The URL can be used to link to this page

2016-11-01 City Council - Full Agenda-1781o Agenda Edmonds City Council snl. ynyo COUNCIL CHAMBERS 250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 NOVEMBER 1, 2016, 7:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE 2. ROLL CALL 3. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 4. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of October 25, 2016 2. Approval of claim checks. 3. Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Carole E. Nowak ($3,963.04), from Magic Toyota ($3,404.43), from Terry Olmsred (amount undetermined), and from Scott and Melissa Hanson ($682.13). 5. PRESENTATIONS/REPORTS 1. WSDOT 2016 Award of Excellence - Five Corners Roundabout Project (10 min.) 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS (3-MINUTE LIMIT PER PERSON) - REGARDING MATTERS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA AS CLOSED RECORD REVIEW OR AS PUBLIC HEARINGS 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public Hearing for 92nd Avenue West Street Vacation (20 min.) 2. Public Hearing: Proposed 2017-2022 Capital Facilities Plan/Capital Improvement Program (20 minutes) 3. Public Hearing: Update to the 2016 Traffic Impact Fees and new Section 3.36 of ECC (20 min.) 8. STUDY ITEMS 1. Mayor and Council Compensation Review (15 min.) 2. Discussion regarding the 2017 Proposed City Budget (60 min.) 9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS 11. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(1) 12. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. ADJOURN Edmonds City Council Agenda November 1, 2016 Page 1 4.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/1/2016 Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of October 25, 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: Cm 102516 Packet Pg. 2 4.1.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES October 25, 2016 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Kristiana Johnson, Council President Michael Nelson, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT S. Gagner, Police Officer Phil Williams, Public Works Director Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir. Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir Shane Hope, Development Services Director Scott James, Finance Director Dave Turley, Assistant Finance Director Mary Ann Hardie, Human Resources Director Linda Coburn, Municipal Court Judge Rob English, City Engineer Joan Ferebee, Court Administrator Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5"' Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of Councilmember Buckshnis. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 18, 2016 2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM, PAYROLL AND BENEFIT DIRECT DEPOSIT, CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 1 Packet Pg. 3 Ln N O_ E c.� c d E z U 2 a 4.1.a 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN AN AMENDMENT TO WASHINGTON STATE RECREATION AND CONSERVATIVE OFFICE SALMON PROJECT 4. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH SHANNON & WILSON FOR THE WILLOW CREEK DAYLIGHTING PROJECT 5. RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO ASSUME THE DUTIES OF THE EDMONDS TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING ON NOVEMBER 15, 2016 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Robert Stivers, Edmonds, thanked the City Council and staff for the new public restroom facilities next to City Hall. He suggested consideration be given to public restroom facilities at the far end of Sunset Avenue, recalling a time he and his wife needed such a facility and, mindful of proper public conduct, cut their excursion short to return to their car. He suggested staff analyze places where there is a fair amount of pedestrian traffic a considerable distance from public restroom facilities and consider include a restroom in the capital budget. He also suggested consideration be given to a nude beach in Edmonds due to public health benefits of nudity such as Vitamin D. He recalled the ordinance regarding public indecency specifically mentioned a nude beach. 6. STUDY ITEMS AGREEMENT FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT, DISPOSAL AND CONVEYANCE SERVICES Public Works Director Phil Williams explained this agreement has been in negotiations for approximately a year; this is intended as an update as the final document has not yet been completed. He provided an overview: • 1957: First WWTP (primary) built — Mountlake Terrace and Ronald have been our partners since 1959 and Olympic View since 1968 V • 1986-1991: Secondary treatment facility is built $35M project — 1/2 from federal grants and 1/2 `r° local (51 % Edmonds, 49% partners) • Current partnership agreement, 30-year term, expires May 2018 N • 1998: City signs "flow swap" agreement with King County — expires July 2036 o Flow from old Richmond Beach WTP flows to Edmonds from a new pump station built by E King County. This flow is "swapped" by pulling an equal amount out to East Edmonds (Lake Ballinger PS) that goes to King County o The agreement detailed the construction arrangements, flow exchange, and payment plan E z o Amended in 1993 and 2000 c� o Edmonds and Olympic View Water & Sewer's Comprehensive Plan show the Pt Wells area a in Olympic View's sewer service area He displayed and reviewed a Capital Improvement Expense pie chart (based on proportionate share of plant's million gallons/day (mgd) capacity): • Edmonds: 5.99 mgd 0.787% • Mountlake Terrace: 2.73 mgd 23.17% • Olympic View: 1.95mgd 16.551% • Ronald: 1.12 mgd 9.488% • Plant capacity: 11.8 mgd Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 2 Packet Pg. 4 4.1.a He displayed and reviewed an Operation and Maintenance Expenses pie chart (based on metered flow, approximate percentage, calculated as O&M actual expense less overhead): • Edmonds: 48% • Mountlake Terrace: 30% • Olympic View: 14% • Ronald: 8% Mr. Williams displayed a map of Edmonds Sewer, Mountlake Terrace Sewer, Olympic View Sewer and Ronald Sewer District, identifying a blue dashed line that identifies the waste -shed where properties' sewer flows to the Edmonds WWTP. He displayed another map that identifies the 37 separate basins that flow either directly to the Edmonds WWTP or to a pipe that carries flow from another area. He displayed another map that identifies the meter stations that monitor flows. He identified issues in the draft agreement: • Service area commitments o Map in draft agreement shows Point Wells area in Olympic View WWD service area as flow that will come to Edmonds • Ronald being taken over by Shoreline in 2017; agreement does not expire until May 2018 • The draft agreement provides a method for sharing the costs on "joint use" facilities • The agreement defines an approach to "high strength" discharges and expands Edmonds' pretreatment authority • Increases the overhead allowance from 10% to 20% (still being discussed) Council President Johnson asked about high strength discharge and pretreatment authority. Mr. Williams — used the example of a flour mill that discharges a lot of biochemicals in the organic matter in their wastewater, much more than residential sewage. Treatment requires more air which requires more electric o expense, more chemicals and ultimately a higher cost to treat that waste as compared to regular sewage. If n a new business locates in one of the cities or districts whose sewage is remarkably different than Q residential sewage, the agreement provides the ability to create a rate that reflects the cost to treat their Q sewage. Regarding pretreatment, when King County had difficulties in their collection systems, Edmonds to WWTP took all the flows from the Lake Ballinger pump station and Ronald until the flow swap was fully implemented in 2012. When King County upgraded their collection system and pump stations as part of Ln Brightwater, King County implemented the flow swap which resulted in a loss of revenue to Edmonds c WWTP. Because King County is now taking flows from areas in Snohomish County and occasionally _ east Edmonds, King County wanted their own pretreatment program; Edmonds said no and it was agreed t� Edmonds would provide pretreatment and get paid for it. a� E Councilmember Teitzel relayed his understanding that the 3,000 units at Pt. Wells with potentially 5,000 residents plus the 5,000 new residents expected in Edmonds over the next 10 years will increase flows to the WWTP. He asked when there would be capacity issues at the WWTP. Mr. Williams answered the a rated, permitted dry weather capacity of the Edmonds WWTP is 11.8 mgd. The WWTP currently averages 4 mgd in the summer and 6-6%2 mgd in the winter so there is a lot of capacity. However, due to the episodic nature of storms, flows can spike quickly and any extra dry weather flow reduces the amount of storm flow that can be handled without exceeding capacity. He was comfortable with the additional amounts from growth and Pt. Wells because water consumption has decreased down 15% over the last 26 years which also affects the WWTP. Councilmember Nelson commented he had no idea Edmonds competed with other cities and counties for sewage. He asked the revenue potential from flows from Pt. Wells. Mr. Williams said King County currently charges Ronald $42.16/month to treat wastewater that is credited to the King County System. Ronald only charges its customers $16/month to manage the entire collection system so together the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 3 Packet Pg. 5 4.1.a charge is $54/ month for residents in Shoreline. The cost in Edmonds is $37.50/month, a $16/month difference or $200/year. If 3,000 condominiums are built at Pt. Wells, the revenue would be $600,000/year that residents would pay for sewer services. Edmonds can provide the same level of service more efficiently. The wastewater would need to be pumped six times to reach Brightwater but only once to reach Edmonds WWTP, a superior solution environmentally as well as financially. The competition is very real; not for sewage but the revenue associated with treatment. Councilmember Tibbott observed the agreement is reaching the end of the 30-year term and asked whether it would make sense to have a shorter term in the future. Mr. Williams said there is a balance; with a long contract, the parties are locked into it and if a party wanted to leave, there is a cost associated with breaking agreement the which is included in the current and draft. The new draft agreement is a 30- year term, expiring in December 31, 2048. Councilmember Tibbott asked if there was any benefit to a shorter term. Mr. Williams said the agreement includes the ability for the parties to modify the agreement to include new features or negotiate new outcomes. However just one entity does not have option to leave or modify the agreement, which protects Edmonds. Councilmember Tibbott concluded a 30-year term works well. Mr. Williams agreed there were some downsides but on balance a longer term was better. Council President Johnson congratulated Pamela Randolph for the fabulous job she does managing the Edmonds WWTP under Mr. Williams' guidance. Mr. Williams agreed. Council President Johnson asked what happened if Esperance annexed to Edmonds. Mr. Williams said there would not be much change related to wastewater as Esperance is in Olympic View's service area; Olympic View owns the pipes and facilities and bills those customers. Nothing would have to happen if Edmonds annexed Esperance; it could but that would be a different decision. Council President Johnson suggested including in the agreement what would happen when Esperance annexes into Edmonds. Mr. Williams said a majority of Olympic View's customers live in Esperance and if annexed, a majority of Olympic View's customers would be Edmonds residents. State law and GMA encourages cities to be the service provider within their borders. Mayor Earling asked when the agreement will be finalized and presented to Council. Mr. Williams m answered it could be as early as two weeks; however, if Ronald does not sign, it may be delayed significantly. cfl Ln N 2. PRESENTATION OF THE PROPOSED 2017-2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES c PLAN/CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM E V City Engineer Rob English provided a diagram showing components found only in the CIP and only in the CFP and components found in both the CIP and CFP. The CIP contains 6-year maintenance projects E with funding sources, the CFP contains long range (20-year) capital project needs, and both contain 6- year capital projects with funding sources. Q Mr. English provided a summary of CIP fund numbers and the department managing each fund: Fund Description Department 016 Building Maintenance Public Works 112 Transportation Public Works 125 Capital Projects Fund Parks & Recreation/Public Works 126 Special Capital/Parks Acquisition Parks & Recreation/Public Works 129 Special Projects Parks & Recreation 132 Parks -Construction (Grant Funding) Parks & Recreation 421 Water Projects Public Works 422 Storm Projects Public Works Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 4 Packet Pg. 6 4.1.a 423 Sewer Projects I Public Works 423 Wastewater Treatment Plant I Public Works Mr. English highlighted projects in the 2016 CFP/CIP: • 228th Corridor project — completed • Walkway on 238th from 100th to 104th — will complete in 2016 • Pavement preservation program • 236th Street Walkway — begins this week • 76th Avenue & 212th Street Intersection Improvement Project — rebid in 2017 He displayed a graph of the City's Capital Program 2008-2017, highlighting 2017 totals: • Fund 423 Sewer: $ 5,135,070 • Fund 422 Storm: $ 4,058,099 • Fund 421 Water: $ 5,517,640 w • Fund 112: $ 7,062,022 • Parks: $ 3,595,000 • General Fund Total: $25,637,830 a c Mr. English highlighted key 2017 projects: • 112 Fund 0 76th/212th intersection improvements o Citywide bicycle improvements 'o 0 238th St Walkway from SR104 to SR99 c� 0 84th Ave overlay from 220th St — 212th St o • Transportation — 126/125 REET Funds > o Pavement preservation program a o Traffic calming program Q o Curb ramp upgrades program o Minor sidewalk replacement V o Audible pedestrian signals to o SR99 Access management pre -design (216th to 224th) o ADA Transition Plan Update (underway) i o Trackside warning system Main/Dayton (2016-17) 0 220th Signal coordination (grant?) E o Local match for Waterfront At -Grade Alternatives v • Utility Fund 0 7,300 ft of watermain replacement z o Overlay 8,200 feet of street affected by waterline replacements o Seaview infiltration project a o Willow Creek/Edmonds Marsh: design o Stormwater Comprehensive Plan update o Dayton St pump station (2017 or 2018) 0 2,900 ft sewermain replacement 0 3,000 ft CIPP sewermain rehabilitation o Pavement overlay on 8,600 ft of street affected by sewermain replacements Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite reviewed: • 2016 Accomplishments o Acquisition and planning of Civic Field o Opening of the spray park Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 5 Packet Pg. 7 4.1.a o Completed Dayton Street Plaza o Luminous Forest (41h Avenue) o Wayfinding signs o Approved Marina Beach Master Plan o Fishing Pier Rehabilitation o Downtown Public Restroom o REET 125 ■ Yost spa rebuild, in progress ■ Frances Anderson Center stage replacement, in process ■ Veteran's Plaza, in progress ■ Marina Beach Playground replacement ■ Meadowdale preschool playground replacement, in process 2017 Parks CIP/CFP projects: o Edmond Marsh, daylighting of Willow Creek o Parklet development o Outdoor fitness zones o City gateway replacement o Meadowdale playfields o City storage building o Civic grandstand removal o Community Garden o Veteran's Plaza o Waterfront Redevelopment/Walkway completion o Land acquisition opportunities Ms. Hite suggested the Council consider deleting the following from the Parks CFP: • Cultural Arts Facility Needs Study; can be completed as operational item, and if determined we need a facility, then would be added to CFP • Downtown Public restroom: completed Mr. English reviewed the CFP/CIP Schedule: • July: o City staff begins development of capital budget • August/September o Submit proposed capital budget to finance o Prepare draft CFP and CIP o Planning Board presentation • October o Planning Board; public hearing (10/12/16) o City Council; public hearing (11/l/16) • November/December o City Council approval o Adopt CFP with budget into the Comprehensive Plan Ln N O_ E c.� c d E z U 2 a Council President Johnson referred to the bar graph of the City's Capital Program, recalling Mayor Earling indicated there was a significant facilities component in the 2017 budget. She asked that amount and why it was so small compared to the other funds. Public Works Director Phil Williams answered the funds for facilities are included in the graph but the $300,000 decision package is a small percentage of $25 million. Council President Johnson observed facilities was significantly higher in 2016. Mr. Williams said the 2016 budget included an ESCO project related to lighting and energy savings projects that was Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 6 Packet Pg. 8 not undertaken as it was not cost effective. Mr. English said the 2016 estimate also included the fishing pier project. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented the 2281h project is well loved by residents; she has received many comment about the intersection. She recalled concern expressed at the open houses about cut - through traffic to avoid the signal and asked if there had been any complaints. Mr. English answered there have not been any complaints. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to the 238th Walkway project, observing 238th on the east side of SR99 is ranked 12th for walkway. She encouraged staff to move that 4-block project up as there are no sidewalks on either side, pedestrians use it to reach Madrona School and Safeway and she has observed people walking in the ditch to avoid cars. Mr. English explained the ranking was developed by the Sidewalk Committee when the Transportation Plan was developed. The ranking will not necessarily be changed but staff will keep it on their radar when applying for grant funds. Councilmember Fraley- Monillas asked if that was 2007 Sidewalk Committee. Mr. English answered it was in 2015 when the Transportation Plan was updated. Councilmember Nelson asked what size community garden was envisioned. Ms. Hite answered 30-50 plots. The City supported the Floretum Garden Club's community garden at a church near Esperance Park but the church subsequently asked the community garden to leave. The Floretum Garde Club and City have had discussions with the church at Westgate that has 20 plots primarily for church members and the public when there is availability. She summarized there is a need for a larger community garden space of 30-50 plots. Councilmember Nelson asked if replacing the City Park storage building destroyed by arson would include security enhancements due to the history of vandalism in that areas. Ms. Hite said it will be included in the project. Councilmember Teitzel agreed the 228th connector was a big improvement and anticipated it may be -.A. increasing traffic volumes on 228th. As there have not been any improvements on the west side of SR99, m he asked whether the increased volume would affect levels of service, triggering the need for more capital investment. Mr. English said the CIP includes improvements to 228th west of SR99. That will be an cfl expensive project and due to its location in unincorporated Snohomish County, will require a partnership N with Snohomish County. Volumes and growth will be monitored; there is currently no funding for design o or improvements in that section west of SR99. Councilmember Teitzel asked if there were plans to E signalize the 4-way stop. Mr. English answered possibly, the level of service and volumes at the intersection would be evaluated. E z Councilmember Teitzel referred to the $300,000 for the trackside warning system, recalling a need for BNSF to adjust their signals so the Sounder train does not trigger signal Dayton and Main at the same a time. He recalled that project was to be presented to City Council for a final decision whether to proceed if that was the outcome. In his view, an unfavorable outcome would be installing the warning system and having even more complaints. Mr. Williams explained after staff worked with BNSF, BNSF's final answer was they would not tweak the software in their signal cabinet. BNSF will provide a signal to operate the arms at both crossings that could be used to trigger the trackside horns. He acknowledged there was a downside; two sets of horns occasionally but only for the eight passenger trains per day. In addition, the negative impact is limited to an area 100 feet on either side of the tracks for a limited distance. The remainder of Edmonds, up to 9th Avenue, will benefit greatly. There was a decision to proceed with design and the plans have been submitted to BNSF identifying the location for installation of the horns and staff is awaiting approval of the plans as well as an agreement for the City to maintain the horns. He anticipated installation of the horns would occur in 2017. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 7 Packet Pg. 9 4.1.a Councilmember Teitzel asked if there was any intent to return to Council to confirm there was a green light from Council for that project. Mr. Williams recalled the Council already gave the green light. Although he would have loved to solve that problem along with the benefits provided by the trackside warning system, the best approach was the greatest benefit from the investment. He summarized BNSF holds all the cards. Councilmember Teitzel did not recall a discussion where Council fully endorsed the concept. Mr. Williams did not recall that the conversation Councilmember Teitzel referred to included a request for an endorsement because it was his understanding Council had given the go-ahead. He offered to inform the Council once the agreement with BNSF is finalized. Councilmember Teitzel requested a final report once the plan is in place. Mayor Earling pointed out there are currently 40 trains/day through Edmonds; with the trackside warning, approximately 30 will not have an audible sound other than the wayside horn and the horns will sound at the 2 intersections approximately 8 times/day which he viewed that as a tremendous improvement. Addition, the wayside horn is 115`h-1/6`h the volume locally. Mr. Williams said BNSF's general practice is not to allow anything on the structure that supports the flashing red lights above the street. During the last meeting with BNSF, they indicated they could make an exception in Edmonds considering the geometry and that will reduce the project cost. As a follow-up to Councilmember Teitzel's comment, Councilmember Mesaros said he lives the closest of any Councilmember to Dayton Street crossing and often hears the trains. Currently, when a passenger train comes through, both Main and Dayton intersections engage at the same time even though the train stops at the station. BNSF has said that will not change even with the trackside horn. He agreed for the 30 freight trains, the trackside horn would work just the way it was envisioned which was an improvement especially for those who live close to the tracks. The amount of noise produced by the horns at both intersections for eight passenger trains would be much less than having the train whistle blow eight times. Council President Johnson recalled there was a vote on the trackside horn system and she voted against it and other Councilmembers voted in favor. Her objection at that time was it was a great deal of money for Q a small change. She was still curious about a quiet zone, how it much cost, how it would be implemented, m envisioning it likely would be via a local improvement district that included properties in the sound -shed. She would like to have an overview of that concept before a final vote on the trackside warning system. cfl Mr. Williams said he could not provide a precise estimate without designing a quiet zone. He recalled N BNSF had serious concerns about a quiet zone at Dayton due to the geometry, the level of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and the limited size of the intersection, anticipating it may be impossible to meet all the v standards. He estimated the cost of design and installation at $800,000+ for each of the two intersections. c a� Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled the Council has been talking about the trackside horn for three z years and the Council voted to proceed. She preferred to proceed once a vote had been taken. She recalled Council President Johnson voted in opposition, commenting it may have been before Councilmember a Teitzel was on the Council. Mr. Williams recalled there was a more recent update to Council regarding discussions with BNSF. He assumed the vote Council President Johnson referred to was during last year's CIP. Councilmember Teitzel recalled he was on the Council when the vote was taken and he voted in favor. He recalled subsequent discussion that staff would work with BNSF to resolve the Sounder train issue that would produce more horn noise and return to Council to ensure the Council was comfortable proceeding. He offered to research the minutes. Councilmember Tibbott referred to fitness zones and asked if there were any parks in other cities with that type of facility. Ms. Hite answered there is a fitness trail at Hickman and there are some in Seattle. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 8 Packet Pg. 10 4.1.a She will check with local jurisdictions. She explained a fitness zone was different that a fitness trail, it has more interactive types of equipment and one pad can accommodate 8-12 components. Councilmember Tibbott asked how much had accrued for land acquisition. Ms. Hite answered the funds have not been rolled over; $200,000 is included in the budget each year. There has been discussion about accumulating those funds for an opportunity. Civic Field was purchased using $200,000 in the 2014 budget rolled over into 2015, $200,000 in the 2015 budget as well as grant funds. Councilmember Tibbott asked whether the $200,000 is expended in a typical year. Ms. Hite answered it has only be spent twice since she has been at the City in the past five years. Councilmember Tibbott acknowledged it could make sense to roll those funds over. Councilmember Tibbott reported Ms. Hite and he have had a conversation with a young citizen about the possibility of a mountain bike track which raised the question of how citizens' ideas for parks are included in the CFP. Ms. Hite explained the way parks projects are included in the CFP is through Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. The development of the 6-year PROS Plan includes a robust public process including a public hearing. She told the two young citizens interested in a mountain bike track that she will include it on the interest list and that it would be best to include it in the next PROS Plan; that process will start in 2018. Short of being on the PROS Plan, any citizen can suggest to Council that a project be added. The Comprehensive Plan is updated annually and it is the Council's decision whether to add something outside the PROS Plan process. Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. 3. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE 2017 PROPOSED CITY BUDGET Economic Development/Community Services M Economic Development/Community Services Director Patrick Doherty reviewed: ° a • 2016 Accomplishments Community Services Q o Oversaw substantial ramp -up of use of social media City-wide V o Together with services of Carolyn Douglas as part-time public information officer/press to relations coordinator, we have created a substantial, continuous public/media presence cfl leading to regional press coverage, increased and regular social media activity, etc. N o Monitored and updated the Strategic Action Plan quarterly (Fall quarter update coming c November!) E o Managed lobbying efforts in Olympia and DC on behalf of Edmonds interests — both legislative and funding o Collaborated with Public Works in managing the At -Grade Rail Crossings Alternatives z Analysis and co -staffed the Mayor's Advisory Task Force o Provided oversight and support to the Diversity Commission, leading to successful presence a and events, with more to come. o Successfully conducted National Citizen Survey Economic Development o Related to Tourism: ■ Increased visibility and use of City's tourism website (visitedmonds.com) and arts/culture/events calendar ■ Enhanced tourism -promotional ad presence in the region — radio, print, digital — including a particular push for 2016 holiday season ■ Conducted tourism forums with partners to leverage assets o Worked with BID on new initiatives, especially small grants program, marketing/outreach, finances, parking Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 9 Packet Pg. 11 4.1.a o Started up Holiday Farmers Market o Together with BID continued substantially enhanced Holiday offerings/activities, with even more on tap for 2016 o Provided more enhanced business -attraction advertising throughout region (Seattle Business magazine, Daily Journal of Commerce, Business Xpansion Journal, and KUOW radio) o Scheduled tentative business -attraction event late November o Provided oversight to the re-creation of the EDC and staffed their meetings, subgroups and initiatives o Provided support to property owners and/or architects & developers on potential redevelopment projects, such as downtown hotel, Highway 99 area projects, etc. Mr. Doherty played a radio spot about attracting businesses to Edmonds and displayed a brochure created to attract European businesses to Edmonds. Mr. Doherty continued his review: • 2017 Challenges Community Services o Potential process to update the Strategic Action Plan o Pursue Legislative agenda and capital $ for Frances Anderson Center, Hwy 99 and At -Grade Crossing Alternative(s) o Support the Diversity Commission and its 2017 Work Plan Economic Development o Begin implementation strategies for Highway 99 redevelopment o Support property owners in Downtown, Westgate and other business districts to assist with appropriate redevelopment o Continue to seek hotel for Downtown o Enhanced and expanded business -attraction advertising, including foreign appeal in concert with EASC o Recruitment of new business/investment and retention/expansion of existing business o Pursue greater tourism -promotion opportunities Expenditures Expenditures 2016 Approved 2016 YE 2017 Recmd % Change Budget Estimate Budget Community Services $403,860 $403,860 $470,530 6% Economic Development 92,190 92,190 92,700 0% Total $496,050 $496,050 $563,230 5% Decision packages Community Services o DP #13: $6,000 for Diversity Commission contracted staff services o DP #14: $30,000 to continue public information/community relations contracted staff o DP #15: $72,000 for federal lobbyist/strategist o DP #16: $3,000 for Diversity Commission program support o DP #39: $150,000 for At -Grade Crossing Alternative(s) design, environmental, permitting Economic Development o No decision packages Mr. Doherty reported on the LTAC Tourism Promotion Program: • Lodging tax revenues are used to fund the City's Tourism Promotion Program • Only permissible use of these funds (RCW 67.28.1816) • Revenues are up in 2016 (approx. 5%, expected YE total: $112,404); similar growth expected in 2017. • City's Tourism Promotion Program consists of: Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 10 Packet Pg. 12 Ln N O_ E c.� c d E z U 2 a 4.1.a • Support and promotion of arts, culture and other events that attract visitors • General Marketing and promotion (ads, website, rack cards, etc.) He presented the proposed 2017 Tourism Promotion Program - Use of Funds • Arts/Culture-related (25% of revenue): o $19,000 Arts Commission grants for tourism -promotion: $2,000 - Cascade Symphony $2,000 - Olympic Ballet Theater $1,100 - Art Studio Tour $2,000 - Driftwood Players $1,500 - Sno-King Chorale $2,000 - Art Walk $2,000 - DeMiero Jazz Fest $2,000 - Jazz Connection $400 - Arts Festival $2,000 Cascadia Art Museum $500 - Emerging opportunities 1 $1,500 - CAFE o $12,300 in Arts Commission program expenditures $7,500 - Write on the Sound $3,000 - Public art brochure m r $300 - Concerts in the Park $1,500 -Misc. ads o General tourism promotion (75%): c ■ $7,500 - Printing/distribution of rack card ■ $1,500 - Promotion/support of Bird Fest a c ■ $6,200 - Support of Snohomish Co. Tourism Bureau ■ $30,000 - General advertising ■ $12,500 - Advertising in ECA Season Brochure ■ $4,000 - Promotion of Edmonds arts/culture events in Snohomish County Visitors Guide, CRAZE recreation guide and "Arts Access" (Snohomish Countywide) v ■ $20,000 - Contracted staff support for tourism promotion/website/arts-events calendar c ■ $2,500 - Edmonds Visitors Centers ■ $2,575 - Miscellaneous, incl ad design work, photography, emerging issues, etc. o ■ $3,425 - Contingency n ■ TOTAL - $90,200 Q ■ One-time expenditures: o - $2,000 - Enhanced advertising for 2017 Waterfront Festival grant - $1,000 -Enhanced advertising for 2017 Chamber Chowder Cook -Off - $1,000 -emerging opportunities fund, such as Visitor Center directional signage Ln - TOTAL - $4,000 c E Mr. Doherty presented Tourism decision packages t� • DP #55: $5,000 increase in general tourism advertising a� • DP #56: $3,000 in one-time funds: E o $2,000 for enhanced advertising - 2017 Waterfront Festival o $1,000 for enhanced advertising- 2017 Chamber Chowder Cook -Off c° • DP #57: $2,200 increase in professional services: a o $200 for Snohomish County Tourism Bureau o $2,000 for overall tourism support contracted services • DP #58: $850 increase in contingency item, approx. 3% contingency factor • DP #59: $4,000 in one-time funds: o $3,000 to host RevitalizeWA Con£ - WITHDRAW as City not selected o $1,000 to support emerging opportunities Councilmember Tibbott observed lodging tax is up $112,000 in 2016 and the proposal is to spend $90,000 to advertise businesses. Mr. Doherty clarified the $90,000 is related to advertising and support for events and programs that promote tourism. Councilmember Tibbott asked the multiplier effect on the local economy. Mr. Doherty answered that is difficult to determine but the industry standard is overnight Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 11 Packet Pg. 13 4.1.a visitors spend the most, $150-200/day. Day trippers spend $50-75/day if they are within the same metropolitan region and $75+ if they are from outside the region. With the number of events and number of people attending, he summarized it is a great deal of money. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding the multiplier effect goes up if businesses are open until 8 p.m. Mr. Doherty agreed, explaining it has been shown national that more money can be made after 5 p.m. than the rest of day. Unfortunately, not a lot of businesses in Edmonds stay open later other than possibly on Thursday and Friday evenings. Councilmember Tibbott asked what events include evening activities. Mr. Doherty said evening activities such as at the ECA, music at the pub, the theaters, etc. attract people in evening. Restaurants are open in the evening and it would be good if more retailers stayed open later due to the direct correlation between leisure shopping and dinner. Councilmember Nelson referred to $1,000 for enhanced advertising for the annual chowder cook -off and offered his services as a judge. He recalled in the past there was bus package tourism and asked if that has continued. Mr. Doherty advised there was one bus tour this summer from California. The bus tours in the past were from Canada due to the exchange rate which is no longer favorable. Councilmember Teitzel referred to DP13 $6,000 for contracted services for the Diversity Commission and asked if that would be brought in-house at some point. Mr. Doherty said the intent of having 10 hours/month of specific support in addition to his and Ms. Cruz's support is the person has expertise in diversity and helps programmatically to queue up issues. Staff administrates the Diversity Commission but are not educated in the issue. For now and for the foreseeable future, 1-2 years, it is beneficial to have someone with experience and knowledge base related to diversity issues to drive the programmatic element of Diversity Commission. Councilmember Mesaros commented he was recently a tourist in Europe and was amazed how many people know about Rick Steves. He reported on walking food tours of 10-15 people in small European towns that include stops for coffee, cheese, ice cream, etc., remarking that would be an interesting possibility in Edmonds. Mr. Doherty said Rick Steves is featured Edmonds' tourism website. He suggested a soft landing for the food tour would be to include that as one of the suggested itineraries on the website. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how much was spent on the Washington D.C. lobbyist last year. cfl Mr. Doherty estimated $50,000. A lower rate was negotiated with the consultant for the first year; the rate N for the second year, $72,000, is higher but still less than their usual rate. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas inquired about a measurable goal for that expenditure. Mr. Doherty answered not a specific dollar v amount. A federal lobbyist is one of the only ways for the City to get itself in front of decision makers in Washington D.C. on a regular basis. Things change daily; for example, the lobbyist informed staff last week that the Obama administration will open FASTLANE grant applications during the remainder of z Obama's term. As a representative of Edmonds, the lobbyist can meet with and interact with senators and agencies. When the lobbyist eventually helps the City obtain funding for a project, the return on a investment could be calculated. In advance of securing funding, it is difficult to determine that return. During his previous employment with Federal Way, the city always had a federal lobbyist and Federal Way was extremely successful in obtaining federal money. The hope is this expense will pave the way toward higher amounts of money for big projects. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about the City's relationship with the congressional delegation, envisioning they would be responsible enough to contact the City when things of interest occurred. She asked if that was their role. Mr. Doherty agreed there is a great deal of staff in the congressional delegations' offices but he did not want to rely on their contacting the City regarding the changing opportunities. While staff could contact them weekly, having a lobbyist in Washington D.C. is more Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 12 Packet Pg. 14 4.1.a effective. For example the lobbyist can identify when it is the most appropriate for City staff to travel to Washington D.C. to meet with the delegation. Council President Johnson referred to the contingency fee in the tourism promotion budget and asked why it was included and did any other departments have contingency fees. Mr. Doherty clarified it is not a fee, with higher tourism revenue projected next year and and a very ambitious program, staff did not want to program 100% of the projection and instead included a 3% contingency in event projections are lower than anticipated. If projections are less than expected by mid-2017, expenditures will be reduced and if they are higher than expected, the contingency may be used for opportunities that arise. Council President Johnson asked what city won the bid to host the RevitalizeWA Conference. Mr. Doherty answered Ellensburg. Development Services Development Services Director Shane Hope reviewed: • 2016 Accomplishments o Handling high level of permit & inspection activity o Positive feedback from most customers o Development code updates, including: o Critical Area Regulations (adopted) o Building & Fire Codes (adopted) o Impact Fee Process (adopted) o Sign Code (adopted) o Green Resource Center o Highway 99 Subarea Planning project in final stages o Conversion of Street Files into electronic records o Staffing for several boards & commissions —ongoing a Challenges Q o Given continued high levels of permit activity per employee, difficult to: ■ Provide timely plan reviews m ■ Have time to complete work on other projects (such as development code updates & Urban Forest Management Plan) cfl o Recognition that development fees have not been updated for 3 years N o Desire to assist with community needs, including affordable housing o o Building permit and revenue comparison January through September 2001-2016 E o Building permits per employee 1985-2015 v Graphs: o Building Permits and Revenue for January through August period 2001-2016 z o Building Permits per Development Services Employee 1985-2015 Expenditures Q Expenditures 2016 2016 YE 2017 Recmd Discussion Budget Estimate Budget Total Dept $2,688,350 $2,685,130 $2,916,680 8% Increase Salaries 1,444,230 1,460,840 1,547,970 2 x PT staff Prof. Services 573,940 541,940 554,860 -3% Interfund (incl IT) 12,950 12,950 135,780 New Tech Fund Total Dept Less IT $2,675,400 $2,672,180 $2,780,900 4% Fund • Revenue 2016 216 YE Revenue � Discussion T Budget Estimate Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 13 Packet Pg. 15 4.1.a Bldg Permit/Reviews $950,000 $1,150,000 Healthy economy & interest in Edmonds Dev Services Technology Fee 42,000 50,400 Strong permit activity Decision Packages o DP #18: Housing Strategy - $30,000 o DP # 19: Digital permit tracking system — $125,000 o DP #20: Digitization & archiving - $48,000 o DP #21: 0.5 Permit Coordinator — $33,880 o DP #22: Building plan review - professional services — $10,000 o DP #23: Credit card fee compensation - $15,000 o DP #24: 0.5 Planner — $56,230 Councilmember Mesaros asked how banking fees are calculated for the City. Finance Director Scott James explained the City avoids paying bank fees as rule due to the bank balance. Council President Johnson asked if DP21 will allow the second floor to be open all day on Wednesdays. Ms. Hope answered yes. Council President Johnson asked about implementation of the credit card fee. Ms. Hope advised staff will present the Development Fee Schedule to Council for adoption in November and it would be effective January 1, 2017. (Councilmember Fraley-Monillas left at 9:15 p.m.) Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite reviewed: 2016 Accomplishments o Ribbon cutting of new spray area at Edmonds City Park o Marina Beach Master plan adopted o Dayton Street Plaza completion o Civic Field acquisition and master planning effort o YMCA Yost Partnership o Pickle ball tournament o Health & Fitness Expo o Puget Sound Bird Fest o Beach Ranger program o Anderson Center stage o Fishing Pier Rehab: November ribbon cutting o WOTS Conference: sold out! o Luminous Forest o Wayfinding signs o City Park and HMP concerts o Downtown restroom o Volunteer hours: 4745 volunteer hours or 2.25 FTEs Ln N O_ E c.� c a� E z U 2 a Challenges o Staffing: ability to recruit and hire gymnastics staff o Park Maintenance: Hard to keep up with everything, City Park fire. o Bidding environment: Veteran's Plaza, Frances Anderson Center Bandshell o Fishing Pier: Unanticipated issues. 2017 Projects o Waterfront Redevelopment, Walkway connection. o Outdoor Fitness Zones Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 14 Packet Pg. 16 4.1.a o Community Garden 0 4th Ave Cultural Corridor: Park]et o Yost Spa o Veteran's Plaza o Stadium removal o City Park storage shed rebuild o Civic Field adoption of Master Plan, design development Expenditures Expenditures 2016 2016 YE 2017 Discussion Budget Estimate Recomm Administration $ 388,000 $ 389,700 $ 363,010 Decision package #2 Student Conserv. Assoc Recreation 1,267,160 1,258,790 1,403,500 DP #3, reorg, and Interfund Rental Charges added Programs 426,300 391,510 425,700 Park Maintenance 1,644,750 1,656,370 1,850,610 DP #1 & 6, FTE and portable toilets Flower Program 48,330 42,530 44,920 Total Budget $3,774,540 $3,738,990 $4,087,740 Decision packages and Interfund charges for IT • Revenues Revenue 2016 2016 YE 2017 Discussion Budget Estimate Recomm Program Fees $ 880,830 $ 869,790 $ 911,400 Gymnastics Rentals 128,000 145,000 147,000 Picnic shelter rentals City Park Leases 218,100 168,910 172,435 Incorrect budget number for 2016, should be 168,910 Special event dollars Park donations 9,500 4,350 4,350 programmed in a different bud et 11 Total $1,236,430 $1,188,050 $1,235,185 • Decision Packages o Parks Maintenance FTE: $83,000 ongoing, $47,000 one time. o Parks Dept Reorganization: $8,548 o Student Conservation Association: $5,000 o Portable toilets: $15,000 Councilmember Tibbott asked about deferred maintenance such as painting. Ms. Hite said staff tries to paint all restrooms every spring as part of routine maintenance. Department staff are working with Facilities on some deferred maintenance issues. The additional FTE will help catch up on deferred maintenance. Councilmember Mesaros recalled public comment tonight regarding a suggestion for a restroom at the far end of Sunset Avenue. Human Resources Human Resources Director Mary Ann Hardie reviewed: • 2016 Accomplishments o Implemented the City's new online applicant tracking system (NEOGOV) o Provided City-wide Anti -harassment, Anti -retaliation and Cultural Diversity Training Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 15 Packet Pg. 17 Ln N 0 E c.� c d E z U 2 a 4.1.a o Posted 48 recruitments (to date) and worked through the selection process for those positions o Scheduled City-wide Workplace Violence Prevention Training for November 2016 o Started EPOA (commissioned police officers) negotiations o Started the Prosecutor's contract negotiations o Offered a City Health & Wellness Fair. Promoted the Wellness event "Kids to Work Day" in April 2016 o Hired and trained the new part-time, HR Assistant o Had a successful MEBT audit o Started development of an internal supervisor training program for new and first time supervisors Challenges o Legislation/regulation considerations — Legal mandates, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) implications, FLSA overtime rule changes, etc. o Labor relations issues o Recruitments- finding different ways to attract the best pool of candidates as retirements occur and continuing to fill for police recruitments with approximately 600 law enforcement openings across the state. o Launching the updated (full) Accident Prevention Plan- many moving parts o Health insurance plan change/transition effective 1/1/2018 o Increasing workers' compensation claims costs 2017 Projects o Union negotiations with the EPOA (commissioned police), Law Support (non- commissioned), Teamsters and SEIU o Safety Training - implementing the Accident Prevention Program (APP) o Update of the 2015 City Personnel Policies o Continue work toward the AWC Well -City Award through the Wellness Committee o Continue work on the internal supervisor training program o Continuing oversight of the public defense consultant work o Planning for transitions in HR (staff retirement in 2018) Expenditures Expenditures 2016 2016 YE 2017 Discussion Budget Estimate Recomm Human Resources $438,860 $432,240 $433,310 Decision package Civil Service 23,180 23,180 23,180 Decision Packages o Safety & Risk Coordinator (part-time) ■ $20,000. This part-time Safety/Risk Coordinator will also take the place of HR to serve as the worker's compensation claims management coordinator to help reduce the cost of the City's insurance premiums through accident prevention and claims management. ■ The City has received $16,805.88 to date from SAW (L & I's early return to work program) reimbursements that have been applied toward the City's APP accident prevention program launch (training hiring a consultant for the APP). ■ It is estimated that there will be an additional $2000 - 5000 in SAW reimbursements. Going forward, with the funds used to pay Penser and the SAW reimbursements as well as likely reducing workers' compensation claims costs, those funds will fund this position. Municipal Court Municipal Court Judge Linda Coburn reviewed: • 2016 Investments and Improvements o Permanent In -Court Clerk's Station Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 16 Packet Pg. 18 Ln N O_ E c.� c a� E z U 2 a 4.1.a o In -Court Video o In -Custody Equipment o Court Recordings Available Online o Online Payments Credit Cards Jan - Set 2015 2016 Service Fee $8,092 $6,169 Recouped Service Fee $0 $5,300 • Collections via credit card Month Paypros Online June $41,861 $733 July 45,631 4,040 August 38,476 10,281 September 41,175 7,778 Total $167,144 $22,832 • Expenditures Expenditures 2016 Budget 2016 YE Estimate 2017 Recomm Discussion Up: motion/trials; video in - Prof Services $39,000 $44,600 $45,000 custody (Court security Down: jail costs, consolidate infraction calendar Miscellaneous 34,000 12,000 20,000 Electronic File Mgmt System Tanned for 2017 • Courts are not revenue centers: o By statute, '[t]he court shall not order a defendant to pay costs unless the defendant is or will be able to pay them.' RCW 10.01.160(3). To determine the amount and method for paying the costs, 'the court shall take account of the financial resources of the defendant and the nature of the burden that payment of costs will impose.' -- State v. Blazina, 182 Wn..2d 827, 838, 344 P.3d 680, 685 (2015) Washington is one of five states selected for `Price of justice' grant. o DOJ awards nearly $500,000 to study and improve use of court fines and fees for offenders o "The group will explore a `calculator' currently used in Edmonds Municipal Court to see if computer software can make the calculator a useful tool in courts across the state." Revenue/Intake Infractions Intake 2016 YE Estimate 2016 Actuals (Jan -Sept) 2017 Projections Non -Criminal Traffic $132,670 $207,792 $173,000 Non -Traffic Infractions 5,727 1,571 10,225 Parking 12,645 20,432 21,600 TOTAL $151,042 $229,795 $204,825 Criminal Intake Traffic $19,163 $28,186 $33,500 DUI 19,463 22,036 28,500 Non -Traffic 6,147 10,811 10,500 TOTAL $44,773 $61,033 $72,500 Adult Probation Service Charge $36,610 $52,872 $60,000 2106 YE 2017 Current Intake 2016 Actuals Estimate Projections Balance Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 17 Packet Pg. 19 Ln N 0 v c d E z U 2 a 4.1.a Court Improvement $16,400 $17,677 $17,700 $17,846* Fund *Court contributed $20,000 to the improved audio/visual system in courtroom/council chambers. Decision Packages o Electronic File Management System ■ Will create an electronic file for each defendant. Increasing the court's time management skills and improving the court's case -flow management ■ Automation will include: - Electronic documents (pleadings, filings, and orders) - Records can be accessed by entering a case number, a party's name or displaying the judge's calendar - All documents will be imaged as PDF and all required signatures will be recorded electronically. ■ Benefits - The court's efficiency will increase as it relates to staff productivity and reduction in the expense for paper, pre-printed forms and other supplies - Improve efficiency and instant access to court documents for all judicial users and the general public - Elimination need for additional file cabinets, storage area and office space Existing Resources - The city receives funds from "Washington State Court Improvements Account". The funds are restricted and must to be used only for improving the court's efficiency. The balance in this account as of today is $71,846.00. - Total Estimated Expense Year 12016 12017 Amount 1 $20,000* 1 $20,000 * Implemented online payments in 2016, but not paperless court a n • 2017 Challenges Q o Fluctuations in filings c o Elimination of jail alternatives at Sno Co Jail o Implementation of Paperless Court o New Court Administrator • 2017 Opportunities c o Development/testing of LFO calculator o Community Outreach (new alt. programs) v o Implementation of Paperless Court o New Court Administrator 0 Changing of the Guard o Court Administrator Joan Ferebee retiring Jan. 27, 2017 ■ After 23 years of public service to Edmonds Municipal Court Q o New Court Administrator Sharon Whittaker ■ Brings 26 years of experience: Asst. Court Admn. (Skagit County District Court) Asst. Dir/Supervisor /Lead Clerk/Clerk (Snohomish County District Court) Clerk (Everett Municipal Court) Councilmember Nelson complimented Judge Coburn on the efficiencies and modernizations she has brought to the court and for the Price of Justice grant. Councilmember Mesaros echoed Councilmember Nelson's comments regarding the changes Judge Coburn has instituted and planning for the future. He joked that her presentation did not include a Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 18 Packet Pg. 20 4.1.a proposal for a volleyball court in the City. Judge Coburn said her family and friends are free to lobby the City for a sand volleyball court and league. Council President Johnson referred to revenue from DUIs of $20,000 - $28,000 and inquired about the average fine for a DUI. Judge Coburn answered the maximum fine that can be imposed is $5,000. Under the law there is a "mandatory minimum" of $350; additional assessments bring the total to $2,000 - $3,000. If she finds that someone is truly indigent, she can waive that and impose only the mandatory conviction fee of $43. A wide range of fines can be imposed based on the person's ability to pay. She starts with the mandatory minimum and goes up; if the person is indigent, she makes adjustments downward. Council President Johnson asked how many DUIs the $20,000 - $28,000 in fines represented. Judge Coburn advised there were 97 DUI cases in 2015, 82 in 2014, 116 in 2013, 110 in 2012, 154 in 2011, and 158 in 2010. There has been a decrease in DUI cases and generally filings are down due to staffing issues but criminal filings are down statewide. Council President Johnson asked if a marijuana impairment would be classified as a DUI. Judge Coburn answered yes. Mayor Earling complimented Ms. Whittaker for attending the entire Council meeting waiting to be introduced. Judge Coburn explained the hiring process was completed in advance of Ms. Ferebee's retirement to allow Ms. Whittaker to attend the Presiding Judge Conference with her in November; Ms. Whittaker does not start work until mid -January. 7. REPORTS ON OUTSIDE BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 15 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Tibbott reported on the Economic Development Commission meeting where their recommendations regarding parking were presented. He also attended several meetings related to housing and learned there are opportunities for affordable housing in Edmonds although any kind of affordable housing project usually requires 8-9 partners. A key step was the Council's approval of the multi -family tax exemption. Councilmember Mesaros reported he will attend the PFD Board meeting on Thursday. He also plans to attend the Joint PFD and ECA Board retreat on December 3 where the boards will discuss how to work more closely which may include changes in the legal structure. An attorney has been hired to facilitate that discussion. Councilmember Mesaros reported as part of a potential merger of SNOCOM with SNOPAC, three issues are being considered, 1) whether it will improve service; a 911 call from a SNOPAC service area may be connected to SNOCOM which results in a 40-60 second delay to transfer the call, 2) provide services at the same or reduced cost, and 3) governance (SNOCOM Board is half elected officials and half professional service and SNOPAC is entirely professional service). Councilmember Mesaros said his preference is to have a portion of the board be elected officials. A presentation will be made to the Council in December/January. Councilmember Teitzel reported the Port of Edmonds is doing very well financially; revenues are up in 2016 compared to 2015. The Port recently received a very clean audit and are working on their 2017 budget. The Port continues to have significant concerns with the setbacks and buffers approved by Council and will be working with Ecology. The Historic Preservation Commission is evaluating two homes for potential inclusion on the historic register. The Long Range Plan group continues its work led Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 19 Packet Pg. 21 Ln N 0 E c.� c a� E z U 2 a by Mr. James. The team has created a rough draft of a capital prioritization model that considers levels of service, safety, availability of funding, grants, Strategic Action Plan, etc. Councilmember Teitzel reported an open house on Civic Field was held October 19 where the consultant, Walker I Macy, revealed a hybrid design; the online open house is still open. Key issues include the location of the skate park; neighbors on the northern border are concerned the skate park has been moved too close to the border. The Boys & Girls Club would like to have 18,000-20,000 square feet for their activities; the current structure is far smaller. Options include an addition to the existing site or potentially a new building where the tennis courts are currently located in the northwest corner. A final design will be presented to Council on November 22. Councilmember Mesaros reported the Disability Board welcomed a new Citizen at Large member at its October 20 meeting, Jim Distelhorst, a Harvard -educated doctor. Dr. Distelhorst and Sharon Cates Lighthouse Law Group, attended the meeting and assisted with working through some contentious issues. On Thursday Councilmembers Tibbott and Nelson and he plan to meet with the Edmonds Downtown Alliance regarding sign code issues and potential options for moving forward. Council President Johnson reported she attended the demo garden open house near the hatchery, the Diversity Commission's Immigrant Forum, the AWC dinner attended by five Councilmembers, the Civic Field open house and the Civic Field Advisory Committee. The next step for Civic Field are presentations and a public hearing at the Planning Board followed by a Planning Board recommendation to the City Council. She will participate in the Long Range Financial Plan tomorrow and the public official's reception for the Economic Alliance of Snohomish County on Thursday. Councilmember Nelson reported the Pedestrian Safety Task Force finalize a presentation that can be given to community groups to empower citizens to be safe on walkways and roadways. He attended the AWC regional meeting where he learned every city in King County and Snohomish County is benefitting from the increase in revenue from growth while struggling with challenges related to impacts on infrastructure. Tomorrow he will attend Snohomish County Tomorrow and the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee on November 1. 8. MAYOR'S COMMENTS C0 Ln 04 Mayor Earling reported 50-60 staff members participated in the Staff Health Fair today, the largest turnout ever. Flu shots were also administered. The downtown restroom will be ready for Halloween as E promised also some ancillary details still need to be completed. The AWC meeting held in Edmonds at v Scotts was the fifth of eight meetings and was the best attended of any the gatherings. The Governor attended the AWC meeting and received an award. z M 9. COUNCIL COMMENTS a Council President Johnson reported on upcoming events: • November 5 - Historic Museum annual dinner • November 10 —Hwy 99 open house at Swedish Edmonds 4th floor Councilmember Teitzel reported last Friday Councilmember Fraley-Monillas and he attended the Snohomish Community Health Civic Boot Camp; he offered to provide presentation slides to Council. The boot camp, presented by the Seattle CityClub along with the Everett Housing Authority, Providence, and the Snohomish County Health District, was a great opportunity to hear what other agencies are doing about affordable housing, homelessness and other health issues. The camp included a walking tour of the Hawthorne Neighborhood in Everett which has historically been a very rough neighborhood with a great Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 20 Packet Pg. 22 4.1.a deal of crime and violence. It has been a great success story; Everett has been involved in providing subsidized housing and services and there is a strong sense of support, community and joy. Councilmember Teitzel reported last Saturday he attended an orientation with about 15 Western Washington University students as part of the Sustainable Cities Partnership. Keeley O'Connell provided an orientation at the Edmonds Marsh. Councilmember Mesaros reported he has been on vacation for last three weeks; he had a great trip and it was fun to be gone and see new places. He found an additional Sister City, Cassis, France. He found it remarkable how well known Rick Steves is throughout Europe; he is a great ambassador for the City. 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 With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:17 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes October 25, 2016 Page 21 Packet Pg. 23 Ln N O E c.i �.i C d E t U 2 a 4.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/1/2016 Approval of claim checks. Staff Lead: Scott James Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Nori Jacobson Background/History Approval of claim checks #222507 through #222601 dated October 27, 2016 for $363,700.17. Staff Recommendation Approval of claim checks. Fiscal Impact Claims $363,700.17 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 10-27-16 FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 10-27-16 Packet Pg. 24 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 222507 10/25/2016 075596 MOE, LAURA 222508 10/27/2016 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 222509 10/27/2016 061029 ABSOLUTE GRAPHIX 222510 10/27/2016 075679 AGR CONTRACTING INC Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice WOTS MOE L 376434 147 ESFA.Pmt 3 222511 10/27/2016 074306 AMWINS GROUP BENEFITS INC 4432479 4482299 PO # Description/Account WOTS MOE L PRESENTATION WOTS MOE L PRESENTATION 117.100.64.573.20.41.00 Total WWTP: 10/17/16 PEST CONTROL 10/17/16 PEST CONTROL 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 Total P&R:VESTS P&R: GREEN VESTS (10X2.85) 001.000.64.571.23.24.00 SCREEN CHARGES 001.000.64.571.23.24.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.23.24.00 Total ESFA.PMT 3 THRU 10/12/16 ESFA.Pmt 3 thru 10/12/16 422.200.72.594.31.65.00 ESFA.Ret 3 422.200.223.400 Total LEOFF 1 MEDICAL INSURANCE OC BARNARD, COOPER & WEINZ 617.000.51.517.20.23.10 ALL OTHER LEOFF VS 009.000.39.517.20.23.10 LEOFF 1 MEDICAL INSURANCE NO BARNARD, COOPER, WEINZ 4.2.a Page: 1 Page: 1 Packet Pg. 25 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 222511 10/27/2016 074306 AMWINS GROUP BENEFITS INC Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) 222512 10/27/2016 074718 AQUATIC SPECIALTY SERVICES INC 11056 222513 10/27/2016 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 222514 10/27/2016 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 1988847334 0978599-IN PO # Description/Account 617.000.51.517.20.23.10 ALL OTHERS 009.000.39.517.20.23.10 Total : PM: YOST POOL PUMP SEAL PART, 2 O'RING, SEAL PLATE/VOLUTE 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 2 PUMP SEAL, PS200 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 IMPELLER, 75HP FIRM HP UR DURA 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 SHIPPING & HANDLING- 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 Total WWTP: 10/19/16 UNIFORMS, TOWE wwtp uniforms 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 wwtp mats & towels 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 Total FLEET - REGULAR 6201 GAL Fleet - Regular 6201 Gal 511.000.77.548.68.34.11 WA St Excise Tax Gas, WA Oil Spill 511.000.77.548.68.34.11 Diesel 3515 Gal 4.2.a Page: 2 Page: 2 Packet Pg. 26 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 3 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222514 10/27/2016 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM (Continued) 511.000.77.548.68.34.10 5,383.9< WA St Excise Tax Gas, WA Oil Spill 511.000.77.548.68.34.10 1,813.9, Bio-Diesel 185 Gal 511.000.77.548.68.34.13 274.2E WA St Excise Tax Gas, WA Oil Spill 511.000.77.548.68.34.13 95.3z WA St Svc Fees 511.000.77.548.68.34.13 50.1 < 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.34.13 4.9' Total: 21,400.5 , 222515 10/27/2016 075217 BASLER, TONY 14742 INTERPRERTER FEE INTERPRERTER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 107.5 , Total: 107.5 , 222516 10/27/2016 072455 BEAR COMMUNICATIONS INC 4519046 WWTP: RADIO PROGRAMMING LAI Radio programming labor 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 160.0( 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 15.6E Total: 175.61 222517 10/27/2016 002258 BENS EVER READY 12941 UNIT EQ96PO, E105PO,E124PO - FI Unit EQ96PO, E105PO,E124PO - FIF 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 288.0( UNIT E118PR, E119PR, E128PR - FI 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 264.0( 9.8% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 54.0� Total: 606.01 222518 10/27/2016 069226 BHC CONSULTANTS LLC 7968 ESFE.SERIVCES THRU 9/23/16 Page: 3 Packet Pg. 27 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 4 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222518 10/27/2016 069226 BHC CONSULTANTS LLC (Continued) ESFE.Services thru 9/23/16 422.200.72.594.31.41.00 496.5( 8151 E6GA.SERVICES THRU 9/23/16 E6GA.Services thru 9/23/16 423.200.75.594.35.41.00 21,363.7( 8157 ESJB.SERVICES THRU 9/23/16 ESJB.Services thru 9/23/16 421.200.74.594.34.41.00 2,504.9E 8160 ESGB.SERVICES THRU 9/23/16 ESGB.Services thru 9/23/16 423.200.75.594.35.41.00 15,172.5( Total: 39,537.71 222519 10/27/2016 075817 BLACK LION CONSTRUCTION SRVCS BLD20161372 REFUND -PERMITS REFUND -PERMITS 001.000.257.620 20.0( BLD20161378 REFUND -PERMITS REFUND -PERMITS 001.000.257.620 20.0( Total: 40.0( 222520 10/27/2016 074307 BLUE STAR GAS 9679 FLEET AUTO PROPANE 680.9 GAL Fleet Auto Propane 680.9 Gal 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 694.8: Total: 694.8. 222521 10/27/2016 067391 BRAT WEAR 20115 INV#20115 - EDMONDS PD - POLAI` HANES WHITE T-SHIRTS 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 31.2E NAVY SWEATSHIRT 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 25.0( SCREEN PRINT NAME ON SHIRTS/ 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 112.0( NAVY KNIT SHORTS 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 30.5( Page: 4 Packet Pg. 28 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 222521 10/27/2016 067391 BRAT WEAR 222522 10/27/2016 066578 BROWN AND CALDWELL 222523 10/27/2016 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 5 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) L/S RAGLAN TEE _ 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 31.9E vi 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 a� 25.4( NAVY SWEATPANTS E 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 28.5( Total: 284.6: 0 149109 WWTP: 8/26-9/29/16 ODOR SCRUBI @ 8/26-9/29/16 ODOR SCRUBBER CAI 0 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 4,236.9( m Total: 4,236.9( Q 16606134 INV#16606134 - EDMONDS PD N COPY RENTAL #6255 FOR 10/2016 .. 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 151.8 i B/W METER USAGE 08/01-9/30/16 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 78.6E N COPY RENTAL #3325 FOR 10/2016 0 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 r 60.7( N B/W METER USAGE 08/01-9/30/16 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 14.3' E COLOR METER USAGE 08/01-9/30/' 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 119.9( COPY RENTAL #5240 FOR 10/2016 c 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 m 160.0( E B/E METER USAGE 08/01-9/30/16 U 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 27.4, 20 COLOR METER USAGE 08/01-9/30/' r Q 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 51.1( 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 65.0 1 16606138 RENTAL OF COPIER RENTAL OF COPIER 001.000.23.512.50.45.00 65.3E Page: 5 Packet Pg. 29 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 6 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222523 10/27/2016 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES (Continued) COPIER MAINTANCE _ 001.000.23.512.50.48.00 121.4 1 vi 16606139 C/A 572105 CONTRACT# 3091/0521 Finance dept copier contract charge 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 209.6' E B&W Meter usage IRC5250 8/01/16 - M 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 24.5. 6 Color Meter usage IRC5250 8/01/16 - o 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 49.8E 9.8% Sales Tax o L 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 27.8, a 16606141 C/A 572105 CONTRACT# 3091/0521 Q Finance dept copier contract charge N 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 209.6' c'o B&W Meter usage IRC5250 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 199.0: m Color Meter usage IRC5250 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 141.6E N 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 53.9< Y 16606142 C5250 CONTRACT & USE CHARGE October contract charges C5250 E 001.000.22.518.10.45.00 161.1' October contract charges C5250 ; 001.000.61.557.20.45.00 34.5. October contract charges C5250 E t 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 34.5, um usage charges C5250 8/16 - 9/16 r Q 001.000.22.518.10.45.00 158.91 usage charges C5250 8/16 - 9/16 001.000.61.557.20.45.00 34.0 1 usage charges C5250 8/16 - 9/16 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 34.0( 16606145 CONTRACT CHARGE-IRC2501F Page: 6 Packet Pg. 30 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 222523 10/27/2016 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) 16606146 16606148 16606151 16609416 222524 10/27/2016 075023 CAROLYN DOUGLAS COMMUNICATIONf 59 4.2.a Page: 7 PO # Description/Account Amoun CONTRACT CHARGE-IRC2501F 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 74.0 , w CONTRACT CHARGE-IRC2501F CONTRACT CHARGE-IRC2501F t 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 55.8E C/A 572105 CONTRACT# 3091/0521 Finance dept copier contract charge 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 32.3, o 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 3.1 1 o C/A 572105 CONTRACT# 3091/0521 L 0- Finance dept copier contract charge Q 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 26.4z B&W Meter usage IRC2501F '' 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 28.4 Color Meter usage IRC2501F 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 29.0' 9.8% Sales Tax N 001.000.31.514.23.45.00 8 2z c COUNILC COPIER USAGE CHARGE N Contract Charge 001.000.11.511.60.31.00 26.4z . B&W Metering c° 001.000.11.511.60.31.00 3.9E ; Color Metering 001.000.11.511.60.31.00 31.6( E 9.8% Sales Tax U 001.000.11.511.60.31.00 6.0E Q CONTRACT CHARGE-IRC7270 CONTRACT CHARGE-IRC7270 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 344.0( Total : 2,958.9! COMMUNICATIONS & OUTREACH F Communications and outreach for Oc Page: 7 Packet Pg. 31 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 222524 10/27/2016 075023 CAROLYN DOUGLAS COMMUNICATION (Continued) 222525 10/27/2016 003710 CHEVRON AND TEXACO BUSINESS 48711926 222526 10/27/2016 075162 CITIES DIGITAL INC 222527 10/27/2016 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 222528 10/27/2016 075648 COVICH-WILLIAMS CO INC 39059 PO # Description/Account 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 Total ; INV#48711926 ACCT#7898305185 - FUEL FOR NARCS VEHICLE-POFF 104.000.41.521.21.32.00 TAX EXEMPT FILING FEE 104.000.41.521.21.32.00 Total LASERFICHE ANNUAL SUPPORT Al LASERFICHE ANNUAL SUPPORT Al 001.000.62.524.10.48.00 LASERFICHE ANNUAL SUPPORT Al 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 LASERFICHE ANNUAL SUPPORT Al 422.000.72.531.40.49.00 LASERFICHE ANNUAL SUPPORT Al 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 LASERFICHE ANNUAL SUPPORT Al 001.000.67.518.21.49.00 LASERFICHE ANNUAL SUPPORT Al 001.000.31.518.88.48.00 Total 12536 INV#12536 CUST#47 - EDMONDS P PRISONER R&B FOR AUG 2016 001.000.39.523.60.51.00 Total 0286270-IN UNIT 21 - SUPPLIES UNIT 21 - Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 4.2.a Page: 8 Amoun 2,500.0( 2,500.0( Y a� t 74.0' . c� 0.7z c 74.7! 0 a a 5,764.7: Q N 823.5< 823.5< N 823.5< o r N 823.51 E 2,882.31 M 11,941 Z c m E t 1,057.5( r 1,057.5( Q 1 Page: 8 Packet Pg. 32 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # 222528 10/27/2016 075648 075648 COVICH-WILLIAMS CO INC (Continued) 222529 10/27/2016 073912 CROWN FILMS/CUSTOM BIOPLASTICS 81049 222530 10/27/2016 060914 CUMMINS NORTHWEST LLC 222531 10/27/2016 067794 DALCO INC 222532 10/27/2016 061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 03 Description/Account Total PM: SUPPLIES REG. SIZE DOG WASTE BAG 400C- 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 FREIGHT CHARGE 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 Total 001-26253 UNIT 66 - BELT TENSIONER Unit 66 - Belt Tensioner 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 Total: 93048 WWTP: PHW3-11024D/SNAPNGOA PHW3-11024D/SNAPNGO AUTO ST) 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 Total 422684 INV#422684 - EDMONDS PD CALIBRATE #GHD-03881 GENESIS 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 CALIBRATE #GHS-08723 GENESIS 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 CALIBRATE #LP03397 PRO LITE 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 CALIBRATE PL22583 PRO LASER II 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 4.2.a Page: 9 Page: 9 Packet Pg. 33 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 10 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222532 10/27/2016 061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 03 (Continued) CALIBRATE #VP-08496 GENESIS VI 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 70.0( FUELSURCHARGE 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 10.0( 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 35.2E Total : 395.21 222533 10/27/2016 073757 DEX MEDIA WEST INC 651150804 CEMETERY ADVERTISING CEMETERY ADVERTISING 130.000.64.536.20.41.40 5.0( Total : 5.0( 222534 10/27/2016 073772 DIRECT MATTERS 54323 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.23.512.50.31.00 194.0� Total : 194.0$ 222535 10/27/2016 074030 ECHELBARGER INVESTMENTS LLC 141324 HYDRANT USE PERMIT DEPOSIT R Hydrant Use Permit Deposit Refund 421.000.245.110 950.0( Total : 950.0( 222536 10/27/2016 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 4-34080 LIFT STATION #14 7909 211TH PL S' LIFT STATION #14 7909 211TH PL S' 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 44.7' Total : 44.7' 222537 10/27/2016 075827 EDWIN & MAURINE NOBLE 7-09925 #40177474-807-CR4 UTILITY REFUf #40177474-807-CR4 Utility refund - 411.000.233.000 126.5< Total : 126.5: 222538 10/27/2016 075566 EHRBAR, PAMELA BID-102516 BID ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 1C BID administrative services for 140.000.61.558.70.41.00 292.5( Page: 10 Packet Pg. 34 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 11 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222538 10/27/2016 075566 075566 EHRBAR, PAMELA (Continued) Total: 292.5( 222539 10/27/2016 047407 EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT 312 000 093 ES REF # 94513310 7 Q3-16 Unemployment Claims 001.000.39.517.78.23.00 314.9( Total: 314.9( 222540 10/27/2016 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD EDH726175 E6FD.RFQ ADVERTISEMENT E6FD,RFQ Advertisement 422.200.72.594.31.41.00 178.8f EDH726179 LEGAL ADS-APL20160001 LEGAL ADS-BORIS AND ELENA 001.000.62.558.60.41.40 79.1, EDH726336 LEGAL ADS-PLN201600032 LEGAL ADS -VACATION PORTION 9: 001.000.62.558.60.41.40 60.2( Total: 318.2( 222541 10/27/2016 075381 EVERETT POLYGRAPH SERVICES LLC 2016-1019E INV 2016-1019E EDMONDS PD - PR PRE -EMPLOY POLYGRAPH - SAUN 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 200.0( Total: 200.0( 222542 10/27/2016 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU41626 FLEET SHOP SUPPLIES Fleet Shop Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 1.7( 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 0.1 " WAMOU41719 PM: SUPPLIES PM: MISC. SUPPLIES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 52.1 < 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 5.1' WAMOU41720 PM: SUPPLIES PM: MISC SUPPLIES - THREAD REF 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 7.9( Page: 11 Packet Pg. 35 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 12 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222542 10/27/2016 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY (Continued) 9.8% Sales Tax _ 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 0.7 0 vi WAMOU41771 PM: SUPPLIES PM: MISC. SUPPLIES t 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 14.6 9.8% Sales Tax •@ 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 1.4z u Total: 83.8$ o 222543 10/27/2016 011900 FRONTIER 253-007-4989 SEAVIEW RESERVOIR TELEMETR) > 0 SEAVIEW RESERVOIR TELEMETR) a 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 30.9E Q 253-012-9166 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 to 161.7 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 300.4� 253-014-8062 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE N TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE c 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 r 19.7( u) TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 36.7( E 253-017-4360 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 86.8E TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE E 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 46.7 1 U 425-712-8347 CIVIC CENTER ELEVATOR PHONE r CIVIC CENTER ELEVATOR PHONE Q 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 68.2( 425-775-2455 CIVIC CENTER ALARM LINES 250 5 CIVIC CENTER FIRE AND INTRUSIC 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 63.0E 425-776-3896 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER AL, FRANCESANDERSON CENTER FIF Page: 12 Packet Pg. 36 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 13 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222543 10/27/2016 011900 FRONTIER (Continued) 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 131.3E Total: 945.9' 222544 10/27/2016 074416 GRANT, TAMMY 101716 REFUND COURT TRAINING GRANT REFUND COURT TRAINING gRANT 001.000.23.512.50.43.00 23.2: Total: 23.2! 222545 10/27/2016 012560 HACH COMPANY 10152531 WWTP: NITRIC ACID/SOD.HYDROX : NITRIC ACID/SOD.HYDROXID/PUF 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 1,332.6z Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 76.21, 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 138.0� 222546 10/27/2016 074804 HARLES, JANINE 222547 10/27/2016 013007 HASNER, EZRA J Total: 197345 PHOTOGRAPHY FOR OCTOBER 20 Photography for October 2016 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 Total 61 LEOFF 1 MEDICAL REIMBURSEMEI TENDER HEART HOME CARE 009.000.39.517.20.29.00 62 LEOFF 1 MEDICAL REIMBURSEMEI TENDER HEAR LONG TERM CARE 009.000.39.517.20.29.00 67 LEOFF 1 MEDICAL REIMBURSEMEI PRESCRIPTION CO PAY REIMBURE 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 68 LEOFF1 MEDICAL REIMBURSEMEN TENDER HEART HOME CARE 009.000.39.517.20.29.00 Total Page: 13 Packet Pg. 37 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 14 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222548 10/27/2016 013140 HENDERSON, BRIAN 63 LEOFF 1 MEDICAL REIMBURSEMEI AREDS 2 MEDICATION 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 256.4E 64 LEOFF 1 MEDICAL REIMBURSEMEI VISIO BOOKS 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 1,542.5( 65 LEOFF 1 MEDICAL REIMBURSEMEI OCUTECH SIGHTSCOPE 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 1,069.2( Total: 2,868.1 E 222549 10/27/2016 072647 HERRERA ENVIRONMENTAL 39236 CONSULTING -TREE BOARD-PROJE CONSULTING -TREE BOARD-PROJE 001.000.62.524.10.41.00 669.3z Total: 669.31 222550 10/27/2016 074966 HIATT, ELLEN COE 2016 1026 TOURISM ADVERTISING & MARKEI Tourism advertising & marketing 120.000.31.575.42.41.00 1,500.0( Total: 1,500.0( 222551 10/27/2016 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 1080890 PM: YOST POOL SUPPLIES PM: YOST POOL SUPPLIES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 29.5( 1200402 PM: PEAT MOSS PM: 6X PEAT MOSS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 78.6z 1200409 PM: PAVER SAND PM: 4x PAVER SAND 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 17.4E 1200453 PM: SPHAGNUM PEAT MOSS PM: 5X SPHAGNUM PEAT MOSS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 65.5z 1253138 PM: DEADBOLT RETURN PM: DEADBOLD RETURN (ORIG IN) 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 -33.9' Page: 14 Packet Pg. 38 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher List City of Edmonds Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account 222551 10/27/2016 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued) 2020061 PM: YOST PARK SPRAY PAD PM: YOST PARK SPRAY PAD 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 2200368 PM: SPHAGNUM PEAT MOSS PM: 4X SPHAGNUM PEAT MOSS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 3088048 PM: SUPPLIES PM: SUPPLIES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 4010743 PM: TRASH CANS PM: 3X 32GAL TRASH CANS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 5024773 PM: SUPPLIES PM: SUPPLIES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 5087857 PM: SPHAGNUM PEAT MOSS PM: 4X SPHAGNUM PEAT MOSS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 5202153 PM: SUPPLIES PM: SUPPLIES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 8070144 PM: GUTTER FILTER PM: 2X GUTTER FILTER 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9020452 PM: SWING PIPE PM: SWING PIPE 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9090352 PM: SUPPLIES PM: SUPPLIES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 Total 222552 10/27/2016 060165 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC 27015 E3FH.SERVICES THRU 9/26/16 E3FH.Services thru 9/26/16 422.200.72.594.31.41.00 4.2.a Page: 15 Page: 15 Packet Pg. 39 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 16 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222552 10/27/2016 060165 060165 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC (Continued) Total: 3,545.5( 222553 10/27/2016 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2866743 AVERY MARKS -A -LOT DRY ERASE vi Avery Marks -a -lot Dry Erase Marker 2 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 25.6E 9.8% Sales Tax U 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 2.5, . 2867393 ECONOMAT CHAIR MAT 60X46 Deflect-o Economat Chair Mat - 60" x c 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 109.0: @ 9.8% Sales Tax o 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 10.6E a 2868101 OFFICE SUPPLIES -CALENDARS Q- Q OFFICE SUPPLIES -CALENDARS 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 04 121.7, Total: to 269.6, 222554 10/27/2016 071634 INTEGRATELECOM 14203658 C/A768328 PR1-1 & 2 City Phone Service 001.000.31.518.88.42.00 N 912.1E c Tourism Toll free lines 877.775.6929; N 001.000.61.558.70.42.00 8.5( Econ Devlpmnt Toll free lines E 001.000.61.558.70.42.00 8.5( 'ca Total: 929.2E 222555 10/27/2016 069040 INTERSTATE AUTO PARTS 906-617165 FLEET SHOP SABER THIN LIGHT c Fleet Shop Saber Thin Light t 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 180.0( 9.8% Sales Tax r Q 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 17.6z 906-617194 FLEET SHOP SUPPLIES Fleet Shop Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 157.5z Fleet Brake Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.34.40 325.8( Page: 16 Packet Pg. 40 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 17 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222555 10/27/2016 069040 INTERSTATE AUTO PARTS (Continued) 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 15.4z 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.34.40 31.9: 906-617214 FLEET SHOP SUPPLIES Fleet Shop Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 155.5E 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 15.2z Total: 899.1. 222556 10/27/2016 014940 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS f300-10014642 FLEET - WIRE STRIPPER Fleet - Wire Stripper 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 21.9E 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 2.1 E Total: 24.1( 222557 10/27/2016 015270 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 703573 WWTP: HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTIOf HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTION & WA 1 423.000.76.535.80.31.53 3,900.1( Total: 3,900.1( 222558 10/27/2016 075356 JENNIFER ZIEGLER PUBLIC 16 STATE LOBBYIST FOR OCTOBER 2 State lobbyist for October 2016 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 3,358.0( Total: 3,358.0( 222559 10/27/2016 073494 KERNS, LAUREN 101716 TRAVEL REFUND FOR COURT TRA TRAVEL REFUND FOR COURT TRA 001.000.23.512.50.43.00 125.7z Total: 125.71 222560 10/27/2016 074240 KNIGHT, KAREN 5017 FUN FACTORY 5017 FUN FACTORY INSTRUCTION 5017 FUN FACTORY INSTRUCTION Page: 17 Packet Pg. 41 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 18 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222560 10/27/2016 074240 KNIGHT, KAREN (Continued) 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 589.9: 5020 FUN FACTORY 5020 FUN FACTORY INSTRUCTION 5020 FUN FACTORY INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 584.7E Total: 1,174X 222561 10/27/2016 017050 KWICK'N KLEEN CAR WASH 10042016-03 CITY CAR WASHES City Car Washes 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 10.0E Total: 10.0E 222562 10/27/2016 075159 LIFE INSURANCE CO OF NO AMER November 2016 CIGNA INSURANCE PREMIUMS NO November 2016 Insurance Premiums 811.000.231.550 11,543.4,1 Total: 11, 543.4! 222563 10/27/2016 019920 MCCANN, MARIAN 60 LEOFF1 MEDICAL REIMBURSEMEI\ VISITING ANGELS HOME CARE 009.000.39.517.20.29.00 8,855.7E Total: 8,855.7! 222564 10/27/2016 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 83679933 WWTP: BALL BEARINGS/RULERS BALL BEARINGS/RULERS 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 149.2' Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 6.9� 84604364 WWTP: CREDIT 2ND RULER ON IN' CREDIT AGAINST INV 83679933 FO 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 -6.8z 84772640 WWTP: CREDIT 1ST RULER ON IN\ Credit for 1 st steel ruler 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 -6.8z 84780706 WWTP: STEEL RULER Steel Ruler 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 6.8z Page: 18 Packet Pg. 42 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # 222564 10/27/2016 020039 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO (Continued) 222565 10/27/2016 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENTALL INC 247394 222566 10/27/2016 068662 MINNIHAN, TERRY 222567 10/27/2016 072746 MURRAY SMITH & ASSOCIATES 222568 10/27/2016 075828 NAFZIGER MICROSCOPES 247405 14-1605-16 14-1605-17 15-1715-14 1999 4.2.a Page: 19 Description/Account Amoun Total : 149.3E PM: EQUIPMENT RENTAL vi PM:SLEEVE Y 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 8.5( 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 0.8< .E PM: EQUIPMENT RENTAL SERVICE KIT c 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 27.5( @ 9.8% Sales Tax o 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 2.7( a Total : 39.6; Q LEOFF 1 MEDICAL REIMBURSEMEI C14 PRESCRIPTION REIMBURSEMENT 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 1,009.5< .. Total : 1,009.5: WATER SUPPLY OPERATION EVALI N Water Supply Operation Evaluation 0 r 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 4,285.8( WATER SUPPLY OPERATION EVALI E Water Supply Operation Evaluation 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 556.2( ESKA.SERVICES THRU 9/30/16 ESKA.Services thru 9/30/16 421.200.74.594.34.41.00 15,234.4 E Total : 20,076.5: r r Q DISCOVERY PROGRAM MICROSC( SERVICE & MAINTENANCE 001.000.64.571.23.41.00 110.0( POWER CORD REPLACEMENT 001.000.64.571.23.41.00 15.0( 9.8% Sales Tax Page: 19 Packet Pg. 43 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 222568 10/27/2016 075828 NAFZIGER MICROSCOPES (Continued) 222569 10/27/2016 024960 NORTH COAST ELECTRIC COMPANY S7449253.001 S7449253.003 S7449253.004 S7449253.005 S7449253.006 S7449253.007 PO # Description/Account 001.000.64.571.23.41.00 Total: WWTP: FRT CHG ERROR -CREDIT I Freight should not have been charge( 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 WWTP: REACTOR REACTOR 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 WWTP: ETHERNET SWITCH ETHERNET SWITCH 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 WWTP: CREDITAGAINST INV S744 CREDIT AGAINST INV S7449253.00 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 WWTP: PUSH-PULL DEVICE/HEADi FPUSH-PULL 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 WWTP: CREDIT FOR INV. S744925: Frt should not have been charged. 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 4.2.a Page: 20 Page: 20 Packet Pg. 44 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 222569 10/27/2016 024960 NORTH COAST ELECTRIC COMPANY (Continued) 222570 10/27/2016 025690 NOYES, KARIN 222571 10/27/2016 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 222572 10/27/2016 072739 O'REILLYAUTO PARTS S7449253.008 S74499253.002 258201 3685-234388 PO # Description/Account Freight 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 WWTP: PUSH BU/PILOT LIGHT PUSH BU/PILOT LIGHT 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 WWTP: FRT CHG ERROR; CREDIT Frt was charged; CREDIT INV 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 Total PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 10/12) PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 10/12) 001.000.62.558.60.41.00 Total P&R LEGAL PADS & FACIAL TISSUE P&R: LEGAL PADS 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 P&R: FACIAL TISSUE 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 Total UNIT 40 - SUPPLIES Unit 40 - Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 4.2.a Page: 21 Page: 21 Packet Pg. 45 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 22 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222572 10/27/2016 072739 O'REILLYAUTO PARTS (Continued) 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 0.7E 3685-235432 UNIT 51 -AIR FILTER Unit 51 -Air Filter 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 12.7E 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 1.2E 3685-235437 UNIT 51 -SUPPLIES Unit 51 - Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 92.2E 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.0z Total: 123.7 , 222573 10/27/2016 002203 OWEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY 00081596 UNIT 66 - PARTS Unit 66 - Parts 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 360.2E Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 21.1( 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 37.3 1 00081614 UNIT 66 - IDLER BOLT Unit 66 - Idler Bolt 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 49.9E Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 20.2� 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.8� Total: 495.8E 222574 10/27/2016 027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS 230546 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 96.0( 230559 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees Page: 22 Packet Pg. 46 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 23 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222574 10/27/2016 027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS (Continued) 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 120.0( 231362 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 96.0( 231390 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 96.0( Top Soil 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 132.0( 7.7% sales tax 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 10.1( 231414 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 96.0( 231424 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 96.0( Total 222575 10/27/2016 070962 PAULSONS TOWING INC 111697 INV#111697 - EDMONDS PD TOW LEXUS #AON5337 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 Total 222576 10/27/2016 073070 PERRINE, JULIE 5034 CLAY EXPLOR 5034 CLAY EXPLORATION INSTRU( 5034 CLAY EXPLORATION INSTRU( 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 Total 222577 10/27/2016 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC K402279 SEWER - CONTAINER ELECT SUPF Sewer - Container Elect Supplies 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 9.8% Sales Tax Page: 23 Packet Pg. 47 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 24 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222577 10/27/2016 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC (Continued) 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 4.3� _ K413559 FS 20 - AREA LED LIGHT SUPPLIEr vi FS 20 - Area LED Light Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 750.0( t 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 73.5( K434352 FS 20 - LED SUPPLIES FS 20 - LED Supplies p 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 234.0( City Hall - LED Supplies L 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 236.0( 0- 9.8% Sales Tax Q' Q 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 46.0( N K434549 FAC - LED EXIT SIGNS WITH EMER FAC - LED Exit Signs with Emergency to 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1,782.0( 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 174.6z N K440434 SEWER - CONTAINER ELECT SUPF r Sewer - Container Elect Supplies Y 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 40.7z 9.8% Sales Tax E 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 3.9� K443595 SEWER - CONTAINER ELECT SUPF ; Sewer - Container Elect Supplies 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 31.5: E 9.8% Sales Tax U 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 3.0� r K447542 LIBRARY - SUPPLIES Q Library - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 64.0( 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 6.2 , K447593 SEWER - CONTAINER ELECT SUPF Page: 24 Packet Pg. 48 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 222577 10/27/2016 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 25 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) Sewer - Container Elect Supplies 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 196.0E w 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 a� 19.2' K450315 SEWER - REFUND E Sewer - Refund 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 -19.6- 6 9.8% Sales Tax o 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 -1.9: K450408 SEWER - CONTAINER ELECT SUPF o Sewer - Container Elect Supplies L a 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 38.3( Q 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 N 3.7E to K459263 CITY HALL - SUPPLIES City Hall - Supplies m 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 32.8, 9.8% Sales Tax N 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 3.2, K481321 LIBRARY - SUPPLIES N Library - Supplies V 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.7E . 9.8% Sales Tax c° 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1.0E ; K530195 WWTP: FM7 BODIES/WATER TIG/LI m FM7 BODIES/WATER TIG/LFMC/CO E 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 t 893.5E u 9.8% Sales Tax r Q 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 87.5 1 K530239 WWTP: GBX: C CELL & FLASHBLSP GBX: C CELL & FLASHBLSM 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 117.0( 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 11.4 Page: 25 Packet Pg. 49 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 26 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222577 10/27/2016 028860 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC (Continued) Total: 4,888.21 222578 10/27/2016 075432 POINT BLANK ENTERPRISES IF-1260828 INV#IF-1260828 - ROTH - EDMOND,' AXIIIA BALLISTIC VEST 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 896.0( Freight 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 8.0< Total: 904.W 222579 10/27/2016 071594 PROFORCE LAW ENFORCEMENT 289301 INV#289301 CUST#007522 - EDMOI TSR SIMULATION SUIT 001.000.41.521.40.35.00 573.3( 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.40.35.00 56.1 £ Total: 629.4i 222580 10/27/2016 064088 PROTECTION ONE 291104 ALARM MONITORING - PARKS MAII ALARM MONITORING FOR PARKS I 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 21.3z ALARM MONITORING FOR PARKS I 001.000.64.576.80.42.00 21.3z ALARM MONITORING FOR FIRE ST, 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 146.0' Total: 188.6$ 222581 10/27/2016 070809 PUGET SOUND EXECUTIVE 15-3404 COURT SECURITY COURT SECURITY 001.000.23.512.50.41.00 440.0( Total: 440.0( 222582 10/27/2016 030695 PUMPTECH INC 0110559-IN WWTP: BODY CHECK VALVE BODY CHECK VALVE 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 1,192.0( 9.8% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 116.8, Total: 1,308.8, Page: 26 Packet Pg. 50 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account 222583 10/27/2016 070955 R&R STAR TOWING 117124 INV#117124 - EDMONDS PD TOW 2003 BMW #492-DLF 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 Tota I : 222584 10/27/2016 064769 ROMAINE ELECTRIC 5-011051 UNIT 132 - BATTERY Unit 132 - Battery 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 Total: 222585 10/27/2016 073993 SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES W0083879 SATELLITE HOOKUP FOR (CM) AC( Satellite Hookup for (CM) Accuracy G 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 Satellite Hookup for (CM) Accuracy G 422.000.72.531.40.49.00 Satellite Hookup for (CM) Accuracy G 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 Total: 222586 10/27/2016 068489 SIRENNET.COM 0206675-IN UNIT E124PO - CAR PARTS Unit E124PO - Car Parts 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 9.8% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 Total: 222587 10/27/2016 060889 SNAP -ON INDUSTRIAL ARV/30399195 FLEET SHOP SMALL TOOLS Fleet Shop Small Tools 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 9.8% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 4.2.a Page: 27 Page: 27 Packet Pg. 51 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 222587 10/27/2016 060889 060889 SNAP -ON INDUSTRIAL 222588 10/27/2016 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 28 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) Total : 214.3' 2002-0254-7 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 21930 95- vi PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 21930 95- Y 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 16.8E 2003-4823-3 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 84TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 84TH AVE W E 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 44.2 u 2003-9895-6 FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST : o FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST ; 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 905.2£ o 2004-6859-3 LIFT STATION #4 8311 TALBOT RD / a LIFT STATION #4 8311 TALBOT RD / Q- Q 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 261.6z 2004-9314-6 MAPLEWOOD PARK IRRIGATION M N MAPLEWOOD PARK IRRIGATION M to 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 18.5z 2006-1131-7 LIFT STATION #9 19300 80TH AVE V LIFT STATION #9 19300 80TH AVE V N 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 124.3E o 2006-3860-9 OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON N OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON Y 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 183.4E E 2007-1403-8 SEAVIEW PARK c� SEAVIEW PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 39.9E c 2007-3984-5 SEAVIEW RESERVOIR 18520 90TH E E SEAVIEW RESERVOIR 18520 90TH 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 17.0E r 2008-6520-2 LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTRE Q LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTRE 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 69.8' 2011-9708-4 SEAVIEW PARK SEAVIEW PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 92.0E 2012-3682-5 FISHING PIER Page: 28 Packet Pg. 52 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 29 Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222588 10/27/2016 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) FISHING PIER 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 89.0, w 2013-2711-1 PINE ST PARK PINE ST PARK t 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 12.3E 2015-5174-4 SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / � SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / � 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 1,645.3< o 2015-7289-8 TRAFFIC LIGHT 117 3RD AVE S / ME TRAFFIC LIGHT 117 3RD AVE S / ME p L 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 43.5E a 2016-1195-1 TRAFFIC LIGHT 20801 76TH AVE W Q' Q TRAFFIC LIGHT 20801 76TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 N 25.5' to 2016-5690-7 DECORATIVE LIGHTING 413 MAIN,' DECORATIVE LIGHTING 413 MAIN 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 127.5E 2017-5147-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9932 220TH ST SW N TRAFFIC LIGHT 9932 220TH ST SW r 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 45.8' Y 2017-8264-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 901 WALNUT ST / � TRAFFIC LIGHT 901 WALNUT ST / � E 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 17.9E 2019-0786-2 TRAFFIC LIGHT 7133 212TH ST SW TRAFFIC LIGHT 7133 212TH ST SW r- m 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 30.7' E 2019-4248-9 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH : U PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; r 001.000.65.518.20.47.00 82.4: Q PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 111.000.68.542.90.47.00 313.3, PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 313.3, PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 313.3, Page: 29 Packet Pg. 53 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 222588 10/27/2016 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 222589 10/27/2016 071585 STERICYCLE INC Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 30 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH 511.000.77.548.68.47.00 313.3, w PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 422.000.72.531.90.47.00 a� 313.3' 2022-8912-0 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23801 HWY 99 / ME E TRAFFIC LIGHT 23801 HWY 99 / ME 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 60.6( 6 2022-9166-2 CIVIC CENTER & FIRE STATION #1 , o CIVIC CENTER & FIRE STATION #1 , 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 4,684.2E L 2023-8937-5 STREET LIGHT 7601 RIDGE WAY / I a STREET LIGHT 7601 RIDGE WAY / I Q' Q 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 8.5E N 2024-2158-2 LOG CABIN & DECORATIVE LIGHTI LOG CABIN & DECORATIVE LIGHTI 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 77.0( 2024-3924-6 CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N / METER CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N / METER N 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 1,860.7( 2026-2041-5 MATHAY BALLINGER PARK IRRIGA Y MATHAY BALLINGER PARK IRRIGA 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 17.4. .E 2028-0763-2 TRAFFIC LIGHT 8429 196TH ST SW c° TRAFFIC LIGHT 8429 196TH ST SW 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 19.3E y 2030-9778-7 WWTP: 9/15-10/13/16 200 2ND AVE E WWTP: 9/15-10/13/16 200 2ND AVE U 423.000.76.535.80.47.61 25,805.0: r Total : 37,993.4, Q 3003606801 INV#3003606801 CUST#6076358 - E MEDIUM DISPOSAL BOX + BAGS 001.000.41.521.80.41.00 54.2' Total : 54.2' Page: 30 Packet Pg. 54 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 31 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222590 10/27/2016 075024 STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOC 122222 MUNICIPAL SVCS AGREEMENT 2016 SCA EDMONDS SUMMER COP 125.000.64.576.80.41.00 5,000.0( Total: 5,000.0( 222591 10/27/2016 074797 SUPER CHARGE MARKETING LLC 2741 SOCIAL MEDIA SERVICES FOR OC' Social media services for October 20, 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 300.0( Total: 300.0( 222592 10/27/2016 075491 TAYLOR'S EXCAVATORS INC E3DB.Pmt 8 FINAL E3DB.PMT 8 THRU 8/25/16 FINAL E3DB.Pmt 8 thru 8/25/16 FINAL 112.000.68.595.33.65.00 9,500.0( E3DB.Ret 8 112.000.223.400 -475.0( Total: 9,025.0( 222593 10/27/2016 071666 TETRATECH INC 35009-12B ESDB.SERVICES THRU SEPTEMBE ESDB.Services thru September 2016 001.000.67.518.21.41.00 53,627.2( 35009-4A ESDB.SUBCONTRACTOR INVOICE ESDB.Subcontractor Invoice Previous 001.000.67.518.21.41.00 345.8' Total: 53,973.0 , 222594 10/27/2016 075139 THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP INC 116155 E4FE.SERVICES THRU 9/30/16 E4FE.Services thru 9/30/16 422.200.72.594.31.41.00 28,187.8E Total: 28,187.8E 222595 10/27/2016 072572 TRENCHLESS CONSTRUCTION SERVIC 141327 HYDRANT USE PERMIT DEPOSIT R Hydrant Use Permit Deposit Refund 421.000.245.110 950.0( Total: 950.0( 222596 10/27/2016 062693 US BANK 2674 AMAZON.COM - UNIT EQ96PO - 2 L Amazon.com - Unit EQ96PO - 2 LED Page: 31 Packet Pg. 55 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 222596 10/27/2016 062693 US BANK Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 32 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 245.9( _ WA Dept of Lic - Underground Storag vi 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 365.0( WA Dept of Lic - Online Fees t 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 9.11 Fisheries - Unit E118PR - Parts •@ 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 40.1. u Amazon - Unit EQ96PO - Dash moun o 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 83.7( Amazon - Unit E118PR - Folding Ster L 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 44.7( 0- Melrose Tech - Fleet Shop Supplies - Q 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 63.8( N Fisheries - Unit G01 - Parts 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 82.9' Amazon Prime Fees, Charged in erro m 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 108.7( Lind Elect - Unit 310, E105PO, E107F N 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 142.9( Lind Elect - Unit 310, E105PO, E107F 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 428.6� Prestige Window Tinting - Unit 282 E 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 175.6E Talley - Unit E113PO- Parts 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 80.8E WA DOL - Unit E128PR - Lic Fees E 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 214.1 , um 2674 a DAVID CLARK CO - REFUND Q David Clark CO - Refund 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 -120.7( 2674 b DAVID CLARK CO - REFUND David Clark CO - Refund 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 -45.0( 3535 TIDELANDS - STORM Page: 32 Packet Pg. 56 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 222596 10/27/2016 062693 US BANK Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) 3535 3535 7000 8083 222597 10/27/2016 044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR 6090133 4.2.a Page: 33 PO # Description/Account Amoun Tidelands - Storm 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 37.9( Y Green River - Water - Water Dist Mgi 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 300.0( Monoprice - Charge Cords - PW Supl U E 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 46.5( Amazon - Sewer - Otterbox 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 57.0� o Monoprice - Car Chargers - PW Supp 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 62.7 1 o Half Price Banners - Banner - Recyclf a Q. 421.000.74.537.90.35.00 126.0( Q HOME DEPOT - RECYCLE SUPPLIE N Home Depot - Recycle Supplies 421.000.74.537.90.49.00 21.5E PayPal NWWA-AWWA- Strategic m 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 285.0( NW RESTAURANT - REFUND OF CI• N NW Restaurant - Refund of Charge d r 001.000.65.518.20.48.00 -522.2 1 Y TRAVEL EXPENSES-SHANE HOPE TRAVEL EXPENSES-SHANE HOPE E 001.000.62.524.10.43.00 43.0( OFFICE SUPPLIES ; OFFICE SUPPLIES m 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 923.2, E MEMBERSHIP RENEWALS U 001.000.62.524.10.41.00 189.8� Q TRAINING 001.000.62.524.10.41.00 940.0( Total : 4,431.4, UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 123.5E Page: 33 Packet Pg. 57 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 222597 10/27/2016 044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR (Continued) 222598 10/27/2016 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 222599 10/27/2016 069816 VWR INTERNATIONAL INC PO # Description/Account UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 Total 9773597763 C/A 671247844-00001 Cell Service-Eng 001.000.67.518.21.42.00 Cell Service Fac-Maint 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 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 Sewer 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 Cell Service-WWTP 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 Total 8046471317 WWTP: DESICCATOR SECADOR DESICCATOR SECADOR 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 9.8% Sales Tax 4.2.a Page: 34 Amoun 123.5E vi a� 127.3, M 374.41 E 0 92.4 , 0 111.8E a Q. Q 59.7z N 286.7, m 133.4z N 19.3, N Y 18.4( E 18.4( 56.3E y E 74.1z u r r 36.9, Q 907.9( 430.2E Page: 34 Packet Pg. 58 vchlist 10/27/2016 11:57:31 AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.2.a Page: 35 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 222599 10/27/2016 069816 VWR INTERNATIONAL INC (Continued) 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 42.1 _ Total: 472.4E vi 222600 10/27/2016 067195 WASHINGTON TREE EXPERTS 116-627 REMOVE 3 MAPLE TREES TO STUE w t REMOVE 3 MAPLE TREES TO STUE 001.000.64.576.80.48.00 1,400.0( .� 9.8% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.48.00 137.2( c Total: 1,537.2( 222601 10/27/2016 070432 ZACHOR & THOMAS PS INC 1070 OCT-16 RETAINER a Monthly Retainer Q- Q 001.000.36.515.33.41.00 17,430.0( Motions hearing EDM vs E Nuno 5z1: N 001.000.36.515.33.41.00 300.0( Total: 17,730.0( m 95 Vouchers for bank code : usbank Bank total : 363,700.1 , N 95 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 363,700.1 , N Y V E V a+ C d E L V R r r Q Page: 35 Packet Pg. 59 4.2.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Project Title Number Number STM 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements c484 E5FE STR 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) c424 E3DC STM 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs c491 E61FE SWR 2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA STR 2014 Chip Seals c451 E4CB STM 2014 Drainage Improvements c433 E41FA STM 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD STR 2014 Overlay Program c438 E4CA WTR 2014 Waterline Overlays c452 E4CC STM 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects c466 E51FA STR 2015 Overlay Program c463 E5CA SWR 2015 Sewerline Overlays i007 E5CC SWR 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project c441 E4GA STR 2015 Traffic Calming c471 E5AB WTR 2015 Waterline Overlays c475 E5CB WTR 2015 Waterline Replacement Program c440 E4J13 STR 2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades i016 E6DC STR 2016 Overlay Program i008 E6CA SWR 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 E5GA SWR 2016 Sewerline Overlays i010 E6CC WTR 2016 Water Comp Plan Update c460 E4JC WTR 2016 Waterline Overlays i009 E6CB WTR 2016 Waterline Replacement Projects c468 E5JA SWR 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project i013 E6GA WTR 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects i014 E6J13 SWR 2018/19 Sewerline Replacement Project c492 E6GC WTR 2018/19 Waterline Replacement Project c493 E6JC STR 220th Street Overlay Project c462 E4CD STM 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements c486 E6FB WTR 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) c418 E3J13 STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STR 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) c425 E3DD STR 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) c423 E3DB STR 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) c485 E6DA STM 3rd Ave Rain Gardens i012 E6FC STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB FAC A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers c476 E51-A STR ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S c426 E3DE STR ADA Transition Plan s016 E6DB STR Bikelink Project c474 E5DA PRK City Spray Park c417 E41VIA SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II c488 E6GB STR Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion i015 E6AB Revised 10/26/2016 Packet Pg. 60 4.2.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) c482 E5J13 STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1 FM PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA 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 General Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis c478 E5DB FAC ESCO III Project c419 E3LB PRK FAC Band Shell Replacement c477 E6MB WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating c473 E5KA STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) c342 E1AA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA STR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) c405 E2AD SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study s011 E5G13 STM LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin c434 E4FB SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA STM Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive i011 E61FA STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 E3FE STM NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) m013 E7FG STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1 FN STM Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study c408 E3FC FAC Public Safety Controls System Upgrades c444 E4LA STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 E5FD WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA 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 UTILITIES Standard Details Updates solo E5NA STM Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th c429 E3FG STM Stormwater Comp Plan Update s017 E6FD STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1DA STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c430 E3FH 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 PRK Veteran's Plaza c480 E6MA STM Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines c459 E4FF STM Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 E5HA Revised 10/26/2016 Packet Pg. 61 4.2.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Protect Protect Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title 1AA Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) STR ElCA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements - E1DA W Sunset Walkway Improveme STM E1 FM c374 Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives moor— errinville Creek Culvert Replacemen STR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update 9th Avenue Improvement Projectis STR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) North Talbot Road Drainage Improvement STM E2FB c379 SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Studl c380 SWR E2GB c390 2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c427 Corridor Transportation Stud STR E3DB c423 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) STR R" c424 IF 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Av STR E3DD c425 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) STR E3DE c426 ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S STM E3FC c408 Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Driv STM E3FG c429 Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th ElrS W Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements SWR E3GA c398 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project WTR location (2013 FAC E3LB c419 ESCO III Project STR E4CA c43 2014 Overlay Program i STR E4CB c451 2014 Chip Seals WTR E4CC 2014 Waterline Overlays STR E4CD c462 220th Street Overlay Project STR Train Trench - Concept STR E4DB c454 SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing STM 014 Drainage Improvements W STM E4FB c434 LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin STM c435 ek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration STM E4FD c436 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects STM c455 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station STM E4FF c459 Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines SWR E4GA c441 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project SWR E4GB c456 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I SWR E4GC c461 Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study WWTP E4HA c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c440 2015 Waterline Replacement Program WTR E4JC c460 2016 Water Comp Plan Update F Public Safety Controls System Upgrades PRK E4MA c417 City Spray Park F dmonds Fishing Pier Rehab STR E5AA c470 Trackside Warning System Revised 10/26/2016 Packet Pg. 62 4.2.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Protect Protect Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title E5AB 2015 Traffic Calming STIR E5CA c463 2015 Overlay Program E5CB Epw 2015 Waterline Overlays SWR E5CC i007 2015 Sewerline Overlays c474 Bikelink Project General E5DB c478 Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis 015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects STM E5FB c467 Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects rSTM E5FC 1W Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) STM E5FD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility STM E5FE c48 2th Ave & Sierra StormwatdWstem Improvements SWR E5GA c469 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects SWR E5GB 0 ke Ballinger Trunk Sewer Stu WWTP E5HA c481 WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications WTR E5JA c468 2016 Waterline Replacement Projects WTR E5J13 c482 Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) WTR c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating FAC E5LA c476 A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers UTILITIES E5NA tandard Details Updates STIR E6AA s014 SR99 Safety Improvements (224th to 216th) STIR llff'i015 Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion STIR E6CA i008 2016 Overlay Program WTR i009 7r 2016 Waterline Overlays SWR E6CC i010 2016 Sewerline Overlays STIR E6DA c485 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) STIR E6DB s016 ADA Transition Plan STIR E6DC i016 2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades STM E6FA i011 Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive WTA c486 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements STM E6FC i012 3rd Ave Rain Gardens KTM s017 Stormwater Comp Plan Update STM E6FE c491 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs WR i013 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project SWR E6GB c488 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II SWR c492 2018/19 Sewerline Replacement Project UTILITIES E6JA s013 Utility Rate Update WTR E6,113 i014 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects WTR E6JC c493 2018/19 Waterline Replacement Project PRK E6MA c480 Veteran's Plaza PRK E6MB c477 FAC Band Shell Replacement 0 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements STM E7FG m013 NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) ayton Street Plaza PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor Revised 10/26/2016 Packet Pg. 63 4.2.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Protect Project Accounting Funding Number Number Protect 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) STIR E1 DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements STIR ElCA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements STM E1 FM c374 Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives STM E1 FIN c376 Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement .-. STM E2FA c378 North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements V STM E2FB c379 SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System STM E2FC c380 Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study v E SWR E2GB c390 2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation M STIR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update v STIRE2AB c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project O M SWR E3GA c398 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project > O STIR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) L Q STM E3FC c408 Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study Q STM EYE c410 Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive cm PRK E4MA c417 City Spray Park WTR E3JB c418 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) to FAC E3LB c419 ESCO III Project STIR E3DB c423 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) N 0 STIR E3DC c424 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) N L STIR E3DD c425 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) STIR E3DE c426 ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S E 7 STIR E3AB c427 SR104 Corridor Transportation Study ? •O STM E3FG c429 Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th d STM E3FH c430 SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements d to STM E4FA c433 2014 Drainage Improvements T STM E4FB c434 LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin STM E4FC c435 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration STM E4FD c436 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects i STIR E4CA c438 2014 Overlay Program LL r-� WTR E4J13 c440 2015 Waterline Replacement Program O SWR E4GA c441 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project t FAC E4MB c443 Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab M FAC E4LA c444 Public Safety Controls System Upgrades .r r� Q WWTP E4HA c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring STIR E4CB c451 2014 Chip Seals WTR E4CC c452 2014 Waterline Overlays STIR E4DA c453 Train Trench - Concept STIR E4DB c454 SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing STM E4FE c455 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station SWR E4GB c456 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I STM E4FF c459 Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines WTR E4JC c460 2016 Water Comp Plan Update SWR E4GC c461 Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study Revised 10/26/2016 Packet Pg. 64 4.2.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Protect Project Accounting Funding Number Number Project Title STR E4CD c462 220th Street Overlay Project STR E5CA c463 2015 Overlay Program STM E5FA c466 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects STM E5FB c467 Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects WTR E5JA c468 2016 Waterline Replacement Projects SWR E5GA c469 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects STIR E5AA c470 Trackside Warning System STR E5AB c471 2015 Traffic Calming V STM E5FC c472 Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) WTR E5KA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating v E STR E5DA c474 Bikelink Project cc WTR E5CB c475 2015 Waterline Overlays v FAC E5LA c476 A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers O M PRK E6MB c477 FAC Band Shell Replacement > O General E5DB c478 Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis L Q STM E5FD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility Q PRK E6MA c480 Veteran's Plaza N WWTP E5HA c481 WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications WTR E5J13 c482 Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) to STM E5FE c484 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements STR E6DA c485 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) CV 0 STM E6FB c486 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements N L SWR E6GB c488 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II STM E6FE c491 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs E 7 SWR E6GC c492 2018/19 Sewerline Replacement Project ? •O WTR E6JC c493 2018/19 Waterline Replacement Project d STR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements d to SWR E5CC i007 2015 Sewerline Overlays T STR E6CA i008 2016 Overlay Program WTR E6CB i009 2016 Waterline Overlays 7 tT SWR E6CC i010 2016 Sewerline Overlays i STM E6FA i011 Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive LL r-� STM E6FC i012 3rd Ave Rain Gardens O SWR E6GA i013 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project t WTR E6JB i014 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects M STR E6AB i015 Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion .r r� Q STR E6DC i016 2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades STM E7FG m013 NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) UTILITIES E5NA solo Standard Details Updates SWR E5GB s011 Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study UTILITIES E6JA s013 Utility Rate Update STR E6AA s014 SR99 Safety Improvements (224th to 216th) STR E6DB s016 ADA Transition Plan STM E6FD s017 Stormwater Comp Plan Update Revised 10/26/2016 Packet Pg. 65 4.2.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number FAC A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers c476 E5LA FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB FAC ESCO III Project c419 E3LB FAC Public Safety Controls System Upgrades c444 E41-A General Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis c478 E5DB PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA PRK City Spray Park c417 E4MA PRK FAC Band Shell Replacement c477 E6MB PRK Veteran's Plaza c480 E6MA STM 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements c484 E5FE STM 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs c491 E6FE STM 2014 Drainage Improvements c433 E4FA STM 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD STM 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects c466 E5FA STM 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements c486 E6FB STM 3rd Ave Rain Gardens 012 E6FC STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1 FM STM Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) c472 E5FC STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E4FE STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC STM LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin c434 E4FB STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA STM Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive 011 E6FA STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 E3FE 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 Stormwater Comp Plan Update s017 E6FD STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c430 E3FH STM Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects c467 E5FB STM Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines c459 E4FF STM Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC STIR 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) c424 E3DC STIR 2014 Chip Seals c451 E4CB STIR 2014 Overlay Program c438 E4CA STIR 2015 Overlay Program c463 E5CA STIR 2015 Traffic Calming c471 E5AB STIR 2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades 016 E6DC STIR 2016 Overlay Program i008 E6CA STIR 220th Street Overlay Project c462 E4CD STIR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STIR 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) c425 E3DD Revised 10/26/2016 Packet Pg. 66 4.2.b PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number STIR 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 STIR ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S c426 E3DE STR ADA Transition Plan s016 E6DB STR Bikelink Project c474 E5DA STR Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion i015 E6AB 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 E1 DA STR Trackside Warning System c470 E5AA STR Train Trench - Concept c453 E4DA STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA SWR 2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA SWR 2015 Sewerline Overlays i007 E5CC SWR 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project c441 E4GA SWR 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 E5GA SWR 2016 Sewerline Overlays i010 E6CC SWR 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project i013 E6GA SWR 2018/19 Sewerline Replacement Project c492 E6GC SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II c488 E6GB SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study s011 E5GB SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC UTILITIES Standard Details Updates solo E5NA UTILITIES Utility Rate Update s013 E6JA WTR 2014 Waterline Overlays c452 E4CC WTR 2015 Waterline Overlays c475 E5CB WTR 2015 Waterline Replacement Program c440 E4JB WTR 2016 Water Comp Plan Update c460 E4JC WTR 2016 Waterline Overlays i009 E6CB WTR 2016 Waterline Replacement Projects c468 E5JA WTR 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects 014 E6JB WTR 2018/19 Waterline Replacement Project c493 E6JC WTR 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) c418 E3J13 WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) c482 E5JB WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating c473 E5KA WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 E5HA Revised 10/26/2016 Packet Pg. 67 4.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/1/2016 Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Carole E. Nowak ($3,963.04), from Magic Toyota ($3,404.43), from Terry Olmsred (amount undetermined), and from Scott and Melissa Hanson ($682.13). Staff Lead: {Type Name of Staff Lead) Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Linda Hynd Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Acknowledge receipt of the Claims for Damages by minute entry. Narrative Carole E. Nowak 9514 231st Place SW Edmonds, WA 98020 ($3,963.04) Magic Toyota 21300 Highway 99 Edmonds, WA 98020 ($3,404.43 ) Terry Olmsred 22510 Woodway Place Woodway, WA 98020 (amount undetermined) Scott and Melissa Hanson 914 Puget Way Edmonds, WA 98020 ($682.13) Attachments: Nowak Claim for Damages Magic Toyota Claim for Damages Olmsred Claim for Damages Hanson Claim for Damages —Redacted Packet Pg. 68 4.3.a RECEIVED CITY OF EDMON[)S OCT 21 2016 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM EDMONDS CITY CLERK Rate RecClaieived b Form ('� 12"•�� Ptv� Received by city W/ z1f _ � - Please take note that C,1 A01 e 45. /l et k l & —who currently resides at 75,1V .231 A2 S"40 L Al4'A'4 5' ey mailing address .5A& e home phone # Vie 77V work phone # , and who resided at .5"4116 at the time of the occurrence and whose date of birth is 3 '7 , is claiming damages against C iTY cF in the sum of $ :3 f613. d y arising out of the following circumstances listed below. DATE OF OCCURRENCE: 21,3Q1,2(J/G TIME: ;2,"30 A& LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE: YP1/ 31 pL S k1 aNi a� c� DESCRIPTION: E c� 1. Describe the conduct and circumstance;that brought about the injury or damage. Also describe the injury or damage. 7`f%4 —R) 4, e E -- 2_ Leg&L& Z-14 2. 011Iy11J 1'Uu 1z'.S 4 4L ,�5 C!T Y'Z&/ AZS ,[f 'E 'T11f- � �F /17 r]i._iF,Ek f ,4J 4dJ;Ai Cr9.f� �iillJ 721e W'yT_C4 4 �T SILL 'f l9clA&4� -0t_)L 4'ZW'JV 4 l.Ufd h/ t "Use_ f= f'Loi+rr' CtH�i.Ca/�T�`} ld�Yf:�= U (1 I T_7 Ii1 O /7 `]r!I �` C n kr� r I al `i'I�E" pL' C .g��-r� I7 tr��!' SD�j /I� I] ' (attach an extra sheet for additional information, if needed) rn 2. Provide a list of witnesses, if applicable, to the occurrence including names, addresses, and phone numbers. a� �11y 7i6f �s z y 3 I �'G ssru Ct7hd,us Sig ��d o2 d6 Y,sY = A E E E k5 4 ZZI J CL Sy 5 ,? e .514) C z! j elud-s 91_9_,'2:re :7 0 C L 3. Attach copies of all documentation relating to expenses, injuries, losses, and/or estimates for repair. 4. Have you submitted a claim for damages to your insurance company? Yes No If so, please provide the name of the insurance company: and the policy #: G®0 EZ-9__1 ,�,2_ * * ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AUTOMOBILE CLAIMS ONLY * * License Plate # Driver License # Type Auto DRIVER: Address: Phone#: Passengers: Name: Address: (year) (make) (model) OWNER: Address: Phone#: Name: Address: Fonn Revised 05/06/14 Page 1 of 2 Packet Pg. 69 4.3.a * * NOTE: THIS FORM MUST BE SIGNED AND NOTARIZED * * 1, If 17OZ, being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the claimant for the above described; that I have read the above claim, know the contents thereof and believe the same to be true. I further acknowledge that any information I provide as part of this claim may be considered a public record and may be subject to disclosure pursuant to RCW 42.56. Q x Signature of Claimant(s) State of Washington County of Slat,6 oiMI*t%— I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that �' f alTv . l` �� is the person who appeared before me, and said 0 person acknowledged that (he/she) signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be (his/her) free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. E E .��NI1111111i Dated: 0 �l ..N, Lton ♦ Signature ca Title i N �y. sy ►`�, s Z My appointment expires: ��_ �� ,3 AZ `_ M '1111tp 4) 1f,wA5yk-z'� Please present the completed claim form to: City Clerk's Office City of Edmonds 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA, 98020 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Form Revised 05/06/14 Page 2 Packet Pg. 70 Northwest Property AM Ali State- TIGARDW ORU9H7224 SUITE 200 Youte In good hands. 4.3.a 'I�II��I��II�I'��I�Ill��l'lll'I��II��111�1�1�'lll'�III'1�1�1��11 CAROLE E NOWAK 9514 231ST PL SW EDMONDS WA 980205022 September 25, 2016 INSURED: CAROLE NOWAK DATE OF LOSS: September 19, 2016 CLAIM NUMBER: 0429277049 POLICY NUMBER: 60694 335259 Re: Your Claim Status PHONE NUMBER: 800-597-9001 FAX NUMBER: 800410-8162 OFFICE HOURS: Mon - Fri 8:00 am - 5:30 pm, Sat 8:00 am - 5:00 pm Dear CAROLE E NOWAK, We have carefully examined the circumstances surrounding this loss and believe, at this time, we have sufficient information C) CN to make a decision regarding your claim. M We have found that there is no coverage available for the loss that occurred on September 19, 2016. As a result, we will not be able to make any payment for the following reasons: a� Losses We Cover Under Coverages A and B: E 0 We will cover sudden and accidental direct physical loss to property described in Dwelling Protection —Coverage A and c Other Structures Protection —Coverage B except as limited or excluded in this policy. E 2 Losses We Do Not Cover Under Coverage A And Coverage B: V We do not cover loss to the property described in Dwelling Protection —Coverage A or Other Structures Protection— 3 Coverage B caused by or resulting in any manner from any of the following excluded events as described in 1. through 23. Z below. Loss will be considered to have been caused by an excluded event if that event: a) -directly and solely results loss; or — aa) b) initiates a sequence of events that results in loss, regardless of the nature of any intermediate or final event in that E sequence. U r r 1. Flood, including surface water, waves, tidal water or overflow of any body of water, or spray from any of these, whether or Q not driven by wind. 2. Water or any other substance that: a) backs up through sewers or drains; or b) overflows from a sump pump, sump pump well or other system designed for the removal of subsurface water which is drained from a foundation area of a structure. 3. Water or any other substance on or below the surface of the ground, regardless of its source. This includes water or any other substance which exerts pressure on, or flows, seeps or leaks through any part of the residence premises. We do cover sudden and accidental direct physical loss caused by fire, explosion or theft resulting from items 1. through 3. listed above. 0429277049 RLM 5000020160925TR00400170100100100312B Packet Pg. 71 ServiceMaster by SRS 1727 E. Marine View Dr. Ste A Everett, WA 98201 Bill To Carole Nowak 9514 231 st Pl SW Edmonds, WA 98020 USA Local Office Phone # 425-353-5585 I Service Location Carole Nowak 9514 231st Pl SW Edmonds, WA 98020 USA 4.3.a Invoice Date Invoice # 9/30/2016 9250 P.O. Number Terms Rep Service Date Project Claim Number Net30 SR 9/30/2016 SRS16-0775-WTR-SR Item Code Class Description Quantity Price Each Amount WDD-32211 Water Damage - Residen... Water Restoration Srvs 293293.9.91 928.82T 293.91T EQD-35101 Water Damage - Residen... Equipment Rental 1,222.73 Subtotal glc7 Total $1,342.56 Please remit payment to our corporate office: ServiceMaster by SRS 15000 Woodinville Redmond Rd. Ste. B600 Woodinville, WA 98072 Phone 425-637-9770 License # SERVIS*942NU Bond # 546861C Snohomish Restoration Services, LLC Fed_ ID # 74-3181880 Subtotal $1,222.73 Sales Tax (9.8%) $119.83 Payments/Credits $0.00 Balance Due $1,342.56 Packet Pg. 72 Page 4 of 15 r��A i1DriPRE i 4.3.a Contract Payment Details Buyer 1 Carole Nowak Billing Address 9514 231 PI SW Edmonds WA 98020 Contract Amount ................... ...... ............ ---- ......__.--- ------ — ....... Tax Applicable�� Contract Total Deposit Amount -- - Deposit Method Amount Financed Balance Due Estimated Delivery Date Estimated Start Date Buyer 2 Installation Address 9514 231 PI SW Edmonds WA 98020 $2,386.59 $233.89 $2,620.48 $0.00 $0.00 $2,620.48 _ N/A 10/4/2016 Price and Payment Terms All financing subject to third party lender and credit approval. Empire Today, Li_C is neither a lender or broker. By signing below, I confirm that I have reviewed and agree that the contract amount and payment details, including deposit amount and balance due, are full, accurate and correct based on my selections included on the prior Flooring Specification screen, and that I am not relying on any oral or written madlficabons or promises relative to these contract payment details. I agree and understand that if I finance the work by Empire or a third party, my separately provided financing documents will include the number of monthly payments and the amount of each payment, including any finance charge. PiBy checking here, I further agree that if at, or before, the time of installation, Empire determines that my sub floor needs to be repaired or replaced, either (1)1 will be responsible for the repair or replacement and all charges related thereto, or (2) if able, Empire will repair or replace my sub floor and I agree to pay Empire an additional amount for this work. i Carole Nowak Activity Id: 1-2366869793 Empire/Residential/Seattle 9/29/201 E a� a� 0 L 0 0 U N M W m a� E 0 E M U 0 Z c aD E t r r Q Packet Pg. 73 �-0 �4.3.b RECEI CITY OF EDMONDS UU 21 2016 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM Received by City 77,(�' I1' .-1-1Z- Please take note that who currently resides at mailing address home phone rk phone # Y2<- )7 S!2Y who resided at " 53 at the time of the occurrencend whose date of birth is S is claiming damages against in the sum of $ ��QJ 4� arising out of the �folloQw�ing circumstances listed below. V / q, DATE OF OCCURRENCE: �1 S Gbytr1 1'� °�r✓ f �I FIME: LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE: 7-1 D DESCRIPTION: the conduct and circumstar�ce that ought about he inju or damage. Also describe the injury or damage ('� �� t�k fsi�>rvwv�rS l Y,u llc' ��1e� U�.►n,t I n 13c (attach an extra sheet for additional information, if needed) 2. Provide a list of witnesses, if applicable, totpe occurrence includingnames, a r ses, Ja�1rv�,�. 1 �/.,xC WzS17S14 —U b a C.. d 3. Attach copies of all documentation relating to expenses, injuries, losses, and/or estimates for repair. 4. Have you submitted a claim for damages to your insurance company? If so, please provide the name of the insurance company: and the policy #: License Plate # Type Auto: Yes ✓( No ""ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AUTOMOBILE CLAIMS ONLY"" Driver License # (year) (make) (model) DRIVER: OWNER: Address: Address: Phone#: Phone#: Passengers: Name: Name: Address: Address: Form Revised 05/06/14 Page I of 2 a� a� E CU L O M U N M CD 7 Packet Pg. 74 4.3.b * * NOTE: THIS FORM MUST BE SIGNED AND NOTARIZED I, ,being first duly sworn, depose and y that I am described; that I have read the above cla , know the contents thereof and believe th ame to be true. I information I provide as part of this cl ' ay be considered a public record and may a subjeW to discjga State of Washington' County of 5-VNj6rlomiSV\ claimant for the above her acknowledge that any pursuant to RCW 42.56. of Claimant(s) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 5C.t4LWLr— _ is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that (he/she) signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be (his/her) free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. a ed: 1 1 1 �tgnature Title My appointment expires: Please present the completed claim form to: Form Revised 05/06/14 TRACIE L. CARPENTER NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 29, 2017 City Clerk's Office City of Edmonds 121 51h Avenue North Edmonds, WA, 98020 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Page 2 of 2 Packet Pg. 75 fy \ ' 4 r � . ■ .- '. r - r. gas • } � .• • •� ' , ~ �+ �� ' • • •' it .' ar + }•f �i �1 ti- r r • • • • • • • • flab , ;;. r a 1 3 r n f CD l V 00 Attachment: 1. # 3 � a ` i i jjjj� i LJ m for Damages (1632 : Claims for Damages) CITY OF EDMONDS CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM RECEIVED OCT 25 2016 /- Received by City Please take note that W VA who currently resides at e D (1) 0 ©J s�Q}C•�-� mailing address home phone # 4-Z�work phone # and who resided at at the time of the occurrence and whose date of birth is 467 l , is claiming damages against (�J ,A -Cr,--L-C-r in the sum of $ arising out of the following circumstances listed below. cv -V O--L 0-e__rt-pi 1!n-12-1A - wA a (V% 'A kct a) -- DATE OF OCCURRENCE: TIME: _ C LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE: �Y[�3�. + ��-, �'� (oT" 40rin (fax r � k1z? rxj,,L— Pr DESCRIPTION: 1. � Dessc_ribe the conduct and gircumstance that brought about th�injury or d age. Also describe the injury or l�{ �L.�r. _?T v l [ 1 iA C 41 (attach an extra sheet for additional information, if needed)) J 2. Provide a list of witnesses,"ff applicable, to the occurre�including names, addresses, and phone numbers. Attach copies of all documentation relating to expenses, injuries, losses, and/or estimates for repair. Have you submitted a claim for damages to your insurance company? If so, please provide the name of the insurance company: and the policy #: Yes No * * ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AUTOMOBILE CLAIMS ONLY License Plate # Driver License # Type Auto: (year) (make) (model) DRIVER: OWNER: Address: Address: Phone#: Phone#: Passengers: Name: Name: Address: Address: m a� R E M L 0 E V N M co Form Revised 05/06/14 Page 1 of 2 Packet Pg. 80 4.3.c * NOTE: THIS FORM MUST BE SIGNED AND NOTARIZED * * I, �w,-0 1 VK S being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the claimant for the above described; that I 6ve read the above claim, know the contents thereof and believe the same to be true. I further acknowledge that any information I provide as part of this claim may be considered a public record and may be su ' t to disclosure pu ant to RC 42.56. x L x Signature of Claimant(s) State of Washington County of 5/VDX/47/76' S/j� I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that a S4%is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that (he/she) signed this instrument and dcknowledged it to be (his/her) free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: ,aie- () ., g JONP 11'/ n f c �aa�uttrt+� 0 4 C4_ Title 7 My appointment expires 4V81.�G too ;,WA, `\ ►a Please present the completed claim form to: City Clerk's Office City of Edmonds 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA, 98020 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. rn m a� M E `o U) M V N M co Form Revised 05/06/14 Page 2 of 2 Packet Pg. 81 "C-''{� CUSTOMER #$ : 118580 �� 2p�� r =� 3.99331 UNIT# 11619 TERRY OLMSTED m *INVOICE* LEANNA OLMSTED EDMOyaDS �� 22510 WOODWAY PARK RD WOODWAY, WA 98020-6171 PAGE 1 HOME:425-774-4001 CONT:425-774-4001 BUS: CELL: SERVICE ADVISO nn A.r/c,h rtn[i VIN BRILLIANT 11lNISSAN LEAF DEL, DATE I PRODS ...DATE WAR-R. EXP. 27 16:07 240CT16 LINE OPCODE I :29 250CT16 TYPE HOURS CAMPBELL Cornimm fy Driven CAMPBELL NISSAN OF EDMONDS 24325 Highway 99 Edmonds, WA 98026 (425) 774-2174 www.campbellautogroup.com 868 JOHN SCHAMPIER LICENSE I MILEAGE IN / OUT TAG JNIAZOCP5BT004570 AFA3422 1 25065 25065 IT184 PROM.IS.E=D PO NO. RATE PAYMENT INV. DATE 17:00 240CT16 CASH 125OCT16 OPTIONS: SOLD-STK:11619 ENG:80_kw_PAC_Synchronous Motor 1)SEC+PREF GOLD 24M0 40K EX6 27 13 DED_50 OLMSTED 2 More... LIST NET TOT7 A PAS-S REAR. "TIRE FLAT. :TOW 1N TR. REPAIR LEAKING TIRE 403 CNR 17.70 17.7:0 1 OETIR-02906 BRIDGESTONE P205/55R16 89H 139.00 128.00 128.00 1 'TIRE . NEW TIRE TAX 2 .-0 2 . 50 2.50 25065 REPLACED RIGHT REAR TIRE BAD SIDE WALL B HIT A SIGN IN ROAD. LOOK FOR ANY ADDITIONAL DAMAGE. 100 ROAD TESTED :FOR BRAKE GRAB. ALL:. WORKING NORMALLY AND UPDATES HAVE BEEN DONE. 11l CNR 0.00 0.:00 CUSTOMER PAY SHOP CHARGE FOR REPAIR ORDER 2.68 ********************************************* * YOUR SATISFACTION IS OUR '41 PR:IORI-TY * * IF YOU ARE NOT COMPLETELY SATISFIED * WITH YOUR .RECENT SERVICE WORK PLEASE * * NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY. A SURVEY GRADING * OUR PERF':ORMANCE WILL BE.MAIL,ED TO YOU ********************************************* Parts and labor warranted for 12 months or 12,000 miles, whichever occurs first on all Nissan parts, !DESCRIPTION "HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL & SHOP SUPPLIES" This charge Is for disposal of hazardous waste generated by the repair of your vehicle. This charge of the disposal of LABOR AMOUNT hazardous waste is the result of Federal & State mandated waste regulations. These products include, but are not limited to materials, various solvents and other products used in the dealership that PARTS AMOUNT petroleum products, englne antilreexe, asbestos are designated as In materials. GAS, OIL, LURE A charge equivalent to 7% of the labor charge is included for supplies used on your vehicle. Maximum charge $24.63. SUBLET AMOUNT I hereby auhtorizo tits rappalf Work herein sat Forth to be deed algnp vyith necessary material and agree that you are not respopsibla beyond control ar for any a]ays MISC. CHARGES for loss or dammgej to veiticin or articles left In vehlcle in case of IIFa, lheli, or any otltBr cause your caused byy unavaflabilily of parts ah]prnams by the supplier a+ transporter. 1 haraby grant you andlor your ornplayees permissfan to herein described streets, higqhways or elsewhere for the purpose of tesiing andlor Vnspection. An oxvress TOTAL CHARGES operata•the vehicle on machanic's lion Is hereby saknowlodged on above vn�iola to secure the amount of repslrs Ihe( a10- LESS INSURANCE I ACKNOWLEDGED RECEIPT OF VEHICLE AND I HAVE RECEIVED A COPY OF THIS INVOICE. SALES TAX PLEASE PAY x CUSTOMER SIGNATURE THIS AMOUNT TOTALS _ N m E 0 E U 04 M co to N IM M V d N E 0 C E t V Q 17.70 _ 130.50 _ 0.00 M 0.00 2.68 r 150.88 _ 0.00 _ 14.78 Packet Pg. 82 CITY OF EDMONDS CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM .d RECEDE4.3 OCT 2 7 2016 Claim Form 10-s7-/6 Ple20AA&M take note that �` v 1 h S� �� ocently resides at U 2 ailing address home phone #q;l,%-W0=77Ydbork phone �'�7 , and who resided at U_ r at the time of the occurrence and whose date of birth is 7 6 i is claiming damages against C + 0T �in�in the sum of $'• 13 arising out of the following circumstances listed below. DATE OF OCCURRENCE: t ( — "— E to 01 • qs I" TIME: `mot 14 S A" LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE: ♦ R�� DESCRIPTION: Alter « - n44r ze,-h&- c-r- X%10 %i zVI 2. Provide list of nesses, if ap licable, to the occurrent c11u ng names, addr sses, and phone numbers. 3. Attach copies of all documentation relating to expenses, injuries, losses, and/or estimates for repair. 4. Have you submitted a claim for damages to your insurance company? Yes Nc If so, please provide the name of the insurance company: and the policy #: *"ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AUTOMOBILE CLAIMS ONLY *" License Plate # 6%3 -5q 3 �x Driver License # Type Auto: 29dS _ r�, ear ( ake) (model) DRIVER: +'S 74- OWNER: Address: ! Address: rJ-a Phone#: Phone#: Passengers: Name: `741%l Name: Address: -&AAA= Address: Form Revised 05/06/14 Page 1 of 2 Packet Pg. 83 4.3.d * * NOTE: THIS FORM MUST BE SIGNED AND NOTARIZED * * I, being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the claimant for the above described; that I have read the a ove claim, know the contents thereof and believe the same to be true. I further acknowledge that any information I provide as part of this claim may be considered a public record and may be subvto disclosKre pursuant to RCW 42.56. *1 Signature of Claimant(s) State of Washington Countyof rl,11EP I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that ,CyL�_� 1 -za W-nSOPJ is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that (he/she) signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be (his/her) free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: fo --Aro -1201 (10 �Signat re l�ao-, 7t oxc. Title /�p, ✓� My appointment expires: Please present the completed claim form to: ram, �� • ' � 'f � MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES OF oo .�'. City Clerk's Office City of Edmonds 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA, 98020 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Form Revised 05/06/14 Page 2 of 2 Packet Pg. 84 20161026_110039.jpg https://mail.google.com/—/scs/mail-static/—/js/k=gmail. 4.3.d m E 0 L 0 0 E .2 U 1 fFEW" dtCT,�. f ),N-j)SCffYCLERkk Q Of 1 I Packet Pg. 85 20161026_110025.jpg https://mail.google.com/—/ses/mail-static/—/j s/k=gmail. 4.3.d m E 0 L 0 0 E .2 U OU 2 7 2016 ` ANDS CITY CLERK j,j Q Of 1 Packet Pg. 86 20161026_122008.jpg https://mail.google.com/_/scs/mail-static/_/js/lr—gmail. 4�7 � � L E N M w _ - r --�54 - Aj r zp*- RECEIVED ED OCT 2 7 2016 CITY CLERK Packet Pg. 87 20161026_110013.jpg https://mail.google.com/—/scs/mail-static/—/js/k=gmail.rpain 4.3.d E U a Of 1 I Packet Pg. 88 5.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/1/2016 WSDOT 2016 Award of Excellence - Five Corners Roundabout Project (10 min.) Staff Lead: Phil Williams Department: Engineering Preparer: Rob English Background/History Staff Recommendation Narrative The City of Edmonds is receiving the 2016 Award of Excellence from the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for the Five Corners Roundabout Intersection Improvement Project. Kathleen Davis, Director of WSDOT Local Programs, will present the award to the City. Packet Pg. 89 7.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/1/2016 Public Hearing for 92nd Avenue West Street Vacation (20 min.) Staff Lead: Kernen Lien Department: Planning Division Preparer: Kernen Lien Background/History Westgate Chapel and one other property owner have submitted a petition to vacate that portion of 92nd Avenue W lying south of 228th Street SW. The City Council is required to consider street vacations in a public hearing set by resolution. The City Council passed Resolution No. 1371 setting the public hearing for November 1, 2016. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the Council direct staff to prepare a Resolution of Intent to Vacate with the conditions noted in the staff report in Exhibit 1. Narrative An application and petition has been filed with the City of Edmonds to vacate that portion of 92nd Avenue W that extends south of 228th Street SW for approximately 375 feet. The width of the right-of- way varies from 30 feet at the southerly terminus to 60 feet over the northerly 290 feet. The City of Edmonds has a storm water drainage conveyance system within the westerly half of the roadway and Olympic View Water and Sewer District has sanitary sewer and water lines within the right-of-way. Westgate Chapel owns the majority of the property along this portion of 92nd Avenue W with the only other property owner addressed at 9126 228th Street SW (in the southwest corner of the intersection of 92nd Ave. W and 228th St. SW) also signing the petition for this street vacation. The City Council is to consider the vacation request at a public hearing set by resolution. The City Council passed Resolution No. 1371 setting the public hearing for November 1, 2016. Procedures and criteria for street vacations are detailed in Chapter 20.70 Edmonds Community Development Code. The staff report and attachments in Exhibit 1 includes a detailed analysis of the requested street vacation and provides a recommendation to the City Council. Attachments: Exhibit 1 - PLN20160032 Staff Report with Attachments Packet Pg. 90 7.1.a `/)C. 18Lpi CITY OF EDMONDS 1215th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION REPORT & RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL Project: Consideration of vacating that portion of 92"d Avenue West lying south of 2281h Street SW Requested Permits: PLN20160032 Date of Report: rber 21, 2016 Staff Contact: ernen Lien, S Planner Public Hearing: November 1, 2016 Council Chambers 250 - 5th Avenue North, Edmonds SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL AND PROCESS An application and petition has been filed with the City of Edmonds to vacate that portion of 92"d Avenue West that extends south of 2281h Street SW for approximately 375 feet (Attachments 1 — 7). Westgate Chapel owns the majority of the abutting private property along this portion of 92"d Avenue W with the only other property owner addressed at 9126 — 228th Street SW (in the southwest corner of the intersection of 92"d Avenue W and 22th St. SW) also signing the petition for this street vacation. The width of the right-of-way varies from 30 feet at the southerly terminus to 60 feet over the norther 290 feet (Attachment 4). The City Council is required to consider street vacations in a public hearing set by resolution. The Council passed Resolution No. 1371 (Attachment 8) which set the public hearing for November 1, 2016. Below is staff s evaluation of the street vacation criteria as established in Chapter 20.70 Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). II. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Location: The subject street vacation is for that portion of 92"d Avenue West that extend south of 2281h Street SW. Westgate Chapel at 22901 Edmonds Way is located on the west side of this portion of 92"d Avenue W and the east side of 92"d Avenue W is the Esperance area of unincorporated Snohomish County. PLN20160018 Page 1 of 11 x w d E Q Packet Pg. 91 7.1.a 2. Zoning: Public right-of-ways are unzoned. The Westgate Chapel site to the west is primarily zoned RM-1.5 (Multi -family residential; maximum density of one dwelling unit per every 1,500 square feet of lot area). The Westgate Chapel site also contains a small sliver of RS-8 zoning (Single-family residential; 8,000 square feet minimum lot size) along the northern boundary with 228th Street SW. See Attachment 9 for zoning and vicinity map. Given the Comprehensive Plan designation for the site is Edmonds Way Corridor, in order to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the right-of- way should be zoned RM-1.5 should the Council approve the vacation. Attachment 10 is an excerpt from the Comprehensive Plan that identifies compatible zoning classifications with the different Comprehensive Plan designations. 3. Size: The area of the proposed vacation is 20,323 square feet. 4. Existing Use: The portion of 92"d Avenue W is used for access to the Westgate Chapel property and access for the four parcels on the eastside of 92"d Avenue W. III. NOTICE Public Notice requirements for street vacations are detailed in ECDC 20.70.090. A notice for the council's consideration of vacation was published in the Herald Newspaper on October 12, 2016. A notice was also posted at the subject site and mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the site. In accordance with ECDC 20.70.090, the public notice included description of easements that may be retained during the vacation process (Attachment 11). The City has complied with the noticing provisions of ECDC 20.70.090. IV. PUBLIC CONCERNS No public comments have been received as of the writing of this staff report. V. TECHNICAL COMMITTEE This application was reviewed and evaluated by Snohomish County Fire District #1, City of Edmonds Engineering Division, Olympic View Water and Sewer District and Snohomish County Public Works. Snohomish County Fire District #1: Snohomish County Fire District #1 provided the following comments and recommendations (Attachment 12): 1. No easement is currently required. If the area of vacation, or the three vacant lots on the cast side of 92"d Avenue W are to be developed in the future, a fire access road easement will be required. PLN20160032 — 92°d Avenue West Street Vacation Page 2 of 11 Packet Pg. 92 7.1.a 2. If the current road surface becomes unusable, blocked, or removed, thereby deny emergency access, the existing fire hydrant located on the west side of 92" d Ave W, mid -block between 228'h Street SW and the terminus of the existing road shall be rotated 180 degrees so the largest outlet (nozzle cap) faces west. Olympic View Water and Sewer District: Olympic View Water and Sewer District has a high flow sewer main and a water main within the proposed vacation area. OVWSD noted that utility easements will need to be granted at or prior to vacation and has requested that the City require said utility easements be granted as part of the street vacation and not something granted at a later date (Attachment 13). Snohomish County Public Works, Surface Water Management: The east side of 92"d Avenue West falls within unincorporated Snohomish County. Some of the stormwater that flows from this area drains into the stormwater facilities located within 92°d Avenue West and within the Westgate Chapel property. Snohomish County drainage system connects to the City of Edmonds drainage system in 92°d Avenue West via a culvert under 228th Street SW at the 92"d Avenue W intersection. Snohomish County recommended that this connection point stay under City of Edmonds responsibility to ensure there are no blockages or failures that would create a road safety hazard along 228th Street SW, which is listed as a minor arterial in the City's Transportation Plan (Attachment 14). The culvert under 228th Street SW is not within the vacation area and will remain under City ownership. Snohomish County also recommended the City of Edmonds be granted a drainage facility maintenance covenant for the property that would allow the Public Works Department to inspect and maintain the system if the owners fail to do so properly. As noted in the City of Edmonds' Engineering Division Comments (Attachment 15), the Engineering Division is recommending that Westgate Chapel assume ownership and maintenance responsibility for the stormwater facilities within 92nd Avenue W and the Westgate Chapel property. The City's Engineering Division is not recommending that a stormwater maintenance covenant be retained for the City of Edmonds. City of Edmonds Engineering Division: The Engineering Division provided the following comments and recommendation regarding the proposed street vacation (Attachment 15): Engineering has reviewed the application from Westgate Chapel requesting vacation of 92"d Ave W right-of-way, south of 228" St SW. The information provided is consistent with Title 18 Edmonds Community Development Code & Engineering standards. The Engineering Division recommends approval of the street vacation with the following conditions of approval: 1) The Transportation Comp Plan has identified a project for street improvements along 228" St SW between SR 99 and 95th PI W. In an effort to maintain sufficient right- of-way through the 92"d Ave W intersection, the right-of-way alignment on the north edge of 92"d Ave needs to be adjusted from what the applicant has shown. The PLN20160032 — 92" d Avenue West Street Vacation Page 3 of 11 Packet Pg. 93 7.1.a northern line of that portion of 92"d Ave W to be vacated shall be shown as a continuation of the southern boundary line of 228th St SW as shown east of 92"d Ave. With this revision, the area shown in red below (an area 10-feet by 30-feet) would remain City right-of-way. 2) The City releases all ownership interest in the stormwater facilities located upon or within the vacated 92"d Ave Street right-of-way, as well as the stormwater facilities located through the Westgate Chapel property at 22901 Edmonds Way. Westgate Chapel shall assume ownership and maintenance responsibilities for these facilities and provide easements to abutting property owners as needed. Ownership of the stormwater facilities within the intersection of 92"d and 228th will remain under the ownership of the City of Edmonds as this portion of right-of-way is not being vacated. Background information regarding the stormwater facilities is provided below. 3) The Olympic View Water and Sewer District currently owns and maintains water and sewer facilities through the subject 92"d Ave W right-of-way. Easements shall be provided to OVWSD accordingly. 4) Other dry utilities such as power, gas, phone and cable may also exist within the subject right-of-way. Easements shall be provided to all entities as required to allow for continued ownership and maintenance of any such facilities. Back round Information on Stormwater Facilities: The City currently has stormwater facilities within the subject 92"d Ave W right-of-way and through the Westgate Chapel property at 22901 Edmonds Way, as shown highlighted on the map below. Most of the stormwater runoff draining through this storm system is from upstream properties located within Snohomish County jurisdiction and/or from the PLN20160032 — 92°a Avenue West Street Vacation Page 4 of 11 Packet Pg. 94 7.1.a Westgate Chapel property at 22901 Edmonds Way. As such, upon vacation of 92nd Ave W, the City no longer needs to maintain ownership and maintenance of these stormwater facilities. mU m - 228TH S1 SW a N i Ml�- In response to the City's initial comments on the street vacation proposal, the applicant made contact with Snohomish County to determine their interest in the storm system. Snohomish County provided a written response to the City (see attachment in the staff report) stating "Since this road right-of-way is outside the county's legal jurisdiction, it would not be practical or appropriate for Snohomish County to secure a maintenance covenant or public drainage easement". The County had concerns about the City's ability to inspect the stormwater system, however, Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 18.30.090 requires property owners to maintain their stormwater facilities and allows for city access to private stormwater facilities to ensure they are properly operated and maintained. VI. ECDC 20.70 — STREET VACATIONS A. ECDC 20.70.050 Initiation of Proceedings Pursuant to ECDC 20.70.050.13 a vacation may be initiated by petition of the owners of more than two-thirds of property abutting the portion of the street or alley to be vacated. A petition for vacation was submitted with signatures from Brent McAtee and John Murphy of Westgate Chapel and Larry and Claudia Walters who own the property addressed as 9126 — 228" Street SW. Westgate Chapel owns all of the property on the west side of 92ad Avenue W and three of the four parcels on the east side of 92" d Avenue West. The Walter's own the remainingparcel on the east side of 92"d Avenue W. The only other properties that abut the 92° Avenue W right-of-way are the Sequoyah Condominiums which abut the southern terminus of 92nd Avenue west. PLN20160032 — 92"d Avenue West Street Vacation Page 5 of 11 Packet Pg. 95 7.1.a The initiation of vacation proceedings is compliant with ECDC 20.70.050. B. ECDC 20.70.020 Criteria for Vacation The City Council may vacate a street, alley or easement only if it finds that: 1. The vacation is in public interest; and The applicants submitted a statement in support of the public interest criterion (Attachment 7). The applicants note that approval of the vacation will remove the City form ongoing responsibility of maintaining the driving surface and adjacent shoulders of the current roadway. Additionally, divesting ownership of the stormwater facilities in the right-of-way and Westgate Chapel property as recommended by the Engineering Division will further reduce ongoing maintenance costs for the City of Edmonds. This section of 92"d Avenue West only serves those property owners who have signed the petition for vacation. The City of Edmonds has no plans to open a right-of-way to connect 92"d Avenue West to State Route 104. Staff finds the proposal would be in the public interest. 2. No property will be denied direct access as a result of the vacation. All the properties that take access from 92"d Avenue West have signed the petition for vacation. The majority of the vacated right-of-way will transfer to Westgate Chapel. The Westgate Chapel property on the west side of 92"d Avenue West will continue to have direct access to 228th Street SW and Edmonds Way. Westgate Chapel also owns the three parcels on the east side of 92"d Avenue West. While those parcels will no longer of direct access to 228th Street SW, Westgate Chapel still has access to those properties through their existing property. The 30 feet of 92"d Avenue W adjacent to the Walters' property at 9126 - 228th Street SW will transfer to the Walters and thus the Walters will still have access to 92"d Avenue W and 228th Street SW. No properties would be denied direct access as a result of the vacation. C. ECDC 20.70.040 Limitations on Vacations 1. Pursuant to ECDC 20.70.040.A, "the city may not vacate any street, alley, easement, or part thereof that abuts any body of water unless all elements of RCW 35.79.035 are complied with, and the vacated area will thereby become available for the city or other public entity to acquire and to use for a public purpose." The proposed vacation area does not abut any bodies of water. PLN20160032 — 92"d Avenue West Street Vacation Page 6 of 11 Packet Pg. 96 7.1.a 2. Pursuant to ECDC 20.70.040.B, "the city shall not proceed with the vacation if the owners of 50 percent or more of the property abutting the street or alley or part thereof, or underlying the easement or part thereof, to be vacated file a written objection in the planning division prior to the time of the hearing." As of the writing of this staff report, the City has not received any written objections to the proposed street vacation. D. ECDC 20.70.140 Final Decision 1. ECDC 20.70.140.A provides the following: Following the public hearing, the city council shall, by motion approved by a majority of the entire membership in a roll call vote, either: 1. Adopt an ordinance granting the vacation; or 2. Adopt a motion denying the vacation; or 3. Adopt a resolution of intent to vacate stating that the city council will, by ordinance, grant the vacation if the owners) of property abutting upon the street or alley, or part thereof so vacated, meet specific conditions within 90 days. The city may require the following as conditions: a. Either: i. Monetary compensation to be paid to the city in the amount of up to one-half the fair market value for the street, alley, or part thereof to be vacated unless acquired at `public expense, " then full appraised value shall be paid; or ii. The grant of a substitute public right-of-way which has value as an access way at least equal to the vacated street, alley, or part thereof, or iii. Any combination of subsections (A)(3)(a)(i) and (A)(3)(a)(ii) of this section totaling but not more than one-half the fair market value of the street, alley, or part thereof to be vacated. OR b. A grant of an easement to the city in exchange for the easement vacated. PLN20160032 — 92" d Avenue West Street Vacation Page 7 of 11 Packet Pg. 97 7.1.a If the abutting property owner(s) complies with conditions imposed in the resolution of intent to vacate within 90 days, the city council shall adopt an ordinance granting the vacation. 2. The City may require monetary compensation OR require a grant of an easement to the City. While Olympic View Water and Sewer District has requested easements for their utilities within 92"d Avenue W, the City of Edmonds is not requiring an easement; thus, the City should be monetarily compensated for the vacation. 3. An appraisal was included with the street vacation petition (Attachment 6). The appraisal assumed a highest and best use of the property as multi -family residential development. a. Before Vacation Value. The existing zoning of the majority of the site is RM-1.5 (Mulit-family Residential with a maximum density of one dwelling unit for every 1,500 square feet of lot area). The Westgate Chapel site is currently 171,191 square feet and with the RM-1.5 zone could have a maximum of 114 multi -family units. The appraisal found the land value of the property before the street vacation to be $2,166,000. b. After Vacation Value. The area of vacation included in the petition is 20,323 square feet. So if all the vacation area was appended to the Westgate Chapel property, the new area of the site would be 191,514 square feet. This square footage would provide a maximum density of 127 multi -family units on the site. Excluding the 300 square feet of area the City of Edmonds Engineering Division recommends retaining in right-of-way would give the property 191,214 square feet, which would still yield 127 multi -family units on the site. The appraisal found the land value of the property post vacation to be $2,355,000. The difference in value post vacation in $189,000. If the 300 square feet retained by the City is deducted at the unencumbered value of $12.60 per square feet would resulting difference in land value post vacation would be $185,220. 4. Most of the right-of-way in 92nd Avenue West that is the subject of this vacation request was dedicated in two plats; Plantz Addition recorded under AFN 1167958 in 1955 (Attachment 16) and Ridge Acres recorded under AFN 262998 in 1919 (Attachment 17). It appears a small segment of the right-of-way was dedicated under a deed granted to Snohomish County recorded under AFN 2050548. 5. Pursuant to ECDC 20.70.140.A.3.a.i monetary compensation to be paid to the city in the amount of up to one-half the fair market value for the street. According to the appraisal in Attachment 6 and the $3,780 deduction for the right-of-way recommended to be retained, one-half of the fair market value is $92,610. PLN20160032 — 92°d Avenue West Street Vacation Page 8 of 11 Packet Pg. 98 7.1.a VII. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The comprehensive plan designation for the properties surround the proposed vacation is "Edmonds Way Corridor." The comprehensive plan provides the following with regard to the Edmonds Way Corridor. Commercial Development Goal E. The Edmonds Way Corridor consists of portions of Edmonds Way between the 100th Avenue West intersection and Highway 99. This corridor serves as a key transportation corridor, and also provides a key link between Edmonds and Interstate S. Established residential areas lie on both sides of the corridor. An established pattern of multiple family residential development lies along much of the corridor, while small-scale businesses can be found primarily near intersections. A major concern is that the more intensive development that occurs along the corridor should not interfere with the flow of through traffic or intrude into adjoining established communities. E.1 Permit uses in planned multiple family or small-scale business developments that are designed to minimize contributing significantly to traffic congestion. E.2 Provide for transit and pedestrian access to development. E.3 Use design review to encourage the shared or joint use of driveways and access points by development onto SR-104 in order to support the movement of traffic in a safe and efficient manner. Site access should not be provided from residential streets unless there is no feasible alternative. E. 4 Use design review to ensure that development provides a transition to adjacent residential neighborhoods. For uses in transitional areas adjacent to single family neighborhoods, use design techniques such as the modulation of facades, pitched roofs, stepped -down building heights, multiple buildings, and landscaping to provide designs compatible with single family development. Make use of natural topography to buffer incompatible development whenever possible. (Comprehensive Plan, pg. 72) Additionally, the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan identifies a project for street improvements along 228th St SW between SR 99 and 95th PI W (Comprehensive Plan, pg. 266). As conditioned, the proposed street vacation would still be consistent with the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. PLN20160032 — 92" d Avenue West Street Vacation Page 9 of 11 Packet Pg. 99 7.1.a VIII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis in and the attachments to this report, staff finds the requested vacation of 92nd Avenue W to be in accordance with the criteria in ECDC 20.70.020 and the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution of intent for the right-of-way vacation and that the following conditions be addressed within 90 days of adoption of the resolution in accordance with ECDC 20.70.140.A.3: 1. The City of Edmonds will retain the northern 10 feet of the western 30 feet of 92nd Avenue West lying south of 2281h Street SW. Legal description of the vacation area and map of the vacation area must be adjusted to recognize this change in the vacation area. 2. The City releases all ownership interest in the stormwater facilities located upon or within the vacated 92nd Ave Street right-of-way, as well as the stormwater facilities located through the Westgate Chapel property at 22901 Edmonds Way. Westgate Chapel shall assume ownership and maintenance responsibilities for these facilities and provide easements to abutting property owners as needed. 3. The Olympic View Water and Sewer District currently owns and maintains water and sewer facilities through the subject 92nd Ave W right-of-way. Easements shall be provided to OVWSD accordingly. 4. Other dry utilities such as power, gas, phone and cable may also exist within the subject right-of-way. Easements shall be provided to all entities as required to allow for continued ownership and maintenance of any such facilities. 5. The petitioners shall pay the City of Edmonds $92,610 which is one-half the appraised value of the vacation property. 6. If the area of vacation or the three vacant lots on the east side of 92nd Avenue W are to be developed in the future, a fire access road easement will be required. 7. If the current road surface becomes unusable, blocked, or removed, thereby deny emergency access, the existing fire hydrant located on the west side of 92nd Ave W, mid -block between 228th Street SW and the terminus of the existing road shall be rotated 180 degrees so the largest outlet (nozzle cap) faces west. IX. ATTACHMENTS 1. Land Use Application 2. Application Cover Letter 3. Petition for Vacation 4. Vacation Map 5. Legal Description of Vacation 6. Appraisal 7. Applicant response to request for additional information 8. Resolution No. 1371 PLN20160032 — 92nd Avenue West Street Vacation Page 10 of 11 Packet Pg. 100 7.1.a 9. Zoning and Vicinity Map 10. Comprehensive Plan Excerpt 11. Public Notices 12. Snohomish County Fire District No. 1 Comments 13. Olympic View Water and Sewer District Comments 14. Snohomish County Surface Water Management Comments 15. Engineering Division Comments 16. Plantz Addition 17. Ridge Acres PARTIES OF RECORD City of Edmonds 121 — 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Snohomish County 3000 Rockefeller Ave M/S 607 Everett, WA 98201 Olympic View Water and Sewer District Snohomish County Fire District No. 1 8128 - 228t' Street SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Westgate Chapel, Inc. 22901 Edmonds Way Edmonds, WA 98020 Larry and Claudia Walters 9126 — 228th Street SW Edmonds, WA 98026 PLN20160032 — 92" d Avenue West Street Vacation Page 11 of 11 x w m E z Q Packet Pg. 101 7.1.a City of Edmonds Land Use Application IM ❑ ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW ■ ❑ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT n ❑ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 7D7ATE. �] ONE K O IN ❑ HOME OCCUPATION REC'D BY C❑ FORMAL SUBDIVISION❑ SHORT SUBDIVISION . RECEIPT # ❑ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT HEARING DATE ❑ PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ❑ OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT ❑ HE ❑ STAFF ❑ PB ❑ ADB kC M STREET VACATION ❑ REZONE ❑ SHORELINE PERMIT ❑ VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION ❑ OTHER: • PLEASE NOTE THATA LL INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN THE APPLICATION IS A PUBLIC RECORD • PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LOCATION 92nd Ave W. south of 228th St. S.W. and north of Edmonds Way PROJECT NAME (IF APPLICABLE) 92nd Ave W Street Vacation PROPERTY OWNER City of Edmonds, Washington PHONE # 425-771-0220 ADDRESS 121 5th Ave. N., Edmonds, WA 98020 E-MAIL michaelclugston@edmondswa.gov FAX # 425-771-0221 31 27N 4 EWM & TAX ACCOUNT # None. It is a public right-of-way. SEC. 36 TWP. 27N RNG. 3 EWM DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED USE (ATTACH COVER LETTER AS NECESSARY) See attached project description DESCRIBE HOW THE PROJECT MEETS APPLICABLE CODES (ATTACH COVER LETTER AS NECESSARY) Street vacations are governed by Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 20.70. The following criteria are both met by the proposal. 20.70.020 A. The vacation is In the public interest; and B. No property will be denied direct access as a result of the vacation. Refer to cover letter. APPLICANT Westgate Chapel, Inc. PHONE # 425-775-2776 ADDRESS 22901 Edmonds Way, Edmonds, WA 98020-5038 E-MAIL bmcatee@westgatechape.com FAX# CONTACT PERSON/AGENT Jim Egge c/o James Egge & Associates PHONE # 425-388-1698 ADDRESS 10807 25th St. S.E., Lake Stevens, WA 98258 E-MAIL )a-9Qmsn•wm FAX# The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees. By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that I am authorized to file this application on the behalf of the owner as listed below, SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT l _DATE 6/20/16 I SIX Property Owner's Authorization I, )#&;y A. HwgPxe3� 3, under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the following is a true and correct statement: I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application, and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purposes of inspecti n sli atlrindant to this application. SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE 6/20/16 s? Call (425) 771-0220, Revised on 8122112 B - Land Use Application Page I of l t k W C d E t V y+ Q Attachml Packet Pg. 102 7.1.a JAMES EGGE & ASSOCIATES 425-388-1698 Land Use Planning ♦ Project Management ♦ Development Analysis ♦ Agency Representation June 20, 2016 Development Services Department / Planning Division City of Edmonds, Washington 121 51h Ave. N. RECEIVED Edmonds, WA 98020 Attn: Michael Clugston, Associate Planner JUN 2 0 2016 Re: Street Vacation — 92nd Ave. W. DEVELOMEN- - Dear Mr. Clugston, The proposed action: I herewith submit the enclosed (both paper and electronic copied) documents on behalf of my client, Westgate Chapel, Inc. related to proposed vacation of a portion of 92nd Ave. W. south of 228th St. S.W. You and I have previously reviewed the required exhibits in support of the vacation request. Subject site: 92nd Ave W. lying south of 228th St. S.W. Jurisdiction: City of Edmonds, Washington Area: Approximately 0.46 acre (20,323 sq. ft.) Current status: 92nd Ave W. currently serves as paved public roadway which extends southerly from 228th St. S.W. for approximately 375 feet. It is a two-lane roadway with a paved width of 20 feet with gravel shoulders of varing width along portions of both east and west margins. Right-of-way varies in width from 30' at the southerly terminus to 60' over the northerly 290 feet (+/-). The City of Edmonds maintains a storm drainage conveyance system withini the westerly half of the roadway, which will remain and be provided with permanent easement following right-of-way vacation. There are also other utilities (sanitary sewer, water) within the right-of-way, and overhead elecrical powelines and poles situated along the east margin of the right-of-way which are owned and maintained by utility purveyors. Access: 92nd Ave W. currently serves as legal access to four single family properties along the easterly margin, and also serves as one several access points to "Westgate Chapel" to the west. Permanent access easements to each property east of 92nd Ave. W. will be preserved as part of vacation proceedings. Westgate Chapel currently owns all abutting properties which take access from 92nd Ave. W, except tax parcel 00555300200106 which lies at the southeast corner of 92nd Ave. W. and 228th St. S.W. The existing single family detached home on said lot is addressed as 9126 228th St. S.W., although it takes vehicular access from 92nd Ave. W. All other properties southerly of the existing terminus of 92nd Ave. W. take access from either Edmonds Way, or other public roadways to the east.The Sequoyah Condominiums - Phases 1 and 5 lie directlly south of the subject site. Three smaller individual tax parcels lie west of the Sequoyah development and take access from Edmonds Way. Westgate Chapel owns all remaining property directly west and south of 92nd Ave. W., along with Lots 8,9 and 10, Belt Add No 6 which abut the east margin of said roadway. The aforementioned tax parcel at the southwest corner of the intersection of 228th St. S.W. and 92nd Ave. W. is owned by Claudia Marie Walters and Larry Wayne according to county assessor tax records. The Walters have signed the vacation petition. 10807 25th Street SE ♦ Lake Stevens, Washington 98258 ♦ jamese-a@msn.com r a Attachml Packet Pg. 103 7.1.a 92nd Ave. W. proposed street vacation Westgate Chapel, Inc. June 20, 2016 Zoning/Comprehensive Plan: Incorporated city limits abut the east margin of 92nd Ave W. with lands immediately east under jurisdiction of Snohomish County. The county zoning designation for properties immediately east of 92nd Ave W. is R-8400, a single family low density urban residential zone. Lands to the north of 228th St. S.W. lying easterly of 92nd Ave. W. are similarly zoned. The Sequoyah Condominiums to the east of 92nd and south are zoned PRD-MR (Planned Residential Development — Multifamily Residential). A small portion of the Westgate Chapel property which abuts the southerly margin of 228th St. S.W. west of 92nd Ave. W is zoned RS-8 (8,000 sq. ft. lots), as are lands to the north. That portion of the church ownership north of 228th St. S.W. is part of an existing parking lot which serves the church. The remainder of the church ownership south of 228th St. S.W. within the city is zoned RM-1.5 Multi Family (1,500 sq. ft. of lot area per unit), as are the three smaller tax parcels which abut Edmonds Way that are not church owned. The Future Land Use Map for Snohomish County's Comprehensive Plan depicts lands to the immediate east of 92nd Ave W. as Urban High Density Residential. Land west of 92nd Ave W. lies within the City of Edmonds. City comprehensive plan maps designate lands west of 92nd Ave. W as follows: South of 228th St. S.W. — This is the main church site which is designated within the Edmonds Way Corridor which lists compatible zoning categories as BP BN, BC or similar commercial zones; and RM zones; North of 228th St. S.W. — This area is shown as Single Family — Urban 1, which is consistent with existing RS-8 zoning. The proposed action: As they represent all properties which front the proposed portion of 92nd Ave. W., Westgate Chapel and the Walters mutually propose vacation of 92nd Ave. W. south of 228th St. S.W. where it abuts their respective ownerships. Permanent access easements will be provided to all affected existing ownerships at the time of formal approval of the vacation. Easements will also be granted in favor of all existing purveyors who maintain facilities within the existing right-of-way. Finally, the accompanying exhibits are hereby submitted for consideration by the city as provided for in Edmonds Municipal Code. Please contact me as the primary contact for the vacation request as things progress. Thank you. Jim Egge, Project Planner JAMES EGGE & ASSOCIATES ENCL. Cc Westgate Chapel, Inc. (attn: Pastor Brent McAtee) r Q Attachmj Packet Pg. 104 ,, : ECEIVED PETITION FOR STREET OR ALLEY VACATION JUN 2 0 2016 TO: THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASIIINNGTON DEVELOPMENT SERVICES We, the undersigned owners of two-thirds of the real property abutting upon that public right-of-way described below, pursuant to RCW 35,79.010, do hereby petition the City of Edmonds to vacate said public right-of-way, described as follows: A portion of City of Edmonds existing public right-of-way for 92nd Ave. W as described on attached EXHIBIT A. all situate in the City of Edmonds, County of Snohomish, State of Washington, and request that said City Council by Resolution fix a time and place when this Petition shall be heard and determined by that authority, which time shall not be more than sixty (60) days nor less than twenty (20) days after the passage of such Resolution. These pages are a group of pages containing an identical text and prayer intended by the signers of this Petition to be presented and considered as one Petition and may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures which cumulatively may be considered as a single Petition. WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these petitions, or signs a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he. or she is otherwise not qualified to sing, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. PRAYER OF PETITION: For the vacation of public right -of -Way —�� Brent McAtee vvestgate unapei Inc. zzuui tamonas way Edmonds, WA 98020-5039 Larry Wayne Walters 9126 228th St SW, Edmonds, WA 98026-8463 Claudia Marie Walters (same) Page_,__ of-1— Mvw=Xorna-sov-N Attachment: Exhibit 1 - PLN20160032 Staff Report with Attachments (1643 : Public Hearing on a proposal to Vacate a Portion of 92nd Ave W) 7.1.a 1 31 } -T 01 I ' 1 rr= 1 00,1 , AF NCO. 982137 I I � JUN 2 0 2016 ,- - --� - - !_(PMENtr I42 I 41 40 I _ r_L_ 02 I I I II E. TN0. 14 30' AF NO. 1214687 34 33 343 44 I 45 I 2287H STREET S.W. N 25 3o M 10.00' N S013'09"E 20.0]` 3s 31 a .�... f �.._.. T._.. �. _ b 1 I I P.0.8 S88'22'55"E I II 4 I 130, 30' S88'41'25"E 30.02' I 30.01' TAX 06 04 I 05 I 03 "WESTGATE CHAPEL I "05553002-1 LOT 1, BiX 2, RIDGE ACRES D0106 AF NO. 262998 / TAX #0054620000100 #0054520000101 I J Y � AREA OF YACATTO J� / PARCEL A. CITY OF o 20,323 SF EDMONDS LOT LINE ADJT. TAX $ 3 N0, LL 2006-026 �w 0391000000800 e / GAF NO, 200703025001 / z �-- — - TAX 9 z 30' 1 #04391000000900 C3 TAX #00391000001000 400 v� S61'49'47-iN 10 / 33.96' Ir/ 5 / N NO'13'09"W / 91.85' L _ ljN "•88'42'29"W 30.01' \ I SEQUOCONDOMINIUM �s AF NO.. 200704125001 ISHEETJOF STREET VACATION GROUP FOURln. 1 ESTGATE CHAPEL nd-ACITY OF EDMONDS P.°.BOX 14g)#0841� AK(W6M134f'wwwGRP�mwnsez5a Attachml Packet Pg. 106 7.1.a RECEIVED ED EXHIBIT A JUN 2 ® 2016 LEGAL DESCRXPTION OF CITY of EDMONDS STREET vACATl2H EVELOPMENTSERACES THAT PORTION OF CITY OF EDMONDS EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY, BEING A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN OF 228TH STREET S.W. AND THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN 92ND AVENUE W., SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, RIDGE ACRES, PER PLAT RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 262998; THENCE SOUTH 0013'09" EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN OF 92ND AVENUE W., A DISTANCE OF 375.41 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY PLAT BOUNDARY OF SEQUOYAH, A CONDOMINIUM, PER PLAT RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 200704125001; THENCE NORTH 88042'29" WEST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY PLAT BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 30.01 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF PARCEL "A" OF CITY OF EDMONDS LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO, LL 2006-026, RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 200703025001; THENCE NORTH 0013'09" WEST ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE OF PARCEL "A", A DISTANCE OF 91.85 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 61049'47" WEST CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE OF PARCEL "A", A DISTANCE OF 33.96 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0013'09" WEST CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE OF PARCEL "A A DISTANCE OF 310.46 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL "A", SAID NORTHEASTERLY CORNER ALSO BEING THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN OF 228TH STREET S.W. AND THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN 92"' AVENUE W.; THENCE SOUTH 88022'55" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 30.02 FEET TO A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF 92ND AVENUE W., SAID POINT LYING SOUTH 0°13'09" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 20.01 FEET FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 36; THENCE SOUTH 0013'09" EAST ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, A DISTANCE OF 10.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88041'25" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 30.01 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SITUATE IN THE CITY OF EDMONDS, COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. CONTAINING 20,323 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS. 1 OF 1 Attachmj Packet Pg. 107 7.1.a APPRAISAL GROUP OF THE NORTHWEST LLP Appraisal of the Westgate Chapel Right of Way Acquisition located at 22901 Edmonds Way Edmonds, WA 98020 for Mr. James Egge Right of Way Consultant James Egge & Associates 10807 25th St SE Lake Stevens, WA 98258 by James B. Price, MAI, SR/WA Glenn L. Price, Appraiser Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP 1409 140th Place NE, Suite 105 Bellevue, WA 98007 V. A-5183 JUN 20 �016 DEVELOPMENT SEpMCES Attachml Packet Pg. 108 7.1.a Mr. James Egge Right of Way Consultant James Egge & Associates 10807 25th St SE Lake Stevens, WA 98258 Parcel No.: 005462000001E00, 00546200000101 Owner: West ate Cha el Inc. Federal Aid No: N/A Proiect: 92nd Avenue West Street Vacation R/W Plan Title: N/A Mau Sheet: 1 of 1 Map Approval Date: Date of Last Mau Revision: Certificate of Appraiser I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: ♦ The statements of fact contained in this appraisal are true and correct; ♦ The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal, impartial, unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions; ♦ I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this appraisal, and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved; ♦ My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined value or direction that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value estimate, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event; ♦ My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this appraisal has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice; ♦ I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report. I have made a personal exterior inspection of the comparable sales contained in the report addenda; ♦ I have afforded the owner or a designated representative of the property that is the subject of this appraisal the opportunity to accompany me on the inspection of the property; ♦ No one provided significant professional assistance to the persons signing this report; ♦ I have disregarded any increase in Fair Market Value caused by the proposed public improvement or its likelihood prior to the date of valuation. I have disregarded any decrease in Fair Market Value caused by the proposed public improvement or its likelihood prior to the date of valuation, except physical deterioration within the reasonable control of the owner; ♦ This appraisal has been made in conformity with the appropriate State and Federal laws and requirements, and complies with the contract between the agency and the appraiser; ♦ The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute regarding review by its duly authorized representatives; ♦ The appraisal report was prepared in conformity with the Appraisal Foundation's Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. ♦ We have performed no appraisal services for this parcel in the last three years. The property has been appraised for its fair market value as though owned in fee simple, or as encumbered only by the existing easements as described in the right of way diagram dated 9/9/2014. The opinion of value expressed below is the result of, and is subject to, the data and conditions described in detail. I made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report on 2/25/2016. The Date of Value for the property that is the subject of this appraisal is 2/25/2016. Per the FAIR MARKET VALUE definition herein, the value conclusions for the property that is the subject of this appraisal are on a cash basis and are: FAIR MARKET VALUE BEFORE ACQUISITION $2,166,000 FAIR MARKET VALUE AFTER ACQUISITION $2,369,000 DIFFERENCE $203,000 Notice to Proceed Date: Date Signed: May 23, 2016 Signature: Washington State Certified General Real Estate Certification Number Date Signed: May 23, 2016 Signature: Washington State Certified General Real Estate Certification Number February 13, 2014 James B. Price, MAI, SR/WA Cert. # 1100229 Glenn L. Price, Appraiser Cert. # 1101927 r a Appraisers: Price & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP Parcel# 00546200000100, 0054S2IIQ 040 _ Packet Pg. 109 Page 2 7.1.a Assignment Scope of Work The client of this report is James Egge & Associates . In the event of conflict or dispute in determining correct appraisal procedures that are not addressed in the standards noted above, the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions (Yellow Book) will be the determining authority. Eminent Domain Appraisal Information and Definitions The intended use of this appraisal is to provide information to the client, James Egge & Associates , as a basis for acquiring the portion of the subject property needed for the proposed project. Unless stated otherwise in the report, the property rights appraised constitute the fee simple interest. "Fair Market Value" is defined as: the amount in cash which a well-informed buyer, willing but not obliged to buy the property, would pay, and which a well-informed seller, willing but not obligated to sell it would accept, taking into consideration all uses to which the property is adapted and might in reason be applied (Washington Pattern Instruction 150.08). The intended user of this report is primarily the client, James Egge & Associates . Additionally, its funding partners may review the appraisal as part of their oversight activities. A copy of this report may be provided to the property owner as a courtesy and part of the good faith bargaining process. However, this does not imply that the property owner has standing as an intended user and is not authorized to publish or use the report for any other purpose. In condemnation, the larger parcel is the portion of a property that has unity of ownership, contiguity, and unity of use, the three conditions that establish the larger parcel for consideration of severance damages. This is also known as the "parent parcel." A review of the tax records indicate that the two Subject parcels have unity of ownership, contiguity, and use; therefore, we conclude the subject's two parcels is the larger or "parent parcel." Though there is also another parcel to the north that has unity of ownership and contiguity, the improvements are separate and not associated with the same tenants, therefore are not considered to be part of the larger parcel as they do not share unity of use. Extraordinary assumptions or hypothetical conditions include, but may not be limited to, the following: State and Federal standards require the appraiser to disregard any decrease or increase in the fair market value of the subject caused by the project. The appraiser may cite the Jurisdictional Exception Rule to comply with this requirement which is found in RCW 8.26.180 and WAC 468-100-102 (2). The after value is based on the assumption that the project has been constructed as proposed on the Right of Way plans as of the date of value. The subject has been appraised as if there were no environmental hazards or contamination. However, any apparent environmental hazards or contamination observed or discovered during the appraisal process must and will be noted in the report. Appraisers: Price & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP Parcel# 00546200000100, 005AUAIW A Packet Pg. 110 Page 3 7.1.a APPRAISAL ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS 1. The property description supplied to the appraiser is assumed to be correct. 2. No survey of the property has been made or reviewed by the appraiser, and no responsibility is assumed in connection with such matters. Illustrative material, including maps and plot plans, utilized in this report are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property. Property dimensions and sizes are considered to be approximate. 3. No responsibility is assumed for matters of a legal nature affecting title to the property, nor is any opinion of title rendered. Property titles are assumed to be good and merchantable unless otherwise stated 4. Information furnished by others is believed to be true, correct, and reliable. However, no responsibility for its accuracy is assumed by the appraiser. 5. All mortgages, liens, encumbrances, leases, and servitude have been disregarded unless so specified within the report. The property is assumed to be under responsible, financially sound ownership and competent management. 6. It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil, or structures which would render the property more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for arranging for engineering studies which may be required to discover them. 7. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous material, which may or may not be present on the property, was not observed by the appraiser. However, the appraiser is not qualified to detect such substances. The presence of substances such as asbestos, urea -formaldehyde foam insulation or other potentially hazardous materials may affect the value of the property. The value conclusions in this report are predicated on the assumption that there are no such materials on or in the property that would cause a loss of value. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions, or for the expertise required to discover them. The client is urged to retain an expert in this field if desired. The analysis and value conclusions in this report are null and void should any hazardous material be discovered. 8. It is assumed that, if hazardous materials, substances or waste are known or suspected to exist, the property to be acquired will be delivered clean and free of any such hazardous materials, substances or waste, unless otherwise stated in the appraisal report. It is assumed that the grantor(s), or any party of interest, agrees to indemnify the acquiring agency and hold harmless the acquiring agency for any costs or liabilities associated with the removal or remediation of any hazardous substances that have been released, or otherwise come to be located on the site, during the grantor's ownership or operation of the site, including those that may have migrated from the site through water or soil to other properties. "Hazardous substances" shall include all those substances identified as hazardous under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 9601 et seq. and the Washington Model Toxics Control Act, RCW 70.105.010 et seq.; and shall include gasoline and other petroleum products. "Costs" shall include but not be limited to all response costs, disposal fees, investigatory costs, monitoring costs, civil or criminal penalties, and attorney fees and other litigation costs incurred in complying with state or federal environmental laws, which shall include but not be limited to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 9601; the Clean Water Act 33 U.S.C. Section 1251; the Clean Air Act 42 U.S.C. Section 7401; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 6901; and the Washington Model Toxics Control Act, RCW 70.105D.010. It is further assumed that the grantors shall retain any and all liabilities arising from the offsite disposal, handling, treatment, storage, or transportation of any hazardous substances, including petroleum products, removed from the site by the grantors or their employees or agents. 9. Unless otherwise stated in this report, no environmental impact studies were either requested or made in conjunction with this report. The appraiser reserves the right to alter, amend, revise, or rescind any opinions of value based upon any subsequent environmental impact studies, research, or investigation. 10. It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental regulations and laws unless noncompliance is specified, defined, and considered in this report. 11. It is assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions have been complied with, unless non -conformity has been specified, defined and considered in this report. 12. It is assumed that all required licenses, certificates of occupancy, consents, or other legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, or federal governmental or private entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use on which the value estimate is based. 13. The appraiser will not be required to give testimony or appear in court because of having made this report, unless arrangements have previously been made. 14. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not cant' with it the right of publication. It may not be used for any purpose by any person other than the client without the written consent of the appraiser and, in any event, only with properly written qualification and only in its entirety. 15. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, or copy thereof, shall be conveyed to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or any other media without written consent and approval of the appraiser. Nor shall the appraiser, client, firm, or professional organization of which the appraiser is a member be identified without the written consent of the appraiser. 16. The liability of the appraiser, employees, and subcontractors is limited to the client only. There is no accountability, obligation, or liability to any third party. If this report is placed in the hands of anyone other than the client, the client shall make such party aware of all limiting conditions and assumptions of the assignment and related discussions. The appraiser is in no way responsible for any costs incurred to discover or correct any deficiencies of the property. 17. It is assumed that the public project, which is the object of this report, will be constructed in the manner proposed and in the foreseeable future. 18. Acceptance and/or use of this report constitutes acceptance of the foregoing assumptions and limiting conditions. r a Appraisers: Price & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP Parcel# 00546200000100; ODqNU(1APacket Pg. 111 Page 4 7.1.a SUBJECT PARCEL MAP The subject whole property, access frontages, "North arrow", camera location and direction of each subject photo on the following pages are shown below. r a Appraisers: Price & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP Parcel# 00546200000100„QO aCg0001 Packet Pg. 112 Page 5 7.1.a RIGHT OF WAY EXHIBIT 11 12 13 37 � � 30 1 „_ 160' 36 j 31 I; M �� 38 16�' W F {2 s �I 39 551 1 40 PINECREST AF M. 952137 01 I ROBERT E. THOMAS NO. 14 C ' AF NO. 1214 7 f I ¢8 ! I 02 0 34 35 33 .I L361 1 32 30 1 43 44 45 4S � - � - 50,13'09"E — Ta�, �r as 30 10.00' _ sa•13'09'e 20.01 36 31 - - - - - I I I `P.O.'a588'22'55E 3a'30" S88'4125'E30.02' 1- 30.01' 1WESTCAS CHAPEL" o i °+ t as 03 I D+ I 02 — — vi LOT 1, SUL. 2, RID6E ACRES / A L AF ND. 262448� i / TAX /0054620000100 , / JW546200DOIDI EA OF &;A� - / / k' TAX 20,8323 5F w 3 2 1 / PARCEL A, CITY OF :., $ 10aouao6m o - EOMONDS LOT UNE ADJT. / M !2 NO. ILL L 2006-026 i I AF NO 2007 25001 LTA s I r4 Y -� — 9 � ; 4S• 'f � T S61'49'47'W 10� 391000001000 5 6 7 $air N0'13. -w !� 91.85' \ - ItN88 42'29'W - 30.01' % SEOWYAH CONDOMINIUM PHASES I - 5• AF NO 200704125001 SHEET of STREET VACATION 1 ESTATE CHAPEL GROUP FOUR.. 1 J1 cnE.,nr� CITY OF EDMONDS OTA � O � P� O BOX /059 / 1911 VERMON ROAD SUITE 'A, LAKE STEVENS, WA 86758 SNOHOMISH CO. WASHINGTON nww 2s)4oa1152 • FAXr42SJB77.1341 • ».GRPl.com Appraisers: Price & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP Parcel# 00546200000100'AMthfil Packet Pg. 113 Page 6 7.1.a PHOTOGRAPHS OF ALL PRINCIPAL IMPROVEMENTS AND/OR FEATURES AFFECTING VALUE 1. Looking West along 228th St SW from across the Street from the NE Corner of the Subject L. Looxmg aoutn along Acquisition Area of YL Taken By: Glenn L. Price Ave w trom the iv w i.orner Date Taken: 4/20/2016 r Q Appraisers: Price & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP Parcel# 00546200000100QM6MPacket Pg. 114 Page 7 7.1.a 3. Looking North along 92" d Ave W from the Southern Edge of the Acquisition Area 4. Looking SW at the Church Land from the NE Corner of the Acquisition Area Taken By: Glenn L. Price Date Taken: 4/20/2016 r a Appraisers: Price & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP Parcel# 00546200000100, 5ft packet pg. 115 Page 8 APPRAISAL REPORT 1. OWNER: Westgate Chapel, Inc. 2. LOCATION OF SUBJECT: The subject is located adjacent to and east of 22901 Edmonds Way in the City of Edmonds. According to a survey completed by Group Four for the client, there is approximately 20,323 SF of land in 92"d Ave W to be vacated. Since the vacated street cannot be valued in itself, the value will be determined after being added to the value of the adjacent parcel to the west, which is our Subject. 3. SUBJECT LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Refer to the Addenda. The Subject has Tax Parcel Numbers 00546200000100, 00546200000101 according to Snohomish County property records. 4. DELINEATION OF TITLE (10 years): According to public record, the subject has not transferred between parties in the last 10 years. There is no evidence that the subject property has been offered for sale in the past 3 years. 5. THE APPRAISAL PROBLEM AND APPRAISER'S SCOPE OF WORK: This appraisal is for the 92nd Avenue West Street Vacation project. 92"d Ave West will be vacated by the City of Edmonds below 228th Street Southwest. This appraisal is for a fee acquisition of 20,323 square feet within the existing right of way along the east side of the Subject property that includes the Westgate Chapel and parking area. The value of improvements situated within the acquisition area including gravel and asphalt installed by the city of Edmonds will be reimbursed. The value of the vacated street is predicated upon the across -the -fence value of the property to the west (owned by the Westgate Chapel). The amount to be paid for the street is based on its value as additional land to the property to the west with the same highest and best use. 6. PROPERTY RIGHTS TO BE ACQUIRED AND EFFECTS OF ACQUISITION/ PROJECT: This is the full acquisition of the ROW (Right of Way) inside 92nd Avenue W. based on the exhibit provided earlier. The public street will be vacated into private hands and all easements will remain in place (including some that must be created subsequent to this appraisal for existing utilities). All of the site improvements that have been installed by the City of Edmonds must be reimbursed. 7. DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: Neighborhood: A neighborhood can be defined as an area of complementary land z uses. A neighborhood's boundaries identify the area that influences the value of the _J a. subject property. The subject is located in the city of Edmonds in a suburban area of Snohomish County. Edmonds is located approximately equidistant between Seattle to the south and Everett to the northeast, both of which are about 12 miles away. It is z surrounded by the cities of Woodway, Mountlake Terrace, and Lynnwood. w r The subject's immediate neighborhood is situated in a south central area of the City of Edmonds, just to the west of a pocket of unincorporated Snohomish County completely surrounded by Edmonds. This area consists primarily of single- and multi -family r housing with neighborhood commercial development at key intersections. Q Appraisers: Price & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP Parcel# 00546200000100A10ff Packet Pg. 116 7.1.a Page 9 Primary access is provided by Interstate 5 and Highway 99, both of which are generally north/south arterials, and by Highway 104, the main NW/SE arterial that leads from I-5 to the southeast to the Edmonds CBD (Central Business District) to the northwest. Subject: The Subject has a total site area in the Valuation -Before of 3.93 acres or about 171,191 SF with the majority of the level site at grade with the frontage streets. The subject is zoned RM 1.5 which allows for multifamily development. The highest and best use for the overall site as vacant would be for a multifamily development. A. Present Use: The lot is currently developed with a church that was constructed in 1979 and is currently in operation. B. Accessibility and Road Frontages: The Subject is a corner lot with access along its frontage streets of 228th Street SW to the north and 92na Ave W to the south. C. Land Contour and Elevations: The lot has a level topography and is at the grade of the fronting streets. D. Land Area: The lot size is 171,191 SF in the before. E. Land Shape: The lot is an irregularly shaped parcel, but the shape is not restrictive to development. F. Utilities: All utilities are reported to be available to the site at the street. These include water, sewer, electricity, and telephone. G. Present Zoning: Since the ROW currently functions as a public street, it does not have a zoning designation. However, if it were added to the adjacent land to the west (the Subject), the vacated street would most likely be rezoned to the same zoning as that parcel. The adjacent lot is zoned RM 1.5 (Multifamily Residential 1,500 SF/Unit), a designation to reserve and regulate areas for a variety of housing types, and a range of greater densities than are available in the single-family residential zone, while still maintaining a residential environment. It also provides for those additional uses which complement and are compatible with multiple residential uses. There is a minimum setback from the street of 15 feet, 10 feet from the sides, and 15 feet from the rear. The maximum building height is 25 feet and maximum lot coverage ratio is 45%. The minimum lot area for each unit is 1,500 SF. Though there is technically a strip of single-family zoning along the northern edge of the adjacent land, the comprehensive plan will allow this area to be rezoned RM 1.5 according to the City of Edmonds planning department, therefore this adjacent zoning was not considered. The land to the east of the subject is not in the City of Edmonds, but rather unincorporated Snohomish County. Zoning cannot carry over across the city boundary since Edmonds and Snohomish County have different zoning codes, so only adjacent zonings within the Edmonds City Limits can be considered. Number of Potential Units in the Before In order to estimate how many units are possible for the Subject land, we will use the SF before the acquisition of 171,191 SF. Now we must divide by the base density Appraisers: Price & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP Parcel# 00546200000100AOffyc packet pg. 117 Page 10 7.1.a allowed by zoning, which is 1,500 SF/potential dwelling unit, to figure out how many units would theoretically be allowed by zoning. 171,191 SF / 1,500 SF/DU = 114 Potential Dwelling Units H. Highest and Best Use As If Vacant: Introduction: The Highest and Best Use is defined as that reasonable and probable use that supports the highest present fair market value as of the effective date of the appraisal. The highest and best use of a property must meet four criteria: physically possible; legally permissible; financially feasible and maximally productive. There are two types of highest and best use: that of the property as if vacant and of the property as improved. In each situation, the highest and best use must meet four criteria. Physically Possible — Uses of the property that are physically possible; Legally Permissible — Uses of the property allowed by land use and deed restrictions; Financially Feasible — Possible and legitimate uses, which produce a net return to the property's owner; Maximally Productive — The feasible use of the property, which produces the highest net return or highest present worth, the Highest and Best Use. The highest and best use concept is based upon traditional appraisal theory and reflects the attitudes of typical buyers and sellers who recognize that value is predicated on future benefits. This theory is based upon wealth maximization of the owner. The highest and best use of the property as if vacant and available for use may be different from the highest and best use of the improved property, if applicable. This is valid when the improvement is not a suitable one, but still makes a contribution to the total property value in excess of the land value. In estimating the highest and best use, the following tests must be satisfied to meet the above criteria: the use must be legal; it needs to be probable, not speculative or surmised; and there must be a profitable demand for such use giving the highest net return for the longest period of time. Highest and Best Use — Unimproved: Physically Possible: The use to which a site can be developed can be affected by its size, shape, topography, access, and soil type. The Subject site is an irregularly shaped parcel containing an area of 171,191 square feet. The site has a level topography that is at the grade of its fronting street. All utilities are reported to be available to the site or available in the street. Legally Permissible: The ROW currently does not have a zoning category as it is being used as a public street. However, if it were available on the open market, it would be rezoned for private use. Based on land uses in the area and the adjacent RM-1.5 zoning of the Subject to the west, we are making the extraordinary assumption that the Subject Appraisers: Price & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP Parcel# 00546200000100 0 46210001 Packet Pg. 118 7.1.a Page 11 would be zoned RM-1.5. Based on our calculations above, the site could be developed with 114 dwelling units. Financially Feasible: A financially feasible use of the subject site, if vacant, would be development for a multi -family use. The current market conditions for multi -family development in the greater Puget Sound region have been strong, even through the recent recession. The expected continued growth within the neighborhood indicates a financially feasible option for the Subject. Maximally Productive: The subject site is suited for a variety of development possibilities that would be maximally productive. The size, location, and supporting infrastructure indicate a multi -family development, which would maximize the development as allowed by the RM-1.5 zoning. Conclusion of Highest and Best Use as "if vacant": The highest and best use of the subject site if vacant is for a multi -family development. I. Improvements: No improvements must be addressed in the Before condition. J. Specialty Items: N/A K. Real Estate Taxes: The following is the county's indication of assessed value. The Adjacent Land is being used for religious purposes so no taxes are assessed. TOTAL ASSESSED VALUATION 2016 Assessed Value: Land Improvements Total Taxes (2016) P/N 00546200000100, 00546200000101 L. Assessments Current and Pending: N/A M. Existing Lease or Rental Data: N/A $3,386,500 $6,644,400 $10,030,900 Exempt N. Highest and Best Use of the Whole Property As Improved: The subject improvements provide a significant contribution to the land as it is currently being used as a public street. The cost to install the road must be reimbursed to the City of Edmonds as the road will remain usable after the acquisition. N ++ c as E M Q 3 0 a a� 0 Cn N M 0 0 to 0 N Z J a x w _ a) E z n: Q Appraisers: Price & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP Parcel# 00546200000100Aof ff fd Packet Pg. 119 Page 12 7.1.a 8. APPROACHES TO VALUE: There are three accepted methods of evaluating all types of real property: the cost approach, the sales comparison approach, and the income capitalization approach. All three approaches are used when applicable. When sufficient information is not available, only those approaches or that approach containing the most information is used and/or relied upon. Cost Approach The cost approach to value arises from the economic concept of objective value. This concept implies that the value of anything is the cost incurred to create it. This approach is based upon the estimated reproduction or replacement cost of the improvements. The cost is then reduced in value by the accrued depreciation, if any. The depreciated value of site improvements, if any, and estimated land value are then added to the depreciated reproduction cost of the improvements to develop an indication of value by the cost approach. Sales Comparison Approach The sales comparison approach method of valuation reflects the opinion of buyers and sellers of comparable property about the value of the subject property. The sales comparison approach is based on the principle of substitution: no well-informed, prudent buyer is going to pay more for any property than is necessary to buy another equally desirable substitute property. The sales comparison approach requires the appraiser to assume the role of a typical buyer; gather sufficient data; and analyze, weigh, and adjust the data in such a manner as to properly apply this information to the property being appraised. Income Capitalization Approach The income capitalization approach method of valuation is used primarily in the appraisal of investment property. Therefore, the appraiser must analyze the rental value of the comparable properties and, in addition, obtain background information on what a prudent investor in this type of property expects as a return on investment. From this information, a return on the invested capital can be ascertained and then applied to the subject property's market rent to develop a reliable indication of value based on income. The rent paid or income received, commonly known as contract rent, is not always market rent for a given property. In other words, a survey of comparable properties must be made for the purpose of obtaining rental information to ascertain the going or market rent for comparable properties and the subject property. This information must then be related to the subject property being appraised. The income capitalization approach is the primary approach used in arriving at the indicated market value for income -producing property. Approaches to Value Used All three approaches to value have been considered in estimating the market value of the subject. However, the cost and income capitalization approaches, although considered, are not applicable to the valuation of the subject property: the cost approach, because the valuation is for land only, and the income capitalization approach, because these kinds of properties do not normally produce ground rent. Only the most appropriate approach to value, the sales comparison approach, has been utilized. Appraisers: Price & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP Parcel# 0054620000010MWI110 W Packet Pg. 120 7.1.a Page 13 9. VALUATION -BEFORE: (A) Site Valuation: (1) Sales Comparison Approach: In the sales comparison approach, the value of a property is estimated by comparing it with similar properties in its market area. This approach is based on the premise that the value of a property is set by the prices of equally desirable substitute properties in the same area. In the Before, we will value the Adjacent Lot to the west of the Subject. In this section, the market value of the fee simple interest of the site, as vacant, will be estimated by comparing it with recent sales of vacant land located in the subject property's neighborhood or in surrounding neighborhoods having similar characteristics. Comparable sales were selected with consideration given to the subject's current attributes, which include zoning, size, amenities, and location. (a) Scope of Data Search: The data search was accomplished using public records, NWMLS, CBA, and CoStar. The search period included sales occurring in the city of Edmonds and surrounding neighborhoods of Snohomish and King Counties. In order to reflect current market conditions, the search included sales from the last three years and the closest in proximity to the subject property with similar site sizes and highest and best use considerations. Sale Idendfica6m Sale Date Sale Pdm Ulk / hits Sue (SF) ` vp, Sub 22901 Gdnrnnds Way, Edmonds 85 171.191 1,511 1 2130548th Ave W, Mountlake Tenace 12/31/13 $500,000 $18,519/lot 27 59,219.00 1,645 2 7907230th St SW., EdnDnds 6115/15 $625,000 $3Z895/lot 19 39204.00 1,548 1. 3 114615 Madison Way, Lynn"ood 4/1/16 $3,200,000 $17,77WIot 180 472,625.00 1,969 4 17xxT F_205th, Shoreline 12/1/14 $1,725,000 $15,972/lot 108 32.200.00 224 (b) General Discussion: N/A (c) Comparative Analyses: Unit of Comparison The most prevalent indicator of value for multifamily land is the $/Unit (Price per Unit). Adjustments The limited number of sales in the subject's immediate area and lack of uniformity within this market prevent direct extraction of reliable paired -sale adjustments from the marketplace. Any attempt to apply paired -sales adjustments for this property is somewhat subjective and unreliable. Therefore, a general bracketing analysis reflecting market behavior is utilized to determine which Sales are generally superior or inferior to the subject site. This analysis establishes value parameters for the subject allowing for a final conclusion of value. A brief discussion of the various adjustments applied to the comparable sales is presented below: Appraisers: Price & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP Parcel# 00546200000100, 5ft packet pg. 121 Page 14 7.1.a Time of Sale — This adjustment is caused by changes in market conditions between the time of sale of a comparable and the date of the appraisal of the subject. Changes in market conditions may be caused by inflation, deflation, fluctuations in supply and demand, or other factors. The sales utilized are fairly recent, dating back to late 2013. Rents in the greater Seattle metro area rose about 12% last year and the apartment market in the Seattle area is one of the strongest in the nation, fueled in part by skyrocketing single-family values. We have made an adjustment of 12% per year to all Sales. Adjustments to Market Corrected Sales Prices The bracketing analysis will be based on the values of the Sales including a market adjustment for sale date. Total Site Area — The Subject gross site area is 171,191 square feet. For multifamily land, we have not found a reliable correlation between the size of the lot and the $/Unit, so we have made no adjustments. Zoning — The zoning of the Subject and the Sales have similar highest and best uses, so no adjustments have been made. While there are inherent differences between zoning regulations between municipalities, the differences are primarily due to allowable density, which is adjusted for later in this analysis. Location —We have only made a downward adjustment to Sale 3 since it is in a statistically inferior market compared to the Subject. Access — Sale 4 has superior access to the freeway compared to the Subject and all of the Sales, so a downward adjustment has been made. Shape — None of the Sales or the Subject have a restrictive shape so no adjustments have been made. Critical Areas — When environmentally critical areas are present it can distort the density calculation for the analysis. Sale 2 does have environmentally sensitive areas, reflected in the lowest density of development for all of the Sales. We have made no adjustment as discussed below in the Density section. Topography — All of the Sales and the Subject are considered to have similar topography so no adjustments have been made. Utilities — All of the Sales have similar access to utilities. Other — Sales 1 and 2 will be developed with townhomes instead of apartments. We have not made an adjustment, but due to this fact, Sales 1 and 2 are given lower reliance in the final reconciliation. Preliminary Approval — Multifamily properties often sell with preliminary approval for a project that drastically reduces the time from sale of the property until breaking ground on the project compared to those properties that sold without preliminary design approval in place. The Subject does not currently have a development plan in place that has been given preliminary approval by the City of Edmonds, but all of the sales do have preliminary approval. We have used a paired sales analysis to analyze the difference in sales price for properties that sold with Appraisers: Price & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP Parcel# 00546200000100TYRIQQQ( Packet Pg. 122 7.1.a Page 15 approval verses those that did not, and an appropriate downward adjustment has been made. Density (SF/Unit) — This accounts for the difference in density of development for all of the Sales compared to the Subject. On a unit basis, far denser developments tend to achieve a lower $/Unit, so we have made an upward adjustment to Sale 4. Though Sale 2 has a higher density compared to the other Sales, this is due in part to the presence of critical areas as discussed earlier, so it is likely that the effective density is significantly lower, therefore we have made no adjustment. r Q Appraisers: Price & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP Parcel# 00546200000100Attge Packet Pg. 123 Page 16 COMPARABLE LAND SUMMARY GRID Subject Comparable Sale 1 A ' Comparable Sale 2 Adj. Comparable Sale 3 A ' Co able Sale 4 A ' Location 22901 Edmonds Way, Edmonds 21305 48th Ave W, Mountlake Terrace 7907 230th St SW, Edmonds 14615 Madison Way, Lynnwood 17xxNE 205th St, Shoreline Sale Price $500,000 $625,000 $3,200,000 $1,725,000 Sale Price/Unit $18,519 $32,895 $17,778 $15,972 Date of Sale 12/31/2013 28% 6/15/2015 11% 4/1/2016 1% 12/1/2014 17% Adj. Price / Unit $23,724 $36,399 $17,971 $18,703 # of Units 114 Potential Units 27 Potential Units - 19 Potential Unils -- 180 Potential Units + 108 Potential Units Total Site Area 171,191 59,219 39,204 472,625 32,200 Zonis RM-1.5 Park West Condo. Conplex MR MR CB Location Average Similar I Similar Inferior + Similar Access Average Similar Similar Similar Good - Shape Irregular -Unrestricted i Irregular -Unrestricted Rectangular Irregular -Unrestricted Rectangular Critical Areas None Known None Known None Known Yes None Known To r Level Similar Similar Similar Similar Utilities All Availlable Same Same Same Same Prelim Approvai No Yes - Yes - Yes - Yes - Density SF/Unit 1,502 2,193 2,063 2,626 298 ++ Other Potential A artments Townhomes Townhomes Apartments Apartments Net Lot A '. Superior -- Far Superior --- Slightly Inferior I + Inferior + Attachment: Exhibit 1 - PLN20160032 Staff Report with Attachments (1643 : Public Hearing on a proposal to Vacate a Portion of 92nd Ave W) 7.1.a Page 17 Comparable Analysis A search for similar sites conducted in the subject's neighborhood produced a relatively limited number of sales. The selected land sales, including competitive neighborhoods, are detailed in the Addenda of this report. Each sale will be briefly described. It should be recognized that the comparable sales vary from the subject in several factors, but allow a bracketing process to be developed to establish a reasonable value range for the subject. (d) Correlation and Conclusions of Sales Comparison Approach to Land Value Before: The sales, taken as a whole, indicate an unadjusted sale price of $15,972 to $32,895 per Unit. The bracketing analysis is based on the market adjusted sale prices that have an adjusted range of $17,971 to $36,399 per unit. Most emphasis was placed on Sale 3 since it will be developed with apartments and sold very recently in 2016. Sale 4 was given secondary weight since the density allowed is so much higher, but a similar quantity of potential units compared to the Subject. Sales 1 and 2 were given tertiary weight since they are being developed with townhomes, though apartments would also have been potentially allowed. Based on the bracketing analysis, we estimate that a fair market unit value for the Subject is $19,000 per potential multifamily dwelling unit. The Subject has the potential for the development of 114 multifamily apartment units. Accordingly, based on the above analysis, it is our opinion that the market value of the subject site in the Before is calculated as follows: 114 Units x $19,000/Unit = $2,166,000 (2) Income Approach to Land Value (if appropriate): N/A (3) Correlation and Final Conclusions of Land Value Before: $2,166,000 B. Whole Property Valuation Before: (1) Sales Comparison Approach to Value of Whole Property: N/A (2) Income Approach to Value of Whole Property Before: N/A (3) Cost Approach to Value of Whole Property (if appropriate): N/A C. Correlation and Final Conclusion from All Approaches: The sales comparison approach was the only approach utilized to estimate the subject property's value, as the other approaches were not considered to provide credible or reliable value indications for this acquisition. The land value in the Before condition is estimated at $2,166,000. 10. REMAINDER EVALUATION: (1) Assumptions and Limiting Conditions: General Assumptions and Limiting Conditions remain unchanged. (Refer to Appraisal Assumptions and Limiting Conditions in this report.) Attachmj Packet Pg. 125 Page 18 7.1.a (2) Neighborhood Factors: The neighborhood factors remain unchanged. (3) Description of Subject Remainder: The proposed fee acquisition consists of 20,323 SF in fee in the ROW to the east of the Subject. When added to the existing 171,191 SF, the new size of the Subject will become 191,514 SF. After the acquisition, the subject's access will remain the same for as long as the ROW corridor is preserved at the discretion of the client. After the acquisition, the subject will continue to have a generally level topography, an irregular, but non-restrictive shape, and access to all available utilities. As is common with public streets, there are a number of utilities within the ROW including water (blue), sewer (orange), electric (yellow), and storm sewer (green) as shown in the following exhibit. (Not to scale) Though some of the utilities within the ROW lack legal easements, we are making the assumption that the City of Edmonds will record appropriate easements from each one based on the requirements of the particular utility. In the case of storm sewer, the City of Edmonds requires an easement of 5 feet on either side of the line. Snohomish PUD requires 5.5 feet from either side of the electric line. A setback of 7.5 feet on either side of the water and sewer line is required by Olympic View Water and Sewer. The location of all of the utilities constrains development to such a degree that placing an improvement anywhere in the vacated street would be impractical. Only about 2,000 SF of land is unconstrained by the easements located in the northwest and southwest corners of the acquisition area based on our calculations using Google Earth Pro. Though the ROW will not add additional area for buildings, there is substantial real estate value since all of the area within the ROW can be used to increase the density of Attachm Packet Pg. 126 7.1.a Page 19 development on other areas of the lot. This has been confirmed with the City of Edmonds planning department. If the Subject was vacant and this land was added to the existing lot, an even greater quantity of potential dwelling units could be developed. In the After condition the size of the Subject lot will now be 191,514 SF. As discussed earlier, the ROW will very likely be zoned RM-1.5. Dividing the new site area by 1,500 SF per dwelling unit allows for development of 127 units (rounded down) in the After condition, as opposed to 114 in the Before condition. (4) Highest and Best Use Analysis: The zoning will remain Multiple Residential. As in the Before, the highest and best use of the Subject site as if vacant is for a multifamily development, which is consistent with the current City of Edmonds zoning. (5) Valuation - Remainder A. Land as Though Vacant Scope of Data Search The site analysis and evaluation that was conducted for the property in the Before in Section 9 is relied upon for the Remainder. Thus, the scope of data search is identical to that used to value the subject property in the Before. Discussion of Approaches to Value Remainder: Approaches to Value Remainder Used All three approaches to value have been considered in estimating the market value of the subject. However, income capitalization approach, although considered, is not applicable to the valuation of the subject property since the property is not typical of income -producing properties that rely on ground rent. A small cost approach was used to value the site improvements within the ROW. The only applicable approach to valuation of the land is the Sales Comparison approach. (For additional comments about approaches to value, refer to Section 8.) Comparative Analyses Other than the Subject being a slightly larger parcel, in is the appraisers' opinion, the function of the Subject site is essentially unchanged from the Before. B. Whole Property Valuation in the Remainder: (1) Sales Comparison Approach to Value of Whole Property: r The best conclusion from the available data is to apply the subject's Before value of $19,000 per unit to the subject's Remainder area: x w The addition of the ROW allows for 127 units. r c as $19,000/unit x 127 units = $2,413,000 E Since it is not practical to build any substantial improvements with the acquisition Q area due to the presence of utilities, this area is less valuable than unencumbered land. The loss of value associated with land that can be used for density and site Attacliml Packet Pg. 127 Page 20 7.1.a improvements (parking areas or landscaping) is fairly small, given the constraints of this particular area can be designed around if a development was planned. The estimate of the loss of value due to the reduction of some property rights cannot typically be obtained from sales directly, but has been loosely standardized by entities who purchase large quantities of right of way for infrastructure projects. Typically a loss of value is calculated based on the $/SF of the underlying land value. A reduction of value of 100% is typically reserved for land that is so encumbered that it is very difficult to use in any meaningful way. A reduction of 50% is typical for an easement that disallows improvements, but the encumbered area can still be used for landscaping or parking, but the land is constrained in an inconvenient way. A reduction of 25% is typical for properties where the encumbered area could conveniently be utilized for a use that supports the highest and best use of the land (such as parking or landscaping area for the church), even if it cannot be improved with a building. This is the case that best matches the S Subject. Smaller reductions of value less than 25% are typically reserved for encumbrances that have minimal effect on the uses of the underlying land, such as buying an easement on top of a preexisting easement that already constrains development, or buying an easement within buildings setbacks where construction was already not permitted. The value of the land in the After condition is $2,413,000 without taking the easements into account. After dividing by the 191,514 SF of the increased site area, the $/SF of land is $12.60/SF. Out of the total 20,323 SF of acquisition area, only about 2,000 SF is feasibly able to be improved in conjunction with the Subject land due to the easements that are (or will be) in place. Taking the Before land area of 171,191 SF and adding 2,000 of unencumbered acquisition area means that a total of 173,191 SF of unencumbered land will be valued at full fee value. 173,191 SF (Unencumbered Land) x $12.60/SF = $2,182,207 (Unencumbered Land Value) The remaining 18,323 of encumbered land will be valued at 25% less on a $/SF basis. $12.60/SF — 25% _ $9.45/SF 18,323 SF (Encumbered Land) x $9.45/SF = $173,152 (Encumbered Land Value) $2,182,207 (Unencumbered Land) + $173,152 (Encumbered Land) _ $2,355,359. Thus, the concluded land value in the After is $2,355,000 (Rounded to nearest $1,000) (2) Income Approach to Value of Whole Property in the Remainder: N/A (3) Cost Approach to Value of Whole Property: The acquisition area has been paved at the expense of the City and the value of E this asphalt must be taken into account and added to the After land value. We have estimated the footprint of the existing asphalt paving at about 10,100 SF Q based on our estimates using Google Earth Pro. Using cost information provided by the Marshall and Swift Cost Handbook, we have found that an average Attachm Packet Pg. 128 7.1.a Page 21 residential subdivision street can be built for about $.75/SF for the rock base and an additional $2.20/SF for paving using asphalt for a total of $2.95/SF. From the date of publication of the data, a multiplier of 1.06 must be used to account for higher construction costs since publication for a result of 3.13/SF. Since costs in the Seattle area are higher than the national average, a multiplier of 1.18 must be used to account for this difference, for a result of $3.69/SF. 10,100 SF (Existing Asphalt Paving) x $3.69/SF = $37,269 (Cost of New Asphalt) We must depreciate the value of the paving because while it appears in serviceable condition, there are obvious signs of wear and tear including a fair amount of cracking and patches. Average quality residential streets have an average lifespan of about 8 years until they must be resealed. There are no dramatic potholes on the existing road, but the pavement is obviously distressed and some of the cracks have started to grow vegetation. Of the original 8 years, I estimate that there is no more than 3 years of economic life to the existing road before steps to rehabilitate the asphalt must be taken. Using straight line depreciation, we apply the $37,269 cost of a new road by 3/8 (remaining life/total life) = $14,000 (rounded to nearest $100). $2,355,000 (Value of Land in the After) + $14,000 (Value of depreciated Asphalt) = $2,369,000 Correlation and Conclusion from All Approaches of Land and Improvements Values Remainder: $2,369,000 (6) Recapitulation: A. Value of property "Before" acquisition B. Value of property "After" acquisition $2,166,000 2 3$ 69,000 C. Difference between "Before" and "After" values $203,000 11. EXPLANATION, MEASUREMENT, and ALLOCATION of DAMAGES/SPECIAL BENEFITS: Damages: There are no damages to the owner of the underlying land. Benefits: The appraisers have not found any special benefit to the subject property remainder. Attachml Packet Pg. 129 Page 22 12. SUMMARY OF APPRAISAL CONCLUSIONS Indicated Value Before Acquisition Highest andBest Use Before: Subdivision Type Size Unit Value Land value before Fee Land 114 Lots $19,000 perUnitl $ 2,166,000 Total Area: 114 Lots Total Land: Total Subject Value Before Project Indicated Subject Value After Project Highest and Best Use After: Subdivision 7.1.a $ 2,166,000 Total hnprowments $ - $ 2,166,000 Land Unencumbered Land 173,191 SF $12.60 er SF $ 1182,207 Encumbered Land 18,323 SF $9.45 per SF $ 173,152 Total Area: 173,191 SF (It to $1,000) Total Land: hn owments Depreciated Asphalt $ 14,000 Total hn ovements: Less Cost to Cure if an Total Subject Value After Project $ 2,355,000 14,000 $ 2,369,000 c a� E a 3 0 a m r N M O O O r O N Z J a. t X W r C d E t v R .r r a Attachml Packet Pg. 130 �a y Oew- Owe rt W Attachment: Exhibit 1 - PLN20160032 Staff Report with Attachments (1643 : Public Hearing on a proposal to Vacate a Portion of 92nd Ave W) CD CD N W 7.1.a Qualifications of James B. Price, mai, sr/wa Page 25 Comparable Land Sale No. 1 (1) ADDRESS or LOCATION: 21309 481h Ave W, Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043 (2) SALE SKETCH and PHOTO are on following page. (3) a. Access: Private drive off 481h Ave West b. Use at Sale: Vacant c. H & B Use: High Density Residential/Multifamily d. Zoning: RMM (Park West Condo. Complex), Mountlake Terrace f. Area: 59,219 SF g. Sale Date: 12/17/2013 h. Sale Price: $500,000 i. Instrument Type: Statutory Warranty Deed j. Terms: Cash k. Ex. Tax # or AF #:E033083 1. Seller: HDCCBG LLC m. Buyer: Park West LLC p. Date Inspected: 5/5/2016 (4) LEGAL DESCRIPTION or TAX PARCEL NUMBER: Tax Parcel No. 01 080100 0002 00, Snohomish County, Washington (5) PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS (description at sale, confirmation information, changes since sale, etc.): Property Description: This is the sale of multifamily -zoned land on the eastern edge of an established complex of condos and apartments. The new project is called Terrace at Park West Townhomes and will consist of 27 fee simple townhomes in 5 buildings. The preliminary plat had already been approved before the sale date. (6) ANALYSIS: Land: 59.219 SF CONTRIBUTION MARKET UNIT VALUE $ $500,000 $ $18,519/Unit Other (Site, Yard, etc.): $ F19 TOTAL SALE PRICE $ $500,000 $ Sale No. 1 c a� E c� a z 3 0 a m r N M O O W r O N Z J a. t X W r C d E t v R .r r a Attachml Packet Pg. 133 7.1.a Qualifications of James B. Price, mai, sr/wa 26 Comparable Land Sale No. 1 (cont.) N �.f• s .. �� - =jr -AVA r Sale No. 1 Taken By: Glenn Price Date Taken: 5/5/2016 Attachml Packet Pg. 134 7.1.a Qualifications of James B. Price, mai, sr/wa Page 27 Comparable Land Sale No. 2 (1) ADDRESS or LOCATION: 7907 230" St SW, Edmonds, WA (2) SALE SKETCH and PHOTO are on following page. (3) a. Access: 2301h St SW off of Highway 99 b. Use at Sale: Single Family c. H & B Use: High Density Residential/Multifamily d. Zoning: MR, Snohomish County f. Area: 39,204 SF g. Sale Date: 6/15/2015 h. Sale Price: $625,000 i. Instrument Type: Statutory Warranty Deed j. Terms: Cash Equivalent k. Ex. Tax or AF #: 1077722 1. Seller: IFF Holding LLC m. Buyer: Mietzner Brothers Properties LLC o. Confirmed by: GLP p. Date Inspected: 5/5/2016 (4) LEGAL DESCRIPTION or TAX PARCEL NUMBER: Tax Parcel No. 00 576700 0004 03, Snohomish County, Washington (5) PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS (description at sale, confirmation information, changes since sale, etc.): A.) Property Description: This is the sale of a lot that previously had a small single-family home on the site but is now being improved with 19 townhomes. Plans had undergone pre -approval at the time of sale. The home was given no value in the transaction, and the rental income over the course of approvals likely offset much, if not all, of the demolition costs to remove it. (6) ANALYSIS: ITEM Land: 39,204 SF $ Other (Site, Yard, etc.): $ CONTRIBUTION MARKET UNIT VALUE $625,000 $ $32,895/Unit TOTAL SALE PRICE $ $625,000 $ Sale No. 2 Attachml Packet Pg. 135 7.1.a Qualifications of James B. Price, mai, sr/wa Page 28 Comparable Land Sale No. 2 (cont.) TiSlvl Sale No. 2 Taken By: Glenn Price Date Taken: 5/5/2016 Attachml Packet Pg. 136 7.1.a Qualifications of James B. Price, mai, sr/wa Page 29 Comparable Land Sale No. 3 (1) ADDRESS or LOCATION: 14615 Madison Way, Lynnwood, WA 98087 (2) SALE SKETCH and PHOTO are on following page. (3) a. Access: Madison Way b. Use at Sale: Vacant (Forested) c. H & B Use: Multifamily d. Zoning: MR, Snohomish County f. Area: 472,971 SF g. Sale Date: 4/1/2016 h. Sale Price: $3,200,000 i. Instrument Type: Special Warranty Deed j. Terms: Cash Equivalent k. Ex. Tax or AF #: 8650375 1. Seller: The Nichols, LLC m. Buyer: Madison Management, LLC o. Confirmed by: GLP p. Date Inspected: 5/5/2016 (4) LEGAL DESCRIPTION or TAX PARCEL NUMBER: 003733 003 002 00 and 003733 003 003 00, Snohomish County, Washington. (5) PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS (description at sale, confirmation information, changes since sale, etc.): A.) Property Description: The sale consists of two parcels in an area that has seen relatively rapid growth of apartment units. At sale, plans for 180 apartment units had already received pre - approval. The site does have a stream running through the middle with associated building setbacks, lowering the amount of usable area for units. (6) ANALYSIS: ITEM CONTRIBUTION MARKET UNIT VALUE Land: 472,625 SF $ $3,200,000 $ $17,778/Unit $ $ Other (Site, Yard, etc.): $ $ TOTAL SALE PRICE $ $3,200,000 $ Sale No. 3 c a� E c� r Q z 3 0 a m r N M O O W 0 N Z J a. t X W r C d E t v R .r r a Attachml Packet Pg. 137 7.1.a Qualifications of James B. Price, mai, sr/wa Page 30 Comparable Land Sale No. 3 T Sale No. 3 Taken By: Glenn Price IV Date Taken: 5/5/2016 r a Attachml Packet Pg. 138 7.1.a Qualifications of James B. Price, mai, sr/wa Page 31 Comparable Land Sale No. 4 (1) ADDRESS or LOCATION: 17xx NE 205t", Shoreline, WA (2) SALE SKETCH and PHOTO are on following page. (3) a. Access: NE 2051h Street b. Use at Sale: Vacant c. H & B Use: Multifamily d. Zoning: CB, City of Edmonds f. Area: 32,200 SF g. Sale Date: 12/1/2014 h. Sale Price: $1,725,000 i. Instrument Type: Statutory Warranty Deed j. Terms: Cash k. Ex. Tax # or AF #:2703746 1. Seller: Woodland Park Ave Apartments LLC in. Buyer: GRE 205"' LLC o. Confirmed by: GLP p. Date Inspected: 5/5/2016 (4) LEGAL DESCRIPTION or TAX PARCEL NUMBER: 741770 0552, King County, Washington. (5) PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS (description at sale, confirmation information, changes since sale, etc.): A.) Property Description: This property could be used for several permitted uses, but the most profitable is as a multifamily apartment complex. Though commercial uses are allowed, the value for such a use is not the economic highest and best use for the site. Preliminary plat approval was granted for 108 units prior to closing with a first level parking garage. (6) ANALYSIS: ITEM Land: 32,200 SF CONTRIBUTION VALUE $ $1,725,000 $ Other (Site, Yard, etc.): $ $ TOTAL SALE PRICE $ $1,725,000 $ MARKET UNIT $15,972/Unit Sale No. 4 Attachml Packet Pg. 139 Qualifications of James B. Price, mai, sr/wa 7.1.a 32 Comparable Land Sale No. 4 ❑zoc A 4: Sale No. 4 Taken By: Glenn Price i Date Taken: 5/5/2016 N _ N E t t� M r r Q t r 3 0 a m 0 Cn N M O O O O N Z J IL z x w d E Q Attachml Packet Pg. 140 7.1.a Qualifications of James B. Price, mai, sr/wa Page 33 Market Data LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PLANTZ ADDITION BLK 000 D-00 - SEGD FOR TX PURP ONLY - PAR A, ADJUSTED, CITY OF EDM LLA NO. LL-99-46 ACCORDING TO LLA THOF REC AFN 9905170971 TGW LOTS 62-65 INC PLAT OF PINECREST AKA PAR A CITY OF EDM LLA #LL-2006-026 REC AFN 200703025001 EXC SELY 1.33 AC THOF SD ADJ PAR A & LOTS 62-65 INC PLAT OF PINECREST - REFER TO 005462-000-001-01 FOR TXBL PORTION (EXEMPT PER ST OF WA REG #03280-001) r a Attachml Packet Pg. 141 Qualifications of James B. Price, mai, sr/wa Page 34 7.1.a ACQUISITION FULL LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHXBXT A LZOLL MSCRIBTIM OF ClTr OF E,tHc bmg STREVAGATXON= THAT PORTION OF CITY OF EDMONDS EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY, RRIXG A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, AND THE MRTNEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 36. TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W,X., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS BEGINNING AT A POINT OF INTERS'F771014 OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN OF 228" STREET S.W. AND THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN 92- AV'ENUiE W. , SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, RIDGE ACRES, PER PLAT RECORDED 1UNDEiR AUDITOR'S FILE NUXBER 262998; THENCE SOUTH 0';13' 09" EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN OF 92N° AVENUE WY., A DISTANCE OF 375.41 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY FLAT CRY OF SEDUOYAH, A CO'NDOMINI'UM, PER PLAT RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 200704225001; THENCE NORTH $0*42'29' WEST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY PLAT BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 30.01 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINC OF PARCEL •A' OF CITY OF EDMONDS LOT LINE ADJUS•I1(ENT NO, LL 2006-026, RROORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 200703025001; THENCE NORTH 0"13'09• WEST ALONG SAID EASTERLY LIME OF PARCEL "A", A DISTANCE OF 91.85 PEET; TRUCE SOUTH 61049'47' WEST CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE OF PARCEL *A", A DISTANCE OF 33.95 PEET; THENCE NORTH 0013'o9• WEST CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE OF PARCEL "A", A DISTANCE OF 320.46 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL "A', SAID NORTHEASTERLY CORNER ALSO H'EINO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN OF 228`" STREET S.W. AND THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY KARGIN 9211° AV31NUE W . ! THENCE SOUTIR $8022155' EAST, A DISTANCE OF 30.02 FEET TO A POINT ON THE CEMERLINE OF 92"0 AVENUE W. , SAI-D POINT LYING 9C347M 0°13'09' EAST, A DISTANCE OF 20,01 FEET FROM THE NORTHEAST COMER OF SAID SECTION 36; THENCE SOUTH 00131090 FAST ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, A DISTANCE OF 10,00 FBETI THENCE SOUTH 88"41'25' EAST, A DISTANCE Or 30,01 FEET To THE POINT OF RFr-' TNMT rdr- _ SITUATE IN THE CITY OF EDMOUDS, COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON, CONTAINING 20,323 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS. I OF] Attachml Packet Pg. 142 7.1.a Qualifications of James B. Price, mai, sr/wa Page 35 ACQUISITION LEGAL DESCRIPTION 37 r . 39 I ��i3T 1 3D ` �� o 9eirl7 �� dK r f L ifoa Na 14 Ar &u. s�r� I I � 1 er tin�� i 35 34 3l .1 ` -svi a• W22`55`E �.oaT' �- I I I 30�2' �sR xt 'z•,� 1 I � 43DA�4+ CS d5 Qi OY _ — 1 � 11 a'tI �.L� i .... r7 arts I IL4I 1 �. Ao1F�. Jrf ntt 3 P �, C1Fr OF rlLk w l g i%L x "617M-M 51— i Ar Pic. i(qR 1 fI 33,9E ►iiiiROR34D4EW0 5 G 7 I N98'f2"29'W I "HEETI01STREET VACATION ESTGATE CHAPE 14-403 CITY OF EDMONDS SNOkQMISH CO. 'WASHIHGUM 6EUM M FT1FM9—i of oil 'twhwr2sw ORMP FOUR*R R�OYQYi109A dP!f4M4baklEGMP5619�'A;lrL1�SSC1�51y*LNISI 132 . Auc4wff-M#j I whwraoun Attachml Packet Pg. 143 7.1.a Qualifications of James B. Price, mai, sr/wa Page 36 QUALIFICATIONS OF APPRAISER .TAMES B. PRICE, MAI, SR/WA www.APPRAISALGROUPNW.COM ; JPRICE@APPRAISALGROUPNW.COM PHONE No.: (425) 453-9292; FAx No. (425) 455-9740 1409140TIl PLACE NE, STE 105, BELLEVUE, WA 98007-3963 EDUCATION Bachelor of Science in Finance, Real Estate Emphasis; Northern Illinois University/ University of Illinois. Appraisal Institute courses include Capitalization Theory, Residential Valuation, Easement Valuation, and Standards of Professional Practice. Seminars and Classes include: Al Course 833- Fundamentals of Separating Real Property, Personal Property, and Intangible business Assets, Real Estate Feasibility, Business Valuation, Valuation of Easements and Litigation Skills, Appraising for Pension Funds, and Appraisal of Partial Acquisitions. PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS Appraisal Institute Membership: MAI Designated Member of the Appraisal Institute since 1979 Formerly: President, Director, and Vice President, Seattle Chapter and Alaska Chapter International Right of Way Association Designation: SR/WA (Senior Right of Way Agent) Position: International Right of Way Association Valuation Committee, past chair Formerly: Regional Chair, Region 7, International Right of Way Association International Right of Way Association Director, President, and Vice President; Seattle, Washington and Fairbanks, Alaska Chapters EXPERIENCE: Over 43 years Currently: General Partner, APPRAISAL GROUP OF THE NORTHWEST LLP Developer of subdivision, office building, and residences Owner of office buildings and apartments Formerly: Proprietor, APPRAISAL GROUP OF THE NORTHWEST Appraiser, Schueler, McKown & Keenan Partner, Price & Associates, Alaska Senior Appraiser, First State Bank of Oregon Appraiser, Pacific First Federal Savings Bank Appraiser, U.S. Small Business Administration Appraiser, Washington State Dept. of Transportation Qualified as an expert witness in Superior Court, Federal Court Master's Hearings, and J Federal Bankruptcy Court. Served as an arbitrator in property valuation and lease renewals. a. Washington State Department of Transportation approved appraiser. r Fee reviewer; Washington Dept. of Transportation, major banks, and governmental clients. Qualified as a Master; held Master's Hearings in Alaska. w Currently certified under the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute. Currently certified in Washington State as a General Appraiser (Certificate No. 1100229) Vice President- Newcastle Trails r a Attachlul Packet Pg. 144 7.1.a CLIENTS SERVED Abeyta & Associates, R/W Company Benson & McLaughlin, Accountants Boston Private Bank Bullivant, Houser, Bailey, Pendergrass & Hoffinan; Bureau of Indian Affairs Bureau of Land Management Camp Korey Cathay Bank Center Bank Certified Land Services Chevron Products Company Church of God, Western Washington City of Auburn City of Bellevue City of Des Moines City of Issaquah City of Maple Valley City of Mount Vernon City of Newcastle City of Port Angeles City of Redmond City of SeaTac City of Seattle City of Shoreline City of Tacoma Coldwell Banker Relocation Columbia Bank Costco Eastman, Scott, Attorney, Bellevue El Centro De La Raza, Felicia Gonzales Enumclaw Public Schools First Sound Bank HDR Engineering John Lynch, CPA, Bellevue Johns Monroe Mitsunaga, Attorneys; Michael Monroe, Darrell Mitsunaga Keating Bucklin & McCormack, Attorneys Kent Schools r Appraisers: Watts & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP A-5183 Q Attachlul Packet Pg. 145 Qualifications of GLENN L. PRICE, APPRAISER 7.1.a Paae KeyBank of Washington King County Library System Korea Exchange Bank Lane & Associates, Inc., R/W Company O. R. Colan Associates, Inc. (Acquisition Specialists) Ogden Murphy Wallace, Attorneys Pharos Corporation (R/W Company) Port of Friday Harbor Port of Orcas Port of Seattle Puget Sound Energy Reid Middleton, Engineers Saehan Bank Seattle City Light Seattle School District Sound Transit Tacoma Utilities U.S. Bank U.S. Fidelity & Guarantee U.S. Postal Service Union Bank Universal Field Services, Inc. Washington Dept. of Transportation -Approved Appraiser & Reviewer Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources Washington State Parks & Recreation Commission Waste Management Williams Northwest Pipeline Wilshire State Bank APPRAISAL GROUP OF THE NORTHWEST LLP r a Attachml Packet Pg. 146 i 54 Attachment: Exhibit 1 - PLN20160032 Staff Report with Attachments (1643 : Public Hearing on a proposal to Vacate a Portion of 92nd Ave W) Qualifications of GLENN L. PRICE, APPRAISER 7.1.a Pace APPRAISAL GROUP "NORTHWEST EDUCATION QUALIFICATIONS OF APPRAISER GLENN L. PRICE 1yw%N,.APPRAISALGROLI PN W.cahi; GPRi(:C(a)APPRAISALGRot1PN W.coni PHONE No. (425) 453-9292 #126 FAx No. (425) 455-9740 1409140TH PLACE NE, SUITE 105, BELLEVUE, WA 98007-3963 Bachelor of Science from University of Washington, Geology major, Architecture minor CONTINUING EDUCATION Appraisal Principals, Appraisal Institute, 2005 USPAP & Ethics, Standards of Professional Practice, Appraisal Institute, 2005 Basic Income Capitalization, Appraisal Institute, 2005 Appraisal Procedures, Appraisal Institute, 2006 Right of Way: 100, IRWA, 2007 General Applications, 2007, Appraisal Institute, 2007 Advanced Income Capitalization, Appraisal Institute, 2007 General Market Analysis & Highest and Best Use, Appraisal Institute, 2008 Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions, Appraisal Institute, 2008 General Appraiser Report Writing and Case Studies, Appraisal Institute, 2010 Principles of Real Estate Engineering, IRWA, 2012 Advanced Concepts and Case Studies, Appraisal Institute, 2013 EXPERIENCE: 3 Currently:Appraiser, Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP, Bellevue, WA c 2003 — 2009, 2012 - Current Past: Hage & Associates Appraisers, Fairbanks, AK 2009 - 2012 r AFFILIATIONS: N M Candidate for Designation of the Appraisal Institute, Seattle Chapter CD Washington State General Certified Real Estate Appraiser (Certification No. 1101927) o N SPECIALTIES J Commercial, Industrial, Residential, Land a Sensitive Areas and Conservation Easements and Acquisitions r Right of Way Acquisitions Litigation w Consulting as E r APPRAISAL GROUP OF THE NORTHWEST LLP Q Attachml Packet Pg. 148 7.1.a CLIENTS SERVED Abeyta & Associates Alaska Department of Fish & Game Alaska Department of Transportation Bellevue College Bluefield Holdings Brandt Law Group Bullivant, Houser, Bailey Attorneys Catherine Janicki, Atty. Certified Land Services City of Arlington City of Auburn City of Edmonds City of Lake Stevens City of Lynden City of Kenmore City of Kennewick City of Milton City of Mountlake Terrace City of Port Townsend City of Redmond City of Richland City of Sammamish City of Shoreline City of Tacoma City of Woodinville Chase Bank Citywide Mortgage Cook Schuhmann & Groseclose, Inc. Core Business Bank Davis & Jonas, CAP Denali State Bank Dynasty Mortgage Evangelical Christian Credit Union Fairbanks North Star Borough Financial Advantage Forterra (Cascade Land Conservancy) HDR, Inc. Howe, Cunningham & Lowe, PLC H.W. Lochner, Inc. Joseph DePalma Administrative Trust John H. O'Rourke Law Offices Johns Monroe Mitsunaga Attorneys Johnson River Enterprises Kent Schools Keller Williams Real Estate KeyBank National Association Lummi Nation Pacific Christian Center Pacific City Bank Puget Sound Energy King County Library System King County Water District #1 O.R. Colan Associates, Inc. Oregon Mutual Insurance Company Plaza Bank Port of Seattle Prime Pacific Bank Ronald Wastewater District Schwartz, Kales, Accountants Snohomish County PUD Sound Transit Suburban North Wealth Management Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians Tagiugmiullu Nunamiullu Housing Authority Tahoma School District Terry Brink, Atty. Umpqua Bank Unibank Union Bank Universal Field Services US Bank Wilshire State Bank Weichert Relocation Company W.W. Grainger Inc. Appraisers: Watts & Price Appraisal Group of the Northwest LLP A-5183 Attachml Packet Pg. 149 7.1.a JAMES EGGE & ASSOCIATES 425-377-1703 Land Use Planning ♦ Project Management ♦ Development Analysis ♦ Agency Representation September 22, 2016 Kernen Lien, Senior Planner City of Edmonds, Washington 121 51h Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Re: Westgate Chapel — 92nd Ave W. Street Vacation City File No. PLN20160032 Dear Mr. Lien, This letter is in response to your July 19, 2016 request for additional information related to the above street vacation application currently pending before the city. If upon review of the information provided herein, you concur that the request may now be forwarded for consideration by the Edmonds City Council, please contact me to coordinate the potential hearing date as soon as possible. Following are the four specific areas of inquiry in your July 19 letter, with a response to each on behalf of the petitioner: 1. "Pursuant to ECDC 20.07.020 fsic}, one of the criteria the City Council must consider in evaluating a street vaction is whether the vacation is in the public interest. Please submit a statement regarding what public interest would be served by the vacation of this portion of 924d Ave. West." RESPONSE: ECDC 20.70.020 Criterion A. The vacation is in the public interest. This criterion would be met through the elimination of all city public roadway maintenance and attendant liability. 92nd Ave W. currently serves as a lightly used paved public roadway which extends southerly from 228th St. S.W. for approximately 375 feet. It is a two-lane roadway with a paved width of 20 feet with gravel shoulders of varing width along portions of both east and west margins. Approval of the vacation will remove the city from ongoing responsibility to maintain driving surface and adjacent shoulders of the current roadway. That responsibility would be assumed by Westgate Chapel and tax parcel 00555300200106, the sole other ownership currently served by this portion of 92nd Ave W. The aforementioned tax parcel is situtated at the southwest corner of the intersection of 228th St. S.W. and 92nd Ave. W. where a single family home is owned by Claudia and Larry Walters according to county assessor tax records. The Walters have signed the vacation petition. Criterion B. No property will be denied direct access as a result of the annexation. 92nd Ave W. currently serves as legal access to four single family properties along its easterly margin, three of which are owned by Westgate Chapel. The remaining parcel (#00555300200106) is owned by the Walters, who have joined the petition to vacate the right-of-way. 92nd Ave W also serves as one of several access points to the main "Westgate Chapel' complex to the west. Permanent access easements to each existing property will be preserved as part of vacation proceedings. The Walters parcel lies at the southeast corner of 92nd Ave. W. and 228th St. S.W. The existing single family detached home on said lot is addressed as 9126 228th St. S.W., although it takes vehicular access from 92nd Ave. W. All other properties southerly of the existing terminus of 92nd Ave. W. take access from either Edmonds Way, or other public roadways further to the east.The Sequoyah Condominiums - Phases 1 and 5 lie directlly south of the subject site. Three smaller individual tax parcels lie west of the Sequoyah development and take access from Edmonds Way. Westgate Chapel owns all remaining property directly 10807 25`" Street SE ♦ Lake Stevens, Washington 98258 ♦ jamese-a@msn.com a Attachml Packet Pg. 150 7.1.a Re: Westgate Chapel - 92nd Ave W vacation September 22, 2016 west and south of 92nd Ave. W., along with Lots 8, 9 and 10, Belt Add No 6 which abut the east margin of said roadway. No property will be denied access by the approval of the vacation of 92nd Ave W Q 2. "The vacation request was also reviewed by Snohomish County Fire District #1 which has requested additional information about the future use of the vacated right-of-way. The Fire District may require a turn- around for emergency vehicles if the use of the area is to change. Please provide information regarding o future use of this area if the vacation is approved." c RESPONSE: There are no current plans for development of the vacated right-of-way, other than continuation of private access to existing properties through easement provisions to be executed with vacation approval. Should Westgate Chapel propose incorporation of the vacated right-of-way into future church related or other permitted facilities, such proposed use would be required to undergo appropriate agency review and approvals per ECDC and other adopted regulation. Consultation with other public agencies would be undertaken by the city at that time as required by code. 3. "The City of Edmonds has existing stormwater facilities within 92nd Ave Wand through the Westgate Chapel property at 22901 Edmonds Way, as shown highlighted below. The stormwater facilities currently serve only that portion of 92nd Ave W proposed to be vacated, along with runoff from right-of-way and properties located within Snohomish County jurisdiction. Please note, if the City were to vacate 92nd Ave W, ownership and maintenance of the facilities would become the responsibility of the adjoining property owners and/or Snohomish County." RESPONSE: Comment noted. Westgate Chapel is willing to assume maintenance responsibility for existing city storm drainage facilities in the subject portion of 92"d Ave W. and/or provide a maintenance covenant for ongoing city maintenance access. (see response following item 3 for results of consultation with Snohomish County) 4. "Please consult with Snohomish County as to whether the County wishes to maintain ownership of said storm facilities, or if they would be agreeable to private ownership and maintenance of the system. Easements would need to be provided accordingly." RESPONSE: Both the applicant and city representatives have consulted with Snohomish County regarding this issue. On August 24, 2016, a formal response by Snohomish County was issued as it relates to the existing city owned storm drainage conveyance system in 92nd Ave W (copy attached). In their response the county makes recommendations related to ongoing ownership and maintenance of a cross -culvert connection at 228" St. S.W. and the city owned conveyance system in 92nd Ave. W. Westgate Chapel is willing to cooperate with the city and county to assure proper long-term maintenance of these facilities, whether it be by maintenance covenant or other mechanism that would provide for ongoing inspection, repair or maintenance of said facilities. The county also noted concern regarding providing easements to existing properties that take access from 92nd Ave. W. Those concerns have been addressed in earlier portions of this letter. Please contact me should you have further questions prior to scheduling a public hearing before the City Council. Thank you. Sincerely, r a+ t X W Jim Egge, on behalf of Westgate Chapel, Inc. JAMES EGGE & ASSOCIATES E Encl. Q Cc -Westgate Chapel, Inc, (attn: Brent McAtee) Attachml Packet Pg. 151 7.1.a RESOLUTION NUMBER 1371 A RESOLUTION OF THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SETTING A DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF 92ID AVENUE WEST LYING SOUTH OF 228TH STREET SOUTH WEST WHEREAS, RCW 35.79.010 and ECDC 20.70.050 authorizes a street vacation process to be initiated by the petition of the owners of more than two-thirds of property abutting the portion of the street or alley to be vacated; and WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds has received a petition from all of the property owners abutting the portion of 92"d Avenue West lying south of 228"' Street Southwest; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.79.010 and ECDC 20.70.070 requires the city council to fix a time by resolution for public hearing on any proposed street vacation; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.79.010 and ECDC 20.70.070 requires that such hearing occur no less than twenty days and no more than sixty days after the passage of the resolution fixing the hearing date; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edmonds, Washington as follows: Section 1. A public hearing on the proposed street vacation shall be scheduled for November 1, 2016 at 7:00 p.m. before the Edmonds City Council. Section 2. The city clerk shall provide notice of the public hearing as required pursuant to RCW 35.79.020 and ECDC 20.70.090 to the extent that such notice requirements are applicable. RESOLVED this 4th day of October, 2016. APPR VED: MAYOR, DAVE O. EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: LERK, SCOTT A Y FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: September 30, 2016 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: October 4, 2016 RESOLUTION NO. 1371 1 a Attachml Packet Pg. 152 7.1.a 251 22518 = 22519 22516 0 22 18 2260 00 �1• 22603 22522 2260 22512 �G 2260 LA 2607 0 22604 22605 22604 tm 22608 22609 ca 22615 22608 22609 �' 22606608 22609 22608 22614 !L 22616 qT11H11P 22621 22620 22612 22622 22613 22612 22613 22612 22620 22619 22620 22619 22704 N 0422628 N N 22706 ;:27�05 22705 22706+�aAi0 ? w M coo a� a 22707 0 `�^ WESTGAT C ACE c ?��0 N °' 22720 = 22715 _ Cn CD ti 9505 PARKING N 9203 r' � 0 22726 N °, 0 CT C1A/ 0 CD O N aD TH ST SW co co rinc N N 88 0 C1 000 00 22819 �p r c ;7 0? T 22825 9030 229TH ST SW C�� ` 22903 co 0 8925 0 ti 0 0 00 A SE OI 3229TH PL .5 O P RKING > 8912 0 23015 Q � LO AO B = 0 0 O � 2300 ��'p �, < v�i 230TH ST S �to to � o ��0 (' CY)N � 9y �� Cn O 00 Cl) Cl) O^� E D ?�o 9Sp8 �o�o �p ti� PARKI G 7S o0 ��ti� 3� 9321 9307 ! ! : 8 REc �O i •�29 1 ROOM 987654 507 or, 7p ST S 9229 ! 30 2 15 23121 2 23109 0 23109 9302 N 04 N 31 34 111 1 3 110 8 N 9409 °' 2311 CV) °' °' M - �� 19 25� S 231ST PL O r N T 27 M M % 8926 °' 9411 9327 °M' 0 Cn 04 ( CD N 2 ��, %y,3�,� ST SW �f �••` 0�,0 9004 23130 O N O O M N 99 N Zoning and Vicinity Map PLN20160032 92nd Avenue Street Vacation `�c, i sy, c m s Q 3 0 a a� N M O O to 0 N z J a k W E Scale Q 1 inch = 250 feet Attachml Packet Pg. 153 7.1.a Land Use Element Land Use Map Whenever there are references in this plan to categories of land use, they shall apply to areas shown on the Comprehensive Plan Map as follows: Plan Map Designation Land Use Type Compatible Zoning Density Classifications Units/Acre Activity Center Corridor Development Designated Park or School Site Single Family, Resource Single Family, Urban 3 Single Family, Urban 2 Single Family, Urban 1 Multi Family - High Density Multi Family — Medium Density ........................................................................................... Mixed Use Commercial Community Commercial Neighborhood Commercial Highway 99 Corridor Edmonds Way Corridor Westgate Corridor (Planned Business) Hospital / Medical Master Plan Development Public Use or Park/Open Space Mix of uses; refer to specific plan designations within activity center Mixed use development corridor; refer to specific plan designations within corridor See appropriate category below; also refer to specific activity center discussion in plan See appropriate category below; also refer to specific corridor discussion in plan Public Facility P-zone or appropriate R-zone compatible with neighborhood. ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Single family RSW-12, RS-12, RS-20 < 4 RS-10 < 4.4 RS-8 < 5.5 RS-6, RS-8 5-8 Multi family RM-1.5, RM-2.4 18-30 RM-2.4, RM-3.0 < 18 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ Commercial Mixed Use Commercial or mixture of zones WMU, BC, BN, or equivalent BN or equivalent based on neighborhood plan CG, CG2; transitional zones as appropriate BP, BN, BC, or similar commercial zone; RM zones BP, BN Special Use District Hospital or Medical zone Master Plan Master Plan Overlay or equivalent classification Public or Parks P, OS, or equivalent classification Land Use 37 Attachmel Packet Pg. 154 7.1.a ` PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL On Tuesday, November 1, 2016 the Edmonds City Council will hold a public hearing regarding the following issue: CONSIDERATION FOR THE VACATION OF THAT PORTION OF 92ND AVENUE WEST LYING SOUTH OF 228T" STREET SW. EASEMENTS MAY BE RETAINED FOR FIRE ACCESS AND UTILITIES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. The City Council meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. at the Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex, 250 5t Avenue North, Edmonds, Washington. At the time and place stated above, all interested parties will be heard, however, there will be a time restriction for oral comment. Written comments are welcomed prior to or at the public hearing. Information on this project can be viewed or obtained at the City of Edmonds Development Services Department, 121 5th Ave North, Edmonds, WA 98020 between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 4:30 P.M. Monday — Friday (8:30 A.M. to 12:00 P.M. only on Wednesdays) or online through the City's website at www.edmondswa.gov through the Permit Assistance link. Search for permit PLN20160032. If the item is continued to another date because it is not completed, or further information is needed, the date of the continuation will be announced only at the meeting. Additional information may be obtained at the Development Services Department, 121 5th Avenue N., Edmonds. Telephone: (425) 771-0220. Scott M. Passey, MMC Edmonds City Clerk Published: October 12, 2016 Posted/Mailed: October 12, 2016 WARNING! THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR CONCEALMENT OF THIS NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE OF THE MEETING IS A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVED AFTER NOVEMBER 1, 2016 Parking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities. Contact the City Clerk at (425) 775-2525 with 24 hours advance notice for special accommodations. Attachme Packet Pg. 155 7.1.a Everett Daily Herald Affidavit of Publication State of Washington } County of Snohomish } ss Kathleen Landis being first duly sworn, upon oath deposes and says: that he/she is the legal representative of the Everett Daily Herald a daily newspaper. The said newspaper is a legal newspaper by order of the superior court in the county in which it is published and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of the first publication of the Notice hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continually as a daily newspaper in Snohomish County, Washington and is and always has been printed in whole or part in the Everett Daily Herald and is of general circulation in said County, and is a legal newspaper, in accordance with the Chapter 99 of the Laws of 1921, as amended by Chapter 213, Laws of 1941, and approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of Snohomish County, State of Washington, by order dated June 16, 1941, and that the annexed is a true copy of EDH726336 PLN20160032 as it was published in the regular and entire issue of said paper and not as a supplement form thereof for a period of 1 issue(s), such publication commencing on 10/12/2016 and ending on 10/12/2016 and that said newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of said period. The amount of the fee for such publication is $60.20. Subscribed and sworn b ore me on this ,_ day of Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. City of Edmonds - LEGAL ADS 114101416 KERNEN LIEN DEBRA ANN GRIGG Notary Public State of Washington My Commission Expires October 31, 2017 Attachmel Packet Pg. 156 7.1.a C 11 Y OF EDMONDS 4— PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE EDMONDS CfTY COUNCIL On IkaFiYlay vemhar 1- 2015 the Edmonds City Council will hold awbiclear66rdigho ooriniissue: A710kOTHE VACATION ON OCos10EI]lF THAT PORTION OF 92ND AVENUE WEST LYING SOUTH OF 228TH STREET SW. EASEMENTS MAY BE RETAINED FOR FIRE ACCESS AND UTILITIES THAT CVfiRENTLY EXIST WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. The CIly CpunCil meellI fl will begin at 7. .0.m-�L1h9S4unctl At Iha limo and place slated above, all inler8sl1h parties tall be heard, hovievor, there will be a time restriction for oral comment. Written comments are w@IOMW prior to or at the public hearing. Information on this project can be viewed or obtained at the City of Edmonds Development Services Department, 121 Sin Ave North. Edmonds, WA 98020 between the hours of 0:00 A.M. and 4:30 P..M. Monday - Friday ($:39 A.M. to 12:00 P.M. only on Wednesdays) dr online Ililou@h the Clty's website at �y7pe'yl,� bV�A,,.qtl�9c Ihrovgh the Permit Aasislence fink, search for pefrill PLN2016W52. 11 the [tern Is eonitnued to another dale becatrse it Is not completed, or further Information is needed, the date Of the corillnualion will be announced only at Rra meeting. Addltionol iniorelahorl may 130 obtained at the Duvelopment Services Doparinlanl, 121 5th Avenue N„ Edrnonds.Telephona:(425) 771.0220. Scott M. Passeyy, MMC Edm dds City Clerk ParHing and meeting rooms are accessible for parsons with dksabilitlas. Contact the City Clerk at (426) 775.2626 wiM 24 hdura advenco notice for specJW accommodallons. PbetedlMBfled: Oct6ber 12, 2016 fPublished: October 12, 2016. EDI72G3313_ r a+ X W C d E t r, R .-r r a Attachme Packet Pg. 157 7.1.a 1� �f Ud�1':�4tCt•Rt.. October 27, 2016 CITY OF EDMONDS DEPARTMENT OF FIRE PREVENTION MEMORANDUM To: Mr. Kernen Lien, Senior Planner From: Kevin Zweber, Fire Marshal Subj: Westgate Chapel — 92"d Ave W. Street Vacation, PLN20160032 In reference to the above application for street vacation, because of the remaining legal lots on 92"d Steet SW, the following condition should be added to ensure fire access and public safety: 1. No easement is currently required. If the area of vacation, or the three vacant lots on the East side of 92"d Steet SW are to be developed in the future, a fire access road easement will be required. 2. If the current road surface becomes unuseable, blocked, or removed, thereby denying emergency access, the existing fire hydrant located on the west side of 92"d Street SW, mid -block between 228th Street SW and the terminus of the existing road shall be rotated 180 degrees so the largest outlet (nozzle cap) faces West. Kevin Z Deputy Chief — Fire Marshal City of Edmonds, Department of Fire Prevention Snohomish County Fire District 1 425-771-0213 r a Attachmel Packet Pg. 158 7.1.a CITY OF EDMONDS - PLANNING DIVISION COMMENT FORM ❑ PW-Engineering ❑ Fire ❑ PW - Maintenance ❑ Parks & Rec. ❑ Building ❑ Economic Dev. ❑ Parks Maintenance Project dumber: PLN20160032 Applicant's Name: WESTGATE CHAPEL INC Property Location: 92nd Ave W. South of 228th St SW, North of Edmonds Way Date of Application: 06.20.16 Date Form Routed: 0&21.16 Zoning: R-O-W Project Description: STREET VACATION "PER ECDC 20.02.005 ALL COMMENTS MUST BE SUBMITTED WITHIN 15 DAYS OF THE DATE THIS FORM WAS ROUTED: _DUE BY 7/14/2016_ If you have any questions or need clarification on this project, please contact: Responsible Staff. KERNEN LIEN Ext, 1778 Name of Individual Submitting Comments: Lynne Danielson Title: General Manager - Olympic View Water and Sewer District ❑ I have reviewed this land use proposal for my department and have concluded that IT WOULD NOT AFFECT MY DEPARTMENT, so I have no comments. My department may also review this project during the building permit process (if applicable) and reserves the right to provide additional comments at that time. X I have reviewed this land use proposal for my department and have concluded that IT WOULD AFFECT MY DEPARTMENT, so I have provided comments or conditions below or attached. Comments (please attach memo if additional space is needed): The District h s high flow sewer m in within the ro ed vacation area. There is also a water main within the proposed area Sewer and water easements will need to be grgnted at or prior to vacation of the area defined in the attached submission. The following conditions should be attached to this permit to ensure compliance with the requirements of this department (please attach memo if additional space is needed): Easements th 3 allow direct access to manholes, currently located on 921,d Avenueshould be art of the vacation and not something that is to be given cit a later date upon vacation . r a Attachmel Packet Pg. 159 7.1.a August 24, 2016 Kernen Lien, Senior Planner City of Edmonds- Development Services Department 121 5th Ave N Edmonds, WA 98020 Dear Mr. Lien, Re: Westgate Chapel Street Vacation Application #PLN20160032 i 44k Snohomish County Public Works Surface Water Management 3000 Rockefeller Ave., M/S 607 Everett, WA 98201-4046 (425) 388-3464 www.snoco.org Dave Somers County Executive Thank you for giving Snohomish County -Surface Water Management Division the opportunity to comment on this application for a right-of-way vacation of City of Edmonds roadway to the Westgate Chapel Inc. Snohomish County does have an interest in the maintenance of the storm sewer system located in the jurisdiction of City of Edmonds on 228°' St SW and 92 Ave W. We are particularly interested in the drainage connection point between Snohomish County MS4 and City of Edmonds MS4 at the cross culvert (Pipe #8742 per Edmonds data records) across 228" St SW and our ditch on the northside of 228d' St SW at the 92"d street intersection. Our understanding is this storm pipe is currently owned and operated by the City of Edmonds and will continue to be owned, operated and maintained by City of Edmonds. We strongly recommend this connection point stays under City of Edmonds responsibility to ensure there are no blockages or failures that would create a road safety hazard along the main arterial of 228t' St SW. For the downstream part of the storm conveyance system that resides within the 92' Ave W roadway, we recommend City of Edmonds at a minimum be granted a drainage facility maintenance convent for the property, that would allow the Public Works Department to inspect and maintain the system if the owners fail to do so properly. Since this road right-of-way is outside the county's legal jurisdiction, it would not be practical or appropriate for Snohomish County to secure a maintenance convent or public drainage easement. However, even with a convent, since there are no facilities on site that require inspection under the City of Edmonds Phase II NPDES, we are concerned that there is no proactive mechanism to ensure that maintenance takes place. City of Edmonds is advised to access that potential risk and consult their Stormwater Utility Division prior to approving this application. In addition, there are several parcels within the county that would become landlocked due to this vacation. If and when those parcel develop, they will need to show proper ingress and egress in their building permit application to Snohomish County. We request that those land owners be notified of this application and given the opportunity to provide comments. Please contact me with any questions you may have on this issue and thank you again for consulting Snohomish County- SWM on this application. Sincerely, - —J Laura B. Frolich, Public Works Supervisor III Surface Water Management Phone: (425) 388-6691 uJ Email: Laura. frolichimsnoco.or m Cc: Karen Kerwin, P.E. Engineering Manager- SWM; James Egge, James Egge & Associates Q Attachmel Packet Pg. 160 7.1.a Date: To: From: Subject MEMORANDUM October 27, 2016 Kernen Lien, Senior Planner Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager PLN20160032 - Westgate Chapel Street Vacation - 92nd Ave W, south of 228th St SW Engineering has reviewed the application from Westgate Chapel requesting vacation of 92nd Ave W right-of-way, south of 228th St SW. The information provided is consistent with Title 18 Edmonds Community Development Code & Engineering standards. The Engineering Division recommends approval of the street vacation with the following conditions of approval: 1) The Transportation Comp Plan has identified a project for street improvements along 228th St SW between SR 99 and 95th PI W. In an effort to maintain sufficient right-of-way through the 92nd Ave W intersection, the right-of-way alignment on the north edge of 92nd Ave needs to be adjusted from what the applicant has shown. The northern line of that portion of 92nd Ave W to be vacated shall be shown as a continuation of the southern boundary line of 2281h St SW as shown east of 92nd Ave. With this revision, the area shown in red below (an area 10-feet by 30-feet) would remain City right-of-way. --IIII I L1 1 ' II_160'16EI' 36 I 31 130PINECR — I 42� 41 40 e0.E 82t37 01 IpRT THWAS07 11 \ 35 34 I 33 02 T � 32 ]tl 70' I L I 47 43 I 14 �45 IS -SO'13'09'E - I � T— ^� _ I ��. `b'13'G9'E 2n p1 � a m � _ — _ — _ — _ . I I I SBB'22'55-E— �'iS86'41'25`E 30.02' a 30.01' �AESTB4 I LHtiPELL — — I o4 I 05 I 03 DOEI 5t I 02 01 .�— LOt 1, fill(_ 2, RIACRES O TnM p06+Q6xoD0a�m / $ o T. 20J23 SF / PANEL A. CITY OF i] 0391W000OfisO I `ea 2 1 / FOUNDS LOT WE ADO / K NO. 100711j0V23001 � b iF% s Y \ / YOD3910000a090G I i 4 �f 31 \ 4 T SBI'49'47'W ux 10 33.96' // 4007910O9WIW0� 5 � 8 1 7 _ c / � N4'13'0914 IL \ ' I N86'42'29'W 30.01' City of Edmonds Q Attachmell Packet Pg. 161 7.1.a 2) The City releases all ownership interest in the stormwater facilities located upon or within the vacated 92nd Ave Street right-of-way, as well as the stormwater facilities located through the Westgate Chapel property at 22901 Edmonds Way. Westgate Chapel shall assume ownership and maintenance responsibilities for these facilities and provide easements to abutting property owners as needed. Ownership of the stormwater facilities within the intersection of 92n and 228d' will remain under the ownership of the City of Edmonds as this portion of right-of-way is not being vacated. Background information regarding the stormwater facilities is provided below. 3) The Olympic View Water and Sewer District currently owns and maintains water and sewer facilties through the subject 92nd Ave W right-of-way. Easements shall be provided to OVWSD accordingly. 4) Other dry utilities such as power, gas, phone and cable may also exist within the subject right-of-way. Easements shall be provided to all entities as required to allow for continued ownership and maintenance of any such facilities. Background Information on Stormwater Facilities: The City currently has stormwater facilities within the subject 92nd Ave W right-of-way and through the Westgate Chapel property at 22901 Edmonds Way, as shown highlighted on the map below. Most of the stormwater runoff draining through this storm system is from upstream properties located within Snohomish County jurisdiction and/or from the Westgate Chapel property at 22901 Edmonds Way. As such, upon vacation of 92nd Ave W, the City no longer needs to maintain ownership and maintenance of these stormwater facilities. �s ` z 2287iIS SW�� PC115-tr. _ _ �Gg�9 o° a � 0 1 Lg�b i Isal � � r 6 ry OPD15.10 (V ®Q ; J ®o a� In response to the City's initial comments on the street vacation proposal, the applicant made x contact with Snohomish County to determine their interest in the storm system. Snohomish w r County provided a written response to the City (see attachment in the staff report) stating "Since this road right-of-way is outside the county's legal jurisdiction, it would not be E w r Q Attachmell Packet Pg. 162 7.1.a practical or appropriate for Snohomish County to secure a maintenance covenant or public drainage easement". The County had concerns about the City's ability to inspect the stormwater system, however, Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 18.30.090 requires property owners to maintain their stormwater facilities and allows for city access to private stormwater facilities to ensure they are properly operated and maintained. x w m E z Q Attachmell Packet Pg. 163 ' r• ..PLANTZ ADD T ON .... SECTION 36, TWR 27 N 7 R 3 EWok r .r' ti.....�. 7 SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON ' �•''' �' • "��• . SCA L E Z I" = 100' - S-228- TWIN - NJ N.% ti Aoao ., N 4w. low lot Ao do Cal I .e . DESCRIPTION T/rir /df of ,01,o YTZ d for/iod of Axe /Y. E. �4 of scc%rv� ��, 7".Y� Z7 /Y, .PBE, /J'/I/ .Srroifornif/i laa�, %iresifiiry/os, d'escri6ec� ds �//o�.r: Bdyi:�.�iny df /rld /Y. E. comer o`' sdid' Sccf%vn -3�,• iritircc SD%71J'�" d/o�9 /rfe eas/ /ire of said' stc�oa /B99B �/,• /rlerce s'.�B�/.a/�!' �oo...s.� �f fo //id /rorir%ds/erg rddryir� oi' Socoirvrdry Sfd/d .��ii�-sy /l�o. /-fY� ii%�►cc /YB.�'�/o7i1�' d/on9 sdid' /yidr9iir, /�5� �f A d Roza/ of cared /o Axe A -A,, /4ffw d rda✓ivs oi-QdD.1B/,• /ilevice ob•,y .said' carrel /.fro y,6 d cew/ra/ dny/e of 16owf;r7; do drr ells/duct o/'20�20 ff,• /iidrad /YD'/�':Sd "E /27�7 ro rind /ire of sdio� sec/io,� B�,• /�e�►cd s8B 17.�0 E d/off norfii /ird al, S�s�fi /o /ris �oirr/ ®� 6d9.ani�y. RESTRICTIONS /1v /o/ or o/' d /o/ %r %i%r /e/ si%/J' 6c dne/ so/ir or rero%r ar oiraBrsr% c�ldny� o•- ,irdzs�rred' .r.lrrBy /.fe oir.,Errs.�� of d� �/;�• of ��lcf �/d/ sfd// 6e /srs /i% vsc �f/ric/ s/af`d' on /ifc /d .•� TREASURER'S CERTIFICATE r /y irE.P.YE f/E/'E�PS'� Treasurer o��iioiforn%� Cwair�s h'dsifir9fa��► _ _� rf�6 , c�.�' r�/id/ d� /d.+'es orr rid d6ore r/escri6ed' frdc/ DT /d/r� /rare?rr� �dr fo d/ro/ /mac/vo✓iry file yedr- Tredsare/•'•..Sno�lo�„�s,��irrri� DC�o dsarer .Snoaos�r%sf-Cvrio� ;�.+ r � � • •��• .� , r• DEDICATION ' ' '.!'�I'O�i' �'L rJ1ErY'�Y Tif/E.SE r�iPE.SEi1'T-f fildf srs //rc virorers9�►ao� o�.ocrs is /eel sides/ /d/ror /i�re6y /d//eon o✓ ifere6 �cc/drd sold' /o-/ d/!or Oreo1/ca><e /o lie y6/�rerei •; d// /'odo/s dnd' rr�s si%rro' /iereon, �i/,f f/% . r' /rdce�s,d� sees >or cotes d/rd' '%r U�o� A. -I /v1s o/' /dna/ _ao rm► ao Ai%ct�// '� %/! //1d l'ed..tond6/e D/'/�/%1d/ Q/do✓n9 o>`'d// /'�'�s s�oir�► /ei-e�►. Timid Csu�r� or �ti • • .ram ' saccd ems, s // /idrd {e r9�1/ d'rvin 'ell/odI.r diror s/ree/s ovdr dno� '' . dcros.S , ,day �/ or �/s IrrfdrB Is�d/er Ini��i/ /d.�e d /fd/ard/ cocrse df�er //je /-odors'' d`':s/ro'�/s dre yradeo! /giro/ ori-didin9 said// 6e o�rdr/o'or /o �a6/c • • -' •dodo! .T'iyri/s of zw" ,mv-m.-•e,ir---encit o�'�ainoyd-d>`eis ice► ca/r�r/s o/- orrains oi- i-d-i-oar<i� LAND SURVEYORS CERTIFICATE r"14 ss .� X- -mod// d>� eX��s� o'��` /rr /Y/TdEss `j1yE,pEoF we i%re sCf our /snot dn�.ted,G /iiis"�Pd� of-u�cisf _/�fS / rP. rPvse'iv Fiss�E-.P , .Pdyis/ereor Ldo�.�arr yor , oo i%rc6 � cei-/i� >lifd/ /,6is � ' /a'/ /••d�resen�%r do do/va/ .svrrty dnd' .Sl/6o�I'%J%On of /i% more �Bscri�Bo� .. . f/•dc/ Ae �s/dr�c`� dnd' �oarses dre dccard/% si%�rd, /oi ..... — ,�CtM► cor/rdrs /%rd 6e" s/d•Feo� dad' coacrd/e /noavineafs sei ors iiro✓cd/ea! .... ti I GBrfi�ca/e /Yo. 2077 ,Pellrewa� ""'- r' ACI�CNOWLEDGMENT v'�til IAS 44, .STi�TE DF fY�s///rY6rOrY ' '� APPROVALS %/t%f /s TO cCr�%/�°' '�/�d� O/�' 'f/!%S �n�•' d'�y -0>d - ��/-QG/.Tf - - /�.�5 IJ�cTD/"C /!!d Exdnired' dnvr duo roved' rr/iis _ .% _ del o�L�'�Y�r� fir= _ /ys•,s f/fe v/r�Brf9�'ed. d' iYa,•fdy �e�.�, �oBrsoii% d��edrd�, E.9/PL roO1.9/Y7-Z anal -� 641f EVE IY, 4Z- f'L A /Y �-Z hr:; •'w:fc;r' ro :..ol� ,Fnois-a /0 6e lie ia�i-ioad/s info .01 eel' >` ,o� /oW /.ol�v -s�jropov aaol, . Q=�— sdd/Ba/ Ae (dove ds /r�eir va,�`rii,/dry dCii'ono' �/eo'1� f'ar /r% uses aro��ar�osas /jfdrdrir rroriairris laayire•Cr /l7Bn�%nBo! t''- h/i"iJ'Ess /!jy Avow" dnw/ E,rdinirrdd' dad' d��rordd' fins of'1 �¢e,N. Cridirrrrdo, Barora�o lo�ri�ry iubaers /Yo%i- �v6/c is oaor or�fedsi�./io (Y / /idrd6y aerfiT Pilaf /,6c Sri/rfi�►/elf o /�L,�iYTI /SOD/T/DAY %r oay r, -• t��' d��roreo' 6� / Saor%a►itrf wry P/duality lio��sian �,6ir 7 _ d'dy oi1(1 r, ti fY/ , RECORDING CERTIFICATE IOC/- r rdcord' of /ile re9vds/ 1• r / 1• _ o inin`�es / or .f oaa 01 A-0., ir llc!► d "" ti ,. ,' 1 Q N O) 4- 0 r- O 0 a f3 Q Cu O R O om 0 Cu r- O a� C �L R a� M r c cu a t 3 0 a N M 0 0 co 0 N Z J a t x w c a Attachment Packet Pg. 164 59L 13d 40MOed i i • I •. r• r •% Section 31 Tvvp. 27 N. R.4 E. 1N. M 9 5r)oh om i s � Co, Wr). aw^0917er1 46;4rWi7e.- If Fiscfie. Inc. Eny�.t Jet J/ �e erec certa.f�„r that the Dlat 01 se ;acres is based aocn at. actual sur-ey rind subdlvi3lon of -jeC. 1, 27 ii., ., W.;'.'.. that t:.e 'L'CVarc:s and courses Ja ar4-les are s low n thereor, correctly. • �;� rr 'nixr,yrA+ havn b 1-1, C•r, set and lot ..0i c4 c--r,,ners 3taiccd. , u'(-� �'0'lr�C�. liar drier, mar .er & Fischer, Tnc . y' 4M.a J.iYe�.l azid. a n i li ed W.hi zth r {' e 1 n _•.egem ber—h.:t. ��.� . nLy;zneer X aT �...�"I I v' � ri 'S� K'.i .j V a :I rl 14J d a Jr V 4 C� OQ I �.., Y"'�3 ;,pars o �Oun y u o I y,,i 3s- 3riers . IlLi or ri;cord at 4- r c q• of ri. eta: sr, ararFr r ische.r i'.c .,. past 42.fig��L dnutej r `reC/J. rtE� .o< v.47/� _ of Plats, �w's%i�r�•.2i+. ree.c_r�`3 v;' ono :,pr.,:sn Coon �, �iC4�d: f�.`JY:• I, D. Carl Pectr500. Treasurer of Snob o- I mish County Wash. do hereby certify that all -taxes oo t h e above described property. hare. wy id, up �o and including the year Co.- -for. V%j beeq 1`uil3l pg � I 1919. ,1 Couhfy Treasurer. .SCi9L E /� 2Gl� This plat of Ridge Acres embraces thefolk Wi described tract of (4 of 1.7j) f Section 31, Towns'►:ip ..7 "'orth of Ranvre 4 Fast of t ae "'i llsmette Meridian. .ill r'itances are as silo n on this plat in feet. ,. T I IT ,. �_ !J Mn, ow all me:, l. •;- -..resents thhat the Boulder lRealty Company, a ,'ornoration the utate of :ton, bei,n�- o?mner in fee simple of the land shover. in the annexed plat anF, r.-,ore -oarticularly described the3: i/ 'rs f_ 11 L U J .:.. - 1 5 �� , '.4V e s h V r V 'A V- Yi .. a�i.v an . -aesl� a e 3aio 31at as 1ho n 4- hyarici 7-nP e 'A L?•r rAc 1 nV'_4 V£ �{�i ' r old .: ii St `ets, ave=l e an alleys as aU,T'": Qn said'', lau tO +be 'x"'riic f0re•.tc:r, r r+rj i�, � � Fes+ � ♦rG;: Ir �r�tre r .,rem:" s��icaider e=1yt:. /, •Pas ca,ae itQ c r"}or y e "^;8 tUg V '�'+•��.Ly li. . crcun sbs�r;' r = -d it p�}-peal 13 Yxce sI^ - v s �e c r e -17 , rea3urer rluAn eIF . 1 press KING ) this �-'�� 4" 77 .� . efore ;e , _ o Lar� ��,i�c lr. ^ , or sa is .r y,. • I ' vO..:�'�'rJ- '1rr_�vnq� i�.: an-)eared-JO�ZiLL._,ksEydv_. erPrdegl to n.e Known .o b'e tEe resi- rE _r, reaecUzve�y o€•'t'.c Roulder :.ca1', . �•' + : v3Mna-' t1i_ne s :-'o+r±.7*-!^orr.. at _��+�� eX� a+d �h� for�o.1r� - anc..-acfh;urleged eikid ir.stru}pert tc be the act a nrr' dFF of Rai r', sir tone 1.`-es )-'rl n-r' ,ces therein "neii : � ? r;^ u9 v.i S a e a"i %0 L:1E' "iere stM;-Lv rx zed tC e .,;c : we sa1� _ .. s rume t m"and, fiat, the seal affixed is the c:orromit,e Seal: of sai4 Cor-joration.. i.r: `if; 1.4' : " w1iereof have iereur:to set I,. '%. � '-rear d iK!si ai`f ibed.-fill vf?iC l seal the .- . yr, • f ^ C i'7'7 I.. . • .. •ate WRng ='U11 ; in and or 6uh rtX Seal td, �r• '�•tip. •. • r' .' _ L 1.. r a. r' o Attachment 17 7.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/1/2016 Public Hearing: Proposed 2017-2022 Capital Facilities Plan/Capital Improvement Program (20 minutes) Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History On October 25, 2016, staff presented this item to Council. Staff Recommendation Consider public comment and discuss possible changes and/or forward the item to the consent agenda for approval at a future City Council meeting. Narrative The City's Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Element is a document updated annually and identifies capital projects for at least the next six years which support the City's Comprehensive Plan. The CFP contains a list of projects that need to be expanded or will be new capital facilities in order to accommodate the City's projected population growth in accordance with the Growth Management Act. Thus, capital projects that preserve existing capital facilities are not included in the CFP. These preservation projects are identified within the six -year capital improvement program (CIP) along with capital facility plan projects which encompass the projected expenditure needs for all city capital related projects. CIP vs. CFP The CFP and CIP are not the same thing; they arise from different purposes and are in response to different needs. While the CIP is a budgeting tool that includes capital and maintenance projects, tying those projects to the various City funds and revenues, the CFP is intended to identify longer term capital needs (not maintenance) and be tied to City levels of service standards. The CFP is also required to be consistent with the other elements (transportation, parks, etc) of the Comprehensive Plan, and there are restrictions as to how often a CFP can be amended. There are no such restrictions tied to the CIP. The proposed 2017-2022 CFP is attached as Exhibit 1. The CFP has three project sections comprised of General, Transportation and Stormwater. The proposed 2017-2022 CIP is attached as Exhibit 2. The CIP has two sections related to general and parks projects and each project list is organized by the City's financial fund numbers. Exhibit 3 is a comparison that shows added, deleted and changed projects between last year's CFP/CIP to the proposed CFP/CIP. The CFP and CIP were presented to the Planning Board on September 28th and a public hearing was held on October 12th. The Planning Board provided comments and recommended the CFP and CIP be forwarded to the City Council for approval. The minutes (draft for October 12th) from the Planning Board meeting are attached as Exhibits 4 and 5. Packet Pg. 166 7.2 Attachments: Exhibit 1 - Draft CFP 2017-2022 Exhibit 2 - Draft CIP 2017-2022 Exhibit 4 - 09/28/16 Planning Board Minutes Exhibit 5 - Draft 10/12/16 Planning Board Minutes Exhibit 3 - CFP-CIP Comparison Packet Pg. 167 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN U~� 2017-2022 St. � P-3 %�p DRAFT Packet Pg. 168 V N iu Attachment: Exhibit 1 - Draft CFP 2017-2022 (1636 : CIP/CFP 2017-2022 - Public Hearing) G� z U Attachment: Exhibit 1 - Draft CFP 2017-2022 (1636 : CIP/CFP 2017-2022 - Public Hearing) n b V N V N iu Attachment: Exhibit 1 - Draft CFP 2017-2022 (1636 : CIP/CFP 2017-2022 - Public Hearing) City of Edmonds Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Parks, General, and Regional Projects (2017-2022) Current Grant Project (2017-2022) Project Name Purpose Opportunity Phase Total Cost Revenue Source 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Aquatic Facility Meet citizen needs for an Aquatics $0 Public Vote Center (Feasibility study complete Unknown Conceptual $0 G.O. Bonds August 2009). $0 $0 Total 5-$23 M Civic Center Development City master plan in progress $0 Public Vote RCO Land Conceptual $135,000 REET 1 / Grants $135,000 Acquisition $0 G.O. Bonds $135000 Total $135,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $3,135,000 Community Park / Athletic Complex - In cooperation with ESD#15 develop $0 Capital Campaign Old Woodway High School: Phase 2 and 3 a community park and athletic RCO Phasel $0 REET 2 complex. Complete $0 School District $0 Foundation $0 Grants $0 Total Unknown Parks & Facilities Maintenance & Operations Replace / Renovate deteriorating $0 Public Vote Building building in City Park. Unknown Conceptual $0 G.O. Bonds $0 $0 Total $3-4M Waterfront RedevlopmenWVaterfront Walkway Rehabilitate grounds, parking, beach $1,600,000 REET / Grants $1,600,000 Completion access and area around Senior Unknown Conceptual $0 G.O. Bonds Center, walkway access. $500,000 Park Impact Fees $500,000 $0 Private Partnership $2,100,000 Total $2,100,000 Edmonds Crossing WSDOT Ferry / Mutimodal Relocate ferry terminal to Marina EIS $0 Federal (Unsecured) Facility Beach. US DOT Completed $0 State Funds I $0 Total Unknown Public Market (Downtown Waterfront) Acquire and develop property for a year round public market. Unknown Conceptual $0 Grants I $0 Total Unknown Edmonds Waterfront Analysis Develop alternatives to improve $150,000 General Local Funds $150,000 emergency access and safety Unknown Conceptual $0 Grants improvements. $150,000 Total $150,000 Unknown 7.2.a N N O N r ti O N d LL 0 d W to M t0 r N N O N I,- r O N LL <.i L 0 r Total CFP $2,385,000 Annual CFP Totals $2,250,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 t K LU C E t V tC a Packet Pg. 172 V N iu Attachment: Exhibit 1 - Draft CFP 2017-2022 (1636 : CIP/CFP 2017-2022 - Public Hearing) CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Aquatic Facility ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $5,000,000 — $23,000,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Implement recommendations of the Aquatics Feasibility Study completed in 2009. Six scenarios were presented and the plan recommended by the consultants was a year round indoor pool with an outdoor recreational opportunity in the summer. The project is dependent upon a public vote. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The current Yost Pool, built in 1972, is nearing the end of its life expectancy. The comprehensive study done in 2009 assessed the needs and wants of Edmonds citizens in regard to its aquatic future as well as the mechanical condition of the current pool. SCHEDULE: 2021-2037 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction 1 % for Art TOTAL $5m - $23m * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts Packet Pg. 174 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Civic Center Development ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $3,135,000 / Stadium Demolition PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Civic Center Development / Stadium Demolition. As part of the Master planning process for Civic, and in consideration of the current condition of the stadium, it is being recommended to demolish the current stadium. The City also has some grant funds available to assist with this. In addition, develop a signature downtown park at this site. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Civic Center Development / Stadium Demolition. The Civic Master plan will be complete by early 2017. Funds will be set aside, and grant funds applied for in order to develop the master plan. This is a high priority in the PROS plan. SCHEDULE: 2017 - 2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Construction $135,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 TOTAL $135,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 Packet Pg. 175 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Community Park / Athletic ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: Unknown Complex at the Former Woodway High School w.:,... �. -- t f 1 i 1 M i ji V. .►x ra CIA HOGAN 5 f5-0n . -- -- - -_- 6 IF FORMER WOODWAY HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS PR E PAnto fOX THE E DMON D5 5CHOOL DISH ICf PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Develop community park and regional athletic complex with lighted or unlighted fields and recreational amenities in partnership with Edmonds School District, community colleges, user groups, and other organizations. Development dependent upon successful regional capital campaign. $10m - $12M project for all 3 phases. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The site is currently an underutilized and under maintained facility with great potential as community multi -use active park. Site has existing controlled access, greenbelt, parking and 4-court tennis facility with substandard fields. Highly urbanized area with 150,000 residents within 5-mile radius. Future maintenance supported by user fees. Phase 1 was completed in 2015 for $4.2M, Phases 2 & 3 will be completed in the future for an additional $6-8M. SCHEDULE: 2017-2037 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023- COST 2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction 1 % for Art TOTALI I I Unknown " all or a portion of this project may quality for 1 % for the Arts al C a. N N O N ti O N a. U a_ U W CM to r 9 Packet Pg. 176 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Parks & Facilities ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $3-$4 Million Maintenance & Operations Building Building Outline Perime(er zone — 4,200 st Existing Fence Line PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The 40 year old maintenance building in City Park is reaching the end of its useful life and is in need of major renovation or replacement. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Parks and Facilities Divisions have long outgrown this existing facility and need additional work areas and fixed equipment in order to maintain City parks and Capital facilities for the long term. SCHEDULE: Contingent on finding additional sources of revenue from general and real estate taxes. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction 1 % for Art TOTAL $3m - $4m * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts 10 Packet Pg. 177 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN DESCRIPTION 7.2.a PROJECT NAME: Waterfront Redevelopment ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $2,100,000 / Waterfront Walkway Completion Euf�� 1�C R�.� �•{yljl �� - To Bncn }- 7 -� ' ----- -------------- ®R.--� A 4 kYr�4 Prapvwd Rmw4 W arerlront Ganrer 1 - � raAm°wrtdno � rrnrprre� BEa Ova j � 1 FW"PO'N"trRa•.- .��• $ nro.r+.wahr.. ia. trm 9�rrti yggtr pl.�n q O �- PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Work with Sr. Center to renovate surrounding park, parking lot and walkway. Remove creosote pier, reintroduce habitat for fish and wildlife. Increase access to the waterfront. Connect waterfront walkway from Brackett's Landing South to Olympic Beach, including completion in front of the Ebb tide condominiums. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Provide anew Senior and Community Center and provide a new beachfront walkway. One of the top priorities in the PROS plan is to open up beach -front access. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. $100,000 Construction $2,000,000 $0 $0 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL $2,100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 all or part of this Project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts a1 C •L R 2 V B 7 d N N O N ti O N a LL U a_ U co M to 11 Packet Pg. 178 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION 7.2.a PROJECT NAME: Edmonds Crossing ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: Unknown WSDOT Ferry / Multimodal Facility 011114*�M* Modified Pt. Edwards Alternative p - uHacu paf of�'s„y,� �.r ym ee mnmaol A1r4r IMrJ� yQy„ 3 mom am � Edw��.ls a PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Edmonds Crossing is multimodal transportation center that will provide the capacity to respond to growth while providing improved opportunities for connecting various forms of travel including rail, ferry, bus, walking and ridesharing. NOTE: The design of Marina Beach Park is a separate project. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: To provide an efficient point of connection between existing and planned transportation modes. SCHEDULE: 2023-2037 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023- 2037 Engineering & Administration of Way —Right Construction 1 % for Art TOTAL Unknown C1 a. N N O N ti O N a U a_ U W M t0 all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts 12 Packet Pg. 179 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Public Market (Downtown ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: Unknown Waterfront) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Work with community partners to establish a public market, year around, on the downtown waterfront area. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The project will help to create a community gathering area, boost economic development, bring tourists to town, and will be a valuable asset to Edmonds. SCHEDULE: This project depends on the ability to secure grant funding, and community partners willing to work with the city to establish this. This potentially can be accomplished by 2018. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction 1 % for Art TOTAL Unknown * all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts. 13 Packet Pg. 180 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Edmonds Waterfront ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: Unknown Analysis PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Alternative analysis to study, 1) Waterfront access issues emphasizing and prioritizing near term solutions to providing emergency access, also including, but not limited to, 2) At grade conflicts where Main and Dayton Streets intersect BNSF Rail lines, 3) Pedestrian/bicycle access, and 4) Options to the Edmonds Crossing Multimodal Terminal Project (Identified as Modified Alternative 2) within the 2004 Final Environmental Impact Statement. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve waterfront access. SCHEDULE: 2017-2018 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $150,000 Construction 1 % for Art TOTAL $150,000 Unknown 14 Packet Pg. 181 cn O y y O rt 00 Attachment: Exhibit 1 - Draft CFP 2017-2022 (1636 : CIP/CFP 2017-2022 - Public Hearing) n ITI It V N V N iu Attachment: Exhibit 1 - Draft CFP 2017-2022 (1636 : CIP/CFP 2017-2022 - Public Hearing) City of Edmonds Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Transportation Projects (2017-2022) Grant (2017-2022) Project Name Purpose Opportunity Project Phase Total Cost Funding Source 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Safety / r-rity Gnalv_ci_c 228th St. SW Corridor Safety Realign highly skewed intersection to $25,000 (Federal or State secured) $25,000 Improvements address safety and improve $0 (Federal or State unsecured) operations; create new east -west corridor between SR-99 and 1-5. Construction $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $0 Total 228th St. SW from Hwy 99 to 95th PI. Install two-way left turn lanes and $0 (Federal or State secured) W sidewalks to improve capacity and pedestrian safety (project split with $375,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $75,000 $300,000 $8,690,000 Snohomish County) Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $1,356,000 $375,000 Total $75,000 $300,000 $10,046,000 76th Av. W @ 212th St. SW Intersection improvements to $3,006,500 (Federal or State secured) $2,920,000 $86,500 Intersection Improvements improve intersection delay and level $0 (Federal or State unsecured) of service (LOS). Construction $0 (Unsecured) $2,086,663 (Local Funds) $2,073,163 $13,500 $5,093,163 Total $4,993,163 $100,000 Highway 99 Gateway / Revitalization Install gateway elements and safety $10,000,000 (Federal or State secured) $5,000,000 $5,000,000 improvements along SR-99 Corridor. $2,600,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $1,600,000 $1,000,000 $72,400,000 State Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) Appropriation $300,000 (Local Funds) $300,000 $12,900,000 Total $300,000 $6,600,000 $6,000,000 $72,400,000 SR 524 (196th St. SW) / 88th Ave W Improve intersection safety by $0 (Federal or State secured) Intersection Improvements converting a stop controlled $744,500 (Federal or State unsecured) $122,000 $87,500 $535,000 intersection for NB and SB movements to a signalized Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) intersection. $158,500 (Local Funds) $71,000 $87,500 $903,000 Total $193,000 $175,000 $535,000 Main St. and 9th Ave S Install traffic signal to improve $0 (Federal or State secured) intersection delay and Level of Service (mini roundabout is an $894,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $118,000 $776,000 alternative solution). Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $17,000 (Local Funds) $17,000 $911,000 Total $135,000 $776,000 76th Ave. W @ 220th St. SW Convert split phasing operation for $0 (Federal or State secured) Intersection Improvements EB and We movements to $5,637,450 (Federal or State unsecured) $285,450 $1,557,000 $3,795,000 concurrent through movements, with protected / permissive LT phasing. Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $287,550 (Local Funds) $44,550 $243,000 $5,925,000 Total $330,000 $1,800,000 $3,795,000 Hwy 99 @ 212th St SW Intersection Widen 212th St. SW to add a $0 (Federal or State secured) Improvements westbound left turn lane for 200' $2,783,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $152,000 $1,091,000 $1,540,000 storage length and an eastbound left turn lane. Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $23,000 (Local Funds) $23,000 $2,806,000 Total $175,000 $1,091,000 $1,540,000 7.2.a N N O N ti r O N LL LL U d to M t0 v N N O N ti r O N a- LL U tv 0 r y+ Z t K LLI C E t V tC a Packet Pg. 184 00 City of Edmonds Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Transportation Projects (2017-2022) Grant �Project!Phasj (2017-2022) Project Name Purpose Opportunity To 'ding Source 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023.2037 Hwy. 99 @ 216th St. SW Intersection Widen 216th St. SW to add a left $0 (Federal or State secured) Improvement turn lane for eastbound and $2,313,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $142,000 $334,000 $1,837,000 westbound movements. Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $22,000 (Local Funds) $22,000 $2 335 000 Total $164,000 $334 000 $1 837 000 Hwy. 99 @ 220th St. SW Intersection Widen 220th St. SW and Hwy 99 to $0 (Federal or State secured) Improvement add a westbound right turn lane (for 325, storage length) and a soutbound $3,192,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $152,000 $1,085,000 $1,955,000 left turn lane (for 275' storage Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) length). $23,000 (Local Funds) $23,000 $3,215,000 Total $175,000 $1,085,000 $1,955,000 SR-104 @ 226th St. SW / 15th St. SW Extend left turn storage area for W B $0 (Federal or State secured) Intersection Improvements movement on SR-104 w/ various $179,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $15,000 $164,000 bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $15,000 (Local Funds) $15,000 $194,000 Total $30,000 $164,000 SR-104 @ 95th PI. W Intersection Convert EB and W B LT along SR- $0 (Federal or State secured) Improvements 104 to protected LT phasing; $485,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $65,000 $420,000 upgrade ADA curb ramps; and add C-Curb for access management Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $10,000 (Local Funds) $10,000 $495,000 Total $75,000 $420,000 SR-104 @ 238th St. SW Intersection Install traffic signal to improve $0 (Federal or State secured) Improvements vehicular and pedestrian safety; $1,311,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $173,000 $1,138,000 revise geometry to allow for safer turns. Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $27,000 (Local Funds) $27,000 $1,338,000 Total $200,000 $1,138,000 Olympic View Dr. @ 76th Ave. W Install traffic signal to reduce the $0 (Federal or State secured) Intersection Improvements intersection delay and improve Level $0 (Federal or State unsecured) $1,183,000 of Service. Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $0 Total $1,183,000 84th Ave. W (212th St. SW to 238th Install two-way left turn lanes and $0 (Federal or State secured) St. SW) sidewalk to improve capacity and $0 (Federal or State unsecured) $15,441,000 pedestrian safety (split with Snohomish County) Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $0 Total $15,441,000 7.2.a N N O N ti r O N d LL U d W to M t0 N N O N ti O N a- LL U L 0 r y+ t K LLI C E M V ft1 a Packet Pg. 185 (D City of Edmonds Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Transportation Projects (2017-2022) Grant (2017-2022) Project Name Purpose Opportunity LojectPhasj To 'ding Source 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023.20 SR-104 @ 100th Ave. W Intersection / Implement Westgate Circulation $0 (Federal or State secured) Westgate Area Improvements Access Plan, midblock pedestrian $0 (Federal or State unsecured) $1,017,468 crossings along 100th Ave. W, and rechannelization with bike lanes / Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) sharrows along 100th Ave. W. $0 (Local Funds) $0 Total $1 017 468 SR-104 @ 76th Ave. W Intersection Add a 2nd W B left turn lane (split $0 (Federal or State secured) Improvements with Shoreline). $0 (Federal or State unsecured) $3,017,000 Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $0 Total $3,017 000 Olympic View Dr. @ 174th St. SW Install traffic signal to improve Level $0 (Federal or State secured) Intersection Improvements of Service and intersection delay. $0 (Federal or State unsecured) Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $610,000 $0 (Local Funds) $0 Total $610 000 Non -motorized Pedestrian / Bicvcle Proiects Sunset Ave. Walkway from Bell St. to Provide walkway on the west side of $157,121 (Federal or State secured) $157,121 Caspers St. Sunset Ave, with various utility Possible $1,870,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $1,870,000 upgrades. RCO / TIB Grant Design $0 (Unsecured) for construction $751,129 (Local Funds) $26,129 $725,000 $2,778,250 Total $183,250 $2,595,000 Dayton St. between 7th Ave. S to 8th Provide safe sidewalk along short $0 (Federal or State secured) Ave. S Walkway missing link. $37,500 (Federal or State unsecured) $37,500 Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $37,500 (Local Funds) $37,500 $75,000 Total $75,000 232nd St. SW from 100th Ave. W to Improve pedestrian safety along $0 (Federal or State secured) SR-104 232nd St. SW from 100th Ave. to $1,205,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $100,000 $1,105,000 SR-104. Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $100,000 (Local Funds) $100,000 $1,305,000 Total $200,000 $1,105,000 238th St. SW from 100th Ave. W to Improve pedestrian safety along $12,000 (Federal or State secured) $12,000 104th Ave. W 238th St. SW from 100th Ave. to 104th Ave. $0 (Federal or State unsecured) Construction $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $12,000 Total $12,000 236th St SW from Edmonds Way (SR- Improve pedestrian safety along $50,600 (Federal or State secured) $50,600 104) to Madrona Elementary 236th St. SW, creating a safe $0 (Federal or State unsecured) pedestrian connection from SR-104 to Madrona school. Construction $0 (Unsecured) $38,000 (Local Funds) $38,000 $88,600 Total $88,600 236th St SW from Edmonds Way Improve pedestrian safety along $0 (Federal or State secured) (SR-104) to 97th Ave. W 236th St. SW, creating a safe $1,288,500 (Federal or State unsecured) $106,500 $1,182,000 pedestrian connection from SR-104. Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $106,500 (Local Funds) $106,500 $1,395,000 Total $213,000 $1,182,000 7.2.a N N O N ti r O N d LL 0 d W to M t0 r N N O N ti O N a- LL 0 L 0 r y+ t K LLI C E M V ft1 a Packet Pg. 186 City of Edmonds Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Transportation Projects (2017-2022) Grant (2017-2022) Project Name Purpose O ortunit Project Phase Total Cost Funding Source 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023.2037 84th Ave. W from 238th St. SW to Improve pedestrian safety along 84th $0 (Federal or State secured) 234th St. SW Ave. W. from 238th St. SW to 234th $90,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $90,000 $495,000 St. SW. Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $90,000 Total $90,0001 $495,000 80th Ave. W from 212th St SW to Improve pedestrian safety along 80th $0 (Federal or State secured) 206th St. SW Ave. W, within proximity to Edmonds $1,439,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $210,000 $1,229,000 Woodway High School. Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $1 439 000 Total $210,000 $1 229 000 2nd Ave. S from James St. to Main St. Provide safe sidewalk along short $0 (Federal or State secured) Walkway missing link. $0 (Federal or State unsecured) Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $30,000 (Local Funds) $30,000 $30,000 Total $30,000 Maplewood Dr. from Main St. to 200th Provide safe sidewalk, connecting to $0 (Federal or State secured) St. SW ex. sidewalk along 200th St. SW $1,591,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $230,000 $681,000 $680,000 (direct link to Maplewood Elementary School). Possible grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $1,591,000 Total $230,000 $681,000 $680,000 95th Pl. W from 224th St. SW to 220th Provide sidewalk on one side of 95th $0 (Federal or State secured) St. SW PI. W from 224th St. SW to 220th St. $409,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $84,000 $325,000 SW completing missing link) Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $141,000 (Local Funds) $21,000 $120,000 $550,000 Total $105,000 $445,000 218th St. SW from 76th Ave. W to Provide safe sidewalk along a $0 (Federal or State secured) 84th Ave. W missing link of 218th St. SW. from 76th Ave. to 84th Ave. $978,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $100,000 $878,000 Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $327,000 (Local Funds) $100,000 $227,000 $1,305,000 Total $200,000 $1,105,000 Walnut St from 3rd Ave. S to 4th Ave. Provide short missing link. $0 (Federal or State secured) S Walkway $105,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $105,000 Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $105,000 Total $105,000 216th St. SW Walkway from Hwy. 99 Provide sidewalk on north side of $0 (Federal or State secured) to 72nd Ave W 216th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 72nd $137,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $137,000 Ave W (completing missing link) Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $20,000 (Local Funds) $20,000 $157,000 Total $157,000 238th St. SW from SR-104 to Hwy. 99 Provide sidewalk on north side of $316,800 (Federal or State secured) $316,800 238th St. SW from SR-104 to Hwy. $0 (Federal or State unsecured) 99 (completing missing link) Design $0 (Unsecured) $96,200 (Local Funds) $96,200 $413,000 Total $413,000 15th St. SW from 8th Ave. S to 9th Provide sidewalk on south side of $0 (Federal or State secured) Ave. S 15th St. SW from 8th Ave. S to 9th $200,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $200,000 Ave. S (completing missing link) Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $30,000 (Local Funds) $30,000 $230,000 Total $30,000 $200,000 7.2.a N N O N ti r O N d LL 0 a - to M t0 r N N O N ti O N a- LL V cc L 0 Packet Pg. 187 City of Edmonds Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Transportation Projects (2017-2022) Grant �ProjectPhasj (2017-2022) Project Name Purpose Opportunity To 'ding Source 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023.2037 Elm Way from 8th Ave. S to 9th Ave. Provide sidewalk on one side of Elm $0 (Federal or State secured) S Way from 8th Ave. S to 9th Ave. S $789,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $156,000 $633,000 Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $789,000 Total $156 000 $633 000 Minor Sidewalk Program Complete short sidewalk stretches $0 (Federal or State secured) throughout the City (annual program) $0 (Federal or State unsecured) Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $320,000 (Local Funds) $70,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $700,000 $320 000 Total $70,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $700 000 191 at St. SW from 80th Ave. W to Provide sidewalk on one side of $0 (Federal or State secured) 76th Ave. W 191 th St. SW from 80th Ave. to 76th $0 (Federal or State unsecured) $630,000 Ave. (completing missing link) Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $0 Total $630 000 104th Ave. W / Robinhood Lane from Provide sidewalk on west side of $0 (Federal or State secured) 238th St. SW to 106th Ave. W 104th Ave. from 238th St. SW to $0 (Federal State $990,000 106th Ave. W (completing missing or unsecured) link) Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $0 Total $990 000 80th Ave. W from 218th St. SW to Provide sidewalk on one side of 80th $0 (Federal or State secured) 220th St. SW Ave. W from 218th St. SW to 220th $0 (Federal or State unsecured) $315,000 St. SW (completing missing link) Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $0 Total $315,000 84th Ave. W from 188th St. SW to Provide sidewalk on one side of 84th $0 (Federal or State secured) 186th St. SW Ave. W from 188th St. SW to 186th $0 (Federal or State unsecured) $315,000 St. SW Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $0 Total $315,000 236th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 76th Provide sidewalk on one side of $0 (Federal or State secured) Ave. W 236th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 76th Ave. W $0 (Federal or State unsecured) $765,000 Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $0 Total $765 000 238th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 76th Provide sidewalk on one side of $0 (Federal or State secured) Ave. W 238th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 76th Ave W $0 (Federal or State unsecured) $1,170,000 Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $0 Total $1,170,000 7.2.a N N O N ti r O N a- LL 0 a- W t0 M t0 r N N O N ti O N a- LL V cc L 0 Packet Pg. 188 City of Edmonds Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Transportation Projects (2017-2022) Grant (2017-2022) Project Name Purpose Opportunity LojectPhasj To 'ding Source 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023.20 80th Ave. W / 180th St. SW from Provide sidewalk on one side of 80th $0 (Federal or State secured) 188th St. SW to OVD Ave. W / 180th St. SW from 188th State $1,350,000 St. SW to OVD $0 (Federal or unsecured) Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $0 Total $1 350 000 189th PI. SW from 80th Ave. W to Provide sidewalk on one side of $0 (Federal or State secured) 76th Ave. W 189th Pl. SW from 80th Ave. W to 76th Ave. W $0 (Federal or State unsecured) $585,000 Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $0 Total $585,000 Ferry/Railroad Ferry Storage Improvements from Improve ferry queueing by extending $0 (Federal or State secured) Pine St. to Dayton St. ferry storage area along SR-104 $357,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $357,000 (striping changes). Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured) $0 (Local Funds) $357,000 Total $357,000 Traffic Plannina Proiects Trackside Warning System at Dayton Install wayside horns at bath $0 (Federal or State secured) St. and Main St. Railroad Crossings crossings to reduce noise from train horns. $0 (Federal or State unsecured) Design / $0 (Unsecured) Construction $10,000 (Local Funds) $10,000 $10,000 Total $10,000 Total CFP 1 1 $49,300,013 1 Annual CFP Totals 1 $6,070,013 1 $150,000 1 $50,000 1 $5,760,000 1 $18,278,000 1 $18,992,000 1 $111,029,468 Revenue Summary by Year Totals Source 2017 J 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 $13,568,021 Total Federal & State Secured $3,481,521 $86,500 $o $0 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $0 $30,809,950 Total Federal &State Unsecured) $0 $0 $0 $4,517,450 $12,577,500 $13,715,000 $108,363,468 $0 Unsecured $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $610,000 $4,947,0421 LocalFundsl $2,613,4921 $63,500 $50,000 $1,242,550 $700,500 $277,000 $2,056,000 7.2.a N N O N ti r O N a- LL C.) IL W W M t0 N N O N r ti O N d LL cc L 0 r t X LU C E V Q Packet Pg. 189 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 228 th St. SW Corridor ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $7,300,000 Safety Improvements J PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 1) Extend 2281h St across the unopened right-of-way to 76th Avenue West 2) Signalize the intersection of 2281h St SW @ SR99 and 2281h St. SW @ 761h Ave. West 3) Construct a raised median in the vicinity of 761h Avenue West. 4) Add illumination between 2241h St SW and 2281h St SW on SR 99 5) Overlay of 228th St. SW from 801h Ave. W to — 2,000' east of 76th Ave. W. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The project will improve access / safety to the 1-5 / Mountlake Terrace Park & Ride from SR99. This east / west connection will reduce demand and congestion along two east -west corridors (220th Street SW and SR104). Roadway safety will also be improved as SR 99/ 228th Street SW will become a signalized intersection. 228th St. SW is being overlaid from 80th Pl. W to — 1,000 LF east of 72"d Ave. W. as well as 76th Ave. W from 228th St. SW to Hwy. 99. The project consists of various utility upgrades. SCHEDULE: Construction began in 2015 and substantial completion was obtained in May 2016. Physical completion is scheduled to be reached in October 2016. The only remaining task in 2017 is the completion of the Federal documentation. Federal and State grants were secured for the construction phase. This project was combined into one construction contract with the Hwy. 99 (Phase 3) Lighting project. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering, Administration, and ROW Construction $25,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $25,000 ' All or a portion of this project may qualify for 1 % for the arts 23 Packet Pg. 190 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 228 th St. SW from Hwy. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $10,421,000 99 to 95t" PI. W c M a) x a N N O N I- Q N IL U a_ U to CO) O PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Widen 228t St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 95t PI. W to three lanes (with two-way left turn lane), with curb and gutter, sidewalk, and bike lanes. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: This project would improve pedestrian safety and traffic flow along this corridor. SCHEDULE: The design phase is scheduled to begin in 2021 (pending funding). COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $75,000 $300,000 Construction $9,821,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $75,000 $300,000 $9,821,000 24 Packet Pg. 191 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 76 Ave W @ 212 St. SW ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $6,500,000 Intersection Improvements 1 i i 0 tUMUNUb-VVUUUVVHY HIGH SCHOOL I OFFICE W a R Fi 1301 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Add a northbound and southbound left -turn lane to convert the signal operation for those approaches from split phasing to protected -permissive phasing. Add a right -turn lane for the westbound, southbound, and northbound movements. The project also consists of various utility upgrades and conversion of overhead utilities to underground. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Reduce the intersection delay and improve the existing level of service to LOS C. SCHEDULE: Design was completed in May 2016. The project was advertised in June 2016 but the lowest bid was rejected since it was - approx. $1.3 Million over budget. The project is scheduled to be re -advertised in early 2017. A TIB grant to cover the possible shortfall was submitted in August 2016. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration & ROW Construction $4,993,163 $100,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $4,993,163 $100,000 25 Packet Pg. 192 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Highway 99 ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $85,000,000 Gateway/Revitalization PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project would include, among other features, wider replacement sidewalks or new sidewalk where none exist today, new street lighting, center medians for access control and turning movements, etc., attractive and safe crosswalks, better stormwater management, targeted utility replacements, potential undergrounding of overhead utilities, landscaping and other softscape treatments to identify the area as being in Edmonds. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve aesthetics, safety, user experience, and access management along this corridor. In addition, economic development would be improved. SCHEDULE: The design phase is scheduled to begin in 2017 (pending approval of the 2017 decision package).An HSIP grant was also submitted in July 2016 for this project. The construction phase is scheduled to begin in 2021 (pending additional funding / $10M from Connecting Washington allocation has been secured). COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & $300,000 $6,600,000 Administration & ROW Construction $6,000,000 $72,400,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $300,000 $6,600,000 $6,000,000 $72,400,000 26 Packet Pg. 193 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: SR-524 (196t" St. SW)/ 88t" ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $903,000 Ave. W Intersection Improvements SEVEN DAY ADVENl1ST CHURCH 4 196TH Sf SW IRP 1-1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install traffic signal at the intersection of 196 th St. SW @ 88 th Ave. W. The modeling in the 2009 Transportation Plan indicated that restricting northbound and southbound traffic to right -turn -only (prohibiting left -turn and through movements) would also address the deficiency identified at this location through 2025. This is same alternative as one concluded by consultant in 2007 study but not recommended by City Council. This could be implemented as an alternate solution, or as an interim solution until traffic signal warrants are met. The ex. LOS is F (below City Standards: LOS D). This project was ranked #6 in the Roadway Project Priority in the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve traffic flow characteristics and safety at the intersection. The improvement would modify LOS to A, but increase the delay along 196t" St. SW. SCHEDULE: The intersection LOS must meet MUTCD traffic signal warrants and be approved by WSDOT since 196t" St. SW is a State Route (SR524). No funding is currently allocated to this project (pending grant funding). COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & $193,000 $175,000 Administration & ROW Construction $535,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $193,000 $175,000 $535,000 27 Packet Pg. 194 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Main St and 9th Ave. S :1 ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $911,000 BELL Sr I .WM6 LLF W a _ a MAIN St Lj W a S H DAYTON 5 , Z WADE JAM ES THEATER J PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Installation of a traffic signal (or mini -roundabout is an alternative solution). PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The existing intersection is stop -controlled for all approaches and the projected intersection LOS in 2035 is LOS F (below the City's concurrency standards: LOS D). The installation of a traffic signal would improve the intersection delay to LOS B. The project ranked #4 in the Roadway Project Priority of the 2015 Transportation Plan. SCHEDULE: All phases are scheduled between 2020 and 2021 (unsecured funding) COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $135,000 Construction $776,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $135,000 $776,000 28 Packet Pg. 195 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 220" St SW @ 76t" Ave W ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: Intersection Improvements $5,925,000 2,9rH sr sw J 21919 J J J 3 414 I' Lri ,a Ui in J _J 1 2215TPLSW TOP FOODS JSTARBU KS J 220TH ST SW — 1 r LYNWOOD HONDA PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Reconfigure eastbound lanes to a left turn lane and through / right turn lane. Change eastbound and westbound phases to provide protected -permitted phase for eastbound and westbound left turns. Provide right turn overlap for westbound movement during southbound left turn phase. (ROADWAY ROJECT PRIORITY #1 in 2015 Transportation Plan). PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Reduce the intersection delay and improve the LOS. The projected LOS in 2035 would be improved from LOS F to LOS D. SCHEDULE: Engineering, ROW, and construction scheduled between 2020 and 2022 (unsecured funding). COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & ROW $330,000 $1,800,000 Administration Construction $3,795,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $330,000 $1,800,000 $3,795,000 ' All or a portion of this project may quality for 1 % for the arts 29 Packet Pg. 196 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Hwy. 99 @ 212 St. SW ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $2,806,000 intersection improvements 21 g sw:T I i W W Pa Nung sign Shop / n 7373 P.U.B 3 Edmonds Edmonds / W Family Clinic ei ADD Publm%Torks KENNEL 21 1 21114 / f Arbor Apt Q �az 211 / ofNlla Ramps 21109 / n he Box / 212TH ST Sw 7,.5�• CUPIC a LZF "3'2" PARK & RIDE 2151TH N ST 5W � 0 a PLANT AEGIS w _SWEDISH DNnS CRM Pl15 ' ALLIED / ROOFING / / B&M / CON ST 21414 / 21448 / / / NCOONRLD' Q( 1ALUE / PILLAGE / 16TH ST/Sw PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Widen 212 th St. SW to add a westbound left turn lane for 200' storage length and an eastbound left turn lane for 300' storage length. Provide protected left turn phase for eastbound and westbound movements. (ROADWAY PROJECT PRIORITY in 2015 Transportation Plan: #4) PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve intersection efficiency and reduce delay. SCHEDULE: All phases are scheduled between 2020 and 2022 (unsecured funding).The project cost is split between Lynnwood and Edmonds since half the project is in Lynnwood. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering, ROW, & Administration $175,000 $1,091,000 Construction $1,540,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $175,000 $1,091,000 $1,540,000 30 Packet Pg. 197 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Hwy. 99 @ 216 St. SW ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $2,335,000 intersection improvements 21410 13� 21408w 214021d12 21405 04 LU N I{ U 2> 1420 < MCDUHAL6' C 2i43� un �.o an z 150 r 215 AEGIS 21558 VALUE 2 t. VILLAGE ST SW -me�� 2161 H ST SW 21600 {� 21619 KRUGER CLINIC f 21632 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Widen 216t St. SW to add a westbound left turn lane for and an eastbound left turn lane. Provide protected -permissive left turn phases for eastbound and westbound movements. This project ranked #3 in the Roadway Project Priority in the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve intersection efficiency and reduce delay. SCHEDULE: All phases are scheduled between 2020 and 2022 (unsecured funding). COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & ROW & Administration $164,000 $334,000 Construction $1,837,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $164,000 $334,000 $1,837,000 a1 C x 3 d N N 0 N ti r 0 N IL U_ U IL_ U co M r 31 Packet Pg. 198 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Hwy. 99 @ 220 St. SW ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $3,215,000 intersection improvements TOP FOODS V � 19TH sT SW / 21919 STARBU S / / 220TH Sr SW •/�— — 7514 I I 12215T PL SW LYNFUN TA 91A WOOD HONOA a I I I uc"s I I 13 I lu zzzz � �chm r n $S I I 224TH Ei FZ/— /TR"E E R INN L7 w .F 7223'J' A.dy's N td 7391 R A r_ a 0 a S H ¢ nm rsw PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Widen 220th St. SW to add Westbound right turn lane for 325' storage length. Widen SR-99 to add 2nd Southbound left turn lane for 275' storage length. (ROADWAY PROJECT PRIORITY in 2015 Transportation Plan: #1). PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Reduce intersection delay and improve traffic flow and safety. SCHEDULE: All Phases are scheduled between 2020 and 2022 (unsecured funding for all phases). COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 COST Planning/Study Engineering & Administration & ROW $175,000 $1,085,000 Construction $1,955,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $175,000 $1,085,000 $1,955,000 32 Packet Pg. 199 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: SR-104 @ 226 1h St. SW / ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $194,000 15t" St. SW Intersection Improvements ALrL_L1 L L 14TH WAY SW . 226TH ST SW W uJ 226TH PL SW M PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Extend the left turn lane for the westbound movement on SR-104. Complete various pedestrian and bicycle intersection improvements. This project was identified in the SR-104 Complete Streets Corridor Analysis (completed in 2015). PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve non -motorized transportation safety at the intersection and improve traffic flow along the SR-104 corridor. SCHEDULE: 2020-2021 (unsecured funding) COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration & ROW $30,000 Construction $164,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $30,000 $164,000 33 Packet Pg. 200 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: SR-104 @ 95" PI. W ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $495,000 Intersection Improvements W r 06 L 06 06 L Cn WESTOAT C 17E PARKING 'H ST S a WESTGATE a CHAPEL 0 to M O ' N �IJ N O N PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Upgrade all ADA Curb Ramps; and add C-Curb for access management. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve intersection safety for pedestrians and vehicles. SCHEDULE: 2020-2021 unsecured funding) COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration & ROW $75,000 Construction $420,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $75,000 $420,000 34 Packet Pg. 201 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: SR-104 @ 238" St. SW ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,338,000 Intersection Improvements ■ To Hwy 99 i 10 239TH ST SW PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install traffic signal. The warrants are met for such an installation. This project was identified in the SR-104 Complete Street Corridor Analysis (completed in 2015). PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve vehicular and pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: 2020-2021 (unsecured funding) COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration & ROW $200,000 Construction $1,138,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $200,000 $1,138,000 •L x a N N O N ti O N IL U- U a_ U M to N N O N ti r 35 Packet Pg. 202 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Olympic View Dr. @ 76 Ave. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: W Intersection Improvements $1,183,000 N SEAVIEW PARK 3 PLSW 186TH ST SW m m POST 3� OFFICE, a I I I I I 1 . PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install traffic signal (the intersection currently stop controlled for all movements). (ROADWAY ROJECT PRIORITY in 2015 Transportation Plan: #11). PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The improvement will reduce the intersection delay. The projected Level of Service is LOS F in 2035, which is below the City's concurrency standards (LOS D). The project will improve the Level of Service to LOS B. SCHEDULE: Engineering and Construction are scheduled between 2023 and 2037 (unsecured funding). COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $200,000 Construction $983,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $1,183,000 36 Packet Pg. 203 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 84 Ave. W (212 St. SW ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $15,441,000 to 238" St. SW) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Widen 84 th Ave. W to (3) lanes with curb, gutter, bike lanes, and sidewalk on each side of the street. (part of this project was ranked #6 in the Long Walkway list of the 2015 Transportation Plan). PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve overall safety of the transportation system along this collector street: 1) the sidewalk and bike lanes would provide pedestrians and cyclists with their own facilities and 2) vehicles making left turn will have their own lane, not causing any back-up to the through lane when insufficient gaps are provided. SCHEDULE: Engineering and Construction are scheduled between 2023 and 2037 (unsecured funding). The project cost is split between Snohomish County and Edmonds since half the project is in Esperance. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & $2,000,000 Administration Construction $13,441,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $15,441,000 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts. 37 Packet Pg. 204 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: SR-104 @ 100t Ave. W ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,017,468 Intersection Improvements • h0 __ L_ EDMONDS WAY PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Implement Westgate Circulation Access Plan, install mid -block pedestrian crossing along 100th Ave. W, and re -striping of 100th Ave. W with the potential addition of bike lanes. This project was identified in the SR-104 Completed Streets Corridor Analysis (completed in 2015). PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve access and safety at the intersection and improve non -motorized transportation safety. SCHEDULE: 2023-2037 (unsecured funding) COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $150,000 Construction $867,468 1 % for Art TOTAL $1,017,468 38 Packet Pg. 205 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: SR-104 @ 76t Ave. W ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $3,017,000 Intersection Improvements x M1 M1 y W 7M EPM ONDS f . ■ a'1 - -EDL W1W Dr- FLAY- _ - - — - - - - - _ LAKE BALLING €R WAY PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Add a 2 nd left turn lane along SR-104. This project was identified in the SR-104 Complete Street Corridor Analysis (completed in 2015). PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve access and safety at the intersection and improve non -motorized transportation safety. SCHEDULE: 2023-2037. The project cost would be split between Shoreline and Edmonds since half the intersection is in Shoreline. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $453,000 Construction $2,564,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $3,017,000 C �L :i N N O N ti 0 N a. U U W M t0 39 Packet Pg. 206 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Olympic View Dr. @ 174t" St. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $610,000 SW Intersection Improvements L+ 4 + — Meadowdale Middle School — — — Parking L- ssoi St. Thomas Moore I Catholic School Ballfi.1d y I—" PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Widen Olympic View Dr. to add a northbound left turn lane for 50' storage length. Shift the northbound lanes to the east to provide an acceleration lane for eastbound left turns. Install traffic signal to increase the LOS and reduce intersection delay. (ROADWAY ROJECT PRIORITY in 2015 Transportation Plan: #13) PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve intersection efficiency and safety of drivers accessing either street. SCHEDULE: Engineering and Construction are scheduled between 2023 and 2037 (unsecured funding). COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $100,000 Construction $510,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $610,000 40 Packet Pg. 207 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Sunset Ave Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $3,000,000 from Bell St to Caspers St. s UHDVIEwavrs ♦ ♦ �� I■� 11111■0 I NONE 0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Provide a walkway on the west side of the street, facing waterfront (— 1/2 mile / more recent project). PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route. SCHEDULE: Temporary improvements have been installed to evaluate the alignment of the proposed walkway. Additional modification to the temporary improvements will be completed in 2017 (since construction isn't scheduled to occur until 2019 / 2020 when utility improvements are scheduled along this stretch). No grant funding has yet been secured for the construction phase. The design phase will be completed in 2017. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 COST Planning/Study Engineering & $183,250 Administration Construction $2,595,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $183,250 $2,595,000 all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts. 41 Packet Pg. 208 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Dayton St Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $75,000 between 7t" Ave. S and 8t" Ave. S 1_ MAIM ST z NO -ISLE FRANCES ANDERSON 4v0 tA W ❑ Q � 660 701 DAYTOM 5T w MAPLE 57 I T k PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct a missing link of sidewalk (approximately 250') on Dayton St. between 7t" Ave. S and 8t" Ave. S (ranked #2 in Short Walkway Project list in 2015 Transportation Plan). PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route. SCHEDULE: Engineering & Construction scheduled for 2020 (unsecured funding). COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $75,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $75,000 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts. 42 Packet Pg. 209 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 232 nd St. SW Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,305,000 from 100t" Ave. W to SR-104 EDMONDS WAY Wt'.11VARS ., LLJ a� 2 . UUT H ' CHURCH ■ ■ ■ ■ I Uj 7 I ■ ` ■■ - x + a jr �Q'k C 2 ESTATES AY I _ PARK c \29 Dorn 98 7 6 5 L. •L. ' 30 2 15 a) 37 3 14 7• _ J 432 45 171 3Z V r a �� _ N ■ , \� N ■ O �ss�s sss,s N 73306 (0) a LL �tl pm ! ■ a U to CO) St. SW from 100t Ave. W to SR-104. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install sidewalk along 232" This project ranked #3 in the Long Walkway List of 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: This project would improve pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: 2021-2022 (unsecured funding) COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $200,000 Construction $1,105,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $200,000 $1,105,000 43 Packet Pg. 210 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 238 St. SW Walkway from ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,400,000 100th Ave. W to 104th Ave. W and Stormwater Improvements 2 � Pp COMM wn m Z LIBRARY m a BASEBALL 2357 FIELD 23 TO 42 OLD WOODWAY HIGH SCHOOL 236TH PL SW HICKMAN PARK 0 0 a } a x J Y 237TH PLSW 3 3 a w Q F V1 tj 0 0 a a a 238TH ST SW f� O `ll � M - PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Installation of -- 1,200' of sidewalk on the north side of 238t St. SW from 100th Ave. W to 104th Ave. W. as well as sharrows. Stormwater improvements will also be incorporated into the project. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve pedestrian safety and create a safe pedestrian connection between 100th Ave. W and 104th Ave. W. SCHEDULE: Construction is complete. The project was funded by the Safe Routes to School grant program. Stormwater improvements were funded by the Stormwater Utility Fund 422. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $12,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $12,000 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts C �L f3 d 2 3 d N N CD N O N a LL U a_ U co M to f 44 Packet Pg. 211 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 236 1h St. SW Walkway from ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $900,000 Edmonds Way to Madrona Elementary School PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct an — 800' sidewalk on the south side of 236 th St. SW from SR-104 to Madrona Elementary as well as the addition of sharrows along that stretch. (This is only part of a stretch of Walkway project, which ranked #1 in the Long Walkway list in the 2009 Transportation Plan) PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route near Madrona Elementary School and along 236t" St. SW. SCHEDULE: Construction is scheduled to start in Fall 2016 and be completed by Spring 2017. The project is funded through the Safe Routes to School Grant program, Fund 422 for stormwater improvements, and REET funds for the pavement reconstruction. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration & ROW Construction $88,600 1 % for Art TOTAL $88,600 45 Packet Pg. 212 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 236 th St. SW Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,395,000 from Madrona Elementary to 97t" Ave. W -Sr SW 232N0 PL SW . ]T1Rq0FS1F!SW ■; u NEW, ' Ym 234TFiTST'sW=� , 7 i # ■ ■ _ � I ` 235fH:-Sr SW ■ �,� x1 oila 7 ry 236TH Si SW ■ ■ '� - • ■ ME- 234H-57_sW III ■ -2367HPus W �1 237TH PL SW aall PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install sidewalk with curb and gutter along 236 nd St. SW from Madrona Elementary to 97t" Ave. W. This project ranked #4 in Long Walkway list of the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: This project would improve pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: 2020-2021 (unsecured funding) COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $213,000 Construction $1,182,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $213,000 $1,182,000 a� c �L c� a� V a. N N O N ti 0 N a. a_ U a_ U O M co 46 Packet Pg. 213 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 841Ave. W Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $585,000 from 238th St. SW to 234th ST. SW PARK EDnnoNDs SAL GALLL APTS m O CH RIST LH TH E RAN CHURCH PARK & RIDE A OFFICE L 236:1 4 23603 SAFEWAY $ 23605 WH L KJIHG R 23607 SUNSET 23619 0 P Q DL R AURORA rota S MARKETPLACE T c H FAMILYPANCAKE 8 U 7-77 " 239TH ST SW co WZ L A TRAVEL LOOG E^ n5r, •2 7 d naL Long N 6ROCK c N ti O N a U- m LU p U a_ U to PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install sidewalk along 84 th Ave. W from 238 th St .SW to 234 th St. SW, with curb and gutter. This project ranked #5 in the Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: This project would improve pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: Begin design in 2022 (unsecured funding) COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $90,000 Construction $495,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $90,000 $495,000 47 Packet Pg. 214 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 801Ave. W Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,439,000 from 206t" St. SW to 212t" ST. SW I PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install sidewalk along 80t Ave. W from 206t St. SW to 212 th St. SW with curb and gutter. This project ranked #1 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The improvements will improve non -motorized transportation safety. SCHEDULE: 2020-2022 (funding unsecured). A Pedestrian and Bicycle Program grant to fund the design phase was submitted in May 2016 (response scheduled for Spring 2017). COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration & ROW $210,000 Construction $1,229,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $210,000 $1,229,000 48 Packet Pg. 215 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 2" Ave. S Walkway from ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $30,000 James St. to Main St. 4t 3� <1 NG 5 f 4 r PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 2"d Ave. S between Main St. 2015 Transportation Plan). Construct a missing link of sidewalk (approximately 100') on and James St. (Ranked #2 in Short Walkway Project list in PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route. SCHEDULE: 2020 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $30,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $30,000 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts 49 Packet Pg. 216 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Maplewood Dr. Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,591,000 from Main St. to 200th St. SW PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct sidewalk on Maplewood Dr. from Main St. to 200t St. SW (- 2,700'). A sidewalk currently exists on 200th St. SW from Main St. to 76th Ave. W, adjacent to Maplewood Elementary School (rated #22 in the Long Walkway list of the 2015 Transportation Plan). PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Create pedestrian connection between Maplewood Elementary School on 200th St. SW and Main St., by encouraging kids to use non -motorized transportation to walk to / from school. SCHEDULE: Engineering scheduled for 2020 and construction in 2022 (funding unsecured). A grant application through Safe Routes to School Program was submitted in May 2016 for design funding (response scheduled for Spring 2017). COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & $230,000 Administration Construction $681,000 $680,000 1 % for Art TOTAL 1 $230,000 $681,000 $680,000 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts. 50 Packet Pg. 217 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 95 1h PI. W Walkway from ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $550,000 2241" ST. SW to 220t" St. SW PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install sidewalk along 95 th PI. W from 224 th ST. SW to 220th ST. SW, with curb and gutter. This project ranked #9 in the Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: This project would improve pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: Engineering scheduled for 2020 and construction in 2021 (funding unsecured). A TIB grant application was submitted in August 2016 to fund this project (response scheduled for November 2016). COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2036 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $105,000 Construction $445,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $105,000 $445,000 51 Packet Pg. 218 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 21 8thSt. SW Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,305,000 from 76t" Ave. W to 84t" Ave. W MENNEN YEMEN MEN! INS oil ME MEN �sxe••r' rsxx ••x• � c a� x R AXT a �R x o °aw N N ER Q a N B EYEX'x Q N E4liH N CEMi ER U a_ U to M PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install sidewalk along 218t St. SW from 76t Ave. W to 84 th Ave. W with curb and gutter. This project ranked #2 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The improvements will improve pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: 2021-2022 (unsecured funding) COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration & ROW $200,000 Construction $1,105,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $200,000 $1,105,000 52 Packet Pg. 219 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Walnut St. Walkway from 3r ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $105,000 Ave. S to 4t" Ave. S ARTS W ENTER a Z UNDOW NEI N ALDER ALDER ST 346 414 412 410 arking 5 5 LA UJ o SOUND VIEW o: HOWELL WAY W a x v DAYTON ST tMILLTOWN MAPLE ST FETRIC ALDER ST N W a FBECKWT'S z BAN K T- 409 530Pancak 407 540 Hau s 4003 546 0 401 w a WALNUT Sr --F GREGORY e H 525 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct a missing link of sidewalk (approximately 350') on Walnut St. between 3rd Ave. S and 4t" Ave. S (ranked #3 in Short Walkway Project list in 2015 Transportation Plan). PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route. SCHEDULE: Engineering & Construction scheduled for 2020 (unsecured funding). COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $10,000 Construction $95,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $105,000 all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts a� c �L R V 3 d N N O N 0 N IL LL U a_ U tD M to r 53 Packet Pg. 220 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 216 St. SW Walkway from ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $157,000 Hwy. 99 to 72"d Ave. W 7200 PARK & RIDE 7309 5TEVE N MAN oa M1 rlao 21407 21507 21511 � y IL 0 211 52 M STEVEN COIL RT 21527 21B7H 120 EVENS FILION �� 21500 AEGIS S 21600 KRUGER CLINIC 210 B &M40 CONS _ 1410 0. 214�1 214DB 1 L 1412 21420 MCDONALD' d 21431 Ln N Ilk N N O 1 N 21558 . ` o VALUE N VILLAGE/ U . 216 TIl v { 21619 to - N PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install 150' sidewalk on north side of 216 th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 72nd Ave. W (completing a missing link on north side of stretch). This project ranked #4 in the Short Walkway List (from 2015 Transportation Plan). PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route. SCHEDULE: Engineering & Construction scheduled for 2020 (unsecured funding). COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $30,000 Construction $127,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $157,000 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts 54 Packet Pg. 221 CITY OF EDMONDS 7.2.a CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 238 St. SW Walkway from ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $491,000 Hwy. 99 to SR-104 i 1 L PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Ranked #12 in Long Walkway list from 2015 Transportation Plan. Install 5' sidewalk on the north side of 238t" St. SW. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve pedestrian safety along that stretch and creating safe pedestrian connection between Hwy. 99 and 76t" Ave. W. SCHEDULE: The design phase is underway and will be completed by early 2017. Construction is scheduled for 2017. A TIB grant was secured to fund the design and construction phases. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $413,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $413,000 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts. 55 Packet Pg. 222 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 15 St. SW Walkway from 8 ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $240,000 Ave. S to 9th Ave. S 813 495 / _F 1440 y m f23 / r ( 8(5 811 98 vial M1 v 9111, 982 1439 807 809 1457 \ y 7 Edmonds Memorial Cemetery a/ 5 9906 4832 226W 9826 9 a1 c •L f3 d 2 3 d N N O N ti 0 N a a_ U a U co M 10 r N } N O N ti PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Add missing sidewalk link along 15 St. SW from 8t Ave. S to 9t Ave S PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve pedestrian safety along that stretch and providing pedestrian connection from 9th Ave. S. SCHEDULE: The design phase will be completed in 2017. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $30,000 Construction $200,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $30,000 $200,000 all or part of this project may quality for 1 % for the Arts. 56 Packet Pg. 223 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Elm Way Walkway from ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $789,000 8t" Ave. S to 9t" Ave. S 4 �^ I r. 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install sidewalk along Elm Way from 8t Ave. S to 9t Ave. S. This project ranked #6 in the Short Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: This project would improve pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: 2020-2021 (funding unsecured). A Safe Routes to School grant application was submitted in May 2016 to fund the design and construction phases of this project (response scheduled for Spring 2017. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $156,000 Construction $633,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $156,000 $633,000 57 Packet Pg. 224 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Minor Sidewalk Program ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: varies PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Complete missing sidewalk along short segments throughout the City. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: annual program COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration & ROW $10,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 Construction $60,000 $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $70,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 58 Packet Pg. 225 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 191th St. SW Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $630,000 from 80t" Ave. W to 76t" Ave. W o�. z a i r 192ND PL 5W 1� PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install sidewalk along 191th St. SW from 80th Ave. W to 76t Ave., with curb and gutter. This project ranked #8 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: This project would improve pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: 2023-2037 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $90,000 Construction $540,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $630,000 a N N O N ti O N a U a_ U W M t0 59 Packet Pg. 226 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 104 th Ave. W Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $990,000 from 238t" St. SW to 106t" Ave. W PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install sidewalk along 104 th Ave. W from 238t ST. SW to 106t Ave. W, with curb and gutter. This project ranked #10 in the Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: This project would improve pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: 2023-2037 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $150,000 Construction $840,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $990,000 60 Packet Pg. 227 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 801h Ave. W Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $315,000 from 218t" St. SW to 220t" St. SW n STEVE Golden , HEAL Leaves i EVENS A K — LEGEND WES1 x ESTATES ISLE - ' J a 218TH ST SW 219TH ST SW ■ r m M1 - n - --- -----_228TH STSW_ —-------�T--------- PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install sidewalk along 80t Ave. W from 218t ST. SW to 220t ST. SW, with curb and gutter. This project ranked #7 in the Short Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: This project would improve pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: 2023-2037 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $55,000 Construction $260,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $315,000 C M 2 2 a N N O N ti 0 N a U- U a co M O 61 Packet Pg. 228 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 841Ave. W Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $315,000 from 188th St. SW to 186th St. SW r`T Jr K, r 5■■ i r .} '■ F i L ■ r r r ri 186TH ST W m w L i M—m mm m d r■ ■ 18 TH 5 5W ■ 188TH 5T 5W ' ' W , a r .; _ L r 1 a ■rn J °° F r 1 r SFAMF W AL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install sidewalk along 84 th Ave. W from 188 th St. SW to 186 th St. SW., with curb and gutter. This project ranked #5 in Short Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: This project would improve pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: 2023-2037 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $60,000 Construction $255,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $315,000 N 2 V a. N N O N ti O N a. U a. U co M t0 62 Packet Pg. 229 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 236 th St. SW Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $765,000 from Hwy 99 to 76t" Ave. W ■ PARK & RIDE 236TH ST SW_ 23607 23603 SAFEN 23605 � KJI 23607 NON PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install sidewalk along 236t St. SW from Hwy 99 to 76t Ave. W. This project ranked #11 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: This project would improve pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: 2023-2037 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $115,000 Construction $650,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $765,000 63 Packet Pg. 230 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 238thSt. SW Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,170,000 from Hwy 99 to 76t" Ave. W j r PARK r JL NA LN OHOS APTS •A•HIRL BALL • 1 Mr r. u 1 Ov NORTH m CH RIST LH THE RAN CHURCH PARK S N & RIDE � � R — 2 TH T OFFICE r 23667 23663 23606 SAFEWAY � 23667 N4N L HJIHG R ' L • . 23679 O SUNSET '•A•1L LO•h: P Q , BROOK R AURORA rotas - . ` S MARKETPLACE T MMILY PANCAKE 1 L_ r H V �4-711 - ' 238TH ST SW L821SEOUL■ PLAZA _ ,♦ 1 ■ f �1 ' . 23827 �DG' TRAVEL LOE ST. FRANCIS -MISISON TACOTIM MOTEL . . . - ■ WHSE ■ _+ K&EMOTEL ' 1 . AI, 1:11 RIl RIl III F 1 ■ ■ ■ , IN ■ E r t ;,.�E :yA PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install sidewalk along 238t St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 76t Ave. W This project ranked #12 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: This project would improve pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: 2023-2037 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $175,000 Construction $995,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $1,170,000 C M 2 7 a N N O N ti O N a. U_ U a U M O 64 Packet Pg. 231 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 80 Ave. W / 180" St. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,350,000 SW Walkway from 188" St. SW to OVD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install sidewalk along 80th Ave. W from 188 th St. SW to OVD. This project ranked #13 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: This project would improve pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: 2023-2037 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $270,000 Construction $1,080,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $1,350,000 65 Packet Pg. 232 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 189thPI. SW Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $585,000 from 80t" Ave. W to 76t" Ave. W PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install sidewalk along 189t PI. SW from 80th Ave. W to 76 th Ave. W. This project ranked #14 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: This project would improve pedestrian safety. SCHEDULE: 2023-2037 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023-2037 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $115,000 Construction $470,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $585,000 66 Packet Pg. 233 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Ferry Storage ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $357,000 Improvements from Pine St. Dayton St. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Modify existing lane channelization on SR104 to add vehicle storage for ferry users. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Reduce conflicts between ferry storage and access to local driveways. SCHEDULE: 2020 (unsecured funding) COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration $50,000 Construction $307,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $357,000 67 Packet Pg. 234 7.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Trackside Warning System ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $350,000 @ Dayton and Main St. RR Crossing PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install Trackside Warning System @ Dayton and Main St. Railroad Crossings. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Reduce noise from train horns at both intersections. SCHEDULE: Construction is scheduled to be completed by late 2016 or early 2017. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $10,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $10,000 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts. 68 Packet Pg. 235 y O 7� o � Y y 7� UAttachment: Exhibit 1 - Draft CFP 2017-2022 (1636 : CIP/CFP 2017-2022 - Public Hearing) n OM V N V N iu Attachment: Exhibit 1 - Draft CFP 2017-2022 (1636 : CIP/CFP 2017-2022 - Public Hearing) City of Edmonds Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Stormwater Projects (2017-2022) 7.2.a Project Name Purpose Grant Opportunity Grant/Date Current Project Phase (2017-2022) Total Cost 2017 201 2019 2020 2021 2022 Dayton St and Hwy 104 Drainage Add lift station and other new infrastructure to reduce $0 (Federal or State secured) Improvements. intersection flooding. Design $0 (Federal or State unsecured) $1,950,000 (DebUStormwater Fees) $1,900,000 $50,000 $1,950,000 Total $1,900,000 $50,000 Willow Creek/Daylighting Daylight channel to allow better connnectivity with the Puget RCO SRF Grant $0 (Federal or State secured) Sound to benefit fish and reduce flooding. Possible Grant/TBD Study $4,200,000 (Federal or State unsecured) $225,000 $225,000 $1,800,000 $1,950,000 $1,420,000 (DebUStormwater) $75,000 $75,000 $600,000 $650,000 $20,( $5,620,000 Total $300,000 $300,000 $2,400,000 $2,600,000 $20,( Perrinville Creek High Flow Find solution to high peak stream flows caused by excessive Ecology Grant $510,375 (Federal or State secured) $5101,375 Reduction/Management Project - stormwater runoff that erodes the stream, causes flooding Possible Grant/TBD Design $1,087,500 (Federal or State unsecured) $337,500 $375000 $375000 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility and has negative impacts on aquatic habitat. $582,625 (DebUStormwater Fees) $170,125 $112,500 $125:000 $125:000 $51 $2,180,500 Total $680,500 $450,000 $500,000 $500,1) $50,( Total CFP $9,750,500 Annual CFP Totals $2,880,500 1 $800,000 1 $2,900,000 1 $3,100,000 $0 $70,OOC v Revenue Summary by Year Totals Source 2017 1 2018 1 2019 2020 2021 2022 $510,375 Total Federal& State (Secured) $510,375 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,287,500 Total Federal & State (Unsecured) $225,000 $562,500 $2,175,000 $2,325,000 $0 $3,952,625 Debt/ Stormwater Fees $2,145,125 $237,500 $725,000 $775,000 $0 $70,( O C �L G1 V_ Z 3 IL N N O N f: O N d LL U d U to M t0 Packet Pg. 238 V N iu Attachment: Exhibit 1 - Draft CFP 2017-2022 (1636 : CIP/CFP 2017-2022 - Public Hearing) CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN DESCRIPTION 7.2.a PROJECT NAME: Dayton St and Hwy 104 ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $2,227,700 Drainage Improvements $p 200 !Tqk 146 301 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Add lift station in the Beach Place parking lot and other new infrastructure. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: To reduce flooding at the intersection of Dayton St and State Hwy 104. SCHEDULE: 2017-2019 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. $100,000 Construction $1,800,000 $50,000 1% for Art $10,000 TOTAL $1,900,000 $50,000 c M a) x a N N O N ti O N a U U to CO) O 73 Packet Pg. 240 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Willow Creek Daylighting ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $5,825,000 Edmonds Marsh as seen from the viewing platform. Previously restored section of Willow Creek. Source: www.unocaledmonds.info/clean-U/ ag llery_php PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Building on the studies completed in 2013 and 2015 that assessed the feasibility of daylighting the Willow Creek channel, this project will likely construct a new tide gate and 1,100 linear ft of new creek channel lined with an impermeable membrane. Funds will be used for design and construction but exact breakdown cannot be assessed at this time. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The daylighting of Willow Creek will help reverse the negative impacts to Willow Creek and Edmonds Marsh that occurred when Willow Creek was piped in the early 1960s. This project will provide habitat for salmonids, including rearing of juvenile Chinook. This project, along with its companion CIP projects "Edmonds Marsh Channel Improvements" and "Dayton Street Pump Station," will also help reduce the flooding problem at the intersection of SR-104 and Dayton Street. SCHEDULE: 2017-2025 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. $459,278 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 Construction 1 % for Art TOTAL $459,278 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 74 Packet Pg. 241 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN DESCRIPTION 7.2.a PROJECT NAME: Perrinville Creek High Flow ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $2,532,950 Reduction/Management Project Talhot Frederick 7 C n m 1 4t 185th 00 M U 87th cv 1 AQ7{L 172n w t 73 d �0 a Perrinville d4 Creek th 78th 77th' 1 78th -w 1 Oth m 181s to m a �RRfL n n t Perrinville Creek Channel illustrating the channel incision that will be addressed by restoration. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A flow reduction study for the Perrinville Creek basin was completed in 2014. This study recommended a number of flow control and water quality projects to improve the conditions in Perrinville Creek. The City applied for and won a grant from the Department of Ecology for $633,750 to design and construct a stormwater infiltration facility in Seaview Park. The 2017 budget is for that facility. The dollars allocated in the out years are to implement additional water quality and flow control projects in the Perrinville Creek basin as recommended by the Flow Reduction Study. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Urbanization of the Perrinville Creek Basin has increased flows in the creek, incision of the creek, and sedimentation in the low -gradient downstream reaches of the creek. Before any habitat improvements can be implemented, the flows must be controlled or these improvements will be washed away. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 COST Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. $35,000 $50,000 50000 50000 $50,000 $50,000 Construction $944,000 $400,000 $450,000 $450000 1% for Art $3,950 $1,125 $1,250 $1,250 TOTAL $982,950 $451,125 $501,250 $501,250 $50,000 $50,000 75 Packet Pg. 242 7.2.b CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 2017-2022 ECM 0 x�p Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: Exhibit 2 - Draft CIP 2017-2022 (1636 : CIP/CFP 2017-2022 - Public Hearing) 7.2.b CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (2017-2022) Table of Contents GENERAL 016 Building Maintenance Public Works 7 112 Transportation Public Works 9 125 Capital Projects Fund Parks & Recreation/ Public Works 12 126 Special Capital / Parks Acquisition Parks & Recreation/ Public Works 14 129 Special Projects Parks & Recreation 16 132 Parks Construction (Grant Funding) Parks & Recreation 17 421 Water Projects Public Works 19 422 Storm Projects Public Works 20 423 Sewer Projects Public Works 22 423.76 Waste Water Treatment Plant Public Works 24 PARKS — PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS Capital Parks & Recreation/ 125 Projects Fund Public Works 27 Special Capital / Parks & Recreation/ 126 Parks Acquisition Public Works 61 Parks Construction 132 Grant Funding) Parks & Recreation 64 Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: Exhibit 2 - Draft CIP 2017-2022 (1636 : CIP/CFP 2017-2022 - Public Hearing) G� z UAttachment: Exhibit 2 - Draft CIP 2017-2022 (1636 : CIP/CFP 2017-2022 - Public Hearing) n 00 Attachment: Exhibit 2 - Draft CIP 2017-2022 (1636 : CIP/CFP 2017-2022 - Public Hearing) 7.2.b Capital Improvements Program Fund 016 - Buildina Maintenance Proiects for 2017-2022 PROJECT NAME CFP 2016 E 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 (20Total 2) ADA Improvements- City Wide $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $20,000 Anderson Center Accessibility $10,000 $5,000 $5,000 $20,000 Anderson Center Interior Painting $20,000 $30,000 $50,000 Anderson Center Exterior Painting $15,000 $15,000 Anderson Center Radiator Replacement $25,000 $85,000 $110,000 Anderson Center Exterior Repairs $75,000 $75,000 Anderson Center Exterior Flashing $10,000 $5,000 $5,000 $20,000 Anderson Center Blinds $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $20,000 Anderson Center HVAC control install $20,000 $5,000 $25,000 Anderson Center Steam Radiator Retrofits $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $20,000 Anderson Center Asbestos Abatement $20,000 $20,000 $40,000 Anderson Center Flooring/Gym $25,000 $25,000 $50,000 Anderson Center Countertop Replacement $20,000 $20,000 $40,000 Anderson Center Carpeting $7,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $37,000 Anderson Center Oil Tank Decommissioning $30,000 $30,000 Anderson Center Elevator Replacement $225,000 $225,000 Anderson Center Roof Replacement $350,000 $25,000 $375,000 Cemetery Building Gutter Replacement $8,000 $8,000 City Hall Carpet Replacement $25,000 1 $50,000 $25,000 $75,000 City Hall Window Failed Window Seal Replacements $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $20,000 City Hall Elevator Replacement $225,000 $225,000 City Hall Exterior Cleaning and Repainting $85,000 $20,000 $105,000 City Hall Roof Repairs $15,000 $100,000 $115,000 City Hall HVAC $5,000 $5,000 $20,000 $20,000 $25,000 $25,000 $95,000 City Hall Security Measures $5,000 $30,000 $10,000 $40,000 City Park Maint. Bldg. Roof $25,000 $25,000 ESCO III Project $0 ESCO IV Project $0 ESCO _ Project $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $370,000 Fishing Pier Rehab $1,870,650 $2,000 $2,000 Fire Station #16 Painting $10,000 $10,000 Fire station #16 Generator $43,000 $5,000 $48,000 Fire Station #16 Carpet $20,000 $10,000 $30,000 Fire Station #16 HVAC Replacement $30,000 $30,000 Fire Station #17 Ceiling repairs $25,000 Fire Station #17 Carpet $12,000 $12,000 Fire Station #17 Interior Painting $15,000 $15,000 Fire Station #20 Carpet $15,000 $15,000 Fire Station #20 Interior Painting $10,000 $10,000 Fire Station #20 Stairs and Deck Replacement $40,000 $40,000 Grandstand Exterior and Roof Repairs $0 Library Plaza Appliance Replacement $15,000 $5,000 $20,000 Library Plaza Brick Fagade Addition $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 Library Wood Trim $10,000 $5,000 $15,000 Library West Deck Waterproofing and Garage Repair $20,000 $5,000 $25,000 Meadowdale Clubhouse Roof Replacement $50,000 $50,000 Meadowdale Flooring Replacement $25,000 $25,000 Meadowdale Clubhouse Gutter Replacement $15,000 $10,000 $10,000 Meadowdale Clubhouse Ext. Surface Cleaning $5,000 $5,000 Meadowdale Clubhouse Flooring Replacement Partial $15,000 $10,000 $10,000 $35,000 C �L d 2 v 7 IL N N O N ti O N IL ILL d w Cl) t0 N N O N O N IL U L 0 N t K W C d E t V M r Q Packet Pg. 249 7.2.b W Meadowdale Clubhouse Fire Alarm Replacement $25,000 $25,000 Misc. Fire Sprinkler System Repairs $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $15,000 $15,000 $60,000 Museum East Window Replacement $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $100,000 Museum Exterior Door Replacement $5,000 $5,000 $10,000 City Wide Capital renewal $300,000 $300,000 $350,000 $350,000 $400,000 $400,000 $2,100,000 Misc. / Unanticipated Buliding Maintenance $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $25,000 $20,000 $20,000 $10,000 $120,000 Public Safety/Fire Station #17 Soffit Installation $4,000 $4,000 Public Safety Exterior Painting $25,000 $25,000 Public Safety Council Chamber Carpet $20,000 $5,000 $25,000 Public Safety HVAC Repairs & Maintenance $10,000 $10,000 Public Works Failed Window Seal Replacement $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $15,000 Public Works Decant Improvements $0 Senior Center Misc Repairs & Maintenance $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $40,000 Senior Center Siding/ Sealing (CDBG) $0 Total Projects $2,010,650 $907,000 $877,000 $1,040,000 $782,000 $1,090,000 $665,000 $5,361,000 Revenues and Cash Balances 2016-2022 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Beginning Cash Balance(January 1st $52,400 $80,000 $75,000 $98,000 -$42,000 $76,000 -$114,000 Interest Earnings $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contribution from Gen Fund #001 and other $56,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Contribution from REET Fund #126 $300,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 Contribution from REET Fund #125 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Unsecured Funding $0 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 WA Dept. of Ecology Grant $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 WDFW & RCO Grants for Fishing Pier Secured $1,770,650 $2,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Reimbursement from 125 Fund for Fishing Pier $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Utility Grant Funding Estimated $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 WA State HCPF Grant Funding Secured $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Revenues $1,979,050 $982,000 $975,000 $998,000 $858,000 $976,000 $786,000 Total Revenue $1,979,050 $9$9082,000 $975,000 $998,000 $858,000 $976,000 $786,000 Total Project ($2,010,650) 7,000 ($877,000) ($1,040,000) ($782,000) ($1,090,000) ($665,000) Ending Cash Balance I I -$31,600 1 $75,0001 $98,000 -$42,000 $76,000 -$114,000 $121,000 Packet Pg. 250 7.2.b Capital Improvements Program Fund 112 - Transportation Projects Projects for 2017-2022 PROJECT NAME CFP E 2016 mate 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 (20Total 2) Annual Street Preservation Program (Overlays, Chip Seals, Etc. $1,162,764 $1,091,200 $1,420,000 $2,900,000 $2,060,000 $3,120,000 $2,350,000 $12,941,200 220th St. SW Overlay from 76th Ave W to 84th Ave W $215,000 $10,000 $10,000 84th Ave. W Overlay from 220th St. SW to 212th St. SW $900,000 $900,000 Citywide - Signal Improvements $325,000 $325,000 $650,000 Puget Dr. OVD Signal Upgrades $75,000 $425,000 $500,000 Signal Upgrades - 100th Ave 238th St. SW $750,000 $750,000 Main St. 3rd Signal Upgrades $75,000 $300,000 $375,000 Safety / Capacity Analysis 212th St. SW / 84th Ave Five Corners Roundabout X $9,791 $0 228th St. SW Corridor Safety Improvements X $1,129,944 $25,000 $25,000 228th St. SW from Hwy 99 to 95th PI. W X $75,000 $300,000 $375,000 76th Ave W 212th St SW Intersection Improvements X $376,051 $4,993,163 $100,000 $5,093,163 Hwy 99 Gateway / Revitalization X $300,000 $6,600,000 $6,000,000 $12,900,000 SR 524 196th St. SW / 88th Ave. W - Intersection Improvements X $193,000 $175,000 $535,000 $903,000 Main St. 9th Ave. X $135,000 $776,000 $911,000 220th St SW 76th Ave. W - Intersection Improvements X $330,000 $1,800,000 $3,795,000 $5,925,000 Hwy 99 212th St. SW Intersection Improvements X $175,000 $1,091,000 $1,540,000 $2,806,000 Hwy. 99 216th St. SW Intersection Improvements X $164,000 $334,000 $1,837,000 $2,335,000 Hwy. 99 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements X $175,000 $1,085,000 $1,955,000 $3,215,000 SR-104 226th St. SW / 15th St. SW Intersection Improvements X $30,000 $164,000 $194,000 SR-104 95th PI. W Intersection Improvements X $75,000 $420,000 $495,000 SR-104 238th St. SW Intersection Improvements X $200,000 $1,138,000 $1,338,000 Ci ide Protective / Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion $20,000 $0 220'" St. SW Traffic Signal Coordination from Hwy 99 to 76`" Ave $300,000 $300,000 Non -motorized transportation Projects Sunset Ave Walkway from Bell St. to Cas ers St. X $2,000 $183,250 $2,595,000 $2,778,250 Dayton St. from 7th Ave. S to 8th Ave. S Walkway X $75,000 $75,000 232nd St. SW from 100th Ave. to SR-104 X $200,000 $1,105,000 $1,305,000 238th St. SW from 100th Ave W to 104th Ave W X $455,661 $12,000 $12,000 236th St. SW from Edmonds Way / SR-104 to Madrona Elementary X $791,841 $88,600 $88,600 236th St. SW from Madrona Elementary to 97th Ave. W X $213,000 $1,182,000 $1,395,000 84th Ave. W from 238th St. SW to 234th St. SW X $90,000 $90,000 80th Ave. W from 212th St. SW to 206th St. SW X $210,000 $1,239,000 $1,449,000 2nd Ave. S from James St. to Main St. Walkway X $30,0001 $30,000 218th St. SW from 76th Ave. W to 84th Ave. W X $200,000 $1,105,000 $1,305,000 Walnut St. from 3rd Ave. to 4th Ave. Walkway X $105,000 $105,000 216th St. SW Walkway from Hwy. 99 to 72nd Ave W X $157,000 $157,000 238th St. SW from SR-104 to Hwy. 99 X $67,000 $413,000 $413,000 Citywide Crossing Enhancement $120,000 $940,000 $1,060,000 Elm Way from 8th Ave. S to 9th Ave. S X $156,000 $633,000 $789,000 Maplewood Dr. from Main St. to 200th St. SW Walkway X $230,000 $681,000 $680,000 $1,591,000 ADA Curb Rams Improvements $25,000 $25,000 $50,000 $50,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,625,000 Audible Pedestrian Signals $20,000 1 $20,000 95th PI. W Walkway from 224th St. SW to 220th St. SW X $105,000 $445,000 $550,000 15th St. SW from Edmonds Way to 8th Ave S X $50,535 $0 15th St. SW from 8th Ave. S to 9th Ave. S X $10,000 $30,000 $200,000 1 $230,000 Hwy 99 Enhancement Phase 3 $140,011 $8,000 1 $8,000 Minor Sidewalk Program X 1 $40,000 $70,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $320,000 ADA Curb Ramps along3rd Ave S from Main St to Pine St $512 $500 $500 Verdant Citywide Bicycle Improvements 1 $89,687 1 $652,5001 1 $652,500 Traffic Calming Projects Traffic Calmin Program / non -motorized transportation safe $20,0001 $20,0001 $20,0001 $20,0001 $20,0001 $20,0001 $20,000 $120,000 Packet Pg. 251 O Fer Projects Fer Stora a Im rovements from Pine St. to Dayton St. X $357,000 $357,000 Traffic Planning Projects Ci ide ADA Transition Plan $50,000 $60,000 $60,000 Trackside Warning Sys or Quiet Zone Dayton/Main St. RR Crossings X $333,280 $10,000 $10,000 Total Projects $4,989,077 $9,212,213 $1,640,000 $3,020,000 $9,810,000 $23,693,000 $22,162,000 $69,537,213 Debt Service on Loan (1) 220th St Design i $18,687 1 $18,5961 19,506 $18,415 $18,3251 18,325 $18,325 Debt Service on Loan 2 220th St Construction $22,023 $21,917 $21,811 $21,706 $21,494 $21,494 $21,494 Debt Service on Loan (3) 100th Ave Road Stabilization $34,525 $34,3611 $34,1961 $34,0321 $33,8681 $33,8681 $33,868 Total Debt $75,235 $74,874 $75,513 $74,153 $73,687 $73,687 $73,687 Revenues and Cash Balances 2016-2022 2016 Estimate 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Beginning Cash Balance $9,000 $17,233 $163,030 $314,017 $479,864 $228,627 $99,940 Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 P50,000 Multi -Modal Revenue $50,000 $110,000 $110,000 $110,000 $110,000 $110,000 $110,000 Reimbursement - Fund 125 Annual Street Preservation Program $186,000 $305,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 Reimbursement - Fund 126 Annual Street Preservation Program $880,000 $786,200 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 Contribution - General Fund for Annual Street Preservation Program $96,764 Reimbursement - Fund 126 220th St. SW Overlay from 76th to 84th $29,025 $1,350 Reimbursement - Fund 126 84th Ave. W Overlay from 212th to 220th $208,800 Reimbursement - Fund 423 for 228th St. SW Corridor Improvement $150 Reimbursement - Mountlake Terrace for 228th St. SW Improvements(Overlay) $3,725 Reimbursement - Fund 421 for 76th Ave W @ 212th St. Intersection Improvements $6,690 $776,475 Reimbursement - Fund 422 for 76th Ave W @ 212th St. Intersection Improvements $7,926 $450,528 Reimbursement - Fund 423 for 76th Ave W @ 212th St. Intersection Improvements $4,866 $718,685 Reimbursement - Wave / Comcast for 76th Ave W @ 212th St. Intersection Improvements $127,475 Reimbursement - Fund 126 for Citywide Protective / Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion $20,000 Reimbursement - Fund 126 for 220th St. SW Traffic Signal Coordination from Hwy. 99 to 76th $47,000 Reimbursement - Fund 126 for Hwy 99 Gateway / Revitalization $300,000 Reimbursement - Fund 421 for Sunset Ave. Walkway $575,000 Reimbursement - Fund 423 for Sunset Ave. Walkway $150,000 Reimbursement - Fund 422 for 238th St. SW Walkway from 100th Ave. W to 104th Ave. W $274,824 Reimbursement - PSE for 238th St. SW Walkway from 100th Ave. W to 104th Ave. W $55,159 Reimbursement - Fund 422 for 236th St. SW Walkway from SR-104 to Madrona School $189,475 $25,000 Reimbursement - General Fund for pavement work in 236th St. SW Walkway $250,270 Reimbursement - Fund 126 for 15th St. SW from 8th Ave. S to 9th Ave. S $10,000 Reimbursement - Fund 125 for 15th St. SW from 8th Ave. S to 9th Ave. S $30,000 Reimbursement - Fund 126 for Minor Sidewalk Program $40,000 Reimbursement - Fund 125 for Minor Sidewalk Program $70,000 Reimbursement - Fund 126 ADA Curb Ramp Improvements $25,000 Reimbursement - Fund 125 ADA Curb Ramp Improvements $25,000 Reimbursement - Fund 125 Audible Pedestrian Signals $20,000 Reimbursement - Fund 125 - Hwy 99 Lighting (Phase 3) $30,000 Reimbursement - Fund 126 for Traffic Calming Program $20,000 $20,000 Reimbursement - Fund 126 for Citywide ADA Transition Plan $50,000 $60,000 Reimbursement - General Fund for Trackside Warning System $43,280 Reimbursement - Fund 126 Trackside Warning System $290,000 $10,000 Reimbursement - Fund 422 (STORMWATER) $0 Traffic Impact Fees $150,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Total Revenues $2,872,154 $4,358,746 $1,223,030 $1,374,017 $2,264,864 $1,288,627 $1,159,940 Packet Pg. 252 7.2.b Grants 2016-2022 2016 Estimate 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Federal for 220th St. SW Overlay from 76th Ave to 84th Ave $185,975 $8,650 (Federal) for 84th Ave. W Overlay from 220th St. SW to 212th St. SW $691,200 Federal for 212th 84th Five Corners Roundabout $3,949 (Federal) for 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements $838,514 $25,000 State for 228th St. SW Corridor Im rovements $238,565 (Federal) for 76th Ave W @ 212th St SW Intersection Improvements $141,587 $2,920,000 $86,500 State Hwy 99 Gateway / Revitalization $5,000,000 $5,000,000 (Federal) Sunset Ave. Walkway from Bell St. to Caspers St. $1,730 $157,121 State for 238th St. SW from SR-104 to Hwy. 99 $55,520 $316,800 (State) 238th St. SW from 100th Ave W to 104th Ave W $125,678 $12,000 State 15th St. SW from Edmonds Way to 8th Ave S $44,588 (Federal) 236th St. SW from Edmonds Way / SR-104 to Madrona Elementary $359,460 $50,600 Federal Hwy 99 Enhancement Phase 3 $110,011 $4,500 (Federal) ADA Curb Ramps along 3rd Ave. S from Main St. to Pine St. §14127 Verdant Verdant Citywide Bicycle Improvements $89:687 1 $652,500 Yearly Sub Total Grants/ Loans Secured $2,209,391 $4,838,371 $86,500 $0 $0 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Grants 2016-2022 1 Estimate Grants/ Loans Sought / Funding (not Secured) Annual Street Preservation Program (Overlays, Chip Seals, Etc $720,000 $1,300,000 $1,360,000 $1,420,000 $1,650,000 Annual Street Preservation Program Federal Funds Overla s, Chip Seals, Etc $900,000 $1,000,000 Citywide Safety Improvements - Signal Cabinet $325,000 $325,000 Puget Dr. @ OVD Signal Upgrades $75,000 $425,000 Signal Upgrades - 100th Ave W @ 238th St SW $750,000 Main St @ 3rd Ave Signal Upgrades $37,500 $300,000 228th St. SW from Hwy 99 to 95th PI. W $75,000 $300,000 Hwy. 99 Gateway / Revitalization $1,600,000 $1,000,000 220' St. SW Traffic Signal Coordination from Hwy 99 to 76`" Ave $253,000 196th St SW @ 88th Ave W - Intersection Improvements $122,000 $87,500 $535,000 Main a 9th Ave. Intersection Improvements $118,000 $776,000 76th Ave. W @ 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements $285,450 $1,800,000 $3,795,000 Hwy 99 @ 212th St SW Intersection Improvements $152,000 $1,091,000 $1,540,000 Hwy 99 @ 216th St. SW Intersection Improvements $142,000 $334,000 $1,837,000 Hwy 99 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements $152,000 $1,085,000 $1,955,000 SR-104 @ 226th / 15th Intersection Improvements $15,000 $164,000 SR-104 @ 95th PI. W Intersection Improvements $65,000 $420,000 SR-104 @ 238th St. SW Intersection Improvements $173,000 $1,138,000 Sunset Ave Walkway from Bell St to Cas ers St $1,870,000 Dayton St. Walkway from 7th to 8th Ave. $37,500 232nd St. SW Walkway from 100th Ave. to SR-104 $100,000 $1,105,000 236th St. SW Walkway from Madrona Elementary to 97th PI. W $106,500 $1,182,000 84th Ave. W Walkway from 238th to 234th $90,000 80th Ave. W Walkway from 212th to 206th $210,000 $1,239,000 218th St. SW Walkway from 76th to 84th $200,000 $878,000 Walnut St. Walkway from 3rd to 4th $105,000 216th St. SW Walkway from Hwy 99 to 72nd Ave W $137,000 Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements $120,000 $940,000 Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave. S to 9th Ave. S $156,000 $633,000 15th St. SW Walkwa from 8th Ave. S to 9th Ave. S $200,000 Maplewood Dr. Walkway from Main St. to 200th $230,000 $681,000 $680,000 ADA Curb Rams Improvements $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 95th PI. W Walkway from 224th St. SW to 220th St. SW $84,000 $325,000 Ferry Storage Improvements 1 $357.000 Yearly Sub Total Grants/ Loans Sought / Funding (not secured) $0 $253,000 $720,000 $2,200,000 $7,847,450 $17,578,000 $16,165,000 Grant / Not Secured Funding Subtotal $2,209,391 $5,091,371 $806,500 $2,200,000 $7,847,450 $22,578,000 $21,165,000 Total Revenues & Grants $5 081 545 $9 450 117 $2,029 530 $3 574 017 $10,112 314 $23 866 627 $22,324,940 Total Projects $4 989 077 $9 212 213 $1,640,000 $3 020 000 $9,890,000 $23 693 000 $22,162,000 Total Debt $75 235 $74 874 $75,513 $74153 $73,687 $73 687 $73,687 Ending Cash Balance $17 233 $163 030 $314,017 $479 864 $228,6271 $99 940 $89,253 Packet Pg. 253 7.2.b N Capital Improvements Program Fund 125 - Capital Projects Fund Projects for 2017-2022 PROJECT NAME CFP E tomate 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 (20Total 2) Park Development Projects* Anderson Center Field / Court / Stage $191,870 $5,000 $10,000 $5,000 $5,000 $25,000 Brackett's Landing Improvements $50,000 $100,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $115,000 City Park Improvements $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $75,000 Civic Center Improvements/Grandstand demolition X $100,000 $5,000 $10,000 $10,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,125,000 Sunset Avenue Walkway $0 Fishing Pier & Restrooms $100,000 $75,000 $5,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $120,000 Community Garden X $0 $155,000 $155,000 Maplewood Park Improvements $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $15,000 Marina Beach Park Improvements $100,000 $325,000 $500,000 $500,000 $5,000 $1,330,000 Mathay Ballinger Park $0 $20,000 $5,000 $5,000 $30,000 Meadowdale Clubhouse Grounds $75,000 $5,000 $5,000 $10,000 Meadowdale Pla ields $0 $500,000 $500,000 Pine Ridge Park Improvements $5,000 $5,000 $10,000 Seaview Park Improvements $50,000 $10,000 $5,000 $65,000 Sierra Park Improvements $70,000 $70,000 Waterfront Redevelopment / Waterfront Walkway Completion X $425,000 $425,000 Yost Park / Pool Improvements $120,000 $40,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $25,000 $30,000 $245,000 Parklet development, 4th Ave cultural corridor $10,000 $30,000 $40,000 $70,000 City Gateway replacements $10,000 $30,000 $30,000 City Park Storage Building $200,000 $200,000 Veteran's Plaza $30,000 $30,000 Outdoor Fitness Zones $0 $75,000 $75,000 Citvwide Park Improvements* Citywide Beautification $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $126,000 Flower Pole Replacement $0 $20,000 $20,000 Misc Paving $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $40,000 Citywide Park Improvements/Misc Small Projects $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $240,000 Sports Fields Upgrade / Playground Partnership $20,000 $5,000 $25,000 $25,000 $55,000 S ecialized Projects* A vatic Center Facility (dependent upon successful capital campaign) X $0 Trail Development* Misc Unpaved Trail / Bike Path Improvements 1 $10,0001 1 $10,0001 1 1 $20,000 Planning Edmonds Marsh Feasibility & Restoration X $32,150 $80,000 $30,000 $30,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $155,000 Edmonds Cemetery Mapping Project $0 Civic Center Master Plan $80,000 $20,000 $20,000 Waterfront Development / Waterfront Waiw-a-y $25,000 $100,000 $100,000 Pine Ridge Park Forest Management Study $40,000 $40,000 Total Parks Projects $895,020 $2,026,000 $746,000 $726,000 $746,000 $651,000 $641,000 $5,536,000 Packet Pg. 254 D..hlir W-4- P-i-f. Pavement Preservation Program $186,000 $305,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $1,555,000 Highway 99 Lighting Phase 3 $30,000 $0 Upgrade Curb Ramps to ADA Stds $25,000 $25,000 Audible Pedestrian Signals $20,000 $20,000 Minor Sidewalk Program $100,000 $100,000 Building Maintenance $0 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $500,000 Total Public Works Projects $216,000 $450,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $2,200,000 Total Project Costs (Parks & Public Works) $1,111,020 $2,476,000 $1,096,000 $1,076,000 $1,096,000 $1,001,000 $991,000 $7,736,000 Raimhursamanfs Reimbursement to Park Fund 132 (Waterfront Redevelopment/Walkway Completion) $525,000 Reimbursement to Park Fund 132 (Veteran's Plaza) $30,000 Reimbursement to Park Fund 132 Outdoor Fitness Zones $75,000 Reimburesement to Park Fund 132 City Park Storage rebuild $200,000 Reimbursement to Park Fund 132 Civic Grandstand demo $100,000 Reimbursement to Park Fund 132 (Dayton St Plaza Reimbursement to Building Maintenance Fund 016(Fishing Pier $100,000 Reimbursement to Park Fund 132(Community Garden X $155,000 Reimbursement to Street Fund 112 Pavement Preservation Program) $186,000 $305,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 Reimbursement to Street Fund 112 (Highway 99 Lighting Phase 3 $30,000 Reimbursement to Street Fund 112 (Upgrade Curb Ramps to ADA Stds) $25,000 Reimbursement to Street Fund 112 Audible Pedestrian Signals) $20,000 Reimbursement to Street Fund 112 Minor Sidewalk Program) $100,000 Reimbursement to Street Fund 016(Building Maintenance $0 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Total Reimbursements w Total Projects & Reimbursements $316,000 $1,535,000 $3501000 $3501000 $3501000 $3501000 $3501000 $1,427,020 $4,011,000 $1,446,000 $1,426,000 $1,446,000 $1,351,000 $1,341,000 Revenues and Cash Balances 2016-2022 2016 Estimate 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Beginning Cash Balance(January 1st $ 1,629,534 $ 1,865,814 $ 701,714 $ 818,414 $ 855,414 $ 772,914 $ 786,714 Real Estate Tax 1/4% $ 1,335,000 $ 1,300,000 $ 1,200,000 $ 1,100,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Donations Investment Interest $ 12,300 $ 11,900 $ 12,700 $ 13,000 $ 13,500 $ 14,800 $ 14,000 Total Revenues $ 2,976,834 $ 3,177,714 $ 1,914,414 $ 1,931,414 $ 1,868,914 $ 1,787,714 $ 1,800,714 Total Revenue 1 1 $ 2,976,834 $ 3,177,714 $ 1,914,414 $ 1,931,414 $ 1,868,914 $ 1,787,714 $ 1,800,714 Total Projects -$1,111,020 -$2,476,000 -$1,096,000 -$1,076,000 -$1,096,000 -$1,001,000 -$991,000 Endin Cash Balance $ 1,865,814 $ 701,714 $ 818,414 $ 855,414 $ 772,914 $ 786,714 $ 809,714 *Projects in all categories may be eligible for 1%for art with the exception of planning projects. C �L d 2 v IL N N O N ti O N d ILL U d t0 Cl) t0 Packet Pg. 255 7.2.b Capital Improvements Program P.-i 19A . A...inl r-ifal/Pant. A-,iaifi- P-i-fa f- qn1 Z9n99 PROJECT NAME CFP Estimate lma 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Total (2017-2022) Debt Service on City Hall $0 Debt Service Marina Bch/Library Roof $83,228 $82,028 $80,828 $79,628 $83,428 $325,912 Debt Service on PSCC Purchase $56,198 $60,298 $54,298 $53,398 $52,498 $138,725 $140,275 $499,492 Debt Service on FAC Seismic retrofit $29,957 $29,621 $29,640 $29,630 $29,981 $29,887 $29,763 $178,522 Total Debt $169,383 $171,947 $164,766 $162,656 $165,907 $168,612 $170,038 $1,003,926 Parks Projects Total Parks Projects $492,180 $275,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $1,275,000 P..hlir W-k. Prni-fc Annual Street Preservation Program $880,000 $995,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $3,245,000 220th St Overlay $29,025 $1,350 $1,350 Trackside Warning System $290,000 $10,000 $10,000 Signal Cabinet Upgrades $70,000 $0 Upgrade Curb Ramps to ADA Stds $25,000 $0 ADA Transition Plan $50,000 $60,000 $60,000 Traffic Calming Program $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 Protective/Permissive Traffic Signal Conv $20,000 $0 Minor Sidewalk Program $50,000 $0 Hwy 99 Gateway/Revitalization (Access Management) $300,000 $300,000 220th St Signal Coordination 1 $47,0001 1 1 1 1 $47,000 Building Maintenance 1 $300,0001 $200,0001 $200,0001 $200,0001 $200,0001 $200,000 $1,300,000 Total Public Works Projects Total Project Cost (Parks and Public Works) RA-h..,-.nfs $1,434,025 $1,733,350 $650,000 $650,000 $650,000 $650,000 $650,000 $4,983,350 $1,926,205 $2,008,350 $850,000 $850,000 $850,000 $850,000 $850,000 $6,258,350 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for Annual Street Preservation Program $880,000 $995,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $3,245,000 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for 220th StOverlay $29,025 $1,350 $1,350 Reimbursement to Fund 132 for Land/Civic Acquisition $492,180 $0 Reimbursement to Fund 132 for Waterfront Redevelopment $75,000 $75,000 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for Trackside Warning System $290,000 $10,000 $10,000 Reimbursement to Fund 111 for Signal Cabinet Upgrades $70,000 $0 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for Upgrade Curb Ramps to ADA Stds $25,000 $0 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for ADA Transition Plan $50,000 $60,000 $60,000 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for Traffic Calming Program $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 Reimbursement to Fund 112 Protective/Permissive Traffic Signal Conv $20,000 $0 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for Minor Sidewalk Program $50,000 $0 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for SR99 Access Management $300,006 $300,000 Reimbursement to Fund 112 for 220th St Signal Coordination $47,000 Reimbursement to Fund 016 for Building Maintenance $300,000 $200,000 $200,0001 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $1,300,000 Total Project & Reimbursements $1,926,205 $1,808,350 $650,000 $650,000 $650,000 $650,000 $650,000 $5,011,350 C �L 4) 2 V 7 IL N N O N ti O N IL LL d t0 M t0 Packet Pg. 256 7.2.b Revenues and Cash Balances 2016-2022 2016 Estimate 2017 2018 9114a 2020 ML2021 2 Beginning Cash Balance(January 1st $2,239,006 $1,495,118 $629,221 $827,255 $926,199 $919,892 $912,880 Real estate Tax 1/4%/1 st Qtr % $1,335,000 $1,300,000 $1,200,000 $1,100,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Interest Earnings $16,700 $14,400 $12,800 $11,600 $9,600 $11,600 $11,000 Total Revenues $3,590,706 $2,809,518 $1,842,021 $1,938,855 $1,935,799 $1,931,492 $1,923,880 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Grants 2016-2022 Estimate Grants/ Loans Souaht (not Secured) Yearly Sub Total Grants/ Loans Secured $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Revenue & Grants & Subsidy $3,590,706 $2,809,518 $1,842,021 $1,938,855 $1,935,799 $1,931,492 $1,923,880 Total Debt ($169,383) ($171,947) ($164,766) ($162,656) ($165,907) ($168,612) ($170,038) Total Project & Reimbursements ($1,926,205) ($2,008,350) ($850,000) ($850,000) ($850,000) ($850,000) ($850,000) Ending Cash Balance $1,495,118 $629,221 $827,255 $926,199 $919,892 $912,880 $903,842 to Packet Pg. 257 7.2.b Capital Improvements Program Fund 129 - Special Projects Projects for 2017-2022 PROJECT NAME CFP 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 E (20Total 2) $0 Total Projects $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Revenues and Cash Balances 2016-2022 Estimate Beginning Balance(January 1st $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 Investment Interest Total Revenues $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $0 $0 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Grants 2016-2022 Estimate $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Grants $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Revenues & Grants 1 $17,922 $17,9221 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $0 $0 Total Construction Projects 1 $0 $0 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Ending Cash Balance 1 $17,922 $17,9221 $17,922 $17,922 $17,922 $0 $0 8 C d 2 V 7 IL N N O N ti 0 N IL LL d V to M t0 Packet Pg. 258 7.2.b Capital Improvements Program Fund 132 - Parks Construction Projects for 2017-2022 PROJECT NAME CFP 2016 Estimate 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Total (20 2) 4th Ave Corridor Enhancement $1,425,000 $2,900,000 $4,325,000 Cultural Heritage Tour and Way -Finding Signage $0 Dayton Street Plaza $130,000 $30,000 $30,000 Civic Center Acquisition/Development/Stadium demo $992,180 $135,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $3,135,000 Waterfront Redevelopment / Waterfront Walkway Completion $25,000 $2,100,0001 1 $2,100,000 City Park Revitalization $192,805 $0 Community Garden $155,000 $155,000 Wetland Mitigation $0 Edmonds Marsh/Daylighting Willow Creek/Marina Beach $200,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $3,200,000 Fishing Pier Rehab $0 Public Market (Downtown Waterfront) X $0 Outdoor Fitness Zones 1 $175,000 $175,000 City Park Maintenance Storage Building 1 1 $250,0001 1 1 $250,000 Veteran's Plaza I 1 1 $550,0001 1 1 1 $550,000 Total Projects $1,339,985 $3,595,000 $1,425,000 $4,400,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $13,920,000 Revenues and Cash Balances 2016-2022 2016 Estimate 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 022 Beginning Cash Balance (January 1st) $560,500 $1,422,185 $2,327,526 $2,527,526 $1,877,526 $1,577,526 $2,677,526 Beg Balance Park Impact Fees $336,920 $815,855 Park Impact Fees $478,935 $119,486 Beginning Cash Balance Milltown Beginning Cash Balance Cultural Heritage Tour Reimbursement from Fund 125 Waterfront development $525,000 Reimbursement from Fund 126 for Waterfront development $75,000 Park Impact Fees/Waterfront development $500,000 Reimbursement from Fund 117-200 for Cultural Heritage Tour Reimbursement from Fund 120 for Cultural Heritage Tour Reimbursement from Fund 125 for City Park Storage Building $200,000 Reimbursement from Fund 127-200 for Cultural Heritage Tour Reimbursement from Fund 120 for Way -Finding Signage Grant Match Reimbursement from Fund 125 for Outdoor Fitness Zones $75,000 Reimbursement from Fund 125 for Veteran's Plaza $30,000 Reimbursement from Fund 125 for Civic Demolition $100,000 Reimbursement from Fund 125 for Community Garden $155,000 Reimbursement from Fund 125 for Waterfront Redevelopment $0 Reimbursement from Fund 126 for Civic Acquisition $492,180 Contribution from 01 for Edmonds Marsh $200,000 $200,000 $200,0001 $200,0001 $200,0001 $200,000 Reimbursement from Fund 125 for Marsh/Marina Beach Reimbursement from Fund 125 for Fishing Pier Investment Interest $830 rotal Revenues $2,069,365 $4,217,526 $2,527,526 $2,727,526 $2,077,526 $1,777,526 $2,677,526 Packet Pg. 259 7.2.b 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Grants 2016-2022 Estimate Grants/ Loans (Secured) 4th Ave / Cultural Heritage Tour Preserve America/National Park Service Dayton Street Plaza (Arts Fest. Found./Hubbard Trust/Ed in Bloom) Interurban Trail (Federal CMAQ) RCO City Park $192,805 Fire Insurance City park storage $50,000 RCO State grant /Civic Acquisition ( $1 M directly to escrow) Snohomish County Tourism for Way -Finding Conservation Futures/Civic Acquisition $500,000 Wetland Mitigation RCO/Civic Demolition $35,000 Outdoor Fitness Zones grant Veterans Plaza: various donations/grants $520,000 RCO/Fishing Pier Yearly Sub Total Grants/ Loans Secured Grants/ Loans Sought (not Secured) $692,805 $605,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 4th Ave Corridor Enhancement (state, federal, other) $1,425,000 $2,900,000 Outdoor Fitness Zones $100,000 RCO Waterfront Development ( Sr Ctr) $1,000,000 Edmonds Marsh/Marina Beach $650,000 $1,000,000 Veterans Plaza Civic Development $2,400,000 Bond funding/Civic Yearly Sub Total Grants/ Loans Sought (not secured) Grants Subtotal w $0 $1,100,0001 $1,425,0001 $3,550,0001 $1,000,0001 $2,400,000 $0 $692,80511 $1,705,0001 $1,425,0001 $3,550,0001 $1,000,0001 $2,400,000 $0 Total Revenues & Cash Balances & Grants $2,762,170 $5,922,5261 $3,952,526 $6,277,526 $3,077,526 $4,177,526 $2,677,526 Total Construction Projects (1,339,985) ($3,595,000) ($1,425,000) ($4,400,000) ($1,500,000) ($1,500,000) ($1,500,000) EndingCash Balance $1,422,185 $2,327,5261 $2,527,526 $1,877,5261 $1,577,526 $2,677,526 $1,177,526 'Projects may be partially eligible for 1 % for Art Packet Pg. 260 7.2.b Z8 Capital Improvements Program Fund 421 - Water Proiects Proiects for 2017-2022 PROJECT NAME CFP 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Esti16 mate (20Total 2) 2015 Replacement Program $634,176 $0 2016 Replacement Program $1,416,688 $30,000 $30,000 2016 Waterline Overlays $62,072 $0 Dayton Ave 3rd to 9th Utility Improvements $327,000 $311,000 $311,000 2017 Replacement Program $302,948 $2,288,815 $2,288,815 2017 Waterline Overlays $210,000 $210,000 2018 Replacement Program $400,000 $2,003,080 $2,403,080 2019 Replacement Program $299,079 $2,200,664 $2,499,743 2020 Replacement Program $328,580 $3,013,510 $3,342,090 2021 Replacement Program $449,946 $3,134,050 $3,583,996 2022 Replacement Program $467,944 $3,259,412 $3,727,356 2023 Replacement Program $486,661 $486,661 Five Corners Reservoir Recoating $114,412 $1,885,588 $1,885,588 2016 Water System Plan Update $144,500 $4,000 $4,000 Total Projects Reimbursements & Contributions $3,001,796 $5,129,403 $2,302,159 $2,529,244 $3,463,456 $3,601,994 $3,746,073 $20,772,329 Reimbursement to Street Fund 112 (228th Project) 1 $2 $0 Reimbursement to Street Fund 112 (212th & 76th Improvements) $6,690 $776,815 $776,815 $0 Reimbursement to Fund 117 1 % Arts (2017 Watermain) $0 Total Reimbursements Total Water Projects $6,692 $776,815 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $776,815 $3,008,488 $5,906,218 $2,302,159 $2,529,244 $3,463,456 $3,601,994 $3,746,073 $21,549,144 Revenues & Cash Balances 2016-2022 2016 Estimate 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Beginning Balance (January 1st) Connection Fee Proceeds $301,400 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Interfund Reimbursement from Fund 423 (Dayton 3rd to 9th) $100,000 $100,000 Interfund Reimbursement from Fund 422 (Dayton 3rd to 9th) $137,500 $100,000 2015 Bond General Fund Fire Hydrant Improvements $51,006 $70,000 $123,900 $128,856 $134,010 $139,370 Total Secured Revenue (Utility Funds, Grants Loans, misc) $589,906 $370,000 $223,900 $228,856 $234,010 $239,370 $100,000 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Unsecured Revenue 2015-2021 Estimate New revenue, grants, loans, bonds, interest, transfers Total Unsecured Revenue $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Revenues Total Projects & Reimbursements Ending Cash Balance rn c •L R d 2 v 7 a N N O N I- O N IL LL _d U M Packet Pg. 261 7.2.b 10 Capital Improvements Program Fund 422 Storm Projects for 2017-2022 PROJECT NAME CFP 2016 2 17 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Total Estimate (2017-2022) SW Edmonds Basin Study Implementation Projects 105th & 106th Ave SW Drainage Improvement Project. 1 $654,7411 $2,0001 1 1 1 1 1$2,000 Edmonds Marsh Related Projects Dayton St and Hwy 104 Drainage Improvements- Dayton St Pump Station (See Note1) X $267,700 $1,900,000 $50,000 1 1 1 $1,950,000 Willow Cr - Final Feasibility Study / Design/Construction (See Note 1 and Note 2) X $38,698 $459,278 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 "$300,000 $1,959,278 Edmonds Marsh Channel Improvements 1 1 $200,000 $500,000 $50,000 $750,000 Willow Creek Pipe Rehabilitation $82,500 $82,500 $550,000 $715,000 Northstream Projects Northstream Culvert Abandonment South of Puget Dr - Assessment / Stabilization 1 1 $36,595 $153,530 $153,530 Rehab/Re lace of Northstream Culvert under Puget Dr 113 215 $432,5601 $5,0001 1 1 $437,560 Perrinville Creek Basin Projects Perrinville Creek Flow Management Projects - Seaview Infiltration (See Note1 X $116,000 $979,000 $979,000 Perrinville Creek Flow Management Projects (See Note 2) X 1 $450,000 $500,000 $500,000 $50,000 $50,000 $1,550,000 Storm Drainage Im rovement Projects Im rovements - 88th Ave W and 194th St SW $4,195 1 1 1 1 1 $0 Improvements - Sierra PI- 12th Ave N to Olympic 1 $522,75111 $2,0001 1 1 1 1 1 $2,000 Annually Funded Projects Ci -wide Draina a Replacement Projects $306,900 $150,000 $2,050,000 $1,250,000 $1,800,000 $1,800,000 $1,872,000 $8,922,000 Lake Ballinger Associated Proiects $17,000 4,0001 $66,0001 $68,0001 $68,0001 $70,0001 $70,000 $406,000 $0 Compliance -Related Projects Storm and Surface Water Comprehensive Plan (including asset management Ian $25,000 $195,000 1 1 1 $195,000 Total Project $2,102.795 $4.619.868 $3.503.500 $2.718.000 $2.668.000 $2.220.000 $2.292.000 $18.021.368 Packet Pg. 262 7.2.b Estimate 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 (20Total 2) Reimbursements Tn 112 -Street Fund SW Edmonds Basin Study Project 3 - Drainage portion of 238th SW Sidewalk project (connect sumps on 238th St SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System) $362,053 $0 76th Ave W & 212th St SW Intersection Improvements $7,926 $450,528 $450,528 236th SW Walkwav Project $214,500 $0 UtilitV Replacements Da on btwn 3rd & 9th Ave $137,500 $100,000 $100,000 $0 Total Reimbursements to 112 Fund $721.979 $550.528 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $550.528 Tn 117 - Arta 105th & 106th Ave SW Drainage Improvement Project $4,923 $0 City-wide Drainage Replacement Projects $1,443 $500 $500 Perrinville Creek Flow Management Projects - Seaview Infiltration $3,950 $3,950 Perrinville Creek Flow Management Projects $1,125 $1,250 $1,250 $3,625 Edmonds Marsh/Shellabar er Cr/Willow Cr - Feasibility Study/Marsh $0 76th Ave W & 212th St SW Intersection Improvements $4,505 $4,505 Improvements - Sierra PI- 12th Ave N to Olympic $3,598 $0 236th SW Walkwav Project $1,150 $0 Dayton St and Hwy 104 Drainage Improvements- Dayton St Pump Station $10,000 $10,000 Total Reimbursements to 117 Fund Total Reimbursements Total Project & Reimbursements N $11,114 $18,955 $1,125 $1,250 $1,250 $0 $0 $22,580 $733.093 $569.483 $1.125 $1.250 $1.250 $0 $0 $573.108 $2,835,888 $5,189,351 $3,504,625 $2,719,250 $2,669,250 $2,220,000 $2,292,000 $18,594,476 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 avenues and Cash Balances 2016-2022 Estimate is Beginning Balance(January 1st Proceeds of Long-term debt Bonds Estimated Connection Fees (capital facilities charge) $31,975 $30,000 $31,000 $32,000 $33,000 $34,000 $35,000 Grants (Secured) - Edmonds Marsh/Shellabarger Cr/Willow Cr - Final Feasibility Study/Marsh Restoration See Note 1 $31,500 $384,505 Grants (Secured) - Perrinville Creek Flow Management -Seaview Infiltration See Note 1 X $87,000 $546,750 Total Secured Revenues $150,475 $961,255 $31,000 $32,000 $33,000 $34,000 $35,000 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Unsecured Revenue 2015-2021 Estimate Proceeds of Long-term debt Bonds Grants (Unsecured) - Perrinville Creek Flow Management Projects (See Note 2) X $337,500 $375,000 $375,000 $37,500 $37,500 Grants (Unsecured) - Edmonds Marsh/Shellabarger Cr/Willow Cr- Feasibility Study/Marsh Restoration See Note 2 X $225,000 $225,000 $225,000 $225,000 $225,000 Grants (Unsecured) - Dayton St & Hwy 104 Drainage Improvements (See Note 3) X $950,000 $25,000 Total Unsecured Revenues $0 $950,000 $587,500 $600,000 $600,000 $262,500 $262,500 Total Revenue Total Project & Transfers Ending Cash Balance Notes: 1. All or part of this project funded bV secured grants or grants will be pursued, see Revenue section for details. 2 Assumes grant funding is 75 % of total project costs per year beginning 2018 3. Assumes grant funding is 50 % of total project costs per year beginning 2017 C �L 0) t) 7 IL N N O N ti O N IL LL 0 IL 0 t0 M t0 Packet Pg. 263 7.2.b Capital Improvements Program Fund 423 - Sewer Proiects Proiects for2017-2022 PROJECT NAME CFP 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022ima Est (2017-2022) Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitations $0 Sewer Main Replacement and CIPP $0 $0 2015 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements $88,000 $0 2016 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements $1,520,362 $11,000 $11,000 2016 Sewerline Overlays $217,250 $0 2017 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements $245,750 $1,364,905 $1,364,905 2017 Sewerline Overlays 1 $220,000 $220,000 2018 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements $287,113 $1,598,462 $1,885,575 2019 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements $295,726 $1,646,416 $1,942,142 2020 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements $304,598 $1,695,809 $2,000,406 2021 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements $313,736 $1,746,683 $2,060,419 2022 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements 1 $323,148 1 $1,816,550 $2,139,698 2023 Sewer Replacement / Rehab / Improvements 1 1 $336,074 $336,074 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehabilitation $1,182,263 $312,0001 $424,360 1 $437,091 1 $450,204 1 $463,710 1 $482,258 1 $2,569,622 Infiltration & Inflow Study & Projects Lift Station 1 Metering & Flow Stud $185,000 $0 N Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Stud $124,000 66,0001 1 1 1 1$166,000 N Total Projects $3,562,625 $2,361,018 $2,318,548 $2,388,105 $2,459,748 $2,533,541 $2,634,882 $14,695,841 Reimbursements & Contributions Reimbursement to Fund 421 (Dayton 3rd to 9th $100,000 $100,0001 1 1 1 1 1 $100,000 Reimbursement to Fund 112 228th Project $150 1 1 1 1 1 1 $0 Reimbursement to Fund 112 (212th & 76th Improvements) 1 1 $4,866 $718,6851 1 1 1 1 1 $718,685 Total Reimbursements $105,016 $818,685 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $818,685 Total Projects, Transfers & Reimbursements $3,667,641 $3,179,703 $2,318,548 $2,388,105 $2,459,748 $2,533,541 $2,634,882 $15,514,526 C �L 4) v 7 IL N N O N ti O N IL LL U d tO M tO Packet Pg. 264 7.2.b and Cash Balances 2016-2022 2016 Estimate 2017 019 2020 2021Revenues Be innin Balance Janua 1stSewer Connection Fees $310,200 $100,000j2E018 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 2015 Bond Total Secured Revenue (Utility Funds, Grants Loans, misc) $310,200 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Unsecured Revenue 2016-2022 Estimate New revenue, grants, loans, bonds, interest, transfers $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Unsecured Revenue Total Revenues Total Projects & Reimbursements Ending Cash Balance N W $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Packet Pg. 265 7.2.b N Capital Improvements Program Fiinrl d91 7R - Wnctownfor Trantmant Plant Prniartc Mr 91317-9n99 PROJECT NAME CFP 16 E 20mate 2 2019 2020 2021 2022 (20Total 2) Repair and Replacement $250,000 $250,000 $330,000 $330,000 $250,000 $1,410,000 Construction Projects - In House $20,000 $20,000 $40,000 Construction Projects Contracted $3,112,120 $2,125,000 $250,000 $250,000 $300,000 $600,000 $250,000 $3,775,000 Debt Service - Principle and Interest $257,516 $256,163 $255,371 $255,929 $256,371 $256,902 $222,847 $1,503,583 Total Project Projects less revenue from outside partnership $3,369,636 $2,381,163 $755,371 $755,929 $906,371 $1,206,902 $722,847 $3,321,586 $2,346,113 $740,321 $740,879 $891,321 $1,191,852 $722,847 Revenues and Cash Balances 2016-2022 2016 stimate 2019 2020 2021 2022 Beginning Cash Balance(January 1st $200,000 $200,000 -&� $200,000 $550,000 $550,000 $550,000 $550,000 Intergovernmental $3,321,586 $2,346,113 $740,321 $740,879 $891,321 $1,191,852 $722,847 Interest Earnings $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 Miscellaneous biosolids, Lynnwood, etc $40,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 Grants, Incentives and Rebate for Engergy Eff. Projects $8,000 $20,000 Subtotal $3,569,636 $2,581,163 $955,371 $1,305,929 $1,456,371 $1,756,902 $1,272,847 Total Revenue 1 $3,569,636 1 $2,581,1631 $955,3711 $1,305,9291 $1,456,371 $1,756,902 $1,272,847 Total Project 1 ($3,369,636) 1 ($2,381,163) ($755,371) ($755,929) ($906,371) ($1,206,902) ($722,847) Ending Cash Balance 1 $200,00011 $200,0001 $200,0001 $550,0001 $550,000 $550,000 $550,000 Interest earned estimated at 0.75 % per year Contribution breakdown by agency 2016 Estimate 2017 2 2019 20 20 Edmonds 50.79% $1,686,934 $1,191,520 $375,987 $376,270 $452,675 $605,306 $367,112 Mountlake Terrace 23.17% $769,744 $543,688 $171,562 $171,691 $206,555 $276,200 $167,513 OI m is View Water & Sewer District 16.55% $549,756 $388,305 $122,531 $122,623 $147,523 $197,263 $119,638 Ronald Sewer District 9.49% $315,152 $222,599 $70,242 $70,295 $84,569 $113,083 $68,584 TOTALS 1 100.00% $3,321,586 $2,346,113 $740,321 $740,879 $891,321 $1,191,852 $722,847 *In 2019 per the agreement, fund balance will increase to $550,000. C �L ns d 2 v Z 7 IL N N O N ti O N IL IL d t0 M t0 v Packet Pg. 266 N CJl Attachment: Exhibit 2 - Draft CIP 2017-2022 (1636 : CIP/CFP 2017-2022 - Public Hearing) n 00 Attachment: Exhibit 2 - Draft CIP 2017-2022 (1636 : CIP/CFP 2017-2022 - Public Hearing) CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Anderson Center ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $25,000 Field/Court/Stage 700 Main Street, Snohomish County, within Edmonds City limits 2.3 acres; zoned public neighborhood park/openspace field PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Upgrades to youth sports field, picnic and playground amenities and children's play equipment. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: As a neighborhood park, the Frances Anderson Center serves the community with various sports, playground and field activities including various special events. Upgrade and additions essential to meet demand for use. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $0 $5,000 $10,000 $5,000 $0 $5,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $0 $5,000 $10,000 $5,000 $0 $5,000 * all or a portion of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts. 27 Packet Pg. 269 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Brackett's Landing ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $115,000 Improvements b lo South: Main Street and Railroad Avenue south of Edmonds Ferry Terminal on Puget Sound North: 2.7 acres with tidelands and adjacent to Department of Natural Resources public tidelands with Underwater Park South: 2.0 acres with tidelands south of ferry terminal. Regional park/Zoned commercial waterfront. Protected as public park through Deed -of -Right; partnership funding IAC/WWRC/LWCF /DNR-ALEA & Snohomish Conservation Futures PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Landscape beautification, irrigation, furnishings/bench maintenance, exterior painting, repairs, jetty improvements/repair, north cove sand, habitat improvement, fences, interpretive signs, structure repairs, sidewalk improvements, restroom phased rehabilitation in 2018. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Retention of infrastructure for major waterfront park, regional park that serves as the gateway to Edmonds from the Kitsap Peninsula. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $0 $100,000 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $5,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $0 $100,000 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $5,000 ' all or part of this project may quality for 1 % for the Arts �L :i N N O N ti O N a tL U a- m M to 28 Packet Pg. 270 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: City Park Improvements I ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $75,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: City Park. Continued pathway, access improvements and ongoing upgrades to PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Make ongoing upgrades to City Park as referenced in the PROS plan. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $0 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $0 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 *all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the arts 29 Packet Pg. 271 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Civic Center ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,325,000 Improvements / Stadium Demolition PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Civic Center Improvements / Stadium Demolition PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Civic Center Improvements / Stadium Demolition. As part of the Master planning process for Civic, and in consideration of the current condition of the stadium, it is being recommended to demolish the current stadium. The City also has some grant funds available to assist with this. SCHEDULE: 2017 - 2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Construction $100,000 $5,000 $10,000 $10,000 $600,000 $600,000 TOTAL $100,000 $5,000 $10,000 $10,000 $600,000 $600,000 30 Packet Pg. 272 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Sunset Avenue Walkway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $ See Transportation CIP dobw -0111111111", PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Provide a multi -use path on the west side of Sunset Ave with expansive views of the Puget Sound and the Olympic Mountains. The multi -use path will connect the downtown business district, surrounding neighborhoods, water access points, and the existing parks and trails system. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: This multi -use path has been a priority for the City of Edmonds for several years. It is included in 5 different City plans, the Transportation Improvement Plan, Non -Motorized Section; the Parks Recreation and Open Plan; the City comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Plan; the Capital Improvement Plan; and the Shoreline Master Program. Specifically, the Parks Recreation and Open Space Plan identified Sunset Avenue Overlook priorities, namely improved connectivity and multi -modal access, complete the bicycle and pedestrian route system, identify scenic routes and view areas, and landscape improvements. SCHEDULE: COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction 1 % for Art TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 31 Packet Pg. 273 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Fishing Pier & Restrooms ESTIMATED COST: $120,000 LWCF/IAC Acquisition and Development Project 7.2.b PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Fishing pier parking lot landscape improvements. Re -tile and renovate restroom facilities. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Capital improvements to retain capital assets and enhance western gateway to the Puget Sound. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $75,000 $5,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $75,000 $5,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts 32 Packet Pg. 274 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN DESCRIPTION 7.2.b PROJECT NAME: Community Garden ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $155,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Locate and develop a community garden site. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: This was formerly planned for the Former Woodway HS site. This is adopted as part of the PROS plan. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $155,000 1 % for Art TOTAL a� c.i N N O N ti O N a U U to M to all or a portion of this project may quality for 1 % for the Arts 33 Packet Pg. 275 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Maplewood Park ESTIMATED COST: $15,000 Improvements 89t" Place West and 197t" Street SW, Edmonds City limits, within Snohomish County 12.7 acres (10.7 acres Open Space & 2 acres Neighborhood Park) Zoned Public PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Improvements to the picnic, roadway, parking, play area and natural trail system to Maplewood Park. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improvements to retain site as an asset to the neighborhood park system. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $0 $0 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL $0 $0 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts 34 Packet Pg. 276 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Marina Beach Park ESTIMATED COST: $1,330,000 Improvements c �L :i N N O N ti O N a u_ U d U m M to South of the Port of Edmonds on Admiral Way South, Edmonds City limits, Snohomish County 4.5 acres / Regional Park / Zoned Commercial Waterfront, marina beach south purchased with federal transportation funds. WWRC / IAC Acquisition Proiect; Protected throuqh Deed -of -Right RCW PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 2018-2020. Begin development of Master plan, daylighting Willow Creek in PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improvements to retain site as an asset to the regional waterfront park system. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $0 $325,000 $500,000 $500,000 $5,000 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL $0 $325,000 $500,000 $500,000 $5,000 $0 x all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts. 35 Packet Pg. 277 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Mathay Ballinger Park I ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $30,000 781h Place W. & 241st St. at Edmonds City Limits. 1.5 acres/Neighborhood Park/Zoned Public. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Improvements to Mathay Ballinger Park. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improvements to retain site as an asset in the neighborhood park system. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $20,000 $0 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL $20,000 $0 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts 36 Packet Pg. 278 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Meadowdale Clubhouse ESTIMATED COST: $10,000 Grounds 6801 N. Meadowdale Road, Edmonds City limits, within Snohomish County 1.3 acres / Neighborhood Park / Zoned RS20 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Improvements to the parking area, wooded area, trail system and landscaping of exterior clubhouse at Meadowdale Clubhouse site. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improvements to retain site as an asset with installation that provides community use of the facility and north Edmonds programming for day care, recreation classes and preschool activities. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $0 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL $0 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts 37 Packet Pg. 279 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Meadowdale Playfields I ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $500,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Partnerships with City of Lynnwood and Edmonds School District to renovate Meadowdale Playfields.. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Partnership to leverage funds, renovate two multi use athletic fields and softball fields. Increase field accessibility and use for Edmonds citizens. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Engineering & Administration Construction $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 38 Packet Pg. 280 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Pine Ridge Park ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $50,000 Improvements 83`d Avenue West and 2041" St. SW, Edmonds City Limits, within Snohomish County 22 acres (20 acres zoned openspace/2 acres neighborhood park) Zoned Public; Adopted Master Plan PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Forest improvements, habitat improvements, tree planting, wildlife habitat attractions, trail improvements, signs, parking. Natural trail links under Main Street connecting to Yost Park. Forest Management Study in 2018 PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Retention of natural open space habitat site and regional trail connections. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study 40000 Eng. & Admin. Construction $0 $0 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL I $0 $40000 $5,000 $0 1 $5,000 1$0 New additions meet the 1 % for the Arts Ordinance requirements 39 Packet Pg. 281 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Seaview Park ESTIMATED COST: $65,000 Improvements 801h Street West and 1861h Street SW, Snohomish County, within Edmonds City limits 5.5 acres; Neighborhood Park/ Zoned Public; Purchased and developed with LWCF funds through IAC; protected with Deed - Of -Right PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Annual repair and upgrade to facilities and fields. Maintenance of tennis courts, pathway improvements, and play area. Replace roof on restrooms. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Site serves as neighborhood park with children's play area, open lawn, softball/baseball fields and soccer fields, restroom facilities, basketball court, parking and tennis courts. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $50,000 $0 $10,000 $0 $5,000 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL $50,000 $0 $10,000 $0 $5,000 $0 " all or part of this Project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts 40 Packet Pg. 282 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Sierra Park Improvements ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $70,000 LACE LEA FJAPAN ESF MAPLE {Acrr pol malum dhsremmJ ihlkderlduaus shrub or t— is nafire fo J Alm -and Dore;, lI !s uruslly many elemmrd and Is !im moll ale.' end drllr;I¢ of all maples. Its leaves are 7 fe a Inches in t-Vh ire flaelp cul Inrn rhreidlIke see ions. 1¢a(color* a rit% hp sarletp hu1 lhs uet —on ¢ 1— are hrlgh! Rreen and red, 'These Iron hire a mauaJed frm nirh x'eepl Lrancher. The, ¢an be Rn•..n In tubs and are _cuen. for humaL r ; r• 80`h Street West and 1911h Street SW, Snohomish County, within Edmonds City limits 5.5 acres; Neighborhood Park/ Zoned Public PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Improve pathways and interpretive braille signs. Field renovation to include field drainage for turf repair. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Site serves as neighborhood park with children's play area, open lawn, softball/baseball fields and soccer fields, portable restroom facilities, basketball hoops, parking and Braille interpretive trail for the blind. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $0 $70,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL $0 $70,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts •L tV tV O tV ti O tV IL LL U d U m M to 41 Packet Pg. 283 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Waterfront Redevelopment ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $525,000 / Waterfront Walkway Completion ------------ Accra Propvwd Edmonds Wam(from Garver Arws; -ycox ww •a u.r� swv. - •su •nr -• . �a5•WWlaw� r Ia[.erlle Rv.p & t.R. � rvwq'i0°�" C•�eou aewm bi�e�-�• l+++dVM.y M9gwer Tbrn pfl M •om+.aron.n. n..n garen W ran patln n 6e�d. P�ipf..d Mcr+.{4 Pw� PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Work with Sr. Center to renovate surrounding park, parking lot and walkway. Remove creosote pier, reintroduce habitat for fish and wildlife. Increase access to the waterfront. Connect waterfront walkway from Brackett's Landing South to Olympic Beach, including completion in front of the Ebb tide condominiums. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Provide anew Senior and Community Center and provide a new beachfront walkway. One of the top priorities in the PROS plan is to open up beach -front access. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study $100,000 Eng. & Admin. Construction $425,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL $525,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 'all or part of this Project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts 42 Packet Pg. 284 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Yost Park / Pool ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $245,000 Improvements PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Pool replastering, tile work, and annual anticipated and unanticipated repairs. Add in -pool play amenities. Park site improvements and repairs to trails and bridges, picnicking facilities, landscaping, parking, tennis/pickleball courts and erosion control. ADA improvements. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Beautiful natural area serves as upland area for environmental education programs as well as enjoyable setting for seasonal Yost Pool users. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $40,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $25,000 $30,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $40,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $25,000 $30,000 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts. 43 Packet Pg. 285 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Parklet Development, 4"' ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $70,000 Avenue Cultural Corridor A parklet is a small urban park that is made by creating a sidewalk extension that provides more space and amenities for people using the street. Usually parklets are installed on top of parking lanes and use one or more parking spaces, but do not permanently impact the underlying street. Parklets typically extend out from the sidewalk at the level of the sidewalk to the width of the adjacent parking space creating a patio and seating area, often including plantings. Parklets are public space and open to everyone. 10 A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Develop one or more parklets on the 4 th Avenue Cultural Corridor. The first parklet will be created on 4t" Avenue adjacent to the ECA. The design will be developed with Parks crew and an artist/landscape consultant. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Provide a small urban park along the 4 th Avenue Cultural Corridor with views of Puget Sound and seating on a popular walking route. Parklets are a resting and a gathering space and highlight the social function integral to streets. The importance of additional small gathering spaces is referred to in both the Community Cultural Plan and the PROS Plan. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Construction $30,000 $0 $0 $40,000 $0 $0 TOTAL $30,000 $0 $0 $40,000 $0 $0 44 Packet Pg. 286 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: City Gateway ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $30,000 Replacements (. 1, ot th PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Design and construct new gateway elements at SR 104 and 5 Ave. S and at Sunset and Main St. to replace aging and deteriorated signage. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The PROS Plan, Community Cultural Plan and Streetscape Plan all refer to the importance of these visual "gateways" to the City of Edmonds. New signage with artistic elements will enhance the gateways and reinforce Edmonds reputation as a cultural destination for visitors. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Repairs & Maintenance $30,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $30,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 45 Packet Pg. 287 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: City Park Storage Building � ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $200,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct a new City Park Storage Building PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Construct a new City Park storage building to replace the previous storage building which was destroyed by fire in 2016. SCHEDULE: 2017 - 2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Construction $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 46 Packet Pg. 288 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $550,000 Veteran's Plaza PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The establishment of a Veteran's Plaza was unanimously approved by the City Council in 2014. It will serve as a tribute to the patriotic and courageous men and women who served this nation. The Plaza will reflect the bravery, sacrifice and strength they gave our country. The design will accommodate flagpoles (in their existing location), space for display of military seals and a Plaza, seating areas for reflection, some educational monuments or placards, and existing hardscape and significant trees. The address is 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020 and is adjacent to the Edmonds Public Safety Building. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The Veteran's Plaza will serve as a focal point which raises awareness of the contributions made by veterans and illustrates the high respect the citizens of Edmonds have for the men and women who have defended the rights and freedoms of this nation. It will provide a tribute for the men and women who have served and are serving in the Armed Forces of the United States. The Plaza will establish a central site for the citizens of Edmonds to conduct official observances, activities and ceremonies to honor veterans including Veterans Day. SCHEDULE: 2017-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study -Eng. & Admin. Construction $30,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $30,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 x all or part of this Project may quality for I % for the Arts 47 Packet Pg. 289 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Outdoor Fitness Zones I ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $75,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Create outdoor fitness zones by adding fitness equipment within the park system. PROJECT BENEFITI RATIONALE: Provide outdoor places to exercise to improve the health and wellness of citizens and park users, which provides adults the opportunity to exercise while their children play. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Construction $75,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $75,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 48 Packet Pg. 290 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Citywide Beautification I ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $126,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Beautification citywide to include Library, Senior Center, outdoor plazas, City Park, corner parks, irrigation, planting, mulch, FAC Center, vegetation, tree plantings, streetscape/gateways/street tree planting, flower basket poles. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Improve beautification citywide and provide comprehensive adopted plan for beautification and trees. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $21,000 49 Packet Pg. 291 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Flower Pole Replacement I ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $20,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Replacement of Flower Poles in various places as needed throughout City. PROJECT BENEFITI RATIONALE: Replacement of Flower Poles in various places as needed throughout City. SCHEDULE: 2017 - 2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Construction $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 50 Packet Pg. 292 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Miscellaneous Paving � ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $ 40,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Includes miscellaneous small paving and park walkway improvements citywide. PROJECT BENEFITI RATIONALE: Capital improvement needs citywide in park system. SCHEDULE: 2017 - 2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Construction $10,000 $0 $10,000 $0 $10,000 $10,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $10,000 $0 $10,000 $0 $10,000 $10,000 all or a portion of these projects may qualify for 1 % for the Arts- 2006 Miscellaneous Paving 51 Packet Pg. 293 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Citywide Park ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $240,000 Improvements / Misc Small Projects PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Citywide park facility and public landscaping improvements including signage, interpretive signs, buoys, tables, benches, trash containers, drinking fountains, backstops, bike racks, lighting, small landscaping projects, play areas and equipment. Landscape improvements at beautification areas and corner parks, public gateway entrances into the city and 4t" Avenue Corridor from Main St. to the Edmonds Center for the Arts, SR 104, street tree and streetscape improvements. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Overall capital improvements for citywide park facilities and streetscape improvements in public areas. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering / Administration Construction $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 52 Packet Pg. 294 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Sports Field Upgrade / ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $55,000 Playground Partnerships PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Partnerships with local schools, organizations, or neighboring jurisdictions to upgrade additional youth ball field or play facilities or playgrounds to create neighborhood park facilities at non -City facilities. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Annual partnerships with matching funds to create additional facilities. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Engineering & Administration Construction $5,000 $25,000 $0 $25,000 $0 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL $5,000 $25,000 $0 $25,000 $0 $0 53 Packet Pg. 295 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Miscellaneous Unpaved ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $ 20,000 Trail / Bike Path Improvements PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Complete portions of designated trail through public parks to meet the goals of the Bicycle Plan and Pathway Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Walking and connections was listed as a high priority in the comprehensive Park Plan from public survey data. Creating trails, paths and bike links is essential to meet the need for the community. Provides for the implementation of the citywide bicycle path improvements and the elements and goals of the citywide walkway plan. Linked funding with engineering funding. SCHEDULE: 2017 - 2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $0 $10,000 $0 $10,000 $0 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL $0 $10,000 $0 $10,000 $0 $0 * all or part of these projects may qualify for 1 % for the Arts. 54 Packet Pg. 296 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Cultural Arts Facility ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $unk Needs Study - - 4it, Al W-1 _ [R J PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Initiate feasibility study of providing and promoting Cultural / Arts facilities for the City of Edmonds. The need for visual and performing arts facilities is a high priority stated in the adopted updated Community Cultural Arts Plan 2001 and in the 2008 update process. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The City of Edmonds desires to secure and provide for public Cultural Arts facilities in the community. The emphasis on the arts as a high priority creates the need to study performance, management and long term potential for arts related facilities. SCHEDULE: COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction 1 % for Art TOTAL 'all or part of this Project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts 55 Packet Pg. 297 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Edmonds Marsh Feasibility ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $155,000 & Restoration / Walkway South of Dayton Street and Harbor Square, east of BSNF railroad, west of SR 104, north of UNOCAL 23.2 acres; Natural Open Space / Zoned Open Space PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Using strategies and recommendations identified in the comprehensive management plan, protect site from adjacent development and storm water impacts. Continue to support daylighting of Willow Creek to Puget Sound. Continue to maintain current sidewalk / pathway/boardwalk. For 2018, a section of the boardwalk will be replaced. Continue to work with Friends of the Edmonds Marsh, Earthcorps and others in the rejuvenation and management of the marsh. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The Edmonds Marsh is a unique urban salt and fresh water marsh with abundant habitat / wildlife species. It is a designated and protected bird sanctuary. Protection is vital. Co -fund the completion of design of daylighting Willow Creek using Storm Water Utility funds as defined in the comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan, as well as grant funds available through various agencies and foundations. SCHEDULE: 2017 - 2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 COST Professional $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 Services Construction $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $80,000 $30,000 $30,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 56 Packet Pg. 298 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Edmonds Cemetery ESTIMATED COST: $ 100,000 Mapping 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. PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Operations of a public cemetery, with effective and accurate stewardship. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study $100,000 Eng. & Admin. Construction 1 % for Art TOTAL $0 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 57 Packet Pg. 299 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Civic Center Master Plan � ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $20,000 6t" Street N. and Edmonds Street, Edmonds City limits, Snohomish County 8.1 acres / property owned and leased from Edmonds School District until 2021; Community Park/Zoned Public PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Civic property was purchased from the Edmonds School District in 2016. A Master Plan process is underway to develop a long term plan for the property. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: To determine the best use and future plans for redevelopment at Civic Center. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/StudyPlanning/Study $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Eng. & Admin. Construction 1 % for Art TOTAL $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 *all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts 58 Packet Pg. 300 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Waterfront Redevelopment ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $525,000 / Waterfront Walkway Completion ------------ Accra Propvwd Edmonds Wam(from Garver Arws; -ycox ww •a u.r� swv. - •su •nr -• . �a5•WWlaw� r Ia[.erlle Rv.p & t.R. � rvwq'i0°�" C•�eou aewm bi�e�-�• l+++dVM.y M9gwer Tbrn pfl M •om+.aron.n. n..n garen W ran patln n 6e�d. P�ipf..d Mcr+.{4 Pw� PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Work with Sr. Center to renovate surrounding park, parking lot and walkway. Remove creosote pier, reintroduce habitat for fish and wildlife. Increase access to the waterfront. Connect waterfront walkway from Brackett's Landing South to Olympic Beach, including completion in front of the Ebb tide condominiums. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Provide anew Senior and Community Center and provide a new beachfront walkway. One of the top priorities in the PROS plan is to open up beach -front access. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study $100,000 Eng. & Admin. Construction $425,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL $525,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 'all or part of this Project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts 59 Packet Pg. 301 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Pine Ridge Park ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $50,000 Improvements 83`d Avenue West and 2041" St. SW, Edmonds City Limits, within Snohomish County 22 acres (20 acres zoned openspace/2 acres neighborhood park) Zoned Public; Adopted Master Plan PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Forest improvements, habitat improvements, tree planting, wildlife habitat attractions, trail improvements, signs, parking. Natural trail links under Main Street connecting to Yost Park. Forest Management Study in 2018 PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Retention of natural open space habitat site and regional trail connections. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study 40000 Eng. & Admin. Construction $0 $0 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL I $0 $40000 $5,000 $0 1 $5,000 1$0 New additions meet the 1 % for the Arts Ordinance requirements 60 Packet Pg. 302 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION 7.2.b PROJECT NAME: Debt Service on Approved ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,003,926 Capital Projects and Acquisitions PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Approximate annual debt service payments on: Marina Beach / Library Roof: $82,028 PSCC (Edmonds Center for the Arts): $60,298 Anderson Center Seismic Retrofit: $29,621 PROJECT BENEFITI RATIONALE: Debt service to pay for approved capitol projects SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction 1 % for Art Principal & Interest $171,947 $164,766 $162,656 $165,907 $168,612 $170,038 TOTAL $171,947 $164,766 $162,656 $165,907 $168,612 $170,038 " all or part of this Project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts �L :i tV tV O CV ti O tV a. u_ U d U w M to 61 Packet Pg. 303 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Miscellaneous Open ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,200,000 Space / Land PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Acquisition of properties when feasible that will benefit citizens that fit the definitions and needs identified in the Parks Comprehensive Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Fulfills needs of citizens for parks, recreation and open space. SCHEDULE: 2017 - 2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST $2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Land $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200000 1 % for Art TOTAL $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200000 62 Packet Pg. 304 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION 7.2.b PROJECT NAME: Waterfront Redevelopment ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $75,000 / Waterfront Walkway Completion G � VOW rti PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Redevelop waterfront to secure access to Puget Sound for public use as indentified in the Parks, Recreation & Open Space Comprehensive Plan. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Public ownership of waterfront and tidelands on Puget Sound. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $75,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL $75,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 63 Packet Pg. 305 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: 4" Avenue ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $4,325,000 Corridor Enhancement PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Begin 4 th Avenue site development with temporary and/or moveable surface elements and amenities to begin drawing attention and interest to the corridor and create stronger visual connection between Main Street and the Edmonds Center for the Arts. Possible projects may include surface art, interpretive signage and wayfinding, or low level lighting. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The corridor improvements in the public right of way will encourage pedestrian traffic & provide a strong visual connection along 4t" Ave. Improvements will enhance connectivity as an attractive walking corridor & contribute to the economic vitality in the downtown by encouraging the flow of visitors between the downtown retail & the Edmonds Center for the Arts. Timing for 30% design phase is crucial as the City addresses utility projects in the area & will assist the City in the process of identifying & acquiring funding sources for the total project implementation phase. SCHEDULE: 2017 - 2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $0 $1,425,000 $2,900,000 $0 $0 $1 1 % for Art TOTAL $0 $1,425,000 $2,900,000 $0 $0 $1 " all or part of this Project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts 64 Packet Pg. 306 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Cultural Heritage Tour and ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: TBD Way -Finding Signage :191Al0]►10I•y9I91►i►Ii1(GAT1►[ato1MtoI1k; 0 G : I : I:]IETC Iatell] V (Proposed sites) N 2 2'r qS ti y � a Q a s F Z a r ® D I C Oa[t. 5[ PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Create a downtown Edmonds walking tour highlighting a dozen historic sites with artist made interpretive markers, and add way -finding signage for the downtown area. Completed. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Promote tourism and economic development in the core downtown. The walking tour and interpretive signage focuses on local history and as unique artist made pieces also reflect the arts orientation of the community. Improved way -finding signage which points out major attractions and services/amenities such as theaters, museums, beaches, train station, shopping, dining and lodging promotes both tourism and economic vitality in the downtown /waterfront activity center. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction 1 % for Art TOTAL * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 65 Packet Pg. 307 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Dayton Street Plaza ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $30,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Renovate small park and plaza at north end of old public works building, 2nd & Dayton Street. Improve landscaping, plaza, and accessibility. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Capital improvements to public gathering space and creation of additional art amenities and streetscape improvements in downtown on main walking route. Financial support from Edmonds Arts Festival Foundation, Hubbard Foundation and Edmonds in Bloom. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction $30,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL $30,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts 66 Packet Pg. 308 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Civic Center Development ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $3,135,000 / Stadium Demolition PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Civic Center Development / Stadium Demolition. As part of the Master planning process for Civic, and in consideration of the current condition of the stadium, it is being recommended to demolish the current stadium. The City also has some grant funds available to assist with this. In addition, develop a signature downtown park at this site. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Civic Center Development / Stadium Demolition. The Civic Master plan will be complete by early 2017. Funds will be set aside, and grant funds applied for in order to develop the master plan. This is a high priority in the PROS plan. SCHEDULE: 2017 - 2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Construction $135,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 TOTAL $135,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 67 Packet Pg. 309 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Waterfront Redevelopment ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $2,100,000 / Waterfront Walkway Completion ------------ Accra Propvwd Edmonds Waterfront Genrer Arws; -ycox ww •a u.r� swv. - •su •nr f -• . �a5•WWlaw� r Ia[.erlle Rv.p & t.R. � rvwq'i0°�" C•�eou aewm bi�e�-�• l+++dVM.y M9gwer Tbrn pfl M •om+.aron.n. n..n garen W ran patln n 6e�d. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Work with Sr. Center to renovate surrounding park, parking lot and walkway. Remove creosote pier, reintroduce habitat for fish and wildlife. Increase access to the waterfront. Connect waterfront walkway from Brackett's Landing South to Olympic Beach, including completion in front of the Ebb tide condominiums. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Provide anew Senior and Community Center and provide a new beachfront walkway. One of the top priorities in the PROS plan is to open up beach -front access. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. $100,000 Construction $2,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL $2,100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts 68 Packet Pg. 310 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN DESCRIPTION 7.2.b PROJECT NAME: Community Garden ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $155,000 } � t t � c t Ts, PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Locate and develop a community garden site. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: This was formerly planned for the Former Woodway HS site. This is adopted as part of the PROS plan. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $155,000 1 % for Art TOTAL a� c.i N N O N ti O N a U a- U to M O all or a portion of this project may quality for 1 % for the Arts 69 Packet Pg. 311 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Wetland Mitigation I ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: TBD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Using strategies and recommendations identified in the comprehensive management plan, protect site from adjacent development and storm water impacts. Continue to support day -lighting of Willow Creek to Puget Sound. Sidewalk / pathway repairs and continuation of walkway / viewing path to the hatchery if environmentally feasible. Work with Friends of the Edmonds Marsh, People for Puget Sound and others in the rejuvenation and management of the marsh. This also includes planning for the outfall of Willow Creek into Marina Beach Park. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The Edmonds Marsh is a unique urban salt and freshwater marsh with abundant habitat / wildlife species. It is a designated and protected bird sanctuary. Protection is vital. Co -fund the completion of a master plan using Storm Water Utility funds as defined in the comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan. As well as grant funds available through various agencies and foundations. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction 1 % for Art TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts. 70 Packet Pg. 312 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION 7.2.b PROJECT NAME: Edmonds Marsh / Willow ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $3,200,000 Creek Daylighting PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Using strategies and recommendations identified in the comprehensive management plan, protect site from adjacent development and storm water impacts. Continue to support day -lighting of Willow Creek to Puget Sound. Sidewalk / pathway repairs and continuation of walkway / viewing path to the hatchery if environmentally feasible. Work with Friends of the Edmonds Marsh, People for Puget Sound and others in the rejuvenation and management of the marsh. This also includes planning for the outfall of Willow Creek into Marina Beach Park. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The Edmonds Marsh is a unique urban salt and fresh water marsh with abundant habitat / wildlife species. It is a designated and protected bird sanctuary. Protection is vital. Co -fund the completion of a master plan using Storm Water Utility funds as defined in the comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan. As well as grant funds available through various agencies and foundations. SCHEDULE: 2015-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study Engineering & Administration Construction $200,000 $0 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $0 $0 1 % for Art TOTAL 1 $200,000 $0 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $0 $0 * all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts. c �L :i tV tV O CV ti O tV a U d U W M to 71 Packet Pg. 313 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Public Market (Downtown ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: Unknown Waterfront) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Work with community partners to establish a public market, year around, on the downtown waterfront area. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The project will help to create a community gathering area, boost economic development, bring tourists to town, and will be a valuable asset to Edmonds. SCHEDULE: This project depends on the ability to secure grant funding, and community partners willing to work with the city to establish this. This potentially can be accomplished by 2017. COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022-2027 Planning/Study Eng. & Admin. Construction 1 % for Art TOTAL * all or part of this project may qualify for 1 % for the Arts.72 Packet Pg. 314 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: Outdoor Fitness Zones I ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $175,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Create outdoor fitness zones by adding fitness equipment within the park system. PROJECT BENEFITI RATIONALE: Provide outdoor places to exercise to improve the health and wellness of citizens and park users, which provides adults the opportunity to exercise while their children play. SCHEDULE: 2017-2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Construction $175,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $175,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 73 Packet Pg. 315 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: City Park Storage Building I ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $250,000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct a new City Park Storage Building PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: Construct a new City Park storage building to replace the previous storage building which was destroyed by fire in 2016. SCHEDULE: 2017 - 2022 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Construction $250,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $250,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 74 Packet Pg. 316 CITY OF EDMONDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT NAME: ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $550,000 Veteran's Plaza PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The establishment of a Veteran's Plaza was unanimously approved by the City Council in 2014. It will serve as a tribute to the patriotic and courageous men and women who served this nation. The Plaza will reflect the bravery, sacrifice and strength they gave our country. The design will accommodate flagpoles (in their existing location), space for display of military seals and a Plaza, seating areas for reflection, some educational monuments or placards, and existing hardscape and significant trees. The address is 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020 and is adjacent to the Edmonds Public Safety Building. PROJECT BENEFIT/RATIONALE: The Veteran's Plaza will serve as a focal point which raises awareness of the contributions made by veterans and illustrates the high respect the citizens of Edmonds have for the men and women who have defended the rights and freedoms of this nation. It will provide a tribute for the men and women who have served and are serving in the Armed Forces of the United States. The Plaza will establish a central site for the citizens of Edmonds to conduct official observances, activities and ceremonies to honor veterans including Veterans Day. SCHEDULE: 2017-2021 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Planning/Study -Eng. & Admin. Construction $550,000 1 % for Art TOTAL $550,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 x all or part of this Project may quality for I % for the Arts 75 Packet Pg. 317 7.2.c CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 28, 2016 Chair Lovell called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex, 250 — 5`' Avenue North. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Philip Lovell, Chair Carreen Rubenkonig, Vice Chair Matthew Cheung Alicia Crank Nathan Monroe Valerie Stewart BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT Todd Cloutier (excused) Daniel Robles (excused) READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES STAFF PRESENT Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager Rob English, City Engineer Carrie Hite, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Director Jerry Bevington, Video Recorder Karin Noyes, Recorder BOARD MEMBER STEWART MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2016 BE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. BOARD MEMBER MONROE SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA The agenda was accepted as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS There was no one in the audience. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT TO PLANNING BOARD Chair Lovell referred to Page 3, which contains a brief update on the Waterfront Access Study. He clarified that a second public meeting was recently held, and his understanding is that the Task Force will be making a recommendation to the City Council via Mayor Earling sometime in October. PRESENTATION OF THE PROPOSED 2017-2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN (CFP) AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) Mr. English started his presentation by providing a diagram to illustrate the components of the CIP and CFP, particularly noting differences between the two documents and where they overlap. He explained that both plans identify the six -year capital projects with funding sources, but the CIP also identifies six -year maintenance projects with funding sources and the Packet Pg. 318 CFP identifies long-range (20 year) capital project needs. The CFP is divided into three project sections: General (parks, buildings and regional projects), Transportation (safety/capacity and pedestrian bicycle projects), and Utilities. The CIP is organized based on the City's financial funds and provides a description of each of the capital projects identified for the six - year period. He summarized that the CIP is a budgeting tool that includes capital and maintenance projects, linking those projects to the various City funds and revenues, and the CFP is intended to identify longer -term capital needs (not maintenance) and be tied to City level -of -service standards. The CFP is also required to be consistent with other elements of the Comprehensive Plan, (i.e. transportation, parks, etc.), and there are restrictions on how often a CFP can be amended. There are no such restrictions tied to the CIP. He reviewed each of the funds as follows: • Fund 112 — Transportation. This fund is managed by the Public Works Department. • Fund 116 — Building Maintenance. This fund is also managed by the Public Works Department. • Fund 125 — Capital Projects. This fund is managed by the Parks and Recreation and Public Works Departments. Money for this fund comes from the Real Estate Excise Tax (REET), and the dollars are split between the two departments. • Fund 126 — Special Capital/Park Acquisition. This fund is supported by REET funds and is managed by the Parks and Recreation Department. • Fund 129 — Special Projects. This fund is currently idle and was last used for the Highway 99 International District Lighting Project that was completed a few years ago. Any new capital project would program into this fund. • Fund 132 — Parks Construction (Grant Funding). This fund is managed by the Parks and Recreation Department. • Fund 421— Water Projects. This fund is managed by the Public Works Department. • Fund 422 — Storm Projects. This fund is also managed by the Public Works Department. • Fund 423 — Waste Water Treatment Plant. This fund is managed by the Public Works Department. Next, Mr. English recapped some of the larger projects that have been completed or the City is working towards completion of in 2016: • The 228`h Street Corridor Improvement Project started in May of 2015 and reached substantial completion in March of 2016. The project included a new signalized intersection that connects 2281h Street east to west across Highway 99 and into Mountlake Terrace, providing a new east/west connection to Interstate 5. • Safety improvements were completed with a median down Highway 99 to eliminate the left turns from south bound Highway 99 to 76`h Avenue West. This should help reduce accidents and provide safety turning movements. • A sidewalk improvement project on 238th Street between 100th and 104`h Streets was completed via a Safe Routes to Schools Grant. Stormwater funds were used to improve drainage, including bio-retention rain gardens in key locations. The street was also overlaid using funds from the Pavement Restoration Program. • Sewer mains were replaced on Walnut Street, and the project also included new pavement via the Pavement Restoration Program. • On September 271h, the City Council approved a contract for a project on the south side of 2361h Street between SR-104 and Madrona School. The project will include a new sidewalk, with a five-foot path to cross over to school, and curbs and gutters will also be installed. The pavement is in poor condition, so the roadway will be rebuilt. The project will include stormwater and water main work, as well. The City is coordinating with the School District's plan to rebuild the school starting in 2017 to provide a sidewalk leading into the school property. • As part of the Pavement Preservation Program, 9.6 lane miles of roadway were repaved, and pedestrian curb ramp upgrades were completed. • REET dollars (125 and 126 Funds) were used to fund the 2016 Pavement Preservation Program, single cabinet upgrades, traffic calming program, curb ramp upgrades, and an ADA transition plan update. Mr. English reviewed the projects that will be funded in 2017 via the 112 Fund as follows: Planning Board Minutes September 28, 2016 Page 2 Packet Pg. 319 7.2.c The 76th Avenue West and 212th Street Intersection Improvement Project was bid out in May. However, given the bidding climate, the bids came in much higher than the engineer's estimate. Only two bids were received and both were high. The City elected to reject both bids and rebid the project during the winter months. That means the project would likely start in the spring of 2017. In the meantime, the City has applied for additional grant funding from the Transportation Improvement Board, but won't know the outcome of the application until November. This large project will add capacity to the intersection and underground utilities. Chair Lovell pointed out that the project is identified in the CIP as being unfunded at this time. Mr. English said the City has secured federal funding for the project, and has applied for additional grant funding, as well. Chair Lovell referred to the spreadsheet on Page 9 and said it is unclear how much grant funding has been secured in 2016 and how much needs to be secured in 2017. Mr. English agreed to revisit the numbers and update them accordingly. He suggested that perhaps the labels needed to be corrected to more clearly reflect the intent. He said that in addition to grant funding for the project, additional funding will come from the water and storm utility funds, since infrastructure needs to be replaced in the intersection prior to pavement work being done. • Citywide bicycle improvements will continue in 2017. For example, a striping project will occur on 76th Avenue West to add bicycle lanes and change a four -lane facility into a 3-lane facility. This project will likely be bid in conjunction with the intersection improvements to get some economy. • The 238th Street Walkway Project from SR-104 to SR-99 will also be completed in 2017. The City received a grant from the State Transportation Improvement Board and design work has been started. • The City received federal funding to move forward with an overlay of 84th Avenue from 200th Street to 212th Street during the summer of 2017. • REET dollars will be used to install Trackside Warning Systems at Main and Dayton Streets to reduce the sound footprint that the current train horns have. The warning systems will be permanently installed at the intersections, and the horns will blow whenever a train is passing through Edmonds in either direction. The noise from the horns will be more focused at the intersections so there will be less impact to surrounding properties. Mr. English summarized that the Water Utility Fund (421) supported the replacement of 4,850 feet of water main in 2016, and 3,400 feet of street affected by waterline replacements was overlaid. In 2017 it is anticipated that 7,300 feet of water main will be replaced and 8,200 feet of street affected by waterline replacement will be overlaid. Mr. English also reviewed that the Stormwater Utility Fund (422) supported the 238th Street drainage improvements that were completed in 2016, as well as the new pipe and infiltration gallery in southwest Edmonds between 106th and 105th Street. The 2017 projects include the Seaview infiltration project, further design of the Willow Creek/Edmonds Marsh project, an update of the Stormwater Comprehensive Plan, and installation of the Dayton Street Pump Station. He explained that the Seaview project is funded via a grant and will help reduce the number of surges from stormwater flowing into Perrinville Creek. The Willow Creek/Edmonds Marsh project is ongoing, and it is anticipated that final design work and permitting can move forward in 2017. He explained that during heavy rain events and high tide, the intersection at Dayton Street and SR- 104 floods. Given its proximity to the marsh, Willow Creek, the outfall, and the tide, the solution is complicated. As proposed, a lift station will be installed off of Dayton Street in the fishing pier parking lot as a first step to solve the flooding problems at the intersection. Lastly, Mr. English reviewed that in 2016 the Sewer Utility Fund (423) supported the replacement of 2,000 feet of sewer main and the rehabilitation of 6,400 feet of sewer main using the cured -in -place process (CIPP). In addition, it funded 1,075 of pavement overlay on streets affected by the sewer main replacement projects. It is anticipated that 2,900 feet of sewer main will be replaced in 2017, with 3,000 feet of CIPP rehabilitation and pavement overlay on 8,600 feet of street affected by sewer main replacement. A large wastewater treatment project is in process near the ferry holding lanes where the secondary clarifier is being replaced. The project should be completed in October. Planning Board Minutes September 28, 2016 Page 3 Packet Pg. 320 7.2.c Chair Lovell asked if the Edmonds Waterfront Analysis relates to the work being done by the Railroad Crossing Task Force. Ms. Hite answered affirmatively. Chair Lovell asked why no funding has been set aside for this project in the next four years. Mr. English said there is still momentum to move a crossing project forward, and the task force will continue its work. The Mayor is currently working on the 2017 budget, which will be presented to the City Council in October. They will know more about funding after the draft budget has been released. In addition, the City has applied for some transportation grants to continue the work. At this point, it is too early to know if there will be funding for the project, and it was included in the CFP as a placeholder. Mr. English summarized that staff begins working on the CIP and CFP updates in July, and a preliminary draft is typically presented to the Planning Board in September. A public hearing on the CIP and CFP is scheduled for October 12' , after which the Board will forward a recommendation to the City Council. Updated documents will be provided at the hearing, including more detailed information to outline the differences between 2016 and 2017. Staff is scheduled to make an initial presentation to the City Council on October 18th, with a public hearing on November I". Using the Board's input and public comments, the City Council will discuss the draft documents and make revisions. It is anticipated that final adoption will occur in November or December. Once adopted, the CFP will be included as part of the next batch of Comprehensive Plan Amendments. Board Member Monroe requested more information about the Citywide Capital Renewal Program, which is listed on Page 11 of the CIP. Ms. Hite said this program is managed by the Facilities Division. She explained that, in years past, the program has had minimal funding, and many infrastructure renewal projects have been deferred. This year, Mayor Earling is proposing that a lump sum be set aside for doing renewal of the City's capital assets. The Capital Facilities Manager has prepared a list of needs, and the projects will be funded by the $1.5 million set aside for the Capital Renewal Program. The intent is to chip away at the projects each year. For example, there are numerous needs at the Frances Anderson Center that have been deferred from previous years. Board Member Stewart said she is excited to see the projects that have been accomplished during the year, as well as projects that will happen going forward. She asked if staff could provide the Board and City Council with a copy of the list of projects associated with the Capital Renewal Project. Ms. Hite agreed to provide the list as an attachment for the public hearing. Board Member Stewart asked if City staff works to coordinate infrastructure projects so they can be done simultaneously. For example, are sewer and water main replacements coordinated so they are completed before a street is overlaid. Mr. English answered affirmatively. Once a significant project has been identified, City staff inspects the condition of other elements, such as water and sewer mains. If needed, the pro�ects can be done simultaneously. For example, he referred to the Dayton Street Project that took place between P and 9 Avenues, which was initiated as a stormwater improvement. After doing a comprehensive review of the other utilities, the project was expanded to include water and sewer main improvements, as well. The project at the 212th Street intersection is another example of a combined project. It initially started as a transportation capacity project, but after evaluating the condition of the utilities, replacement of the sewer and stormwater mains were incorporated into the project. Board Member Stewart reviewed that frontage improvements, including sidewalks, are required for any new development in the City. She voiced concern that, sometimes the improvements that are made are torn up just a few years later to accommodate a City improvement project. She asked if it is possible for City staff to help developers anticipate the future improvements and perhaps postpone or defer the frontage improvements until the City's larger project moves forward. Mr. English said City staff has more control when it comes to coordinating City projects, but it is more difficult for private development. A good example is the 200th Street Overlay Project. A developer found out about the project via the notification process and the City worked with the developer to get the connections made to the City's systems before the overlay project moved forward. He said staff tries to coordinate city projects and development proposals through the building permit application. Ideally, the City can hold off on a project to allow a developer to get his/her work done, but he acknowledged that is not always the case. Board Member Stewart summarized that the City should do its part to help property owners by allowing them to postpone the improvements until they can be coordinated with larger, planned City projects. Planning Board Minutes September 28, 2016 Page 4 Packet Pg. 321 7.2.c Board Member Stewart asked if Planning Board Members would have an opportunity to provide feedback relative to the fitness stations that are proposed for City parks. Ms. Hite answered that she would love to have feedback from the Board as the project moves forward. Board Member Stewart asked if funding for open space acquisition is included in the CIP. Ms. Hite answered that she programs $200,000 into each year's budget for open space acquisition. She agreed it is important to include this in the yearly discussions, and she will add it to her presentation for the public hearing. She said it would be helpful to have feedback from the Board as to whether they support rolling this funding over from year-to-year until an opportunity comes up. Board Member Stewart observed that, as land continues to be developed, the City should remain open to opportunities to acquire open space. Once land is developed, the opportunity will be lost. Board Member Cheung asked how the City prioritizes the capital improvement projects. Mr. English explained that, from a pavement preservation standpoint, staff evaluates the condition of the pavement each year and places a rating on the streets. They also try to coordinate the work with needed utility replacement projects. For example, a street overlay may be postponed if the City knows that a water or sewer main project will be needed in the near future so that the two projects can be coordinated and completed at the same time. As far as capital project prioritization, there is very limited funding, and the City typically uses grant opportunities as a way to prioritize these projects. First, they look at the prioritized list of projects in the 2015 Transportation Improvement Plan. As grant opportunities come up, staff selects the most competitive projects that fit the particular grant requirements. Typically, the transportation capital infrastructure budget is very small (between $140,000 and $150,000). Additional funding for capital projects comes from grants and from traffic impact fees. On the other hand, Mayor Earling has made pavement preservation a priority for the past few years. Board Member Cheung asked how citizens can recommend transportation improvement projects for inclusion in the Transportation Improvement Plan. Mr. English explained that, from a planning standpoint, staff uses the list that is included in the Transportation Improvement Plan, which an adopted element of the Comprehensive Plan. Adoption of the Transportation Improvement Plan included an extensive public process that allowed the public to identify projects they felt were most important. During the most recent update, a sidewalk committee was formed to evaluate each street and identify where sidewalks are needed. Citizens can contact the Public Works or Engineering Department to provide feedback on potential projects, and staff will evaluate the situation to determine what the appropriate solution might be. Vice Chair Rubenkonig added that the Police Department also takes note of situations were a high number of accidents are occurring. Board Member Crank said she appreciates the work that was done at the intersection of 228th Street and Highway 99. However, some people are questioning the design of the median, which appears to have benches where people can sit. Mr. English advised that the design was intended to provide relief to the median's appearance. There are a lot of design options to choose from, but it was felt that the concrete or grass median was not very aesthetically pleasing for this location. Given the speed of traffic along the corridor, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) also felt that the taller median was needed for safety reasons. The center section of the median has a colored concrete stamp that was intended to provide an aesthetic element to the median as opposed to a concrete covered center. Board Member Crank referred to the new flashing traffic signal that was installed at Edmonds Way and 232nd Street. She asked if the area is currently being monitored and if there has been an uptick in traffic volumes as a result of the new marijuana business and proposed new residential development. Mr. English agreed to looking into the issue and provide a better answer about traffic volumes at the public hearing. He recalled that the SR-104 Corridor Analysis that was recently completed looked at the entire corridor through Edmonds. It identified several recommendations for capital improvement projects to make the corridor more pedestrian friendly and safe. Board Member Crank asked if there have been any reports of traffic accidents associated with the newly installed Luminous Forest. Ms. Hite advised that the Police Department had some concerns when the it was first installed, and the artist advised that after the installation has been on for one month, the surface will become scratched and dim. She hasn't heard of any accidents on 4tb Avenue to date. Board Member Crank said she would love to see the community garden concept come to fruition. It would be a very attractive amenity for apartment dwellers. Ms. Hite agreed, but explained that the City has had a difficult time finding an appropriate location. It was originally planned for the south side of the Old Woodway High School site, but because of Planning Board Minutes September 28, 2016 Page 5 Packet Pg. 322 7.2.c controversy surrounding the athletic fields, staff decided against pursuing that location. She expressed her belief that the park in Esperance would be good location for a community garden, and she will continue to work with Snohomish County to make that happen. Vice Chair Rubenkonig said she has had a long-standing concern about the intersection at 76th Avenue and 212th Street for a number of years. The last time the CIP was before the Board, she requested that the City consider placing an "all walk" crossing at this intersection. She lives in the area and is at the intersection often. It seems like an all walk would make it faster for the students to get across the road. She asked if this could be included in the 2016 CIP. Mr. English said the concept has been discussed by staff and it comes down to finding a balance between pedestrian safety and getting vehicles through the intersection. He agreed to talk to the Transportation Engineer to get more information about the concept and then report back to the Board at their next meeting. Chair Lovell observed that this is the first time that neither the CIP nor CFP identifies funding for the Edmonds Crossing Project. He assumes that staff will provide an explanation for this change and indicate whether the funds that were previously allocated would be used elsewhere. Mr. English said there have been no changes associated with the Edmonds Crossing Project. The project is currently identified as unknown based on WSDOT's current planning horizon for the multi - modal terminal, which is beyond 2035 or even 2040. Although the project is still included on WSDOT's list of future improvements, it remains unfunded, and the City does not know when funding will be allocated for it to move forward. When the capital plan for the ferry is updated in the future, the City may have more information about the project's timing. Chair Lovell commented that it is good to see that there are a lot of projects taking shape to meet the needs and cravings of the citizens. Things are moving towards the betterment of the City's infrastructure overall. He asked if there has been any interface between various City departments and the Tree Board, particularly in regard to street trees. The impact that some species of street trees can have on sidewalk infrastructure is becoming a big concern, as repair and/or replacement is often required. He noted that concern has also been raised about the types of trees that are planted at the Civic Center Field, which could end up blocking views. Ms. Hite said managing trees requires a joint effort, and the Parks, Planning and Public Works staff all work with the Tree Board, depending on the topic. Chair Lovell said he has heard that effort is being made to ensure that new trees are selected to be the right species, size and growth pattern to protect the City's infrastructure. Chair Lovell announced that a public hearing on the draft CIP and CFP is scheduled for October 12th. He encouraged Board Members to forward any outstanding questions directly to staff so they can be answered at the public hearing. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA Chair Lovell reviewed the updated Extended Agenda, noting that a public hearing on the CIP and CFP is scheduled for October 12th. Staff will also present an update on the Comprehensive Plan Amendments pertaining to parks, Highway 99, street trees and water. On October 26th, the agenda will include a presentation on the University of Washington/Forterra Plan that was prepared for Five Corners, a discussion on the land use procedures code update, and an update on the Highway 99 Subarea Plan. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Lovell did not provide any additional comments. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Board Member Crank reported that she and Vice Chair Rubenkonig attended the City's Volunteer Dinner. Board Member Monroe reported on his attendance at the September 21st meeting of the Edmonds Citizens Economic Development Commission where they put together a list of recommendations related to the Civic Field Master Plan. Most of the recommendations were driven by economic development. For example, they want to see a playfield that can attract users who will presumably shop in downtown Edmonds. The list was presented to the City Council on September 27th. Planning Board Minutes September 28, 2016 Page 6 Packet Pg. 323 be invited to provide feedback. An on-line open house will follow for two weeks to solicit additional public feedback. At the close of the on-line open house, the hybrid design will be presented to the Planning Board for a public hearing and recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will also conduct a public hearing before making a final decision on the master plan design. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT TO PLANNING BOARD Chair Lovell referred the Board to the written report that was provided by the Development Services Director. He reported that he and Vice Chair Rubenkonig met recently with Mayor Earling and received an update on the Sustainable Cities Partnership, a collaboration between Western Washington University and the City of Edmonds. Mayor Earling advised that there is currently a lot of activity and the students are moving forward with the projects identified as part of the program. He spoke very positively about the experience thus far. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED 2017-2022 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN (CFP) AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) Chair Lovell reviewed the rules and procedures for the public hearing, which would start with a staff report by Mr. English and Ms. Hite. Mr. English started his presentation by providing a diagram to illustrate the components of the CIP and CFP, particularly noting the differences between the two documents and where they overlap. The CFP is a planning document that includes the 20-year projects and 6-year projects to address roads. The CIP identifies the short-term horizon projects that include both capital and maintenance projects over the next six years. The overlap is where the six -year capital projects relate to growth; these projects will be in both plans. The CFP is divided into three project sections: General (parks, buildings and regional projects), Transportation (safety/capacity and pedestrian bicycle projects), and Utilities. The CIP is organized based on the City's financial funds and provides a description of each of the capital projects identified for the six -year period. He reviewed each of the funds as follows: • Fund 112 — Transportation. This fund is managed by the Public Works Department. • Fund 116 — Building Maintenance. This fund is also managed by the Public Works Department. • Fund 125 — Capital Projects. This fund is managed by the Parks and Recreation and Public Works Departments. Money for this fund comes from the Real Estate Excise Tax (BEET), and the dollars are split between the two departments. • Fund 126 — Special Capital/Park Acquisition. This fund is supported by REET funds and is managed by the Parks and Recreation Department. • Fund 129 — Special Projects. This fund is currently idle and was last used for the Highway 99 International District Lighting Project that was completed a few years ago. Any new capital project would program into this fund. • Fund 132 — Parks Construction (Grant Funding). This fund is managed by the Parks and Recreation Department. • Fund 421— Water Projects. This fund is managed by the Public Works Department. • Fund 422 — Storm Projects. This fund is also managed by the Public Works Department. • Fund 423 — Waste Water Treatment Plant. This fund is managed by the Public Works Department. Next, Mr. English recapped some of the larger projects that have been completed or the City is working towards completion of in 2016: • The 228 h Street Corridor Improvement Project started in May of 2015 and reached substantial completion in March of 2016. The project included a new signalized intersection that connects 228th Street east to west across Highway 99 and into Mountlake Terrace, providing a new east/west connection to Interstate 5. • The 228"' Street Sidewalk Improvement Project connects 100"b Street to 104`h Street with sidewalks on the north side. This project was funded by a Safe Routes to Schools Grant. Planning Board Minutes October 12, 2016 Page 2 Packet Pg. 324 7.2.d • The Pavement Restoration Program is a program that Mayor Earling has prioritized and funded for the fourth year in a row using Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) revenue from the 126 Fund. • A walkway project will start soon on 236th Street, from SR-104 to Madrona School. This project will also be funded by a Safe Routes to Schools Grant. Mr. English reviewed some of the projects that will be funded in 2017: • The 76"h Avenue West and 212th Street Intersection Improvement Project was bid out in May. However, given the bidding climate, the bids came in much higher than the engineer's estimate. The City elected to reject the bids and rebid the project during the winter months. That means the project would likely start in the spring of 2017. In the meantime, the City has applied for additional grant funding from the Transportation Improvement Board, but won't know the outcome of the application until November. • Citywide bicycle improvements will continue in 2017. For example, a striping project will occur on 76th Avenue West in conjunction with the intersection improvements described above. As proposed, the roadway would change from four to three lanes, and a bicycle lane would be added. • The 238th Street Walkway Project from SR-104 to SR-99 will also be completed in 2017. The City received a grant from the State Transportation Improvement Board and design work has been started. • The City received federal funding to move forward with an overlay of 841h Avenue from 2001h Street to 212th Street during the summer of 2017. • REET dollars will be used to install Trackside Warning Systems on Railroad Avenue at the Main and Dayton Street intersections to reduce the sound footprint that the current train horns have. The warning systems will be permanently installed at the intersections, and the horns will blow whenever a train is passing through Edmonds in either direction. The noise from the horns will be more focused at the intersections so there will be less impact to surrounding properties. Mr. English advised that, since the Board's last meeting, the Mayor approved his "decision package, which identifies projects that staff identified for 2017. The package includes: • Funding of $1.1 million for the Pavement Preservation Program, which is a critical piece of the City's ability to maintain infrastructure. • Funding for pre -design work for the access management on SR-99 between 216'h and 2241h Streets. The City has observed a higher accident problem along this stretch of roadway related to the two-way left turn lane on SR-99. The intent is to go forward with pre -design of the improvements in 2017. • In coordination with Mountlake Terrace, the City has applied for a grant to coordinate the signals on 2201h Street, which is badly needed. If the grant application is successful, the 2017 budget includes the matching funds to move the project forward. • $150,000 has been set aside to match grant dollars to continue to pursue alternatives for a waterfront at -grade crossing. The committee will present the results of their study to the Mayor soon, and a presentation will be made to the City Council in late October or early November. • The proposed 2017 budget includes funding to replace 7,300 feet of water main and 2,900 feet of sewer main. It also includes funding to rehabilitate 3,000 feet of sewer main. Ms. Hite reviewed the 2016 projects that were completed by the Parks and Recreation Department in 2016 as follows: Planning Board Minutes October 12, 2016 Page 3 Packet Pg. 325 7.2.d • The City acquired the Civic Field property and is currently in the process of completing a master plan for its redevelopment. The consultant is working on a hybrid plan that will be unveiled at a public open house on October 19th • The spray park at City Park was opened in the spring and had a very successful summer. • The Dayton Street Plaza is nearly completed and it is already heavily used. They are currently in the last stages of landscaping. • The temporary art installation (Luminous Forest) on 4th Avenue was completed, and wayfinding signs were installed throughout the City. • The Marina Beach Park Master Plan was completed in early 2016, and the intent is to formally adopted the plan into the City's Comprehensive Plan before the end of the year. • The Fishing Pier Rehabilitation Project is nearing completion, and it expected to open with a ribbon -cutting ceremony on November 15"h. • The Downtown Public Restroom Project is currently under construction near City Hall. • The Yost Spa Project is currently in progress. However, the project had to be redesigned in order to meet current code requirements. • The Frances Anderson Center Stage Replacement Project is currently in progress. • The design work for the Veteran's Project was completed. The City received two bids that were higher than the engineer's estimate, and the project is being rebid. • The playground equipment at Marina Beach Park has been replaced, and they are currently working to replace the equipment at the Meadowdale Preschool playground. Next, Ms. Hite reviewed the proposed 2017 projects as follows: • The Edmonds Marsh and Daylighting of Willow Creek Project is ongoing. The City has obtained grant funding to continue the feasibility study, and they have applied for other competitive grants, as well. • Parklet Projects will move forward in 2017, as will the Outdoor Fitness Zone Project • Gateway replacement is ongoing and in process. • The City is partnering with the City of Lynnwood to rehabilitate the Meadowdale Playfields. • The City's storage building burned down earlier in the year, and the City has received reimbursement from its insurance company. Considering the storage needs of both the Facilities and Parks and Recreation Departments, staff is proposing that the building be rebuilt to a size that is nearly 2.5 times larger but in the same location. • There is funding left from the state grant that was used to acquire Civic Field, and the City has received permission from the State to use the funds to demolish the grandstands. • Funding was set aside in the 2016 CIP for a community garden, and staff is working with Snohomish County regarding the possibility of partnering to create a community garden as Esperance Park. • The bids received for the Veteran's Plaza were rejected, and the City will go out to bid again soon. They expect to break ground in early 2017 and open the plaza in May of 2017. Planning Board Minutes October 12, 2016 Page 4 Packet Pg. 326 7.2.d The Senior Center is undertaking a capital program to redevelop the site into a Waterfront Center, and the City has discussed the opportunity to redevelop the waterfront at the same time. This will involve removing the existing creosote pilings, reconfiguring the park, adding a bioswale and raingardens to filter runoff from the parking lot before it goes into the Sound, adding a hand boat launch, providing more access to the beach, and adding a picnic area with a natural access to the senior center. In addition, the City is currently in discussions with the owners of the Ebb Tide Condominiums to complete the waterfront walkway in front of their building within the City's 10-foot easement. The City has applied for two $50,000 grants, and the project has scored high on both. The City has also set aside park impact fee dollars for the proj ect. • Land acquisition is a high priority in the Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan, and the proposed budget sets aside an additional $200,000 for this purpose. The intent is to having matching funds for grants available when opportunities to acquire land come about. Ms. Hite said staff is recommending that the Cultural Arts Facilities Needs Study be deleted from the CFP. While the study could still be done, it would be more of an operational project than a capital project. If a study determines that the City needs a facility at some point in the future, it can be added to the CFP. Also, the Downtown Restroom Project should be completed by the end of the year and can be removed from the 2017 CFP. Ms. Hite advised that, since the last meeting, the CIP was updated to highlight "land acquisition" as a goal. As requested by the Board at their last meeting, Mr. English provided a handout that lists the needs that were identified by the Capital Facilities Manager for the 2017 Citywide Capital Renewal Program. He explained that, in past years, the budget for capital facilities maintenance has been about $55,000. The Capital Facilities Manager requested that this amount be increased up to $400,000 to quick start the program of investing in and maintaining the City's existing facilities. The projects include roof repairs, painting, carpeting, seal coating, etc. Mr. English recalled that the Board also asked him to provide more information about traffic volumes on SR-104. He advised that the State does a number of traffic counts along the highway starting from the Ferry Terminal all the way to Interstate 5. While the 2016 counts are not available, the 2015 counts can be compared to previous years. The counts conclude that there was no increase in traffic volume from the ferry to 238th Street, but there was a small increase of 2% from 2401h Street to Interstate 5. At their last meeting, Board Member Crank asked how new development along SR-104 might impact traffic volumes. He learned that the new development she referred to was actually permitted by Snohomish County so the City does not have any transportation data. However, it is likely that the development had very little impact to the overall traffic volumes on the highway. Mr. English recalled that, at their last meeting, Vice Chair Rubenkonig asked about the possibility of adding an "all -walk" phase at the intersection of 2121h Street and 76t1i Avenue to provide a safer pedestrian access for high school students. He acknowledged that the concept has been used in select locations across the country, and it amounts to adding another phase to the signal timing that closes the movement of traffic on all four lanes of the intersection to allow pedestrians to cross. He explained that the City's current Level of Service (LOS) Standard for arterials is LOS D or better, and the proposed project would improve the intersection to LOS D. If an all -walk phase were added, the standard at the intersection would change to LOS E. He reminded the Board that the City secured a $3.96 million grant from the Congestion, Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Fund, and the purpose of the grant was to improve air quality by reducing emissions and congestion. As currently proposed, the intersection project would reduce emissions for carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbon and oxides of nitrogen. The benefit of the project is that reducing congestion will bring down emissions and that is why the City received the funding. It would be difficult to change the project to add an all -walk phase because it would reduce the LOS standard and increase emissions. Staff is proposing that the project be constructed as currently designed. Mr. English summarized his presentation by reviewing that after the public hearing the Board will be asked to forward a recommendation to the City Council. The CIP and CFP, along with the Board's recommendation, will be presented to the City Council for a study session, followed by a public hearing on November I't Planning Board Minutes October 12, 2016 Page 5 Packet Pg. 327 7.2.d Chair Lovell opened the public portion of the hearing. However, there was no one in the audience, and the public portion of the hearing was subsequently closed. Board Member Crank asked if the overlay project on 84th Avenue between 220th Street and 212th Street would take place while school is in session. Mr. English said that, if all goes well, the intent is to do the work during the summer when school is on break. Board Member Crank said she is glad to hear that the City's goal is to do the Waterfront Redevelopment Project in tandem with the Senior Center's Waterfront Center Project. She said she serves on the Senior Center Board, and the plan to talk about fundraising and strategies at their upcoming retreat. Board Member Crank referred to the funding set aside for land acquisition and asked if there are targeted properties the City is looking to acquire. Ms. Hite answered that the PROS Plan identifies areas of the City that are not as well served by parks and open space, and the City will look for opportunities to acquire additional land to serve these neighborhoods. In addition, the City is always looking for opportunities to acquire properties along Shell Creek and other properties that run parallel to the watersheds. However, the City must also consider the need to maintain the park space it already has. It requires a balancing act. Board Member Crank thanked Mr. English for providing data about traffic volumes on SR-104. She appreciates that data is needed to make a case for improvements, and she looks forward to comparing 2016 data to previous years to determine the impact of new development. She noted that, just tonight, the light stopped blinking because there was an emergency vehicle coming through the intersection. People are accustomed to the light blinking, and a car was almost hit when it did not stop at the light. She said she hopes new data will support the need for a study to see if mitigation is needed. Board Member Cheung asked if the Traffic Engineer's analysis of an all -walk phase at the intersection of 212th Street and 76th Avenue considered that the phase would only need to be activated during certain times of the day (when students arrive, when students leave, and when students go to lunch). Mr. English acknowledged that the phase could be timed to only activate during certain times of the day, but the morning period when students are arriving at school is also during the peak commute period. Board Member Cheung asked if LOS D could be maintained with an all -walk phase that only operate during certain times of the day as described above. Mr. English said more traffic modeling would be needed to answer that question. Vice Chair Rubenkonig commented that adding an all -walk phase at the intersection of 76th Avenue and 212th Street would minimize the pedestrians' exposure to pollution. Mr. English agreed that is possible, but it would depend on when the pedestrian reaches the intersection. Depending on the phase of the light, a pedestrian may have to wait longer if an all -walk phase were added. He also voiced concern that students may get impatient waiting for the signal and cross against traffic. Chair Lovell asked if the Traffic Engineer has solicited feedback from the Edmonds School District relative to the proposed changes at the intersection of 76th Avenue and 212th Street. Mr. English answered that the City has worked closely with the school district to coordinate the phasing of the intersection improvements, and the school district has voiced support for the proposed changes. The district has not requested an all -walk phase. Ms. Clark said she uses the intersection at 76th Avenue and 212th Street often, and it could use some work. She often has to wait about five minutes to cross the street, and she knows that some students become impatient and jay walk. Mr. English explained that, currently, the intersection lacks turning movement, which means it takes longer for cars and pedestrians to get through the sequence. With the proposed changes, the left turn lanes going north/south will go at the same time, which allows the light to cycle faster. The same would be done for the east/west lanes. Board Member Cheung asked if the intersection improvements would include left turns on a blinking light. Mr. English said they have not made a firm decision on this option because it could lead to conflicts with the high school. A left -turn arrow would hold up pedestrians. With a flashing yellow light for left turns, there is a potential that a student could be hit while using a crosswalk if a driver sees a break in traffic and initiates the turn. Staff will continue to evaluate the option, but his first thought is that it would not be appropriate in this location. Board Member Cheung asked if it would be possible to time the lights so that the flashing turn is available only when school is not in session. Mr. English agreed that is a possibility. Planning Board Minutes October 12, 2016 Page 6 Packet Pg. 328 Chair Lovell thanked Ms. Hite and Mr. English for providing responses to the issues and concerns raised by the Board at their last meeting. He asked that these responses also be conveyed to the City Council for consideration in their review of the CIP and CFP. Chair Lovell requested clarification on the funding that is currently available for the Veteran's Plaza. Ms. Hite answered that the City will contribute $30,000 to the project, and the remaining portion of the $550,000 cost will come from fundraising. Chair Lovell asked if the City is contemplating that work will start on the Waterfront Center and Waterfront Redevelopment Projects in 2017. Ms. Hite said the goal is to do the projects in tandem. However, it is possible that the Senior Center will not reach its funding goal in time to complete the project during the fish window, and the Waterfront Center Project will have to be postponed until 2018. Based on grant funding, it may be necessary for the City to move forward with the Waterfront Redevelopment Project in 2017. Again, she said the City's goal is to move the two projects forward in 2017, hoping that the Senior Center will be ready, as well. Board Member Crank advised that the Senior Center's target is to break ground on the project in September of 2017. Ms. Hite emphasized that there is a fish window that limits when waterfront development can occur, and it happens to be during the summer months. Ms. Crank said the Senior Center Board's goal is to meet that window. Board Member Robles asked for clarification of the small boat launch that is proposed as part of the waterfront redevelopment project. Ms. Hite said this would be a hand launch facility that is not meant for large boats. She referred to the proposed design of the project and noted the location of the boat launch. She explained that the ramp would serve a dual purpose for launching small watercraft (kayaks, paddleboards, etc.) and providing Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) access. Board Member Stewart referred to Page 150 of the Staff Report that describes the Edmonds Marsh Feasibility and Restoration/Walkway Project, which is estimated to cost $155,000. She asked if the project would include a new walkway around the marsh. Ms. Hite said the project includes restoration of the current walkway, which is queued up for 2017. However, the work done by the Western Washington University Students as part of the Sustainable Cities Project will include consideration of a boardwalk all the way around the marsh. Several community citizens have volunteered to participate on a focus group to discuss the concept further. Board Member Stewart asked if the walkway that is proposed in front of the Ebb Tide Condominiums would be ADA accessible. Ms. Hite answered that there would be two sections of stairs to provide broader accessibility, but the boardwalk would all be accessible. The boardwalk proposed in front of the Ebb Tide Condominiums would connect the north and south portions of the existing boardwalk together. Board Member Stewart noted that there are redundancies in the CIP, as some projects appear to be listed twice, and the dollar amounts do not match up. Ms. Hite said the redundancy has to do with the different funds that are used for the projects. In many cases, funding will come from a variety of sources and/or funds. Board Member Stewart said she is glad that the documents identify certain properties the City is keeping an eye on for park acquisition. There is forest land in the northern portion of the City that has been on and off the market for quite some time and is part of the Perrinville Creek Drainage Basin. There is a real desire in the neighborhood for the City to acquire this property, and it can only happen if funding is available. She suggested that the City allocate a significantly larger amount in 2017 to allow the City to competitively bid for the property. Ms. Hite commented that this would be difficult. She explained that Mayor Earling weighs out all of the priorities for the City and attempts to balance all needs when allocating the REET dollars in the 126 Fund. For example, the 126 Fund is also used to support the Street Preservation and Facilities Restoration Programs, which both have a backlog of projects. In addition to acquiring more park and open space, it is also important for the City to adequately maintain their existing properties. However, she agreed to make note of Board Member Stewart's request when presenting the CIP and CFP to the City Council. Board Member Stewart commented that the City could establish a donor program to provide funding support for future park and open space acquisition. Ms. Hite agreed and said that she has been working with Council Member Mesaros to pursue this option further. Board Member Stewart agreed to assist in the effort. Planning Board Minutes October 12, 2016 Page 7 Packet Pg. 329 7.2.d Vice Chair Rubenkonig requested clarification relative to the schedule for the Sunset Avenue Walkway Project, which is described on Page 58 of the Staff Report. Mr. English reviewed that staff provided a report to the City Council in August relative to the concept of building a walkway on the west side of Sunset Avenue. Currently, there is temporary striping that designates a walkway area, but there has been quite a lot of discussion about where the parking should be located, what kind of parking should be provided, etc. Parallel with the Sunset Avenue Walkway Project is a utility improvement project. The City is considering options for improving the lift station on Sunset Avenue south of Caspers Street to install a new gravity line to take sewage to the treatment plant rather than having to pump it. A waterline also needs to be replaced. No permanent walkway or designated parking would be constructed until after the utility work has been completed in 2017. He agreed to clarify the schedule in the project description. Vice Chair Rubenkonig observed that the proposed sidewalk project on 232nd Street SW from 100th Avenue W to SR-104 (Page 60 of the Staff Report) would provide the fastest walking route to Westgate from the intersection with SR-104, and the City should encourage people to use it as such. She also suggested that the CIP and CFP should include a listing of the sources recommending action to help citizens know how long a project has been in the making, and the embedded vicinity maps may be easier to navigate if compass points were included. While providing footage of the sidewalk projects has begun, it could be completed, and highlighting project areas could assist the reader in identifying the size and location of the proposed work. Vice Chair Rubenkonig asked for clarification about the Pine Ridge Forest Management Study, which is described on Page 105 of the Staff Report. In particular, she asked if the City has done similar studies for other parks in the past. Ms. Hite explained that the Public Works, Planning and Parks Departments are coordinating an effort to complete an Urban Forestry Management Plan for the entire City in 2016 and 2017, but there are a lot of older trees in Pine Ridge Park that warrant an evaluation to assess the City's liability, etc. Chair Rubenkonig pointed out that the acronym WWTP (Page 117 of the Staff Report) should be spelled out as the Waste Water Treatment Plant. She also referred to the Table that lists the publicly -owned facilities in Edmonds and other nearby areas and suggested that the Civic Center Playfield should be removed from the list of school district properties and added to the list of City -owned properties. VICE CHAIR RUBENKONIG MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) AND CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN (CFP) FOR 2016 THROUGH 2O22 TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL BASED ON THE COMMENTS PROVIDED BY THE BOARD. BOARD MEMBER STEWART SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. THE BOARD RECESSED THE MEETING FOR A FIVE-MINUTE BREAK AT 8:20 P.M. THE MEETING RECONVENED AT 8:27 P.M. 2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS Mr. Chave reviewed that the most recent Comprehensive Plan update was completed in 2015, and included a major review as required by the Growth Management Act. Typically, the City undertakes relatively minor amendments in intervening years. This year's amendments will include the following: Amending the Comprehensive Plan to incorporate the updated CFP. Amending the Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan to include the adopted Marina Beach Master Plan as a new "Appendix D." Appendix A would also be amended to acknowledge and reflect the Marina Beach Master Plan. Amending the Capital Facilities Element to add an implementation action that would read, "Develop level of service standards for key public facilities by the end of 2017 and consider including the standards in the Comprehensive Plan." In addition to the amendments listed above, Mr. Chave advised that two more substantial amendments are currently being developed: The Water Comprehensive Plan and the Street Tree Plan. Drafts of each of the plans are due before the end of Planning Board Minutes October 12, 2016 Page 8 Packet Pg. 330 UP / CIP COMPARISON (2016 TO 2017) 7.2.e ADDED PROJECTS FUND I PROJECT NAME I CFP I DESCRIPTION 112 84th Ave. W Overlay from 220th St. SW to 212th St. SW Complete overlay along 84th Ave. W from 220th St. SW to 212th St. SW 112 220th St. SW Traffic Signal Coordination from Hwy. 99 to 76th Ave. W Improve traffic flow along 220th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 76th Ave. W with the installation of coordination system 112 236th St. SW Walkway from Hwy 99 to 76th Ave. W X Improve pedestrian safety along 236th St. SW from Hwy 99 to 76th Ave. W 112 238th St. SW Walkway from Hwy 99 to 76th Ave. W X Improve pedestrian safety along 238th St. SW from Hwy 99 to 76th Ave. W 112 80th Ave. W / 180th St. SW Walkway from 188th St. SW to OVD X Improve pedestrian safety along 80th / 180th St. SW from 188th St. SW to OVD 112 189th PI. W Walkway from 80th Ave. W to 76th Ave W X Improve pedestrian safety along 89th Pl. W from 80th Ave. W to 76th Ave. W 112 15th St. SW Walkway from 8th Ave. S to 9th Ave. S X Improve pedestrian safety along 15th St. SW from 8th Ave. S to 9th Ave. S 112 Maplewood Dr. Walkway from Main St. to 200th St. SW X Improve pedestrian safety along Maplewood Dr. from Main St. to 200th St. SW 112 95th PI. W Walkway from 224th St. SW to 220th St. SW X Improve pedestrian safety along 95th PI. W from 224th St. SW to 220th St. SW 112 Citywide Crossing Enhancement Improve safety at various pedestrian crossings throughout the City 016 Museum exterior door replacements Replace non -historic doors to comply with historic registry specifications 016 Museum East window replacement double hung sash approved by State Historic Architect 016 Library West deck water seal and repair parking ceiling Waterproof deck and repair pan -deck ceiling at covered parking 016 FAC metal flashing replacement and repair Remove and replace failed metal flashing as needed to eliminate water intrusion 016 PW replace failed insulated window units Replace glazing at failed window units 016 CH replace failed insulated window units Replace glazing at failed window units 016 FAC add building controls to both boiler systems Add Alerton building controls to existing boilers 016 FAC steam radiator retrofits Retrofit steam radiators as needed to replace abandoned or leaking radiators 016 Exterior building washing, sealing and painting Wash seal and paint building exteriors 016 Replace carpeting and flooring Replace warn carpeting and flooring as necessary 016 CH electrical infastructure survey and replacement iSurvey and replace electrical infastructure at CH, phase 1 of 5 016 Clean and maintenance City facility roofs Cleand inspect and maintain roofs of all City Facilities 016 CH Planned maintenance and replacemnet of HVAC Replace failed HVAC unit and maintain all existing end of life HVAC infastructure. Yearly program 016 Retro comission City building Retro Commission a City building to bring HVAC operation to engineered specifications and optimize DDC system and energy performance. 016 CH heat tape installation Add freeze protection to uninsulated vulnerable water pipes 016 Museum structural analysis of upper fagade Analysis of upper fagade structrure since previous stop gap repair measure 016 Failed sash and glazing replacement Replace failed window sash and glazing at various non -historic locations 016 MCH replace damaged and warn flooring at kitchen and entry Replace existing damaged and warn flooring at Kitchen and entry N N O N ti O N d W U d U cD CO) O C O N �L E O U d U a U- U M t X W c d E t v tv r Q Page 1 of 4 Packet Pg. 331 125 Civic Center Grand stand removal x Consistent with Civic planning process, master plan 125 Community Garden Consistent with PROS plan. 125 City Park Storage buidling Replacement from fire. 125 Waterfront Redevelopment/Walkway completion Consistent with PROS plan. 125 Upgrade Curb Ramps to ADA Stds 2017 Project budget will be funded by REET 2 revenue. 125 Audible Pedestrian Signals 2017 Project budget will be funded by REET 2 revenue. 125 Minor Sidewalk Program 2017 Project budget will be funded by REET 2 revenue. 126 Hwy 99 Gateway / Revitalization (Access Management) 1 12017 Project budget will be funded by REET 1 revenue. 126 220th St. Signal Coordination 1 12017 Project budget will be funded by REET 1 revenue. 132 Civic Stadium Demolition Consistent with PROS plan, master plan 132 Waterfront Revel opment/Walkway Completion Consistient with PROS plan 132 Community Garden Consistent with PROS plan. 132 City Park Storage buidling Replacement from fire. 421 2023 Replacement Program Estimated future costs for waterline replacements. 421 2017 Waterline Overlays Estimated future costs for road repairs due to waterline replacements. 423 2023 Sewer Replacement/Rehab/Improvements Estimated future costs for sewerline replacements/rehab/impr. 423 2017 Sewerline Overlays Estimated future costs for road repairs due to sewerline repl/rehab/impr. 7.2.e Page 2 of 4 Packet Pg. 332 UP / CIP COMPARISON (2016 TO 2017) 7.2.e DELETED PROJECTS I CFP I DESCRIPTION FUND PROJECT NAME 112 Five Corners Roundabout X Completed in 2016 112 Arterial Street Signal Coordination Identified as 220th St. SW Traffic Signal Coordination from Hwy 99 to 76th Ave. W. 112 Citywide Protective / Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion Completed in 2016 112 Type 2 Pavement Markers Project to be addressed as part of future overlay projects 112 15th St. SW from Edmonds Way to 8th Ave. S X Completed in 2016 112 Transportation Plan Update Completed in 2015 112 SR-104 Transportation Corridor Study lCompleted in 2015 112 Traffic Calming Program X I Non -growth related project 113 Multimodal Transportation Fund X Fund Deleted per City Council action on October 18, 2016 016 Council/Court Chamber AV upgrade Audio Visual upgrade project 016 MCH gutter replacement Replacement of rain gutters 016 Estimate of CH security needs Estimate and survey of necessary security upgrades 016 FAC spot flooring replacement in Beach Ranger office Replace carpeting at Ranger offices 016 FS16 Generator replacement Replace emergency generator at FS 421 2014 Replacement Program I lCompleted in 2015. 421 2015 Waterline Overlays I lComoleted in 2015. 422 Improvements - Dayton 3rd to 9th This project was combined with the waterline/sewerline project that covers that same area. 422 Storm System Video Assessment Deleted. This project will be covered as part of operations and maintenance. Operations and maintenance will do this work as part of their operations and maintenance tasks. 423 2015 Sewerline Overlays Completed in 2015. 423 Lift Stations 3,4,5,9,10,11,12,14,15 Completed in 2015. 423 Phase 1 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Completed in 2015. 423 Phase 2 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Completed in 2015. Page 3 of 4 Packet Pg. 333 CFP / CIP COMPARISON (2016 TO 2017) 7.2.e CHANGED PROJECTS FUND PROJECT NAME CFP CHANGE 016 1 CH security upgrades SecurityUpgrades on hold until recommendations and estimate arrive. 423.76 Repair and Replacement The Secondary Clarifier #3 Structural Repair contract was awarded in 2016. The contractor will not be able to complete the work by the Oct. 2016 so the project may need to be extended. Pagoda repairs have been placed on hold for time being. 423.76 Upgrades Offsite Flow Telemetry project was completed in 2016. The Control System Upgrade will replace aging control system equipment, provide for redundancy and upgrade the operating platform. The 600 PLC is the final element and is scheduled for spring 2017. The project completion was pushed back in order to coordinate work with Phase 5 Energy Project. The SSI project is on hold awaiting EPA approval to install and test the mercury modules. We continue to report compliance status on a monthly basis. The Phase 4 energy improvement project is in close out. The Phase 5 Energy Improvement project has been started. By the end of 2016 the solids conveyor and sludge hopper should be upgraded and the new 126 HP blower has been installed. The project has given us the opportunity Ito optimize the aeration control system. 423.76 Studies and Consulting In the future we will be to study Peracetic Acid disinfection however this may put off until 2018. Page 4 of 4 Packet Pg. 334 7.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/1/2016 Public Hearing: Update to the 2016 Traffic Impact Fees and new Section 3.36 of ECC (20 min.) Staff Lead: Phil Williams Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History On November 2, 2015, the City Council had further discussion on the proposed 2015 traffic impact fees. On October 13, 2015, staff presented the updated 2015 Traffic Impact Fees to Council. On September 20, 2016, staff presented the updated 2016 Traffic Impact Fees to Council. Staff Recommendation Consider public comment and discuss possible changes and/or forward the item to the consent agenda for approval at a future City Council meeting. Narrative A public hearing is scheduled to receive comments on the proposed recommendation to increase the transportation impact fee to $5,530 per PM peak hour trip. The increase would be phased in over three equal annual steps, beginning in January 2017. The cost per trip would be $2,543.01 in 2017; $4,036.61 in 2018; and $5,530.21 in 2019. The traffic impact fee rate is updated during the adoption of the Transportation Plan (approximately every six years). The rate is determined by identifying all the intersections operating below the City's Level of Standards (LOS D), determining their total costs, and identifying the total number of projected growth trips. In 2010 following the adoption of the 2009 Transportation Plan, a traffic impact fee of $1,049.41 per trip was adopted. The 2015 Transportation Plan was adopted in 2015 and the proposed updated fee was $5,530 per trip. During the November 2, 2015 Council meeting, this rate was compared with nearby jurisdictions and several alternatives were presented on how this new rate could be implemented. As shown in the new section of the ECC (modified from Section18.82 to Section 3.36), a phased increase over a 3-year period (_> increase of $1,493.60 / year) is being proposed, reaching the calculated amount of $5,530 per trip by 2019. The traffic impact fees for the most commonly used land use categories in Edmonds are provided in a table in Section 3.36.125. For all properties within the Downtown Business District (BD zone), the Specialty Retail ITE land use category will now apply when calculating the traffic impact fees (Land Use Code 814). Previously a business within this zone might have been identified as a sit-down restaurant, general office, specialty retail, or other. This change provides a unified approach to charging impact fees throughout the downtown core. City Code Section 3.36.040 Exemptions was revised to clarify that the exemption from impact fees applied when a structure is replaced with a structure of similar size when a Packet Pg. 335 7.3 building permit application is submitted to the City within 12 months of demolition. The previous code language stated the 12 month period of time was from demolition of the structure to replacement of the structure. Attachments: Proposed Ordinance Redlined Ordinance Presentation Packet Pg. 336 7.3.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE IMPACT FEE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 3.36 OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, chapter 18.82 of the Edmonds City Code ("Traffic Impact Fee" Section) has been moved to chapter 3.36 of the Edmonds City Code; WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds updated the Transportation Plan in 2015 and a revised traffic impact fee is being proposed with a phased increase over the next three years; WHEREAS, the land use category for any property in the Downtown Business (BD) zone used for the purpose of calculating the traffic impact fee will be Specialty Retail (ITE Land Use Code of 814); NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 3.36 of the Edmonds City Code, entitled "IMPACT FEES," is hereby amended to read as follows (text added is shown as underlined; deleted text is shown as Chapter 3.36 IMPACT FEES Sections: 3.36.010 Findings and authority. 3.36.020 Definitions. 3.36.030 Assessment and payment of impact fees. 3.36.040 Exemptions. 3.36.050 Credits. 3.36.060 Tax adjustments. 3.36.070 Appeals. 3.36.080 Establishment of impact fee accounts. Q -1- Packet Pg. 337 7.3.a 3.36.090 Refunds. 3.36.100 Use of funds. 3.36.110 Review. 3.36.120 Park impact fee rates. 3.36.125 Street impact fee rates. 3.36.130 Independent fee calculations. 3.36.140 Existing authority unimpaired. 3.36.150 Procedures guide. 3.36.160 Deferral system for single-family residences. 3.36.010 Findings and authority. The city council of the city of Edmonds (the "council") hereby finds and determines that new growth and development in the city of Edmonds will create additional demand and need for public facilities in the city of Edmonds, and the council finds that new growth and development should pay a proportionate share of the cost of new facilities needed to serve the new growth and development. The city of Edmonds has conducted extensive studies documenting the procedures for measuring the impact of new developments on public facilities, has prepared the rate study and procedures guide for park impact fees, has prepared the rate study and procedures guide for transportation impact fees, and hereby incorporates these studies into this title by reference. Therefore, pursuant to Chapter 82.02 RCW, the council adopts the ordinance codified in this chapter to assess impact fees for parks and streets. The provisions of this chapter shall be liberally construed in order to carry out the purposes of the council in establishing the impact fee program. These fees can and will only be applied to projects resulting from city-wide development growth. These fees cannot be used to mitigate existing shortfalls of the park system or street system. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.020 Definitions. The following words and terms shall have the following meanings for the purposes of this chapter unless the context clearly requires otherwise. Terms otherwise not defined herein shall be defined pursuant to RCW 82.02.090 and ECDC Title 21 or given their usual and customary meaning. A. "Accessory dwelling unit" is defined in ECDC 21.05.015. B. "Building permit" means an official document or certification which is issued by the building official and which authorizes the construction, alteration, enlargement, conversion, reconstruction, remodeling, rehabilitation, erection, demolition, moving or repair of a building or structure. C. "Capital facilities plan" means the capital facilities plan element of a comprehensive plan adopted by the city of Edmonds pursuant to Chapter 36.70A RCW, and such plan as amended. There are many references in state statutes to the "capital facilities plan" (CFP) as the basis for projects that are eligible for funding by impact fees. The parks element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan fulfills the requirements of RCW 82.02.050 et seq., pertaining to a "capital facilities plan," and is considered to be the "capital facilities plan" (CFP) for the purpose of Edmonds' impact fees for parks. The transportation element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan fulfills the requirements of RCW 82.02.050 et seq., pertaining to a "capital facilities plan," and is considered to be the "capital facilities plan" (CFP) for the purpose of Edmonds' impact fees for streets. Depending on the context, references to a CFP in the impact fee chapter, rate study, and procedures guide are interpreted as referring to either the parks element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan or the transportation element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan, including the projects eligible for impact fees listed in Appendix C of the procedures guide for the transportation impact fees. D. "City" means the city of Edmonds. E. "Council" means the city council of the city of Edmonds. F. "Department" means the development services department. G. "Development activity" means any construction, expansion, or change in the use of a building or structure that creates additional demand and need for public facilities. H. "Development approval" means any written authorization from the city of Edmonds which authorizes the commencement of a development activity. I. "Director" means the director designated by the mayor to administer the impact fee program or that director's designee. I "Dwelling unit" is defined in ECDC 21.20.050. K. "Encumbered" means to reserve, set aside, or otherwise earmark the impact fees in order to pay for commitments, contractual obligations, or other liabilities incurred for public facilities. L. "Feepayer" is a person, corporation, partnership, an incorporated association, or any other similar entity, or department or bureau of any governmental entity or municipal corporation commencing a land development activity -2- Packet Pg. 338 7.3.a which creates the demand for additional capital facilities, and which requires the issuance of a building permit. "Feepayer" includes an applicant for an impact fee credit. M. Reserved. N. "Hearing examiner" is defined in ECDC 21.40.010. O. "Impact fee" means a payment of money imposed by the city of Edmonds on development activity pursuant to this chapter as a condition of granting development approval in order to pay for the public facilities needed to serve new growth and development. "Impact fee" does not include a reasonable permit fee, an application fee, the administrative fee for collecting and handling school impact fees, the cost of reviewing independent fee calculations or any other charge or fee based upon the administrative costs of processing a development application. P. "Impact fee account" or "account" means the account(s) established for each type of public facility for which impact fees are collected. The accounts shall be established pursuant to ECC 3.36.080 and 3.36.090 and comply with the requirements of RCW 82.02.070. Q. "Independent fee calculation" means the impact fee calculation and/or economic documentation prepared by a feepayer to support the assessment of an impact fee other than by the use of the rates listed in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125, or the calculations prepared by the director where none of the fee categories or fee amounts in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 accurately describe or capture the impacts of the new development on public facilities. R. "Interest" means the average interest rate earned in the last fiscal year by the city of Edmonds. S. Reserved. T. "Occupancy permit" means the permit issued by the city of Edmonds authorizing the building to be occupied where a development activity results in a change in use of the preexisting structure, or the creation of a new use where none previously existed. U. "Owner" means the owner of record of real property, or a person with an unrestricted written option to purchase property; provided, that if the real property is being purchased under a recorded real estate contract, the purchaser shall be considered the owner of the real property. V. "Procedures guide" means the administrative guidance document prepared by the director pursuant to ECC 3.36.150. W. "Project improvements" means site improvements and facilities that are planned and designed to provide service for a particular development or users of the project and are not system improvements. No improvement or facility included in a capital facilities plan adopted by the council shall be considered a project improvement. X. "Public facilities" means the public parks, open space and recreation facilities owned by the city of Edmonds or other governmental entities in the context of the park impact fee and means the public streets and roads owned by the city of Edmonds or other governmental entities in the context of the street impact fee. Y. "Rate study" means the "Rate Study for Impact Fees for Parks, Open Space and Recreation Facilities," city of Edmonds, dated July 12, 2013, in the context of the park impact fee and means the "Rate Study for Impact Fees for Roads," city of Edmonds, dated October 29, 2009, in the context of the street impact fee. Z. "Residential' or "residential development" means all types of construction intended for human habitation. This shall include, but is not limited to, single-family, duplex, triplex, and other multifamily development. This also includes the residential portion of mixed -use developments. AA. Reserved. BB. "Service area" means the entire corporate limits of the city of Edmonds. CC. "Significant past tax payment" means taxes exceeding five percent of the amount of the impact fee, and which were paid prior to the date the impact fee is assessed and were earmarked or proratable to the same system improvements for which the impact fee is assessed. DD. Reserved. EE. "State" means the state of Washington. FF. Reserved. GG. "System improvements" means public facilities that are included in the city of Edmonds capital facilities plan and are designed to provide service to service areas within the community at large, in contrast to project improvements. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.030 Assessment and payment of impact fees. A. Required. The city shall collect impact fees, based on the rates in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125, from any applicant seeking development approval from the city for any development activity within the city as provided herein, including the expansion of existing structures or uses or change of existing uses that creates additional demand for public facilities. -3- Packet Pg. 339 7.3.a 1. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include miscellaneous improvements that do not add any demand for public facilities, including, but not limited to, fences, walls, swimming pools accessory to a residential use, and signs. 2. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include replacement of a residential structure with a new residential structure of the same type at the same site or lot when such replacement occurs within 12 months of the demolition or destruction of the prior residential structure. Replacement of a residential structure with a new residential structure of the same type shall be interpreted to include any residential structure for which there is no increase in the number of residential units. 3. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include alterations, expansions, enlargement, remodeling, rehabilitation or conversion of an existing dwelling unit where no additional dwelling units are created and the use is not changed. Note: accessory dwelling units (ADU) are not considered to create additional dwelling units because ECDC 20.21.020 does not consider ADUs as increasing the overall density of a single- family residential neighborhood. B. Timing and Calculation of Fees. Impact fees shall be assessed based upon the impact fee rates in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit, including but not limited to change of use permit or remodel permit. 1. For a change in use of an existing building or dwelling unit, including any alteration, expansion, replacement or new accessory building, the impact fee shall be the applicable impact fee for the new use, less an amount equal to the applicable impact fee for the prior use. 2. For mixed use developments, impact fees shall be imposed for the proportionate share of each land use based on the applicable measurement in the impact fee rates set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125. 3. Where the impact fees imposed are determined by the square footage of the development, the building official will establish the gross floor area created by the proposed development. 4. Applicants that have been awarded credits prior to the submittal of the complete building permit application pursuant to ECC 3.36.050 shall submit, along with the complete building permit application, a copy of the letter or certificate prepared by the director pursuant to ECC 3.36.050 setting forth the dollar amount of the credit awarded. 5. Applicants shall pay an administrative fee that covers the cost of staff time in administering the impact fee program. The amount of the administrative fee shall be established and updated from time to time by resolution of the city council. C. Payment. Unless deferred pursuant to ECC 3.36.160, impact fees shall be paid at the time the building permit or business license is issued by the city. The department shall not issue the required building permit or business license or other approval unless and until the impact fees set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 have been paid in the amount that they exceed exemptions or credits provided pursuant to ECC 3.36.040 or 3.36.050; provided, that building permits may be issued without impact fee payment when payment is deferred in accordance with ECC 3.36.160. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.040 Exemptions. A. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from the payment of all impact fees under this chapter: 1. Alteration of an existing nonresidential structure that does not involve a change in use and does not expand the usable space or add any residential units; 2. Miscellaneous improvements that do not expand usable space or add any residential units, including, but not limited to, fences, walls, swimming pools, and signs; 3. Demolition or moving of a structure; 4. Expansion of an existing structure that results in the addition of 100 square feet or less of gross floor area; 5. Replacement of a structure with a new structure of the same size and use at the same site or lot when a building permit application for such replacement is submitted to the City within 12 months of the demolition or destruction of the prior structure. Replacement of a structure with a new structure of the same size shall be interpreted to include any structure for which the gross square footage of the building will not be increased by more than 100 square feet; or 6. Alterations, expansions, enlargement, remodeling, rehabilitation or conversion of an existing dwelling unit where no additional dwelling units are created and the use is not changed (accessory dwelling units (ADU) are not considered to create additional dwelling units because ECDC 20.21.020 does not consider ADUs as increasing the overall density of a single-family residential neighborhood, and because the city's traffic model does not assign additional trips to the network as a result of ADUs). B. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from the payment of park impact fees under this chapter: Q Packet Pg. 340 7.3.a 1. Low-income housing provided by nonprofit organizations such as, but not limited to, Habitat for Humanity. Owners of low-income single-family dwelling units, condominiums and other low-income housing shall execute and record a lien against the property, in favor of the city, for a period of 10 years guaranteeing that the dwelling unit will continue to be used for low-income housing or that impact fees from which the low-income housing is exempted, plus interest, shall be paid. The lien against the property shall be subordinate only to the lien for general taxes. In the event that the development is no longer used for low-income rental housing, the owner shall pay the city the impact fee from which the owner or any prior owner was exempt, plus interest at the statutory rate. Any claim for an exemption for low-income owner occupied housing must be made no later than the time of application for a building permit. Any claim not so made shall be deemed waived. C. The director shall be authorized to determine whether a particular development activity falls within an exemption identified in this section, in any other section, or under other applicable law. Determinations of the director shall be in writing and shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in ECC 3.36.070. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 20131. 3.36.050 Credits. A. Pursuant to the requirement of RCW 82.02.060(4), a feepayer shall be entitled to a credit for the value of any dedication of land for, improvement to, or new construction of any system improvements provided by the feepayer, to facilities that are identified in the capital facilities plan and that are required by the city as a condition of approving the development activity. B. The director shall determine if requests for credits meet the criteria in subsection (A) of this section. C. For each request for a credit or credits, the director shall select an appraiser or the feepayer may select an independent appraiser acceptable to the director. D. The appraiser must be prequalified by the city and shall not have a fiduciary or personal interest in the property being appraised. A description of the appraiser's certification shall be included with the appraisal, and the appraiser shall certify that he/she does not have a fiduciary or personal interest in the property being appraised. E. The appraiser shall be directed to determine the total value of the dedicated land, improvements, and/or construction provided by the feepayer on a case -by -case basis. F. The feepayer shall pay for the cost of the appraisal or request that the cost of the appraisal be deducted from the credit which the director may be providing to the feepayer, in the event that a credit is awarded. G. After receiving the appraisal, the director shall provide the applicant with a letter or certificate setting forth the dollar amount of the credit, the reason for the credit, the legal description of the site donated where applicable, and the legal description or other adequate description of the project or development to which the credit may be applied. The applicant must sign and date a duplicate copy of such letter or certificate indicating his/her agreement to the terms of the letter or certificate, and return such signed document to the director before the impact fee credit will be awarded. The failure of the applicant to sign, date, and return such document within 60 calendar days shall nullify the credit. H. No credit shall be given for project improvements required of the development by city code and/or SEPA; only dedications in excess of those required by law are eligible for credit. In no event shall this provision be interpreted to authorize cash payment. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to limit the discretion of the city council to decline to accept any proposed dedication. I. A feepayer can request that a credit or credits for impact fees be awarded to him/her for significant past tax payments. For each request for a credit or credits for significant past tax payments for impact fees, the feepayer shall submit receipts and a calculation of past tax payments earmarked for or proratable to the particular system improvement. The director shall determine the amount of credits, if any, for significant past tax payments for public facilities. I Any claim for credit must be made no later than 20 calendar days after the submission of an application for a building permit. The failure to timely file such a claim shall constitute a final bar to later request any such credit. K. Determinations made by the director pursuant to this section shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in ECC 3.36.070. L. A feepayer may, in the alternative, appeal an assessment or mitigation requirement which he believes exceeds the total which may lawfully be imposed. See ECDC 18.50.020(C). [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.060 Tax adjustments. Pursuant to and consistent with the requirements of RCW 82.02.060, the rate study has provided adjustments for future taxes to be paid by the new development which are earmarked or proratable to the same new public facilities which will serve the new development. The impact fee rates in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 have been reasonably -5- Packet Pg. 341 7.3.a adjusted for taxes and other revenue sources which are anticipated to be available to fund public improvements. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.070 Appeals. A. Any feepayer may pay the impact fees imposed by this chapter under protest in order to obtain a building permit. B. Appeals regarding the amount of the impact fee imposed on any development activity may only be filed by the feepayer of the property where such development activity will occur. This provision shall control over any other provisions of city ordinance. C. The feepayer must first file a request for review regarding impact fees with the director, as provided herein: 1. The request shall be in writing on the form provided by the city; 2. The request for review by the director shall be filed within 14 calendar days of the feepayer's payment of the impact fees at issue. The failure to timely file such a request shall constitute a final bar to later seek such review; 3. An administrative fee will be imposed for the request for review by the director; this shall be the same as that imposed for a request for reconsideration of a staff decision; 4. The director shall issue his/her determination in writing within 14 days from the receipt of a request for review. D. Determinations of the director with respect to the applicability of the impact fees to a given development activity, the availability or value of a credit, or the director's decision concerning the independent fee calculation which is authorized in ECC 3.36.130, or the fees imposed by the director pursuant to ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125, or any other determination which the director is authorized to make pursuant to this chapter, can be appealed to the hearing examiner. E. The decision of the director may be appealed to the hearing examiner as a Type II decision. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.080 Establishment of impact fee accounts. A. Impact fee receipts shall be earmarked specifically and deposited in special interest -bearing accounts. B. There is hereby established a separate impact fee account for the park impact fees collected pursuant to this chapter, the park impact account. There is also hereby established a separate impact fee account for the street impact fees collected pursuant to this chapter, the street impact account. Funds withdrawn from these accounts must be used in accordance with the provisions of ECC 3.36.100 and applicable state law. Interest earned on the fees shall be retained in the respective accounts and expended for the purposes for which the impact fees were collected. C. On an annual basis, the finance director shall provide a report to the council on the impact fee accounts showing the source and amount of all monies collected, earned, or received, and the public improvements that were financed in whole or in part by impact fees. D. Impact fees shall be expended or encumbered within 10 years of receipt, unless the council identifies in written findings extraordinary and compelling reason or reasons for the city to hold the fees beyond the 10-year period. Under such circumstances, and prior to the expiration of the 10-year period, the council shall establish the period of time within which the impact fees shall be expended or encumbered. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.090 Refunds. A. If the city fails to expend or encumber the impact fees within 10 years of when the fees were paid or, where extraordinary or compelling reasons exist, such other time periods as established pursuant to ECC 3.36.080, the current owner of the property on which impact fees have been paid may receive a refund of such fees. In determining whether impact fees have been expended or encumbered, impact fees shall be considered expended or encumbered on a first -in, first -out basis. B. The city shall notify potential claimants by first class mail that they are eligible for an impact fee refund. This notification shall be done by first class mail deposited with the United States Postal Service at the last known address of such claimants. A potential claimant must be the owner of the property. C. Owners seeking a refund of impact fees must submit a written request for a refund of the fees to the director within one year of the date the right to claim the refund arises or the date that notice is given, whichever is later. D. Any impact fees for which no application for a refund has been made within this one-year period shall be retained by the city and expended on the appropriate public facilities. E. Refunds of impact fees under this section shall include any interest earned on the impact fees by the city. F. When the city seeks to terminate any or all components of the impact fee program, all unexpended or unencumbered funds from any terminated component or components, including interest earned, shall be refunded pursuant to this section. Upon the finding that any or all fee requirements are to be terminated, the city shall place notice of such termination and the availability of refunds in a newspaper of general circulation at least two times and Q Packet Pg. 342 7.3.a shall notify all potential claimants by first class mail at the last known address of the claimants. All funds available for refund shall be retained for a period of one year. At the end of one year, any remaining funds shall be retained by the city, but must be expended for the appropriate public facilities. This notice requirement shall not apply if there are no unexpended or unencumbered balances within the account or accounts being terminated. G. The city shall also refund to the current owner of property for which impact fees have been paid, including interest earned on the impact fees, if the development activity for which the impact fees were imposed did not occur; provided, that if the city has expended or encumbered the impact fees in good faith prior to the application for a refund, the director can decline to provide the refund. If within a period of three years, the same or subsequent owner of the property proceeds with the same or substantially similar development activity, the owner can petition the director for an offset. The petitioner must provide receipts of impact fees previously paid for a development of the same or substantially similar nature on the same property or some portion thereof. Determinations of the director shall be in writing and shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in ECC 3.36.070. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.100 Use of funds. A. Pursuant to this chapter, impact fees: 1. Shall be used for public improvements that will reasonably benefit new development; and 2. Shall not be imposed to make up for deficiencies in public facilities serving existing developments; and 3. Shall not be used for maintenance or operations. B. Impact fees may be spent for public improvements, including, but not limited to, planning, engineering, surveying, land acquisition, right-of-way acquisition, site improvements, necessary off -site improvements, construction, architectural, permitting, financing, and administrative expenses, applicable impact fees or mitigation costs, and any other expenses which can be capitalized. C. Impact fees may also be used to recoup public improvement costs previously incurred by the city to the extent that new growth and development will be served by the previously constructed improvements or incurred costs. D. In the event that bonds or similar debt instruments are or have been issued for the advanced provision of public improvements for which impact fees may be expended, impact fees may be used to pay debt service on such bonds or similar debt instruments to the extent that the facilities or improvements provided are consistent with the requirements of this section and are used to serve the new development. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.110 Review. The fee rates set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 may be reviewed and adjusted by the council as it deems necessary and appropriate in conjunction with the annual update of the capital facilities plan element of the city's comprehensive plan. The fee rates may be adjusted 12 months after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter, or 12 months after the most recent review by the council. The council may determine the amount of any adjustment up or down and revise the fee rates set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.120 Park impact fee rates. The park impact fee rates in this section are generated from the formula for calculating impact fees set forth in the rate study, which is incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise provided for independent fee calculations in ECC 3.36.130, exemptions in ECC 3.36.040 and credits in ECC 3.36.050, all new developments in the city will be charged the park impact fee applicable to the type of development as follows: A. Effective October 1, 2014: 1. Single-family house: $2,734.05 per dwelling unit. 2. Multifamily residential housing: $2,340.16 per dwelling unit. 3. Nonresidential development: $1.34 per square foot. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.125 Street impact fee rates. The street impact fee rates in this section are generated from the formula for calculating impact fees set forth in the rate study, which is incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise provided for herein, all new developments in the city will be charged the street impact fee applicable to the type of development as follows in the table below. For properties zoned BD — Downtown Business, an ITE Land Use Code of 814 — Specialty Retail shall be applied. 2016 2017 2018 2019 and (w/ (with (w/ beyond(w/ Fee $1,049.41 $2,543.01 4,036.61 $5,530.21 ITE Land Use Code - Description Calculation cost per cost per cost per cost per trip) -7- Packet Pg. 343 7.3.a trip) trip) trip) per square 110 - Light Industrial foot $1.50 $3.64 $5.77 $7.91 per square 140 - Manufacturing foot $1.12 $2.72 $4.32 $5.92 per square 151 - Mini -warehouse foot $0.40 $0.97 $1.54 $2.10 per dwelling 210 - Single-family house unit $1,196.33 $2,873.60 $4,561.37 $6,249.14 per dwelling 220 - Apartment unit $776.56 $1,881.83 $2,987.09 $4,092.36 per dwelling 230 - Condominium unit $629.65 $1,525.81 $2,421.97 $3,318.13 per dwelling 240 - Mobile home unit $671.62 $1,627.53 $2,583.43 $3,539.33 per dwelling 251 - Senior Housing unit $157.41 $584.89 $928.42 $1,271.95 320 - Motel per room $629.65 $1,525.81 $2,421.97 $3,318.13 per boat 420 - Marina berth $188.89 $457.74 $726.59 $995.44 444 - Movie theater per screens $13,166.00 $31,905.90 $50,645.37 $69,384.85 per square 492 - Health/fitness club foot $2.78 $6.74 $10.98 $14.66 per square 530 - High school foot $0.82 $1.98 $3.15 $4.31 per square 560 - Church foot $0.69 $1.68 $2.67 $3.65 per square 565 - Day care center foot $6.57 $15.77 $25.02 $34.29 620 - Nursing home per bed $199.39 $483.17 $766.96 $1,050.74 per square 710 - General office foot $2.07 $5.01 $7.95 $10.89 per square 720 - Medical office foot $3.81 $9.54 $15.14 $20.74 per square 820 - Shopping center foot $1.34 $3.26 $5.17 $7.08 per square 826 - Specialty retail foot $0.93 $2.06 $3.27 $4.48 per square 850 - Supermarket foot $4.80 $10.50 $16.84 $22.84 per square 850 - Convenience market 15-16hrs foot $5.80 $14.07 $22.38 $30.58 per square 912 - Drive-in bank foot $7.00 $15.97 $25.41 $34.73 per square 932 - Restaurant: sit-down foot $4.70 $10.04 $15.95 $21.84 per square 933 - Fast food, no drive -up foot $9.19 $22.28 $35.36 $48.44 per square 934 - Fast food with drive -up foot $11.23 $26.24 $41.66 $57.07 936 - Coffee/donut shop, no drive- per square UP foot $5.73 $13.88 $22.04 $30.19 V V w 4- 0 to M M c 0 0 d w M W T m c M c �a L O d 0 am 0 L IL r c m E z c� Q Packet Pg. 344 7.3.a 938 - Coffee/donut shop, drive -up, per square no indoor seating foot $10.55 $25.56 $40.37 $55.58 945 - Gas station with convenience per vehicle $3,347.62 fueling position 1 1 $6,916.99 1 $10,979.58 1 $15,042.18 3.36.130 Independent fee calculations. A. If in the judgment of the director, none of the fee categories or fee amounts set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and/or 3.36.125 accurately describe or capture the impacts of a new development on parks and/or streets, the department may ask the applicant to conduct independent fee calculations and the director may impose alternative fees on a specific development based on those calculations. The alternative fees and the calculations shall be set forth in writing and shall be agreed to by the director and the feepayer. The documentation submitted shall show the basis upon which the independent fee calculation was made. B. Any feepayer submitting an independent fee calculation will be required to pay the city of Edmonds a fee to cover the cost of reviewing the independent fee calculation. A fee is required by the city for conducting the review of the independent fee calculation plus the actual cost of outside consultant review if required by the city, unless otherwise established by the director, and shall be paid by the feepayer prior to initiation of review. C. While there is a presumption that the calculations set forth in the rate study are valid, the director shall consider the documentation submitted by the feepayer, but is not required to accept such documentation or analysis which the director reasonably deems to be inaccurate or not reliable, and may, in the alternative, require the feepayer to submit additional or different documentation for consideration. The director is authorized to adjust the impact fees on a case - by -case basis based on the independent fee calculation, the specific characteristics of the development, and/or principles of fairness. The fees or alternative fees and the calculations shall be set forth in writing and shall be mailed to the feepayer. D. Determinations made by the director pursuant to this section may be appealed to the office of the hearing examiner as set forth in ECC 3.36.070. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Art. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.140 Existing authority unimpaired. Nothing in this chapter shall preclude the city from requiring the feepayer or the proponent of a development activity to mitigate adverse environmental impacts of a specific development pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW, based on the environmental documents accompanying the underlying development approval process, and/or Chapter 58.17 RCW, governing plats and subdivisions; provided, that the exercise of this authority is consistent with the provisions of Chapters 43.21C and 82.02 RCW. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.150 Procedures guide. The director is authorized to develop a procedures guide to facilitate the city's administration and enforcement of this chapter. The procedures guide shall be consistent with the provisions of this chapter, shall be for the sole convenience of the city, and shall not vest any rights in or for any other person. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Art. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.160 Deferral system for single-family residences. A. An applicant for a building permit for a single-family detached or attached residence may request a deferral of the full impact fee payment until final inspection. The building official may withhold certification of final inspection until the impact fees have been paid in full. B. The amount of impact fees that may be deferred under this section must be determined by the fees in effect at the time the applicant applies for a deferral. C. The term of an impact fee deferral under this section may not exceed 18 months from the date of building permit issuance. D. An applicant seeking a deferral under this section must grant and record a deferred impact fee lien against the property in favor of the city in the amount of the deferred impact fee. The deferred impact fee lien, which must include the legal description, tax account number, and address of the property, must also be: 1. In a form approved by the city attorney; 2. Signed by all owners of the property, as demonstrated by a current title report, with all signatures acknowledged as required for a deed; 3. Recorded with the Snohomish County auditor's office; 4. Binding on all successors in title after the recordation; and SZ Packet Pg. 345 7.3.a 5. Junior and subordinate to one mortgage for the purpose of construction upon the same real property granted by the person who applied for the deferral of impact fees. E. If impact fees are not paid in accordance with a deferral authorized by this section, the city may institute foreclosure proceedings in accordance with Chapter 61.12 RCW. F. In addition to the administrative fee collected pursuant to ECC 3.36.030(B)(5), the city shall collect an additional reasonable administrative fee to implement this section from permit applicants who are seeking to delay the payment of impact fees under this section. The amount of the administrative fee shall be established and updated from time to time by resolution of the city council. G. The section shall be construed to be consistent with state law and RCW 82.02.050, in particular. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 20161. Section 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance is subject to referendum and shall take effect thirty (30) days after final passage of this ordinance. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: Im APPROVED: MAYOR DAVID O. EARLING -10- Packet Pg. 346 C) �tzCn� r) tZ l7 x �x td Oy �n a � � d r rt (Q W ~ Attachment: Proposed Ordinance (1638 : Public Hearing: Update to the 2016 Traffic Impact Fees and new Section 3.36 of ECC) 7.3.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 IMPACT FEE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 3.36 OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2016. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY -12- Packet Pg. 348 7.3.b ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE IMPACT FEE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 3.36 OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, chapter 18.82 of the Edmonds City Code ("Traffic Impact Fee" Section) has been moved to chapter 3.36 of the Edmonds City Code; WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds updated the Transportation Plan in 2015 and a revised traffic impact fee is being proposed with a phased increase over the next three years; WHEREAS, the land use category for any property in the Downtown Business (BD) zone used for the purpose of calculating the traffic impact fee will be Specialty Retail (ITE Land Use Code of 814); NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 3.36 of the Edmonds City Code, entitled "IMPACT FEES," is hereby amended to read as follows (text added is shown as underlined; deleted text is shown as Chapter 3.36 IMPACT FEES Sections: 3.36.010 Findings and authority. 3.36.020 Definitions. 3.36.030 Assessment and payment of impact fees. 3.36.040 Exemptions. 3.36.050 Credits. 3.36.060 Tax adjustments. 3.36.070 Appeals. 3.36.080 Establishment of impact fee accounts. -1- Packet Pg. 349 7.3.b v U W G 3.36.090 Refunds. 3.36.100 Use of funds. iM 3.36.110 Review. r'M 3.36.120 Park impact fee rates. C 3.36.125 Street impact fee rates. 3.36.130 Independent fee calculations. v 3.36.140 Existing authority unimpaired. fn 3.36.150 Procedures guide. ?� 3.36.160 Deferral system for single-family residences. d 3.36.010 Findings and authority. The city council of the city of Edmonds (the "council") hereby finds and determines that new growth and development in the city of Edmonds will create additional demand and need for public facilities in the city of M Edmonds, and the council finds that new growth and development should pay a proportionate share of the cost of new y facilities needed to serve the new growth and development.LL d The city of Edmonds has conducted extensive studies documenting the procedures for measuring the impact of new developments on public facilities, has prepared the rate study and procedures guide for park impact fees, has prepared v the rate study and procedures guide for transportation impact fees, and hereby incorporates these studies into this title Q. by reference. Therefore, pursuant to Chapter 82.02 RCW, the council adopts the ordinance codified in this chapter to E assess impact fees for parks and streets. The provisions of this chapter shall be liberally construed in order to carry v out the purposes of the council in establishing the impact fee program. These fees can and will only be applied to projects resulting from city-wide development growth. These fees cannot be used to mitigate existing shortfalls of the park system or street system. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Art. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. H 3.36.020 Definitions. T The following words and terms shall have the following meanings for the purposes of this chapter unless the context clearly requires otherwise. Terms otherwise not defined herein shall be defined pursuant to RCW 82.02.090 and 04 ECDC Title 21 or given their usual and customary meaning. t A. "Accessory dwelling unit" is defined in ECDC 21.05.015. +' -W B. `Building permit" means an official document or certification which is issued by the building official and which authorizes the construction, alteration, enlargement, conversion, reconstruction, remodeling, rehabilitation, erection, 4 demolition, moving or repair of a building or structure. M C. "Capital facilities plan" means the capital facilities plan element of a comprehensive plan adopted by the city of Q. Edmonds pursuant to Chapter 36.70A RCW, and such plan as amended. There are many references in state statutes to the "capital facilities plan" (CFP) as the basis for projects that are eligible for funding by impact fees. The parks element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan fulfills the requirements of RCW 82.02.050 et seq., pertaining to a "capital facilities plan," and is considered to be the "capital facilities plan" (CFP) for the purpose of Edmonds' t`o impact fees for parks. The transportation element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan fulfills the requirements 2 of RCW 82.02.050 et seq., pertaining to a "capital facilities plan," and is considered to be the "capital facilities plan" V (CFP) for the purpose of Edmonds' impact fees for streets. Depending on the context, references to a CFP in the — impact fee chapter, rate study, and procedures guide are interpreted as referring to either the parks element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan or the transportation element of the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan, including d the projects eligible for impact fees listed in Appendix C of the procedures guide for the transportation impact fees. D. "City" means the city of Edmonds. M E. "Council" means the city council of the city of Edmonds. T F. "Department" means the development services department. G. "Development activity" means any construction, expansion, or change in the use of a building or structure that V creates additional demand and need for public facilities. H. "Development approval" means any written authorization from the city of Edmonds which authorizes the R r_ commencement of a development activity. :a I. "Director" means the director designated by the mayor to administer the impact fee program or that director's O designee. J. "Dwelling unit" is defined in ECDC 21.20.050. y K. "Encumbered" means to reserve, set aside, or otherwise earmark the impact fees in order to pay for commitments, contractual obligations, or other liabilities incurred for public facilities. L. "Feepayer" is a person, corporation, partnership, an incorporated association, or any other similar entity, or department or bureau of any governmental entity or municipal corporation commencing a land development activity r C d E t -2- M a Packet Pg. 350 7.3.b v U W G which creates the demand for additional capital facilities, and which requires the issuance of a building permit. "Feepayer" includes an applicant for an impact fee credit. M M. Reserved. NM N. "Hearing examiner" is defined in ECDC 21.40.010. r— O. "Impact fee" means a payment of money imposed by the city of Edmonds on development activity pursuant to this chapter as a condition of granting development approval in order to pay for the public facilities needed to serve new t) growth and development. "Impact fee" does not include a reasonable permit fee, an application fee, the administrative tq fee for collecting and handling school impact fees, the cost of reviewing independent fee calculations or any other ?� charge or fee based upon the administrative costs of processing a development application. d P. "Impact fee account" or "account" means the account(s) established for each type of public facility for which impact fees are collected. The accounts shall be established pursuant to ECC 3.36.080 and 3.36.090 and comply with the requirements of RCW 82.02.070. M Q. "hndependent fee calculation" means the impact fee calculation and/or economic documentation prepared by a y feepayer to support the assessment of an impact fee other than by the use of the rates listed in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125, or the calculations prepared by the director where none of the fee categories or fee amounts in ECC yam., 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 accurately describe or capture the impacts of the new development on public facilities. v R. "Interest" means the average interest rate earned in the last fiscal year by the city of Edmonds. Q. S. Reserved. E T. "Occupancy permit" means the permit issued by the city of Edmonds authorizing the building to be occupied v where a development activity results in a change in use of the preexisting structure, or the creation of a new use where none previously existed. U. "Owner" means the owner of record of real property, or a person with an unrestricted written option to purchase H property; provided, that if the real property is being purchased under a recorded real estate contract, the purchaser T shall be considered the owner of the real property. N V. "Procedures guide" means the administrative guidance document prepared by the director pursuant to ECC 14 3.36.150. M W. "Project improvements" means site improvements and facilities that are planned and designed to provide service a for a particular development or users of the project and are not system improvements. No improvement or facility +• included in a capital facilities plan adopted by the council shall be considered a project improvement. 4 X. "Public facilities" means the public parks, open space and recreation facilities owned by the city of Edmonds or M other governmental entities in the context of the park impact fee and means the public streets and roads owned by the Q. city of Edmonds or other governmental entities in the context of the street impact fee. Y. "Rate study" means the "Rate Study for Impact Fees for Parks, Open Space and Recreation Facilities," city of Edmonds, dated July 12, 2013, in the context of the park impact fee and means the "Rate Study for Impact Fees for Roads," city of Edmonds, dated October 29, 2009, in the context of the street impact fee. M Z. "Residential" or "residential development" means all types of construction intended for human habitation. This d 2 shall include, but is not limited to, single-family, duplex, triplex, and other multifamily development. This also V includes the residential portion of mixed -use developments. AA. Reserved. 1313. "Service area" means the entire corporate limits of the city of Edmonds. tL CC. "Significant past tax payment" means taxes exceeding five percent of the amount of the impact fee, and which were paid prior to the date the impact fee is assessed and were earmarked or proratable to the same system M improvements for which the impact fee is assessed. T DD. Reserved. EE. "State" means the state of Washington. V FF. Reserved. GG. "System improvements" means public facilities that are included in the city of Edmonds capital facilities plan R C and are designed to provide service to service areas within the community at large, in contrast to project :a improvements. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. OL 3.36.030 Assessment and payment of impact fees. A. Required. The city shall collect impact fees, based on the rates in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125, from any applicant y seeking development approval from the city for any development activity within the city as provided herein, including the expansion of existing structures or uses or change of existing uses that creates additional demand for public facilities. r C d E -3- z M a Packet Pg. 351 7.3.b v U W 4- G 1. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include miscellaneous improvements that do not add any demand for public facilities, including, but not limited to, fences, walls, swimming pools accessory M to a residential use, and signs. r'M 2. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include replacement of a residential structure C with a new residential structure of the same type at the same site or lot when such replacement occurs within 12 months of the demolition or destruction of the prior residential structure. Replacement of a residential structure v with a new residential structure of the same type shall be interpreted to include any residential structure for fn which there is no increase in the number of residential units. ?� 3. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include alterations, expansions, enlargement, remodeling, rehabilitation or conversion of an existing dwelling unit where no additional dwelling units are created and the use is not changed. Note: accessory dwelling units (ADU) are not considered to create additional dwelling units because ECDC 20.21.020 does not consider ADUs as increasing the overall density of a single- M family residential neighborhood. y B. Timing and Calculation of Fees. Impact fees shall be assessed based upon the impact fee rates in effect at the time LL of issuance of the building permit, including but not limited to change of use permit or remodel permit. 1. For a change in use of an existing building or dwelling unit, including any alteration, expansion, replacement v or new accessory building, the impact fee shall be the applicable impact fee for the new use, less an amount Q. equal to the applicable impact fee for the prior use. E 2. For mixed use developments, impact fees shall be imposed for the proportionate share of each land use based v on the applicable measurement in the impact fee rates set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125. 3. Where the impact fees imposed are determined by the square footage of the development, the building official will establish the gross floor area created by the proposed development. H 4. Applicants that have been awarded credits prior to the submittal of the complete building permit application cfl T pursuant to ECC 3.36.050 shall submit, along with the complete building permit application, a copy of the letter O or certificate prepared by the director pursuant to ECC 3.36.050 setting forth the dollar amount of the credit N awarded. t 5. Applicants shall pay an administrative fee that covers the cost of staff time in administering the impact fee C program. The amount of the administrative fee shall be established and updated from time to time by resolution +• of the city council. C. Payment. Unless deferred pursuant to ECC 3.36.160, impact fees shall be paid at the time the building permit or M business license is issued by the city. The department shall not issue the required building permit or business license Q. or other approval unless and until the impact fees set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 have been paid in the amount that they exceed exemptions or credits provided pursuant to ECC 3.36.040 or 3.36.050; provided, that building permits may be issued without impact fee payment when payment is deferred in accordance with ECC 3.36.160. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. t`o 3.36.040 Exemptions. = A. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from the payment of all impact fees under this V chapter: 1. Alteration of an existing nonresidential structure that does not involve a change in use and does not expand 3 the usable space or add any residential units; d 2. Miscellaneous improvements that do not expand usable space or add any residential units, including, but not limited to, fences, walls, swimming pools, and signs; M 3. Demolition or moving of a structure; co T 4. Expansion of an existing structure that results in the addition of 100 square feet or less of gross floor area; 5. Replacement of a structure with a new structure of the same size and use at the same site or lot when a V building permit application for such replacement is submitted to the Cityeeeurs within 12 months of the demolition or destruction of the prior structure. Replacement of a structure with a new structure of the same size R C shall be interpreted to include any structure for which the gross square footage of the building will not be increased by more than 100 square feet; or 0 6. Alterations, expansions, enlargement, remodeling, rehabilitation or conversion of an existing dwelling unit where no additional dwelling units are created and the use is not changed (accessory dwelling units (ADU) are y not considered to create additional dwelling units because ECDC 20.21.020 does not consider ADUs as increasing the overall density of a single-family residential neighborhood, and because the city's traffic model M does not assign additional trips to the network as a result of ADUs). B. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from the payment of park impact fees under this chapter: d E z a Packet Pg. 352 7.3.b v U W 4- G 1. Low-income housing provided by nonprofit organizations such as, but not limited to, Habitat for Humanity. Owners of low-income single-family dwelling units, condominiums and other low-income housing shall execute M and record a lien against the property, in favor of the city, for a period of 10 years guaranteeing that the dwelling M unit will continue to be used for low-income housing or that impact fees from which the low-income housing is exempted, plus interest, shall be paid. The lien against the property shall be subordinate only to the lien for general taxes. In the event that the development is no longer used for low-income rental housing, the owner shall v pay the city the impact fee from which the owner or any prior owner was exempt, plus interest at the statutory fn rate. Any claim for an exemption for low-income owner occupied housing must be made no later than the time ?� of application for a building permit. Any claim not so made shall be deemed waived. d C. The director shall be authorized to determine whether a particular development activity falls within an exemption identified in this section, in any other section, or under other applicable law. Determinations of the director shall be in writing and shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in ECC 3.36.070. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. M 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 20131. y 3.36.050 Credits. A. Pursuant to the requirement of RCW 82.02.060(4), a feepayer shall be entitled to a credit for the value of any yam., dedication of land for, improvement to, or new construction of any system improvements provided by the feepayer, to v facilities that are identified in the capital facilities plan and that are required by the city as a condition of approving Q. the development activity. E B. The director shall determine if requests for credits meet the criteria in subsection (A) of this section. v C. For each request for a credit or credits, the director shall select an appraiser or the feepayer may select an independent appraiser acceptable to the director. D. The appraiser must be prequalified by the city and shall not have a fiduciary or personal interest in the property H being appraised. A description of the appraiser's certification shall be included with the appraisal, and the appraiser T shall certify that he/she does not have a fiduciary or personal interest in the property being appraised. E. The appraiser shall be directed to determine the total value of the dedicated land, improvements, and/or CM construction provided by the feepayer on a case -by -case basis. t F. The feepayer shall pay for the cost of the appraisal or request that the cost of the appraisal be deducted from the C credit which the director may be providing to the feepayer, in the event that a credit is awarded. -W G. After receiving the appraisal, the director shall provide the applicant with a letter or certificate setting forth the 4 dollar amount of the credit, the reason for the credit, the legal description of the site donated where applicable, and M the legal description or other adequate description of the project or development to which the credit may be applied. Q. The applicant must sign and date a duplicate copy of such letter or certificate indicating his/her agreement to the terms of the letter or certificate, and return such signed document to the director before the impact fee credit will be awarded. The failure of the applicant to sign, date, and return such document within 60 calendar days shall nullify the 'L credit. M H. No credit shall be given for project improvements required of the development by city code and/or SEPA; only 2 dedications in excess of those required by law are eligible for credit. In no event shall this provision be interpreted to V authorize cash payment. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to limit the discretion of the city council to decline to — accept any proposed dedication. 7 I. A feepayer can request that a credit or credits for impact fees be awarded to him/her for significant past tax d payments. For each request for a credit or credits for significant past tax payments for impact fees, the feepayer shall submit receipts and a calculation of past tax payments earmarked for or proratable to the particular system M improvement. The director shall determine the amount of credits, if any, for significant past tax payments for public T facilities. J. Any claim for credit must be made no later than 20 calendar days after the submission of an application for a V building permit. The failure to timely file such a claim shall constitute a final bar to later request any such credit. K. Determinations made by the director pursuant to this section shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in R r_ ECC 3.36.070. L. A feepayer may, in the alternative, appeal an assessment or mitigation requirement which he believes exceeds the O total which may lawfully be imposed. See ECDC 18.50.020(C). [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 20131. y 3.36.060 Tax adjustments. Pursuant to and consistent with the requirements of RCW 82.02.060, the rate study has provided adjustments for future taxes to be paid by the new development which are earmarked or proratable to the same new public facilities which will serve the new development. The impact fee rates in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 have been reasonably r C d E -5- z M a Packet Pg. 353 7.3.b v U W G adjusted for taxes and other revenue sources which are anticipated to be available to fund public improvements. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Art. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. M i 3.36.070 Appeals. C" A. Any feepayer may pay the impact fees imposed by this chapter under protest in order to obtain a building permit. C B. Appeals regarding the amount of the impact fee imposed on any development activity may only be filed by the feepayer of the property where such development activity will occur. This provision shall control over any other v provisions of city ordinance. fn C. The feepayer must first file a request for review regarding impact fees with the director, as provided herein: ?� 1. The request shall be in writing on the form provided by the city; C 2. The request for review by the director shall be filed within 14 calendar days of the feepayer's payment of the impact fees at issue. The failure to timely file such a request shall constitute a final bar to later seek such review; 3. An administrative fee will be imposed for the request for review by the director; this shall be the same as that M imposed for a request for reconsideration of a staff decision; y 4. The director shall issue his/her determination in writing within 14 days from the receipt of a request for d LL review. r.+ D. Determinations of the director with respect to the applicability of the impact fees to a given development activity, v the availability or value of a credit, or the director's decision concerning the independent fee calculation which is Q. authorized in ECC 3.36.130, or the fees imposed by the director pursuant to ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125, or any other E determination which the director is authorized to make pursuant to this chapter, can be appealed to the hearing v examiner. E. The decision of the director may be appealed to the hearing examiner as a Type II decision. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. H 3.36.080 Establishment of impact fee accounts. T A. Impact fee receipts shall be earmarked specifically and deposited in special interest -bearing accounts. N B. There is hereby established a separate impact fee account for the park impact fees collected pursuant to this 14 chapter, the park impact account. There is also hereby established a separate impact fee account for the street impact t fees collected pursuant to this chapter, the street impact account. Funds withdrawn from these accounts must be used C in accordance with the provisions of ECC 3.36.100 and applicable state law. Interest earned on the fees shall be -W retained in the respective accounts and expended for the purposes for which the impact fees were collected. 4 C. On an annual basis, the finance director shall provide a report to the council on the impact fee accounts showing M the source and amount of all monies collected, earned, or received, and the public improvements that were financed Q. in whole or in part by impact fees. D. Impact fees shall be expended or encumbered within 10 years of receipt, unless the council identifies in written findings extraordinary and compelling reason or reasons for the city to hold the fees beyond the 10-year period. Under such circumstances, and prior to the expiration of the 10-year period, the council shall establish the period of t`o time within which the impact fees shall be expended or encumbered. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Art. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 _ (Exh. A), 20131. v 3.36.090 Refunds. — A. If the city fails to expend or encumber the impact fees within 10 years of when the fees were paid or, where extraordinary or compelling reasons exist, such other time periods as established pursuant to ECC 3.36.080, the d current owner of the property on which impact fees have been paid may receive a refund of such fees. In determining whether impact fees have been expended or encumbered, impact fees shall be considered expended or encumbered on M a first -in, first -out basis. cor B. The city shall notify potential claimants by first class mail that they are eligible for an impact fee refund. This notification shall be done by first class mail deposited with the United States Postal Service at the last known address V of such claimants. A potential claimant must be the owner of the property. C C. Owners seeking a refund of impact fees must submit a written request for a refund of the fees to the director within to E one year of the date the right to claim the refund arises or the date that notice is given, whichever is later. :a D. Any impact fees for which no application for a refund has been made within this one-year period shall be retained O by the city and expended on the appropriate public facilities. E. Refunds of impact fees under this section shall include any interest earned on the impact fees by the city. y F. When the city seeks to terminate any or all components of the impact fee program, all unexpended or unencumbered funds from any terminated component or components, including interest earned, shall be refunded pursuant to this section. Upon the finding that any or all fee requirements are to be terminated, the city shall place notice of such termination and the availability of refunds in a newspaper of general circulation at least two times and r C d E -6- z M a Packet Pg. 354 7.3.b shall notify all potential claimants by first class mail at the last known address of the claimants. All funds available for refund shall be retained for a period of one year. At the end of one year, any remaining funds shall be retained by the city, but must be expended for the appropriate public facilities. This notice requirement shall not apply if there are no unexpended or unencumbered balances within the account or accounts being terminated. G. The city shall also refund to the current owner of property for which impact fees have been paid, including interest earned on the impact fees, if the development activity for which the impact fees were imposed did not occur; provided, that if the city has expended or encumbered the impact fees in good faith prior to the application for a refund, the director can decline to provide the refund. If within a period of three years, the same or subsequent owner of the property proceeds with the same or substantially similar development activity, the owner can petition the director for an offset. The petitioner must provide receipts of impact fees previously paid for a development of the same or substantially similar nature on the same property or some portion thereof. Determinations of the director shall be in writing and shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in ECC 3.36.070. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.100 Use of funds. A. Pursuant to this chapter, impact fees: 1. Shall be used for public improvements that will reasonably benefit new development; and 2. Shall not be imposed to make up for deficiencies in public facilities serving existing developments; and Shall not be used for maintenance or operations. B. Impact fees may be spent for public improvements, including, but not limited to, planning, engineering, surveying, land acquisition, right-of-way acquisition, site improvements, necessary off -site improvements, construction, architectural, permitting, financing, and administrative expenses, applicable impact fees or mitigation costs, and any other expenses which can be capitalized. C. Impact fees may also be used to recoup public improvement costs previously incurred by the city to the extent that new growth and development will be served by the previously constructed improvements or incurred costs. D. In the event that bonds or similar debt instruments are or have been issued for the advanced provision of public improvements for which impact fees may be expended, impact fees may be used to pay debt service on such bonds or similar debt instruments to the extent that the facilities or improvements provided are consistent with the requirements of this section and are used to serve the new development. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 20131. 3.36.110 Review. The fee rates set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 may be reviewed and adjusted by the council as it deems necessary and appropriate in conjunction with the annual update of the capital facilities plan element of the city's comprehensive plan. The fee rates may be adjusted 12 months after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter, or 12 months after the most recent review by the council. The council may determine the amount of any adjustment up or down and revise the fee rates set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.120 Park impact fee rates. The park impact fee rates in this section are generated from the formula for calculating impact fees set forth in the rate study, which is incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise provided for independent fee calculations in ECC 3.36.130, exemptions in ECC 3.36.040 and credits in ECC 3.36.050, all new developments in the city will be charged the park impact fee applicable to the type of development as follows: A. Effective October 1, 2014: 1. Single-family house: $2,734.05 per dwelling unit. 2. Multifamily residential housing: $2,340.16 per dwelling unit. 3. Nonresidential development: $1.34 per square foot. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.125 Street impact fee rates. The street impact fee rates in this section are generated from the formula for calculating impact fees set forth in the rate study, which is incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise provided for herein, ealeu L.t:,.. s in EGG 3.36. 130 exewiptiens in EGG 4 36 040 and of -edits i. EGG 3.36.050, all new developments in the city will be charged the street impact fee applicable to the type of development as follows in the table below.: For properties zoned BD - Downtown Business, an ITE Land Use Code of 814 - Specialtv Retail shall be applied. 2016 2017 2018 2019 and ee with / beyond (w/ ITE Land Use Code - Description Calculation $1, 449.41 $2,543.01 4 036.61 $5 530.21 Comment [Al]: Cost per trip in 2016 = $1,049.41. Cost per trip in 2017 and beyond: annual in $1493.60 (to max of $5530.21) Formatted Tble v U W 4- 0 W M M C O V d N C O rn d d LL t 0 M e. E c� M L co T O N O t O r� O M CL O) C �L M d 2 v 7 (L 00 M W T N V C R C :a O N C a Packet Pg. 355 7.3.b cost peY trip) cost per kipi cost per trip) cost per trip) 110 - Light Industrial geragmare foot $1.50 $3.64 $5.77 $7.91 140 - Manufacturing er s uare foot $1.12 $2.72 $4.32 $5.92 151 - Mini -warehouse gerLg1jare foot $0.40 $0.97 $1.54 $2.10 210 - Single-family house per dwelling $1 196.33 $2,873.60 $4,561.37 $6, 449.14 unit 220 - Apartment per dwelling $776.56 $1,881.83 $2,987.09 $4, 992.36 unit 230 - Condominium per dwelling $629.65 1 525.81 $2,421.97 JLLI8.13 unit 240 - Mobile home per dwelling 1671.62 $1,627.53 $2,583.43 ILL39.33 unit 251 - SenioLHousing per dwelling 157.41 $584.89 $928.42 jlM.95 unit 320 - Motel per room $629.65 $1,525.81 $2,421.97 JLL18.13 420 - Marina ggLr boat berth J188.89 $457.74 $726.59 995.44 444 - Movie theater per screens $13,166.00 $31,905.90 $50,645.3 $69,384.85 7 492 - Health/fitness club Der square, foot 2.78 6.74 10.98 14.66 530 - Hi h school er s uare foot 0.82 1.98 3.15 4.31 560 - Church er s uare foot $0.69 $1.68 $2.67 $3.65 565 - Da care center er s uare foot $6.57 $15.77 $25.02 $34.29 620 - Nursinghome er bed 199.39 $483.17 $766.96 $1,050.74 710 - General office Der s uare foot 2.07 $5.01 7.95 10.89 720 - Medical office er s uare foot $3.81 $9.54 $15.14 $20.74 820 - Shopping center er s uare foot $1.34 $3.26 $5.17 $7.08 826 - Specialty retail per square foot $0.93 $2.06 $3.27 $4.48 850 - Supermarket er s uare foot $4.80 $10.50 $16.84 $22.84 850 - Convenience market 15-16hrs per square foot 5.80 $14.07 22.38 30.58 912 - Drive-in bank er s uare foot $7.00 15.97 25.41 34.73 932 - Restaurant: sit-down er s uare foot S4.70 $10.04 $15.95 21.84 933 - Fast food no drive -up er s uare foot $9.19 $22.28 $35.36 $48.44 934 - Fast food with drive-u er s uare foot $11.23 $26.24 $41.66 $57.07 936 - Coffee/donut shop, no drive- gerLgILare foot $5.73 $13.88 $22.04 $30.19 0 938 - Coffee/donut shop, drive -up, permgware, foot $10.55 $25.56 $40.37 55.58 no indoorse 945 - Gas station with convenience per vehicle fueling positio $3,347.62 6 916.99 $10,979.5 $15,042.18 8 -8- Packet Pg. 356 7.3.b v U W Cede raffia.. louse c1 196 4- O D. Single 1TC Land Use 2M 33 per dwell:„e..„a E. Apa ft.....e..t TTC Land Use Code 220: $7 7L 56 per dwelling unit i17i F. /`ondomini....... TTC and Use Code 230n $629 GG per dwelling unit r1TE (V' G. Mobile hoxme'Land Use Code 240: $671.62-per dwelling -unit. � u ..l. ce„:ee...,:„e rmC Land Use was 251. Q 1 c7 n 1 ..,... dwelling unit G . T Metel TTC Land Use Code 320$629 GG per room a+ (� 1. '♦heatef TTC Land Use Cede AAA. $2 48 per squafe feet K. T,re..:e L. Health/fitness el..l. TTC Land Use Code 491 $2 78 per squafe feet. T.r GZn. cn ....,. % High sehae1'Land and Use Cede 82 pe......e feet !` N. hurel, 1TCT and Use Cede 560: $0 Gn pe« square feet-. 0 Day e....e ee«te« TTC hand Use Code 56SE $6 57 per sEfae e feet. M P. TT..«..:„e he„.e TTC Land Use Cede 620$199.39 PeF bed. V% Q. Gener-al squafe feet. R. TAe.l: vel eCF.veTTC' Land Use !Cede^77n. Q'2 C1 ... LL S. Specialty retail, TTC Land Use Gede 81 A. cn 93 „ square feet t.l �. T. Shopping eentef, TTC Land Use Cede 820n N1 34 „ square feet Q . U. C..„efmafLet TTC Land Use Code CGn. CA 80 per s"are feet. E V7 ! sw',e«:e«ee ..... ir4et 1 G 1 6 l.e..«.. TTC hand Use Gede O521 S5 80 per square foot. W. Drive in Lank'TTC Land Use Cede n 1'1. $7 .. nn per eua fe feet. D X. est....ran4. sit do .% TTC Land Use Code 932: C.I '70 „ square feet. (� Y. Fast feed, a drive ... TTC Land Use Code 933: cn 1 n per square feet-. Z. Ce..« feel with dFiye up' TTC r aiid Use Gede 93 A. S1 1 ..,..... f 23 per e et (tl AA. Gef[ a/.1e„..t she„ ne drive up TTC Land Use Cede 936. $5 73 „ squaf feet. drive foet. BB. Coffee/de"t indoor ITE Land Use Code 938: $10.55 T 0 N shop, iip, no seating, per sqttare O GG. Gas sta+iefi with eonvenienee, UE Land Use Code 9 4 5 � $3,3 4 7.62 pef vehiele ffieling position. . 4 037 § 1t +' (ntt n� 2016] �� 3.36.130 Independent fee calculations. O 0 A. If in the judgment of the director, none of the fee categories or fee amounts set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and/or 3.36.125 accurately describe or capture the impacts of a new development on parks and/or streets, the department O may ask the applicant to conduct independent fee calculations and the director may impose alternative fees on a Q. specific development based on those calculations. The alternative fees and the calculations shall be set forth in writing and shall be agreed to by the director and the feepayer. The documentation submitted shall show the basis upon which the independent fee calculation was made. B. Any feepayer submitting an independent fee calculation will be required to pay the city of Edmonds a fee to cover M the cost of reviewing the independent fee calculation. T he -A fee is required by the city for conducting the review of = the independent fee calculation h ll�^plus the actual cost of outside consultant review if required by the V city, unless otherwise established by the director, and shall be paid by the feepayer prior to initiation of review. — C. While there is a presumption that the calculations set forth in the rate study are valid, the director shall consider the 7 documentation submitted by the feepayer, but is not required to accept such documentation or analysis which the d director reasonably deems to be inaccurate or not reliable, and may, in the alternative, require the feepayer to submit additional or different documentation for consideration. The director is authorized to adjust the impact fees on a case- M by -case basis based on the independent fee calculation, the specific characteristics of the development, and/or T principles of fairness. The fees or alternative fees and the calculations shall be set forth in writing and shall be mailed to the feepayer. V D. Determinations made by the director pursuant to this section may be appealed to the office of the hearing examiner as set forth in ECC 3.36.070. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. R C 3.36.140 Existing authority unimpaired. Nothing in this chapter shall preclude the city from requiring the feepayer or the proponent of a development activity � to mitigate adverse environmental impacts of a specific development pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW, based on the environmental documents accompanying the underlying development approval y process, and/or Chapter 58.17 RCW, governing plats and subdivisions; provided, that the exercise of this authority is consistent with the provisions of Chapters 43.21C and 82.02 RCW. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Art. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. r C d E -9- z v rM. r� a Packet Pg. 357 7.3.b 3.36.150 Procedures guide. The director is authorized to develop a procedures guide to facilitate the city's administration and enforcement of this chapter. The procedures guide shall be consistent with the provisions of this chapter, shall be for the sole convenience of the city, and shall not vest any rights in or for any other person. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Art. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.160 Deferral system for single-family residences. A. An applicant for a building permit for a single-family detached or attached residence may request a deferral of the full impact fee payment until final inspection. The building official may withhold certification of final inspection until the impact fees have been paid in full. B. The amount of impact fees that may be deferred under this section must be determined by the fees in effect at the time the applicant applies for a deferral. C. The term of an impact fee deferral under this section may not exceed 18 months from the date of building permit issuance. D. An applicant seeking a deferral under this section must grant and record a deferred impact fee lien against the property in favor of the city in the amount of the deferred impact fee. The deferred impact fee lien, which must include the legal description, tax account number, and address of the property, must also be: 1. In a form approved by the city attorney; 2. Signed by all owners of the property, as demonstrated by a current title report, with all signatures acknowledged as required for a deed; 3. Recorded with the Snohomish County auditor's office; 4. Binding on all successors in title after the recordation; and 5. Junior and subordinate to one mortgage for the purpose of construction upon the same real property granted by the person who applied for the deferral of impact fees. E. If impact fees are not paid in accordance with a deferral authorized by this section, the city may institute foreclosure proceedings in accordance with Chapter 61.12 RCW. F. In addition to the administrative fee collected pursuant to ECC 3.36.030(B)(5), the city shall collect an additional reasonable administrative fee to implement this section from permit applicants who are seeking to delay the payment of impact fees under this section. The amount of the administrative fee shall be established and updated from time to time by resolution of the city council. G. The section shall be construed to be consistent with state law and RCW 82.02.050, in particular. [Ord. 4037 § 1 (Art. A), 2016]. Section 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance is subject to referendum and shall take effect thirty (30) days after final passage of this ordinance. APPROVED: -10- Packet Pg. 358 7.3.b ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: JEFFREY B. TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. MAYOR DAVID O. EARLING -11- Packet Pg. 359 7.3.b 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 IMPACT FEE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 3.36 OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2016. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Era Packet Pg. 360 m Q- 0 1 CD- Ln n n 0 c n z ■ O rD rD i N N O N 01� i 3" EM �ri e 0 i 0 �r Attachment: Presentation [Revision 1] (1638 : Public Hearing: Update to the 2016 Traffic 7.3.c • TAG'O ;qrmw 01,71 :J a I I I I- dna A Brims 1. Definition of Impact Fees � ° L s o N O r� O M _ eo d 2 t� a ao M 2. Reasons to Charge Impact Fee n� 3. Rules for Impact Fees 4. What Impact Fees Can be Us For 5. Calculations and Comparisor O _ e ° _ ° N L a November 1, 2o16 Edmonds City Council Packet Pg. 362 7.3.c :11i0[; • Added 6 projects • Removed projects 0 • 3 projects completed / to be c in 2017 Increased cost of 7 carry-over p • Adjusted deficiency exclusion • Reduced cost estimates by adju external trips r- M L N O t O r� O N _ eo d a 00 C) CD Tm- �N _ O _ N A m a November 1, 2o16 Edmonds City Council I Packet Pg. 363 7.3.c 6111to ■ 1 1 : 1 Olympic View & 174th St. SW 61 7% ■MI 4 196th St. SW (SR 524) & 88t"Ave 903,00o ri3% 8 212th St. & SR 99 2,806,000 0% 63% 14 220th St. & SR 99 3,215,000 0% 33% 11 Main St. & 9th Ave. 911,000 0% 63% 15 220th St. & 76th Ave. 4,314,000 0% 33% 20 SR 104 BSc 238th St. 1,339.000 4o vO 49% 21 SR toy, & 76th Ave W 1,508,500 0% 49% A 84th Ave. W, between 212th St. S & 238th St. SW 7,720,500 0% 65% g 238th St. SW, between Edmonds Way & 84th 3,045,000 C Add 228th St. SW from SR 99 to 95th pl. 10,146,000 65% Total November 1, 2o16 40,036,000 monds City Council 1% 53% M S= 0 7 M d 5� 011 1 L A E s a 21,733,7.iw Packet Pg. 364 7.3.c rn :1N[il1M4 Eligible Costs $21,733,736 Growth Trips 3,930 ost per $59530 November 1, 2o16 Edmonds City Council Packet Pg. 365 7.3.c ■ a ' Ah �:l 11 C�'m per $59530 Trip Rate / apartment i Impact Fee RMr S4.092/ aioartment ■ r- November 1, 2o16 Edmonds City Council 7.3.c Ak i r. CWPer $59530 x Trip Rate 0.00197 / sq ft office = rmpVW e Ramie $10.8jjOq ft offic November 1, 2016 Edmonds City Council I Packet Pg. 367 0 7.3.c I Eligible Costs $21,733,736 ERL=r- Growth Trips 3,930 a � 1W Ah $59530 November 1, 2o16 Edmonds City Council Packet Pg. 368 7.3.c L, n u Kenmore Lynnwood Bothell Shoreline Edmonds (update) Average of 8 Others Mill Creek Snohomish County Mukilteo Edmonds (curren-I Mountlake Terrace (currently being updated) November 1, 2o16 Edmonds City Council 1 1 1 1, FZ AL $ 8,350 7,944 6,941 6,804 5,530 4,761 3,000 2,453 1,875 1,050 714 0 • c2 r- Packet Pg. 369 7.3.c BY: C7 s a11■rrr« lo Raise impact fee to $5,530 per PM peak hour trips 2. Phased over (3) equal annual sty through 2019 r- M L T 0 N O 0 m M a c ea d 2 3 a eo M CD T O T d C O N d E a November 1, 2o16 Edmonds City Council Packet Pg. 370 i O rD 3 0- rm N N O F-� 01 m 0 X CD rt W n Attachment: Presentation [Revision 1] (1638 : Public Hearing: Update to the 2016 Traffic 8.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/1/2016 Mayor and Council Compensation Review (15 min.) Staff Lead: Andrew Pierce Department: City Council Preparer: Andrew Pierce Background/History In August 2016, a meeting was held between Council President Johnson, Council President Pro Tern Mesaros, Council Member Buckshnis, former Human Resources Director Carrie Hite, and Legislative Assistant Andrew Pierce to review comparable data regarding elected official salaries. At that time is was determined that this issue should be brought before Council for deliberation. The issue was initially presented to Council during the September 13th Council meeting, where Council identified additional points of comparisons to be evaluated and directed staff to compile and present that information to Council before any further action be taken on the matter. Staff Recommendation None. Narrative See attached report. Attachments: Elected Official Compensation Report Packet Pg. 372 8.1.a REPORT TO EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ELECTED OFFICIAL COMPENSATION It is important to set the salary of elected officials commensurate with the duties of the position to ensure fair and adequate compensation for the work performed, aptitude required, and accountability demanded. Additionally, setting the compensation of elected officials as competitively as possible arguably attracts new, well qualified candidates for those offices. In order to maintain those objectives, legislative institutions must review and periodically consider changes to elected official compensation. When taking action to increase or decrease the compensation of an elected official, city councils must not only weigh and consider the political aspects of such action, but must also ensure that any such action does not violate state law. In Washington, there are two ways in which a city council can instigate any change to elected official compensation: 1) an ordinance, or 2) by establishing a salary commission sanctioned under RCW 35.21.015. Each scheme offers unique legal requirements and political concerns discussed below. PROCEDURES FOR ENACTING SALARY CHANGES FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS In Washington, a city council can choose to set elected official compensation via two methods: 1) by enacting any changes by ordinance, or 2) by enacting a salary commission who then has the authority to set the compensation rates for elected officials with no further action of any elected official. When a city council takes action to increase or decrease council member's compensation via an ordinance, Article 11, section 8 of the state constitution prohibits any changes from taking effect after his or her election or during his or her term in office. Thus, when an official is taking action to set their own r salary, any increase or decrease may not take effect until their next term in office. The salary of other a elected officials, those who do not set their own salary, such as a mayor or judge, may be increased at any time, and they may benefit from the new salary as soon as the new salary goes into effect. c Despite the constitutional provision discussed above, there is a way to increase the salaries of council members during their present term of office. RCW 35.21.015 authorizes the setting of elected officials' salaries by a local salary commission. Not only does enacting a salary commission to review and authorize any change in compensation ensure compliance with the constitutional requirements discussed above, the purpose of the act was to remove any perceived impropriety of self -enrichment from public office or collusion when acting to set the salary of other officials. It is important to remember, if a city chooses to create a salary commission, the elected officials are paid the salaries established by the commission, although those salaries are subject to referendum. If no referendum is filed within 30 days, the new salaries can be effective immediately, except for salaries the commission determines should be decreased. Any decreases do not take effect until the next term in office. If the Council decides to take action to increase or decrease elected official salary, it is important to base compensation rates on realistic standards weighing several factors: including, a) duties of the office, b) local labor market conditions or comparable salaries, c) the ability of the city to pay, and d) any other relevant factors. Packet Pg. 373 8.1.a Ordinance or Salary Commission I ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE CITIES' MAYOR AND COUNCIL SALARY All data was gathered directly by Edmonds' Human Resources by survey, and supplemented and cross-referenced against the Washington City and County Employee 2015 Salary and Benefit Survey completed, in partnership, by the Association of Washington Cities. Four factors were used to identify comparative cities, no single factor was weighted more than any other, and each factor was analyzed individually and in aggregate with the remaining factors: A) Cities with populations within +/- 20,000 of the population of Edmonds; B) Cities with a Mayor -Council structure of city government, so called "Strong Mayor" cities; C) Cities within the Puget Sound Region; including cities in Snohomish, King, Pierce, and Thurston County respectively; and D) Absence of a City Administrator ("CAO"); commonly referred to as a City Manager or Chief of Staff. Packet Pg. 374 8.1.a Using the above criteria, Redmond, Lynnwood, Bremerton, and Marysville were identified as comparative cities (now "Cities") in the Puget Sound region, within the population range, with a "Strong Mayor" form of government, and without a City Administrator. Note that comparative salaries for elected officials are a single measure of compensation. Most Human Resources experts, as well as, the Washington Citizens' Commission of Salaries for Elected Officials (the salary commission created by the Washington State Legislature) base salaries on realistic standards in order to pay elected officials according to the duties of their office. MAYOR COMPARISONS Mayor Salary & Benefits Comparisons $2,452.42 $11,416.66 1$10, 559.93 Q $8,917.00 $8,577.00 Edmonds Bremerton Lynnwood City Mayor Salary Benefits Total Redmond $11,416.66 $2,452.42 $13,869.08 Marysville $10,659.93 $2,449.48 $13,109.41 Edmonds $9,622.84 $2,006.04 $11,628.88 Bremerton $8,917.00 $2,571.00 $11,488.00 Lynnwood $8,577.00 $2,582.10 $11,159.10 AVERAGES $9,838.69 $2,412.21 $12,250.89 The Edmonds mayor's current salary sits 2.2% below the average salary of mayors in comparable cities. However, the Edmonds mayor's current salary sits 15% below the highest comparable city's mayor. The Edmonds Mayor's benefits package sits 16% below the average of comparable mayor benefits packages, and 22.3% below the highest comparable city's mayor's benefits package. In total, the Edmonds mayor's total compensation package sits 5.1% below the average total compensation of mayors in the comparison cities, and 16.15% below the highest comparable total compensation. For comparative and review purposes, the following charts and graphs contain information of comparable mayor salaries, each based on a single factor from the above criteria. v m r Packet Pg. 375 8.1.a $12,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,000.00 $6,000.00 $4,000.00 $2,000.00 $0.00 Mayor Salary Compared to All Puget Sound Region Citites with Populations between 20K-60K s,�\e �ooa o�ay aQJar `roc ooa \�eo ,eo5 \aoe `\ec OJT `\`ce \ aoa o e0 eta` aoe a yr yooa �\,, a doSa te \oa � Q, �o *Note that the cities with an asterisk in front of their name are the cities are share all comparative factors used for analysis. Thus, if no asterisk is present, that city did not possess one or more of the distinguishing characteristics for the list of comparable cities. Additionally, benefits information for all listed cities was not available or this analysis, thus these single -factor breakdowns are for salary only. As such, the above chart is less for comparative purposes and serves to give an overall picture of the group of cities that should be used in comparison toward the left hand side of the chart. City Pop. Salary *Marysville 60,020 $10,450.00 *Redmond 54,144 $10,417.00 *Edmonds 39,709 $9,623.00 Issaquah 30,434 $9 243.00 *Bremerton 37,729 $8,917.00 *Lynnwood 35,836 $8,369.00 Mukilteo 20,254 $5,900.00 Lake Stevens 28,069 $2,000.00 University Place 31,144 $1,688.00 Burien 33,313 $1,400.00 Puyallup 37,022 $1367.00 Shoreline 53,007 $1,250.00 Bainbridge Island 23,025 $1,250.00 Bothell 33,505 $1,200.00 SeaTac 26,909 $1,200.00 Mountlake Terrace 19,909 $1,000.00 Sammamish 45,780 $950.00 Lakewood 58,163 $900.00 Maple Valley 22,684 $825.00 Kenmore 20,460 $750.00 Mercer Island 22,699 $400.00 3 Packet Pg. 376 8.1.a $12,000.00 T— $10,500.00 $9,000.00 $7,500.00 $6,000.00 $4,500.00 $3,000.00 $1,500.00 $0.00 Mayor Salary Compared by "Strong Mayor" Cities with populations between 20K-60K oca ca5 mar t�oc ooa t�o�mot ,e�5 mac at�S eat ado 0'aQ ewe � � cam �� a 45, QJ\\ o�� e del 1e 0 11 City Pop. Mayor Salary *Marysville 60,020 $10,450.00 *Redmond 54,144 $10,417.00 *Edmonds 39,709 $9,623.00 Issaquah 30,434 $9,243.00 *Bremerton 37,729 $8,917.00 *Lynnwood 35,836 $8,369.00 Mount Vernon 31,743 $8,040.00 Wenatchee 31,925 $6,589.00 Mukilteo 20,254 $5,900.00 Oak Harbor 22,075 $4,206.00 Lake Stevens 28,069 $2,000.00 Pullman 29,799 $1,417.00 Packet Pg. 377 8.1.a The following is the master list used in the analysis, and consists of all Washington cities with populations between twenty and sixty thousand. Cit Strong Mayo Pop. Mayor Salary Puget Sound Region City Number of FTEs CAO CoS/CAO Salary *Marysville 1 60,020 $10,450.00 1 258 0 $0.00 *Redmond 1 54,144 $10,417.00 1 609 0 $0.00 *Edmonds 1 39,709 $9,623.00 1 219 0 $0.00 *Bremerton 1 37,729 $8,917.00 1 318 0 $0.00 *Lynnwood 1 35,836 $8,369.00 1 332 0 $0.00 Mount Vernon 1 31,743 $8,040.00 0 204 0 $0.00 Wenatchee 1 31,925 $6,589.00 0 168 0 $0.00 Issaquah 1 30,434 $9,243.00 1 243 1 $15,445.00 Mukilteo 1 20,254 $5,900.00 1 107 1 $9,555.00 Lake Stevens 1 28,069 $2,000.00 1 61 1 $12,495.00 Oak Harbor 1 22,075 $4,206.00 0 139 1 $12,106.00 Pullman 1 29,799 $1,417.00 0 212 1 $11,072.00 University Place 0 31,144 $1,688.00 1 47 1 $12,612.00 Burien 0 33,313 $1,400.00 1 63 1 $12,917.00 Puyallup 0 37,022 $1,367.00 1 268 1 $12,500.00 Shoreline 0 53,007 $1,250.00 1 132 1 $13,911.00 Bainbridge Island 0 23,025 $1,250.00 1 113 1 $12,941.00 Bothell 0 33,505 $1,200.00 1 290 1 $15,501.00 SeaTac 0 26,909 $1,200.00 1 108 1 $13,469.00 Mountlake Terrace 0 19,909 $1,000.00 1 120 1 $11,813.00 Sammamish 0 45,780 $950.00 1 80 1 $16,133.00 Lakewood 0 58,163 $900.00 1 216 1 $14,158.00 Maple Valley 0 22,684 $825.00 1 42 1 $12,654.00 Kenmore 0 20,460 $750.00 1 29 1 $13,268.00 Mercer Island 0 22,699 $400.00 1 194 1 $14,677.00 Olympia 0 46,478 $1,664.00 0 549 1 $13,155.00 Lacey 0 42,393 $1,550.00 0 258 1 $12,495.00 Longview 0 36,648 $1,500.00 0 297 1 $16,594.00 Richland 0 48,058 $1,362.00 0 467 1 $14,603.00 Moses Lake 0 20,366 $1,000.00 0 174 1 $12,055.00 Walla Walla 0 31,731 $500.00 0 260 1 $12,533.00 Note: the binary system used for certain data points (e.g. "Strong Mayor," "Puget Sound Region," and "Cos/CAO") is a simple yes/no data point with a "0" indicating "no," and a "1" indicating "yes." 3 Packet Pg. 378 8.1.a LYNNWOOD COUNCIL COMPARISONS City Council Salary & Benefit Comparisons u Council President Salary a Council Member's Salary i Benefits MARYSVILLE REDMOND EDMONDS BREMERTON $0 City Council President Salary Council Member's Salary Benefits Total C REDMOND $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,124.10 $2,124.10 $2,124. EDMONDS $1,200.00 $1,000.00 $707.51 $1,907.51 $1,707. BREMERTON $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $0.00/No data $1,000.00 $1,000.1 MARYSVILLE $950.00 $950.00 $0.00/No data $950.00 $950.0 LYNNWOOD $1,100.00 $900.00 $2,081.53 $3,181.53 $2,981.! Average $1,050.00 $970.00 $374.70 $2,404.38 $2,271.1 Note that total compensation calculations do not include the comparable cities without benefits data, Bremerton and Marysville respectively. Using the same criteria for comparison cities, currently, Edmonds City Council members make 3% more than the average of the comparison cities, and are currently in the top of the range of salaries. The same can be said for the Council President salary, currently making 14.3% above the average City Council President salary and is also currently the highest compensated Council President of the comparison cities. However, when looking at overall compensation, Edmonds City Council president and members are both compensated at 20.7% and 24.8% respectively lower than the average of comparable cities than the average when accounting for both salary and benefits. Packet Pg. 379 8.1.a CONCLUSION After thorough review of the available data, the Council should decide whether to take action to increase or decrease Edmonds elected officials' salaries. At that time, the Council may decide to undertake such action, setting elected official compensation by enacting an ordinance. Additionally, Council may decide to establish a citizens' salary commission as authorized by state law, at which point deliberation and action is under the authority of that commission and no further action is required by Council. The decision tree below may help organize Council's process. Packet Pg. 380 8.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/1/2016 Discussion regarding the 2017 Proposed City Budget (60 min.) Staff Lead: {Type Name of Staff Lead} Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Scott James Background/History Mayor presented his recommended 2017 Budget to Council on October 11, 2016. Staff Recommendation N/A Narrative During tonight's Council Meeting, staff will provide Council presentations of their 2017 budget requests. Tentative Department Budget Presentations are scheduled as follows: October 18th: Public Works Utilities, Street, Public Works Administration, Facilities Maintenance, Equipment Rental and Engineering. October 25th: 1. Economic Development; 2. Development Services; 3. Parks; 4. Human Resources; 4. City Attorney and 5. Municipal Court. November 1st: 1. Police Dept.; 2. City Clerk; 3. Mayor's Office, Council; 4. Finance & Information Services and 5. Non - departmental. November 7th: Revenue Sources and Public Comment. November 15th: Public Hearing and Potential Adoption of the 2017 Budget and Public Comment. November 22nd: Public Hearing and Potential Adoption of the 2017 Budget (if necessary) December 6th: 2017 Budget Review Adoption of the 2017 Budget (if necessary) Packet Pg. 381