25,090 - 25,090 0% $ 26,880 $ - $ $ 26,880 0% $ 3,000 $ 890 $ 327 $ 2,673 11% $ 3,000 $ 890 $ 327 $ 2,673 11% $ 28,300 $ 1,715 $ 3,737 $ 24,563 13% - - - - 0% 3,200 - - 3,200 0% $ 31,500 $ 1,715 $ 3,737 $ 27,763 12% 7 Packet Pg. 187 I 4.4.a I Page 3 of 6 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent REAL ES TATE EXC IS E TAX 2 (125) SUPPLIES $ 21,000 $ 20,955 $ 14,821 $ 6,179 71% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 186,788 27,543 18,090 168,698 10% RENTAL/LEASE - 2,196 966 (966) 0% UTILITIES - - - - 0% REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 140,000 - - 140,000 0% t^, CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 1,660,844 - 1,437 1,659,407 0% p REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 1, PARKS AC Q (126) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MISCELLANEOUS INTERFUND SUBSIDIES LAND CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OTHER DEBT & DEBT SERVICE COST S INTEREST GIFTS CATALOG FUND (127) SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INTERFUND SUBSIDIES SPECIAL PROJECTS FUND (129) CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS CEMETERY MAINTENANCEIIIVIPRO VEMENT (130) SALARIES AND WAGES OVERTIME BENEFITS UNIFORMS SUPPLIES SUPPLIES PURCHASED FOR INVENTORY/RESALE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS TRAVEL ADVERTISING RENT AL/LEASE UTILITIES REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND (132) SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LAND CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS INTERFUND SUBSIDIES SISTER CITY COMMISSION (138) SUPPLIES TRAVEL MISCELLANEOUS TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT (139) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSURANCE INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES $ 2,008,632 $ 50,695 $ 35,314 $ 1,973,318 2% 0. $ 212,050 $ - $ - $ 212,050 0% - - - 0% C1 139,430 - - 139,430 0% CM 692,180 - 476,669 215,511 69% S 1,406,700 - - 1,406,700 0% LL 19,890 - 19,890 0% i - - - 0% G1 10,070 - - 10,070 0% $ 2,480,320 $ - $ 476,669 $ 2,003,651 19% Ci $ 13,110 $ 905 $ 253 $ 12,857 2% 6,000 273 6,300 (300) 105% N 25,840 - - 25,840 0% s $ 44,950 $ 1,178 $ 6,553 $ 38,397 15% i t0 $ - $ - $ - $ - 0%�2. $ - $ - $ - $ - 00/. 00 C1 T" $ 108,410 $ 19,545 $ 18,401 $ 90,009 17% 3,500 176 26 3,474 1% 44,500 8,179 8,341 36,159 19% p 1,000 197 - 1,000 0% d 7,000 306 - 7,000 0% w 20,000 5,101 3,342 16,658 17% is 4,200 190 218 3,982 5% Ct 1,410 441 250 1,160 18% 500 - - 500 0% - - - - 0% 11,550 2,496 2,888 8,663 25% >' 3,800 139 150 3,650 4% G� 500 - - 500 0% Ca 4,000 1,624 601 3,399 15% = $ 210,370 S 38,394 $ 34,217 $ 176,153 16% Cy m $ - $ - $ - $ - 0% 225,000 16,960 10,901 214,099 5% 500,000 - 475,710 24,291 95% 2,035,770 75,900 26,510 2,009,260 1% - - - - 0% $ 2,760,770 $ 92,860 $ 513,120 $ 2,247,650 19% $ 2,000 $ $ $ 2,000 0% 4,500 4,500 0% 6,000 6,000 0% $ 12,500 $ - $ $ 12,500 0% $ - $ - $ - $ - 0% 2,500 2,500 2,500 - 100% 680,000 155,385 161,266 518,734 24% $ 682,500 $ 157,885 $ 163,766 $ 518,734 24% Packet Pg. 188 I 4.4.a I Page 4 of 6 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent BUSINESS EMPROVFNMI ;T DISTRICT FUND (140) SUPPLIES $ $ 1,175 $ 39 $ (39) 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - 2,291 (2,291) 0% MISCELLANEOUS - - 195 (195) 0% - 1,175 2,525 2,525 0% LID FUND CONTROL (211) INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 2012 LTGO DEBT SERVIC FUND (231) GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND INTEREST OTHER INTEREST & DEBT SERVICE COSTS 2014 DEBTSERVICEFUND (232) GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND 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 RENT AL/LEASE INSURANCE UTILITIES REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES INTERFUND TAXES INTERFUND SUBSIDIES MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS REVENUE BONDS INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOANS INTEREST DEBT ISSUE COSTS OTHER INTEREST & DEBT SERVICE COSTS INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES $ 14,400 $ - $ $ 14,400 0% $ 14,400 $ - $ $ 14,400 0% $ 536,270 $ - $ $ 536,270 0% 140,610 - 140,610 0% 500 54 500 0% $ 677,380 S 54 $ $ 677,380 0% $ 933,210 $ - $ 933,208 $ 2 100% 16,330 - 3,221 13,109 20% $ 949,540 $ - $ 936,429 $ 13,111 99% $ 795,220 $ 183,543 $ 191,718 $ 603,502 24% 24,000 5,380 6,167 17,833 26% 372,550 82,519 88,674 283,876 24% 4,000 1,241 914 3,086 23% 151,000 26,484 16,679 134,321 11% 1,600,000 283,734 323,157 1,276,843 20% 143,000 29,976 22,544 120,456 16% 11,000 7,491 - 11,000 0% 1,793,286 114,498 215,782 1,577,504 12% 30,000 7,896 5,826 24,174 19% 200 - - 200 0% 340,000 73,018 89,451 250,549 26% 100,750 24,098 24,825 75,925 25% 58,920 70,904 52,335 6,585 89% 40,000 5,966 6,591 33,409 16% 17,000 8,214 1,038 15,962 6% 66,700 25,383 24,089 42,611 36% 30,000 10,782 11,110 18,890 37% 1,229,110 256,539 285,967 943,143 23% 731,220 - - 731,220 0% 15,000 - - 15,000 0% 4,551,921 166,886 291,092 4,260,829 6% 2,300 - - 2,300 0% 323,870 - 323,870 0% 25,840 - 25,840 0% 256,870 - 256,870 0% - - - 0% - 31 - 0% - - - - 0% $ 12,713,757 S 1,384,585 $ 1,657,959 $ 11,055,798 13% 9 Packet Pg. 189 I 4.4.a I Page 5 of 6 CITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent S TO RM FUND (422) SALARIES AND WAGES $ 640,470 $ 126,111 $ 139,144 $ 501,326 22% OVERTIME 6,000 3,846 3,475 2,525 58% BENEFITS 313,950 61,766 69,210 244,740 22% UNIFORMS 6,500 4,154 4,190 2,310 64% SUPPLIES 46,500 9,282 3,428 43,072 7% SMALL EQUIPMENT 4,000 787 - 4,000 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,638,530 110,793 83,484 2,555,046 3% COMMUNICATIONS 3,200 603 537 2,663 17% TRAVEL 4,300 - 200 4,100 5% EXCISE TAXES 55,000 14,925 15,787 39,213 29% RENTAL/LEASE 252,990 53,333 62,249 190,741 25% INSURANCE 64,120 39,269 63,187 933 99% UTILITES 10,500 2,407 2,668 7,832 25% REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 13,000 7,846 - 13,000 0% MISCELLANEOUS 91,200 15,467 8,951 82,249 10% INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES 85,000 21,322 40,837 44,163 48% INTERFUND TAXES AND OPERATING ASSESSMENT 330,430 94,185 98,791 231,639 30% INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 410,080 - 4,923 405,157 1% LAND 25,000 - - 25,000 0% MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT - - - 0% CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 2,168,330 - 2,168,330 0% GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS 83,800 - 83,800 0% REVENUE BONDS 158,300 - 158,300 0% INTERGOVERNMENTAL LOANS 32,070 - 32,070 0% INTEREST 166,430 166,430 0% DEBT ISSUE COSTS - - 0% OTHER INTEREST & DEBT SERVICE COSTS - 15 0% INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES - - - - 0% $ 7,609,700 $ 566,110 $ 601,062 $ 7,008,639 8% 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 RENT AL/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 DEBT ISSUE COSTS OTHER INTEREST & DEBT SERVICE COSTS INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES BOND RESERVEFUND (424) REVENUE BONDS DEBT ISSUE COSTS INTEREST OTHER INTEREST & DEBT SERVICE COSTS $ 1,721,530 $ 410,626 $ 432,417 $ 1,289,113 25% 100,000 20,186 19,910 80,090 20% 771,920 178,128 194,349 577,571 25% 9,500 4,892 3,102 6,398 33% 420,200 57,234 67,374 352,826 16% 90,000 11,762 6,675 83,325 7% 4,000 - - 4,000 0% 46,000 8,524 18,584 27,416 40% 1,934,696 259,690 248,223 1,686,473 13% 43,000 9,055 9,806 33,194 23% 5,000 - - 5,000 0% 150,000 40,836 52,111 97,889 35% 182,670 49,082 44,371 138,299 24% 96,630 139,648 105,637 (9,007) 109% 1,05 6,660 189,581 193,391 863,269 18% 325,000 143,744 79,130 245,870 24% 101,700 17,430 13,473 88,227 13% 150,000 67,206 71,403 78,597 48% 629,140 144,720 160,667 468,473 26% 2,563,949 - - 2,563,949 0% - - - - 0% 6,843,825 154,257 54,182 6,789,643 1% 130,140 - - 130,140 0% 72,840 - - 72,840 0% 170,620 13,109 13,414 157,206 8% 122,280 4,090 3,917 118,363 3% - - - - 0% - 3,093 2,955 (2,955) 0% - - - - 0% $ 17,741,300 $ 1,926,894 $ 1,795,089 $ 15,946,211 10% $ 655,010 $ - $ $ 655,010 0% - - - 0% 1,334,910 - 1,334,910 0% 1,000 54 1,000 0% $ 1,990,920 $ 54 $ $ 1,990,920 0% 10 Packet Pg. 190 I 4.4.a I Page 6 of 6 CITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES BY FUND - DETAIL 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND (511) SALARIES AND WAGES $ 224,880 $ 52,255 $ 56,302 $ 168,578 25% OVERTIME 2,000 61 - 2,000 0% BENEFITS 105,050 23,730 24,285 80,765 23% UNIFORMS 1,000 426 512 488 51% SUPPLIES 110,000 21,860 18,396 91,604 17% FUEL CONSUMED 1,000 - - 1,000 0% SUPPLIES PURCHASED FOR INVENTORY/RESALE 308,200 17,260 24,424 283,776 8% SMALL EQUIPMENT 58,000 13,273 693 57,307 1% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 44,000 314 423 43,577 1% COMMUNICATIONS 3,000 472 618 2,382 21% TRAVEL 1,000 1,196 10 990 1% RENTAL/LEASE 19,440 3,603 4,611 14,829 24% INSURANCE 29,560 40,605 29,967 (407) 101% UTILITIES 14,000 3,214 3,752 10,248 27% REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 60,000 8,656 16,630 43,370 28% MISCELLANEOUS 7,190 120 140 7,050 2% INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES 2,500 - - 2,500 0% MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 965,000 39,949 106,506 858,494 11% INTERFUND RENTAL - - - - 0% $ 1,955,820 $ 226,996 $ 287,269 $ 1,668,551 15% FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND (617) BENEFITS $ 30,940 $ 8,590 $ 5,188 $ 25,752 17% PENSION AND DISABILITY PAYMENTS 27,470 6,803 6,453 21,017 23% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,200 - - 1,200 0% $ 59,610 $ 15,392 $ 11,641 $ 47,969 20% TOTAL EXPENDITURE ALL FUNDS $ 106,084,031 $ 14,070,271 $ 18,391,200 $ 87,692,831 17% 11 Packet Pg. 191 4.4.a Page 1 of 1 CITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN SUMMARY 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent CITY COUNCIL $ 295,500 $ 54,262 $ 44,120 $ 251,380 150/c OFFICE OF MAYOR 260,250 62,160 64,319 195,931 250/c .-. HUMAN RESOURCES 445,790 97,488 90,412 355,378 200/c 0 MUNICIPAL COURT 909,270 199,177 219,191 690,079 240/c CITY CLERK 585,310 151,490 142,107 443,203 240/c .� c� ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 1,839,930 496,123 403,231 1,436,699 220/c C CITY ATTORNEY 741,560 164,833 162,968 578,592 220/c LL NON -DEPARTMENTAL 14,939,500 3,261,415 4,389,675 10,549,825 290/c POLICE SERVICES 9,628,550 2,171,600 2,295,467 7,333,083 240/, 3 COMMUNITY SERVICES✓ECONOMIC DEV. 483,580 90,926 101,724 381,856 210/c DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 2,473,970 538,490 565,548 1,908,422 230/c o N PARKS& RECREATION 3,762,150 729,804 770,996 2,991,154 200/c v L PUBLIC WORKS 2,842,120 520,651 610,297 2,231,823 21% FACILITIES MAINTENANCE 1,483,800 344,860 357,601 1,126,199 240/c 00 $ 40,691,280 $ 8,883,278 $ 10,217,655 $ 30,473,625 250/, C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - UTILITY- BY FUND IN SUMMARY Title 2016 Adopted Budget 3/31/2015 Expenditures 3/31/2016 Expenditures Amount Remaining %Spent WATER UTILITY FUND $ 12,713,757 $ 1,384,585 $ 1,657,959 $ 11,055,798 130/ STORM UTILITY FUND 7,609,700 566,110 601,062 7,008,639 80/ SEWER/WWTP UTILITY FUND 17,741,300 1,926,894 1,795,089 15,946,211 100/ BOND RESERVE FUND 1,990,920 54 - 1,990,920 0% $ 40,055,677 $ 3,877,644 $ 4,054,109 $ 36,001,568 100/( 12 Packet Pg. 192 Page 1 of 4 CITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN DEIAAIL 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent CITY COUNCIL SALARIES OVERTIME BENEFITS SUPPLIES SMALL EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS TRAVEL RENT AL/LEASE REPAIRS/MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS OFFICEOFMAYOR SALARIES BENEFITS SUPPLIES SMALL EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATION TRAVEL RENT AL/LEASE REPAIR/MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS HUMAN RESOURCES SALARIES OVERTIME BENEFITS SUPPLIES SMALL EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS TRAVEL ADVERTISING RENT AL/LEASE REPAIR/MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS MUNIC IPAL C O URT SALARIES OVERTIME BENEFITS SUPPLIES SMALL EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS TRAVEL RENT AL/LEASE REPAIR/MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS $ 119,100 $ 30,712 $ 22,896 $ 96,204 19% 1,000 - - 1,000 0% 88,550 17,317 17,377 71,173 20% 2,000 217 617 1,383 31% .-. - - - - 0% p 47,160 4,300 1,432 45,728 3% 3,000 1,432 600 2,400 20% Q' 6,700 70 1,073 5,627 16% 490 160 125 365 25% 'C1 500 - - 500 0% 27,000 54 27,000 0% C $ 295,500 $ 54,262 $ 44,120 $ 251380 15% LL $ 197,160 $ 48,969 $ 49,371 $ 147,789 25% L 48,190 11,112 12,012 36,178 25% M 1,500 210 317 1,183 21% C'1 - - - - 0% �p 2,000 764 848 1,152 42% 1,400 80 191 1,209 14% N 3,000 143 514 2,486 17% V 2,400 605 430 1,970 18% - - - - 0% a 4,600 277 636 3,964 14% '' $ 260,250 $ 62,160 $ 64,319 $ 195,931 25% 00 C) $ 226,880 $ 51,939 $ 54,965 $ 171,915 24% - - 43 (43) 0% 73,380 16,985 18,258 55,122 25% d 2,300 405 1,339 961 58% 300 - - 300 0% 114,000 17,395 12,523 101,477 11% 'C1 700 190 191 509 27% CM 1,000 - - 1,000 0% ,r- _ - - - - 0% LL 2,200 605 430 1,770 20% i 7,850 7,793 - 7,850 0% 17,180 2,175 2,663 14,517 16% cp $ 445,790 $ 97,488 $ 90,412 $ 355,378 20% $ 566,190 $ 128,070 $ 141,118 $ 425,072 25% 600 213 - 600 0% 222,750 43,306 51,834 170,916 23% 9,930 3,714 2,126 7,804 21% 2,800 1,234 132 2,668 5% 64,000 16,200 19,111 44,889 30% 1,800 424 671 1,129 37% 2,500 966 139 2,361 6% 800 155 130 670 16% 1,700 117 242 1,458 14% 36,200 4,778 3,689 32,511 10% $ 909,270 $ 199,177 $ 219,191 $ 690,079 24% 13 Packet Pg. 193 Page 2 of 4 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN DETAIL 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent CITY CLERK SALARIES AND WAGES $ 324,480 $ 96,115 $ 93,318 $ 231,162 29% OVERTIME - 312 1,509 (1,509) 0% BENEFITS 129,300 30,569 33,432 95,868 26% SUPPLIES 10,240 2,184 1,429 8,811 14% SMALL EQUIPMENT - 140 500 (500) 0% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 28,310 3,666 4,435 23,875 16% COMMUNICATIONS 50,000 8,112 112 49,888 0% TRAVEL 1,000 - - 1,000 0% ADVERTISING - - - - 0% RENTAL/LEASE 20,000 3,935 5,130 14,870 26% REPAIRS&MAINTENANCE 17,980 5,624 1,350 16,630 8% MISCELLANEOUS 4,000 834 891 3,109 22% $ 585,310 $ 151,490 $ 142,107 $ 443,203 24% ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SALARIES $ 892,390 $ 193,520 $ 207,819 $ 684,571 23% OVERTIME 6,670 235 200 6,470 3% BENEFITS 305,800 66,112 70,390 235,410 23% SUPPLIES 43,050 2,104 1,459 41,591 3% SMALL EQUIPMENT 110,650 37,314 22,212 88,438 20% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 111,400 26,168 6,201 105,199 6% COMMUNICATIONS 61,500 8,613 12,575 48,925 20% TRAVEL 2,900 - 14 2,886 0% RENTAL/LEASE 8,200 2,090 1,865 6,335 23% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 242,680 121,787 32,536 210,144 13% MISCELLANEOUS 15 14,690 23,402 47,960 (33,270) 326% MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT 40,000 14,777 - 40,000 0% $ 1,839,930 $ 496,123 $ 403,231 $ 1,436,699 22% CITY ATTO RNEY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $ 741,560 $ 164,833 $ 162,968 $ 578,592 22% MISCELLANEOUS - - - - 0% $ 741,560 $ 164, 333 $ 162,968 $ 578,592 22% NON -DEPARTMENTAL SALARIES $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ 100,000 0% BENEFITS -UNEMPLOYMENT 34,500 257 471 34,029 1% SUPPLIES 3,000 56 609 2,391 20% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 626,920 92,527 106,355 520,565 17% EXCISE TAXES 6,500 634 630 5,870 10% RENTAL/LEASE 3,600 3,600 3,600 - 100% INSURANCE 534,440 418,367 538,732 (4,292) 101% REPAIR & MAINTENANCE - - - - 0% MISCELLANEOUS 69,010 46,746 40,272 28,738 58% INTERGOVT SERVICES 10,302,760 2,699,194 2,762,577 7,540,183 27% ECA LOAN PAYMENT 135,000 - - 135,000 0% INTERFUND SUBSIDIES 2,909,320 936,429 1,972,891 32% GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND 168,300 - 168,300 0% INSTALLMENT PURCHASES - - - 0% OTHER DEBT - - - 0% INTEREST ON LONG-TERM DEBT 46,150 - 46,150 0% DEBT ISSUANCE COSTS - - - 0% FISCAL AGENT FEES 33 - - 0% INTERFUND SERVICES - 0% $ 14,939,500 $ 3,261,415 $ 4,389,675 $ 10,549,825 29% 15 Difference between 2015 and 2016 is due to Microsoft Office Windows Software Renewal in 2016. 14 r- Packet Pg. 194 1 1 4.4.a I Page 3 of 4 CITY OF EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENTIN DETAIL 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent PO LIC E S ERVIC ES SALARIES $ 5,778,330 $ 1,316,006 $ 1,408,786 $ 4,369,544 24% OVERTIME 396,240 110,325 105,596 290,644 27% HOLIDAY BUYBACK 217,790 1,543 674 217,116 0% BENEFITS 2,220,940 507,479 549,159 1,671,781 25% UNIFORMS 80,310 17,764 22,222 58,088 28% p SUPPLIES 86,730 24,930 13,288 73,442 15% Q- SMALL EQUIPMENT 20,400 1,363 3,694 16,706 18% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 117,170 22,671 21,037 96,133 18% COMMUNICATIONS 26,210 4,941 5,199 21,011 20% C1 TRAVEL 17,310 3,045 1,278 16,032 7% ADVERTISING - - - - 0% S RENTAL/LEASE 595,100 142,989 147,715 447,385 25% LL REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 14,620 1,089 1,238 13,382 8% L MISCELLANEOUS 46,850 12,183 10,308 36,542 22% INTERGOVTL SERVICES 10 550 5 272 5 274 5 276 50% M COMMUNITY SERVIC ES/EC 0 N DEV. SALARIES BENEFITS SUPPLIES SMALL EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS TRAVEL ADVERTISING RENT AL/LEASE REPAIR/MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES /PLANNING SALARIES OVERTIME BENEFITS UNIFORMS SUPPLIES SMALL EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS TRAVEL ADVERTISING RENT AL/LEASE REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS ENGINEERING SALARIES OVERTIME BENEFITS UNIFORMS SUPPLIES SMALL EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS TRAVEL RENT AL/LEASE REPAIR/MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS $ 9,628,550 $ 2,171,600 $ 2,295,467 $ 7,333,083 24% $ 224,960 $ 54,297 $ 56,435 $ 168,525 25% 67,430 15,604 17,199 50,231 26% N 7,000 41 23 6,977 0% v 800 - 125 676 16% 170,400 16,577 26,476 143,924 16% 1,490 189 202 1,288 14% 2,000 179 - 2,000 0% 00 w - - - - 0% 2,000 605 431 1,569 22% .� 500 - - 500 0% 7,000 3,434 834 6,166 12% C. $ 483,580 $ W926 $ 101,724 $ 381,856 21% W $ 1,433,430 $ 339,709 $ 355,435 $ 1,077,995 25% 1,300 - 3,289 (1,989) 253% 530,270 119,763 128,803 401,467 24% 500 - - 500 0% 16,100 2,563 3,284 12,816 20% 5,250 4,338 453 4,797 9% 403,960 27,029 52,445 351,515 13% 8,500 838 998 7,502 12% 4,250 - 1,484 2,766 35% - - - - 0% 24,750 8,637 4,861 19,889 20% 6,800 2,529 274 6,526 4% 38,860 33,084 14,222 24,638 37% $ 2,473,970 $ 538,490 $ 565,548 $ 1,908,422 23% $ 1,373,500 $ 305,088 $ 308,514 $ 1,064,986 22% 5,000 774 439 4,561 9% 561,900 119,962 123,167 438,733 22% 360 - - 360 0% - - - 0% 2,200 1,033 1,167 47% 465,000 - 75,851 389,149 16% 11,800 1,523 1,861 9,939 16% 600 - 20 580 3% 26,370 3,720 6,109 20,261 23% 2,600 - - 2,600 0% 21,000 2,178 4,256 16,744 20% $ 2,470,330 $ 433,246 $ 521,251 $ 1,949,079 21% 15 Packet Pg. 195 Page 4 of 4 C ITY O F EDMO NDS EXPENDITURES - GENERAL FUND - BY DEPARTMENT IN DETAIL 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount Title Budget Expenditures Expenditures Remaining %Spent PARKS & REC REATIO N SALARIES $ 1,830,090 $ 401,653 $ 415,996 $ 1,414,094 23% OVERTIME 10,000 2,202 1,836 8,164 18% BENEFITS 695,310 149,936 158,503 536,807 23% UNIFORMS 5,370 2,634 603 4,767 11% SUPPLIES 117,500 19,848 25,474 92,026 22% SMALL EQUIPMENT 9,080 6,252 6,205 2,875 68% PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 501,950 28,763 45,261 456,689 9% COMMUNICATIONS 30,140 1,275 1,109 29,031 4% TRAVEL 4,450 - - 4,450 0% ADVERTISING - - - - 0% RENTAL/LEASE 170,310 42,801 46,009 124,301 27% PUBLIC UTILITY 175,000 36,008 34,232 140,768 20% REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 50,800 14,877 14,248 36,552 28% MISCELLANEOUS 91,450 18,557 16,520 74,930 18% MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT - - - - 0% INTERGOVTL SERVICES 70,700 5,000 5,000 65,700 7% $ 3,762,150 $ 729,804 $ 770,996 $ 2,991,154 20% PUBLIC WORKS SALARIES OVERTIME BENEFITS SUPPLIES SMALL EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS TRAVEL RENT AL/LEASE PUBLIC UTILITY REPAIR/MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS FACILITIES MAINTENANCE SALARIES OVERTIME BENEFITS UNIFORMS SUPPLIES SMALL EQUIPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS TRAVEL RENT AL/LEASE PUBLIC UTILITY REPAIR/MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES $ 263,850 $ 63,617 $ 65,440 $ 198,410 25% 200 - - 200 0% 81,750 18,943 20,728 61,022 25% 7,600 1,118 471 7,129 6% 1,000 1,479 - 1,000 0% 200 8 20 180 10% 1,350 131 150 1,200 11% 500 - - 500 0% 7,640 1,476 1,536 6,104 20% 2,800 633 702 2,098 25% 1,000 - - 1,000 0% 3,900 3,900 0% $ 371,790 $ 87,405 $ 89,046 $ 282,744 24% 669,430 155,972 162,548 506,882 24% 2,500 777 3,209 (709) 128% 291,990 62,317 64,020 227,970 22% 2,750 554 455 2,295 17% 87,000 25,809 16,674 70,326 19% 3,000 295 197 2,803 7% - - - - 0% 14,000 3,337 3,362 10,638 24% - - - - 0% 52,530 13,324 13,870 38,660 26% 280,000 68,047 74,103 205,897 26% 78,500 13,154 15,961 62,539 20% 2,100 1,274 3,203 (1,103) 153% $ 1,483,800 $ 344,860 $ 357,601 $ 1,126,199 24% S 40,691,280 S 8,883,278 S 10,217,655 $ 30,473,625 25% 16 Packet Pg. 196 I 4.4.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -General Fund 2016 General Fund Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 1,918,337 $ February 4,634,891 March 6,893,920 April 10,554,422 May 18,443,843 June 20,419,802 July 22,540,807 August 24,729,200 September 26,735,162 October 29,955,787 November 37,295,545 December 39,266,670 Real Estate Excise Tax 1 & 2 1,918,337 $ 2,112,632 10.13% 2,716,554 4,307,339 -7.07% 2,259,028 6,797,209 -1.40% 3,660,503 7,889,420 1,975,960 2,121,005 2,188,392 2,005,962 3,220,626 7,339,758 1,971,125 City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Real Estate Excise Tax 2016 Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 189,874 $ February 316,058 March 479,194 April 640,872 May 800,918 June 986,094 July 1,276,157 August 1,480,830 September 1,690,614 October 1,875,616 November 2,069,074 December 2,200,000 189,874 $ 216,395 13.97% 126,183 447,070 41.45% 163,136 551,728 15.14% 161,679 160,046 185,176 290,062 204,673 209,784 185,002 193,458 130,926 *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 17 Packet Pg. 197 1 4.4.a Contractors 273,625 Health & Personal Care 27,401 Retail Eating & Drinking 204,358 Gasoline Stations 7,957 Automotive Repair 42,350 Retail Automotive 418,635 Total Retail Automotive Misc Retail Trade Business Services Retail Eating & Drinking Retail Food Stores Wholesale Trade Others Accommodation Health & Personal Care Gasoline Stations Clothing and Accessories Automotive Repair Amusement & Recreation Communications Contractors ($40,000) Sales Tax Analysis By Category Current Period: March 2016 Year -to -Date Total $1,693,551 Wholesale Trade 69,581 Clothing and Accessories 62,793 Change in Sales Tax Revenue: March 2016 compared to March 2015 ns 55,052 0 Misc Retail Trade 229,182 N C t0 Accommodation 9,203 � LL Business Services 126,081 L 3 C'1 Amusement & Recreation 15,527 r 0 N Retail Food Stores 67,153 t Others 84,656 0 CD - V77 ($20,000) $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 18 Packet Pg. 198 I 4.4.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Sales and Use Tax 2016 Sales and Use Tax Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 471,315 $ 471,315 $ 539,867 14.54% February 1,055,135 583,820 1,204,754 14.18% March 1,506,759 451,624 1,693,551 12.40% April 1,936,463 429,704 May 2,478,856 542,394 June 2,960,731 481,875 July 3,457,813 497,082 August 3,998,806 540,993 September 4,517,576 518,770 October 5,055,818 538,242 November 5,626,862 571,044 December 6,144,400 517,538 Sales and Use Tax 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 too 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Year Budget mar Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Gas Utility Tax 2016 Gas Utility Tax Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 90,678 $ 90,678 $ 85,977 -5.18% February 190,868 100,190 176,574 -7.49% March 272,706 81,838 249,556 -8.49% April 346,987 74,281 May 405,847 58,860 June 445,893 40,046 July 477,342 31,449 August 501,633 24,291 September 523,862 22,229 October 548,406 24,545 November 586,112 37,705 December 647,900 61,788 Gas Utility Tax 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 -0-- Prior Yeaz *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 19 Packet Pg. 199 1 I 4.4.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Telephone Utility Tax 2016 Telephone Utility Tax Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast TrD Actuals Variance January $ 125,356 $ 125,356 $ 91,384 -27.10% February 226,461 101,105 230,098 1.61% March 344,917 118,456 328,246 -4.83% April 457,974 113,057 May 577,752 119,778 June 685,900 108,148 July 794,692 108,792 August 904,737 110,045 September 1,019,063 114,326 October 1,131,491 112,428 November 1,235,975 104,484 December 1,349,100 113,125 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 Yeaz Budget --dr- Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Electric Utility Tax 2016 1lectric Utility Tax Cumulative Monthly TrD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals January $ 155,396 $ 155,396 $ 177,383 14.15% February 311,244 155,848 348,280 11.90% March 463,906 152,662 509,702 9.87% April 612,759 148,854 May 749,676 136,917 June 854,497 104,821 July 956,312 101,815 August 1,049,934 93,622 September 1,145,581 95,647 October 1,239,871 94,290 November 1,346,584 106,712 December 1,451,800 105,216 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 --O-Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 20 Packet Pg. 200 1 I 4.4.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Meter Water Sales 2016 Meter Water Sales Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 573,717 $ 573,717 $ 553,882 -3.46% February 969,279 395,562 943,114 -2.70% March 1,534,923 565,644 1,529,160 -0.38% April 1,915,226 380,303 May 2,481,868 566,642 June 2,912,390 430,522 July 3,586,469 674,079 August 4,157,711 571,242 September 4,946,125 788,414 October 5,503,014 556,889 November 6,162,012 658,998 December 6,572,750 410,738 City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary -Storm Water Sales 2016 Storm Water Sales Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 238,091 $ 238,091 $ 238,442 14.15% February 750,139 512,049 750,909 11.90% March 988,469 238,330 988,089 9.87% April 1,200,403 211,933 May 1,439,120 238,718 June 1,651,173 212,053 July 1,891,010 239,837 August 2,403,804 512,795 September 2,641,727 237,923 October 2,853,622 211,895 November 3,092,120 238,497 December 3,304,340 212,220 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 -dr,- Prior Year O N C C LL L d 7 CY tD r O N t V i fC 00 CD *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 21 Packet Pg. 201 1 I 4.4.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Revenue Summary-Unmeter Sewer Sales 2016 Unmeter Sewer Sales Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance January $ 571,975 $ 571,975 $ 566,825 -0.90% February 1,033,695 461,721 1,035,133 0.14% March 1,603,598 569,903 1,607,616 0.25% April 2,066,627 463,029 May 2,641,462 574,835 June 3,110,919 469,457 July 3,697,613 586,694 August 4,168,968 471,356 September 4,762,598 593,630 October 5,236,709 474,111 November 5,819,454 582,746 December 6,291,410 471,956 F O Q N fC C R C iL L N to 3 to O tl t U L C� G 00 CD r r *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 22 Packet Pg. 202 1 I 4.4.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -General Fund 2016 General Fund Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 4,534,064 $ 4,534,064 $ 4,953,956 9.26% February 7,039,425 2,505,361 7,893,221 12.13% March 10,195,267 3,155,842 10,217,655 0.22% April 14,199,472 4,004,205 May 16,374,414 2,174,942 June 20,134,963 3,760,549 July 23,368,286 3,233,323 August 26,955,976 3,587,690 September 30,559,040 3,603,064 October 33,147,709 2,588,669 November 36,747,228 3,599,518 December 40,691,280 3,944,052 City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Non -Departmental 2016 Non -Departmental Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Variance Actuals % January $ 2,637,164 $ 2,637,164 $ 3,074,199 16.57% February 3,090,761 453,597 4,065,136 31.53% March 4,177,637 1,086,876 4,389,675 5.08% April 6,115,913 1,938,276 May 6,276,776 160,863 June 7,917,237 1,640,461 July 8,983,200 1,065,963 August 10,280,111 1,296,911 September 11,804,336 1,524,225 October 12,235,538 431,202 November 13,396,879 1,161,341 December 14,939,500 1,542,621 Non -Departmental 16,000,000 14,000,000 12,000,000 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 001, 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC t Current Year —Budget —dm- Prior Year O d C C LL L d O 7 CY tD O N t V i fC O CD *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 23 Packet Pg. 203 1 I 4.4.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -City Council 2016 City Council Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 19,588 $ 19,588 $ 13,340 -31.90% February 43,238 23,650 27,668 -36.01% March 68,617 25,379 44,120 -35.70% April 91,002 22,385 May 115,388 24,386 June 142,957 27,568 July 169,613 26,656 August 194,018 24,404 September 218,163 24,145 October 242,646 24,484 November 268,263 25,616 December 295,500 27,237 City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Office of Mayor 2016 Office of Mayor Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 22,161 $ 22,161 $ 21,296 -3.90% February 44,020 21,859 43,294 -1.65% March 65,603 21,583 64,319 -1.96% April 86,693 21,090 May 108,016 21,323 June 129,368 21,352 July 151,400 22,032 August 172,781 21,380 September 193,702 20,921 October 217,172 23,470 November 239,237 22,065 December 260,250 21,013 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 -dr,- Prior Year O d C M C_ LL L d O 7 CY O O N t V i fC O CD *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 24 Packet Pg. 204 1 I 4.4.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Community Services/Economic Development 2016 Community Services/Economic Development Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 28,028 $ 28,028 $ 25,054 -10.61% February 65,193 37,165 61,145 -6.21% March 101,769 36,576 101,724 -0.04% April 152,174 50,405 May 189,175 37,001 June 223,124 33,949 July 264,279 41,155 August 303,281 39,002 September 346,067 42,786 October 388,176 42,108 November 429,367 41,192 December 483,580 54,213 City Clerk Community Services/Economic Development 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 -dp- Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -City Clerk 2016 Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 50,489 $ 50,489 $ 44,524 -11.81% February 96,125 45,635 87,838 -8.62% March 145,204 49,079 142,107 -2.13% April 189,944 44,740 May 234,027 44,083 June 281,576 47,549 July 329,270 47,695 August 379,179 49,909 September 428,220 49,041 October 485,933 57,714 November 535,319 49,385 December 585,310 49,991 700,000 City Clerk 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 -dr- Prior Year O d C co C LL L d O 7 CY O O N t V i fC O CD *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 25 Packet Pg. 205 1 I 4.4.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Human Resources 2016 Human Resources Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 33,067 $ 33,067 $ 28,007 -15.30% February 68,688 35,621 58,708 -14.53% March 111,242 42,553 90,412 -18.73% April 145,138 33,896 May 182,888 37,750 June 219,759 36,871 July 256,747 36,988 August 291,944 35,197 September 332,154 40,210 October 368,111 35,957 November 400,133 32,022 December 445,790 45,657 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 OCT NOV DEC Current Year Budget t Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Municipal Court 2016 Municipal Court Cumulative Monthly YTD Variance Budget Forecast Budget Forecast Actuals % January $ 67,768 $ 67,768 $ 67,346 -0.62% February 140,999 73,231 145,300 3.05% March 219,268 78,269 219,191 -0.04% April 293,243 73,975 May 365,511 72,268 June 440,872 75,361 July 515,865 74,993 August 594,541 78,676 September 669,574 75,033 October 750,559 80,985 November 828,307 77,748 December 909,270 80,963 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 -0-- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 26 Packet Pg. 206 I 4.4.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Information Services 2016 Information Services Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast TrD Actuals Variance % January $ 87,065 $ 87,065 $ 55,507 -36.25% February 163,617 76,552 158,620 -3.05% March 224,796 61,179 205,381 -8.64% April 281,617 56,821 May 331,746 50,129 June 381,470 49,725 July 448,514 67,044 August 521,686 73,171 September 590,807 69,121 October 648,167 57,360 November 735,478 87,311 December 900,110 164,632 Finance Information Services 1,000,000 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 0. !77 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Current Year - Budget -90-- Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Finance 2016 Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast TrD Actuals Variance % January $ 97,947 $ 97,947 $ 62,994 -35.69% February 174,402 76,455 130,335 -25.27% March 249,528 75,126 197,850 -20.71% April 330,097 80,569 May 403,825 73,728 June 478,183 74,359 July 551,010 72,826 August 624,240 73,230 September 699,491 75,251 October 782,345 82,854 November 857,044 74,699 December 939,820 82,776 Finance 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 +Current Year - Budget -dP-- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 27 Packet Pg. 207 1 I 4.4.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -City Attorney 2016 City Attorney Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 61,797 $ 61,797 $ 60,070 -2.79% February 123,593 61,797 120,220 -2.73% March 185,390 61,797 162,968 -12.09% April 247,187 61,797 May 308,983 61,797 June 370,780 61,797 July 432,576 61,797 August 494,373 61,797 September 556,170 61,797 October 617,966 61,797 November 679,763 61,797 December 741,560 61,797 Police 800,000 City Attorney 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 -dr- Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Police 2016 Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 742,439 $ 742,439 $ 771,955 3.98% February 1,500,827 758,388 1,527,193 1.76% March 2,270,564 769,738 2,295,467 1.10% April 3,024,634 754,070 May 3,778,474 753,839 June 4,596,174 817,700 July 5,361,301 765,126 August 6,134,061 772,761 September 6,899,091 765,029 October 7,695,105 796,015 November 8,764,862 1,069,757 December 9,628,550 863,688 Police 10,000,000 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 OCT NOV DEC -*--Current Year - Budget -*I,- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 28 Packet Pg. 208 I 4.4.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Development Services 2016 Development Services Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 187,956 $ 187,956 $ 170,060 -9.52% February 382,755 194,799 361,353 -5.59% March 596,922 214,167 565,548 -5.26% April 791,247 194,325 May 991,993 200,746 June 1,183,614 191,621 July 1,388,451 204,836 August 1,596,781 208,330 September 1,803,127 206,345 October 2,032,106 228,979 November 2,241,805 209,699 December 2,473,970 232,165 Parks & Recreation Development Services 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 t Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Parks & Recreation 2016 Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 242,792 $ 242,792 $ 252,899 4.16% February 503,727 260,935 502,972 -0.15% March 778,531 274,804 770,996 -0.97% April 1,055,428 276,898 May 1,355,118 299,690 June 1,671,726 316,608 July 2,101,457 429,730 August 2,558,858 457,401 September 2,879,622 320,763 October 3,172,797 293,176 November 3,426,737 253,939 December 3,762,150 335,413 Parks & Recreation 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 t Current Yeaz Budget -dm- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 29 Packet Pg. 209 1 I 4.4.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Public Works 2016 Public Works Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 31,230 $ 31,230 $ 29,570 -5.31% February 62,130 30,900 59,034 -4.98% March 92,810 30,680 89,046 -4.05% April 123,243 30,434 May 154,320 31,076 June 185,380 31,060 July 216,622 31,243 August 246,986 30,363 September 276,279 29,293 October 308,266 31,987 November 337,169 28,904 December 371,790 34,621 Facilities Maintenance Public Works 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 OCT NOV DEC Current Year Budget --AP- Prior Year City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Facilities Maintenance 2016 Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 115,588 $ 115,588 $ 116,661 0.93% February 236,621 121,033 240,595 1.68% March 365,554 128,934 357,601 -2.18% April 487,500 121,946 May 604,005 116,504 June 723,757 119,752 July 857,071 133,314 August 967,719 110,648 September 1,099,287 131,567 October 1,211,418 112,132 November 1,335,849 124,431 December 1,483,800 147,951 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 OCT NOV DEC --#- Current Year -Budget --O-Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 30 Packet Pg. 210 1 I 4.4.a I City of Edmonds, WA Monthly Expenditure Report -Engineering 2016 Engineering Cumulative Monthly Budget Forecast Budget Forecast YTD Actuals Variance % January $ 198,055 $ 198,055 $ 160,475 -18.97% February 396,423 198,368 303,810 -23.36% March 597,281 200,858 521,251 -12.73% April 796,160 198,879 May 1,001,003 204,843 June 1,201,964 200,961 July 1,401,670 199,706 August 1,603,612 201,942 September 1,807,951 204,339 October 2,023,470 215,519 November 2,232,307 208,838 December 2,470,330 238,023 Engine a ring 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 —dp-- Prior Year *The monthly budget forecast columns are based on a five-year average. 31 Packet Pg. 211 INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO SUMMARY I 4.4.a I City of Edmonds Investment Portfolio Summary As of March 31, 2016 (a) Term Purchase Purchase Maturity Agency/Issuer Investment Type (months) Date Price Date Washington State Local Investment Pool Various $13,413,047 Various Government Investment Pool Snohomish County Investment Pool Various $35,453,364 Various Investment Pool FICO Bonds 33 9/19/2014 1,027,000 6/6/2017 FHLMC Bonds 54 12/27/2012 1,000,000 6/27/2017 FHLMC Bonds 60 12/28/2012 1,000,000 12/28/2017 FHLMC Bonds 33 2/19/2016 1,000,000 11/19/2018 FFCB Bonds 36 1/25/2016 2,000,000 12/28/2018 FFCB Bonds 37 1/25/2016 2,000,000 1/25/2019 FNMA Bonds 60 9/19/2014 1,000,000 9/19/2019 TOTAL F O O_ Yield to Weighted Maturity Average 0.45% 0.10% c ii 0.79% 0.48% L m 0.96% 0.02% CY 0.75% 0.01 % co 0 0.90% 0.02% cV t U L 1.25% 0.02% 1.42% 0.05% rn 1 .23% 0.04% 1.87% 0.03% Q' 0.78% 0.78% Investment Mix % of Total Rate Comparison State Investment Pool 23.17% Current 6-month treasury rate 0.39% Bonds 15.59% Current State Pool rate 0.45% Snohomish County Investment Pool 61.24% Blended Edmonds rate 0.78% 100.0% (a) To maturity. Investment interest through March of 2016 is$91,770, whereas interest through March of 2015 was$83,712; difference of $8,058. 32 Packet Pg. 212 4.4.a GENERAL FUND OVERVIEW FUND BALANCES CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES o GENERAL FUND & SUBFUNDS ---- ACTUAL ---- ---- ACTUAL ---- 12/31 /2015 2/28/2016 3/31 /2016 Q1 YTD i 001-General Fund $ 9,196,139 $ 4,716,874 $ 5,775,692 $ (3,420,446) $ (3,420,44f 009-Leoff-Medical Ins. Reserve 519,409 477,074 453,760 (65,648) (65,64t u_ 011-Risk Management Fund 961,512 962,390 963,340 1,828 1,82t ', 012-Contingency Reserve Fund 1,664,488 1,672,096 1,667,653 3,164 L 3,16, � 013-Mulitmodal Transportation FD 56,487 56,538 56,594 107 10- M= 014-Historic Preservation Gift Fund 9,026 9,034 9,043 17 1' CY 016-Building Maintenance 118,085 133,427 133,260 15,175 15,17! c N Total General Fund & Subfunds $ 12,525,146 $ 8,027,434 $ 9,059,344 $ (3,465,802) $ (3,465,80: t v L C� G 00 CD r r.+ L 0 Q - General Fund & Subfunds 2 18 U 16 ii 14 $12.53 �' L 12 1` 10 $9.06 $8.03 CY 0 8 - - m r 6 N 4 L L 2 — d Dec 2015 Feb 2016 Mar 2016 Q- E 0 U c a� E c� *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. a This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. The beginning fund balances for 2016 are preliminary, these will be updated after the completion of the 2015 Financial Statements. 33 Packet Pg. 213 4.4.a GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS OVERVIEW CHANGE IN FUND FUND BALANCES BALANCES GOVERNMENTAL ---- ACTUAL ---- FUNDS ---- ACTUAL ---- 12/31 /2015 2/28/2016 3/31 /2016 Q1 YTD — o a General Fund & Subfunds $ 12,525,146 $ 8,027,434 $ 9,059,344 $ (3,465,802) $ (3,465,80 Special Revenue 9,206,543 9,937,132 11,887,729 2,681,185 2,681,18 �a Debt Service 114,790 115,564 115,564 773 77 .5 ca Total Governmental Funds $ 21,846,480 $ 18,080,129 $ 21,062,636 $ (783,843) $ (783,84LL c L V to Governmental Fund Balances -By Fund GrouP Governmental Fund r N t 16 14 12 10 c 0 8 6 4 2 Balances - Combined U ao CD 24 — .. - General Fund & Subfunds 18 f Special o Revenue 12 Debt Service $0.11 $0.12 $0.12 Dec 2015 Feb 2016 Ma r 2016 6 Dec 2015 Feb 2016 Mar 2016 *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. The beginning balances for 2016 are preliminary, these will be updated after the completion of the 2015 Financial Statements. 34 Packet Pg. 214 1 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS OVERVIEW 1 4.4.a I FUND BALANCES GOVERNMENTAL ---- ACTUAL ---- SPECIAL REVENUE 12/31 /2015 2/28/2016 3/31 /2016 104 - Drug Enforcement Fund $ 68,732 $ 71,138 $ 120,531 111 - Street Fund 514,447 411,912 426,929 112 - Combined Street Const/Improve 1,504,539 2,714,817 3,813,826 117 - Municipal Arts Acquis. Fund 468,470 465,260 482,084 118 - Memorial Street Tree 17,919 17,935 17,953 120 - Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Fund 153,885 158,871 164,509 121 - Employee Parking Permit Fund 64,481 71,294 71,765 122 - Youth Scholarship Fund 15,469 15,296 15,173 123 - Tourism Promotional Fund/Arts 84,568 84,575 86,486 125 - Real Estate Tax 2 1,629,534 1,819,277 1,874,258 126 - Real Estate Excise Tax 1 2,239,005 1,967,598 2,042,221 127 - Gifts Catalog Fund 265,924 277,668 284,615 129 - Special Projects Fund 38,393 38,428 38,466 130 - Cemetery Maintenance/Improvement 137,256 138,476 142,169 132 - Parks Construction Fund 897,415 541,055 1,160,606 136 - Parks Trust Fund 152,249 152,388 152,538 137 - Cemetery Maintenance Trust Fund 883,730 887,183 889,731 138 - Sister City Commission 3,785 3,789 3,792 139 - Transportation Benefit District 0 0 0 140 - Business Improvement Disrict 66,743 100,170 100,076 Total Special Revenue $ 9,206,543 $ 9,937,132 $ 11,887,729 15 12 c 9 0 6 3 Special Revenue Funds $9.94 CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE; ---- ACTUAL ---- Q1 YTD $ 51,800 $ 51,80( (87,517) (87,511 Q 2,309,287 2,309,281 13,614 13,61 Fa 34 3z 10,624 10,62z c 7,284 7,28z ii (295) (29`. 1,918 1,91E 244,723 244,7Z (196,784) (196,78: CY 18,690 18,69( c 73 7; N 4,913 4,91; z U 263,191 263,19' 289 28� 6,001 6,00' rn 7 33,333 33, 33, Q. $ 2,681,185 $ 2, 681,18: $11.89 Special Revenue Dec 2015 Feb 2016 Mar2016 *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. The beginning fund balances for 2016 are preliminary, these will be updated after the completion of the 2015 Financial Statements. 35 Packet Pg. 215 ENTERPRISE FUNDS OVERVIEW I 4.4.a I ENTERPRISE FUNDS 421 - Water Utility Fund 422 - Storm Utility Fund 423 - Sewer/WWTP Utility Fund 424 - Bond Reserve Fund 411 - Combined Utility Operation Total Enterprise Funds $70,000,000 $60,000,000 $50,000,000 $40, 000,000 $30,000,000 $20,000,000 $10, 000,000 FUND BALANCES ---- ACTUAL ---- $ 15, 000, 775 $ 20, 440, 890 $ 15, 513,148 $ 10, 032, 988 14,188, 251 10, 572, 881 43,129, 479 51, 909,129 43, 952, 248 843,961 843,913 843,964 - 25,583 47,129 $ 69, 007, 203 $ 87, 407, 767 $ 70.929, 369 $ Enterprise Fund Balances as of March 31, 2016 Combined Utility Water 10,572,881 E L O CL CHANGE IN FUND ---- ACTUAL ---- — 512,373 $ 539,894 822,769 3 47,129 1.922,167 $ YID 512, 37, c 539, 89z 822, 76t r 47,12t a 1,922,161 c N t V L C� C 00 Cn r $843,964 Storm Sewer/WWTP Bond Reserve *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. The beginning fund balances for 2016 are preliminary, these will be updated after the completion of the 2015 Financial Statements. 36 Packet Pg. 216 SUMMARY OVERVIEW 4.4.a I CITY-WIDE Governmental Funds Enterprise Funds Internal Services Fund Agency Funds Total City-wide Total FUND BALANCES ACTUAL CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES ---- ACTUAL ---- $ 21,846,480 $ 18,080,129 $ 21,062,636 $ (783,843) $ 69,007,203 87,407,767 70,929,369 1,922,167 8,166,494 7,543,590 8,273,556 107,063 203,101 194,925 191,835 (11,265) $ 99,223,277 $113,226,412 $100,457,398 $ 1,234,121 $ Governmental Fund Balances as of March 31, 2016 General Fund & Subfunds 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 Transportation Benefit District $ (0) Business Improvement District L.I.D. Fund Control L.I.D. Guaranty Fund 2012 LTGO Debt Service Fund $ (0) Equipment Rental Fund Firemen's Pension Fund $1 $3,792 YTD E (783,84: Q m 1,922,16-1 W 107,06: (11,26f 1,234,12' ii L CY to $9,059,34, N $120,531 v $426,929 $3,81 ,826 $482,084 co $17,953 $164,509 $71,765 r- $15,173 $86,486 $1,874,2 8 $2,042,2 1 $284,615 $38,466 — $142,169 � $1,160,606 � $152,538 $889,731 � $100,076 $10,429 $105,135 $191,835 *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. The beginning fund balances for 2016 are preliminary, these will be updated after the completion of the 2015 Financial Statements. $8,273,55E $20,000,000 37 Packet Pg. 217 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS OVERVIEW I 4.4.a I INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS 511 - Equipment Rental Fund Total Internal Service Funds 10 8 6 0 4 2 FUND BALANCES ---- ACTUAL ---- 12/31 /2015 2/28/2016 3/31 /2016 $ 8,166, 494 $ 7,543,590 $ 8,273,556 $ $ 8,166, 494 $ 7,543,590 $ 8,273,556 1 $ Internal Service Fund Balances 0 17 $8.27 Dec 2015 Feb 2016 Mar 2016 CHANGE IN FUND 00. BALANCES ---- ACTUAL ---- iU_ 01 YTD � c 107,063 $ 107, 06< ii 107,063 $ 107, 06' �a Ci r O N t V i fC 511- Equipment Rental Fund *Please note that these revenues and expenses occur within annual cycles. This Interim Report is not adjusted for accruals or those annual cycles. The beginning fund balances for 2016 are preliminary, these will be updated after the completion of the 2015 Financial Statements. 38 co CD Packet Pg. 218 1 4.4.b Is' Quarter 2016 Financial T d Management Repord, ➢ 1 St Quarter Financial Highlights ➢ Financial Quiz ➢ Q &A r 0 N U L C� C 00 a a r- O U- CD N L V F N r C N t V r Q Packet Pg. 219 4.4.b QIU- z 21 L ➢ Question 1. The Chart Below represents? 0 N L 12.0 10.0 I ICO COE =E■w■—�� WWW �I/■�MEEF-� 4.0 TL 2.0 E as 0.0 c c� ti,�� 1°)�� ti�� °�� 1°�� ti�� ti�� ti�� ti�� ti�� ti�� 1�01 ti�� c c ii co N a) Sales Tax Revenues(in Millions) & Recessions L b) Number of Housing Unit Permits Issued(in Tens) & Periods of Economic r Recovery E c) Greater Seattle Unemployment Rate (in percent) & Recessionary PeriodL Packet Pg. 220 (lneetinn 4.4.b QIU- z L 1. The Chart Below represents? 3 Cy 250 - co 12 0 N 'f1C. l Q 200 10 c`o AVX\ 6 a r- 100 A 4 Q. 50 OFv 2 E m 0 0 c 1p'O 10011 yp0� 106^ If" 11p 11 tiffs\" a) Sales Tax Revenues(in Thousands), Commercial Building Permits & Recessions N b) Number of Housing Unit Permits Issued, Unemployment Rate & Periods a of Recession d c) Street Lane Improvements(1,000's of feet), Addition of New Residents to City(ten's) & Periods of Economic Recovery Packet Pg. 221 4.4.b General Fund - Funds Revenue Comparison "a C. 100 9 V 1st QUARTER 2016 REVENUE SUMMARY - GENERAL FUND TYPES Fund NO. Fund Name YTD 2015 Receipts YTD 2016 Receipts $ Change 116 -'15 % Chang '16 -'15 001 GENERAL FUND 692349620 697979209 5629589 9.0 009 LEOFF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE 19270 924 (346) -27.2 011 RISK MANAGEMENT FUND 21684 1,828 (856) -31.9 012 CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND 14,247 3,164 (11,082) -77.8 013 MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION FUND 147 107 (39) -26.8 014 HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND 3 17 14 515.4 UILDING MAINTENANCE 45,235 33,918 (11,316) -25.0 notals r 692989206 69837,169 5389963 8.6 21 CD d r N U L C� C 00 r r a a 0 a m r 0 N L V F N r C N t V r Q Packet Pg. 222 General Fund Revenue Budget to Actual General Fund Year -to -Date Actual Budget % of Budget Resource Category 21 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 % 2015 2016 2015 2016 Taxes m Property Taxes 680,898 728,189 6.9% 14,320,535 14,705,650 2.7% 4.8% 5.0% Sales Tax 1,605,365 1,693,551 5.5% 5,627,000 6,144,400 9.2% 28.5% 27.6% CY 0 Utility Taxes 1,867,607 1,935,674 3.6% 6,732,519 6,789,980 0.9% 27.7% 28.5% c Other Taxes 233,353 241,616 3.5% 872,750 939,340 7.6% 26.7% 25.7% N t Total Taxes 4,387,224 4,599,031 4.8% 27,552,804 28,579,370 3.7% 15.9% 16.1% 2 Licenses & Permits Business Licenses & Misc. Permits 114,091 108,355 -5.0% 236,680 244,220 3.2% 48.2% 44.4% Franchise Fees 278,145 281,141 1.1% 1,093,490 1,142,800 4.5% 25.4% 24.6% CD Develo ment Related Permits 140,974 203,267 44.2% 567,370 624,100 10.0% 24.8% 32.6% Total Licenses & Permits 533,210 592,763 11.2% 1,897,540 2,011,120 6.0% 28.1% 29.5% a Intergovernmental Revenues d Liquor Board Profits 87,538 87,409 -0.1% 356,890 357,800 0.3% 24.5% 24.4% r- 0 Liquor Excise Tax 19,873 42,903 115.9% 65,000 65,200 0.3% 30.6% 65.8% y Grants 6,634 91,032 1272.2% 40,470 412,100 918.3% 16.4% 22.1% Other Intergovernmental 18,019 94,561 424.8% 254,190 259,720 2.2% 7.1 % 36.4% r Total Intergovernmental Revenues 132,064 315,905 139.2% 716,550 1,094,820 52.8% 18.4% 28.9% E Fees For Service m Interfund Reimbursement 209,431 236,439 12.9% 1,969,500 2,964,600 50.5% 10.6% 8.0% Engineering Services 23,666 56,787 140.0% 267,630 180,350 -32.6% 8.8% 31.5% Plan Check & Inspection Fees 181,458 91,965 -49.3% 323,060 459,250 42.2% 56.2% 20.0% 70 Zoning & Subdivision Fees 23,809 17,798 -25.2% 95,950 75,000 -21.8% 24.8% 23.7% EMS Transport Fees 200,431 233,613 16.6% 824,575 837,100 1.5% 24.3% 27.9% Parks & Recreational Fees 250,441 326,671 30.4% 1,066,360 889,580 -16.6% 23.5% 36.7% u_ co Other Charges for Services 71,864 75,031 4.4% 305,411 332,300 8.8% 23.5% 22.6% c Total Fees For Service 961,099 1,038,305 8.0% 4,852,486 5,738,180 18.3% 19.8% 18.1% cL Fines & Forfeitures Ci Fines & Forfeitures 134,994 164,100 21.6% 602,450 522,130 -13.3% 22.4% 31.4% n Total Fines & Forfeitures 134,994 164,100 21.6% 602,450 522,130 -13.3% 22.4% 31.4% T Miscellaneous Revenues m Interest Earnings & Misc. 86,030 87,105 1.3% 362,012 495,210 36.8% 23.8% 17.6% E t Total Miscellaneous Revenues 86,030 87,105 1.3% 362,012 495,210 36.8% 23.8% Financing SourcesInterfund Transfers 0 0 0.0% 822,175 825,840 0.4% 0.0% LIT%Other %Total Other Financing Sources 0 0 0.0% 822,175 825,840 0.4% 0.0%11 Total Revenues 6,234,620 6,797,209 9.0% 36,806,017 39,266,670 6.7% 16.9% ket Pg. 223 General Fund Revenue Budget to Actual Year -to -Date Actual % General Fund Resource Category 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Change Taxes Property Taxes 6801898 7281189 6.9% Sales Tax 116051365 L6931551 5.5% Utility Taxes 1186707 L935,674 3.6% Other Taxes 2331353 2411616 3.5% Total Taxes 4,387,224 4,5999031 4.8% Licenses & Permits Business Licenses & Misc. Permits 1141091 1081355 -5.0% Franchise Fees 2781145 2811141 1.1 % Development Related Permits 1401974 2031267 44.2% Total Lice ns e s & Pe rmits 5339210 -� —r 5929763 11.2 c� 0 N L 2 00 CD a O a - CD U- 0 N L cY F U) r C N E t V r Q Packet Pg. 224 4.4.b Contractors 273.625 Health & Persc 27,401 Retail Eating & Drinkin, 204,358 Gasoline Stations 7,957 Automotive Repair 42,3; Sales Tax Analysis By Category Current Period: March 2016 Year -to -Date Total $1,693,551 Wholesale Trade 69,5811 1 (Communications 55,052 Clothing and Accessories 62,793 0 0. as r c dation 9,203 E as c c� ervices 126,08 2 0 c & Recreation E LL ,527 0 .ores 67,153 Cl T E c� a Packet Pg. 225 4.4.b Change in Sales Tax Revenue: March 2016 compared to March 2015 Total Retail Automotive Misc Retail Trade Business Services Retail Eating & Drinking Retail Food Stores Wholesale Trade Others Accommodation Health & Personal Care Gasoline Stations Clothing and Accessories Automotive Repair Amusement & Recreation Communications Contractors ($40,000) ($20,000) $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80 000 Packet Pg. 226 General Fund - Fun""" Expenditure Comparison rnc. 1$y" 1st QUARTER 2016 EXPENSE SUMMARY - GENERAL FUND TYPES Fund NO. Fund Name YTD 2015 Expenses YTD 2016 Expenses $ Change '16 -'15 % Chant 16 -'15 001 GENERAL FUND $8,883,278 1092179655 193349376 15.0' 009 LEOFF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE 83,216 66,573 (169643) -20.0' O11 RISK MANAGEMENT FUND - - - 0.0' 012 CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND - - - 0.0' 014 HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND - - - 0.0' 016 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 529764 18,743 (34,020) -64.5' Totals 990199258 10,302,971 1,283,713 14.2' 21 r 0 N M U L C� C 00 CD r r a a r- O a- E 2 U- 0 N c� r C N E t V M r Q Packet Pg. 227 'Ile. 1 009V Title General Fund Departm L ExpenseSumma r y� a to r 0 N L CM C 2016 Adopted 3/31/2015 3/31/2016 Amount co Budget &penditures &penditures Remaining % Spent °' CITY COUNCIL $ 295,500 $ 54,262 $ 44,120 $ 251,380 15% a a OFFICE OF MAYOR 260,250 62,160 64,319 195,931 25% L HUMAN RESOURCES 445,790 97,488 90,412 355,378 20% 0 MUNICIPAL COURT 909,270 199,177 219,191 690,079 24% E CITY CLERK 585,310 151,490 142,107 443,203 24% 0� ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 1,839,930 496,123 403,231 1,436,699 22% 0 CITY ATTORNEY 741,560 164,833 162,968 578,592 22% c NON -DEPARTMENTAL 14,939,500 3,261,415 4,389,675 10,549,825 29% ii POLICE SERVICES 9,628,550 2,171,600 2,295,467 7,333,083 24% co COMMUNITY SERVICESECONOMIC DEV. 483,580 90,926 101,724 381,856 21% 0 ci CY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 2,473,970 538,490 565,548 1,908,422 23% N PARKS & RECREATION 3,762,150 729,804 770,996 2,991,154 20% a� PUBLIC WORKS 2,842,120 520,651 610,297 2,231,823 21% E FACILITIES MAINTENANCE 1,483,800 344,860 357,601 1,126,199 24% a $ 40,691,280 $ 8,883,278 $ 10,217,655 $ 30,473,625 25% in Packet Pg. 228 4.4.b Special Revenue Funds Revenue Comparison 1st QUARTER 2016 REVENUE SUMMARY - SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Fund NO. Fund Name YTD 2015 Receipts YTD 2016 Receipts $ Change '16 -'15 % Chang '16 -'15 104 DRUG ENFORCEMENT FUND 11,205 68,542 57,337 511.7 111 STREET FUND 324,473 358,400 33,927 10.5 112 COMBINED STREET CONST/IMPROVE 573,506 3,398,849 2,825,344 492.6 117 1 MUNICIPAL ARTS ACQUIS. FUND 10,664 17,826 7,162 67.2 118 MEMORIAL STREET TREE 47 34 (12) -26.8 120 HOTEL/MOTEL TAX REVENUE FUND 169034 16,745 710 4.4 121 EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND 7,135 7,284 150 2.1 122 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND 157 32 (125) -79.9 123 1 TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS 5,443 5,656 213 3.9 125 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 2 229,844 280,037 50,193 21.8 126 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 1 228,977 279,885 50,908 22.2 127 GIFTS CATALOG FUND 27,899 25,243 (2,656) -9.5 129 SPECIAL PROJECTS FUND 100 73 (27) -26.8 130 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE/IMPROVEMT 46,478 39,130 (7,348) -15.8 132 PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND 30,076 776,311 746,235 2481.2 136 PARKS TRUST FUND 396 289 (106) -26.8 137 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE TRUST FD 79393 6,001 (19392) -18.8 138 SISTER CITY COMMISSION 4 7 3 70.2 139 TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT 157,885 163,766 5,881 1 3.7 Totals 1,677,714 5,444,109 3,766,395 1 224.5 a 11 Packet Pg. 229 p ED pAfO � Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax 'IC. 1 g9 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $0 4.4.b Revenues >, �d+ L 1 st Quarter 2016 Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax Revenues $196,961 $194,118 188 794 $192 586 $208,373 Lai l C 00 T IL a r- 0 0. as c a� E a� c c� 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 c LL T 0 N The City receipts 82% of its Motor Vehicle Fuel Excise Tax (gas tax) into the Street Fund. This fund is used for costs related to street maintenance. N T The remaining 18% of the gas tax is used for street construction and improvement projects. E a 19 Packet Pg. 230 '11C. 1009V $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $0 Hotel/Motel Lodging Tax 4.4.b Revenues >, �d+ L Lai l C 1 st Quarter 2016 Hotel/Motel Lodging Tax Revenues rVO $145124 12 651 $14,801 2010 2011 $16,75 $201926 E 7.632 2 U- 0 N L V N 2015 r The City receipts 75% of its Lodging Tax into the Hotel/Motel Tax Fund, which uses the funds for E the purpose of promoting tourism and visitors to Edmonds. The remaining 25% of the Lodging Tax 2012 2013 2014 is receipted into the Fund 123 Tourism Promotion/Arts Fund, which uses the funds to promote a tourism through support arts and culture events. Packet Pg. 231 1 'Ile. 1009V $600,000 $500,000 $400,000 $300,000 $200,000 $100,000 $0 Real Estate Excise .. N 4.b Tax Revemij 1 st Quarter 2016 Real Estate Excise Tax Revenues 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 114 Packet Pg. 232 4.4.b Special Revenue Funds Expenditure Comparison T 1st QUARTER 2016 EXPENSE SUNMARY -SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Fund NO. Fund Name YTD 2015 Expenses YTD 2016 Expenses $ Change '16 -'15 % Changi 16 -'15 104 DRUG ENFORCEMENT FUND 910 161,742 159832 1738.90r III STREET FUND 408,019 445,917 379898 9.30r 112 COMBINED STREET CONST/IMPROVE 1599883 190899563 9299680 581.50r 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS ACQUIS. FUND 13,771 4412 (91559) -69.40r 118 MEMORIAL STREET TREE - - - 0.00/ c 120 HOTEL/MOTEL TAX REVENUE FUND 31552 69121 21569 72.3°r j 121 EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND - - - 0.0 °i c 122 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND 890 327 (563) -63.3 °r 123 TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS 1,715 39737 2,022 117.90r 125 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 2 50,695 359314 (159381) -30.30r 126 REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 1 - 4769669 476,669 100.00r 127 GIFTS CATALOG FUND 19178 69553 59374 456.20r 129 SPECIAL PROJECTS FUND - - - 0.00r 130 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE/IMPROVEMT 389394 349217 (49178) -10.90r 132 PARKS CONSTRUCTION FUND 929860 513,120 4209260 452.60r 136 PARKS TRUST FUND - - - 0.00r 138 SISTER CITY COMMISSION - - - 0.00r 139 TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT 157,885 163,766 51881 3.70r Totals 9299753 29796,257 118669504 200.80r Vi Packet Pg. 233 'Ile. ] 009V Utility Fur�dP Revenue Comparison 1st QUARTER 2016 REVENUE SUMMARY - UTILITY FUNDS Fund NO. Fund Name YTD 2015 Receipts YTD 2016 Receipts $ Change '16 -'15 % Chang '16 -'15 411 COMBINED UTILITY OPERATION 839625 479129 (369496) -43.6 421 WATER UTILITY FUND 197049798 291709332 4659533 27.3 422 STORM UTILITY FUND 193299403 191409955 (1889448) -14.2 423 SEWER/WWTP UTILITY FUND 290549065 296179857 5639792 27.4 424 BOND RESERVE FUND 2 3 1 80.1 Totals 591719892 599769276 8049384 15.6 21 CD N M U L C� C 00 r r a a r- O a - CD - 0 N L V N r C N E t V r Q ig Packet Pg. 234 Utility Fur�dP Expense Comparison 'nc. 1$y" 1st QUARTER 2016 EXPENSE SUMMARY - UTILITY FUNDS Fund NO. Fund Name YTD 2015 Expenses YTD 2016 Expenses $ Change '16 -'15 % Chant 16 -'15 421 WATER UTILITY FUND 11384,585 196579959 2739374 19.7' 422 STORM UTILITY FUND 566,110 6019062 349951 6.24 423 SEWER/WWTP UTILITY FUND 11926,894 197959089 (1319806) -6.8' 424 BOND RESERVE FUND 1 54 - 1 (54) -100.0' Totals 3,877,644 4,054,109 176,465 4.6' 21 r N U L C� C 00 CD r r a a O a - CD A2 U- r 0 N L V F N r C N E t V r Q 17 Packet Pg. 235 Quiz Answers to Be Shared Dur Council '`re. l sy" Meeting'" 0 N U L C 00 r r Packet Pg. 236 4.4.b • Questions?Zl CD N u L C a a Packet Pg. 237 6.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/3/2016 Critical Area Ordinance Update (30 min.) Staff Lead: Kernen Lien Department: Planning Division Preparer: Kernen Lien Background/History All cities and counties in Washington State are required to adopt and periodically update critical areas regulations by the Growth Management Act (GMA). As defined by the GMA, "Critical areas" include the following areas and ecosystems: (a) wetlands; (b) areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water; (c) fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas; (d) frequently flooded areas; and (e) geologically hazardous areas." [RCW 36.70A.030(5)] In 2015, the City worked with an environmental consulting firm, ESA, on updating the City's critical area regulations as required by the GMA. The update began with a review of the City's 2004 Best Available Science (BAS) report for which ESA prepared the 2015 BAS Addendum. This information, along with staff experiences implementing the critical area regulations over the last 10 years, was used to propose an update to the City's critical area regulations contained in the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 23.40 - 23.90, as well as the portion of the building code that addresses frequently flooded areas (a typed of critical area) for likely sea rise. The Best Available Science and Gap Analysis Matrix summarize proposed changes to the code. ESA also prepared a memorandum that addressed some flexibility that is being proposed in the updated critical area regulations following the format of WAC 365-195-915. Staff also prepared a Q & A memorandum that addressed some general concepts and specific questions that arose during review of the critical area regulations. On October 29, 2015, Washington State Department of Ecology submitted a letter of support for the draft critical area regulations. The Planning Board reviewed the proposed changes to the critical area regulations over the course of five meetings and forwarded a recommendation to the City Council in July 2015. The City Council began review of the critical area regulations in September 2015 and reviewed the updated critical area regulations over five Council meetings in 2015. At the last Council meeting of 2015, the City Council proposed a number of amendments to the draft critical area regulations which were adopted in Ordinance No. 4017 and subsequently vetoed by the Mayor. Following reconsideration of the Mayor's veto, the Council discussed returning to review the version of the critical area regulations that were considered at the December 15, 2015 meeting. Staff Recommendation Adopt the ordinance included as Exhibit 1. Narrative Packet Pg. 238 6.1 At the February 2, 2016, the Council discussed returning to the December 15, 2015 version of the critical area regulations. An initial set of proposed Council amendments was discussed at the February 23, 2016 Council meeting. The Council decided to hold another public hearing on the "universe" of potential amendments to the draft critical area regulations. A second public hearing on the critical area regulations and potential amendments was held on March 15, 2016. Following the public hearing on March 15, 2016, the Council began taking action on the various proposed amendments. Review and action on potential amendments continued at the April 5, April 12, and April 19 Council meetings. At the April 19, 2016 Council meeting, the Council directed the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance to present to the City Council. The City Attorney has prepared a draft ordinance included as Exhibit 1. The ordinance in Exhibit 1 contains all of the changes to the critical area regulations in Chapters 23.40 through 23.90 ECDC in a strike -thro gl /underline format, as well as related amendments to ECDC 19.00.025 (building code frequently flooded areas amendment), ECDC 21.40.030 (definition of height frequently flooded amendment), ECDC 20.01.003 (permit process amendment related to new critical area contingent review process), and ECDC 20.03.002 (notice of application requirements related to new critical area contingent review process). Exhibit 2 is a table that summarizes all of the Council actions on the proposed Council amendments taken at the March 15, April 5, April 12, and April 19 Council meetings as well as where the amendments can be located in the ordinance in Exhibit 1. As requested by the Council, Exhibit 3 is a clean version of the critical area regulations for just those portions that are in ECDC 23.40 through 23.90. Attachments: Exhibit 1- Draft Ordinance Exhibit 2 - Council Amendment Actions Summary Table Exhibit 3 - Clean version of ECDC 23.40 through 23.90 Exhibit 4 - March 15, 2016 Council Minutes Excerpt Exhibit 5 - April 5, 2016 Council Minutes Excerpt Exhibit 6 - April 12, 2016 Council Minutes Excerpt Exhibit 7 - April 19, 2016 Council Minutes Excerpt Packet Pg. 239 6.1.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTERS 23.40 ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREAS GENERAL PROVISIONS, 23.50 WETLANDS, 23.60 CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS, 23.70 FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS, 23.80 GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS, AND 23.90 FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION AREAS, AMENDING ECDC SECTION 19.00.025, A PROVISION OF THE BUILDING CODE RELATED TO FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS, AMENDING ECDC SECTION 21.40.030, TO ADD A NEW EXCEPTION TO THE DEFINITION OF "HEIGHT" FOR USE IN COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREAS AND COASTAL "A" FLOOD ZONES; AMENDING CERTAIN PERMIT REVIEW PROCESSES RELATED TO CRITICAL AREAS IN ECDC SECTIONS 20.01.003 AND 20.03.002. WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds is required to plan under RCW 36.70A.040; and WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.130(1) requires City of Edmonds to take legislative action to review and, if needed, revise its comprehensive plan and development regulations, including its policies and regulations designating and conserving natural resource lands and designating and protecting critical areas to comply with the requirements in chapter 36.70A RCW (the Growth Management Act or GMA); and WHEREAS, on June 16, 2015, the city council of the City of Edmonds reviewed its comprehensive plan and conducted a public hearing on the 2015 update to the City of Edmonds comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds adopted the 2015 update to the City of Edmonds comprehensive plan with Ordinance 4003; and WHEREAS, based on early direction from the City Council, the 2015 update did not involve a major policy shift, but instead focused on consistency and streamlining, including the latest data, as well as the addition of several performance measures; and Packet Pg. 240 6.1.a WHEREAS, it was determined during this review process that, with the exception of the critical areas regulations, the City of Edmonds' development regulations remained consistent with and would continue to implement the comprehensive plan and the proposed update to it so that no other development regulations would need to be revised at this time; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act (GMA) defines "critical areas" to include the following areas and ecosystems: (a) wetlands; (b) areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water; (c) fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas; (d) frequently flooded areas; and (e) geologically hazardous areas; and WHEREAS, the GMA requires that each city adopt development regulations that protect critical areas; and WHEREAS, cities in Snohomish County are expected to take action to review and, if needed, revise their comprehensive plans and development regulations to ensure the plan and regulations comply with the requirements of the GMA on or before June 30, 2015, and every eight years thereafter; and WHEREAS, cities must include the best available science in developing policies and development regulations to protect the functions and values of critical areas; and WHEREAS, cities must give special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries; and WHEREAS, the City has not comprehensively reviewed its critical areas ordinance and best available science since 2005 when the current version of the critical area regulations became effective; and WHEREAS, the City selected environmental consultants ESA to assist the City in updating the 2004 City's Best Available Science Report (Exhibit 1 to September 8, 2015 agenda memo 7969) and to evaluate the City's critical area regulations given the changes in science; and WHEREAS, the Best Available Science addendum prepared by ESA reviewed the current science related to critical areas as it has changed since 2004 (see Exhibit 2 to September 8, 2015 agenda memo 7969); and Packet Pg. 241 6.1.a WHEREAS, ESA also prepared a memo for the City's review that outlines certain provisions that may deviate from Best Available Science, as required by WAC 365-195-915; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board reviewed proposed changes to the critical area regulations over the course of five Planning Board meetings between March 25 and July 22, 2015; and WHEREAS, the Board's review included a July 8, 2015 public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board forwarded its recommended changes to the City's critical area regulations to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board also forwarded a recommendation for some modifications to the building code Title 19 ECDC and definitions in Title 21 ECDC, in conjunction with its recommendations on critical areas and frequently flooded area regulations; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the draft updated critical area regulation as recommended by the Planning Board at the September 8, 2015 Council meeting and continued that review at the September 22, 2015 Council meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing at the October 6, 2015 City Council meeting and continued to review the critical area regulations at the November 2, 2015 City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council directed the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance to adopt the updated critical areas regulations as amended by the City Council during the December 15, 2015 City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, the Mayor asked the City Council to reconsider the amendments that were approved during the December 15, 2015 City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, the Mayor forwarded to the City Council a December 22, 2015 memo that addresses the implications of the December 15, 2015 amendments; and WHEREAS, on January 26, 2016, the City Council adopted a critical areas ordinance in the form of Ordinance 4017, which included the eight amendments made at the December 15, 2015 City Council meeting; and Packet Pg. 242 6.1.a WHEREAS, Ordinance 4017 was vetoed by Mayor Earling on January 28, 2016; and WHEREAS, at the February 2, 2016 City Council meeting, rather than voting on whether to override the veto, the City Council discussed returning to the December 15, 2015 (pre - amendments) version of the critical area regulations and providing staff a new set of proposed amendments, using that version as a baseline, for discussion at future City Council meetings; and WHEREAS, an initial set of proposed amendments were discussed at the February 23, 2016 City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 1351 on March 1, 2016, which expressed a goal date of April 30, 2016 for adoption of another critical areas ordinance and made a finding that, except for the critical areas ordinance, the required 2015 review of the City's comprehensive plan and development regulations had been completed and found to be consistent with the GMA; and WHEREAS, the City Council decided to hold another public hearing on potential amendments to the draft critical area regulations on March 15, 2016; and WHEREAS, the City Council took preliminary action on the proposed amendments on March 15, 2016, April 5, 2016, April 12, 2016 and April 19, 2016; and WHEREAS, this ordinance serves as the final legislative action required by the City under RCW 36.70A.130 for the 2015 review and update; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The following chapters of the Edmonds Community Development Code are hereby amended to read as set forth in Attachment A hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in stfikethr-eu& text moved from one location to another is shown in double underline where it was moved to and shown in where it was moved from; new graphics have an underline under the graphic; deleted graphics have been crossed -out with an X): chapter 23.40, entitled "Environmentally Critical Areas General Provisions;" chapter 23.50, entitled Packet Pg. 243 6.1.a "Wetlands;" chapter 23.60, entitled "Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas;" chapter 23.70, entitled "Frequently Flooded Areas;" chapter 23.80, "Geologically Hazardous Areas;" and chapter 23.90 entitled, "Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas." Section 2. Section 19.00.025 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "International Building Code section amendments," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Attachment B hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in s#ike dffetigh) to require the elevation of the lowest floor of all structures located in the Coastal High Hazard Areas and Coast A Flood Zones to be a minimum of two feet above the base flood elevation. Section 3. Section 21.40.030 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Height," is hereby amended to read as follows (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strike through): 21.40.030 Height. A. Height means the average vertical distance from the average level of the undisturbed soil of the site covered by a structure to the highest point of the structure. (See subsection (D) of this section for exceptions to this rule.) B. "Average level" shall be determined by averaging elevations of the downward projections of the four corners of the smallest rectangle which will enclose all of the building, excluding a maximum of 30 inches of eaves. If a corner falls off the site, its elevation shall be the average elevation of the two points projected downward where the two sides of the rectangle cross the property line. (See subsection (D) of this section for exceptions to this rule.) C. Accessory buildings that are attached to the main building by a breezeway, hallway, or other similar connection so that the accessory building is separated by 10 feet or less from the main building shall be considered to be part of the main building for purposes of determining the average level. For the purposes of this section, in order for an accessory building to be considered to be attached to and a part of the main building, the connecting structure must have a roof and be constructed of similar materials to both the main building and the accessory building so that it appears to be a unified and consistently designed building. D. Height Exceptions. Packet Pg. 244 6.1.a 1. (Rem For all properties located within the Coastal High Hazard Areas and Coastal A Flood Zones, height is measured from the elevation that is two feet above base flood elevation as identified from the applicable FEMA flood hazard map; 2. Church steeples; 3. Elevator penthouses, not to exceed 72 square feet in horizontal section, or three feet in height, for that portion above the height limit; 4. Chimneys, not to exceed nine square feet in horizontal section or more than three feet in height, for that portion above the height limit. In RM districts, chimneys shall be clustered. No multiple -flue chimney shall exceed 39 square feet in horizontal section. The first chimney shall not exceed nine square feet in horizontal section, and other chimneys shall not exceed six square feet in horizontal section; 5. Vent pipes not to exceed 18 inches in height above the height limit; 6. Standpipes not to exceed 30 inches in height above the height limit; 7. Solar energy installations not to exceed 36 inches in height above the height limit. Such an installation may be approved as a Type II staff decision if it is designed and located in such a way as to provide reasonable solar access while limiting visual impacts on surrounding properties; and a 8. Replacement of existing rooftop HVAC equipment which exceeds the existing height limit, so long as the replacement equipment does not exceed the height of the existing equipment by more than 12 inches. The replacement equipment must have earned the Energy Star label. Section 4. Section 20.01.003 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Permit type and decision framework," is hereby amended to read as follows (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strike -through): 20.01.003 Permit type and decision framework. A. Permit Types. TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE III-B TYPE IV -A TYPE IV-B TYPE V Zoning Accessory Contingent Outdoor dining Essential public Final formal Site specific Development Critical compliance letter dwelling unit facilities plats rezone agreements Area Review Packet Pg. 245 TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE III-B TYPE IV -A TYPE IV-B TYPE V Lot line Formal Technological Design review Final planned Zoning text adjustment interpretation of impracticality (where public residential amendment; area - the text of the waiver for hearing by development wide zoning map ECDC by the amateur radio architectural amendments director antennas design board is required) Critical area SEPA Critical Area Shoreline Comprehensive determinations determinations Variance substantial plan amendments development, shoreline conditional use, shoreline variance Shoreline Preliminary short Contingent Conditional use Annexations Exemptions plat Critical Area permits (where Review if public public hearing hearing requested by hearing examiner is required) Minor Land Variances Development amendments to clearing/grading regulations planned residential development Minor Revisions to Home preliminary plat shoreline occupation amendment management permit (where permits public hearing by hearing examiner is required) Staff design Administrative Preliminary review, including variances formal plat signs Final short plat Land use permit Preliminary extension requests planned residential development Sales Guest house office/model (ECDC 17.70.005) Innocent purchaser determination B. Decision Table. PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERNHT APPLICATIONS LEGISLATIVE (TYPE I - IV) TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE III-B TYPE IV -A TYPE IV-B TYPE V Recommendation N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Planning board Planning board by: Final decision by: Director Director Director Hearing Hearing City council City council City council examiner examiner/ADB Notice of No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No application: T r� t K W r.+ C N E s M Q Packet Pg. 246 PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS (TYPE I — IV) LEGISLATIVE TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE III-B TYPE IV -A TYPE IV-B TYPE V Open record No Only if 1)i Yes, before Yes, before No Yes, before Yes, before public hearing or appealed, Director hearing hearing planning board planning board open record open record decision is examiner to examiner or which makes which makes appeal of a final hearing appealed, render final board to render recommendation recommendation decision: before open record decision final decision to council to council or hearing hearing council could examiner before hold its own hearing hearing examiner converted to Type III - process Closed record No No No No Yes, before the No Yes, before the review: council council Judicial appeal: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes C. Any reference to "Type II" in the Edmonds Community Development Code without expressly being modified as "Type II-B" shall be construed to mean Type II -A for the purposes of this section unless the context clearly suggests otherwise. Section 5. Section 20.03.002 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Notice of application," is hereby amended to read as follows (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strike thr-o g ): 20.03.002 Notice of application. A. Generally. A notice of application shall be provided by the director to the public, all city departments and agencies with jurisdiction of all Type II, III and IV development project permit applications in accordance with this chapter. The notice of application for these permits shall also be provided to the public by posting, publishing and mailing. B. Issuance of Notice of Application. 1. A notice of application shall be issued within 14 days after the city has made a determination of completeness pursuant to ECDC 20.02.003. Packet Pg. 247 6.1.a 2. If any open record predecision hearing is required for the requested development project permit(s), the notice of application shall be provided at least 15 days prior to the open record hearing. C. Contents. The notice of application shall include the following information in a format determined by the director: 1. The date of submission of the initial application, the date of the notice of completion and acceptance of the application, and the date of the notice of application; 2. A description of the proposed project and a list of the development project permits requested in the application and, if applicable, a list of any studies requested under Chapter 36.7013 RCW; 3. A description of other required permits not included in the application, to the extent known by the city at that time; 4. A description of existing environmental documents that evaluate the proposed project, and, if not otherwise stated on the document providing notice of application, the location where the application and any studies can be reviewed; 5. A statement setting forth: (a) the time for the public comment period, which shall be not less than 15 days following the date of notice of application; (b) the right of any person to comment on the application, receive notice of and participate in any hearings, and request a copy of the decision on the application; and (c) any appeal rights; 6. The date, time, place and type of hearing, if a hearing has been scheduled when the date of notice of application is issued;. For Type II-B processes, the notice shall provide information regarding _ the process for requesting, a public hearing in accordance with the applicable Type II-B permit application. 7. Any other information determined appropriate by the director such as the director's threshold determination, if complete at the time of issuance of the notice of application. D. Mailed Notice. Notice of application shall be mailed to: 1. The owners of the property involved if different from applicant; and Packet Pg. 248 6.1.a 2. The owners of real property within 300 feet of the boundaries of the property(ies) involved in the application. Addresses for a mailed notice required by this code shall be obtained from the applicable county's real property tax records. The adjacent property owners list must be current to within six months of the date of initial application. 3. Type III Preliminary Plat Actions. In addition to the above, requirements for mailed notice of filing for preliminary plats and proposed subdivisions shall also include the following: a. Notice of the filing of a preliminary plat adjacent to or within one mile of the municipal boundaries of any city or town, or which contemplates the use of any city or town utilities shall be given to the appropriate city or town authorities; b. Notice of the filing of a preliminary plat of a proposed subdivision adjoining the boundaries of Snohomish County shall be given to the appropriate county officials; c. Notice of the filing of a preliminary plat of a proposed subdivision located adjacent to the right-of-way of a state highway shall be given to the Secretary of Transportation; 4. For a plat alteration or a plat vacation, notice shall be as provided in RCW 58.17.080 and 58.17.090. All mailed public notices shall be deemed to have been received on the next business day following the day that the notice is deposited in the mail. E. Published Notice. Notice of application shall be published in the city's official newspaper (The Everett Herald, as identified in Chapter 1.03 ECC). The format shall be determined by the director and the notice must contain the information listed in ECDC 20.03.002(C). F. Posting. Posting of the property for site specific proposals shall consist of one or more notice boards as follows: 1. A single notice board shall be placed: a. At the midpoint of the street fronting the site or as otherwise directed by the director for maximum visibility; Packet Pg. 249 6.1.a b. Five feet inside the street property line, except when the board is structurally attached to an existing building; provided, that no notice board shall be placed more than five feet from the street without approval of the director; c. So that the bottom of the notice board is between two and four feet above grade; and d. Where it is completely visible to pedestrians. e. The size of the notice board shall be determined by the director. 2. Additional notice boards may be required when: a. The site does not abut a public road; b. A large site abuts more than one public road; or c. The director determines that additional notice boards are necessary to provide adequate public notice. 3. Notice boards shall be: a. Maintained in good condition during the notice period; b. In place at least 14 days prior to the date of any hearing, and at least 14 days prior to the end of any required comment period; c. Removed within 30 days of the date of the project decision, unless the decision is appealed. If the project decision is appealed, the sign must be removed 30 days after the appeal decision is issued. 4. Removal of the notice board prior to the end of the notice period shall be cause for discontinuance of the department review until the notice board is replaced and remains in place for the specified time period. G. Public Comment on the Notice of Application. All public comments in response to the notice of application must be received by the city's development services department by 4:30 p.m. on the last day of the comment period. Comments in response to the notice of application received after the comment period has expired will not be accepted no matter when they were mailed or postmarked. Comments shall be mailed or personally delivered. Comments should be as specific as possible. Packet Pg. 250 6.1.a Section 6. 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 7. 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. 251 6.1.a SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2016, 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 THE CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTERS 23.40 ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREAS GENERAL PROVISIONS, 23.50 WETLANDS, 23.60 CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS, 23.70 FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS, 23.80 GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS, AND 23.90 FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION AREAS, AMENDING ECDC SECTION 19.00.025, A PROVISION OF THE BUILDING CODE RELATED TO FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS, AMENDING ECDC SECTION 21.40.030, TO ADD A NEW EXCEPTION TO THE DEFINITION OF "HEIGHT" FOR USE IN COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREAS AND COASTAL "A" FLOOD ZONES; AMENDING CERTAIN PERMIT REVIEW PROCESSES RELATED TO CRITICAL AREAS IN ECDC SECTIONS 20.01.003 AND 20.03.002. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2016. 4840-7251-8158,v. 1 13 CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Packet Pg. 252 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 EDMONDS CITY CODE AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE Chapter 23.40 ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREAS GENERAL PROVISIONS Sections: Part I. Purpose and General Provisions 23.40.000 Purpose. 23.40.3-29005 Definitions pertaining to critical areas. 23.40.010 Authority. 23.40.020 Relationship to other regulations. 23.40.030 Severability. 23.40.040 Jurisdiction — Critical areas. 23.40.050 Protection of critical areas. 23.40.055 City Council Reports Part II. Critical Areas Review Process 23.40.060 General requirements. 23.40.070 Critical areas preapplication consultation. 23.40.080 Notice of initial determination. 23.40.090 Critical areas report — Requirements. 23.40.100 Critical areas report— Modifications to requirements. 23.40.110 Mitigation requirements. 23.40.120 Mitigation sequencing. 23.40.130 Mitigation plan requirements. 23.40.140 Innovative mitigation. 23.40.150 Critical areas decision. Page 1 of 100 a Packet Pg. 253 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 23.40.160 Review criteria. 23.40.170 Favorable critical areas decision. 23.40.180 Unfavorable critical areas decision. 23.40.190 Completion of the critical areas review. 23.40.195 Contingent review procedure for certain types of development 23.40.200 Appeals. 23.40.210 Variances. 23.40.215 Critical Area Restoration Projects Part III. Allowed Activities, Exemptions and Noncompliance Penalties 23.40.220 Allowed activities. 23.40.230 Exemptions. 23.40.240 Unauthorized critical areas alterations and enforcement. Part IV. General Critical Areas Protective Measures 23.40.250 Critical areas markers and signs. 23.40.270 Critical areas tracts. 23.40.280 Building setbacks. 23.40.290 Bonds to ensure mitigation, maintenance, and monitoring. 23.40.300 Critical areas inspections. Part V. Incorporation of Best Available Science 23.40.310 Best available science. Part I. Purpose and General Provisions Page 2 of 100 Q Packet Pg. 254 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 23.40.000 Purpose. A. The purpose of this title is to designate and classify ecologically sensitive and hazardous areas and to protect these areas and their functions and values, while also allowing for reasonable use of private property. B. This title is to implement the goals, policies, guidelines, and requirements of the comprehensive plan and the Washington State Growth Management Act. C. The city of Edmonds finds that critical areas provide a variety of valuable and beneficial biological and physical functions that benefit Edmonds and its residents, and/or may pose a threat to human safety or to public and private property. The beneficial functions and values provided by critical areas include, but are not limited to, water quality protection and enhancement, fish and wildlife habitat, food chain support, flood storage, conveyance and attenuation of flood waters, ground water recharge and discharge, erosion control, wave attenuation, protection from hazards, historical, archaeological, and aesthetic value protection, and recreation. These beneficial functions are not listed in order of priority. D. Goals. By limiting development and alteration of critical areas, this title seeks to: 1. Protect members of the public and public resources and facilities from injury, loss of life, or property damage due to landslides and steep slope failures, erosion, seismic events, or flooding; o� 2. Maintain healthy, functioning ecosystems through the protection of unique, fragile, and valuable elements of the environment, including ground and surface waters, wetlands, and fish and wildlife and their habitats, and to conserve the biodiversity of plant and animal species; 3. Direct activities not dependent on critical areas resources to less ecologically sensitive sites and mitigate unavoidable impacts to critical areas by regulating alterations in and adjacent to critical areas; and 4. Prevent cumulative adverse environmental impacts to water quality, wetlands, and fish and wildlife habitat, and the overall net loss of wetlands, frequently flooded areas, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. E. The regulations of this title are intended to protect critical areas in accordance with the Growth Management Act and through the application of the best available science, as determined according to WAC 365-195-900 through 365-195-925 and RCW 36.70A.172, and in consultation with state and federal agencies and other qualified professionals. F. This title is to be administered with flexibility and attention to site -specific characteristics. It is not the intent of this title to make a parcel of property unusable by denying its owner reasonable economic use of the property nor to prevent the provision of public facilities and services necessary to support existing development. G. The city of Edmonds' enactment or enforcement of this title shall not be construed to benefit any individual person or group of persons other than the general public. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Page 3 of 100 Packet Pg. 255 Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 23.40. 0005 Definitions pertaining to critical areasjc SHRRE For the puraoses of this chapter and the chanters on the five specific critical area tunes (Chapters 23.50 23.60, 23.70, 23.80 and 23.90 ECDC) the following definitions shall apply: "Adjacent" means those afeas activities located on -site immediately adjoining a critical area; or distance equal to or less than two hundred and twenty five (225) 2Wfeet of a development proposal or subject parcel. ,,,,a 4hese areas l,,eatea within 800 feet f a a,,,.,,,.. entea ba4 a "Alteration" means anv human -induced action which changes the existing condition of a critical area or its buffer. Alterations include; but are not limited to: grading; filling; dredging; draining; channelizing; cutting, pruning, limbing or topping, clearing, relocating or removing vegetation; applying herbicides or a pesticides or any hazardous or toxic substance; discharging pollutants; paving, construction, application of gravel; modifying for surface water management pumoses; or any other human activity that changes the existing landforms, vegetation, hydrology, wildlife or wildlife habitat value of critical areas. L 0 "Best Available Science." See ECDC 23.40.310 M L a "Best management practices" means a system of practices and management measures that: r L 1. Control soil loss and reduce water quality degradation caused by nutrients, animal waste, and toxics• �? o� 2. Control the movement of sediment and erosion caused by land alteration activities• a� 3. Minimize adverse impacts to surface and ground water quality, flow, and circulation patterns; and c 4. Minimize adverse impacts to the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of critical areas. 0` "Buffer" means the designated area immediately next to and a part of a steep slope or landslide hazard a area and which protects slope stability, attenuation of surface water flows and landslide hazards r reasonably necessary to minimize risks to persons or property: or a designated area immediately next to and part of a stream or wetland that is an integral part of the stream or wetland ecosystem. x w "Chapter" means those sections of this title sharing the same third and fourth digits. E s "City" means the city of Edmonds. M a "Class" or "wetland class" means descriptive categories of wetland vegetation communities within the wetlands taxonomic classification system of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Cowardin, et al., 19791. "Clearing" means the act of cutting and/or removing vegetation. This definition shall include grubbing vegetation and the use or application of herbicide. "Compensation project" means an action(s) specifically designed to replace project -induced critical area or buffer losses. Compensation project design elements may include, but are not limited to: land Page 4 of 100 Packet Pg. 256 Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 acquisition procedures and detailed plans including functional value assessments, detailed landscaping designs, construction drawings, and monitoring and contingency plans. "Compensatory mitigation" means replacing project -induced losses or impacts to a critical areaand includes, but is not limited to, the following: 21. "Creation" means actions performed to intentionally establish a wetland at a site where it did not formerly exist. 2. "Re-establishment" means actions performed to restore processes and functions to an area that was formerly a critical area, where the former critical area was lost by past alterations and activities. 3. "Rehabilitation" means improving or repairingprocessesand functions to an area that is an existing critical area that is highly degraded because one or more environmental processes supporting the critical area have been disrupted. -34. "Enhancement" means actions performed to improve the condition of existing degraded wetlands so that the functions they provide are of a higher quality. 45. "Preservation" means actions taken to ensure the permanent protection of existing high -quality wetlands. Council" or "Council." See ECDC 21.15.030. "Creation" means a compensation project performed to intentionally establish a wetland or stream at a site where one did not formerly exist. "Critical areas" for the city of Edmonds means wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas as defined in Chapters 23.50, 23.600 23.70, 23.80 and 23.90 ECDC, respectively. "Development proposal" means any activity relating to the use and/or development of land requiring -a permit or approval from the city, including, but not limited to: commercial or residential building permit; binding site plan; conditional use permit; franchise; right-of-way permit; grading and clearing permit; mixed use approval; planned residential development; shoreline conditional use permit; shoreline substantial development permit; shoreline variance; short subdivision; special use permit; subdivision; flood hazard permit; unclassified use permit; utility and other use permit; variance; rezone - or any required permit or approval not expressly exempted by this title. "Director" means the city of Edmonds development services director or his/her designee. "Division" means the planning division of the city of Edmonds development services department. Page 5 of 100 T t x w c as E s M Q Packet Pg. 257 Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 "Enhancement" means an action taken to improve the condition and function of a critical area. In the case of wetland or stream, the term includes a compensation project performed to improve the conditions of an existing degraded wetland or stream to increase its functional value. "Erosion" means the process in which soil particles are mobilized and transported by natural agents such as wind, rain, frost action, or stream flow. Erosion Hazard Areas. See ECDC 23.80.020(Al. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. See Chanter 23.90 ECDC. as "Floodplain" means the total area subject to inundation by a "100-year flood." "100-year flood" means a r �. flood having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. a� c "Footprint of Existing Development" or "Footprint of Development" means the area of a asite that contains legally established: buildings; roads, driveways, parking lots, storage areas, walkways or other areas paved with concrete, asphalt or compacted gravel; outdoor swimming pools; patios. 0 0 L a "Frequently Flooded Areas." See Chapter 23.70 ECDC. r "Functions" means the roles served by critical areas including, but not limited to: water a_uality L v protection and enhancement: fish and wildlife habitat; food chain support; flood storage, conveyance and attenuation: ground water recharge and discharge: erosion control: wave attenuation: aesthetic value protection; and recreation. These roles are not listed in order of priority. c "Geologically Hazardous Areas." See Chapter 23.80 ECDC. L 0 "Geologist" means a person licensed as a geologist, engineering geologist, or hydrologist in the state of Washington c` ra 4 least t� 0 0 00 o ,� l gist few f two .eas n foxrovienee etieine of vexBe..;enc-e r ++ Iry i ioa n .it nli fie n4i niv. . .ajugie i landslidewith n o eeeleey anda elese atio a K eeeleesta d eeeteehnieal/ei-,M neer3. For geologically hazardous areas, an applicant may choose W a geologist or engineering_geologist licensed in the State of Washington to assess the potential hazard. E "Geotechnical engineer" means a practicing geotechnical/civil engineer licensed as a professional civil engineer in the state of Washington who has at least fewfive years of professional employment as a Q geotechnical engineer in responsible charge including experience with landslide evaluation. "Grading" means any one or a combination of excavating, filling, or disturbance of that portion of the soil profile which contains decaying organic matter. "Habitats of local importance" means areas that include a seasonal range or habitat element with which a given species has a primary association, and which, if altered may reduce the likelihood that the species will maintain and reproduce over the long-term. These might include areas of high relative density or Page 6 of 100 Packet Pg. 258 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds - City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas - April 26, 2016 species richness, breeding habitat, winter range, and movement corridors. These might also include habitats that are of limited availability or high vulnerability to alterations such as cliffs, talus, and wetlands. In urban areas like the city of Edmonds, habitats of local importance include biodiversjty areas and corriodrs, which as characterized by a framework of ecological components which provides the physical conditions necessary for ecosystems and species populations to survive in a human - dominated landscape. inelude a seasonal r-angt r- habita4 elemei * with w-hieh a given 0 es has a-nd whigh. if alter-ed. mayff:Q(Wee the likelihood that the will maintain and 0oN,er-areasr-elatiyeor-0 0 r4ehaess. habitat. , er-o and mevementeeffider-s.0 ef n+udfiats. eel .beds. and weflands=,(:See ECDC 23 . °�010(^ "In lieu fee program" means a program which sells compensatory mitigation credits to permittees whose obligation to provide compensatory mitigation is then transferred to the in lieu pro_r�ponsor, a governmental or non-profit natural resource management entity "Landslide Hazard Areas." (See ECDC 23.80.020(BA_} "Mitigation" means the use of any or all of the following actions, which are listed in descending order of preference: 1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action: 2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps such as project redesign, relocation, or timing to avoid or reduce impacts: 3. Rectifying the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, and habitat conservation areas by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to the historical conditions or the conditions existing at the time of the initiation of the project; 4. Minimizing or eliminating the hazard by restoring or stabilizing the hazard area through engineered or other methods: 5. Reducing or eliminating the impact or hazard over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action• 6. Compensating for the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, and habitat conservation areas by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and 7. Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when necessary. Page 7 of 100 T x w c as E s M a Packet Pg. 259 Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 "Native vegetation" means vegetation comprised of plant species which are indigenous to the Puget Sound region and which reasonably could have been expected to naturally occur on the site. "Native vegetation" does not include noxious weeds as defined by the state of Washington or federal agencies. "Normal maintenance of vegetation" means removal of shrubs/non-woody vegetation and trees (less than 4-inch diameter at breast height) that occurs at least every other year. Maintenance also maX include tree topping that has been previousl approved by the City in the past 5 years. "Noxious weeds" means any plant ,.,hie . when esta.lishe,a, that is highly destructive. competitive or difficult to control by cultural or chemical practices, limited to those plants on the state noxious week •f*'i list contained as fef- listen in Cha ter 16-750 WAC. °� "Planning staff' means those employed in the planning division of the city of Edmonds development Q. M services department. c c "Qualified critical areas consultant" or "qualified professional" means a person who has the o qualifications specified below to conduct critical areas studies pursuant to this title, and to make recommendations for critical areas mitigation. For geologically hazardous areasFef afeas of petenfiga L ge ' g;,.:,,sWb4ity, the qualified critical areas consultant shall be a geologist or geeteehnieal engine engineering geologist licensed in the State of Washington to assess the potential hazard. If development is to take place within a geologically hazardous area, the qualified critical areas consultant developer L v _ mitigation plans and design shall be a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of Washington and familiar with landslide and slope stability mitigation. For wetlands and streams, the qualified critical areas consultant shall be a specialist in botany, fisheries, wetland biology, and/or hydrology with a minimum of twefive years' field experience with wetlands and/or streams in the Pacific Northwest. c Requirements defining a qualified critical areas consultant or qualified professional are contained within the chapter on each critical area type. O "Reasonable economic use(s)" means the minimum use to which a property owner is entitled under c applicable state and federal constitutional provisions in order to avoid a taking and/or violation of ' substantive due process. T "Redeveloped land(s)" means those lands on which existing structures are demolished in their entirety to w allow for new development. The director shall maintain discretion to determine if the demolition of a c majority of existing structures or portions thereof constitute the re -development of a property or subject E a Q "Restoration" means the actions necessary to return a stream, wetland or other critical area to a state in which its stability. functions and values approach its unaltered state as closely as possible. For wetlands, restoration as compensatory mitigation may include re-establishment or rehabilitation. "Seismic Hazard Areas." See ECDC 23.80.020(CU "Species of local importance" means those species that are of local concern due to their population status, their sensitivity to habitat manipulation, or that are game (hunted) species. (See ECDC 23.90.010(A)(4).) Page 8 of 100 Packet Pg. 260 Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 "Storm Water Management Manual" means the Stef,v. W er- �a,,,,,,,.enwnt M rua o r the PUeet c,,,,,,a stormwater manualspecified in in Chanter 18.30 ECDC). "Streams" means any area where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed which demonstrates clear evidence, such as the sorting of sediments, of the passage of water. The channel or bed need not contain water year-round. This definition is not meant to include irrigation ditches, canals, storm or surface water runoff devices (drainage ditches) or other entirely artificial watercourses unless they are used by salmonids or used to convey streams naturally occurring prior to construction of such watercourse. Streams are further classified into Categories SFNn and Ns and fishbearing or nonfishbearing 1, 2 and 3. (See ECDC 23.90.010(A)(1).) "Title" means all chapters of the city of Edmonds Development Code beginning with the digits 23. "Undeveloped land(s)" means land(s) on which manmade structures or land modifications (clearing. grading, etc.) do not exist. The director retains discretion to identify undeveloped land(s) in those instances where historical modifications and structures may have existed on a property or subject parcel in the past. "Wetland functions" means those natural processes performed by wetlands, such as facilitating food chain production; providing habitat for nesting, rearing and resting sites for aquatic, terrestrial or avian species; maintaining the availability and quality of water; acting as recharge and/or discharge areas for ground water aquifers; and moderating surface water and storm water flows. "Wetland mitigation bank" means a site where wetlands are restored, created, enhanced, or in exceptional circumstances, preserved expressly for the purpose of providing compensatory mitigation in advance of authorized impacts to similar resources. "Wetlands" means those areas that are inundated or saturated by ground or surface water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limitedrgion and drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street or highway. However, wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland areas created to mitigate conversion of wetlands if permitted by the city (WAC 365-190-030(22)). Wetlands are further classified into Categories 1, 2, 3 and 4. (See ECDC 23.50.010(B).) [Ord. 3952 & 1, 2013; Ord. 3931 & 2, 2013; Ord. 3527 & 2, 20041. 23.40.010 Authority. A. As provided herein, the Edmonds development services director or his/her designee (hereafter referred to as "the director") is given the authority to interpret and apply, and the responsibility to enforce, this title to accomplish the stated purpose. Page 9 of 100 o� a� c M c �a 0L r- M c` T x w c as E s M Q Packet Pg. 261 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 B. The director may withhold, condition, or deny development permits or activity approvals to ensure that the proposed action is consistent with this title. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.020 Relationship to other regulations. A. These critical areas regulations shall apply as an overlay and in addition to zoning, site development, stormwater management, building and other regulations adopted by the city of Edmonds. B. Any individual critical area adjoined or overlain by another type of critical area shall have the buffer and meet the requirements that provide the most protection to the critical areas involved. When any provision of this title or any existing land use regulation conflicts with this title, that which provides more protection to the critical area shall apply. C. These critical areas regulations shall be coordinated with review conducted under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), as necessary and locally adopted. D. Compliance with the provisions of this title does not constitute compliance with other federal, state, a and local regulations and permit requirements that may be required (for example, shoreline substantial a development permits, Hydraulic Permit Act (HPA) permits, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 permits, and National Pollution Discharge L Elimination System permits). The applicant is responsible for complying with these requirements, apart �? from the process established in this title. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.030 Severability. If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this title or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall be judged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such order or judgment shall be confined in its operation to the controversy in which it was rendered. The decision shall not affect or invalidate the remainder of any part thereof and to this end the provisions of each clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this law are hereby declared to be severable. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.040 Jurisdiction — Critical areas. A. The director shall regulate all uses, activities, and developments within, adjacent to, or likely to affect one or more critical areas, consistent with the best available science and the provisions herein. B. Critical areas regulated by this title include: 1. Wetlands as designated in Chapter 23.50 ECDC, Wetlands; 2. Critical aquifer recharge areas as designated in Chapter 23.60 ECDC, Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas; 3. Frequently flooded areas as designated in Chapter 23.70 ECDC, Frequently Flooded Areas; Page 10 of 100 Packet Pg. 262 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 4. Geologically hazardous areas as designated in Chapter 23.80 ECDC, Geologically Hazardous Areas; and 5. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas as designated in Chapter 23.90 ECDC, Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. C. All areas within the city of Edmonds meeting the definition of one or more critical areas, regardless of any formal identification, are hereby designated critical areas and are subject to the provisions of this title. D. Areas Adjacent to Critical Areas Subject to Regulation. Areas adjacent to critical areas shall be considered to be within the jurisdiction of these requirements and regulations to support the intent of this title and ensure protection of the functions and values of critical areas. " " shall mean a*y .twity l,.eatea. air_sr.�r:�sr.�:ea:ss:ee�.riT.��ss��reef:ersss�e� _ .rrs:re��asrtrs��r.�:r�ziy� 23.40.050 Protection of critical areas.13 SHARE Any action taken pursuant to this title shall result in equivalent or greater functions and values of the critical areas associated with the proposed action, as determined by the best available science. All actions and developments shall be designed and constructed in accordance with ECDC 23.40.120, Mitigation sequencing, to avoid, minimize, and restore all adverse impacts. Applicants must first demonstrate an inability to avoid or reduce impacts before the use of actions to mitigate potential 0` impacts will be allowed. No activity or use shall be allowed that results in a net loss of the functions or values of critical areas. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. c` 23.40.055 City Council Reports The Director will provide a report to the Citv Council during the 1 st and 3rd auarter each vear summarizing critical area decisions that have been made since the previous report. The report will include information such as, the number and type of critical area decisions that have been made, including information on buffers and enhancements approved for each applicable decision, a description of each approved restoration proiect. and other information specifically reauested by the Council following the previous report. Part Il. Critical Areas Review Process 23.40.060 General requirements.3 SHARE A. As part of this review, the director shall: 1. Verify the information submitted by the applicant; Page 11 of 100 Packet Pg. 263 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 2. Evaluate the project area and vicinity for critical areas; 3. Determine whether the proposed project is likely to impact the functions or values of critical areas; and 4. Determine if the proposed project adequately assesses all impacts, avoids impacts, and/or mitigates impacts to the critical area associated with the project. B. If the proposed project is within, adjacent to, or is likely to impact a critical area, the director shall: 1. Require a critical areas report from the applicant that has been prepared by a qualified professional; 2. Review and evaluate the critical areas report; 3. Determine whether the development proposal conforms to the purposes and performance standards of this title, including the criteria in ECDC 23.40.160, Review criteria•, 4. Assess the potential impacts to the critical area and determine if they can be avoided or minimized; and 5. Determine if any mitigation proposed by the applicant is sufficient to protect the functions and values �? of the critical area and public health, safety, and welfare concerns consistent with the goals, purposes, objectives, and requirements of this title. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.070 Critical areas preapplication consultation.0 SHARE Any person preparing to submit an application for development or use of land that may be regulated by the provisions of this title may request a preapplication meeting with the director prior to submitting an application for development or other approval. At this meeting, the director shall discuss the requirements of this title; provide critical areas maps, scientific information, and other source materials; outline the review process; and work with the activity proponent to identify any potential concerns that might arise during the review process, in addition to discussing other permit procedures and requirements. All applicants, regardless of participation in a preapplication meeting, are held fully responsible for knowledge and disclosure of critical areas on, adjacent to, or associated with a subject parcel and full compliance with the specific provisions and goals, purposes, objectives, and requirements of this title. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.080 Notice of initial determination.13 SHARE A. If the director determines that no critical areas report is necessary, the director shall state this in the notice of application issued for the proposal. B. If the director determines that there are critical areas on the site that the proposed project is unlikely to impact and the project meets the requirements for and has been granted a waiver from the requirement Page 12 of 100 Packet Pg. 264 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 to complete a critical areas report, this shall be stated in the notice of application for the proposal. A waiver maygranted if the director determines that all of the following requirements will be met: 1. There will be no alteration of the critical area or buffer; 2. The development proposal will not affect the critical area in a manner contrary to the purpose, intent, and requirements of this Title. C. If the director determines that critical areas may be affected by the proposal and a critical areas report is required, public notice of the application shall include a description of the critical area that might be affected and state that a critical areas report(s) is required. D. Critical areas determinations shall be considered valid for five years from the date in which the determination was made; after such date the city shall require a new determination, or at minimum documentation of a new assessment verifying the accuracy of the previous determination [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.090 Critical areas report — Requirements.0 SHARE A. Preparation by Qualified Professional. The applicant shall submit a critical areas report prepared by a qualified professional as defined herein. For wetlands, frequently flooded areas and fish and wildlife v habitat conservation areas, an applicant may choose one of the qualified technical consultants on the city's approved list to prepare critical areas reports per the requirements of this title or may apply to o� utilize an alternative consultant. Critical areas studies and reports developed by an alternative consultant shaU-nLaLbe subject to independent review pursuant to subsection B of this section. the sefviees of a qualified teehnieal eensultant f�om the eity's approved list shall enter- into a three pfR4y ,i*«.,et between the applicant, the consultant and th ty-. All costs associated with the critical areas study shall be borne by the applicant. 0` B. Independent Review of Critical Areas Reports. Critical areas studies and reports on geologically hazardous areas and those developed by an applicant representative or consultant not as part of a three - party contract may, at the discretion of the director, be subject to independent review. This independent review shall be performed by a qualified technical consultant selected by the city with all costs borne by the applicant. The purpose of such independent review is to provide the city with objective technical assistance in evaluating the accuracy of submitted reports and/or the effects on critical areas which may be caused by a development proposal and to facilitate the decision -making process. The director may also have technical assistance provided by appropriate resource agency staff if such assistance is available in a timely manner. C. Best Available Science. The critical areas report shall use scientifically valid methods and studies in the analysis of critical areas data and field reconnaissance and reference the source of science used. The critical areas report shall evaluate the proposal and all probable impacts to critical areas in accordance with the provisions of this title. D. Minimum Report Contents. At a minimum, the report shall contain the following: Page 13 of 100 Packet Pg. 265 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 1. The name and contact information of the applicant, a description of the proposal, and identification of the permit requested; 2. A copy of the site plan for the development proposal including: a. A map to scale depicting critical areas, buffers, the development proposal, and any areas to be cleared; and b. A description of the proposed storm water management plan for the development and consideration of impacts to drainage alterations; c. The site plan shall identify the location of all native and non-native vegetation of 6 inches dbh or larger. 3. The dates, names, and qualifications of the persons preparing the report and documentation of any fieldwork performed on the site; 4. Identification and characterization of all critical areas, wetlands, water bodies, shorelines, and buffers adjacent to the proposed project area; 5. A description of reasonable efforts made to apply mitigation sequencing pursuant to ECDC �? 23.40.120, Mitigation sequencing, to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to critical areas; and 6. Report requirements specific to each critical area type as indicated in the corresponding chapters of this title. c 7. A statement specifying the accuracy of the report and all assumptions made and relied upon; 8. A description of the methodologies used to conduct the critical areas study, including references; and 9. Plans for adequate mitigation, as needed to offset any critical areas impacts, in accordance with the Mitigation Plan Requirements in Section 23.40.130. E. Unless otherwise provided, a critical areas report may incorporate, be supplemented by or composed, in whole or in part, of any reports or studies required by other laws and regulations or previously prepared for and applicable to the development proposal site, as approved by the director. At the discretion of the director, reports previously compiled or submitted as part of a proposal for development may be used as a critical areas report to the extent that the requirements of this section and the report requirements for each specific critical area type are met. F. Critical areas reports shall be considered valid for five years; after such date the city shall determine whether a revision or additional assessment is necessary.[Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.100 Critical areas report —Modifications to requirements.C3 SHARE Page 14 of 100 Packet Pg. 266 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 A. Limitations to Study Area. The director may limit the required geographic area of the critical areas report as appropriate if: 1. The applicant, with assistance from the city of Edmonds, cannot obtain permission to access properties adjacent to the project area; or 2. The proposed activity will affect only a limited part of the subject site. B. Modifications to Required Contents. The applicant may consult with the director prior to or during preparation of the critical areas report to obtain approval of modifications to the required contents of the report where, in the judgment of a qualified professional, more or less information is required to adequately address the potential critical area impacts and required mitigation. C. Additional Information Requirements. The director may require additional information to be included in the critical areas report when determined to be necessary to the review of the proposed activity in accordance with this title. Additional information that may be required includes, but is not limited to: 1. Historical data, including original and subsequent mapping, aerial photographs, data compilations and summaries, and available reports and records relating to the site or past operations at the site; 2. Grading and drainage plans; and o� 3. Information specific to the type, location, and nature of the critical area. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.110 Mitigation requirements.13 SHARE A. The applicant shall avoid all impacts that degrade the functions and values of critical areas. Unless otherwise provided in this title, if alteration to the critical area is unavoidable, all adverse impacts to or from critical areas and buffers resulting from a development proposal or alteration shall be mitigated using the best available science in accordance with an approved critical areas report and SEPA documents, so as to result in no net loss of critical area functions and values. B._ Mitigation shall be in sufficient to maintain or compensate for the functions and values of the impacted critical area and to prevent risk from a hazard posed by a critical area. C. Mitigation shall not be implemented until after the director has provided approval of a critical areas report that includes a mitigation plan. Mitigation shall be implemented in accordance with the provisions of the approved critical areas report. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.120 Mitigation sequencing.0 SHARE A. Applicants shall demonstrate that all reasonable efforts have been examined with the intent to avoid and minimize impacts to critical areas. Page 15 of 100 Packet Pg. 267 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 B. When an alteration to a critical area is proposed, such alteration shall be avoided, minimized, or compensated for in the following sequential order of preference: 1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; 2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps, such as project redesign, relocation, or timing, to avoid or reduce impacts; 3. Rectifying the impact to wetlands, frequently flooded areas, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to the historical conditions or the conditions existing at the time of the initiation of the project; 4. Minimizing or eliminating the hazard by restoring or stabilizing the hazard area through engineering or other methods; 5. Reducing or eliminating the impact or hazard over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; 6. Compensating for the impact to wetlands, frequently flooded areas, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and/or o� 7. Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when necessary. C. Mitigation for individual actions may include a combination of the above measures. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004] . 23.40.130 Mitigation plan requirements.0 SHARE When mitigation is required, the applicant shall submit for approval by the director a mitigation plan as part of the critical areas report. The mitigation plan shall include: A. Environmental Goals and Objectives. The mitigation plan shall include a written report identifying environmental goals and objectives of the compensation proposed and including: 1. A description of the anticipated impacts to the critical areas and the mitigating actions proposed and the purposes of the compensation measures, including the site selection criteria; identification of compensation goals; identification of resource functions; and dates for beginning and completion of site compensation construction activities. The goals and objectives shall be related to the functions and values of the impacted critical area; 2. A review of the best available science supporting the proposed mitigation; 3. An analysis of the likelihood of success of the compensation project; and 4. Specific mitigation plan and report requirements for each critical area type as indicated in this title. Page 16 of 100 Packet Pg. 268 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 B. Performance Standards. The mitigation plan shall include measurable specific criteria for evaluating whether or not the goals and objectives of the mitigation project have been successfully attained and whether or not the requirements of this title have been met. C. Detailed Construction Plans. The mitigation plan shall include written specifications and descriptions of the mitigation proposed, such as: 1. The proposed construction sequence, timing, and duration; 2. Areas of proposed impacts on critical areas or buffers; 3. Grading and excavation details; -34. Erosion and sediment control features; 45. A planting plan specifying plant species, quantities, locations, size, spacing, and density; and 56. Measures to protect and maintain plants until established. These written specifications shall be accompanied by detailed site diagrams, scaled cross -sectional L drawings, topographic maps showing slope percentage and final grade elevations, and any other �? drawings appropriate to show construction techniques or anticipated final outcome. D. Monitoring Program. The mitigation plan shall include a program for monitoring construction and for assessing a completed project. A protocol shall be included outlining the schedule for site monitoring M (for example, monitoring shall occur in years one, three, and five after site construction), and how the �a monitoring data will be evaluated to determine if the performance standards are being met. A monitoring 0 report shall be submitted as needed to document milestones, successes, problems, and contingency actions of the compensation project. The compensation project shall be monitored for a period necessary a to establish that performance standards have been met, but not for a period less than tie -five 5 years r without approval from the director. E. Contingency Plan. The mitigation plan shall include identification of potential courses of action and any corrective measures to be taken if monitoring or evaluation indicates project performance standards are not being met. F. Financial Guarantees. The mitigation plan shall include financial guarantees, as necessary, to ensure that the mitigation plan is fully implemented. Financial guarantees ensuring fulfillment of the compensation project, monitoring program, and any contingency measures shall be posted in accordance with ECDC 23.40.290, Bonds to ensure mitigation, maintenance, and monitoring. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.140 Innovative mitigation.0 SHARE A. The city of Edmonds may encourage, facilitate, and approve innovative mitigation projects that are based on the best available science. Advance mitigation, in lieu fee programs, or mitigation banking are examples of alternative mitigation prejeet-, pI oaches allowed under the provisions of this section Page 17 of 100 Packet Pg. 269 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 wherein one or- more applieants, or- an or-gamza4ion with demonstr-ated eapability, may undet4ake-a mitigation pFoject toget if it is demonstrated that all of the following circumstances exist: 1. There are no reasonable onnortunities on --site or within the same sub -drainage basin. or onnortunities on -site or within the sub -drainage basin do not have a high likelihood of success based on a determination of the capacity of the site to compensate for the impacts. Considerations should include: anticipated replacement ratios for wetland mitigation, buffer conditions and proposed widths, available water to maintain anticipated hydro _ eg omorphic classes of wetlands when restored, proposed flood storage capacity, and potential to mitigate fish and wildlife impacts (such as connectivity); 4-2. The off -site mitigation has a greater likelihood of providing equal or improved critical areas functions than the altered critical area, and there is a clear potential for success of the proposed mitigation at the identified mitigation site. 3. Off -site locations shall be in the same basin and within the City unless: a. Established watershed goals for water quality, flood storage or conveyance, habitat, or other wetland functions have been established by the City and strongly justify location of mitigation at another site; or b. Credits from an approved (State -certified) wetland mitigation bank are used as compensation, and the use of credits is consistent with the terms of the approved bank instrument; c. Fees are paid to an approved in -lieu fee program to compensate for the impacts. B. Development nr000sals impacting critical areas and/or associated buffers may contribute oavment towards an identified City of Edmonds mitigation with approval from the director, provided that the mitigation approach meets all state and federal permit requirements, where required. Such miti ag tion actions shall be consistent with ECDC 23.40.140.A.1. and ECDC 23.40.140.A.2., and with all other applicable provisions of ECDC Chapters 23.50 and 23.90. 1BC. Conducting mitigation as part of a cooperative process provides for retention or an increase in the beneficial functions and values of critical areas within the Edmonds jurisdiction. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.150 Critical areas decision.0 SHARE The city of Edmonds development services director shall make a decision as to whether the proposed activity and mitigation, if any, is consistent with the provisions of this title. The decision shall be based on the criteria of ECDC 23.40.160, Review criteria, and shall affect and be incorporated within the larger project decision. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Page 18 of 100 Packet Pg. 270 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 23.40.160 Review criteria.0 SHARE A. Any alteration to a critical area, unless otherwise provided for in this title, shall be reviewed and approved, approved with conditions, or denied based on the proposal's ability to comply with all of the following criteria: 1. The proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas in accordance with ECDC 23.40.120, Mitigation sequencing; 2. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare on or off the development proposal site; 3. The proposal is consistent with the general purposes of this title and the public interest; 4. Any alterations permitted to the critical area are mitigated in accordance with ECDC 23.40.110, Mitigation requirements; 5. The proposal protects the critical area functions and values consistent with the best available science and results in no net loss of critical area functions and values; and 6. The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards. o� B. The director may condition the proposed activity as necessary to mitigate impacts to critical areas and to conform to the standards required by this title. Except as provided for by this title, any project that cannot adequately mitigate its impacts to critical areas in the sequencing order of preferences in ECDC 23.40.120 shall be denied. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.170 Favorable critical areas decision.0 SHARE If the director determines that the proposed activity meets or is exempt from the criteria in ECDC 23.40.160, Review criteria, and complies with the applicable provisions of this title, the development services director shall prepare a written notice of decision for the applicant and identify any required conditions of approval as part of the larger project decision. The notice of decision and conditions of approval shall be included in the project file and be considered in the next phase of the city's review of the proposed activity in accordance with any other applicable codes or regulations. Any conditions of approval included in a notice of decision shall be attached to the underlying permit or approval. Any subsequent changes to the conditions of approval shall void the previous decision pending re -review of the proposal and conditions of approval previously set by the director. A favorable decision should not be construed as endorsement or approval of any underlying permit or approval. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.180 Unfavorable critical areas decision.0 SHARE Page 19 of 100 Packet Pg. 271 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 If the director determines that a proposed activity is not exempt or does not adequately mitigate its impacts on critical areas and/or does not comply with the criteria in ECDC 23.40.160, Review criteria, and the provisions of this title, the director shall prepare a written decision for the applicant that includes findings of noncompliance. No proposed activity or permit shall be approved or issued if it is determined that the proposed activity does not adequately mitigate its impacts on the critical areas and/or does not comply with the provisions of this title. Following notice of decision that the proposed activity does not meet the review criteria and/or does not comply with the applicable provisions of this title, the applicant may request consideration of a revised critical area report. If the revision is found to be substantial and relevant to the critical area review, the director may reopen the critical area review and make a new decision based on the revised report. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.190 Completion of the critical areas review.0 SHARE The director's decision regarding critical areas pursuant to this title shall be final concurrent with the final project decision to approve, condition, or deny the development proposal or other activity involved. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.195 Contingent review procedure for certain types of development. A. Scope. The procedures set forth in this section shall apply to the following types of critical area restoration projects as allowed by ECDC 23.40.215: 1. Restoration projects involving anadromous fish streams 2. Restoration projects involving Category I or Category II wetlands 3. Restoration projects involving Category I or Category II estuarine wetlands B. Notice of application. Development activity within the scope of subsection A, above, shall be processed as a Type II application, unless the process is altered according to subsection D, below. In addition to the notice provided pursuant to Title 20, notice of application for all such development shall also be sent to the city council by email. C. Contingent review process. Development activity within the scope of subsection A, above, shall be escalated to a Type III -A process when: 1. The city receives a request from any person for a public hearing within 14 days of the date of the notice of application; and 2. The public hearing request is accompanied by a hearing fee in the amount of 50% of the difference between the Type II and Type III -A application fee. Page 20 of 100 Packet Pg. 272 Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 D. Effect of contingent review. When the contingent review process is triggered pursuant to subsection C above, the project applicant shall pay the other 50% of the difference between the Type II and Type III -A application fee, on top of the previously paid Type II application fee. The applicant shall pay this fee within 30 days of notice from the city that the fee is due. If the applicant fails to pay the additional fee within the required 30-dayperiod, the application for the project shall be deemed withdrawn. The city shall not schedule the public hearing until the additional fee has been paid. For these public hearings, the cost of the hearing examiner shall be borne by the city_ E. Notice of decision. Whether development activity within the scope of subsection A, above, is processed as a Type II application or escalated to a Type III -A application, notice of decision shall be sent by email to the city council in addition to any other notice that ma,, b�quired by Title 20. 23.40.200 Appeals.0 SHARE Any decision to approve, condition, or deny a development proposal or other activity based on the requirements of this title may be appealed according to, and as part of, the appeal procedure, if any, for the permit or approval involved. [Ord. 3736 § 71, 2009; Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.210 Variances.13 SHARE A. Variances from the standards of this title may be authorized through the process of hearing examiner review in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 20.85 ECDC only if an applicant o, demonstrates that one or more of the following two conditions exist: 1. The application of this title would prohibit a development proposal by a public agency or public utility. A public agency and utility exception may be granted as a variance if: a. There is no other practical alternative to the proposed development with less impact on the critical areas; b. The application of this title would unreasonably restrict the ability to provide utility services to the public; c. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare on or off the development proposal site; d. The proposal attempts to protect and mitigate impacts to the critical area functions and values consistent with the best available science; and e. The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards. 2. The application of this title would deny all reasonable economic use (see the definition of "reasonable economic use(s)" in ECDC 23.40.320) of the subject property. A reasonable use exception may be authorized as a variance only if an applicant demonstrates that: a. The application of this title would deny all reasonable economic use of a property or subject parcel; Page 21 of 100 Packet Pg. 273 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 b. No other reasonable economic use of the property consistent with the underlying zoning and the city comprehensive plan has less impact on the critical area; c. The proposed impact to the critical area is the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable economic use of the property; d. The inability of the applicant to derive reasonable economic use of the property is not the result of actions by the applicant after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this title or its predecessor; e. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare on or off the development proposal site; f. The proposal minimizes net loss of critical area functions and values consistent with the best available science; and g. The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards. B. Specific Variance Criteria. A variance may be granted if the applicant demonstrates that the requested action conforms to all of the following specific criteria: 1. Special conditions and circumstances exist that are peculiar to the land, the lot, or something inherent �? in the land, and that are not applicable to other lands in the same district; 2. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant; 3. A literal interpretation of the provisions of this title would deprive the applicant of all reasonable economic uses and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and zone of the subject property under the terms of this title, and the variance requested is the minimum necessary to provide the applicant with such rights; 4. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this title to other lands, structures, or buildings under similar circumstances; 5. The granting of the variance is consistent with the general purpose and intent of this title, and will not further degrade the functions or values of the associated critical areas or otherwise be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the subject property; and 6. The decision to grant the variance is based upon the best available science and gives special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fish habitat. C. Hearing Examiner Review. The city hearing examiner shall, as a Type III -A decision (see Chapter 20.01 ECDC), review variance applications and conduct a public hearing. The hearing examiner shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny variance applications based on a proposal's ability to comply with general and specific variance criteria provided in subsections (A) and (B) of this section. Page 22 of 100 Packet Pg. 274 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 D. Conditions May Be Required. The director retains the right to prescribe such conditions and safeguards as are necessary to secure adequate protection of critical areas from adverse impacts, and to ensure conformity with this title for variances granted through hearing examiner review. E. Time Limit. The director shall prescribe a time limit within which the action for which the variance is required shall be begun, completed, or both. Failure to begin or complete such action within the established time limit shall void the variance, unless the applicant files an application for an extension of time before the expiration. An application for an extension of time shall be reviewed by the director as a Type II decision (see Chapter 20.01 ECDC). F. Burden of Proof. The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to bring forth evidence in support of a variance application and upon which any decision has to be made on the application. [Ord. 3783 § 15, 2010; Ord. 3775 § 15, 2010; Ord. 3736 §§ 72, 73, 2009; Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.215 Critical Area Restoration Proiects A. When a critical area restoration project is proposed that is not required as mitigation for a development proposal, the Director or Hearing Examiner (as applicable)may grant relief from standard critical area buffer requirements if the restoration project involves: 1. The daylighting of a stream or tidal channel, or o� 2. Expansion of a wetland that would cause a landward expansion of the wetland buffer. B. The restoration project proposal will include a proposed buffer width for the project that is developed from an assessment by a qualified Critical Area Consultant on the buffer width necessary to ensure that the restoration project is successful and the ecological functions of the areas adjacent to the stream or wetland will be enhanced. C. The Director or Hearing Examiner (as applicable) will consider the proposed buffer width along with hydrologic, geologic, and other habitat data for the site to determine if the project warrants a buffer width that deviates from the standard critical area buffer widths. D. If the Director or Hearing Examiner (as applicable) determines that a reduced buffer width is appropriate for the proposed restoration project, the Director may approve the reduced buffer width for the proposed restoration site. Part III. Allowed Activities, Exemptions and Noncompliance Penalties 23.40.220 Allowed activities. FC3 s"RRI 1 A. Critical Area Report. Activities allowed under this title shall have been reviewed and permitted or approved by the city of Edmonds or other agency with jurisdiction, but do not require submittal of a critical area report, unless such submittal was required previously for the underlying permit. The director Page 23 of 100 Packet Pg. 275 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 may apply conditions to the underlying permit or approval to ensure that the allowed activity is consistent with the provisions of this title to protect critical areas. B. Required Use of Best Management Practices. All allowed activities shall be conducted using the best management practices that result in the least amount of impact to the critical areas. Best management practices shall be used for tree and vegetation protection, construction management, erosion and sedimentation control, water quality protection, and regulation of chemical applications. The city may observe or require independent inspection of the use of best management practices to ensure that the activity does not result in degradation to the critical area. Any incidental damage to, or alteration of, a critical area shall be restored, rehabilitated, or replaced at the responsible party's expense. C. Allowed Activities. The following activities are allowed: 1. Permit Requests Subsequent to Previous Critical Areas Review. Development permits and approvals that involve both discretionary land use approvals (such as subdivisions, rezones, or conditional use permits) and construction approvals (such as building permits) if all of the following conditions have been met: a. The provisions of this title have been previously addressed as part of another approval; b. There have been no material changes in the potential impact to the critical area or buffer since the v prior review; o� c. The permit or approval has not expired or, if no expiration date, no more than five years have elapsed since the issuance of that permit or approval; c d. There is no new information available that is applicable to any critical area review of the site or particular critical area; and de. Compliance with any standards or conditions placed upon the prior permit or approval has been achieved or secured.; 2. Modification to Structures Existing Outside of Critical Areas and/or Buffers. Structural modification of, addition to, or replacement of a legally constructed structure existing outside of a critical area or its buffer that does not further alter or increase the impact to the critical area or buffer and there is no increased risk to life or property as a result of the proposed modification or replacement; 3. Perr hied Altefatio Modifications to Existing Structures Existing within Critical Areas and/or Buffers. Permitted altef tior Modification to a legally constructed structure existing within a critical area or buffer shall be allowed when the a' atmodification:does no a. Does not increase the footprint of the structuredevelopment; and b. Does not increase the impact to the critical area or buffer; and Page 24 of 100 Packet Pg. 276 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 c. Does not increasether-e ;s no iner-e se risk to life or property as a result of the proposed modification or replacement_ ( Aadditions to legally constructed structures existing within a critical area or buffer that do increase the existing footprint of development shall be subject to and permitted in accordance with the development standards of the associated critical area type (see ECDC 23.50.040 and 23.90.040)). This provision shall be interpreted to supplement the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code relating to nonconforming structures in order to permit the full reconstruction of a legal nonconforming building within its footprint; 4. Development Proposals within Interrupted Stream or Wetland Buffers. Adjacent areas that may be physically separated from a stream or wetland due to existing„ legally established structures or paved areas may be exempted from the prescribed buffer widths if proven scientifically to be functionally isolated from the stream or wetland. The Director will require the applicant to provide a site assessment and functional analysis documentation report by a qualified Critical Area Consultant that demonstrates the interrupted buffer area is functionally isolated. The Director shall consider the hydrologic, geologic, and/or biological habitat connection potential and the extent and permanence of the physical separation. 45. Activities within the Improved Right -of -Way. Replacement, modification, installation, or construction of utility facilities, lines, pipes, mains, equipment, or appurtenances, when such facilities r L are located within the improved portion of the public right-of-way or a city -authorized private roadway., v except those activities that alter a wetland or watercourse, such as culverts or bridges, or result in the transport of sediment or increased stormwater. -56. Minor Utility Projects. Utility projects that have minor or short -duration impacts to critical areas, as determined by the director in accordance with the criteria below, and which do not significantly impact the function or values of a critical area(s); provided, that such projects are constructed with best management practices and additional restoration measures are provided. Minor activities shall not result in the transport of sediment or increased storm water. Such allowed minor utility projects shall meet the following criteria: a. There is no practical alternative to the proposed activity with less impact on critical areas; b. The activity involves the placement of utility pole(s), street sign(s), anchor(s), or vault(s) or other small component(s) of a utility facility; and c. The activity involves disturbance of an area less than 75 square feet; 6. Public and Private Pedestrian Trails. New public and private pedestrian trails subject to the following: a. The trail surface shall be limited to pervious surfaces and meet all other requirements, including water quality standards set forth in the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19; b. Critical area and/or buffer widths shall be increased, where possible, equal to the width of the trail corridor, including disturbed areas; and Page 25 of 100 Packet Pg. 277 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 c. Trails proposed to be located in landslide or erosion hazard areas shall be constructed in a manner that does not increase the risk of landslide or erosion and in accordance with an approved geotechnical report; and d. Trails located only in the outer twenty percent (25%) of critical areas buffers, and located to avoid removal of significant trees. Where existing legally established development has reduced the width of the critical areas buffer, trails may be placed in the outer twenty percent (25%, of the remaining critical area buffer. The trail shall be no more than five (5) feet in width and for pedestrian use only. Raised boardwalks utilizing nontreated pilings may be acceptable. Allowances for trails within the inner seventy percent (75%) of critical areas buffers are provided within applicable sections of ECDC Chapters 23.50 — 23.90. 7. Select Vegetation Removal Activities. The following vegetation removal activities: a. The removal of the following vegetation with hand labor and Et -hand-held equipment when the area of work is under one thousand five hundred (1,500)square feet in area as calculated cumulatively three (3) years: i. Invasive and noxious weeds; ii. English ivy (Hedera helix); o� iii. Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor, R. procerus); iv. Evergreen blackberry (Rubus laciniatus); v. Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius); and vi. Hedge and field bindweed (Convolvulus sepium and C. arvensis); Removal of these invasive and noxious plant species shall be restricted to hand removal unless permits or approval from the appropriate regulatory _ agencies have been obtained for approved biological _ or chemical treatments or other removal techniques. All removed plant material shall be taken away from the site and appropriately disposed of. Plants that appear on the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board list of noxious weeds must be handled and disposed of according to a noxious weed control plan appropriate to that species. b. The removal of trees from critical areas and buffers that are hazardous, posing a threat to public safety, or posing an imminent risk of damage to private property; provided, that: i. The applicant submits a report from an ISA- or ASCA-certified arborist or registered landscape architect that documents the hazard and provides a replanting schedule for the replacement trees; Page 26 of 100 Packet Pg. 278 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 ii. Tree cutting shall be limited to pruning and crown thinning, unless otherwise justified by a qualified professional. Where pruning or crown thinning is not sufficient to address the hazard, trees should be removed or converted to wildlife snags; iii. All vegetation cut (tree stems, branches, etc.) shall be left within the critical area or buffer unless removal is warranted due to the potential for disease or pest transmittal to other healthy vegetation or unless removal is warranted to improve slope stability; iv. The land owner shall replace any trees that are removed with new trees at a ratio of two replacement trees for each tree removed (two ene2:1) within one year in accordance with an approved restoration plan. Replacement trees may be planted at a different, nearby location if it can be determined that planting in the same location would create a new hazard or potentially damage the critical area. Replacement trees shall be species that are native and indigenous to the site and a minimum of one to two inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) for deciduous trees and a minimum of six feet in height for evergreen trees as measured from the top of the root ball; v. If a tree to be removed provides critical habitat, such as an eagle perch, a qualified wildlife biologist shall be consulted to determine timing and methods of removal that will minimize impacts; and vi. Hazard trees determined to pose an imminent threat or danger to public health or safety, to public or r L private property, or of serious environmental degradation may be removed or pruned by the land owner v prior to receiving written approval from the city; provided, that within 14 days following such action, the land owner shall submit a restoration plan that demonstrates compliance with the provisions of this title; c. Measures to control a fire or halt the spread of disease or damaging insects consistent with the State Forest Practices Act, Chapter 76.09 RCW; provided, that the removed vegetation shall be replaced in kind or with similar native species within one year in accordance with an approved restoration plan; d. Chemical Annlications. The aaalication of herbicides. pesticides. organic or mineral -derived fertilizers, or other hazardous substances, if necessary, as approved by the City, provided that their use shall be restricted in accordance with state Department of Fish and Wildlife Management Recommendations and the regulations of the state Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and Department of Ecology; and de. Unless otherwise provided, or as a necessary part of an approved alteration, removal of any vegetation or woody debris from a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area or wetland shall be prohibited; 8. Minor Site Investigative Work. Work necessary for land use submittals, such as surveys, soil logs, percolation tests, and other related activities, where such activities do not require construction of new roads or significant amounts of excavation. In every case, impacts to the critical area shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be immediately restored; and 9. Navigational Aids and Boundary Markers. Construction or modification of navigational aids and boundary markers. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Page 27 of 100 Packet Pg. 279 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 23.40.230 Exemptions.P SHARE A. Exemption Request and Review Process. The proponent of the activity may submit a written request for exemption to the director that describes the activity and states the exemption listed in this section that applies. The director shall review the exemption request to verify that it complies with this title and approve or deny the exemption. If the exemption is approved, it shall be placed on file with the city of Edmonds. If the exemption is denied, the proponent may continue in the review process and shall be subject to the requirements of this title. B. Exempt Activities and Impacts to Critical Areas. All exempted activities shall use reasonable methods to avoid potential impacts to critical areas. To be exempt from this title does not give permission to degrade a critical area or ignore risk from natural hazards. Any incidental damage to, or alteration of, a critical area that is not a necessary outcome of the exempted activity shall be restored, rehabilitated, or replaced at the responsible party's expense. C. Exempt Activities. The following developments, activities, and associated uses shall be exempt from the provisions of this title; provided, that they are otherwise consistent with the provisions of other local, state, and federal laws and requirements: 1. Emergencies. Those activities necessary to prevent an immediate threat to public health, safety, or welfare, or that pose an immediate risk of damage to private property and that require remedial or preventative action in a time frame too short to allow for compliance with the requirements of this title. as Emergency actions that create an impact to a critical area or its buffer shall use reasonable methods to address the emergency; in addition, they must have the least possible impact to the critical area or its buffer. The person or agency undertaking such action shall notify the director within one working day following commencement of the emergency activity. Within 30 days, the director shall determine if the action taken was within the scope of the emergency actions allowed in this subsection. If the director determines that the action taken, or any part of the action taken, was beyond the scope of an allowed emergency action, then enforcement provisions of ECDC 23.40.240, Unauthorized critical area alterations and enforcement, shall apply. After the emergency, the person or agency undertaking the action shall fully fund and conduct necessary restoration and/or mitigation for any impacts to the critical area and buffers resulting from the emergency action in accordance with an approved critical areas report and mitigation plan. The person or agency undertaking the action shall apply for review, and the alteration, critical area report, and mitigation plan shall be reviewed by the director in accordance with the review procedures contained herein. Restoration and/or mitigation activities must be initiated within one year of the date of the emergency and completed in a timely manner; 2. Operation, Maintenance, or Repair. Operation, maintenance, or repair of existing structures, infrastructure improvements, utilities, public or private roads, dikes, levees, or drainage systems that do not require construction permits, if the activity does not further alter or increase the impact to, or encroach further within, the critical area or buffer and there is no increased risk to life or property as a Page 28 of 100 Packet Pg. 280 Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 result of the proposed operation, maintenance, or repair. Operation and maintenance also includes normal maintenance of vegetation performed in accordance with best management practices, provided that such management actions are part of regular and ongoing maintenance, do not expand further into the critical area, are not the result of an expansion of the structure or utility, and do not directly impact an endangered or threatened species; and 3. Passive Outdoor Activities. Recreation, education, and scientific research activities that do not degrade the critical area, including fishing, hiking, and bird watching. Trails must be constructed pursuant to ECDC 23.40.220(C)(6), Public and Private Pedestrian Trails. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.240 Unauthorized critical area alterations and enforcement. o SHARE A. When a critical area or its buffer has been altered in violation of this title or the provisions of Chapter 7.200 ECC, all ongoing development work shall stop and the critical area shall be restored. The director shall have the authority to issue a stop work order to cease all ongoing development work, and order restoration, rehabilitation, or replacement measures at the owner's or other responsible party's expense to compensate for violation of the provisions of this title. The director may also require an applicant or property owner to take immediate action to ensure site stabilization and/or erosion control as needed. B. Requirement for Restoration Plan. All development work shall remain stopped until a restoration plan L is prepared and approved by the director. Such a plan shall be prepared by a qualified professional using �? the best available science and shall describe how the actions proposed meet the minimum requirements described in subsection C of this section. The director shall, at the violator's expense, seek expert advice in determining the adequacy of the plan. Inadequate plans shall be returned to the applicant or violator for revision and resubmittal. 5 C. Minimum Performance Standards for Restoration. 1. For alterations to frequently flooded areas, wetlands, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, the following minimum performance standards shall be met for the restoration of a critical area; provided, that if the violator can demonstrate that greater functional and habitat values can be obtained, these standards may be modified: a. The historic structural and functional values shall be restored, including water quality and habitat functions; b. The historic soil types and configuration shall be replicated; c. The critical area and buffers shall be replanted with native vegetation that replicates the vegetation historically found on the site in species types, sizes, and densities. The historic functions and values should be replicated at the location of the alteration; and d. Information demonstrating compliance with the requirements in ECDC 23.40.130, Mitigation plan requirements, shall be submitted to the city planning division. Page 29 of 100 Packet Pg. 281 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 2. For alterations to flood and geological hazards, the following minimum performance standards shall be met for the restoration of a critical area; provided, that if the violator can demonstrate that greater safety can be obtained, these standards may be modified: a. The hazard shall be reduced to a level equal to, or less than, the predevelopment hazard; b. Any risk of personal injury resulting from the alteration shall be eliminated or minimized; and c. The hazard area and buffers shall be replanted with native vegetation sufficient to minimize the hazard. D. Site Investigations. The director is authorized to make site inspections and take such actions as are necessary to enforce this title. The director shall present proper credentials and make a reasonable effort to contact any property owner before entering onto private property. E. Penalties. Any person, party, firm, corporation, or other legal entity convicted of violating any of the o provisions of this title shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to penalties not to exceed a square a footage cost of three dollars ($3.00) er square foot of impacted critical area and critical area buffer a and/or a per tree penalty consistent with ECDC 18.45.070B. and C. _set fort i ECDC 18.45.070 U r L shall ,.onstit to a sepafa4e offense. Any development carried out contrary to the provisions of this title v shall constitute a public nuisance and may be enjoined as provided by the statutes of the state of Washington. The city of Edmonds may levy civil penalties against any person, party, firm, corporation, or other legal entity for violation of any of the provisions of this title. The civil penalty shall be assessed as proscribed in ECDC 18.45.070 and 18.45.075.[Ord. 3828 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. c Part IV. General Critical Areas Protective Measures 23.40.250 Critical areas markers and signs.0 SHARE A. The boundary at the outer edge of a critical area, critical area buffer or critical area tract may, at the discretion of the director, be required to be delineated with wood fencing. B. The boundary at the outer edge of the critical area or buffer may be identified with temporary signs prior to any site alteration. Such temporary signs may be replaced with permanent signs prior to occupancy or use of the site. C. These provisions may be modified by the director as necessary to ensure protection of sensitive features or wildlife needs. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.270 Critical areas tracts and easements.0 sHRRE ] A. At the discretion of the director, critical areas tracts and/or easements may be required in development proposals for subdivisions, shoi4 subdivisions, Na „lamed unit. deve opmep.developments that include critical areas. These critical areas tracts and/or easements shall delineate and protect those contiguous critical areas and buffers greater than 5,000 square feet including: Page 30 of 100 Packet Pg. 282 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 1. Landslide hazard areas and buffers; 2. Wetlands and buffers; 3. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas; and 4. Other lands to be protected from alterations as conditioned by project approval. B. Notice on Title. The owner of any property with field -verified presence of critical areas and/or critical areas buffers, except critical aquifer recharge areas, for which a permit application is submitted shall, as a condition of permit issuance, record a notice of the existence of such critical area and/or critical area buffer against the property with the Snohomish County Auditor's office. The notice shall be approved by the director and the city attorney for compliance with this provision. The titleholder will have the right to challenge this notice and to have it released if the critical area designation no longer applies; however, the titleholder shall be responsible for completing a critical areas report, subject to approval by the director. before the notice on title can be released. Gr-it ea ,,real 4aets shall be r-eeer-ded on all C. Critical areas tracts or easements shall be designated on the face of the plat or recorded drawing in a format approved by the director. The designation shall include the following restrictions: 1. An assurance that native vegetation will be preserved for the purpose of preventing harm to property and the environment, including, but not limited to, controlling surface water runoff and erosion, maintaining slope stability, buffering, and protecting plants, fish, and animal habitat; and 2. The right of the director to enforce the terms of the restriction. D. The director may require that critical areas tracts be dedicated to the city, to be held in an undivided interest by each owner of a building lot within the development with the ownership interest passing with the ownership of the lot, or held by an incorporated homeowner's association or other legal entity (such as a land trust), which ensures the ownership, maintenance, and protection of the tract and contains a process to assess costs associated therewith. E. The use of herbicides within critical areas tracts or easements is prohibited except use of aquatic gpproved herbicides where recommended by the Noxious Weed Control Board and where otherwise consistent with the provisions of ECDC Title 23. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.280 Building setbacks.0 sHa_R Unless ethefwise Except for geologically hazardous areas where setbacks are determined by a geotechnical report, buildings and other structures shall be set back a distance of 15 feet from the edges of all critical area buffers or from the edges of all critical areas, if no buffers are required. T4+,—In addition to other allowances provided by this Title, the following may be allowed in the building setback area: A. Landscaping; Page 31 of 100 Packet Pg. 283 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 B. Uncovered decks; C. Building overhangs, if such overhangs do not extend more than 30 inches into the setback area; and D. Impervious ground surfaces, such as driveways and patios; provided, that such improvements may be subject to water quality regulations as adopted in the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.290 Bonds to ensure mitigation, maintenance, and monitoring.0 SHARE A. When mitigation required pursuant to a development proposal is not completed prior to final permit approval, such as final plat approval or final building inspection, the applicant shall be required to post a performance bond or other security in a form and amount deemed acceptable by the director. If the development proposal is subject to mitigation, the applicant shall post a mitigation bond or other security in a form and amount deemed acceptable by the city to ensure mitigation is fully functional. B. The bond shall be in the amount of 120 percent of the estimated cost of the uncompleted actions or the estimated cost of restoring the functions and values of the critical area that are at risk, whichever is greater. The amount of the performance bond shall include a reasonable allocation for inflation based on the length of anticipated delay and the provisions of subsection D of this section. C. The bond shall be in the form of a surety bond, performance bond, and/or maintenance bond from an V-, acceptable financial institution, with terms and conditions acceptable to the city of Edmonds' attorney. D. Bonds or other security authorized by this section shall remain in effect until the director determines, in writing, that the standards bonded for have been met. Bonds or other security shall be held by the city for a minimum of twee -five 5 years to ensure that the required mitigation has been fully implemented and demonstrated to function, and may be held for longer periods when necessary to achieve these goals E. Depletion, failure, or collection of bond funds shall not discharge the obligation of an applicant or violator to complete required mitigation, maintenance, monitoring, or restoration. F. Public development proposals shall be relieved from having to comply with the bonding requirements of this section if public funds have previously been committed for mitigation, maintenance, monitoring, or restoration. G. Any failure to satisfy critical area requirements established by law or condition including, but not limited to, the failure to provide a monitoring report within thirty k30) days after it is due or comply with other provisions of an approved mitigation plan shall constitute a default, and the city may demand payment of any financial guarantees or require other action authorized under this title or any other law. H. Any funds recovered pursuant to this section shall be used to complete the required mitigation. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.300 Critical area inspections. SHARE Page 32 of 100 Packet Pg. 284 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 Reasonable access to the site shall be provided to the city, state, and/or federal agency review staff for the purpose of inspections during any proposal review, restoration, emergency action, or monitoring period. Failure to provide access shall constitute grounds for issuance of a stop work order. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part V. Incorporation of Best Available Science 23.40.310 Best available science.0 SHARE A. Protect Functions and Values of Critical Areas with Special Consideration to Anadromous Fish. Critical areas reports and decisions to alter critical areas shall rely on the best available science to protect the functions and values of critical areas and must give special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fish, such as salmon and bull trout, and their habitat, where applicable. B. Best Available Science to Be Consistent with Criteria. The best available science is that scientific information applicable to the critical area prepared by local, state, or federal natural resource agencies, a qualified scientific professional, or a team of qualified scientific professionals that is consistent with criteria established in WAC 365-195-900 through 365-195-925 and RCW 36.70A.172. C. Characteristics of a Valid Scientific Process. In the context of critical areas protection, a valid �? scientific process is one that produces reliable information useful in understanding the consequences of a local government's regulatory decisions, and in developing critical areas policies and development regulations that will be effective in protecting the functions and values of critical areas. To determine whether information received during the permit review process is reliable scientific information, the director shall determine whether the source of the information displays the characteristics of a valid scientific process. Such characteristics are as follows: 0` 1. Peer Review. The information has been critically reviewed by other persons who are qualified scientific experts in that scientific discipline. The proponents of the information have addressed the criticism of the peer reviewers. Publication in a refereed scientific journal usually indicates that the information has been appropriately peer -reviewed; 2. Methods. The methods used to obtain the information are clearly stated and reproducible. The methods are standardized in the pertinent scientific discipline or, if not, the methods have been appropriately peer -reviewed to ensure their reliability and validity; 3. Logical Conclusions and Reasonable Inferences. The conclusions presented are based on reasonable assumptions supported by other studies and consistent with the general theory underlying the assumptions. The conclusions are logically and reasonably derived from the assumptions and supported by the data presented. Any gaps in information and inconsistencies with other pertinent scientific information are adequately explained; 4. Quantitative Analysis. The data have been analyzed using appropriate statistical or quantitative methods; Page 33 of 100 Packet Pg. 285 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 5. Context. The information is placed in proper context. The assumptions, analytical techniques, data, and conclusions are appropriately framed with respect to the prevailing body of pertinent scientific knowledge; and 6. References. The assumptions, analytical techniques, and conclusions are well referenced with citations to relevant, credible literature and other pertinent existing information. D. Nonscientific Information. Nonscientific information, such as anecdotal observations, non -expert opinion, and hearsay, may supplement scientific information, but it is not an adequate substitute for valid and available scientific information. E. Absence of Valid Scientific Information. Where there is an absence of valid scientific information or incomplete scientific information relating to a critical area leading to uncertainty about the risk to critical area function of permitting an alteration of or impact to the critical area, the director shall: 1. Take a "precautionary or a no -risk approach" that strictly limits development and land use activities until the uncertainty is sufficiently resolved; and 2. Require application of an effective adaptive management program that relies on scientific methods to evaluate how well regulatory and nonregulatory actions protect the critical area. An adaptive r L management program is a formal and deliberate scientific approach to taking action and obtaining v information in the face of uncertainty. An adaptive management program shall: a. Address funding for the research component of the adaptive management program; a) b. Change course based on the results and interpretation of new information that resolves uncertainties; and c. Commit to the appropriate time frame and scale necessary to reliably evaluate regulatory and nonregulatory actions affecting protection of critical areas and anadromous fisheries. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004] . SHARE 0, •- -- - --- --- A ltgvp» , > >filling; > > >PMRi0g, OF > >Pesticide's > OF > > > > Page 34 of 100 Packet Pg. 286 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 >1 waste, and tw; .-. > d r c� m GG � c c �a L 7 O !C L a GG ,� �L GG �) GG f) cG f) T T ii GG f) O GG f) L jud— 1 , T ++ f de'signs and fflomitor-i"g and t 7 7 x W � GG Mitigation"44044&8 7 � s ' M GG a . b >IEFEU5, Of GG » GGFF— » jr Page 35 of 100 Packet Pg. 287 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 MONISM 111 _ • �._.___e.=__=_-_ _ •____.____—__!!�ll�;�lSA:!!�1!P��:IPI�:P.l�lrfrlR�l�:!l�l�i!!!! f- --- El------ 7__`�V_ S7_ ------------- ill low. Page 36 of 100 T t x W C N E s M Q Packet Pg. 288 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds - City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas - April 26, 2016 geologist, > appliA eflgifwor- in the 4-W who Four- y@RFS of .-. d r c� > Q. c « »• c association, p ;breeding habitat, wiwer- range,, and fflow'Ment L a vAil ability of; high N,Ulmer-ability to alter-a4i-n, S"@h as ,Mudflats, •L > U T o� T • T « v c :a L 0 L 1 T ++ f f tifflifig to x W yr • 7 f 7 a"d ha 7 I OF w8toFing Ow ewixiE s Page 37 of 100 Q Packet Pg. 289 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 : I M�M� OPINION I M... new.1 . GG jr .-. d at r Q. GGQualified GG efitie-Al m c �a L O 7 ) , L a �L U T 7 x W d E GG ff � tea_ .Tsr.a�r�rrcreazrxssr�.r.•_ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ cc » > > • > > Page 38 of 100 Packet Pg. 290 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 IMMIN, INS ------------ « » ------------------ --- ------------ -------- - ------ ... Page 39 of 100 T t x W d E s M Q Packet Pg. 291 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Chapter 23.50 WETLANDS Sections: Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.50.000 Wetlands compliance requirements flowchart. 23.50.010 Designation, rating and mapping —Wetlands. Part Il. Allowed Activities — Wetlands 23.50.020 Allowed activities — Wetlands. Part III. Additional Report Requirements — Wetlands 23.50.030 Special study and report requirements — Wetlands. Part IV. Development Standards — Wetlands �? o� 23.50.040 Development standards — Wetlands. 23.50.050 Mitigation requirements — Wetlands. 23.50.060 Performance standards — Subdivisions. Part V. City of Edmonds Wetland Field Data Form 23.50.070 Wetland field data form. Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.50.000 Wetlands compliance requirements flowchart.0 SHARE See Figure 23.50.000 at the end of this chapter. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.50.010 Designation, rating and mapping — Wetlands.D SHARE A. Designating Wetlands. Wetlands are those areas, designated in accordance with the approved federal wetland delineation manual and analicable reizional suoblements as set forth in WAC 173-22-035 Washington State Wetland 1dent f;,.ation and Deiineatio,, Manual (1997), that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. All areas within the city of Edmonds meeting the wetland designation criteria i the ideat f:, atier ara Page 40 of 100 Packet Pg. 292 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds - City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas -April 26, 2016 Deli,ea4i .,, Manual, regardless of any formal identification, are hereby designated critical areas and are subject to the provisions of this title. B. Wetland Ratings. Wetlands shall be rated according to the Washington State Department of Ecology wetland rating system found in the 2014 Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington doetimen4s O)Upgfp� AlLaS ingto„, Ecology Publications Nos. 14-06-02993 74 and nn 06 OM). Thiese doeuments eontains- defining the following wetland rating e-atego.v:os.• Consistent with the wetland rating system criteria and parameters within this document, wetlands that are rated for ecological functions with highest point totals 23 points or higher) perform ecological functions associated with water flow, water quality an habitat at highest levels, whereas wetlands that are rated with lowest point totals (15 points or lower) perform ecological functions at lowest levels. Wetlands that are rated with points between 16 and 22 points perform ecological functions at moderate to high levels. The City of Edmonds Wetland Rating Categories: a. Category 4-I Wetlands. Category 4-I wetlands are those that represent a unique or rare wetland type; are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands; are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are impossible to replace within a human lifetime; or provide a high level of function. The following types of wetlands are Category Lr eetoneor- more of the followinger-i i. Relatively undisturbed estuarine wetlands larger than ones acre; ii. Wetlands of high conservation value that are identified by scientists of the Washington Natural a) Heritage Program/MR; r_ Pr-egr-am�DNR as high quality wedapids; c iii. Bogs larger than e half acre--, iv. Wetlands with mature and old growth forests M.,tufe and old growth r^r-este 'v,o*'larger than one (1) acre; v. Wetlands in coastal lagoons; vi. Wetlands that perform functions at high levels Wetlands ds that perform many functions well as indicated by a score of twenty-three (23�points or more based on functions on the city of Edmonds wetland field data rn.,,, b. Category -2-Il Wetlands. Category lI wetlands are those that are difficult, though not impossible, to replace, and provide high levels of some functions. The following types of wetlands are Category 2II wetlands are- i. Estuarine wetlands smaller than one acre, or disturbed estuarine wetlands larger than one acre; Page 41 of 100 Packet Pg. 293 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 iv. Wetlands with a moderately high level of functions as indicated by a score of 51 te-6920 to 22 points based on functions o the eity o4'Edmonds . ,edan f:^'a data fefm. c. Category - -III Wetlands. Category 3-III wetlands are wetlands with a moderate level of functions as indicated by a score of 3&16 to 5G-19 points based on functions. d. Category 4-IV Wetlands. Category 4-IV wetlands are those with the lowest levels of functions as indicated by scores below 3-0-16 points based on functions fem. All wetlands should be rated consistent with the 2014 Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washinjzton using the 2014 Western Washington Rating Form. C. Date of Wetland Rating. Wetland rating categories shall be applied as the wetland exists on the date of adoption of the rating system by the local government, as the wetland naturally changes thereafter, or as the wetland changes in accordance with permitted activities. Wetland rating categories shall not change due to illegal modifications. o� D. Mapping. The approximate location and extent of wetlands are shown on the city of Edmonds critical areas inventory. In addition, the National Wetlands Inventory and Soil Maps produced by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Resources Conservation Service may be useful in helping to identify potential wetland areas. The inventory and cited resources are to be used as a guide for the city of Edmonds project applicants, and/or property owners and may be continuous) updated as new �p J pp p p Y Y Y p 0` critical areas are identified. They are a reference and do not provide a final critical area designation. E. Delineation. The exact location of a wetland's boundary shall be determined through the performance of a field investigation by a qualified professional wetland scientist applying the approved federal wetland delineation manual and annlicable reizional sunnlementsWashi ete State Wetlara� 449-7). Wetland delineations are valid for five years; after such date the city shall determine whether a revision or additional assessment is necessary. F. Lake Ballinger. Lake Ballinger is designated on the U.S. National Wetlands Inventory as a lacustrine (lake) environment and should not be delineated as a wetland in its entirety. Lake fringe wetlands existing along the periphery of Lake Ballinger shall be identified according to specific criteria provided in 23.50.010. -the Washington State Wetlands 1dentifieation and Delineation Ma+mal (Eeolog -Pttblieatien No. 96 94, 1997) and updated guidanee provided in Washington State Wetlands Rating System for- West€m Washington Revised (E E6logy Pzublieu4io„ No. nn 06 025, 2�004) Consistent with guidance for delineating lake fringe wetlands provided in these resources, the existence of jurisdictional wetlands along Lake Ballinger shorelines shall be largely based upon the presence of persistent emergent vegetation in shoreline areas less than 6.6 feet in depth. Provisions for protection of Lake Page 42 of 100 Packet Pg. 294 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 Ballinger shorelines not meeting criteria for jurisdictional wetlands are provided in the city of Edmonds shoreline master program. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part II. Allowed Activities — Wetlands 23.50.020 Allowed activities — Wetlands.0 SHARE The activities listed below are allowed in wetlands in addition to those activities listed in, and consistent with, the provisions established in ECDC 23.40.220, and do not require submission of a critical areas report, except where such activities result in a loss to the functions and values of a wetland or wetland buffer. These activities include: A. Conservation or preservation of soil, water, vegetation, fish, shellfish, and other wildlife that does not entail changing the structure or functions of the existing wetland. B. The harvesting of wild crops in a manner that is not injurious to natural reproduction of such crops and provided the harvesting does not require tilling of soil, planting of crops, chemical applications, or alteration of the wetland by changing existing topography, water conditions, or water sources. C. Drilling for utilities under a wetland; provided, that the drilling does not interrupt the ground water L connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil column. Specific studies v by a hydrologist are necessary to determine whether the ground water connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil column could be disturbed. D. Enhancement of a wetland through the removal of nonnative invasive species. Weeding shall be restricted to hand removal and weed material shall be removed from the site. Bare areas that remain after weed removal shall be revegetated with native shrubs and trees at natural densities. Some hand seeding may also be done over the bare areas with native herbs. Noxious weeds listed on the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board list must be handled and disposed of according to a noxious weed control Ian appropriate to that species. E. Permitted alteration to a legally constructed structure existing within a wetland or wetland buffer that does not increase the footprint of development or impervious surfacing or increase the impact to a wetland or wetland buffer. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part III. Additional Report Requirements — Wetlands 23.50.030 Special study and report requirements — Wetlands.0 SHARE A. Additional Requirements for Wetlands. In addition to the general critical areas report requirements of ECDC 23.40.090, critical areas reports for wetlands must meet the requirements of this section. Critical areas reports for two or more types of critical areas must meet the report requirements for each relevant type of critical area. Page 43 of 100 Packet Pg. 295 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 B. Critical areas report requirements for wetlands may be met in "stages" or through multiple reports. The typical sequence of potentially required reports that may in part or in combination fulfill the requirements of this section include: 1. Wetland reconnaissance report documenting the existence and general location of wetlands in the vicinity of a project area; 2. Wetland delineation report documenting the extent and boundary of a jurisdictional wetland per RCW 36.70A.175; and 3. Wetland mitigation report documenting potential wetland impacts and mitigation measures designed to retain or increase the functions and values of a wetland in accordance with ECDC 23.50.050 and the general provisions of this title. C. A wetland critical areas report may include one or more of the above three report types, depending on the information required by the director and the extent of potential wetland impacts. The Edmonds development services director maintains the authority and discretion to determine which report(s) alone or combined are sufficient to meet the requirements outlined below and to waive report requirements based upon site conditions and the potential for project impacts. D. Preparation by a Qualified Professional. A critical area report for wetlands shall be prepared by a v qualified professional who is a certified professional wetland scientist or a noncertified professional wetland scientist with a minimum of five years of experience in the field of wetland science and with experience preparing wetland reports. Pursuant to ECDC 23.40.090(A), applicants may choose one of a) the qualified technical consultants on the city's approved list in preparing critical areas reports for wetlands, or may utilize an alternative consultant. Critical areas studies and reports developed by an alternative consultant shall be subject to independent review pursuant to ECDC 23.40.090(B). n` E. Area Addressed in Critical Area Report. The following areas shall be addressed in a critical area report for wetlands: 1. The project area of the proposed activity; 2. All wetlands and recommended buffers within 200 feet of the project area; and 3. All shoreline areas, water features, floodplains, and other critical areas, and related buffers within 200 feet of the project area. The location and extent of wetlands and other critical areas existing outside of the project area or subject parcel boundary may be shown in approximation as practical and necessary to provide an assessment of potential project effects. F. Wetland Analysis. In addition to the minimum required contents of ECDC 23.40.090, Critical areas reports — Requirements, a critical areas report for wetlands shall contain an analysis of the wetlands, including the following site- and proposal -related information at a minimum: 1. A written assessment and accompanying maps of the wetlands and buffers within 200 feet of the project area, including the following information at a minimum: Page 44 of 100 Packet Pg. 296 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 a. Wetland delineation and required buffers; b. Existing wetland acreage; c. Wetland category; d. Vegetative, faunal, and hydrologic characteristics; e. Soil and substrate conditions; f. Topographic elevations, at two -foot contours; and g. A discussion of the water sources supplying the wetland and documentation of hydrologic regime (locations of inlet and outlet features, water depths throughout the wetland, and evidence of recharge or discharge, evidence of water depths throughout the year: drift lines, algal layers, moss lines, and sediment deposits). The location, extent and analyses of wetlands not contiguous with the subject parcel existing outside of the immediate project area may be described in approximation as practical and necessary to provide an assessment of potential project effects and hydrologic/ecological connectivity to on -site wetlands and other critical areas. o� 2. A discussion of measures, including avoidance, minimization, and mitigation, proposed to preserve existing wetlands and restore any wetlands that were degraded prior to the current proposed land use activity. c 3. A habitat and native vegetation conservation strategy that addresses methods to protect and enhance on -site habitat and wetland functions. 4. Functional evaluation for the wetland and adjacent buffer using a local or state agency staff - recognized method and including the reference of the method and all data sheets. 5. Proposed mitigation, if needed, including a written assessment and accompanying maps of the mitigation area, including the following information at a minimum: a. Existing and proposed wetland acreage; b. Vegetative and faunal conditions; c. Surface and subsurface hydrologic conditions including an analysis of existing and future hydrologic regime and proposed hydrologic regime for enhanced, created, or restored mitigation areas; d. Relationship to the watershed and existing waterbodies; e. Soil and substrate conditions, topographic elevations; Page 45 of 100 Packet Pg. 297 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 f. Existing and proposed adjacent site conditions; g. Required wetland buffers; and h. Property ownership. 6. A scale map of the development proposal site and adjacent area. A discussion of ongoing management practices that will protect wetlands after the project site has been developed, including proposed monitoring and maintenance programs. 7. A bond estimate for the installation (including site preparation, plant materials and installation, fertilizers, mulch, and stakes) and the proposed monitoring and maintenance work for the required number of years. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part IV. Development Standards — Wetlands 23.50.040 Development standards — Wetlands.0 SHARE A. Activities may only be permitted in a wetland buffer if the applicant can show that the proposed activity will not degrade the functions and functional performance of the wetland and other critical areas. o� B. Activities and uses shall be prohibited in wetlands and wetland buffers, except as provided for in this title. as C. Category 4-I Wetlands. Activities and uses shall be prohibited from Category 47I wetlands, except as provided for in the public agency and utility exception, reasonable use exception, and variance sections of this title. D. Category III Wetlands. With respect to activities proposed in Category III wetlands, the following standards shall apply: 1. Water -dependent activities may be allowed where there are no practicable alternatives that would have a less adverse impact on the wetland, its buffers and other critical areas. 2. Where non -water -dependent activities are proposed, it shall be presumed that alternative locations are available, and activities and uses shall be prohibited, unless the applicant demonstrates that: a. The basic project purpose cannot be accomplished as proposed and successfully avoid, or result in less adverse impact on, a wetland on another site or sites in the general region; and b. All alternative designs of the project as proposed, such as a reduction in the size, scope, configuration, or density of the project, would not avoid or result in less of an adverse impact on a wetland or its buffer. Page 46 of 100 Packet Pg. 298 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 E. Category 3411 and 44V Wetlands. Activities and uses that result in unavoidable and necessary impacts may be permitted in Category 3-III and 4IV wetlands and associated buffers in accordance with an approved critical areas report and mitigation plan. F. Wetland Buffers. 1. Standard Buffer Widths. The standard buffer widths in ECDC 23.50.040.F.1.d below have been established in accordance with best available science. The buffers are based on the category of wetland and the habitat score as determined byqualified wetland professional using the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington. a. The use of the standard buffer widths requires the implementation of the measures in ECDC 23.50.040.F.2, where applicable, to minimize the impacts of the adjacent land uses. b. If an applicant chooses not to apply the mitigation measures in ECDC 23.50.040.F.2, than a thirty three (33%) increase in the width of all buffers is required. c_The standard buffer widths presume the existence of a relatively intact native vegetation community a in the buffer zone adequate to protect the wetland functions and values at the time of the proposed activity. If the buffer is composed of nonnative vegetation, lawn, or bare ground, vegetation is r L inadequate, then, at the discretion of the director, the buffer width may be increased or an applicant may v be required to either develop and implement a wetland buffer enhancement plan to maintain the standard Cn width or widen the standard width to ensure that adequate functions of the buffer are provided.-(s-ee subseetion (F)(3) of this seetion). R.elluife-d standard wetiand bti�r-s, based on wetland eategofy, are as as max F-919MMUMAMFORIM �rMITNTMAMMIEVm d. Standard Wetland Buffer Widths Table. Minimum Buffer Buffer Buffer Width Width Buffer Width Width Wetland Wetland (Wetland scores (Wetland Wetland Category scores 3-4 scores 5 scores 6-7 8-9 habitat habitat habitatpoints) habitat points) oints points) Page 47 of 100 c Packet Pg. 299 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Category i. 75 ft 105 ft 165 ft 225 ft Based on total score Category I: Bogs and 190 ft 190 ft 190 ft 225 ft Wetlands of Hiah Conservation Value Category I: 75 ft 105 ft 165 ft 225 ft Forested Camay I. 150 ft 150 ft 150 ft 150 ft Estuarine Category 75 ft 105 ft 165 ft 225 ft Based on score Category III (allj 60 ft 105 ft 165 ft 165 ft Category V (all) 40 ft 40 ft 40 ft 40 ft 2. Required Measures to Minimize Impacts to Wetlands. The standard wetland buffer widths in ECDC v 23.50.040.F. Le assumes implementation of the following measures, where applicable to a specific proposal Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts Lights Direct lights away from wetland Noise Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland • If warranted, enhance existing buffer with native vegetation plantings adjacent to noise source • immediately adjacent to the out wetland buffer Toxic runoff Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while Page 48 of 100 Packet Pg. 300 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts ensuring wetland is not dewatered • Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 feet of wetlands • Apply integrated pest management Stormwater runoff • Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for roads and existing adjacent development • Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly enters the buffer • Use Low Impact Development techniques (per Puget Sound Action Team publication on LID techniques) Change in water regime • Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new runoff from impervious surfaces and new lawns Pets and human disturbance • Use privacy fencing OR plant dense vegetation to delineate buffer edge and to discourage disturbance using vegetation appropriate for the ecoregion Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or protect with a conservation easement Dust • Use best management practices to control dust Disruption of corridors or • Maintain connections to offsite areas that are undisturbed Restore corridors or connections to offsite habitats by replanting Page 49 of 100 Packet Pg. 301 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts connections 2. Increased Wetland Buffer Widths. The director shall require increased buffer widths in accordance with the recommendations of an experienced, qualified professional wetland scientist and the best available science on a case -by -case basis when a larger buffer is necessary to protect wetland functions and values based on site -specific characteristics. This determination shall be based on one or more of the following criteria: a. A larger buffer is needed to protect other critical areas; b. The buffer or adjacent uplands has a slope greater than 15 percent or is susceptible to erosion and standard erosion control measures will not prevent adverse impacts to the wetland; or c. The buffer area has minimal vegetative cover. In lieu of increasing the buffer width where existing r L buffer vegetation is inadequate to protect the wetland functions and values, development and v implementation of a wetland buffer enhancement plan in accordance with subsection (F)(3) of this section may substitute. d. The wetland and/or buffer is occupied by a federally listed threatened or endangered species, a bald eagle nest, a ,great blue heron rookery, or a species of local importance; and it is determined by the director that an increased buffer width is necessary to protect the species. -53. Measurement of Wetland Buffers. All buffers shall be measured from the wetland boundary as surveyed in the field. The buffer for a wetland created, restored, or enhanced as compensation for approved wetland alterations shall be the same as the buffer required for the category of the created, restored, or enhanced wetland. 64. Buffer Consistency. All mitigation sites shall have buffers consistent with the buffer requirements of this chapter. -5. Buffer Maintenance. Except as otherwise specified or allowed in accordance with this title. wetland buffers shall be retained in an undisturbed or enhanced condition. Removal of invasive nonnative weeds is required for the duration of the mitigation bond. G. Wetland Buffer Modifications and Uses 1. Where wetland or buffer alterations are permitted by the City of Edmonds, the applicant shall miti _ ante impacts to achieve no not loss of wetland acreage and functions consistent with ECDC 23.50.050 and other applicable provisions of this Title. Page 50 of 100 Packet Pg. 302 Attachment A City of Edmonds - City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas - April 26, 2016 2. At the discretion of the Director, standard wetland buffers may be averaged or reduced when consistent with all criteria in ECDC 23.50.040.G. Wetland buffer averaging with enhancement shall be preferred over wetland buffer reduction with enhancement. Wetland buffer reduction shall only be approved by the director when buffer averaging cannot be accomplished on -site. 43. Wetland Buffer Width Averaging with Buffer Enhancement. The director may allow modification of a standard or r wetland buffer width in accordance with an approved critical areas report and the best available science on a case -by -case basis by averaging buffer widths. Any allowance for averaging buffer widths shall only be granted concomitant to the development and implementation of a wetland buffer enhancement plan for areas of buffer degradation. Only those portions of a wetland buffer existing within the project area or subject parcel shall be considered the total standard er -buffer for buffer averaging. Averaging of buffer widths may only be allowed where a qualified professional wetland scientist demonstrates that: a. The buffer averaging and enhancement plan provides evidence that wetland functions and values will be: i. Increased or retained through plan implementation for those wetlands where existing buffer vegetation _ is generally intact; or ii. Increased throuizh elan implantation for those wetlands where existing buffer vegetation is inadeauate v to protect the functions and values of the wetland; a. It will not reduee the function and value of wetlands or associated buff-ers; a� b. The wetland contains variations in sensitivity due to existing physical characteristics or the character of the buffer varies in slope, soils, or vegetation, and the wetland would benefit from a wider buffer in places and would not be adversely impacted by a narrower buffer in other places; c. The total area contained in the buffer area, or the total buffer area existing on a subject parcel for wetlands extending off -site, after averaging is no less than that which would be contained within a standard ,-edu e buff r; and d. The buffer width at any single location is not reduced to4e&s4hanby more than twenty-five percent 25% 50-percent of the standard er - buffer width. 34. Buffer Width Reductions Thfeughthrouh Buffer Enhancement. At the discretion of the Edmonds development set-viees director, and only when buffer averaging cannot be accomplished on site, wetland buffer width reductions (or approval of standard buffer widths for wetlands where existing buffer conditions require increased buffer widths) may be granted concomitant to the development and implementation of a wetland buffer enhancement plan for Category 3-III and 4-IV wetlands only. Approval of a wetland buffer enhancement plan shall, at the discretion of the director, allow for wetland buffer width reductions by no more than twenty-fivepercent 25% to no loss 50 per-eent of the standard width; provided, that: a. The plan provides evidence that wetland functions and values will be: Page 51 of 100 Packet Pg. 303 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 i. Inncreased or retained through plan implementation to at least the level ^.idea by ^ standard buffer- or- through additional for those wetlands where existing buffer vegetation is generally intact; or ii. Increased through plan implementation for those wetlands where existing buffer vegetation is inadequate to protect the functions and values of the wetland; b. The plan documents existing native plant densities and provides for increases in buffer native plant densities to no less than three feet on center for shrubs and eight feet on center for trees; c. The plan requires monitoring and maintenance to ensure success in accordance with ECDC 23.40.130(D); and d. The plan specifically documents methodology and provides performance standards for assessing iner-eases in wetland btt r- ftmetioni g as relate including but not limited to: i. Water- quality „roteet o Percent vegetative cover; ii. Provision ofwildlife h.,b; ercent invasive species cover; iii. Maintenance of wetiand h.,arolen.,Species richness; and �? o� iv. Restr4eting wetland ifitndsion and distwbaneeAmount of large woody debris. - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - NO 8. Buffer Uses. The following uses may be permitted within a wetland buffer in accordance with the review procedures of this title; provided, they are not prohibited by any other applicable law and they are conducted in a manner so as to minimize impacts to the buffer and adjacent wetland: a. All activities allowed by ECDC 23.50.020 (Allowed activities — wetlands). b. Conservation and Restoration Activities. Conservation or restoration activities aimed at protecting the soil, water, vegetation, or wildlife. Page 52 of 100 Packet Pg. 304 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 bc. Passive Recreation. Passive recreation facilities designed and in accordance with an approved critical area report, including: i. Walkways and trails; provided, that those pathways are generally constructed with a surface that does not interfere with substrate permeability-, are generally located only in the outer twenty-fivepercent (25%) of wetland buffers, and are located to avoid removal of significant trees. Where existing lega11X established development has reduced the width of the wetland buffer, trails may be placed in the outer twenty-fivepercent (25%) of the remaining wetland buffer. The trail shall be no more than five (5 feet in width and for pedestrian use only.Raised boardwalks utilizing nontreated pilings may be acceptable_ The director may allow trails within the inner twenty-five percent (25%) of wetland buffers when required to provide access to wildlife viewing structures, fishing access areas, or connections to other trail facilities; ii. Wildlife viewing structures; and iii. Fishing access areas down to the water's edge that shall be no larger than six feet. c. Storm Water Management Facilities. Storm water management facilities, limited to outfalls, pipes and conveyance systems, storm water dispersion outfalls and bioswales, may be allowed within the outer 25 percent of a standard or modified buffer for Category 3 or 4 wetlands only; provided, that: i. No other location is feasible; and ii. The location and function of such facilities will not degrade the functions or values of the wetland. a) iii. Storm water management facilities are not allowed in buffers of Category 1 or 2 wetlands. iv. Projects shall also comply with all applicable requirements in Chapter 18.30 ECDC, Stormwater Management, including Minimum Requirement #8, Wetland Protection. 4 H. Signs and Fencing of Wetlands. 1. Temporary Markers. The outer perimeter of the wetland or buffer and the limits of those areas to be disturbed pursuant to an approved permit or authorization shall be marked in the field in such a way as to ensure that no unauthorized intrusion will occur and is subject to inspection by the director prior to the commencement of permitted activities. The director may require the use of fencing to protect wetlands from disturbance and intrusion. Temporary marking shall be maintained throughout construction and shall not be removed until permanent signs, if required, are in place. 2. Permanent Signs. As a condition of any permit or authorization issued pursuant to this chapter, the director may require the applicant to install permanent signs along the boundary of a wetland or buffer. a. Permanent signs shall be made of an enamel -coated metal face and attached to a metal post or another nontreated material of equal durability. Signs must be posted at an interval of one per lot or every 50 feet, whichever is less, and must be maintained by the property owner in perpetuity. The sign shall be worded as follows or with alternative language approved by the director: Page 53 of 100 Packet Pg. 305 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Protected Wetland Area Do Not Disturb Contact the City of Edmonds Regarding Uses and Restrictions b. The provisions of subsection (G)(2)(a) of this section may be modified as necessary to assure protection of sensitive features or wildlife. 3. Permanent Fencing. Permanent fencing shall be required at the outer edge of the critical area buffer under the following circumstances, provided that the director may waive this requirement: a. As part of any development proposal for single-family plats, single-family. s�plats, multifamily, mixed use, and commercial development where the director determines that such fencing is necessary to protect the functions of the critical area, provided that breaks in permanent fencing may be allowed for access to permitted buffer uses (ECDC 23.50.040.G.8); b. As part of development proposals for parks where the adjacent proposed use is active recreation and r L the director determines that such fencing is necessary to protect the functions of the critical area; �? o� c. When buffer averagingis s employ e�part of a development proposal; d. When buffer reductions are employed as part of a development proposal; or e. At the director's discretion to protect the values and functions of a critical area. FIL Additions to Structures Existing Within Wetlands and/or Wetland Buffers. 1_Additions to legally constructed structures existing within wetlands or wetland buffers that increase the footprint of development or impervious surfacing shall be permitted consistent with the development standards of this section. provided that a wetland and/or buffer enhancement elan is provided to mitigate for impacts consistent with this Title, and provided that all.. impacts from temporary disturbances within the critical area buffer shall be addressed through use of best management plans and buffer enhancement plantings during and following construction of the allowed alteration. Provisions for standard wetland buffers, buffer- r-eduetienthrough enhaneemen wetland buffer averaging with enhancement, and buffer reductions with enhancement require applicants to locate such additions in accordance with the following sequencing: -Ia. Outside of the standard wetland buffer; -3b. Outside of a wetland buffer averaged (with enhancement)ing per subsection (FG)(43) of this section; Page 54 of 100 Packet Pg. 306 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 -2c. Outside of a wetland buffer reduced wither enhancement) per subsection (EG)(34) of this section; 4d. Outside of the inner twenty fiv 2-5 percent 25% of the standard wetland buffer width thr-ough the use of both buffer- r-eduetien a -ad bti�r- with no more than three hundred (300)square feet of structure addition footprint within the inner fifty percent (50%) of the standard wetland buffer width, provided that enhancement is provided at a minimum three -to -one (3:1, ratio (enhancement -to -impact), e. Outside of the inner twentv five percent (25%) of the standard wetland buffer width with no more than five hundred (500)square feet of new footprint within the inner fifty percent(50%) of the standard wetland buffer width, provided that enhancement is provided at a minimum five -to -one (5:1,) ratio (enhancement -to -impact), and that stormwater low impact development (LID) techniques and other measures are included as part of the wetland / buffer enhancement plan. 2. Where meeting wetland buffer enhancement reauirements reauired by H.1. of this section would result in enhancement that is separated from the critical area due to uncommon property ownership, alternative enhancement approaches may be approved by the director. Alternative approaches could include a vegetated rain garden that receives storm runoff, replacement of existing impervious surfaces with pervious materials, or other approaches that provide ecological benefits to the adjacent critical area. o� 3. Additions to legally constructed structures existing within wetlands or wetland buffers that cannot be accommodated in accordance with the above sequencing in H.1. of this section (i.e., additions proposed 4) within a wetland or the inner 25 percent of a standard buffer width) may be permitted at the director's r_ discretion as a variance subject to review by the city hearing examiner and the provisions of ECDC 23.40.210. J. Development Proposals within the Footprint of Existing Development. New development shall be allowed within the footprint of existingdevelopment evelopment occurring within a wetland buffer, provided that the following conditions are met: 1. The footprint of existingdevelopment evelopment was legally established, and is consistent with the definition provided in ECDC 23.40.320; 2. The proposed development within the footprint of existing development is sited as far away from the wetland edge as is feasible; 3. As part of the development proposal, opportunities to reduce the footprint of existing development evelopment are implemented where such reduction would increase the buffer width adjacent to the wetland and not represent an undue burden given the scale of the proposed development. 4. The proposed development includes enhancement to the adjacent wetland and associated buffer in order to improve functions degraded by previous development; Page 55 of 100 Packet Pg. 307 Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 5. Enhancement is provided as wetland or buffer enhancement for an equivalent area of the footprint of the newly proposed development within the footprint of existingdevelopment evelopment occurring in a wetland buffer, or through an alternative approach approved by the director that restores degraded functions of the wetland and remaining buffer; and 6. Impacts from temporary disturbances within the wetland buffer shall be addressed through use of best management plans and buffer enhancement plantings during and following construction of the allowed alteration. IK. Small, hydrologically _ isolated wetlandsE�s. The director may allow small, hydrolo _ ig ca11X isolated Category 3-III or IV4 wetlands under 588one thousand- 1 000 square feet in area to be exempt from the avoidance sequencing, provisions of ECDC 23.40.120 and the wetland development standards provisions of ECDC 23.50.040.F. At the discretion of the director such wetlands may be altered, provided that pp-feevWens of this title. A wetland exemption shall granted i a submitted critical areas report and miti atg ion plan, �r *"� �� r�*��' of delineation, provides evidence that all of the following conditions are met: 1. The wetland is unless than done thousand (1,000) square feet in area; -32. The wetland does not provide significant habitat value for wildlife; aftd 3. The wetland is not adjacent to a riparian area; 4. The wetland has a score of three (3) — four (4) points for habitat in the adopted Western Washing rating system; and 5. A mitigation plan to replace lost wetland functions and values is developed, approved and implemented consistent with ECDC 23.50.050. rre!rr.��Tsssrssee!*: �!�rzt�:�stre�r�as� •2004]._ - 23.50.050 Mitigation requirements — Wetlands.P SHARE Compensatory mitigation for alterations to wetlands shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic functions. Wetland mitigation plans shall be consistent with the state Depaftment of Eeeleg Gguidelines fef-in Wetland Mitigation in Washington State —Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans (Ecologyy, 2006) and Selecting Wetland Mitigation Sites Using a Watershed Approach (Ecology, 2009)Devele„ing Freshwater- Wetlands Mitigation Plans and sals, 1994, as revised. Page 56 of 100 Packet Pg. 308 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 ............ E A. Mitigation for Lost or Affected Functions. Compensatory mitigation actions shall address functions affected by the alteration to achieve functional equivalency or improvement and shall provide similar wetland functions as those lost, except when: 1. The lost wetland provides minimal functions as determined by a site -specific function assessment, and the proposed compensatory mitigation action(s) will provide equal or greater functions or will provide functions shown to be limiting within a watershed through a formal Washington State watershed assessment plan or protocol; or 2. Out -of -kind replacement will best meet formally identified watershed goals, such as replacement of historically diminished wetland types. o� GB. Preference of Mitigation Actions. Mitigation actions that require compensation by replacing, enhancing, or substitution shall occur in the following order of preference: 1. Implementing compensatory restoration through purchase of credits at an approved mitigation bank or through payment into an approved in lieu fee program. -12. Restoring (re-establishing) wetlands on upland sites that were formerly wetlands. -23. Creating wetlands on disturbed upland sites such as those with vegetative cover consisting primarily of nonnative, introduced species. This should only be attempted when there is a consistent source of hydrology and it can be shown that the surface and subsurface hydrologic regime is conducive for the wetland community that is being designed. 4. Enhancing significantly degraded wetlands in combination with restoration or creation. Such enhancement should be part of a mitigation package that includes replacing the impacted area meeting appropriate ratio requirements. D�C. Type and Location of Mitigation. Unless it is demonstrated that a higher level of ecological functioning would result from an alternate approach, compensatory mitigation for ecological functions shall be in -kind and conducted on the site or in the vicinity of the alteration except when all of the following apply: 1. On -site opportunities do not have a high likelihood of success, after a determination of the natural capacity of the site to mitigate for the impacts. Consideration should include: anticipated wetland Page 57 of 100 Packet Pg. 309 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 mitigation replacement ratios, buffer conditions and proposed widths, hydrogeomorphic classes of on - site wetlands when restored, proposed flood storage capacity, and potential to mitigate riparian fish and wildlife impacts (such as connectivity); 2. Off -site mitigation has a greater likelihood of providing equal or improved wetland functions than the impacted wetland; -and 3. Off -site mitigation incorporates guidance from Calculating Credits and Debits for Compensatory Mitigation in Wetlands of Western Washington (Ecology Publication #10-06-011, Hruby. 2012), and -34. Off -site locations for compensatory mitigation are consistent with city of Edmonds goals for rimwatershed-wide ecological restoration. Off -site locations are selected with a preference for sites within the same basin as the impact, followed by other sites within the city. -Specific areas targeted for restoration efforts include: a. Lake -fringe wetlands and habitat areas associated with Lake Ballinger; b. Edmonds marsh; c. Yost Park wetlands; d. Good Hope wetlands; and e. Wetlands and habitat areas peripheral to anadromous fish -bearing streams:; and f. Sites available through an approved mitigation bank or in --lieu fee program. m. This list is not comprehensive and may change as the city of Edmonds identifies areas suitable for restoration and capital improvement projects consistent with goals for jurisdiction -wide habitat retention and enhancement provided in the city's comprehensive plan. ED. Mitigation Timing. Mitigation projects shall be completed with an approved monitoring plan prior to activities that will disturb wetlands. In all other cases, mitigation shall be completed immediately following disturbance and prior to use or occupancy of the activity or development. Construction of mitigation projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to existing fisheries, wildlife, and flora. EE. Mitigation Ratios. 1. Acreage Replacement Ratios. The fellewing ratios in the table below shall apply to ere r-estor-atie or re-establishment, rehabilitation, or enhancement that is in -kind, is on -site, is the same eategor-y, is timed prior to or concurrent with alteration, and has a high probability of success. These ratios do not apply to remedial actions resulting from unauthorized alterations; greater ratios shall apply in those cases. The first number specifies the acreage of replacement wetlands and the second specifies the acreage of wetlands altered. Ratios for rehabilitation and enhancement may be reduced when combined with 1:1 replacement through creation or re-establishment pursuant to Table la, Wetland Mitigation in Washington State — Part 1: Agency Policies and Guidance —Version 1, (Ecologyy Page 58 of 100 Packet Pg. 310 Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Publication #06-06-1 la, or as revised). Creation, re-establishment, rehabilitation, and enhancement definitions are provided in ECDC 23.40.320 (see definition for "compensatory mitigation", and shall be additionally consistent with intent pursuant to Ecology Publication #06-06-1 la.: e. Category 3: two to one-, Category and Tyne of Wet/and Creation or Re - establishment Rehabilitation Enhancement only only Category IV 1.5:1 3:1 6:1 Category III 2:1 4:1 81 Category II 3:1 6:1 12:1 Category I: Based on functions 4:1 8:1 16:1 Category I: Mature and old growth forest 6:1 12:1 24:1 Category I: High conservation Not considered Not considered Not considered possible possible possible value / Boq Mitigation requirements may also be determined using the credit/debit tool described in Calculating Credits and Debits for Compensatory Mitigation in Wetlands of Western Washington: Final Report (Ecology Publication #10-06-011, Olympia, WA, March 2012, or as revised) if gpproved by the director. 2. Off -site Mitigation. - These ratios provided in ECDC 23.50.050.F.1. do not apply to off -site mitigation, _ including4he use of credits from a state -certified wetland mitigation bank or payment to a certified in - lieu fee program. When off -site mitigation is proposed, or when ^redits from armed mitigation bank Page 59 of 100 Packet Pg. 311 Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 or in lieu fee program isafe used, replacement ratios mayshou-M incorporate guidance from Calculating Credits and Debits for Compensatory Mitigation in Wetlands of Western Washington (Ecology Publication #10-06-011, Hruby. 2012), and for mitigation banks or in lieu fee program should be consistent with the certification requirements ef the bmk's eet4i fie fie . Use of mitigation banks shall meet all requirements of ECDC 23.50.050.H.The firs* number- oeifies the ae of r-eplaeemen -23. Increased Replacement Ratio. The director may require increased compensatory mitigation ratios under the following circumstances: a. Uncertainty exists as to the probable success of the proposed restoration or creation; b. A significant period of time will elapse between impact and replication of wetland functions; c. Proposed mitigation will result in a lower -category wetland or reduced functions relative to the wetland being impacted; or d. The impact was an unauthorized impact. G. Wetlands Enhancement as Mitigation. 1. Impacts to wetland functions may be mitigated by enhancement of existing significantly degraded wetlands, but may, at the discretion of the director, be used in conjunction with restoration and/or creation. Applicants proposing to enhance wetlands must produce a critical areas report that identifies how enhancement will increase the functions of the degraded wetland and how this increase will adequately mitigate for the loss of wetland area and function at the impact site. An enhancement must also show whether existing wetland functions will be reduced b the enhancement proposal g Y 0 o actions. 2. At a minimum, enhancement acreage shall be double the acreage required for creation or restoration under subsection F of this section. The ratios shall be greater than double the required acreage where the enhancement proposal would result in minimal gain in the performance of wetland functions and/or result in the reduction of other wetland functions currently being provided in the wetland. 3. Mitigation ratios for enhancement in combination with other forms of mitigation shall range from six - to -one to three -to -one and be limited to Class 3 and 4 wetlands. H. Wetland Mitigation Banks and In --Lieu Fee Programs. 1. Wetland Mitigation Banks. Credits from a wetland mitigation bank may be approved for use as compensation for unavoidable impacts to wetlands when: a. The bank is certified under state rules; b. The director determines that the wetland mitigation bank provides appropriate compensation for the authorized impacts; and Page 60 of 100 Packet Pg. 312 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 c. The proposed use of credits is consistent with the terms and conditions of the bank's certification instrument. d. Replacement ratios for projects using bank credits mare consistent with replacement ratios specified in the bank's certification. e. Credits from a certified wetland mitigation bank are used to compensate for impacts located within the service area specified in the certified bank instrument. In some cases, the service area of the bank may include portions of more than one adjacent drainage basin for specific wetland functions. 32. In --Lieu Fee Programs. As an alternative to on -site or other off -site mitigation pproaches, the director may previ 1egpprove purchase of credit for compensatory �. mitigation from an in lieu fee program. An.. such used to compensate for direct wetland impacts shall be developed and approved throu_hg_a public process and be consistent with federal rules, c state policy on in lieu fee mitigation and state water quality regulations, Determiningcredit redit purchase necessary to compensate for wetland impacts shall incorporate guidance from Calculating Credits and Debits for Compensatory Mitigation in Wetlands of Western Washington (Ecology Publication #10-06- 011, Hruby. 2012). Development proposals impacting critical areas and/or associated buffers maX a contribute payment towards an identified City of Edmonds mitigation project with approval from the director, provided that the mitigation meets all state and federal permit requirements, where r L required. vwhieh shall be, at a fiiiniffr&m, equal to the eest of designing, developing, implemeating and menitofing in kind ^ ^ ator-y mitigation on to ^ in the „ eet viei„ t* -.-Applicant provision of funds for compensatory mitigation shall only be approved if: c a. The director determines that it would provide environmentally ppropriate compensation for the proposed wetland impacts; effo14S; b. The mitigation will occur on a site identified using the site selection and prioritization process in the approved in --lieu fee program instrument or at a City -identified restoration site consistent with ECDC23.40.140 with the pr-evisions and faties of this title; c. A restoration area and plan have been identified and shall be implemented within three years of project development; d. Restoration efforts are focused in those areas identified in subsection (T"«` of this section and areas identified as suitable for restoration by the director; and e. Credits from an approved in --lieu fee program may be used to compensate for impacts located within the service area specified in the approved in --lieu fee instrument. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Page 61 of 100 Packet Pg. 313 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 23.50.060 Performance standards — Subdivisions.13 SHARE The subdivision and short subdivision of land in wetlands and associated buffers is subject to the following: A. Land that is located wholly within a wetland or its buffer may not be subdivided. B. Land that is located partially within a wetland or its buffer may be subdivided; provided, that an accessible and buildable contiguous portion of each new lot is located outside of the wetland and its buffer. C. Access roads and utilities serving the proposed subdivision may be permitted within the wetland and associated buffers only at the discretion of the director. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part V. City of Edmonds Wetland Field Data Form 23.50.070 Wetland field data form.0 SHARE The eity ofEdmonds-wetland field data used for completion of wetland ratings shall be consistent with the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology v Publication # 14-06-029: Hrubv 2014).E fm is available in the eity of Edmonds de ve ^3m ent sepviees Figure 23.50.000 - [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. o� Page 62 of 100 Packet Pg. 314 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 CITY OF EDMONDS CRITICAL AREAS Critical Areas Compliance Requirements* Wetlands wetland nr?v Wetland Reconnais• Reconnaissance Wetland belineatiun giff" Impacts cannot NffurAmai�mr uffer — belccated sanceREQuIRED ta detemInes that REQilIREStoidentify annar+.ntiand be avoided on or near determine ifpotential jurisdictional wetland bound atic �nt throughSubject Plan wetland rneets ju risdic- wetland exist andclassify wetland standard buffer o prove parcel- LlonaI criteria and is within 22.5 ft of per updated Increase located within 2254of subject parcel. categories. nctions subject parcel. es. Butter wiEih rMuciien th rpu��n hor.�mc�t [:a agury3a�4+ Wetland Buller Recon n ai5sa nce identifies Wetland impacts are p;,�ni.�gaaarwap ihattcemcrrc Plan well an d is not j urisd fiction a l avendPd thfougn EQIHREh top rove (and ju rlsd lttlon a l determl- standard buffer Mention or Inc rease nation is confirmed by the widths for wetiand in wetland functions; U,& Army Gor ps of category. a nd va lues. Engineers); or reconnais- sance identifies th at wetland Is located � 225It P Wetland Buffer from subjectparcel . No additional woe V m f"'' Mitigation Plan maaaron Qv RE IRED Per compliance J u pd a led ccd a req ui re- requ iremen ts, ment5 to prove 'ten lion or increase No additlonaI of wetland functions compliance :aod imlu�, l requirements. Nearing Examiner imi—tscar rot to EQUOR Ea on ly for va ri a nees nie®�ue projects for wh[chimpacis n not be miligat�d to retain well and functions and values. WPM -1ii hemen[s may hP rent thmueh subMIM1011 nl a slnele nd[ral area rP. n rrt or midtlplo roparts In fnm6lnatlnn. Page 63 of 100 No additional compliance required. No additional compliance required. No additional compliance required. Packet Pg. 315 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 CITY OF EDMONDS CRITICAL AREAS Critical Areas Compliance Requirements* Wetlands �. il•r I �: Hed+nJ Hrwnn.nwxr Rr.,•nnar..J n.r ► pdino.eien i�nlvy.,n�,,,,,, iJJmonJ r_riliuf ••..I...I. y "t;IHEIsn..trrrnnlnr ,kemnmrath.! � RWIAW P y n.ok'C11 :. iiwNpsirt I'•• ' I.� •• i!I'r'rrnti+! r+},.ewwi-CCla J itlmlilywolurJ 0r'.1 r.I 1' REQ IRDIENT to 1•Lr+.1Jnr;m+! "Ut,J nlrtle nn •irhm :Un rt •.r bvurwluler and I.rurr rerntk. of wor�li+rrcr lunw awri+!cntene �yj sul•i. •+r.Yl. dwity-VIIm.J it• fun:ann-40 r400; tnluirrmrrots. is;ucmed a Ili,In NO It of nldrt.d Ihr..0+, mw kl,, wt,lhl {�arcri. i.,rne• �r In Wrdurd lrRer k'aArrrcemrwd Play No +Jdrt.•,,.I 1![.'onFWAU CJrrann nlrt IYEQLRATUr., pw".. wrtlrnd is not nu+sJKa wl rrrrntkr �K must' cwnptinwe M n I timed r 'QD It fmm In wct4nd lummom eryuieemmn. +nd taiuet. wMtre rynrl. .. �.trl. _. wa4"d Mil#w lair �n�f.hrmnal r' MisREQUIKEU Tiu+Sdriiunal wm lian:e prr tr�Aasrd.,rJe .. .14... rrymrcmni^. ,r n I n rryuirrmrnit. � p r+ cr !v„re Menskm a rr yaarrneola m�rrax o1 w,relanJ Mq•r. n .+nnw !. requirements may be met through submission of a single critical area report or multiple reports in combi Page 64 of 100 Packet Pg. 316 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Chapter 23.60 CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS Sections: Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.60.010 Critical aquifer recharge areas designation. Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.60.010 Critical aquifer recharge areas designation.0 SHARE Critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs) are those areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water as defined by WAC 365-190-030(2). CARAs have prevailing geologic conditions associated with infiltration rates that create a high potential for contamination of ground water resources or contribute significantly to the replenishment of ground water. CARAs are protected as critical areas under the Washington State Growth Management Act. However, no areas meeting criteria for CARAs exist in the vicinity of the city of Edmonds. Thus, additional specific provisions for protection of this critical area type are not provided within this title. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Page 65 of 100 Packet Pg. 317 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Chapter 23.70 FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS Sections: Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.70.010 Designation, rating and mapping —Frequently flooded areas. Part IL Additional Report Requirements — Frequently Flooded Areas 23.70.020 Special study and report requirements — Frequently flooded areas. 23.70.030 Warning and disclaimer of liability. Part III. Development Standards — Frequently Flooded Areas 23.70.040 Development standards — Frequently flooded areas. Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping �? o� 23.70.010 Designation, rating and mapping — Frequently flooded areas. SHARE A. Frequently Flooded Areas. Frequently flooded areas shall include: 1. Those areas identified on FEMA flood insurance maps as areas of special flood hazard, which include those lands in the floodplain subject to a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. For the purposes of this title, areas of special flood hazard for the city of Edmonds are hereby declared generally to be those areas shown as Zone A (including Zones A, AE, Al—A30, AH, AO, AR and A99) and Zone V (including Zones V and YE Ion the following FEMA maps or panels: 53061C00; 5306IC1292 E, Panel 1292; 53061C1285 E, Panel 1285; 5306IC1315 E, Panel 1315; and 5306IC1305 E, Panel 1305. The following maps and panels were revised and effeetive on jafmafy 30, 1999, and such inaps and panels are adepted by this referenee as a part of this ehapter as if ful1y-s-e4 f i*' n.The city will use the most currently adopted FEMA maps in determining whether a propertX is located within a frequently flooded area. Base flood elevations and flood hazard factors for those areas shown as Zone A on the map have not been determined and the local flood management administrator shall utilize such other data as may be reasonably available from federal, state or other sources in administering this chapter as provided in the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19. 2. Those areas identified as frequently flooded areas on the city of Edmonds critical areas inventory. Identified frequently flooded areas are consistent with and based upon designation of areas of special flood hazard on FEMA flood insurance maps as indicated above. Page 66 of 100 Packet Pg. 318 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 B. City Discretion and Designation. Flood insurance maps and the city's critical areas inventory are to be used as a guide for the city of Edmonds development services department, project applicants and/or property owners, and the public and should be considered a minimum designation of frequently flooded areas. As flood insurance maps may be continuously updated as areas are reexamined or new areas are identified, newer and more restrictive information for flood hazard area identification shall be the basis for regulation. The city of Edmonds shall retain the right to designate and identify areas known to be prone to flooding outside of the 100-year floodplain and subject them to the provisions and protections of this title and the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part II. Additional Report Requirements — Frequently Flooded Areas 23.70.020 Special study and report requirements — Frequently flooded areas. s"pE In addition to the general critical areas report requirements of ECDC 23.40.090, critical areas reports for frequently flooded areas must meet the requirements of this section and the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19. Critical areas reports for two or more types of critical areas must meet the report requirements for each relevant type of critical area. A. Preparation by a Qualified Professional. A frequently flooded areas report shall be prepared by a �? qualified professional who is a hydrologist or engineer, licensed in the state of Washington, with experience in preparing flood hazard assessments. Pursuant to ECDC 23.40.090(A), applicants may choose one of the qualified technical consultants on the city's approved list in preparing critical areas reports for frequently flooded areas, or may utilize an alternative consultant. Critical areas studies and reports developed by an alternative consultant shall be subject to independent review pursuant to ECDC E 23.40.090(B). p` B. Areas to Be Addressed. The following areas shall be addressed in a critical areas report for frequently flooded areas: 1. The site area of the proposed activity; 2. All areas of a special flood hazard area, as indicated on the flood insurance map(s), within 200 feet of the project area; and 3. All other flood areas indicated on the flood insurance map(s) within 200 feet of the project area. C. Flood Hazard Assessment. A critical area report for a proposed activity within a frequently flooded area shall contain a flood hazard assessment including the following site- and proposal -related information at a minimum: 1. Site and Construction Plans. A copy of the site and construction plans for the development proposal showing: Page 67 of 100 Packet Pg. 319 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 a. Floodplain (100-year flood elevation), 10- and 50-year flood elevations, floodway, other critical areas, buffers, and shoreline areas; b. Proposed development, including the location of existing and proposed structures, fill, storage of materials, and drainage facilities, with dimensions indicating distances to the floodplain; c. Clearing limits; and d. Elevation of the lowest floor (including basement) of all structures, and the level to which any nonresidential structure has been floodproofed. 2. Watercourse Alteration. Alteration of natural watercourses shall be avoided, if feasible. If unavoidable, a critical areas report shall include: a. Extent of Watercourse Alteration. A description of and plan showing the extent to which a watercourse will be altered or relocated as a result of a proposal; b. Maintenance Program Required for Watercourse Alterations. A maintenance program that provides maintenance practices for the altered or relocated portion of the watercourse to ensure that the flood - carrying capacity is not diminished. D. Information Regarding Other Critical Areas. Potential impacts to wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat, and other critical areas shall be addressed in accordance with the applicable sections of this title. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.70.030 Warning and disclaimer of liability.0 SHARE The degree of flood protection required by this chapter and the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19, is considered reasonable for regulatory purposes and is based on scientific and engineering considerations. Larger floods can and will occur on rare occasions. Flood heights may be increased by manmade or natural causes. This chapter does not imply that land outside frequently flooded areas or uses permitted within such areas will be free from flooding or flood damages. This chapter shall not create liability on the part of the city of Edmonds, any officer or employee thereof, or the Federal Insurance Administration for any flood damages that result from reliance on this chapter or any administrative decision lawfully made hereunder. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part III. Development Standards — Frequently Flooded Areas 23.70.040 Development standards — Frequently flooded areas-0 SHARE Development standards and provisions for protection of frequently flooded areas are provided as applicable to areas of special flood hazard in the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19. Conformance with the provisions for flood hazard reduction of the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19, shall constitute conformance with ECDC 23.40.050, Page 68 of 100 Packet Pg. 320 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 Protection of critical areas, per the mandates of the Washington Growth Management Act and the purposes and objectives of this title. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Chapter 23.80 GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS Sections: Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.80.000 Geologically hazardous areas compliance requirements flowchart. 23.80.010 Designation, rating and mapping —Geologically hazardous areas. 23.80.020 Designation of specific hazard areas. 23.80.030 Mapping of geologically hazardous areas. Part II. Allowed Activities — Geologically Hazardous Areas 23.80.040 Allowed activities — Geologically hazardous areas. u; Part III. Additional Report Requirements — Geologically Hazardous Areas 23.80.050 Special study and report requirements — Geologically hazardous areas. Part IV. Development Standards — Geologically Hazardous Areas 23.80.060 Development standards — General requirements. 23.80.070 Development standards — Specific hazards. Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.80.000 Geologically hazardous areas compliance requirements flowchartA SHARE See Figure 23.80.000 at the end of this chapter. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.80.010 Designation, rating and mapping — Geologically hazardous areas.0 SHARE Geologically hazardous areas include areas susceptible to erosion, land sliding, earthquake, or other geological events. They pose a threat to the health and safety of citizens when incompatible Page 69 of 100 Packet Pg. 321 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 development is sited in areas of significant hazard. Such incompatible development may not only place itself at risk, but also may increase the hazard to surrounding development and use. Areas susceptible to one or more of the following types of hazards shall be designated as a geologically hazardous area: A. Erosion hazard; B. Landslide hazard; and C. Seismic hazard. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.80.020 Designation of specific hazard areas. SHRRE A. Erosion Hazard Areas. Erosion hazard areas are at least those areas identified by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service as having a "moderate to severe," "severe," or "very severe" rill and inter -rill erosion hazard. Erosion hazard areas are also those areas impacted by shoreland and/or stream bank erosion. Within the city of Edmonds erosion hazard areas include: 1. Those areas of the city of Edmonds containing soils that may experience severe to very severe erosion hazard. This group of soils includes, but is not limited to, the following when they occur on slopes of 15 percent or greater: a. Alderwood soils (15 to 25 percent slopes); b. Alderwood/Everett series (25 to 70 percent slopes); as c. Everett series (15 to 25 percent slopes); 2. Coastal and stream erosion areas which are subject to the impacts from lateral erosion related to moving water such as stream channel migration and shoreline retreat. 3-2. Any area with slopes of 15 percent or greater and impermeable soils interbedded with granular soils and springs or ground water seepage; and 4-3. Areas with significant visible evidence of ground water seepage, and which also include existing landslide deposits regardless of slope. B. Landslide Hazard Areas. Landslide hazard areas are areas potentially subject to landslides based on a combination of geologic, topographic, and hydrologic factors. They include areas susceptible because of any combination of b soil, slope (gradient), slope aspect, structure, hydrology, or other factors. Within the city of Edmonds potential landslide hazard areas speeifieally include: 1. Areas of ancient or historic failures in Edmonds which include all areas within the earth subsidence and landslide hazard area as identified in the 1979 report of Robert Lowe Associates and amended by the 1985 report of GeoEngineers, Inc. and further discussed in the 2007 report by Landau Associates; Page 70 of 100 Packet Pg. 322 Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 2. Coastal areas mapped as class a (unstable), ups (unstable old slides), and urs (unstable recent slides) in the Department of Ecology Washington coastal atlas; 3. Areas designated as quaternary, steps, earthflows, mudflows, or landslides on maps published by the United States Geological Survey or Washington State Department of Natural Resources; Figure 1 Simple Slope Calculation The slope calculation guidance shall be used to determine the toe and top of% slope for slopes that are potentially landslide hazard areas or potentially erasion hazard areas. Toe and top of landslide hazard areas (generally slopes of 40% or greater) delineated where incline reverses or diminishes to <40Vo over at least 10 feet of horizontal distance. Toe and top of erosion hazard areas (generally slopes 15.40 %) delineated where incline reverses or diminishes to <15%over at Ipast 10 fppt of hnri7nntal rlidanrp WO% slop, hazard are slope (era! a reaj over rri n 10 ft. 101 Top of Slope r V (Vertical Rise) % Slope = x 100% H QiorizontalRun) Note: Steps, grad! entchanges, and incline reversals o r brea ks b e low percent slopes dellning landslide hazard areas (40%) and erasion hazard areas (15%) shall he included as part of the larger slope. Page 71 of 100 Packet Pg. 323 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Simple Slope Calculation Toe and top a ndsllde hazard areas (slopes of 40% or greater) delineate where incline reverses or diminishes to <40% over at leasNO feet of horizontal distance. Toe and top of erosion ha areas (slopes 15-40%) delineated where incline revertals,or diminishes to <15% over at least 10 feet of horizontal N Canoe. M Toe of Slope #* {pol to of Slope <40%dDpe (Iand sllde 1i�m�dam) or "5% 1---401 awe(Gmk>n hazard OM) Owr MPO. 1 oft. AV H IL landa'de %, slope f tFtor�ua�n awl Run) x 10096 or el 10, hazard in. 10 lepa, grsdfenl changes and incline reversals or bnaaks be6ow percent siopcs Jelin n9 iandsirde0%) and erasion hazard areas (15%) snalI be Inpudad as part of a larger slope unless trray aretoal foot or longer 24. Any slope of forty percent (40%) or steeper that exceeds a vertical height of ten (10) feet over a twenty-five (25) foot horizontal run. Except for rockeries that have been engineered and approved b, the engineer as having been built according to the engineered design, all other modified slopes (including slopes where there are breaks in slopes) meeting overall average steepness and height criteria should be considered potential landslide hazard areas); 5. Any slope with all three of the following characteristics: a. Slopes steeper than fifteen percent (15%), b. Hillsides intersecting aeoloaic contacts with a relativelv permeable sediment overlvina a relativelv impermeable sediment; and Springsc. groundwater seepage;.0 per-eent or- steeper- and with a VeI4 relief of 10 or- more feet exeept areas eemposed of eonselidated r-eek. A slope is delineated b establishing its tee and top (as defined in Figufe 1 in subseetion (B)(1) of this seefien) and is measii by averaging the inelination over- at least 10 feet of vet4ieal r-ekef or- 25 feet of her-izental distanee. Benehes, steps and vafiations in gfadient shall be ineefpef4ed inte a lafger- slope if they do not mee Page 72 of 100 Packet Pg. 324 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds - City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas - April 26, 2016 5lvpes Extending Q!f Lots ral Top If the toe or top a slope is located off of a subject property, th it shall be delineated 200 horizontal feet from the roperty boundary or at its natural location, whiche r is closer to the subject parcel. Top Defined Here Parcel Toe Defined Here Natural T 200 ft. 200 fL-1 \ r' 36. Any area potentially unstable as a result of rapid stream incision or stream bank erosion; -ate 47. Any area located on an alluvial fan, presently subject to, or potentially subject to, inundation by debris flow or deposition of stream -transported sediments, and 8. Any slopes that have been modified by past development activity that still meet the slope triter - C. Seismic Hazard Areas. Seismic hazard areas are areas subject to severe risk of damage as a result of earthquake -induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement, soil liquefaction, lateral spreading, or surface faulting. These areas are designated as having a "high" and "moderate to high" risk of liquefaction as manned on the Liauefaction Susceatibility Man of Snohomish Countv by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources or areas located within er4ear-landslide hazard areas. satwated soils of low density, typieally in assoeiation with a shallow gr-ound water- ta [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004] . 23.80.030 Mapping of geologically hazardous areas.1-3 A. The approximate location and extent of geologically hazardous areas are shown on the city of Edmonds critical areas inventory. In addition, resources providing information on the location and extent of geologically hazardous areas in Edmonds include: Page 73 of 100 Packet Pg. 325 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 1. Washington Department of Ecology coastal zone atlas (for marine bluffs); 2. U.S. Geological Survey geologic maps, landslide hazard maps, and seismic hazard maps; 3. Washington State Department of Natural Resources seismic hazard maps for Western Washington; 4. Washington State Department of Natural Resources slope stability maps; 5. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration tsunami hazard maps; and 6. Federal Emergency Management Administration flood insurance maps. B. The critical areas inventory and the resources cited above are to be used as a guide for the city of Edmonds development services department, project applicants and/or property owners and may be continuously updated as new critical areas are identified. They are a reference and do not provide a final critical area designation. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part II. Allowed Activities — Geologically Hazardous Areas 23.80.040 Allowed activities — Geologically hazardous areas.0 SHARE The following activities are allowed in geologically hazardous areas as consistent with ECDC V_, 23.40.220, Allowed activities, Chapter 19.10 ECDC, Building Permits — Earth Subsidence and 77 Landslide Hazard Areas, and Chapter 18.30 ECDC, Storm Water Management, and do not require submission of a critical area report: A. Erosion and Landslide Hazard Areas. Except for installation of fences and as otherwise provided for in this title, only those activities approved and permitted consistent with an approved critical areas report in accordance with this title shall be allowed in erosion or landslide hazard areas. B. Seismic Hazard Areas. The following activities are allowed within seismic hazard areas: 1. Construction of new buildings with less than 2,500 square feet of floor area or roof area, whichever is greater, and which are not residential structures or used as places of employment or public assembly; 2. Additions to existing single -story residences that are 250 square feet or less; and 3. Installation of fences. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part III. Additional Report Requirements — Geologically Hazardous Areas 23.80.050 Special study and report requirements — Geologically hazardous areas. SHARE Critical area report requirements for geologically hazardous areas are generally met through submission to the director of one or more geotechnical ngreports. In addition to the general critical areas Page 74 of 100 Packet Pg. 326 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 report requirements of ECDC 23.40.090, critical areas reports for geologically hazardous areas must meet the requirements of this section and Chapters 18.30 and 19.10 ECDC as applicable. Critical areas reports for two or more types of critical areas must meet the report requirements for each relevant type of critical area. Geotechnical report(s) submitted for the purpose of critical areas review are required as necessary in addition to reports, data and other information mandated per ECDC Titles 18 and 19. Geotechnical report(s) shall be required: whenever a potential erosion hazard area or potential landslide hazard area, as mapped by Edmonds critical areas inventory or shown on other information consistent with ECDC 23.80.030, is located within 50 feet of the proposed development site; whenever a development site is located within a seismic hazard area; or when otherwise determined warranted by the director (e.g. a distance equal to the height of the slope). A. Preparation by a Qualified Professional. A critical areas report for assessing a potential geologically hazardous area shall be prepared by a geologist licensed in the state of Washington, with experience analyzing geologic, hydrologic, and ground water flow systems, and who has experience preparing reports for the relevant type of hazard. If mitigation measures are necessary, the report detailing the mitigation measures and design of the mitigation shall be prepared by an engineer licensed in the State of Washington, with experience stabilizing slopes with similar geotechnical properties. Critical areas studies and reports on geologically hazardous areas shall be subject to independent review pursuant to ECDC 23.40.090(B). B. Area Addressed in Critical Areas Report. The following areas shall be addressed in a critical areas v report for geologically hazardous areas: 1. The project area of the proposed activity; and a) 2. All geologically hazardous areas within 200 feet of the project area or that have the potential to be affected by the proposal. C. Geological Hazards Assessment. A geology hazard assessment ^r-itie ' area report for a geologically hazardous area shall include a field investigation and contain an assessment of whether or not each type of LyeoloLyic hazard identified in ECDC 20.80.020 is present or not present and if development of the site will increase the risk of landslides or erosion on or off the site. Geotechnical reports shall be prepared, stamped and signed _byqualified professional. These reports must: 1. Be appropriate for the scale and scope of the project; 2. Include a discussion of all geologically hazardous areas on the site and any geologically hazardous areas off site potentially impacted by the proposed project. If the affected area extends beyond the subject property, the geology hazard assessment may utilize existing data sources pertaining to that area; 3. Clearly state that the proposed project will not decrease slope stability or pose an unreasonable threat to persons or property either on or off site and provide a rationale as to those conclusions based on geologic conditions and interpretations specific to the project, 4. Provide adequate information to determine compliance with the requirements of ECDC Chapter 23.80; Page 75 of 100 Packet Pg. 327 Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 5. Generally follow the guidelines set forth in the Washington State Department of Licensing Guidelines for Preparing Engineering Geology Reports in Washington (2006). In some cases, such as when it is determined that no landslide or erosion risk is present, a full report may not be necessary to determine compliance with the ECDC Chapter 23.80. and in those cases a letter or abbreviated report may be provided. 6. If a landslide or erosion hazard is identified, provide minimum setback recommendations for avoiding the landslide or erosion hazard, other recommendations for site development so that the frequency or magnitude of landsliding or erosion on or off the site is not altered, and recommendations consistent with ECDC 23.80.060 and 23.80.070. I 11. 11111 MINOR !�.�rsz�r�:�:�srsss�rsss��irs� !�Ers�:�esz��ers�sa�.s:�sz�r��:eTs Page 76 of 100 T t x W yr d E s M Q Packet Pg. 328 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 D. Incorporation of Previous Study. Where a valid critical areas report has been prepared within the last five years for a specific site, and where the proposed land use activity and surrounding site conditions are unchanged, said report may be incorporated into the required critical areas report. The applicant shall submit a hazards assessment detailing any changed environmental conditions associated with the site. E. Mitigation of Long -Term Impacts. When hazard mitigation is required, the mitigation plan shall specifically address how the activity maintains or reduces the preexisting level of risk to the site and all other adjaeent-properties potentially pacted on a long-term basis (equal to or exceeding the projected lifespan of the activity or occupation). Proposed mitigation techniques shall be considered to provide long-term hazard reduction only if they do not require regular maintenance or other actions to maintain their function. Mitigation may also be required to avoid any increase in risk above the preexisting conditions following abandonment of the activity. F. Additional Technical Information Requirements for Projects within Erosion and Landslide Hazard a Areas. In addition to the basic critical areas report requirements for geologically hazardous areas provided in subsections A through E of this section, technical information for any development within r L earth subsidence and landslide hazard areas shall meet the requirements of Chapter 19.10 v ECDC and include the following information at a minimum: 1. Site Plan. The critical areas report shall include a copy of the site plan for the proposal showing: a) a. The height of slope, slope gradient, and cross-section of the project area; b. The location of springs, seeps, or other surface expressions of ground water on or within 200 feet of the project area or that have the potential to be affected by the proposal; and c. The location and description of surface water runoff features; 2. Hazards Analysis. The hazards analysis component of the critical areas report shall specifically include: a. A description of the extent and type of vegetative cover; b. A description of subsurface conditions based on data from site -specific explorations; c. Descriptions of surface and ground water conditions, public and private sewage disposal systems, fills and excavations, and all structural improvements; d. An estimate of slope stability and the effect construction and placement of structures will have on the slope over the estimated life of the structure; Page 77 of 100 Packet Pg. 329 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 e. An estimate of the bluff retreat rate or an estimate of the percent risk of landslide area expansion that recognizes and reflects potential catastrophic events such as seismic activity or a 100-year storm event; f. Consideration of the run -out hazard of landslide debris and/or the impacts of landslide run -out on down -slope properties; g. A study of slope stability including an analysis of proposed cuts, fills, and other site grading; h. Recommendations for building siting limitations; and i. An analysis of proposed surface and subsurface drainage, and the vulnerability of the site to erosion; 3. Geotechnical Engineering Report. The technical information for a project within a landslide hazard area shall include a geotechnical engineering report prepared by a licensed engineer that presents engineering recommendations for the following: a. Parameters for design of site improvements including appropriate foundations and retaining structures. These should include allowable load and resistance capacities for bearing and lateral loads, installation considerations, and estimates of settlement performance; b. Recommendations for drainage and subdrainage improvements; o� c. Earthwork recommendations including clearing and site preparation criteria, fill placement and compaction criteria, temporary and permanent slope inclinations and protection, and temporary excavation support, if necessary; and c d. Mitigation of adverse site conditions including slope stabilization measures and seismically unstable soils, if appropriate; 4. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. For any development proposal on a site containing an erosion hazard area, an erosion and sediment control plan shall be required. The erosion and sediment control plan shall be prepared in compliance with requirements set forth in Chapter 18.30 ECDC. G. Limited Report Requirements for Stable Erosion Hazard Areas. At the director's discretion, detailed critical areas report requirements may be waived for erosion hazard areas with suitable slope stability. Report requirements for stable erosion hazard areas may be met through construction documents that shall include at a minimum an erosion and sediment control plan prepared in compliance with requirements set forth in Chapter 18.30 ECDC. H. Seismic Hazard Areas. In addition to the basic critical areas report requirements for geologically hazardous areas provided in subsections A through E of this section, a critical areas report for a seismic hazard area shall also meet the following requirements: Page 78 of 100 Packet Pg. 330 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 -21. The hazards analysis shall include a complete discussion of the potential impacts of seismic activity on the site (for example, forces generated and fault displacement). 32. A geotechnical engineering report shall evaluate the physical properties of the subsurface soils, especially the thickness of unconsolidated deposits and their liquefaction potential. If it is determined that the site is subject to liquefaction, mitigation measures appropriate to the scale of the development shall be recommended and implemented. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part IV. Development Standards — Geologically Hazardous Areas 23.80.060 Development standards — General requirements.0 SHARE A. Alterations of geologically hazardous areas or associated buffers may only occur for activities that: 1. Will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent properties beyond predevelopment conditions; 2. Will not adversely impact other critical areas; 3. Are designed so that the hazard to the project is eliminated or mitigated to a level equal to or less than predevelopment conditions; and o� 4. Are certified as safe as designed and under anticipated conditions by a qualified engineer or geologist, licensed in the state of Washington. as B. Critical Facilities Prohibited. Critical facilities shall not be sited within geologically hazardous areas unless there is no other practical alternative. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.80.070 Development standards — Specific hazards.0 SHARE A. Erosion and Landslide Hazard Areas. Activities on sites containing erosion or landslide hazards shall meet the requirements of ECDC 23.80.060, Development Standards — General Requirements, and the specific following requirements: 1. Minimum Building Setback. The minimum setback shall be the distance required to ensure the proposed structure will not be at risk from landslides for the life of the structure, considered to be one hundred and twenty (120) years and will not cause an increased risk of landslides takingplaceon or off the site. Buffer "e,,uirenwnt. A setback buff-ershall be established from all edges of landslide hazard areas. The size of the setbackbuffer shall be determined by the director consistent with recommendations provided in the geotechnical report to eliminate or minimize the risk of property damage, death, or injury resulting from landslides caused in whole or part by the development, based upon review of and concurrence with a critical areas report prepared by a qualified professional. 2. Buffer Requirements. A buffer may be established with specific requirements and limitations, including but not limited to, drainage, rgradinding, irrigation, and vegetation. Buffer requirements shall be determined by the director consistent with recommendations provided in the geotechnical report to Page 79 of 100 Packet Pg. 331 Attachment A City of Edmonds - City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas - April 26, 2016 eliminate or minimize the risk of property damage, death, or injury resulting from landslides caused in whole or part by activities within the buffer area, based upon review of and concurrence with a critical areas report prepared by a qualified professional. LT,erperp.MMU • - - e�sa,; I M-1061M -23. Alterations. Alterations of an erosion or landslide hazard area, minimum building setback and/or buffer may only occur for activities for which a hazards analysis is submitted and certifies that: a. The alteration deve rmen will not increase surface water discharge or sedimentation to adjacent properties beyond predevelopment conditions; b. The alterationdeve ormer* will not decrease slope stability on adjacent properties; and c. Such alterations will not adversely impact other critical areas; 3. Design Standards within erosion and landslide hazard areas. Development within an erosion or landslide hazard area and/or buffer shall be designed to meet the following basic requirements unless it can be demonstrated that an alternative design that deviates from one or more of these standards provides greater long-term slope stability while meeting all other provisions of this title. The requirement for long-term slope stability shall exclude designs that require regular and periodic maintenance to maintain their level of function. The basic development design standards are: a. The proposed development shall not decrease the factor of safety for landslide occurrences below the limits of 1.5 for static conditions and 1.2 for dynamic conditions. If stability at the proposed development site is below these limits, the proposed development shall provide practicable approaches to reduce risk to human safety and improve the factor of safety for landsliding. In no case shall the existing factor of safety be reduced for the subject property or adjacent properties; b. Structures and improvements shall be clustered to avoid geologically hazardous areas and other critical areas; c. Structures and improvements shall minimize alterations to the natural contour of the slope, and foundations shall be tiered where possible to conform to existing topography; d. Structures and improvements shall be located to preserve the most critical portion of the site and its natural landforms and vegetation; Page 80 of 100 Packet Pg. 332 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 e. The proposed development shall not result in greater risk or a need for increased buffers on neighboring properties; f. The use of retaining walls that allow the maintenance of existing natural slope area is preferred over graded artificial slopes; and g. Development shall be designed to minimize impervious lot coverage; 4. Vegetation Retention. Unless otherwise provided or as part of an approved alteration, removal of vegetation from an erosion or landslide hazard area or related buffer shall be prohibited; 5. Seasonal Restriction. Clearing shall be allowed only from May 1 st to October 1 st of each year; provided, that the director may extend or shorten the dry season on a case -by -case basis depending on actual weather conditions, except that timber harvest, not including brush clearing or stump removal, may be allowed pursuant to an approved forest practice permit issued by the city of Edmonds or the Washington State Department of Natural Resources; 6. Point Discharges. Point discharges from surface water facilities and roof drains onto or upstream from an erosion or landslide hazard area shall be prohibited except as follows: a. Conveyed via continuous storm pipe downslope to a point where there are no erosion hazard areas �? downstream from the discharge; o� b. Discharged at flow durations matching predeveloped conditions, with adequate energy dissipation, into existing channels that previously conveyed storm water runoff in the predeveloped state; or c. Dispersed discharge upslope of the steep slope onto a low -gradient, undisturbed buffer demonstrated to be adequate to infiltrate all surface and storm water runoff, and where it can be demonstrated that such discharge will not increase the saturation of the slope; and 7. Prohibited Development. On -site sewage disposal systems, including drain fields, shall be prohibited within erosion and landslide hazard areas and related buffers. B. Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area. In addition to the requirements of this chapter, development proposals for lands located within the earth subsidence and landslide hazard area as indicated on the critical areas inventory shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter 19.10 ECDC C. Seismic Hazard Areas. Activities proposed to be located in seismic hazard areas shall meet the standards of ECDC 23.80.060, Development Standards — General Requirements. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Page 81 of 100 Packet Pg. 333 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Figure 23.80.000 CITY OF EDMONDS CRITICAL AREAS Critical Areas Compliance Requirements* Geologically Hazardous Areas Geologically Goo-Haxa Geo-Hazard assess- GeotechnicalReport Development hazardousarea REQUIRE menteoncludes REQUIREMENT to encroaches within (geo•hazard) may be ALntifyclassification and jurisdictional delineate boundaries delineated located on or near location of geohazard. geo-hazard area and extent of geo-hazard area subject parcel. located with in200ft geo-hazard area- andlorminimum of subject parcel. bu ild i n g setback, .to Geo-Hazard assessment concludes n o ju risd ic- Development avoids G e otec h n ical Re port � tionalgeo•hazard geo-hazard area and REQUI REMENT to identify located -200Rfrom required minimum design modifications and subject parcel, buildingsetbo(* mitigation sufficient to 'a buffer. avoid additional potential O risk associated with development in and i around geo-hazard areas. N o additiona I Q compliance requirements. No ad ditiona l V compliance required. No additional V compliance requirements upon implementation of geotechnical recommendations -Report requirements may be met through submission of a single critical area report or multiple reports in corn binawn. Page 82 of 100 Packet Pg. 334 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Chapter 23.90 FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION AREAS Sections: Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.90.000 Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas compliance requirements flowchart. 23.90.010 Designation, rating and mapping —Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. Part IL Additional Report Requirements — Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas 23.90.020 Special study and report requirements — Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. Part III. Development Standards — Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas 23.90.030 Development standards — General requirements. 23.90.040 Development standards — Specific habitats. �? o� Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.90.000 Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas compliance requirements flowchart.. SHARE _ See Figure 23.90.000 at the end of this chapter. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.90.010 Designation, rating and mapping — Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. SHARE A. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas in the city of Edmonds include: 1. Streams. Within the city of Edmonds streams shall include those areas where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed which demonstrates clear evidence, such as the sorting of sediments, of the passage of water. The channel or bed need not contain water year-round. Streams shall be classified in accordance with the Washington Department of Natural Resources water typing system (WAC 222-16- 030) hereby adopted in its entirety by reference and summarized as follows: a. Type S: streams inventoried as "shorelines of the state" under Chapter 90.58 RCW and the rules promulgated pursuant to Chapter 90.58 RCW; b. Type F: streams which contain fish habitat; Page 83 of 100 Packet Pg. 335 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 c. Type Np: perennial nonfish habitat streams; and d. Type Ns: seasonal nonfish habitat streams. All streams included on the inventory that are known to exist within the city of Edmonds do not meet criteria for "shorelines of the state" but contain fish habitat and, thus, meet designation criteria for Type F waters pursuant to WAC 222-16-030. However, not all Edmonds streams support anadromous fish populations or have the potential for anadromous fish occurrence because of obstructions, blockages or access restrictions resulting from existing conditions. Therefore, in order to provide special consideration of and increased protection for anadromous fish in the application of development standards, Edmonds streams shall be further classified as follows: Anadromous fishbearing streams: streams existing in whole or in part within the city of Edmonds in which anadromous fish are known to occur. As of 2004, Edmonds fishbearing streams are known to include Willow Creek, Shellabarger Creek, Shell Creek, Hindley Creek, Perrinville Creek, and Lunds Creek; and Nonanadromous fishbearing streams: streams existing in whole or in part within the city of Edmonds which do not support fish populations and do not have the potential for fish occurrence because of barriers to fish passage or lack of suitable habitat. Streams with anadromous fish occurrence were identified in the Edmonds Stream Inventory and Assessment, a 2002 report of Pentec Environmental which is incorporated by this reference as if herein set forth. The city of Edmonds advocates and encourages the removal of barriers to anadromous fish a) passage consistent with the purposes and objectives of this title. The director may provide updated r_ information on the occurrence of anadromous fish in Edmonds streams consistent with changes in existing environmental conditions. L 2. Areas with VA+ieh-which State or Federally Designated Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Species Have a Primary Association, or offer important fish and wildlife habitat within the urban environment_ a. Federally designated endangered and threatened species are those fish and wildlife species identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the NOAA Fisheries that are in danger of extinction or threatened to become endangered. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service should be consulted for current listing status. b. State -designated endangered, threatened, and sensitive species are those fish and wildlife species native to the state of Washington identified by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, that are in danger of extinction, threatened to become endangered, vulnerable, or declining and are likely to become endangered or threatened in a significant portion of their range within the state without cooperative management or removal of threats. State -designated endangered, threatened, and sensitive species are periodically recorded in WAC 232-12-014 (state endangered species) and WAC 232-12-011 (state threatened and sensitive species). The state Department of Fish and Wildlife maintains the most current listing and should be consulted for current listing status. Page 84 of 100 Packet Pg. 336 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 3. State Priority Habitats and Areas Associated with State Priority Species. Priority habitats and species are considered to be priorities for conservation and management. Priority species require protective measures for their perpetuation due to their population status, sensitivity to habitat alteration, and/or recreational, commercial, or tribal importance. Priority habitats are those habitat types or elements with unique or significant value to a diverse assemblage of species. A priority habitat may consist of a unique vegetation type or dominant plant species, a described successional stage, or a specific structural element. Priority habitats and species are identified by the state Department of Fish and Wildlife. 4. Habitats and Species of Local Importance. Habitats and species of local importance are those identified by the city of Edmonds, including but not limited to those habitats and species that, due to their population status or sensitivity to habitat manipulation, warrant protection. Habitats may include a seasonal range or habitat element with which a species has a primary association, and which, if altered, may reduce the likelihood that the species will maintain and reproduce over the long term. 4-5. Commercial and Recreational Shellfish Areas. These areas include all public and private tidelands or bedlands suitable for shellfish harvest, including shellfish protection districts established pursuant to Chapter 90.72 RCW. 56. Kelp and eelgrass beds and herring and smelt spawning areas. 6-7. Naturally Occurring Ponds Under 20 Acres. Naturally occurring ponds are those ponds under 20 v acres and their submerged aquatic beds that provide fish or wildlife habitat, including those artificial ponds intentionally created from dry areas in order to mitigate impacts to ponds. Naturally occurring ponds do not include ponds deliberately designed and created from dry sites, such as canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, temporary construction ponds, and landscape amenities, unless such artificial ponds were intentionally created for mitigation. E 79. Waters of the State. Waters of the state include lakes, rivers, ponds, streams, inland waters, underground waters, salt waters, and all other surface waters and watercourses within the jurisdiction of the state of Washington, as classified in WAC 222-16-031 (or WAC 222-16-030, depending on classification used). B. All areas within the city of Edmonds meeting one or more of these criteria, regardless of any formal identification, are hereby designated critical areas and are subject to the provisions of this title and shall be managed consistent with the best available science, such as the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's Management Recommendations for Priority Habitat and Species. Page 85 of 100 Packet Pg. 337 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 C. Mapping. The approximate location and extent of fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas are shown on the city of Edmonds critical areas inventory. Resources providing information on the location and extent of fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas incorporated into the inventory include: 1. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife priority habitat and species maps; 2. Washington State Department of Natural Resources official water type reference maps, as amended; 3. Washington State Department of Natural Resources Puget Sound intertidal habitat inventory maps; 4. Washington State Department of Natural Resources shorezone inventory; 5. Washington State Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program mapping data; 6. Washington State Department of Health annual inventory of shellfish harvest areas; 7. Anadromous and resident salmonid distribution maps contained in the habitat limiting factors reports published by the Washington Conservation Commission; and 8. Washington State Department of Natural Resources state natural area preserves and natural resource conservation area maps. o� The critical areas inventory and the resources cited above are to be used as a guide for the city of Edmonds development services department, project applicants, and/or property owners and should be continuously updated as new critical areas are identified. They are a reference and do not provide a final critical areas designation. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part II. Additional Report Requirements — Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas 23.90.020 Special study and report requirements — Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. -3StL In addition to the general critical areas report requirements of ECDC 23.40.090, critical area reports for fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas must meet the requirements of this section. Critical areas reports for two or more types of critical areas must meet the report requirements for each relevant type of critical area. A. Preparation by a Qualified Professional. A critical areas report for a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area shall be prepared by a qualified professional who is a biologist with experience preparing reports for the relevant type of habitat. Pursuant to ECDC 23.40.090(A), applicants may choose one of the qualified technical consultants on the city's approved list in preparing critical areas reports for fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, or may utilize an alternative consultant. Critical areas studies and reports developed by an alternative consultant shall be subject to independent review pursuant to ECDC 23.40.090(B). Page 86 of 100 Packet Pg. 338 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 B. Areas Addressed in Critical Areas Report. The following areas shall be addressed in a critical areas report for fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas: 1. The project area of the proposed activity; 2. All fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas and recommended buffers within 200 feet of the project area; 3. All shoreline areas, floodplains, other critical areas, and related buffers within 200 feet of the project area; and- 4. A discussion of the efforts to avoid and minimize potential effects to these resources and the implementation of mitigation/enhancement measures as required. C. Habitat Assessment. A habitat assessment is an investigation of the project area to evaluate the potential presence or absence of designated critical fish or wildlife species or habitat. A critical areas report for a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area shall contain an assessment of habitats, including the following site- and proposal -related information at a minimum: 1. Detailed description of vegetation on and adjacent to the project area and its associated buffer; 2. Identification of any species of local importance, priority species, or endangered, threatened, sensitive, or candidate species that have a primary association with habitat on or adjacent to the project area, and assessment of potential project impacts to the use of the site by the species; 3. A discussion of any federal, state, or local special management recommendations, including Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife habitat management recommendations, that have been developed for species or habitats located on or adjacent to the project area. D. Additional Technical Information Requirements for Streams. Consistent with specific development standards for Edmonds streams (ECDC 23.90.040(D)), critical areas report requirements for streams may be met, at the discretion of the director, through submission of one or more specific report types. If stream buffer enhancement is proposed to reduce a standard stream buffer width or as part of project mitigation required by the director, a stream buffer enhancement plan may be submitted to fulfill the requirements of this section. If no project impacts are anticipated and standard stream buffer widths are retained, a stream survey report, general critical areas report or other reports alone or in combination may be submitted as consistent with the specific requirements of this section. In addition to the basic critical areas report requirements for fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas provided in subsections (A) through (C) of this section, technical information on streams shall include the following information at a minimum: 1. A written assessment and accompanying maps of the stream and associated hydrologic features within 200 feet of the project area, including the following information at a minimum: a. Stream survey showing the ordinary high water mark(s); Page 87 of 100 Packet Pg. 339 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 b. Standard stream buffer boundary; c. Boundary for proposed reduced stream buffers; d. Vegetative, faunal, and hydrologic characteristics; e. Soil and substrate conditions; and f. Topographic elevations, at two -foot contours; 2. A detailed description and functional assessment of the stream buffer under existing conditions pertaining to the protection of stream functions, fish habitat and, in particular, potential anadromous fisheries; 3. A habitat and native vegetation conservation strategy that addresses methods to protect and enhance on -site habitat and stream functions; 4. Proposed buffer enhancement, if needed, including a written assessment and accompanying maps and planting plans for buffer areas to be enhanced, including the following information at a minimum: a. A description of existing buffer conditions; o� b. A description of proposed buffer conditions and how proposed conditions will increase buffer functioning in terms of stream and fish habitat protection; c. Performance standards for measuring enhancement success through a monitoring period of at least three years; and d. Provisions for monitoring and submission of monitoring reports documenting buffer conditions as compared to performance standards for enhancement success; 5. A discussion of ongoing management practices that will protect stream functions and habitat value through maintenance of vegetation density within the stream buffer. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part III. Development Standards — Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas 23.90.030 Development standards — General requirements.0 SHARE A. Alterations. A fish and wildlife habitat conservation area may be altered only if the proposed alteration of the habitat or the mitigation proposed does not degrade the quantitative and qualitative functions and values of the habitat. There are no specific development standards for upland habitats of local importance unless these areas include another critical area (streams, heron rookeries, steep slopes, etc.). City staff will review the critical areas report (ECDC 23.90.020) and work with the applicant to minimize effects or improve conditions to upland habitat. Page 88 of 100 Packet Pg. 340 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 B. Approvals of Activities. The director shall condition approvals of activities allowed within or adjacent to a habitat conservation area or its buffers as necessary to minimize or mitigate any potential adverse impacts. Conditions shall be based on the best available science and may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Establishment of buffer zones; 2. Preservation of critically important vegetation and/or habitat features such as snags and downed wood; 3. Limitation of access to the habitat area, including fencing to deter unauthorized access; 4. Seasonal restriction of construction activities; 5. Establishment of a duration and timetable for periodic review of mitigation activities; and 6. Requirement of a performance bond, when necessary, to ensure completion and success of proposed mitigation. C. Mitigation and Equivalent or Greater Biological Functions. Mitigation of alterations to fish and r L wildlife habitat conservation areas shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic and hydrologic functions �? and shall include mitigation for adverse impacts upstream or downstream of the development proposal site. Mitigation shall address each function affected by the alteration to achieve functional equivalency or improvement on a per function basis. Mitigation shall be located on -site except when demonstrated that a higher level of ecological functioning would result from an off -site location. Mitigation shall be detailed in a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area mitigation plan, which may include the following c as necessary: 1. A native vegetation planting plan; 2. Plans for retention, enhancement or restoration of specific habitat features; 3. Plans for control of nonnative invasive plant or wildlife species; and 4. Stipulations for use of innovative, sustainable building practices. D. Approvals and the Best Available Science. Any approval of alterations or impacts to a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area shall be supported by the best available science. E. Buffers. 1. Establishment of Buffers. The director shall require the establishment of temporary or permanent buffer areas for permitted activities adjacent to fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas which may result in fish or wildlife disturbance (e.g., construction, grading, etc.) when needed to protect fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. Establishment of buffers shall follow recommendations set forth by a qualified biologist in the project critical areas report. Required buffer widths shall reflect the sensitivity Page 89 of 100 Packet Pg. 341 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 of the habitat and the type and intensity of human activity proposed to be conducted nearby and shall be consistent with the management recommendations issued by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2. Seasonal and Daily Timing Restrictions. When a species is more susceptible to adverse impacts during specific periods of the year or day, seasonal restrictions on permitted activities within or adjacent to fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas may be required at the discretion of the director pursuant to recommendations set forth in a critical areas report. F. Signs and Fencing of Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. 1. Temporary Markers. The outer perimeter of the fish and wildlife habitat conservation area or buffer and the limits of those areas to be disturbed pursuant to an approved permit or authorization shall be marked in the field as required by the director in such a way as to ensure that no unauthorized intrusion will occur. This temporary marking shall be maintained throughout construction and shall not be removed until permanent signs, if required, are in place. 2. Permanent Signs. As a condition of any permit or authorization issued pursuant to this chapter, the director may require the applicant to install permanent signs along the boundary of a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area or buffer. a. Permanent signs shall be made of a metal face and attached to a metal post or another material of equal durability. Signs must be posted at an interval of one per lot or every 50 feet, whichever is less, and must be maintained by the property owner in perpetuity. The sign shall be worded as follows or with alternative language approved by the director: c Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area Do Not Disturb Contact the City of Edmonds Regarding Uses and Restriction b. The provisions of subsection (F)(2)(a) of this section may be modified by the director as necessary to assure protection of sensitive features or wildlife. 3. Fencing. a. The director shall determine if fencing is necessary to protect the functions and values of the critical area. If found to be necessary, the director shall condition any permit or authorization issued pursuant to this chapter to require the applicant to install a permanent fence at the edge of the fish and wildlife habitat conservation area or buffer, when fencing will prevent future impacts to the fish and wildlife habitat conservation area. Page 90 of 100 Packet Pg. 342 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 b. The applicant shall be required to install a permanent fence around the fish and wildlife habitat conservation area or buffer when domestic grazing animals are present or may be introduced on -site. c. Fencing installed as part of a proposed activity or as required in this subsection shall be designed so as to not interfere with species migration, including fish runs, and shall be constructed in a manner that minimizes habitat impacts. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.90.040 Development standards — Specific habitats.0 SHARE A. Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Species. 1. No development shall be allowed within a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area or buffer with which state or federally endangered, threatened, or sensitive species have a primary association, except that which is provided for by a management plan established by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife or applicable state or federal agency. 2. Whenever activities are proposed adjacent to a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area with which a state or federally endangered, threatened, or sensitive species have a primary association, such area shall a be protected through the application of protection measures in accordance with a critical areas report prepared by a qualified professional and approved by the director. Approval for alteration of land L adjacent to the fish and wildlife habitat conservation area or its buffer shall not occur prior to �? consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for animal species, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources for plant species, and other appropriate federal or state agencies. 3. Bald eagle habitat is subject to the Federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Washington State bald eagle protection rules (WAC 232-12-292) shall not be required as long as bald eagles are not listed as a State Endangered or Threatened species. Bald eagle habitat shall be pr-oteete " nt t within 800 feet of a verified nest teffitery or- eemmunal r-eest, a habitat management plan shall be developed by a Valified-ffefessional. The dir-eeter- shall verify the leeation of eagle management afeas for- eaeb proposed aetivity. Appr-oval of the aetivity shall not 3 approval of the habitat management plan by the Washington Department of Fist, and Wfldi;f. B. Anadromous Fish. 1. All activities, uses, and alterations proposed to be located in water bodies used by anadromous fish or in areas that affect such water bodies shall give special consideration to the preservation and enhancement of anadromous fish habitat, including, but not limited to, adhering to the following standards: a. Activities shall be timed to occur only during the allowable work window as designated by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for the applicable species; b. An alternative alignment or location for the activity is not feasible; Page 91 of 100 Packet Pg. 343 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 c. The activity is designed so that it will not degrade the functions or values of the fish habitat or other critical areas; d. Shoreline erosion control measures shall be designed to use bioengineering methods or soft armoring techniques, according to an approved critical areas report; and e. Any impacts to the functions or values of the fish and wildlife habitat conservation area are mitigated in accordance with an approved critical areas report. 2. Structures that prevent the migration of salmonids shall not be allowed in the portion of water bodies currently or historically used by anadromous fish. Fish bypass facilities shall be provided that allow the upstream migration of adult fish and shall prevent fry and juveniles migrating downstream from being trapped or harmed. 3. Fills, when authorized, shall not adversely impact anadromous fish or their habitat or shall mitigate any unavoidable impacts and shall only be allowed for a water -dependent use. C. Retention of Vegetation on Subdividable, Undeveloped Parcels. As a provision of this title, the a director shall require retention of a minimum of 30 percent of native vegetation on undeveloped (or M redeveloped), subdividable lands zoned as RS-12 or RS-20 per Chapter 16.10 ECDC. This standard for r L development shall apply to all undeveloped (or redeveloped), subdividable lands zoned RS-12 or RS-20regardless of the petei4ial for- designatien as a fish and wildlife habitat eensefvafien area or- other- er-itieal. v on areathat contain a landslide hazard area as defined by ECDC 23.80.020.B; a stream or stream buffer; or a wetland or wetland buffer, except for as provided in ECDC 23.90.040.C.4._This provision for native vegetation retention will provide increased protection of fish and wildlife habitat throughout the Edmonds jurisdiction, and shall be applied consistent with the following criteria: c 1. Achieving the minimum 30 percent retention reauirement for native vegetation shall be determined b assessing the existing site area that supports native vegetation. For purposes of this provision, areas that support native vegetation shall include areas dominated by plant species which are indigenous to the Puget Sound region, which reasonably could have been expected to naturally occur on the site, and within which native trees over 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH) make ua more than 40 ercent of the canopy cover. 2. The goal of 30 percent native vegetation can be met through maintaining existing native vegetation, establishing native vegetation, or a combination of both. 3. A vegetation management plan, subject to the approval of the director, is required for approval of the proposed development. 4. For undeveloped (or redeveloped), subdividable lands zoned as RS-12 or RS-20 that currently do not support any native vegetation areas meeting minimum requirements in ECDC 23.90.040.C.1, the director may waive the requirements of this provision. D. Streams. No alteration to a stream or stream buffer shall be permitted unless consistent with the provisions of this title and the specific standards for development outlined below. Page 92 of 100 Packet Pg. 344 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 1. Standard Stream Buffer Widths. Buffers for streams shall be measured on each side of the stream, from the ordinary high water mark. The following shall be the standard buffer widths for streams based upon the Washington State Department of Natural Resources water typing system and further classification based upon fish presence (fishbearing vs. nonfishbearing) for the Type F streams existing in the city of Edmonds: a. Type S: 150 feet; b. Type F anadromous fishbearing stream adjacent to reaches with anadromous fish access: 100 feet; c. Type F anadromous fishbearing stream adjacent to reaches without anadromous fish access: 75 feet; d. Type F nonanadromous fishbearing stream: 75 feet; e. Type Np: 50 feet; f. Type Ns: 2-540 feet. General areas and stream reaches with access for anadromous fish are indicated on the city of Edmonds critical areas inventory. The potential for anadromous fish access shall be confirmed in the field by a qualified biologist as part of critical areas review and determination of standard stream buffer widths. o� 2. Reduced Stream Buffer Widths. Standard stream buffer widths may be reduced by no more than -58 twenty. f�percent 25%) of the standard stream buffer width concomitant to development and implementation of a stream buffer enhancement plan approved by the director. Reduced stream buffer widths shall only be approved by the director if a stream buffer enhancement plan conclusively demonstrates that enhancement of the reduced buffer area will not degrade the quantitative and o L qualitative functions and values of the buffer area in terms of fish and stream protection and the provision of wildlife habitat. Stream buffer enhancement plans must meet the specific requirements of a ECDC 23.40.110, 23.40.120 and 23.40.130 and: a. , will pr-ovide equivalent to or- gr-ea than a star .,,.a b„ff r w itho„* o„h,,,,,.o.,..o„*The buffer enhancement plan proposed as part of buffer reduction provides evidence that functions and values in terms of stream and wildlife protections will bea,,,,ivale„t t o eater than a standard buffer without enha,,,o, en : i. Increased or retained through plan implementation for those streams where existing buffer vegetation _ is generally intact; or ii. Increased through plan implementation for those streams where existing buffer vegetation is inadequate to protect the functions and values of the stream; b. The plan documents existing native plant densities and provides for increases in buffer native plant densities to no less than three feet on center for shrubs and eight feet on center for trees; Page 93 of 100 Packet Pg. 345 Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 c. The plan requires monitoring and maintenance to ensure success for a minimum of tie -five 5 years in accordance with ECDC 23.40.130(D) and (E); and d. The plan specifically documents methodology and provides performance standards for assessing increases in stream buffer functioning as related to: i. Water quality protection; ii. Provision of wildlife habitat; iii. Protection of anadromous fisheries; iv. Enhancement of fish habitat; and v. Restricting intrusion and disturbance. 3. Stream Buffer Width Averaging with Enhancement. The director may allow modification of a a standards stream buffer width in accordance with an approved critical areas report and the best a available science on a case -by -case basis by averaging buffer widths. Any allowance for averaging buffer widths shall only be granted concomitant to the development and implementation of a buffer r L enhancement plan for areas of buffer degradation. Only those portions of a stream buffer existing within �? the project area or subject parcel shall be considered in the total buffer area for buffer averaging. Averaging of buffer widths may only be allowed where a qualified professional demonstrates that: 77 a. The buffer enhancement plan proposed as part of buffer averaging provides evidence that functions and values in terms of stream and wildlife protections will be: i. Increased or retained through plan implementation for those streams where existing buffer vegetation is generally intact; or ii. Increased through plan implementation for those streams where existing buffer vegetation is inadequate to protect the functions and values of the stream; b. The total area contained in the buffer area, or the total buffer area existing on a subject parcel for a stream extending off -site, after averaging is no less than that which would be contained within the standard buffer; bc. The buffer width at any single location is not reduced t loss than Wby more the twenty-five (25%) percent of the r-e"eed of standard width; and 4. Additions to Structures Existing within Stream Buffers. Page 94 of 100 Packet Pg. 346 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 a. Additions to legally constructed structures existing within stream buffers that increase the footprint of development or impervious surfacing shall be permitted consistent with the development standards of this chapter (ECDC 23.90.030 and this section) -,provided that a buffer enhancement plan is provided to mitigate for impacts consistent with this Title, and provided that all impacts from temporary disturbances within the critical area buffer shall be addressed through use of best management plans and buffer enhancement plantings during and following construction of the allowed alteration. Provisions for standard stream buffers, buffer- r-eduetiendffoRgh enhaneement, and stream buffer averaging with enhancement, and buffer reductions through enhancement require applicants to locate such additions in accordance with the following sequencing: ai. Outside of the standard stream buffer; bii. Outside of a stream buffer averaged (with enhancement) per subsection (D)(�3) of this section; eiii. Outside of a stream buffer reduced (with enhancement) *h,.,,,,,,h, b r ,..o, , ,;,, . per subsection (D)(�2) of this section; or div. Outside of the inner twenty five percent (25to) pereen4 of the standard stream buffer width through the ttse of both buff reduction eductio andb„ff �� e ith no more than three hundred (300) square feet r L of structure addition footprint within the inner fifty percent (50%) of the standard stream buffer width, v provided that enhancement is provided at a minimum three -to -one (3:1, ratio (enhancement -to -impact). v. Outside of the inner 25 percent of the standard stream buffer width with no more than five hundred (500)square feet of new footprint within the inner fifty percent (50%) of the standard stream buffer width, provided that enhancement is provided at a minimum five -to -one (5:1,) ratio (enhancement -to - impact), and that stormwater low impact development (LID)techniques or other measures that enhance 0 o` existing buffer condition are included as part of the stream buffer enhancement plan. $ b. Where meeting stream buffer enhancement reauirements reauired by H.1. of this section would result in enhancement that is separated from the critical area due to uncommon property ownership, alternative enhancement approaches may be gpproved by the director. Alternative approaches could include a vegetated rain garden that receives storm runoff, replacement of existing impervious surfaces with pervious materials, or other approaches that provide ecological benefits to the adjacent critical area. c_Additions to legally constructed structures existing within stream buffers that cannot be accommodated in accordance with the above sequencing (i.e., additions proposed within the inner 25 percent of a standard buffer width) may be permitted at the director's discretion as a variance subject to review by the city hearing examiner and the provisions of ECDC 23.40.210. 5. Development Proposals within the Footprint of Existing Development. New development shall be allowed within the footprint of existing development occurring within a stream buffer, provided that the following conditions are met: a. The footprint of existing development was legally established, and is consistent with the definition provided in ECDC 23.40.320; Page 95 of 100 Packet Pg. 347 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 b. The proposed development within the footprint of existing development is sited as far away from the stream edge as is feasible; c. As part of the development proposal, opportunities to reduce the footprint of existing development evelopment are implemented where such reduction would increase the buffer width adjacent to the stream and not represent an undue burden given the scale of the proposed development. d. The proposed development includes enhancement to the adjacent remaining stream buffer in order to improve functions degraded ded by previous development; e. Enhancement is provided as buffer enhancement for an equivalent area of the footprint of the newly proposed development within the footprint of existing development occurring in stream buffer, or through an alternative approach approved by the director that restores degraded functions of the wetland and remaining buffer; and f. Impacts from temporary disturbances within the stream buffer shall be addressed through use of best management plans and buffer enhancement plantings during and following construction of the allowed alteration. -56. Stream Crossings. Stream crossings may be allowed only if all reasonable construction techniques L and best management practices are used to avoid disturbance to the stream bed or bank. Upon v completion of construction, the area affected shall be restored to an appropriate grade, replanted with native species and/or otherwise protected according to a stream mitigation and buffer enhancement plan approved by the director, and maintained and monitored per the requirements of ECDC 23.40.110, a) 23.40.120 and 23.40.130 and providing for buffer enhancement in accordance with the requirements of r_ subsection (D)(2) of this section. In addition, the applicant must demonstrate that best management practices will be used during construction to provide the following: L a. Fisheries protection, including no interference with fish migration or spawning; b. All crossings shall be constructed during summer low flow periods and shall be timed to avoid stream disturbance during periods when stream use is critical to salmonids; c. Crossings shall not occur over salmonid spawning areas unless no other possible crossing site exists; d. Crossings and culverted portions of the stream shall be minimized to the extent feasible and serve multiple purposes and multiple lots whenever possible; e. Roads may cross streams only on previously approved rights -of -way, provided no practical alternative exists and adequate provision is made to protect and/or enhance the stream through appropriate mitigation. Roads shall be designed and located to conform to topography, and maintained to prevent erosion and restriction of the natural movement of ground water as it affects the stream; f. Roads and utilities shall be designed in conjunction to minimize the area of disturbance to the stream; and Page 96 of 100 Packet Pg. 348 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 g. Roads shall be constructed so as to minimize adverse impacts on the hydrologic quality of the stream or associated habitat to a degree acceptable to the city2 h. An alternative alignment or location with less impact is not feasible; and i. The crossing will be designed as near as perpendicular with the water body as possible.. 67. Trails. After reviewing the proposed development and technical reports, the director may determine that a pedestrian -only trail may be allowed in a stream buffer; provided, nonimpervioussttr€aee materials are used, all appropriate provision is made to protect water quality, and all applicable permit requirements have been met. No motorized vehicles shall be allowed within a stream or its buffer except as required for necessary maintenance or security. Vegetative edges, structural barriers, signs or other measures must be provided wherever necessary to protect streams by limiting vehicular access to designated public use or interpretive areas. -8. Storm Water Management Facilities. Storm water management facilities, limited to outfalls, pipes and conveyance systems, storm water dispersion outfalls and bioswales, may be allowed within stream buffers; provided, that: a. No other location is feasible; b. Pipes and conveyance facilities will be in the outer twenty five percent (25%) of the buffer; c. Stormwater dispersion outfalls, bioswales, and bioretention facilities may be allowed anywhere within stream buffers: c d. Such facilities are designed consistent with requirements of ECDC Chapter 18.30; and be. The location and function of such facilities will not degrade the functions or values of the stream or stream buffer. -99. City Discretion in Protection, Enhancement and Preservation of Streams. The city of Edmonds is unique within the state of Washington as a built -out community with streams that have been incorporated within, and often located immediately adjacent to, residential development. This title allows the director full discretion to condition proposals for development on parcels containing, adjacent to, or potentially impacting streams to enhance conditions consistent with ECDC 23.40.050 and the purposes and objectives of this title. Conditions on development shall be required to enhance streams and stream buffers as fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas to provide increased protection of anadromous fisheries and potential fish habitat in accordance with best available science and the recommendations of an approved critical areas report and may include: a. Removal of stream bank armoring; b. In -stream habitat modification; c. Native planting; Page 97 of 100 Packet Pg. 349 6.1.a Attachment A City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas —April 26, 2016 d. Relocation of stream channel portions to create contiguous riparian corridors or wildlife habitat; e. Planting of stream bank native vegetation to increase stream shading; f. Removal and control of nonnative, invasive weed species; g. Requiring additional building setbacks or modified buffers; and h. Limiting or reducing the types or densities of particular uses. The right of discretion in provisioning development in regard to streams is maintained in order to provide for the creation of enhanced conditions over those currently existing around streams in the city of Edmonds. In all instances where an applicant cannot demonstrate that standard stream buffer widths as provided in subsection (D)(1) of this section can be accommodated by project development, the applicant shall be required to submit a stream buffer enhancement plan or a stream mitigation and buffer enhancement plan as part of a critical areas report indicating that post -project site conditions will provide equivalent or greater protection of stream functions and fish habitat over a standard stream buffer and existing site conditions. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Figure 23.90.000 CITY OF EDMONDS CRITICAL AREAS Critical Areas Compliance Requirements` Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas ■ Fish and 4YddUile Cririul Areu R�Iran Cnt;cal AU Report 11, l I! •. Eririnl Area Reporl CriRk'JArrd Mirigrion R Eiahirdr Conorrvatioa RE4U]RL•51LN71u identihea jurisdicriooal IS4'�� DSquIREMEN7 Ln Rrporin Chides _ .1 11 11-I Arta 4LWkCA) hray rdenriep pre unrrrn dtea Wilfim2D) fi of I-M& „�,: dsar idowrald KkrnrLlr ucNnna bebmi.d on or near juriwlicLinna] E1191[h. luhjat panel. of h.11 ital sad idnnLf. FWJiC:A will liPal}• retain nr,tfir- tabjeer WA wiehin 11ir nF rnlamliil nnpw, .suliing xsulr from proien and ralucv sul,icn pun;l., Iron. pr.geri devclnpn L dnrrlopnimr. ul wildtifr hAbAaL. C.ritiwl Aeea Report repast oncIWc< conclkKW Ilo that habitat nlivna No xlsiilinn�l juridictiorml errns fr: and valets will ll not ht rnnspliancr hKotud within X0 R 4 days-d through proiocl Tequirrnunrs. sut%lm pawl. de+xlupmrnr. vn ui�itinmat No oddioianel snmpli,r, camplunen r �uirementx. requiremanlR 9Lxaam�uforEdmkiatal 9r,eem Survey REQUIRED lyen ftEQUipEII w In dnvu,l�.u�um arid 3Toi"r will nsnll dtmomtrow rtoendon of JYofrxr a•ruld, sir or in sjwnDor bllfkr anNln and buffer fuikrwns Imlwi,io strenrn wsl.TiMin uad buffer Winter "P.led L, � impacts s.ilh'rand�m --b.-aad ti'al,lesxirh reduced � huffer moirhd ihmugh wtIm-d-dlo.ffur L—JMI1111J 3-Ilawsli ills bufhrwidilm bttffcrwidrhiw5U%). bufirrwduction. wudihs. %U1HUrd.31uffr7 width. 1 Nkruldarn.nuI Noaddiliona! %tream bufferrvroging Further hurler No additlunal mimpbar— wnq&nm — allawad with odirianal d.di . ..dad 1. r,umpllanuc reyuirc lc TlrluiMmallts. buffer mhancemenl. mid huller in,lrcicm relrLJMHenrs. 'Report requirements may be met through submission of a single rri6cal area report or multiple reports in combination. Page 98 of 100 Packet Pg. 350 6.1.a Attachment B 19.00.025 International Building Code section amendments. The following sections of the IBC are hereby amended as follows: A. Section 104.3, Notices and Orders, is amended to read: The building official shall issue all necessary notices or orders to ensure compliance with this code. The building official is also authorized to use Chapter 20.110 ECDC for code compliance in addition to the remedies provided for in this code. B. Section 105.1.1, Annual Permit, is deleted. C. Section 105.1.1, Demolition Permits, is added and shall read: Before the partial or complete demolition of any building or structure (interior or exterior), a demolition permit shall be obtained from the building official. The permit fee is established pursuant to Chapter 19.70 ECDC. The applicant shall also post with the city, prior to permit issuance, a performance bond, or frozen fund, conforming to Chapter 17.10 ECDC herein, in an amount to be determined by the building official to satisfy all city requirements no later than 180 days after the issuance of the permit. The demolition performance bond or frozen fund shall not be released until the building official determines the following requirements have been completed: 1 Cap Abandoned Sanitary Sewers. Septic tanks shall be pumped, collapsed and removed and/or filled with earth, sand, concrete, CDF or hard slurry. 2 Knock Down of Concrete Foundation Walls, Porches, Chimneys and Similar Structures. V Concrete, bricks, cobbles and boulders shall be broken to less than 12-inch diameter. Debris left V- on site shall conform to IBC Section 1804.2 for clean fill. on 3 Construction debris, vegetation, and garbage attributable to the demolition shall be removed v from the site and from unopened street right-of-way within 30 days of written notice. No debris of any kind may be placed or maintained on street right-of-way (including alleys) without a c permit issued pursuant to Chapter 18.60 or 18.70 of the Edmonds Community Development E Code. A 4 Repair of any damage to, and restoration of, any public property to substantially original conditions, i.e., alley, street, sidewalk, landscaping, water meter, utilities, rockeries, retaining walls, etc, in accordance with this code and the City's engineering requirements. 5 Grading of Site Back to Original Topography Grades. Basements shall be filled and compacted to 90 percent as verified by a special inspector. "Structural fill" is defined as any fill placed below structures, including slabs, where the fill soils need to support loads without unacceptable deflections or shearing. Structural fill shall be clean and free draining, placed above unyielding native site soils and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent modified proctor, per ASTM D1557. 6 Temporary erosion control shall be installed and maintained per Chapter 18.30 ECDC. D. Section 105.1.2, Annual permit records, is deleted. E. Section 105.2, Work exempt from permit, is replaced as follows: Exemptions from permit requirements of this code shall not be deemed to grant authorization for any work to be done in any manner in violation of the provisions of this code or any other laws or ordinances of this jurisdiction. It is the applicant's responsibility to comply with bulk zoning code standards per ECDC Title 16 and storm water management provisions per Chapter 18.30 ECDC. Permits shall not be required for the following unless required by the provisions of ECDC Title 23 or limited or prohibited by the provisions of Chapter 19.10 ECDC: Page 1 of 9 Packet Pg. 351 Attachment B 1. Building (general): (a) One (1) story detached accessory structures used as tool and storage sheds, playhouses and similar uses; provided the floor area (measured to the exterior wall or post) does not exceed 120 square feet, with a maximum eave of thirty (30) inches. (b) Fences not over six (6) feet high; provided a permit is not required by Chapter 17.30 ECDC. (c) Movable cases, counters and partitions not over five (5) feet nine (9) inches high. (d) Retaining walls 4 feet (1,219 nun) in height or less measured vertically from the finished grade at the exposed toe of the retaining wall to the highest point in the wall, unless: I Supporting a surcharge; or 4) II Impounding Class I, II, III -A liquids; or Q- III Subject to the provisions of Chapter 23.50 ECDC or Chapter 23.80 ECDC. m c (e) Rockeries. L O (f) Water tanks supported directly upon grade if the capacity does not exceed 5,000 gallons and m the ratio of height to diameter or width does not exceed two (2) to one (1). Q (g) Sidewalks and driveways not more than 30 inches above adjacent grade, and not over any basement or story below and are not part of an accessible route, provided a permit is not L required by Chapter 18.60 ECDC. �? h Painting, tilin carpeting,cabinets countertops and similar finish work. () g, g, P (i) Temporary motion picture, television and theater stage sets and scenery. c 0) Shade cloth structures constructed for nursery or agricultural purposes. c (k) Prefabricated swimming pools accessory to an occupancy in which the pool walls are L O entirely above the adjacent grade and the capacity does not exceed 5,000 gallons. Hot tubs and spas less than 5,000 gallons, completely supported by the ground. (1) Grading less than fifty (50) cubic yards (placed, removed or moved within any 365-day period) unless subject to the provisions of Chapter 23.50 ECDC or Chapter 23.80 ECDC. (in) Repair of appliances which do not alter original approval, certification, listing or code. t w (n) Replacement or adding new insulation with no drywall removal or placement. (o) Replacement or repair of existing gutters or downspouts. s (p) The following types of signs are exempt from permit requirements except that dimensional Q size and placement standards shall comply with Chapter 20.60 ECDC: I. Replacing the panel on a previously permitted existing wall cabinet or pole sign, II. Repainting an existing previously permitted wood sign, III. Painted or vinyl lettering on storefront windows, IV. Governmental signs, campaign signs, official public notices, and signs required by provision of local, state, or federal law, Page 2 of 9 Packet Pg. 352 6.1.a Attachment B V. Temporary signs announcing the sale or rent of property and other temporary signs as described in ECDC 20.60.080, VI. Signs erected by the transportation authorities, and temporary seasonal and holiday displays. 2. Mechanical: (a) Portable heating, ventilation, cooling, cooking or clothes drying appliances. (b) Replacement of any part that does not alter approval of equipment or make such equipment unsafe. (c) Portable fuel cell appliances that are not connected to a fixed piping system and are not interconnected to a power grid. Q. (d) Steam, hot or chilled water piping within any heating or cooling equipment regulated by this code. c c (d) Portable evaporative cooler. =a O (f) Self-contained refrigeration systems containing ten (10) pounds or less of refrigerant or that m are actuated by motor of one (1) horsepower or less. Q 3. Plumbing: r (a) The stopping of leaks in drains, water, soil, waste or vent pipe, provided that the L �? replacement of defective material shall be done with new material and a permit obtained and inspection made. (b) Reinstallation or replacement of approved prefabricated plumbing fixtures that do not involve or require the replacement or rearrangement of valves or pipes. 4. Residential permit exemptions: In addition the following exemptions apply for single family dwellings: (a) One (1) story detached accessory structures used as tool and storage sheds, playhouses and similar uses; provided the floor area (measured to the exterior wall or post) does not exceed 200 square feet, with a maximum eave of twelve (12) inches and maximum height of fifteen (15) feet. Vehicle storage structures, such as garages and carports, are not exempted. (b) Window awnings supported by an exterior wall and do not project more than fifty-four (54) inches from the exterior wall and do not require additional support. ECDC Title 23 provisions shall not apply to such awnings. (c) Sport courts less than 2,000 square feet. (d) Dock repair of individual decking members. ECDC Title 23 provisions shall not apply. (e) Replacement or repair of existing exterior siding. ECDC Title 23 provisions shall not apply. (f) Replacement or repair of existing windows or doors provided; no alteration of structural members is required, the replacement would not require installation of safety glazing, the installation does not involve required egress windows. ECDC Title 23 provisions shall not apply- (g) Minor like -for -like drywall repairs not involving fire -rated assemblies. Page 3 of 9 Packet Pg. 353 Attachment B (h) Replacement or repair of individual decking, joists, stair treads, or intermediate rails. ECDC Title 23 provisions do not apply. (i) Uncovered platforms, decks, patios, not exceeding 200 square feet in area, that are not more than thirty (30) inches above grade at any point and do not serve the exit door required by IRC Section R311.4. 0) Canopies, as defined in ECDC 17.70.035, accessory to a single family dwelling, with a floor area measured to the exterior wall or post not to exceed 200 square feet, for covered storage, carport or similar use. (k) Reroof overlays, except that all existing layers of roofing must first be removed if the existing material is wood shake, slate, clay, cement or asbestos tile, or where the existing roof has two or more applications of any type of roofing. F. Section 105.3.2, Time limitation of permit application, is amended to read: 1. Applications, for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of application, shall expire by limitation, and plans and other data submitted for review may thereafter be returned to the applicant or destroyed by the building official. 2. The building official may extend the time for action by the applicant for a period not exceeding 180 days prior to such expiration date. 3. No application shall be extended more than once for a total application life of 360 days r except as allowed within this section. In order to renew action on an expired application, the V applicant shall submit a new application, revised plans based on any applicable code or ordinance change, and pay new plan review fees. 4. The Building Official may extend the life of an application if any of the following conditions exist: 0 (a) Compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act is in progress; or (b) Any other City review is in progress; provided, the applicant has submitted a complete response to City requests or the Building Official determines that unique or unusual circumstances exist that warrant additional time for such response and the Building Official determines that the review is proceeding in a timely manner toward final City decision; or (c) Litigation against the City or applicant is in progress, the outcome of which may affect the validity or the provisions of any permit issued pursuant to such application. G. Section 105.3.3, Fully complete application, is added and reads: In accordance with the provisions of RCW 19.27.031 and 19.27.074, an applicant's rights shall vest when a fully complete building permit application is filed. A fully complete building permit application is an application executed by the owners of the property for which the application is submitted or the duly authorized agent(s) for such owners, containing each and every document required under the terms of these ordinances and the IBC and is substantially complete in all respects. It is anticipated that minor changes or revisions may be required and are frequently made in the course of any building application review process, and such minor revisions or changes shall not keep an application from being deemed complete if a good faith attempt has been made to submit a substantially complete application containing all required components. Where required, the application and supporting documents shall be stamped and/or certified by the appropriate engineering, surveying or other professional consultants. A fully complete building permit application shall be accompanied by all required intake fees, including but not limited to plan review fees required under the provisions of this chapter and code. Page 4 of 9 Packet Pg. 354 6.1.a Attachment B H. Section 105.3.4, Concurrent review, is added and reads: An applicant may submit an application for building permit approval and request plan review services concurrently with, or at any time following, the submittal of a complete application for any necessary or required discretionary permit approval or discretionary hearing; provided, that any building permit application submitted concurrently with an application for discretionary permit or approvals shall not be considered complete unless the applicant submits a signed statement, on a form approved by the director, which acknowledges that the building permit application is subject to any conditions or requirements imposed pursuant to the review and approval of any necessary or required discretionary permit or approvals. The applicant shall solely bear the risk of building permit submittal with discretionary permit approval. If, after discretionary approval, the building permit plans are modified or amended to comply with conditions or restrictions required by any discretionary permit or approval, the applicant shall be solely responsible for any and all costs which result therefrom, including but not limited to additional full plan review fees; provided further, that any applicant -initiated changes made after the original plan review is complete shall also require payment of full plan review fees. I. Section 105.5, Permit expiration and extension, is amended to read: 1. Every permit issued under ECDC Title 19 shall expire by limitation 360 days after issuance, O except as provided in ECDC 19.00.025I(2). M m L 2. The following permits shall expire by limitation, 180 days after issuance and may not be Q extended, unless they are associated with a primary building permit for a larger construction project, in which case they may run with the life of the primary permit: L U Demolition permits; o� Permits for Moving Buildings required by Chapter 19.60 ECDC; m Mechanical permits; 0 c M Tank removal, tank fill, or tank placement permits; E L Grading, excavation and fill permits; M L Water service line permits; T Plumbing permits; Gas piping permits; Deck and dock permits; Fence permits; Re -roof permits; Retaining wall permits; Swimming pool, hot tub and spa permits; Sign permits; Shoring permits; Foundation permits. Page 5 of 9 Packet Pg. 355 6.1.a Attachment B 3. Prior to expiration of an active permit the applicant may request in writing an extension for an additional year. Provided there has been at least one (1) required progress inspection conducted by the city building inspector prior to the extension, the permit shall be extended. Permit fees shall be charged at a rate of one quarter the original building permit fee to extend the permit. 4. If the applicant cannot complete work issued under an extended permit within a total period of two (2) years, the applicant may request in writing, prior to the second year expiration, an extension for a third and final year. Provided there has been at least one (1) required progress inspection conducted by the city building inspector prior to the extension, the permit shall be extended. Permit fees shall be charged at a rate of one quarter the original building permit fee to extend the permit. 5. The maximum amount of time any building permit may be extended shall be a total of three (3) years. At the end of any three (3) year period starting from the original date of permit issuance, the permit shall become null and void and a new building permit shall be required, with full permit fees, in order for the applicant to complete work. The voiding of the prior permit shall negate all previous vesting of zoning or Building codes. Whenever an appeal is filed and a necessary development approval is stayed in accordance with ECDC 20.07.004 the time limit periods imposed under this section shall also be stayed until final decision. 6. The building official may reject requests for permit extension where he determines that Q modifications or amendments to the applicable zoning and Building codes have occurred since the original issuance of the permit and/or modifications or amendments would significantly promote public health and safety if applied to the project through the issuance of a new permit. L U J. Repealed by Ord. 3926. o� K. Section 107.3.3, Phased approval, is amended to read: v 1. The building official may issue partial permits for phased construction as part of a m development before the entire plans and specifications for the whole building or structure have c been approved provided architectural design board approval has been granted and a fully =a complete permit application for the entire building or structure has been submitted for review. O 2. Phased approval means permits for grading, shoring, and foundation may be issued separately, provided concurrent approval is granted by the planning manager, city engineer and fire marshal, when applicable. No phased approval permit shall be issued unless approved civil plans detailing the construction of all site improvements including, but not limited to: curbs, gutters, sidewalks, paved streets, water lines, sewer lines, and storm drainage have been signed as approved by the city engineer. 3. With such phased approval, a performance bond shall be posted with the city pursuant to Chapter 17.10 ECDC, to cover the estimated cost of construction to city standards for the improvements. L. Section 108, Temporary Structures and Uses, is deleted. M. Section 110.3.3, Lowest floor elevation, is amended to read: In flood hazard areas, upon placement of the lowest floor, including the basement, and prior to further vertical construction, the elevation certification required in Section 1612.5 shall be submitted to the building official. Prior to final inspection approval, the building official shall require an elevation certificate based on finished construction prepared and sealed by a State licensed land surveyor. N. Section 113, Board of Appeals, is deleted and replaced by Chapter 19.80 ECDC. Page 6 of 9 Packet Pg. 356 6.1.a Attachment B O. Section 501.2, Address Identification, is amended to read: Approved numbers or addresses shall be installed by the property owner for new and existing buildings in such a position as to be clearly visible and legible from the street or roadway fronting the property. Letters or numbers on the building shall be a minimum six (6) inches in height and stroke a minimum of .75 inch of a contrasting color to the building base color. Where public or private access is provided and the building address cannot be viewed from the public way, a monument, pole or other approved sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. This means of premises identification does not preclude approved identification also affixed to structure. P. Section 1612.1.1, Residential Structures, is added and reads: Construction or reconstruction of residential structures is prohibited within designated floodways, except for (i) repairs, reconstruction, or improvements to a structure which do not increase the ground floor area; and (ii) repairs, reconstruction or improvements to a structure, the cost of which does not exceed 50 percent of the market value of the structure either, (A) before the repair, or reconstruction is started, or (B) if the structure has been damaged, and is being restored, before the damage occurred. Any project for improvement of a structure to correct existing violations of State or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which have been identified by the local code enforcement official and which are the minimum necessary to assure safe living conditions, or to structures identified as historic places, may be excluded from the 50 percent calculation. Q. IBC section 1612.4.1, Lowest Flood Elevation, is added and reads: For buildings in all structure cateeories located in the Coastal Hieh Hazard Areas and Coastal A Flood Zones. the elevation of the lowest floor shall be a minimum of two feet above the base flood elevation, as determined from w the applicable FEMA flood hazard map_ QR. Section 3103, Temporary Structures, is deleted. RS. Section 3108.1.1, Radio, television and cellular communication related equipment and devices, is added and reads: A permit shall be required for the installation or relocation of commercial radio, television or cellular tower support structures including monopoles, whip antennas, panel antennas, parabolic antennas and related accessory equipment, and accessory equipment shelters (regardless of size) including roof mounted equipment shelters. 8T. Section 3109.1, Applicability and maintenance, is amended to read: 1. Swimming pools, hot tubs and spas of all occupancies shall comply with the requirements of this section and other applicable sections of this code. 2. It is the responsibility of the owner to maintain a swimming pool, hot tub or spa in a clean and sanitary condition and all equipment shall be maintained in a satisfactory operating condition when the swimming pool, hot tub or spa is in use. A swimming pool, hot tub or spa that is neglected, not secured from public entry and/or not maintained in a clean and sanitary condition or its equipment in accord with manufacturers recommendations shall be determined to be a hazard to health and safety and shall be properly mitigated to the satisfaction of the building official. -TU. Section 3109.3, Public Swimming Pools, is deleted. UV. Section 3109.4, Residential Swimming Pools, is deleted. VW. Section 3109.6, Location and Setbacks, is added and reads: Page 7 of 9 Packet Pg. 357 Attachment B 6.1.a Swimming pools, hot tubs and spas shall meet requirements of the zoning code of the city of Edmonds. 1. Minimum setbacks are measured from property lines to the inside face of the pool, hot tub or spa as required by the zoning code for accessory structures. 2. All other accessory buildings and equipment shall meet the normally required setbacks for accessory structures in the zone in which they are located. WX. Section 3109.7, Tests and cross -connection devices, is added and reads: 1. All swimming pool, hot tub and spa piping shall be inspected and approved before being covered or concealed. 2. Washington State Department of Health approved cross connection devices are required to be provided on potable water systems when used to fill any swimming pool, hot tub or spa. XY. Section 3109.8, Wastewater disposal, is added and reads: A means of disposal of the total contents of the swimming pool, hot tub or spa (including partial or periodic emptying) shall be reviewed and approved by the public works director. 1. No direct connection shall be made between any swimming pool, hot tub or spa to any storm drain, city sewer main, drainage system, seepage pit, underground leaching pit, or sub -soil drain. 2. A sanitary tee (outside cleanout installed on the main building side sewer line) shall be provided for draining of treated water into the city sanitary sewer system. YZ. Section 3109.9, Inspection requirements, is added and reads: The appropriate city inspector shall be notified for the following applicable inspections: 1. Footing, wall, pre -form, pre-gunite, erosion control, underground plumbing, sanitary extension and cleanout, mechanical pool equipment, gas piping, mechanical enclosure location, cross connection and final inspection. 2. An initial cross connection control installation inspection is required by the city cross connection control specialist prior to final installation approval. 3. All backflow assemblies shall be tested by state certified backflow assembly testers upon initial installation and then annually thereafter. Copies of all test reports shall be submitted to the city water division for review and approval. ZAA. Section 3403.2.1, Residential Structures, is added and reads: Construction or reconstruction of residential structures is prohibited within designated floodways, except for (i) repairs, reconstruction, or improvements to a structure which do not increase the ground floor areas; and (ii) repairs, reconstruction or improvements to a structure, the cost of which does not exceed 50 percent of the market value of the structure either, (A) before the repair, or reconstruction is started, or (B) if the structure has been damaged, and is being restored, before the damage occurred. Any project for improvement of a structure to correct existing violations of State or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which have been identified by the local code enforcement official and which are the minimum necessary to assure safe living conditions, or to structures identified as historic places, may be excluded in the 50 percent. AABB. Appendix E, Accessibility Requirements, is amended by deleting Sections E107, E108, El 10 and El 11. Page 8 of 9 Packet Pg. 358 6.1.a Attachment B 13HCC. Appendix G, Flood -Resistant Construction, is amended by addition of new section: Section G301.1(4) Where base flood elevation data has not been provided or is not available from another authoritative source, it shall be generated for subdivision proposals and other proposed developments which contain at least 50 lots or 5 acres, whichever is less. CODD. Appendix H, Signs, is amended as follows: 1. Section H101.2, Signs exempt from permits, is replaced by subsection (E)(1)(p) of this section. 2. Section H101.2.1, Prohibited signs, is added and reads as follows: a. It is unlawful for any person to advertise or display any visually communicated message, by letter or pictorially, of any kind on any seating bench, or in direct connection with any bench. d M b. All signs not expressly permitted by Chapter 20.60 ECDC. c. Signs which the city engineer determines to be a hazard to vehicle or pedestrian traffic m because they resemble or obscure a traffic control device, or pose a hazard to a pedestrian c walkway or because they obscure visibility needed for safe traffic passage. Such signs shall be 'a immediately removed at the request of the city engineer. O d. All signs which are located within a public right-of-way and that have been improperly M m Q posted or displayed are hereby declared to be a public nuisance and shall be subject to immediate removal and confiscation per ECDC 20.60.090. r 3. Sections H104, Identification, H106.1.1, Internally illuminated signs, H107, Combustible materials, H108, L V Animated devices, H109.1, Height restrictions, and H110, Roof signs, are deleted. [Ord. 3926 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013; Ord. 3845 § 6, 2011; Ord. 3796 § 1, 2010]. Page 9 of 9 Packet Pg. 359 6.1.b This table summarizes all of the actions on the proposed Council amendments. The first column lists the proposed amendments. The second column list the date of the Council action and the action taken on the proposed amendment. The third column lists where the amendment is located in the draft ordinance included in Exhibit 1 as well as any clarifying notes on changes made by staff in order to incorporate the Council amendments into the code. Finally at the end of the table, staff summarizes some cleanup items undertaken to prepare the code for Council adoption. Proposed Council Amendment Council Action Location in Ordinance and Revision Notes 1. ECDC 23.40.220.C.4 Physically Separated/Functionally Isolated Buffers - Two potential Council amendments were proposed. Amendment LA was language that would replace the draft language. Amendment 1.13 (which is also included in Amendment LA) relates to renaming the provision. A. Replace draft language with: April 5, 2016 Council Meeting Ordinance Attachment A, Pg. 25. Development Proposals within Physically Separated and Potentially Isolated Council voted to replace the draft Staff made minor revisions to the Council Stream or Wetland Buffers. Adjacent areas that maybe physically separated and physically separated/functionally proposed language due to renaming the potentially functionally isolated from a stream or wetland due to existing, legally isolated language with the Council provision to interrupted buffer. established structures or paved areas may be exempted from the prescribed proposed language minus the language buffer widths if proven scientifically to be functionally isolated from the stream regarding Council review given the or wetland. The Director will require the applicant to provide a site assessment decision on Amendment 2. and functional analysis documentation report by a qualified Critical Area Consultant that demonstrates the separated buffer area is functionally isolated. The Director shall consider the hydrologic, geologic, and/or biological habitat connection potential and the extent and permanence of the physical separation. If the Director determines, based on the report and other available information, that the physically separated stream or wetland buffer area may be functionally isolated, the Director will provide the background information and a recommendation to the Council that an exemption be approved. B. Rename provision to physically separated/potentially isolated or "interrupted March 15, 2016 Council Meeting Ordinance Attachment A, Pg. 25. buffer." Council voted to rename provision "interrupted buffer." Page 1 of 10 Packet Pg. 360 6.1.b Proposed Council Amendment Council Action Location in Ordinance and Revision Notes 2. Council Review/Critical Area Decision Process — Three potential amendments were considered for Council review of critical area decisions. A. Include the City Council in the decision making process for certain critical area April 5, 2016 Council Meeting decisions such as physically separated/functionally isolated buffers, restoration projects, and exemptions. Council voted to adopt the new contingent critical area review process discussed in Amendment 2.0 below. B. Consider adding a decision matrix or some threshold for which projects would April 5, 2016 Council Meeting include the City Council in the decision making process. Council voted to adopt the new contingent critical area review process discussed in Amendment 2.0 below. Page 2 of 10 a� as M E E c 0 Q c m E c m E a 0 U N t K W r-� C N E t c� R r Q Packet Pg. 361 6.1.b Proposed Council Amendment Council Action Location in Ordinance and Revision Notes C. Consider amending the decision process for certain types of critical area decision April 5, 2016 Council Meeting Ordinance Attachment A, pgs. 20 — 21. New (i.e. Type I, Type II, Type III or other new process type). section ECDC 23.40.195. The City Attorney drafted a new critical area contingent review process There are related amendments to ECDC where certain proposals would start at 20.01.003 Permit type and decision framework as a Type II decision with notice (Ordinance Section 4) and ECDC 20.03.002 (including Council notice) with an Notice of Application (Ordinance Section 5). opportunity for interested parties to request a public hearing, thus bumping up the project review to a Type III decision. The Council voted to have this new contingent review process apply to restoration projects (the new ECDC 23.40.215 in Amendment 9 below) that involve anadromous fish streams, Category I and II wetlands, and Category I and II estuarine wetlands. 3. ECDC 23.40.220.C.7.b.iv — Hazard Tree Replacement March 15, 2016 Council Meeting Ordinance Attachment A, pg. 27. The proposed Council amendment is to change the required diameter of deciduous Council voted to make the change as replacement trees from one inch dbh to one to two inches dbh. proposed. 4. Definitions - Four separate amendments related to the critical area definitions were proposed. Amendment 4.A relates to the "normal maintenance of vegetation"; Amendments 4.13 and 4.0 would be new definitions; and Amendment 4.D would change where the definitions are located within the critical area regulations. Page 3 of 10 Q Packet Pg. 362 6.1.b Proposed Council Amendment Council Action Location in Ordinance and Revision Notes A. ECDC 23.40.320 — Normal Maintenance of Vegetation Definition March 15, 2016 Council Meeting Ordinance Attachment A, pg. 8. "Normal maintenance of vegetation" means removal of shrubs/non-woody Council voted to make the change as vegetation and trees (less than 4-inch diameter at breast height) that occurs at proposed. least every other year. Maintenance also may include tree topping that has been previously approved by the City in the past 5 years. B. Add definition for "Council" to reflect "Edmonds City Council." April 5, 2016 Council Meeting Ordinance Attachment A, pg. 5. Council voted to add a reference to ECDC 21.15.030 which contains a definition for "City Council" and "Council." C. Add definition for Best Available Science. March 15, 2016 Council Meeting Ordinance Attachment A, pg. 4. Council voted to add a reference to ECDC 23.40.310 which is the code section that describes "Best Available Science." D. Move definitions from Part VI to ECDC 23.40.010 after Purpose section. March 15, 2016 Council Meeting Ordinance Attachment A, pgs. 4 — 9. Council voted to move the definitions The definitions were moved to following the after the Purpose section as proposed. Purpose section in a new section ECDC 23.40.005. Creating the new ECDC 23.40.005 eliminated the need to renumber the rest of ECDC 23.40 which would have been required if the definitions replaced ECDC 23.40.010. Page 4 of 10 Q Packet Pg. 363 6.1.b Proposed Council Amendment Council Action Location in Ordinance and Revision Notes 5. ECDC 23.90.040.0 — Retention of Vegetation on Subdividable and Undeveloped Parcels. The Councilmembers offered up three potential amendments to ECDC 23.90.040.0 as follows: A. Include RS-8 and RS-10 in addition to RS-12 and RS-20 zones to where this April 19, 2016 Council Meeting provision would apply. Council did not make this proposed amendment. B. Consider requiring a different percentage of coverage for the RS-8 and RS-10, April 19, 2016 Council Meeting such as 20% percent as opposed to the 30% requirement for RS-12 and RS-20 zones. Council did not make this proposed amendment. C. Change "...native trees over 10 inches in dbh make up more than 70 percent of April 19, 2016 Council Meeting Ordinance Attachment A, pg. 92. the canopy cover" to "...native trees over 6 inches in dbh make up more than 40 percent of the canopy cover." Council voted to make the amendment as proposed. 6. Frequently Flood Area Amendments in ECDC 19.00.025 and ECDC 21.40.030 April 19, 2016 Council Meeting Ordinance Attachment B, pg. 7. This proposed amendment was to not include the amendments related to frequently Council voted to make the The related amendment to the definition of flooded areas contained in in ECDC 19.00.025 and 21.40.030. The comment behind amendments as recommended by the height in ECDC 21.40.030 is in Section 3 of this is that the proposed amendments for 19.00.025 and 21.40.030 are not technically planning board. the Ordinance. part of the Critical Areas Ordinance. Additionally, it was noted the proposed changes are in anticipation of FEMA flood hazard maps which have not been issued by the Federal government. Page 5 of 10 a� T r as M E E c Q c as E c as E a c 0 0 N Z t K W r-� C N E t c� R r Q Packet Pg. 364 6.1.b Proposed Council Amendment Council Action Location in Ordinance and Revision Notes 7. Council Status Reports April 5, 2016 Council Meeting Ordinance Attachment A, pg. 11. The following language was proposed for requiring regular status reports on critical Staff proposed some alternate The Council report requirement was inserted area regulations implementation. language for Council reports, which into new section ECDC 23.40.055 City the Council adopted with removing Council Reports. The Director shall prepare regular status reports on current critical area permits to the language regarding "example assist with the monitoring of the objective to protecting and enhance critical areas as projects." described in ECDC 23.40.060. The reports shall be presented biannually to the Council and will be derived from data collected from individual critical area reports and monitoring required in this title. The report will include data from ECDC 23.40.100 Critical Area Requirements, ECDC 23.40.140 Mitigation Plans, ECDC 23.50.030 Wetland Reporting Requirements, and ECDC 23.90.020 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Reporting Requirements, as well as any other provisions deemed necessary by the Council for the status reports. Each biannual status report shall include the following for the period reported: how much mitigation was required, types of mitigation granted, how many buffer reductions were granted, how many projects included buffer increases, how many required off -site mitigation, anticipated mitigation success in replacing wetland acreage and function, how many buffer averaging with buffer enhancements were granted, how many buffer reductions with buffer enhancements were granted, the types of enhancements, anticipated increased buffer functioning from enhancements in terms of stream and fish habitat protection where appropriate, number of developments within footprint of existing development, number of in -Lieu Fee programs that were granted, number of credits used, number of variances issued, number of any exemptions granted, number of violations that occurred, and how much non -compensatory restoration is being done. Page 6 of 10 Q Packet Pg. 365 6.1.b Proposed Council Amendment Council Action Location in Ordinance and Revision Notes 8. Appendices - Two amendments were proposed regarding adopting critical area maps and an inventory of all critical areas within the City of Edmonds as new appendices in the critical area regulations. A. Make new Appendix A formally adopting critical areas maps. April 12, 2016 Council Meeting The City critical area information has been made publicly available on the City's web Instead of formally adopting critical mapping program located at area maps and a critical area inventory maps.edmondswa.gov. (proposed Amendment 8.13), Council voted to make the City's critical area information available on the City web mapping program. B. Make new Appendix B with an inventory of all critical areas within the City of April 12, 2016 Council Meeting Edmonds including buffer widths. See note on amendment 8.A above. Page 7 of 10 a� as M E E c 0 Q c m E c m E a 0 U N t K W r-� C N E t c� R r Q Packet Pg. 366 6.1.b Proposed Council Amendment Council Action Location in Ordinance and Revision Notes 9. ECDC 23.40.215 — Restoration Projects — The proposed amendment was to replace April 5, 2016 Council Meeting Ordinance Attachment A, pg. 23. the draft language in ECDC 23.40.215 with the following: Council voted to adopted the Council Given the contingent review process in A. Restoration of historic ecological functions of critical areas under this title is proposed language with minor Amendment 2, there could be two possible encouraged. When a critical area restoration project is proposed that is not amendments including removing the decision makers for a restoration project, the required as mitigation for a development proposal, the Director may recommend first sentence in subsection A Director or Hearing Examiner. As such, the relief from standard critical area buffer requirements if the restoration project regarding "historic ecological "Director or Hearing Examiner (as involves: functions", changing the "are applicable)" was inserted into the code where 1. The daylighting of a stream or tidal channel, or preserved" in subsection B to "will be it previously just referenced the director. 2. Expansion of a wetland that would cause a landward expansion of the enhanced", and removing the Council wetland buffer. review in subsection D given the critical area contingent review process B. The restoration project proposal will include a proposed buffer width for the discussed in Amendment 2 above. project that is developed from an assessment by a qualified Critical Area Consultant on the buffer width necessary to ensure that the restoration project is successful and the ecological functions of the areas adjacent to the stream or wetland are preserved. C. The Director will consider the proposed buffer width along with hydrologic, geologic, and other habitat data for the site to determine if the project warrants a buffer width that deviates from the standard critical area buffer widths. D. If the Director determines that a reduced buffer width may be appropriate for the proposed restoration project, the Director will recommend to the Council that Appendix B of this title be amended to allow the reduced buffer width for the proposed restoration site. Page 8of10 as T r as 0 0 E E c 0 Q c as E c as E a c 0 0 c� N t K W r-� C N E t U R r Q Packet Pg. 367 6.1.b Proposed Council Amendment Council Action Location in Ordinance and Revision Notes 10. ECDC 23.40.040.0 — Areas subject to the provision of the CAO April 12, 2016 Council Meeting The proposed amendment was to replace this section to refer to new appendices With the decision to make the critical discussed in proposed Amendment 8 above if they are adopted. area information available on the City's web mapping program in Amendment 8, this proposed amendment was no longer applicable. 11. ECDC 23.40.040.D — Areas Adjacent to Critical Areas March 15, 2016 Council Meeting Ordinance Attachment A, pg. 11. The proposed amendment was keep only first sentence and delete the remainder of Council voted to make the amendment the section, so ECDC 23.40.040.D would read as follows: as proposed. Areas Adjacent to Critical Areas Subject to Regulation. Areas adjacent to critical areas shall be considered to be within the jurisdiction of these requirements and regulations to support the intent of this title and ensure protection of the functions and values of critical areas. 12. ECDC 23.40.090.D — Minimum Report Contents April 5, 2016 Council Meeting Ordinance Attachment A, pg. 14. The proposed amendment was add a new subsection to ECDC 23.40.090.D requiring Council voted to make the A new subsection ECDC 23.40.090.D.2.c was critical area reports to identify the location of all native and non-native vegetation of amendment. added to incorporate the Council amendment. 6 inch dbh or larger. CLEAN UP ITEM — Buffer Reduction Language Ordinance Attachment A, pg. 51. The buffer reduction language in ECDC 23.50.040.G.4 (Wetlands) and ECDC 23.90.040.D.2 (Streams) were not consistent. The wetland section noted a buffer could not be reduced less than 75% of the standard buffer, and the stream section noted a buffer could be reduced by no more than 25%. The code in the wetland section was changed to match the code in the stream section. Page 9of10 as 0 0 E E c 0 Q c as E c as E a c 0 0 U N x w c d E U 0 Q Packet Pg. 368 6.1.b Proposed Council Amendment Council Action Location in Ordinance and Revision Notes CLEAN UP ITEM — ECDC 23.50.040.G.2 Ordinance Attachment A, pg. 51. One of the changes with the CAO update is that buffer averaging is preferred over buffer reduction. There was an error in language of ECDC 23.50.040.G.2, which said that "wetland buffer averaging with enhancement shall be preferred over wetland buffer averaging with enhancement." This was corrected to say the "buffer averaging with enhancement shall be preferred over wetland buffer reduction with enhancement." CLEAN UP ITEM — Spelling and typos Throughout Ordinance Attachment A. Various spelling and typos throughout ECDC 23.40 — 23.90 where correct. Page 10 of 10 as M E E c 0 Q c m E c m E a 0 c� N t K W r-� C N E t c� R r Q Packet Pg. 369 City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 6.1.c EDMONDS CITY CODE AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE Chapter 23.40 ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREAS GENERAL PROVISIONS Sections: Part I. Purpose and General Provisions 23.40.000 Purpose. 23.40.005 Definitions pertaining to critical areas. 23.40.010 Authority. 23.40.020 Relationship to other regulations. 23.40.030 Severability. 23.40.040 Jurisdiction — Critical areas. 23.40.050 Protection of critical areas. 23.40.055 City Council Reports Part II. Critical Areas Review Process 23.40.060 General requirements. 23.40.070 Critical areas preapplication consultation. 23.40.080 Notice of initial determination. 23.40.090 Critical areas report — Requirements. 23.40.100 Critical areas report— Modifications to requirements. 23.40.110 Mitigation requirements. 23.40.120 Mitigation sequencing. 23.40.130 Mitigation plan requirements. 23.40.140 Innovative mitigation. 23.40.150 Critical areas decision. Page 1 of 87 Packet Pg. 370 City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 6.1.c 23.40.160 Review criteria. 23.40.170 Favorable critical areas decision. 23.40.180 Unfavorable critical areas decision. 23.40.190 Completion of the critical areas review. 23.40.195 Contingent review procedure for certain types of development 23.40.200 Appeals. 23.40.210 Variances. 23.40.215 Critical Area Restoration Projects Part III. Allowed Activities, Exemptions and Noncompliance Penalties 23.40.220 Allowed activities. 23.40.230 Exemptions. 23.40.240 Unauthorized critical areas alterations and enforcement. Part IV. General Critical Areas Protective Measures 23.40.250 Critical areas markers and signs. 23.40.270 Critical areas tracts. 23.40.280 Building setbacks. 23.40.290 Bonds to ensure mitigation, maintenance, and monitoring. 23.40.300 Critical areas inspections. Part V. Incorporation of Best Available Science 23.40.310 Best available science. Part I. Purpose and General Provisions 23.40.000 Purpose. Page 2 of 87 Packet Pg. 371 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 A. The purpose of this title is to designate and classify ecologically sensitive and hazardous areas and to protect these areas and their functions and values, while also allowing for reasonable use of private property. B. This title is to implement the goals, policies, guidelines, and requirements of the comprehensive plan and the Washington State Growth Management Act. C. The city of Edmonds finds that critical areas provide a variety of valuable and beneficial biological and physical functions that benefit Edmonds and its residents, and/or may pose a threat to human safety or to public and private property. The beneficial functions and values provided by critical areas include, but are not limited to, water quality protection and enhancement, fish and wildlife habitat, food chain support, flood storage, conveyance and attenuation of flood waters, ground water recharge and discharge, erosion control, wave attenuation, protection from hazards, historical, archaeological, and aesthetic value protection, and recreation. These beneficial functions are not listed in order of priority. D. Goals. By limiting development and alteration of critical areas, this title seeks to: 1. Protect members of the public and public resources and facilities from injury, loss of life, or property damage due to landslides and steep slope failures, erosion, seismic events, or flooding; 2. Maintain healthy, functioning ecosystems through the protection of unique, fragile, and valuable elements of the environment, including ground and surface waters, wetlands, and fish and wildlife and their habitats, and to conserve the biodiversity of plant and animal species; 3. Direct activities not dependent on critical areas resources to less ecologically sensitive sites and mitigate unavoidable impacts to critical areas by regulating alterations in and adjacent to critical areas; and 4. Prevent cumulative adverse environmental impacts to water quality, wetlands, and fish and wildlife habitat, and the overall net loss of wetlands, frequently flooded areas, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. E. The regulations of this title are intended to protect critical areas in accordance with the Growth Management Act and through the application of the best available science, as determined according to WAC 365-195-900 through 365-195-925 and RCW 36.70A.172, and in consultation with state and federal agencies and other qualified professionals. F. This title is to be administered with flexibility and attention to site -specific characteristics. It is not the intent of this title to make a parcel of property unusable by denying its owner reasonable economic use of the property nor to prevent the provision of public facilities and services necessary to support existing development. G. The city of Edmonds' enactment or enforcement of this title shall not be construed to benefit any individual person or group of persons other than the general public. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.005 Definitions pertaining to critical areas.0 SHARE Page 3 of 87 Packet Pg. 372 City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 For the purposes of this chapter and the chapters on the five specific critical area types (Chapters 23.50, 23.60, 23.70, 23.80 and 23.90 ECDC) the following definitions shall apply: "Adjacent" means those activities located on -site immediately adjoining a critical area; or distance equal to or less than two hundred and twenty five (225) feet of a development proposal or subject parcel. "Alteration" means any human -induced action which changes the existing condition of a critical area or its buffer. Alterations include, but are not limited to: grading; filling; dredging; draining; channelizing; cutting, pruning, limbing or topping, clearing, relocating or removing vegetation; applying herbicides or pesticides or any hazardous or toxic substance; discharging pollutants; paving, construction, application of gravel; modifying for surface water management purposes; or any other human activity that changes the existing landforms, vegetation, hydrology, wildlife or wildlife habitat value of critical areas. "Best Available Science." See ECDC 23.40.310 "Best management practices" means a system of practices and management measures that: 1. Control soil loss and reduce water quality degradation caused by nutrients, animal waste, and toxics; 2. Control the movement of sediment and erosion caused by land alteration activities; 3. Minimize adverse impacts to surface and ground water quality, flow, and circulation patterns; and 4. Minimize adverse impacts to the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of critical areas "Buffer" means the designated area immediately next to and a part of a steep slope or landslide hazard area and which protects slope stability, attenuation of surface water flows and landslide hazards reasonably necessary to minimize risks to persons or property; or a designated area immediately next to and part of a stream or wetland that is an integral part of the stream or wetland ecosystem. "Chapter" means those sections of this title sharing the same third and fourth digits. "City" means the city of Edmonds. "Class" or "wetland class" means descriptive categories of wetland vegetation communities within the wetlands taxonomic classification system of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Cowardin, et al., 1979). "Clearing" means the act of cutting and/or removing vegetation. This definition shall include grubbing vegetation and the use or application of herbicide. "Compensation project" means an action(s) specifically designed to replace project -induced critical area or buffer losses. Compensation project design elements may include, but are not limited to: land acquisition procedures and detailed plans including functional value assessments, detailed landscaping designs, construction drawings, and monitoring and contingency plans. Page 4 of 87 Packet Pg. 373 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 "Compensatory mitigation" means replacing project -induced losses or impacts to a critical area, and includes, but is not limited to, the following: 1. "Creation" means actions performed to intentionally establish a wetland at a site where it did not formerly exist. 2. "Re-establishment" means actions performed to restore processes and functions to an area that was formerly a critical area, where the former critical area was lost by past alterations and activities. 3. "Rehabilitation" means improving or repairing processes and functions to an area that is an existing critical area that is highly degraded because one or more environmental processes supporting the critical area have been disrupted. 4. "Enhancement" means actions performed to improve the condition of existing degraded wetlands so that the functions they provide are of a higher quality. 5. "Preservation" means actions taken to ensure the permanent protection of existing high -quality wetlands. "City Council" or "Council." See ECDC 21.15.030. "Creation" means a compensation project performed to intentionally establish a wetland or stream at a site where one did not formerly exist. "Critical areas" for the city of Edmonds means wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas as defined in Chapters 23.50, 23.60, 23.70, 23.80 and 23.90 ECDC, respectively. "Development proposal" means any activity relating to the use and/or development of land requiring a permit or approval from the city, including, but not limited to: commercial or residential building permit; binding site plan; conditional use permit; franchise; right-of-way permit; grading and clearing permit; mixed use approval; planned residential development; shoreline conditional use permit; shoreline substantial development permit; shoreline variance; short subdivision; special use permit; subdivision; flood hazard permit; unclassified use permit; utility and other use permit; variance; rezone; or any required permit or approval not expressly exempted by this title. "Director" means the city of Edmonds development services director or his/her designee. "Division" means the planning division of the city of Edmonds development services department. "Enhancement" means an action taken to improve the condition and function of a critical area. In the case of wetland or stream, the term includes a compensation project performed to improve the conditions of an existing degraded wetland or stream to increase its functional value. "Erosion" means the process in which soil particles are mobilized and transported by natural agents such as wind, rain, frost action, or stream flow. Page 5 of 87 Packet Pg. 374 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Erosion Hazard Areas. See ECDC 23.80.020(A). Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. See Chapter 23.90 ECDC. "Floodplain" means the total area subject to inundation by a "100-year flood." "100-year flood" means a flood having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. "Footprint of Existing Development" or "Footprint of Development" means the area of a asite that contains legally established: buildings; roads, driveways, parking lots, storage areas, walkways or other areas paved with concrete, asphalt or compacted gravel; outdoor swimming pools; patios. "Frequently Flooded Areas." See Chapter 23.70 ECDC. "Functions" means the roles served by critical areas including, but not limited to: water quality protection and enhancement; fish and wildlife habitat; food chain support; flood storage, conveyance and attenuation; ground water recharge and discharge; erosion control; wave attenuation; aesthetic value protection; and recreation. These roles are not listed in order of priority. "Geologically Hazardous Areas." See Chapter 23.80 ECDC. "Geologist" means a person licensed as a geologist, engineering geologist, or hydrologist in the state of Washington. For geologically hazardous areas, an applicant may choose a geologist or engineering geologist licensed in the State of Washington to assess the potential hazard. "Geotechnical engineer" means a practicing geotechnical/civil engineer licensed as a professional civil engineer in the state of Washington who has at least five years of professional employment as a geotechnical engineer in responsible charge including experience with landslide evaluation. "Grading" means any one or a combination of excavating, filling, or disturbance of that portion of the soil profile which contains decaying organic matter. "Habitats of local importance" means areas that include a seasonal range or habitat element with which a given species has a primary association, and which, if altered may reduce the likelihood that the species will maintain and reproduce over the long-term. These might include areas of high relative density or species richness, breeding habitat, winter range, and movement corridors. These might also include habitats that are of limited availability or high vulnerability to alterations such as cliffs, talus, and wetlands. In urban areas like the city of Edmonds, habitats of local importance include biodiversity areas and corriodrs, which as characterized by a framework of ecological components which provides the physical conditions necessary for ecosystems and species populations to survive in a human - dominated landscape. "In lieu fee program" means a program which sells compensatory mitigation credits to permittees whose obligation to provide compensatory mitigation is then transferred to the in lieu program sponsor, a governmental or non-profit natural resource management entity. Page 6 of 87 Packet Pg. 375 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 "Landslide Hazard Areas." See ECDC 23.80.020(B). "Mitigation" means the use of any or all of the following actions, which are listed in descending order of preference: 1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; 2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps such as project redesign, relocation, or timing to avoid or reduce impacts; 3. Rectifying the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, and habitat conservation areas by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to the historical conditions or the conditions existing at the time of the initiation of the project; 4. Minimizing or eliminating the hazard by restoring or stabilizing the hazard area through engineered or other methods; 5. Reducing or eliminating the impact or hazard over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; 6. Compensating for the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, and habitat conservation areas by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and 7. Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when necessary. "Native vegetation" means vegetation comprised of plant species which are indigenous to the Puget Sound region and which reasonably could have been expected to naturally occur on the site. "Native vegetation" does not include noxious weeds as defined by the state of Washington or federal agencies. "Normal maintenance of vegetation" means removal of shrubs/non-woody vegetation and trees (less than 4-inch diameter at breast height) that occurs at least every other year. Maintenance also may include tree topping that has been previousl approved by the City in the past 5 years. "Noxious weeds" means any plant that is highly destructive, competitive or difficult to control by cultural or chemical practices, limited to those plants on the state noxious week list contained in Chapter 16-750 WAC. "Planning staff'means means those employed in the planning division of the city of Edmonds development services department. "Qualified critical areas consultant" or "qualified professional" means a person who has the qualifications specified below to conduct critical areas studies pursuant to this title, and to make recommendations for critical areas mitigation. For geologically hazardous areas, the qualified critical areas consultant shall be a geologist or engineering geologist licensed in the State of Washington to assess the potential hazard. If development is to take place within a geologically hazardous area, the qualified critical areas consultant developing mitigation plans and design shall be a Professional Page 7 of 87 Packet Pg. 376 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Engineer licensed in the State of Washington and familiar with landslide and slope stability mitigation. For wetlands and streams, the qualified critical areas consultant shall be a specialist in botany, fisheries, wetland biology, and/or hydrology with a minimum of five years' field experience with wetlands and/or streams in the Pacific Northwest. Requirements defining a qualified critical areas consultant or qualified professional are contained within the chapter on each critical area type. "Reasonable economic use(s)" means the minimum use to which a property owner is entitled under applicable state and federal constitutional provisions in order to avoid a taking and/or violation of substantive due process. "Redeveloped land(s)" means those lands on which existing structures are demolished in their entirety to allow for new development. The director shall maintain discretion to determine if the demolition of a majority of existing structures or portions thereof constitute the re -development of a property or subject parcel. "Restoration" means the actions necessary to return a stream, wetland or other critical area to a state in which its stability, functions and values approach its unaltered state as closely as possible. For wetlands, restoration as compensatory mitigation may include re-establishment or rehabilitation. "Seismic Hazard Areas." See ECDC 23.80.020(C). "Species of local importance" means those species that are of local concern due to their population status, their sensitivity to habitat manipulation, or that are game (hunted) species. (See ECDC 23.90.010(A)(4).) "Storm Water Management Manual" means the stormwater manual specified in in Chapter 18.30 ECDC. "Streams" means any area where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed which demonstrates clear evidence, such as the sorting of sediments, of the passage of water. The channel or bed need not contain water year-round. This definition is not meant to include irrigation ditches, canals, storm or surface water runoff devices (drainage ditches) or other entirely artificial watercourses unless they are used by salmonids or used to convey streams naturally occurring prior to construction of such watercourse. Streams are further classified into Categories S, F, Np and Ns and fishbearing or nonfishbearing 1, 2 and 3. (See ECDC 23.90.010(A)(1).) "Title" means all chapters of the city of Edmonds Development Code beginning with the digits 23 "Undeveloped land(s)" means land(s) on which manmade structures or land modifications (clearing, grading, etc.) do not exist. The director retains discretion to identify undeveloped land(s) in those instances where historical modifications and structures may have existed on a property or subject parcel in the past. "Wetland functions" means those natural processes performed by wetlands, such as facilitating food chain production; providing habitat for nesting, rearing and resting sites for aquatic, terrestrial or avian species; maintaining the availability and quality of water; acting as recharge and/or discharge areas for ground water aquifers; and moderating surface water and storm water flows. Page 8 of 87 Packet Pg. 377 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 "Wetland mitigation bank" means a site where wetlands are restored, created, enhanced, or in exceptional circumstances, preserved expressly for the purpose of providing compensatory mitigation in advance of authorized impacts to similar resources. "Wetlands" means those areas that are inundated or saturated by ground or surface water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street or highway. However, wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland areas created to mitigate conversion of wetlands if permitted by the city (WAC 365-190-030(22)). Wetlands are further classified into Categories 1, 2, 3 and 4. (See ECDC 23.50.010(B).) [Ord. 3952 § 1, 2013; Ord. 3931 § 2, 2013; Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.010 Authority. A. As provided herein, the Edmonds development services director or his/her designee (hereafter referred to as "the director") is given the authority to interpret and apply, and the responsibility to enforce, this title to accomplish the stated purpose. B. The director may withhold, condition, or deny development permits or activity approvals to ensure that the proposed action is consistent with this title. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.020 Relationship to other regulations. A. These critical areas regulations shall apply as an overlay and in addition to zoning, site development, stormwater management, building and other regulations adopted by the city of Edmonds. B. Any individual critical area adjoined or overlain by another type of critical area shall have the buffer and meet the requirements that provide the most protection to the critical areas involved. When any provision of this title or any existing land use regulation conflicts with this title, that which provides more protection to the critical area shall apply. C. These critical areas regulations shall be coordinated with review conducted under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), as necessary and locally adopted. D. Compliance with the provisions of this title does not constitute compliance with other federal, state, and local regulations and permit requirements that may be required (for example, shoreline substantial development permits, Hydraulic Permit Act (HPA) permits, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 permits, and National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permits). The applicant is responsible for complying with these requirements, apart from the process established in this title. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.030 Severability. Page 9 of 87 Packet Pg. 378 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this title or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall be judged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such order or judgment shall be confined in its operation to the controversy in which it was rendered. The decision shall not affect or invalidate the remainder of any part thereof and to this end the provisions of each clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this law are hereby declared to be severable. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.040 Jurisdiction — Critical areas. A. The director shall regulate all uses, activities, and developments within, adjacent to, or likely to affect one or more critical areas, consistent with the best available science and the provisions herein. B. Critical areas regulated by this title include: 1. Wetlands as designated in Chapter 23.50 ECDC, Wetlands; 2. Critical aquifer recharge areas as designated in Chapter 23.60 ECDC, Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas; 3. Frequently flooded areas as designated in Chapter 23.70 ECDC, Frequently Flooded Areas; 4. Geologically hazardous areas as designated in Chapter 23.80 ECDC, Geologically Hazardous Areas; and 5. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas as designated in Chapter 23.90 ECDC, Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. C. All areas within the city of Edmonds meeting the definition of one or more critical areas, regardless of any formal identification, are hereby designated critical areas and are subject to the provisions of this title. D. Areas Adjacent to Critical Areas Subject to Regulation. Areas adjacent to critical areas shall be considered to be within the jurisdiction of these requirements and regulations to support the intent of this title and ensure protection of the functions and values of critical areas. 23.40.050 Protection of critical areas. 'I SHARE Any action taken pursuant to this title shall result in equivalent or greater functions and values of the critical areas associated with the proposed action, as determined by the best available science. All actions and developments shall be designed and constructed in accordance with ECDC 23.40.120, Mitigation sequencing, to avoid, minimize, and restore all adverse impacts. Applicants must first demonstrate an inability to avoid or reduce impacts before the use of actions to mitigate potential impacts will be allowed. No activity or use shall be allowed that results in a net loss of the functions or values of critical areas. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.055 City Council Reports Page 10 of 87 Packet Pg. 379 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 The Director will provide a report to the City Council during the 1st and 3rd quarter each year, summarizing critical area decisions that have been made since the previous report. The report will include information such as, the number and type of critical area decisions that have been made, including information on buffers and enhancements approved for each applicable decision, a description of each approved restoration project, and other information specifically requested by the Council following the previous report. Part II. Critical Areas Review Process 23.40.060 General requirements.0 SHARE A. As part of this review, the director shall: 1. Verify the information submitted by the applicant; 2. Evaluate the project area and vicinity for critical areas; 3. Determine whether the pro posed project is likely to impact the functions or values of critical areas; and 4. Determine if the proposed project adequately assesses all impacts, avoids impacts, and/or mitigates impacts to the critical area associated with the project. B. If the proposed project is within, adjacent to, or is likely to impact a critical area, the director shall 1. Require a critical areas report from the applicant that has been prepared by a qualified professional; 2. Review and evaluate the critical areas report; 3. Determine whether the development proposal conforms to the purposes and performance standards of this title, including the criteria in ECDC 23.40.160, Review criteria; 4. Assess the potential impacts to the critical area and determine if they can be avoided or minimized; and 5. Determine if any mitigation proposed by the applicant is sufficient to protect the functions and values of the critical area and public health, safety, and welfare concerns consistent with the goals, purposes, objectives, and requirements of this title. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.070 Critical areas preapplication consultation.0 SHARE Any person preparing to submit an application for development or use of land that may be regulated by the provisions of this title may request a preapplication meeting with the director prior to submitting an application for development or other approval. At this meeting, the director shall discuss the requirements of this title; provide critical areas maps, scientific information, and other source materials; outline the review process; and work with the activity proponent to identify any potential concerns that Page 11 of 87 Packet Pg. 380 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 might arise during the review process, in addition to discussing other permit procedures and requirements. All applicants, regardless of participation in a preapplication meeting, are held fully responsible for knowledge and disclosure of critical areas on, adjacent to, or associated with a subject parcel and full compliance with the specific provisions and goals, purposes, objectives, and requirements of this title. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.080 Notice of initial determination.0 SHARE A. If the director determines that no critical areas report is necessary, the director shall state this in the notice of application issued for the proposal. B. If the director determines that there are critical areas on the site that the proposed project is unlikely to impact and the project meets the requirements for and has been granted a waiver from the requirement to complete a critical areas report, this shall be stated in the notice of application for the proposal. A waiver may be granted if the director determines that all of the following requirements will be met: 1. There will be no alteration of the critical area or buffer; 2. The development proposal will not affect the critical area in a manner contrary to the purpose, intent, and requirements of this Title. C. If the director determines that critical areas may be affected by the proposal and a critical areas report is required, public notice of the application shall include a description of the critical area that might be affected and state that a critical areas report(s) is required. D. Critical areas determinations shall be considered valid for five years from the date in which the determination was made; after such date the city shall require a new determination, or at minimum documentation of a new assessment verifying the accuracy of the previous determination [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.090 Critical areas report — Requirements. 0 SHARE A. Preparation by Qualified Professional. The applicant shall submit a critical areas report prepared by a qualified professional as defined herein. For wetlands, frequently flooded areas and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, an applicant may choose one of the qualified technical consultants on the city's approved list to prepare critical areas reports per the requirements of this title or may apply to utilize an alternative consultant. Critical areas studies and reports developed by an alternative consultant may be subject to independent review pursuant to subsection B of this section. All costs associated with the critical areas study shall be borne by the applicant. B. Independent Review of Critical Areas Reports. Critical areas studies and reports on geologically hazardous areas and those developed by an applicant representative or consultant not as part of a three - party contract may, at the discretion of the director, be subject to independent review. This independent review shall be performed by a qualified technical consultant selected by the city with all costs borne by the applicant. The purpose of such independent review is to provide the city with objective technical assistance in evaluating the accuracy of submitted reports and/or the effects on critical areas which may Page 12 of 87 Packet Pg. 381 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 be caused by a development proposal and to facilitate the decision -making process. The director may also have technical assistance provided by appropriate resource agency staff if such assistance is available in a timely manner. C. Best Available Science. The critical areas report shall use scientifically valid methods and studies in the analysis of critical areas data and field reconnaissance and reference the source of science used. The critical areas report shall evaluate the proposal and all probable impacts to critical areas in accordance with the provisions of this title. D. Minimum Report Contents. At a minimum, the report shall contain the following: 1. The name and contact information of the applicant, a description of the proposal, and identification of the permit requested; 2. A copy of the site plan for the development proposal including: a. A map to scale depicting critical areas, buffers, the development proposal, and any areas to be cleared; and b. A description of the proposed storm water management plan for the development and consideration of impacts to drainage alterations; c. The site plan shall identify the location of all native and non-native vegetation of 6 inches dbh or larger. 3. The dates, names, and qualifications of the persons preparing the report and documentation of any fieldwork performed on the site; 4. Identification and characterization of all critical areas, wetlands, water bodies, shorelines, and buffers adjacent to the proposed project area; 5. A description of reasonable efforts made to apply mitigation sequencing pursuant to ECDC 23.40.120, Mitigation sequencing, to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to critical areas; 6. Report requirements specific to each critical area type as indicated in the corresponding chapters of this title. 7. A statement specifying the accuracy of the report and all assumptions made and relied upon; 8. A description of the methodologies used to conduct the critical areas study, including references; and 9. Plans for adequate mitigation, as needed to offset any critical areas impacts, in accordance with the Mitigation Plan Requirements in Section 23.40.130. E. Unless otherwise provided, a critical areas report may incorporate, be supplemented by or composed, in whole or in part, of any reports or studies required by other laws and regulations or previously Page 13 of 87 Packet Pg. 382 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 prepared for and applicable to the development proposal site, as approved by the director. At the discretion of the director, reports previously compiled or submitted as part of a proposal for development may be used as a critical areas report to the extent that the requirements of this section and the report requirements for each specific critical area type are met. F. Critical areas reports shall be considered valid for five years; after such date the city shall determine whether a revision or additional assessment is necessary.[Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.100 Critical areas report — Modifications to requirements. sH"RE A. Limitations to Study Area. The director may limit the required geographic area of the critical areas report as appropriate if. 1. The applicant, with assistance from the city of Edmonds, cannot obtain permission to access properties adjacent to the project area; or 2. The proposed activity will affect only a limited part of the subject site. B. Modifications to Required Contents. The applicant may consult with the director prior to or during preparation of the critical areas report to obtain approval of modifications to the required contents of the report where, in the judgment of a qualified professional, more or less information is required to adequately address the potential critical area impacts and required mitigation. C. Additional Information Requirements. The director may require additional information to be included in the critical areas report when determined to be necessary to the review of the proposed activity in accordance with this title. Additional information that may be required includes, but is not limited to: 1. Historical data, including original and subsequent mapping, aerial photographs, data compilations and summaries, and available reports and records relating to the site or past operations at the site; 2. Grading and drainage plans; and 3. Information specific to the type, location, and nature of the critical area. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004] 23.40.110 Mitigation requirements.0 SHARE A. The applicant shall avoid all impacts that degrade the functions and values of critical areas. Unless otherwise provided in this title, if alteration to the critical area is unavoidable, all adverse impacts to or from critical areas and buffers resulting from a development proposal or alteration shall be mitigated using the best available science in accordance with an approved critical areas report and SEPA documents, so as to result in no net loss of critical area functions and values. B. Mitigation shall be sufficient to maintain or compensate for the functions and values of the impacted critical area and to prevent risk from a hazard posed by a critical area. Page 14 of 87 Packet Pg. 383 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 C. Mitigation shall not be implemented until after the director has provided approval of a critical areas report that includes a mitigation plan. Mitigation shall be implemented in accordance with the provisions of the approved critical areas report. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.120 Mitigation sequencing.0 SHARE A. Applicants shall demonstrate that all reasonable efforts have been examined with the intent to avoid and minimize impacts to critical areas. B. When an alteration to a critical area is proposed, such alteration shall be avoided, minimized, or compensated for in the following sequential order of preference: 1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; 2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps, such as project redesign, relocation, or timing, to avoid or reduce impacts; 3. Rectifying the impact to wetlands, frequently flooded areas, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to the historical conditions or the conditions existing at the time of the initiation of the project; 4. Minimizing or eliminating the hazard by restoring or stabilizing the hazard area through engineering or other methods; 5. Reducing or eliminating the impact or hazard over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; 6. Compensating for the impact to wetlands, frequently flooded areas, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and/or 7. Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when necessary C. Mitigation for individual actions may include a combination of the above measures. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004] . 23.40.130 Mitigation plan requirements.0 SHARE When mitigation is required, the applicant shall submit for approval by the director a mitigation plan as part of the critical areas report. The mitigation plan shall include: A. Environmental Goals and Objectives. The mitigation plan shall include a written report identifying environmental goals and objectives of the compensation proposed and including: 1. A description of the anticipated impacts to the critical areas and the mitigating actions proposed and the purposes of the compensation measures, including the site selection criteria; identification of Page 15 of 87 Packet Pg. 384 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 compensation goals; identification of resource functions; and dates for beginning and completion of site compensation construction activities. The goals and objectives shall be related to the functions and values of the impacted critical area; 2. A review of the best available science supporting the proposed mitigation; 3. An analysis of the likelihood of success of the compensation project; and 4. Specific mitigation plan and report requirements for each critical area type as indicated in this title. B. Performance Standards. The mitigation plan shall include measurable specific criteria for evaluating whether or not the goals and objectives of the mitigation project have been successfully attained and whether or not the requirements of this title have been met. C. Detailed Construction Plans. The mitigation plan shall include written specifications and descriptions of the mitigation proposed, such as: 1. The proposed construction sequence, timing, and duration; 2. Areas of proposed impacts on critical areas or buffers; 3. Grading and excavation details; 4. Erosion and sediment control features; 5. A planting plan specifying plant species, quantities, locations, size, spacing, and density; and 6. Measures to protect and maintain plants until established. These written specifications shall be accompanied by detailed site diagrams, scaled cross -sectional drawings, topographic maps showing slope percentage and final grade elevations, and any other drawings appropriate to show construction techniques or anticipated final outcome. D. Monitoring Program. The mitigation plan shall include a program for monitoring construction and for assessing a completed project. A protocol shall be included outlining the schedule for site monitoring (for example, monitoring shall occur in years one, three, and five after site construction), and how the monitoring data will be evaluated to determine if the performance standards are being met. A monitoring report shall be submitted as needed to document milestones, successes, problems, and contingency actions of the compensation project. The compensation project shall be monitored for a period necessary to establish that performance standards have been met, but not for a period less than five (5) years without approval from the director. E. Contingency Plan. The mitigation plan shall include identification of potential courses of action and any corrective measures to be taken if monitoring or evaluation indicates project performance standards are not being met. Page 16 of 87 Packet Pg. 385 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 F. Financial Guarantees. The mitigation plan shall include financial guarantees, as necessary, to ensure that the mitigation plan is fully implemented. Financial guarantees ensuring fulfillment of the compensation project, monitoring program, and any contingency measures shall be posted in accordance with ECDC 23.40.290, Bonds to ensure mitigation, maintenance, and monitoring. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.140 Innovative mitigation.0 SHARE A. The city of Edmonds may encourage, facilitate, and approve innovative mitigation projects that are based on the best available science. Advance mitigation, in lieu fee programs, or mitigation banking are examples of alternative mitigation approaches allowed under the provisions of this section if it is demonstrated that all of the following circumstances exist: 1. There are no reasonable opportunities on -site or within the same sub -drainage basin, or opportunities on -site or within the sub -drainage basin do not have a high likelihood of success based on a determination of the capacity of the site to compensate for the impacts. Considerations should include: anticipated replacement ratios for wetland mitigation, buffer conditions and proposed widths, available water to maintain anticipated hydrogeomorphic classes of wetlands when restored, proposed flood storage capacity, and potential to mitigate fish and wildlife impacts (such as connectivity); 2. The off -site mitigation has a greater likelihood of providing equal or improved critical areas functions than the altered critical area, and there is a clear potential for success of the proposed mitigation at the identified mitigation site. 3. Off -site locations shall be in the same basin and within the City unless: a. Established watershed goals for water quality, flood storage or conveyance, habitat, or other wetland functions have been established by the City and strongly justify location of mitigation at another site; or b. Credits from an approved (State -certified) wetland mitigation bank are used as compensation, and the use of credits is consistent with the terms of the approved bank instrument; c. Fees are paid to an approved in -lieu fee program to compensate for the impacts. B. Development proposals impacting critical areas and/or associated buffers may contribute payment towards an identified City of Edmonds mitigation project with approval from the director, provided that the mitigation approach meets all state and federal permit requirements, where required. Such mitigation actions shall be consistent with ECDC 23.40.140.A.1. and ECDC 23.40.140.A.2., and with all other applicable provisions of ECDC Chapters 23.50 and 23.90. C. Conducting mitigation as part of a cooperative process provides for retention or an increase in the beneficial functions and values of critical areas within the Edmonds jurisdiction. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.150 Critical areas decision.0 SHARE The city of Edmonds development services director shall make a decision as to whether the proposed activity and mitigation, if any, is consistent with the provisions of this title. The decision shall be based Page 17 of 87 Packet Pg. 386 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 on the criteria of ECDC 23.40.160, Review criteria, and shall affect and be incorporated within the larger project decision. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.160 Review criteria..) SHARE A. Any alteration to a critical area, unless otherwise provided for in this title, shall be reviewed and approved, approved with conditions, or denied based on the proposal's ability to comply with all of the following criteria: 1. The proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas in accordance with ECDC 23.40.120, Mitigation sequencing; 2. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare on or off the development proposal site; 3. The proposal is consistent with the general purposes of this title and the public interest; 4. Any alterations permitted to the critical area are mitigated in accordance with ECDC 23.40.110, Mitigation requirements; 5. The proposal protects the critical area functions and values consistent with the best available science and results in no net loss of critical area functions and values; and 6. The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards. B. The director may condition the proposed activity as necessary to mitigate impacts to critical areas and to conform to the standards required by this title. Except as provided for by this title, any project that cannot adequately mitigate its impacts to critical areas in the sequencing order of preferences in ECDC 23.40.120 shall be denied. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.170 Favorable critical areas decision.0 SHARE If the director determines that the proposed activity meets or is exempt from the criteria in ECDC 23.40.160, Review criteria, and complies with the applicable provisions of this title, the development services director shall prepare a written notice of decision for the applicant and identify any required conditions of approval as part of the larger project decision. The notice of decision and conditions of approval shall be included in the project file and be considered in the next phase of the city's review of the proposed activity in accordance with any other applicable codes or regulations. Any conditions of approval included in a notice of decision shall be attached to the underlying permit or approval. Any subsequent changes to the conditions of approval shall void the previous decision pending re -review of the proposal and conditions of approval previously set by the director. A favorable decision should not be construed as endorsement or approval of any underlying permit or approval. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Page 18 of 87 Packet Pg. 387 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 23.40.180 Unfavorable critical areas decisionA3 SHARE a If the director determines that a proposed activity is not exempt or does not adequately mitigate its impacts on critical areas and/or does not comply with the criteria in ECDC 23.40.160, Review criteria, and the provisions of this title, the director shall prepare a written decision for the applicant that includes findings of noncompliance. No proposed activity or permit shall be approved or issued if it is determined that the proposed activity does not adequately mitigate its impacts on the critical areas and/or does not comply with the provisions of this title. Following notice of decision that the proposed activity does not meet the review criteria and/or does not comply with the applicable provisions of this title, the applicant may request consideration of a revised critical area report. If the revision is found to be substantial and relevant to the critical area review, the director may reopen the critical area review and make a new decision based on the revised report. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.190 Completion of the critical areas review.0 SHARE The director's decision regarding critical areas pursuant to this title shall be final concurrent with the final project decision to approve, condition, or deny the development proposal or other activity involved. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.195 Contingent review procedure for certain types of development. A. Scope. The procedures set forth in this section shall apply to the following types of critical area restoration projects as allowed by ECDC 23.40.215: 1. Restoration projects involving anadromous fish streams 2. Restoration projects involving Category I or Category II wetlands 3. Restoration projects involving Category I or Category II estuarine wetlands B. Notice of application. Development activity within the scope of subsection A, above, shall be processed as a Type II application, unless the process is altered according to subsection D, below. In addition to the notice provided pursuant to Title 20, notice of application for all such development shall also be sent to the city council by email. C. Contingent review process. Development activity within the scope of subsection A, above, shall be escalated to a Type III -A process when: 1. The city receives a request from any person for a public hearing within 14 days of the date of the notice of application; and Page 19 of 87 Packet Pg. 388 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 2. The public hearing request is accompanied by a hearing fee in the amount of 50% of the difference between the Type II and Type III -A application fee. D. Effect of contingent review. When the contingent review process is triggered pursuant to subsection C above, the project applicant shall pay the other 50% of the difference between the Type II and Type III -A application fee, on top of the previously paid Type II application fee. The applicant shall pay this fee within 30 days of notice from the city that the fee is due. If the applicant fails to pay the additional fee within the required 30-day period, the application for the project shall be deemed withdrawn. The city shall not schedule the public hearing until the additional fee has been paid. For these public hearings, the cost of the hearing examiner shall be borne by the city. E. Notice of decision. Whether development activity within the scope of subsection A, above, is processed as a Type II application or escalated to a Type III -A application, notice of decision shall be sent by email to the city council in addition to any other notice that may be required by Title 20. 23.40.200 Appeals.0 SHARE Any decision to approve, condition, or deny a development proposal or other activity based on the requirements of this title may be appealed according to, and as part of, the appeal procedure, if any, for the permit or approval involved. [Ord. 3736 § 71, 2009; Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.210 Variances.0 SHARE A. Variances from the standards of this title may be authorized through the process of hearing examiner review in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 20.85 ECDC only if an applicant demonstrates that one or more of the following two conditions exist: 1. The application of this title would prohibit a development proposal by a public agency or public utility. A public agency and utility exception may be granted as a variance i£ a. There is no other practical alternative to the proposed development with less impact on the critical areas; b. The application of this title would unreasonably restrict the ability to provide utility services to the public; c. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare on or off the development proposal site; d. The proposal attempts to protect and mitigate impacts to the critical area functions and values consistent with the best available science; and e. The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards. Page 20 of 87 Packet Pg. 389 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 2. The application of this title would deny all reasonable economic use (see the definition of "reasonable economic use(s)" in ECDC 23.40.320) of the subject property. A reasonable use exception may be authorized as a variance only if an applicant demonstrates that: a. The application of this title would deny all reasonable economic use of a property or subject parcel; b. No other reasonable economic use of the property consistent with the underlying zoning and the city comprehensive plan has less impact on the critical area; c. The proposed impact to the critical area is the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable economic use of the property; d. The inability of the applicant to derive reasonable economic use of the property is not the result of actions by the applicant after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this title or its predecessor; e. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare on or off the development proposal site; f. The proposal minimizes net loss of critical area functions and values consistent with the best available science; and g. The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards. B. Specific Variance Criteria. A variance may be granted if the applicant demonstrates that the requested action conforms to all of the following specific criteria: 1. Special conditions and circumstances exist that are peculiar to the land, the lot, or something inherent in the land, and that are not applicable to other lands in the same district; 2. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant; 3. A literal interpretation of the provisions of this title would deprive the applicant of all reasonable economic uses and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and zone of the subject property under the terms of this title, and the variance requested is the minimum necessary to provide the applicant with such rights; 4. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this title to other lands, structures, or buildings under similar circumstances; 5. The granting of the variance is consistent with the general purpose and intent of this title, and will not further degrade the functions or values of the associated critical areas or otherwise be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the subject property; and Page 21 of 87 Packet Pg. 390 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 6. The decision to grant the variance is based upon the best available science and gives special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fish habitat. C. Hearing Examiner Review. The city hearing examiner shall, as a Type III -A decision (see Chapter 20.01 ECDC), review variance applications and conduct a public hearing. The hearing examiner shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny variance applications based on a proposal's ability to comply with general and specific variance criteria provided in subsections (A) and (B) of this section. D. Conditions May Be Required. The director retains the right to prescribe such conditions and safeguards as are necessary to secure adequate protection of critical areas from adverse impacts, and to ensure conformity with this title for variances granted through hearing examiner review. E. Time Limit. The director shall prescribe a time limit within which the action for which the variance is required shall be begun, completed, or both. Failure to begin or complete such action within the established time limit shall void the variance, unless the applicant files an application for an extension of time before the expiration. An application for an extension of time shall be reviewed by the director as a Type II decision (see Chapter 20.01 ECDC). F. Burden of Proof. The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to bring forth evidence in support of a variance application and upon which any decision has to be made on the application. [Ord. 3783 § 15, 2010; Ord. 3775 § 15, 2010; Ord. 3736 §§ 72, 73, 2009; Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.215 Critical Area Restoration Projects A. When a critical area restoration project is proposed that is not required as mitigation for a development proposal, the Director or Hearing Examiner (as applicable) may grant relief from standard critical area buffer requirements if the restoration project involves: 1. The daylighting of a stream or tidal channel, or 2. Expansion of a wetland that would cause a landward expansion of the wetland buffer. B. The restoration project proposal will include a proposed buffer width for the project that is developed from an assessment by a qualified Critical Area Consultant on the buffer width necessary to ensure that the restoration project is successful and the ecological functions of the areas adjacent to the stream or wetland will be enhanced. C. The Director or Hearing Examiner (as applicable) will consider the proposed buffer width along with hydrologic, geologic, and other habitat data for the site to determine if the project warrants a buffer width that deviates from the standard critical area buffer widths. D. If the Director or Hearing Examiner (as applicable) determines that a reduced buffer width is appropriate for the proposed restoration project, the Director may approve the reduced buffer width for the proposed restoration site. Page 22 of 87 Packet Pg. 391 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Part I1I. Allowed Activities, Exemptions and Noncompliance Penalties 23.40.220 Allowed activities.o SHARE A. Critical Area Report. Activities allowed under this title shall have been reviewed and permitted or approved by the city of Edmonds or other agency with jurisdiction, but do not require submittal of a critical area report, unless such submittal was required previously for the underlying permit. The director may apply conditions to the underlying permit or approval to ensure that the allowed activity is consistent with the provisions of this title to protect critical areas. B. Required Use of Best Management Practices. All allowed activities shall be conducted using the best management practices that result in the least amount of impact to the critical areas. Best management practices shall be used for tree and vegetation protection, construction management, erosion and sedimentation control, water quality protection, and regulation of chemical applications. The city may observe or require independent inspection of the use of best management practices to ensure that the activity does not result in degradation to the critical area. Any incidental damage to, or alteration of, a critical area shall be restored, rehabilitated, or replaced at the responsible party's expense. C. Allowed Activities. The following activities are allowed: 1. Permit Requests Subsequent to Previous Critical Areas Review. Development permits and approvals that involve both discretionary land use approvals (such as subdivisions, rezones, or conditional use permits) and construction approvals (such as building permits) if all of the following conditions have been met: a. The provisions of this title have been previously addressed as part of another approval; b. There have been no material changes in the potential impact to the critical area or buffer since the prior review; c. The permit or approval has not expired or, if no expiration date, no more than five years have elapsed since the issuance of that permit or approval; d. There is no new information available that is applicable to any critical area review of the site or particular critical area; and e. Compliance with any standards or conditions placed upon the prior permit or approval has been achieved or secured. 2. Modification to Structures Existing Outside of Critical Areas and/or Buffers. Structural modification of, addition to, or replacement of a legally constructed structure existing outside of a critical area or its buffer that does not further alter or increase the impact to the critical area or buffer and there is no increased risk to life or property as a result of the proposed modification or replacement; 3. Modifications to Existing Structures within Critical Areas and/or Buffers. Modification to a legally constructed structure existing within a critical area or buffer shall be allowed when the modification: Page 23 of 87 Packet Pg. 392 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 a. Does not increase the footprint of the structure; and b. Does not increase the impact to the critical area or buffer; and c. Does not increase risk to life or property as a result of the proposed modification or replacement. Additions to legally constructed structures existing within a critical area or buffer that do increase the existing footprint of development shall be subject to and permitted in accordance with the development standards of the associated critical area type (see ECDC 23.50.040 and 23.90.040). This provision shall be interpreted to supplement the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code relating to nonconforming structures in order to permit the full reconstruction of a legal nonconforming building within its footprint; 4. Development Proposals within Interrupted Stream or Wetland Buffers. Adjacent areas that may be physically separated from a stream or wetland due to existing, legally established structures or paved areas may be exempted from the prescribed buffer widths if proven scientifically to be functionally isolated from the stream or wetland. The Director will require the applicant to provide a site assessment and functional analysis documentation report by a qualified Critical Area Consultant that demonstrates the interrupted buffer area is functionally isolated. The Director shall consider the hydrologic, geologic, and/or biological habitat connection potential and the extent and permanence of the physical separation. 5. Activities within the Improved Right -of -Way. Replacement, modification, installation, or construction of utility facilities, lines, pipes, mains, equipment, or appurtenances, when such facilities are located within the improved portion of the public right-of-way or a city -authorized private roadway, except those activities that alter a wetland or watercourse, such as culverts or bridges, or result in the transport of sediment or increased stormwater. 6. Minor Utility Projects. Utility projects that have minor or short -duration impacts to critical areas, as determined by the director in accordance with the criteria below, and which do not significantly impact the function or values of a critical area(s); provided, that such projects are constructed with best management practices and additional restoration measures are provided. Minor activities shall not result in the transport of sediment or increased storm water. Such allowed minor utility projects shall meet the following criteria: a. There is no practical alternative to the proposed activity with less impact on critical areas; b. The activity involves the placement of utility pole(s), street sign(s), anchor(s), or vault(s) or other small component(s) of a utility facility; and c. The activity involves disturbance of an area less than 75 square feet; 6. Public and Private Pedestrian Trails. New public and private pedestrian trails subject to the following: a. The trail surface shall be limited to pervious surfaces and meet all other requirements, including water quality standards set forth in the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19; Page 24 of 87 Packet Pg. 393 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 b. Critical area and/or buffer widths shall be increased, where possible, equal to the width of the trail corridor, including disturbed areas; c. Trails proposed to be located in landslide or erosion hazard areas shall be constructed in a manner that does not increase the risk of landslide or erosion and in accordance with an approved geotechnical report; and d. Trails located only in the outer twenty-five percent (25%) of critical areas buffers, and located to avoid removal of significant trees. Where existing legally established development has reduced the width of the critical areas buffer, trails may be placed in the outer twenty-five percent (25%) of the remaining critical area buffer. The trail shall be no more than five (5) feet in width and for pedestrian use only. Raised boardwalks utilizing nontreated pilings may be acceptable. Allowances for trails within the inner seventy-five percent (75%) of critical areas buffers are provided within applicable sections of ECDC Chapters 23.50 — 23.90. 7. Select Vegetation Removal Activities. The following vegetation removal activities: a. The removal of the following vegetation with hand labor and hand-held equipment when the area of work is under one thousand five hundred (1,500) square feet in area as calculated cumulatively over three (3) years: i. Invasive and noxious weeds; ii. English ivy (Hedera helix); iii. Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor, R. procerus); iv. Evergreen blackberry (Rubus laciniatus); v. Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius); and vi. Hedge and field bindweed (Convolvulus sepium and C. arvensis); Removal of these invasive and noxious plant species shall be restricted to hand removal unless permits or approval from the appropriate regulatory agencies have been obtained for approved biological or chemical treatments or other removal techniques. All removed plant material shall be taken away from the site and appropriately disposed of. Plants that appear on the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board list of noxious weeds must be handled and disposed of according to a noxious weed control plan appropriate to that species. b. The removal of trees from critical areas and buffers that are hazardous, posing a threat to public safety, or posing an imminent risk of damage to private property; provided, that: i. The applicant submits a report from an ISA- or ASCA-certified arborist or registered landscape architect that documents the hazard and provides a replanting schedule for the replacement trees; Page 25 of 87 Packet Pg. 394 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 ii. Tree cutting shall be limited to pruning and crown thinning, unless otherwise justified by a qualified professional. Where pruning or crown thinning is not sufficient to address the hazard, trees should be removed or converted to wildlife snags; iii. All vegetation cut (tree stems, branches, etc.) shall be left within the critical area or buffer unless removal is warranted due to the potential for disease or pest transmittal to other healthy vegetation or unless removal is warranted to improve slope stability; iv. The land owner shall replace any trees that are removed with new trees at a ratio of two replacement trees for each tree removed (2:1) within one year in accordance with an approved restoration plan. Replacement trees may be planted at a different, nearby location if it can be determined that planting in the same location would create a new hazard or potentially damage the critical area. Replacement trees shall be species that are native and indigenous to the site and a minimum of one to two inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) for deciduous trees and a minimum of six feet in height for evergreen trees as measured from the top of the root ball; v. If a tree to be removed provides critical habitat, such as an eagle perch, a qualified wildlife biologist shall be consulted to determine timing and methods of removal that will minimize impacts; and vi. Hazard trees determined to pose an imminent threat or danger to public health or safety, to public or private property, or of serious environmental degradation may be removed or pruned by the land owner prior to receiving written approval from the city; provided, that within 14 days following such action, the land owner shall submit a restoration plan that demonstrates compliance with the provisions of this title; c. Measures to control a fire or halt the spread of disease or damaging insects consistent with the State Forest Practices Act, Chapter 76.09 RCW; provided, that the removed vegetation shall be replaced in kind or with similar native species within one year in accordance with an approved restoration plan; d. Chemical Applications. The application of herbicides, pesticides, organic or mineral -derived fertilizers, or other hazardous substances, if necessary, as approved by the City, provided that their use shall be restricted in accordance with state Department of Fish and Wildlife Management Recommendations and the regulations of the state Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and Department of Ecology; and e. Unless otherwise provided, or as a necessary part of an approved alteration, removal of any vegetation or woody debris from a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area or wetland shall be prohibited; 8. Minor Site Investigative Work. Work necessary for land use submittals, such as surveys, soil logs, percolation tests, and other related activities, where such activities do not require construction of new roads or significant amounts of excavation. In every case, impacts to the critical area shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be immediately restored; and 9. Navigational Aids and Boundary Markers. Construction or modification of navigational aids and boundary markers. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Page 26 of 87 Packet Pg. 395 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 23.40.230 Exemptions.P SHARE A. Exemption Request and Review Process. The proponent of the activity may submit a written request for exemption to the director that describes the activity and states the exemption listed in this section that applies. The director shall review the exemption request to verify that it complies with this title and approve or deny the exemption. If the exemption is approved, it shall be placed on file with the city of Edmonds. If the exemption is denied, the proponent may continue in the review process and shall be subject to the requirements of this title. B. Exempt Activities and Impacts to Critical Areas. All exempted activities shall use reasonable methods to avoid potential impacts to critical areas. To be exempt from this title does not give permission to degrade a critical area or ignore risk from natural hazards. Any incidental damage to, or alteration of, a critical area that is not a necessary outcome of the exempted activity shall be restored, rehabilitated, or replaced at the responsible party's expense. C. Exempt Activities. The following developments, activities, and associated uses shall be exempt from the provisions of this title; provided, that they are otherwise consistent with the provisions of other local, state, and federal laws and requirements: 1. Emergencies. Those activities necessary to prevent an immediate threat to public health, safety, or welfare, or that pose an immediate risk of damage to private property and that require remedial or preventative action in a time frame too short to allow for compliance with the requirements of this title. Emergency actions that create an impact to a critical area or its buffer shall use reasonable methods to address the emergency; in addition, they must have the least possible impact to the critical area or its buffer. The person or agency undertaking such action shall notify the director within one working day following commencement of the emergency activity. Within 30 days, the director shall determine if the action taken was within the scope of the emergency actions allowed in this subsection. If the director determines that the action taken, or any part of the action taken, was beyond the scope of an allowed emergency action, then enforcement provisions of ECDC 23.40.240, Unauthorized critical area alterations and enforcement, shall apply. After the emergency, the person or agency undertaking the action shall fully fund and conduct necessary restoration and/or mitigation for any impacts to the critical area and buffers resulting from the emergency action in accordance with an approved critical areas report and mitigation plan. The person or agency undertaking the action shall apply for review, and the alteration, critical area report, and mitigation plan shall be reviewed by the director in accordance with the review procedures contained herein. Restoration and/or mitigation activities must be initiated within one year of the date of the emergency and completed in a timely manner; 2. Operation, Maintenance, or Repair. Operation, maintenance, or repair of existing structures, infrastructure improvements, utilities, public or private roads, dikes, levees, or drainage systems that do not require construction permits, if the activity does not further alter or increase the impact to, or encroach further within, the critical area or buffer and there is no increased risk to life or property as a Page 27 of 87 Packet Pg. 396 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 result of the proposed operation, maintenance, or repair. Operation and maintenance also includes normal maintenance of vegetation performed in accordance with best management practices, provided that such management actions are part of regular and ongoing maintenance, do not expand further into the critical area, are not the result of an expansion of the structure or utility, and do not directly impact an endangered or threatened species; and 3. Passive Outdoor Activities. Recreation, education, and scientific research activities that do not degrade the critical area, including fishing, hiking, and bird watching. Trails must be constructed pursuant to ECDC 23.40.220(C)(6), Public and Private Pedestrian Trails. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.240 Unauthorized critical area alterations and enforcement. o SHARE A. When a critical area or its buffer has been altered in violation of this title or the provisions of Chapter 7.200 ECC, all ongoing development work shall stop and the critical area shall be restored. The director shall have the authority to issue a stop work order to cease all ongoing development work, and order restoration, rehabilitation, or replacement measures at the owner's or other responsible party's expense to compensate for violation of the provisions of this title. The director may also require an applicant or property owner to take immediate action to ensure site stabilization and/or erosion control as needed. B. Requirement for Restoration Plan. All development work shall remain stopped until a restoration plan is prepared and approved by the director. Such a plan shall be prepared by a qualified professional using the best available science and shall describe how the actions proposed meet the minimum requirements described in subsection C of this section. The director shall, at the violator's expense, seek expert advice in determining the adequacy of the plan. Inadequate plans shall be returned to the applicant or violator for revision and resubmittal. C. Minimum Performance Standards for Restoration. 1. For alterations to frequently flooded areas, wetlands, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, the following minimum performance standards shall be met for the restoration of a critical area; provided, that if the violator can demonstrate that greater functional and habitat values can be obtained, these standards may be modified: a. The historic structural and functional values shall be restored, including water quality and habitat functions; b. The historic soil types and configuration shall be replicated; c. The critical area and buffers shall be replanted with native vegetation that replicates the vegetation historically found on the site in species types, sizes, and densities. The historic functions and values should be replicated at the location of the alteration; and d. Information demonstrating compliance with the requirements in ECDC 23.40.130, Mitigation plan requirements, shall be submitted to the city planning division. Page 28 of 87 Packet Pg. 397 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 2. For alterations to flood and geological hazards, the following minimum performance standards shall be met for the restoration of a critical area; provided, that if the violator can demonstrate that greater safety can be obtained, these standards may be modified: a. The hazard shall be reduced to a level equal to, or less than, the predevelopment hazard; b. Any risk of personal injury resulting from the alteration shall be eliminated or minimized; and c. The hazard area and buffers shall be replanted with native vegetation sufficient to minimize the hazard. D. Site Investigations. The director is authorized to make site inspections and take such actions as are necessary to enforce this title. The director shall present proper credentials and make a reasonable effort to contact any property owner before entering onto private property. E. Penalties. Any person, party, firm, corporation, or other legal entity convicted of violating any of the provisions of this title shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to penalties not to exceed a square footage cost of three dollars ($3.00) per square foot of impacted critical area and critical area buffer and/or a per tree penalty consistent with ECDC 18.45.070B. and C. Any development carried out contrary to the provisions of this title shall constitute a public nuisance and may be enjoined as provided by the statutes of the state of Washington. The city of Edmonds may levy civil penalties against any person, party, firm, corporation, or other legal entity for violation of any of the provisions of this title. The civil penalty shall be assessed as proscribed in ECDC 18.45.070 and 18.45.075.[Ord. 3828 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part IV. General Critical Areas Protective Measures 23.40.250 Critical areas markers and signs.0 SHARE A. The boundary at the outer edge of a critical area, critical area buffer or critical area tract may, at the discretion of the director, be required to be delineated with wood fencing. B. The boundary at the outer edge of the critical area or buffer may be identified with temporary signs prior to any site alteration. Such temporary signs may be replaced with permanent signs prior to occupancy or use of the site. C. These provisions may be modified by the director as necessary to ensure protection of sensitive features or wildlife needs. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.270 Critical areas tracts and easements.0 SHARE A. At the discretion of the director, critical areas tracts and/or easements may be required in development proposals for developments that include critical areas. These critical areas tracts and/or easements shall delineate and protect those contiguous critical areas and buffers greater than 5,000 square feet including: Page 29 of 87 Packet Pg. 398 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 1. Landslide hazard areas and buffers; 2. Wetlands and buffers; 3. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas; and 4. Other lands to be protected from alterations as conditioned by project approval. B. Notice on Title. The owner of any property with field -verified presence of critical areas and/or critical areas buffers, except critical aquifer recharge areas, for which a permit application is submitted shall, as a condition of permit issuance, record a notice of the existence of such critical area and/or critical area buffer against the property with the Snohomish County Auditor's office. The notice shall be approved by the director and the city attorney for compliance with this provision. The titleholder will have the right to challenge this notice and to have it released if the critical area designation no longer applies; however, the titleholder shall be responsible for completing a critical areas report, subject to approval by the director, before the notice on title can be released.. C. Critical areas tracts or easements shall be designated on the face of the plat or recorded drawing in a format approved by the director. The designation shall include the following restrictions: 1. An assurance that native vegetation will be preserved for the purpose of preventing harm to property and the environment, including, but not limited to, controlling surface water runoff and erosion, maintaining slope stability, buffering, and protecting plants, fish, and animal habitat; and 2. The right of the director to enforce the terms of the restriction. D. The director may require that critical areas tracts be dedicated to the city, to be held in an undivided interest by each owner of a building lot within the development with the ownership interest passing with the ownership of the lot, or held by an incorporated homeowner's association or other legal entity (such as a land trust), which ensures the ownership, maintenance, and protection of the tract and contains a process to assess costs associated therewith. E. The use of herbicides within critical areas tracts or easements is prohibited except use of aquatic approved herbicides where recommended by the Noxious Weed Control Board and where otherwise consistent with the provisions of ECDC Title 23. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.280 Building setbacks.0 SHARE Except for geologically hazardous areas where setbacks are determined by a geotechnical report, buildings and other structures shall be set back a distance of 15 feet from the edges of all critical area buffers or from the edges of all critical areas, if no buffers are required. In addition to other allowances provided by this Title, the following may be allowed in the building setback area: A. Landscaping; B. Uncovered decks; Page 30 of 87 Packet Pg. 399 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 C. Building overhangs, if such overhangs do not extend more than 30 inches into the setback area; and D. Impervious ground surfaces, such as driveways and patios; provided, that such improvements may be subject to water quality regulations as adopted in the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.290 Bonds to ensure mitigation, maintenance, and monitoring. SHARE A. When mitigation required pursuant to a development proposal is not completed prior to final permit approval, such as final plat approval or final building inspection, the applicant shall be required to post a performance bond or other security in a form and amount deemed acceptable by the director. If the development proposal is subject to mitigation, the applicant shall post a mitigation bond or other security in a form and amount deemed acceptable by the city to ensure mitigation is fully functional. B. The bond shall be in the amount of 120 percent of the estimated cost of the uncompleted actions or the estimated cost of restoring the functions and values of the critical area that are at risk, whichever is greater. The amount of the performance bond shall include a reasonable allocation for inflation based on the length of anticipated delay and the provisions of subsection D of this section. C. The bond shall be in the form of a surety bond, performance bond, and/or maintenance bond from an acceptable financial institution, with terms and conditions acceptable to the city of Edmonds' attorney. D. Bonds or other security authorized by this section shall remain in effect until the director determines, in writing, that the standards bonded for have been met. Bonds or other security shall be held by the city for a minimum of five (5) years to ensure that the required mitigation has been fully implemented and demonstrated to function, and may be held for longer periods when necessary to achieve these goals. E. Depletion, failure, or collection of bond funds shall not discharge the obligation of an applicant or violator to complete required mitigation, maintenance, monitoring, or restoration. F. Public development proposals shall be relieved from having to comply with the bonding requirements of this section if public funds have previously been committed for mitigation, maintenance, monitoring, or restoration. G. Any failure to satisfy critical area requirements established by law or condition including, but not limited to, the failure to provide a monitoring report within thirty (30) days after it is due or comply with other provisions of an approved mitigation plan shall constitute a default, and the city may demand payment of any financial guarantees or require other action authorized under this title or any other law. H. Any funds recovered pursuant to this section shall be used to complete the required mitigation. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.40.300 Critical area inspections.0 SHARE Reasonable access to the site shall be provided to the city, state, and/or federal agency review staff for the purpose of inspections during any proposal review, restoration, emergency action, or monitoring Page 31 of 87 Packet Pg. 400 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 period. Failure to provide access shall constitute grounds for issuance of a stop work order. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part V. Incorporation of Best Available Science 23.40.310 Best available science.0 SHARE A. Protect Functions and Values of Critical Areas with Special Consideration to Anadromous Fish. Critical areas reports and decisions to alter critical areas shall rely on the best available science to protect the functions and values of critical areas and must give special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fish, such as salmon and bull trout, and their habitat, where applicable. B. Best Available Science to Be Consistent with Criteria. The best available science is that scientific information applicable to the critical area prepared by local, state, or federal natural resource agencies, a qualified scientific professional, or a team of qualified scientific professionals that is consistent with criteria established in WAC 365-195-900 through 365-195-925 and RCW 36.70A.172. C. Characteristics of a Valid Scientific Process. In the context of critical areas protection, a valid scientific process is one that produces reliable information useful in understanding the consequences of a local government's regulatory decisions, and in developing critical areas policies and development regulations that will be effective in protecting the functions and values of critical areas. To determine whether information received during the permit review process is reliable scientific information, the director shall determine whether the source of the information displays the characteristics of a valid scientific process. Such characteristics are as follows: 1. Peer Review. The information has been critically reviewed by other persons who are qualified scientific experts in that scientific discipline. The proponents of the information have addressed the criticism of the peer reviewers. Publication in a refereed scientific journal usually indicates that the information has been appropriately peer -reviewed; 2. Methods. The methods used to obtain the information are clearly stated and reproducible. The methods are standardized in the pertinent scientific discipline or, if not, the methods have been appropriately peer -reviewed to ensure their reliability and validity; 3. Logical Conclusions and Reasonable Inferences. The conclusions presented are based on reasonable assumptions supported by other studies and consistent with the general theory underlying the assumptions. The conclusions are logically and reasonably derived from the assumptions and supported by the data presented. Any gaps in information and inconsistencies with other pertinent scientific information are adequately explained; 4. Quantitative Analysis. The data have been analyzed using appropriate statistical or quantitative methods; Page 32 of 87 Packet Pg. 401 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 5. Context. The information is placed in proper context. The assumptions, analytical techniques, data, and conclusions are appropriately framed with respect to the prevailing body of pertinent scientific knowledge; and 6. References. The assumptions, analytical techniques, and conclusions are well referenced with citations to relevant, credible literature and other pertinent existing information. D. Nonscientific Information. Nonscientific information, such as anecdotal observations, non -expert opinion, and hearsay, may supplement scientific information, but it is not an adequate substitute for valid and available scientific information. E. Absence of Valid Scientific Information. Where there is an absence of valid scientific information or incomplete scientific information relating to a critical area leading to uncertainty about the risk to critical area function of permitting an alteration of or impact to the critical area, the director shall: 1. Take a "precautionary or a no -risk approach" that strictly limits development and land use activities until the uncertainty is sufficiently resolved; and 2. Require application of an effective adaptive management program that relies on scientific methods to evaluate how well regulatory and nonregulatory actions protect the critical area. An adaptive management program is a formal and deliberate scientific approach to taking action and obtaining information in the face of uncertainty. An adaptive management program shall: a. Address funding for the research component of the adaptive management program; b. Change course based on the results and interpretation of new information that resolves uncertainties; and c. Commit to the appropriate time frame and scale necessary to reliably evaluate regulatory and nonregulatory actions affecting protection of critical areas and anadromous fisheries. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004] . Page 33 of 87 Packet Pg. 402 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Chapter 23.50 WETLANDS Sections: Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.50.000 Wetlands compliance requirements flowchart. 23.50.010 Designation, rating and mapping —Wetlands. Part II. Allowed Activities — Wetlands 23.50.020 Allowed activities — Wetlands. Part III. Additional Report Requirements — Wetlands 23.50.030 Special study and report requirements — Wetlands. Part IV. Development Standards — Wetlands 23.50.040 Development standards — Wetlands. 23.50.050 Mitigation requirements — Wetlands. 23.50.060 Performance standards — Subdivisions. Part V. City of Edmonds Wetland Field Data Form 23.50.070 Wetland field data form. Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.50.000 Wetlands compliance requirements flowchart.0 SHARE See Figure 23.50.000 at the end of this chapter. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.50.010 Designation, rating and mapping — Wetlands.0 SHARE A. Designating Wetlands. Wetlands are those areas, designated in accordance with the approved federal wetland delineation manual and applicable regional supplements as set forth in WAC 173-22-035, that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. All areas within the city of Edmonds meeting the wetland designation criteria, regardless Page 34 of 87 Packet Pg. 403 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 of any formal identification, are hereby designated critical areas and are subject to the provisions of this title. B. Wetland Ratings. Wetlands shall be rated according to the Washington State Department of Ecology wetland rating system found in the 2014 Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Ecology Publication No. 14-06-029). Consistent with the wetland rating system criteria and parameters within this document, wetlands that are rated for ecological functions with highest point totals (23 points or higher) perform ecological functions associated with water flow, water quality and habitat at highest levels, whereas wetlands that are rated with lowest point totals (15 points or lower) perform ecological functions at lowest levels. Wetlands that are rated with points between 16 and 22 points perform ecological functions at moderate to high levels. The City of Edmonds Wetland Rating Categories: a. Category I Wetlands. Category I wetlands are those that represent a unique or rare wetland type; are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands; are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are impossible to replace within a human lifetime; or provide a high level of function. The following types of wetlands are Category I:: i. Relatively undisturbed estuarine wetlands larger than one(1) acre; ii. Wetlands of high conservation value that are identified by scientists of the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR;; ill. Bogs; iv. Wetlands with mature and old growth forests larger than one (1) acre; v. Wetlands in coastal lagoons; vi. Wetlands that perform functions at high levels as indicated by a score of twenty-three (23) points or more based on functions. b. Category II Wetlands. Category II wetlands are those that are difficult, though not impossible, to replace, and provide high levels of some functions. The following types of wetlands are Category II: i. Estuarine wetlands smaller than one acre, or disturbed estuarine wetlands larger than one acre; iv. Wetlands with a moderately high level of functions as indicated by a score of 20 to 22 points based on functions. c. Category III Wetlands. Category III wetlands are wetlands with a moderate level of functions as indicated by a score of 16 to 19 points based on functions. d. Category IV Wetlands. Category IV wetlands are those with the lowest levels of functions as indicated by scores below 16 points based on functions. Page 35 of 87 Packet Pg. 404 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 All wetlands should be rated consistent with the 2014 Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington using the 2014 Western Washington Rating Form. C. Date of Wetland Rating. Wetland rating categories shall be applied as the wetland exists on the date of adoption of the rating system by the local government, as the wetland naturally changes thereafter, or as the wetland changes in accordance with permitted activities. Wetland rating categories shall not change due to illegal modifications. D. Mapping. The approximate location and extent of wetlands are shown on the city of Edmonds critical areas inventory. In addition, the National Wetlands Inventory and Soil Maps produced by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Resources Conservation Service may be useful in helping to identify potential wetland areas. The inventory and cited resources are to be used as a guide for the city of Edmonds, project applicants, and/or property owners, and may be continuously updated as new critical areas are identified. They are a reference and do not provide a final critical area designation. E. Delineation. The exact location of a wetland's boundary shall be determined through the performance of a field investigation by a qualified professional wetland scientist applying the approved federal wetland delineation manual and applicable regional supplements. Wetland delineations are valid for five years; after such date the city shall determine whether a revision or additional assessment is necessary. F. Lake Ballinger. Lake Ballinger is designated on the U.S. National Wetlands Inventory as a lacustrine (lake) environment and should not be delineated as a wetland in its entirety. Lake fringe wetlands existing along the periphery of Lake Ballinger shall be identified according to specific criteria provided in 23.50.010. Consistent with guidance for delineating lake fringe wetlands provided in these resources, the existence of jurisdictional wetlands along Lake Ballinger shorelines shall be largely based upon the presence of persistent emergent vegetation in shoreline areas less than 6.6 feet in depth. Provisions for protection of Lake Ballinger shorelines not meeting criteria for jurisdictional wetlands are provided in the city of Edmonds shoreline master program. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part II. Allowed Activities — Wetlands 23.50.020 Allowed activities — Wetlands.0 SHARE The activities listed below are allowed in wetlands in addition to those activities listed in, and consistent with, the provisions established in ECDC 23.40.220, and do not require submission of a critical areas report, except where such activities result in a loss to the functions and values of a wetland or wetland buffer. These activities include: A. Conservation or preservation of soil, water, vegetation, fish, shellfish, and other wildlife that does not entail changing the structure or functions of the existing wetland. B. The harvesting of wild crops in a manner that is not injurious to natural reproduction of such crops and provided the harvesting does not require tilling of soil, planting of crops, chemical applications, or alteration of the wetland by changing existing topography, water conditions, or water sources. C. Drilling for utilities under a wetland; provided, that the drilling does not interrupt the ground water connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil column. Specific studies Page 36 of 87 Packet Pg. 405 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 by a hydrologist are necessary to determine whether the ground water connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil column could be disturbed. D. Enhancement of a wetland through the removal of nonnative invasive species. Weeding shall be restricted to hand removal and weed material shall be removed from the site. Bare areas that remain after weed removal shall be revegetated with native shrubs and trees at natural densities. Some hand seeding may also be done over the bare areas with native herbs. Noxious weeds listed on the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board list must be handled and disposed of according to a noxious weed control plan appropriate to that species. E. Permitted alteration to a legally constructed structure existing within a wetland or wetland buffer that does not increase the footprint of development or impervious surfacing or increase the impact to a wetland or wetland buffer. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part III. Additional Report Requirements — Wetlands 23.50.030 Special study and report requirements — Wetlands.0 SHARE A. Additional Requirements for Wetlands. In addition to the general critical areas report requirements of ECDC 23.40.090, critical areas reports for wetlands must meet the requirements of this section. Critical areas reports for two or more types of critical areas must meet the report requirements for each relevant type of critical area. B. Critical areas report requirements for wetlands may be met in "stages" or through multiple reports. The typical sequence of potentially required reports that may in part or in combination fulfill the requirements of this section include: 1. Wetland reconnaissance report documenting the existence and general location of wetlands in the vicinity of a project area; 2. Wetland delineation report documenting the extent and boundary of a jurisdictional wetland per RCW 36.70A.175; and 3. Wetland mitigation report documenting potential wetland impacts and mitigation measures designed to retain or increase the functions and values of a wetland in accordance with ECDC 23.50.050 and the general provisions of this title. C. A wetland critical areas report may include one or more of the above three report types, depending on the information required by the director and the extent of potential wetland impacts. The Edmonds development services director maintains the authority and discretion to determine which report(s) alone or combined are sufficient to meet the requirements outlined below and to waive report requirements based upon site conditions and the potential for project impacts. D. Preparation by a Qualified Professional. A critical area report for wetlands shall be prepared by a qualified professional who is a certified professional wetland scientist or a noncertified professional wetland scientist with a minimum of five years of experience in the field of wetland science and with Page 37 of 87 Packet Pg. 406 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 experience preparing wetland reports. Pursuant to ECDC 23.40.090(A), applicants may choose one of the qualified technical consultants on the city's approved list in preparing critical areas reports for wetlands, or may utilize an alternative consultant. Critical areas studies and reports developed by an alternative consultant shall be subject to independent review pursuant to ECDC 23.40.090(B). E. Area Addressed in Critical Area Report. The following areas shall be addressed in a critical area report for wetlands: 1. The project area of the proposed activity; 2. All wetlands and recommended buffers within 200 feet of the project area; and 3. All shoreline areas, water features, floodplains, and other critical areas, and related buffers within 200 feet of the project area. The location and extent of wetlands and other critical areas existing outside of the project area or subject parcel boundary may be shown in approximation as practical and necessary to provide an assessment of potential project effects. F. Wetland Analysis. In addition to the minimum required contents of ECDC 23.40.090, Critical areas reports — Requirements, a critical areas report for wetlands shall contain an analysis of the wetlands, including the following site- and proposal -related information at a minimum: 1. A written assessment and accompanying maps of the wetlands and buffers within 200 feet of the project area, including the following information at a minimum: a. Wetland delineation and required buffers; b. Existing wetland acreage; c. Wetland category; d. Vegetative, faunal, and hydrologic characteristics; e. Soil and substrate conditions; f. Topographic elevations, at two -foot contours; and g. A discussion of the water sources supplying the wetland and documentation of hydrologic regime (locations of inlet and outlet features, water depths throughout the wetland, and evidence of recharge or discharge, evidence of water depths throughout the year: drift lines, algal layers, moss lines, and sediment deposits). The location, extent and analyses of wetlands not contiguous with the subject parcel existing outside of the immediate project area may be described in approximation as practical and necessary to provide an assessment of potential project effects and hydrologic/ecological connectivity to on -site wetlands and other critical areas. Page 38 of 87 Packet Pg. 407 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 2. A discussion of measures, including avoidance, minimization, and mitigation, proposed to preserve existing wetlands and restore any wetlands that were degraded prior to the current proposed land use activity. 3. A habitat and native vegetation conservation strategy that addresses methods to protect and enhance on -site habitat and wetland functions. 4. Functional evaluation for the wetland and adjacent buffer using a local or state agency staff - recognized method and including the reference of the method and all data sheets. 5. Proposed mitigation, if needed, including a written assessment and accompanying maps of the mitigation area, including the following information at a minimum: a. Existing and proposed wetland acreage; b. Vegetative and faunal conditions; c. Surface and subsurface hydrologic conditions including an analysis of existing and future hydrologic regime and proposed hydrologic regime for enhanced, created, or restored mitigation areas; d. Relationship to the watershed and existing waterbodies; e. Soil and substrate conditions, topographic elevations; f. Existing and proposed adjacent site conditions; g. Required wetland buffers; and h. Property ownership. 6. A scale map of the development proposal site and adjacent area. A discussion of ongoing management practices that will protect wetlands after the project site has been developed, including proposed monitoring and maintenance programs. 7. A bond estimate for the installation (including site preparation, plant materials and installation, fertilizers, mulch, and stakes) and the proposed monitoring and maintenance work for the required number of years. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part IV. Development Standards — Wetlands 23.50.040 Development standards — Wetlands.0 SHARE A. Activities may only be permitted in a wetland buffer if the applicant can show that the proposed activity will not degrade the functions and functional performance of the wetland and other critical areas. Page 39 of 87 Packet Pg. 408 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 B. Activities and uses shall be prohibited in wetlands and wetland buffers, except as provided for in this title. C. Category I Wetlands. Activities and uses shall be prohibited from Category I wetlands, except as provided for in the public agency and utility exception, reasonable use exception, and variance sections of this title. D. Category II Wetlands. With respect to activities proposed in Category II wetlands, the following standards shall apply: 1. Water -dependent activities may be allowed where there are no practicable alternatives that would have a less adverse impact on the wetland, its buffers and other critical areas. 2. Where non -water -dependent activities are proposed, it shall be presumed that alternative locations are available, and activities and uses shall be prohibited, unless the applicant demonstrates that: a. The basic project purpose cannot be accomplished as proposed and successfully avoid, or result in less adverse impact on, a wetland on another site or sites in the general region; and b. All alternative designs of the project as proposed, such as a reduction in the size, scope, configuration, or density of the project, would not avoid or result in less of an adverse impact on a wetland or its buffer. E. Category III and IV Wetlands. Activities and uses that result in unavoidable and necessary impacts may be permitted in Category III and IV wetlands and associated buffers in accordance with an approved critical areas report and mitigation plan. F. Wetland Buffers. 1. Standard Buffer Widths. The standard buffer widths in ECDC 23.50.040.F.1.d below have been established in accordance with best available science. The buffers are based on the category of wetland and the habitat score as determined by a qualified wetland professional using the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington. a. The use of the standard buffer widths requires the implementation of the measures in ECDC 23.50.040.F.2, where applicable, to minimize the impacts of the adjacent land uses. b. If an applicant chooses not to apply the mitigation measures in ECDC 23.5 0.040. F.2, than a thirty- three (33%) increase in the width of all buffers is required. c. The standard buffer widths presume the existence of a relatively intact native vegetation community in the buffer zone adequate to protect the wetland functions and values at the time of the proposed activity. If the buffer is composed of nonnative vegetation, lawn, or bare ground, then, at the discretion of the director, the buffer width may be increased or an applicant may be required to either develop and implement a wetland buffer enhancement plan to maintain the standard width or widen the standard width to ensure that adequate functions of the buffer are provided.. Page 40 of 87 Packet Pg. 409 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 d. Standard Wetland Buffer Widths Table. Minimum Buffer Buffer Buffer Width Width Buffer Width Width (Wetland (Wetland (Wetland scores (Wetland Wetland Category scores 3-4 scores 5 scores 6-7 8-9 habitat habitat habitat points) habitat points) points) points) Category L• 75 ft 105 ft 165 ft 225 ft Based on total score Category I: Bogs and 190 ft 190 ft 190 ft 225 ft Wetlands of High Conservation Value Category I: 75 ft 105 ft 165 ft 225 ft Forested Category L• 150 ft 150 ft 150 ft 150 ft Estuarine Category II: 75 ft 105 ft 165 ft 225 ft Based on score Category III (all) 60 ft 105 ft 165 ft 165 ft Category IV (all) 40 ft 40 ft 40 ft 40 ft 2. Required Measures to Minimize Impacts to Wetlands. The standard wetland buffer widths in ECDC 23.50.040.F.I.e assumes implementation of the following measures, where applicable to a specific proposal. Disturbance I Required Measures to Minimize Impacts Lights I • Direct lights away from wetland Page 41 of 87 Packet Pg. 410 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts Noise • Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland If warranted, enhance existing buffer with native vegetation plantings adjacent to noise source • immediately adjacent to the out wetland buffer . Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while Toxic runoff ensuring wetland is not dewatered Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 feet of wetlands Apply integrated pest management Stormwater runoff . Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for roads and existing adjacent development Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly enters the buffer • Use Low Impact Development techniques (per Puget Sound Action Team publication on LID techniques) Change in water . Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new runoff regime from impervious surfaces and new lawns Pets and human • Use privacy fencing OR plant dense vegetation to delineate buffer edge and to discourage disturbance using vegetation Page 42 of 87 Packet Pg. 411 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts appropriate for the ecoregion disturbance • Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or protect with a conservation easement Dust • Use best management practices to control dust Disruption of • Maintain connections to offsite areas that are undisturbed corridors or . Restore corridors or connections to offsite habitats by replanting connections 2. Increased Wetland Buffer Widths. The director shall require increased buffer widths in accordance with the recommendations of an experienced, qualified professional wetland scientist and the best available science on a case -by -case basis when a larger buffer is necessary to protect wetland functions and values based on site -specific characteristics. This determination shall be based on one or more of the following criteria: a. A larger buffer is needed to protect other critical areas; b. The buffer or adjacent uplands has a slope greater than 15 percent or is susceptible to erosion and standard erosion control measures will not prevent adverse impacts to the wetland; or c. The buffer area has minimal vegetative cover. In lieu of increasing the buffer width where existing buffer vegetation is inadequate to protect the wetland functions and values, development and implementation of a wetland buffer enhancement plan in accordance with subsection (F)(3) of this section may substitute. d. The wetland and/or buffer is occupied by a federally listed threatened or endangered species, a bald eagle nest, a great blue heron rookery, or a species of local importance; and it is determined by the director that an increased buffer width is necessary to protect the species. 3. Measurement of Wetland Buffers. All buffers shall be measured from the wetland boundary as surveyed in the field. The buffer for a wetland created, restored, or enhanced as compensation for approved wetland alterations shall be the same as the buffer required for the category of the created, restored, or enhanced wetland. 4. Buffer Consistency. All mitigation sites shall have buffers consistent with the buffer requirements of this chapter. Page 43 of 87 Packet Pg. 412 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 5. Buffer Maintenance. Except as otherwise specified or allowed in accordance with this title, wetland buffers shall be retained in an undisturbed or enhanced condition. Removal of invasive nonnative weeds is required for the duration of the mitigation bond. G. Wetland Buffer Modifications and Uses 1. Where wetland or buffer alterations are permitted by the City of Edmonds, the applicant shall mitigate impacts to achieve no not loss of wetland acreage and functions consistent with ECDC 23.50.050 and other applicable provisions of this Title. 2. At the discretion of the Director, standard wetland buffers may be averaged or reduced when consistent with all criteria in ECDC 23.50.040.G. Wetland buffer averaging with enhancement shall be preferred over wetland buffer reduction with enhancement. Wetland buffer reduction shall only be approved by the director when buffer averaging cannot be accomplished on -site. 3. Wetland Buffer Width Averaging with Buffer Enhancement. The director may allow modification of a standard wetland buffer width in accordance with an approved critical areas report and the best available science on a case -by -case basis by averaging buffer widths. Any allowance for averaging buffer widths shall only be granted concomitant to the development and implementation of a wetland buffer enhancement plan for areas of buffer degradation. Only those portions of a wetland buffer existing within the project area or subject parcel shall be considered the total standard buffer for buffer averaging. Averaging of buffer widths may only be allowed where a qualified professional wetland scientist demonstrates that: a. The buffer averaging and enhancement plan provides evidence that wetland functions and values will be: i. Increased or retained through plan implementation for those wetlands where existing buffer vegetation is generally intact; or ii. Increased through plan implantation for those wetlands where existing buffer vegetation is inadequate to protect the functions and values of the wetland; b. The wetland contains variations in sensitivity due to existing physical characteristics or the character of the buffer varies in slope, soils, or vegetation, and the wetland would benefit from a wider buffer in places and would not be adversely impacted by a narrower buffer in other places; c. The total area contained in the buffer area, or the total buffer area existing on a subject parcel for wetlands extending off -site, after averaging is no less than that which would be contained within a standard; and d. The buffer width at any single location is not reduced by more than twenty-five percent (25%) percent of the standard buffer width. Page 44 of 87 Packet Pg. 413 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 4. Buffer Width Reductions through Buffer Enhancement. At the discretion of the director, and only when buffer averaging cannot be accomplished on site, wetland buffer width reductions (or approval of standard buffer widths for wetlands where existing buffer conditions require increased buffer widths) may be granted concomitant to the development and implementation of a wetland buffer enhancement plan for Category III and IV wetlands only. Approval of a wetland buffer enhancement plan shall, at the discretion of the director, allow for wetland buffer width reductions by no more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the standard width; provided, that: a. The plan provides evidence that wetland functions and values will be: i. Increased or retained through plan implementation for those wetlands where existing buffer vegetation is generally intact; or ii. Increased through plan implementation for those wetlands where existing buffer vegetation is inadequate to protect the functions and values of the wetland; b. The plan documents existing native plant densities and provides for increases in buffer native plant densities to no less than three feet on center for shrubs and eight feet on center for trees; c. The plan requires monitoring and maintenance to ensure success in accordance with ECDC 23.40.1300; and d. The plan specifically documents methodology and provides performance standards including but not limited to: i. Percent vegetative cover; ii. Percent invasive species cover; iii. Species richness; and iv. Amount of large woody debris. 8. Buffer Uses. The following uses may be permitted within a wetland buffer in accordance with the review procedures of this title; provided, they are not prohibited by any other applicable law and they are conducted in a manner so as to minimize impacts to the buffer and adjacent wetland: a. All activities allowed by ECDC 23.50.020 (Allowed activities — wetlands). Page 45 of 87 Packet Pg. 414 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 b. Conservation and Restoration Activities. Conservation or restoration activities aimed at protecting the soil, water, vegetation, or wildlife. c. Passive Recreation. Passive recreation facilities designed and in accordance with an approved critical area report, including: i. Walkways and trails; provided, that those pathways are generally constructed with a surface that does not interfere with substrate permeability, are generally located only in the outer twenty-five percent (25%) of wetland buffers, and are located to avoid removal of significant trees. Where existing legally established development has reduced the width of the wetland buffer, trails may be placed in the outer twenty-five percent (25%) of the remaining wetland buffer. The trail shall be no more than five (5) feet in width and for pedestrian use only. Raised boardwalks utilizing nontreated pilings may be acceptable. The director may allow trails within the inner twenty-five percent (25%) of wetland buffers when required to provide access to wildlife viewing structures, fishing access areas, or connections to other trail facilities; ii. Wildlife viewing structures; and iii. Fishing access areas down to the water's edge that shall be no larger than six feet. c. Storm Water Management Facilities. Storm water management facilities, limited to outfalls, pipes and conveyance systems, storm water dispersion outfalls and bioswales, may be allowed within the outer 25 percent of a standard or modified buffer for Category 3 or 4 wetlands only; provided, that: i. No other location is feasible; and ii. The location and function of such facilities will not degrade the functions or values of the wetland. iii. Storm water management facilities are not allowed in buffers of Category 1 or 2 wetlands. iv. Projects shall also comply with all applicable requirements in Chapter 18.30 ECDC, Stormwater Management, including Minimum Requirement #8, Wetland Protection. H. Signs and Fencing of Wetlands. 1. Temporary Markers. The outer perimeter of the wetland or buffer and the limits of those areas to be disturbed pursuant to an approved permit or authorization shall be marked in the field in such a way as to ensure that no unauthorized intrusion will occur and is subject to inspection by the director prior to the commencement of permitted activities. The director may require the use of fencing to protect wetlands from disturbance and intrusion. Temporary marking shall be maintained throughout construction and shall not be removed until permanent signs, if required, are in place. 2. Permanent Signs. As a condition of any permit or authorization issued pursuant to this chapter, the director may require the applicant to install permanent signs along the boundary of a wetland or buffer. Page 46 of 87 Packet Pg. 415 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 a. Permanent signs shall be made of an enamel -coated metal face and attached to a metal post or another nontreated material of equal durability. Signs must be posted at an interval of one per lot or every 50 feet, whichever is less, and must be maintained by the property owner in perpetuity. The sign shall be worded as follows or with alternative language approved by the director: Protected Wetland Area Do Not Disturb Contact the City of Edmonds Regarding Uses and Restrictions b. The provisions of subsection (G)(2)(a) of this section may be modified as necessary to assure protection of sensitive features or wildlife. 3. Permanent Fencing. Permanent fencing shall be required at the outer edge of the critical area buffer under the following circumstances, provided that the director may waive this requirement: a. As part of any development proposal for single-family plats, single-family short plats, multifamily, mixed use, and commercial development where the director determines that such fencing is necessary to protect the functions of the critical area, provided that breaks in permanent fencing may be allowed for access to permitted buffer uses (ECDC 23.50.040.G.8); b. As part of development proposals for parks where the adjacent proposed use is active recreation and the director determines that such fencing is necessary to protect the functions of the critical area; c. When buffer averaging is employed as part of a development proposal; d. When buffer reductions are employed as part of a development proposal; or e. At the director's discretion to protect the values and functions of a critical area. I. Additions to Structures Existing Within Wetlands and/or Wetland Buffers. 1. Additions to legally constructed structures existing within wetlands or wetland buffers that increase the footprint of development or impervious surfacing shall be permitted consistent with the development standards of this section, provided that a wetland and/or buffer enhancement plan is provided to mitigate for impacts consistent with this Title, and provided that all impacts from temporary disturbances within the critical area buffer shall be addressed through use of best management plans and buffer enhancement plantings during and following construction of the allowed alteration. Provisions for standard wetland buffers, wetland buffer averaging with enhancement, and buffer reductions with enhancement require applicants to locate such additions in accordance with the following sequencing: a. Outside of the standard wetland buffer; Page 47 of 87 Packet Pg. 416 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 b. Outside of a wetland buffer averaged (with enhancement) per subsection (G)(3) of this section; c. Outside of a wetland buffer reduced (with enhancement) per subsection (G)(4) of this section; d. Outside of the inner twenty five percent (25%) of the standard wetland buffer width with no more than three hundred (300) square feet of structure addition footprint within the inner fifty percent (50%) of the standard wetland buffer width, provided that enhancement is provided at a minimum three -to -one (3:1) ratio (enhancement -to -impact); e. Outside of the inner twenty five percent (25%) of the standard wetland buffer width with no more than five hundred (500) square feet of new footprint within the inner fifty percent (50%) of the standard wetland buffer width, provided that enhancement is provided at a minimum five -to -one (5:1) ratio (enhancement -to -impact), and that stormwater low impact development (LID) techniques and other measures are included as part of the wetland / buffer enhancement plan. 2. Where meeting wetland buffer enhancement requirements required by H.1. of this section would result in enhancement that is separated from the critical area due to uncommon property ownership, alternative enhancement approaches may be approved by the director. Alternative approaches could include a vegetated rain garden that receives storm runoff, replacement of existing impervious surfaces with pervious materials, or other approaches that provide ecological benefits to the adjacent critical area. 3. Additions to legally constructed structures existing within wetlands or wetland buffers that cannot be accommodated in accordance with the sequencing in H.1. of this section (i.e., additions proposed within a wetland or the inner 25 percent of a standard buffer width) may be permitted at the director's discretion as a variance subject to review by the city hearing examiner and the provisions of ECDC 2340210 J. Development Proposals within the Footprint of Existing Development. New development shall be allowed within the footprint of existing development occurring within a wetland buffer, provided that the following conditions are met: 1. The footprint of existing development was legally established, and is consistent with the definition provided in ECDC 23.40.320; 2. The proposed development within the footprint of existing development is sited as far away from the wetland edge as is feasible; 3. As part of the development proposal, opportunities to reduce the footprint of existing development are implemented where such reduction would increase the buffer width adjacent to the wetland and not represent an undue burden given the scale of the proposed development. 4. The proposed development includes enhancement to the adjacent wetland and associated buffer in order to improve functions degraded by previous development; 5. Enhancement is provided as wetland or buffer enhancement for an equivalent area of the footprint of the newly proposed development within the footprint of existing development occurring in a wetland Page 48 of 87 Packet Pg. 417 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 buffer, or through an alternative approach approved by the director that restores degraded functions of the wetland and remaining buffer; and 6. Impacts from temporary disturbances within the wetland buffer shall be addressed through use of best management plans and buffer enhancement plantings during and following construction of the allowed alteration. K. Small, hydrologically isolated wetlands. The director may allow small, hydrologically isolated Category III or IV wetlands under one thousand(1,000) square feet in area to be exempt from the avoidance sequencing provisions of ECDC 23.40.120 and the wetland development standards provisions of ECDC 23.50.040.F. At the discretion of the director such wetlands may be altered, provided that a submitted critical areas report and mitigation plan provides evidence that all of the following conditions are met: 1. The wetland is less than one thousand (1,000) square feet in area; 2. The wetland does not provide significant habitat value for wildlife; 3. The wetland is not adjacent to a riparian area; 4. The wetland has a score of three (3) — four (4) points for habitat in the adopted Western Washington rating system; and 5. A mitigation plan to replace lost wetland functions and values is developed, approved and implemented consistent with ECDC 23.50.050. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.50.050 Mitigation requirements — Wetlands.0 SHARE Compensatory mitigation for alterations to wetlands shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic functions. Wetland mitigation plans shall be consistent with guidelines in Wetland Mitigation in Washington State —Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans (Ecology, 2006) and Selecting Wetland Mitigation Sites Using a Watershed Approach (Ecology, 2009), as revised. A. Mitigation for Lost or Affected Functions. Compensatory mitigation actions shall address functions affected by the alteration to achieve functional equivalency or improvement and shall provide similar wetland functions as those lost, except when: 1. The lost wetland provides minimal functions as determined by a site -specific function assessment, and the proposed compensatory mitigation action(s) will provide equal or greater functions or will provide functions shown to be limiting within a watershed through a formal Washington State watershed assessment plan or protocol; or 2. Out -of -kind replacement will best meet formally identified watershed goals, such as replacement of historically diminished wetland types. Page 49 of 87 Packet Pg. 418 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 B. Preference of Mitigation Actions. Mitigation actions that require compensation by replacing, enhancing, or substitution shall occur in the following order of preference: 1. Implementing compensatory restoration through purchase of credits at an approved mitigation bank or through payment into an approved in lieu fee program. 2. Restoring (re-establishing) wetlands on upland sites that were formerly wetlands. 3. Creating wetlands on disturbed upland sites such as those with vegetative cover consisting primarily of nonnative, introduced species. This should only be attempted when there is a consistent source of hydrology and it can be shown that the surface and subsurface hydrologic regime is conducive for the wetland community that is being designed. 4. Enhancing significantly degraded wetlands in combination with restoration or creation. Such enhancement should be part of a mitigation package that includes replacing the impacted area meeting appropriate ratio requirements. C. Type and Location of Mitigation. Unless it is demonstrated that a higher level of ecological functioning would result from an alternate approach, compensatory mitigation for ecological functions shall be in -kind and conducted on the site or in the vicinity of the alteration except when all of the following apply: 1. On -site opportunities do not have a high likelihood of success, after a determination of the natural capacity of the site to mitigate for the impacts. Consideration should include: anticipated wetland mitigation replacement ratios, buffer conditions and proposed widths, hydrogeomorphic classes of on - site wetlands when restored, proposed flood storage capacity, and potential to mitigate riparian fish and wildlife impacts (such as connectivity); 2. Off -site mitigation has a greater likelihood of providing equal or improved wetland functions than the impacted wetland; 3. Off -site mitigation incorporates guidance from Calculating Credits and Debits for Compensatory Mitigation in Wetlands of Western Washington (Ecology Publication #10-06-011, Hruby. 2012); and 4. Off -site locations for compensatory mitigation are consistent with city of Edmonds goals for watershed -wide ecological restoration. Off -site locations are selected with a preference for sites within the same basin as the impact, followed by other sites within the city. Specific areas targeted for restoration efforts include: a. Lake -fringe wetlands and habitat areas associated with Lake Ballinger; b. Edmonds marsh; c. Yost Park wetlands; d. Good Hope wetlands; Page 50 of 87 Packet Pg. 419 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 e. Wetlands and habitat areas peripheral to anadromous fish -bearing streams; and f. Sites available through an approved mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program. This list is not comprehensive and may change as the city of Edmonds identifies areas suitable for restoration and capital improvement projects consistent with goals for jurisdiction -wide habitat retention and enhancement provided in the city's comprehensive plan. D. Mitigation Timing. Mitigation projects shall be completed with an approved monitoring plan prior to activities that will disturb wetlands. In all other cases, mitigation shall be completed immediately following disturbance and prior to use or occupancy of the activity or development. Construction of mitigation projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to existing fisheries, wildlife, and flora. E. Mitigation Ratios. 1. Acreage Replacement Ratios. The ratios in the table below shall apply to creation or re-establishment, rehabilitation, or enhancement that is in -kind, is on -site, is timed prior to or concurrent with alteration, and has a high probability of success. These ratios do not apply to remedial actions resulting from unauthorized alterations; greater ratios shall apply in those cases. The first number specifies the acreage of replacement wetlands and the second specifies the acreage of wetlands altered. Ratios for rehabilitation and enhancement may be reduced when combined with 1:1 replacement through creation or re-establishment pursuant to Table la, Wetland Mitigation in Washington State — Part 1: Agency Policies and Guidance —Version 1, (Ecology Publication #06-06-1 la, or as revised). Creation, re- establishment, rehabilitation, and enhancement definitions are provided in ECDC 23.40.320 (see definition for "compensatory mitigation", and shall be additionally consistent with intent pursuant to Ecology Publication #06-06-1 la. Creation or Category and Rehabilitation Enhancement Re - Type of Wet/and only only establishment Category IV 1.5:1 3:1 6:1 Category III 2:1 4:1 8:1 Category II 3:1 6:1 12:1 Category I: 4:1 8:1 16:1 Based on functions Category I: 6:1 12:1 24:1 Mature and old Page 51 of 87 Packet Pg. 420 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 growth forest Category I: Not considered Not considered Not considered High conservation possible possible possible value / Bog Mitigation requirements may also be determined using the credit/debit tool described in Calculating Credits and Debits for Compensatory Mitigation in Wetlands of Western Washington: Final Report (Ecology Publication #10-06-011, Olympia, WA, March 2012, or as revised) if approved by the director 2. Off -site Mitigation. The ratios provided in ECDC 23.50.050.F.1. do not apply to off -site mitigation, including use of credits from a state -certified wetland mitigation bank or payment to a certified in -lieu fee program. When off -site mitigation is proposed, or when a mitigation bank or in lieu fee program is used, replacement ratios may incorporate guidance from Calculating Credits and Debits for Compensatory Mitigation in Wetlands of Western Washington (Ecology Publication #10-06-011, Hruby. 2012), and for mitigation banks or in lieu fee program should be consistent with the certification requirements. Use of mitigation banks shall meet all requirements of ECDC 23.50.050.H. 3. Increased Replacement Ratio. The director may require increased compensatory mitigation ratios under the following circumstances: a. Uncertainty exists as to the probable success of the proposed restoration or creation; b. A significant period of time will elapse between impact and replication of wetland functions; c. Proposed mitigation will result in a lower -category wetland or reduced functions relative to the wetland being impacted; or d. The impact was an unauthorized impact. G. Wetlands Enhancement as Mitigation. 1. Impacts to wetland functions may be mitigated by enhancement of existing significantly degraded wetlands, but may, at the discretion of the director, be used in conjunction with restoration and/or creation. Applicants proposing to enhance wetlands must produce a critical areas report that identifies how enhancement will increase the functions of the degraded wetland and how this increase will adequately mitigate for the loss of wetland area and function at the impact site. An enhancement proposal must also show whether existing wetland functions will be reduced by the enhancement actions. 2. At a minimum, enhancement acreage shall be double the acreage required for creation or restoration under subsection F of this section. The ratios shall be greater than double the required acreage where the enhancement proposal would result in minimal gain in the performance of wetland functions and/or result in the reduction of other wetland functions currently being provided in the wetland. Page 52 of 87 Packet Pg. 421 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 3. Mitigation ratios for enhancement in combination with other forms of mitigation shall range from six - to -one to three -to -one and be limited to Class 3 and 4 wetlands. H. Wetland Mitigation Banks and In -Lieu Fee Programs. 1. Wetland Mitigation Banks. Credits from a wetland mitigation bank may be approved for use as compensation for unavoidable impacts to wetlands when: a. The bank is certified under state rules; b. The director determines that the wetland mitigation bank provides appropriate compensation for the authorized impacts; and c. The proposed use of credits is consistent with the terms and conditions of the bank's certification instrument. d. Replacement ratios for projects using bank credits are consistent with replacement ratios specified in the bank's certification. e. Credits from a certified wetland mitigation bank are used to compensate for impacts located within the service area specified in the certified bank instrument. In some cases, the service area of the bank may include portions of more than one adjacent drainage basin for specific wetland functions. 2. In -Lieu Fee Programs. As an alternative to on -site or other off -site mitigation approaches, the director may approve purchase of credit for compensatory mitigation from an in lieu fee program. Any such program used to compensate for direct wetland impacts shall be developed and approved through a public process and be consistent with federal rules, state policy on in lieu fee mitigation and state water quality regulations, Determining credit purchase necessary to compensate for wetland impacts shall incorporate guidance from Calculating Credits and Debits for Compensatory Mitigation in Wetlands of Western Washington (Ecology Publication #10-06-011, Hruby. 2012). Development proposals impacting critical areas and/or associated buffers may contribute payment towards an identified City of Edmonds mitigation project with approval from the director, provided that the mitigation approach meets all state and federal permit requirements, where required. Applicant provision of funds for compensatory mitigation shall only be approved if: a. The director determines that it would provide environmentally appropriate compensation for the proposed wetland impacts;; b. The mitigation will occur on a site identified using the site selection and prioritization process in the approved in -lieu fee program instrument or at a City -identified restoration site consistent with ECDC23.40.140; c. A restoration area and plan have been identified and shall be implemented within three years of project development; d. Restoration efforts are focused in areas identified as suitable for restoration by the director; and Page 53 of 87 Packet Pg. 422 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 e. Credits from an approved in -lieu fee program may be used to compensate for impacts located within the service area specified in the approved in -lieu fee instrument. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.50.060 Performance standards — Subdivisions.C3 SHARE The subdivision and short subdivision of land in wetlands and associated buffers is subject to the following: A. Land that is located wholly within a wetland or its buffer may not be subdivided. B. Land that is located partially within a wetland or its buffer may be subdivided; provided, that an accessible and buildable contiguous portion of each new lot is located outside of the wetland and its buffer. C. Access roads and utilities serving the proposed subdivision may be permitted within the wetland and associated buffers only at the discretion of the director. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part V. City of Edmonds Wetland Field Data Form 23.50.070 Wetland field data form.0 SHARE The wetland field data used for completion of wetland ratings shall be consistent with the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology Publication #14-06-029; Hruby 2014). [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Figure 23.50.000 Page 54 of 87 Packet Pg. 423 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 CITY OF EDMONDS CRITICAL AREAS Critical Areas Compliance Requirements* Wetlands Wetlra and nv Wetland Reconnais• billet RetonnaissanWetiand aelineatiw=:-gingwtn y ce Impactscannot Nffu tarot buffer Q- belccated sance REQUIRED to determ Ines that REQUIRED to identify be avoided-hd^M—j Averagingand NDadditional (D on or near dctermi ne if potential jurisdictional wetland bound atic R through )IF Enhancement Plan compliance V Subject wetland meetsjurisdi[- wetland exist and classify wetland standard buffer REQiHREO to prove required. C parcel- Llonal criteria and is within 22.5 ft of per updated wld NS ention orincmase located within 2259of subject parcel. categoi ies. in wetland functions subject pa r[el. and va I ues. Butter wiEih tM�ciien O th rp,�r:nhor.�mc^t [: cgury3a^4+ Wetland Buller Recon n ai5sa ace identifies Wetland Impacts are cv ^ning rarwap iF..hattccmcrrc Plan No additional i Q well andis not jurisdictienal avridPA thrnupjn EQDIRED to prove compliance (and jurlsdlctlonaI determl- standard buffer etention orInc rease required- nation is confirmed by the widths for wetland in wetland tunctfons J,& Army Gor ps of category. and va lues. a+ Engineers); or reconnais- L sauce identifies th at V wetland Is located � 225It Wetland Buffer from su bfect parcel. No wota^a im j Mitigation Plan additional mitas=c. REQII I RED Per compliance j upda led cede require- No additional requirements. mentstoprove compliance r 'Lea Idea or increase required. No additional of wetland (uric lions CD 0) compliance :aoda,mlu� M l requirements. N t Nearing Examiner imrr«tsca^^ot to EQUOR Ell only forvanances nie®�ue projects for wh[chi mpacts 0 B nnot be mitigated to retain i w•elland functions and values. � '(span rwry bemen[s may( hP mat thmueh Suh111IM1nn nl a sleele nd[ral area tP. fMrt or mldtlplo roparts In fnmbir atlnn. M Page 55 of 87 Packet Pg. 424 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Chapter 23.60 CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS Sections: Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.60.010 Critical aquifer recharge areas designation. Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.60.010 Critical aquifer recharge areas designation.0 SHARE Critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs) are those areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water as defined by WAC 365-190-030(2). CARAs have prevailing geologic conditions associated with infiltration rates that create a high potential for contamination of ground water resources or contribute significantly to the replenishment of ground water. CARAs are protected as critical areas under the Washington State Growth Management Act. However, no areas meeting criteria for CARAs exist in the vicinity of the city of Edmonds. Thus, additional specific provisions for protection of this critical area type are not provided within this title. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Page 56 of 87 Packet Pg. 425 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Chapter 23.70 FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS Sections: Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.70.010 Designation, rating and mapping —Frequently flooded areas. Part IL Additional Report Requirements — Frequently Flooded Areas 23.70.020 Special study and report requirements — Frequently flooded areas. 23.70.030 Warning and disclaimer of liability. Part III. Development Standards — Frequently Flooded Areas 23.70.040 Development standards — Frequently flooded areas. Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.70.010 Designation, rating and mapping — Frequently flooded areas. SHRRE A. Frequently Flooded Areas. Frequently flooded areas shall include: 1. Those areas identified on FEMA flood insurance maps as areas of special flood hazard, which include those lands in the floodplain subject to a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. For the purposes of this title, areas of special flood hazard for the city of Edmonds are hereby declared generally to be those areas shown as Zone A (including Zones A, AE, Al—A30, AH, AO, AR and A99) and Zone V (including Zones V and VE) on the following FEMA maps or panels: 53061C00; 53061 C 1292 E, Panel 1292; 53061 C 1285 E, Panel 1285; 53061 C 1315 E, Panel 1315; and 53061 C 1305 E, Panel 1305. The city will use the most currently adopted FEMA maps in determining whether a property is located within a frequently flooded area. Base flood elevations and flood hazard factors for those areas shown as Zone A on the map have not been determined and the local flood management administrator shall utilize such other data as may be reasonably available from federal, state or other sources in administering this chapter as provided in the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19. 2. Those areas identified as frequently flooded areas on the city of Edmonds critical areas inventory. Identified frequently flooded areas are consistent with and based upon designation of areas of special flood hazard on FEMA flood insurance maps as indicated above. B. City Discretion and Designation. Flood insurance maps and the city's critical areas inventory are to be used as a guide for the city of Edmonds development services department, project applicants and/or property owners, and the public and should be considered a minimum designation of frequently flooded Page 57 of 87 Packet Pg. 426 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 areas. As flood insurance maps may be continuously updated as areas are reexamined or new areas are identified, newer and more restrictive information for flood hazard area identification shall be the basis for regulation. The city of Edmonds shall retain the right to designate and identify areas known to be prone to flooding outside of the 100-year floodplain and subject them to the provisions and protections of this title and the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 20041. Part IL Additional Report Requirements — Frequently Flooded Areas 23.70.020 Special study and report requirements — Frequently flooded areas.0 SHARE In addition to the general critical areas report requirements of ECDC 23.40.090, critical areas reports for frequently flooded areas must meet the requirements of this section and the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19. Critical areas reports for two or more types of critical areas must meet the report requirements for each relevant type of critical area. A. Preparation by a Qualified Professional. A frequently flooded areas report shall be prepared by a qualified professional who is a hydrologist or engineer, licensed in the state of Washington, with experience in preparing flood hazard assessments. Pursuant to ECDC 23.40.090(A), applicants may choose one of the qualified technical consultants on the city's approved list in preparing critical areas reports for frequently flooded areas, or may utilize an alternative consultant. Critical areas studies and reports developed by an alternative consultant shall be subject to independent review pursuant to ECDC 23.40.090(B). B. Areas to Be Addressed. The following areas shall be addressed in a critical areas report for frequently flooded areas: 1. The site area of the proposed activity; 2. All areas of a special flood hazard area, as indicated on the flood insurance map(s), within 200 feet of the project area; and 3. All other flood areas indicated on the flood insurance map(s) within 200 feet of the project area. C. Flood Hazard Assessment. A critical area report for a proposed activity within a frequently flooded area shall contain a flood hazard assessment including the following site- and proposal -related information at a minimum: 1. Site and Construction Plans. A copy of the site and construction plans for the development proposal showing: a. Floodplain (100-year flood elevation), 10- and 50-year flood elevations, floodway, other critical areas, buffers, and shoreline areas; Page 58 of 87 Packet Pg. 427 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 b. Proposed development, including the location of existing and proposed structures, fill, storage of materials, and drainage facilities, with dimensions indicating distances to the floodplain; c. Clearing limits; and d. Elevation of the lowest floor (including basement) of all structures, and the level to which any nonresidential structure has been floodproofed. 2. Watercourse Alteration. Alteration of natural watercourses shall be avoided, if feasible. If unavoidable, a critical areas report shall include: a. Extent of Watercourse Alteration. A description of and plan showing the extent to which a watercourse will be altered or relocated as a result of a proposal; b. Maintenance Program Required for Watercourse Alterations. A maintenance program that provides maintenance practices for the altered or relocated portion of the watercourse to ensure that the flood - carrying capacity is not diminished. D. Information Regarding Other Critical Areas. Potential impacts to wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat, and other critical areas shall be addressed in accordance with the applicable sections of this title. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.70.030 Warning and disclaimer of liability.0 SHARE The degree of flood protection required by this chapter and the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19, is considered reasonable for regulatory purposes and is based on scientific and engineering considerations. Larger floods can and will occur on rare occasions. Flood heights may be increased by manmade or natural causes. This chapter does not imply that land outside frequently flooded areas or uses permitted within such areas will be free from flooding or flood damages. This chapter shall not create liability on the part of the city of Edmonds, any officer or employee thereof, or the Federal Insurance Administration for any flood damages that result from reliance on this chapter or any administrative decision lawfully made hereunder. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part III. Development Standards — Frequently Flooded Areas 23.70.040 Development standards — Frequently flooded areas-0 SHARE Development standards and provisions for protection of frequently flooded areas are provided as applicable to areas of special flood hazard in the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19. Conformance with the provisions for flood hazard reduction of the current editions of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19, shall constitute conformance with ECDC 23.40.050, Protection of critical areas, per the mandates of the Washington Growth Management Act and the purposes and objectives of this title. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Page 59 of 87 Packet Pg. 428 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Chapter 23.80 GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS Sections: Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.80.000 Geologically hazardous areas compliance requirements flowchart. 23.80.010 Designation, rating and mapping —Geologically hazardous areas. 23.80.020 Designation of specific hazard areas. 23.80.030 Mapping of geologically hazardous areas. Part II. Allowed Activities — Geologically Hazardous Areas 23.80.040 Allowed activities — Geologically hazardous areas. Part III. Additional Report Requirements — Geologically Hazardous Areas 23.80.050 Special study and report requirements — Geologically hazardous areas. Part IV. Development Standards — Geologically Hazardous Areas 23.80.060 Development standards — General requirements. 23.80.070 Development standards — Specific hazards. Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.80.000 Geologically hazardous areas compliance requirements flowchart.0 SHARE See Figure 23.80.000 at the end of this chapter. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.80.010 Designation, rating and mapping — Geologically hazardous areas.C3 SHARE Geologically hazardous areas include areas susceptible to erosion, land sliding, earthquake, or other geological events. They pose a threat to the health and safety of citizens when incompatible development is sited in areas of significant hazard. Such incompatible development may not only place itself at risk, but also may increase the hazard to surrounding development and use. Areas susceptible to one or more of the following types of hazards shall be designated as a geologically hazardous area: Page 60 of 87 Packet Pg. 429 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 A. Erosion hazard; B. Landslide hazard; and C. Seismic hazard. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.80.020 Designation of specific hazard areas.O SHARE A. Erosion Hazard Areas. Erosion hazard areas are at least those areas identified by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service as having a "moderate to severe," "severe," or "very severe" rill and inter -rill erosion hazard. Erosion hazard areas are also those areas impacted by shoreland and/or stream bank erosion. Within the city of Edmonds erosion hazard areas include: 1. Those areas of the city of Edmonds containing soils that may experience severe to very severe erosion hazard. This group of soils includes, but is not limited to, the following when they occur on slopes of 15 percent or greater: a. Alderwood soils (15 to 25 percent slopes); b. Alderwood/Everett series (25 to 70 percent slopes); c. Everett series (15 to 25 percent slopes); 2. Coastal and stream erosion areas which are subject to the impacts from lateral erosion related to moving water such as stream channel migration and shoreline retreat. 3. Any area with slopes of 15 percent or greater and impermeable soils interbedded with granular soils and springs or ground water seepage; and 4. Areas with significant visible evidence of ground water seepage, and which also include existing landslide deposits regardless of slope. B. Landslide Hazard Areas. Landslide hazard areas are areas potentially subject to landslides based on a combination of geologic, topographic, and hydrologic factors. They include areas susceptible because of any combination of soil, slope (gradient), slope aspect, structure, hydrology, or other factors. Within the city of Edmonds potential landslide hazard areas include: 1. Areas of ancient or historic failures in Edmonds which include all areas within the earth subsidence and landslide hazard area as identified in the 1979 report of Robert Lowe Associates and amended by the 1985 report of GeoEngineers, Inc. and further discussed in the 2007 report by Landau Associates; 2. Coastal areas mapped as class u (unstable), uos (unstable old slides), and urs (unstable recent slides) in the Department of Ecology Washington coastal atlas; 3. Areas designated as quaternary slumps, earthflows, mudflows, or landslides on maps published by the United States Geological Survey or Washington State Department of Natural Resources; Page 61 of 87 Packet Pg. 430 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 Figure 1 Simple Slope Calculation The slope calculation guidance shall be used to determine the toe and top of % slope for slopes that are potentially landslide hazard areas or potentiallyerosion hazard areas. Toe and top of landslide hazard areas (generally slopes of 4Wo or greater) delineated where incline reverses or diminishes to <40Vo over at least 10 feet of horizontal distance. Toe and top of erosion hazard areas (generally slopes 15-40%) delineated where incline reverses or diminishes to t15%over at IPAst 10 fppt of hnri7nntal rlidanrp Toe oft 40%slope (landslide hazard area) or <1594 slope (erosion ham rd area) over min 10 ft. 10, Top of Slope r V (Vertical Rise) % Slope = x 100% H QHorizontalRun) Note: Steps, gradientchanges, and incline reversals or breaks below percent slopesdellning landslide harard areas (40%) and erasion hazard areas (15%) shall be included as part of the larger slope. 4. Any slope of forty percent (40%) or steeper that exceeds a vertical height of ten (10) feet over a twenty-five (25) foot horizontal run. Except for rockeries that have been engineered and approved by the engineer as having been built according to the engineered design, all other modified slopes (including slopes where there are breaks in slopes) meeting overall average steepness and height criteria should be considered potential landslide hazard areas); 5. Any slope with all three of the following characteristics: a. Slopes steeper than fifteen percent (15%); Page 62 of 87 Packet Pg. 431 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 b. Hillsides intersecting geologic contacts with a relatively permeable sediment overlying a relatively impermeable sediment; and c. Springs or groundwater seepage; 6. Any area potentially unstable as a result of rapid stream incision or stream bank erosion; 7. Any area located on an alluvial fan, presently subject to, or potentially subject to, inundation by debris flow or deposition of stream -transported sediments; and 8. Any slopes that have been modified by past development activity that still meet the slope criter C. Seismic Hazard Areas. Seismic hazard areas are areas subject to severe risk of damage as a result of earthquake -induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement, soil liquefaction, lateral spreading, or surface faulting. These areas are designated as having a "high" and "moderate to high" risk of liquefaction as mapped on the Liquefaction Susceptibility Map of Snohomish County by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources or areas located within landslide hazard areas.. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.80.030 Mapping of geologically hazardous areas.l SHARE A. The approximate location and extent of geologically hazardous areas are shown on the city of Edmonds critical areas inventory. In addition, resources providing information on the location and extent of geologically hazardous areas in Edmonds include: 1. Washington Department of Ecology coastal zone atlas (for marine bluffs); 2. U.S. Geological Survey geologic maps, landslide hazard maps, and seismic hazard maps; 3. Washington State Department of Natural Resources seismic hazard maps for Western Washington; 4. Washington State Department of Natural Resources slope stability maps; 5. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration tsunami hazard maps; and 6. Federal Emergency Management Administration flood insurance maps. B. The critical areas inventory and the resources cited above are to be used as a guide for the city of Edmonds development services department, project applicants and/or property owners and may be continuously updated as new critical areas are identified. They are a reference and do not provide a final critical area designation. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part II. Allowed Activities — Geologically Hazardous Areas Page 63 of 87 Packet Pg. 432 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 23.80.040 Allowed activities — Geologically hazardous areas.P SHARE The following activities are allowed in geologically hazardous areas as consistent with ECDC 23.40.220, Allowed activities, Chapter 19.10 ECDC, Building Permits — Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Areas, and Chapter 18.30 ECDC, Storm Water Management, and do not require submission of a critical area report: A. Erosion and Landslide Hazard Areas. Except for installation of fences and as otherwise provided for in this title, only those activities approved and permitted consistent with an approved critical areas report in accordance with this title shall be allowed in erosion or landslide hazard areas. B. Seismic Hazard Areas. The following activities are allowed within seismic hazard areas: 1. Construction of new buildings with less than 2,500 square feet of floor area or roof area, whichever is greater, and which are not residential structures or used as places of employment or public assembly; 2. Additions to existing single -story residences that are 250 square feet or less; and 3. Installation of fences. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part III. Additional Report Requirements — Geologically Hazardous Areas 23.80.050 Special study and report requirements — Geologically hazardous areas. SHARE Critical area report requirements for geologically hazardous areas are generally met through submission to the director of one or more geotechnical reports. In addition to the general critical areas report requirements of ECDC 23.40.090, critical areas reports for geologically hazardous areas must meet the requirements of this section and Chapters 18.30 and 19.10 ECDC as applicable. Critical areas reports for two or more types of critical areas must meet the report requirements for each relevant type of critical area. Geotechnical report(s) submitted for the purpose of critical areas review are required as necessary in addition to reports, data and other information mandated per ECDC Titles 18 and 19. Geotechnical report(s) shall be required: whenever a potential erosion hazard area or potential landslide hazard area, as mapped by Edmonds critical areas inventory or shown on other information consistent with ECDC 23.80.030, is located within 50 feet of the proposed development site; whenever a development site is located within a seismic hazard area; or when otherwise determined warranted by the director (e.g. a distance equal to the height of the slope). A. Preparation by a Qualified Professional. A critical areas report for assessing a potential geologically hazardous area shall be prepared by a geologist licensed in the state of Washington, with experience analyzing geologic, hydrologic, and ground water flow systems, and who has experience preparing reports for the relevant type of hazard. If mitigation measures are necessary, the report detailing the mitigation measures and design of the mitigation shall be prepared by an engineer licensed in the State of Washington, with experience stabilizing slopes with similar geotechnical properties. Critical areas studies and reports on geologically hazardous areas shall be subject to independent review pursuant to ECDC 23.40.090(B). Page 64 of 87 Packet Pg. 433 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 B. Area Addressed in Critical Areas Report. The following areas shall be addressed in a critical areas report for geologically hazardous areas: 1. The project area of the proposed activity; and 2. All geologically hazardous areas within 200 feet of the project area or that have the potential to be affected by the proposal. C. Geological Hazards Assessment. A geology hazard assessment report for a geologically hazardous area shall include a field investigation and contain an assessment of whether or not each type of geologic hazard identified in ECDC 20.80.020 is present or not present and if development of the site will increase the risk of landslides or erosion on or off the site. Geotechnical reports shall be prepared, stamped and signed by a qualified professional. These reports must: 1. Be appropriate for the scale and scope of the project; 2. Include a discussion of all geologically hazardous areas on the site and any geologically hazardous areas off site potentially impacted by the proposed project. If the affected area extends beyond the subject property, the geology hazard assessment may utilize existing data sources pertaining to that area; 3. Clearly state that the proposed project will not decrease slope stability or pose an unreasonable threat to persons or property either on or off site and provide a rationale as to those conclusions based on geologic conditions and interpretations specific to the project; 4. Provide adequate information to determine compliance with the requirements of ECDC Chapter 23.80; 5. Generally follow the guidelines set forth in the Washington State Department of Licensing Guidelines for Preparing Engineering Geology Reports in Washington (2006). In some cases, such as when it is determined that no landslide or erosion risk is present, a full report may not be necessary to determine compliance with the ECDC Chapter 23.80, and in those cases a letter or abbreviated report may be provided. 6. If a landslide or erosion hazard is identified, provide minimum setback recommendations for avoiding the landslide or erosion hazard, other recommendations for site development so that the frequency or magnitude of landsliding or erosion on or off the site is not altered, and recommendations consistent with ECDC 23.80.060 and 23.80.070. D. Incorporation of Previous Study. Where a valid critical areas report has been prepared within the last five years for a specific site, and where the proposed land use activity and surrounding site conditions are unchanged, said report may be incorporated into the required critical areas report. The applicant shall submit a hazards assessment detailing any changed environmental conditions associated with the site. E. Mitigation of Long -Term Impacts. When hazard mitigation is required, the mitigation plan shall specifically address how the activity maintains or reduces the preexisting level of risk to the site and all other properties potentially impacted on a long-term basis (equal to or exceeding the projected lifespan Page 65 of 87 Packet Pg. 434 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 of the activity or occupation). Proposed mitigation techniques shall be considered to provide long-term hazard reduction only if they do not require regular maintenance or other actions to maintain their function. Mitigation may also be required to avoid any increase in risk above the preexisting conditions following abandonment of the activity. F. Additional Technical Information Requirements for Projects within Erosion and Landslide Hazard Areas. In addition to the basic critical areas report requirements for geologically hazardous areas provided in subsections A through E of this section, technical information for any development within earth subsidence and landslide hazard areas shall meet the requirements of Chapter 19.10 ECDC and include the following information at a minimum: 1. Site Plan. The critical areas report shall include a copy of the site plan for the proposal showing: a. The height of slope, slope gradient, and cross-section of the project area; b. The location of springs, seeps, or other surface expressions of ground water on or within 200 feet of the project area or that have the potential to be affected by the proposal; and c. The location and description of surface water runoff features; 2. Hazards Analysis. The hazards analysis component of the critical areas report shall specifically include: a. A description of the extent and type of vegetative cover; b. A description of subsurface conditions based on data from site -specific explorations; c. Descriptions of surface and ground water conditions, public and private sewage disposal systems, fills and excavations, and all structural improvements; d. An estimate of slope stability and the effect construction and placement of structures will have on the slope over the estimated life of the structure; e. An estimate of the bluff retreat rate or an estimate of the percent risk of landslide area expansion that recognizes and reflects potential catastrophic events such as seismic activity or a 100-year storm event; f. Consideration of the run -out hazard of landslide debris and/or the impacts of landslide run -out on down -slope properties; g. A study of slope stability including an analysis of proposed cuts, fills, and other site grading; h. Recommendations for building siting limitations; and i. An analysis of proposed surface and subsurface drainage, and the vulnerability of the site to erosion; Page 66 of 87 Packet Pg. 435 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 3. Geotechnical Engineering Report. The technical information for a project within a landslide hazard area shall include a geotechnical engineering report prepared by a licensed engineer that presents engineering recommendations for the following: a. Parameters for design of site improvements including appropriate foundations and retaining structures. These should include allowable load and resistance capacities for bearing and lateral loads, installation considerations, and estimates of settlement performance; b. Recommendations for drainage and subdrainage improvements; c. Earthwork recommendations including clearing and site preparation criteria, fill placement and compaction criteria, temporary and permanent slope inclinations and protection, and temporary excavation support, if necessary; and d. Mitigation of adverse site conditions including slope stabilization measures and seismically unstable soils, if appropriate; 4. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. For any development proposal on a site containing an erosion hazard area, an erosion and sediment control plan shall be required. The erosion and sediment control plan shall be prepared in compliance with requirements set forth in Chapter 18.30 ECDC. G. Limited Report Requirements for Stable Erosion Hazard Areas. At the director's discretion, detailed critical areas report requirements may be waived for erosion hazard areas with suitable slope stability. Report requirements for stable erosion hazard areas may be met through construction documents that shall include at a minimum an erosion and sediment control plan prepared in compliance with requirements set forth in Chapter 18.30 ECDC. H. Seismic Hazard Areas. In addition to the basic critical areas report requirements for geologically hazardous areas provided in subsections A through E of this section, a critical areas report for a seismic hazard area shall also meet the following requirements: 1. The hazards analysis shall include a complete discussion of the potential impacts of seismic activity on the site (for example, forces generated and fault displacement). 2. A geotechnical engineering report shall evaluate the physical properties of the subsurface soils, especially the thickness of unconsolidated deposits and their liquefaction potential. If it is determined that the site is subject to liquefaction, mitigation measures appropriate to the scale of the development shall be recommended and implemented. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part IV. Development Standards — Geologically Hazardous Areas 23.80.060 Development standards — General requirements.0 SHARE A. Alterations of geologically hazardous areas or associated buffers may only occur for activities that: Page 67 of 87 Packet Pg. 436 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 1. Will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent properties beyond predevelopment conditions; 2. Will not adversely impact other critical areas; 3. Are designed so that the hazard to the project is eliminated or mitigated to a level equal to or less than predevelopment conditions; and 4. Are certified as safe as designed and under anticipated conditions by a qualified engineer or geologist, licensed in the state of Washington. B. Critical Facilities Prohibited. Critical facilities shall not be sited within geologically hazardous areas unless there is no other practical alternative. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.80.070 Development standards — Specific hazards.O SHIIf A. Erosion and Landslide Hazard Areas. Activities on sites containing erosion or landslide hazards shall meet the requirements of ECDC 23.80.060, Development Standards — General Requirements, and the specific following requirements: 1. Minimum Building Setback. The minimum setback shall be the distance required to ensure the proposed structure will not be at risk from landslides for the life of the structure, considered to be one hundred and twenty (120) years and will not cause an increased risk of landslides taking place on or off the site. A setback shall be established from all edges of landslide hazard areas. The size of the setback shall be determined by the director consistent with recommendations provided in the geotechnical report to eliminate or minimize the risk of property damage, death, or injury resulting from landslides caused in whole or part by the development, based upon review of and concurrence with a critical areas report prepared by a qualified professional. 2. Buffer Requirements. A buffer may be established with specific requirements and limitations, including but not limited to, drainage, grading, irrigation, and vegetation. Buffer requirements shall be determined by the director consistent with recommendations provided in the geotechnical report to eliminate or minimize the risk of property damage, death, or injury resulting from landslides caused in whole or part by activities within the buffer area, based upon review of and concurrence with a critical areas report prepared by a qualified professional. 3. Alterations. Alterations of an erosion or landslide hazard area, minimum building setback and/or buffer may only occur for activities for which a hazards analysis is submitted and certifies that: a. The alteration will not increase surface water discharge or sedimentation to adjacent properties beyond predevelopment conditions; b. The alteration will not decrease slope stability on adjacent properties; and c. Such alterations will not adversely impact other critical areas; Page 68 of 87 Packet Pg. 437 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 3. Design Standards within erosion and landslide hazard areas. Development within an erosion or landslide hazard area and/or buffer shall be designed to meet the following basic requirements unless it can be demonstrated that an alternative design that deviates from one or more of these standards provides greater long-term slope stability while meeting all other provisions of this title. The requirement for long-term slope stability shall exclude designs that require regular and periodic maintenance to maintain their level of function. The basic development design standards are: a. The proposed development shall not decrease the factor of safety for landslide occurrences below the limits of 1.5 for static conditions and 1.2 for dynamic conditions. If stability at the proposed development site is below these limits, the proposed development shall provide practicable approaches to reduce risk to human safety and improve the factor of safety for landsliding. In no case shall the existing factor of safety be reduced for the subject property or adjacent properties; b. Structures and improvements shall be clustered to avoid geologically hazardous areas and other critical areas; c. Structures and improvements shall minimize alterations to the natural contour of the slope, and foundations shall be tiered where possible to conform to existing topography; d. Structures and improvements shall be located to preserve the most critical portion of the site and its natural landforms and vegetation; e. The proposed development shall not result in greater risk or a need for increased buffers on neighboring properties; f. The use of retaining walls that allow the maintenance of existing natural slope area is preferred over graded artificial slopes; and g. Development shall be designed to minimize impervious lot coverage; 4. Vegetation Retention. Unless otherwise provided or as part of an approved alteration, removal of vegetation from an erosion or landslide hazard area or related buffer shall be prohibited; 5. Seasonal Restriction. Clearing shall be allowed only from May 1 st to October 1 st of each year; provided, that the director may extend or shorten the dry season on a case -by -case basis depending on actual weather conditions, except that timber harvest, not including brush clearing or stump removal, may be allowed pursuant to an approved forest practice permit issued by the city of Edmonds or the Washington State Department of Natural Resources; 6. Point Discharges. Point discharges from surface water facilities and roof drains onto or upstream from an erosion or landslide hazard area shall be prohibited except as follows: a. Conveyed via continuous storm pipe downslope to a point where there are no erosion hazard areas downstream from the discharge; Page 69 of 87 Packet Pg. 438 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 b. Discharged at flow durations matching predeveloped conditions, with adequate energy dissipation, into existing channels that previously conveyed storm water runoff in the predeveloped state; or c. Dispersed discharge upslope of the steep slope onto a low -gradient, undisturbed buffer demonstrated to be adequate to infiltrate all surface and storm water runoff, and where it can be demonstrated that such discharge will not increase the saturation of the slope; and 7. Prohibited Development. On -site sewage disposal systems, including drain fields, shall be prohibited within erosion and landslide hazard areas and related buffers. B. Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Area. In addition to the requirements of this chapter, development proposals for lands located within the earth subsidence and landslide hazard area as indicated on the critical areas inventory shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter 19.10 ECDC C. Seismic Hazard Areas. Activities proposed to be located in seismic hazard areas shall meet the standards of ECDC 23.80.060, Development Standards — General Requirements. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Page 70 of 87 Packet Pg. 439 City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 6.1.c Figure 23.80.000 CITY OF EDMONDS CRITICAL AREAS Critical Areas Compliance Requirements* Geologically Hazardous Areas Geologically Goo-Haxa Geo-Hazard assess- GeotechnicalReport Development h azardous area REQUIRE ment concludes REQUIREMENT to encroaches within (geo•hazard) may be ALnit fyclassification and jurisdictional delineate boundaries delineated located on or near location of geohazard. geo-hazard area and extent of geo-hazard area subject parcel. located with in200R geo-hazard area- andlorminimum of subject parcel. bu ild i n g setback, Geo-Hazard assessment concludes n o ju risd ic- Development avoids G eotech it ical Report tional geo hazard geo-h atard area and REQUIREMENT to identify located -200 Rfrom required minimum design modifications and subject parcel, build ingsetbock mitigation sufficient to buffer. avoid additional potential risk associated with development in and around geo-hazard areas. N o additiona I compliance requirements. No ad ditiona l compliance required. No additional compliance requirements upon implementation of geotechnical remmmendations -Report requirements may be met through submission of a single critical area report or multiple reports in corn binawn. Page 71 of 87 Packet Pg. 440 City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 6.1.c Chapter 23.90 FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION AREAS Sections: Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.90.000 Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas compliance requirements flowchart. 23.90.010 Designation, rating and mapping —Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. Part IL Additional Report Requirements — Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas 23.90.020 Special study and report requirements — Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas Part III. Development Standards — Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas 23.90.030 Development standards — General requirements. 23.90.040 Development standards — Specific habitats. Part I. Designation, Rating and Mapping 23.90.000 Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas compliance requirements flowchart.. SHARE _ See Figure 23.90.000 at the end of this chapter. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.90.010 Designation, rating and mapping — Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. SHARE A. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas in the city of Edmonds include: 1. Streams. Within the city of Edmonds streams shall include those areas where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed which demonstrates clear evidence, such as the sorting of sediments, of the passage of water. The channel or bed need not contain water year-round. Streams shall be classified in accordance with the Washington Department of Natural Resources water typing system (WAC 222-16- 030) hereby adopted in its entirety by reference and summarized as follows: a. Type S: streams inventoried as "shorelines of the state" under Chapter 90.58 RCW and the rules promulgated pursuant to Chapter 90.58 RCW; b. Type F: streams which contain fish habitat; Page 72 of 87 Packet Pg. 441 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 c. Type Np: perennial nonfish habitat streams; and d. Type Ns: seasonal nonfish habitat streams. All streams included on the inventory that are known to exist within the city of Edmonds do not meet criteria for "shorelines of the state" but contain fish habitat and, thus, meet designation criteria for Type F waters pursuant to WAC 222-16-030. However, not all Edmonds streams support anadromous fish populations or have the potential for anadromous fish occurrence because of obstructions, blockages or access restrictions resulting from existing conditions. Therefore, in order to provide special consideration of and increased protection for anadromous fish in the application of development standards, Edmonds streams shall be further classified as follows: Anadromous fishbearing streams: streams existing in whole or in part within the city of Edmonds in which anadromous fish are known to occur. As of 2004, Edmonds fishbearing streams are known to include Willow Creek, Shellabarger Creek, Shell Creek, Hindley Creek, Perrinville Creek, and Lunds Creek; and Nonanadromous fishbearing streams: streams existing in whole or in part within the city of Edmonds which do not support fish populations and do not have the potential for fish occurrence because of barriers to fish passage or lack of suitable habitat. Streams with anadromous fish occurrence were identified in the Edmonds Stream Inventory and Assessment, a 2002 report of Pentec Environmental which is incorporated by this reference as if herein set forth. The city of Edmonds advocates and encourages the removal of barriers to anadromous fish passage consistent with the purposes and objectives of this title. The director may provide updated information on the occurrence of anadromous fish in Edmonds streams consistent with changes in existing environmental conditions. 2. Areas with which State or Federally Designated Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Species Have a Primary Association, or offer important fish and wildlife habitat within the urban environment. a. Federally designated endangered and threatened species are those fish and wildlife species identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the NOAA Fisheries that are in danger of extinction or threatened to become endangered. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service should be consulted for current listing status. b. State -designated endangered, threatened, and sensitive species are those fish and wildlife species native to the state of Washington identified by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, that are in danger of extinction, threatened to become endangered, vulnerable, or declining and are likely to become endangered or threatened in a significant portion of their range within the state without cooperative management or removal of threats. State -designated endangered, threatened, and sensitive species are periodically recorded in WAC 232-12-014 (state endangered species) and WAC 232-12-011 (state threatened and sensitive species). The state Department of Fish and Wildlife maintains the most current listing and should be consulted for current listing status. Page 73 of 87 Packet Pg. 442 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 3. State Priority Habitats and Areas Associated with State Priority Species. Priority habitats and species are considered to be priorities for conservation and management. Priority species require protective measures for their perpetuation due to their population status, sensitivity to habitat alteration, and/or recreational, commercial, or tribal importance. Priority habitats are those habitat types or elements with unique or significant value to a diverse assemblage of species. A priority habitat may consist of a unique vegetation type or dominant plant species, a described successional stage, or a specific structural element. Priority habitats and species are identified by the state Department of Fish and Wildlife. 4. Habitats and Species of Local Importance. Habitats and species of local importance are those identified by the city of Edmonds, including but not limited to those habitats and species that, due to their population status or sensitivity to habitat manipulation, warrant protection. Habitats may include a seasonal range or habitat element with which a species has a primary association, and which, if altered, may reduce the likelihood that the species will maintain and reproduce over the long term. 4. Commercial and Recreational Shellfish Areas. These areas include all public and private tidelands or bedlands suitable for shellfish harvest, including shellfish protection districts established pursuant to Chapter 90.72 RCW. 5. Kelp and eelgrass beds and herring and smelt spawning areas. 6. Naturally Occurring Ponds Under 20 Acres. Naturally occurring ponds are those ponds under 20 acres and their submerged aquatic beds that provide fish or wildlife habitat, including those artificial ponds intentionally created from dry areas in order to mitigate impacts to ponds. Naturally occurring ponds do not include ponds deliberately designed and created from dry sites, such as canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, temporary construction ponds, and landscape amenities, unless such artificial ponds were intentionally created for mitigation. 7. Waters of the State. Waters of the state include lakes, rivers, ponds, streams, inland waters, underground waters, salt waters, and all other surface waters and watercourses within the jurisdiction of the state of Washington, as classified in WAC 222-16-031 (or WAC 222-16-030, depending on classification used). B. All areas within the city of Edmonds meeting one or more of these criteria, regardless of any formal identification, are hereby designated critical areas and are subject to the provisions of this title and shall be managed consistent with the best available science, such as the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's Management Recommendations for Priority Habitat and Species. C. Mapping. The approximate location and extent of fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas are shown on the city of Edmonds critical areas inventory. Resources providing information on the location and extent of fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas incorporated into the inventory include: 1. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife priority habitat and species maps; 2. Washington State Department of Natural Resources official water type reference maps, as amended; 3. Washington State Department of Natural Resources Puget Sound intertidal habitat inventory maps; Page 74 of 87 Packet Pg. 443 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 4. Washington State Department of Natural Resources shorezone inventory; 5. Washington State Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program mapping data; 6. Washington State Department of Health annual inventory of shellfish harvest areas; 7. Anadromous and resident salmonid distribution maps contained in the habitat limiting factors reports published by the Washington Conservation Commission; and 8. Washington State Department of Natural Resources state natural area preserves and natural resource conservation area maps. The critical areas inventory and the resources cited above are to be used as a guide for the city of Edmonds development services department, project applicants, and/or property owners and should be continuously updated as new critical areas are identified. They are a reference and do not provide a final critical areas designation. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part II. Additional Report Requirements — Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas 23.90.020 Special study and report requirements — Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. SHARE _J In addition to the general critical areas report requirements of ECDC 23.40.090, critical area reports for fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas must meet the requirements of this section. Critical areas reports for two or more types of critical areas must meet the report requirements for each relevant type of critical area. A. Preparation by a Qualified Professional. A critical areas report for a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area shall be prepared by a qualified professional who is a biologist with experience preparing reports for the relevant type of habitat. Pursuant to ECDC 23.40.090(A), applicants may choose one of the qualified technical consultants on the city's approved list in preparing critical areas reports for fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, or may utilize an alternative consultant. Critical areas studies and reports developed by an alternative consultant shall be subject to independent review pursuant to ECDC 23.40.090(B). B. Areas Addressed in Critical Areas Report. The following areas shall be addressed in a critical areas report for fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas: 1. The project area of the proposed activity; 2. All fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas and recommended buffers within 200 feet of the project area; 3. All shoreline areas, floodplains, other critical areas, and related buffers within 200 feet of the project area; and Page 75 of 87 Packet Pg. 444 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 4. A discussion of the efforts to avoid and minimize potential effects to these resources and the implementation of mitigation/enhancement measures as required. C. Habitat Assessment. A habitat assessment is an investigation of the project area to evaluate the potential presence or absence of designated critical fish or wildlife species or habitat. A critical areas report for a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area shall contain an assessment of habitats, including the following site- and proposal -related information at a minimum: 1. Detailed description of vegetation on and adjacent to the project area and its associated buffer; 2. Identification of any species of local importance, priority species, or endangered, threatened, sensitive, or candidate species that have a primary association with habitat on or adjacent to the project area, and assessment of potential project impacts to the use of the site by the species; 3. A discussion of any federal, state, or local special management recommendations, including Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife habitat management recommendations, that have been developed for species or habitats located on or adjacent to the project area. D. Additional Technical Information Requirements for Streams. Consistent with specific development standards for Edmonds streams (ECDC 23.90.040(D)), critical areas report requirements for streams may be met, at the discretion of the director, through submission of one or more specific report types. If stream buffer enhancement is proposed to reduce a standard stream buffer width or as part of project mitigation required by the director, a stream buffer enhancement plan may be submitted to fulfill the requirements of this section. If no project impacts are anticipated and standard stream buffer widths are retained, a stream survey report, general critical areas report or other reports alone or in combination may be submitted as consistent with the specific requirements of this section. In addition to the basic critical areas report requirements for fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas provided in subsections (A) through (C) of this section, technical information on streams shall include the following information at a minimum: 1. A written assessment and accompanying maps of the stream and associated hydrologic features within 200 feet of the project area, including the following information at a minimum: a. Stream survey showing the ordinary high water mark(s); b. Standard stream buffer boundary; c. Boundary for proposed reduced stream buffers; d. Vegetative, faunal, and hydrologic characteristics; e. Soil and substrate conditions; and f. Topographic elevations, at two -foot contours; Page 76 of 87 Packet Pg. 445 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 2. A detailed description and functional assessment of the stream buffer under existing conditions pertaining to the protection of stream functions, fish habitat and, in particular, potential anadromous fisheries; 3. A habitat and native vegetation conservation strategy that addresses methods to protect and enhance on -site habitat and stream functions; 4. Proposed buffer enhancement, if needed, including a written assessment and accompanying maps and planting plans for buffer areas to be enhanced, including the following information at a minimum: a. A description of existing buffer conditions; b. A description of proposed buffer conditions and how proposed conditions will increase buffer functioning in terms of stream and fish habitat protection; c. Performance standards for measuring enhancement success through a monitoring period of at least three years; and d. Provisions for monitoring and submission of monitoring reports documenting buffer conditions as compared to performance standards for enhancement success; 5. A discussion of ongoing management practices that will protect stream functions and habitat value through maintenance of vegetation density within the stream buffer. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Part III. Development Standards — Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas 23.90.030 Development standards — General requirements.0 SHARE A. Alterations. A fish and wildlife habitat conservation area may be altered only if the proposed alteration of the habitat or the mitigation proposed does not degrade the quantitative and qualitative functions and values of the habitat. There are no specific development standards for upland habitats of local importance unless these areas include another critical area (streams, heron rookeries, steep slopes, etc.). City staff will review the critical areas report (ECDC 23.90.020) and work with the applicant to minimize effects or improve conditions to upland habitat. B. Approvals of Activities. The director shall condition approvals of activities allowed within or adjacent to a habitat conservation area or its buffers as necessary to minimize or mitigate any potential adverse impacts. Conditions shall be based on the best available science and may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Establishment of buffer zones; 2. Preservation of critically important vegetation and/or habitat features such as snags and downed wood; 3. Limitation of access to the habitat area, including fencing to deter unauthorized access; Page 77 of 87 Packet Pg. 446 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 4. Seasonal restriction of construction activities; 5. Establishment of a duration and timetable for periodic review of mitigation activities; and 6. Requirement of a performance bond, when necessary, to ensure completion and success of proposed mitigation. C. Mitigation and Equivalent or Greater Biological Functions. Mitigation of alterations to fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic and hydrologic functions and shall include mitigation for adverse impacts upstream or downstream of the development proposal site. Mitigation shall address each function affected by the alteration to achieve functional equivalency or improvement on a per function basis. Mitigation shall be located on -site except when demonstrated that a higher level of ecological functioning would result from an off -site location. Mitigation shall be detailed in a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area mitigation plan, which may include the following as necessary: 1. A native vegetation planting plan; 2. Plans for retention, enhancement or restoration of specific habitat features; 3. Plans for control of nonnative invasive plant or wildlife species; and 4. Stipulations for use of innovative, sustainable building practices. D. Approvals and the Best Available Science. Any approval of alterations or impacts to a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area shall be supported by the best available science. E. Buffers. 1. Establishment of Buffers. The director shall require the establishment of temporary or permanent buffer areas for permitted activities adjacent to fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas which may result in fish or wildlife disturbance (e.g., construction, grading, etc.) when needed to protect fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. Establishment of buffers shall follow recommendations set forth by a qualified biologist in the project critical areas report. Required buffer widths shall reflect the sensitivity of the habitat and the type and intensity of human activity proposed to be conducted nearby and shall be consistent with the management recommendations issued by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2. Seasonal and Daily Timing Restrictions. When a species is more susceptible to adverse impacts during specific periods of the year or day, seasonal restrictions on permitted activities within or adjacent to fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas may be required at the discretion of the director pursuant to recommendations set forth in a critical areas report. F. Signs and Fencing of Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. Page 78 of 87 Packet Pg. 447 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 1. Temporary Markers. The outer perimeter of the fish and wildlife habitat conservation area or buffer and the limits of those areas to be disturbed pursuant to an approved permit or authorization shall be marked in the field as required by the director in such a way as to ensure that no unauthorized intrusion will occur. This temporary marking shall be maintained throughout construction and shall not be removed until permanent signs, if required, are in place. 2. Permanent Signs. As a condition of any permit or authorization issued pursuant to this chapter, the director may require the applicant to install permanent signs along the boundary of a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area or buffer. a. Permanent signs shall be made of a metal face and attached to a metal post or another material of equal durability. Signs must be posted at an interval of one per lot or every 50 feet, whichever is less, and must be maintained by the property owner in perpetuity. The sign shall be worded as follows or with alternative language approved by the director: Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area Do Not Disturb Contact the City of Edmonds Regarding Uses and Restriction b. The provisions of subsection (F)(2)(a) of this section may be modified by the director as necessary to assure protection of sensitive features or wildlife. 3. Fencing. a. The director shall determine if fencing is necessary to protect the functions and values of the critical area. If found to be necessary, the director shall condition any permit or authorization issued pursuant to this chapter to require the applicant to install a permanent fence at the edge of the fish and wildlife habitat conservation area or buffer, when fencing will prevent future impacts to the fish and wildlife habitat conservation area. b. The applicant shall be required to install a permanent fence around the fish and wildlife habitat conservation area or buffer when domestic grazing animals are present or may be introduced on -site. c. Fencing installed as part of a proposed activity or as required in this subsection shall be designed so as to not interfere with species migration, including fish runs, and shall be constructed in a manner that minimizes habitat impacts. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. 23.90.040 Development standards — Specific habitats.0 SHARE A. Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Species. Page 79 of 87 Packet Pg. 448 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 1. No development shall be allowed within a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area or buffer with which state or federally endangered, threatened, or sensitive species have a primary association, except that which is provided for by a management plan established by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife or applicable state or federal agency. 2. Whenever activities are proposed adjacent to a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area with which state or federally endangered, threatened, or sensitive species have a primary association, such area shall be protected through the application of protection measures in accordance with a critical areas report prepared by a qualified professional and approved by the director. Approval for alteration of land adjacent to the fish and wildlife habitat conservation area or its buffer shall not occur prior to consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for animal species, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources for plant species, and other appropriate federal or state agencies. 3. Bald eagle habitat is subject to the Federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Washington State bald eagle protection rules (WAC 232-12-292) shall not be required as long as bald eagles are not listed as a State Endangered or Threatened species. B. Anadromous Fish. 1. All activities, uses, and alterations proposed to be located in water bodies used by anadromous fish or in areas that affect such water bodies shall give special consideration to the preservation and enhancement of anadromous fish habitat, including, but not limited to, adhering to the following standards: a. Activities shall be timed to occur only during the allowable work window as designated by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for the applicable species; b. An alternative alignment or location for the activity is not feasible; c. The activity is designed so that it will not degrade the functions or values of the fish habitat or other critical areas; d. Shoreline erosion control measures shall be designed to use bioengineering methods or soft armoring techniques, according to an approved critical areas report; and e. Any impacts to the functions or values of the fish and wildlife habitat conservation area are mitigated in accordance with an approved critical areas report. 2. Structures that prevent the migration of salmonids shall not be allowed in the portion of water bodies currently or historically used by anadromous fish. Fish bypass facilities shall be provided that allow the upstream migration of adult fish and shall prevent fry and juveniles migrating downstream from being trapped or harmed. 3. Fills, when authorized, shall not adversely impact anadromous fish or their habitat or shall mitigate any unavoidable impacts and shall only be allowed for a water -dependent use. C. Retention of Vegetation on Subdividable, Undeveloped Parcels. As a provision of this title, the director shall require retention of a minimum of 30 percent of native vegetation on undeveloped (or Page 80 of 87 Packet Pg. 449 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 redeveloped), subdividable lands zoned as RS-12 or RS-20 per Chapter 16.10 ECDC. This standard for development shall apply to all undeveloped (or redeveloped), subdividable lands zoned RS-12 or RS-20 that contain a landslide hazard area as defined by ECDC 23.80.020.B; a stream or stream buffer; or a wetland or wetland buffer, except for as provided in ECDC 23.90.040.C.4. This provision for native vegetation retention will provide increased protection of fish and wildlife habitat throughout the Edmonds jurisdiction, and shall be applied consistent with the following criteria: 1. Achieving the minimum 30 percent retention requirement for native vegetation shall be determined by assessing the existing site area that supports native vegetation. For purposes of this provision, areas that support native vegetation shall include areas dominated by plant species which are indigenous to the Puget Sound region, which reasonably could have been expected to naturally occur on the site, and within which native trees over 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH) make up more than 40 percent of the canopy cover. 2. The goal of 30 percent native vegetation can be met through maintaining existing native vegetation, establishing native vegetation, or a combination of both. 3. A vegetation management plan, subject to the approval of the director, is required for approval of the proposed development. 4. For undeveloped (or redeveloped), subdividable lands zoned as RS-12 or RS-20 that currently do not support any native vegetation areas meeting minimum requirements in ECDC 23.90.040.C.1, the director may waive the requirements of this provision. D. Streams. No alteration to a stream or stream buffer shall be permitted unless consistent with the provisions of this title and the specific standards for development outlined below. 1. Standard Stream Buffer Widths. Buffers for streams shall be measured on each side of the stream, from the ordinary high water mark. The following shall be the standard buffer widths for streams based upon the Washington State Department of Natural Resources water typing system and further classification based upon fish presence (fishbearing vs. nonfishbearing) for the Type F streams existing in the city of Edmonds: a. Type S: 150 feet; b. Type F anadromous fishbearing stream adjacent to reaches with anadromous fish access: 100 feet; c. Type F anadromous fishbearing stream adjacent to reaches without anadromous fish access: 75 feet; d. Type F nonanadromous fishbearing stream: 75 feet; e. Type Np: 50 feet; f. Type Ns: 40 feet. Page 81 of 87 Packet Pg. 450 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 General areas and stream reaches with access for anadromous fish are indicated on the city of Edmonds critical areas inventory. The potential for anadromous fish access shall be confirmed in the field by a qualified biologist as part of critical areas review and determination of standard stream buffer widths. 2. Reduced Stream Buffer Widths. Standard stream buffer widths may be reduced by no more than twenty five percent (25%) of the standard stream buffer width concomitant to development and implementation of a stream buffer enhancement plan approved by the director. Reduced stream buffer widths shall only be approved by the director if a stream buffer enhancement plan conclusively demonstrates that enhancement of the reduced buffer area will not degrade the quantitative and qualitative functions and values of the buffer area in terms of fish and stream protection and the provision of wildlife habitat. Stream buffer enhancement plans must meet the specific requirements of ECDC 23.40.110, 23.40.120 and 23.40.130 and: a. The buffer enhancement plan proposed as part of buffer reduction provides evidence that functions and values in terms of stream and wildlife protections will be: i. Increased or retained through plan implementation for those streams where existing buffer vegetation is generally intact; or ii. Increased through plan implementation for those streams where existing buffer vegetation is inadequate to protect the functions and values of the stream; b. The plan documents existing native plant densities and provides for increases in buffer native plant densities to no less than three feet on center for shrubs and eight feet on center for trees; c. The plan requires monitoring and maintenance to ensure success for a minimum of five (5) years in accordance with ECDC 23.40.130(D) and (E); and d. The plan specifically documents methodology and provides performance standards for assessing increases in stream buffer functioning as related to: i. Water quality protection; ii. Provision of wildlife habitat; iii. Protection of anadromous fisheries; iv. Enhancement of fish habitat; and v. Restricting intrusion and disturbance. 3. Stream Buffer Width Averaging with Enhancement. The director may allow modification of a standard stream buffer width in accordance with an approved critical areas report and the best available science on a case -by -case basis by averaging buffer widths. Any allowance for averaging buffer widths shall only be granted concomitant to the development and implementation of a buffer enhancement plan for areas of buffer degradation. Only those portions of a stream buffer existing within the project area or Page 82 of 87 Packet Pg. 451 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 subject parcel shall be considered in the total buffer area for buffer averaging. Averaging of buffer widths may only be allowed where a qualified professional demonstrates that: a. The buffer enhancement plan proposed as part of buffer averaging provides evidence that functions and values in terms of stream and wildlife protections will be: i. Increased or retained through plan implementation for those streams where existing buffer vegetation is generally intact; or ii. Increased through plan implementation for those streams where existing buffer vegetation is inadequate to protect the functions and values of the stream; b. The total area contained in the buffer area, or the total buffer area existing on a subject parcel for a stream extending off -site, after averaging is no less than that which would be contained within the standard buffer; c. The buffer width at any single location is not reduced by more the twenty-five (25%) percent of standard width; and Additions to Structures Existing within Stream Buffers. a. Additions to legally constructed structures existing within stream buffers that increase the footprint of development or impervious surfacing shall be permitted consistent with the development standards of this chapter (ECDC 23.90.030 and this section), provided that a buffer enhancement plan is provided to mitigate for impacts consistent with this Title, and provided that all impacts from temporary disturbances within the critical area buffer shall be addressed through use of best management plans and buffer enhancement plantings during and following construction of the allowed alteration. Provisions for standard stream buffers, stream buffer averaging with enhancement, and buffer reductions through enhancement require applicants to locate such additions in accordance with the following sequencing: i. Outside of the standard stream buffer; ii. Outside of a stream buffer averaged (with enhancement) per subsection (D)(3) of this section; iii. Outside of a stream buffer reduced (with enhancement) per subsection (D)(2) of this section; or iv. Outside of the inner twenty five percent (25%) of the standard stream buffer width with no more than three hundred (300) square feet of structure addition footprint within the inner fifty percent (50%) of the standard stream buffer width, provided that enhancement is provided at a minimum three -to -one (3:1) ratio (enhancement -to -impact). v. Outside of the inner 25 percent of the standard stream buffer width with no more than five hundred (500) square feet of new footprint within the inner fifty percent (50%) of the standard stream buffer width, provided that enhancement is provided at a minimum five -to -one (5:1) ratio (enhancement -to - impact), and that stormwater low impact development (LID) techniques or other measures that enhance existing buffer condition are included as part of the stream buffer enhancement plan. Page 83 of 87 Packet Pg. 452 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 b. Where meeting stream buffer enhancement requirements required by H.1. of this section would result in enhancement that is separated from the critical area due to uncommon property ownership, alternative enhancement approaches may be approved by the director. Alternative approaches could include a vegetated rain garden that receives storm runoff, replacement of existing impervious surfaces with pervious materials, or other approaches that provide ecological benefits to the adjacent critical area. c. Additions to legally constructed structures existing within stream buffers that cannot be accommodated in accordance with the above sequencing (i.e., additions proposed within the inner 25 percent of a standard buffer width) may be permitted at the director's discretion as a variance subject to review by the city hearing examiner and the provisions of ECDC 23.40.210. 5. Development Proposals within the Footprint of Existing Development. New development shall be allowed within the footprint of existing development occurring within a stream buffer, provided that the following conditions are met: a. The footprint of existing development was legally established, and is consistent with the definition provided in ECDC 23.40.320; b. The proposed development within the footprint of existing development is sited as far away from the stream edge as is feasible; c. As part of the development proposal, opportunities to reduce the footprint of existing development are implemented where such reduction would increase the buffer width adjacent to the stream and not represent an undue burden given the scale of the proposed development. d. The proposed development includes enhancement to the adjacent remaining stream buffer in order to improve functions degraded by previous development; e. Enhancement is provided as buffer enhancement for an equivalent area of the footprint of the newly proposed development within the footprint of existing development occurring in stream buffer, or through an alternative approach approved by the director that restores degraded functions of the wetland and remaining buffer; and f Impacts from temporary disturbances within the stream buffer shall be addressed through use of best management plans and buffer enhancement plantings during and following construction of the allowed alteration. 6. Stream Crossings. Stream crossings may be allowed only if all reasonable construction techniques and best management practices are used to avoid disturbance to the stream bed or bank. Upon completion of construction, the area affected shall be restored to an appropriate grade, replanted with native species and/or otherwise protected according to a stream mitigation and buffer enhancement plan approved by the director, and maintained and monitored per the requirements of ECDC 23.40.110, 23.40.120 and 23.40.130 and providing for buffer enhancement in accordance with the requirements of subsection (D)(2) of this section. In addition, the applicant must demonstrate that best management practices will be used during construction to provide the following: Page 84 of 87 Packet Pg. 453 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 a. Fisheries protection, including no interference with fish migration or spawning; b. All crossings shall be constructed during summer low flow periods and shall be timed to avoid stream disturbance during periods when stream use is critical to salmonids; c. Crossings shall not occur over salmonid spawning areas unless no other possible crossing site exists; d. Crossings and culverted portions of the stream shall be minimized to the extent feasible and serve multiple purposes and multiple lots whenever possible; e. Roads may cross streams only on previously approved rights -of -way, provided no practical alternative exists and adequate provision is made to protect and/or enhance the stream through appropriate mitigation. Roads shall be designed and located to conform to topography, and maintained to prevent erosion and restriction of the natural movement of ground water as it affects the stream; f. Roads and utilities shall be designed in conjunction to minimize the area of disturbance to the stream; g. Roads shall be constructed so as to minimize adverse impacts on the hydrologic quality of the stream or associated habitat to a degree acceptable to the city; h. An alternative alignment or location with less impact is not feasible; and i. The crossing will be designed as near as perpendicular with the water body as possible. 7. Trails. After reviewing the proposed development and technical reports, the director may determine that a pedestrian -only trail may be allowed in a stream buffer; provided, pervious materials are used, all appropriate provision is made to protect water quality, and all applicable permit requirements have been met. No motorized vehicles shall be allowed within a stream or its buffer except as required for necessary maintenance or security. Vegetative edges, structural barriers, signs or other measures must be provided wherever necessary to protect streams by limiting vehicular access to designated public use or interpretive areas. 8. Storm Water Management Facilities. Storm water management facilities, limited to outfalls, pipes and conveyance systems, storm water dispersion outfalls and bioswales, may be allowed within stream buffers; provided, that: a. No other location is feasible; b. Pipes and conveyance facilities will be in the outer twenty five percent (25%) of the buffer; c. Stormwater dispersion outfalls, bioswales, and bioretention facilities may be allowed anywhere within stream buffers; d. Such facilities are designed consistent with requirements of ECDC Chapter 18.30; and Page 85 of 87 Packet Pg. 454 6.1.c City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 e. The location and function of such facilities will not degrade the functions or values of the stream or stream buffer. 9. City Discretion in Protection, Enhancement and Preservation of Streams. The city of Edmonds is unique within the state of Washington as a built -out community with streams that have been incorporated within, and often located immediately adjacent to, residential development. This title allows the director full discretion to condition proposals for development on parcels containing, adjacent to, or potentially impacting streams to enhance conditions consistent with ECDC 23.40.050 and the purposes and objectives of this title. Conditions on development shall be required to enhance streams and stream buffers as fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas to provide increased protection of anadromous fisheries and potential fish habitat in accordance with best available science and the recommendations of an approved critical areas report and may include: a. Removal of stream bank armoring; b. In -stream habitat modification; c. Native planting; d. Relocation of stream channel portions to create contiguous riparian corridors or wildlife habitat; e. Planting of stream bank native vegetation to increase stream shading; f. Removal and control of nonnative, invasive weed species; g. Requiring additional building setbacks or modified buffers; and h. Limiting or reducing the types or densities of particular uses. The right of discretion in provisioning development in regard to streams is maintained in order to provide for the creation of enhanced conditions over those currently existing around streams in the city of Edmonds. In all instances where an applicant cannot demonstrate that standard stream buffer widths as provided in subsection (D)(1) of this section can be accommodated by project development, the applicant shall be required to submit a stream buffer enhancement plan or a stream mitigation and buffer enhancement plan as part of a critical areas report indicating that post -project site conditions will provide equivalent or greater protection of stream functions and fish habitat over a standard stream buffer and existing site conditions. [Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004]. Page 86 of 87 Packet Pg. 455 City of Edmonds — City Code and Community Development Code Environmentally Critical Areas — April 26, 2016 6.1.c Figure 23.90.000 CITY OF EDMONDS CRITICAL AREAS Critical Areas Compliance Requirements* Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas ,dher r Fish and MUllfe C liul Araa Repea R on Cridcal Areparr RVFf':A Cririe.l Area Report CrllkrJAM miripbe—Plan E{abien Corrkatia,l REgfA REM:: i,, idralifka jurisdl.,datuel r4P� REQUIREMENT u, Repnrl or,Ad jdes REOUIRED is Am IF 611 'A} cur ulun � tiiy E,resei,m W Brea wirhin2R0 frof � p—ulk yi axsussnurnt 111.1 in,pmcex to `* ru-kdy actin., u, U kbxsrrd Qn or,icni ;.H .Hednnal EV11CA lubjen paNel. of h.,hitat.nd kk3niip fWHCA will ILWV remi. nr,urrK,.� ihu U e6iee1 purl. within JJI}jt nl pul-jw i,npa ;—.W.V, "all fro., pruist, Innetiuns and valuu ,uhjeci p4-1. fmrn prnieet dr prnrni. dew4lounl. of wild3iir, hahn,u.� 4 t Critical Area F j+ort kel—, mnclud� O concludra na thsr h.,bimt Funceianx Na Adciilirmel and vAlue, will not hr snm inns M juridirtinml flme ]R N h,cetA within YQ R nF - dnreamd,hmugh prnim ri�Gpl feine M1ra. L uIbject parcel. = de+elapmrnr. Q Nei nddisinnal mrnpliarrre rxgnirrm h. V s ucam Buffer Enh r.sml . . Amiurli'ien REQUIRM Ia io el—lyItrcam: sid � 3kr+Ieu will �j1j drmortelro[r rroendon of CY) Jaro 1 avoid, in,pac-I, Jelwn,�no df sl,.-a.n or in rAm,mar hllffer „ MAILI and huff[t tmklrnns Impwi,lo ssreurn V— wstr{vin and buffrr F bolfer,.;ll he unpxled L irnpacts,rilh stand.o __Im- nod %1,lenrrieh lyduced huffer voided 1hmugh w,di.iaudarl buffer prujuiinipLo iiiawni wiiR b4t, widths, buffer ridrh i 10 5u%). buffer wduction. .... walth.. ,tah,6Al3�od�r w�,ltls. C Further hulls, NC-; 6"Liuiul M Noaddii—t No Addilio- 5neem htlfkrA+ereging iucNnn needed in unn 1 a N cmnply, i— mnEiona � od Allowwish aditional m1" .. rrquiir—ir tequirenlerl,r. huf erenhancrmenl- hoti r in, yet,. rcymre�ntnu. rn `Report requirements mcy be reset through submission of a single critical area report or muliipie reports in combination. Page 87 of 87 Packet Pg. 456 6.1.d COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS WITH DES FOR $3,700,416 AND AUTHORIZE WASTEWATER FUNDS TO BE EXPENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was not present for the vote.) Citing the winds this weekend, Councilmember Mesaros asked Mr. Williams to provide a brief update on how Public Works addressed any issues. Mr. Williams explained staff was very busy all weekend, many staff members working overtime to address weather -related issues including worked with PUD after seven major trees fell into power lines. Most of the pump stations were out of power including Lift 1 on Sunset Avenue; all the generators came on and everything worked perfectly including the transfer switches. Councilmember Mesaros echoed kudos My Edmonds New gave Public Works staff. 5. PUBLIC HEARING A. PUBLIC HEARING ON CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE UPDATE Senior Planner Kernen Lien relayed: a • Update started in fall 2014 with review of existing code and BAS • Planning Board and City Council Review in 2015 • Council Adoption January 26th and Mayor veto • December 15, 2015 Code in Exhibit 1 • February 23, 2015 Council scheduled public hearing for tonight to consider potential new CD amendments to draft regulations in Exhibit 1 o Intent of public hearing was to identify universe of potential amendments to the December 15 code in Exhibit 1 Tonight and next steps o Tonight ■ Review proposed City Council amendments ■ Take public comments ■ Staff emailed Council comments received after packet prepared o Next City Council meetings ■ April 5th — Council discuss and decide which proposed amendments to carry forward ■ April 12th — Discuss and refine proposed amendments carried forward on April 5th ■ April 19th — Potential adoption of updated critical area regulations ■ Council previously adopted resolution indicating critical area regulations would be adopted by April 30. ■ May be time tonight to begin discussion of potential amendments Mr. Lien reviewed the potential amendments grouped by topic: ECDC 23.40.220.C.4 — Physically Separated/Functionally Isolated • LA — Require determination to be made by a qualified critical area consultant o Maintains flexibility o Maybe costly for smaller projects • LB — Rename Provision o "Potentially isolated" o Change to "Interrupted Buffer" ■ Defection of buffer: designated area immediately next to and part of a stream or wetland that is an integral part of the stream or wetland ecosystem Council Review/Critical Area Decision Process • 2.A — Include City Council in decision making process for certain critical area decisions Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 15, 2016 Page 4 Packet Pg. 457 6.1.d o Could insert public opinion into what is supposed to be opinion based on science o Could create an appearance of fairness issue 2.B - Decision matrix/threshold for which projects would include City Council in decision making process 2.0 - Consider amending the decision process for certain types of critical area decisions Exhibit 2 - Contingent Critical Area Review Procedure (proposed by City Attorney) o Scope: ■ Development of at least 600 square feet within standard buffer - Physically separated/functionally isolated buffer - Restoration project - Wetland/stream buffer reduction ■ Would include also moving physically separated/functionally isolated out of allowed activities and into new provisions in the wetland and stream sections o New Type II-B procedure ■ Public notice (including City Council) ■ Citizen may request public hearing which would escalate the process up to a Type III -A - Public hearing before Hearing Examiner - Requestor must pay a fee in the amount of 50% the difference between Type II-B and Type III -A application fee - Project proponent shall pay the other 50% difference between Type II-B and Type III -A application within 30 days T' o Notice of Final Decision to City Council with opportunity to appeal Hearing Examiner decision through LUPA appeal a o Staff will provide an example at April 5 meeting ECDC 23.40.220.C.7.b.iv - Hazard tree replacement • 3 - Change the required diameter of deciduous replacement trees from 1-inch dbh to 1 to 2 inches dbh o Larger tree not necessarily better for restoration o Smaller relative root ball for larger tree o More difficult for tree to become established Definitinnc • 4.A - Change "normal maintenance of vegetation" from ...trees less than 3-inch dbh to trees less than 4-inch dbh... o Normal maintenance exemption in ECDC 23.40.230.C.2 o Allows the clearing of slightly larger saplings as a critical area exemption • 4.B - Add definition for "Council" o Definition exists in ECDC 21.15.030 • 4.0 - Add definition for Best Available Science o ECDC 23.40.310 -Best Available Science • 4.13 -Move definitions from Part VI to ECDC 23.40.010 after Purpose section ECDC 23.90.040.C.I -Native Vegetation • 5.A -Apply to RS-8 and RS-10 zones o Would greatly expand the area the provision would apply to o RS-12 and RS-20 established because the presence of critical areas o Comprehensive Plan designation ■ Single-family Resource (RS-12, RS-20) ■ Single-family Urban (RS-8, RS-10) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 15, 2016 Page 5 Packet Pg. 458 6.1.d • 5.B — Consider different native vegetation percentage for RS-8 and RS-10 zones • 5.0 — Change "...native trees over 10 inches in dbh make up more than 70 percent of the canopy cover" to "...native trees over 6 inches in dbh make up more than 40 percent of the canopy cover." o May trigger the requirements of this provision on more properties than the original proposal o Original proposal based on specific habitat features o Amendment intended to preserve more canopy coverage • May be further refined through development of UFMP Frequently Flooded Areas a • 6 — Do not consider amendments to ECDC 19.00.025 and 21.40.030 at this time d o Frequently flooded areas are critical areas by definition c o Building code regulates development in the flood plain c o Proposed amendment to definition height intended to compensate for requirement to build two feet above base flood elevation 0 c� o Is appropriate to consider at this time a ■ Language in Comprehensive Plan Sustainability Element: "Focusing on short term expedient solutions will only make actions necessary to support sustainability more difficult in the future. For example the areas of environmental issues and climate change, v deferred action now will only make cumulative effects more difficult to resolve in the future. The familiar GMA-based 20-year planning timeframe will not be sufficient — a, planning for sustainability must take an even longer view." Council Status Reports • 7 — Require periodic reports to the City Council o Detailed reports can be time consuming and expensive o With existing resources could provide periodic reports with basic data, for example: ■ How many buffer reductions were granted and where ■ Number of critical area determinations ■ Number and general type of physically separated/functionally isolated buffer determinations ■ Provide some sample projects o Clarify report frequency Appendices • 8.A — Insert new Appendix A: Map of Critical Areas in Edmonds o Not regulatory - used for reference purposes only o Maps do not show the exact locations of all critical areas o Subject to change • 8.13 — Insert new Appendix B: Listing of critical areas in Edmonds with buffer widths and category/classification designations o Cost prohibitive o Would have to visit every property in Edmonds o Critical areas not fixed in time or place o Per updated code, critical area determinations and reports only valid for five years (ECDC 23.40.080 and 23.40.090.F) • Could make existing critical area information available on City of Edmonds web map o Do not want people making decisions based on information that may be incorrect Mr. Lien displayed Wetland and Streams; Landslide, Erosion and Seismic Hazards; and Priority Habitat Areas maps for Edmonds. He continued his review of the proposed amendments: Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 15, 2016 Page 6 Packet Pg. 459 6.1.d ECDC 20.15.215 Restoration Projects • 9 — Replace draft language in Exhibit 1 with Council proposal o Restoration of historic ecological functions is encouraged ■ Which "historic" period ■ Looking to improve existing conditions o Project proponent proposes buffer width necessary to ensure success ■ Should have some specific parameters o Director reviews and forwards recommendation to City Council ■ Same issues with Council administration of the code as previously discussed ECDC 23.40.040.0 — Areas subject to the provision of the CAO • 10 — Replace to refer to new appendices if appendices are adopted o ECDC 23.40.040.0 notes that the critical area regulations apply regardless of any formal identification ECDC 23.40.040.D — Areas Adiacent to Critical Areas a • 11 — Keep only first sentence and delete the remainder of the section o Amendment would correct discrepancy between ECDC 23.40.040.1) and definition of adjacent in ECDC 23.40.320 v CD Councilmember Buckshnis commended Mr. Lien for all his hard work. She has read four different critical r area ordinances and will rely on Shoreline's Ordinance 723 which includes a definition for BAS and others words. She offered to confer with Mr. Lien outside the meeting about definitions. Councilmember Teitzel read from Department of Ecology's January 12, 2016 letter which states, " In recognition of the value of restoration in urban landscapes and the limited restoration opportunities, in 2009 the Washington State Legislature amended the Shoreline Management Act (see RCW 90.58.580) to encourage urban restoration. This amendment allows local jurisdictions to grant relief from shoreline permitting requirements when a restoration project causes a landward shift of the ordinary high water mark. Allowing a reduction in the standard buffer is a similar approach to encouraging restoration; not implementing a restoration project because of inadequate buffers would be an unfortunate loss of opportunities for environmental improvement." He asked Mr. Lien if he agreed with DOE's conclusion. Mr. Lien answered yes, the provision in the CAO is based on a SMA provision. The DOE's letter is in response to one of the December 15, 2015 amendments which would have deleted one of the sections in the restoration projects. DOE's letter supports the language proposed in Exhibit 1. Councilmember Teitzel relayed his understanding allowing and encouraging restoration by reducing the buffer is a win for the environment and for the landowner which should be the City's goal. Mr. Lien agreed, explaining the language in Exhibit 1 states the restoration project must have a net environmental benefit. If the land owner were allowed to reduce the buffer, the project overall would be required to have a net environmental benefit. Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Mike Echelbarger, Edmonds, a builder in Edmonds, he relayed his experience with a stream and critical area on an adjacent property and requirement for a study. The study was related to language deleted from ECDC 23.40.090 and 23.40.310 regarding peer review. He described how peer review works in Edmonds; they were required do a report, in this case a watershed analysis. They hired a licensed engineer and paid $10,000 for the report. The report was submitted to the City and the City hired a consultant to do peer review which cost another $10,000. The consultant identified one addition and it Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 15, 2016 Page 7 Packet Pg. 460 6.1.d cost him $1500 to have it included in the report. The bill for peer review from the City was $5,000. He summarized he did not believe in peer review; the cost was nearly three times what it should have cost and he did not believe the results were significantly different. Next, he referred to ECDC 23.40.280 building setbacks, questioning why a setback, essentially a buffer for the buffer, was required in addition to the critical area buffer and how 15-feet was determined. He recommended the City inform its residents; there was little development potential in Edmonds but many people living next to a stream or wetland do not know these changes are being proposed. Justin Heckt, Edmonds, a Students Saving Salmon volunteer, said for the greater environmental health W of Edmonds and surrounding areas, the City needs to be accountable by doing scientific testing and using a reliable and unbiased data collected from critical area. Critical areas contain streams and marshes that add D to the ecosystem and can potentially support a thriving salmon community. These test provide not only c information for health factors such as pH, dissolved oxygen and other factors, they look for potentially c dangerous factors such as E.coli and toxins that can leak into neighborhoods or enter streams and the Marsh. Due to potential threats and the need to defend the environment, the City should look to scientific O organizations such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Washington State i University Extension to guide reports that will be used to make future guidelines. It is important that BAS a be used in conjunction with the data acquired. Not having dependable data could lead to compromised water sources, increased potential infections from bacteria, exposure to pollutants in stormwater runoff. L He suggested focusing attention on the Edmonds Marsh, an estuarine wetland and priority habitat. As the �? Marsh feeds into Puget Sound, it impacts the health of upland waters. Using BAS and all available data CD can promote a healthy society that will lead to a sustainable future. r Alan Merns, Edmonds, referred to written materials he provided, a chart showing, 1) bird population trends in his Maplewood neighborhood over 13 years, species and how they have appeared/disappeared, and 2) photos of 20 trees on a property near his home that were marked in late February; he was unsure this meant they were intended to be removed. He expressed concern with the CAO's inaction on bird and wildlife corridors across Edmonds. Although not in a critical area, he monitor birds in his yard; the abundance and biodiversity of bird life has been decreasing since 2005. He has shared his observations during the past five years with Edmonds citizens via presentations at the Bird Fest, Edmonds Floretum, Native Plant Demonstration Garden and a recent course at the Edmonds Community College Creative Retirement Institute. At least 6 of the 75 species are now locally extinct in his area; climate change and tree and shrub removal are likely factors in the decline. Citizens attending his presentations have been alarmed and are employing their own monitoring. When his family moved to Edmonds, there was a corridor of tall trees connecting Yost Park and Maplewood Park where birds including eagles, owls, band - tailed pigeon could be observed. During that time over 100 trees have been cut and not replaced. During its deliberations, he encouraged the Council to be inspired by the increased citizen monitoring and concern. Phil Lovell, Edmonds, said the Council must incorporate support and implement appropriate language necessary to address the potential impacts of sea level rise on the Edmonds Puget Sound waterfront. The new community center currently under design per City Resolution 1313 approved on March 18, 2014, is based on a full 30-foot tall building with a first floor at elevation 15.0 in NAVD 88 datum. This criteria compiles with the current building height regulations and engineering based on BAS. He submitted the briefing document presented to the Council during the senior center's briefing to City Council at its March 4 retreat. He referred to a New York Times article printed in the March 15, 2016 Seattle Times regarding a recently published study in the magazine "Nature Climate Change" which states in part, "rising seas which already endanger coastal communities through tidal floods and storm surges could rise 3 feet and possibly even more." The updated CAO must contain provisions supporting the current design direction of the new waterfront community center so important to the welfare and benefit of the community. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 15, 2016 Page 8 Packet Pg. 461 6.1.d Sam Kleven, Edmonds, expressed concern for the City's wildlife including salmon that use streams and wetlands. He cited the importance of protecting wildlife with the help of buffers. To successful complete their lifecycle, salmon need wide enough buffers, sized in accordance with BAS. A buffer is a strip of land that surrounds environmentally fragile streams and wetland; properly sized buffers will help prevent harmful silt and pollutants such as stormwater runoff from entering streams and wetlands. Providing native vegetation and shade to nourish salmon will create a safe haven for species in Edmonds. As well protecting birds, plants, insects and fish native to the City, buffers are also a visual symbol of Edmonds' land stewardship. Restoring urban streams also includes daylighting wherever possible; for example, Willow Creek will be daylighted thanks to the City's efforts to secure funding. The Students Saving Salmon Stream Team at Edmonds-Woodway High School monitors the status of many streams in Edmonds, including Willow Creek. Bringing back salmon runs will require providing incentives for daylighting streams and enhancing buffer areas such as tax reductions. Several incentives can be offered to citizens with regard to buffers via the Puget Sound Urban Resources Partnership, Community Salmon Fund, private stewardship programs and Five Star Restoration Challenge grants. The City currently supports the Student Saving Salmon program, a step in the right direction toward conservation restoration. He encouraged the Council to approve the use of strong language regarding conservation in Edmonds' CAO. Joe Scordino, Edmonds, retired fishery biologist, summarized points in an email he provided the Council. First, he supported including a list of critical areas in Edmonds in the regulations. He questioned having 90+ pages of regulations but not knowing where they apply. Regulations should be easily readable r by the public and people should know whether they apply to their property. He suggested simply listing Shellabarger Creek, Willow Creek, Edmonds Marsh and others and their buffers. Next, he felt it was important to encourage restoration projects and suggested letting the project proponent dictate the size of x the buffer. For a restoration project to be successful it needs an adequate buffer and the buffer should be w based on the science of the project rather than setting arbitrary buffer widths. With regard to physically separated/functionally isolated buffers, he recommended modifying the language to ensure what is functional isolated is scientifically proven not just based on a regulation. He supported the amended 2 language regarding monitoring and reporting so residents can see what is happening to critical areas. He referred to numerous regulatory structuring comments in his email. With regard to preserving the Marsh, he agreed there was some overlap with the SMP which has not yet been approved. He feared the intersect �j of the two may result in a reduction of the Marsh buffer widths or other changes in the Marsh's protection. He encouraged the Council to look closely at the Marsh when structuring the regulations. N John Reed, Edmonds, speaking on behalf the Alliance of Citizens for Edmonds (ACE), explained a task force of ACE members have considered the 12 proposed amendment as well as ideas and main areas identified for updating in the public hearing notice dated March 1, 2016. The task force also considered the 8 amendments made by Council on December 15, 2015 and the presentation by staff on the 12 amendments on February 23, 2016. Yesterday ACE submitted written comments to the Council, Mayor and Mr. Lien, suggesting changes and voicing support for some aspects of the CAO. ACE's comments are based on the October 19, 2015 redline version of the CAO and in some instances the proposed amendment in the public hearing memo in tonight's material has been revised and incorporates some of the recommendations in their submittal. He highlighted ACE's major recommendations. • Amendment 1: The 2015 Council deleted this new section. ACE recommends the two terms be carefully and completely defined in the CAO definition section. This provisions needs to be coordinated with footprint development and the SMP. Note F footprint of development should include compacted gravel. This was addressed in 2015 Amendment 5 to include legally established buildings, paved roads, driveways and parking lots. ACE recommends it be limited to those items. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 15, 2016 Page 9 Packet Pg. 462 6.1.d • Amendment 2: Agree this needs to be limited to major items in physically separated/functionally isolated restoration exemption areas and recommend adding variances. • Amendment 5.A: Agree this is unduly burdensome unless selected area such as parcels falling within a fish a wildlife habitat conservation area can be specifically called out. • Amendment 9: Recommend remove buffer reduction allowance and allow project proponents to propose based on need for special projects. Reduction be limited to 25% and eliminate paragraph B.3 as proposed in 2015 • Note C: Recommend compensatory mitigation be eliminated and actual mitigation be required • Building code and height exceptions: Stand by position taken on January 25, 2016 letter to Council.... He requested the Council keep in mind the primary purpose of the ordinance was to protect critical areas and allow exceptions only when absolutely necessary. Susan Paine, Edmonds, cited the importance of trees to critical areas and the environmental services O they provide, more so in critical areas. She supported preserving existing trees and expressed concern M with allowing the removal of trees smaller than 4 inches or 6 inches as it eliminates much of the a underbrush and prevents trees from maturing. Trees provide slope stabilization and other environmental benefits. She recommended restoration projects be limited to non -development projects to prevent M additional development around sensitive areas which will be important for future generations and salmon v runs. Regarding physically separated/functionally isolated buffers, she did not support including that provision, envisioning a sawtooth system of buffers around sensitive areas, wetlands and streams that o, would be difficult to enforce. With regard to building footprint, she questioned including gravel as part of a building footprint and recommended retaining the old language and not including loose or compacted a gravel. She recommended Council review projects where a buffer reduction of 25% or more is proposed. `m Bob McChesney, Executive Director, Port of Edmonds, said his comments are not related to any specific project or specific property. The local regulations such as the CAO are already restrictive as they pertain to future development opportunities and may devalue private property located in or adjacent to critical areas as well as place new limits on previously accepted private property rights. The Port's mission endorses both economic development and environmental stewardship as core values. The Port is committed to the balance between restoration and protection and renewal and economic vitality to serve future generations. In an ideal world restoration and redevelopment work together; the Port's responsibility is to find reasonable solutions that create new resources, to invest in restoration and support environmental stewardship. The Port is opposed to wider buffers around the Marsh as they would be overly restrictive and counterproductive to Marsh restoration which is a mutual goal. The Port is also concerned with amendments to frequently flooded areas. A contract rezone for Harbor Square, in existence since for many years, stipulates maximum building heights to 35 feet which should be reflected and protected in the new CAO. With regard to how the physically separated/functionally isolated provision works in the real world, he explained a portion of the footprint for the new Jacobsen Marine was in a critical area even though the Burlington Northern railroad runs down the middle, preventing any impacts to the Marsh. Regardless, $11,000 in mitigation was required for impacts that did not exist. He was hopeful whatever amendments are passed do not overly restrict future development opportunities. Eric Thuesen, Edmonds, recommended informing residents if their property is located in a critical area. Many of Edmonds' critical areas are steep slopes, anything over 15%, so it would not be difficult to delineate those. The information is important for a person to know when purchasing property. He expressed concern with the Council's level of involvement in critical area decisions, noting the Council has not been involved in past. Developers spend a considerable amount to hire experts to review projects using BAS to make determinations. Involving the Council, it becomes a political situation and may result in five years getting through the process. He acknowledged LUPA was an option but was expensive for the City as well as the proponent. He recommended the Council not be involved in decisions and instead Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 15, 2016 Page 10 Packet Pg. 463 rely on experts and the Hearing Examiner. Often the Council does not have the expertise and the net effect could be an expensive lawsuit. He agreed with the proposal to increase the height of a house in a wetland. Rondi Nordal, President, Edmonds-Woodway High School Students Saving Salmon Club, urged the Council to take to heart her and other young people's comments as they are the future of Edmonds. As a member of the Stream Team, she places a high value on the environmental health and conscientious protection and restoration of it. This requires the use of BAS as a means of ensuring these projects have a net positive benefit for wildlife habitat, critical because if BAS is not applied, restoration projects may not W focus on key environmental factors or appropriate species. An example of a key factor is embeddedness, a the extent to which silt surrounds or fills rocks, a key factor to stream health. One way to ensure D restoration efforts benefit critical habit is continued monitoring with oversight by qualified officials. a� c Continued monitoring ensures a project progresses successfully and also collects information that can be c used for future updates of the CAO and similar documents. In addition, qualified officials, preferably =a someone with a specialization in the factors being assessed, adds another level of accountability and O potential for success. Considering the current BAS, she questioned whether tradeoffs that allow i development to encroach on critical areas or add impervious surfaces in critical buffer zones should be a encouraged and whether the width of a buffer established to protect critical habitat should be reduced, allowing human interests to come before the greater health of the collective environment. She urged the L Council to consider the best interests of Edmonds when drafting amendments to the CAO. The natural �? beauty of Edmonds is a core identity and reflects the residents' values. She thanked the Council for their CD commitment to drafting the best CAO as it will greatly impact the future. r Ferrell Fleming, Edmonds, Executive Director, Senior Center, commented Edmonds pride itself on being a community with a high level of environmental sensitivity and awareness and a commitment to sustainability. BAS demands the City take account of sea level rise. While the magnitude and timeframe of that rise if a matter of considerable debate, sea level rise is a fact. Amendment 6 proposes not including amendments related to frequently flooded areas in the ordinance. Although this amendment may be well- meaning deal with the belief that this matter should be address elsewhere in the code, frequently flooded areas are critical areas by definition and with the growing attention paid to the threat of sea level rise, it would be odd for an environmentally progressive community such as Edmonds with considerable stake in its waterfront, to leave frequently flooded areas out of the CAO update. He urged the Council to defeat this amendment and leave frequently flooded areas in the updated CAO. The City's Strategic Action Plan asked the senior center to build a community center; that can be stopped at any number of points in the process either by action or inaction; consideration of the CAO is one such point. He urged the Council to pay specific attention to framing the language of the CAO update in such a way that they can build a multi -generational center that will serve many generations to come. David Mellitte, Edmonds, a Woodway High School teacher, agreed with the students' comments regarding the impact that critical areas have on the environment. Critical areas are often overlooked unless one steps in it but they are extremely necessary to health and economic benefit. As has been seen in Louisiana, when critical areas are overlooked, they do not act as sponges to soak up overflows from natural changes in weather patterns and cannot act as a buffer. If buffers are intentionally reduced and robust buffers are not required, property owners will face the consequences. He encouraged the Council to maintain a robust effort with regard to critical areas. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, thanked Mayor Earling for his veto which extended discussion regarding the CAO and the four Councilmembers who voted in favor of holding a public hearing. He appreciated Councilmember Teitzel's question regarding buffer modification which would apply to stream restoration. He found that extremely critical and said being overly strict, non -practical would discouraged stream restoration. He pointed out toxic crumb rubber should be addressed in the CAO, noting there are Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 15, 2016 Page 11 Packet Pg. 464 6.1.d no provisions for stormwater with toxic materials that flows into Puget Sound. With regard to replacement trees, he pointed out a 1-inch tree has a better survival rate. He commented definite critical area maps are overly expensive and are impractical. As a board member at the senior center, he preferred to keep the old center to avoid these problems. He did not believe sea level rise would be as high as has been stated and did not think that belonged in the CAO. Doug Swartz, Edmonds, referred to Amendment 9 regarding restoration and requested the Council consider restricting buffer reduction to 25%. Many Edmonds regulations include flexibility; although flexibility sounds good at the outset, the problem is if staff gives into one developer, every other developers or special interest will clamor for the same treatment. Buffer reduction up to 75% or allowing the proponent to recommend the amount of buffer reduction violates the idea of a code. If a project need more than a 25% reduction, the variance process would be appropriate. He urged the Council not to allow up to a 75% buffer reduction without a variance because the end result would be a code that was immaterial and that people could get around. Sue Little, Edmonds, explained after purchasing her home at 806 Dayton Street in January 2007, she was told by the City in October 2011 to daylight the stream on the property. Before she daylighted the a stream, it was in a pipe except for a waterfall. She hired a biologist and was told to complete a SEPA checklist for the work in the onsite stream. The biologist reported the stream is a non -fish bearing L tributary to Shellabarger Creek. She was also required to obtain hydrologist project approval and even �? though her yard has no evidence of a wetland or habitat for endangered, threatened or sensitive species, CD she was told to create a berm to hold water in the stream. The work had to be done during low flow r during the summer, 10 months from the time the original problem began with the rockery. Her rockery failed due to the timing. The Fish and Wildlife report stated an annual inspection was required which has never been done by Fish and Wildlife, the biologist or the Edmonds. After five years of misinformation, x lack of communication has created more water problems and expense. She found this very stressful as a w property owner as she cannot control the water coming down hill, the rain or the amount of water in her backyard. After discovering rodents in her crawlspace, 3 feet of water was pumped out, a sump pump and more drainage installed under her home at a cost of $9.000 She summarized throughout this process she 2 has spent approximately $40,000-$45,000 and still needs to spend more for drainage to address water issues. She assured she was an environmentalist and liked water and trees but she did not like water threatening her home. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Earling closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. He noted the agenda memo and the agenda mentions only a public hearing. He agreed discussion was appropriate but questioned whether the Council wanted to take action on the amendments tonight. Councilmember Mesaros recalled Mr. Lien's slides recommended discussion on April 5 and asked Mr. Lien to clarify. Mr. Lien agreed the agenda memo identified April 5 to narrow the potential amendments. As there are no other items on tonight's agenda, he suggested the Council have further discussion tonight. Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out the agenda memo states potential action and asked if the Council could begin taking action on the amendments. City Attorney Jeff Taraday responded the agenda memo limitations are more of a Council protocol issue than a legal issue; there is no legal issue with the Council narrowing down the amendments tonight. Councilmember Tibbott commented it may be worthwhile to consider amendments the Council can agree on and address the remaining amendments at the next meeting. Council President Johnson thanked everyone who participated in the public hearing particularly the Students Saving Salmon, noting it was good to hear from young people in the community. She assured Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 15, 2016 Page 12 Packet Pg. 465 6.1.d the Council will consider the written comments that have been submitted and citizens are welcome to make comments regarding the specific amendments. As Mr. Lien mentioned, the Council wanted to create the universe of potential amendments for the public hearing. The CAO is a very complex, complicated ordinance and the Council should carefully consider how to move forward. She agreed with proposed the schedule with adoption by the end of April. Councilmember Teitzel appreciated Ms. Little's comments about her experience. If a citizen invests thousands to daylight a stream for the benefit of the environment, it should be a positive experience for the citizen and the environment. He supported establishing the CAO so that a citizen has reasonable use of their property at the same time restoring and enhancing the environment to the extent possible and avoiding Ms. Little's experience whenever possible. Councilmember Nelson relayed his excitement to begin working on the amendments, preferring to begin with the amendments that Councilmembers disagree on. Council President Johnson commented on the importance of the Council considering the comments made during the public hearing, fearing that taking action tonight would be premature. She preferred to read the record more thoroughly, consider what has been said tonight and return at a future meeting. Councilmember Mesaros was not certain which amendments the Council agreed on; he preferred to begin with Amendment 1. as T T Councilmember Buckshnis suggested delaying Amendment 2 until the April 5 when the City Attorney will provide information and Mr. Lien will provide an example. She suggested Amendment 11was an easy one, simply cleaning up the language. u Councilmember Teitzel did not advocate for the Council's involvement in the administration's decision - making process; Councilmembers are legislators and set policy, the administration acts on the policy. If a decision was made not to have Council take action on exceptions and in 1-2 years the Council found the legislative intent was not being carried out, he asked if the Council could reopen the CAO to make it more restrictive and possibly have the Council involved or did the Council have to wait 7 years to make an amendment Mr. Taraday responded the Council could always clarify ambiguities in the code at a later date if an ambiguity leads to decisions by the Hearing Examiner that the City Council did not contemplated when adopting the code. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said the Council could also include something in the CAO and if it didn't work, amend it. Mr. Taraday agreed that could also be done; whatever the Council adopts in 2016, the Council was not forced to live with the 2016 CAO unchanged for 8 years. The Council can amend and clarify it as necessary. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the Council could modify it in 2017. Mr. Taraday answered yes. Main Motion #1 COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE AMENDMENT 11 AS PROPOSED. Mr. Taraday clarified Councilmember Tibbott was seeking Council consensus to include Amendment 11 in the CAO. He advised the Council was not adopting anything tonight. Action on Main Motion #1 MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON VOTING NO. Main Mntinn ;t2 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 15, 2016 Page 13 Packet Pg. 466 COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO APPROVE AMENDMENT 3. Councilmember Mesaros asked if 2 inch dbh replacement trees will be required if the amendment is approved. Mr. Lien responded if the amendment is approved, the required replacement must be between 1-2 inches; a 1-inch tree would still be allowed. Councilmember Mesaros asked whether 3-inch tree would be allowed. Mr. Lien answered yes. Councilmember Mesaros clarified the minimum was 1 inch. Councilmember Teitzel asked what was gained with the amendment as the size of the replacement tree was at a person's discretion. Mr. Lien said the vast majority of proposals will propose to plant a 1-inch tree. Action on Main Motion #2 UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS NELSON, FRALEY-MONILLAS, BUCKSHNIS AND TIBBOTT VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS MESAROS AND TEITZEL VOTING NO Councilmember Teitzel proposed changing the title of ECDC 23.40.220.C.4, Amendment LB, Physically separated/functionally isolated to physically separated/interrupted buffer. Mr. Lien clarified his 2 suggestion was to replace the entire phrase "physically separated/functionally isolated" with "interrupted buffer." as T Main Motion #3 r COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO a CHANGE THE TITLE OF ECDC 23.40.220.C.4. TO INTERRUPTED BUFFER. Mr. Lien said changing the entire section to interrupted buffer may require changing other references to physically separated/functionally isolated throughout the CAO. Action on Main Motion #3 MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Main Motion #4 COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE 4-INCH DBH IN AMENDMENT 4.A. Council President Johnson referred to comment from Susan Paine regarding the importance of brush and small young trees. Changing maintenance to allow removal of trees 4-inches dbh or smaller was not taking into consideration other vegetation that may be useful in stabilizing a slope or providing habitat. She suggested Ms. Paine's comments were worthy of additional consideration. She interpreted this change to basically allow clear cutting of any steep slope that had 4 inch or less dbh vegetation. Councilmember Mesaros responded he did to interpret this to allow clear cutting. He read it to allow removal of vegetation as part of normal maintenance of vegetation around a critical area. He was certain a property owner wanted to protect the slope as much as the City did. He recommended approving Amendment 4.A and allow property owners to take responsibility for their land. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked for clarification. Mr. Lien explained this definition refers to a specific exemption in 23.40.230 (page 22 of Exhibit 1), an exemption allowed for operation, maintenance or repair. A statement was added that reads, "Operation and maintenance also includes normal maintenance of vegetation performed in accordance with best management practices, provided that such management actions are part of regular and ongoing maintenance, do not expand further into the critical area, are not the result of an expansion of the structure or utility, and do not directly impact an endangered Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 15, 2016 Page 14 Packet Pg. 467 6.1.d or threatened species." A definition of normal maintenance of vegetation was also added, "normal maintenance of vegetation means removal of shrubs, non -woody vegetation and trees less than 4 inch dbh that occurs at least every other year. Maintenance also may include tree topping that has been previously approved by the City in the past five years." Another possible provision would be within the allowed activity section, 23.40.220.C.7 (page 19 of Exhibit 1) that addresses select vegetation removal activities and includes a list of evasive and noxious weeds. Amendments to this section would limit the amount of clearing to an area 1500 square feet over a 3 year period. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how this would apply to the two incidents on one property where property owners cut trees on a hillside in a critical area. Mr. Lien answered the most common is alders that sprout on a property. Alders are a pioneering species and can come up by the thousands on a site. The exemption would prevent alders from taking over the site. The site Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was referring to was subject to restoration. Alders can overwhelm a restoration project. The exemption would allow a property owner to control the alders. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented it was not related only to alders. Mr. Lien agreed, alders were only an example that this would apply to; other trees sprout in a similar manner. Councilmember Mesaros relayed his understanding if the amendment were approved, the regulations M would not allow a clear cut. Mr. Lien agreed the regulations would not allow a clear cut; it was related to L normal maintenance of vegetation on an ongoing regular basis. �? CD Councilmember Buckshnis asked why 4 inches was preferable to 3 inches. Councilmember Mesaros r recalled a citizen presenting a 3-inch and a 4-inch log to illustrate there was not much difference between 3 inches and 4 inches. Q- Action on Motion #4 MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON VOTING NO. Main Motion #5 COUNCILMEMBER NELSON MOVED, SECONDED BY TIBBOTT TO APPROVE AMENDMENT LA. Councilmember Nelson explained this amendment provided a balance between allowing some flexibility while requiring a qualified critical area consultant to make the determination whether it is in fact a separated and isolated buffer. Councilmember Mesaros referred to Mr. Echelbarger's comments regarding peer review and asked whether this amendment would require peer review. Mr. Lien answered that was elsewhere in the regulations. The amendment would not necessarily require peer review but it could. One of the instances when the City requires peer review is when there are multiple critical area reports that do not agree. In the instance referenced by Mr. Echelbarger, staff did not feel they had the expertise to review the critical area reports so it was sent to a consultant with that expertise. Another area that always requires peer review is development within the earth subsidence landslide hazard area in North Edmonds. He summarized there are a few instances where this amendment may require peer review. Councilmember Mesaros referred to Ms. Little's comments and the investments she has made when trying to do the right thing that has not turned out well for her. If decisions are made to reduce the buffer, he supported having good reason to do so and having expertise but did not want the property owner to go through a series of events that complicates their lives rather than helps them with their property and helps the City. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 15, 2016 Page 15 Packet Pg. 468 6.1.d Mr. Taraday pointed out a portion of Amendment LA overlaps with Amendment 2; Amendment LA includes a process involving a recommendation to the City Council and Amendment 2 includes a different process. An earlier Council comment recommended deferring Amendment 2 to a later date. Councilmember Buckshnis said if Amendment LA was related to Amendment 2, she preferred to first hear from the City Attorney on April 5. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding Amendment LA was an opportunity to agree with what was already proposed in the CAO and was one of greatest opportunities to allow for development that would improve environmental effectiveness in the critical area. He was supportive of Amendment LA and looked forward to a further understanding of Amendment 2. Action on Main Motion #5 COUNCILMEMBER NELSON WITHDREW AMENDMENT LA WITH AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. Councilmember Teitzel expressed concern with the wording of Amendment LA, which states the director a will require the applicant to provide a site assessment and functional analysis report by a qualified critical E area consultant. His concern was this removes staff almost entirely from the decision. He envisioned a property downslope from a stream and did not support requiring a report when it was absolutely clear t� there was no impact on the nearby stream or wetland. He found Amendment LA too restrictive and felt it should be reworded. r' T �r Main Motion #6 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO REMOVE AMENDMENT 4.C, ADDING A DEFINITION FOR BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the definition is already contained in ECDC 21.40.310. Action on Main Motion #6 MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Main Motion ;t7 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO APPROVE AMENDMENT 4.1), MOVE DEFINITIONS FROM PART VI TO ECDC 24.40.010 AFTER PURPOSE SECTION. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the definitions should be at the beginning which is done in other cities' CAO for readability. Mr. Lien commented moving definitions from Part IV will not move the section related to BAS which has its own section describing characteristics of BAS, not a definition. He clarified Section 23.40.310 BAS is not contained in the definitions; the motion is to move the definitions contained in Part IV, 23.40.320 to 23.40.010, moving the definitions from the end of the general section to the beginning. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if Mr. Lien could bring back the amended text next week. Mr. Lien relayed his understanding the Council was reducing the amendments via changes discussed tonight so there were fewer to consider on April 5. He did not intend to make any of the changes approved tonight and would incorporate all the proposed amendments following the April 5 meeting into a new draft code for the April 12 meeting. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas feared it would be difficult to follow on April 5 if some changes were approved tonight and not incorporated into the document. Mr. Lien offered to create a new draft for the April 5 meeting although moving the definitions would require renumbering everything which would be very confusing. Mr. Taraday suggested when the COA returns to Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 15, 2016 Page 16 Packet Pg. 469 6.1.d the Council on April 5, staff categorize the amendments the Council has already acted on and amendments that have not yet been acted on. Mr. Lien agreed with Mr. Taraday's suggestion. Councilmember Mesaros asked the intent of Amendment 4.B. Councilmember Buckshnis answered it relates to Amendment 2. Councilmember Teitzel agreed it made sense to move the definition to the beginning as it will help the reader to have the definitions as they read the CAO. With regard to BAS, he suggested referencing in the list of definitions where BAS is in the document. Mr. Lien commented there was already motion to a) remove Amendment 4.C. Councilmember Teitzel clarified his suggestion was to reference the section on a BAS as the definition of BAS. D a� c Councilmember Buckshnis agreed with Councilmember Teitzel's suggestion. c L Councilmember Mesaros clarified Councilmember Teitzel's suggestion; he was not recommending the O language regarding BAS be included in the definitions, he was recommending including a reference to i BAS in the definitions. a Amendment #1 to Main Motion #7 L COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, V TO AMEND TO ADD REFERENCE CLARIFYING IN THE DEFINITION LIST WHERE A READER MIGHT FIND INFORMATION ON BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE. T- T Action on Amendment #1 AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Action on Main Motion #7 as amended MAIN MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. It was the consensus of the Council to defer further discussion and action on the amendments to April 5. 7. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling advised the new Economic Development Commission (EDC) has been formed and thanked Councilmembers for their appointments. The EDC is a fabulous group of people; their first meeting is March 30. The Mayors Pedestrian Safety Committee will meet for the first time on April 5. Mayor Earling reminded of the Snohomish County Cities dinner on Thursday; he is unable to attend. 8. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Nelson referred to comments regarding the subject of sea level rise. He was excited there was so much interest in the topic and Edmonds, as well as other communities along the Washington coast including Seattle, Olympia, King County, Bellingham and Bremerton and Kitsap Council have looked at comprehensive ways to address sea level rise. If the City takes on this challenge, which he believed the City should, we should look at ways to adopt, prepare and fight. The reality is all the modeling is over an 84-year time frame and for the first 34 years of that modeling, the damage is already done. Seas will rise regardless of whether habits or lifestyles change. Beyond that point, from 2050 to 2100, there are things the City can do to impact sea level rise and he recommended being proactive not just reactive. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas apologized for arriving late; she was at Health District's annual retreat until 6:45. The Health District is struggling with cuts and deciding which programs to cut. One of the proposals is for the Health District to no longer serve the WIC program and subcontract it instead. There Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 15, 2016 Page 17 Packet Pg. 470 6.1.e It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval of a resolution on next week's Consent Agenda. Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. NEW ITEM: CONSIDERATION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT RELATED TO A CONDEMNATION ACTION AT THE CORNER OF 76TH AVENUE AND 212TH STREET COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO APPROVE THE MARCH 29, 2016 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDMONDS AND FOUR PROPERTY OWNERS KNOWN AS THREE GRACES #1 LLC, THREE GRACES #2 LLC, THREE GRACES #3 LLC AND PORTERFIELD DEVELOPMENT LLC IN WHICH THE PARTIES HAVE AGREED TO SETTLE THE CONDEMNATION ACTION FILED UNDER SNOHOMISH COUNTY CAUSE NUMBER 15-2-05187-1 FOR A TOTAL JUST COMPENSATION OF $273,000. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. B. CRITICAL AREA ORDINANCE UPDATE Senior Planner Kernen Lien reviewed expectations for tonight's meeting and next steps: @ • Tonight o Recap Decisions made on March 15, 2016 c i o Continue Council discussion and decide which proposed amendments to carry forward r o City Attorney not at next week's meeting so need to make decision regarding contingent r' critical area review procedure tonight Next Council Meetings: o April 12th — Discuss and refine proposed amendments carried forward on April 5th o April 19th — Potential adoption of updated critical area regulations Mr. Lien reviewed amendments the Council approved at the March 15 meeting: • Amendment 1.13: Rename provision to physically separated/potentially isolated or "interrupted buffer." o Council voted to rename of the physically separated/functionally isolated buffer provision to "interrupted buffer." ■ All references to physically separated/functionally isolated buffer in the CAO will be changed prior to adoption • Amendment 3: ECDC 23.40.220.C.7.b.iv - Hazard Tree Replacement o Council voted to change the required diameter of deciduous replacement trees from one inch dbh to one to two inches dbh Amendments 4: Definitions A. ECDC 23.40.320 - Normal Maintenance of Vegetation Definition o Council voted to Include removal of trees less than 4-inch dbh C. Add definition for Best Available Science. o Council voted to insert reference to ECDC 23.40.310 (Best Available Science) in the definitions section D. Move definitions from Part VI to ECDC 23.40.010 after Purpose section o Council voted to move definitions to ECDC 23.40.010 • Amendment 11: ECDC 23.40.040.13 - Areas Adjacent to Critical Areas o Council voted to keep only the first sentence and delete the remainder of this section Mr. Lien reviewed potential amendments: Council Review/Critical Area Decision Process • 2.A — Include City Council in decision making process for certain critical area decisions Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 5, 2016 Page 10 Packet Pg. 471 2.B — Decision matrix/threshold for which projects would include City Council in decision making process 2.0 — Consider amending the decision process for certain types of critical area decisions Exhibit 2 — Contingent Critical Area Review Procedure Mr. Lien described the contingent critical area review procedure: • Scope o Development of 600 square feet within standard buffer ■ Interrupted Buffer ■ Restoration Project ■ Wetland/Stream Buffer Reduction • New Type II-B procedure U o Public Notice (including City Council) o Citizen may request public hearing which would escalate the process up to a Type III -A ■ Public Hearing before Hearing Examiner O ■ Requestor must pay a fee in the amount of 50% the difference between Type 11-B and Type III -A application fee Q ■ Project proponent shall pay the other 50% difference between Type II-B and Type III -A application within 30 days' L • Notice of Final Decision to City Council with opportunity to appeal Hearing Examiner decision �? through LUPA appeal r rn Council President Johnson referred to the contingent critical area review procedure, observing a 0. restoration project such as Willow Creek daylighting may not have 600 square feet of development within the standard buffer. Mr. Lien explained after the restoration project there will be a buffer to the critical area; if the restoration project involved more than 600 square feet of disturbance from daylighting the w stream or expansion of the wetland, it would elevate to this process. Mr. Taraday clarified for this procedure to apply, both the 600 square foot threshold and at least one of the other three items (interrupted buffer, restoration project or wetland/stream buffer reduction) needs to occur. It would not 2 apply every time there was development of 600 square feet within a standard buffer. U Council President Johnson said she will keep this question in mind and will see how the contingent critical area review procedure would work for a project with restoration but no construction within the buffer. Mr. Lien said if the desire was to have all restoration projects included, the language could be changed to restoration projects or interrupted buffer or wetland buffer reduction that include development of 600 square feet within the standard buffer. Mr. Lien provided a photograph and described a theoretical contingent review: • Features of example: o Stream requiring a 75-foot buffer 0 75-foot buffer 0 25% buffer reduction allowed by CAO 0 600 square foot detached garage on a developed property with stream o Interrupted buffer or buffer reduction may be applicable o Initial applications required • Contingent review process: o Planning staff reviews critical area application and issues a "Study Required" finding do the presence of a stream o Planning staff reviews building permit application ■ Notes 600 square feet of disturbance within standard buffer ■ Notifies applicant of contingent review process Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 5, 2016 Page 11 Packet Pg. 472 6.1.e Contingent review process — Type II-B o Applicant applies for the Type 11-B contingent review and pays $820 application fee ■ 28-day completeness review for Type I1 applications ■ Notice of Application provided • Properties within 300 ft., posted on site, published in Everett Herald, and notice provided to Council ■ City received request for public hearing within the 14-day comment period • Requesting party pay $921 ■ Applicant pays $921 to continue with Type III contingent review process within 30 days Contingent review process — Type III -A o Notice of Public Hearing provided ■ Properties within 300 ft., posted on site, published in Everett Herald, and notice provided to Council o Public hearing held ■ Hearing Examiner has 10 business days to issue decision o Hearing Examiner decision may be appeal under LUPA (RCW 36.70C) o No appeal on Hearing Examiner decision ■ Building permit process may be completed He provided a comparison of the critical area contingent review: Review Type Length of Process Cost Building permit review 25-30 days $1,173.50 Building permit review with Type II-B critical area contingent review 2-3 months $1,993.50 Building Permit review with Type III -A critical area contingent review 4-5 months $2,914.50 Mr. Lien reviewed contingent review process takeaways: • Adds opportunity for public input into decision process • Adds cost ad time to project review Council options o Adjust threshold for when project is triggered o Further limit what type of projects are subject to contingent review o Reserved for special circumstances o Keep existing review process o Not apply to buffer reduction ■ Current critical area code includes buffer reduction of 50% of standard buffer and reduced buffer can also be buffer averaged ■ Draft code only allows reduction of up to 25% of standard buffer and does not allow combining buffer reduction with buffer averaging Councilmember Buckshnis said her intent has been to address wetland categories 1 and 2 and estuaries. She recalled an instance where a massive cutting took place, Council provided input to staff and staff did not act on Council's input. Her intent was to ensure the Council had knowledge of the threshold and what is occurring. Her primary concerns were daylighting Willow Creek and any issues related to Lake Ballinger. Council President Johnson referred to Mr. Lien's indication that buffer reduction and buffer averaging could not be combined. She recalled for Willow Creek there was a 25% buffer reduction on the south side and the Marina Beach Master Plan includes a buffer of less than 75 feet on the north side and there was an Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 5, 2016 Page 12 Packet Pg. 473 6.1.e opportunity for buffer averaging. Mr. Lien responded both sides of the creek have 75-foot buffer; buffer averaging could be done on one side and a buffer reduction could potentially be done on the other side; they cannot be combined on one side. Council President Johnson observed the current code allows a 25% buffer reduction and the proposed code allows a 50% reduction. Mr. Lien said her observation related to several provisions in the CAO. There is a provision that applies to streams and wetlands that allows buffer reduction. The current code allows a buffer reduction of 50% of the standard buffer and that 50% buffer could be averaged as well. The current code does not have a provision for restoration projects. The buffer can only be reduced by 25%, not 50% and buffer reduction and buffer averaging cannot be combined. With regard to the restoration section of the code, a new section based on the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) only applies to projects that are not required as mitigation for a development proposal such as daylighting of a stream or landward expansion of a wetland. If a stream is in a culvert, there is no buffer. Once the stream is daylighted, it is subject to the critical area regulations. The restoration section was modeled after the SMA provision that states for a shoreline project that expands shoreline jurisdiction, the SMP does not apply in that area. The draft critical area provision states a restoration project that expands the critical area buffer, the buffer could be reduced if certain criteria are met to a maximum of 50% of the standard critical area buffer. Another amendment will address that issue; he recommended focusing on the contingent review procedure tonight in order to complete it while Mr. Taraday is present. As currently drafted the contingent review would apply to restoration projects T Council President Johnson commented if the Council were involved, she recalled a ten-day period for the Council to act after the Hearing Examiner's decision. Mr. Lien explained a LUPA appeal must be made within 21 days of the Hearing Examiner's decision. Council President Johnson asked if contingent review Q. example had the same deadline and whether it was considered a LUPA appeal. Mr. Taraday responded one of the key features of this process is it takes the City Council out of the quasi-judicial decision w making role for these types of critical area decisions but does not take the Council out of process. That is (n important because when City Councils act in quasi-judicial decision making roles, they incur the greatest potential liability for making a decision based not on adopted criteria but on other factors that may not be permissible. With the contingent review process, the City Council is involved, receives notice of application, can engage with constituents because the Council is not in the decision making role so the c Appearance of Fairness Doctrine does not apply. Councilmembers can talk to proponents and opponents, o testify at the Hearing Examiner, etc. and if a majority of the Council does not like the Hearing Examiner's decision, the Council can direct the City Attorney to file a LUPA appeal of the Hearing Examiner's o decision to Superior Court. He summarized the Council was involved, just not as decision makers. Council President Johnson asked for clarification regarding notification to Council and how quickly the Council needed to act. Mr. Lien advised there are three potential notices to Council, 1) notice of application of Type II-B, 2) notice of public hearing if a party requests a public hearing, and 3) notice of the Hearing Examiner's decision. If a decision is made at the end of the Type 11-B process without a public hearing, that decision is appealable to the Hearing Examiner. Councilmember Nelson referred to the comparison of costs. A homeowner constructing a garage would pay the $1173.50 building permit. If it was discovered the garage met the criteria, the homeowner would pay an additional $821. He asked what the homeowner would be responsible for in moving forward in a Type II-B process. Mr. Lien advised the application fees do not include any consultant fees. The property owner will be required to prepare a critical area report. Once an application is submitted and deemed complete, there is usually additional discussion with staff. If there is no request for a hearing, that is the end for the property owner. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 5, 2016 Page 13 Packet Pg. 474 6.1.e Councilmember Nelson clarified if someone requests a public hearing, that person pays a fee. Mr. Lien explained in an attempt for the requested party to have some buy -in to the process to prevent abuse, the person requesting the public hearing must pay the half difference between the Type II and III permit process. Councilmember Nelson asked how the cost for the Type II and III permit fee is determined. Mr. Lien answered they are in the City's adopted fee schedule. A Type III process is about $1,600 and anything that goes to the Hearing Examiner, the applicant is required to pay the cost of the Hearing Examiner and staff takes a deposit at the time of application. Councilmember Nelson observed the person requesting a public hearing pays 50% of the fee and the homeowner pays 50% of the fee even though they may not want a Type III process. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how many applications the City receives a year for property restoration projects. Mr. Lien did not think the City had ever had an application for a restoration project and that is not currently included in the code. There has only been one daylighting of stream that he knew of and it did not start out as a restoration project. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas summarized the occurrence of restoration projects is very low. Mr. Lien answered it could be but he could foresee a situation where someone wanted to daylight a stream on their property for a water feature but they may not want to if daylighting the stream requires a 50-75 foot buffer that takes away the use of their property. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if a property owner could daylight a stream on their property now. Mr. Lien answered they could but there is no provision that provides relief from the critical area regulations; if someone daylighted a stream, they would be stuck with the standard buffer. T Councilmember Mesaros pointed out there was no incentive for a property owner to do a restoration project. Mr. Lien agreed. If the goal was to encourage restoration, Councilmember Mesaros said a system that provided some relief or incentive was a positive step. He noted the small relief would still cost the Q. property owner a lot of money, time and effort. Mr. Lien agreed. x w Council President Johnson pointed out there have been no requests for this in the past and before (n providing an incentive via such a tremendous change, the Council needs to consider how this would actually be applied. She observed it applies to the Willow Creek daylighting project. Councilmember Buckshnis supported reserving the contingent review process for special circumstances c such as Wetland 1 and 2 and Estuary 1 and 2. Many stakeholders are involved in those areas and the o projects will be very expensive so it is important to have the Council provide oversight and opportunity to 0 involve the City Attorney. If someone wants to daylight a stream in their yard, the Council does not need o to be involved; however, the Council will want to be involved with the daylighting of Willow Creek and N if there are any issues with Lake Ballinger Council in the future. Mr. Lien summarized the Council's `" direction: reserve for special circumstances to apply to restoration projects on anadromous fish bearing 0 streams which include Willow Creek or wetland restoration projects on Category 1 and 2 wetlands and tweak the language to have it apply to those projects. Councilmember Teitzel agreed with Councilmember Mesaros' comment. He referred to Mr. Lien's w indication that there have virtually been no restoration requests because homeowners are cognizant if they take a stream out of a culvert, they may not be able to expand their home to add bedroom or a deck so it is not surprising homeowners have not made any requests. That is unfortunate because it is a lost E z opportunity to enhance the environment and those type of projects need to be encouraged. He encouraged the Council to strike the proper balance between respect for the environment and homeowner rights and Q not create a disincentive to take a stream out of a culvert. Councilmember Nelson relayed concern with costs for an average homeowner trying to doing a project. He agreed this process would be rare and infrequent and would only be applicable to a substantial restoration project. He did not support trying to do a restoration project while fixing something else on a Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 5, 2016 Page 14 Packet Pg. 475 6.1.e property. He preferred to make a distinction between an improvement on a property that fell within a critical area versus restoring a critical area. If the goal was to restore a critical area, that should be the priority. Councilmember Mesaros referred to the photo of the contingent review process example. There is a culverted stream on a property and a homeowner wants to build a garage next to their house. They decide to daylight the stream as a part of the construction to add value to their property. They may determine daylighting the stream will not allow construction of the garage. Mr. Lien said if the stream was culverted and the homeowner daylighted it, there would be a 75-foot buffer which could be reduced via the buffer width reduction or potentially an interrupted buffer. Daylighting the stream would further restrict the rest of the property. He summarized with a stream in a culvert there is no buffer, daylighted, there is a buffer. Councilmember Mesaros wanted to allow a homeowner constructing a garage to be able to daylight the stream. They likely would not do that because without buffer reduction and daylighting would not allow them to construct the garage. Mr. Lien agreed that was potentially correct. Mr. Lien clarified a restoration project is not tied to a development project and not required as mitigation, it is just something a property owner wants to do to improve the critical area. Councilmember Mesaros a asked if a property owner could do both if they wanted to. Mr. Lien said he would discourage a restoration project to obtain a reduced buffer for a development proposal. Councilmember Mesaros 2 clarified the homeowner may want all the construction to be done at one time. He anticipated the planning department would inform the homeowner that daylighting the creek would require a 75-foot buffer and T describe any additional costs and the homeowner may decide to leave the stream in the culvert. Mr. Lien said the homeowner would be informed of the consequences. He agreed the City wants to encourage restoration projects where possible. If the contingent review process only applied to anadromous fish Q. bearing streams and Category 1 and 2 wetlands, it would not impact the property in the example because an anadromous fish bearing stream has a 100-foot buffer. ,L Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed with Councilmember Nelson, finding it difficult to believe anyone would want to restore a waterway on their property at same time they are increasing the footprint of their home. She was glad Councilmembers were interested in the environment and restoration, noting the built -out condition of Edmonds will require more preservation of the environment. She summarized most homeowners would choose to do one or the other, develop the waterway or their home and she doubted they would do both at same time. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas announced the meeting audio is online right now but not on television; IT staff are working on the AV system. Councilmember Buckshnis said she also wanted to include Category 1 and 2 estuaries due to DOE's downgrading the marsh to a Category 2 estuary. Council President Johnson asked for clarification; originally there were three categories: buffer reduction, restoration projects and interrupted buffer. She asked if the Council wanted to include all three in the contingency critical area review procedures. Mr. Lien said he has only heard interest in including restoration projects. He said a buffer reduction would not be allowed on a Category 1 or 2 wetland, it is only allowed on Category 3 and 4 wetlands. Council President Johnson asked the Council's interested in including the interrupted buffer. Mr. Lien relayed what he has heard from the Council: include Category 1 and 2 wetlands, estuary wetlands and anadromous fish bearing streams restoration projects. For Councilmember Buckshnis, Mr. Lien explained for a restoration project on a Category 1 or 2 wetland, estuary wetland or anadromous fish bearing streams, the buffer relief associated with the restoration Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 5, 2016 Page 15 Packet Pg. 476 project is addressed in that review. There are different stream and wetland buffer reduction sections in the code but a buffer reduction cannot occur on a Category 1 or 2 wetland. Main Motion #1 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, THAT THE CONTINGENT REVIEW PROCESS APPLY TO CATEGORY 1 AND 2 WETLANDS AND CATEGORY 1 AND 2 ESTUARIES AND ANADROMOUS FISH BEARING STREAMS FOR BOTH RESTORATION PROJECTS AND WETLAND STREAM BUFFER REDUCTIONS. Mr. Lien clarified a wetland buffer reduction cannot be done on a Category 1 or 2 wetland. Councilmember Buckshnis restated the motion: THAT THE CONTINGENT REVIEW PROCESS APPLY TO CATEGORY 1 AND 2 WETLANDS AND CATEGORY 1 AND 2 ESTUARIES AND ANADROMOUS FISH BEARING STREAMS FOR RESTORATION PROJECTS. Action on Main Motion #1 MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Lien continued his review of potential amendments: j ECDC 23.40.220.C.4 — Interrupted Buffer T • LA — Require determination to be made by a qualified critical area consultant o Maintains flexibility o Maybe costly for smaller projects a Mr. Lien advised the language in LA also originally included Council review but given the previous discussion, he assumed that would be removed. Councilmember Mesaros concurred with eliminating City Council review based on the previous discussion. Councilmember Teitzel expressed concern this amendment was very restrictive and required a critical area assessment to be done in all cases. He envisioned some instances where staff may determine analysis may not be required such as a property that is downslope from stream where there can be no impact from development. This amendment would require the homeowner to bear the cost in that instance; therefore, he did not support the amendment. As the drafter of this amendment, Councilmember Nelson supported it with the modification to remove Council review. As demonstrated in the text, it maintains flexibility and allows the project/property owner flexibility that they do not currently have. The determination is important and he wanted a qualified critical area consultant to make the determination. Councilmember Mesaros suggested if staff makes a determination a project proposal cannot proceed, why would a consultant be needed to affirm staff s determination. Councilmember Nelson suggested staff also could be mistaken and their decision would deny the homeowner the ability to do some development; the critical areas consultant could find development could occur. This provision allows an expert to make that determination. Main Motion #2 COUNCILMEMBER NELSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO ADOPT THE AMENDMENT WITHOUT THE COUNCIL REVIEW. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 5, 2016 Page 16 Packet Pg. 477 6.1.e Council President Johnson spoke in favor of motion, commenting it requires a hydrologic, geologic and/or biological habitat professional. These areas of the City are critical and it would not apply to all development. Councilmember Mesaros acknowledged Councilmember Nelson's response, commenting he had not looked at it that way, staff could be overruled by the consultant's determination. Action on Main Motion #2 MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL VOTING NO. Mr. Lien continued his review of potential amendments: c� Q- ECDC 20.15.215 Restoration Projects (not required as mitigation) • 9 — Replace draft language in Exhibit 1 with Council proposal o Restoration of historic ecological functions is encouraged ■ Which "historic" period • Looking to improve existing conditions o Project proponent proposes buffer width necessary to ensure success L a ■ Should have some specific parameters o Director reviews and forwards recommendation to City Council ■ Same issues with Council administration of the code as previously discussed v Mr. Lien explained the draft language is based on the SMA provision and would allow an automatic a� reduction of 25% of the buffer and if certain criteria are met, could be reduced to 50% of the expanded v buffer area. He referred to revised language in the packet that combines Amendment 9 and the existing a code. Another proposal regarding restoration projects was submitted this afternoon. x Councilmember Mesaros referred to the language in the PowerPoint, "Director reviews and forwards w recommendation to City Council" and asked how many projects this will affect. Mr. Lien answered given the previous discussion regarding the contingent review process, if this were a restoration project on a Category 1 or 2 wetland, estuary wetland or anadromous fish bearing streams, this would be the contingent review process, it would be a staff process and would not be forwarded to City Council. Based on the Council's previous discussion the last bullet, "Director reviews and forwards recommendation to 0 City Council" would be eliminated. v co Councilmember Nelson advised his modified language no longer references historic. He emphasized the 0 N importance of a qualified critical area consultant making the determination regarding the buffer. He noted "_' people often wrongly assume a qualified professional will require a larger buffer when in fact a qualified 0 consultant may determine a smaller buffer is appropriate such on Willow Creek. This allows the use of , science for a specific location rather than a one size fits all buffer. Mr. Lien reviewed the staffs proposed language in the packet for ECDC 23.40.215, explaining the x revised language provides a range for the reduced buffer, up to 50%. w c d Council President Johnson expressed concern with allowing the director to reduce the buffer by 50%. She E understood that may be good for a particular project but she did not like the idea in general and preferred to use the contingency review process to make that determination. Mr. Lien said given the earlier Q amendment, this process would still go through the contingency review process. For a restoration project on a Category 1 or 2 wetland, estuary wetland or anadromous fish bearing stream, these criteria would apply but it would still go through the contingency review process. Council President Johnson asked why it needed to be specified that the buffer could be reduced by 50%. Mr. Lien responded if 50% was not specified, someone could propose 25%. Council President Johnson Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 5, 2016 Page 17 Packet Pg. 478 6.1.e relayed her understanding the State allows a 25% reduction; she felt it best to follow the State's guidelines rather than the City creating its own. Mr. Lien clarified 75% of the standard buffer would be a 25% reduction. If the code does not at least specify 50% a proposal could be made for 25% of the standard buffer. Council President Johnson relayed her understanding that the State wants to encourage restoration projects and have taken a position of allowing a 25% reduction of the buffer. Mr. Lien responded the State guidelines are modeled after SMA which states for a shoreline project within shoreline jurisdiction, the SMP does not have to be applied at all in the expanded shoreline area. This provision was modeled after that but did not propose not having critical area regulations applied in the expanded area but was intended to provide some buffer relief. For buffer reduction or buffer averaging for project proposals and mitigation, the State's recommendation is 25% reduction of the buffer. He clarified that is related to specific development proposals and not restoration projects; the restoration project would still be required to have a net environmental benefit. A daylighted stream with a 50% buffer will have a net environmental benefit over a stream in a culvert. Council President Johnson said to her knowledge, the City has never had any restoration projects, a however, a big restoration project is proposed for the daylighting of Willow Creek. The City has unofficially determined it would have a 25% reduction or averaging and that the current proposal fits within the guidelines of a 25% reduction. She saw no purpose for going down to 50%, finding it unnecessary and she preferred to retain the 25% reduction. T r Main Motion #3 COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON MOVED TO ACCEPT THE LANGUAGE FOR THIS a AMENDMENT BUT CHANGE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF A 50% BUFFER y REDUCTION. Y Action on Main Motion #3 MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Council President Johnson clarified she did not want to allow a 50% buffer reduction. Mr. Lien asked for clarification regarding Council direction regarding the three versions under consideration. Council President Johnson's proposal was the project proponents may request a reduced buffer up to 75% of the expanded buffer; that means they can only get a 25% reduction in the buffer. Council President Johnson preferred the language be more clear and state 25% rather than 75%. Mr. Lien agreed he could revise the language accordingly. Councilmember Nelson referred to his proposed language, commenting the percentages in this amendment make it complicated. The intent is a restoration project could deviate from the standard CAO requirements by hiring a qualified professional who would recommend a reduction in the buffer of 50%, 75%, etc. or whatever makes sense for the site as long as the ecological functions are maintained and the site is restored. Councilmember Buckshnis said a report could be prepared to support a buffer reduction. Mr. Lien agreed there would need to be a report to allow reduction of the buffer. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested clarifying the buffers can be reduced based on a report from a qualified consultant. She asked why a number needed to be included. Mr. Lien answered technically a number did not need to be included; he suggested a number to establish a lower limit for reducing the buffer. Council President Johnson preferred not have lower number. Main Motion #4 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 5, 2016 Page 18 Packet Pg. 479 6.1.e COUNCILMEMBER NELSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT WITH THE REMOVAL OF THE HISTORICAL COMPONENT AND NOT REQUIRE COUNCIL REVIEW. Councilmember Mesaros expressed support for the motion, noting Councilmember Nelson's proposal will solve the problem and address specific issues and locations. Mr. Lien explained the intent of a restoration project is to improve a critical area. For example, for a culverted stream, the goal is not to preserve the existing conditions but to enhance the critical area. He suggested the language proposed for ECDC 23.40.215.B be revised to read, "The restoration project proposal will include a proposed buffer width for the project that is developed from an assessment by a qualified Critical Area Consultant on the buffer width necessary to ensure that the restoration project is successful and there will be a net environmental benefit of the restoration project." Councilmember Nelson responded the intent of restoration is to restore something. He suggested "ecological functions are enhanced." Mr. Lien clarified the goal is a net environmental benefit from the restoration project. Council President Johnson asked whether the motion includes staff s proposal for the amount of buffer v reduction the applicant can request. Councilmember Nelson clarified his motion was not the redlined amendment. He restated the motion: a, TO ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT (REPLACE DRAFT LANGUAGE IN ECDC 23.40.215 WITH SECTIONS A — D) WITH THE EXCEPTION OF NOT HAVING THE COUNCIL REVIEW +, PROCESS. Q' L Amendment #1 COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO CHANGE ITEM B TO READ, "...THE FUNCTION OF THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE STREAM OR WETLAND ARE PRESEPAIED WILL BE ENHANCED." Councilmember Tibbott expressed support for staff redlined version including reference to the allowed 50% reduction which was not included in Councilmember Nelson's amendment. He felt it was important to identify a percentage and agreed with a 50% reduction. He did not support the amendment. Vote on Amendment #1 AMENDMENT CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT VOTING NO. Mr. Lien recalled the original motion also included eliminating restoration of the historic ecologically functions from Item A. Councilmember Nelson agreed. Action on Motion #4 MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT VOTING NO. Following a brief discussion, Council agreed to continue review of the amendments until 10:00 p.m. Mr. Lien reviewed the remaining amendments: Definitions • 4.B - Add definition for Council o Definition exists in ECDC 21.15.030 Main Mntinn #t5 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 5, 2016 Page 19 Packet Pg. 480 6.1.e COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO ADD A DEFINITION OF COUNCIL VIA REFERENCING ECDC 21.15.030. Action on Main Motion #5 MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ECDC 20.40.090.D —Minimum Report Contents • 12 — Add a new subsection to ECDC 23.40.090.D require critical area report to identify the location of all native and nonnative vegetation of 6 inch dbh and larger Main Motion #6 COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE COUNCIL AMENDMENT AS WRITTEN. Councilmember Tibbott asked what is involved in researching 6 inch dbh vegetation on a site such a 2 or 5-acre site. Mr. Lien answered critical areas are unlikely to cover the entire 2 or 5-acre site and there are few 2-5 acre sites in the City. The critical area report, which focuses on the critical area and buffers, requires a site visit and description of the site. This information is already included in most critical area reports so this language does not add additional burden but specifies what is to be included in the critical area report. Action on Main Motion #6 MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Council Status Reports • 7 — Require periodic reports to the City Council o Detailed reports can be time consuming and expensive o With existing resources could provide periodic reports with basic data, for example: ■ How many buffer reductions were granted and where ■ Number of critical area determinations ■ Number and general type of interrupted buffer determinations ■ Provide some sample projects o Staff proposed language in agenda packet ■ Reports in 1st and 3rd quarter of each year ■ List critical area decisions made since the last report ■ Provide specific examples ■ Provide whatever information the Council requests during the previous report Councilmember Nelson expressed support for staff s proposal, commenting it simplifies his overly detailed proposal and provides flexibility for staff and Council. Main Motion #7 COUNCILMEMBER NELSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO ADOPT COUNCIL STATUS REPORTS AS STAFF DESCRIBED. Councilmember Teitzel appreciated staff s efforts to streamline the amendment but expressed concern with staffs proposal specifically, "staff will provide example projects." He felt that was too broad and suggested the following alternative language. Amendment #2 COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO AMEND TO STATE, "THE DIRECTOR SHALL PROVIDE TWO REPORTS PER YEAR TO COUNCIL, ONE IN THE FIRST QUARTER AND ONE IN THE THIRD Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 5, 2016 Page 20 Packet Pg. 481 6.1.e QUARTER, ITEMIZING AND INSTANCES OF BUFFERS REDUCTIONS IN CRITICAL AREAS OCCURRING SINCE THE PRIOR REPORT THAT WERE ASSOCIATED WITH MITIGATION, ENHANCEMENT OR RESTORATION. THE REPORT SHALL INCLUDE THE DEGREE OF BUFFER REDUCTION IN EACH INSTANCE, THE SPECIFIC REMEDIATION ASSOCIATED WITH EACH BUFFER REDUCTION AS WELL AS OTHER INFORMATION SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED BY COUNCIL. Councilmember Teitzel said his amendment appropriately streamlines the language to remove ambiguity and removes the term "example project." Mr. Lien expressed concern the language was very specific and tied to buffer reductions during a period of time; the staff proposed language is more broad and would include information about all critical area decisions, restoration projects, buffer reduction, buffer averaging. The term "example projects" was used as it would be staffs decision regarding what examples to include; his intent would be typical project or extraordinary projects. The proposed language would limit the type of information would provide to Council in the reports. The reference in staff s proposal, "...other information specifically requested by the Council following the previous report." would allow the reports to evolve to include information the Council wants to hear. Councilmember Teitzel agreed staff s proposed language was a substantial improvement from the initial proposal. He preferred to remove the term example projects. Action on Amendment #2 COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL WITHDREW HIS AMENDMENT. Amendment #3 COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO REMOVE "EXAMPLE PROJECTS" FROM THE THIRD PARAGRAPH. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked what example projects are. Mr. Lien said example projects would include any extraordinary projects done since the previous report and if there were several buffer reduction or averaging projects, staff would provide an example of one rather than reporting on all the projects. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed that would help pull the report together. Mr. Lien agreed. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas did not support removing example projects if staff was interested in providing that information. Councilmember Buckshnis observed if there had been seven projects during the reporting period, staff would report on one project but would have information available on all seven projects. Mr. Lien answered yes. Councilmember Buckshnis did not support the amendment. Councilmember Tibbott commented if the language were removed, staff could still improve an example or case study. Mr. Lien said he probably would, noting the intent was to provide the information the Council was interested in. Councilmember Tibbott expressed support for the amendment, noting staff could include examples if they chose. Councilmember Nelson expressed support for the amendment because in reality staff will provide information requested by Council following the previous report. After hearing a report, if there were no examples, Council could request examples. Councilmember Teitzel commented an ordinance is an important document, this is a confusing ordinance and he did not support including the term "example projects" as it was subject to interpretation. The Council can request information from staff as desired. rn Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 5, 2016 Page 21 Packet Pg. 482 6.1.e Action on Amendment #3 UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT CARRIED (4-3), COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS NELSON, TEITZEL, AND TIBBOTT VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS FRALEY-MONILLAS, BUCKSHNIS, AND MESAROS VOTING NO. Action on Main Motion #7 MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. As there were a few more amendments to be considered at the April 12 meeting Mr. Lien advised he will not make any revisions to the code until all the amendments are adopted. He will return with the revised code including all the amendments at the April 19 Council meeting. 8. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling had no report. 9. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Teitzel reported he had an opportunity to meet the new WSU President Dr. Kirk Schulz at Everett Community College. He is very dynamic and friendly and supports branch campuses and the t i new WSU medical school in Spokane. r rn Councilmember Teitzel, a member of the Civic Field Master Plan Advisory Committee, reported three consultants were interviewed today. All three had great presentations with creative ideas. The master a planning process will include a great deal of public involvement and there will be great things in the future at Civic Field. w Councilmember Fraley-Monillas invited the public to attend tomorrow's Diversity Commission meeting at the Edmonds Senior Center. She reported the PSRC General Assembly meeting at Husky Stadium included a report on what Sound Transit's accomplishments during the past year. Councilmember Buckshnis reported she is participating in WRIA8's grant funding process, commenting it is fascinating to see what other cities are doing; Seattle is undertaking a daylighting project that will cost $12 Million. She reported Edmonds was a star in the Citizens Action Training School, an 8-week environmental school that selects 30 participants who are required to do 50 hours of training. She recognized two students of that program, Joe Scordino and Val Stewart, who started the Students Saving Salmon via this project. Councilmember Nelson thanked Mayor Earling for convening the Pedestrian Safety Task Force who had their first meeting this morning. He relayed his research in preparation for that meeting, particularly in light of the recent pedestrian incident last night, shared data compiled by the Washington traffic Safety Commission over the last 5 years regarding the cause of pedestrian fatalities: • Most dangerous time for pedestrians is between 3:00 and 9:00 p.m. at an intersection in a city where the speed limit is 25-35 mph • Highest percentage of fatalities are between the ages of 46 and 65 • Of the accidents where the driver was main contributor, the #1 contributing factor was the driver was distracted, #2 was the driver failed to yield the right-of-way, #3 was the driver was impaired and #4 was speed • Investigation determined 56% of drivers had not made an error • Pedestrian's contribution to fatalities were #1 impaired by alcohol drugs, #2 not visible to the driver, and #3 crossing improperly. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 5, 2016 Page 22 Packet Pg. 483 6.1.f legal description and includes the acreage from the streets and alley into the area that is not restricted. She requested authorization to schedule approval on next week's Consent Agenda as Snohomish County needs to expend the funds by April 22. It was the consensus of Council to schedule this item for approval on next week's Consent Agenda. H. CRITICAL AREA ORDINANCE UPDATE Senior Planner Kernen Lien said with the limited amount of time for review of the remaining amendments, the revised CAO would not be read for adoption next week. He reviewed potential amendments: Appendices • 8.A — Insert new Appendix A: Map of Critical Areas in Edmonds o Not regulatory - used for reference purposes only o Maps do not show the exact locations of all critical areas o Subject to change ■ Many referenced maps in the code are controlled by other agencies ■ Critical area code references that maps should be continuously updated as new critical areas are discovered (ECDC 23.50.010.1), 23.70.010.B, 23.80.040.B, and 23.90.010) • 8.B — Insert new Appendix B: Listing of critical areas in Edmonds with buffer widths and category/classification designations o Cost prohibitive o Would have to visit every property in Edmonds o Critical areas not fixed in time or place o Per updated code, critical area determinations and reports only valid for five years (ECDC 23.40.080 and 23.40.090.17) • Suggest making existing critical area information available on City of Edmonds web map with disclaimer He displayed the City of Edmonds web maps available at Maps. Edmondswa. gov, explaining he has been working with the City's GIS Analyst Dave Rohde to add the critical area layers to the map. Councilmember Nelson thanked Mr. Lien for developing this compromise. This is a great opportunity to inform citizens of critical areas in their neighborhoods and/or in their backyards. He asked how the public would access the maps. Mr. Lien said there is a link to the maps on the City's website available by searching maps. The maps currently include layers for storm water, water and sewer, as-builts, etc.; critical areas would be a new layer. Councilmember Nelson asked whether citizens could access the maps from a computer at City Hall. Mr. Lien answered the plan is to have computers available for citizens' use in the Green Resources Room; any computer with internet access can access the maps. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON MOVED, SECONDED COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO SUPPORT AMENDMENT 8B. Councilmember Tibbott commented the maps are a great educational opportunity. He expressed concern the GIS maps raise an issue of privacy and asked if there had been concerns with displaying critical areas that exist on private property. Mr. Lien answered any information the City has is a public record. With regard to privacy related to aerial photographs, he suggested Dave Rohde may be able to answer that. He noted Google Earth allows anyone to look at basically anything anywhere in the world. He recalled in the past the State restricted the priority habitat species layer due to concern with identifying the location of endangered species. That layer is now publicly available on their website. With regard to critical areas, he Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 12, 2016 Page 16 Packet Pg. 484 did not find a privacy issue as most information can be accessed via public records. Councilmember Tibbott asked if there was a way to prevent access to map layers that might be considered private information. Mr. Lien said none of the critical area layers would be considered private. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON WITHDREW THE MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO APPROVE AMENDMENT 8A. Mr. Lien said Amendment 8A was to include the maps as appendices to the CAO which make them static. His proposal was to make the information publicly available which is neither Amendment A or B. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON WITHDREW THE MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SEDOND. COUNCILMEMBER NELSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE AMENDMENT 8C, TO HAVE THE DIGITAL MAPS PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE AND TO INCLUDE A DISCLAIMER. Councilmember Buckshnis clarified Amendment 8C was adding the GIS map and asked if it will also include critical area buffers. Mr. Lien explained determining buffers for critical areas requires a site visit and a critical areas determination. For example, wetland buffers are based on habitat score. The critical area layer would show the potential presence of critical areas on or adjacent to a site. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested using standardized buffer widths because citizens will want to know what buffer width is required. She referred to the buffer required for an anadromous fish bearing stream as an example. Mr. Lien advised the buffer width determination is made when a qualified professional makes a determination regarding the stream category. As an example, he noted the wetland buffer for a Category 3 wetland ranges from 60 to 165 feet depending on habitat score. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested including a minimum buffer. Mr. Lien said including the minimum buffer of 60 feet would be misleading when the buffer could be 165 feet. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether consideration had been given to including an address layer. Mr. Lien demonstrated typing in the address, advising there are many tools and information in the mapping program including critical areas, stormwater lines, sewers, zoning, easements, deeds, street maps, and links to the permitting system, the Snohomish County assessor, etc. He said Dave Rhode developed this program. Councilmember Teitzel asked how steep slopes were identified on the map. Mr. Lien pointed out areas identified on the map as potential erosion hazard 15-40% slope, slopes greater than 40% and the liquefaction hazard zone. Mr. Lien clarified the motion was to make the City's critical area information available to citizens on the City's website without a login and to include a disclaimer regarding the accuracy of the information. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Lien displayed Amendment 10: ECDC 23.40.040.0 — Areas subject to the provision of the CAO • 10 — Replace to refer to new appendices if appendices are adopted Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 12, 2016 Page 17 Packet Pg. 485 6.1.f ■ ECDC 23.40.040.0 notes that the critical area regulations apply regardless of any formal identification As Amendment 10 was tied to Amendment 8, he suggested the previous motion takes care of Amendment 10. i�u EV013MCI] u lu 101eI Ik. Mayor Earling reminded of the Creative Age Festival of Edmonds (CAFE) on Friday and Saturday, an opportunity to learn how to become more involved in the community. He invited the Council to attend the ribbon cutting ceremony on Sunday for the Lutheran Church's new solar panels. He reported tomorrow he will be attending a cub scout meeting to talk about good government. 8. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Tibbott reported over the past several weeks he has meet with citizen in regard to the CAO. This week he will have the opportunity to do a water quality check with Joe Scordino and students from Students Saving Salmon. He looked forward to seeing what the students are doing as well as the implications it has for the City. Councilmember Mesaros announced the Edmonds Veterans Plaza is fully funded. The next step is linking information available at the Veterans Plaza to programs at Edmonds Community College which provides an opportunity for anyone who has not made a donation to do so. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported the World Health Organization declared the Ebola situation in West Africa no longer constitutes a public health emergency of international concern and the temporary recommendations adopted in response should be terminated. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas relayed a Snohomish County Health Districts' report regarding the Zika virus: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has issued a detailed recommendation for preventing transmission to women who are pregnant or likely to become pregnant in the near future. Beyond avoiding mosquito bites, the CDC recommends abstaining from sex or practicing safe sex and delaying conception for at least eight weeks after possible Zika virus illness or exposure. More information is available at the Snohomish Health District website. Councilmember Buckshnis announced the K-9 statute at the Veterans Plaza is also fully funded. A committee will be reviewing designs on Thursday night. Councilmember Buckshnis commended Keely O'Connell, Carrie Hite and Rob English for their fabulous presentation to the Salmon Recovery Funding Board regarding final design of Willow Creek daylighting project. 9. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) This item was not needed. 10. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION This item was not needed. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 12, 2016 Page 18 Packet Pg. 486 6.1.g Senior Planner Kernen Lien displayed the final plat map, explaining Seabrook Estates is a 7-lot plat located at the corner of Caspers Street and 9th at 860 Caspers Street, next to the United Methodist Church. The Hearing Examiner held a public hearing on April 9, 2015 and granted approval of the preliminary plat on April 23, 2015. Final plat approvals are Type IV -A decisions made by the City Council; if the City Council finds the public use and interest will be served by the proposed subdivision and that all requirements of the preliminary approval have been met, the final plat shall be approved and the Mayor and City Clerk shall sign the statement of City Council approval on the final plat. The applicant has completed all the requirements of the preliminary plat approval or, in the case of some Engineering and Planning Division requirements, a performance bond has been posted to ensure completion. Upon completion of required improvements, maintenance bonds will be posted as required. Since all the conditions and requirements of the preliminary plat have been completed or provided for, staff recommends the final plat be approved. The packet includes the final plat, signed by the Public Works Director and Development Services Director. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if all the Hearing Examiner's conditions have been met. Mr. Lien answered yes. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 1358 IN PREPARATION FOR RECORDING OF THE PLAT WITH THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY AUDITOR Councilmember Teitzel noted the soil structure is very dense and drainage is not great. Typically the City requires all roof runoff to be managed on site; he asked how that would be accomplished if the soil does not drain well. Mr. Lien answered the stormwater plan calls for detention rather than infiltration. Councilmember Teitzel observed any overflow from the detention facility would be into the City storm system. Mr. Lien agreed. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. F. CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE Senior Planner Kernen Lien reviewed: Tonight o Recap of amendment decision o Continue Council discussion and decide which proposed amendments to carry forward Next Council meetings: o April 24th — present draft copy of code with all amendments Mr. Lien reviewed potential amendments: ECDC 23.90.040.C.1 Native Vegetation • 5.A — Apply to RS-8 and RS-10 zones o Would greatly expand the area the provision would apply to o RS-12 and RS-20 established because of the presence of critical areas o Comprehensive Plan designation ■ Single-family Resource (RS-12, RS-20) ■ Single-family Urban (RS-8, RS-10) • 5.B — Consider different native vegetation percentage for RS-8 and RS-10 zones • 5.0 — Change "...native trees over 10 inches in dbh make up more than 70 percent of the canopy cover" to "...native trees over 6 inches in dbh make up more than 40 percent of the canopy cover." Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 19, 2016 Page 10 Packet Pg. 487 6.1.g o May trigger the requirements of this provision on more properties than the original proposal o Original proposal based on specific habitat features o Amendment intended to preserve more canopy coverage o May be further refined through development of UFMP Councilmember Tibbott referred to proposed development on undeveloped land zoned RS-8 or RS-10 land and asked how this amendment or low impact development (LID) would instruct the City on the preservation of native vegetation. Mr. Lien answered that is not really a critical area issue. Updated subdivision regulations will be presented to the City in the future; if the City wanted to maintain more canopy coverage, LID could provide flexibility in the way plats are designed to cluster lots to preserve trees or other features. LID techniques include stormwater infiltration, less impervious surface, etc. Councilmember Tibbott acknowledged it was not a CAO goal but it was a policy the City could pursue in the future. Mr. Lien agreed, via the UFMP. Councilmember Buckshnis said forests and steep slopes are critical areas. Mr. Lien agreed steep slopes, streams, wetlands are critical areas. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if 5.0 would include R-8, 10, 12 and 20 zones. Mr. Lien explained 5.0 would only apply to the RS-12 and RS-20. Councilmember Buckshnis asked the timing of the UFMP. Mr. Lien said the Comprehensive Plan anticipates adoption by the end of 2017. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO APPROVE AMENDMENT 5C. Council President Johnson asked how canopy coverage requirements in 5.0 would be managed and implemented in advance of the UFMP. Mr. Lien explained the canopy coverage requirements in 5.0 are related to subdividable properties. For example, if a subdivision was proposed in the RS-12 or 20 zone, staff would consider whether the specific conditions/criteria are met such as is there a stream, wetland or landslide hazard associated with that potential subdivision. If yes, the makeup of the native vegetation would be considered. If 5.0 passed, whether 40% of the canopy coverage consist of trees of 6 inch dbh or larger would be considered. If yes, this provision would apply. He summarized it is site specific. Council President Johnson asked how the canopy cover would be measured. Mr. Lien referred to Amendment 12 which requires native trees over 6 inch dbh or larger be identified. He provided an example of a subdividable property, identifying trees 10 inch or greater dbh and trees 6 inch or greater dbh. In this example the trees do not make up more than 70% of the canopy coverage so in the draft proposal this requirement would not be triggered. If 5.0 were adopted, trees greater than 6 inch dbh make up more than 40% of the canopy coverage so it would be triggered. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether a category forest could be considered a critical area. Mr. Lien answered potentially. The Priority Habitat Species Map maps forested urban corridors. A forest could be a critical area if it was on the Priority Habitat Map but it may not be if it is just a flat, forested 2- acre property that is not connected to anything else. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed the way a forest becomes a critical area is if it has habitat. Mr. Lien clarified if it is associated with another critical area, stream, wetland or slope or identified on the Priority Habitat Species layer. Council President Johnson recalled a proposal to include other zoning areas. She wanted assurance any critical area would be evaluated regardless of the zone. Mr. Lien assured the critical area regulations apply to all properties in the City regardless of the zone. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. It was the consensus of the Council that Amendments 5A and B were off the table. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 19, 2016 Page 11 Packet Pg. 488 6.1.g Frequently Flooded Areas • 6 — Do not consider amendments to ECDC 19.00.025 and 21.40.030 at this time o Frequently flooded areas are critical areas by definition o Building code regulates development in the flood plain o Proposed amendment to definition height intended to compensate for requirement to build two feet above base flood elevation o Is appropriate to consider at this time Council President Johnson asked whether discussion of all the CAO amendments had been concluded. Mr. Lien explained this is a CAO amendment; frequently flooded areas are critical areas by definition. The City regulates frequently flooded areas in the building code rather than what is normally thought of as the CAO, Chapters 23.40 — 23.90. Council President Johnson asked whether there were any other Council amendments to be considered tonight before the Council directed the City Attorney to bring back the CAO for Council consideration and final adoption. Mr. Lien answered yes, this is a CAO amendment. Council President Johnson asked if there were any further amendments for the Council to consider other than the frequently flooded areas amendment. Mr. Lien answered all the amendments other than frequently flooded areas have been reviewed. He stressed frequently flooded areas are critical areas and it is part of the critical area regulations. COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE THE CRITICAL AREA ORDINANCE IN TWO FORMS, THE UNDERLINED/REDLINED VERSION AND A CLEAN COPY FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL. Council President Johnson relayed her understanding there were three components the Council was considering. The first, the CAO which is adopted as part of the GMA and when adopted will be in place immediately. There are two very important and related pieces of legislation before the Council, changing the building code and the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). She recognized they are related to the CAO but were contained in different documents. The City Council's obligation was to complete the CAO which she felt the Council could do by concluding the amendments. If time remains, the Council can discuss the other two items. Councilmember Buckshnis said she looks at things very differently; she looks at it globally; frequently flooded areas need to be considered as part of the CAO similar to the amendment that included reference to the definition of City Council. She did not support the motion. Councilmember Tibbott asked for reference to frequently flooded areas in the CAO. Mr. Lien displayed Exhibit 1, page 59, Chapter 23.70.010 in the portion of the code that is generally thought of as the critical area regulations. This chapter specifically states, "... administration shall utilize such other data as may be reasonably available from the federal state or other sources in administering this chapter as provided in the current edition of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19." He summarized the critical area regulations specifically reference frequently flooded areas are addressed in the building code. The COA update includes frequently flooded areas and since they are regulated by the building code, the change in Title 19 of the building code has been proposed. The proposed definition change is due to the implications the recommendation has for building height. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding Mr. Lien was suggesting floodplains be identified the same as identified on FEMA maps. An amendment has been proposed to increase the base by two feet for any new buildings constructed in the floodplains. Mr. Lien clarified the proposed Council amendment was not to consider the proposed changes. During Planning Board review, the Planning Board Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 19, 2016 Page 12 Packet Pg. 489 6.1.g recommended all structures be required to be at least 2 feet above base elevation and to consider a potential amendment to the definition of where height is measured, 2 feet above base elevation. Councilmember Tibbott said if the Council approves the CAO as written without any further amendments, it contains the 2-foot provision. Development Services Director Shane Hope clarified if the proposal before Council as recommended by the Planning Board along with the other amendments is approved by the City Council, it would have the two feet above base elevation provision and it would not dock the height of new buildings constructed in the floodplain at the new base flood elevation. City Attorney Jeff Taraday asked for clarification regarding the ordinance he is being directed to draft. From the discussion it appears a least a couple Councilmembers seem to think the motion contemplates the original frequently flooded areas language would remain in the ordinance he would be drafting. Council President Johnson clarified her motion was to direct the City Attorney to prepare the CAO contained in all of the discussions to date, meaning it only addresses the CAO and does not include any proposed amendments from December 15, 2015 and does not include the Planning Board recommendations. Her intent was to recognize there are three separate, legal instruments, 1) the CAO which is part of the GMA, 2) the building code, and 3) the ECDC. Her motion was directed toward the CAO as presented by staff. Mr. Taraday relayed his understanding is the Council has already adopted amendments as part of this process that are contained in Title 21. He asked whether Council President Johnson's motion was directing him to take out those Title 21 amendments from the ordinance. Council President Johnson said it was difficult to answer that question but basically yes, she wanted the ordinance to focus on the CAO first and foremost and the Council can adopt that and then discuss the related building code and ECDC amendment separately. Mr. Taraday said it would be more clear if the Council spoke with regard to titles; until now, when discussing the CAO, there has not been a distinction between the Title 21, Title 23 or Title 19 portions of the CAO. He suggested the motion may be more clear if it directed him to draft the Title 23 portions of the CAO. Mr. Lien relayed his understanding of Council President Johnson's intent, to direct the City Attorney to draft an ordinance that would include all the proposed amendments, Exhibit 1, pages 1 — 90, but not include the proposed amendments to 19.025.Q requiring all structures to be built 2 feet above base flood elevation or the amendment to ECDC 21.40.030.D related to the height exception. COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO 19.025.Q AND HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas raised a point of order that the amendment changed the intent of the motion. Mr. Taraday agreed that given how expressly Council President Johnson intended to remove those portions of the proposal in her motion, the amendment seems to go in the opposite direction which typically is not allowable for an amendment. He suggested it would be more appropriate to speak against the motion rather than to make the proposed amendment. Councilmember Mesaros said this portion of the CAO is important as the City moves forward. He appreciated that Council President Johnson was trying to put things in silo format. However, issues in the City are not siloed, they are integrated. He recommended voting down Council President Johnson's motion. City Clerk Passey described a process in Roberts Rules of Order for a substitute motion which is used when a motion presents a radically different solution than the motion on the table. The form would be to Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 19, 2016 Page 13 Packet Pg. 490 6.1.g move to substitute for the motion this other solution. If the motion to substitute is seconded, the debate is taken on the first motion, then debate and conclusion occurs on the second motion, and then Council votes whether to substitute. Councilmember Mesaros suggested the cleaner version was Mr. Taraday's suggestion to vote on the first motion. COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS WITHDREW HIS AMENDMENT. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4); COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS NELSON AND FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, MESAROS, TEITZEL, AND TIBBOTT VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO APPROVE THE CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE AND ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT THE ORDINANCE AND PRESENT IT TO COUNCIL NEXT WEEK TO INCLUDE THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATIONS ON TITLE 19 AND THE HEIGHT EXCEPTION. Councilmember Mesaros commented this has been a great process and a long process, the Council has been reviewing the CAO since September. Mr. Lien added this is the 12th City Council meeting regarding the CAO update. Councilmember Mesaros referred to an email he received from a citizen regarding how hasty the Council was being. This has been a thoughtful process and staff has been very interactive. An ordinance was originally approved by the Council and vetoed by the Mayor. There are others in addition the senior center awaiting the Council's decision on the CAO. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas expressed appreciation for all the work that has been done. She pointed out the Council approved the CAO in December; it was the Mayor's veto that took it back through the process. She was shocked by the lack of environmental concern demonstrated by several Councilmembers. Not enough is known about frequently flooded areas, there has been discussion about climate change, the marsh, waste management, etc. Whether two feet is enough had not been discussed to her satisfaction; she felt six feet was more appropriate. One of the recommendations related to sea level rise is to move buildings to the back side of the property which has not been discussed. She recalled being laughed at when she made that suggestion with regard to the senior center due to dislike for cars between the building and the water. She has learned a lot during the process but also viewed it as a hurry -up -and - wait process. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she refused to be held hostage to the senior center saying they will not construct a new building if they do not get exactly what they want, finding that blackmail at its best. She expected better than that from the senior center, noting she had the right to say that because she serves on the Board of Directors and is a frequent volunteer. She wanted to do the right thing for the waterfront and for all of Edmonds, not the right thing for one area. She assured there would be a better outcome if the Council looked at the building codes and determined the responsible approach. Stating two feet is the right thing is a travesty when the floodplains are expected to extend to SR104. She concluded she did not have enough information to make a decision tonight. Councilmember Nelson observed all Councilmembers agree sea level rise is a real threat and concern to the City; where Councilmembers differ is how respond, address and adapt to it. In doing his homework, he looked at Olympia, one of only a few cities who began looking at this issue over 20 year ago. Olympia updated their CAO in February 2016. One of the things that struck him was how sea level rise is being impacted by the current El Nino events, a greater hazard than climate -driven sea level rise. In November/December tides were 6 inches higher than predicted; on December 11 and 13, tides were 30 inches higher than predicted. This is a problem identified by science, quoting Albert Einstein, "The significant problems of our time cannot be solved by the same level of thinking that created them." He urged caution over expediency and did not support motion. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 19, 2016 Page 14 Packet Pg. 491 6.1.g Councilmember Buckshnis suggested taking emotion out of this; everyone agrees sea level rise is going to happen. After spending a great deal of time working with WRIA 8 and the marsh, she did not like being told she did not understand the environment. She understood there is never right answer; even if all the world's scientists were put in a room, there would never be the right answer. This is an issue that either Councilmembers get or they don't; if they get it and want to do something about it, they either do it or don't. It has nothing to do with height, there is still a 30-foot height limit at the senior center and the waterfront and a 35-foot height limit at Harbor Square. The issue is water levels will rise, plain and simple. The Council can guess at the number but sooner or later a decision needs to be made. She relayed Lake Washington has been raised and lowered 2 feet every year for years, anticipating a great deal of discussion was necessary to make that decision. The fact of the matter is something has to be done and there appears to be enough support for this something. Council President Johnson estimated the Council had 1 hour and 25 minutes' worth of agenda items left. This one of the reasons she wanted to simply adopt the CAO because she knew this would require a great deal of discussion and debate. Based on a review of the Planning Board minutes, there was a lot of discussion at the Planning Board regarding sea level rise; the City Council has not had any presentations on sea level rise or been educated on how the two -foot recommendation was made. It was her understanding that recommendation was made by staff based on their best estimate of all the scientific estimates. She felt the Council would benefit from a larger, longer discussion regarding sea level rise. She favored adoption of the CAO and would support on an interim basis the two -foot height adjustment for the building code but did not support the recommendation made by Phil Lovell at the Planning Board to define a new base level for evaluating height. She viewed this as three distinct and interrelated decisions. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said her hope would have been to pull together groups and information, have good solid base information regarding sea level rise as well as look at what other cities on Puget Sound and on open waters have done. In her opinion this was a travesty to the environment and although she may not be the biggest environmentalist, she understood that going to a few meetings did not make her an environmentalist; what made her an environmentalist was standing up for the environment. Councilmember Teitzel relayed he had done a significant amount of research regarding this issue, studying many difference pieces of research related to sea level rise. The mean level that can be expected is 2 feet or possibly little bit more over the next 100 years. He noted 100 years is a long time; governments across the world are making efforts to work together to limit greenhouse gases; he was hopefully sea level rise could be arrested over time. Based on the available data, the time is right to adjust the base level elevation and measurement as proposed. There is a great deal of emotion related to this issue; he agreed with Councilmember Buckshnis' suggestion to take the emotion out of the discussion and to talk about facts and logic. Logic would say to proceed; not proceeding is not responsible. With regard to comments about honoring his campaign pledges, he said his predominate campaign pledge was to take all the input he received, process it properly and make the very best decision he could for the City; he intended to do that tonight. Councilmember Tibbott said the complete CAO proposal includes Title 19, the provision related to an additional 2 feet in the floodplain. When this came to Planning Board, they considering data provided by the federal government. FEMA does not make recommendations without a great deal study and input from scientists. FEMA's recommendation is that it would be advisable for cities to use their information as a basis for establishing a base two feet above the floodplain. In his opinion that recommendation from the federal government was responsible and allowed cities to look at the reality of sea level rise and plan for it. It is also equitable; all humans and possibly animals have contributed to the problem of sea level rise and global warming. As a result, it is only equitable to plan for sea level rise plan and establish a two - foot base for buildings in those locations. The proposal is simply to establish a new way of measuring the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 19, 2016 Page 15 Packet Pg. 492 6.1.g base in a frequently flooded area. The same option will not be extended to other areas of the City nor will new standards be created for measuring on a hillside. This simply adjusts the way the base is measured for new buildings in the floodplain. With regard to a campaign pledge not to increase building heights, he assured the base is responsible and equitable and buildings will be the same as they have always been. He summarized this was doing the best possible with the knowledge available and making use of the information received from FEMA. Council President Johnson asked when the FEMA map was due to be promulgated. Mr. Lien responded the draft FEMA map is currently scheduled to be effective June 2017. Council President Johnson asked if the FEMA states the elevation for building heights. Mr. Lien advised the FEMA map establishes the base flood elevation; in the waterfront area it is 12 feet. Council President Johnson said there is no direction from FEMA regarding the base flood elevation. She recognized that is an important issue but there are many different opinions and she would like to hear those opinions. For example, the University of Washington plans to convene a conference on this subject and she was interested in what they said. She relayed there is no requirement for a new way of measuring building height. It may be an equity issue, for example if a building is constructed two feet above the current level to accommodate sea level rise, there is no requirement to allow an additional two feet in building height. This is strictly a policy decision and a political decision; the Council cannot rely on what the Planning Board said, the decision needs to be made independently and the Council must be responsible for the decision. Councilmember Mesaros asked Mr. Lien to review the bar graph related to sea level rise. Mr. Lien explained the graph relates to the two most recent studies related to sea level rise, NRC 2012 and Mote et al 2008. The NRC projection is about a two -foot sea level rise in the Puget Sound region; that is one of the criteria used for establishing two feet above base flood elevation. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to Councilmember Tibbott's comment that FEMA indicated buildings needed to be two feet above base flood elevation. Mr. Lien explained FEMA sets the base flood elevation. The 2-foot recommendation was a result of, 1) most recent information indicates the average projection are 2 feet at year 2100, and 2) the existing building code requires some structures to be at base flood elevation and potentially up to 2 feet above base flood elevation. The amendment requires all structures to be at two feet above base flood elevation. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether that was from FEMA. Mr. Lien answered no. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas relayed her understanding FEMA did not recommend two feet. Mr. Lien said FEMA establishes the base flood elevation and he was not aware of any specific FEMA recommendation to require structures be above base flood elevation. Councilmember Buckshnis commented it is a simple question, either you get it or not; either you are ready to make decision or you won't. She used the example that Edmonds passed a plastic bag ban before other cities. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. MOTION FAILED (4-3) COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON VOTING NO. [MOTION REQUIRES A SUPER MAJORITY TO PASS.] UPON ROLL CALL, MAIN MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, MESAROS, TEITZEL AND TIBBOTT VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS NELSON AND FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO. Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. B. FIRST QUARTER BUDGET AMENDMENT Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 19, 2016 Page 16 Packet Pg. 493 6.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/3/2016 Dayton Street Plaza Project Budget authorization (10 min.) Staff Lead: Carrie Hite Department: Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Preparer: Carrie Hite Background/History The Dayton Street Plaza has been in the PROS plan and the adopted in the Parks CIP for several years. We have completed the bid process and awarded the contract to K-A Construction. We are currently under construction. Staff Recommendation Authorize project budget for Dayton Street Plaza. Narrative Staff recently went out to bid on the Dayton Street Plaza project. This project has been in the PROS plan for quite some time, and the plan was adopted in 2011. The low bid came in at $94,223.87. The Mayor authorized this contract, because it was under the threshold to bring forth for Council authorization. We have had several change orders on this project, mainly dealing with increasing the sidewalk width around the old public works building, and raising curbs from 3" to 6". This has put the project cost over the $100,000 threshold for Council authorization. According to the purchasing policy, the Mayor has preliminarily approved these expenditures, pending authorization from Council. Please see the attached project budget for authorization. We currently have $168,000 in the approved Council budget for this project, so we are well below what we have set aside for this project. As laid out in our purchasing policy, when staff is under construction on a project, and a change order takes it above the $100,000 threshold, it is suggested that staff alert Council via email, and bring forth a budget and authorization to Council at the next City Council agenda for review. There is a stipulation in the policy that allows the Mayor to approve these if a speedier approval process is needed ( i.e. if a contractor would need to stop work, and add cost delays to a project). After Mayoral approval, then staff needs to bring this to Council at the next meeting. This is the case with this project, as the contractor is on site working, and it would add costs to stop work. Attachments: Packet Pg. 494 s.2 Dayton Street Project budget April 2016 Packet Pg. 495 6.2.a 2016 Dayton Street Plaza Project Budget Base bid including tax $94,223.66 Total $94,223.66 Change Orders Date Brief Description Change order 1 3/31/2016 Saw Cut & Jack hammer 40 ft sidewalk along building $1,982.00 Change order 2 3/31/2016 Resetting catch basin elevation $427.05 Change order 3 3/31/2016 Drop evelvation to create 1/4 foot slope in inner circle area $930.75 Change order 4 4/5/2016 Cut and remove asphalt and increase sidewalk width from 36" to 48" along north side of building $5,809.40 Change Order 5 4/21/2016 Raise curb form 3" to 6" plus extra cement. Install dowels in lower seat wall to patio at 16" on center. This includes rerbar, expoxy and roto hammer rental. Extra cement and color along building $2,613.24 Total to 4/21/16 $105,986.10 Additional Management Reserve - 15% $15,897.00 Total Authorization Request $121,883.10 Packet Pg. 496