Loading...
2013-04-23 City Council - Public Agenda-1492'4- o 90� AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers — Public Safety Complex 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds APRIL 23, 2013 Work Session 7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER / FLAG SALUTE 1. (5 Minutes) Roll Call 2. (5 Minutes) Approval of Agenda 3. (5 Minutes) Approval of Consent Agenda Items A. AM-5694 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2013. B. AM-5693 Approval of claim checks #201596 through #201717 dated April 18, 2013 for $1,226,036.24. Approval of payroll direct deposit & checks #60137 through #60152 for $429,100.81, benefit checks #60153 through #60160 and wire payments of $187,962.15 for the period April 1, 2013 through April 15, 2013. C. AM-5652 Approval of list of Edmonds' Businesses applying for renewal of their liquor licenses with the Washington State Liquor Control Board, March 2013. D. AM-5697 Community Services/Economic Development Department Quarterly Report - April, 2013. E. AM-5656 Report on bids opened April 16, 2013 for the 2013 Waterline Replacement Project and award of contract to D&G Backhoe in the amount of $1,304,457.70. F. AM-5654 Authorization for Mayor to approve release of a Utility Easement & acceptance and recording of new Storm Utility and Public Pedestrian Access Easement. G. AM-5692 Request to award the WWTP Standby Power Distribution and Switchgear Improvement Project to Ewing Electric, Inc. Packet Page 1 of 494 H. AM-5680 Ordinance amending the Edmonds Community Development Code to apply design standards to the BD2, BD3 and BD4 Zones to replace the requirement for building step backs. The proposal also includes a provision exempting small decorative 'blade signs' from sign code area calculation limitations. 4. (5 Minutes) Proclamation in honor of White Cane Days. AM-5672 5. (5 Minutes) Proclamation in honor of Loyalty Day. AM-5674 6. Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)* *Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings 7. (20 Minutes) Annual Reports by the Snohomish County Tourism Bureau and Snohomish County AM-5698 Tourism Promotion Area 8. (15 Minutes) Discussion: Proposed code amendment to increase the time frame for validity of AM-5687 preliminary short plat approval as established in ECDC 20.75.100 (File No. AMD20130002). 9. (10 Minutes) Approval of the Mayor's request for an additional period of appointment of Rob Chave AM-5699 as acting Director of Development Services to include January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013, and corresponding out of class pay. 10. (15 Minutes) Discussion regarding alternatives for non -represented longevity compensation.. AM-5663 11. (45 Minutes) Park Impact Study results AM-5678 12. (45 Minutes) Discussion: Shoreline Master Program Update AM-5689 13. (15 Minutes) Possible action regarding draft Resolution adopting Robert's Rules of Order as the City AM-5685 Council's new Rules of Procedure. 14. (15 Minutes) Report on outside Board and Committee Meetings. 15. (5 Minutes) Mayor's Comments 16. (15 Minutes) Council Comments 17. (15 Minutes) Convene in executive session regarding pending litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). 18. (5 Minutes) Reconvene in open session. Potential action as a result of meeting in executive session. ADJOURN Packet Page 2 of 494 AM-5694 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: Submitted By: Sandy Chase Department: City Clerk's Office Review Committee: Type: Action Committee Action: Information Subject Title Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2013. Recommendation Review and approval. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Attached is a copy of the draft minutes. 04-16-13 Draft City Council Minutes Inbox Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Sandy Chase Final Approval Date: 04/18/2013 Attachments Form Review Reviewed By Date Dave Earling 04/18/2013 03:14 PM Sandy Chase 04/18/2013 03:23 PM Started On: 04/18/2013 11:51 AM 3. A. Packet Page 3 of 494 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES April 16, 2013 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5tn Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Lora Petso, Council President Frank Yamamoto, Councilmember Joan Bloom, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Strom Peterson, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember* * participated by phone in Agenda Items 7 —11 ALSO PRESENT Walker Kasinadhuni, Student Representative 1. ROLL CALL STAFF PRESENT Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic Development Director Phil Williams, Public Works Director Ronald Cone, Interim Finance Director Rob English, City Engineer Kernen Lien, Senior Planner Renee McRae, Recreation Manager Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder City Clerk Sandy Chase called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of Councilmembers Buckshnis and Peterson. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETSO, TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS AND PETERSON. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Council President Petso requested Item 16 be removed from the agenda. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER YAMAMOTO, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Bloom requested Item N be removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 1 Packet Page 4 of 494 A. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 2, 2013. B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #201326 THROUGH #201472 DATED APRIL 4, 2013 FOR $1,847,241.94 (REISSUED CHECKS #201395 $118.27 & #201396 $104.26), AND CLAIM CHECKS #201473 THROUGH #201594 DATED APRIL 11, 2013 FOR $188,617.98 (REISSUED CHECK #201527 $68.49). APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT & CHECKS #60108 THROUGH #60123 AND #60136 FOR $469,312.58, BENEFIT CHECKS #60124 THROUGH #60135 AND WIRE PAYMENTS OF $201,375.27 FOR THE PERIOD MARCH 16, 2013 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2013. C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECK #201595 DATED APRIL 11, 2013 FOR $219.00. D. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM JAIMIE WINNETT AND RICK PATNEAUDE ($8,388.20). E. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDMONDS AND SNOHOMISH COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT NO. 1 REGARDING CLASSES. F. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN ANNUAL SPECIAL EVENT CONTRACTS. G. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO APPROVE ACCEPTANCE AND RECORDING OF A WATER UTILITY EASEMENT. H. REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE TALBOT ROAD GRIND AND OVERLAY SMALL WORKS PROJECT AND ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT. I. QUARTERLY PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT REPORT. J. SURPLUS OF COMPUTERS AND MONITORS AND DONATION TO INTERCONNECTION. K. FEBRUARY 2013 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT. L. AUTHORIZATION TO CONTRACT WITH JAMES G. MURPHY TO SELL SURPLUS CITY VEHICLES. M. HR REPORTING DIRECTOR SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT. ITEM N: ACTING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR ASSIGNMENT Councilmember Bloom apologized for scheduling this on the Consent Agenda, recalling a number of questions were raised at the Public Safety and Personnel Committee meeting. She raised the following issues: • The process for approval of this position including whether an interim director position could be approved on the Consent Agenda. • Approval of the assignment now when the position was vacated on December 31, 2012. • Issues raised at the March 6, 2012 meeting related to the interim appointment process in the code have not been followed up on. She suggested scheduling this item on a future agenda and to include the minutes of the March 6, 2012 meeting in the packet. MAYOR PRO TEM PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM, TO SCHEDULE THIS ITEM ON NEXT WEEK'S AGENDA. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 2 Packet Page 5 of 494 Mayor Earling requested an opportunity to address this item. Council President Petso asked if there were any objections to Mayor Earling addressing this topic. No objections were voiced. Mayor Earling explained Rob Chave has done an exemplary job in this position for the past year. He was hesitant to delay it as Mr. Chave was on vacation and could not be reached for questions, funds for the acting position are included in the 2013 budget, and there are no funds available to hire a full-time director. Mr. Chave has agreed to remain as the acting director and has done an exemplary job leading the department, a fact other directors were likely to agree with. He reiterated he was hesitant to delay as there was no one in charge now. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about Mayor Earling's comment that there was no one in charge. Mayor Earling advised there was no interim director at this time because Mr. Chave was on vacation. Councilmember Bloom pointed out there has not been an interim director in that position since the appointment expired on December 31, 2012. Mayor Earling advised Mr. Chave has been acting in that role and was aware the assignment would need to be re -approved by the Council. Mayor Earling assured Mr. Chave was the person who has kept that department engaged and moving forward. Councilmember Yamamoto said he was unsure why this was an issue when the Council had approved it in March 2012 and little had changed since that time. His dealings with Mr. Chave have been fine and there had been few problems. He summarized the Council had discussed this assignment previously along with the Acting Human Resources Director and little had changed. Council President Petso clarified the delay was not about Mr. Chave in the position but the lack of information in the packet and her understanding a year ago that it was a temporary appointment. She would appreciate clarification of the approval process and determining whether the code amendments discussed last year were needed. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed Mr. Chave does a fantastic job and always thoroughly answered her questions. As Mr. Chave would be gone for another week, she felt a week's delay would not be problematic. MOTION CARRIED (4-1), COUNCILMEMBER YAMAMOTO VOTING NO. 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS As Council meetings are now aired live, Mayor Earling cautioned speakers against giving their address as it could be used for someone to burglarize their residence while they were at the Council meeting. Richard Senderoff, Edmonds, stated his comments regarding Harbor Square represent his own perspectives and not the Economic Development Commission on which he serves as a Commissioner and are consistent with previous comments he shared with the Port, Council and the community. He urged the Council to continue discussions regarding the Harbor Square subarea, explaining a subarea plan should strike a balance between certainty and flexibility. He did not feel the original Port Harbor Square Master Plan met this condition and contributed to the emotional and polarizing response from the community. He referenced a term used by Councilmember Buckshnis, non -monetary capital, elements on which the community places high intrinsic value that contribute to quality of life and the Edmonds brand such as low level architecture and environmental protection. A balance between certainty and flexibility forms the basis of incentive zoning where base zoning is established at what currently exist and bonuses provided if specific criteria are met that address other unmet needs that citizens value and are consistent with surrounding neighborhoods. That seems to be the Council's direction and is consistent with the concepts Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 3 Packet Page 6 of 494 proposed in the draft Westgate redevelopment plan by the UW Green Futures Lab. Although he favors protecting low level architecture in downtown Edmonds, he also places great value in restoring the wildlife sanctuary beyond no net loss and realizes stormwater and flooding at Harbor Square needs to be addressed. He urged the Council to show leadership and continue down this road. Darlene Stern, Edmonds, said her comments are her own and do not represent the viewpoints of any of the organizations of which she is a member. She questioned the Council's vision for the community and themselves, if they had a plan to improve city revenues, when they would implement a plan, if they expected to work as a team or a partnership with other organizations, and whether they respectfully considered all points of view. The Port presented a plan to bring freshness and energy to the community while providing public spaces, marsh enhancement and needed revenue. She asked what the Council envisioned as the outcome of their refusal to consider any aspect of the Harbor Square Master Plan because of the issue of building height. Building height is a minor issue in the larger outcome of benefits and, had the plan been accepted, the Council would still have control of the building height issue. She viewed the Plan as a win -win. Even if the Council develops a new plan, there is no assurance the Port will be interested in being a partner. She suggested contacting the Port to consider and comment on the city's proposal. The last new commercial building in Edmonds was the bank on 5th and Dayton, seven years ago. Without development, the Council has little choice but to ask taxpayers for more money or continue the decline that has occurred during the 12 years she has been a resident. The city will be out of money by 2015; she inquired about the Council's vision and timeframe to increase revenue. She was concerned with the demeanor of some Councilmembers, the disrespect shown to the city's directors, demands that a Port representative answer questions put forth in a condescending and accusing manner, and brushing aside the detailed research done by the Planning Board and citizens. She referred to the first objective in the Strategic Plan, to create economic health, economic vitality and sustainability, and asked the Council's vision to achieve this objective. She looked forward to the prosperity resulting from the implementation of the Council's vision. Mike Schindler, Edmonds, a resident and business owner doing government consulting, explained after the Harbor Square fiasco, he felt he should give back to the process. He favored putting personal agendas and party politics aside and focusing on the 1% that can be agreed on and moving forward 100% on that 1%. He cited what the Council gave up by voting no: $1.4 million of one-time revenue, $312,000 of ongoing revenues and 385+ jobs. He asked the Council what their plan is, explaining saying no to a plan is not a plan. By saying no to the plan, the Council has saddled Edmonds taxpayers with increased taxes. Without a plan, the Council's legacy will be preserving a declining revenue base. Some Councilmembers were caught up in personal agendas, party politics and listening to the few instead of looking how future generations can live in Edmonds if there are no efforts to attract businesses, housing and a destination. Although he was in favor of preserving the marsh, he asked who took a vacation to a marsh? He encouraged the Council to develop a plan. Richard Bisbee, Edmonds, invited the public to a viewing of the film "Chasing Ice" at 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 23, hosted by Sustainable Edmonds and the Sierra Club. Following the movie, Dr. Richard Gammon, UW Professor of Atmospheric Science, will discuss climate change. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, asked the intent of the motion made at the March 19, 2013 Council meeting, "to work with the staff provided a draft of the subarea plan known as Harbor Square as a basis to develop a new plan," that passed 4-3 with Councilmembers Peterson, Buckshnis, Yamamoto and Johnson voting yes. He posed several questions that he hoped would be answered this evening: • Did the motion to direct staff to develop a new plan constitute denial of the Port's application? • Was it an option to develop a new subarea plan without first denying the Port's Comprehensive Plan amendment application? If so were funds available in the budget for staff to prioritize and develop a new subarea plan related to Harbor Square? Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 4 Packet Page 7 of 494 Does developing a new subarea plan require docketing a new plan proposal that needs to go through the planning process? Would Port and City taxpayers have benefits from a concurrent Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone process? Would a concurrent process have been more efficient than a Comprehensive Plan amendment followed by a future rezone effort or development agreement? Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, stated two weeks ago staff proposed a change to the code under the guise of removing step -backs in the BC zone and changing a couple other things but did not mention building heights. During discussion some Councilmembers realized the proposed change included increasing building heights from 25 feet to 30 feet. Council President Petso's motion to retain the 25-foot building height failed 4-3. Councilmembers Johnson, Peterson, Buckshnis and Yamamoto voted to change building heights from 25 feet to 30 feet, a fact to remember in future elections. Dave Page, Edmonds, referred to Agenda Item 7, and recommended the Council either adopt Roberts Rules of Order or begin following the existing rules. He was subject to Robert's Rules while in local realtor associations. He was irritated by Councilmembers who address each other rather than the Chair, get into arguments with each other and audience members and suggested those practices stop. He noted factions and undercurrents on the Council make it obvious Councilmembers are not following Robert's Rules of Order or any rules. He expressed concern with Councilmembers speaking while members of the public were speaking and suggested Councilmembers pay attention to the meeting rather than their iPads. 5. PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF EARTH DAY, APRIL 22, 2013. Mayor Earling read a proclamation designating April 22, 2013 as Earth Day. He presented the proclamation to Cynthia Pruitt, Rebecca Wolfe, Richard Bisbee, and Bob and Janice Freeman. Bob Freeman thanked the City for the proclamation. He explained Earth Day dates back to 1970 nationally and 2006 in Edmonds. Although climate change is a global issue, much progress can be made at a local level. He looked forward to seeing Councilmembers at the Edmonds Climate Protection Committee meetings on the first Thursday of the month at 9:00 a.m. 6. PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF THE OPENING OF THE SWEDISH CANCER INSTITUTE AT EDMONDS. Mayor Earling referred to the new building on Highway 99, the Swedish Cancer Institute. He read a proclamation declaring April 17, 2013 as Swedish Cancer Institute at Edmonds Day. He presented the proclamation to Swedish Edmonds Chief Executive David Jaffee. Mr. Jaffee expressed his appreciation for the proclamation, commenting today is a glorious day at Swedish Edmonds, bringing state-of-the-art cancer care closer to home for patients in need. Councilmember Johnson reported she attended the open house. She congratulated Swedish Edmonds on an extraordinary, state-of-the-art facility that can serve up to 175 patients per day. She referred to the art of healing that represents 13 artists via various media throughout the building. 7. TRAINING AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING A DRAFT RESOLUTION ADOPTING ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER AS THE CITY COUNCIL'S NEW RULES OF PROCEDURE. (Councilmember Buckshnis joined the Council meeting by telephone at 7:38 p.m.) Mayor Earling provided background on Ann Macfarlane, Jurassic Parliament. Ms. Macfarlane commended the Council's consideration of adopting Robert's Rules which she strongly recommended. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 5 Packet Page 8 of 494 She explained in some respects, Robert's Rules is a terrible book, over 800 pages. The original book was first published as a small pocket manual. Over the years substantial additions have been made. There is a core to Robert's Rules that is essential to the free and democratic society and her company, Jurassic Parliament, focuses on that core. She noted Robert's Rules recognizes this and have published "Robert's Rules in Brief." If the Council adopts Robert's Rules, they will have a strong foundation and can proceed to build on it based on the principles. She described the two types of organizations: 1. Accountability Hierarchy: a leader at the top with members below in rank and status 2. Voluntary Association: a leader is a peer and each member has equal standing. The Council is a Voluntary Association. She highlighted the three duties of a leader: • Manage or administer the association • Lead the association • Preside at the association's meetings Ms. Macfarlane reviewed the six principles of meetings (with credit to Jim Lochrie): 1. The majority must be allowed to rule. 2. The minority have rights that must be respected. 3. Members have a right to information to help make decisions. 4. Courtesy and respect are required. 5. All members have equal rights, privileges and obligations. 6. Members have a right to an efficient meeting. She provided a key point: The role of the presider is paradoxical — the most important person and the least important person in the room. Council President Petso asked about the process in Robert's Rules when the Mayor requests an opportunity to speak. Her practice has been to ask the Council, a practice for which she has been criticized. Ms. Macfarlane answered Robert's Rules is silent on the matter of a Mayor in a Mayor -Council setting. The Council will want to establish special rules of order to address that. She agreed with the way Council President Petso handled it tonight, asking if there was any objection to the Mayor speaking. She summarized the phrases "without objection" or "is there any objection" are among the most useful for a presider as it acknowledges the group is the final authority. If a member voices an objection, the Council President immediately takes a vote. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the principle, members have a right to information, pointing out the Mayor had the ability to provide the information. Ms. Macfarlane agreed, noting the decision to allow the Mayor or staff to provide the information rests with the Council. Ms. Macfarlane continued her comments regarding the paradoxical role of the presider; it follows that the presider must be strict on process. The presider is not responsible for the decision the group makes. The group is the final authority. She provided authority for the above: • RCW 35A.12.120: The council shall determine its own rules and order of business, and may establish rules for the conduct of council meetings and the maintenance of order. • Common Parliamentary Law (Robert's Rules of Order is the most commonly used and accepted formulation of common parliamentary law in the U.S.) Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 6 Packet Page 9 of 494 Ms. Macfarlane explained Robert's Rules has "small board rules" that apply to bodies of the Council's size and offered to provide a handout regarding small board rules. The Council also has the right to craft its own rules of procedure based on the foundation of Robert's Rules. These "special rules of order" will allow discussion and debate in the way that makes the most sense for the Council. In Washington State, the presider, if a Councilmember acting in place of the Mayor, retains full rights of discussion and voting while running the meeting. State law supersedes Robert's Rules. The Council's own rules must also conform to state law. Council President Petso expressed a concern that in the small board rules, motions do not require a second. Ms. Macfarlane answered the Council is required to have seconds for motions. Council President Petso asked whether the handout on small board rules would address that. Ms. Macfarlane answered it is not written to address City Councils but she will consider that and provide input. Ms. Macfarlane reminded that discussion at board meetings is not a conversation. Structure is essential if discussion is to be fair. She provided seven essential rules: 1. All members have an equal right to speak, make motions, and vote. 2. Non-members do not have the right to speak, to make motions, or to vote. (However, the Council may invite anyone whom it chooses to speak. Staff members have this right as a matter of routine.) 3. One subject at a time 4. One person speaks at a time. 5. No interrupting. 6. Courtesy and respect are required at all times. 7. No one may speak a second time until everyone who wishes to do so has spoken once. With regard to #7, she suggested there are two methods of keeping track of who has spoken, 1) the presider keeps a list, and 2) round robin, each person is asked for comments in turn. Ms. Macfarlane provided a flow of authority at a meeting: The group adopts its rules and guidelines. In attending, members accept the rules of the group. During meetings, the presiding officer applies the rules for the benefit of the group. All persons present at a meeting have an obligation to obey the legitimate orders of the presiding officer. Any member who disagrees with a ruling, decision or order by the presiding officer may appeal the ruling. If another member seconds the appeal, the group will decide by majority vote whether the ruling, decision or order is legitimate. The presiding officer obeys the group's decision. Ms. Macfarlane described the process to raise a point of order and had Councilmembers demonstrate a point of order and appeal of a point of order. She recommended staff also be authorized to raise a point of order in the event a mistake has been made. She reviewed the process for a request for information: • This motion is a question. Used to be called "point of information." • Used to request information that is urgent and relevant to debate. • Can only be made by a member. • May interrupt a speaker when necessary. • Not used to provide information. Providing information is part of debate. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 7 Packet Page 10 of 494 She explained under Robert's Rules a motion must be made before discussion begins. In a small board it is okay to discuss something before a motion is made. She reviewed making an amendment: • You "amend" a motion to improve it. • Amendments are voted on BEFORE the main motion. • Why? To "perfect" the motion. • If the amendment passes, it becomes part of the main motion. • Very common mistake: voting on the amendment and thinking you're done. Must vote on main motion. • It feels like voting twice, but it isn't. • Once something has been amended, it takes special motions to change it again. She reviewed calling the question: • This motion is a request by a single member to stop debate and vote now. • Must not interrupt a speaker. • Requires a second and a two-thirds vote in favor to pass. • Cannot be debated. • Is often misused, violating other members' rights. She reviewed tabling: • Cannot be debated and takes only a majority to pass. • Proper use is to put something aside temporarily. • May not be used to "kill" a motion. • Presider may ask, "For what purpose does the member seek to table the motion?" • If you want to kill something without voting on it, use "motion to postpone indefinitely." Council President Petso asked about whether a motion to postpone indefinitely was debatable and how the matter could be brought back in the future. Ms. Macfarlane answered a motion to postpone is debatable and any motion that has been defeated can be reintroduced at future meetings. Councilmember Yamamoto asked if anyone could reintroduce a failed motion. Ms. Macfarlane answered yes. A motion to reconsider, which is only supposed to be used during the meeting, requires that the person introducing it voted on the prevailing side. Ms. Macfarlane reviewed abstaining: • Under Robert's Rules, to abstain is to do nothing and abstentions are not counted. • The effect of abstaining is to go along with the majority, whatever that is. • See MRSC article published April 4 on this issue. She provided information regarding motives: • Under Robert's Rules, except for conflict of interest issues, a member may not speak about the motives of other members. It is fine to speak about one's own motives. It is fine to speak about the motives of others who are not members. Ms. Macfarlane noted a member may not criticize a prior action of the group unless the action is under discussion by the body as a whole, or the member is going to introduce a motion to change or rescind it at the end of her speech. A member must support the group. A member may not make statements which tend to "injure the good name of the organization, disturb its well-being, or hamper it in its work." Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 8 Packet Page 11 of 494 She reviewed limits on debate: • Each member has the right to speak twice for up to 10 minutes at a time. • In small boards, these limits should be changed. • We recommend a 5-minute maximum for each speech. She reviewed possible dangers to governance: • Presider takes on too much responsibility. • Members become "free riders." • Outspoken members and old-timers dominate conversation. • Members don't want to be seen as troublemakers, so keep quiet when they should speak up. • People assume that somebody else has thought of their objections, so don't bring up their issues. • Members become lazy. • A culture of "go along to get along" develops. In a truly democratic system: • All members have equal rights, privileges and obligations. • Input from everyone is needed. • Differing opinions are good, not bad. • Healthy debate is essential. • Conflict should be welcomed, not swept under the rug. • We'll try for consensus, but if we don't achieve it, we'll vote. • The majority will decide. • The minority will accept the decision (gracefully we hope!) • The organization will move forward. Councilmember Johnson asked for clarification regarding working for consensus and if not achieved, voting, noting debate often follows a motion. Ms. Macfarlane answered under small board rules, the Council can have debate prior to a motion. She offered to email the Council a specific method of discussion for building consensus. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if there were other cities that followed Robert's Rules. Ms. Macfarlane answered few cities in Washington have adopted Robert's Rules. Most have their own rules of procedure or have nothing. Council President Petso recalled Robert's Rules suggests motions be stated in a positive manner and the maker of the motion vote against it if they do not support it rather than making a negative motion. For example, she asked whether a Councilmember could make a motion to deny a land use action. Ms. Macfarlane answered a motion to deny was appropriate. Robert cautions against using the word "not" in a motion. For example, rather than saying the Council does not like an action the Legislature took, say we deplore or reject the decision. She summarized a no vote on a motion that includes "not" is confusing. Ms. Macfarlane invited Councilmembers to sign up for Jurassic Parliament's free electronic newsletter. She is also available to answer Councilmembers' questions. Councilmember Johnson asked how discussions occur using Robert's Rules. Ms. Macfarlane answered there were two options, 1) have discussion prior to a motion in accordance with small board rules, or 2) make a motion and then have discussion. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas summarized her understanding that an agenda topic could be discussed and at the conclusion of discussion, the Council may/may not make a motion. Ms. Macfarlane agreed. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 9 Packet Page 12 of 494 Student Representative Walker Kasinadhuni explained he did a project regarding Robert's Rules in eighth grade. He asked how Robert's Rules was conducive to creating lively debate; it seemed to slow debate. He had not seen any evidence of rudeness or disruptiveness on the Council and questioned why it was necessary to implement Robert's Rules. Ms. Macfarlane answered she has been on many boards where following Robert's Rules with modifications has worked very well. The default for many boards is a conversation mode but it tends to be dominated by the outspoken people and may reach a certain conclusion too rapidly. Even if it is slower to utilize the round robin method, in her experience, it provided a better picture of what the entire body thinks and results in a better decision. 8. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN AMENDMENT TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN AND SIX -YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TO ADD THE STATE ROUTE-99 GATEWAY/REVITALIZATION PROJECT. Public Works Director Phil Williams explained in 2006/2007 the City conducted a significant study of Highway 99 that was limited to potential transportation improvement projects related to safety and to a less extent capacity and access. The intent of this project is to utilize the work done in that study and add additional value, specifically pedestrian amenities, access control and softscaping to improve the appearance as well as the function of the transportation system on Highway 99. The State Legislature has been debating a number of packages to improve funding for transportation statewide. One of the possibilities this year or next year is a large capital program designed to further stimulate the economy as well as solve transportation problems. The City was asked to provide a significant project with significant funding on the list for consideration. A project envisioned by Representative Marko Liias, Mayor Earling and others was to utilize some of the best features of Shoreline's frontage improvements such as pedestrian amenities, access control, softscaping, better illumination, bicycle facilities, etc. Tonight is the public hearing to add such a project, with limited scope definition, to the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP). This project is envisioned as an initial $10 million, likely applying to Phase 1. Further improvements would occur in future years via multiple phases. Council President Petso recalled at the same time Shoreline initiated their project, Edmonds initiated a project on Highway 99 to widen the road. She asked if this project would reduce travel lanes. Mr. Williams answered he did not know but there was a prioritized list of projects as a result of the Highway 99 Study that would serve as a starting point for discussion plus adding other values for a broad -based transportation improvement on Highway 99. Council President Petso asked if that list was included in the Council packet. Mr. Williams answered there was a paragraph in the description; a project scope has not yet been developed. As a resident in that corridor, Councilmember Fraley-Monillas relayed that most of the people in the area look forward to improvements. When driving from Shoreline to Edmonds, the difference in the condition of the road, number and appearance of businesses, etc. was readily apparent. She viewed this as a great first step to improve the area, noting improvements would attract people and businesses, better transportation. She noted the road was not widened the entire length; in some places the Swift buses utilize the regular travel lanes. Mr. Williams responded the goal would be to make improvements in a way that increases the efficiency and appearance of transportation facilities but also promotes a better retail climate and development on Highway 99. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas was excited by the development of medical facilities on Highway 99 and she supported improvements to the area that would attract businesses and residents in this transit -oriented area. Mr. Williams referred to the first project on the list, design and construction of improvements at 228`h and Highway 99 which is fully grant funded. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 10 Packet Page 13 of 494 Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the Hospital District and the International District and asked if the project would include gateways, sidewalks, overpasses, etc. Mr. Williams answered the softscape improvements could include undergrounding of utilities in key areas, median treatments, and gateways. Councilmember Bloom asked whether bike lanes would be included. Mr. Williams answered bicycles would be included but he was uncertain whether the project would include bike lanes on Highway 99. Councilmember Bloom asked when that decision would be made. Mr. Williams stated this project arose quickly; if funding is provided, staff will begin developing ideas for Council consideration. Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. There were no members of the audience present who wished to provide testimony and Mayor Earling closed the public hearing. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM, TO ADD THE STATE ROUTE-99 GATEWAY/BEVITALIZATION PROJECT TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN AND SIX -YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. Councilmember Johnson advised she participated in the 2007 Highway 99 study; at that time most of the projects were capacity improvements at intersections. There was insufficient time or money to include items that would be part of this project. This project is consistent with the goals, policies and objectives of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mayor Earling declared a 5 minute break. 9. AUTHORIZATION TO CONDUCT A REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL AND APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS — CITY OWNED ADMIRALTY ACRES LOT #12 (SNOHOMISH COUNTY TAX PARCEL ID NO.00370800101200). Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton explained this is a .66 acre parcel that was included within a proposed 27-lot Planned Residential Development (PRD) known as Angler's Crossing that received preliminary approval on January 22, 2007. Pursuant to a recently updated RCW, preliminary approval is valid for 9 years or until January 22, 2016. After receiving preliminary approval, the buyer failed to close on the purchase and sale agreement for this parcel and the purchase and sale agreement expired. Staff has been contacted by a number of people interested in purchasing Lot #12. He identified Lot #12 on a vicinity map, explaining it constitutes a portion of the 27-lot plat. If the PRD plat moved forward as approved the developer would need to purchase City -owned Admiralty Acres Lot #12 because some of the lots depicted on the PRD/Plat map make use of the Admiralty Acres Lot #12 property. Materials included in the Council packet include: • 1997 Contract Rezone • Map depicting Admiralty Acres Lot #12 and its location relative to Angler's Crossing PRD/Plat • Angler's Crossing Staff Report • Angler's Crossing Hearing Examiner decision • Angler's Crossing purchase and sale agreement (which has expired) • Appraisal conducted in 2005 on Lot #12 • Cost estimates to conduct the appraisal from three firms Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 11 Packet Page 14 of 494 The firms were asked to conduct two types of appraisals, 1) a standalone appraisal as if the property were not part of the PRD, and 2) as if Lot 12 were part of the PRD and including all the entitlements associated with the PRD. The cost estimates are as follows: Firm Location Cost Turnaround Time Macauley & Associates, Ltd. Everett $4,450 4-5 weeks Northwest Valuation Service Mill Creek $5,750 4 weeks Lamb Hanson Lamb Appraisal Associates, Inc. Seattle $4,500 4 weeks The City's Parks and Recreation Department has had success using Macauley & Associates in the past and Lamb Hansen Lamb conducted an appraisal on the property in 2006. At that time it appraised for approximately $200,000. In order to conduct the appraisal, the City Council will need to identify a funding source and appropriate funds. Possible funding sources include Council Contingency or Ending Fund Balance. Once completed, the appraisal will be presented to the City Council for review. Mr. Clifton relayed an issue raised by Councilmember Petso about whether height variances tied to certain lots of the Planned Residential Development (PRD) are still valid. Upon review of this issue, City staff and City Attorney have determined that the height variances do not have the same longevity as the plat/PRD itself. Because the variances were not acted on (by obtaining a building permit) and no request for an extension was filed, they have expired. In response to a question raised by Councilmember Fraley-Monillas during a meeting with Mayor Earling and Council President Petso about the use of the proceeds of the sale of the property, Mr. Clifton relayed Duane Farman who lives within the general facility of the proposed PRD recalled in 2007 the City Council discussed using the proceeds for a sight distance project on 80'`' Avenue near 184th. Senior Planner Kernen Lien's research found in April 2007 the Council passed Ordinance No. 3638 and discussed using the proceeds from the sale of the property to fund an 80th Avenue Sight Distance Project. At that time the cost of that project was $292,000. That project is contained in the Transportation Plan but not in the Capital Improvement Plan. The Council could appropriate the funds to conduct the appraisal, determine whether to sell the property and if/when the property sells, make a decision regarding use of the funds. Council President Petso observed Perrinville Creek was not depicted on the map; it was her understanding the property was located above Perrinville Creek. Mr. Lien identified the location of Perrinville Creek, concluding it is not located on this property but across Olympic View Drive. Council President Petso asked whether the study of Perrinville Creek flows has been completed to determine whether this land may be useful in addressing flows. Mr. Lien answered the study has not begun. Councilmember Buckshnis did not support funding the appraisal from the Council Contingency Fund and preferred to use operating cash. She preferred the Council Contingency be utilized for one-time appropriations. Councilmember Buckshnis supported using Macauley & Associates because Lamb Hanson Lamb Appraisal Associates conducted the appraisal in 2006. Councilmember Bloom asked for further details on the 80th Avenue Sight Distance Project. Public Works Director Phil Williams explained 80th Avenue has a pronounced crown that limits sight distance, there are residential properties on both sides, and there is an accident history. The intent was to re -grade the hill to take approximately three feet out to improve the sight distance. Councilmember Bloom asked the cost of the project. Mr. Williams answered at the time, the cost was estimated to be $292,000. Councilmember Bloom asked if the rationale for using the proceeds from the sale of the property for that project was because the project was in the vicinity. Mr. Williams answered the Council passed the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 12 Packet Page 15 of 494 ordinance with the thought the proceeds from the sale of the property would be used for this project which is on the road that the project abuts. It was also proposed that the transportation impact fees collected from the project be used to supplement the cost of the project. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the Council had to adhere to the ordinance that designated how the funds would be used. Mr. Clifton answered the ordinance did not address using the proceeds from the sale for the project. The ordinance the Council passed included the project in the Capital Improvement Program. The Council discussed using the proceeds from the sale to help fund the project. City Attorney Jeff Taraday answered it would be non -binding on the Council. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas relayed her understanding the proceeds from the sale of the property could be used for any project. Staff agreed. Councilmember Johnson asked how many appraisals would be sought. Mr. Clifton answered one, consisting of two parts. Councilmember Johnson asked if staff had been satisfied with the previous appraisal. Mr. Clifton answered it was thorough and $200,000 was reasonable at that time, which was the peak of the market. The appraisal done in 2006 did not include entitlements because it preceded preliminary plat approval in 2007. Councilmember Bloom asked why the City originally wanted to sell the property. Mr. Clifton referred to the Angler's Crossing subdivision, explaining 4-5 lots of the 27 lot Angler's subdivision are located on the property owned by the City and a portion is retained as open space. In order for the plat to be developed, the City needs to sell the property. The Council discussed selling the property in 2006 and using the proceeds for the sight distance project prior to the Hearing Examiner's decision. Councilmember Bloom asked if the City used the property. Mr. Clifton replied no, it is in its natural state. Councilmember Bloom asked if there were any critical areas on the property. Mr. Lien answered the site is very steep and would meet erosion hazards if not landslide hazard areas. He referred to the Angler's Crossing plat, pointing out the majority of the property was set aside as open space as required in the PRD with a few of the buildable lots extending into it. The lot would remain primarily in a natural state. Mr. Lien identified the City -owned parcel in the plat on a vicinity map. Councilmember Yamamoto asked whether the property was vital to completing the PRD. Mr. Lien answered if the City did not sell the property, the PRD would need to go through the process again because the parcel is integral to the plat/PRD. Council President Petso asked if the preliminary plat approved in 2007 had expired. Mr. Lien answered the preliminary plat was approved January 22, 2007; recent changes to State law extended the approval to 9 years or January 22, 2016. Another amendment, SHB 1074, has been approved by the Legislature and will extend preliminary plat approval for subdivisions that received approval prior to December 31, 2007. COUNCILMEMBER YAMAMOTO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, THAT THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZE A REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL UTILIZING THE THREE FIRMS MR. CLIFTON SUGGESTED, WITH FUNDING FROM ENDING FUND BALANCE. Council President Petso said she will vote against the motion as she was not ready to make a decision to sell the property because it is in the Perrinville Creek study area. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-2), COUNCILMEMBERS YAMAMOTO, FRALEY- MONILLAS, JOHNSON AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETSO AND COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM VOTING NO. Councilmember Johnson commented the intent of the motion was to authorize the appraisal but mentioned three appraisals although staff intends to only obtain one appraisal. Mr. Clifton responded he contacted three firms to obtain a cost estimate; any one of the three firms may conduct the appraisal. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 13 Packet Page 16 of 494 10. CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON INCORPORATING THE HARBOR SQUARE MASTER PLAN INTO THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Council President Petso relayed a request from Councilmember Peterson, who was unable to be at tonight's meeting and was unable to phone in, that the Council not take definitive action on this item tonight. Council President Petso hoped the Council would achieve clarity on options in light of the Port's decision to withdraw their application. Councilmember Buckshnis commented there seems to be a tremendous amount of confusion as was indicated during audience comments. The Council has not finished the process and has not reviewed the Planning Board's recommendations. She relayed her understanding the Council was moving through a subarea plan, however, the agenda memo states because the Port has withdrawn their application for a master plan, continued planning for Harbor Square would require docketing a new plan proposal. City Attorney Jeff Taraday answered he did not draft the agenda memo. The City Code does not state what happens in the event a Comprehensive Plan amendment application is withdrawn by the applicant. It is a legislative process and a legislative determination; therefore an argument can be made that the Council can proceed, not withstanding withdrawal of an application. Even if the Council decided it wanted to start the process over to ensure there was no confusion, it could conclude its deliberations at this state, and remand to the Planning Board with direction and guidance regarding the subarea plan and the Planning Board could conduct public hearings. He envisioned the Council would have opted to send the plan back to the Planning Board for further public comment in light of the significant changes that have been made even if the Port had not withdrawn its application. With regard to docketing, Mr. Taraday referred to ECDC 20.00.020 that states upon receipt of a completed application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment or upon direction of the Council and following department review, hearings shall be set before the Planning Board and City Council. He clarified under this code provision an application was not required to start the process, only the direction of the City Council was required. It is less clear what happens if the Council chooses to proceed forward. The City Council has the legislative discretion to restart its own planning process and send it back to the Planning Board. Councilmember Buckshnis summarized her understanding that the Council could move forward if they chose. She asked whether the Port could reapply in the future using the same application if the Council chose not to move forward. Mr. Taraday answered yes. Councilmember Buckshnis agreed all Councilmembers should be present when a decision is made. She referred to Mr. Reidy's question whether the City Council technically denied the Port's plan by rejecting the Port's plan and moving forward with a new plan. Mr. Taraday advised the code allows the Council to modify an application. He referred to 20.00.040, the City Council shall consider the recommendation and may at that time or subsequently, approve, approve with modifications or disapprove the proposed amendment. He acknowledged there could be a question regarding what was meant by approve with modifications. The final City Council modifications are not yet known and therefore it is difficult to say whether the final modifications would have been similar enough to the Port's application to be considered an approval with modifications. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the Harbor Square subarea plan could be tabled and other subarea plans such as Westgate and Five Corners that include incentive zoning, bonuses, and base height, moved forward. Mr. Taraday answered the withdrawal of the application alleviates the Council from the timelines in 20.00.040 as there is no longer an applicant waiting for the Council to take action. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 14 Packet Page 17 of 494 Councilmember Buckshnis advised she preferred to continue with the process but wait until all Councilmembers were present. Council President Petso referred to legal advice reflected in the February 5, 2013 minutes that the Council could modify the plan however it wanted and there was no requirement that the modifications resemble the Port's original plan. Yet tonight Mr. Taraday used the language "similar enough" when referring to modifications. She asked if the process had to start over if the plan was not similar enough. Mr. Taraday answered the code was not clear when a change was significant enough that it must go back to the Planning Board. He recalled the discussion at the February meeting was whether the City Council was required to make an up/down decision on the Port's vision or could it embark on its own visioning exercise. His legal advice at that time was the Council could embark on its own visioning exercise. Whether the Council would want to send that back to the Planning Board out of an abundance of caution to provide the public process contemplated by ECDC 20.00 may have depended upon what the Council's final deliberations looked like. Council President Petso recalled at the February meeting, it was contemplated the Port may bail on the plan if the Council did not stay true enough to their original proposal. And if the Port bailed, the Council could continue working on a modified proposal. Council President Petso asked if there was any legal effect of the Port's decision to withdraw their application. Mr. Taraday answered there was no legal effect on the ultimate outcome; the City Council can develop a subarea plan for the Harbor Square property; it does not matter whether the Port likes the City's plan. It is less clear procedurally. Out of an abundance of caution and to provide the full public process contemplated by ECDC 20.00, it may be prudent for the City Council to send the plan back to the Planning Board. Council President Petso asked whether it would be cleaner if the Council denied the Port's Harbor Square Master Plan and sent a new subarea plan through the full public process. Mr. Taraday answered the Port's withdrawal of their application makes denial a moot point. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the statement in the Port's letter, "the Council formally voted to stop consideration of the Port's proposed Master Plan," was accurate. Mr. Taraday answered he was uncertain the exact verbiage of the motion but recalled certain Councilmembers made comments to that effect. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas questioned if the Port would have withdrawn their application if there was not a vote to stop consideration. Mr. Taraday responded that was a question for the Port. Councilmember Bloom read the motion: "Councilmember Buckshnis moved, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to work with the staff -provided draft of the subarea plan known as Harbor Square as a basis to develop a new plan. The motion passed 4-3." She assumed that was the action the Port was referring to. Mr. Taraday reiterated that was a question for the Port. His interpretation of the motion was the City Council would continue planning for Harbor Square in a way that was not necessarily tied to the proposal made by the Port. Because he never saw the results of the City Council's process, he was unable to say that it was a fair characterization that the City Council was no longer considering the Port's plan. The process would need to be concluded in order to judge whether Council's plan contained any similarities to the Port's plan. Council President Petso asked the normal procedure for a Council -initiated Comprehensive Plan amendment. Mr. Lien referred to ECDC 20.00, explaining a party could request a Comprehensive Plan amendment or it could be directed by the City Council. If started by the City Council, direction would be given to the Planning Board to work on the amendment followed by the same process followed for the Harbor Square Master Plan, deliberations and public hearing at the Planning Board and a recommendation to the City Council. He summarized the same process is followed; only the initiation is different. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 15 Packet Page 18 of 494 Council President Petso recalled the process typically includes public hearings at the Planning Board over the summer, public hearing at Council and adoption in December. Mr. Lien explained there typically is more than one Comprehensive Plan amendment in a year; the Council may consider and make decisions on several amendments and they are all approved in one ordinance at the end of the year. Mr. Taraday explained if the City Council drafted a subarea plan for Harbor Square, it would not necessarily be tied to that schedule. Council President Petso summarized her understanding the normal process would start at the Planning Board with public hearing and adoption by the Council in December. Mr. Lien explained applications for private amendments must be submitted by December 31 for consideration in the following year. The City may also docket elements of the Comprehensive Plan such as the Sewer Comprehensive Plan that is being considered this year. All the Comprehensive Plan amendments are then adopted via one ordinance. Council President Petso asked if the Council made a determination by May 7, could an amendment go through the normal process this year? Mr. Lien answered the agenda memo also addresses concerns with staffing if the planning process were to begin again. Given current priorities such as the code rewrite and increased permitting as well as current staffing levels, there are concerns about whether there are sufficient resources to undertake this work. Council President Petso asked whether a high level Comprehensive Plan amendment would be less burdensome on staff than a detailed subarea plan. Mr. Lien answered there may be fewer meetings but the process takes the same amount of time. Councilmember Yamamoto asked if a subarea plan would be easier since there were not the time limits associated with a Comprehensive Plan amendment. He was uncertain why the process would be started over again. Mr. Lien answered subarea plans do not adhere to the once a year Comprehensive Plan amendment schedule and could be adopted whenever the Council completed it. A subarea plan does not provide more brevity as far as staff time and input. Councilmember Buckshnis complimented staff on the work they have done, particularly Exhibits 2 and 3. Exhibit 3 addresses the 14 Planning Board recommendations. She disagreed with the Port's interpretation that the Council rejected the Port's Plan; her motion was simply that the Council was no longer working off the Port's plan. She suggested taking a break and then moving forward on the subarea plan. Observing the contract rezone for Harbor Square prohibits residential, Councilmember Bloom asked if the Port would be required to apply for a contract rezone if the Council included residential in a Comprehensive Plan amendment or a subarea plan. Mr. Taraday stated if the new subarea plan for Harbor Square contemplated residential development, some type of rezoning would be necessary either via the regular legislative process or another contract rezone or development agreement. He summarized some type of zoning change would be necessary to make the Comprehensive Plan consistent with the zoning. Councilmember Bloom asked if that process would be initiated by the Port. Mr. Taraday answered not necessarily the Port; the City could initiate that process as well. Councilmember Bloom questioned the amount of work necessary to make the current zoning, which prohibits residential, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan if residential is included in a subarea plan or a Comprehensive Plan amendment. Mr. Taraday answered the amount of work would depend on the kind of rezoning. For example, if an existing zoning classification that includes residential is applied to Harbor Square, it would not require a great deal of work. Conversely creating new development regulations that only applied to Harbor Square would be a great deal of work. Councilmember Bloom asked about the public process for a zoning change. Mr. Taraday answered Planning Board and City Council. Councilmember Bloom asked whether public hearings would be required at both. Mr. Taraday answered he believed so. Councilmember Bloom observed it would be a long process either way. Mr. Taraday agreed there would be a process. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 16 Packet Page 19 of 494 Councilmember Bloom asked if the process would be shorter if the Port applied for a contract rezone that included residential. Mr. Taraday answered he did not think so, and that process would be quasi-judicial. Councilmember Johnson commented 60 minutes had been allotted on the agenda for continued discussion on incorporating the Harbor Square Master Plan into the City's Comprehensive Plan. She suggested the Council decide if they wanted to review the Planning Board's recommendations. She felt the Council had an obligation to follow through with that process. Council President Petso advised next week's agenda is full and suggested time be allocated for a decision on May 7, assuming all Councilmembers would be present. Councilmember Johnson asked if the time allocated could be used for that discussion tonight. Council President Petso observed the time allocated had already been used to discuss the process. Mayor Earling requested an opportunity to speak. Council President Petso asked if there were any objections; none were voiced. Mayor Earling suggested after watching the dynamics in the community for the last several weeks, taking a timeout in the process to allow things to settle down. He acknowledged there were strong feelings on both sides of the issue and suggested slowing the process. He referred to current workloads and short staffing as well as priorities such as the Shoreline Master Plan and code rewrite along with increased permitting. He summarized he had a concern with providing direction that would result in extensive work by staff. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed this had been overwhelming for the City. The Port's withdrawal of their application has slowed the process. She suggested the Council discuss starting the process in a thoughtful, slow manner but she did not support a 4-5 month delay and then a rushed process. If the Council chose to move ahead, she favored beginning fairly soon and taking the time to digest it rather than reacting emotionally to the project. Councilmember Buckshnis agreed with Councilmember Johnson, pointing out there are only two more pages to review. She suggested a 15 minute discussion at the next Council meeting. She agreed with Mayor Earling on slowing down the process, commenting the public is very emotional and many do not understand what is going on. Council President Petso advised a 15 minute discussion could be squeezed into next week's agenda. She noted there are already three hours of agenda items scheduled. Other options include up to 30 minutes on May 7 and the June 4 agenda is open. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 30 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Yamamoto spoke in favor of having a 30 minute discussion on May 7 versus 15 minutes next week. Councilmember Johnson asked which Council meeting is a workshop. Council President Petso answered the work session is next week, April 23. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule a 30 minute discussion at the May 7 meeting. 11. FORMAL REOUEST FROM KING COUNTY AND THE CITY OF SEATTLE FOR $5,000 TO SUPPORT A HEALTH IMPACTS ASSESSMENT OF THE PACIFIC GATEWAY COAL TERMINAL PROPOSAL. Mayor Earling advised he emailed Councilmembers several supporting documents. Several cities in Washington and Oregon are participating in the study including Marysville and possibly Everett. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 17 Packet Page 20 of 494 COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE $5,000 TO STUDY THE HEALTH IMPACTS OF THE PACIFIC GATEWAY COAL TERMINAL PROPOSAL. Council President Petso asked about the funding source. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested ending cash. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested funding the one-time expenditure for this important study from the $25,000 balance in the Council Contingency Fund. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled the Council Contingency Fund was 45% used. Finance Director Ron Cone responded that he did not know the status of the Council Contingency Fund. Council President Petso referred to a printout of the Council Contingency fund, advising there was $25,000 in the fund and most expenditures are on track although she acknowledged legal fees are a variable. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas stated she was satisfied with funding it from the Council Contingency Fund. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS WITHDREW HER MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO AUTHORIZE EXPENDITURE OF $5,000 FROM THE COUNCIL CONTINGENCY FUND TO SUPPORT A HEALTH IMPACTS ASSESSMENT OF THE PACIFIC GATEWAY COAL TERMINAL PROPOSAL. Councilmember Bloom said she would vote against the Council Contingency Fund as a funding source in light of Council President Petso's comment that attorney fees are variable. Council President Petso asked Councilmember Buckshnis to explain her rationale for funding this from the Council Contingency Fund when an earlier expenditure was from ending cash. Councilmember Buckshnis responded the appraisal has nothing to do with the Council and is related to operating. In the past, no more than $10,000 had been spent on attorney fees from the Council Contingency Fund. It was important for the Council to show their interest in this study via funding from the Council Contingency Fund. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Buckshnis discontinued her participation by phone at approximately 10:09 p.m.) 12. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS OF APRIL 8 AND 9, 2013. Finance Committee Councilmember Yamamoto reported the committee discussed surplus of computers and monitors and donation to InterConnection and also authorization to contract with James G. Murphy to sell surplus vehicles; both were approved on tonight's Consent Agenda. The committee further reviewed the February 2013 Monthly Financial Report which was approved on the Consent Agenda. Ron Wambolt and Bruce Witenberg provided public comment at the meeting. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 18 Packet Page 21 of 494 Public Safety and Personnel Committee Councilmember Bloom reported on the committee's discussion of the following: • HR Reporting Director special assignment — approved on the Consent Agenda • Acting Development Services Director assignment — pulled from the Consent Agenda and referred to discussion next week • Consideration of mandatory bike helmets — Chief Compaan will work with the City Attorney on an ordinance for Council consideration • Resolution regarding Robert's Rules — discussed on tonight's agenda • Code of Ethics — Bainbridge Island's Code of Ethics will be used as a framework with inclusion of provisions from other cities' Code of Ethics. The City Attorney will be asked to draft a policy for Council review. The Council will also discuss forming an Ethics Board Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee Councilmember Johnson reported four items were approved on tonight's Consent Agenda and one item will be on next week's Consent Agenda. She reported on the committee's discussion of the following: • Report on the Five Corners Roundabout Project — the project will not start in 2013 due to complications related to underground easements and construction • Proposed Interlocal Agreement between Snohomish County and the City of Edmonds for the SR99-2281h Street SW Corridor and Safety Improvements — scheduled for further discussion at a future Council meeting • Tracking of items referred by Council to the Economic Development Commission or Planning Board — agreed quarterly Planning Board reports will continue and the Planning Board extended agenda will be available online. The Planning Board and staff requested direction from the Council on proceeding with the Five Corners or Westgate subarea plans. Council President Petso offered to schedule that on a future Council agenda. 13. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling reported a delegation of 27 visited Hekinan, Japan, to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Sister City relationship and the 65t`' anniversary of Hekinan's formation. The delegation received a wonderful reception from the citizens of Hekinan and was kept busy from 8:00 a.m. to 10 p.m. for 7 days straight. He had meetings with heads of the Chamber of Commerce and the hospital and spoke at two gatherings. A Hekinan delegation is looking forward to visiting Edmonds in October. 14. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Yamamoto said his thoughts and prayer s are with the participants and spectators at the Boston Marathon. Council President Petso said the resolution regarding Robert's Rules will be scheduled on next week's agenda. Other items under consideration for future agendas include changes to the Economic Development Commission ordinance and possibly a mini Council retreat on a Friday afternoon. She invited Councilmembers to provide input on both those items. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to comments made under Audience Comments about Councilmembers using their iPads during Council meetings and not paying attention. She explained Councilmembers were provided computers to view the Council packet; and paper packets, which require staff time to copy and deliver, were discontinued. Using the computer to view packets is also more environmentally friendly. She assured Councilmembers were using their computers to look up information and some Councilmembers take notes. She concluded the computers were a great use of staff time and resources. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 19 Packet Page 22 of 494 Mayor Earling advised each of the 27 members of the Hekinan delegation paid for their own expenses. 15. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). Mayor Earling relayed City Attorney Jeff Taraday's indication that the executive session could be deferred. It was the consensus of the Council to defer the executive session. 16. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION This item was removed from the agenda via action under Agenda Item 1. 17. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:23 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2013 Page 20 Packet Page 23 of 494 AM-5693 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: Consent Submitted For: Ronald Cone Department: Finance Review Committee: Type: Action Tnfnrmatinn Submitted By: 3. B. Nori Jacobson Committee Action: Approve for Consent Agenda Subject Title Approval of claim checks #201596 through #201717 dated April 18, 2013 for $1,226,036.24. Approval of payroll direct deposit & checks #60137 through #60152 for $429,100.81, benefit checks #60153 through #60160 and wire payments of $187,962.15 for the period April 1, 2013 through April 15, 2013. Recommendation Approval of claim, payroll and benefit direct deposit, checks and wire payments. Previous Council Action N/A 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. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Year: 2013 Revenue: Expenditure: 1,843,099.20 Fiscal Impact: Claims $1,226,036.24 Payroll Employee checks and direct deposit $429,100.81 Payroll Benefit checks and wire payments $187,962.15 Total Payroll $617,062.96 AttarhmPntc Claim Checks 04-18-13 Payroll Benefit 04-15-13 Packet Page 24 of 494 Payroll Summary 04-15-13 Project Numbers 04-18-13 Inbox City Clerk Mayor Finalize for Agenda Fonn Started By: Nori Jacobson Final Approval Date: 04/18/2013 Form Review Reviewed By Date Sandy Chase 04/18/2013 11:50 AM Dave Earling 04/18/2013 03:15 PM Sandy Chase 04/18/2013 03:23 PM Started On: 04/18/2013 11:17 AM Packet Page 25 of 494 vchlist 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Page: 1 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201596 4/16/2013 064183 WA STATE LEOFF EDUCATION ASSOC 04/16/13 2013 WSLEA Conference - 5/7 - 5/10 2013 WSLEA Conference - 5/7 - 5/10 009.000.39.517.37.49.00 290.00 Total: 290.00 201597 4/18/2013 070322 A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC 2-4-13/2-28-13 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 1,754.94 Total: 1,754.94 201598 4/18/2013 074384 ADCOASTERS PSSH-CS-004 PUGET SOUND STARTS HERE - CC Puget Sound Starts Here - Coffee Sle 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 883.80 Total: 883.80 201599 4/18/2013 000850 ALDERWOOD WATER DISTRICT 9307 MONTHLY WHOLESALE WATER Cl- MONTHLY WHOLESALE WATER Cl- 421.000.74.534.80.33.00 96,974.70 Total: 96,974.70 201600 4/18/2013 071844 AMTEST AIR QUALITY LLC 4714AT-02 WWTP - INCINERATOR TESTING WWTP - INCINERATOR TESTING 423.100.76.594.39.41.10 13,838.75 Total: 13,838.75 201601 4/18/2013 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 655-6749716 UNIFORM SERVICE UNIFORM SERVICE 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 31.74 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 3.02 Total: 34.76 201602 4/18/2013 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 655-6678653 FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 18.55 9.5% Sales Tax Page: 1 Packet Page 26 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 201602 4/18/2013 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 1.76 655-6678659 WWTP UNIFORMS, TOWELS, & MA WWTP UNIFORMS 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 1.14 WWTP TOWELS & MATS 423.000.76.535.80.41.11 54.10 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 0.11 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.11 5.14 655-6683102 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 001.000.65.519.91.41.00 1.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 4.09 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.519.91.41.00 0.10 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax Page: 2 Packet Page 27 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 201602 4/18/2013 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.38 655-6683103 STREET/STORM DIVISION UNIFOR STREET/STORM DIVISION UNIFOR 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 5.13 STREET/STORM DIVISION UNIFOR 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 5.12 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 0.49 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 0.48 655-6683104 FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MAT FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 3.11 FLEET DIVISION MATS 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 6.89 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 0.30 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.65 655-6690525 FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 18.55 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 1.76 655-6690530 WWTP UNIFORMS, TOWELS, & MA WWTP UNIFORMS 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 11.68 WWTP TOWELS & MATS 423.000.76.535.80.41.11 54.10 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 1.11 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.11 5.14 655-6695000 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: Page: 3 Packet Page 28 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 4 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 201602 4/18/2013 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 001.000.65.519.91.41.00 1.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 4.09 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.519.91.41.00 0.10 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.38 655-6695001 STREET/STORM DIVISION UNIFOR STREET/STORM DIVISION UNIFOR 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 5.00 STREET/STORM DIVISION UNIFOR 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 5.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 0.47 655-6695002 FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MAT Page: 4 Packet Page 29 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 5 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 201602 4/18/2013 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 3.11 FLEET DIVISION MATS 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 6.89 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 0.30 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.65 655-6702253 FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 18.55 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 1.76 655-6702259 WWTP UNIFORMS, TOWELS, & MA WWTP UNIFORMS 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 1.14 WWTP TOWELS & MATS 423.000.76.535.80.41.11 54.10 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 0.11 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.11 5.14 655-6706725 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 001.000.65.519.91.41.00 1.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE Page: 5 Packet Page 30 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 6 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 201602 4/18/2013 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 4.09 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.519.91.41.00 0.10 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.38 655-6706726 STREET/STORM DIVISION UNIFOR STREET/STORM DIVISION UNIFOR 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 5.00 STREET/STORM DIVISION UNIFOR 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 5.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 0.47 655-6706727 FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MAT FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 3.11 FLEET DIVISION MATS 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 7.04 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 0.29 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.67 655-6714154 FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 18.55 Page: 6 Packet Page 31 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 7 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201602 4/18/2013 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 1.76 655-6714159 WWTP UNIFORMS, TOWELS, & MA WWTP UNIFORMS 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 1.14 WWTP TOWELS & MATS 423.000.76.535.80.41.11 54.10 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 0.11 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.11 5.14 655-6718636 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 001.000.65.519.91.41.00 1.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 4.09 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.519.91.41.00 0.10 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.39 Page: 7 Packet Page 32 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 8 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201602 4/18/2013 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.38 655-6718637 STREET/STORM DIVISION UNIFOR STREET/STORM DIVISION UNIFOR 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 5.00 STREET/STORM DIVISION UNIFOR 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 5.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 0.47 655-6718638 FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MAT FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 44.72 FLEET DIVISION MATS 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 6.36 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 4.25 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.60 655-6725929 FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 18.55 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 1.76 655-6725934 WWTP UNIFORMS, TOWELS, & MA WWTP UNIFORMS 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 1.14 WWTP TOWELS & MATS 423.000.76.535.80.41.11 54.10 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 0.11 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.11 5.14 Page: 8 Packet Page 33 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 9 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 201602 4/18/2013 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) 655-6730391 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 001.000.65.519.91.41.00 1.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 4.07 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 4.09 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.519.91.41.00 0.10 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.39 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.38 655-6730392 STREET/STORM DIVISION UNIFOR STREET/STORM DIVISION UNIFOR 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 5.05 STREET/STORM DIVISION UNIFOR 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 5.05 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 0.48 Page: 9 Packet Page 34 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 10 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201602 4/18/2013 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES (Continued) 655-6730393 FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MAT FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 3.11 FLEET DIVISION MATS 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 6.89 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 0.30 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.65 Total: 687.96 201603 4/18/2013 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 422024-IN WWTP - DIESEL WWTP - DIESEL 423.000.76.535.80.32.00 4,713.53 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.32.00 447.79 Total: 5,161.32 201604 4/18/2013 064706 AWC 4/1/13 AWC room reservation AWC room reservation 001.000.22.518.10.43.00 100.00 Total: 100.00 201605 4/18/2013 074386 BECKER, BONNIE BECKER 04182013 BEST BOOK PRESENTER BEST BOOK PRESENTER 117.100.64.573.20.41.00 100.00 Total: 100.00 201606 4/18/2013 074307 BLUE STAR GAS 0694419-IN Fleet Auto Propane Inventory 200 Ga Fleet Auto Propane Inventory 200 Ga 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 325.40 0695197-IN Fleet Auto Propane Inventory 320 Ga Fleet Auto Propane Inventory 320 Ga 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 529.14 Total: 854.54 Page: 10 Packet Page 35 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 11 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 201607 4/18/2013 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORMS & EQUIP 967842 992308 201608 4/18/2013 074383 BOB ALLEN & THOMAS MAURICE Eagles Nest.Refund 201609 4/18/2013 065739 BOBBY WOLFORD TRUCKING & 201610 4/18/2013 069295 BROWN, CANDY 201611 4/18/2013 070385 CAMERON, APRIL 201612 4/18/2013 068484 CEMEX LLC 056053 BROWN 16531 CAMERON 04012013 9425769399 PO # Description/Account Amount INV 967842 EDMONDS PD - MEHL SECOND CHANCE SUMMIT II VEST 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 725.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 68.88 INV 992308 EDMONDS PD - PAULS( PAULSON UNIFORM PANTS 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 216.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 20.52 Total : 1,030.40 EAGLES NEST REFUND FOR SIDE\ Eagles Nest Refund for Sidewalk 112.200.68.595.33.41.00 3,560.00 Total : 3,560.00 Storm - Concete Recycle Fees Storm - Concete Recycle Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 417.37 Total : 417.37 PACIFIC NORTHWEST BIRDS 1653( PACIFIC NORTHWEST BIRDS 1653( 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 53.90 Total : 53.90 REFUND FROM CLASS REFUND FROM CLASS 001.000.239.200 62.00 Total : 62.00 Roadway - Asphalt Roadway - Asphalt 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 251.40 9.5% Sales Tax Page: 11 Packet Page 36 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 12 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201612 4/18/2013 068484 CEMEX LLC (Continued) 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 23.89 9425817464 Roadway - Asphalt Roadway - Asphalt 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 175.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 16.63 Total: 466.92 201613 4/18/2013 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY 192512 PARKS SUPPLIES PARKS SUPPLIES 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 53.90 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 5.13 Total: 59.03 201614 4/18/2013 064291 CENTURY LINK 206-Z02-0478 WWTP TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE WWTP TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 138.73 Total: 138.73 201615 4/18/2013 064840 CHAPUT, KAREN E CHAPUT 16665 FRIDAY NIGHT OUT 16665 FRIDAY NIGHT OUT 16665 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 85.48 Total: 85.48 201616 4/18/2013 074380 CHARLES & JESSIE EBEL 5-06250 #13-182-JMO UTILITY REFUND #13-182-JMO Utility refund due to 411.000.233.000 228.14 Total: 228.14 201617 4/18/2013 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD FLYERS O41513 PARK SHARE FEE PARK SHARE FEE 001.000.64.576.80.51.00 5,000.00 Total: 5,000.00 201618 4/18/2013 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 10011 E1JB.CONSTRUCTION 2/21/13-3/20 Page: 12 Packet Page 37 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 13 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201618 4/18/2013 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD (Continued) E1JB.Construction 2/21/13-3/20/13 421.000.74.594.34.41.10 28,402.12 Total: 28,402.12 201619 4/18/2013 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 10007 2012 O&M RECONCILIATION FOR E 2012 O&M RECONCILIATION FOR E 423.000.75.535.80.47.20 136,762.00 Total: 136,762.00 201620 4/18/2013 022200 CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE 2465 EDMONDS PORTION OF SUMMER EDMONDS PORTION OF SUMMER 001.000.64.571.22.42.00 6,959.49 Total: 6,959.49 201621 4/18/2013 073135 COGENT COMMUNICATIONS INC APR-13 C/A CITYOFED00001 Apr-13 Fiber Optics Internet Connecti 001.000.31.518.87.42.00 407.20 Total: 407.20 201622 4/18/2013 074343 CONE, RONALD May 2013 Interim Finance Director May Rent Interim Finance Director May Rent 001.000.31.514.20.41.00 1,000.00 Total: 1,000.00 201623 4/18/2013 072848 COPIERS NW INV845872 INV845872 ACCT HMH636 EDMONE MONTHLY COPIER RENTAL IRC504 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 226.77 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 21.54 INV845873 INV845873 ACCT HMH636 EDMONE BLACK COPIES - IRC5045 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 92.61 COLOR COPIES - IRC5045 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 134.61 9.5% Sales Tax Page: 13 Packet Page 38 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 14 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201623 4/18/2013 072848 COPIERS NW (Continued) 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 21.59 Total: 497.12 201624 4/18/2013 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 3273665 WWTP - AD FOR SWITCHGEAR PR WWTP - AD FOR SWITCHGEAR PR 423.100.76.594.39.41.10 372.40 Total: 372.40 201625 4/18/2013 072189 DATASITE 33041 SHREDDING SERVICES/CABINETS Shred Sery City Clerk & Storage 001.000.25.514.30.41.00 623.50 Doc Shred Services Finance 001.000.31.514.23.41.00 25.00 Total: 648.50 201626 4/18/2013 061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 03 329549 Unit 791- Radio Repairs Unit 791- Radio Repairs 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 598.50 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 56.86 Total: 655.36 201627 4/18/2013 070230 DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING 3/28/13 - 4/17/13 STATE SHARE OF CONCEALED PIE State Share of Concealed Pistol 001.000.237.190 363.00 Total: 363.00 201628 4/18/2013 072145 DISTINCTIVE WINDOWS INC 18109 Dev Svc City Hall - Glass for Lobby Dev Svc City Hall - Glass for Lobby 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 820.56 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 77.95 Total: 898.51 201629 4/18/2013 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 1-00655 LIFT STATION #7 121 W DAYTON S- LIFT STATION #7 121 W DAYTON S- Page: 14 Packet Page 39 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 15 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201629 4/18/2013 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION (Continued) 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 31.79 1-00925 LIFT STATION #8 113 RAILROAD AV LIFT STATION #8 113 RAILROAD AV 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 34.52 1-01950 LIFT STATION #1 105 CASPERS ST LIFT STATION #1 105 CASPERS ST 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 31.79 1-03950 OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 495.91 1-05350 OLD PUBLIC WORKS SHOP METEF OLD PUBLIC WORKS SHOP METEF 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 71.04 1-05705 LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 64.70 1-13975 CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 479.40 1-14000 CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 84.54 Total: 1,293.69 201630 4/18/2013 070676 EFFICIENCY INC 1175 ADAPTER FOR FTR ADAPTER FOR FTR 001.000.23.512.50.31.00 49.28 Total: 49.28 201631 4/18/2013 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 085744 COPIER MAINT COPIER MAINT 001.000.23.523.30.45.00 91.28 Total: 91.28 201632 4/18/2013 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 086141 1 Additional Images -Council Off Copier Page: 15 Packet Page 40 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 16 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201632 4/18/2013 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES (Continued) Additional Images -Council Off Copier 001.000.11.511.60.45.00 3.26 Total: 3.26 201633 4/18/2013 074098 ERGO SYNCHRONUS SOLUTIONS 4 WWTP - FIBER OPTICS PROJECT WWTP - FIBER OPTICS PROJECT 423.100.76.594.39.41.10 2,695.00 Total: 2,695.00 201634 4/18/2013 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU28088 Unit 32 - Hooks Unit 32 - Hooks 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 8.90 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 0.85 WAMOU28093 Unit 54 - Hooks Unit 54 - Hooks 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 13.35 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 1.27 Total: 24.37 201635 4/18/2013 072174 FRIENDS OF FRANK DEMIERO 6010 TOURISM PROMOTION GRANT/JA2 TOURISM PROMOTION GRANT/JAG 123.000.64.573.20.41.00 1,250.00 Total: 1,250.00 201636 4/18/2013 011900 FRONTIER 425-775-1344 BEACH RANGER PHONE @ FISHIN BEACH RANGER PHONE @ FISHIN 001.000.64.574.35.42.00 54.44 Total: 54.44 201637 4/18/2013 011900 FRONTIER 206-188-0247 TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 275.03 TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY A, Page: 16 Packet Page 41 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 17 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 201637 4/18/2013 011900 FRONTIER Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 275.02 253-011-1177 PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE' 001.000.65.519.91.42.00 5.48 PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE' 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 20.81 PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE' 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 20.81 PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE' 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 20.81 PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE' 511.000.77.548.68.42.00 20.81 PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE' 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 20.78 425-712-0417 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 26.85 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 26.84 425-712-8251 PUBLIC WORKS OMC ALARM, FAX, PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND IN' 001.000.65.519.91.42.00 14.92 PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND IN' 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 74.61 PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND IN' 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 62.67 PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND IN' 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 62.67 PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND IN' 511.000.77.548.68.42.00 83.57 425-745-4313 CLUBHOUSE ALARM LINES 6801 M CLUBHOUSE FIRE AND INTRUSIOI` 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 110.64 425-774-1031 LIFT STATION #8 VG SPECIAL ACCI Page: 17 Packet Page 42 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 18 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201637 4/18/2013 011900 FRONTIER (Continued) LIFT STATION #8 TWO VOICE GRAI 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 46.84 425-775-2455 CIVIC CENTER ALARM LINES 250 5 CIVIC CENTER FIRE AND INTRUSIC 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 50.80 425-775-7865 UTILITY BILLING RADIO LINE UTILITY BILLING RADIO LINE TO FI' 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 53.80 425-776-1281 SNO-ISLE LIBRARY ELEVATOR PH( SNO-ISLE LIBRARY ELEVATOR PH( 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 41.69 425-776-2742 LIFT STATION #7 VG SPECIAL ACCI LIFT STATION #7 V/G SPECIAL ACC 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 26.02 Total: 1,341.47 201638 4/18/2013 011900 FRONTIER 425-712-0423 WWTP AFTER HOUR BUSINESS LII WWTP AFTER HOUR BUSINESS LII 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 59.56 Tota I : 59.56 201639 4/18/2013 072515 GOOGLE INC 5638034 C/A#396392 MESSAGE DISCOVER Internet Anti -Virus & Spam Maint Fee 001.000.31.518.88.48.00 486.00 Total: 486.00 201640 4/18/2013 012560 HACH COMPANY 8233894 WWTP - CALIBRATION SOLUTION WWTP - CALIBRATION SOLUTION ; 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 54.49 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 15.95 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 6.70 Total: 77.14 Page: 18 Packet Page 43 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 19 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201641 4/18/2013 065764 HASNER, THOMAS W 39 LEOFF Reimbursement LEOFF Reimbursement 009.000.39.517.37.23.00 1,744.53 Total: 1,744.53 201642 4/18/2013 006030 HDR ENGINEERING INC 00068224-B WWTP - PSA TASK ORDER 1.12, TE WWTP - PSA TASK ORDER 1.12, TE 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 619.05 Total: 619.05 201643 4/18/2013 072647 HERRERA ENVIRONMENTAL 32738 E3FA.SERVICES THRU 3/29/13 E3FA.Services thru 3/29/13 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 64.69 32739 E9FB.SERVICES THRU MARCH 201 E9FB.Services thru March 2013 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 1,291.65 Total: 1,356.34 201644 4/18/2013 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 4260248 WWTP - WASHER WWTP - WASHER 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 499.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 47.41 Total: 546.41 201645 4/18/2013 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 2030355 WWTP - Lock System Supplies WWTP - Lock System Supplies 423.000.76.535.80.31.23 10.46 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.23 0.99 3030245 Parks / Sidwalk Supplies Parks / Sidwalk Supplies 111.000.68.542.61.31.00 9.35 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.61.31.00 0.89 3032103 Fac Maint - Supplies Page: 19 Packet Page 44 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 20 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201645 4/18/2013 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued) Fac Maint - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 18.90 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1.80 3060224 Water Supplies Water Supplies 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 33.59 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 3.19 3061673 Fac Maint Shop - 18 V Lith Battery Fac Maint Shop - 18 V Lith Battery 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 79.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 7.51 3093417 PW - Self levaling Concrete PW - Self levaling Concrete 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 7.20 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 0.68 4032001 Fac Maint - Unit 5 - Roof Patch Suppl Fac Maint - Unit 5 - Roof Patch Suppl 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 18.40 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1.75 4040083 Sr Center - Repair Supplies Sr Center - Repair Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 64.81 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 6.16 4042157 Fac Maint - Unit 26 - Supplies Fac Maint - Unit 26 - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.94 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1.04 Page: 20 Packet Page 45 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 21 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201645 4/18/2013 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued) 4060140 Sr Center - Supplies Sr Center - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 33.01 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 3.14 4095787 Sewer - Supplies Sewer - Supplies 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 9.71 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 0.92 5045125 Fac Maint Shop Supplies Fac Maint Shop Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 26.92 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.56 5081944 FAC - Supplies FAC - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 5.97 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 0.57 6041848 Fac Maint Unit 5 - Supplies Fac Maint Unit 5 - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 54.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 5.18 7041524 PS - Courts - Supplies 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 0.76 PS - Courts - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 7.96 7041585 MCH - Doorstop MCH - Doorstop 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 15.99 9.5% Sales Tax Page: 21 Packet Page 46 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 22 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201645 4/18/2013 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued) 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1.52 7046759 Fac Maint - Supplies Fac Maint - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 27.02 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.57 7046863 PW - Sink drain supplies 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.57 PW - Sink drain supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 27.02 8034967 PW - Paint Supplies for Front Counte PW - Paint Supplies for Front Counte 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 4.98 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 0.47 8043244 FAC -Dumpster Supplies FAC -Dumpster Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 4.97 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 0.47 8043428 City Hall - Stretch Wrap City Hall - Stretch Wrap 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 21.96 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.09 8083792 Water Supplies Water Supplies 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 14.97 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 1.42 8265019 FAC - Mach Screws Supplies FAC - Mach Screws Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1.18 Page: 22 Packet Page 47 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 23 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201645 4/18/2013 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 0.11 8283854 Plaza Room - Supplies Plaza Room - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 23.24 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.21 8594007 Sewer - Supplies Sewer - Supplies 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 39.61 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 3.76 9043102 FAC - Dumpster Area parts FAC - Dumpster Area parts 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 30.41 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.89 9062367 Traffic Control - Supplies Traffic Control - Supplies 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 136.26 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 12.94 9264983 Traffic Control - Supplies Traffic Control - Supplies 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 20.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 1.90 9597060 Fac Maint - Unit 95 - Supplies Fac Maint - Unit 95 - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 9.97 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 0.95 Total: 841.31 201646 4/18/2013 060165 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC 24145 BURNSTEAD/WOODWAY PLAT RE\ Page: 23 Packet Page 48 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 24 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201646 4/18/2013 060165 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC (Continued) Burnstead/Woodway Plat Review 001.000.67.532.20.41.00 840.00 Total: 840.00 201647 4/18/2013 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2255141 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.23.523.30.31.00 329.76 2255771 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.23.523.30.31.00 122.85 Total: 452.61 201648 4/18/2013 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2261703 STENO SPIRAL NOTEBOOKS Prism Steno Spiral Notebooks, 6x9 pi 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 24.46 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 2.32 2262852 WATERCOLOR MARKERS Mr. Sketch Watercolor Markers, Blab 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 15.48 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 1.47 Total: 43.73 201649 4/18/2013 074326 KIMBALL MIDWEST 2907882 WWTP - MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES WWTP - MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 177.64 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 16.88 2908673 WWTP - REPAIR AND REPLACE, MI WWTP - REPAIR AND REPLACE, MI 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 1,254.42 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 119.17 Page: 24 Packet Page 49 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 25 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201649 4/18/2013 074326 074326 KIMBALL MIDWEST (Continued) Total: 1,568.11 201650 4/18/2013 074330 KING, BEN 4/1/13 - 4/15/13 GEOSPATIAL DATA COLLECTION & Geospatial Data Collection Mapping 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 892.62 Total: 892.62 201651 4/18/2013 068677 KONECRANES AMERICA INC SEA00766913 WWTP - REPLACE HOIST MOTOR ( WWTP - REPLACE HOIST MOTOR ( 423.000.76.535.80.48.11 1,525.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.11 144.88 Total: 1,669.88 201652 4/18/2013 074217 KRUEGER SHEET METAL CO 27281-4 WWTP - REROOF PROJECT WWTP - REROOF PROJECT 423.100.76.594.39.65.10 19,636.00 Total: 19,636.00 201653 4/18/2013 017050 KWICK'N KLEEN CAR WASH 04082013-01 INV 04082013-01 EDMONDS PD 35 CARWASHES@ $4.59 PLUS TAX 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 160.65 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.48.00 15.40 Total: 176.05 201654 4/18/2013 072264 LEXIPOL LLC 8666 INV 8666 EDMONDS PD - LE POLIC LAW ENFORCE. POLICY MANUAL l 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 3,200.00 Total: 3,200.00 201655 4/18/2013 066064 LISTEN AUDIOLOGY SERVICE INC 3325 HEARING TESTING HEARING TESTING 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 295.00 Total: 295.00 201656 4/18/2013 018980 LYNNWOOD HONDA 824860 PLATE Page: 25 Packet Page 50 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 26 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201656 4/18/2013 018980 LYNNWOOD HONDA (Continued) PLATE 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 18.29 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 1.74 Total: 20.03 201657 4/18/2013 019582 MANOR HARDWARE 465443-00 POLLUTION PREVENTION - MUNIC Pollution Prevention - Municipal 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 8,042.30 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 764.02 Total: 8,806.32 201658 4/18/2013 074379 MARGARET FRIEDMANN 4-40975 #NXWA-0079307 UTILITY REFUND #NXWA-0079307 Utility refund due tc 411.000.233.000 68.59 Total: 68.59 201659 4/18/2013 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 1216 INTERPRETER FEES INTERPRETER FEES 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 88.32 1217 INTERPRETER FEES INTERPRETER FEES 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 88.32 1249 INTERPRETER FEES INTERPRETER FEES 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 88.32 844 INTERPRETER FEES INTERPRETER FEES 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 88.32 Total: 353.28 201660 4/18/2013 070028 MCA 4113 PROBATION ASSOCIATION MEMBE PROBATION ASSOCIATION MEMBE 001.000.23.523.30.49.00 25.00 Page: 26 Packet Page 51 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 27 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201660 4/18/2013 070028 070028 MCA (Continued) Total: 25.00 201661 4/18/2013 019920 MCCANN, MARIAN 38 LEOFF Reimbursement LEOFF Reimbursement 009.000.39.517.37.29.00 8,370.00 Total: 8,370.00 201662 4/18/2013 063773 MICROFLEX 00021235 03-13 TAX AUDIT PROGRAM TAX AUDIT PROGRAM 001.000.31.514.23.41.00 213.94 Total: 213.94 201663 4/18/2013 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENTALL INC 163440 FAC - Project - Chain Purchase for FAC - Project - Chain Purchase for 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 225.95 Chainsaw Rental and Warrenty 001.000.66.518.30.45.00 82.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 22.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.45.00 7.30 Total: 337.75 201664 4/18/2013 074306 NEBCO/NPRIT 2769094 LEOFF Fire NEBCO premiums LEOFF Fire NEBCO premiums 617.000.51.522.20.23.00 1,572.78 LEOFF NEBCO premiums 009.000.39.517.37.23.00 8,594.18 Total: 10,166.96 201665 4/18/2013 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0494842-IN Unit 66 - Filters Unit 66 - Filters 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 27.46 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 2.60 Total: 30.06 Page: 27 Packet Page 52 of 494 vchlist 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Page: 28 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201666 4/18/2013 066628 NORTHWEST DISTRIBUTING CO 0010012158 Fleet - Supplies Fleet - Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 270.22 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 3.33 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 25.67 Total: 299.22 201667 4/18/2013 065332 NVL LABORATORIES INC 1305478 FAC Locker Rm Lead Analysis FAC Locker Rm Lead Analysis 016.000.66.518.30.41.00 70.00 Total: 70.00 201668 4/18/2013 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 132471 OFFICE SUPPLIES Office Supplies 001.000.25.514.30.31.00 69.51 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.25.514.30.31.00 6.61 Total: 76.12 201669 4/18/2013 070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER March, 2013 COURT, BLDG CODE & JIS TRANS Emergency Medical Services & Traun 001.000.237.120 1,797.69 PSEA 1, 2 & 3 Account 001.000.237.130 39,589.32 Building Code Fee Account 001.000.237.150 148.50 State Patrol Death Investigation 001.000.237.330 80.15 Judicial Information Systems Account 001.000.237.180 6,466.63 School Zone Safety Account 001.000.237.200 110.35 Washington Auto Theft Prevention 001.000.237.250 3,427.09 Page: 28 Packet Page 53 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 29 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201669 4/18/2013 070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER (Continued) Traumatic Brain Injury 001.000.237.260 630.79 Accessible Communities Acct 001.000.237.290 133.32 Multi -Model Transportation 001.000.237.300 133.32 Hwy Safety Acct 001.000.237.320 127.15 Crime Lab Blood Breath Analysis 001.000.237.170 354.81 WSP Hwy Acct 001.000.237.340 454.75 Total: 53,453.87 201670 4/18/2013 072876 OPENSHAW, DOUGLAS OPENSHAW 04122013 REFUND, CLASS CANCELLED REFUND, CLASS CANCELLED 001.000.239.200 53.00 Total: 53.00 201671 4/18/2013 069873 PAPE MACHINERY INC 7006306 Unit 137 - Fue Element Unit 137 - Fue Element 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 68.38 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 7.08 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 7.17 Total: 82.63 201672 4/18/2013 070962 PAULSONS TOWING INC 100894 INV 100894 EDMONDS PD CASE 13 TOW NISSAN MAXIMAACX1433- 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 158.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 15.01 101102 INV 101102 EDMONDS PD TOWING TOW NISSAN TO CAMPBELL NELS( Page: 29 Packet Page 54 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 30 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201672 4/18/2013 070962 PAULSONS TOWING INC (Continued) 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 158.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 15.01 Tota I : 346.02 201673 4/18/2013 008475 PETTY CASH 2/26-4/16/13 Mayors Office - Lamp Shade - Fac M, Mayors Office - Lamp Shade - Fac M, 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 54.74 Water - Gas for City truck 511.000.77.548.68.34.11 43.89 Water - BAT 2013 Member Forum - L 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 5.00 Storm - Cell Phone Cover 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 12.31 Storm - Training Away - Meals Reimb 422.000.72.531.40.43.00 116.01 Storm - Training Away - Meals Reimb 422.000.72.531.40.43.00 119.88 Fleet - CDL Test and Endoresment - 511.000.77.548.68.49.00 24.00 Total: 375.83 201674 4/18/2013 064552 PITNEY BOWES 9607730AP13 POSTAGE MACHINE LEASE Lease 3/30 to 4/30 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 718.60 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 68.26 Total: 786.86 201675 4/18/2013 073546 PITNEY BOWES RESERVE ACCOUNT 13654 Water Quality 2013 Brochure Mailing Water Quality 2013 Brochure Mailing 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 2,500.00 Total: 2,500.00 201676 4/18/2013 071023 POINT EDWARDS LLC PLN 2012.0040 Refund to Point Edwards LLC for Page: 30 Packet Page 55 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 31 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201676 4/18/2013 071023 POINT EDWARDS LLC (Continued) Refund to Point Edwards LLC for 001.000.257.620 694.88 Total: 694.88 201677 4/18/2013 064088 PROTECTION ONE 31146525 ALARM MONITORING CITY HALL ALARM MONITORING CITY HALL 12 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 41.73 Total: 41.73 201678 4/18/2013 067263 PUGET SAFETY EQUIPMENT COMPANY 0011743-IN WWTP - PPE WWTP - PPE 423.000.76.535.80.31.12 623.90 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.12 12.40 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.12 60.45 Total: 696.75 201679 4/18/2013 070809 PUGET SOUND EXECUTIVE 13-221 COURT SECURITY COURT SECURITY 001.000.23.512.50.41.00 2,790.00 Total: 2,790.00 201680 4/18/2013 074156 RAZZ CONSTRUCTION INC E9GA.Pmt 4 E9GA.PMT 4 THRU 3/29/13 E9GA.Pmt 4 thru 3/29/13 423.000.75.594.35.65.30 717,045.47 Total: 717,045.47 201681 4/18/2013 062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL COMPANY 004200 Storm Dump Fees Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 1,665.62 004201 Storm Dump Fees Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 103.97 Total: 1,769.59 Page: 31 Packet Page 56 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 32 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201682 4/18/2013 061540 REPUBLIC SERVICES #197 3-0197-0800478 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 140.72 3-0197-0800897 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH 001.000.65.519.91.47.00 27.89 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 111.000.68.542.90.47.00 105.99 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 105.99 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 105.99 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 511.000.77.548.68.47.00 105.99 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 422.000.72.531.90.47.00 106.00 3-0197-0801132 FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST ; FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST ; 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 149.29 3-0197-0829729 CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDAL CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDAL 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 64.98 Total: 912.84 201683 4/18/2013 006841 RICOH USA INC 502564881 Additional images DSD large copier Additional images DSD large copier 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 97.01 502564882 Additional Images Eng copier Additional Images Eng copier 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 188.22 Total: 285.23 201684 4/18/2013 070042 RICOH USA INC 88833300 Rental/Lease MPC 6000 Eng copier Rental/Lease MPC 6000 Eng copier 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 443.48 88833302 Rental/Lease R907 EX copier DSD Page: 32 Packet Page 57 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 33 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201684 4/18/2013 070042 RICOH USA INC (Continued) Rental/Lease R907 EX copier DSD 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 827.00 Total: 1,270.48 201685 4/18/2013 069062 RONGERUDE, JOHN 7886 PUBLIC DEFENDER PUBLIC DEFENDER 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 1,800.00 Total: 1,800.00 201686 4/18/2013 074385 ROOT, CHERYL ROOT 040112013 CLASS CANCELLED REFUND ISSU CLASS CANCELLED REFUND ISSU 001.000.239.200 53.00 Total: 53.00 201687 4/18/2013 074014 SAIC ENERGY, ENVIRONMENT & 03-743 E1 FM.SERVICES THRU 3/8/13 E1 FM.Services thru 3/8/13 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 10,098.77 Total: 10,098.77 201688 4/18/2013 074086 SIGNON 144516 INTREPRATIVE SIGNING FOR FISH INTREPRATIVE SIGNING FOR FISH 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 800.00 DRIVING FOR INSTRUCTOR 001.000.64.571.22.43.00 73.22 Total: 873.22 201689 4/18/2013 068489 SIRENNET.COM 0151318-IN Unit 98 - Amber Strobe Beacon Unit 98 - Amber Strobe Beacon 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 74.40 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.81 Total: 81.21 201690 4/18/2013 036955 SKY NURSERY 82320 FLOWER PROGRAM FLOWER PROGRAM 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 299.77 Page: 33 Packet Page 58 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 34 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201690 4/18/2013 036955 SKY NURSERY (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 28.48 82322 FLOWER PROGRAM FLOWER PROGRAM 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 89.94 9.5% Sales Tax 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 8.54 Total: 426.73 201691 4/18/2013 066748 SNO CO DEPT OF INFO SERVICES 1000324945 2013 FIBER NETWORK HOSTING S 2013 Fiber Network Hosting Services 001.000.31.518.87.42.00 600.00 Total: 600.00 201692 4/18/2013 037303 SNO CO FIRE DIST# 1 13-115 Q1-13 EMS BILLING & POSTAGE Q1-13 Ambulance billings & postage 001.000.39.522.70.41.00 11,896.30 Total: 11,896.30 201693 4/18/2013 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2002-6027-1 9537 BOWDIN WAY 9537 BOWDIN WAY 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 744.73 2025-4064-7 8100 190TH ST SW 8100 190TH ST SW 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 31.78 Total: 776.51 201694 4/18/2013 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2007-0685-1 TRAFFIC LIGHT 21200 84TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 21200 84TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 31.77 2007-2302-1 TRAFFIC LIGHT 961 PUGET DR / MI TRAFFIC LIGHT 961 PUGET DR / MI 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 39.74 2011-0356-1 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23800 FIRDALE AVI TRAFFIC LIGHT 23800 FIRDALE AVI Page: 34 Packet Page 59 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 35 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201694 4/18/2013 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 54.00 2014-3124-4 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9301 PUC. PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9301 PUC 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 31.79 2014-4175-5 TRAFFIC LIGHT 21531 HWY 99 / ME TRAFFIC LIGHT 21531 HWY 99 / ME 111.000.68.542.68.47.00 87.91 2016-9084-9 TRAFFIC LIGHT 900 PUGET DR / MI TRAFFIC LIGHT 900 PUGET DR / MI 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 31.69 2017-1178-5 STREET LIGHTING (183 LIGHTS @ STREET LIGHTING (183 LIGHTS @ 111.000.68.542.68.47.00 1,414.10 2017-9000-3 ALDERWOOD INTERIE 6130 168TH ALDERWOOD INTERIE 6130 168TH 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 62.35 2022-8945-0 TRAFFIC LIGHT 21931 HWY 99 / ME TRAFFIC LIGHT 21931 HWY 99 / ME 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 179.27 2025-2918-6 STREET LIGHTING (303 LIGHTS @ STREET LIGHTING (303 LIGHTS @ 111.000.68.542.68.47.00 2,439.86 2025-2920-2 STREET LIGHTING (13 LIGHTS @ 4 STREET LIGHTING (13 LIGHTS @ 4 111.000.68.542.68.47.00 113.38 2025-7615-3 STREET LIGHTING (2029 LIGHTS C STREET LIGHTING (2029 LIGHTS C 111.000.68.542.68.47.00 14,045.93 2025-7948-8 STREET LIGHTING (58 LIGHTS @ 2 STREET LIGHTING (58 LIGHTS @ 2 111.000.68.542.68.47.00 329.36 2047-1489-3 STREET LIGHTING (1 LIGHT @ 150' STREET LIGHTING (1 LIGHT @ 150' 111.000.68.542.68.47.00 3.05 2047-1492-7 STREET LIGHTING (18 LIGHTS @ 2 Page: 35 Packet Page 60 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 36 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201694 4/18/2013 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) STREET LIGHTING (18 LIGHTS @ 2 111.000.68.542.68.47.00 67.73 2047-1493-5 STREET LIGHTING (5 LIGHTS @ 40 STREET LIGHTING (5 LIGHTS @ 40 111.000.68.542.68.47.00 35.72 2047-1494-3 STREET LIGHTING (2 LIGHTS @ 10 STREET LIGHTING (2 LIGHTS @ 10 111.000.68.542.68.47.00 9.07 2047-1495-0 STREET LIGHTING (26 LIGHTS @ 2 STREET LIGHTING (26 LIGHTS @ 2 111.000.68.542.68.47.00 123.19 Total: 19,099.91 201695 4/18/2013 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2002-0255-4 WWTP FLOW METER 2400 HIGHW WWTP FLOW METER 2400 HIGHK 423.000.76.535.80.47.62 30.70 2019-2988-2 WWTP FLOW METER 8421 244TH WWTP FLOW METER 8421 244TH 423.000.76.535.80.47.62 30.70 Total: 61.40 201696 4/18/2013 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE 3-13 SNOCO JAIL MED MAR 2013 JAIL MEDICAL CHARGE INMATE MEDICATION - MAR 2013 001.000.41.523.60.31.00 9.01 Total: 9.01 201697 4/18/2013 067609 SNOHOMISH COUNTY CITIES SCC Dinner 3-21-2013 SCC Dinner Mtg-Monillas 3-21-12 SCC Dinner Mtg-Monillas 3-21-12 001.000.11.511.60.43.00 35.00 Total: 35.00 201698 4/18/2013 037800 SNOHOMISH HEALTH DISTRICT CEDM FLEET DIVISION HEP A/B VACCINE FLEET DIVISION HEP A/B VACCINE 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 238.00 Total: 238.00 Page: 36 Packet Page 61 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 37 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201699 4/18/2013 038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS 4212653-01 WWTP NORDQUIST 2013 UNIFORM WWTP NORDQUIST 2013 UNIFORM 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 -43.25 4215499-01 Water - Work Jeans (5) P Rochford Water - Work Jeans (5) P Rochford 421.000.74.534.20.24.00 210.80 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.20.24.00 20.03 Total: 187.58 201700 4/18/2013 074381 STEPHEN BROWN & ROBIN HARTLEY 3-21400 #30077794-327 UTILITY REFUND #30077794-327 Utility refund due to 411.000.233.000 104.86 Total: 104.86 201701 4/18/2013 065578 SYSTEMS INTERFACE INC 14644 Water - Replace Relays at Sea Interti Water - Replace Relays at Sea Interti 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 316.00 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 30.02 Total: 346.02 201702 4/18/2013 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1001814857-03262013 E3JA.AD FOR BIDS E3JA.Ad for Bids 421.000.74.594.34.41.10 158.24 101808931-01302013 E3FC.AD FOR RFQ E3FC.Ad for RFQ 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 447.20 Total: 605.44 201703 4/18/2013 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1815567 NEWSPAPER ADS Ordinance 3917 001.000.25.514.30.44.00 27.52 1815900 NEWSPAPER ADS Hrng Amend CIP, CFP & TIP 001.000.25.514.30.44.00 41.28 Page: 37 Packet Page 62 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 38 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201703 4/18/2013 009350 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY (Continued) Total: 68.80 201704 4/18/2013 038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR US53022 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE MUSEUI ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE MUSEU 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 214.98 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 20.42 US53323 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE CITY HA ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE CITY HA 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 1,020.79 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 96.98 US54073 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE SENIOR ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE SENIOR 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 178.00 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 16.91 US54537 ELEVATOR PHONE MONITORING C ELEVATOR PHONE MONITORING C 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 48.13 US54628 ELEVATOR PHONE MONITORING S ELEVATOR PHONE MONITORING S 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 14.48 Total: 1,610.69 201705 4/18/2013 062693 US BANK 4675 PARKS AND REC CC DISCOVERY FANNY PACKS 001.000.64.574.35.31.00 56.93 EGG HUNT FOIL CHOCOLATE 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 120.00 TIDE TABLES 001.000.64.574.35.31.00 13.07 PRO SAFETY VESTS 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 259.30 ACORN NATURALIST 001.000.64.574.35.31.00 145.81 Page: 38 Packet Page 63 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 39 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 201705 4/18/2013 062693 US BANK Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) BATTERIES FOR TELEPHONE AND 001.000.64.574.35.31.00 38.30 MASKS FOR DISCOVERY 001.000.64.574.35.31.00 17.52 LANYARDS 001.000.64.574.35.31.00 21.85 RITE AID HAND/FC 001.000.64.575.52.31.00 3.60 WET REFILL 001.000.64.575.54.31.00 10.39 SHIRTS FOR DISCOVERY 001.000.64.574.35.24.00 124.95 WAIST PACK DISCOVERY 001.000.64.574.35.31.00 119.96 PARKA DISCOVERY 001.000.64.574.35.24.00 109.49 GYMNASTIC EQUIPMENT 001.000.64.575.55.35.00 1,819.56 CACCULATOR AND HP INK 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 99.62 PLANTS HOSTA, SALVIA 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 282.12 UMBRELLA STAND FOR HMP 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 33.35 CATEPILLARS FOR PRESCHOOL 001.000.64.575.56.31.00 26.14 MARKET UMBRELLA FOR HMP 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 69.99 BOOKS FOR USAG COMPULSORY 001.000.64.575.55.31.00 96.50 CONQUER THE HILL BIBS AND SAF 001.000.64.575.52.31.00 93.65 DARKROOM CHEMICALS 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 12.49 Page: 39 Packet Page 64 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 40 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201705 4/18/2013 062693 US BANK (Continued) DARKROOM CHEMCIALS 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 23.49 SEEDS FOR PARKS 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 3.99 4675 BAGS RETURNED BAGS RETURNED 001.000.64.574.35.31.00 -19.99 Total: 3,582.08 201706 4/18/2013 062693 US BANK 3249 PASSPORT MAILING COST PASSPORT MAILING COST 001.000.23.512.50.42.00 9.16 Total: 9.16 201707 4/18/2013 062693 US BANK 2143 Newegg.com - DisplayPort to DVI-D Newegg.com - DisplayPort to DVI-D 001.000.31.518.88.31.00 209.70 Hostmonster.com - Renew web hostir 001.000.31.518.88.49.00 107.88 TigerDirect.com - Plantronics HL10 001.000.23.512.50.49.00 257.74 3470 DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION, VI[ Radio Shack - Cables for Destiny/Sm 001.000.31.518.88.31.00 26.04 Amazon Marketplace - Cables for 001.000.31.518.88.31.00 33.16 City of Edmonds - IT testing 001.000.31.518.88.49.00 1.00 Apple iTunes - Write a Review/Report 001.000.31.518.88.31.00 10.94 BulkRegister.com - Domain Name 001.000.31.518.88.49.00 41.85 5179 ASUS LED MONITORS, IPAD SCREI JCD Repair - Apple iPad screen repai 001.000.31.518.88.48.00 282.51 Page: 40 Packet Page 65 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 41 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201707 4/18/2013 062693 US BANK (Continued) TigerDirect.com - ASUS VS228H-P 2; 001.000.23.512.50.35.10 313.37 TigerDirect.com - ASUS VS228H-P 2; 423.000.76.535.80.31.42 156.68 TigerDirect.com - ASUS VS228H-P 2; 001.000.31.518.88.35.00 313.37 Totusoft - LAN Speed Test - LST Sery 001.000.31.518.88.41.00 11.00 TigerDirect.com - ASUS VS228H-P 2; 001.000.31.518.88.35.00 630.33 Total: 2,395.57 201708 4/18/2013 062693 US BANK 3644 PSRC GENERAL ASSEMBLY PSRC General Assembly Banquet 001.000.21.513.10.49.00 50.00 AWC Mayor's Exchange 001.000.21.513.10.49.00 45.00 Yarberry retirement poster framing 001.000.21.513.10.41.00 26.48 Brochure paper 001.000.21.513.10.31.00 34.99 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.21.513.10.41.00 2.52 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.21.513.10.31.00 3.32 3686 MARCH MAYOR'S LUNCHEON March Mayor's Luncheon 001.000.21.513.10.43.00 10.49 Councilmember Wright lunch 001.000.21.513.10.49.00 20.00 Total: 192.80 201709 4/18/2013 062693 US BANK 5593 CITY CLERK PURCHASE CARD Misc recorded documents 001.000.25.514.30.49.00 354.00 Page: 41 Packet Page 66 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 42 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201709 4/18/2013 062693 US BANK (Continued) Recording of Utility Liens 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 176.00 Recording of Utility Liens 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 176.00 Total: 706.00 201710 4/18/2013 062693 US BANK 2519 INV 2519 4-8-13 EDMONDS PD ENGRAVED PLATES FOR MARLO F 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 28.47 3181 INV 3181 4-8-13 EDMONDS PD MINDFLASH FOR MARCH 2O13 001.000.41.521.40.49.00 179.10 FLASHLIGHT BACKORDER (1) 001.000.41.521.22.35.00 111.66 FROLAND - WSHNA CONFERENCE 001.000.41.521.40.49.00 185.00 MACK - WSHNA CONFERENCE 001.000.41.521.40.49.00 185.00 7 FLASHLIGHTS - BACKORDER 001.000.41.521.22.35.00 781.62 1 FLASHLIGHT - BACKORDER 001.000.41.521.22.35.00 111.66 REFRESHMENTS FOR ARMORER C 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 8.98 WAPRO SPRING CONF & MEMBER 001.000.41.521.40.49.00 150.00 8 SANDISK FLASH MEMORY CARD 001.000.41.521.22.35.00 75.68 PARKING @ SNO CO - PSR SUBCO 001.000.41.521.40.43.00 3.00 OTTER BOX IPHONE REPLACEMEP 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 32.19 REFRESHMENTS - COACHING CLA 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 9.98 Page: 42 Packet Page 67 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 43 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code Voucher 201710 201711 usbank Date Vendor 4/18/2013 062693 US BANK Invoice (Continued) 3314 3520 7914 4/18/2013 068724 US HEALTHWORKS MED GROUP OF WA 0470331-WA PO # Description/Account Amount TLO MONTHLY SEARCH SERVICE 001.000.41.521.21.41.00 7.75 3 COACHING & COUNSELING REG 001.000.41.521.40.49.00 1,250.00 8 KINGSTON 4GB FLASH MEM CAR 001.000.41.521.22.35.00 70.00 MINDFLASH ONLINE TRAINING 04/' 001.000.41.521.40.49.00 179.10 INV 3314 4-8-13 EDMONDS PD TWO CASES BISTRO CUPS 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 88.26 C RING CLIP APPLICATOR TOOL 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 44.59 LASER ENGRAVE FLASHLIGHTS 001.000.41.521.22.35.00 57.49 INV 3520 4-8-13 FED EX TO FED PUBLIC DEFENDEI 001.000.41.521.10.42.00 32.47 7914 4-8-13 EDMONDS PD EYEWASH BOTTLES 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 53.79 WAPRO SPRING CONFERENCE - T 001.000.41.521.40.49.00 125.00 MAIL BADGES FOR REPAIR 001.000.41.521.10.42.00 16.15 GUNZILLA - 2 16 OZ BOTTLES 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 59.40 ARMORER SUPPLIES 001.000.41.521.40.31.00 72.06 40-PACK OF CR123A BATTERIES 001.000.41.521.22.31.00 51.11 Total : 3,969.51 SEWER DIVISION - DOT RANDOM [ Page: 43 Packet Page 68 of 494 vchlist Voucher List Page: 44 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201711 4/18/2013 068724 US HEALTHWORKS MED GROUP OF WA (Continued) SEWER DIVISION - DOT RANDOM [ 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 130.00 0472197-WA SEWER DIVISION - DOT RANDOM [ SEWER DIVISION - DOT RANDOM [ 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 130.00 Total: 260.00 201712 4/18/2013 044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR 3030117 utility locates March 2013 utility locates March 2013 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 54.32 utility locates March 2013 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 54.32 utility locates March 2013 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 55.95 Total: 164.59 201713 4/18/2013 069836 VOLT SERVICE GROUP 29045895 WWTP - TEMPORARY ADMINISTRA W WTP - TEMPORARY ADMINISTRA 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 611.00 Total: 611.00 201714 4/18/2013 047455 WA ST DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION RE-313-ATB30409001 IT MAINTENANCE & OPERATIONS f IT Maintenance & Operations Fiber O 001.000.31.518.87.41.00 768.12 Total: 768.12 201715 4/18/2013 067195 WASHINGTON TREE EXPERTS 06-8980 PINE TREE PINE TREE 001.000.64.576.80.48.00 820.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.48.00 77.90 Total: 897.90 201716 4/18/2013 026510 WCIA 2013StorageTanklns 2013 UNDERGROUND STORAGE Ti 2013 PW Underground Storage Tank Page: 44 Packet Page 69 of 494 vchlist 04/18/2013 11:05:40AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Page: 45 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 201716 4/18/2013 026510 WCIA (Continued) 511.000.77.548.68.46.00 1,453.00 Total: 1,453.00 201717 4/18/2013 072939 WESTERN WHOLESALE SUPPLY 257321 Dev Svc City Hall - Lobby Design - Vi Dev Svc City Hall - Lobby Design - Vi 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 56.04 Total: 56.04 122 Vouchers for bank code : usbank Bank total : 1,226,036.24 122 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 1,226,036.24 Page: 45 Packet Page 70 of 494 Benefit Checks Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 611 - 04/01/2013 to 04/15/2013 Bank: usbank - US Bank Check # Date Payee # Name Check Amt Direct Deposit 60153 04/19/2013 mebt AST TTEE 75,314.35 0.00 60154 04/19/2013 epoa2 EPOA-POLICE 2,088.00 0.00 60155 04/19/2013 epoa3 EPOA-POLICE SUPPORT 301.50 0.00 60156 04/19/2013 flex FLEX -PLAN SERVICES, INC 315.83 0.00 60157 04/19/2013 pb NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION 3,241.05 0.00 60158 04/19/2013 teams TEAMSTERS LOCAL 763 4,148.00 0.00 60159 04/19/2013 icma VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS 304884 2,215.57 0.00 60160 04/19/2013 wadc WASHINGTON STATE TREASURER 15,900.50 0.00 103,524.80 0.00 Bank: wire - US BANK Check # Date Payee # Name Check Amt Direct Deposit 2001 04/19/2013 front FRONTIER BANK 84,064.45 0.00 2003 04/19/2013 flex FLEX -PLAN SERVICES, INC 164.40 0.00 2004 04/19/2013 oe OFFICE OF SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT 208.50 0.00 84,437.35 0.00 Grand Totals: 187,962.15 0.00 4/18/2013 Page 1 of 1 Packet Page 71 of 494 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 611 (04/01/2013 to 04/15/2013) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount 121 SICK SICK LEAVE 390.50 12,625.66 122 VACATION VACATION 1,340.57 49,370.73 123 HOLIDAY HOLIDAY HOURS 31.50 1,138.80 124 HOLIDAY FLOATER HOLIDAY 109.50 3,014.06 125 COMP HOURS COMPENSATORY TIME 160.05 5,848.81 129 SICK Police Sick Leave L & 1 12.00 399.52 130 COMP HOURS Holiday Compensation Used 27.38 1,020.16 131 MILITARY MILITARY LEAVE 10.00 429.48 132 JURY DUTY JURY DUTY 8.00 292.41 141 BEREAVEMENT BEREAVEMENT 54.00 1,413.35 150 REGULAR HOURS Kelly Day Used 180.00 6,448.92 155 COMP HOURS COMPTIME AUTO PAY 64.76 2,717.05 160 VACATION MANAGEMENT LEAVE 24.00 1,127.46 190 REGULAR HOURS REGULAR HOURS 14,705.50 495,720.26 196 REGULAR HOURS LIGHT DUTY 117.50 4,428.15 215 OVERTIME HOURS WATER WATCH STANDBY 48.00 2,170.02 216 MISCELLANEOUS STANDBY TREATMENT PLANT 15.00 1,327.72 220 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME 1.5 115.00 6,728.21 225 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME -DOUBLE 50.00 3,332.05 410 MISCELLANEOUS WORKING OUT OF CLASS 0.00 163.60 411 SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL 0.00 864.11 600 RETROACTIVE PAY RETROACTIVE PAY 0.00 349.96 602 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP 28.75 0.00 604 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP TIME 73.00 0.00 606 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP TIME 3.00 0.00 901 SICK ACCRUED SICK LEAVE 3.00 0.00 acc MISCELLANEOUS ACCREDITATION PAY 0.00 23.56 acs MISCELLANEOUS ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORT 0.00 159.69 boc MISCELLANEOUS BOC II Certification 0.00 80.05 cpl MISCELLANEOUS TRAINING CORPORAL 0.00 137.44 crt MISCELLANEOUS CERTIFICATION III PAY 0.00 513.04 det MISCELLANEOUS DETECTIVE PAY 0.00 95.89 det4 MISCELLANEOUS Detective 4% 0.00 795.84 ed1 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 2% 0.00 722.30 04/18/2013 Page 1 of 2 Packet Page 72 of 494 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 611 (04/01/2013 to 04/15/2013) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount ed2 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 4% 0.00 834.14 ed3 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 6% 0.00 4,920.31 fmis SICK FAMILY MEDICAL/SICK 128.00 4,384.80 fmly VACATION Family Medical Leave Vacation 21.00 894.76 k9 MISCELLANEOUS K-9 PAY 0.00 211.31 Iq1 LONGEVITY PAY LONGEVITY PAY 2% 0.00 1,928.00 Iq2 LONGEVITY PAY LONGEVITY PAY 4% 0.00 1,518.30 Iq3 LONGEVITY PAY LONGEVITY 6% 0.00 4,669.31 Iq4 LONGEVITY Lonqevity 1 % 0.00 386.00 Iq5 LONGEVITY Lonqevity 3% 0.00 66.98 Iq6 LONGEVITY Lonqevity .5% 0.00 225.96 Iq7 LONGEVITY Lonqevity 1.5% 0.00 604.09 Iqh LONGEVITY Lonqevity Hourly 0.00 0.00 mtc MISCELLANEOUS MOTORCYCLE PAY 0.00 191.78 ooc MISCELLANEOUS 5% OUT OF CLASS 0.00 239.28 pds MISCELLANEOUS Public Disclosure Specialist 0.00 44.66 phy MISCELLANEOUS PHYSICAL FITNESS PAY 0.00 1,665.12 prof MISCELLANEOUS PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS SER 0.00 147.00 sdp MISCELLANEOUS SPECIAL DUTY PAY 5% 0.00 290.85 sqt MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE SERGEANT 0.00 147.00 traf MISCELLANEOUS TRAFFIC 0.00 302.03 17,720.01 $627,129.98 Total Net Pay: $429,100.81 04/18/2013 Page 2 of 2 Packet Page 73 of 494 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Proiect Title Number Number FAC Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project c327 EOLA FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 EOLB General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA General SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing c372 ElEA PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 EBMA PM Interurban Trail c146 E2DB PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 EBMB PM Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements c321 E9MA STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E2FE STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1 FM STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC STM NPDES m013 E7FG STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1 FN STM Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades c339 E1 FD STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1 FF STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity) c349 E1 FH STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 EOFC STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c336 E1 FA STM Talbot Road/Perrinville Creek Drainage Improvements c307 E9FB STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c381 E2FD STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB STR 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade c329 EOAA STR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA STR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB STR 226th Street Walkway Project c312 E9DA STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA STR 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project c245 E6DA STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB STR Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project c256 E6DB STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) c342 E1AA STR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements c265 E7AA Revised 4/18/2013 Packet Page 74 of 494 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Proiect Title Number Number STR Shell Valley Emergency Access Road c268 E7CB STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1 DA STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA SWR Alder/Dellwood/Beach PI/224th St. Sewer Replacement c347 E1GA SWR Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB SWR BNSF Double Track Project c300 EBGC SWR City -Wide Sewer Improvements c301 EBGD SWR Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08) c298 EBGA SWR OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements c142 E3GB SWR Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design c304 E9GA WTR Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update c370 E1GB WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 EOJA WTR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA WTR 2012 Waterline Overlay Program c388 E2CA WTR 2012 Waterline Replacement Program c340 E1JE WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA WTR 5th Avenue Overlay Project c399 E2CC WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1JB WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 EOIA WTR Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study c345 E1JC WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK WTR OVD Watermain Improvements c141 E3JB WTR Pioneer Way Road Repair c389 E2CB WTR PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment c346 E1JD Revised 4/18/2013 Packet Page 75 of 494 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Project Title c329 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade STM EOFC c326 Stormwater GIS Support WM d Res r WTR EOJA c363 2010 Waterline Replacement Program FAC EOLB STR E1AB STR E1 DA c332 c342 c343 ■ c354 c372 STM El FA c336 c339 STM E1FF c341 STM STM E1 FM c374 SWR E1GA c347 WTR c370 WTR E1JA c333 ds Museum Exterior Repairs Project Senior Center Roof Repairs Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming ntersection Improvements Sunset Walkway Improvements SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing SW Edmonds-1 05th/1 06th Ave W Storm Improvements Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades Storm Contribution to lbr Develop -IPDES Capacity) Street & SR104 Storm Drainaae Alternatives nville Creek Culvert Replacement 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach PI/224th St. Sewer Replacement Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Updat 2011 Waterline Re c344 76th WTR E1JC c345 WTR E1JE c340 WTR c375 STR E2AA c391 IR STR E2AC c404 c405 ;ement Program Extension Edmonds General Facilities PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment 2012 Waterline Re Main Street Watermain - Transportation Plan Update Improvement Project Citywide Safety Improvements 99 Enhancements (Phase III) WTR E2CA c388 2012 Waterline Overlay Program c389 Pioneer Way Road Repair STR E2CC c399 5th Ave Overlay Project Interurban Trail amw STM E2FA c378 North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System STM E2FC c380 Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study Revised 4/18/2013 Packet Page 76 of 494 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title E2FD c381 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 STM E2FE c382 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements 012 Sanitary Sewe SWR E2GB c390 Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation STM E3FB c407 STM E3FD c409 STM SWR E3GA c398 3 Citywide Drainage Repl 2013 Lake Ballinger Basin Study & Associated Projects Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) JlorthstreMe Abandon 2013 Sewerline Replacement Proiect Improvements WTR E3JA c397 2013 Waterline Replacement Program OVD Watermain Improvements STR E6DA c245 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project rive (SR524) Walkway Project General E6MA c238 SR99 Enhancement Proaram E7AA c265 Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements STR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements c268 Shell Valley Emergency Access Road STM E7FG m013 NPDES SWR E8GA c298 Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from Us 13 - 09/01/08) c300 BNSF Double Track Project= SWR E8GD c301 Citv-Wide Sewer Improvements Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor PM E8MB c290 Marina Beach Additional Parking c294 2009 Street Overlay Program STR E9DA c312 226th Street Walkway Project albot Rd SWR E9GA c304 Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements Revised 4/18/2013 Packet Page 77 of 494 PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Number Number Project Title WTR c141 E3JB OVD Watermain Improvements SWR c142 E3GB OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements PM c146 E2DB Interurban Trail General c238 E6MA SR99 Enhancement Program STIR c245 E6DA 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project STIR c256 E6DB Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project STIR c265 E7AA Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements STIR c268 E7CB Shell Valley Emergency Access Road PM c276 E7MA Dayton Street Plaza PM c282 EBMA Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor PM c290 EBMB Marina Beach Additional Parking STIR c294 E9CA 2009 Street Overlay Program SWR c298 EBGA Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08) SWR c300 EBGC BNSF Double Track Project SWR c301 EBGD City -Wide Sewer Improvements SWR c304 E9GA Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design STM c307 E9FB Talbot Rd. Storm Drain Project/Perrinville Creek Mitigation STIR c312 E9DA 226th Street Walkway Project PM c321 E9MA Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements WTR c324 EOIA AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements STM c326 EOFC Stormwater GIS Support FAC c327 EOLA Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project STIR c329 EOAA 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade FAC c332 EOLB Senior Center Roof Repairs WTR c333 E1JA 2011 Waterline Replacement Program STM c336 E1 FA SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements STM c339 E1 FD Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades WTR c340 E1JE 2012 Waterline Replacement Program STM c341 E1 FF Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects STR c342 E1AA Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) STIR c343 E1AB 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming WTR c344 E1JB 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood WTR c345 E1JC Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study Revised 4/18/2013 Packet Page 78 of 494 PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Number Number Project Title WTR c346 E1JD PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment SWR c347 E1GA 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach PI/224th St. Sewer Replacement STM c349 E1 FH Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity) STIR c354 E1 DA Sunset Walkway Improvements WTR c363 EOJA 2010 Waterline Replacement Program STIR c368 E1CA 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements SWR c369 E2GA 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update WTR c370 E1GB Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update General c372 ElEA SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing STM c374 E1 FM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives WTR c375 E1JK Main Street Watermain STM c376 E1 FN Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement STM c378 E21FA North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements STM c379 E2FB SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System STM c380 E2FC Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study STM c381 E2FD Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 STM c382 E21FE 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements WTR c388 E2CA 2012 Waterline Overlay Program WTR c389 E2CB Pioneer Way Road Repair SWR c390 E2GB Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation STIR c391 E2AA Transportation Plan Update STIR c392 E2AB 9th Avenue Improvement Project WTR c397 E3JA 2013 Waterline Replacement Program SWR c398 E3GA 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project STIR c399 E2CC 5th Ave Overlay Project STIR c404 E2AC Citywide Safety Improvements STIR c405 E2AD Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) STM c406 E31FA 2013 Citywide Drainage Replacement STM c407 E3FB 2013 Lake Ballinger Basin Study & Associated Projects STM c408 E3FC Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study STM c409 EYD Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) STM c410 EYE Northstream Pipe Abandonement on Puget Drive STIR i005 E7AC 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements STM m013 E7FG NPDES Revised 4/18/2013 Packet Page 79 of 494 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Proiect Title Number Number STR 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade c329 EOAA STR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 EOJA STR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB WTR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E2FE SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA SWR 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach PI/224th St. Sewer Replacement c347 E1GA WTR 2012 Waterline Overlay Program c388 E2CA WTR 2012 Waterline Replacement Program c340 E1JE STM 2013 Citywide Drainage Replacement c406 E3FA STM 2013 Lake Ballinger Basin Study & Associated Projects c407 E3FB SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA STR 226th Street Walkway Project c312 E9DA STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STR 5th Ave Overlay Project c399 E2CC STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1 CA WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1JB STR 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project c245 E6DA STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB SWR Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 EOIA SWR BNSF Double Track Project c300 EBGC STR Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project c256 E6DB STR Citywide Safety Improvements c404 E2AC SWR City -Wide Sewer Improvements c301 EBGD 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) c409 E3FD WTR Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study c345 E1JC STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC FAC Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project c327 EOLA STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) c342 E1AA Revised 4/18/2013 Packet Page 80 of 494 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Proiect Title Number Number PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 EBMA STR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) c405 E2AD PM Interurban Trail c146 E2DB STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c381 E2FD SWR Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08) c298 EBGA STIR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements c265 E7AA WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 EBMB STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA STM Northstream Pipe Abandonement on Puget Drive c410 E3FE STM NPDES m013 E7FG SWR OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements c142 E3GB WTR OVD Watermain Improvements c141 E3JB STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1 FN STM Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study c408 E3FC WTR Pioneer Way Road Repair c389 E2CB WTR PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment c346 E1JD STM Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades c339 E1 FD PM Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements c321 E9MA FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 EOLB SWR Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design c304 E9GA WTR Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update c370 E1GB STIR Shell Valley Emergency Access Road c268 E7CB General SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing c372 ElEA General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1 FF STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity) c349 E1 FH STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 EOFC STIR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1 DA STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c336 E1 FA STM Talbot Rd. Storm Drain Project/Perrinville Creek Mitigation c307 E9FB STIR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA Revised 4/18/2013 Packet Page 81 of 494 PROJECT NUMBERS (Phase and Task Numbers) Phases and Tasks (Enaineerina Division Phase Title ct Construction ds Design pl Preliminary sa Site Acquisition & Prep st Study ro Right -of -Way Task Title 196 Traffic Engineering & Studies 197 MAIT 198 CTR 199 Engineering Plans & Services 950 Engineering Staff Time 970 Construction Management 981 Contract 990 Miscellaneous 991 Retainage stm Engineering Staff Time -Storm str Engineering Staff Time -Street swr Engineering Staff Time -Sewer wtr Engineering Staff Time -Water prk Engineering Staff Time -Park Packet Page 82 of 494 AM-5652 3. C. City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: Consent Submitted For: Dave Earling Submitted By: Carolyn LaFave Department: Mayor's Office Review Committee: Committee Action: Type: Action Information Subiect Title Approval of list of Edmonds' Businesses applying for renewal of their liquor licenses with the Washington State Liquor Control Board, March 2013. Recommendation Please approve the list of Edmonds' businesses applying for renewal of their WSLCB licenses. Previous Council Action Narrative The City Clerk's Office, the Police Department, and the Mayor's Office have reviewed the attached list and have no concerns with the Washington State Liquor Control Board renewing the liquor licenses of the listed businesses. WSLCB March 2013 Inbox Finalize for Agenda Mayor Form Started By: Carolyn LaFave Final Approval Date: 04/16/2013 AttnehmPnte Form Review Reviewed By Date Sandy Chase 04/15/2013 04:52 PM Dave Earling 04/16/2013 08:36 AM Started On: 04/09/2013 09:06 AM Packet Page 83 of 494 C) T v m 00 0 Washington State F Liquor Control Board PO Box 43098, 3000 Pacific Ave. SE, Olympia WA 98504-3098, (360) 664-1600 RECEIVED MAR 12 2013 OFFICE OF THE MAYOR MAYOR OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVE NORTH EDMONDS, WA 98020 0 T v CD m 00 v, 0 cc A Washington State cLa iquor Control Board PO Box 43098, 3000 Pacific Ave. SE, Olympia WA 98504-30983 (360) 664-1600 www.liq.wa.gov Fax #: (360) 753-2710 March 07, 2013 Dear Local Authority: RE: Liquor License Renewal Applications in Your Jurisdiction - Your Objection Opportunity Enclosed please find a list of liquor -licensed premises in your jurisdiction whose liquor licenses will expire in about 90 days. This is your opportunity to object to these license renewal requests as authorized by RCW 66.24.010 (8). 1) Objection to License Renewal To object to a liquor license renewal: fax or mail a letter to the Washington State Liquor Control Board (WSLCB) Licensing Division. This letter must: o Detail the reason(s) for your objection, including a statement of all the facts upon which your objection or objections are based. You may include attachments and supporting documents which contain or confirm the facts upon which your objections are based. o Please note that whether a hearing will be granted or not is within the Board's discretion per RCW 66.24.010 (8)(d). Your letter or fax of objection must _be received by the Board's Licensing Division at least 30 days prior to the license expiration date. If you need additional time you must request that in writing. Please be aware, however, that it is within the Board's discretion to grant or deny any requests for extension of time to submit objections. Your request for extension will be granted or denied in writing. If objections are not timely received, they will not be considered as part of the renewal process. A copy of your objection and any attachments and supporting materials will be made available to the licensee, therefore, it is the Local Authority's responsibility to redact any confidential or non-disclosable information (see RCW 42.56) prior to submission to the WSLCB. 2) Status of License While Objection Pendin During the time an objection to a renewal is pending, the permanent liquor license is placed on hold. However, temporary licenses are regularly issued to the licensee until a final decision is made by the Board. 3) Procedure Fallowing Licensing Division Receipt of ❑b'ection After we receive your objection, our licensing staff will prepare a report for review by the Licensing Director. The report will include your letter of objection, as well as any attachments and supporting documents you send. The Licensing Director will then decide to renew the liquor license, or to proceed with non -renewal. 4) Procedure if Board Does Not Renew License If the Board decides not to renew a license, we will notify the licensee in writing, stating the reason for this decision. The licensee also has the right to request a hearing to contest non -renewal of their liquor license. RCW 66.24.010 (8)(d). If the licensee makes a timely request for a hearing, we will notify you. The Board's Licensing Division will be required to present evidence at the hearing before an administrative law judge to support the non -renewal recommendation. You may present evidence in support of your objection or objections. The administrative law judge will consider all of the evidence and issue an initial order for the Board's review. The Board members have final authority to renew the liquor license and will enter a final order announcing their decision. 5) Procedure if Board Renews License Over Your Objection If the Board decides to renew the license over your objection, you will be notified in writing. At that time, you may be m given an opportunity to request a hearing. An opportunity for a hearing is offered at the Board's discretion. If a hearing is held, you will be responsible for presenting evidence before an Administrative Law Judge in support of your objection to cc license renewal. The Board's Licensing Division will present evidence in support of license renewal. The Licensee may m also participate and present evidence if the licensee desires. The administrative law judge will consider all of the evidence, rn and issue an initial order for the Board's review. The Board members have final authority to renew the liquor license and will enter a final order announcing their decision. For questions about this process, contact the WSLCB Licensing Division at (360) 664-1600 or email us at wslcb@liq.wa.gov. Sincerely, Atan E . Rathbun Alan E. Rathbun, Director, Licensing and Regulation Division LIQ 864 07/10 C091080-2 WASHINGTON STATE LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD DATE: 03/07/2013 LICENSED ESTABLISHMENTS IN INCORPORATED AREAS CITY OF EDMONDS (BY ZIP CODE) FOR EXPIRATION DATE OF 20130630 C m LICENSE LICENSEE BUSINESS NAME AND ADDRESS NUMBER PRIVILEGES m °�° 1 BAKER, WILLIAM R CHANTERELLE SPECIALTY FOODS 072755 BEER/WINE REST - BEER/WINE 316 MAIN ST EDMONDS WA 98020 0000 2 . CHOPSTICK IN EDMONDS INC CHOPSTICK IN EDMONDS 081805 SPIRITS/BR/WN REST LOUNGE + 23025 100TH AVE W EDMONDS WA 98020 0000 3 . EDMONDS MUSEUM GARDEN AND SUMM EDMONDS MUSEUM GARDEN AND SUMMER MARKET 406110 FARMERS MARKET FOR BEER/WINE 5TH AND BELL DOWNTOWN EDMONDS EDMONDS WA 98020 0000 4. S4U INC. FIRDALE MARKET 351382 GROCERY STORE - BEER/WINE 9601 FIRDALE AVE EDMONDS WA 98020 0000 5 . KIM, YUN H WESTGATE MINI MART 070088 GROCERY STORE - BEER/WINE KIM, CHIN SIN 660 EDMONDS WY EDMONDS WA 98020 0000 6. EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS 400617 NON-PROFIT ARTS ORGANIZATION EDMONDS PUBLIC FACILITIES DIST 410 4TH AVE N WAC 314-07-035 EDMONDS WA 98020 3119 7. THE LOFT, INC. THE LOFT 075077 SPIRITS/BR/WN REST LOUNGE + 515 MAIN ST # A SPIRITS/BR/WN REST LOUNGE + EDMONDS WA 98020 3149 8 ARISTA WINE CELLARS, INC. ARISTA WINE CELLARS 079501 BEER/WINE SPECIALTY SHOP 320 5TH AVE S BEER/WINE SPECIALTY SHOP EDMONDS WA 98020 3401 C091080-2 WASHINGTON STATE LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD DATE: 03/07/2013 LICENSED ESTABLISHMENTS IN INCORPORATED AREAS CITY OF EDMONDS (BY ZIP CODE) FOR EXPIRATION DATE OF 20130630 C m T LICENSE Q LICENSEE BUSINESS NAME AND ADDRESS NUMBER PRIVILEGES m w 9 GALLAGHERS' WHERE U-BREW, INC. GALLAGHERS' WHERE U-BREW 407519 DOMESTIC WINERY < 250,000 LITERS 180 W DAYTON ST STE 105 MICROBREWERY EDMONDS WA 98020 4160 10 . THE PHOENIX THEATRE THE PHOENIX THEATRE 407435 NON-PROFIT ARTS ORGANIZATION 9673 FIRDALE AVE EDMONDS WA 98020 6519 11 FEEDME HOSPITALITY LLC BAR DOJO 404212 SPIRITS/BR/WN REST LOUNGE + 8404 BOWDOIN WAY CATERING EDMONDS WA 98026 7322 12 . THAINAKORN, LLC TASTY THAI 078358 BEER/WINE REST - BEER/WINE 22611 76TH AVE W SUITE 103 EDMONDS WA 98026 8306 13 . CHANG HO KORI INC GILSON RESTAURANT 369138 SPIRITS/BR/WN REST SERVICE BAR 22716 HWY 99 N EDMONDS WA 98026 8376 AM-5697 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: Consent Submitted By: Stephen Clifton Department: Community Services Review Committee: Committee Action: Type: Information Information Subject Title Community Services/Economic Development Department Quarterly Report - April, 2013. Recommendation Previous Council Action 3. D. Narrative The attached report provides an update on major projects currently worked on by staff of the Community Services and Economic Development Departments. Attachments Community Services/Economic Development Quarterly Report - April, 2013 Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Stephen Clifton Final Approval Date: 04/18/2013 Form Review Date 04/18/2013 03:49 PM 04/18/2013 04:34 PM 04/18/2013 04:47 PM Started On: 04/18/2013 03:20 PM Packet Page 89 of 494 City of Edmonds L+ f: Community Services Department Economic Development Department Date: April 18, 2013 To: Mayor Earling and City Council members From: Stephen Clifton, AICP Community Services and Economic Development Director Subject: Community Services and Economic Development Quarterly Report — April, 2013 This report provides an update on major projects currently worked on by staff of the Community Services and Economic Development Departments. Community Services I. EDMONDS CROSSING Project Description Edmonds Crossing is a regional project intended to provide a long-term solution to current operational and safety conflicts between ferry, rail, automobile, bus, and pedestrian traffic in downtown Edmonds and along State Route 104. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) (including Washington State Ferries [WSF]), and City of Edmonds propose to relocate the existing state ferry terminal from Main Street, in downtown Edmonds, to Pt. Edwards, south of the downtown core. In the process, a multimodal center would be established that would integrate ferry, rail, and transit services into a single complex. A realigned SR 104 from its current intersection with Pine Street would provide access. The new complex would provide an upgraded ferry terminal designed to meet the operational requirements for accommodating forecast ferry ridership demand; a new rail station designed to meet intercity passenger (Amtrak) and commuter rail (Sounder) service; a transit center that would meet local bus system and regional transit system loading requirements; facilities that allow both vehicular commuters and walk-on passengers to utilize various transportation modes; parking, drop-off areas, retail/concessionaire space, waiting areas; and a system linking these facilities to allow for the safe movement of users. Significant Activities Since January, 2013 • March 28, 2013 — I sent Mayor Earling, the Edmonds City Council, Directors and other City staff an e-mail stating that I received notice from Puget Sound Regional Council Packet Page 90 of 494 (PSRC) that they are no longer able to postpone the redistribution of the remaining approximate amount of $2 million in Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) funds PRSC granted to the Edmonds Multimodal Terminal project. These funds were originally awarded to the project in 1999 and obligated for preliminary engineering/design work in 2005. Due to a lack of progress towards the completion of the project, it was deemed "inactive" by the Federal Highway Administration and the funds were required to be deactivated in June 2012. At that time, we spoke with PSRC and WSDOT about available options that would allow the City to continue moving forward on the project, and PSRC let us know that the options were slim; we had hoped to propose a scope of work that might allow the funds to be retained and re -utilized on the project. Due to new and more rigorous requirements for the delivery of projects utilizing Federal Highway Administration funds, and the fact that there are no current alternatives tied to Edmonds Crossing or Edmonds Crossing minimum build alternatives, PSRC is unable to postpone redistribution of these funds. What this means is that the funds are allocated to another project within the region that is able to move, or currently moving, forward. PSRC and other regions around the state have been assigned specific delivery targets for their federal funds, which if they do not meet, will result in the loss of funds to the region. The $2 million needs to be utilized as quickly as possible to avoid this risk. Per PSRC's adopted policies, when the project is ready to move forward again, the City may re -compete for PSRC's federal funds in a future project selection process. They generally conduct these competitions every 2-3 years. What this means is that all Federal Funding appropriated to the project has been deactivated or de -obligated due to inactivity of the project. De-obligation/deactivation is a step used by FTA in order for federally appropriated funds to be returned to the federal government. II. SOUND TRANSIT (PHASE 1, AKA SOUND MOVE) Project Description During the past several years, Sound Transit has been implementing what is called the Sound Move Plan. One element calls for commuter rail services, otherwise known as Sounder. Commuter rail will eventually link Everett in the north with Seattle, Tacoma and Lakewood in the South, a total of 82 miles through three counties. Sounder is being implemented in three phases, one of which includes Everett to Seattle or the North Commuter Rail corridor. Three commuter rail stations exist along this corridor, i.e., Everett, Mukilteo and Edmonds. Sound Transit Sounder currently operates 8 trains per day between Everett and Seattle, i.e., four round trips. This is a reduction of two round trips from the originally proposed operational plan. The first roundtrip train run began in December, 2003. Located between Main and Dayton Streets along both sides of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) tracks and co -located with Amtrak's and Community Transit, Edmonds Commuter Rail Station includes ADA accessible rail platforms, shelters, signage, lighting fixtures, hanging flower baskets, ticket vending machines, on -site parking, and Community Transit bus station. Packet Page 91 of 494 Significant Activities since January, 2013 • March and April, 2013 — Salish Crossing owners are currently constructing a new parking area for the Edmonds Sounder Commuter Rail Station (Edmonds Station) at the south end of their site between Dayton Street and existing structures. III. SOUND TRANSIT 2 Expanding the regional mass transit system On Nov. 4, 2008, voters of the Central Puget Sound region approved a Sound Transit 2 ballot measure. The plan adds regional express bus and commuter rail service while building 36 additional miles of light rail to form a 55-mile regional system. For additional information, visit http://soundtransit.org/. Sound Transit is preparing to extend light rail from Northgate to Lynnwood, which voters approved as part of the Sound Transit 2 Plan in 2008 along with funding to continue planning future service all the way to Everett. This project relies on competing for and receiving significant federal funding. The Sound Transit Board took a major step in year 2012 by confirming that light rail is the best mode of transit and Interstate 5 is the right corridor to study based on ridership, travel times, service levels and cost. Significant Activities since January, 2013 • January, February, March and April, 2013 — Construction is currently underway on a light rail extension to the University of Washington scheduled to open in 2016, followed by service to Northgate targeted for opening in 2021. Voter -approved additions will bring 36 new miles of service to the north, south and east, creating more than 50 miles of regional light rail service. IV. UNOCAL AKA CHEVRON SITE CLEANUP Project Description The UNOCAL property currently consists of a lower yard which currently contains petroleum contamination resulting from more than 60 years of operation. Chevron, which acquired UNOCAL, is now the entity responsible for cleaning up the site. Cleanup work at the lower yard, which began in 2007, was a continuation of remediation work that has been ongoing at the site since 2001. Chevron conducted cleanup work from summer 2007 through fall 2008 and has since been monitoring the site since. Significant Activities since January, 2013 January, February, March and April, 2013 — Interim actions have addressed most of the contamination at the site. Chevron Environmental Management Company, on behalf of Unocal, is performing a Feasibility Study to assess remedial alternatives to cleaning up contamination that remains. Chevron EMC, Ecology, Washington State Ferries, and the Edmonds Citizen's Awareness Committee continue to meet at key points during the study to discuss the work. The draft Feasibility Study is due to Ecology at the end of 2013. Once the Study is finalized, Ecology will select cleanup actions to be taken at the Site. The selected actions will be presented to the public in a draft Cleanup Action Plan. Packet Page 92 of 494 V. EDMONDS PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT Overview The City Council, pursuant to state law, approved the formation of the Public Facilities District (PFD) at its April 24, 2001 meeting. A PFD is a separate municipal corporation that has authority to undertake the design, construction, operation, promotion and financing of a Regional Center in the city. The Public Facilities District board consists of five members originally appointed by the City Council on June 19, 2001. Phase 1A renovation of the original Edmonds High School Auditorium into a first class Edmonds Center for the Arts (ECA) and multipurpose facility was completed in September of 2006. Significant Activities Since January, 2013 • January, February, March and April, 2013 — No new information VI. SNOHOMISH COUNTY PAINE FIELD Overview On October 14, 2004, a Mead & Hunt Inc. Business Travel Survey was issued which focused on the market potential and options for Paine Field. On August 20, 2004, a Snohomish County Citizen Cabinet issued an Economic Development Final Report -Blueprint for the Economic Future of Snohomish County. Both reports put Paine Field in the regional spotlight as they highlight the possibility of using Paine Field for commercial aircraft operations, thus chancing its general aviation status. Although Snohomish County Executive Aaron Reardon and some County Council members have said they do not support commercial air service at Paine Field, federal law obligates the county to accommodate commercial service. Federal law does not allow the county to prohibit or limit scheduled passenger air service. Instead, it requires that the county negotiate with the airlines in good faith to accommodate their proposed service. Horizon Airlines has indicated it wants to operate four times a day to Portland and twice per day to Spokane, using 75-seat Bombardier Q400 turboprop airplanes on both routes. Allegiant has said it plans to operate twice a week to Las Vegas, using 150-seat MD83 jet aircraft. Before airlines may begin commercial service, the FAA must amend the county's operating certificate for Paine Field as well as the airlines' operating specifications. The county was required to prepare an environmental assessment for Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approval before those amendments can occur. Significant Activities Since January, 2013 • January, February, March and April, 2013 — No new information at this time. VII. RAILROAD QUIET ZONE Overview As discussed in the past, there is an expressed desire of the City Council and Port of Edmonds to establish a full or partial quite zone along the City's shoreline. A quiet zone is a Packet Page 93 of 494 section of rail line that contains one or more consecutive public crossings at which locomotive horns are not routinely sounded. Significant Activities Since January, 2013 • January, February, March and April, 2013 — No new information at this time. Economic Development I. PARTNERSHIPS Goal 1, Policy is of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan is to promote a results - oriented permit and licensing process, which consolidates review timelines, eliminates unnecessary steps, and maintains a strong customer service approach. Significant Activities Since January, 2013 • January, February, March and April, 2013 — The Public Works Director, Acting Development Services Director, Building Official, and other staff have been meeting with me to discuss potential changes in operations to improve development review efficiencies. This includes moving towards re -structuring the City's development code in year 2013. March 28, 2013 — The Public Works Director, Acting Development Services Director, Building Official, City Engineer and other staff met with representatives from the Master Builders Association to discuss steps underway to improve the permitting process. We asked how the Master Builders and their members view the City of Edmonds's customer service and permitting process. Representatives shared that their members view City staff as very helpful and in a positive light. What is widely viewed in a negative light are the procedures, processes and standards that must be followed to obtain a permit. • March 20, 2013 — The City of Edmonds hosted a second education and training seminar called Providing A+ Customer Service in the Public Sector Environment. The seminar was directed towards all staff providing customer service. Goal 1 of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states "foster a healthy business community that provides employment and other economic opportunities." Significant Activities Since January, 2013 • January, February, March and April, 2013 — Economic Development staff continue recruiting businesses to, and helping businesses expand or relocated within, the City of Edmonds. • March, 2013 - Community Health Centers of Snohomish County Building: Community Health Centers of Snohomish County is proposing to construct a new 25,000 square foot facility along Highway 99, just south of Les Schwab Tires. Site plans and elevations have been submitted to the City which indicate the building will be constructed to meet LEED Silver standards. Packet Page 94 of 494 Economic Development Commission Overview On June 2, 2009 — The City Council approved Ordinance 3735 which creates a new Citizens Economic Development Commission (EDC) in order to determine new strategies for economic development within the City and identify new sources of revenues. In conjunction with the Planning Board, the new commission is to review and consider strategies designed to improve commercial viability, tourism development, and activity. The ED Commission consists of 17 members appointed by the Mayor and the City Council. The commission is staffed by the City's Economic Development Director and Executive Assistant. Frances Chapin and Rob Chave also attend regularly. The Commission is to make recommendations to the Mayor and City Council, as well as to other City boards or commissions as appropriate, regarding economic development strategies. Minutes from monthly meetings (once approved by the Edmonds EDC) can be found at http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us/EconDevMinutes.stm. Significant Activities Since January, 2013 • February 20, 2013 — The Edmonds Economic Development Commission conducted a meeting in the Brackett Meeting Room. Agenda topics included Communications with Council members, Communications and Community Outreach, Limiting Office uses on the 15t 45 feet of the ground floor within the BD1 zone, updates by the four sub -groups related to: Technology, Strategic Plan, Tourism and Land Use. • March 20, 2013 - The Edmonds Economic Development Commission conducted a meeting in the Brackett Meeting Room. Agenda topics included Land Use Incentives, Communication and Community Outreach, Coal Train Mitigation, and updates by the four sub -groups related to: Tourism, Strategic Planning process, and Technology. Additional topics included Food Trucks and Twispworks. • March 20, 2013 — Community Services/Economic Development staff worked with Information Technology and City Clerk staff to add Economic Development Commission as a drop down menu on the City's Meetings and Agendas webpage. • April 2, 2013 - A presentation on the final draft Strategic Action Plan was given by Tom Beckwith during a City Council meeting. EDC and Planning Board members were invited to attend. The Council approved the plan 6-1. Goal 1, Policy 1f of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: "Continue to partner with business and economic development organizations, and address feedback from the business community." Significant Activities Since January, 2013 • January, February, March and April, 2013 — I continue attending monthly Edmonds Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Committee meetings, Downtown Edmonds Merchants Association (DEMA) meetings, and Downtown Edmonds Business Improvement District (BID) Board meetings in order to share information about City issues and hear about Chamber, DEMA and BID issues/concerns. Packet Page 95 of 494 II. BUSINESS EXPANSION, RETENTION, AND DIVERSIFICATION OF TAX BASE Goal 1, Policy is of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: "Encourage and expand business expansion and retention programs. Goal 3 calls for diversifying the tax base and increasing revenues to support local services." Significant Activities Since January, 2013 • January, February, March and April, 2013 — I continue working with property and business owners in attempts to help find leasable space in addition to discussing potential leasing and redevelopment of buildings and land. April 2, 2013 - A new Swedish cancer treatment center, located at 21605 — 76th Avenue, opened its doors. In celebration of the new Swedish/Edmonds Cancer Institute opening, the public was invited to tour the facility on Wednesday, April 17, 2013. Swedish also recently met with City staff to discuss regulations that would apply to future Swedish projects and other issues related to Swedish undertaking master planning for the campus. Goal 1, Policy if of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: "Continue to partner with business and economic development organizations, and address feedback from the business community." Significant Activities Since January, 2013 • March 6, 2013 - Connecting With Our Community: The Edmonds Community College hosted a Connecting With Our Community' breakfast. Essentially this was a "meet and greet" event to begin the process of connecting with business owners in the vicinity of the International District as a first step in improving relationships. Attendees included business owners from the International District area, Jean Hernandez, EdCC President, Mayor Dave Earling, Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton, Ailsa Kellam, Chamber of Commerce Development and Communications Director, Valarie Claypool, Chamber of Commerce Membership and Events Director, and Chamber Board members Bob Rinehart and Gary Choo, etc. Goal 2, Policy 2i of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: "Create synergy for commercial businesses where possible, for example, by implementing a "retail core" area in the downtown." Significant Activities Since January, 2013 Amendments to Downtown BD Zones - The Planning Board discussed four potential amendments to the downtown BD zones during meetings on March 9, March 23, April 13, April 27, and June 8, 2011. During the June 8, 2011 Planning Board meeting, the Board voted 7-0 (with amendments) to forward a recommendation to approve the proposed amendments to the City Council. For additional information, see the Planning Board agenda webpage which contains a staff memorandum, draft code language, and June 8, Packet Page 96 of 494 2011 Planning Board minutes. On October 26, 2011, the City Council held a public hearing on the four potential amendments to Downtown BD Zones and discussed these items further during City Council meetings held on August 9 and 23, 2011. Limiting Office Uses along the ground floor of designated commercial street frontages • One of the amendments to the BD1 zone includes limiting office only uses in ground floor storefronts of designated street frontages within the BD1 zone. On September 27, 2011, the City Council voted against this amendment. The City Council discussed this topic again on October 4, 2011. On February 7, 2012, the City Council discussed reconsideration of this issue and studying it further. On August 6, 2012, the City Council voted to have the issue of limiting office only uses in ground floor storefronts of the designated street frontages within the BD1 zone to the August 14, 2012 Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee as a discussion item and to reschedule before the full council at the following City Council meeting. On August 14, 2012, the City Council Planning, Parks and Public Works committee discussed the issue of limiting office only uses in ground floor storefronts of the designated street frontages within the BD1 zone. On August 21, 2012, the Edmonds City Council voted to refer the issue of limiting office only uses to the Planning Board and Economic Development Commission, more specifically what kind of office only uses should be limited and any other proposals the EDC and Planning Board feel are appropriate. The EDC Land Use Sub -group has completed a draft working paper which has been provided to Roger Brooks for his review. Mr. Brooks has agreed to facilitate a meeting with individuals who own buildings within the BD1 zone to discuss this issue and a meeting is likely to take place mid -May, 2013. III. IMPROVING BUSINESS CLIMATE Goal 2, Policy 2e of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: "explore options such as Business Improvement Districts/Areas (special assessment districts) as a way to help shopping areas fund marketing and beautification in a sustainable fashion." Significant Activities Since January, 2013 • March 14, 2013 — The Edmonds Downtown Business Improvement District Interim Members Advisory Board conducted their first meeting. As directed by Ordinance 3909, the Interim Members Advisory Board is working on preparing draft bylaws and a work plan for year 2013. Goal 2, Policy 2h of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: "Work to identify and 'brand" distinct business districts, where there is a natural synergy, such as the Highway 99 International District, the Stevens Hospital Medical Corridor, and the 4t" Avenue Arts Corridor." Significant Activities Since January, 2013 • Highway 99 Enhancement Project: includes adding street lighting fixtures and artwork along the portion of Highway 99 passing through the International District. The main project components include the following: Packet Page 97 of 494 • Replace 6 cobra head light poles with decorative poles that have attached artist made pedestrian level light lanterns and banner signage — east side. • Replace 7 cobra head light poles with decorative poles that have attached standard pedestrian level lights and banner signage — east side both north and south of original 6. • Add at least 3 new pedestrian level lights on west side near an island at 76t" Avenue. • Resurface island at 76t" Avenue, add new ADA curb ramps, and install sculptural lantern artwork with solar panel. • Replace service cabinet. The goal is to create a visual gateway and identity for the Edmonds International District while enhancing the pedestrian experience and safety. • April, 2013 — Construction has resumed and is underway. IV. TECHNOLOGY Goal 3, Policy 3b of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: 'Leverage technology assets, such as existing fiber connections, to pursue new revenue streams." Significant Activities Since January, 2013 • January, February, March and April, 2013 — The Economic Development and Community Services staff continue to meet monthly with the City's Community Technology Advisory Committee (CTAC) regarding existing technology assets, e.g., fiber and communications equipment. March, 2013 — The City of Edmonds is now broadcasting and streaming City Council meetings live via television and the internet. Council meetings are held the 15t, 3rd, and 4t" Tuesday of each month at 7 p.m. and can be watched on Comcast Channel 21 and Frontier Channel 39 or by clicking EdTV on the City of Edmonds Communications webpage. Edmonds Streaming Media Archive - If someone is interested in viewing past City Council meetings, they can click on City Council Meetings on the same EdTV webpage. Archived City Council videos are arranged by date, with the most recent at the top of the list. Click Play to watch the meeting and agenda or meeting index to view related documents. You can also search the archives by typing keywords into the Search box. Testing of the archiving system took place last fall with a full launch in March of 2013. The above information was distributed via the Edmonds Update Quarterly Newsletter which is sent to over 9,000 e-mail addresses. V. TOURISM Goal 3, Policy 3g of the Edmonds Economic Development Plan states: 'Expand tourism efforts to take advantage of regional trends, such as nature tourism." Packet Page 98 of 494 Significant Activities Since January, 2013 • January, February, March and April, 2013 — I continue to serve on the Snohomish County Tourism Promotion Board and attend board meetings. Items of Interest ■ Burlington Northern Santa Fe — Installation of Second Rail Line As a part of the Sound Transit's Sound Move, Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) will be installing a second rail line alongside the existing rail line between the areas north of Downtown Edmonds and south of Marina Beach Park. Regarding a timeline related to the installation of a BNSF second rail line, I have been trying to obtain a definitive date from BNSF as to when installation of the second rail line; BNSF has not provided a commencement date. Significant Activities Since January, 2013 • January, February, March and April, 2013 — No new information. ■ Grants Over the past few years, City of Edmonds staff have been quite successful in securing both state and federal grants to help fund a variety of projects throughout the City. The following highlights grants received not referenced within the last Community Services/Economic Development Quarterly Report: 1. Madrona Elementary Walkway (2361" St. SW from SR-104 to Madrona Elementary) - The City was informed last week that grant funding has been awarded a grant in the amount of $494,000 through Safe Routes to School Program. The only item remaining to secure the funds is the approval from the State Legislature. This project will construct approximately 600 feet of curb, gutter, and sidewalk on the south side of 236t" St. SW connecting Madrona Elementary School to Edmonds Way / SR-104, with ADA curb ramps on all street corners within the project limits, addition of stormwater drainage facilities, and bicycle sharrows on both sides of the street. The project will also consist in an education program, where kids attending Madrona Elementary will be taught different bicycle riding safety tips, with in -class education and bicycle rodeos. The design phase is scheduled to begin in Summer '13 and the construction is planned for Summer '14. There is much work that goes into researching and applying for grants as well as administering them once awarded. This is where City of Edmonds staff excel and the reason the City has been so successful in competing for grants. As projects and programs are identified, and as long as funding opportunities exist, staff will diligently work to secure grants to pay for projects and lessen the cost to the City of Edmonds. Packet Page 99 of 494 Packet Page 100 of 494 AM-5656 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: Consent Submitted For: Mike De Lilla 3. E. Department: Engineering Committee: Parks, Planning, Public Works Submitted By: Megan Luttrell Type: Action Information Subiect Title Report on bids opened April 16, 2013 for the 2013 Waterline Replacement Project and award of contract to D&G Backhoe in the amount of $1,304,457.70. Recommendation Council award a contract to D&G Backhoe in the amount of $1,304,457.70 for the 2013 Waterline Replacement Project and authorize a 10% management reserve for changes during construction. Previous Council Action On March 19, 2013 Council authorized Staff to call for bids for the 2013 Waterline Replacement Project. On April 8, 2013, the Planning, Parks and Public Works committee reviewed this item and recommended it be placed on the consent agenda at the April 23, 2013 Council meeting. Narrative On April 16, 2013, the City received eight bids for the 2013 Waterline Replacement Project. The bids ranged from a low of $1,304,457.70 to a high of $2,121,452.12 including sales tax. The bid tabulation summary is attached as Exhibit 1. D&G Backhoe submitted the low responsive bid in the amount of $1,304,457.70, including sales tax. The engineer's estimate was $1,633,240,14. A review of the low bidder's record is in progress, so far all responses are positive. This project is part of the City's program to replace and upgrade existing waterlines at various locations around the City that are reaching the end of their useful service life, is undersized and unable to meet current requirements, or has some other existing system deficiency. The project will replace at various locations around the City approximately 7,000 linear feet of waterline piping with associated meters, fire hydrants, and two pressure reducing stations. The project costs are being funded by the 421 Water Fund and the General Funds available for fire protection costs. The total 2013 budget required to fund this project is approximately $1,637,749 and is broken down as follows: $ 30,932 - Engineering/Design Costs (Year to Date) $ 140,000 - Engineering & Construction Management $1,304,457 - Contract Award Packet Page 101 of 494 $ 31,293 - Testing Lab Services $ 1,067 - 1% for the Arts $ 130,000 - Management Reserve $1,637,749 - TOTAL Funds Available in 421 Water Fund for 2013 Waterline Replacement Project: $ 101,166 - Fire Hydrant Improvements (General Fund Transfer) $2,092,980 - 421 funds available for water Projects in 2013 $ (155,000) - 421 funds already earmarked to water projects (YTD) $2,039,146 - TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE The General fund transfer of $101,166 will be funded by the 8.7% water utility tax that is collected by the general fund for the hydrant improvements. Exhibit 1 - Bid Tab Exhibit 2 - Project May AffnrhmPnfe Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering Megan Luttrell 04/18/2013 03:07 PM Public Works Phil Williams 04/18/2013 03:47 PM City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/18/2013 03:49 PM Mayor Dave Earling 04/18/2013 04:35 PM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 04/18/2013 04:47 PM Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Started On: 04/09/2013 11:37 AM Final Approval Date: 04/18/2013 Packet Page 102 of 494 City of Edmonds 2013 Watermain Replacement Bid Tab 16-Acr-13 -------------------- MUM Removal of Contaminated Matenal (Addendum 1 C:\Documents and Settings\mc,z wal Seaings\Temporary Infer-Files\CO—Outlook\4AOF9GBM\6052 Bid Tab 2013 W—ain Packet Page 103 of 494 m C:\Dooummisand SettingsMomz wd Seings\Temporary Intern&Files\CO—Outlook\4AOF9GBW6052 Bid Tab 2013 Wetmnain Packet Page 104 of 494 Contract Totals I�E�E�E� �E�E�E�I�E��E�:mE�:E�E�E�E�E�E�f Elf ESE I�E�E�E� �E�E�E�E�E�I�E�I�E�E�f E�E�E�II�E�II�E�E Eloom= ------------------- 1. EAensim errs. Bitl was $211,415.10 as whiten; shoultl M1ave Notes: been 211 fi46.46. No im act on bid osRion. 2. Subt0lal errs. Bid was $1,244,399.00 as wditen; —Id M1ave been 1 264 399,00. No impact oe bid itioe. 3. SubiWal errs. Bid was $Bd,410.00 as—MM; Ih.IdI have been $44.410.00. Na im d on bid m idd. Packet Page 105 of 494 C:\Doo wd, and SeBiN Vd, o%w,I SeVings\Temporary Intern& Files\C -,d.Outlook\4AOF9GBM\605 2 Bid Tab 2013 W atecnaia E3JA 2013 WATERMAIN REPLACEMENT 6T $r VICINITY MAP -T T. —LE i n�Il`I�IIIuIIIIInu®ea® � � � TL212T� ❑❑❑ Di h � PINE sT ®' n�n� rnI' a 216TH ST LJLJ �� �� LJLJ uLJ '� � O� a LJLJ � 2201H Sf 224TH ST � AM-5654 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: Consent Submitted For: Jeanie McConnell 3. F. Department: Engineering Committee: Parks, Planning, Public Works Submitted By: Megan Luttrell Type: Action Information Subiect Title Authorization for Mayor to approve release of a Utility Easement & acceptance and recording of new Storm Utility and Public Pedestrian Access Easement. Recommendation Authorize Mayor to approve release of the Utility Easement and accept and allow recording of the new Storm Utility and Public Pedestrian Access Easement Previous Council Action On April 8, 2013, the Planning, Parks and Public Works committee reviewed this item and recommended it be placed on the consent agenda at the April 23, 2013 Council meeting. Narrative The City of Edmonds is currently reviewing a proposed development project which includes construction of a Walgreens and Bank located at 9801 Edmonds Way. The City currently has a utility easement that runs along the east side of the property that receives storm drainage flows from the 98th Ave W right-of-way that sits to the north and above this site. With the construction of the proposed development the storm drainage flows will be captured in a closed pipe system and with this revision to the storm system, a new storm easement will need to be provided to the City. Along with granting of the new easement, the existing utility easement in this area should be released. This project will also provide wider sidewalks along Edmonds Way, as well as a landscape buffer between the street and the sidewalk. With this design, a portion of the sidewalk will be located on private property and therefore a public pedestrian access easement will need to be granted to the City. Attachments Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map Attachment 2 - Utilities Easement Release & Storm Water Easement & Grant Agreement Attachment 3 - Public Pedestrian Access Easement (Seven Hills Properties 25 LLC) Attachment 4 - Public Pedestrian Access Easement (Wuscher Family LLLP) Form Review Packet Page 107 of 494 Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering Robert English 04/18/2013 01:57 PM Public Works Phil Williams 04/18/2013 03:46 PM City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/18/2013 03:49 PM Mayor Dave Earling 04/18/2013 04:35 PM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 04/18/2013 04:47 PM Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Started On: 04/09/2013 11:25 AM Final Approval Date: 04/18/2013 Packet Page 108 of 494 LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST ONE -QUARTER OF NORTHEAST ONE -QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON 36 NE 1/4 CORNER DATE: MARCH 26, 2013 SECTION 36, 1/4" 100 0 100 {{ BRASS PLUG I� WITH PUNCH, I DN. 1.2' IN SCALE 1 " = 100" MONUMENT W BOX, �Lij 22gTh i Fri A E 0 ] LOT 11 SW CORNER OF W Z OLYMPIC VIEW OLYMPtC VIEW ESTATES N01 i , I ESTATES NO. 1 LOT 12 LOT 13 37.5D' C*] LO N I CM N co uj 5v CO ko 7. O T N o -13� o Q O Q 1-133 z z 40,00' 0 258.03' ci ECDMONEDa3 WAY C _F OU -F N CD_ -1 0--I- ...... way;Wc SURVEYED DY .h D . • `' 2'; FOSTER & MADDUX SURVEYING, INC. � 708 NE 238TH PLACE �O WOOD VILLAGE, OREGON 97060-2921 y4 / 21675 J�v • 503-667--8307 } / �S • RF�ISTER��•' J� ' 503-997-I 100 �1k%� /ONAL"O�5,•" 503-740-9972 Packet Page 109 of 494 UPON RECORDING RETURN TO: City Clerk City of Edmonds 121 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Space above this line for Recorder's use Document Title or Titles: Utilities Easement Release and Storm Water Easement and Grant Agreement Name of Grantor: Seven Hills Properties 25 LLC, a Washington limited liability company Name of Grantee: City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation Pages referencing additional names: None Prior Recorded Documents: 8005290185 and 8005300038 Abbreviated Legal Description: Northwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 36, Township 27 North, Range 03 East, Willamette Meridian, Snohomish County, Washington Additional Legal Description Found On: Exhibit A Assessor's Property Tax Parcel Number or Account Number: 27033600113300 and 27033600113200 S:\ENGR\ADDRESS_FILES\Alpha\Edmonds_Way-9801\Easements\Seven_Hills_Edmonds_Storm_Water_Easement (Revised) 4 16 13.doc 1 Packet Page 110 of 494 UTILITIES EASEMENT RELEASE AND STORM WATER EASEMENT AND GRANT AGREEMENT THIS UTILITIES EASEMENT RELEASE AND STORM WATER EASEMENT AND GRANT AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is entered into as of the 30th day of April, 2013, by and between Seven Hills Properties 25 LLC, a Washington limited liability company ("Seven Hills") and the City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation ("City of Edmonds"). Seven Hills is the fee owner of that certain real property located in Snohomish County, Washington is legally described on the attached Exhibit A (the "Seven Hills Parcel"). The Seven Hills Parcel is burdened by a reservation of utilities in a vacated street area pursuant to City of Edmonds Ordinance No. 2141 recorded with the Snohomish County Auditor on May 29, 1980 under Recording No. 8005290185 and on May 30, 1980 under Recording No. 8005300038 (the "Existing Utilities Easement"). Seven Hills desires that the Existing Utilities Easement be terminated and released by the City of Edmonds and Seven Hills further desires to grant the City of Edmonds a storm water easement on the portion of the Seven Hills Parcel legally described on the attached Exhibit B and depicted on the attached Exhibit C (the "Easement Area"). NOW, THEREFORE, in accordance with the foregoing recitals, Seven Hills hereby covenants and agrees with the City of Edmonds as follows: 1. Release of Existing Easement. The City of Edmonds hereby terminates and releases all right, title and interest of every nature held by the City of Edmonds, its successors and assigns arising under or accruing as a result of the Existing Utilities Easement. The termination and release of the Existing Utilities Easement shall be effective upon the recordation of this Agreement with the Snohomish County Auditor and upon such recording, the Existing Utilities Easement shall be null and void and of no force and effect. 2. Grant of Easement. Seven Hills hereby grants and conveys to the City of Edmonds a permanent easement for the installation, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, reconstruction or replacement of a storm water pipeline and necessary appurtenances, over, across, through and below the Easement Area, and the further right to remove trees, bushes, undergrowth and other obstructions interfering with the location, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, reconstruction or replacement of such storm water pipeline and appurtenances, together with the right of access to the Easement Area at any time for the stated purposes. 3. Work/Restoration. When necessary to maintain, repair, reconstruct and/or replace the storm water pipeline and appurtenances, the City of Edmonds shall have the right of entry for such purposes, provided that, when such entry is necessary, any such activity shall be performed in a workmanlike manner with all reasonable haste and using reasonable efforts to avoid causing any damage to, or interference with, any improvements on or within the Easement Area (including, upon the mutual written agreement of the parties, any other utility lines installed under, across or within the Easement Area) or on or within the real property adjacent to the Easement Area, and the Easement Area shall be restored to substantially its previous condition as soon as reasonably possible, with the S:\ENGR\ADDRESS_FILES\Alpha\Edmonds_Way-9801\Easements\Seven_Hills_Edmonds_Storm_Water_Easement (Revised) 4 16 13.doc 2 Packet Page 111 of 494 costs of such activity and/or restoration being borne by the City of Edmonds. In connection with its use of the Easement Area pursuant to this Agreement, the City of Edmonds shall, except in an emergency, perform all repair and maintenance work on mutually agreeable days and times. 4. Reservation of Rights to Use Easement Area. All right, title and interest in and to the Easement Area under this Agreement which may be used or enjoyed without interfering with the rights conveyed to the City of Edmonds by this Agreement are reserved to Seven Hills; provided, however, that Seven Hills shall not erect or maintain any buildings or other improvements which may cause damage to or interfere with the improvements to be placed within the Easement Area by the City of Edmonds; or develop, landscape, or beautify the Easement Area in any way which would unreasonably or materially increase the costs to the City of Edmonds of installing the improvements or restoring the Easement Area after such installation. The parties may, upon mutual written agreement, allow other utility lines to be installed under, across and within the Easement Area, provided such utility lines do not materially interfere with the installations of the City of Edmonds. The City of Edmonds shall take all reasonable precautions to avoid damaging or causing interference with the operations of any improvements or facilities installed by such other authorized users of the Easement Area. 5. Liens. The City of Edmonds shall not permit any claim, lien or other encumbrances arising from the City of Edmond's use of the Easement Area to accrue against or attach to the Easement Area or the interest of Seven Hills in adjacent lands. 6. Compliance With Laws. The City of Edmonds shall construct and maintain the City of Edmond's improvements in accordance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations. 7. Invalidity. If any provision of this Agreement shall be invalid or unenforceable the remaining provisions shall not be affected thereby, and every provision of this Agreement shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. 8. Rights and Obligations of Successors. The restrictions, benefits and obligations hereunder shall create mutual benefits and servitudes running with the land and shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective heirs, representatives, lessees, successors and assigns. 9. Headings. The headings herein are inserted only as a matter of convenience and for reference and in no way define, limit or describe the scope or intent of this Agreement nor in any way affect the terms and provisions hereof. 10. Attorneys' Fees. In the event a suit, action, arbitration, or other proceeding of any nature whatsoever, including, without limitation, any proceeding under the US Bankruptcy Code, is instituted, or the services of an attorney are retained, to interpret or enforce any provision of this Agreement or with respect to any dispute relating to this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the losing party its reasonable attorneys', paralegals', accountants', and other experts' fees and all other fees, costs, and expenses actually incurred and reasonably necessary in connection therewith (collectively, "Attorneys' Fees"). In the event of suit, action, arbitration, or other S:\ENGR\ADDRESS_FILES\Alpha\Edmonds_Way-9801\Easements\Seven_Hills_Edmonds_Storm_Water_Easement (Revised) 4 16 13.doc 3 Packet Page 112 of 494 proceeding, the amount thereof shall be determined by the judge or arbitrator, shall include fees and expenses incurred on any appeal or review, and shall be in addition to all other amounts provided by law. 11. Modification/Severability. This Agreement once executed and delivered shall not be modified or altered in any respect except by a writing executed and delivered by the owner of the Seven Hills Parcel and the City of Edmonds or their successors in a form for recordation in the Auditor's Office of Snohomish County, Washington. Invalidation of any provision of this Agreement, in whole or in part, or of any application of a provision of this Agreement, by judgment or court order shall in no way affect other provisions or applications. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement the day and year first written above. Seven Hills: Seven Hills Properties 25 LLC, a Washington limited liability company By: Castenada Investments, Inc., a California corporation, Member By: Thomas J. Rocca, President City of Edmonds: City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation By: Dave Earling, Mayor ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED : Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney S:\ENGR\ADDRESS_FILES\Alpha\Edmonds_Way-9801\Easements\Seven_Hills_Edmonds_Storm_Water_Easement (Revised) 4 16 13.doc 4 Packet Page 113 of 494 STATE OF ) ss. County of ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Thomas J. Rocca is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument as the President of Castenada Investments, Inc., which is a Member of Seven Hills Properties 25 LLC, a Washington limited liability company, and acknowledged it to be his free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument on behalf of such limited liability company. Dated: STATE OF WASHINGTON ss. County of Notary Public in and for the State of , residing at: My appointment expires: _ I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Dave Earling is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument as the Mayor of the City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation, and acknowledged it to be his free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument on behalf of such Washington municipal corporation. Dated: Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at: My appointment expires: S:\ENGR\ADDRESS_FILES\Alpha\Edmonds_Way-9801\Easements\Seven_Hills_Edmonds_Storm_Water_Easement (Revised) 4 16 13.doc 5 Packet Page 114 of 494 EXHIBIT A Seven Hills Parcel Leaal Description THE EAST 178.02 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED TRACT OF LAND: THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH 0051'04" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION, 210.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88045'18" EAST, PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION, 37.50 FEET TO THE EAST MARGIN OF 100TH AVENUE WEST; THENCE SOUTH 0151'04" WEST, ALONG SAID EAST MARGIN, 119.83 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION; THENCE SOUTH 88144'17" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, 292.12 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 88144'17" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, 304.61 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 25 FEET OF SAID SOUTH HALF, BEING THE WEST MARGIN OF 98TH AVENUE WEST; THENCE SOUTH 0129'27" WEST, ALONG SAID MARGIN, 285.11 FEET TO THE NORTH MARGIN OF 230TH STREET SW, BEING A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 3°37'30" WEST 1,388.10 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID MARGIN AN ARC DISTANCE OF 119.32 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 88041'59" WEST, ALONG SAID MARGIN, 316.80 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0051'04" EAST 239.92 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88144'17" EAST 129.78 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0140'16" EAST 50.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF VACATED 98TH AVENUE W WHICH INURED THERETO BY ORDINANCE NO. 2141, RECORDED MAY 29, 1980 AS RECORDING NO. 8005290185 AND ALSO RECORDED MAY 30, 1980 AS RECORDING NO. 8005300038, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. EXCEPTING THEREFROM ANY PORTION LYING WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF EDMONDS WAY (SR 104). S:\ENGR\ADDRESS_FILES\Alpha\Edmonds_Way-9801\Easements\Seven_Hills_Edmonds_Storm_Water_Easement (Revised) 4 16 13.doc 1 Packet Page 115 of 494 EXHIBIT B Easement Legal Description LEGAL DESCRIPTION — Storm Sewer Easement (15.00 feet wide) A strip of land located in a portion of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 36, Township 27 North, Range 3 East of the Willamette Meridian, City of Edmonds, Snohomish County, State of Washington, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the centerfine of 981" Avenue West, said point being on the South line of the plat of "Olympic View Estates No. 1" and the centerline of that portion of 980, Avenue West vacated by Ordinance No. 2141, recorded May 29, 1980 as Recording No. 8005290185, Volume 1670, Page 2740, also recorded May 30, 1980 as Recording No. 8005300038, Volume 1670, Page 2868); thence North 88048'23" West along the South line of Lot 13 of said "Olympic View Estates No. 1" a distance of 18.14 feet to the True Point of Beginning of the 15,00 feet wide (7.50 feet each side) easement area being herein described; thence leaving said South line of said Lot 13, South 2"58'10" West a distance of 51.89 feet; thence South 34045'35" East a distance of 16.97 feet; thence South W00'00" East a distance of 217.85 feet to a point on the northerly right-of-way line of Edmonds Way (S.R. No. 104) and the end of said easement strip. The sidelines of said strip of land shall be lengthenod or shortened at their extremities to conform to the northerly and southerly boundary lines. S:\ENGR\ADDRESS_FILES\Alpha\Edmonds_Way-9801\Easements\Seven_Hills_Edmonds_Storm_Water_Easement (Revised) 4 16 13.doc 1 Packet Page 116 of 494 EXHIBIT C Depiction of Easement Location m-�XXIBIT C - LS'TD S�'��1f' fl%7 LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST ONE -QUARTER OF NORTHEAST ONE -QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON LOT11 DATE: FEBRUARY 26, 2013 T W F- CLYMPIC VIEW ESTATES N� 1 i> LOT 12 LOT 13 a 9 U) S 88°4823" E 2s.Da LOT 8 LOT 7 - 2s.ar S 88°4923" E 2(0) 02' S 2°58'101' W - 51. B9' S 34°4535" 16.9T Centerline 15.00 feet wide - public storm sewer easement 2 t° 85°�00 1-132 �� � 7.50 WEST HALF OF FOISTING 50-FOOT NUDE ! ]T€LITY EASEMENT TO BE RELEASED 18.14' 50 0 50 SCALE 1" = 50' c� m gv, s �sc1' •+n� n�• sURVErE'D BY osTES & MADDIIX SURVEYING, INC. 708 NE 2381H PLACE WOOD VILLAGE, OREGON 97060-2921 503-667--8307 503-997-1100 503-740-9972 59.14' - i - L=144.03' 1 E b NA o ry => �EH;; w n Y L=319.47 �STAT= FROLJTE NC.:_ 1 O4D 1S:\ENGR\ADDRESS FILES\Alpha\Edmonds Way-9801\Easements\Seven Hills_Edmonds_St Packet Page 117 of 494 UPON RECORDING RETURN TO: City Clerk City of Edmonds 121 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Space above this line for Recorder's use Document Title or Titles: Public Pedestrian Access Easement Name of Grantor: Seven Hills Properties 25 LLC, a Washington limited liability company Name of Grantee: City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation Pages referencing additional names: None Abbreviated Legal Description: Northwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 36, Township 27 North, Range 03 East, Willamette Meridian, Snohomish County, Washington Additional Legal Description Found On: Exhibit A Assessor's Property Tax Parcel Number or Account Number: 27033600113300 and 27033600113200 S:\ENGR\ADDRESS_FILES\Alpha\Edmonds_Way-9801\Easements\Seven_HiIIs_Edmonds_Sidewalk_Easement (with SEC edits) 4 15 13.doc 1 Packet Page 118 of 494 PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT THIS PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT is entered into as of the 30th day of April, 2013, by Seven Hills Properties 25 LLC, a Washington limited liability company ("Grantor") in favor of the City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation ("City of Edmonds"). In consideration of the benefits to accrue to Grantor, Grantor grants to the City of Edmonds a permanent public access easement to provide the public with pedestrian access over and across the sidewalk located within the easement areas described on the attached Exhibits "A" and "B". The responsibility and duty to repair, maintain and reconstruct such sidewalk shall be that of the abutting property owner in accordance with the Edmonds City Code. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Easement the day and year first written above. Seven Hills Properties 25 LLC, a Washington limited liability company By: Castenada Investments, Inc., a California corporation, Member By: STATE OF ) ss. County of ) Thomas J. Rocca, President I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Thomas J. Rocca is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument as the President of Castenada Investments, Inc., which is a Member of Seven Hills Properties 25 LLC, a Washington limited liability company, and acknowledged it to be his free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument on behalf of such limited liability company. Dated: Notary Public in and for the State of residing at: My appointment expires: S:\ENGR\ADDRESS_FILES\Alpha\Edmonds_Way-9801\Easements\Seven_HiIIs_Edmonds_Sidewalk_Easement (with SEC edits) 4 15 13.doc 2 Packet Page 119 of 494 EXHIBIT A Easement Leaal Description LEGAL DESCRIPTION Public Pedestrian Access Easement (4.00 feet wide) A strip of land located in a portion of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 36, Township 27 North, Mange 3 East of the Willamette Meridian, City of Edmonds, Snohomish County, State of Washington, described as follows_ Beginning at a point on the North right -of -Way line of Edmonds Way (State Route No. 104), said point being a distance of 40.00 feet front the centerline of said Edmonds Way When measured perpendicular, said point being South 17000'38" East a distance of 652.55 feet from the northeast one -quarter corner of Section 36; thence running along said northerly right-of-way line South 88°46'30" East a distance of 258.03 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING of the easement area being herein described; thence continuing along said {North right-of-way line South 88°46'30" East a distance of 59.14 feet; thence along the arc of a 1388.89 foot radius curve to the left through a central angle of 5056'30" a distance of 144.03 feet to a point that bears North 88'15'15" East a distance of 143.97 feet from the last described point; thence leaving said North right-of-way line North 00025'43" East a distance of 4.02 feat; thence along the arc of a non -tangent 1384.89 foot radius curve to the right through a central angle of 5°57'24" a distance of 143.98 feet to a point that bears South 88014'48" West a distance of 143.91 fee` from the Oast described point; thence North 88°46'30" West a distance of 59.20 feet; thence South 00°25143" West a distance of 4.00 foot to the true point of beginning. Containing 813 square feet more or less. Renewed Thru 04/19/2014 S:\ENGR\ADDRESS_FILES\Alpha\Edmonds_Way-9801\Easements\Seven_HiIIs_Edmonds_Sidewalk_Easement (with SEC edits) 4 15 13.doc 1 Packet Page 120 of 494 EXHIBIT B Depiction of Easement Location - PU�IIC P1l,ST14'IA1Y ' &lY?' LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST ONE —QUARTER OF NORTHEAST ONE —QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHDMIS14 COUNTY, WASHINGTON LOT 11 SATE: MARCH 26, 2073 �YMPIC VIEW ESTATES NO �u w o LOT 12 LOT 13 I g S 88°48'23" E 25.0o LOT 8 25.00' — S 88°48'23" E 203.02 50 0 50 SCALE I" = 50' 29 0i � N CMO ALL! V }NN 7 N o � LO w z 1-132 0 O 1j SURVEYED BY f F09TER & MADDUX SURVEYING, INC. IJ 706 NE 23STH PLACE Woo[) MLLAGE. ORECON 97050-2921 4.00' PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN 503-7-830 503-997-1100 ACCESS EASEMENT 503-740-9972 59,14' Q 1 L=144.03' v Pi-_' — or-Ac'�)r�j©wAY L=319.47' T ^ `T- E-- F�z O L..J T ref I CD Q- 1S:\ENGR\ADDRESS_FILES\Alpha\Edmonds Way-9801\Easements\Seven_Hills_Edmonds_Si Packet Page 121 of 494 UPON RECORDING RETURN TO: City Clerk City of Edmonds 121 - 5t" Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Space above this line for Recorder's use Document Title or Titles: Public Pedestrian Access Easement Name of Grantor: Wuscher Family LLLP, a Washington limited liability limited partnership Name of Grantee: City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation Pages referencing additional names: None Abbreviated Legal Description: Northwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 36, Township 27 North, Range 03 East, Willamette Meridian, Snohomish County, Washington Additional Legal Description Found On: Exhibit A Assessor's Property Tax Parcel Number or Account Number: 27033600113300 S:\ENGR\ADDRESS_FILES\Alpha\Edmonds_Way- 9801\Easements\Seven_Hills_Edmonds_Wuscher_SidewaIk_Easement.DOC 1 Packet Page 122 of 494 PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT THIS PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT is entered into as of the 30th day of April, 2013, by Wuscher Family LLLP, a Washington limited liability limited partnership ("Grantor") in favor of the City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation ("City of Edmonds"). In consideration of the benefits to accrue to Grantor, Grantor grants to the City of Edmonds a permanent public access easement to provide the public with pedestrian access over and across the sidewalk located within the easement areas described on the attached Exhibits "A" and "B". The responsibility and duty to repair, maintain and reconstruct such sidewalk shall be that of the abutting property owner in accordance with the Edmonds City Code. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Easement the day and year first written above. STATE OF ss. County of Wuscher Family LLLP, a Washington limited liability limited partnership By: Title: I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Ralph Wuscher is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument as the of Wuscher Family LLLP, a Washington limited liability limited partnership, and acknowledged it to be his free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument on behalf of such limited liability limited partnership. Dated: Notary Public in and for the State of , residing at: My appointment expires: S:\ENGR\ADDRESS_FILES\Alpha\Edmonds_Way- 9801\Easements\Seven_Hills_Edmonds_Wuscher_SidewaIk_Easement.DOC 2 Packet Page 123 of 494 EXHIBIT A Easement Legal Description That portion of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 36, Township 27 North, Range 3 East of the Willamette Meridian, in Snohomish County, Washington, described as follows: The South 4.00 feet of the following described parcel: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said subdivision; thence South 0051'04" West, along the West line of said subdivision, 210.00 feet; thence South 88045" 8" East, parallel to the North line of said subdivision, 37.50 feet to the East margin of 1001h Avenue West; thence South 0051'04" West, along said East margin, 119.83 feet to the North line of the South half of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of said section; thence South 88044'17" East, along said North line, 292.12 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 88044" 7" East, along said North line, 304.61 feet to the West line of the East 25 feet of said South half, being the West margin of 981h Avenue West; thence South 0029'27" West, along said margin, 285.11 feet to the North margin of 2301h Street SW, being a point on a curve, the center of which bears North 3037'30" West 1,388.10 feet; thence Westerly along said margin an arc distance of 119.32 feet to a point of tangency; thence North 88°41'59" West, along said margin, 316.80 feet; thence North 0°51'04" East 239.92 feet; thence South 88'44'17" East 129.78 feet; thence North 0°40'16" East 50.00 feet to the true point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM the East 178.02 feet. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM any portion lying within the boundaries of Edmonds Way (SR 104). S:\ENGR\ADDRESS_FILES\Alpha\Edmonds_Way- 9801\Easements\Seven_Hills_Edmonds_Wuscher_SidewaIk_Easement.DOC Packet Page 124 of 494 1 Sw Cc "OLYN ESTAT S 88°45'1d' E CJ O v C11 �u 0 EXHIBIT B Depiction of Easement Location ,.Z7bWl NT LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST ONE —QUARTER OF NORTHEAST ONE —QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON DATE: MARCH 26, 20 1 3 LOT10 / RNER OF OLYMPIC VlE\N ESTATES NO 'IC VfEw =S NO. 1" LOT 11 LOT 12 S 88"4&23" E M -oNi a� ro � g � z S 88°45'10" E 129.78' 1-133 4.00' PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ,--ACCESS EASEMENT O � 9 0 N 88°46'30" W EEDN/IQNd!E� W 4Y C =� TA TE�:: R O L_j TH:: f14 cz::�) 50 0 50I SCALE In = 50' 93 rn N t1L dV a 0 z �23 5 SURVEYED BY FOSTER & MADDUX SURVEYING, INC. 1 706 NE 236TH PLACE WOOD VILLAGE, OREGON 97060-2921 503-667-8307 503-997-1100 503-740-9972 � O -1 O - -D Packet Page 125 of 494 1 S:\ENGR\ADDRESS_FILES\Alpha\Edmonds_Way-9801\Easements\Seven_Hills _Edmonds _W AM-5692 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: Consent Submitted By: Pamela Randolph 3. G. Department: Wastewater Treatment Plant Committee: Parks, Planning, Public Works Type: Action Information Subiect Title Request to award the WWTP Standby Power Distribution and Switchgear Improvement Project to Ewing Electric, Inc. Recommendation The City Council award the construction contract for the WWTP Standby Power Distribution and Switchgear Improvement Project to Ewing Electric, Inc. of Edmonds, WA for the amount of $1,170,945. Previous Council Action 3.19.2013 - City Council gave authorization to advertise a Request for Bids for construction services for the WWTP Standby Power Distribution and Switchgear Improvement Project. 3.12.13 - Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee approved the request to forward the item to the Consent Agenda. 12.11.2012 - Authorization for Mayor to sign Proposed Supplemental Agreement No. 1 with HDR Engineering, Inc. for design services on the WWTP Standby Power Distribution and Switchgear Improvement Project. Narrative The WWTP Standby Power Distribution and Switchgear Improvement Project involves removal and replacement of the electrical power distribution switchgear line-up at the City of Edmonds' wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). Completing the project significantly reduces the risk of electrical equipment failure while improving safety and reliability. The engineers estimate to construct is $1,269,160.00. A total of 9 bids were accepted with Ewing Electric, Inc. being the lowest bidder at $1,170,957 including tax. The total project costs will also include minor SCADA programming, construction support from the designer and a final conformed set of drawings. This project was chosen due to the criticality of the main switchgear and the reliance we place on the automated transfer switch to ensure uninterruptable power. Without power and reliable access to backup power, there is a certainty of risk associated with overflows and public health concerns. The WWTP was originally built in the late 1950's and was designed with a small influent wet well and no collection system storage. Further, the main switchgear is located outside in a marine atmosphere. The equipment and cabinets show signs of significant corrosion. During extreme weather, staff is required to work Packet Page 126 of 494 outside, resetting high voltage switchgear in very tight quarters. (Photos attached) Initially the project focus was to replace the automatic transfer switch for the generator and to refurbish the corrode switchgear. After a thorough evaluation of the equipment and associated project costs, a decision was made to replace failing equipment. Replacing the switchgear, instead of refurbishing old equipment, will extend the life of the switchgear; significantly reduce risk in executing the project, increase safety for personnel and incorporated improved electrical monitoring of the systems. Operations and Maintenance staff will be fully trained and involved in the project which in turn enhances our ability to operate and maintain the system in and efficient manner. The new equipment will be enclosed in the appropriate cabinetry that will reduce corrosion. Staff will develop routine preventative and corrective measures to ensure the equipment is maintained according to the manufactures recommendations. WWTP switchgear 1 WWTP switchgear 2 WWTP switchgear 3 WWTP switchgear 4 WWTP switchgear 6 Inbox City Clerk Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Pamela Randolph Final Approval Date: 04/18/2013 Reviewed By Sandy Chase Dave Earling Sandy Chase Attachments Form Review Date 04/18/2013 11:26 AM 04/18/2013 03:16 PM 04/18/2013 03:23 PM Started On: 04/18/2013 11:01 AM Packet Page 127 of 494 i 0-4 z C,;c oR I *.. It s'C 1114t ti 4 ti Packet Page 129 of 49 't* WARNING 4 TO INSURE AGAINST MODELI R-P-POCT-?5000M SHOCK OR ACCIDENT SERIAL AMPS 25W ' DISCONNECT ALL VOLTAGE 27�Me0 SOURCES OF SUPPLY PHASE WIRE 4 MZ 60 ` BEFORE SERM ING EMERGENCY SOURCE EA ER EC 0 1# AM-5680 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: Consent Submitted By: Kernen Lien Department: Planning Review Committee: Type: Action Information Subject Title Committee Action: 3. H. Ordinance amending the Edmonds Community Development Code to apply design standards to the BD2, BD3 and BD4 Zones to replace the requirement for building step backs. The proposal also includes a provision exempting small decorative 'blade signs' from sign code area calculation limitations. Recommendation Approved the Ordinance included as Exhibit 1. Previous Council Action In 2011 the Planning Board recommended that the Council remove stepback requirements from the BD zones as part of its recommendations on a package of BD zoning amendments. The Council held a public hearing on July 26, 2011. On October 16, 2012, the Council voted to ask the Planning Board to recommend design standards that could be put in place in the BD zones so that the stepback requirements could be removed. The Council requested an "expedited review" by the Planning Board. City Council held a Public Hearing on the Planning Board's recommendation on April 2, 2013 (Exhibit 2). Narrative The attached ordinance (Exhibit 1) amends the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) by adopting design standards for the BD2, BD3 and BD4 zones which would take the place of building stepbacks in those zones. The proposal also includes a provision exempting small decorative 'blade signs' from sign code area calculation limitations. Language regarding buildings echoing historic development patterns has been added to ECDC 22.43.010.B.2 in the attached ordinance. Attachments Exhibit 1: Ordinance - BD Design Standards Exhibit 2 - April 2, 2013 City Council Draft Minutes Excerpt Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Community Services/Economic Dev. Stephen Clifton 04/11/2013 04:51 PM City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/11/2013 04:52 PM Packet Page 133 of 494 Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Kemen Lien Final Approval Date: 04/17/2013 Dave Earling 04/17/2013 07:52 AM Sandy Chase 04/17/2013 08:41 AM Started On: 04/11/2013 03:16 PM Packet Page 134 of 494 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTERS 16.43 AND 22.43 ECDC RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS (BD) ZONES. WHEREAS, in 2011 the Planning Board recommended that the City Council remove stepback requirements from the BD zones as part of its recommendations on a package of BD zoning amendments; and WHEREAS, the Council held a public hearing on July 26, 2011; and WHEREAS, on October 16, 2012, the City Council voted to ask the Planning Board to recommend design standards that could be put in place in the BD zones so that the stepback requirements could be removed; and WHEREAS, following a work session with members of the Architectural Design Board on January 9, 2013, the Planning Board held public hearings on this proposal on February 13 and February 27, 2013; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board recommended certain code revisions, which were forwarded to the City Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the proposed code revisions on April 2, 2013; and WHEREAS, after the public hearing, the City Council deliberated regarding the proposed amendments and voted to direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance that adopts the Planning Board's recommendations along with an additional amendment requiring that building facades echo historic patterns; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Packet Page 135 of 494 Section 1. Chapter 16.43 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled `BD — Downtown Business," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Attachment 1 (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strike t' fe g ). Section 2. Chapter 22.43 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, previously entitled "Design Standards for the BDI Zone," is hereby entitled "Design Standards for the BD Zones," and amended to read as set forth in Attachment 2 (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strike *4oug ). Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR DAVE EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: IM JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Page 136 of 494 Packet Page 137 of 494 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2013, 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 CHAPTERS 16.43 AND 22.43 ECDC RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS (BD) ZONES. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2013. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE 4840-7251-8158,v. 1 Packet Page 138 of 494 Chapter 16.43 BD — DOWNTOWN BUSINESS Sections: 16.43.000 Purposes. 16.43.010 Subdistricts. 16.43.020 Uses. 16.43.030 Site development standards. 16.43.035 Design standards — BD47zones. 16.43.040 Operating restrictions. 16.43.000 Purposes. The BD zone has the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for business and commercial zones listed in Chapter 16.40 ECDC: A. Promote downtown Edmonds as a setting for retail, office, entertainment and associated businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community, and as a destination for visitors from throughout the region. B. Define the downtown commercial and retail core along streets having the strongest pedestrian links and pedestrian -oriented design elements, while protecting downtown's identity. C. Identify supporting arts and mixed use residential and office areas which support and complement downtown retail use areas. Provide for a strong central retail core at downtown's focal center while providing for a mixture of supporting commercial and residential uses in the area surrounding this retail core area. D. Focus development between the commercial and retail core and the Edmonds Center for the Arts on small-scale retail, service, and multifamily residential uses. [Ord. 3700 § 1, 2008]. 16.43.010 Subdistricts. The "downtown business" zone is subdivided into five distinct subdistricts, each intended to implement specific aspects of the comprehensive plan that pertain to the Downtown Waterfront Activity Center. Each subdistrict contains its own unique mix of uses and zoning regulations, as described in this chapter. The five subdistricts are: BD — Downtown Retail Core; BD2 — Downtown Mixed Commercial; BD3 — Downtown Convenience Commercial; BD4 — Downtown Mixed Residential; BD5 — Downtown Arts Corridor. [Ord. 3700 § 1, 2008]. Packet Page 139 of 494 Attachment 1 4 6.43.020 Uses. A. Table 16.43-1. Permitted Uses BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5 Commercial Uses Retail stores or sales A A A A A Offices A A A A A Service uses A A A A A Retail sales requiring intensive outdoor display or storage areas, such as trailer sales, used car lots (except as part of a new car sales and service dealer), and heavy equipment storage, sales or services X X X X X Enclosed fabrication or assembly areas associated with and on the same property as an art studio, art gallery, restaurant or food service establishment that also provides an on -site retail outlet open to the public A A A A A Automobile sales and service X A A X X Dry cleaning and laundry plants which use only nonflammable and nonexplosive cleaning agents C A A A X Printing, publishing and binding establishments C A A A C Community -oriented open air markets conducted as an outdoor operation and licensed pursuant to provisions in the Edmonds City Code A A A A A Residential Uses Single-family dwelling A A A A A Multiple dwelling unit(s) A A A A A Other Uses Bus stop shelters A A A A A Churches, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.020 A A A A A Primary and high schools, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050(G) through (R) A A A A A Local public facilities, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050 C C C A C Neighborhood parks, natural open spaces, and community parks with an adopted master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070 A A A A A 2 1 P a g e Packet Page 140 of 494 Permitted Uses BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5 Off-street parking and loading areas to serve a permitted use B B B B B Commuter parking lots in conjunction with a facility otherwise permitted in this zone B B B B X Commercial parking lots C C C C X Wholesale uses X X C X X Hotels and motels A A A A A Amusement establishments C C C C C Auction businesses, excluding vehicle or livestock auctions C C C C C Drive-in businesses C C A C X Laboratories X C C C X Fabrication of light industrial products not otherwise listed as a permitted use X X C X X Day-care centers C C C A C Hospitals, health clinics, convalescent homes, rest homes, sanitariums X C C A X Museums and art galleries of primarily local concern that do not meet the criteria for regional public facilities as defined in ECDC 21.85.033 A A A A A Zoos and aquariums of primarily local concern that do not meet the criteria for regional public facilities as defined in ECDC 21.85.033 C C C C A Counseling centers and residential treatment facilities for current alcoholics and drug abusers X C C A X Regional parks and community parks without a master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070 C C C C C Outdoor storage, incidental to a permitted use D D D D D [Aircraft landings as regulated by Chapter 4.80 ECC D D D D D A = Permitted primary use B = Permitted secondary use C = Primary uses requiring a conditional use permit D = Secondary uses requiring a conditional use permit X = Not permitted For conditional uses listed in Table 16.43-1, the use may be permitted if the proposal meets the criteria for conditional uses found in Chapter 20.05 ECDC, and all of the following criteria are met: 1. Access and Parking. Pedestrian access shall be provided from the sidewalk. Vehicular access shall only be provided consistent with ECDC 18.80.060. When a curb cut is necessary, it 3 1 P a g e Packet Page 141 of 494 shall be landscaped to be compatible with the pedestrian streetscape and shall be located and designed to be as unobtrusive as possible. 2. Design and Landscaping. The project shall be designed so that it is oriented to the street and contributes to the pedestrian streetscape environment. Fences more than four feet in height along street lot lines shall only be permitted if they are at least 50 percent open, such as a lattice pattern. Blank walls shall be discouraged, and when unavoidable due to the nature of the use shall be decorated by a combination of at least two of the following: a. Architectural features or details; b. Artwork; c. Landscaping. [Ord. 3700 § 1, 2008]. 16.43.030 Site development standards. A. Table 16.43-2. Minimum Height of Ground Floor Minimum Minimum Minimum within the Sub Minimum Lot Minimum Street Side Rear Maximum Designated District Area Lot Width Setback Setback' Setback' Height2 Street Front4 BD 1' 0 0 0 0 0 23-'30' 15' BD25 0 0 0 0 0 2-5'30' 12' BD35 0 0 0 0 0 25'30' 12' BD43,5 0 0 0 0 0 2-5'30' 12' BD55 0 0 0 0 0 25' 12' 1 The setback for buildings and structures located at or above grade (exempting buildings and structures entirely below the surface of the ground) shall be 15 feet from the lot line adjacent to residentially (R) zoned property. 2 Specific provisions regarding building heights are contained in ECDC 16.43.030(C). 3 Within the BD4 zone, site development standards listed in Table 16.43-2 apply when a building contains a ground floor consisting of commercial space to a depth of at least 45 feet measured from the street front of the building. If a proposed building does not meet this ground floor commercial space requirement (e.g., an entirely residential building is proposed), then the building setbacks listed for the RM-1.5 zone shall apply. See ECDC 16.43.030(13)(8) for further details. 4 "Minimum height of ground floor within the designated street -front" means the vertical distance from top to top of the successive finished floor surfaces for that portion of the ground floor located within the designated street front (see ECDC 16.43.030(B)); and, if the ground floor is the only floor above street grade, from the top of the floor finish to the top of the ceiling joists or, where there is not a ceiling, to the top of the roof rafters. "Floor finish" is the exposed floor surface, including coverings applied over a finished floor, and includes, but is not limited to, wood, vinyl flooring, wall-to-wall carpet, and concrete, as illustrated in Figure 16.43-1. Figure 16.43-1 shows an example of a ground floor height of 15 feet; note that the "finished" ceiling height is only approximately 11 feet in this example. 5 Site development standards for single-family dwellings are the same as those specified for the RS-6 zone. 4 1 P a g e Packet Page 142 of 494 Map 16.43-1: Designated Street Front for BD Zones 5 1 P a g e Packet Page 143 of 494 Figure 16.43-1: Ground Floor Height Measurement B. Ground Floor. This section describes requirements for development of the ground floor of buildings in the BD zones. 1. For all BD zones, the ground floor is considered to be that floor of a building which is closest in elevation to the finished grade along the width of the side of the structure that is principally oriented to the designated street front of the building (this is normally the adjacent sidewalk). For the purposes of this section, the ground "floor" is considered to be the sum of the floor planes which, in combination, run the full extent of the building and are closest in elevation to one another. For the purposes of this chapter, the definition of "ground floor" contained in ECDC 21.35.017 does not apply. 2. Designated Street Front. Map 16.43-1 shows the streets that define the designated street front for all properties lying within the BD zones. The designated street front is defined as the 45 feet measured perpendicular to the street front of the building lot fronting on each of the mapped streets. 61 Page Packet Page 144 of 494 3. Minimum Height of the Ground Floor within the Designated Street Front. The minimum height of the ground floor specified in Table 16.43-2 only applies to the height of the ground floor located within the designated street front established in subsection (13)(2) of this section. 4. Access to Commercial Uses within the Designated Street Front. When a commercial use is located on the ground floor within a designated street front as defined in subsection (13)(2) of this section, the elevation of the ground floor and associated entry shall be within seven inches of the grade level of the adjoining sidewalk. "Grade" shall be as measured at the entry location. Portions of the ground floor outside the designated street front of the building need not comply with the access requirements specified in this section. 5. When the designated street front of a building is on a slope which does not allow both the elevation of the entry and ground floor within the designated street front to be entirely within seven inches of the grade level of the sidewalk, as specified in subsection (13)(4) of this section, the portion of the ground floor of the building located within the designated street front may be designed so that either: a. The entry is located within seven inches of the grade of the adjacent sidewalk, and the commercial portion of the ground floor located within the designated street front is within seven inches of the grade level of the entry; or b. The building may be broken up into multiple frontages, so that each entry/ground floor combination is within seven inches of the grade of the sidewalk. c. For corner lots, a primary entry shall be established for the purposes of determining where the ground floor entry rules detailed in this section shall apply. The first choice for the primary entry shall be either 5th Avenue or Main Street. In the case of the BD5 zone, the primary entry shall always be on 4th Avenue. 6. Within the BD zone, development on the ground floor shall consist of only commercial uses, except that parking may be located on the ground floor so long as it is not located within the designated street front. 7. Within the BD2 and BD3 zones, development on the ground floor shall consist of only commercial uses within the designated street front. Any permitted use may be located on the ground floor outside of the designated street front. 8. Within the BD4 zone, there are two options for developing the ground floor of a building. One option is to develop the ground floor with commercial space, meeting the same requirements detailed for the BD2 and BD3 zones in subsection (13)(7) of this section. As a second option, if more residential space is provided so that the ground floor does not meet the commercial use requirements described in subsection (13)(7) of this section, then the building setbacks listed for the RM-1.5 zone shall apply. In the case where RM-1.5 setbacks are required, the required street setback shall be landscaped and no fence or wall in the setback shall be over four feet in height above sidewalk grade unless it is at least 50 percent open, such as in a lattice pattern. 9. Within the BD5 zone, one option is to develop the ground floor with commercial space, meeting the same requirements detailed for the BD2 zone in subsection (13)(7) of this section. When development of the ground floor does not conform to these requirements, then development within the BD5 zone shall meet the following requirements: 7 1 P a g e Packet Page 145 of 494 Figure 16.43-2: BD5 Development Building at right (foreground) shows landscaping located between building and street. Building at left (background) shows commercial space integrated with residential uses, and the entry oriented to the street. a. The building shall be oriented to 4th Avenue. "Orientation to 4th Avenue" shall mean that: i. At least one building entry shall face 4th Avenue. ii. If the building is located adjacent to the public right-of-way, architectural details and/or applied art shall be incorporated into the building design to add interest at the pedestrian (i.e., ground floor) level. iii. If the building is set back from the street, landscaping and/or artwork shall be located between the building and the street front. b. Live/work uses are encouraged within the 13D5 zone, and potential live/work space is required for new residential buildings if no other commercial use is provided on -site. i. If multiple residential uses are located on the ground floor, the building shall incorporate live/work space into the ground floor design in such a way as to enable building occupants to use portion(s) of their space for a commercial or art/fabrication use. "Live/work space" means a structure or portion of a structure that combines a commercial or manufacturing activity that is allowed in the zone with a residential living space for the owner of the commercial or manufacturing business, or the owner's employee, and that person's household. The live/work space shall be designed so that a commercial or fabrication or home occupation use can be established within the space. 10. Exceptions and Clarifications. The regulations for the ground floor contained in subsections (13)(1) through (9) of this section apply with the following exceptions or clarifi- cations: a. That in all areas the provision of pedestrian access to permitted residential uses is allowed as a permitted secondary use. b. The restrictions on the location of residential uses shall not apply when a single- family use is the only permitted primary use located on the property. c. Existing buildings may be added onto or remodeled without adjusting the existing height of the ground floor to meet the specified minimum height, so long as the addition or remodel does not increase the building footprint or its frontage along a street by more than 25 percent. Permitted uses may occupy an existing space regardless of whether that space meets the ground floor requirements for height. 8 1 P a g e Packet Page 146 of 494 d. Parking is not considered to be a commercial use for the purposes of satisfying the ground floor commercial use requirement within the designated street front (e.g., when the first 45 feet of a building are within a designated street front in the BD1 zone, parking may not be located within that 45 feet). e. For properties within the BD2 or BD3 zone which have less than 90 feet of depth measured from the street front, parking may be located in the rearmost 45 feet of the property, even if a portion of the parking extends into the first 45 feet of the building. In no case shall the depth of commercial space as measured from the street front of the building be less than 30 feet. f. Within the BD2, BD3 and BD4 zones, if the first 45 feet of the building as measured perpendicular to the street consist only of commercial uses and permitted secondary uses, then permitted multiple -family residential unit(s) may be located behind the commercial uses. g. Recodified as ECDC 22.43.050(B)(4). h. Within the BD 1 zone, each commercial space located on the ground floor within the designated street front shall be directly accessible by an entry from the sidewalk. C. Building Height Regulations. 1. The basic height limit for each BD zone is described in Table 16.43-2 25-feet (see definition of "height" detailed in ECDC 21.40.030). 2. Step Baek Rules. The following fules apply when ealeulating the maximum bttikling heigl:A for- any building in the speeified zene(s) (see Figures 16.43 3 a -ad 16.43 4 for- iflustfated examples), . Withinthe BD2, BD3, zones, -air additional 4ye feet 6f building height, ot - exeeed 30 feet, may be obtained if the building is desiped to meet all of the followi ,, diti . ems: i. A building ing step baekis provided within 15 feetostreet fFo nt. Within the 1- foot step baek, the mffldmumm building height is the lessef of 25 feet above gr-ade at the pr-opefty line (nofmally the baek of the sidewalk) or- 30 feet above the cc level" Avenue, as defined in EC; 21.40.030. For- eofner- lots, a 15 foot step baek is r-equir-ed along both stfeet fFoHts. if a biiildiflg loeated on a eofner- lot has instiffieient lot width (i.e., less than 40 feet of lot width) to enable it to provide the r-eqoir-ed step baek on both stfeet fFonts, then the step baek may be waived f4eing -, seeondar-y stfeet. This not be granted for- building step baeks r-equir-ed from Fifth , A 15 foot step-baek is pr-ovidoa from the p ,.eft. line opposite the trees �crccnrvir. Within the 15 foot step baek, the maximum building height is the lesser- of 25 feet above gra or- 30 feet above the cc level" streets. as defined itt EC;DG 21.40.030. For- eemer- lots for- whieh a 15 foot step baek is r-e"ir-ed on more than one street 4on4, there is no 15 foot step baek r-e"ir-e-d from the pr-opefty line opposite eaeh street front. For- the pur-pose of determinifig step bael-c- As, alleys afe not eonsidefed to be in w-hieh the mir-e is set baek fFoFH the > line, may be s4stituted on a foot for- foot basis for- the r-e"ir-ed building step baek. For- example, -a five foot building setback can be combined with a 10 feet building step back to meet the 15 fo 9 1 P a g e Packet Page 147 of 494 Figure 16.43-3: Uphill Example + 15'-0" + 15'4' • Required building step -backs 32'-6" 30'-0" 25'-0" 25'-0" - - ` Street/ROW 120'-0" • Depth oJ'Properry — Average Level for height calculatio — — — Original Grade " • • • . • . 30' Height Limit from "aver a level" Allowed building heigh nvelope No required building step -back at street, since height limit of 30' above average Figure 1 h.43-4: Downhill Example level is lower than 25' above street 1 s•-a•' DX7Re.qing step -back 25.4. 30'-0" ir 37'-6" 25'-0" — • — StreetlROW _ 7'-6" + 120'-0" • Depilr gJ'Properly — — Average Level for height calculation • — • — • — Original Grade • - - - - - - 30' Height Limit from "average level" Allowed building height envelope b. Within the BDI zene, building height fflay be a fflaxiffluffl of 30 feet in efde PFE)Vide fO i height of 15 feet for- the ground floor. The allowable building height is 101 Page Packet Page 148 of 494 32. Within the BD5 zone, the maximum height may be increased to 30 feet if the building meets one of the following conditions. In addition, if the building is located within 15 feet of the public right-of-way, architectural details and/or applied art shall be incorporated into the building design, and the ground floor shall be distinguished from the upper portions of the building through the use of differences in materials, windows, and/or architectural forms. a. All portions of the building above 25 feet consist of a pitched roof such that the pitch of all portions of the roof is at least six-by-12 and the roof includes architectural features, such as dormers or gables of a steeper pitch, that break up the roof line into distinct segments. b. If the building does not make use of a pitched roof system as described in subsection (C)(3)(a) of this section, , as deser-ibed in s„bseetio (G)(2) of this tie . a building step -back shall be provided within 15 feet of any street front. Within the 15-foot step -back, the maximum building height is the lesser of 25 feet above grade at the property line (normally the back of the sidewalk) or 30 feet above the "average level" as defined in ECDC 21.40.030. For corner lots, a 15-foot step -back is required along both street fronts. If a building located on a corner lot has insufficient lot width (i.e., less than 40 feet of lot width) to enable it to provide the required step -back on both street fronts, then the step -back may be waived facing the secondary street. 43. Height Exceptions. In addition to the height exceptions listed in ECDC 21.40.030, the following architectural features are allowed to extend above the height limits specified in this chapter: a. A single decorative architectural element, such as a turret, tower, or clock tower, may extend a maximum of five feet above the specified height limit if it is designed as an integral architectural feature of the roof and/or facade of the building. The decorative architectural element shall not cover more than five percent of the roof area of the building. b. Roof or deck railings may extend a maximum of 42 inches above the specified height limit within any building step -back required under subsection (C)(2)(h) of this section; provided, that the railing is constructed so that it has the appearance of being transparent. An example meeting this condition would be a railing that is comprised of glass panels. D. Off -Street Parking and Access Requirements. The parking regulations included here apply specifically within the BD zone. Whenever there are conflicts between the requirements of this chapter and the provisions contained in Chapter 17.50 ECDC, Off -Street Parking Regulations, the provisions of this chapter shall apply. 1. Within the BD zone, no new curb cuts are permitted along 5th Avenue or Main Street. 2. No parking is required for any commercial floor area of permitted uses located within the BD I, BD2, BD4, and BD5 zones. 3. No parking is required for any floor area in any building with a total building footprint of less than 4,800 square feet. E. Open Space Requirements. 1. For buildings on lots larger than 12,000 square feet or having an overall building width of more than 120 feet (as measured parallel to the street lot line), at least five percent of the lot area shall be devoted to open space. Open space shall not be required for additions to existing buildings that do not increase the building footprint by more than 10 percent. Open space shall be provided adjacent to the street front (street lot line). Such open space may be provided as any combination of: a. Outdoor dining or seating areas (including outdoor seating or waiting areas for restaurants or food service establishments); 111Page Packet Page 149 of 494 Figure 1643-5: Building Size, Width and Open Space Example: • Building is on four lots, each 30x120 feet. • Building width is 120 feet. • Open space is required due to building width, and due to lot area. • Open space provided exceeds the 5% of lot area requirement. ------- Lot Lines Building Area 0 0 N �_30'4"--� 1--------------- T--------------- T--------------- T---------------' Total Lot Area = 14,400 sq. ft. ; Building Footprint = 13,650 sq. ft. q ;Open Space Required = 720 sq. ft o Building Width Parallel to Street/ROW 120'-0* Open Space ' 750 sq. ft. 04 try b. Public plaza or sidewalk that is accessible to the public; Landscaping which includes a seating area that is accessible to the public. 2. Required open space shall be open to the air and not located under a building story. 3. In overall dimension, the width of required open space shall not be less than 75 percent of the depth of the open space, measured relative to the street (i.e., width is measured parallel to the street lot line, while depth is measured perpendicular to the street lot line). F. Historic Buildings. The exceptions contained in this section apply only to buildings listed on the Edmonds register of historic buildings. 1.If a certificate of appropriateness is issued by the Edmonds historic preservation commission under the provisions of Chapter 20.45 ECDC for the proposed project, the staff may modify or waive any of the requirements listed below that would otherwise apply to the expansion, remodeling, or restoration of the building. The decision of staff shall be processed as a Type II development project permit application (see Chapter 20.01 ECDC). a. Building step -backs required under subsection (C)(2)fl2) of this section. b. Open space required under subsection (E) of this section. 2. No off-street parking is required for any permitted uses located within a building listed on the Edmonds register of historic buildings. Note that additional parking exceptions involving building expansion, remodeling or restoration may also apply, as detailed in ECDC 17.50.070(C). 121 Page Packet Page 150 of 494 3. Within the BD5 zone, if a building listed on the Edmonds register of historic buildings is retained on -site, no off-street parking is required for any additional buildings or uses located on the same property. To obtain this benefit, an easement in a form acceptable to the city shall be recorded with Snohomish County protecting the exterior of the historic building and ensuring that the historic building is maintained in its historic form and appearance so long as the additional building(s) obtaining the parking benefit exist on the property. The easement shall continue even if the property is subsequently subdivided or any interest in the property is sold. G. Density. There is no maximum density for permitted multiple dwelling units. H. Screening. The required setback from R-zoned property shall be landscaped with trees and ground cover and permanently maintained by the owner of the BD lot. A six-foot minimum height fence, wall or solid hedge shall be provided at some point in the setback, except for that portion of the BD zone that is in residential use. I. Signs, Parking and Design Review. See Chapters 17.50, 20.10, and 20.60 ECDC. Sign standards shall be the same as those that apply within the BC zone. J. Satellite Television Antennas. In accordance with the limitations established by the Federal Communications Commission, satellite television antennas greater than two meters in diameter shall be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of ECDC 16.20.050. [Ord. 3865 § 1, 2011; Ord. 3736 § 10, 2009; Ord. 3700 § 1, 2008]. 16.43.035 Design standards — BDI zones. Design standards for the BDI zones are contained in Chapter 22.43 ECDC. [Ord. 3700 § 1, 2008]. 16.43.040 Operating restrictions. A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be carried on entirely within a completely enclosed building, except: 1. Public uses such as utilities and parks; 2. Off-street parking and loading areas, and commercial parking lots; 3. Drive-in businesses; 4. Plant nurseries; 5. Seasonal farmers' markets; 6. Limited outdoor display of merchandise meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.65 ECDC; 7. Bistro and outdoor dining meeting the criteria of ECDC 17.70.040; 8. Outdoor dining meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.75 ECDC. B. Nuisances. All uses shall comply with Chapter 17.60 ECDC, Performance Standards. [Ord. 3700 § 1, 2008]. 131Page Packet Page 151 of 494 Title 22 DESIGN STANDARDS Chapters: 22.43 Design Standards for the BD-� Zones .................. 22.100 Firdale Village Site Design Standards ................. ............................3 ............................8 Packet Page 152 of 494 Attachment 2 Sections: 22.43.000 22.43.010 22.43.020 22.43.030 22.43.040 22.43.050 22.43.060 22.43.070 22.43.000 Chapter 22.43 DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE BDI ZONES Applicability. Massing and articulation. Orientation to street. Ground level details. Awnings/canopies and signage. Transparency at street level. Treating blank walls. Building HVAC equipment. Applicability. The design standards in this chapter apply to all development within the BD I, BD2, BD3, and BD4 downtown retail e-zones, except for multifamily buildings in the BD4 zone. [Ord. 3697 § 2, 2008]. 22.43.010 Massing and articulation. A. Intent. To reduce the massiveness and bulk of large box -like buildings, and articulate the building form to a pedestrian scale. B. Standards. Packet Page 153 of 494 1. Buildings shall convey a visually distinct base and top. A "base" can be emphasized by a different masonry pattern, more architectural detail, visible plinth above which the wall rises, storefront, canopies, or a combination. The top edge is highlighted by a prominent cornice, projecting parapet or other architectural element that creates a shadow line. Buildings should convey a distinct base and top. M base 3 1 P a g e Packet Page 154 of 494 top base The base can be emphasized by a -different material(sl. 2. Building facades shall respect and echo historic patterns. Where a single building exceeds the historic building width pattern, use a change in design features (such as a combination of materials, windows or decorative details) to suggest the traditional building widths. 4 1 P a g e Packet Page 155 of 494 Buildings shall be oriented to the street. 22.43.020 Orientation to street. A. Intent. To reinforce pedestrian activity and orientation and enhance the liveliness of the street through building design. B. Standards. 1. Buildings frontages shall be primarily oriented to the adjacent street, rather than to a parking lot or alley. 2. Entrances to buildings in the 13D1, BD2 and BD4 zones shall be visible from the street and accessible from the adjacent sidewalk. 3. Entrances shall be given a visually distinct architectural expression by one or more of the following elements: a. Higher bay(s); b. Recessed entry (recessed at least three feet); c. Forecourt and entrance plaza. Entrances shall be given visually distinct expression. 51 Page Packet Page 156 of 494 22.43.030 Ground level details. A. Intent. To reinforce the character of the streetscape by encouraging the greatest amount of visual interest along the ground level of buildings facing pedestrian streets. B. Standards. 1. Ground -floor, street -facing facades of commercial and mixed -use buildings shall incorporate at least five of the following elements: a. Lighting or hanging baskets sup- ported by ornamental brackets; belt course tilework b. Medallions; c. Belt courses; Rower basket and medallion d. Plinths for columns; rrght'ng clerestory e. Bulkhead for storefront window; f. Projecting sills; �. g. Tile work; ' h. Transom or clerestory windows; i. Planter box; I D I j. An element not listed here, as I tTT ==E approved, that meets the intent. I _ _ _ 2. Ground floor commercial space is intended to be accessible and at grade with the sidewalk, as provided for in ECDC 16.43.030. Ground floor details encourage visual interest along the ground level of buildings facing pedestrian streets. "WIN Nis, 101 EJ_I■ V _mil 61 Page Packet Page 157 of 494 22.43.040 Awnings/canopies and signage. A. Intent. 1. To integrate signage and weather protection with building design to enhance busi- ness visibility and the public streetscape. 2. To provide clear signage to identify each business or property, and to improve way - finding for visitors. 3. To protect the streetscape from becoming cluttered, and to minimize distraction from overuse of advertisement elements. B. Standards. 1. Structural canopies are encouraged along pedestrian street fronts. If a canopy is not provided, then an awning shall be provided which is attached to the building using a metal or other framework. 2. Awnings and canopies shall be open -sided to enhance visibility of business signage. Front valances are permitted. Signage is allowed on valances, but not on valance returns. 3. Marquee, box, or convex awning or canopy shapes are not permitted. 4. Retractable awnings are encouraged. 5. Awnings or canopies shall be located within the building elements that frame store- fronts, and should not conceal important architectural details. Awnings or canopies should be hung just below a clerestory or transom window, if it exists. 6. Awnings or canopies on a multiple -storefront building should be consistent in character, scale and position, but need not be identical. Open -sided nonstructural awning with front valance. Open -sided structural canopy. 7 1 P a g e F Packet Page 158 of 494 7. Nonstructural awnings should be constructed using canvas or fire-resistant acrylic materials. Shiny, high -gloss materials are not appropriate; therefore, vinyl or plastic awning materials are not permitted. 8. Signage should be designed to integrate with the building and street front. Com- binations of sign types are encouraged, which result in a coordinated design while minimiz- ing the size of individual signs. 9. Blade or projecting signs which include decorative frames, brackets or other design elements area preferred. Projecting signs (including blade signs) of four square feet or less are permitted and are not counted when calculating the amount of signage permitted for a business in ECDC 20.60. This type of detail can be used to satisfy one of the required elements under ECDC 22.43.030(B). 10. Use graphics or symbols to reduce the need to have large expanses of lettering. 11. Instead of broadly lighting the face of the sign, signage should be indirectly lit, or backlit to only display lettering and symbols or graphic design. 12. Signage should be given special consideration when it is consistent with or con- tributes to the historic character of sites on the National Register, the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, or on a city council -approved historic survey. 13. Signage shall include decorative frames, brackets or other design elements. An historic be used to meet this standard. r , Retractable and open -sided awnings allow signoge to be visible. 8 1 P a g e Packet Page 159 of 494 Examples of projecting signs using decorative frames and design elements Awning or canopy shapes: S tarr lard Box Co rnvex Marquee 9 1 P a g e Packet Page 160 of 494 22.43.050 Transparency at street level. A. Intent. To provide visual connection between activities inside and outside the building. B. Standards. 1. The ground level facades of buildings that face a designated street front a -Fe oriented totes shall have transparent windows covering with minimum of 75 percent of the building facade that lies between an average of two feet and 10 feet above grade. 2. To qualify as transparent, windows shall not be mirrored or darkly tinted glass, or prohibit visibility between the street and interior. 3. Where transparency is notes required, the facade shall comply with the standards under ECDC 22.43.060. v 0 s Ground level facades of buildings should have transparent windows between two to 10 feet above grade. Windows shall provide a visual connection between activities inside and outside the building, and therefore should not be mirrored or use darkly tinted glass. 4. Within the BD 1 zone, ground floor windows parallel to street lot lines shall be transparent and unobstructed by curtains, blinds, or other window coverings intended to obscure the interior from public view from the sidewalk.* [Ord. 3697 § 2, 2008]. 101Page Packet Page 161 of 494 22.43.060 Treating blank walls. A. Intent. To ensure that buildings do not display blank, unattractive walls to the abutting street. B. Standards. 1. Walls or portions of walls on abutting streets or visible from residential areas where windows are not provided shall have architectural treatment (see standards under ECDC 22.43.050). At least feu --five of the following elements shall be incorporated into any ground floor, street -facing facade: a. Masonry (except for flat, nondecorative concrete block); b. Concrete or masonry plinth at the base of the wall; c. Belt courses of a different texture and color; d. Projecting cornice; e. Decorative tile work; f. Medallions; g. Opaque or translucent glass; h. Artwork or wall graphics; i. Lighting fixtures; 1. Green walls; jk. An architectural element not listed above, as approved, that meets the intent. lighting fixture opaque glass medallion. ' windows\ projecting cornice masonry ____ belt course metal canopy- —\ I/ . X - recess plinth Blank walls shall be treated with architectural elements to provide visual interest. 111Page Packet Page 162 of 494 Buildings shall not display blank, unattractive walls to the abutting street. 121Page Packet Page 163 of 494 22.43.070 Building HVAC equipment. A. Intent. To ensure that HVAC equipment, elevators, and other building utility features are designed to be a part of the overall building design and do not detract from the streetscape. B. Standards. 1. Rooftop HVAC equipment, elevators and other rooftop features shall be designed to fit in with the materials and colors of the overall building design. These features shall be located away from the building edges to avoid their being seen from the street below. If these features can be seen from the adjoining street, building design shall use screening, decoration, plantings (e.g., rooftop gardens), or other techniques to integrate these features with the design of the building. 2. When HVAC equipment is placed at ground level, it shall be integrated into build- ing design and/or use screening techniques to avoid both visual and noise impacts on adjoining properties. Rooftop equipment should be screened from view. 131Page Packet Page 164 of 494 6. PUBLIC HEARING ON A DRAFT PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) TO APPLY DESIGN STANDARDS TO THE BD2, BD3 AND BD4 ZONES TO REPLACE THE REQUIREMENT FOR BUILDING STEP -BACKS. THE PROPOSAL ALSO INCLUDES A PROVISION EXEMPTING SMALL DECORATIVE 'BLADE SIGNS' FROM SIGN CODE AREA CALCULATION LIMITATIONS. Acting Development Services Director Rob Chave explained the Planning Board's original recommendation to remove the step -back requirements from the BD zones was made in 2011. The Council held a public hearing on July 26, 2011. In 2012, although supportive of replacing the stepback requirements in the BD zone with design standards, the Council wanted design standards in place before removing the step -back requirement. It was referred to the Planning Board and the Board has provided this recommendation. By way of background, he reviewed how height limits have changed over time: • First zoning code in 1956: 45 feet • 1964: 35 feet • 1981: 30 feet o Pitched roof / modulated design / step -backs • Codes since 1981 have addressed what happens in the 5 feet above 25 feet, but the 30-foot height limit has remained unchanged • 2005 - step -back required to increase building height from 25 to 30 feet Mr. Chave displayed photographs of buildings constructed prior to 1956: historic forms that still exist, noting there are common features such as first floor windows; pedestrian awnings; differentiation between the first floor and upper floor using materials and design elements; and rhythm or distinctive breaks in facades. He displayed photographs of buildings constructed 1956 to 1981, what he termed as the "simplified box," unadorned with little architectural character. The solution in 1981 was 25 + 5 feet with some kind of design feature such as a pitched roof. He displayed photographs of buildings constructed 1981 to 1997, commenting they tended to be "buildings with hats." Beginning in 1997 there was a requirement for modulated buildings. He displayed photographs of buildings constructed 1997-2005, explaining the result was different roof forms and some attempt to differentiate vertical forms with a lot of repetitive elements. He pointed out there is a difference between building rhythm and breaking up a large fagade into individual elements. Mr. Chave summarized: • Buildings prior to 1956 o Pedestrian scale & orientation o A richness of materials & architectural detail o Vertical detailing • 1956 to 1981 o Larger scale, very simple buildings o Lacking in architectural detail • 1981 to 1997 o Some improvement in architectural detail o Pitched roofs as an add -on or afterthought • 1997 to 2005 o More architectural elements included o More attention to vertical elements o "Busy" horizontal elements Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 2, 2013 Page 3 Packet Page 165 of 494 Mr. Chave noted one of the differences between historic buildings is richness in material and craftsmanship. Even when craftsmanship is not present, the details and rhythm of the buildings fit into the overall feel. Although buildings can be historic at 50 years old, he did not view many of the buildings constructed more recently as historic; they are typical of the period but not historic. While the concern in recent years has been height, it should be about design, the overall appearance of buildings and how they fit into the streetscape. Mr. Chave summarized the existing code requirements: • Retail core / BD1: o No step -backs o Mandatory design standards • Other BD zones (BD2 — 4) o Mandatory 15-foot step -backs o Design objectives (not design standards) The Board's recommendation is to remove the 15-foot stepback in the BD2-4 zones and replace it with design standards. He provided photographs of 15-foot step -backs in downtown Kirkland and Old Town Bellevue, noting they are typically on much taller buildings. He displayed photographs of Chanterelle's and the Edmonds Theater, commenting step -backs do not complement traditional commercial building styles. Using Chanterelle's as an example, he pointed out step -backs would not allow traditional buildings to be built. He explained the facades on historical buildings were viewed as a desirable downtown element. The intent is to adopt design standards that are consistent with some of the old building types and rhythms found downtown. He relayed downtown property owners have indicated the 15-foot step - back is a building killer and at least one developer concluded that a building utilizing that requirement was not feasible. He displayed photographs of buildings that echo traditional building styles and new construction that often tries to duplicate traditional building styles such as Mill Creek Towne Center. The Board's recommendation eliminates the 15-foot step -back requirement in the downtown BD2, 3 and 4 zones and replaces it with the same regulations that work in the BD1 zone; a height limit of 30 feet and the BD1 zone design standards. With regard to Mr. Hertrich's comment about being unable to find where the idea of 30 feet came from, Mr. Chave referred to the Board's January 9, 2013 minutes, page 8, 3rd paragraph, Board Chair Reed suggested to simplify the code language, 30 feet should be inserted. Mr. Chave noted this made sense because otherwise the language was convoluted with a base height of 25 feet with a 12-foot ground floor and the 12-foot ground floor was already required. He emphasized the 30-foot height was not a height increase. Councilmember Buckshnis clarified the Council approved 25 +5 feet to a maximum of 30 feet in October 2012. Mr. Chave responded that seemed to be the consensus of the Council although the Council did not take formal action to approve it as the Council wanted to see the design standard language before taking final action. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee had reviewed this issue. Mr. Chave answered yes, at the outset of the process in 2011. The Planning Board had a joint meeting with the Architectural Design Board to discuss the design standards. Councilmember Bloom asked when roof modulation was removed from the code. Mr. Chave answered it is still applicable in some parts of the City such as the BC zones in lower downtown including the Salish Crossing property. In 2005-2006, the idea of roof modulation was replaced with step -backs. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 2, 2013 Page 4 Packet Page 166 of 494 Mayor Pro Tem Petso referred to horizontal rhythm, noting large buildings not occupying entire blocks in the past. In recent years buildings are the size of an entire block without any horizontal modulation or rhythm. She asked whether the Planning Board's recommendation addressed that issue. Mr. Chave advised he would have to research that. Mayor Pro Tem Petso observed BD5 was also being amended. Mr. Chave answered BD5 is the 4th Avenue Arts Corridor. The language for BD5 retains the step -back because that area needs a special process. There is already a 15 foot setback requirement for larger buildings in that area. Staff's recommendation to the Planning Board was to consider BD5 separately in the context of the plan that was adopted for that area because it is unique and needs to have its own rules. Mayor Pro Tem Petso observed it appeared an extensive change was made to the BD5 language. Mr. Chave answered the language that was otherwise applicable to all the BD zones was retained for BD5. Although it looks like a big change in the markup copy, it is actually status quo. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the blade signs were reviewed by the Planning Board. Mr. Chave answered yes. He explained the intent is to make small signs that hang under awnings an easy process. Mayor Pro Tem Petso asked whether the blade sign proposal was reviewed by the Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee. Mr. Chave answered it was not, this was the first presentation to the Council. Councilmember Johnson asked how blade signs apply in the BDI zone. Mr. Chave answered the same way as the other BD zones. The proposal is any blade sign under 4 square feet does not count against the overall signage. A business that wants a small blade sign simply undergoes a staff review to ensure there is enough clearance. There is no review of the overall building square footage and allowable sign space. Councilmember Johnson observed the public hearing was in regard to BD2-4 and asked whether a separate process was necessary for the blade sign exemption for BDI. Mr. Chave answered the blade sign exemption was for the BD zones, not just BD2-4. Councilmember Bloom referred to a Planning Board Member's question that it was "his understanding of the current code the additional height from 25 to 30 feet could only be achieved with a step -back. Eliminating the step -back requirement as proposed would mean a developer could achieve the maximum height with certain design accommodations. He asked what a developer might provide in terms of amenities or design features in order to obtain the maximum height. Mr. Chave answered the BD design standards provide illustrations that give a good idea of what would be expected." Councilmember Bloom asked whether it was the Planning Board's understanding that the design standards would be required to obtain the additional 5 feet in height and whether there had been any discussion regarding amenities that would be necessary to obtain the additional 5 feet. Mr. Chave answered the Planning Board agreed the design standards apply regardless of the building height. Councilmember Bloom asked if the Planning Board discussed 25 + 5 feet with an additional amenity of some sort. Mr. Chave answered no; they focused on design standards that would apply consistently across the board. The idea of incentive zoning and other kinds of incentives was not discussed. There is some of that built into the BD zones; for example buildings over a certain size require open space be provided. Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton explained Roger Brooks' presentation talked about the importance of including blade signs on storefronts in the retail area. Blade signs are often used to attract pedestrians or drivers who do not see the storefront because they are traveling perpendicular to the front of the business. He displayed photographs of blade signs in Fairhaven, noting the design of the signs add to the attractiveness of the streetscape. Blade signs are typically much thinner than wall signs. He noted 3-4 businesses have approached him about installing a blade sign but do Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 2, 2013 Page 5 Packet Page 167 of 494 not want to go through the sign process. The proposal is to allow a blade sign up to 4 feet and it would not count against the sign square footage allowed on the building fagade. He summarized blade signs help pedestrians and drivers see businesses more clearly. Council President Pro Tern Fraley-Monillas recalled Roger Brooks mentioning that blade signs often identify the merchandise or service a business provides. Mr. Clifton agreed Mr. Brooks talked about the importance of a business listing what they sell on the blade sign. Council President Pro Tern Fraley- Monillas asked why the blade sign issue was included with the design standards in the BD2-4 rather than separately. Mr. Clifton responded the Council directed the Planning Board to look at the design guidelines for the BD2-5 zones and it is very appropriate that the signage allowed in those zones be part of the design standards. Councilmember Bloom recalled blade signs identify the product a business sells; the examples Mr. Clifton provided did not show that. She asked if that would be allowed? Mr. Clifton answered it would, noting blade signs can also hang from awnings provided they maintain a minimum clearance above the sidewalk. Mayor Pro Tem Petso opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Doug Spee, Edmonds, a property owner in the BD2 zone, commented this is a very fair approach to the challenge to get development going downtown. He liked that the same design standards would apply to B131-4. He noted the Council need not fear ugly or boxy buildings as the ADB review is a very challenging, effective process that, in his case, produced a better building. Once a developer complies with the design guidelines, they still must go through ADB review. Finis Tupper, Edmonds, commented he was involved in the final adoption of the Comprehensive Plan and recalled the last element the Council worked on in 1981 was building heights. He recalled the Harbor building on Main Street was the driver for the 25-foot height. He noted Mr. Chave did not show the view of the Olympics and Puget Sound. The code was written to preserve the downtown area and the entire area was zoned BC. Another dimensional requirement in 1981 was that 51% of the building had to be commercial. Edmonds lacks commercial zones and more condominiums are being built than the City needs. He questioned whether the condominiums on 5th Avenue represented the small town character of Edmonds. If Councilmembers liked big, boxy buildings, he recommended they raise the building height from 25 feet to 30 feet tonight. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, clarified when he spoke under Audience Comments, he was speaking about elections, now he was talking about building heights that have been arbitrarily changed to 30 feet. He noted in the BD zone the height limit was raised due to the extra height of the first floor level; the B132-4 zones were not required to have an increased first floor height. He recalled there were incentives in the past to create extra design features in exchange for additional height such as modulated rooflines, modulated building walls and sloped roofs. He summarized this was an arbitrary increase in height without any requirements. Ron Wambolt, Edmonds, commented if Councilmembers did not support the proposed changes, it meant they liked the current situation. The current situation is not construction of an abundance of beautiful buildings; it is no buildings being built. He was a Councilmember in February 2006 when the new BD zones were implemented to replace the BC zone; no buildings have been constructed since then in a BD zone except for the rebuilding of two banks. David Arista, Edmonds, owner of a building in the BD2 zone, expressed his support for the Planning Board's recommendation to replace the requirement for building step -backs. He does not plan to redevelop his building any time soon, but if he did in the future he wanted the opportunity to do so Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 2, 2013 Page 6 Packet Page 168 of 494 without a step -back. He commented a 15-foot step -back did not make sense for a building 25-30 feet in height. He also supported the proposal to exempt blade signs, explaining blade signs are very helpful as drivers do not see the front of the building but a blade sign catches their attention. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Pro Tem Petso closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. Council President Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas asked the current height limit in the BD1-4 zones. Mr. Chave answered BD1 is 30 feet, BD 2, 3 and 4 is essentially 25 feet and the ability to go to 30 feet with certain things, mainly a step -back. That is why the Planning Board felt if they removed the step -back requirement, there was no reason to call it 25 + 5 anymore because 25 + 5 = 30. In the BD4, there are two options, a commercial building that requires the 15-foot step -back or a multi -family building up to 30 feet with a front yard setback. Council President Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas observed if the Council kept the height the same and removed the step -back, the height limits would be 30 feet in BD1 and 25 feet in BD1, 2, 3 and 4 zones. Mr. Chave answered that would essentially be lowering the height limit in the BD 2, 3 and 4 zones because there is no option to go from 25 feet to 30 feet. Council President Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas observed the only option currently to go from 25 feet to 30 feet is the step -back. Mr. Chave agreed. Council President Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas asked if the option to go from 25 feet to 30 with a step -back was adopted because of building modulation. Mr. Chave answered the genesis of the step -back was a concern with the appearance of the street front. At the time there was a feeling that somehow 25 feet provided a more pedestrian -friendly environment; historically what makes more sense is the design rather than imposing an artificial step -back. That is evident in the design of historic buildings. The primary focus of the Planning Board and ADB Members' discussion was that design is important and the step - back does not really produce good design and in fact is not consistent with historic designs. Council President Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas asked whether design standards instead of a step -back could be required to go from 25 feet to 30 feet in the BD2-4 zones. Mr. Chave answered under the Planning Board's proposal, design standards would be required regardless of building height. Design standards address variation in material, detailing on facades, etc. Mayor Pro Tem Petso asked if horizontal modulation was addressed. Mr. Chave answered not directly; there is discussion about materials and differentiation of facades, but nothing that sets an absolute number when one portion of the building transitions to another and no horizontal standard is included. Mayor Pro Tem Petso observed adopting this tonight would not provide any improvement for a building that runs the full length of the block. Mr. Chave answered it would, such as the detailing that enhances the fagade. There is just not a specific standard that addresses horizontal spacing although that would be relatively easy to add. He referred to the first page of the design standards (page 83 of the packet), 22.43.010 Massing and Articulation, A. Intent. To reduce the massiveness and bulk of large box -like buildings and articulate the building form to a pedestrian scale. A sentence could be added something like "buildings shall echo historic horizontal building spacing or building elements consistent with the historic pattern of the city." He noted it would be different on each block or fagade depending on the historic pattern. He referred to the photographs of historic buildings where there is a distinctive difference between one section of the building frontage and another. Mayor Pro Tem Petso asked whether that would need to go back to the Planning Board or could it be included in the ordinance for approval by Council. Mr. Chave answered the intent is there; if a majority of the Council wanted to include that language, it could be included in the ordinance. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 2, 2013 Page 7 Packet Page 169 of 494 Mayor Pro Tern Petso referred to Mr. Chave's statement that the BD1 building height is 30 feet, yet when she looked at the table in the packet, 25 is crossed out and replaced with 30. She noted it appeared a change was being made to BD L Mr. Chave answered buildings in BD 1 are required to have a 15-foot ground floor; with a 15 foot ground floor, the building can be 30 feet tall; therefore, from a practical standpoint, the height limit in BD1 is 30 feet. That was why Planning Board Chair John Reed recommended changing the table. Mayor Pro Tern Petso observed the same change was being made in the table for the BD2, 3 and 4 zones, changing 25 feet to 30 feet. She asked if it would be possible to eliminate the step -backs, adopt the design standards and not change the table, leaving the height limit at 25 feet. Mr. Chave answered yes, but it would mean no possibility of going from 25 feet to 30 feet. Mayor Pro Tern Petso agreed, pointing out the extra 5 feet could be achieved via a development agreement, incentive zoning or other ideas that have been discussed. Mr. Chave advised that would require a separate process. Councilmember Bloom observed open space was required for a larger bulk building. Mr. Chave agreed. Councilmember Bloom recalled being at Council meetings when the Gregory Building was approved where citizens were in opposition to the building design. The former City Attorney said three errors were made by the Planning Department in approving the building but nothing could be done because an appeal had not been filed during the 21 day LUPA period. She recalled one of the errors was related to open space. Mr. Chave responded he was not directly involved with that project but recalled there was split zoning on the property and a bay window that extended beyond the facade that was not picked up during building review. There was nothing regarding open space at the front of the building. The provisions in the BD zones that he referenced earlier, page 11 of the zoning chapter (page 79 of the packet), Open Space Requirements, for buildings on lots larger than 12,000 square feet or having an overall building width of more than 120 feet, at least five percent of the lot area shall be devoted to open space, is a new requirement that was not in place until the BD zones were adopted. The intent of the open space requirement was to encourage pocket open spaces along a building frontage, particularly larger buildings such as a full block. There is also language regarding where the open space should be located. It is not an incentive; it is a requirement for a large building. The discussion regarding the Gregory Building was related to the back of the building. Councilmember Bloom observed there are a number of buildings that have been built under the current 25 + 5 building code that many citizens have not been happy with, including Old Milltown and the Gregory. She was agreeable to eliminating the step -back but was concerned with eliminating 25 + 5 without any tradeoff for the additional 5 feet. She was also supportive of blade signs. She appreciated Mr. Spee's comments tonight and at the Planning Board that there is a lot of fear. She noted the fear is due to buildings that have been constructed that citizens have had issues with. Mr. Chave responded the ADB and Planning Board looked at it differently. From a practical standpoint, they felt the height limits were established at 30 feet and the discussion is really about the overall facade and design of the building, not what occurs above 25 feet. Councilmember Bloom asked what the highest part of the Gregory Building is, recognizing that portions of buildings can be higher than the height limit due to the topography. Mr. Chave answered the overall height of the Gregory was 30 feet. He referred to the photo of the building with the curved roof which looks like a 2-story building at the street, but is a 4-story building down the hill. The opposite happens on the other side of the street where the uphill slope is behind the building. The Gregory appears taller because it takes advantage of the slope behind the building. That is a function of the way height limits are calculated and the topography. There has been discussion in the past about establishing height limits at the street front; but that was not done because it was such a huge change. Councilmember Bloom asked how tall the front of the Gregory Building is. Mr. Chave guessed it was 33- 34 feet and the back of the building was less than 30 feet. Councilmember Bloom observed that was the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 2, 2013 Page 8 Packet Page 170 of 494 reason citizens view this as a height increase; some buildings seem quite large due to the topography. Mr. Chave agreed a building's height calculation depends on the site's topography. In response to the comment that the City was not getting anything in return, Mr. Clifton assured the City was getting something in return — BD1 design standards applied to the BD2-4 zones. He noted the BD1 design standards were adopted after the development that Councilmember Bloom referred to. The two developments that have occurred since then, the banks, particularly the one at P and Main Street, would not have been allowed under the proposed design standards because they do not reflect the desired downtown urban form. The bank building looks like it belongs in a suburban office park; it would have been better to gut the existing building and build around the fagade than to build that building. He found it interesting that the Council was fearful when they had already approved BD guidelines that require a 15- foot first floor ceiling height which allows a 30-foot building in the most concentrated and intimate area of the downtown, but did not want to allow that in the rest of downtown. He noted the intent of the BD1 design standards was to require building design and construction that reflected the architectural style that many in the community find attractive such as the Beeson building, Chantrelle's, Edmonds Theater, the Starbucks building, etc. He found the 15-foot step -back arbitrary and had never understood why it was imposed. Main Motion COUNCILMEMBER YAMAMOTO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO APPROVE THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDED CODE CHANGES AND DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE FOR CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL TO INCLUDE THE PROVISION EXEMPTING SMALL DECORATIVE BLADE SIGNS FROM SIGN CODE AREA CALCULATION LIMITATIONS. Councilmember Peterson commented by adopting the design standards, it is no longer a tradeoff, it is forcing good design which is a great step toward ensuring buildings fit the feel of downtown. Although not anti -development, the design standards are the City showing a heavier hand and requiring good building design regardless of the height. As Mr. Clifton pointed out, these design standards are required in BD1, a zone that citizens are adamant about protecting, and it makes sense to expand them to the surrounding zones. Amendment #1 MAYOR PRO TEM PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ADD A SENTENCE THAT THE BUILDINGS SHALL ECHO HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT HORIZONTALLY. Mayor Pro Tern Petso referred to Mr. Chave's indication that it would be a simple matter to ensure buildings demonstrate horizontal rhythm by adding a sentence to the ordinance. Mr. Chave responded the intent is stated in the code. He displayed a picture of a block that reflected building rhythm, noting the additional language would not prohibit or otherwise restrict construction of a large building, but it would address the fagade and appearance at the street. Vote on Amendment #1 UPON ROLL CALL, THE AMENDMENT CARRIED (5-2), MAYOR PRO TEM PETSO AND COUNCILMEMBERS PETERSON, FRALEY-MONILLAS, BLOOM, AND JOHNSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS YAMAMOTO AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING NO. Amendment #2 MAYOR PRO TEM PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ELIMINATE THE STEP -BACKS, ADOPT THE DESIGN GUIDELINES BUT LEAVE THE BUILDING HEIGHTS AT 25 FEET. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 2, 2013 Page 9 Packet Page 171 of 494 Councilmember Peterson reiterated the design standards were created with a great deal of public input for the most intimate area of the City, around the fountain, and he did not understand the reasoning behind Mayor Pro Tern Petso's motion. He pointed out many of the buildings on the Historic Register could not be built with a height limit of 25 feet. If the goal is an historical element, which he supports, he questioned how that could be accomplished with this motion. Councilmember Bloom recalled during a past discussion there was an indication that incentive zoning was included in the Comprehensive Plan. She asked if the option for incentive zoning applied to all zones. City Attorney Jeff Taraday advised the City Council always adopts incentive zoning anywhere in the City it wished. Councilmember Bloom asked what would be required to adopt incentive zoning to allow an additional 5 feet with certain amenities. Mr. Taraday referred to the memo his office prepared regarding incentive zoning, explaining there needs to be a careful balance between the public benefit that is sought and the deviation that the City is willing to accommodate. The tradeoff only works if the benefit and deviation are in balance; just the right amount of public benefit and just the right amount of incentive to the developer. That needs to be carefully considered and he was uncertain that there had been any analysis regarding how much going from 25 to 30 feet was worth economically and what a developer would be willing to provide in the way of an amenity to gain the additional 5 feet in height. The drafting of the incentive is a simple process; the analysis of whether it will actually work to generate the amenity has not been done with regard to an increase from 25 to 30 feet. Councilmember Bloom asked whether development agreements could be used to allow an additional 5 feet and get something in exchange. Mr. Taraday said staff could be asked to develop a proposal that would accomplish that and bring it to the Planning Board for review and ultimately to the City Council. Councilmember Johnson commented she had been following this issue for some time and it was both simple and confusing. In the interest of clarity for elected officials, developers, staff and citizens, Planning Board Chair Reed suggested changing the minimum height from 25 feet to 30 feet. It was her understanding the building height was 30 feet prior to the adoption of step -backs and it will be 30 feet once the step -back requirement is eliminated, yet the table indicates the height is 25 feet. At the very least, this is a PR nightmare. She suggested being clear about what the standards were, what they are and what they will be. She agreed the 15-foot step -back was not a good idea. She referred to Figure 16.43.4 that illustrates uphill and downhill examples, observing that depending on the topography, the frontage could be above 30 feet. She summarized the goal was improved communication between advisory boards and the City Council; her preference would have been for the Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee to have reviewed the Planning Board's recommendation so that there could have been an in- depth discussion with staff. In the interest of expediency and because this has been discussed since 2011, she supported making a decision tonight. Councilmember Buckshnis echoed Councilmember Johnson's comments that the goal was clarity and pointing out 25 + 5 = 30 feet. The proposal simplifies the regulations. She referred to Roger Brooks' suggestion #5, keep it simple. The amendment would require buildings to echo historical horizontal design. She agreed this is a PR nightmare in that this has been going on since 2011. She summarized the step -back was being removed and building heights were not being raised because 25 + 5 = 30 feet. Council President Pro Tern Fraley-Monillas disliked step -backs particularly in shorter buildings. She spoke in favor of blade signs. She supported the amendment to keep building heights at 25 feet. Vote on Amendment #2 UPON ROLL CALL, THE AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS FRALEY- MONILLAS AND BLOOM, AND MAYOR PRO TEM PETSO VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS PETERSON, YAMAMOTO, JOHNSON AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING NO. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 2, 2013 Page 10 Packet Page 172 of 494 Mayor Pro Tern Petso said she will not support the main motion; in order for her to support the main motion, both amendments would have needed to pass. She thanked everyone for their work on this; the positive is improved design standards will be adopted and they will be further improved before final adoption via the amendment. Councilmember Bloom echoed Mayor Pro Tem Petso's comments, stating she supported the removal of the step -back requirement and supported blade signs but would vote against the main motion due to the 30-foot height limit. Councilmember Johnson expressed her support for extending the BD1 design standards to the B132, 3 and 4 zones. Vote on Main Motion UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS JOHNSON, YAMAMOTO, BUCKSHNIS AND PETERSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS BLOOM, FRALEY-MONILLAS, AND MAYOR PRO TEM PETSO VOTING NO. Mayor Pro Tern Petso declared a brief recess. 7. EDMONDS STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN — PRESENTATION OF DRAFT FINAL REPORT. Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton reported the Planning Board (PB) and Economic Development Commission (EDC) conducted a joint meeting open to the public on January 23, 2013. The City Council was also invited. The purpose of the meeting was to provide an opportunity for Beckwith Consulting Group (BCG) to present information related to a Draft Strategic Action Plan Report dated December 21, 2013. PB and EDC members asked questions and discussed next steps with Mr. Beckwith. Following the January 23, 2013 joint PB/EDC meeting, Mr. Beckwith submitted a revised Draft Strategic Action Plan dated February 8, 2013 to the City. The document was forwarded to the City Council, PB and EDC members, City staff, Chamber, Senior Center, etc. The document was also provided to the Strategic Action Plan subcommittee consisting of City Council/PB/EDC members and City staff. All entities were asked to review the document and provide comments. On March 5, 2013, the Strategic Action Plan Committee met to discuss the February 8, 2013 document. During the meeting, the committee focused primarily on BCG's proposed five strategic objectives, related plan actions, who/which entity would perform in a lead capacity and as participants, etc. Using comments provided during the meeting, revisions were made to the document and clean/redlined versions were again provided to City Council, PB and EDC members, City staff, Chamber of Commerce, Senior Center, and others and each was asked to provide comments by Friday, March 22, 2013. The redlined document and comments submitted by reviewers were then sent to BCG to give them time to review and prepare the final draft products for the April 2, 2013 City Council meeting. The purpose of tonight's meeting is to provide Tom Beckwith an opportunity to present information related to the Final Draft Strategic Action Plan. Following the presentation, the City Council may be interested in conducting a public hearing on the Final Draft Strategic Action Plan or the Council could approve the Plan tonight in order to begin implementation. Mr. Clifton introduced Tom Beckwith, Beckwith Consulting Group, who introduced Steve Price, Beckwith Consulting Group. Mr. Beckwith provided an overview of the Strategic Action Planning process: Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 2, 2013 Page 11 Packet Page 173 of 494 AM-5672 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: 5 Minutes Submitted For: Dave Earling Department: Mayor's Office Review Committee: Type: Information Tnfner"0finn Subject Title Proclamation in honor of White Cane Days. Recommendation Previous Council Action Submitted By: Committee Action: 9, Carolyn LaFave Narrative White Cane Days is the annual sight fundraiser and public awareness project of the Northwest Lions Foundation. This year's White Cane Days are May 3rd & 4th. Money raised during this event benefit a variety of important programs for sight -impaired individuals. White Cane Days 2013 Inbox Finalize for Agenda Mayor Form Started By: Carolyn LaFave Final Approval Date: 04/16/2013 A++arhmnn+e Form Review Reviewed By Date Sandy Chase 04/15/2013 04:52 PM Dave Earling 04/16/2013 08:36 AM Started On: 04/11/2013 09:57 AM Packet Page 174 of 494 Pr AV JJr1oIrfamuf tian City of Edmonds • Office of the Mayor White Cane Days May 3 — 4, 2013 WHEREAS, White Cane Days is the annual sight fundraiser and public awareness project of the Northwest Lions Foundation for Sight & Hearing; and WHEREAS, during this time, Lions update the public about their activities in sight conservation, restoration, and research; and WHEREAS, donations raised during this event are used to help fund a variety of important programs, including the Lions Health Screening Unit, and the Lions Patient Care Program that provides medical care, equipment, and other forms of assistance to sight -impaired individuals; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that I, David O. Earling, Mayor, do hereby proclaim May 3-4, 2013 as Lions White Cane Days in the City of Edmonds, and I urge all citizens to join me in recognizing the many years of dedication and commitment of the Lions Clubs to sight conservation and restoration, thereby improving the quality of life for the blind and sight -challenged individuals within this state. 1'r David 0. Earling, Mayor April 23, 2013 Packet Page 175 of 494 AM-5674 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: 5 Minutes Submitted For: Dave Earling Department: Mayor's Office Review Committee: Type: Information Tnfnrma+inn Subject Title Proclamation in honor of Loyalty Day. Recommendation Previous Council Action Submitted By: Committee Action: 5. Carolyn LaFave Narrative In 1958 the United States Congress designated May 1 of every year as Loyalty Day. This day was established as a day for reaffirming our loyalty to the United States and to provide us with an opportunity to celebrate the many freedoms secured and preserved for us by the brave patriots who have served in our nation's armed forces. Veterans of Foreign Wars Post #8870 invite all Edmonds community members to join them in observing this very special day. Loyalty Day 2013 Inbox Finalize for Agenda Mayor Form Started By: Carolyn LaFave Final Approval Date: 04/16/2013 A +*a A6 a"+a Form Review Reviewed By Date Sandy Chase 04/15/2013 04:52 PM Dave Earling 04/16/2013 08:36 AM Started On: 04/11/2013 10:05 AM Packet Page 176 of 494 City of Edmonds • Office of the Mayor VF'D01�— 'IF 1, 1 W VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS Loyalty Day May 1, 2013 WHEREAS, in 1958, the United States Congress designated May 1 of every year as Loyalty Day; and WHEREAS, Loyalty Day was established as a day for reaffirming our loyalty to the United States and the documents upon which our nation was founded; and WHEREAS, Loyalty Day provides us with the opportunity to celebrate the many freedoms secured and preserved for us by the brave patriots who have served in our nation's armed forces and risked their lives for liberty and independence; and WHEREAS, it is fitting that the citizens of the City of Edmonds take time to reflect on the privileges of democracy and liberty extended to us by the institutions of American Freedom; and WHEREAS, there continue to exist in the world today, hostile forces that are dedicated to destroying our way of life in America; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that I, David O. Earling, Mayor, proudly join the Veterans of Foreign Wars Post #8870 in proclaiming May 1, 2013 as Loyalty Day in the City of Edmonds and invite all citizens of Edmonds to observe Loyalty Day in an appropriate manner. David 0. Earling, Mayor Packet Page 177 of 494 April 23, 2013 AM-5698 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: 20 Minutes Submitted By: Stephen Clifton Department: Review Committee: Type: Community Services Information Information Committee Action: 7. Subject Title Annual Reports by the Snohomish County Tourism Bureau and Snohomish County Tourism Promotion Area Recommendation For information. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Representatives of the Snohomish County Tourism Bureau and Snohomish County Tourism Promotion Area will present their annual reports. Attachments Snohomish County Visitor's Bureau - 2012 Annual Report Presentation Outline Tourism Promotion Area - Slide Tourism Promotion Area Slide Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Stephen Clifton Final Approval Date: 04/18/2013 Form Review Date 04/18/2013 04:23 PM 04/18/2013 04:34 PM 04/18/2013 04:47 PM Started On: 04/18/2013 03:58 PM Packet Page 178 of 494 SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T ON C(@ li, Close to everything. Far frorn ordinary.® Snohomish County Tourism Bureau 2012 Annual Report Packet Page 179 of 494 Tourism IS Economic Development SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N CI Close to everything. Par from ordinary.— iltft077 to Wal-541h,r��ton S?t� ���nt $ �69 milliafy in 2012; accounti��� ��r nearby $1.1 bfflir)n I'fl lor�i�ytatr rD;( r?venca,?s Packet Page 180 of 494 SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N �r I Tr Impact of Tourism Close to everyPar from rdiraordin Fsi arv.— *� P Tf aw'de, S/ T. Air Rental Car Mo�ortoach +'�� Train I C rul se LI aes ji �. k Travel Meeti n€sf Gas F&ad Campg round doing A mu-sernent Rec rent on Entertairrrr.ent AgLNnr. �onYrnuans � � wages,�,Iries,rfits, Tee �� -000 Outside Goods Laca I Ciao-ds B�erwir`e5 f if _ & Srv��r s 0 till 4L� laofis }�r�rF �� -� � �� • `- • � Shr-P.M9 gel Packet Page 181 of 494 5cho�l Aiud�"'T State Tourism Office Closed Reality is.... SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — All other states have some form of State funding and/or involvement Washington Tourism Alliance is not a sustainable organization using a membership - funded model Packet Page 182 of 494 Our Competitors' Budgets Alask SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — *Washington State reflects the WTA budget 2011-12 data Packet Page 183 of 494 SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N �r I Tr Prindp[esordinarv.— Privately Broad -based responsibility Inclusive of all sectors of the tourism industry Currently evaluating alternative models and funding levels Collaborative partnership with other tourism sectors Packet Page 184 of 494 Long Term Funding Critical Dedicated funds Industry sector balance SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N �r I , ssues- Sectors determine assessment method Show Return on Investment Requested bridge funding from state legislature Packet Page 185 of 494 Tourism IS economic development SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — Travel and tourism is one of the most important " export- oriented' industries in Washington. Spending by visitors generates sales in lodging, food services, recreation, transportation, and retail businesses -the "travel industry. "These sales support jobs for Washington residents and contribute tax revenue to local and state governments. Packet Page 186 of 494 Impact of Travel to Local Economy SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — Overnight Travelers to Washington State � -average 2.3 people per travel party � -stay 2.5 nights � -spend $458 per travel party per day � -totaling $16.9 billion *travelers staying in hotels/motels Packet Page 187 of 494 Because Tourism Matters Effect of Tourism in Snohomish County 9,340 $ 217.3 million $16.6 million $ 45.9 million jobs payroll local taxes state taxes "Data provided by Dean Runyan and Associates March 2013 SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — Packet Page 188 of 494 Tourism Works for Snohomish County! SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N C(,. 0� Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — Visitor spending in Snohomish County is $875.8 million per year; Up 1 % from previous year: Restaurants $ 244.2 million Transportation and fuel $136.6 million Retail stores $121.8 million Recreation and entertainment $115.4 million ■ Accommodations $103.4 million ■ Grocery stores $ 52.5 million *Data,pro vided by Dean Runyan and Associates, March 2013 Packet age 189 of 494 Tourism Rebounds SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary. - The recovery in the travel industry is stabilizing: Washington State as a whole increased revenue 6.9 % while room demand increased byjust 3.3 %, Snohomish Cbuntys recovery is being led by revenue: 10. 7% increase in ff revenue and a 1.7% increase in demand over 2011. *As measured by Smith Travel Research Packet Page 190 of 494 Brief Overview of 2012 Tourism spending and economic impact of tourism in Snohomish County was $875.8 million — up 1%. Generated 13,176 requests for information from ads; a slight decrease from 2011 Web visitors for Snohomish.org, Snohom ishCou ntyWedd i ngs .com and RoomsAtPar.com; up 23.4 % over 2011. SCTB visitor centers served 11,974 visitors. Countywide centers served 91,386 visitors. SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — Achieved $458,000 of free media coverage — up 4% 7,415 definite and 6,150 tentative group and convention room nights were booked in 2012 representing $21 million in economic impact. Hotel occupancy levels were up 1.7% to 66.5%; ADR was up 8.8% leading to a increase in RevPar of 10.7% Hotel motel tax collections were up 5.7%. Packet Page 191 of 494 Convention and Group Tour Sales and Service Ads were placed in meeting and event planner, reunion and sports related publications generating requests for information. 13,176 requests were received from leisure travelers (a slight decrease). Packet Page 192 of 494 SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N �•r ?g. Convention and Group Tour Sales and Service Conducted 16 familiarization tours for meeting, group tour and international tour and travel planners and domestic and internatiom media in the communities of Edmonds, Everett, Lynnwood, Monroe, Mukilteo, Snohomish, Stanwood, Sultan and Tulalip. Packet Page 193 of 494 SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N TM Close to everything. Par from ordinary.— Convention and Group Tour Sales and Service The Bureau conducted 4 sales missions to Vancouver BC, Olympia, Seattle, Boulder CO and Colorado Springs along with: Edward D. Hansen Conference Center Lynnwood Convention Center Future of Flight A viation Center Seattle Premium Outlets City of Lynnwood 10 County hotels Washington Stealth Resulting in 45 new leads for hotels and attractions in Snohomish County and distribution of 86 packets of information. SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N TM Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — Packet Page 194 of 494 Convention and Group Tour Sales and Service Participated in 19 trade shows generating 13, 773 direct leads and distribution of 3.764 tourism guides in 2012. The Bureau assisted 44 groups with conference services distributing 11 600 guides to attendees. Snohomish County Tourism Bureau dimpor- Northwest Washington State t SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N LOD ordinary.— Packet Page 195 of 494 Convention and Group Tour Sales and Service Group tour, meeting and event planner ,bids were prepared which resulted in 7,415 total definite room nights with an economic impact of $17.3million. Additional pending bookings at year end totaled 6,150 room nights and an additional $3.7 million of economic impact. Primary decrease in economic impact due to recording Pacific Rim Gymnastics Championships in 2011. Packet Page 196 of 494 SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T❑ N Room Economic Impact Nights 2010 Definite 5,690 $11.0 million Pending 41580 $4.1 million Total 2010 10,270 $15.1 million 2011 Definite 6,248 $16.5 million Pending 7,969 $6.9 million Total 2011 14,217 $23.4 million 2012 Definite 71,415 $17.3 million Pending 61,150 $3.7 million Total2012 131,564 $21 million Convention and Group Tour Sales and Service The sports market continues to be a significant segment contributing $15.4 million in economic impact. Washington State Cyc%cross Championships Mastercraft Pro Wakeboard Tour US Indoor Nationals and JOAD Indoor (archery) Lake Stevens 2012 Ironman 70.3 event Snohomish Big Foot Soccer Tournament National Softball Association Fastpitch Tourneys 190MMANO LAKE STEVENS Packet P7,90937 19 r WASH INcrON SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N TM Close to everything. Par from ordinary.- 0 ^-- PA CV041-aC RIM L"Muskyja EVERETT, WASHINGTON _ MARCH 16-18, 2012 4 Aga IPIVT PraWakeboardTo r Sports Marketing Recognition and Awards: Finalist for NASC Member of the Year Sports Events Magazine Readers' Choice A ward for the 3rd year! SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary.— SUis READERS' 1%11' CHOICE AWARDS N, D6��6 • C REATTV i iv Ao Packet Page 198 of 494 Tourism Development €a r Fi Ads generated 13,176 total -- requestS for Information /n ZO1 L y �°haneh County, 4%ashinghon is an easydis 1 weehersd grta,vaaiy-Iust2ho-ur.—dh ollan if_ minutes raarth Seattle with hotels dJ%k� at y Spsydarwoaurtdleet rrrallsand I rest qulhraugh arErt Check out ourspecials at 3nohomish Additionally, there were Over - and Enok}aurgetxuay tadsy! 8, 000 visits to RoomsAtPar/ StayShopAndSa ve websites as a Snohomish County result of advertising presence. fL — - _ . . . . . . . . . Media ,buys were placed in a variety of media outlets including Alaska Airlines in-flight magazine, 9' Jug Seattl?. //����// North Sound Living, Outdoors / Y Y _ minur�s rorth nF tlnd muhak and xulptw?s 6y reg onala tiscsa dboutque shopping w you strclt shoF.anddir in the waterfhont arts com munity of Edm:-nds find the , National Geographic Tra veler, latest in fadrion n erds at Alderwood In Lprh-x-ad artifacts of heNwrii3his in neareritage Por ark. Visit Park Ykh s�rneof the mrn neries in nearby Bothell. Budget Tra ve/ weStWOr/d See the works s laigest jet ass _m hNd on the 8oeing Awr of FuNn exOf p Fiend a 4Suk orld l omplte your aviaton experience at nsr, world -class histoi is aviation colic tions. Or explore the reg ion native /� Vancouver Rc ne'/' . heglnnirgsat the HWhulh Ct ltwal termer-Tulalip � Tribesnew Tleidgtin. (� (,/ �/ (,J �/�/ /U /U 5pa/''erS and online sources All wFah ingallt nmusvm '� exploring allaf northwzst l4ashingr=�n..411 with , hemis upmdo�Wsthan Seattle! SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I e to everything. from ordinary. — Packet Page 199 of 494 • R I i — .. nohomish 41 tt,t.atiw�tr,�. Lou my Xylp. •i, Snohomish County �qWNolthsvestWashington �; GREAT DEALS OW6 Shopping Lodging _ TraAl NEa . ��B-338- g�� Just IVlinut s North Of Seattle vA wr.snohomish.nrg 1888.338.0976 Snohomish County �i Northwest Washington i A GREAT DEALS Shopping & Lodging .lust Minutes North of Seattle www.snohomish.org 888.338.0976 -.Snohomish SHOP CkouAND SAVE Just M Inute of Seattle Sta +Sh p n a ave.rom 1-8"-MS-Q976 11 Tourism Development Website visitation to our primary site was up over 2012 by 23%. The weddings website was up by 19%19 wvvvv.snohomish.gW www. Roomsi tRar. com www.Sta�S�AndSave. com www. SnohomishCountylteddin�s. tom Packet Page 201 of 494 0 Search 833-338-0976 . 5-0 DISCOUNT LODGING nonon.aen [,mt-rx]n•-nal.h) wpm, a, meatea In ..om.w�,r we.m.wwn agate, neeneu hetwens floe swdulov bWe warere o} auver spuiM and tM1e ruvved, emmr-cevved peaks of the cascade noumeam. :�wwm�x+. eanrr nW.� r].n•.Ina .Meer- nr s�-en.. n :nl. w.ner Iw ma.a ysem m vnrec�.r. nm n w�a r.rry n� a...y from . son amr ... [vy.� e�.n...le. S,.ap„N. (kw,ey .. d.Wr rewted �,. r<I.x...q tIM m1.•e vrdw rywl...N- e we hex — a a, rnuu syaieeele•Ir bee.90 iireher, k, vre uNeW aaa,er, fweaera rnounuin wildlife seneeueees. I uNmrted vwert�ntws for outdoor tun erd area,, purwas. aM tln best max westd rtely- der ecenoear. utMmq axnks ., Inren port m x.rq roe bM ane.mav Ga•K ape.nye ]a]. ]a]. m aM ]e] nrernnrrr amrmair raaie. nose ro e.e.rrnanp. ae<fro.., oa++rr.arr.c Home Page Welcome to EnahnmishCn. The Snohomish Count, Tou r --- — wesiteas a resource for y, planning. TIME TO GET AWAY Snohomish County offers fir=_ rs, yacht clubs, historic inns, secluded had and Brea Gel ready to shop for that pal feel [pR oc special rriumuril ].Thee rulae and realign your sarnas at a There's something for every. W=Qminp Me RCC,Karoct with InorW: and ra llly or rLWISo0,C1 you pelf In the Wedding Facilities pa{ Get cloaelo Seattle without paying Seattle prices! facilities that are ideal for yo —nil i as and by options - , You won't6elie,e how far your ehoppinQldini ngilod9ing dolmas will yo[ County venues, You will fin, venues, and facilities allowir Get a Free Amtrak Campanian Fare Coupon AND save $$ with a Seattle caterer; all at yourfat id ip=_ wedding venues located In t premium Outlets VIP Discount Voucher. Everett Mall Discount Directory oarrington, Edmonds, Evere' Vil her and Mae y's 11 Discou nt Card -- Index, Lynnwood, Marysville Mountlake Terrace, Mukilt- p0amfir ratrd oiOR rsmenry Aicc.Wnd Rallis may dwngn wfll,lnl noix]h oral are suhler:l to In the Resource Guide, you a Nhuhlrallnn Stale Sala, T S1ay. SMp A Savo retas valid lhrci May n. 2017 and many of the services yo dreamed It would he, CM a free Amhak r fare mij d sa,a with a Seal Premium OueMs VIP ntxrnunt .rngkaninn pan an hq sv ,dilchCf slid EVarctt Mall lll.mA ❑ifoclory vauchar SHtan you bock a atom through If we can be of assistance tc SravShooM 1% ram Buy — Amtrak r, -d-tap Irkel aboard any Amtrak C ..odes mum• and a tally at (425) 348-58f12, e1 forward to helping Vou find t ownpaiWn ides heal Call 1 800A15A RAIL IN scheduW iriforni IIyDu dun'1 r,ceiva your ,,oche to also. just pra,artl rs pmr ynr y„ta resarwstrn confmwhrpr small a[ [he Mae Info Moth About Snohomish Coo nty', Snohomish County is locate, Snohomish Count' offers shcpping galorel Fmm$aahla Prcmnium pldl�s, In AManwxxl In sparkling blue waters of Puc lyno rnod anal l-verett Mail. rx itunlqu,,anoct�nnlma�.c am your pasuna• ma wind-1 nrrt pamx Cascade Mountains. lust 15 and flnwar hand boardwalks at Hor ll Counrfy Villaga or lM hislonc fmsn nl Snohomish is you Short ferry ride away from t Ideally situated for explori par diww loundt Find murals aed sxull by regunal arus[s grid b"ique shupping as you strull. shop and dins In the wnleAmnl arts a:nmmunly of Fdm,iMs For additional information at All In Smhwnlah Canny -Close to Everything. For from Ordlnery. W The Snohomish County Tourism eu Tourism Development 85, 000 copies of an official visitor guide including seasonal calendars of events, and seasonally oriented articles on communities and attractions. SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T❑ N fi TlM Close to everything. i L Accommodations Shopping Restaurants Attractions Breathtaking Scenic Drives Outdoor Activities Fine Arts Events Packet Page 202 of 494 SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y Public Relations ar Six issues of StoryLine were mailed to over 1, 400 travel writers with each issue. Packet Page 203 of 494 harvests of red apples and golden grains, winter and its warm mulled red vane, At rho only American Girt stow and spring with new varieties of lively libations shovaased by local wine shops. young girls and their mothemi .Idle selection of 18-inch dills Come sip and savor the unique and full -flavored beers, vines and distilled girls of various ettnii n—Ad mmemporary life. The stored spirits handcrafted h Passionate boutique producers - man of whom acquire ��- YPa q P Y pa-ti- incIWi g aftemoon re: their key ingredients from Snohomish Cnunty's family -owned organic farms_ their m Gri dulls as well as a hair salm style. Beer: Favored by Cliefs & Enthusiasts Alike The Residence Inn by Marriott . Adam's Northwest Betio & Brewery -Di— the popular Twin Id—arewig oo. brown ale, copper ale, kel5ch and =k,n Girl shoppers with a pouter brews, each pairing ddiim Ay wrdh th-1,4-inspied entrees such wfish & exclusive American CIO dDIVsli drips, short rik, duds breast, and odrer f-orin- dillmm nbeazcePortableand HouH: lunch,Mon.-ni. 1130 am.-130 p.m.; dieter, Tues.-sat.4-]n - p.m.;andsun. a-a— A .l Mpm. PM N Lewis street, on—S 3Fi0-790-W56w AdamsNWBistro.comoron Facebook NDhiTHWas-Burin k Bnewem . Dlamemd knot Breweiyard Ale House-Thiswharf4ikes tty dogpubbmm 11 b e amd ale , a berry hard drier, anda tthe menu paaz, seafood, rteaks and grilled sgreroot tatudraR beer. The beverages complement ha at least years ofage. M a lag, brats. Cask<ond'¢ioned ale every Thursday nigh. Mart beat Ieart 21 Hours:Mon.-Thurs. 11arm.-1 a. m.;Fri &Sat. 11 a. m.- 2 a.m.; sut. noun to ..\ r m M ' c 62fA FmntStreet(henseen Muldleollate BeachaM the ferry tenrnirta j, Mukilteo � c a25-335 8 illvannll }�nOl The Residence I --American C c remiy hiendly option:. Diamond [ShorRua House (;RrvinQ sui[eand day of[heweek. • Hours:Mon.-Thum ll a.m.-9 p.m, Fri- &Sat. ll a.m.-10 p.m.; son. 11 _. -9 p.m. Call the Residence Inn at 425- 4D3 uncoln Ave it Old Town Mukikw Visit w w.Mamiott.comiseal 4 5-S12-amt 0a0oroiaonclKnot.comnron Facebook • MCMenaminsmill creak-Thmugbaglasswindow see the bi—Wsfer entonglarksdrat brew W standards and seven seasowls. The pub menu focuses on freshness such as wild Alaskan k;., , cod for the Alehouse Fish &Chips. Leashed furry or feathered pets may join their human ,may snonon:sn cwnry Tour 1425] , Fox (425) ea companions on the outside patio. Brews -to -go including a hard cider a re for sale in one- or two. M'.' R x 5 quart mason jars, 22Haunce bottles, half gal ion growlers, and full kegs. o Hours:Mon.-Sat. SS a.m.-1a.m.; Sun. noon-midn�ht E ,. 0 13300 Bethel I -Everett Hwy, Mil I peek $ o a25-316 20, M[Menami on Fa book 1 Public Relations and Media Conducted a media sales mission to Vancouver, BC. Attended Society ofAmerican Travel Writers and Travel Media Showcase. Conducted media Tams for 17 travel writers - Snohomish, Mukilteo, Tulalip, Edmonds, Everett, Stanwood Monroe and all pointspin, p between. Public Relations and Media SNA �4 , ") OHOMISH Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — Sent 16 press releases including- - Flying Heritage Collection - New hiking guide - Snohomish County Branding - Sporting events - SCSC Readers Choice Award - Economic Impact of visitors - Tammy Dunn s election to NASC Board of Directors Over 160 media pitches and responses to writers and travel publications requests 50 articles were published Efforts resulted in $458, 000 of free media coverage - up 4%. Packet Page 205 of 494 Social Media: Flickr, Twitter, Facebook & Pinterest Twitter Facebook presence: Snohomish County TO UrIsm, Sports, Weddings, Meetings and Conventions Visitor Information Centers of Snohomish County Is your email address active? WeW tried to send emails to terry@snohomish.org but they are not getting delivered_ Please update your email aettings ortry sending a message again to your current address_ Teets aafl.�rta SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N .>r i TM Close to everything. Par from ordinary.— $nVi3NInISi1 County, NW Waslrinylun Attractiuus is on Face6uok T. --edl. h rbu,ar, rnrrAnrnd o, ,yT V tw f� Why - Snohomish County, NW Washington Attractions i Ls one, of yfir][1i 3 gosh M lhco E a M� 5ak,n[r.•e fli9M n] oinn r�amnm r. M1[ip:t�mvw-r�we�pfaire.canY]fl]Idreonipwvy c-ieia me ]a] B-i �+aaL.e. dwcrs ism w ree 9e L�:v N7 ul� — a s s: - 64 im ukM adrmwm wMie Wei ewna ��.nm.n. wn�rrexwy a.v..rrc�rorc :+rw+n.p"a„�nem zwrm na.m�wa. week wetd.�u LrleM ndrmwresw kwe[Jrq Y Hr do it n henr•mxenb+. wnM1Mn ,,ek OM'rM Packet Page 206 of 494 Social Media: Flickr, Twitter, Facebook & Pintere Pinterest Boards: Activities Hotels Shopping • Fun for families • Great Outdoors • Wildlife And much more! Packet Page 207 of 494 SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N TM Close to everything. StPar from ordinarv.— fr?r��^es� OEganLe n an OF1 V pifl you I Lvgln Organlxe and share �nings you Icve SNOHOMISH o U N �„ Snohomish County Tourism — 3ei 16L Pr 71J4s •p.RF in Pd . 9j FOB FwaiCnMW�f'1bn A.4rGiea rn.,y:. S.rne�;u. ce n.,. se.n.s< i. .x'..{. Srwlwuied Co. Vnrt[ioro M, L4igne k L-nnmd cm nl ... C.no•^ t6alb& Lets E.!! f.n Fa iC.dr-Am. hge 5lwppin�^I N'Mdings in SoWi a Eora]k!-M.";n Boohoo k �. .��•o.�• n..,. �r,r.. e.•r.�„t.... [.cos xvuoFfmho Hr•iii..hi �.. .... �t.uuins onr[1acv I I z gamic *fmlt47% Visitor Services Partnerships Make it Happen! - Continue our partnership with the City of Snohomish, Snohomish Chamber of Commerce, Historic Downtown Snohomish and the Historical Society of Snohomish. - City of Lynnwood Tourism and Parks & Recreation, as well as Alderwood Manor Heritage Association and Snolsle Genealogical Society. SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — Packet Page 208 of 494 SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N �r I Tr Visitor Services Changes: With the strategic tourist Plan initiatives: - Closed the north county VIC due limited visitor traffic - Now manage the VIC at the Future of Flight and Boeing Tour facility Packet Page 209 of 494 Visitor Services Visitor snapshot: - 48 % from more than 50 miles away -10% from other WA counties - 23 % from -15% from other states other countries - 52 % from local area (including surrounding counties) SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — Packet Page 210 of 494 Visitor Services apecucuiar scenic beauty Volunteers are active in the community through the SCTB initiatives: Pacific Rim Gymnastics Event Snohomish County Sportsmen Recreation Expo Ironman Triathlon Nimitz Night at Everett Naval Station Vintage Aircraft Days at Paine Field Evergreen State Fair Arlington Fly In SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N �r I Tr Packet Page 211 of 494 SH Y N Visitor Services 3 FAM tours were held in 2012 Snohomish Stanwood and Tulalip Lynnwood and Edmonds And 6 lodging facilities from Edmonds to Arlington, Marysville to M u ki lteo. Visitor Services Training information included.• Garden Delights Family Friendly Fun A via tion Adventures Distilleries, wineries and breweries Holiday and winter highlights And special highlights on Edmonds, Mukilteo and Arlington SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T❑ N fi Tr Close to everything. Far from ordinary. — Packet Page 213 of 494 Industry Education Sponsored 4 countywide tourism related programs including: SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — Third party Online Booking Engines for hotels and B&Bs Hospitality Sales Training Program Branding of Snohomish County Designing advertising and collateral for ff maximum impact and results Packet Page 214 of 494 Industry Education SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — Created two of six planned video training segments: Aviation Attractions - hitps//vimeo, com/56769241 Shopping and Gaming hitps//vimeo, com/60885395 More to come in 2013 - Arts, Culture and History Farms, Agriculture, Wineries and Distilleries Outdoor Recreation Spectator Sports Packet Page 215 of 494 Arlailcn -Ho%pma" Trnming Module Industry Education Created Tourism Bingo! A training program for frontline hospitality staff members! Packet Page 216 of 494 SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N 0"10 h � r Arlington Everett Lynnwood Index parringtoi >tanwood M!II Creek Bothell Marysville Gold Bar Granite Lake Mukilteo Falls Stevens Monroe Sultan nohomish Tulalip Mountlake Edmonds Arlingtor- Terrace WiII Creek Bothell Monroe Sultan Everett -thing- 2 a'rv_ IM Industry Education SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — And held two training familiarization tours for frontline staff members at local hotels! Packet Page 217 of 494 2013 Initiatives SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — Launch of the new destination brand Launch new website 4 more training videos Industry sector events/tours/tickets to train frontline staff New cyber tours New itineraries, maps and promotions to assist visitors in exploring all of Snohomish County Packet Page 218 of 494 Brief Overview of 2012 Tourism spending and economic impact of tourism in Snohomish County was $875.8 million — up 1%. Generated 13,176 requests for information from ads; a slight decrease from 2011 Web visitors for Snohomish.org, Snohom ishCou ntyWedd i ngs .com and RoomsAtPar.com; up 23.4 % over 2011. SCTB visitor centers served 11,974 visitors. Countywide centers served 91,386 visitors. Packet Page 219 of 494 SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — Achieved $458,000 of free media coverage — up 4% 7,415 definite and 6,150 tentative group and convention room nights were booked in 2012 representing $21 million in economic impact. Hotel occupancy levels were up 1.7% to 66.5%; ADR was up 8.8% leading to a increase in RevPar of 10.7% Hotel motel tax collections were up 5.7%. Tourism Matters To Snohomish County! 9,340 jobs $ 217.3 million in payroll $16.6 million in local taxes SNOHOMISH C O U N T Y W A S T O N r I Tr Close to everything. Par from ordinary. — Snohomish County Tourism Bureau SNOHOMIS C O U N T Y a Close to everything. Far from ordinary. -,- Thank you for supporting tourism Packet Page 220 of 494 in Snohomish County! APPLY FOR A FINANCIAL GRANT WWW.SN000TPA.COM Hello. You've got dreams -- so do we. The Tourism Promotion Area (TPA) was established by the lodging industry to increase overnight stays in Snohomish County. With funding in place, the TPA is looking to support new ideas and events that bring loads of life and overnight lodging to the county with a new grant program. The TPA grant is a wonderful new opportunity to sponsor projects that increase overnights, support the improvement and development of tourism attractions and allow for tourism marketing in new markets. You're an expert in your field. That's pretty cool. We are counting on you! We don't know ALL the exceptional opportunities that are out there, but you do. Contact us to see if your project is a good fit for TPA funding. You are different. That makes two of us. The TPA differs from other lodging grants offered . by Snohomish County, such as the LTAC (Hotel/Motel) program, in that the TPA may fund, at its discretion, a range of expenses outside marketing and promotions, such as bid fees for sporting events and conferences, facility development and improvements. Previous median project funding has been $40,000. ©Q© Package 221 of 494 We're not OK with status quo. • We want BIG ideas! The TPA is soliciting projects that focus on increased overnight stays. • The TPA is not looking to subsidize overhead costs for projects that will take place regardless of TPA support. • The TPA must see a marked increase in overnights as a result of project support. • The TPA generally does not support administrative or personnel -related costs. Projects are one year funding only. Check out this project, we thought it was neat. MasterCraft Pro Wakeboard Tour Estimated overnight stays: 600 The MasterCraft Pro Wakeboard Tour is the most dominant and credible professional wakeboard circuit in the world. Comprised of five nationally televised, cash -prize events, the PWT showcases the worlds top athletes from Europe, Australia, Canada, and the United States. Anticipated attendance is expected to be 7,000 people at Lake Tye, Monroe, for the two-day event. This is a televised event, airing nationally on Versus. Questions? Contact our coordinator. Jessica Voelker, Tourism Promotion Area Coordinator Snohomish County Economic Development 3000 Rockefeller Avenue, MS 411 Everett, WA 98201 Jessica.Voelker@snoco.org / 425.388.31 39 THINK BIG, THINK SNOHOMISH COUNTY, Packet Page 222 of 494 See if we can help fund your nExt Outdoor Festival or Event APPLY FOR A FINANCIAL GRANT Snohomish County: Recent Projects: Where Big Ideas Happen It all started with an idea, which grew into something more. Now, you're ready for it to become a rea liter. V,'e're here to help, and Snohomish County is the perfect place to male it all happen. The Snohomish County Tourism Promotion Area Grant is totally unique —one of only a handful of grants in Washington State that gives you the support and funding you need to bring your project to fruition. THINK BIG. THINK NOHOMI H COUNTY. Learn more Packet Page 223 of 494 013 Ironman 70.3 Triathlon Lake Stevens Mar 2;,20}13 Women's Luring the Dream Ride 2013 Mar 27, 3013 Everett Aqua oxAll-Star Game & Fan Felt Feb 20, 2013 Pr1. AM-5687 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: Submitted By: Department: 15 Minutes Jen Machuga Planning Review Committee: Parks/Planning/Public Works Type: Information Information Committee Action: Recommend Review by Full Council Subject Title Discussion: Proposed code amendment to increase the time frame for validity of preliminary short plat approval as established in ECDC 20.75.100 (File No. AMD20130002). Recommendation Staff recommends that following discussion on this item, the City Council move forward with conducting a public hearing. A public hearing has been scheduled for May 7, 2013. Previous Council Action This item was discussed by the Parks, Planning & Public Works Council Committee on February 11, 2013, and the Committee felt it would be appropriate to increase the current five year time frame and/or add provisions for an extension to the current time frame. The Committee forwarded this item to the Planning Board for discussion and a public hearing before moving forward with full Council review. Narrative Under state law, cities have significant discretion in establishing their own procedures to govern short plats (subdivision of land into four lots or less). RCW 58.17.060 states the following: "The legislative body of a city, town, or county shall adopt regulations and procedures, and appoint administrative personnel for the summary approval of short plats and short subdivisions or alteration or vacation thereof. ...Such regulations shall be adopted by ordinance and shall provide that a short plat and short subdivision may be approved only if written findings that are appropriate, as provided in RCW 58.17.110, are made by the administrative personnel, and may contain wholly different requirements than those governing the approval of preliminary and final plats of subdivisions..." State law also leaves it to cities to determine the time within which a short plat must be recorded before it expires. For formal subdivisions (subdivision of land into five or more lots), current state law establishes a seven year time frame for final approval if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and a five year time frame for final approval if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015 (RCW 58.17.140(3)). These time frames; however, do not apply to short plats. Because state law does not contain any such deadline for short plats, it is up to each city to determine how long a developer should have to finish a short plat. Currently, Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 20.75.100 causes preliminary approval of Packet Page 224 of 494 short plats to expire after five years. However, the city could revise the code to make this time frame shorter or longer. At the January 22, 2013 City Council meeting, concerns were raised by a citizen that the current five year validity of preliminary short plat approval is not long enough -- given the recent recession -- and that the city should revise its code requirements to allow seven years for preliminary short plat approvals to be consistent with the change in state law related to formal plats. This item was discussed by the Parks, Planning & Public Works Council Committee on February 11, 2013, and the Committee felt it would be appropriate to increase the current five year time frame and/or add provisions for an extension to the current time frame. The Committee forwarded this item to the Planning Board for discussion and a public hearing. The Planning Board discussed this item on February 27, 2013 and conducted a public hearing on March 27, 2013. Minutes from both meetings are attached. Following the close of the public hearing, the Planning Board voted to forward this item to the Council with a recommendation of approval. Refer to Attachment 1 for the draft revised code language of which the Planning Board recommended approval. The proposed code language includes provisions for both formal plats and short plats in order to clearly indicate which timing regulations apply to which subdivision type. Regarding formal plats, the proposed code language specifically references the State regulations for the time frame for preliminary plat validity. Also, the proposed code language includes a correction to the decision -making body for preliminary formal plat approval (corrected from the City Council to the Hearing Examiner) and the decision -making body for potential appeals. Regarding short plats, the proposed code language causes preliminary short plat approval to expire at the end of seven years if the preliminary short plat approval is issued on or before December 31, 2013 and at the end of five years if the preliminary short plat approval is issued on or after January 1, 2014. This mirrors the State provisions for formal plats; however, the draft code language causes the time frame to switch back to five years one year sooner than what the State regulations afford to formal plats. The sunset date of December 31, 2013 has been proposed, in part, to address stormwater code changes that the City will be required to implement by 2015 in order to meet Department of Ecology's new permit requirements. This proposed sunset date will minimize the number of applications vested to older stormwater codes, while still recognizing that one of the main purposes for the proposed amendment is to help with those applications that were put on hold due to the economic downturn. To further meet the goal of this code revision, the proposed language also includes a provision for extending the time limit for preliminary short plats that would have expired within the past couple of years, thereby giving them two additional years from the effective date of the ordinance to obtain final approval. Attachments: 1. Draft code language 2. Sampling of time frames established for short plat approvals by other local jurisdictions 3. Chart displaying statistics of recent Edmonds short plats 4. Planning Board public hearing minutes (draft) - March 27, 2013 5. Planning Board discussion minutes - February 27, 2013 6. Parks, Planning, & Public Works Committee discussion minutes - February 11, 2013 Attachments Attachment 1: Draft code language Attachment 2: Sampling of time frames established for short plat approvals by other local jurisdictions Attachment 3: Chart displaying statistics of recent Edmonds short plats Packet Page 225 of 494 Attachment 4: Planning Board public hearing minutes (draft) 3/27/13 Attachment 5: Planning Board discussion minutes 2/27/13 Attachment 6: Parks, Planning, & Public Works Committee discussion minutes 2/11/13 Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Jen Machuga Final Approval Date: 04/18/2013 Form Review Date 04/18/2013 01:35 PM 04/18/2013 03:17 PM 04/18/2013 03:23 PM Started On: 04/17/2013 12:03 PM Packet Page 226 of 494 CURRENT CODE 20.75.100 Preliminary approval — Time limit. Approval of a preliminary plat or preliminary short plat shall expire and have no further validity at the end of five years, unless the applicant has acquired final plat or final short plat approval within the five-year period. The five-year period for subdivisions shall commence upon the date of preliminary plat approval by the adoption of a written decision by the Edmonds city council. The five-year period for preliminary plats of short subdivisions shall commence upon the issuance of a final, written staff decision. In the event that either the decision of the city council or the staff is appealed to the Snohomish County superior court, the five-year period shall commence upon the date of final confirmation of the preliminary plat or preliminary short plat decision by the judiciary. [Ord. 3230 § 1, 1998; Ord. 3211 § 8, 1998; Ord. 3190 § 1, 1998; Ord. 2379 § 3, 1983]. PROPOSED REVISION 20.75.100 Preliminary approval — Time limit. A. Approval of a preliminary plat shall expire and have no further validity at the end of the time period established under RCW 58.17.140, unless the applicant has acquired final plat approval prior to the expiration date established under RCW 58.17.140. The time period for subdivisions shall commence upon the date of preliminary plat approval by the issuance of a written decision by the Edmonds Hearing Examiner. In the event that the decision of the hearing examiner is appealed to the Edmonds City Council and/or Snohomish County Superior Court, the time period shall commence upon the date of final confirmation of the preliminary plat decision by the City Council or judiciary. B. Approval of a short plat shall expire and have no further validity at the end of seven years if preliminary short plat approval is issued on or before December 31, 2013 and five years if preliminary short plat approval is issued on or after January 1, 2014, unless the applicant has acquired final short plat approval within the specified time period. The time period for short plats shall commence upon the issuance of a final, written staff decision. In the event that the decision of staff is appealed to the Edmonds Hearing Examiner and/or Snohomish County Superior Court, the time period shall commence upon the date of final confirmation of the preliminary short plat decision by the Hearing Examiner or judiciary. 20.75.107 Preliminary approval — Time limit extension for previously approved short plats. Short plats that received preliminary approval on or after January 1, 2006 and would have expired prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall have their preliminary approvals automatically extended for a period of two years from the effective date of this ordinance. Preliminary approval of such short plats shall expire and have no further validity at the end of two years from the effective date of this ordinance, unless the applicant has acquired final short plat approval within the specified time period. Attachment 1 Packet Page 227 of 494 Sampling of Time Frames Established for Short Plat Approvals by Other Local Jurisdictions Bothell: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval was issued on or before December 31, 2011 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2012. Everett: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015. Kenmore: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015. Kirkland: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015. Lake Forest Park: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015. Lynnwood: Valid for 2 years with the opportunity for a 1-year extension. Mill Creek: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015 with the opportunity for an extension. Mountlake Terrace: Valid indefinitely, but planning on changing code to put a limit on it. Mukilteo: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015. Shoreline: Valid for 7 years if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014 and valid for 5 years if preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015. Woodinville: Valid for 5 years with the opportunity for a 1-year extension if making progress on civil and/or final review. Attachment 2 Packet Page 228 of 494 Statistics of Recent Edmonds Short Plats Presented to Planning Board on February 27, 2013 Year of Application Number of Applications that Received Preliminary Approval Number Recorded Number Expired 5- ear time frame 2005 27 22 5 2000 2C-1 14 r, 2007 13 r, 0 2008 1CI 3 0 2009 - 2 0 2010 3 0 0 2011 1 4 0 0 2012 2 0 Attachment 3 Packet Page 229 of 494 PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT TO INCREASE THE TIME FRAME FOR VALIDITY OF PRELIMINARY SHORT PLAT APPROVAL AS ESTABLISHED IN ECDC 20.75.100 (FILE NUMBER AMD20130002) Mr. Lien recalled that the Planning Board discussed this item on February 27th and requested that staff return for a public hearing with a proposal that would extend the time frame for preliminary short plat approval to be consistent with the State's time frame for formal subdivision approval. They also asked that the amendment include a provision to address applications that have already expired. Mr. Lien explained that the State Legislature recently established a seven-year time frame for final approval of formal subdivisions (subdivisions into five or more lots) if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014. However, this time frame does not apply to short plats. Instead, State law (RCW 58.17.060) leaves it up to cities to determine the time within which a short plat must be recorded before it expires. Based on the City's current code, preliminary approval of short plats expires after five years, but the City has the ability to make the time frame shorter or longer. Mr. Lien reported that in January, a citizen approached the City Council with the concern that the current five-year validity of preliminary short plat approval was not long enough, given the recent recession. The citizen asked that the City revise its code requirements to allow seven years for preliminary short plat approval to be consistent with the change in state law related to formal plats. This item was discussed by the Council's Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee on February 1lth, and the committee felt it would be appropriate to increase the current time frame. They forwarded the issue to the Planning Board for discussion and a public hearing. Mr. Lien reviewed the draft code language (Attachment 1), which reflects the Planning Board's direction from February 27th: ECDC 20.75.100.A was changed to reference the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 58.17.140, which is the state's current time frame for preliminary approval of formal subdivisions. By simply referencing the RCW, the City's code will not have to be changed if and when the legislature adopts changes to state law. ECDC 20.75.100.B was added to outline the time frame for preliminary approval of short plats. As proposed, preliminary short plat approval would expire at the end of seven years if issued on or before December 31, 2013 and at the end of five years if issued on or after January 1, 2014. This mirrors the state provisions for formal plats. However, staff is recommending that the time frame switch back to five years at the beginning of 2014, which is one year sooner than what the state regulations afford to formal subdivisions. ECDC 20.75.107 was added to include a provision for extending the time limit for preliminary short plats that would have expired within the past couple of years, giving them two additional years from the effective date of the ordinance to obtain final approval. Ms. McConnell explained that the time frame proposed for short plat preliminary approval is slightly different than the time frame outlined in RCW 58.17.140 for formal subdivision preliminary approval. She explained that the City will need to make changes to their stormwater regulations by 2015 in order to meet the Department of Ecology's new permit requirements. Staff is proposing that the extended time frame for short plat preliminary approval should sunset on December 31, 2013 rather than December 31, 2014 so that new applications can be designed and vested in the updated stormwater code when it becomes effective. Ms. McConnell reviewed that the main purpose of the proposed amendment is to help with those applications that were put on hold due to the economic downturn. She noted that several applications expired over the past two years, many of which had already submitted civil construction plans and were being actively reviewed. However, with the downturn in the economy, some applicants were unable to move forward with the subdivision improvements and their applications expired. The proposed amendment would allow a seven-year timeframe for current preliminary short plat approvals. It would also grant an additional two years to preliminary approval that expired in 2011 and 2012. Ms. McConnell reminded the Board that the Engineering and Planning Departments are working on changes to the subdivision regulations, and the City Council recently directed staff to reorganize the entire Edmonds Community Planning Board Minutes March 27, 2013 Page 3 Packet Page 230 of 494 Development Code over the next few years. Another reason for establishing a sunset date of December 31, 2013 is to avoid establishing regulations now that will contradict future proposed changes to the code. Board Member Ellis asked if the extension for expired applications was put forward by the City or if it was the result of a citizen request. Mr. Lien answered that, at the February 27`' Planning Board Meeting, a citizen suggested that the extension should also apply to applications that expired in 2011 and 2012. As currently proposed, the amendment would give these applicants an additional two years to complete the short plat improvements. The Board directed staff to include this change in the draft amendment. Board Member Ellis asked how individuals with expired applications would learn about the extension. Mr. Lien advised that the Planning staff would notify all individuals with expired applications if and when the amendment to extend the time frame is adopted. He emphasized that extending the time frame would not require an application to move an expired application forward. Board Member Ellis asked if staff envisions any legal problems associated with reactivating expired preliminary approvals. Mr. Lien advised that the City Attorney has reviewed the proposed language and did not identify any legal concerns. Vice Chair Stewart asked if the proposed sunset date would cover all of the current applicants who have been waiting for the economy to improve before continuing their project. Ms. McConnell said the proposed seven-year extension would be applicable to all current applications. It would also allow a two-year time frame for all applications that expired in 2011 and 2012. She said the purpose of the revised sunset date is to limit the number of applications that would vest to the existing stormwater code, which will revised in the near future as required by the Department of Ecology. Steve Miles, Edmonds, said he attended the Board's February 27th meeting and was encouraged by their suggestion that Edmonds code should be changed to treat short plats like formal subdivisions and that the time frame for preliminary short plat approval should be extended from five to seven years. He was even more encouraged by the Board's suggestion that the extension could be offered to projects where approval had already expired. Mr. Miles explained that his preliminary approval for a four -lot short plat expired on January 17, 2013. His proposal would have created four lots from two existing lots. Although he partnered with his neighbor to submit the application, he acted as the lead. He said their first application was submitted in November of 2006, and they received preliminary approval in January 2008 and plan approval in mid September 2011. However, the September 2011 approval was too late to start in that construction season, and they were left with only 2012 to build prior to expiration. By that time, the economy had completely tanked and the proposed project was worth less than half what it was at the time of application. Thinking that his situation was not unique, Mr. Miles said he started looking for governmental decisions that might allow them to receive an extension. He was excited to find House Bill 2152, which was unanimously approved by both houses of the Washington State Legislature. The bill extended plat approval to seven years. He said he immediately sent the information to the City and requested an extension. However, he was soon notified that the City's interpretation of House Bill 2152 was that it was not applicable to short plats. While he was devastated and angry, he continued his research by contacting the co-author of the bill, Representative Jan Angel, telling her of the City's denial and the distinction between formal subdivisions and short plats. She offered to write another bill pertaining to short plats, but it would not be done in time to fix his problem. Mr. Miles said he contacted other local jurisdictions and learned that most had applied the extension to both formal subdivisions and short plats. He wrote to Council Member Buckshnis, hoping she would intervene. He said he could not understand why Edmonds had decided not to include short plats when so many others had. Council Member Buckshnis made several inquiries but ultimately responded with disappointing news. He said he spoke with an attorney who assured him that the distinction between short plats and formal subdivisions had been court tested and he should not challenge the City's decision. Mr. Miles said he met once more with City staff prior to the expiration date, asking if they would ask a senior person about House Bill 2152, but this effort was unsuccessful, as well. Staff suggested that he submit a performance bond in lieu of completing the improvements in exchange for a one-year extension. However, the bond cost was twice the cost of resubmitting plans and he knew he would not be ready to build this season. Reapplying and repaying would restart the five - Planning Board Minutes March 27, 2013 Page 4 Packet Page 231 of 494 year cycle again, and that is what they planned to do until introduced to Donna Breske. She was able to get the City's attention regarding the issue at hand. Mr. Miles summarized that he and his neighbor have lived in Edmonds for more than 30 years. They are homeowners, not developers. Their investments in their properties represent a major portion of their assets and long-term security. He said he knows the legislature wrote the new law with no intent to exclude short plats and to provide relief to people exactly like him. He asked the Planning Board to consider a change to the City code that would extend the short plat expiration to seven years and make the extension retroactive for those applications that have already expired. While the economy may not recover in time for him to take advantage of the extension, he asked that they give him the chance the legislature thought they had provided. Donna Breske, Snohomish, said she is a licensed civil engineer working as a private consultant for the past 12 years. She said she first approached the City Council regarding the time frame for preliminary short plat approval on January 22, knowing there other individuals like her client whose approval had expired or would expire soon. She pointed out that the RCW 58.17.140 allows for an extension of up to seven years for formal subdivisions. The RCW also allows local jurisdictions to set time frames for short plats. She expressed her belief that the proposed amendment is consistent with what other jurisdictions are doing, as well. She said she is pleased with the process and the quick time frame the City has followed to move the amendment forward. Ms. Breske said she recently had a discussion with Ms. McConnell regarding the proposed language for ECDC 20.75.107, which extends the time frame an additional two years for applications that expired in 2011 and 2012. She pointed out that RCW 58.17.130 also has a provision for bonding in lieu of improvements, and the concept is allowed in the City's current code, as well. She explained that this provision is particularly important for individuals who only have two years to complete the application process and build the improvements. The bonding in lieu of provision allows up to one additional year for the applicant to complete construction of the project. She suggested that the following language should be added at the end of ECDC 20.75.107 to help applicants clearly understand the existence of this provision: "... unless the applicant has posted a bond in lieu of improvements." THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE HEARING WAS CLOSED Ms. McConnell explained that there is currently a code provision that allows for bonding in lieu of constructing the improvements so an applicant can move forward with recording the short plat. She expressed her belief that because the provision is outlined elsewhere in the code, it might not be appropriate to add the provisions into ECDC 20.75.107, as well. However, staff could solicit input from the City Attorney regarding this option. Again, she reminded the Board that staff will be working on updates to the subdivision code, recognizing that there are sections of the code that do not flow smoothly. This will be accomplished as part of the code rewrite that will take place over the next two years. Vice Chair Stewart agreed with Ms. Breske that language should be added to ECDC 20.75.107 to make it clear that bonding in lieu of improvements is an option for applicants that are approaching the deadline. Mr. Lien pointed out that bonding in lieu of improvements is addressed in ECDC 20.75.030. He clarified that the proposed amendment would not prohibit an applicant from using this provision. Although not specifically called out in ECDC 20.75.107, it would still be one avenue for final plat approval. Board Member Lovell asked how an applicant would learn about the bonding in lieu of option. Mr. Lien said that as an application approaches the deadline, staff informs the applicants about the bonding option. Ms. McConnell added that in order to post a bond in lieu of improvements, applicants must have approved civil plans in place and activity must be occurring. Mr. Lien pointed out that Mr. Miles testified that the City offered bonding as one option to continue his application. Chair Reed suggested that ECDC 20.75.107 could include a reference to ECDC 20.75.030. While he understands staff s viewpoint, he is also sympathetic to land owners and the need to help them understand the process. Again, Ms. McConnell suggested that this issue would be better addressed as part of the City's overall update and reorganization of the development code to make the processes clearer and more concise. She emphasized that the provision is already available to applicants, Planning Board Minutes March 27, 2013 Page 5 Packet Page 232 of 494 and staff discusses the option with applicants who are approaching the deadline. Vice Chair Stewart emphasized her desire to at least include a reference to ECDC 20.75.030 to help citizens who are not knowledgeable about the code. Board Member Ellis cautioned that changing the proposed language might require an additional public hearing, thus slowing the process. He suggested the Board move the amendment forward as quickly as possible to give relief to applicants. They can clean up discrepancies with regards to references at a later time, as long as staff consistently points out the bonding option when people get close to the deadline. Mr. Lien advised that staff provides a hand out to applicants outlining the bond in lieu of improvements process. Chair Reed advised that adding a reference to ECDC 20.75.030 in order to provide clarity would not require an additional hearing before the Board makes a recommendation to the City Council. An additional public hearing would only be required if the changes are more substantive. Board Member Lovell said discussions with the staff have satisfied him that most of the code changes associated with the rewrite will involve reorganization to make the document easier to read. The goal is to make it easier to locate code provisions related to any given subject. He said he senses staffs hesitance to insert additional language into ECDC 20.75.107 that already exists elsewhere in the code, and he supports their recommendation. He recommended the Board move forward with a recommendation on the language as currently proposed. Chair Reed suggested that the Board could forward a recommendation regarding the proposed amendment, with an additional recommendation that the City Council consider adding a reference to ECDC 20.75.030. Again, Ms. Breske suggested that additional language could be added to ECDC 20.75.107 to reference the bond in lieu of improvements provision found in ECDC 20.75.030. BOARD MEMBER LOVELL MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ECDC 20.75.100 AND ECDC 20.75.107 (FILE NUMBER AMD20130002) TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL AS PRESENTED. BOARD MEMBER ELLIS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 3-0-1, WITH VICE CHAIR STEWART ABSTAINING. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA Chair Reed advised that the April 10`h agenda includes a review of Highway 99 initiatives and the status of redevelopment efforts on Highway 99. He recalled that the Highway 99 Task Force provided a report to the Board in 2009, and the Board has also received presentations regarding projects that are taking place in the International District. Chair Reed said the Board was scheduled to continue their discussions about the Westgate Plan and form -based zoning. However, the discussion was taken off the agenda because an issue was recently raised about whether it would be more appropriate to address both Five Corners and Westgate at the same time. He said that on April 24t' the Board would continue their review of the Edmonds Way BC-EW and RM-EW zoning classifications. He reminded the Board they will start working soon on the code rewrite and they will likely continue their discussions regarding the neighborhood centers, as well. Chair Reed reported that he and Vice Chair Stewart will meet with Mayor Earling on March 29tb to discuss Planning Board priorities. City Council Member Petso will be unable to attend, but he will seek input from her in advance. He said the goal is to schedule a time when all four can meet on a regular basis to discuss agenda priorities and the work the Planning Board is doing. Board Member Lovell reported that at their March 20th meeting, the Economic Development Commission voted to send a proposal to the Planning Board that would essentially make the BD zone primarily retail and restaurant types of uses. They have prepared a draft ordinance for the Board's consideration. Chair Reed agreed to find out more about the status of the EDC's draft ordinance. Vice Chair Stewart pointed out that "development agreements" are not scheduled on the Board's extended agenda or included in the list of items pending for 2013. She recalled that, at their last meeting, Ron Wambolt suggested that this issue be revitalized. Chair Reed agreed to clarify the status of this issue with the City Council's Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee. Planning Board Minutes March 27, 2013 Page 6 Packet Page 233 of 494 important to allow both projecting and hanging blade signs to meet the needs of each individual building. Board Member Cloutier pointed out that the actual code language states that projecting signs are "attached to or affixed to a building or wall in a manner that is no more than 12 inches from the surface of the building or wall." Mr. Chave explained that, traditionally, awnings are considered part of a building, which means that hanging signs would also be allowed. He cautioned against making more extensive changes to the sign code now, given that it will be reorganized and updated later in the year. Board Member Duncan referred to ECDC 22.43.060(B)(1)(h) and asked if the design standards require artwork and wall graphics to cover a certain percentage of a wall. Mr. Chave answered that there is no minimum coverage for artwork and wall graphics. Given that there is no minimum coverage requirement for the other elements in ECDC 22.43.060(B)(1), Board Member Duncan questioned the appropriateness of identifying a minimum coverage for green walls. The Board remainder of the Board agreed. CHAIR REED MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD ECDC 16.43 (BD —DOWNTOWN BUSINESS) AND ECDC 22:43 (DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE BD ZONE) TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL AS REVISED PER THE BOARD'S DISCUSSION. BOARD MEMBER CLARKE SECONDED THE MOTION. Board Member Lovell referred to the comments he made at the last meeting regarding the proposal. Since that time, he has listened to the comments and suggestions that have been offered and has read the various emails and written materials pertaining to the proposal once again. He reiterated his belief that the City does not need to adopt additional design standards for the BD2, BD3 and BD4 zones because the design guidelines set forth in the Comprehensive Plan are adequate. In addition, he believes the staff and developers have the ability to figure out what is appropriate for downtown Edmonds, given the design guidelines contained in the Comprehensive plan and the zoning regulations. He said he supports the proposed provision that would exempt blade signs from the sign code area calculation limitations, but he will abstain from voting on the motion because he believes the recommendation the Board forwarded to the City Council in 2011 is very adequate and appropriate. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0-1, WITH BOARD MEMBER LOVELL ABSTAINING. DISCUSSION ON INCREASING TIME FRAME FOR VALIDITY OF PRELIMINARY SHORT PLAN APPROVAL (FILE NUMBER AMD20130002) Ms. Machuga said the purpose of this discussion is to consider the option of increasing the time frame for validity of preliminary short plat approval for subdivisions of fewer than five lots. She briefly reviewed the current short plat process, which consists of three phase: During the Preliminary Review, the City reviews the proposal based on the zoning regulations, critical areas regulations, etc. and identifies the conditions necessary for the subdivision to comply with the code. This process takes about three to five months to complete. As part of the Civil Review, an applicant provides more detailed engineer drawings showing the proposed civil improvements. This process usually takes three months to complete. During the Final Review, the City reviews the final documents to make sure all of the conditions from the preliminary approve are met. This process typically takes about a month to complete. Ms. Machuga explained that the current code causes preliminary approval of short plats to expire after five years. That means an applicant has five years after preliminary approval to complete the civil and final review processes and for the subdivision to be recorded. She advised that in 2010 and 2012, the State extended the time frame for formal subdivisions (five or more lots) to allow up to seven years for final approval if preliminary approval is issued on or before December 31, 2014. The time frame for final approval for formal subdivisions that received preliminary approval before December 31, 2007 was extended to nine years. The time frame reverts back to five years for final approval when preliminary approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015. However, state law does not mandate a deadline for short plats, so it is up to each jurisdiction to determine the appropriate time frame. She advised that some jurisdictions have changed their time frames for short plat approval to mirror the state's time frames for formal plat approval. She referred to Attachment 1, which provides a sampling of time frames established by other local jurisdictions for short plat approvals. Planning Board Minutes February 27, 2013 Page 5 Packet Page 234 of 494 Ms. Machuga provided a chart to illustrate the number of applications the City received for preliminary short plat approval from 2005 through 2102. The chart also identifies the number of applications that expired before final approval was obtained. She advised that about half of the applications that expired had reached the civil review stage, and several got part way through the final phase but were never recorded. Ms. Machuga said staff presented this issue to the City Council's Planning and Public Works Committee on February 1 Vh, and the Committee felt it would be appropriate to increase the current five-year time frame and/or add provisions for an extension to the current time frame. They moved to forward the item to the Planning Board for discussion and a public hearing. Ms. Machuga cautioned that vesting is always a consideration when changing time frames. When time frames are extended, it potentially means that newer regulations will take longer to implement through actual development. She particularly referred to the City's stormwater requirements and explained that as stormwater codes are updated, they typically become stricter than the previously established requirements. She emphasized that the timing for vesting to code requirements should be taken into account when determining whether the validity of a preliminary short plat approval should be increased. Something else to consider is whether or not the time frame for applications that have already expired should also be extended. They could also add a provision for the extended time frame to sunset after a certain date. Board Member Lovell asked for further clarification about the implications an extension could have on the City's ability to implement new stormwater requirements. Ms. Machuga explained that an application is vested to the regulations (including stormwater requirements) that are in place at the time of preliminary approval. Mr. Chave added that, once preliminary approval has been obtained, an applicant currently has five years to complete the civil and final review processes. An extension would allow more time, but it would also result in a longer period of time when an applicant is vested to potentially older conditions. Board Member Duncan asked if it would be possible for the extension to be contingent upon how close an application is to current code standards. Mr. Chave said that not only would this be difficult; but given the time frames they are talking about, it would probably be unnecessary. For example, the changes to the stormwater code over the next few years will not likely be significant. Board Member Clarke expressed his belief that the issue could be adequately addressed by increasing the time frame for short subdivision approval to be consistent with the state's extension for formal subdivision approval. In addition to increasing the time frame for short plat approval, Ms. Machuga said staff believes it would also be helpful to have the option of extending both short plat and formal subdivision applications for a short time to relieve pressure as the deadline approaches. She cautioned that if the Board recommends an increase in the time frame for short plat preliminary approval, they should also recommend a sunset provision similar to the current state law for formal subdivisions. She pointed out that, in a good economy, short plats can be completed in six months to a year. If the Board recommends a time frame for short plats that is similar to the state's timeline for formal subdivisions, Board Member Clarke asked if staff is also recommending an additional extension option for both short plats and formal subdivisions. Mr. Chave clarified that the issue currently before the Board can be addressed by simply applying the state's current time frame for formal subdivisions to short plats, as well. He cautioned that the issue related to extensions for both short plats and formal subdivisions is more complicated and could be dealt with as part of the code reorganization and update process. He emphasized that the change is needed to address current economic problems. Getting into a long, drawn out discussion about the time frame and potential options for extension could postpone final action until the window is passed. He advocated keeping the solution simple at this time. Chair Reed asked if all code requirements are vested at the time of preliminary approval. Mr. Chave answered that only the development regulations pertaining to the subdivision of land are applicable to short plat and formal subdivision applications. All other building and development code requirements would be addressed as part of a building permit application. Board Member Duncan asked if a preliminary short plat approval would be transferrable to a new owner. Ms. Machuga answered affirmatively. Mr. Chave commented that if the Board recommends an extension of the time frame for current applications, it seems only fair to grant extensions for recently expired applications, as well. Ms. Machuga pointed out that nine short plat applications Planning Board Minutes February 27, 2013 Page 6 Packet Page 235 of 494 expired in 2012 and three have expired in 2013. Several of these applicants had already started the civil review process. Because of the current economy, the availability of financing, and the speculative nature of development, Board Member Clarke felt this would be a fair option to consider. Two members of the audience indicated a desire to speak to the Board about the timeline for short plat preliminary approval, and the Board unanimously agreed to allow them an opportunity to speak. Steve Miles, Edmonds, said his preliminary short plat approval expired in January 2013. Knowing of the impending expiration, he looked into possible solutions. He was excited to learn about the state's extended timeline for formal subdivisions, but was disappointed to discover that it did not apply to short plats. He continued to research the issue and contacted State Representative Jan Angel, who co-author the state provision related to formal subdivisions. She was surprised to learn there was a distinction between short plats and formal subdivisions. She said she fully meant for the law to apply to both situations. He said he is not a builder or a developer, and he has owned his property for 30 years. It took four years to complete the preliminary short plat approval, leaving only one construction season to build. The outcome of the project is now worth only one third of its value when he originally applied for the short plat in January 2008. He expressed his belief that the new state law was meant specifically for his situation. He urged the Board to consider changing the short plat timeline to be consistent with the state timeline. He said that although only two new homes would be constructed on his property, he has agreed to voluntarily upgrade the stormwater system to accommodate four homes. Donna Bresky, Civil Engineer, said she was recently approached by a client regarding property that has preliminary approval from the City of Edmonds for a three -lot short plat that expires in March. She said staff s explanation of the short plat process left out the fact that after completing the preliminary and civil reviews, an applicant must also complete actual construction of the subdivision (stormwater, sewer stubs, frontage improvements, surveys, etc.) before obtaining final approval for the short plat to be recorded. While the current time frame for short plat approval is sufficient in a good economy, the recent recession made it difficult for developers to obtain financing to complete construction of the subdivision improvements. While the financing situation has improved, she was shocked to learn that the City watched nine short plat applications expire in 2012 without taking action to extend the timeline. She said she approached City staff, pointing out that other cities have already extended their timelines. Staffs response was for her to take the issue to the City Council, which she did. Ms. Bresky said that while she is glad the City is finally trying to address the issue, they should have taken action two or three years ago. She said she believes the Board has a clear understanding of the need for change. She said her client is looking to purchase a three -lot short plat with preliminary approval, but there is not enough time to do the civil engineering work and get final approval before the preliminary approval expires in March. She pointed out that extending the timeline for an additional two years, consistent with the state's extension for formal subdivisions, would allow developers enough time to complete construction work as weather conditions allow. She pointed out that if the proposed change is approved, her client will contract her to do the civil engineering work, which means money in her pocket. She emphasized that the recession has resulted in a difficult scenario for civil engineers. As per the Board's discussion, staff agreed to prepare a proposal that would extend the time frame for preliminary short plat approval to be consistent with the state's time frame for formal subdivision approval, with a provision to address those applications that have already expired. The Board scheduled a public hearing on the proposal for March 27, 2013. DISCUSSION ON CITY -SPONSORED REZONE OF 22133 — 76TH AVENUE WEST Mr. Clugston said that as part of a potential redevelopment being considered at the Doug's Mazda site on Highway 99, staff did some research regarding a contract rezone that would be part of the project. He found that the rectangular parcel at 22133 — 76th Avenue West (Parcel A) was rezoned in 1988 from RM-2.4 to a contract CG. Unfortunately, the zoning map was not properly updated at the same time. This parcel should have been shown as a contract CG designation and the small area to the northwest (Parcel B) should have remained as RM-2.4. Mr. Clugston further explained that in 1995, the City sponsored and approved an area -wide rezone for most of the remaining RM-2.4 parcels, with the clear intent of rezoning the whole area between 220th and 224tb from 76th Avenue West to Highway 99 to CG2. However, because the 1988 contract rezone was not accurately shown on the zoning map, the area was not Planning Board Minutes February 27, 2013 Page 7 Packet Page 236 of 494 Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee Minutes February 11, 2013 Page 2 6. Report on final construction costs for the 76t" Ave W/75t" PI. W Walkway and 162"d St. Park Project (Haines Wharf Park) and acceptance of the project. Mr. English discussed the final project costs for the 76t" Ave W/75t" PI. W Walkway and 162nd St. Park Project (Haines Wharf Park). ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. 7. Authorization for the Sole Source Procurement of the "Sludge -Mate" Containers for the Vactor Waste Facility Retrofit at the Public Works Yard. Mr. Williams provided a summary of how the Sludge -Mate Containers would be used at the Public Works Yard. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. 8. Energy Savings Contract (ESCO) III. Mr. Williams discussed the scope of the Energy Savings Contract. ACTION: Recommend Staff presentation to the City Council. 9. PROS Plan RFQ. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. 10. City Park RFQ for Landscape Architecture services. ACTION: Moved to Consent Agenda for approval. 11. Consideration of the citizen request to increase time frame for validity of preliminary short plat approval from five years to seven years. Ms. Machuga discussed the current time frame requirements for preliminary short plat approval and explained that the city can amend the code to increase the current time frame or to provide for an extension. Planning and Engineering staff discussed some of the potential implications of changing the current time frame requirements. ACTION: This item was re -opened following Public Comments, and the Committee moved to Planning Board for review with recommendation that the current time frame be increased and/or provisions are added to the code for an extension. 12. Potential rezone of 22133 761" Avenue West. Mr. Clugston discussed a discrepancy on the zoning map at this parcel and possible solutions. Attachment 2 Packet Page 237 of 494 AM-5699 9 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: 10 Minutes Submitted For: Dave Earling Submitted By: Carolyn LaFave Department: Mayor's Office Review Committee: Committee Action: Type: Tnformation Subject Title Approval of the Mayor's request for an additional period of appointment of Rob Chave as acting Director of Development Services to include January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013, and corresponding out of class pay. Recommendation The Mayor is requesting Council approval for an additional period of appointment of Rob Chave as acting Director of Development Services and the corresponding out of class pay. Previous Council Action The Mayor and Council originally approved the Acting Development Services Director and corresponding out of class pay assignment in March of 2012. Narrative Mayor Earling believes that an Acting Development Director is needed to oversee the Development Services Department and he feels Rob Chave has been doing an excellent job covering the duties. With no additional funds in the budget to hire a new Development Services Director it makes sense to continue Mr. Chave's service in the acting position. Edmonds City Code is silent regarding the process for confirming acting directors. (See page 10 of attached meeting minutes from March 6, 2012 City Council Meeting.) ECC 2.35.075 Special Duty Pay does stipulate that "No employee may receive special duty pay for longer than one year without City Council approval". (See attached Ordinance No. 3917 section 2.35.075 Special Duty Pay.) At this time there are funds in the budget to cover Special Duty Pay. Attachments March 6 2012 Approved City Council Minutes Ordinance 3917 Form Review Packet Page 238 of 494 Inbox Finalize for Agenda Mayor Form Started By: Carolyn LaFave Final Approval Date: 04/19/2013 Reviewed By Sandy Chase Dave Earling Date 04/19/2013 09:42 AM 04/19/2013 11:01 AM Started On: 04/19/2013 08:21 AM Packet Page 239 of 494 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES March 6, 2012 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Strom Peterson, Council President Frank Yamamoto, Councilmember Joan Bloom, Councilmember Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Alex Springer, Student Representative STAFF PRESENT Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic Development Director Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director Carrie Hite, Parks & Recreation Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Carl Nelson, CIO Frances Chapin, Cultural Services Manager Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. MEET WITH CANDIDATES FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION At 6:30 p.m., the City Council met with Historic Preservation Commission candidates Gerald Tays, Tim Raetzloff, Bill Muller, and Margaret Keogh. The meeting took place in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. All City Councilmembers and the Mayor were present for the meeting. Mayor Earling reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 7:00 p.m. and Girl Scout Troop 42215 led the flag salute and the Girl Scout Pledge. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Council President Peterson requested Item I, Proposed Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 3821 to Revise the Time Limit Provision Relating to the Payment of Additional Compensation, be removed from the Consent Agenda and rescheduled on a future agenda at the request of the City Attorney. Councilmember Plunkett requested Item K be removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 1 Packet Page 240 of 494 A. ROLL CALL B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 21, 2012. C. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 28, 2012. D. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #130587 THROUGH #130735 DATED FEBRUARY 23, 2012 FOR $2,296,824.25, AND CLAIM CHECKS #130736 THROUGH #130821 DATED FEBRUARY 29, 2012 FOR $456,407.40. E. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM COMCAST ($423.13), AND JANIS CAIN ($1,630.70). F. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN CITY OF EDMONDS LODGING TAX COMMITTEE TOURISM PROMOTION AGREEMENT AWARDING THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY VISITOR'S BUREAU $6,000 FOR TOURISM PROMOTION AND SUPPORT OF VISITOR SERVICES TO PROMOTE EDMONDS. G. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN CITY OF EDMONDS LODGING TAX COMMITTEE TOURISM PROMOTION AGREEMENT AWARDING THE EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS $10,000 TO ATTRACT VISITORS TO EDMONDS THROUGH ADVERTISING AND PROMOTING DOWNTOWN EDMONDS AND ANNUAL CULTURAL EVENTS/FESTIVALS IN THEIR 2011/2012 SEASON BROCHURE. H. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN CITY OF EDMONDS LODGING TAX COMMITTEE TOURISM PROMOTION AGREEMENT AWARDING THE EDMONDS VISITOR'S CENTER $2,500 FOR TOURISM PROMOTION AND SUPPORT OF VISITOR SERVICES TO PROMOTE EDMONDS. J. ORDINANCE NO. 3875 - AMENDING THE CITIZENS' TREE BOARD ORDINANCE; ADDING ONE NON -VOTING, EX-OFFICIO POSITION TO THE CITIZENS' TREE BOARD TO BE FILLED BY AN EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEMBER; AND ESTABLISHING THE LENGTH OF TERM FOR AN APPOINTEE WHO HAS FILLED A VACANCY. ITEM K: CONFIRMATION OF FOUR NEW HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEMBERS Councilmember Plunkett introduced Gerald Tays, Margaret Keogh, Tim Raetzloff, and Bill Muller. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO CONFIRM THE APPOINTMENT OF GERALD TAYS, TIM RAETZLOFF, BILL MULLER AND MARGARET KOEGH TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF GIRL SCOUTS 100TH ANNIVERSARY Mayor Earling read a proclamation applauding the Girl Scouts of America for 100 years of leadership and expertise. The proclamation praised the Girls Scouts of Western Washington for providing the local support for Girl Scouting in the community and the Girl Scouts of Edmonds for their courage, confidence and character to act to make our world a better place. Mayor Earling proclaimed 2012 as the "Year of the Girl." He presented the proclamation to Girl Scout Troop 42215. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 2 Packet Page 241 of 494 Councilmember Fraley-Monillas pointed out Councilmembers Buckshnis, Petso, Bloom and she had also been Girl Scouts. 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Andy Eccleshall, Chamber of Commerce, announced the first Edmonds Business Expo on March 24 at the Edmonds Conference Center from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The Expo will showcase local businesses, specifically businesses that do not have a storefront, and provide an opportunity for those businesses to interact with the public and for the public to meet and interact with local experts. The event can accommodate a maximum of 78 vendors. There will be seminars throughout the day by the businesses, hourly door prizes and light food provided by local caterers. The event is free to the public and booth spaces are only $75. Further information is available at the Chamber website or by calling Jan Vance or him. The deadline for submitting vendor applications is March 16. Councilmember Buckshnis inquired about non-profit corporations. Mr. Eccleshall stated they were welcome and the $75 booth fee could be negotiated. Lynn Heitritter, Edmonds, explained many Edmonds residents find themselves without health insurance. She described a new resource, Edmonds Mobile Medical Clinic, HOPE, that will provide free, basic healthcare services to uninsured individuals in the community on a weekly basis under the non- profit charitable organization, the Puget Sound Christian Clinic, and with support from the Verdant Health Commission. Clinics are offered at the Edmonds United Methodist Church, also the location of the Edmonds Food Bank. The clinic is staffed entirely with volunteers from four different churches in the Edmonds area, as well as individuals from Shoreline, Mukilteo, Lynnwood, Brier, Mill Creek, Camano Island and Federal Way. Their singular focus is to provide their patients with quality and compassionate healthcare. The Edmonds clinic serves a diverse population and age range; 75% are women, many of whom have not had healthcare for several years. The clinic is able to provide follow-up care and about 1/3 of their patients are scheduled for follow-up care, a critical step in preserving and maintaining health. In addition to alleviating the stress and distress of human suffering, the clinic also saves tax dollars by preventing emergency room visits. To celebrate this free healthcare program, she invited the Council and public to a commissioning service at the Edmonds United Methodist Church this Sunday at 9:00 and 10:30 a.m. The HOPE truck will be on site and tours are available. Mayor Earling commended them for offering this fabulous service to the community. Marianne Zagorski, Edmonds, requested the City Council review the eligibility of one of its members to serve on the Council. She referred to rumors that Councilmember Plunkett, who married a Seattle resident last year, no longer resides in Edmonds, having moved to his wife's home in Magnolia. He has publicly moved his office to Magnolia. If Councilmember Plunkett is no longer an Edmonds' resident, he may no longer be eligible to serve on the City Council. She recommended the Council consult with legal counsel to determine his eligibility and if the Council has already done so, share that legal recommendation with citizens. She requested the Council undertake this action soon, fearing the actions taken by the Council may later prove non -binding or non -legal if a vote is decided by someone not eligible to serve on the Council. Inaction may put the City at risk of incurring unnecessary legal expenses. Jenny Anttila, Edmonds, recalled she provided public comment in December regarding healthcare benefits for City employees and suggesting the Council renegotiate with the unions before June. She pointed out the corporate world and other cities are considering a reduction in healthcare benefits and she hoped Edmonds was doing the same. She referred to an article in the Edmonds Beacon where Mayor Earling stated the City will have an $800,000 shortfall in 2013. The article did not describe what the City is considering with regard to savings on expenditures such as healthcare. She assured reducing healthcare benefits is normal and is not picking on anyone. She suggested the Council also consider reducing their own healthcare benefits. She referred to comments on wall sconces behind the City Council, "fairness is Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 3 Packet Page 242 of 494 what justice really is," "justice cannot be for one side only," which refers to citizens paying for benefits they cannot afford themselves, and "common sense is as rare as genius." Dave Page, Edmonds, referred to the City's financial crisis, suggesting citizens need to consider what the City has already done. He has been reviewing the City's budget for the past 25 years and realized since the 1% cap on property tax increase, the City has been going backwards. As an example, he cited population and number of employees for nearby cities: Lynnwood has a population of 39,000 and 465 city employees; Mountlake Terrace's population is 19,900 and has 265 employees; Edmonds' population is 40,000 and has 200 employees. He pointed out there are numerous employees with 10-20 years of service; they have to be paid to do their job. Employee morale is terrific in Edmonds. For every $1 in sales tax, the City receives less than 1 cent and sales tax is down over 30% in the last 5 years. Real Estate Excise Tax is down 35-40% since 2007, placing the City's infrastructure at risk. He assured the City's budget was scraping the bottom of the barrel; a way needs to be found to fund the $800,000 shortfall. He expressed his willingness to pay his share. He recommended the Council find a levy that all Councilmembers can agree on because the City collects all the money from a levy and does not have to share it with the state or county. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to agenda item 7 and suggested the title of manager rather than director was more appropriate for a temporary position. Next, he referred to the advertisement on Channel 21 for the strategic plan charrette, suggesting it did not generate any excitement/encouragement for citizens to attend. He suggested utilizing someone with experience in advertising to make the advertisement more exciting. Don Hall, Edmonds, referred to agenda item 9, an ordinance changing the Economic Development Commission's (EDC) charge to read, identify new sources of revenue as a direct result of economic development projects for consideration of the City Council. Speaking as an individual and not a member of the EDC and relaying questions and ideas from other citizens, he pointed out there may be good ideas that on the surface do not meet that criteria but could help add to the General Fund and free up funds to spend on economic development. He urged the Council not to stifle creativity and volunteerism; hopefully citizens will get together and brainstorm ideas and bring them to committees or the Council and the Council can explore and discuss and make a decision. Regardless of the origin of an idea, the Council makes the final decision; issues and ideas do not go away just because a Councilmember does not like the idea. He expressed concern with the lengthy process to make the proposed change to the EDC's charge. 6. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING PARK IMPACT FEES Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite explained she has presented the concept of park impact fees to the Finance and the Community Services/Development Services Committees as well as the Council in September. The presentation to the Council included information provided by Randy Young, Henderson, Young & Company. At the conclusion of that meeting, the Council requested a public hearing and that staff provide answers to several questions that arose. Ms. Hite provided the definition of an impact fee: a one-time payment, by new development, for capital costs of facilities needed by new development. She clarified current residents would not be assessed park impact fees. Park impact fees are assessed on new development to help pay for the impact the new development has on the City's park infrastructure. She described the calculation and collection of park impact fees: • Collected per dwelling units, either multi -family or single family • Calculated and collected at the time of a building permit. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 4 Packet Page 243 of 494 To the question of whether the park impact fee could be collected after the completion of a building rather than at the time of a building permit as it may be burdensome to pay a park impact fee when applying for permits, she explained in consultation with the City Attorney, that may be possible. Ms. Hite reviewed the requirements for spending park impact fees: • Have to be spent on capital costs of public facilities that are determined in the Capital Facilities plan element. • CFP must identify additional facility capacity needed for new development. • Have to expend within 6 years after collection • New or expanded facilities, not renovation, remodel of existing. • Can provide exemptions (i.e. low income housing) She described how park impact fees are determined, explaining the packet includes examples of several other cities' park impact fees: • Impact fees can only cover the proportionate share of system improvements, capital facilities development • Adjustments requirement: need to consider other revenues that support the CFP (i.e. REET, grants, etc.) • Credit requirement: allows developers to apply for credit if they mitigate Types of park facilities that are covered by park impact fees include parks, recreational facilities, open space and trails. To the question of whether park impact fees can cover arts, the answer is no; they can only be used for parks, recreational facilities, open space and trails. She listed the types of facilities in the City's current Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan that park impact fees could help fund: • Aquatic facility • Sports fields • Additional off -leash area • Community garden • Additional bike lanes, pedestrian connections • Neighborhood parks Ms. Hite provided park impact fees in other cities in 2010, noting the packet included a list of all Washington cities that have nark impact fees: City Park Impact Fee Issaquah $6,404 Monroe $4,579 Snohomish $4,150 Duvall $4,068 Mill Creek $3,887 Kirkland $3,845 Sultan $3,175 Redmond $2,812 Mukilteo $2,438 Kenmore $2,329 Mountlake Terrace $2,026 Bellevue $2,000 Brier $2,000 Woodinville $1,726 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 5 Packet Page 244 of 494 Bothell $1,345 Marysville $1,251 Mount Vernon $ 855 Arlington $ 484 Ms. Hite explained since 2010, several cities have adopted park impact fees, one of which is Tukwila, where the City's Finance Director Shawn Hunstock used to work. To the question of whether park impact fees can be imposed on residential as well as commercial development, Ms. Hite answered yes, most cities impose park impact fees on only residential development; Tukwila adopted a park impact fees in 2011 that is also imposed on commercial development. In response to a question that arose during the previous Council discussion in regard to historical development, Ms. Hite provided a graph of new single family and multi -family dwelling units added 2001-2009: Year Single Family Multi -family 2001 55 71 2002 83 72 2003 63 22 2004 96 245 2005 109 30 2006 73 92 2007 67 70 2008 21 140 2009 9 19 2010 18 21 2011 15 89 To the question of why should Edmonds have impact fees, isn't Edmonds built out, Ms. Hite provided the following: • Conversions from single-family to multi -family, and/or construction of multi -family o Example: new 89 unit multi -family on SR104 • Population growth next six years = 1,237 • Transportation impact fees collected in Edmonds for past six years: $571,872 • Only other capital budget for parks is REET Ms. Hite described potential revenue from park impact fees in Edmonds: • Population growth next six years = 1,237 • 1,237 people _ 2.5 people/dwelling units = 495 dwellings • 495 dwellings @ $1,200/dwelling units* _ $600,000 * This represents an average amount levied from various jurisdictions. Edmonds will need to determine the exact amount through a study Ms. Hite described how park impact fees are determined: • Very complex and regulated • Complicated rules, regulations, determinations • RCW 82.02.050-82.02.100 All cities that have imposed impact fees have completed a rate study (packet includes rate studies from six cities) Cost of the study is $25,000-30,000 ($30,000 is allocated in the CIP in REET under planning) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 6 Packet Page 245 of 494 Ms. Hite described the timing and cost to develop a park impact fees: • Fee Calculation Study (3-4 months) • Ordinance (1 month) • Review and Adoption: o City Staff (1 month) o City Council (1-2 months) Consulting Costs (examples): o Olympia (parks - 2005) $ 29,700 o Issaquah (parks - 2007) 27,050 o Edmonds (roads - 2009) 27,470 o Renton (parks - 2010) 29,830 Councilmember Petso inquired about decision points during a rate study for the Council to provide direction. Ms. Hite envisioned the City would hire a consultant to complete the study; the consultant would review the City's asset inventory, capital, deficit, projected growth, etc. and develop a calculation. At the end of that study period, the Council would need to make several decisions including whether to impose park impact fees on commercial, residential or both; whether to provide exemptions; etc. Councilmember Petso referred to the ability for developers to apply for credit if they mitigate rather than pay a fee. She asked whether that was within the Council's control, noting there are some locations where it would be very valuable for a developer to mitigate via open space or a tot lot but there are other overriding needs such as sports fields where the City may not want to allow a developer to mitigate with a tot lot. City Attorney Jeff Taraday explained state law requires the City to allow credits for the in -kind provision of the same facilities that are included in the park impact fees calculation. For example, if tot lots were included in the impact fee calculation and a developer provides a tot lot, they would receive credit for the value of the tot lot. If tot lots are not included in the park impact fees calculation, they would not receive a credit even if a tot lot is otherwise required as a condition of development. Not everything a developer provides as a condition of development approval necessarily translates into an impact fee credit; it depends on what is provided. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Kirkland's study and the indication that park impact fees could be used for the marsh and wetlands. Ms. Hite answered that could be considered in Edmonds' study; growth certainly would contribute to runoff that flows to the marsh. The marsh feasibility study will provide further information regarding how possible future growth may impact the marsh. She recommended the next update of the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan define the impact of future growth. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Renton's plan that includes fire equipment. Ms. Hite explained there are allowable impact fees in addition to park impact fees. Tonight's discussion is only about parks; Renton's fee study covered a multitude of impact fees that were instituted at the same time. Council President Peterson asked whether a park impact fee is charged if a single family home is demolished and replaced with a single family home. Ms. Hite answered a park impact fee would not be assessed in that instance. Council President Peterson observed bike lanes were one of the approved uses for park impact fees; he asked whether the bike lane had to be on the street where development occurred. Ms. Hite answered it could be a bike lane anywhere in the City to mitigate future growth. Council President Peterson asked how the impact on parks from commercial development was determined. Ms. Hite answered consideration is given to the number of employees coming into the community on a daily basis and making assumptions that those people will be using the trails, going to parks, recreating before/during/after work, etc. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 7 Packet Page 246 of 494 Council President Peterson referred to the 6-year time period to expend park impact fees. Ms. Hite answered it is a rolling 6-year window. She noted park impact fees could be used to apply for grants, leverage REET dollars, etc. Councilmember Yamamoto asked about making revisions to the Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan. Ms. Hite responded the Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan is updated every six years which includes an extensive public process. Mr. Taraday explained the park impact fees calculation should be closely tied to the Capital Facilities Plan. When major amendments are made to the Capital Facilities Plan, the park impact fee calculation should also be adjusted. Minor changes may not require revising the park impact fees calculation. Ms. Hite added the Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan and park impact fees can be amended at any time. Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. There were no members of the public who wished to provide testimony. Mayor Earling closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO MOVE FORWARD AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO DO AN RFP FOR A RATE STUDY. Council President Peterson inquired about funds allocated in the 2012 budget for the rate study. Ms. Hite responded the funds are currently allocated in REET Fund 125 under planning. THE VOTE ON THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. CONFIRMATION OF THE MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF ROB CHAVE AS ACTING DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND ADOPTION OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE ADOPTING A NON -FINANCIAL AMENDMENT TO THE SALARY RANGE APPENDIX. Mayor Earling explained the reason he included the appendix salary range table in the packet was to illustrate that the former mayor included nearly $15,000 for an Acting Development Services Director, and this was not a request for additional funds. Councilmember Buckshnis observed an amendment was not required if the preliminary budget included the funds; the Council was only authorizing the allocation of $14,983. City Manager Jeff Taraday responded the preliminary budget should have included this appendix and it did not. Ideally at some point the City Council would take action to formally approve the appendix in its entirety, not just the one page. To Councilmember Buckshnis' question about amending the budget, that may depend on what one considers an amendment; for some a budget amendment is a new appropriation of money; for others, a budget amendment is any change to the budget book. That is an issue he and Finance Director Shawn Hunstock are still discussing. His preference would be that any changes to the budget book be done via a budget amendment. He had not realized until today that the appendix had not been included in the preliminary budget. The funds for this proposal were included in the final budget so there is no new appropriation. Whether that is considered a budget amendment, reasonable minds could disagree. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested delaying this to allow review by the Finance Committee next week and bring it forward as an amendment to the budget book. Mayor Earling responded that could be done; the reason he moved forward with this proposal was concern by constituents and some Councilmembers that there is no one on point on the second floor on the north side of the building. Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton occasionally provides assistance and he thought that Mr. Clifton had been appointed that responsibility. In fact that did not happen under Mayor Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 8 Packet Page 247 of 494 Haakenson or Mayor Cooper. Mayor Earling felt it was important to move forward with appointing Mr. Chave as Acting Development Services Director to ensure someone was on point, ready to answer questions and be responsible for Development Services. Until formal Council confirmation of his appointment occurs, he will not ask Mr. Chave to take on that responsibility. Observing that the appropriation is included in the budget, Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether Mayor Earling could do an ex -factor appointment until a budget amendment occurred. Mr. Taraday responded the City's code addresses confirmation of directors; the Mayor appoints directors and the City Council confirms those appointments. Unfortunately, the code does not address acting or interim directors. He felt it appropriate for the Council to confirm the appointment of the director in this case because not having the Council confirm an acting director opens a loophole where it may not be clear when a director is acting or permanent. He recommended in the future the Council clarify/give direction regarding when acting directors need City Council confirmation. In the absence of clear direction in the City code, the process is as established in Chapter 2.10. The confirmation process is to the Council's benefit; state law does not require the City Council confirm mayoral appointment of directors. The Council could choose in this instance to waive its confirmation power and authorize the mayor to appoint an acting director. Councilmember Buckshnis preferred to take the appendix to the Finance Committee next week and handle including them in the budget as a budget amendment. In her opinion the mayor has the ability to appoint an interim director because the funds have been appropriated. Mr. Taraday responded the City Council can confirm Mr. Chave tonight regardless of what the Council does regarding the appendix. It would be cleaner if the appendix had already been adopted but because they were not, the Council needs to make the best of the situation. Councilmember Petso inquired whether the code changes could be referred to the Public Works, Parks and Planning Committee and returned to Council in two weeks or did it require review by the Planning Board. Mr. Taraday responded changes to Title 2 did not go to the Planning Board. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented it would also depend on what other items were on the Public Works, Parks and Planning Committee's agenda next Tuesday. Council President Peterson asked whether the salary range table appendix was typically included in the budget book and was inadvertently left out. Mr. Hunstock responded the RCW states the proposed preliminary budget must have the salary range table in it. Unfortunately it was left out at the time. There was an assumption that the final budget document would include the same table; however, unfortunately it was not noticed until after the budget ordinance was adopted. The Council should have been informed at that time. He summarized the salary range table appendix was typically included in the budget book. Council President Peterson commented there were a number of scriveners errors in the budget book and asked whether not including the salary range table fell in that category. Mr. Taraday answered this is a fairly significant, substantive amendment to the budget. The salary range table lists the City's employees and what they can earn. It was not included in the proposed preliminary budget in the form of the appendix. Council President Peterson recognized the salary range table was not included in the form of an appendix and asked whether the information was included in each department's budget. Mr. Hunstock responded positions are mentioned in the budget narrative; however, the dollars are aggregated for all positions within that department and the positions and salaries would not be identified unless there was only one position in the department. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether it would be quicker to bring this part through the Finance Committee and ask the City Attorney to draft a code update and return it to the Council in two weeks. She Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 9 Packet Page 248 of 494 did not anticipate inclusion of the appendix in the budget would be a major undertaking for the Finance Committee. Mr. Taraday agreed he could draft a code amendment for consideration by the Council in two weeks. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recommended the Council proceed in that manner. Councilmember Yamamoto observed the Council was in basic agreement regarding the confirmation of the mayor's appointment of Mr. Chave as the Acting Director of Development Services. COUNCILMEMBER YAMAMOTO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON, TO CONFIRM THE MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF ROB CHAVE AS ACTING DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. Mayor Earling commented there has been some sense of urgency regarding having a person in place as Acting Director of Development Services. He understood the Council's interest in a policy change regarding future appointments, pointing out this is an interim position to last no longer than the end of the year. Based on the sense of urgency expressed by some citizens and some Councilmembers, he would like to have Mr. Chave in this position and for the Council to make policy amendments regarding how interim versus permanent directors are appointed in the future. Councilmember Bloom commented on the need to review the job specifications. Mayor Earling responded the limited staff in the Human Resources Department is in the process of writing job descriptions. He was amenable to reviewing all directors' job descriptions, commenting the directors do a great job for the City. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas understood Mr. Taraday to say that as long as the funding was in place for this position and the position was approved, the City Council really does not have any say who is appointed as an acting/interim director. Mr. Taraday clarified he said the code is silent regarding the process for confirming acting directors. He preferred the code not be silent and state either acting directors come to Council for confirmation or they do not. He looked to the Council to direct him whether they wanted to have the ability to confirm the mayor's appointment of acting directors. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed under the current code, it was not the Council's responsibility to confirm an acting director that is a funded position. Including the appendix in the budget book and the code amendment regarding whether the mayor's appointment of an acting/interim director requires Council confirmation are the Council's responsibilities. Mr. Taraday commented the line between an acting and a permanent director may not always be clear, whether Council confirmation was required or not. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed that needed to be clarified in the code. Council President Peterson advised he has scheduled discussion regarding the salary range table on the Finance Committee agenda as well as code language for Chapter 2.10. He preferred to pass the motion to confirm the mayor's appointment of Mr. Chave as Acting Development Services Director and then give direction to the City Attorney about the code amendment. Councilmember Buckshnis found the ordinance acceptable as long as reference to the salary range table, page 211 was removed. She offered that as a friendly amendment to the motion which Councilmember Yamamoto accepted. Councilmember Petso asked whether the motion did not include the ordinance and was simply confirming the mayor's appointment of Mr. Chave as the Acting Director of Development Services. Councilmember Yamamoto clarified his motion was only confirmation of the mayor's appointment of Mr. Chave. Councilmember Buckshnis withdrew the friendly amendment. Councilmember Bloom requested review of the specification of the job description be added to the Public Safety and Personnel Committee's agenda. Council President Peterson agreed. Mayor Earling restated the motion as follows: Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 10 Packet Page 249 of 494 TO CONFIRM THE MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF ROB CHAVE AS ACTING DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. THE VOTE ON THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. PRESENTATION ON THE SHORT & LONG-TERM BUDGET CHALLENGES. Mayor Earling thanked the Council for the opportunity to present basic information regarding the budget to inform the public of the coming budget challenges. He noted everyone in the last campaign used the economic challenges facing the City as a talking point. Due to the seriousness of the situation, there needs to be a conversation sooner than later regarding how the community will face those challenges. This presentation is intended only as an introduction to the revenue and expense projections along with basic information regarding potential revenue sources. He clarified the Council has extensive budget information, background and expertise, much deeper than will be presented tonight. Over the next several months he will undertake a process to help the public understand the challenges the City faces. This is intended to be an introduction to further information that will be presented and discussed over the next several months. Staff and he have developed a public awareness program that will be provided to the Council and public next week that will help the community establish priorities during the budget process. The community needs to be engaged early and often and this is intended to be the beginning of that several month discussion. He gave a similar presentation to the Chamber of Commerce about ten days ago and it was well received. Mayor Earling described where property taxes go: • Schools: 64% • County: 9% • Port, Library, Hospital: 7% • EMS:4% 0 City:16% Mayor Earling described property taxes for a home with an assessed value of $375,000: Taxing District 2012 Tax per Average Residence $375,000 AV City (bonds) $61.92 City (EMS) 187.50 City Regular 622.80 Subtotal (City Assessed Tax) $872.22 $72/month Port 43.45 County 368.37 Hospital 40.38 Sno-Isle Regional Library 187.48 Schools (local) 1,763.73 Schools (state) 892.06 Subtotal (Other Districts Assessed Tax) $3,295.47 Total Assessed Tax $4,167.69 $347/month Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 11 Packet Page 250 of 494 Mayor Earling described the distribution of sales tax by jurisdiction: 0 State: 6.50% • County: 1.25% • Transit: 0.90% • City: 0.85% Mayor Earling summarized property tax and sales tax provide approximately 55% of the City's total revenue. Property taxes can only increase I Wyear without a levy lid lift. Sales taxes have flatlined for the past 2-3 years with slight increases. The problems facing the City include decreasing assessed values which result in lower property tax collections, a 1 % cap on property tax increase although inflation is approximately 3-4%/year and flatlined sales tax, however, the gap between expenses and revenues will continue to widen over time. Mayor Earling displayed a 2012 list of all 33 of the City's funds. A future presentation will address restrictions on the use of some of these funds. He highlighted the Emergency Financial Reserve which has a balance of approximately $1.97 million that is set aside for an emergency. In addition the City has a Public Safety Emergency Reserve with a balance of approximately $1.3 million. The funds in the Public Safety Emergency Reserve are the proceeds of the sale of Fire Department equipment to FD1. Mayor Earling displayed a graph of total General Fund revenue compared to total General Fund expenditures 2011 estimate, 2011 budget, and 2013 — 2021 projected, explaining revenues and expenditures approximately balance in 2012. In 2013, expenditures begin to exceed revenues. That continues to worsen over time and unlike the $800,000 shortfall in 2013, the shortfall in future years grows to $3-$3.5 million/year. Mayor Earling displayed a graph of the change in ending fund balance compared to cumulative ending fund balance 2011 estimate, 2011 budget, and 2013 — 2021 projected, pointing out there is a substantial problem in 2019, 2020. Mayor Earling explained there are several ways to address the problem. The first is to cut the budget. He referred to Mr. Page's comparison of Edmonds' population and number of employees in Mountlake Terrace and Lynnwood. When one of the City's former Finance Directors Dan Clements identified the long term problem, the City acknowledged the problem in 2003 and laid off 23 staff members. Since then the Council has made further reductions in the budget, merging positions or leaving positions vacant. He summarized relative to other cities, Edmonds is lean with regard to number of staff. Edmonds has 199 staff members and a population of 40,000. By contrast, Mountlake Terrace has a population of slightly less than 20,000 and a staff of 240. He clarified he was not casting dispersions on Mountlake Terrace but pointing out that a city considerably smaller than Edmonds has more staff members. One of his concerns was that much deeper cuts would affect programs. A second way to address the problem would be to ask the voters to approve a levy lid lift. He recalled the City had three issues on the ballot in 2011, a transportation levy, a park levy and a General Fund levy; all three were decisively defeated. The highest percentage was 42% yes. Anyone involved in a campaign knows that 42% of the vote is a decisive loss. He assumed the Council would discuss a levy lid lift during the year, whether to have a levy lid lift, how it should be structured, etc. He remarked the Council's debate last year regarding the levies occurred over several months and when a vote was taken, the Council was divided on the levies. If the Council considers a levy lid lift, he recommended there be substantial agreement among Councilmembers. A third way to address the problem is economic development. He noted Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton has done a wonderful job with regard to economic development; Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 12 Packet Page 251 of 494 there are new businesses like Dick's Drive In, Goodwill, new restaurants and other businesses, a medical complex near the hospital, etc. It will take until 2014-2016 before the convincing, long term benefits of economic development will be realized. A fourth way would be for everyone to pray the economy does a remarkable turnaround by the end of the year•, he did not believe that type of turnaround would be possible. He anticipated a combination of all four ways will be necessary. He summarized the shortfall beyond 2013 becomes very serious. He acknowledged the $800,000 shortfall in 2013 was an estimate. For example, there is a proposal in the legislature that would eliminate approximately $230,000 in liquor tax, increasing the shortfall to over $1 million. Next week staff will provide the Council and public a plan to help the public begin to understand the challenges facing the City. Coverage of this issue will continue in the Edmonds Beacon, My Edmonds News, and the Weekly Herald. In addition to the documentation provided, Councilmember Plunkett suggested also providing the five year General Fund projection that includes actual and targeted ending fund balance. Mayor Earling agreed that could be provided. He assured additional documentation will be provided in the coming months. He referred to the graph of the change in total General Fund revenue compared to Total General Fund expenditures, explaining it included the $1.3 million Public Safety Reserve. The shortfall continues to grow even when those funds are included, at best prolonging the agony up to a year. He pointed out the difficulty with a reserve is that once it is spent, it is gone. Councilmember Buckshnis explained the Finance Committee is developing a new reserve policy due to new standards from the Financial Accounting Standards Board and the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. 9. CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING EDMONDS CITY CODE SECTION 10.75.030(A)(2), EXTENSION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SUNSET DATE, AND OTHER ITEMS RELATED TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION. Community Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton explained on December 20, 2011, the City Council expressed a desire to amend Edmonds City Code Section 10.72.030(A)(2) to read, "Identify new sources of revenue as a direct result of economic development projects for consideration of City Council." As requested, a draft ordinance was prepared and presented to the Council on January 23, 2012. At that meeting, the Council chose to not take action on the draft ordinance, but instead, requested this topic be discussed further during the February 2012 City Council retreat. The Council did take action on Ordinance 3868, extending the sunset date of the Economic Development Commission for 120 days or April 29, 2012. During the February 2012 Council retreat, the Council discussed the amendment and extending the sunset date as well as the following items: • Clarify the Council liaison's role • Have a Port liaison rather than Port Commissioners serving as members • Amend the language so members are not elected officials • Make Commission appointments later • Stagger Commissioners' terms Councilmember Buckshnis asked why extension of the sunset date beyond April 29, 2012 was not included in the ordinance. Mr. Clifton answered that was a topic of discussion for the Council. If the Council chooses to extend the sunset date, a draft ordinance will be prepared. Councilmember Buckshnis Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 13 Packet Page 252 of 494 clarified the proposed ordinance addresses only the change to the powers and duties of the Commission. Mr. Clifton agreed. As the Council liaison to the EDC for the past couple years, Councilmember Buckshnis recommended extending the sunset date and agreed with the concept of staggering terms. Councilmember Plunkett suggested staggered Commission terms would require an amendment to the ordinance. Mr. Clifton suggested returning an ordinance to the Council amending the original ordinance establishing the EDC to include language regarding staggered terms. Councilmember Plunkett observed the ordinance would also need to be amended to prelude Commissioners from being elected officials and clarifying the role of the Council liaison. Staff could request the Port appoint a liaison. Council President Peterson suggested the ordinance needed to be amended with regard to the sunset date. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NO.3876, AMENDING SECTION 10.75.030 AS PRESENTED. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO ESTABLISH 4-YEAR STAGGERED TERMS, 2 YEARS EACH WITH THE STIPULATION THAT NO ELECTED OFFICIALS SERVE ON THE COMMISSION. Councilmember Petso preferred to approve only the amendment proposed in the packet and have the other amendments such as staggered terms, duration, etc. be presented in writing at a future meeting. Council President Peterson responded he might agree with Councilmember Petso if the Council had not had extensive discussion regarding these issues at the retreat. It is important to provide a forward motion to the EDC. He clarified the EDC would be extended for four years and each Councilmember appoints two members, one appointee would be for two years and one for four years. The intent is for all Councilmembers and the Mayor to appoint members; existing members are encouraged to apply so that there is some continuity. Mr. Clifton suggested amending Ordinance No. 3735 as follows: • Extend the EDC for four years • Stagger terms • Not have elected officials serve on the EDC • Amend Section 10.75.030 COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT WITHDREW HIS MOTIONS WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. It was the consensus of the Council to proceed as Mr. Clifton suggested. Council President Peterson advised it would be scheduled on the March 20 agenda. Councilmember Bloom inquired about the role of the liaison. Mr. Clifton explained the liaison attends meetings, participates in discussions but is a non -voting member. The liaison also reports to the Council/Port on issues discussed and the status/progress being made. Councilmember Bloom asked why there were originally two liaisons to the EDC and now there is only one plus an alternate. Council President Peterson recalled there was a Council Economic Development Committee where two Councilmembers met quarterly with Mr. Clifton and the EDC. In the transition between the committee and the commission, there were two Councilmembers involved with the EDC. Councilmember Plunkett welcomed Councilmember Bloom providing language clarifying the Council Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 14 Packet Page 253 of 494 liaison's role. Mr. Clifton relayed Mr. Taraday's suggestion to include a fifth amendment, stating that a Council liaison exists, similar to the Tree Board. 10. COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS TO FILL THREE VACANCIES ON THE CITIZENS TREE BOARD Council President Peterson announced the following Council appointments to the Tree Board: • Councilmember Fraley-Monillas appoints Rebecca Wolfe • Councilmember Yamamoto appoints Steve Hatzenbeler • Councilmember Plunkett appoints Susan Paine COUNCIL PRESIDENT PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO CONFIRM THE APPOINTMENT OF REBECCA WOLFE, STEVE HAZENBELER AND SUSAN PAINE TO THE TREE BOARD. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling encouraged the public to attend one of the strategic plan charrettes: • Wednesday, March 14, 6:00 — 8:00 p.m. at the Edmonds Conference Center at 4th & Bell • Monday, March 19, 6:00 — 8:00 p.m., Library Plaza Room Mayor Earling reported 60 people have signed up to attend the charrettes; there is space for many more. He urged the public to visit the City's website to sign up to attend the charrettes. The charrettes are important because they lay the groundwork for planning and help set priorities for the community. 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Buckshnis announced her plans to attend the charrettes. She planned to visit businesses on Highway 99 to personally invite them to attend. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked the Floretum Garden Club for their $10,000 donation for the Old Milltown Park, a substantial amount of money raised by a club with approximately 124 members. The Garden Club also donated $2,000 for a bench dedicated to Rachel Sedgefield. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas thanked all the applicants for the Tree Board, noting it was a very difficult decision as all the applicants were very qualified. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented on bloggers who she considered armchair quarterbacks, finding it offensive that because someone moved their office from Edmonds to Seattle that meant they no longer lived in Edmonds. She has lived in Edmonds for the past 27-28 years and worked in Seattle before retiring. She is currently working in Kitsap County and has traveled all over the country in the past two years which does not mean she is no longer an Edmonds resident. She found it inappropriate to question a Councilmember because he owns multiple properties. Councilmembers swear an oath when they take office, one of which is to be honest and true. She felt it inappropriate for citizens to bring up what is said in blogs at a Council meeting, making wild allegations that a Councilmember is no longer a resident of Edmonds because he owns multiple properties and has moved his office. She apologized to the Councilmember who was talked about in the blog. Councilmember Bloom encouraged Student Representative Springer to invite students to participate in the strategic plan charrettes. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 15 Packet Page 254 of 494 Council President Peterson announced a workshop on budgeting by priorities by Redmond's Finance Director Mike Bailey is scheduled on Thursday, March 22 at 6:00 — 8:00 p.m. in Council Chambers. He asked for Council input regarding whether to have the workshop videotaped. Although it may be good to inform the public about the concept of budgeting by priorities, he was inclined not to have the workshop videotaped as the Council has not made a decision to proceed with that method. Council President Peterson reported Mayor Earling and he met with staff from Congressman McDermott's office. Edmonds will be in the 7'h Congressional District, represented by Congressman McDermott. Congressman McDermott's staff toured several of the projects underway including Main Street, Sunset Avenue and parks projects as well as toured the Edmonds Center for the Arts (ECA) which was busy with high school students involved in a regional orchestra contest. Congressman McDermott will visit Edmonds Friday and will also tour the ECA. Councilmember Yamamoto reported Councilmember Petso and he plan to visit businesses in the International District on Highway 99 to encourage them to get involved in the strategic planning process and to involve them in the community. He hoped to make the International District an attraction in Edmonds. Student Representative Springer reported he will encourage high school students to participate in the strategic plan charrettes. Mayor Earling referred to Councilmember Fraley-Monillas' comments, clarifying everyone appreciates My Edmonds News, the Patch and Edmonds KOMO. Her comments were directed at the bloggers who comment on their articles. 13. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 6, 2012 Page 16 Packet Page 255 of 494 Policies; and Policy; and Ilia 1 M/X[IN 02M Ilb AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECC CHAPTERS 2.25, 2.30 AND 2.35 TO INCORPORATE UPDATES TO CERTAIN CITY PERSONNEL POLICIES AND TO ADD A SECTION RELATING TO SPECIAL DUTY PAY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City has recently updated certain provisions of its Personnel WHEREAS, the City has recently adopted a special duty pay policy; and WHEREAS, the City has recently adopted a Non -represented Compensation WHEREAS, the City wishes to revise its municipal code to incorporate the updated Personnel Policy provisions and add the special duty pay provision, and add certain provisions of the Non -represented Compensation Policy; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. ECC Section 2.25.050, entitled "Payment of Claims, Demands and Vouchers," is hereby amended as follows (deleted language in strike -through, new language underlined): 2.25.050 Travel authorization and expense reimbursement policies. A. Policy. It is the city's policy to provide payment for the reasonable accommodation of travel required to conduct city business by city officials and employees. -1- Packet Page 256 of 494 B. Applicability. This section and the policies contained herein shall be applicable to all elected officials, members of boards and commissions and city employees unless otherwise specifically exempted. C. Authorization for Travel. All requests for travel or training shall be submitted and approved on an autherization to a4end/4r-avel Authorization to Travel and Attend Training form prior to the person's departure date. 1. All anticipated costs should be listed on the form, whether the costs are known or reasonably estimated. 2. The mayor is authorized to approve all employee's requests which are included within the city's annual budget. D. Travel and Training Request - City Council Approval. City Council President approval must be obtained of all travel and training requests for members of the city council and members of city boards and commissions. E. Accommodations. Accommodations, such as transportation, lodging and conference registration shall normally be arranged in advance by designated staff member and billed directly to the city. Accommodations shall be made at the lowest reasonable rate available, such as coach fare for air transportation, use of special discounts and single occupancy government rates for lodging. Air travel should be used when other reasonable methods of transport are not otherwise available and time schedules require the additional expense. F. Advance Payment of Expenses. Pursuant to ECC 3.04.040, advance payment of authorized expenses in excess of $100.00, as listed on the authorization to attend/travel form, will be provided upon request. Request for an advance payment must be made at least one week prior to the departure date. G. Reimbursement of Travel Expenses. 1. Travel expenses by city officials and employees shall be paid by the city in accordance with the rate schedule listed below. Expense vouchers must be submitted for payment within 10 days following the individual's return. Expense receipts and/or credit card receipts must be submitted for city payment. If a receipt has been lost or stolen, the employee should submit a written statement to the adminis4ative-sees finance director explaining the circumstances of the missing receipt. Reimbursements based on this process may be issued. Reimbursement for any expenses which exceed the limits set forth in this policy shall require approval of the city council. -2- Packet Page 257 of 494 Transportation: Air travel — Coach rate Private car — Current IRS rate Rental car — Requires prior approval Lodging: Regular lodging — Government/commercial rate Conferences — Conference facility rate Meals: mayor Per diem rate in conformance with the State of Washington Office of Financial Management guidelines in effect at the time of travel. Communications: Telephone — One personal call per day kept to a reasonable amount 2. The transportation allowance shall be based upon the direct route round trip costs. Other allowable costs shall include ferry tolls and off-street parking. Taxis may be used if they are the most reasonable means of transportation available. H. Nonallowable Expenses. Expenses not approved for reimbursement include, but are not limited to, alcoholic beverages, expenses for family or guests, entertainment, travel costs paid by another organization, mileage (if traveling as a passenger in a nonowned car), limousine services and personal travel insurance. Only the normal, reasonable and actual expenses will be reimbursed. Public officials and employees utilize public funds for their expenses and are admonished and requested to limit expenditures to those reasonably necessary to provide safe, clean and convenient lodging and healthy meals in settings appropriate to the public mission with which they have been entrusted. I. Use of Private Cars. Private cars should be used by city officials and employees whenever a city vehicle is not available and/or the time the official or employee will be absent exceeds two or more days. Drivers must have a valid operator's license, and the car must be insured to the state's minimum liability standards. The mayor, members of the city council, boards and commissions shall not be reimbursed for mileage expenses incurred within the city limits of Edmonds. City -3- Packet Page 258 of 494 employees will be reimbursed for mileage when using a private vehicle within the city limits when such use is in furtherance of city business. The city's mileage reimbursement rate is intended to cover the cost of fuel, maintenance and insurance costs. Persons using a private vehicle and seeking reimbursement for mileage must maintain a valid driver's license and individual auto insurance, including public liability, bodily injury and property damage, which insurance shall be deemed to be primary as to any other insurance available to the city. If a private vehicle is used in lieu of air transportation, the total amount of reimbursement shall not exceed the cost of air fare as established in subsection H of this section. Section 2. ECC Section 2.30.010 entitled, "Municipal Employee Benefit Plan," is hereby amended as follows (deleted language in strike -through, new language underlined): 2.30.010 Employee benefit plan authorized. There is established for qualified city employees a benefit plan to be provided by the city in lieu of coverage under the Federal Old Age Survivors Disability and Health Insurance Act. The benefit plan shall be as set forth in that certain document entitled, "City of Edmonds Municipal Employees Benefit Trust Plan," p-repar-ed by 14ow ,,-a johnsen and r,...,paf.., three copies of which are and have been on file in the office of the city clerk for use and examination by the public. [Ord. 1922 § 2, 1977; Ord. 615 § 1, 1951]. Section 3. ECC Sections 2.35.030, entitled "Vacations," 2.35.040, entitled "Compensating time," 2.35.045, entitled "Shared leave," and 2.35.060, entitled "Sick leave," are hereby amended (deleted language in strike -through, new language underlined) as follows: 2.35.030 Vacations. A. Regular employees shall accrue the following amount of vacation leave with pay based on the length of continuous service, as that term is defined in the personnel policies: 1. Nonexempt, represented employees shall receive vacation leave in accordance with the applicable collective bargaining agreement; -4- Packet Page 259 of 494 2. Nonexempt supervisor shall schedule: and exempt nonrepresented employees below the level of accrue annual vacation in accordance with the following Years of Days of Employment Vacation After the first 6 days of 6 months of credit continuous employment Second 6 5 days months of additional continuous employment 2 years 11 days through 5 per year years 6 years 16 days through 11 per year years 12 years 21 days through 19 per year years 20 years and 22 days thereafter per year 3. Division managers, supervisors, and equivalent positions, consisting of those individuals designated as such in the annual salary ordinance, shall accrue annual vacation in accordance with the following schedule: Years of Employment Days of Vacation After the first 8 days of 6 months of credit continuous employment Second 6 8 days _5_ Packet Page 260 of 494 months of additional continuous employment 2 years 16 days through 5 per year years 6 years 21 days through 11 per year years 12 years 22 days through 19 per year years 20 years 25 days through 24 per year years 25 years and 27 days thereafter per year 4. The police chief�ef and those individuals designated on the annual salary ordinance as directors shall initially accrue 22 days of vacation per year. Such accrual shall be credited on a semi-monthly basis with each employee's paycheck, except as provided above. The rate of accrual shall be reflected by a credit equal to the proportionate share of vacation earned for the period. B. Employees are encouraged to use their accumulated vacation time within the year in which it is accrued. Vacation accruals of up to one—two year's' accumulation may be carried over from one year to the next. Employees who give notiee of retirement wMin 24 months are authorized to aeeunnilate two years' aeefual at any timeprior- to retirement-. DC. Any employee whose service is honorably terminated after the completion of six months of continuous service shall be paid for any vacation time accumulated prior to the effective date of termination. [Ord. 3583 § 1, 2006; Ord. 3545 § 2, 2005; Ord. 3505 § 1, 2004; Ord. 3279 § 2, 1999; Ord. 2970 § 1, 1994; Ord. 2716, 1989]. Packet Page 261 of 494 2.35.040 Compensating time. When work beyond regular hours is required of an employee of the city (excluding those employees designated as exempt from this benefit on the annual salary schedule) compensating time off may be allowed as city requirements permit, subject to the following requirements: A. Nonexempt employees, on their request and at the city's option, may be permitted to take compensating time off at the overtime rate of one and one-half times the actual overtime worked in lieu of payment; provided, that such employees may not accumulate more than 480 hours of compensating time and any compensating time off must be used within the 12-month period following the date on which overtime is earned. B. All exempt employees other than those excluded by the annual salary ordinance (see subsection E of this section) shall receive compensatory time for night meetings, emergency call outs, and other similar periods for which they are required by their supervisor to work. Compensating time shall not be earned for short extensions of regular work hours less than one hour in length, such as staying late or coming in early. Compensatory time for such exempt employees shall be earned at the straight time rate, one hour of compensatory time earned for each hour worked. The measurement of such time shall be in accordance with the mayor's administrative policies. Such exempt employees shall be allowed to accumulate up to a maximum of 480 hours of compensatory time during any calendar year. The terms of use shall be as established by the mayor's administrative policy. If an employee earns additional compensatory time after he or she has accumulated the maximum, then the employee must either be paid for the additional time or provided time off during the next pay period. C. Compensating time shall be taken at the convenience of the city. All compensating time must be recorded and then approved by the employee's supervisor and/or department head. D. Upon termination no exempt employees shall be paid for unused compensatory time unless time has been eamed in f the 40 houf mwEimum. Nonexempt employees shall be paid for unused compensating time at one and one-half times the overtime worked. However, every effort should be made to use compensating time prior to termination. Fer the ro „der .f the budget year 2004, the positions to a ating time off -%- Packet Page 262 of 494 E. Employees designated as exempt from this compensating time provision shall receive a monthly salary as designated on the annual salary ordinance. Their presence or absence from the regular work schedule shall be reviewed in terms of the employee's overall performance in accordance with the mayor's administrative policies and the city personnel olp iciespales. F. To be more competitive in the market place, the City will provide non - represented employees who are ineligible for compensatory time with 24_hours of Management Leave annually. Management Leave will have no cash -out value and will not be carried over at the end of the calendar year. [Ord. 3505 § 2, 2004; Ord. 3279 § 3, 1999; Ord. 2732 § 1, 1989; Ord. 2542, 1985; Ord. 2508, 1985; Ord. 2482, 1985; Ord. 2340, 1983; Ord. 2204 § 1, 1981; Ord. 1939, 1977; Ord. 1168 § 4, 1966]. 2.35.045 Shared leave. A. Intent. The purpose of shared leave is to permit city employees, at no additional employee cost to the city other than the administrative cost of administering the program, to come to the aid of a fellow employee who is suffering from or has an immediate family member suffering from illness, injury, impairment, physical or mental conditions which has caused, or is likely. to cause, the employee to take leave without pay or to terminate his or her employment. "Immediate family" is defined as spouse, registered domestic partner, son, daughter, mother, father, and in-laws of the same degree. The personnel d reete c� may, but has no obligation, to approve recognition of other, significant relationships similar in nature to that of the immediate family, if the needs of the city permit. In addition to these purposes, the shared leave program may be used by employees who have been involuntarily called to military service. B. A department director, with the mayor's approval, may permit an employee to receive shared leave under this section if. 1. The employee suffers, or has an immediate family member suffering from an illness, injury, impairment or physical or mental condition, which has caused, or is likely to cause, the employee to go on leave without pay or to terminate his or her employment with the city. In addition, the shared leave program may be utilized by an employee who has been involuntarily called to active duty in the Washington National Guard, or in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard or Marine Corps of the United States. An employee seeking to utilize the shared leave program due to an involuntary call to military service need not establish compliance with subsections (13)(2) through (4) of this section. WE Packet Page 263 of 494 2. The employee has depleted or will shortly deplete his or her total of accrued vacation, sick leave, compensatory time, holiday time, and/or other paid leave. 3. Prior to a request to use shared leave, the employee has abided by the sick leave policy. 4. The employee has diligently pursued and is found to be ineligible for state industrial insurance benefits or such benefits have been exhausted. 5. Use of shared leave will not significantly increase the city's costs except for those costs which would otherwise be incurred in the administration of this program and which would otherwise be incurred by the employee's department. C. The aqpplicable department director, with the concurrence of the mayor, shall determine the amount of shared leave, if any, which an employee may receive under this section. The employee shall be required to provide appropriate medical justification and documentation both of the necessity for the leave and the time which the employee can reasonably be expected to be absent due to the condition. Shared leave shall be limited to no more than a maximum of six continuous calendar months or six months total in any five-year period and cannot be used to extend the absence of the employee beyond the post -leave time prescribed by state statute, the applicable labor agreement, or city policy. D. Shared leave shall be funded through voluntary transfers of accrued vacation and/or sick leave from other city employees to the employee approved for a shared leave. Both vacation and sick leave can be donated for a shared leave request, which has been approved due to an extraordinary/catastrophic type illness or injury. Catastrophic illnesses or injuries are those which are potentially career - ending or life -threatening. For this type of request, all donated vacation must be used prior to any use of donated sick leave. For illnesses and injuries, which are noncatastrophic in nature, only vacation leave can be donated and used. Sick leave donations are not allowed for this type of request. Co-workers who donate leave must retain a reasonable amount of accrued vacation and sick leave to protect them from a wage loss due to illness or injury and to enjoy a reasonable vacation period. When reviewing police employees, the police chief may consider holiday and compensatory time for purposes of approving shared leave requests and donations of leave time. Department directors shall not transfer any leave time in excess of the amount specified in the request. All donations shall be voluntary. The gpplicable department director shall determine that no significant increase in city costs will occur as a result of the transfer of leave. M Packet Page 264 of 494 E. Leave may be transferred from employee(s) from one department to an employee of the same department, or, with the concurrence of both department directors, to an employee of another department. F. While an employee is on shared leave, he or she will continue to be classified as a city employee and shall receive the same treatment, in respect to salary and benefits, as the employee would otherwise receive if using vacation leave. 1. All salary benefit payments made to the employee on a shared leave shall be made by the department employing the person using the shared leave. 2. The employee's salary rate shall not change as a result of being on shared leave nor, under any circumstances, shall the total of the employee's salary and other benefits, including but not limited to state industrial insurance or any other benefit received as a result of payments by the city to an insurer, health care provider, or pension system, exceed the total of salary and benefits which the employee would have received had he or she been in a regular pay status. G. Leave shall be transferred on a dollar -for -dollar basis. The value of the leave shall be determined at the current hourly wage of the transferor and the leave available to the receiving employee shall be calculated at the receiving employee's wage. H. The per-somelhuman resources department shall be responsible for computing values of donated leave and shared leave, and shall also be responsible for adjusting the accrued leave balances to show the transferred leave. The administrative set=viees dire tH human resources department shall determine the appropriate fund transfers and budget amendments as needed for city council action. Records of all leave time transferred shall be maintained in the event any unused time is returned at a later date. I. The value of any leave transferred which remains unused shall be returned at its original value to the employee or employees who donated the leave. The dep A.netA aireeter human resources department shall determine when shared leave is no longer needed. To the extent administratively feasible, the unused leave shall be returned on a pro rata basis. J. The per -so melhuman resources department shall monitor the use of shared leave to ensure equivalent treatment for all employees of the city. Inappropriate use or treatment of the shared leave provision may result in cancellation of the donated leave or use of shared leave. [Ord. 3412 § 1, 2002; Ord. 3373 § 2, 2001; Ord. 2910 § 1, 1993; Ord. 2738 § 1, 1989]. -10- Packet Page 265 of 494 2.35.060 Sick leave. A. Represented employees accrue sick leave at the rate of and to the maximum established in the respective collective bargaining agreements. Nonrepresented employees shall accrue sick leave at the rate of one working day for each full calendar month of the employee's continuous service. The maximum amount of accrued sick leave shall not exceed 1,000 hours for such nonrepresented employees. B. Upon honorable termination, unused sick leave shall be paid to nonrepresented employees at a rate equal to one-half of the regular rate of pay at the date of termination to a maximum of 800 hours. In the event of the death of an employee, the payment for unused sick leave shall be paid to the surviving spouse or to the estate of the decedent if there is no surviving spouse. Honorable termination means resignation or lay-off due to lack of work or funding and shall not include any discharge for cause. In the event that further or conflicting terms are established by the provisions of collective bargaining agreements, such provisions shall control such payments to represented employees in accordance with their respective collective bargaining agreement. C. An employee eligible for sick leave with pay shall be granted such leave for: QMW 3. Upon appr-eval of the mayor-, the death of a member of an employee's imaiediate family. 1. Employee's own health condition illness, injury, physical or mental disability, including disabilfty due to pregnancy or childbirth); 2. The need to care for an ill family member in accordance with the Family Care op lick 3. Medical or dental appointments for the employee or dependent child, provided that the employee must make a reasonable effort to schedule such appointments at times which have the least interference with the work day; -11- Packet Page 266 of 494 4. Exposure to a contagious disease where on-the-job presence of the employee would jeopardize the health of others; 5. Use of a prescription drug, which impairs job performance or safety; 6. Additional leave (maximum 3 days) beyond bereavement leave for a death in the immediate family to be authorized by the Department Head. D. The certificate of a physician and/or a written report concerning the need for the sick leave may be required by the city, and if so required shall be supplied by the employee in order to qualify for sick leave with pay. E. As an incentive to the appropriate use of sick leave, nonrepresented employees may earn additional leave hours on an inverse basis to the amount of sick leave used during the calendar year, in accordance with the following schedule: Hours of Sick Annual Leave Leave Used Hours Earned 0 24 8 16 16 8 24 0 Annual leave earned under this program shall be used in the calendar year in which the leave was earned. Absences compensated through the state workers' compensation illness or injury program shall not be taken into consideration when applying the eligibility standards. The leave earned shall be pro -rated to the nearest full hour on the basis of sick leave used. F. Nonrepresented employees who have accrued in excess of 800 hours of sick leave may convert the excess hours to a cash payment at the rate of three hours of sick leave for one hour of compensation at the employee's current rate of pay, up to a maximum of $1,000 per year. The human resources department shall notify the employee of his or her accrued sick leave hours with the last paycheck in August of each year. The sick leave payout shall be paid with the first paycheck in January. Employees must request the optional sick leave payout within 10 working days from the date notice of accrued sick leave was provided. -12- Packet Page 267 of 494 G. Newly hired employees who are entitled to transfer sick leave from their previous employer to the city of Edmonds pursuant to interlocal agreement, collective bargaining agreement and/or state law may transfer such sick leave banks subject to the rules set forth in this section. In addition, a transferred employee who would, under the provisions of the city's personnel policies, be required to pay back worker's compensation benefits advanced by the city and thereby restore his/her sick leave bank may exercise such rights with respect to funds received from Labor and Industries as worker's compensation within the first six months of their employment, thereby buying back sick leave which otherwise could have been transferred. [Ord. 3444 § 1, 2003; Ord. 3279 § 4, 1999; Ord. 2668 § 2, 1988; Ord. 2664 § 7, 1988; Ord. 1462, 1970; Ord. 1422, 1969; Ord. 1168 § 6, 1966]. Section 4. A new section ECC 2.35.075, entitled "Special duty pay," is hereby added to read in its entirety as follows: 2.35.075 Special Duty Pay. A. The mayor is authorized to pay any manager or director level employee special duty pay in addition to that person's regular compensation when the mayor has temporarily assigned special duties to that person. No employee may receive special duty pay for longer than one year without city council approval. "Special duties" are defined as those duties not included as "Primary Duties and Responsibilities" in the employee's official job description and not otherwise associated with the employee's position. B. Special duty pay shall consist of up to ten percent of the employee's salary at the time the special duties are assigned. The mayor is authorized to grant to each such employee up to five percent (5%) for special duty pay at the mayor's discretion, and shall be based upon the scope of the additional responsibilities identified by the mayor. If the mayor determines that special duty pay above five percent (5%) is warranted for a particular employee, the mayor will be authorized to grant up to ten percent (10%) for special duty pay upon prior approval by the City Council. -13- Packet Page 268 of 494 Section 5. 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 6. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi- cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY JEFFREY B. TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: 03-22-2013 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: 03-26-2013 PUBLISHED: 03-31-2013 EFFECTIVE DATE: 04-05-2013 ORDINANCE NO. 3917 -14- Packet Page 269 of 494 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.3917 of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the 26"' day of March, 2013, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. 3917. 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 PROVISIONS OF ECC CHAPTERS 2.25, 2.30 AND 2.35 TO INCORPORATE UPDATES TO CERTAIN CITY PERSONNEL POLICIES AND TO ADD A SECTION RELATING TO SPECIAL DUTY PAY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this 27`h day of March, 2013. ITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE -15- Packet Page 270 of 494 STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH St)f&ARY QF ORD'NANCE N{], 3917 al the City of Edmonds, asfftr3glon On the 281h day o1 Mach, 20t3, the City Cauncl OF 1he City of Edmunds passed Ordinance. No. 3917. A summary of the corltenl of said ordnanoa, Cosssisli�g W the litlg, pmvldesas fellows' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS. WASHIHGTG14, AMEND1N0 THE PROVISIONS OF ECC . CHAPTER 2.7.5, 2.30 AND 2.35 TO INCORPORATE~ UPDATES TO Ci RTAIN GIV PERSONNEL POLICIES AND TO ADD A SECTION RELATING TO SPECIAL DUTY PAY; PROVIDING FOR SEVEFMIILTY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The: NO IM of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this 271h day of Mardi, 2013. CITY CLERK, SAND RA S, CHASE Publisdtad; March 31, 2013, Account Name: City of Edmonds Affidavit of Publication S.S. The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says that she is Principal Clerk of THE HERALD, a daily newspaper printed and published in the City of Everett, County of Snohomish, and State of Washington; that said newspaper is a newspaper of general circulation in said County and State; that said newspaper has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of Snohomish County and that the notice of Ordinance No. 3917 a printed copy of which is hereunto attached, was published in said newspaper proper and not in supplement form, in the regular and entire edition of said paper on the following days and times, namely: March 31, 2013 and that said newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of said period. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 1st day of April, 2013 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, County. Account Number: 101416 Kell a Everett1, Smhomish t PUBLIC `P\ 2-17 zo1 s Order Number. 0001815567 Packet Page 271 of 494 AM-5663 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: 15 Minutes Submitted By: Carrie Hite Department: Parks and Recreation Committee: Finance Type: Information Information Subiect Title Discussion regarding alternatives for non -represented longevity compensation.. Recommendation The Finance Committee is forwarding to full Council for discussion. 10. Previous Council Action During a discussion of non -represented compensation in general at the November 27, 2012 City Council meeting, Council declined to take action at that time regarding the topic of logevity pay for non -represented employees. It was suggested at the time that the issue of longevity pay be brought back to a future Finance Committee meeting in 2013 for further discussion. The Finance Committee discussed this at their committee meeting in February and are forwarding this to back to full Council for discussion. Narrative HR will review the current longevity pay provisions of each of the City's represented (union) groups, and will discuss the options and projected costs to extend longevity pay to the City's non -represented employees. Longevity Comparison Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Carrie Hite Final Approval Date: 04/16/2013 Attachments Form Review Date 04/15/2013 04:51 PM 04/16/2013 08:37 AM 04/16/2013 09:35 AM Started On: 04/10/2013 11:02 AM Packet Page 272 of 494 City of Edmonds Longevity Comparison January 2, 2013 Years SEIU Teamsters Law Support Police 5 .5% .5% 1% 2% 10 1% 1% 2% 4% 14 1.5% 1.5% 3 15 6% 18 2% 4% 19 2% Packet Page 273 of 494 AM-5678 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: 45 Minutes Submitted By: Carrie Hite Department: Parks and Recreation Review Committee: Finance Type: Infnrmntinn Subject Title Park Impact Study results it. Committee Action: Recommend Review by Full Council Recommendation Council receive final report and presentation from Randy Young, Young, Henderson and Company, discuss merits of assessing Park Impact fees and decide next steps. Previous Council Action Council authorized the completion of a Park Impact Fee Study on March 6, 2012. Council amended their motion to allow staff to proceed with selection of a consultant on March 20, 2012. Narrative Narrative Randy Young from Henderson, Young and Company has been working with staff to complete the Park Impact Fee study. Randy Young will be present at the meeting to summarize final report and facillitate discussion with Council. Attachments Park Impact Fee Rate Study Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Carrie Hite Final Approval Date: 04/16/2013 Form Review Date 04/15/2013 04:51 PM 04/16/2013 08:36 AM 04/16/2013 09:36 AM Started On: 04/11/2013 12:55 PM Packet Page 274 of 494 RATE STUDY FOR IMPACT FEES FOR PARKS, OPEN SPACE, AND RECREATION FACILITIES FOR CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON EDP � d ,417c�j Sq(0, Prepared By Henderson Young & Company April 5, 2013 Packet Page 275 of 494 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................................................I 2. STATUTORY BASIS AND METHODOLOGY...................................................................................................3 3. GROWTH ESTIMATES.......................................................................................................................................10 4. PARK IMPACT FEES...........................................................................................................................................13 APPENDIX: EQUIVALENT POPULATION COEFFICIENTS..........................................................................20 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1: IMPACT FEE RATES.........................................................................................................................................I TABLE2: POPULATION.................................................................................................................................................10 TABLE3: EMPLOYMENT...............................................................................................................................................I I TABLE 4: GROWTH OF EQUIVALENT POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT........................................................................12 TABLE 5: ASSET INVENTORY AND CAPITAL VALUE.....................................................................................................14 TABLE 6: VALUE OF PARKS PER EQUIVALENT POPULATION........................................................................................15 TABLE 7: VALUE OF PARKS NEEDED FOR GROWTH.....................................................................................................16 TABLE 8: INVESTMENT NEEDED IN PARKS FOR GROWTH............................................................................................17 TABLE 9: INVESTMENT IN PARKS TO BE PAID BY GROWTH..........................................................................................18 TABLE 10: GROWTH COST PER PERSON.........................................................................................................................19 TABLE 11: IMPACT FEE PER UNIT..................................................................................................................................19 Packet Page 276 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds 1. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to establish the rates for impact fees in the City of Edmonds, Washington for parks, open space, and recreation facilities as authorized by RCW' 82.02,090(7). Throughout this study the term "parks" is used as the short name that means parks, open space, and recreation facilities. Summary of Impact Fee Rates Impact fees are paid by all types of new development2, Impact fee rates for new development are based on, and vary according to the type of land use. The following table summarizes the impact fee rates for each land use category. Table 1: Impact Fee Rates Type of Development Unit Impact Fee per Unit Single -Family dwelling unit $ 2,734.05 Multi -Family dwelling unit 2,340.16 Retail sq, ft, 2.48 Office sq, ft, 0.62 Manufacturing sq, ft, 0.72 Construction sq, ft, 0.25 Impact Fees vs. Other Developer Contributions Impact fees are charges paid by new development to reimburse local governments for the capital cost of public facilities that are needed to serve new development and the people who occupy or use the new development. Throughout this study, the term "developer" is used as a shorthand expression to describe anyone who is obligated to pay impact fees, including builders, owners or developers. Local governments charge impact fees for several reasons; 1) to obtain revenue to pay for some of the cost of new public facilities; 2) to implement a public policy that new development should pay a portion of the cost of facilities that it requires, and that existing development should not pay all of the cost of such facilities; and 3) to assure that adequate public facilities will be constructed to ' Revised Code of Washington (RCW) is the state law of the State of Washington. 2 The impact fee ordinance may specify exemptions for low-income housing and/or "broad public purposes", but such exemptions must be paid for by public money, not other impact fees. The ordinance may specify if impact fees apply to changes in use, remodeling, etc. Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Page 1 Company Packet Page 277 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds serve new development, The impact fees that are described in this study do not include any other forms of developer contributions or exactions, such as mitigation or voluntary payments authorized by SEPA (the State Environmental Policy Act, RCW 43.21 C); system development charges for water and sewer authorized for utilities (RCW 35.92 for municipalities, 56.16 for sewer districts, and 57.08 for water districts); local improvement districts or other special assessment districts; linkage fees; or land donations or fees in lieu of land. Organization of the Study This impact fee rate study contains three chapters: • Chapter 1 - Introduction: provides a summary of impact fee rates for frequently used land use categories, and other introductory materials. • Chapter 2 - Statutory Basis and Methodology: summarizes the statutory requirements for developing impact fees, and describes the compliance with each requirement. • Chapter 3 - Growth Estimates: presents estimates of future growth of population and employment in Edmonds because impact fees are paid by growth to offset the cost of parks, open space and recreation facilities that will be needed to serve new development. • Chapter 4 - Park Impact Fees: presents impact fees for parks. The chapter includes the methodology that is used to develop the fees, the formulas, variables and data that are the basis for the fees, and the calculation of the fees. The methodology is designed to comply with the requirements of Washington state law. Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Company Page 2 Packet Page 278 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds 2. STATUTORY BASIS AND METHODOLOGY This chapter summarizes the statutory requirements for impact fees in the State of Washington, and describes how the City of Edmonds' impact fees comply with the statutory requirements. Statutory Requirements for Impact Fees The Growth Management Act of 1990 (Chapter 17, Washington Laws, 1990, 1st Ex. Sess,) authorizes local governments in Washington to charge impact fees, RCW 82.02.050 - 82.02.090 contain the provisions of the Growth Management Act that authorize and describe the requirements for impact fees. The impact fees that are described in this study are not mitigation payments authorized by the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), There are several important differences between impact fees and SEPA mitigations. Three aspects of impact fees that are particularly noteworthy are: 1) the ability to charge for the cost of public facilities that are "system improvements" (i.e., that provide service to the community at large) as opposed to "project improvements'' (which are "on -site'' and provide service for a particular development); 2) the ability to charge small-scale development their proportionate share, whereas SEPA exempts small developments; and 3) the predictability and simplicity of impact fee rate schedules compared to the cost, time and uncertain outcome of SEPA reviews conducted on a case -by -case basis. The following synopsis of the most significant requirements of the law includes citations to the Revised Code of Washington as an aid to readers who wish to review the exact language of the statutes. Types of Public Facilities Four types of public facilities can be the subject of impact fees: 1) public streets and roads; 2) publicly owned parks, open space and recreation facilities; 3) school facilities; and 4) fire protection facilities. RCW 82,02,050(2) and (4), and RC W 82, 02, 090(7) Types of Improvements Impact fees can be spent on "system improvements" (which are typically outside the development), as opposed to ''project improvements" (which are typically provided by the developer on -site within the development). RCW 82, 02, 050(3) (a) an d RC W 82, 02. 090(5) an d (9) Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Company Page 3 Packet Page 279 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds Benefit to Development Impact fees must be limited to system improvements that are reasonably related to, and which will benefit new development, RCW 82.02.050(3)(0) and (c). Local governments must establish reasonable service areas (one area, or more than one, as determined to be reasonable by the local government), and local governments must develop impact fee rate categories for various land uses. RCW 82.02.060(7) Proportionate Share Impact fees cannot exceed the development's proportionate share of system improvements that are reasonably related to the new development. The impact fee amount shall be based on a formula (or other method of calculating the fee) that determines the proportionate share. RCW 82.02.050(3)(b), RCW 82.02.060(7), and RCW 82.02.090(6) Reductions of Impact Fee Amounts Impact fees rates must be adjusted to account for other revenues that the development pays (if such payments are earmarked for or proratable to particular system improvements). RCW 82.02.050(7)(c) and (2) and RCW 82.02.060(7)(b) Impact fees may be credited for the value of dedicated land, improvements or construction provided by the developer (if such facilities are in the adopted CFP as system improvements eligible for impact fees and are required as a condition of development approval). RCW 82.02.060(4) Exemptions from Impact Fees Local governments have the discretion to provide exemptions from impact fees for low-income housing and other "broad public purpose" development, but all such exempt fees must be paid from public funds (other than impact fee accounts). RCW 82.02.060(2) and (3) Developer Options Developers who are liable for impact fees can submit data and or/analysis to demonstrate that the impacts of the proposed development are less than the impacts calculated in this rate study. RCW 82.02.060(6). Developers can pay impact fees under protest and appeal impact fee calculations. RCW 82.02.070(4) and (5), The developer can obtain a refund of the impact fees if the local government fails to expend or obligate the impact fee payments within 10 years, or terminates the impact fee requirement, or the developer does not proceed with the development (and creates no impacts). RCW 82.02.080 Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Company Page 4 Packet Page 280 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds Capital Facilities Plans Impact fees must be expended on public facilities in a capital facilities plan (CFP) element or used to reimburse the government for the unused capacity of existing facilities. The CFP must conform to the Growth Management Act of 1990, and must identify existing deficiencies in facility capacity for current development, capacity of existing facilities available for new development, and additional facility capacity needed for new development. RCW 82,02,050(4), RCW 82, 02, 060(8), an d RC W 82, 02, 070(2) New Versus Existing Facilities Impact fees can be charged for new public facilities (RCW 82,02,060(7)(0) and for the unused capacity of existing public facilities (RCW 82,02,060(8) subject to the proportionate share limitation described above. Accounting Requirements The local government must separate the impact fees from other monies, expend or obligate the money on CFP projects within 10 years, and prepare annual reports of collections and expenditures. RCW 82,02,070(7)-(3) Compliance With Statutory Requirements for Impact Fees Many of the statutory requirements listed above are fulfilled in calculation of the parks impact fee in Chapter 3. Some of the statutory requirements are fulfilled in other ways, as described below. Types of Public Facilities This study contains impact fees for parks. This study does not contain impact fees for transportation, fire, or schools. In general, local governments that are authorized to charge impact fees are responsible for specific public facilities for which they may charge such fees. The City of Edmonds is legally and financially responsible for the parks facilities it owns and operates within its jurisdiction. In no case may a local government charge impact fees for private facilities, but it may charge impact fees for some public facilities that it does not administer if such facilities are "owned or operated by government entities" (RCW 82,02,090 (7), Types of Improvements The public facilities that can be paid for by impact fees are "system improvements" (which are typically outside the development), and "designed to provide service to service areas within the community at large" as provided in RCW 82,02,090(9)), as opposed to "project improvements" (which are typically Henderson, Young & Company April 5, 2013 Page 5 Packet Page 281 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds provided by the developer on -site within the development or adjacent to the development), and "designed to provide service for a development project, and that are necessary for the use and convenience of the occupants or users of the project" as provided in RCW 82.02.090(5). The impact fees in this study are based on system improvements that are described in Chapter 3. No project improvements are included in this study. Impact fee revenue can be used for the capital cost of public facilities. Impact fees cannot be used for operating or maintenance expenses. The cost of public facilities that can be paid for by impact fees include land acquisition and development. The costs can also include design studies, engineering, land surveys, appraisals, permitting, financing, administrative expenses, applicable mitigation costs, and capital equipment pertaining to capital improvements. Benefit to Development, Proportionate Share and Reductions of Fee Amounts The law imposes three tests of the benefit provided to development by impact fees; 1) proportionate share, 2) reasonably related to need, and 3) reasonably related to expenditure (RCW 80.20.050(3)). In addition, the law requires the designation of one or more service areas (RCW 82.02.060(7) 1. Proportionate Share. First, the "proportionate share" requirement means that impact fees can be charged only for the portion of the cost of public facilities that is "reasonably related" to new development. In other words, impact fees cannot be charged to pay for the cost of reducing or eliminating deficiencies in existing facilities. Second, there are several important implications of the proportionate share requirement that are not specifically addressed in the law, but which follow directly from the law; • Costs of facilities that will benefit new development and existing users must be apportioned between the two groups in determining the amount of the fee. This can be accomplished in either of two ways; (1) by allocating the total cost between new and existing users, or (2) calculating the cost per unit and applying the cost only to new development when calculating impact fees. • Impact fees that recover the costs of existing unused capacity should be based on the government's actual cost. Carrying costs may be added to reflect the government's actual or imputed interest expense. The third aspect of the proportionate share requirement is its relationship to the requirement to provide adjustments and credits to impact fees, where appropriate. These requirements ensure that the amount of the impact fee does not exceed the proportionate share. Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Page 6 Company Packet Page 282 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds The "adjustments" requirement reduces the impact fee to account for past and future payments of other revenues (if such payments are earmarked for, or proratable to, the system improvements that are needed to serve new growth). The impact fees calculated in this study include an adjustment that accounts for any other revenue that is paid by new development and used by the City to pay for a portion of growth's proportionate share of costs. This adjustment is in response to the limitations in RCW 82.02.060 (1)(b) and RCW 82.02.050(2), The "credit" requirement reduces impact fees by the value of dedicated land, improvements or construction provided by the developer (if such facilities are in the adopted CFP, identified as the projects for which impact fees are collected, and are required as a condition of development approval). The law does not prohibit a local government from establishing reasonable constraints on determining credits. For example, the location of dedicated land and the quality and design of donated land or recreation facilities can be required to be acceptable to the local government. 2. Reasonably Related to Need. There are many ways to fulfill the requirement that impact fees be "reasonably related" to the development's need for public facilities, including personal use and use by others in the family or business enterprise (direct benefit), use by persons or organizations who provide goods or services to the fee -paying property or are customers or visitors at the fee paying property (indirect benefit), and geographical proximity (presumed benefit). These measures of relatedness are implemented by the following techniques: Impact fees are charged to properties that need (i.e,, benefit from) new public facilities. The City of Edmonds provides its infrastructure to all kinds of property throughout the City, therefore impact fees have been calculated for all types of property. The relative needs of different types of growth are considered in establishing fee amounts (i.e,, different impact values for different types of land use). Chapter 3 uses different numbers of persons per dwelling unit for residential development, and different numbers of employees and visitors for different types of non-residential development. Feepayers can pay a smaller fee if they demonstrate that their development will have less impact than is presumed in the impact fee schedule calculation for their property classification. Such reduced needs must be permanent and enforceable (i.e., via land use restrictions). Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Company Page 7 Packet Page 283 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds 3. Reasonably Related to Expenditures. Two provisions of Edmonds' impact fee ordinance comply with the requirement that expenditures be "reasonably related" to the development that paid the impact fee. First, the requirement that fee revenue must be earmarked for specific uses related to public facilities ensures that expenditures are on specific projects, the benefit of which has been demonstrated in determining the need for the projects and the portion of the cost of needed projects that are eligible for impact fees as described in this study. Second, impact fee revenue must be expended or obligated within 10 years, thus requiring the impact fees to be used to benefit to the feepayer and not held by the City. 4. Service Areas for Impact Fees Impact fees in some jurisdictions are collected and expended within service areas that are smaller than the jurisdiction that is collecting the fees. Impact fees are not required to use multiple service areas unless such "zones" are necessary to establish the relationship between the fee and the development. Because of the compact size of the City of Edmonds and the accessibility of its parks to all property within the City, Edmonds' parks serve the entire City, therefore the impact fees are based on a single service area corresponding to the boundaries of the City of Edmonds. Exemptions The City's impact fee ordinance addresses the subject of exemptions, Exemptions do not affect the impact fee rates calculated in this study because of the statutory requirement that any exempted impact fee must be paid from other public funds. As a result, there is no increase in impact fee rates to make up for the exemption because there is no net loss to the impact fee account as a result of the exemption. Developer Options A developer who is liable for impact fees has several options regarding impact fees. The developer can submit data and or/analysis to demonstrate that the impacts of the proposed development are less than the impacts calculated in this rate study. The developer can appeal the impact fee calculation by the City of Edmonds. If the local government fails to expend the impact fee payments within 10 years of receipt of such payments, the developer can obtain a refund of the impact fees. The developer can also obtain a refund if the development does not proceed and no impacts are created. All of these provisions are addressed in the City's impact fee ordinance, and none of them affect the calculation of impact fee rates in this study. Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Company Page 8 Packet Page 284 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds Capital Facilities Plan There are references in RCW to the "capital facilities plan" (CFP) as the basis for projects that are eligible for funding by impact fees. Cities often adopt documents with different titles that fulfill the requirements of RCW 82.02.050 et. seq. pertaining to a "capital facilities plan". The City of Edmonds annually adopts a 6-year Capital Improvements Program (CIP), and also an annual update to its CFP that extends beyond the 6-year CIP. These two documents fulfill the requirements in RCW, and are considered to be the "capital facilities plan" (CFP) for the purpose of this impact fee rate study. All references to a CFP in this study are references to the CIP and CFP documents described above. The requirement to identify existing deficiencies, capacity available for new development, and additional public facility capacity needed for new development is determined by analyzing levels of service for each type of public facility. Chapter 3 provides this analysis. New Versus Existing Facilities, Accounting Requirements Impact fees must be spent on capital projects contained in an adopted capital facilities plan, or they can be used to reimburse the government for the unused capacity of existing facilities. Impact fee payments that are not expended or obligated within 10 years must be refunded unless the City Council makes a written finding that an extraordinary and compelling reason exists to hold the fees for longer than 10 years. In order to verify these two requirements, impact fee revenues must be deposited into separate accounts of the government, and annual reports must describe impact fee revenue and expenditures. These requirements are addressed by Edmonds' impact fee ordinance, and are not factors in the impact fee calculations in this study. Data Sources The data in this study of impact fees in Edmonds, Washington was provided by the City of Edmonds, unless a different source is specifically cited. Data Rounding The data in this study was prepared using computer spreadsheet software. In some tables in this study, there may be very small variations from the results that would be obtained using a calculator to compute the same data. The reason for these insignificant differences is that the spreadsheet software was allowed to calculate results to more places after the decimal than is reported in the tables of these reports. The calculation to extra places after the decimal increases the accuracy of the end results, but causes occasional minor differences due to rounding of data that appears in this study. Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Company Page 9 Packet Page 285 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds I GROWTH ESTIMATES Impact fees are meant to have "growth pay for growth" so the first step in developing an impact fee is to quantify future growth in the City of Edmonds. Growth estimates have been prepared for population and employment. Table 2 lists Edmonds population and growth rates from 1940 to the present, and projections to the year 2025. Table 2: Population Year Population Compound Annual Growth Rate Compound Growth Rate Years 1940 1,288 1950 2,057 4,79% 1940-1950 1960 8,016 14,57% 1950-1960 1970 23,684 1 1,44% 1960-1970 1980 27,679 1,57% 1970-1980 1990 30,744 1, 06% 1980-1990 2000 39,515 2,54% 1990-2000 2010 39,709 0,05% 2000-2010 2011 39,800 0,23% 2010-2011 2025 44,880 0,82% 2010-2025 Source of Population for years 1940, 1950, 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000 and 2025: City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan, December 2012, page 10. Source of Population for 2010: U.S, Census. Source of Population for 2011: Washington Office of Financial Management. In addition to residential population growth, Edmonds expects businesses to grow. Business development is included in this study because businesses and their employees and customers benefit from Edmonds' parks. For example, City parks provide places for employees and customers to fake breaks from work and shopping, including restful breaks and/or active exercise to promote healthy living, The Puget Sound Regional Council monitors "covered employment" which is employment tracked by the Washington State Employment Security Department. The data is tracked for eight different major sectors of employment, such as manufacturing, retail, and services. Table 3 lists employment in Edmonds businesses from 2000 to 2011, and growth that is projected to the year 2025, Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Company Page 10 Packet Page 286 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds Table 3: Employment Annual Const Change Year /Res FIRE Mfg. Retail Svices. WTU Govt. Educ. Total of Total 2000 666 513 129 1,594 4,735 321 1,402 892 10,253 2001 766 578 114 1,504 4,593 258 1,717 889 10,418 1,61 % 2002 647 522 81 1,437 4,432 267 1,718 897 10,001 -4,00% 2003 750 532 103 1,426 4,442 307 1,915 888 10,362 3,61 % 2004 778 582 69 1,408 4,669 314 1,670 887 10,377 0,14% 2005 842 591 98 1,426 4,830 346 1,897 899 10,929 5,32% 2006 797 642 97 1,419 5,046 397 1,701 881 10,980 0,47% 2007 813 692 79 1,477 5,320 417 1,665 873 11,338 3,26% 2008 776 696 100 1,492 5,639 312 1,690 883 11,588 2,20% 2009 606 484 116 1,368 5,375 297 1,719 900 10,864 -6,25% 2010 535 400 129 1,363 5,261 294 1,747 946 10,675 -1,74% 2011 482 397 137 1,514 7,292 240 380 919 11,362 6,44% 2025 549 452 156 1,725 8,310 274 433 1,047 12,947 0,94% Const/Res = Construction & Resources; FIRE = Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate; Mfg, = Manufacturing; Svices. _ Services; WTU = Wholesale Trade, Transportation and Utilities; Govt. = Government; Educ. = Education Source of Employment for 2000 - 2011: Puget Sound Regional Council, Source of Employment for 2025: Henderson, Young & Company, based on 2011 PSRC data and compound annual growth rate from 2000-2011. It is clear from Tables 2 and 3 that Edmonds expects growth of population and businesses in the future, so there is a rational basis for park impact fees that would have future growth to pay for parks, open space and recreation facilities that are needed to provide appropriate levels of service to new development. Population and employment are both expected to grow, but they should not be counted equally because employees and visitors spend less time in Edmonds than residents, therefore they have less benefit from Edmonds' parks. There is a well -established and widely -used technique for accounting for these differences in impact, and if involves "equivalency." The Appendix to this study describes equivalency, and explains how the "equivalent population coefficients" were developed for this study of park impact fees for the City of Edmonds. The result allows each category of business to pay its proportionate share of parks for growth based on the "equivalent population" that it generates. Table 4 multiplies the equivalent population coefficients (from the Appendix) times the actual population and employment data from Tables 2 and 3 to calculate the "equivalent" population for the base year (2011), the horizon year (2025) and the growth between 2011 and 2025, Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Company Page 11 Packet Page 287 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds Table 4: Growth of Equivalent Population and Employment 2011 2011 2025 2025 2011- 2011- Base Base Horizon Horizon 2025 2025 Year Year Year Year Growth Growth Full Equivalent Full Equivalent Full Equivalent Land -Use Category EPQ 1 Pop 2 Pop 3 Pop 2 Pop 3 Pop 4 Pop 5 Permanent Pop 0.9375 39,800 37,313 44,880 42,075 5,080 4,762 Construction 0.1986 482 96 549 109 67 13 FIRE 0.5056 397 201 452 229 55 28 Manufacturing 0.5814 137 80 156 91 19 11 Retail Trade 2.0038 1,514 3,034 1,725 3,457 211 424 Services 0.5056 7,292 3,687 8,310 4,202 1,018 515 WTU 0.6004 240 144 274 164 34 20 Government 0.7060 380 268 433 306 53 37 Education 0.5357 919 492 1,047 561 128 69 Total n.a. n.a. 45,314 n.a. 51,194 n.a. 5,880 ' Source: Appendix - Equivalent Population Coefficients. 2 Sources: Tables 2 and 3. 3 Equivalent Population = Equivalent Population Coefficient x Full Population. 4 2011-2025 Growth Full Population = 2025 Full Population - 2011 Full Population. e 2011-2025 Growth Equivalent Population = 2025 Equivalent Population - 2011 Equivalent Population The totals in Table 4 provide the equivalent population for the purpose of developing park impact fees for Edmonds. The total equivalent population for the base year (201 1) is 45,314, for the horizon year (2025) is 51,194, therefore the growth between 2011 and 2025 is 5,880. Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Company Page 12 Packet Page 288 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds 4. PARK IMPACT FEES Overview Impact fees for parks, open space, and recreation facilities use an inventory and valuation of the existing assets in order to calculate the current investment per person (i.e„ equivalent population or equivalent person). The current investment per person is multiplied times the future population to identify the value of additional assets needed to provide growth with the same level of investment as the City owns for the current population. The future investment is reduced by the amount of specific other revenues that are available and the result is the net investment needed to be paid by growth. Dividing the net investment by the growth of the equivalent population results in the investment per person that can be charged as impact fees. The amount of the impact fee is determined by charging each fee -paying development for impact fee cost per person multiplied times the equivalent population coefficient for each type of development, These steps are described below in the formulas, descriptions of variables, tables of data, and explanation of calculations of park impact fees. Throughout this chapter the term "person" is used as the short name that means equivalent population or equivalent person. Formula 1: Parks Capital Value Per Person The capital investment per person is calculated by dividing the value of the asset inventory by the current equivalent population, Value of Parks Current Capital Value ' Inventory _ Equivalent = Per er Person Equivalent population was described in Chapter 3 and explained in the Appendix. There is one new variable that requires explanation: (A) value of parks inventory. Variable (A): Value of Parks Inventory The value of the existing inventory of parks, open space and recreation facilities is calculated by determining the value of park land and improvements. The sum of all of the values equals the current value of the City's park and recreation system. The values in this study come from King County's tax assessment data base. The values of parks in this rate study do not include any costs for interest or other financing. If borrowing is used to "front fund" the costs that will be paid by Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Page 13 Company Packet Page 289 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds impact fees, the carrying costs for financing can be added to the costs, and the impact fee can be recalculated to include such costs. Table 5 lists in alphabetical order the inventory of park land and improvements that make up the City of Edmonds' existing park system. Each listing includes the name, type of park, acreage, land value, improvement value and total value. The total value of park land and improvements currently owned by the City of Edmonds is $80.3 million. Table 5: Asset Inventory and Capital Value Improvement Name Type Acres Land Value Value Total Value 144 Railroad Ave Regional 1.0 $ 333,200 $ 200,000 $ 533,200 Tidelands 7th & Elm Neighborhood 1.5 508,500 0 508,500 Anderson Center Neighborhood 2.3 5,363,100 1,983,600 7,346,700 Ballinger Lake Access Special Use 0.1 80,000 100,000 180,000 Beautification Areas (12 Open Space 9.8 200,000 200,000 400,000 sites) Brackett's North Regional 2.7 3,461,300 57,600 3,518,900 Brackett's South Regional 2.0 4,512,600 0 4,512,600 Cemetery Special Use 5.5 1,721,200 16,700 1,737,900 Centennial Plaza Special Use 0.1 25,000 100,000 125,000 City Park Community 14.5 15,895,200 81,500 15,976,700 City Park Maintenance Special Use 1.1 150,000 1,141,192 1,291,192 Bldg Dayton Street Plaza Special Use 0.1 250,000 250,000 Edmonds Library & Plaza Special Use 2.0 2,736,000 2,748,000 5,484,000 Edmonds Marsh/Walkway Open Space 23.2 254,500 0 254,500 Haines Wharf Park Regional 0.5 354,700 2,600,000 2,954,700 Hazel Miller Plaza (Old Special Use 0.5 250,000 150,000 400,000 Milltown) Hickman Neighborhood 5.6 1,414,800 3,000,000 4,414,800 Hummingbird Hill Park Neighborhood 2.0 352,000 0 352,000 Hutt Park Open Space 4.7 744,200 0 744,200 Interurban Trail Special Use 3.4 2,962,080 1,700,000 4,662,080 Maplewood Hill Park Open Space 12.7 2,066,300 0 2,066,300 Marina Beach Park Regional 4.5 535,800 0 535,800 Mathay Ballinger Neighborhood 1.5 70,000 0 70,000 Meadowdale Clubhouse/Park Special Use 1.3 230,000 156,700 386,700 Meadowdale Natural Open Space 2.0 85,100 0 85,100 Area Ocean Ave Viewpoint Special Use 0.2 32,900 50,000 82,900 Olympic Beach Regional 4.3 1,167,300 0 1,167,300 Park/Walkway Olympic View Open Open Space 0.5 10,000 0 10,000 Space Pine Ridge Park Open Space 22.0 4,118,800 0 4,118,800 Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Company Page 14 Packet Page 290 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds Improvement Name Type Acres Land Value Value Total Value Pine Street Park Neighborhood 1.5 398,800 0 398,800 Seaview Park Neighborhood 5.5 1,143,500 37,600 1,181,100 Seaview Reservoir Open Space 3.0 183,000 0 183,000 Shell Creek Open Space Open Space 1.0 270,400 0 270,400 Sierra Park Neighborhood 5.5 1,812,000 0 1,812,000 South County Senior Center Regional 1.0 5,961,000 624,000 6,585,000 SR 104 Mini Park Special Use 0.3 301,000 0 301,000 SR 104 Wetlands Open Space 9.0 9,200 0 9,200 Stamm Overlook Park Special Use 0.4 386,800 0 386,800 Sunset Ave Overlook Special Use 0.5 240,800 0 240,800 Wade James Theater Special Use 0.7 1,265,000 60,000 1,325,000 Wharf Street Open Space 0.2 30,000 30,000 60,000 Willow Creek Hatchery Special Use 1.0 76,500 0 76,500 Willow Creek Park Open Space 2.2 24,500 0 24,500 Yost Park & Pool Community 48.0 2,900,400 450000 3,350,400 TOTAL 210.4 64,887,480 15,486,892 80,374,372 JOUrce of Jana ana Improvemem vaiues: rung C-ounty Tax assessment TIIes. Table 6 lists the total value of $80,374,372 (from Table 5) and divides it by the current equivalent population of 45,314 (from Table 3) to calculate the capital value of $1,773,71 per equivalent population. Table 6: Value of Parks per Equivalent Population Total Current (2011) Capital Value Value of Equivalent per Equivalent Edmonds Parks Population Population $ 80,374,372 - 45,314 = $ 1,773.71 Formula 2: Value Needed for Growth Impact fees must be related to the needs of growth, as explained in Chapter 2, The first step in determining growth's needs is to calculate the total value of parks that are needed for growth. The calculation is accomplished by multiplying the capital value per person times the number of new persons that are forecast for the City's growth. Capital Value Equivalent Value Needed 2. x Population = per Person Growth for Growth Table 7 shows the calculation of the value of parks needed for growth. The current capital value per person is from Table 6, The growth in equivalent Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Page 15 Company Packet Page 291 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds population is from Table 4. The result is that Edmonds needs to add parks valued at $10.4 million in order to serve the growth of 5,880 additional people who are expected to be added to the City's existing equivalent population. Table 7: Value of Parks Needed for Growth Capital Value Growth of Value per Equivalent Equivalent Needed Population Population for Growth $ 1,773.71 x 5,880 = $ 10,429,210 Formula 3. Investment Needed for Growth The investment needed for growth is calculated by subtracting the value of any existing reserve capacity from the total value of parks needed to serve the growth. Value Value of Investment 3 Needed _ Existing = Needed for for Reserve Growth Growth Capacity There is one new variable used in formula 3 that require explanation; (B) value of existing reserve capacity of parks. Variable (B): Value of Existing Reserve Capacity The value of reserve capacity is the difference between the value of the City's existing inventory of parks, and the value of those assets that are needed to provide the level of service standard for the existing population. Because the capital value per person is based on the current assets and the current population, there is no reserve capacity (i.e., no unused value that can be used to serve future population growth )3. Table 8 shows the calculation of the investment in parks that is needed for growth. The value of parks needed to serve growth (from Table 7) is reduced by the value of existing reserve capacity, in this case zero, and the result shows that Edmonds needs to invest $10A million in additional parks in order to serve future growth. 3 Also, the use of the current assets and the current population means there is no existing deficiency. This approach satisfies the requirements of RCW 82,02.050(4) to determine whether or not there are any existing deficiencies in order to ensure that impact fees are not charged for any deficiencies. Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Page 16 Company Packet Page 292 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds Table 8: Investment Needed in Parks for Growth Value of Value Existing Investment Needed Reserve Needed for Growth Capacity for Growth $ 10,429,210 $ 0 $ 10,429,210 Formula 4. Investment to be Paid by Growth The future investment in parks that needs to be paid by growth may be reduced if the City has other revenues it invests in its parks. The investment to be paid by growth is calculated by subtracting the amount of any revenues the City invests in infrastructure for growth from the total investment in parks needed to serve growth. Investment City Investment 4. Needed for - Investment = to be Paid Growth for Growth by Growth There is one new variable used in formula 4 that requires explanation: (C) revenues used to fund the City's investment in projects that serve growth. Variable (C): City Investment of Non -impact Fee Revenues The City of Edmonds has historically used a combination of state grants and local revenues, such as real estate excise taxes, to pay for the cost of park and recreation capital facilities. The City's plan for the future is to continue using grant revenue and some local revenues to pay part of the cost of parks needed for growth. A detailed analysis was made of the City's 2013-18 CIP and 2019-25 CFP. There are a total of $76.13 million of parks projects. $51.98 million add capacity to the park system, and therefore are considered projects eligible for impact fee funding. $15,76 million of the capacity projects have identified potential funding from grants and/or local revenues. $15,76 million is 30.33% of $51.98 million, therefore grants and local revenues will pay for 30.33% of park projects that add "capacity" to the park system for new development by increasing the value of park and recreation assets. Revenues that are used for repair, maintenance or operating costs are not used to reduce impact fees because they are not used, earmarked or prorated for the system improvements that are the basis of the impact fees. Revenues from past taxes paid on vacant land prior to development are not included because new capital projects do not have prior costs, therefore prior taxes did not contribute to such projects. Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Page 17 Company Packet Page 293 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds The other potential credits that reduce capacity costs (and subsequent impact fees) are donations of land or other assets by developers or builders. Those reductions depend upon specific arrangements between the developer and the City of Edmonds. Reductions in impact fees for donations are calculated on a case -by -case basis at the time impact fees are to be paid. Table 9 shows the calculation of the investment in parks that needs to be paid by growth. The investment in parks needed to serve growth (from Table 8), is multiplied times 30,33% to calculate the value of City investment for growth from grants and some local revenues. The result is that growth in Edmonds needs to pay $10,4 million for additional parks to maintain the City's standards for future growth. The City expects to use $3.1 million in grant and local revenue towards this cost (calculated at 30.33% of $10,4 million needed for growth), and the remaining $7.3 million will be paid by growth. Table 9: Investment in Parks to be Paid by Growth Investment City Investment Investment Needed for Growth @ to be Paid for Growth 30.33% by Growth $ 10,429,210 - $ 3,163,265 = $ 7,265,945 Formula 5: Growth Cost Per Person The growth cost per person is calculated by dividing the investment in parks that is to be paid by growth by the amount of population growth. Investment Growth of Growth Cost 5, to be Paid - Equivalent = by Growth Population per Person There are no new variables used in formula 5. Both variables were developed in previous formulas. Table 10 shows the calculation of the cost per person of parks that needs to be paid by growth. The investment in parks needed to be paid by growth (from Table 9), is divided by the growth population (from Table 4), and the result shows that cost for parks to be paid by growth is $1,235.73 per person. Henderson, Young & Company April 5, 2013 Page 18 Packet Page 294 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds Table 10: Growth Cost per Person Investment Growth of Growth Cost per to be Paid Equivalent Equivalent by Growth Population Population $ 7,265,945 - 5,880 = $ 1,235.73 Formula 6: Impact Fee per Unit of Development The amount to be paid by each new development unit depends on the equivalent population coefficient. The cost per unit of development is calculated by multiplying the growth cost per person by the equivalent population coefficient for each type of development. Growth Cost Equivalent 6, x Population per Person Coefficient Cost per Unit = of Development There are no new variables used in formula 6. Both variables were developed in previous formulas. However, the equivalent population coefficients from the Appendix were calculated for standard increments of 1,000 square feet, but the impact fee is charged per square foot, therefore the equivalent population coefficients from the Appendix are divided by 1,000 and the result is used in Table 11. Table 11 shows the calculation of the parks impact fee per unit of development. The growth cost of $1,253.73 per person from Table 10 is multiplied times the equivalent population coefficient to calculate the impact fee per unit of development. Table 11: Impact Fee per Unit Type Of Development Growth Cost per Equivalent Person Equivalent Population Coefficient Unit of Development Impact Fee Per Unit of Development Residential - single family 1,235.73 2.2125000 dwelling unit $ 2,734.05 Residential - multi family 1,235.73 1.8937500 dwelling unit 2,340.16 Retail 1,235.73 0.0020038 square foot 2.48 Office 1,235.73 0.0005056 square foot 0.62 Manufacturing 1,235.73 0.0005814 square foot 0.72 Construction 1,235.73 0.0001986 square foot 0.25 Henderson, Young & Company April 5, 2013 Page 19 Packet Page 295 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds APPENDIX: EQUIVALENT POPULATION COEFFICIENTS What is "Equivalency"? When governments analyze things that are different than each other, but which have something in common, they sometimes use "equivalency" as the basis for their analysis. For example, many water and sewer utilities calculate fees based on an average residential unit, then they calculate fees for business users on the basis of how many residential units would be equivalent to the water or sewer service used by the business. This well -established and widely practiced method uses "equivalent residential units" (ERUs) as the multiplier that uses the rate for one residence to calculate a variety of rates for different types of businesses. If a business needs a water connection that is double the size of an average house, that business is 2.0 ERUs, and would pay fees that are 2.0 times the fee for an average residential unit. Another use of "equivalency" that is used in public sector organizations is "full time equivalent" (FTE) employees. One employee who works full-time is 1.0 FTE, A half-time employee is 0.5 FTE. By adding up the FTE coefficients of all part-time employees, the total is the FTE (full-time equivalent) of all the part-time employees. Cities like Renton and Redmond charge business licenses on the basis of the number of employees in each business. In order to be fair to businesses with part-time employees, they convert the part-time employee count to FTE, and then pay the fee per FTE. Equivalency and Park Impact Fees The use of equivalency can be used to develop park impact fees that apply to new commercial development as well as residential development. Equivalent population coefficients for park impact fees use the same principles as ERUs or FTEs to measure differences among residential population and different kinds of businesses in their availability to benefit from Edmonds' parks. They document the nexus between parks and development by quantifying the differences among different categories of park users. The analysis that calculates equivalent population coefficients takes into account several factors and reports the result as a statistic that allows each category of business to pay its proportionate share of parks for growth based on the "equivalent population" that it generates. The "equivalency" calculation recognizes that employees and visitors have less time in Edmonds to benefit from Edmonds' parks (in the same way that part-time employees spend less time on the job than full-time employees). The equivalent population coefficients are used in two ways. First, they are multiplied times the number of employees in different types of businesses in Edmonds to count employees and visitors to businesses as "equivalent Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Page 20 Company Packet Page 296 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds population" in Edmonds. This provides a total population of residents, employees and visitors that will be used to calculate the park value per equivalent population. Second, the adjusted park growth cost per equivalent population is multiplied times the equivalent population coefficient for each type of business to calculate the impact fee rate for each type of business. Calculation of Equivalent Population Coefficients for Park Impact Fees There are two parts to the equivalent population coefficient: (1) employees, and (2) visitors. Table A-14 presents the data for the following factors used in analyzing employees: the number of days per week and hours per day that different types of businesses are typically open, the percent of hours that the employees are typically at the business location, and the resulting number of hours per day that each employee is in their business location in Edmonds and therefore proximate to Edmonds' parks. Table A-1: Employee Hours in Location (per Employee) Land -Use Category Employees Days per Week at Location Hours per Day at Location' Percent of Time At Location' Hours in Location per Person 2 Construction 5 9.0 25.0% 11.2500 FIRE 5 9.0 80.0% 36.0000 Manufacturing 5 9.0 100.0% 45.0000 Retail Trade 7 9.0 100.0% 63.0000 Services 5 9.0 80.0% 36.0000 WTU 5 9.0 100.0% 45.0000 Government 5 9.0 80.0% 36.0000 Education 5 9.0 100.0% 45.0000 FIRE = Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate WTU = Wholesale Trade, Transportation and Utilities ' Assumptions from Planner's Estimating Guide. 2 Hours in Location per Person = (#days/week x # hours/day x % of time at location) Table A-2 presents the data for the following factors used in analyzing visitors: the number of days per week that different types of businesses are typically open, the number of hours that visitors are typically at the business location, the number of visitors per employee at different types of business, and the resulting 4 The original version of Tables A-1 through A-3 was developed by Dr. Arthur C. Nelson, a leading scholar and researcher in the field of impact fees. The table appeared in Nelson's 2004 Planner's Estimating Guide, The Underlying employee data has been updated to the most recent edition (2008) of Trip Generation by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Page 21 Company Packet Page 297 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds number of visitor hours per employee that visitors are in the business location in Edmonds and therefore proximate to Edmonds' parks. Table A-2: Visitor Hours in Location (per Employee) Land -Use Category Visitors Days per Week at Location' Hours per Day at Location' Visitors Per Employees Visitor Hours in Location per Employee ° Construction 5 1,0 1,0872 5,4360 FIRE 5 1,0 1,2948 6,4740 Manufacturing 5 1,0 0,7668 3,8340 Retail Trade 7 1,0 15.0461 105.3227 Services 5 1,0 1,2948 6,4740 WTU 5 1,0 1,0872 5,4360 Government 5 1,0 4,6605 23.3025 Education 5 na na 0,0000 Assumptions from Planner's Estimating Guide. 3 Visitors per Employee from Planner's Estimating Guide, Does not include tourists. which are important to Edmonds, but for which no data is available that measures tourists per employee by type of business. ° Visitor Hours in Location per Employee = (#days/week x # hours/day x visitors/employee) Table A-3, presents the last step in calculating the equivalent population coefficient. Employee hours are added to visitor hours per employee for each type of business. The total is divided the total by 84 hours per week. Parks are considered a "daytime" public facility that is assumed to be available 12 hours per day, 7 days per week, for a total of 84 hours5, The result of this calculation is the daytime equivalent population coefficient for each type of business. Table A-3: Equivalent Population Coefficients Land -Use Category Total Total Hours in Location per Employee 5 Daytime Equivalent Population Coefficient - Hours @ 84 Construction 16.6860 0.1986 FIRE 42.4740 0.5056 Manufacturing 48.8340 0.5814 Retail Trade 168.3227 2.0038 Services 42.4740 0.5056 WTU 50.4360 0.6004 Government 59.3025 0.7060 Education 45.0000 0.5357 5 Total Hours in Location per Employee = Employee Hours + Visitor Hours s By way of comparison, police and fire facilities are considered to be "24-hour" public facilities, therefore 24 x 7 = 168 hours for their equivalent population coefficient calculations, Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Page 22 Company Packet Page 298 of 494 Rate Study for Park Impact Fees • City of Edmonds The equivalent population coefficient for residential development is based on the same methodology, but without a separate factor for visitors because residences do not have regular visitors that can be quantified like a business. The residential coefficient assumes 7 days a week, 15 hours per day, 75% at the location, for a total of 78.75 hours in location. Dividing 78.75 by 84 hours for daytime facilities (described above) produces an equivalent population coefficient of 0.9375 for residential development. When calculating the impact fee, the coefficient is multiplied times the average number of persons per housing unit. A single family home has an average of 2.36 persons per house, so the equivalent population coefficient is 0.9375 x 2.36 = 2.2125. A multi -family unit, such as an apartment or condominium, has an average of 2.02 persons per house, so the equivalent population coefficient is 0.9375 x 2.02 = 1.89375. As noted previously, the equivalent population coefficients will be multiplied times the number of employees in each type of business and the residential population to calculate the total equivalent population in Edmonds. Later in the impact fee calculation, the equivalent population coefficient is multiplied times the growth cost per equivalent population for each type of business and housing unit to calculate the impact fee rate for each type of development. Henderson, Young & April 5, 2013 Company Page 23 Packet Page 299 of 494 AM-5689 12, City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: 45 Minutes Submitted By: Kernen Lien Department: Planning Committee: Tvue: Information Information Subject Title Discussion: Shoreline Master Program Update Recommendation Schedule a public hearing on the Shoreline Master Program update. Previous Council Action The City Council heard a brief introduction to the Shoreline Master Program at the December 4, 2012 council meeting. The December 4, 2012 introduction focused the Shoreline Master Program applied to the Harbor Square property. Council continued review of the SMP at the February 26, 2013 meeting with a broader overvic the SMP update. At the March 26, 2013 meeting, staff will provided an in depth review the three Urban Mixed Use shoreline environments (ECDC 24.30.070) as we brief discussion of the allowed uses in the different shoreline environments and setbacks for various uses and shoreline environments. Narrative At this work session staff will focus on how proposed changes to the City's SMP may impact property owners around Lake Ballinger as well as other single family pi owners within the City's shoreline jurisdiction. Staff will also touch on how the updated SMP relates to the Meadowdale Marina area. The Shoreline Master Programs consists of a number of related documents which are included as attachments and explained below. Each of these documents were p as exhibits to the December 4, 2012 and the February 26, 2013 agenda memorandums. Only the SMP Draft Regulations and Shoreline Maps are included with this a memorandum: Exhibit 1: SMP Draft Regulations - Title 24 Edmonds Community Development Code Title 24 of the Edmonds Community Development Code contains the regulations and standards for shoreline uses and modification within in the City's shoreline juri; Title 24 is divided into ten parts, consistent with the material to be included within a master program as established in Chapter 173-26 WAC. In addition to regulation development and modifications within shoreline jurisdiction, Title 24 also contains policies for Edmonds' shoreline jurisdiction that were developed by the Citizens I Advisory Committee and administrative provisions for shoreline permitting. Exhibits 2 - 5: Shoreline Jurisdiction and Shoreline Environmental Designation Maps The attached maps show the City's shoreline jurisdiction and the shoreline environmental designations of the various shoreline areas with the City. Local government required to develop and assign a land use categorization system of shoreline areas as a basis for effective Shoreline Master Programs. The intent of designating shore environment is to encourage development that will enhance the present or desired character the shoreline. To accomplish this, segments of the shoreline are given an environment designation based on existing development patterns, natural capabilities and limitations, and the aspiration of the local community. Descriptions of the s environments are contained within Part III of the regulations linked above (ECDC 24.40.000 through ECDC 24.30.080). A major change over the shoreline jurisdiction identified in the current SMP, is that the tidally influenced portions of the Edmonds Marsh (roughly the western half o marsh west of SR 104) is now considered a shoreline of the state, which means that shoreline jurisdiction extends 200 feet beyond that portion of the marsh. As a rest new Urban Mixed Use III environment is proposed to accommodate development that may occur at Harbor Square and the old UNOCAL site south of the marsh. Th: environment also applies to the property on the west side of Sunset Avenue between Main and Bell Streets. The main difference between this environment and the of Urban Mixed Use environments is that Urban Mixed Use III would allow for residential development. Shoreline Inventory and Characterization The purpose of the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report is to document baseline environmental conditions in the shoreline jurisdiction of the City of Edn This inventory and characterization provides a basis for updating the City's Shoreline Master Program. The inventory and characterization helps the City to evaluate ecological functions and values of natural resources in its shoreline jurisdiction, and explore opportunities for conservation and restoration. Shoreline Restoration Plan A significant feature of state guidelines for the SMP update is the requirement that local governments include a real and meaningful strategy to address restoration of shorelines. Master programs must include goals, policies and actions for restoration of impaired shoreline ecological functions. The restoration plan is not intended tc mitigate past or future development impacts on the City's shorelines. Restoration is intended to improve overall environmental conditions unrelated to upcoming proj planned in the shoreline environment. The Restoration Plan linked below is an early draft that must be updated. Cumulative Impacts Analysis A final piece of the SMP is the Cumulative Impacts Analysis. The Shoreline Master Program Guidelines requires the City to evaluate and consider the cumulative im reasonably foreseeable future development on shoreline ecological functions and other shoreline functions promoted by the Shoreline Management Act. The purpose cumulative impacts analysis is to ensure that the City's SMP includes shoreline policies and regulations that will achieve no net loss of shoreline ecological functions SMP is implemented over time. The City has created a website for the SMP that is linked from the Planning Division's page on the City's website located here: http://www. edmondswa. gov/govermnent/departinents/development-services-home/planning-division-home/plans-long-range-planning/shoreline-master-program-up( Information on the Shoreline Management Act, SMP Update, SMP Documents, and Planning Board's agendas and minutes from their review of the SMP Update are available at this website. Packet Page 300 of 494 on how w of -11 as roperty rovided genda sdiction. is for Iechnical s are line horeline ,f the ult, a is new her two fonds directly ects pacts of of the as the late.html Packet Page 301 of 494 Attachments Exhibit 1 - SMP Regulations Title 24 ECDC Exhibit 2 - Shoreline Man for entire city Exhibit 3 - Shoreline Map North Exhibit 4 - Shoreline Map South Exhibit 5 - Shoreline Map Lake Ballinger Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Sandy Chase 04/18/2013 09:15 AM Mayor Dave Farling 04/18/2013 03:16 PM Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 04/18/2013 03:23 PM Form Started By: Kemen Lien Started On: 04/17/2013 02:06 PM Final Approval Date: 04/18/2013 Packet Page 302 of 494 Packet Page 303 of 494 DRAFT Edmonds Shoreline Master Program PartI. Introduction.............................................................................................................................................3 24.10.000 Purpose and Intent.............................................................................................................................3 24.10.010 Authority...........................................................................................................................................4 24.10.020 Applicability.....................................................................................................................................4 24.10.030 Relationship to Other Plans or Regulations......................................................................................4 24.10.040 Liberal Construction.........................................................................................................................5 24.10.050 Administrative Procedures................................................................................................................5 24.10.060 Document Organization....................................................................................................................6 Part II. Master Program Elements: Goals & Policies for the Edmonds Shoreline Master Program .............6 24.20.000 Introduction....................................................................................................................................... 6 24.20.010 Economic Development Element......................................................................................................7 24.20.020 Public Access Element......................................................................................................................8 24.20.030 Recreational Element......................................................................................................................10 24.20.040 Circulation Element........................................................................................................................11 24.20.050 Shoreline Use Element....................................................................................................................12 24.20.060 Conservation Element.................................................................................................................1645 24.20.070 Historic, Cultural, Scientific and Educational Element...............................................................174-7 24.20.080 Flood Damage Prevention Element.............................................................................................184-8 24.20.090 Views and Aesthetics Element....................................................................................................194-8 24.20.100 Urban Design Element................................................................................................................1943 24.20.110 Restoration Element....................................................................................................................2038 Part III. Shoreline Environments....................................................................................................................2224 24.3 0.000 Introduction.................................................................................................................................2224 24.30.010 Adoption Criteria........................................................................................................................222-2 24.30.020 Shoreline Jurisdiction and Environments Designation Maps......................................................222-2 24.30.030 Aquatic Environment..................................................................................................................2323 24.30.040 Natural Environment...................................................................................................................252-5 24.30.050 Urban Conservancy Environment...............................................................................................272-7 24.30.060 Shoreline Residential..................................................................................................................282-8 24.30.070 Urban Mixed Use........................................................................................................................3038 24.30.080 Urban Railroad............................................................................................................................3233 Part IV General Policies & Regulations........................................................................................................3332 24.40.000 Applicability...............................................................................................................................3332 Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 1 of 159 Packet Page 304 of 494 24.40.010 Archaeological and Historic Resources......................................................................................3332 24.40.020 Critical Areas..............................................................................................................................3433 24.40.030 Flood Hazard Reduction.............................................................................................................4242 24.40.040 Public Access and Views............................................................................................................4342 24.40.050 Shoreline Vegetation Conservation.............................................................................................4746 24.40.060 Water Quality, Stormwater, and Nonpoint pollution..................................................................4848 24.40.070 Shoreline Development Table: User Guide................................................................................5049 24.40.080 Shoreline Development Table: Shoreline Development Permitted by Area Designation ........... 5049 24.40.90 Shoreline Bulk and Dimensional Standards.....................................................................................53-52 Part V Specific Modification Policies & Regulations..................................................................................5755 24.50.000 Applicability ...............................................................................................................................5755 24.50.010 General Modification Policies and Regulations..........................................................................5755 24.50.020 Shoreline stabilization.................................................................................................................5856 24.50.030 Moorage: Piers, Docks, and Floats.............................................................................................6764 24.50.040 Landfill........................................................................................................................................7474 24.50.050 Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs........................................................................................7874 24.50.060 Dredging and dredge material disposal.......................................................................................8077 24.50.070 Shoreline habitat and natural systems restoration and enhancement projects.............................8683 Part V1 Specific Use Policies & Regulations.................................................................................................8885 24.60.000 Applicability...............................................................................................................................8885 24.60.010 Aquaculture.................................................................................................................................8885 24.60.020 Boating Facilities........................................................................................................................9491- 24.60.030 Commercial Development and Light Industrial ........................................................................1029r9 24.60.040 Forest Practices.......................................................................................................................1054-02 24.60.050 In -stream Structures................................................................................................................1054-02 24.60.060 Recreational Development......................................................................................................1064-03 24.60.070 Residential Development........................................................................................................1094-06 24.60.080 Transportation and Parking.....................................................................................................1124-09 24.60.090 Utilities....................................................................................................................................119446 Part VII Nonconforming Development...................................................................................................123M 24.70.000 Purpose....................................................................................................................................1234-29 24.70.010 Nonconforming Uses..............................................................................................................1234M 24.70.020 Nonconforming development, building and/or structure........................................................1244-14 24.70.030 Nonconforming Lots......................................................................................................................1274-13 24.70.040 Nonconforming Signs....................................................................................................................12847M 24.70.050 Nonconforming local public facilities............................................................................................12947M Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 2 of 159 Packet Page 305 of 494 Part VIII Administration — Shoreline Permits.........................................................................................1294-M 24.80.000 Purpose....................................................................................................................................1294-2-6 24.80.010 Exemptions from Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Process...................................1294-2-6 24.80.020 Letter of Exemption................................................................................................................1334-30 24.80.030 Review Criteria for All Development.....................................................................................1344-30 24.80.040 Substantial Development Permit Criteria................................................................................1344-4 24.80.050 Conditional Use Permit Criteria..............................................................................................1344-4 24.80.060 Variance Permit Criteria.........................................................................................................1354-32 24.80.070 Minimum Application Requirements......................................................................................1364-3-3 24.80.080 Notice of Application..............................................................................................................1384-35 24.80.090 Special Procedures for Limited Utility Extensions and Bulkheads.........................................1394-3-5 24.80.100 Public Hearings.......................................................................................................................1394-3-6 24.80.110 Notice of Decision, Reconsideration, and Appeals.................................................................1404-37 24.80.120 Initiation of Development.......................................................................................................1414-39 24.80.130 Revisions.................................................................................................................................1414-3-8 24.80.140 Time requirements of Shoreline Permits.................................................................................143440 24.80.150 Administrative Authority and Responsibility.........................................................................144444- 24.80.160 Compliance.............................................................................................................................14544-2- 24.80.170 Enforcement............................................................................................................................14644-2- PartIX Definitions......................................................................................................................................146442 24.90.000 General Information................................................................................................................146442 24.90.010 Definitions: A to B.................................................................................................................146443, 24.90.020 Definitions: C to F.................................................................................................................148444 24.90.030 Definitions: G to 0.................................................................................................................151447 24.90.040 Definitions: P to R..................................................................................................................155J-54 24.90.050 Definitions: S to T..................................................................................................................1574-5-3 24.90.060 Definitions: U to Z.................................................................................................................1584-54 PartX Appendices.....................................................................................................................................1594-M 24.100.000 Maps of Shoreline Environments and Jurisdictions................................................................1594-5-5 Part I. Introduction 24.10.000 Purpose and Intent This master program, in harmony with the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, is based on the philosophy that the shorelines of the state and our city are among the most valuable and fragile Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 3 of 159 Packet Page 306 of 494 resources that we possess. The Shoreline Management Act made clear that there is a great public concern regarding the use, protection, restoration, and preservation of these shorelines, which concern is the premise of this master program. In recognition of private property rights, local public opinion, existing realities, and the necessary coordination between several levels of government, this program represents an approach toward the enhancement of shorelines rather than the restriction of their use. The purposes of this Master Program are: A. To carry out the responsibilities imposed the City of Edmonds by Washington State Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58). B. To promote uses and development of the City of Edmonds shoreline consistent with the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan while protecting and restoring environmental resources. C. To promote the public health, safety, and general welfare by providing a guide and regulation for future development of the shoreline resources of the City of Edmonds. 24.10.010 Authority Authority for enactment and administration of the program is the shoreline Management Act of 1971, chapter 90.58 RCW, as now or hereafter amended 24.10.020 Applicability All proposed uses and development occurring within shoreline jurisdiction of the City of Edmonds must conform to the Shoreline Management Act and this Chapter. All uses, even those not meeting the definition of development, are subject to the provisions and development regulations of this chapter, even though a permit may not be required. 24.10.030 Relationship to Other Plans or Regulations A. Uses, developments and activities regulated by this Chapter may also be subject to the provisions of the city of Edmonds comprehensive Plan, the Washington State Environmental Policy Act, Edmonds City Code, and various other provisions of local, state, and federal law, as may be amended. Project proponents shall comply with all applicable laws prior to commencing any use, development or activity. B. The shoreline master program has been developed as a both a policy and a regulatory program. As such, the shoreline master program is a part of and was developed to be consistent with the city of Edmonds comprehensive plan and its component elements. C. The Edmonds Community Development Code establishes specific and detailed regulations for most of the uses, development, and activities regulated in this chapter. The Edmonds Community Development Code and this chapter are intended to operate together to produce Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 4 of 159 Packet Page 307 of 494 coherent and thorough shoreline regulations. Uses, developments and activities must comply with both the Edmonds Community Development Code and the shoreline master program in all cases. If there is a conflict between the two, the shoreline master program shall prevail. 24.10.040 Liberal Construction As provided for in RCW 90.58.900, the Shoreline Management Act is exempted from the rule of strict construction; the Act and this Master Program shall, therefore, be liberally construed to give full effect to the purposes, goals, policies, and standards for which the Act and this master Program were enacted. 24.10.050 Administrative Procedures The general administrative procedures for this Title 24 (Edmonds Shoreline Master Program) are not part of this program. They are included with the text of Title 24 for consistency and ease of use. The Department of Ecology will be notified of any changes to the administrative chapters listed below. The use of separate local administrative and enforcement procedures is consistent with the 2003 Washington State Shoreline Master Program Guidelines (WAC 173-26-191(2)(a)(iii)(C)), Administrative Provisions. "Local governments may include administrative, enforcement, and permit review procedures in the master program or the procedures may be defined by a local government ordinance separate from the master program. In either case, these procedures shall conform to the Shoreline Management Act, specifically RCW 90.58.140, 90.58.143, 90.58.210 and 90.58.220 and to chapter 173-27 WAC." This allows the city of Edmonds to revise local administrative procedures (fees, application meetings, authority of Administrator, etc) without another formal state amendment process. ECDC 24.80 must still be consistent and remain consistent with the related provisions in the Shoreline Management Act and sate shoreline rules (WACs). In the event of a conflict, the state RCW or WAC, as amended, will prevail over the local ordinance. The following sections are administrative procedures separate from Title 24: ECDC 24.80.070 Minimum Application Requirements ECDC 24.80.080 Notice of Application ECDC 24.80.100 Public Hearings ECDC 24.80.110 Notice of Decision, Reconsiderations, and Appeals ECDC 24.80.130 Initiation of Development ECDC 24.80.160 Administrative Authority and Responsibility ECDC 24.80.170 Compliance ECDC 24.80.180 Enforcement Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 5 of 159 Packet Page 308 of 494 24.10.060 Document Organization This Master Program is divided into the following ten parts, consistent with the material to be included within a master program as established in Chapter 173-26 WAC: A. Part I, ECDC 24.10.000 through 24.10.000, contains basic and general information regarding the shoreline master program. B. Part II, ECDC 24.20.000 through 24.20.110, contains the city's goals and policies with respect to the program elements established in Chapter 173-26 WAC. C. Part III, ECDC 24.30.000 through 24.30.080, contains information regarding the different shoreline environments to be found within the city including goals, policies and regulations specific to each of the shoreline environments. D. Part IV, ECDC 24.40.000 through 24.40.060, contains policies and regulations with respect to general master program provisions identified in Chapter 173-26 WAC. E. Part V, ECDC 24.50.000 through 24.50.070, contains policies and regulations that apply to specific modifications that are regulated under the shoreline master program. F. Part VI, ECDC 24.60.000 through 24.60.090, contains policies and regulations that apply to specific uses that are regulated under the shoreline master program. G. Part VII, ECDC 24.70.000 through 24.70.050, contains policies and regulations that apply to nonconforming development with the shoreline jurisdiction of the City of Edmonds. H. Part VIII, ECDC 24.80.000 through 24.80.180, contains administrative procedures for shoreline permitting Part IX, ECDC 24.90.000 through 24.90.060, contains definitions applicable to the shoreline master program J. Part X, ECDC 24.100.XXX through 24.=.XXX, contains appendices pertaining to this chapter. Part II. Master Program Elements: Goals & Policies for the Edmonds Shoreline Master Program 24.20.000 Introduction This section contains goals and policies that form the foundation of Edmonds' Shoreline Master Program which are implemented through the regulations in ECDC chapters 24.40 through 24.60, and apply to all areas of the City of Edmonds shoreline jurisdiction, regardless of the designated Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 6 of 159 Packet Page 309 of 494 shore environment. The Shoreline Management Act requires cities to adopt goals, or "elements," to guide and support major shoreline management issues. 24.20.010 Economic Development Element A. Purpose. The economic development element provides for the location and design of industries, industrial projects of statewide significance, transportation facilities, port facilities, tourist facilities, commerce and other developments that are particularly dependent on their location on or use of the shorelines of the state in accordance with RCW 90.58.100(2)(a). B. Economic Development Goal. It is a goal of the city to encourage port facilities, tourist facilities, mixed use, commercial and light industrial development in specific and limited shoreline areas which enhance the public's access to the shoreline. Water dependent, oriented and water enjoyment development are preferred in shoreline areas. The nature of this economic development should attract, and be open to, the general public and should not unduly interfere with the character of the shoreline area or with nearby shoreline and upland uses. C. Economic Development Policies. Mixed -use commercial and light industrial uses in the shoreline area should be permitted only where compatible with existing or planned shoreline and upland development, or where legal parcels of land can be aggregated to minimize the impacts from the mixed - use commercial or light industrial use. 2. Mixed -use commercial and light industrial uses should be permitted only where infrastructure, particularly the roadway system, is presently adequate or is made adequate to accommodate the demands generated by commercial or light industrial development. 3. New shoreline light industrial and commercial development should be limited to that which is classified as water -dependent, water -related, or water -enjoyment uses and non - water -oriented uses which are not accessory to a water -oriented use should be discouraged and/or prohibited. 4. Permitted mixed -use commercial and light industrial development in shoreline areas should enhance opportunity for the public to take advantage of shoreline amenities. Uses that support or enhance the opportunity for public access and compliment the cultural arts related to the shoreline should be encouraged. This might include uses wherein the public can view and enjoy the aesthetic qualities of the shoreline and vista beyond. 5. New development or redevelopment should avoid or mitigate additional loss of shoreline ecological functions. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 7 of 159 Packet Page 310 of 494 6. Development should be discouraged in any critical area and only allowed where impacts to these areas can be mitigated. 7. In shoreline areas where large tracts of land can be aggregated, some degree of flexibility is appropriate to allow for innovative and planned site design within parameters established by the city. 8. Economic benefits derived from wildlife, marine and fish habitats, public access, recreational scuba diving and tourism should be recognized and retained. 9. Priority should be given to those mixed -use commercial or light industrial uses which are water -dependent. 10. The potential adverse effects of mixed -use commercial and light industrial development on other activities should be minimized through local performance standards. 11. The recreational opportunities along the shoreline should be developed as an economic asset in a manner that will enhance the public enjoyment of the shorelines and in -water - related activities. 12. Commercial activities in shoreline areas should be operated with minimum adverse impact on the quality of the environment of the shoreline and adjacent areas. 24.20.020 Public Access Element A. Purpose The public access element provides for public access to publicly owned or privately owned shoreline areas where the public is granted a right of use or access in accordance with RCW 90.58.100(2)(b). B. Public Access Element Goal 1 It is a goal of the city to provide the maximum reasonable opportunity for the public to view and enjoy the amenities of the shoreline area from public viewpoints, while assuring that such access does not contribute to intrusions upon private property, nuisance, personal danger, or over -burdening of fragile natural resources. C. Public Access Policies 1 1. The city should use street ends and other publicly owned or controlled land within the shoreline area as a means of providing additional safe public access to shoreline areas. When these types of areas are developed, the city should also provide for some associated Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 8 of 159 Packet Page 311 of 494 limited off-street parking or public transportation connection in order to minimize impacts to surrounding properties. 2. The city should develop signage, public information brochures and publications for distribution which identify all locations for public access to the shorelines, and underwater activities with information about each site location. 3. The city should maintain public shorelines, waterways and tidelands in public ownership for continued public access and use. 4. With principal access to tidelands existing at public beaches to the north and south, the city, where practicable, should acquire and develop safe convenient public access for pedestrian access and water access to and use of public tidelands and beaches. 5. Public pedestrian access for neighborhood use should be encouraged. 6. Public access afforded by shoreline street ends, public utilities and rights -of -way should be preserved, maintained and enhanced. D. Public Access Goal 2 Incorporate public access into new shoreline development and unify individual public access elements into an organized system. E. Public Access Policies 2 1. Public access will be considered in the review of all private and public developments (including land division) with the exception of one- and two-family dwelling units when necessary to mitigate significant environmental impacts or through provisions designed to exchange access rights for development bonuses. 2. Developments, uses and activities on or near the shoreline should not impair or detract from the public's access to the water. 3. Public access should be provided as close as possible to the water's edge without adversely affecting a sensitive environment and, if feasible, should be designed with provisions for disabled and physically impaired persons. 4. Public access should be designed to provide for public safety and to minimize potential impacts to private property and individual privacy. 5. Assure that public access improvement result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. 6. No public access shall be acquired through a taking without just compensation. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 9 of 159 Packet Page 312 of 494 24.20.030 Recreational Element A. Purpose The recreation element provide for the preservation and enlargement of recreational opportunities including but not limited to parks, tidelands, beaches, and recreational areas in accordance with RCW 90.58.100(2)(c). B. Recreational Goal It is the goal of the city to provide substantial recreational opportunities for the public in shoreline areas through the preservation and expansion of these opportunities through programs such as acquisition, development and maintenance. C. Recreational Policies The city should continue to acquire and develop park land within shoreline areas. The city should also, where feasible, develop street ends within the shoreline area to provide for public recreation. The nature and extent of recreational opportunities provided within the various lands in the shoreline area owned or controlled by the city depends on the nature of the area involved, the amenities and natural resources to be found in that area, the location of the area and the needs of the community. 2. When mitigation requirements or bonus programs) permit, large or intensive private developments within the shoreline area should provide some public recreation amenities, in addition to public pedestrian access along the water's edge. 3. The city should consider both active and passive in -water, shoreline and upland recreational needs in development of recreational areas to meet local and regional needs. 4. The city should acquire, develop, expand and maintain public recreation facilities to meet public demand for recreation use and enjoyment of the water and shoreline. 5. Recreation facilities in the shoreline area should be restricted to those dependent upon a shoreline location, or those benefiting from a shoreline or in -water location that are in the public interest. 6. Public recreation facilities should be designed, developed, and maintained to respect the shoreline environment and minimize the degradation of the shoreline and its natural systems. 7. Public information and education programs, and attendant enforcement procedures, should be developed and implemented to help ensure that the public is aware of park regulations and private property rights, and to prevent the abuse of the shoreline and its natural ecological system. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 10 of 159 Packet Page 313 of 494 8. Recreational boating facilities including waterway trails and trailheads, terminals, moorage, and service facilities should be provided for on publicly owned land. 9. Recreational boating facilities including waterway trails and trailheads, terminals, moorage, and service facilities should be allowed on private property, except in the Natural Environment. 24.20.040 Circulation Element A. Purpose The circulation element provides for the general location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, and other public utilities and facilities in accordance with RCW 90.58.100(2)(d). B. Circulation Goal It is the goal of the city to provide for the safe and efficient movement of people, goods, and emergency services within the shoreline area while recognizing and enhancing the unique, fragile and scenic character of the shoreline area with minimum disruption to the shoreline environment and minimum conflict between different users. C. Circulation Policies Railroad Avenue, Dayton Street, Main Street, Admiral Way, and Sunset Avenue, which provide access to and through the city's accessible downtown shoreline area, should be designed and regulated to safely accommodate the vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian traffic using these corridors, as well as to facilitate egress and ingress from adjacent properties and to enhance the scenic character and recreational use of this corridor, while recognizing that shoreline uses should have primary access to Railroad Avenue and Admiral Way. 2. Whenever practicable, safe pedestrian and bicycle movement on and off roadways in the shoreline area should be encouraged as a means of personal transportation and recreation. 3. Where new streets are needed to serve uses in the shoreline area, these streets should be the minimum size necessary to provide safe and efficient vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle access, including access for emergency vehicles, to the properties to be served. 4. Public waterborne transportation linked to public and private forms of ground transportation should be encouraged to minimize auto usage, and to eliminate barriers between public waterborne transportation and ground transportation in conformance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 11 of 159 Packet Page 314 of 494 5. All transportation planning should be coordinated to provide efficient use and transfer between modes while minimizing the adverse environmental impacts of such facilities. 6. Circulation and transportation systems should be located, designed and developed with respect to existing and/or planned rail, highway and ferry facilities. 7. Public transit systems should be linked to the urban waterfront. 8. Pedestrian walkways, trails and bicycle linkages should be provided between the historic downtown and the waterfront, including the train station and ferry terminal. 9. New or expanded non -water oriented transportation facilities should be located outside of shoreline jurisdiction whenever feasible. 24.20.050 Shoreline Use Element A. Purpose The shoreline use element considers the proposed general distribution and general location and extent of the use on shorelines and adjacent land areas for housing, business, industry, transportation, agriculture, natural resources, recreation, education, public buildings and grounds, and other categories of public and private uses of the land in accordance with RCW 90.58.100(2)(d). B. Shoreline Use Goals The goals of the city are to: Allow for a diversity of uses within the shoreline area consistent with the dramatically different character of the various shorelines within the city, and to preserve and enhance the natural and aesthetic quality of important shoreline areas while allowing for reasonable development which meet the goals and policies of the Shoreline Management Act. 2. Provide performance and development standards for shoreline uses which achieve compatibility among activities. 3. Reserve shoreline and water areas particularly suited for specific and appropriate uses, especially water -oriented and water -dependent uses, for such uses whether they are existing or potential. 4. Establish and implement policies and regulations for shoreline use consistent with the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. These policies and regulations should insure that the overall land use patterns in shoreline areas are compatible with existing shoreline Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 12 of 159 Packet Page 315 of 494 environment designations and will be sensitive to and not degrade habitat and ecological systems and other shoreline resources. 5. Ensure that proposed shoreline uses are distributed, located and developed in a manner that will maintain or improve the health, safety and welfare of the public. 6. Ensure that proposed shoreline uses do not minimize the rights of others or infringe upon the rights of private ownership. 7. Encourage restoration of shoreline areas that have been degraded or diminished in ecological value and functions as a result of past activities or catastrophic events. 8. Ensure that planning, zoning and other regulatory and non -regulatory programs governing lands adjacent to shoreline jurisdictions are consistent with SMA policies and regulations and the provisions of this SMP. 9. Encourage increased accessibility to the shoreline for a variety of users and activities. 10. Develop adaptive management strategies to increase capacity to respond to future possible impacts on the Edmonds shoreline from climate change in the Puget Sound region. 11. Ensure that residential development in the shoreline area is compatible with adjacent uses and minimizes impacts to shoreline processes and functions. 12. Ensure future shoreline development will achieve no net loss of ecological functions and values. C. Shoreline Use Policies "Environmentally critical areas" are to be protected and regulated consistent with the city's environmental review and critical areas regulations contained in Chapters 20.15A and 23.40 through 23.90 ECDC, less the exceptions listed in ECDC 24.40.020.C. 2. New uses and developments in shoreline areas that have established desirable development patterns should be designed to be compatible with those areas; provided the existing uses are consistent with the Shoreline Management Act and the City's comprehensive plan and shoreline master program. 3. In shoreline areas without established development patterns and which are not unique or fragile, the city should allow for a wide range of development options consistent with the Edmonds Community Development Code within established limits to protect the public interest. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 13 of 159 Packet Page 316 of 494 4. Over -water structures other than ferry terminal passenger shelters, docks, piers, walkways, breakwaters and other similar structures should be prohibited with the exception of minor appurtenant buildings, buoys, divers resting floats, and art sculpture. 5. Water -dependent uses should have priority over non -water -dependent uses in the shoreline area. Nonetheless, uses such as dry-docks, boat yards, and similar marine enterprises are incompatible with the character of the majority of the shoreline area and should be limited to specific designated areas. 6. Uses in shoreline areas should not degrade water quality and land disturbances (land covered by water and the land area adjacent to the ordinary high water mark) should be the minimum necessary. 7. The pattern and distribution of land and water uses should be controlled and encouraged in order to enhance the shoreline natural systems, protect against their damage, and provide for their public use and enjoyment. 8. Multiple uses of shorelines should be encouraged. Shoreline uses which allow large numbers of people to enjoy the marine environment should be given a higher priority than uses that lead to the usurpation of the limited urban waterfront by any single use activity. 9. Shoreline use should be compatible with its site, in harmony with adjacent uses, and consistent with long-range comprehensive planning for waterfront use. 10. Uses which adversely alter or degrade the defined shoreline "natural systems" should be prohibited. 11. The City of Edmonds shall stay abreast of scientific information regarding climate change and sea level rise and reevaluate the Shoreline Master Program development standards as soon as adeauate scientific information is available. 12. The Edmonds Marsh study identified in the City of Edmonds Capital Improvement Plan is an important study for determining the potential impacts of climate change and sea level rise on the City of Edmonds and should be considered a high priority for completion. 13. All use and development should use low impact development LID, techniques where appropriate and feasible. 44,14. The rehabilitation of "natural systems" (e.g., the improvement in water quality, removal of beach obstructions, etc.) should be encouraged. 44-.15. Shoreline Use and Development Review. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 14 of 159 Packet Page 317 of 494 a. Shoreline use and development should be provided for through a process of review and analysis that gives priority to: i. The protection and enhancement of the shoreline natural system; ii. The provision for shoreline -dependent uses; iii. The provision for shoreline -oriented uses; and iv. The accommodation of necessary uses that are neither shoreline -dependent nor shoreline -oriented. b. The priority system will recognize, but not be limited to, the following systems and uses: i. Protect and enhance natural systems: A. Biological: 1. Critical areas for fish spawning, rearing, feeding, and migration, including beaches, marshland, aquatic vegetation and nearshore subtidal area; 2. Waterfowl and water associate bird nesting, resting, feeding and nursery areas; 3. Shellfish life — supporting areas; 4. Upland mammal breeding, rearing and feeding areas; 5. Upland plant growth areas (greenbelts, etc.); 6. aquatic (non -fish and non -shell fish) marine organisms life supporting areas; and 7. Other. B. Geological: 1. Bluff and landslide areas; 2. Beaches and tidelands — shoals and coves; 3. Marshland and slough area; 4. Streams and ravines; 5. Below low water submerged lands — canyons, cliffs, rock reefs, sand or mud flat, etc.; and 6. Other. ii. Provide for shoreline -dependent uses, such as: A. Ferry and passenger terminals; B. Terminal and transfer facilities for marine commerce and industry; C. Marine and fresh water construction, dismantling and repair; D. Marinas — boats; E. Intakes and outfalls; F. Boat launch facilities; G. Shoreline recreation — including parks, bike and walking trails, beaches, etc. H. Water -related recreation — including scuba diving, waterway trail system, fishing and small craft boating; I. Marine and limnological research, interpretation and education; J. Piers and related facilities for the loading and unloading of petroleum products; and K. Other uses of like intensity and dependency. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 15 of 159 Packet Page 318 of 494 24.20.060 Conservation Element A. Purpose The shoreline conservation element provides for protection of natural resources, including but not limited to scenic vistas, aesthetics, and vital estuarine areas for fisheries and wildlife protection in accordance with RCW 90.58.100(2)(f). B. Conservation Goal It is the goal of the city to preserve, protect, and enhance unique and fragile areas of flora and fauna and scenic vistas to help assure the continued availability of these resources for future generations and to protect the ecological functions of the shoreline to ensure no net loss of functions. This element is concerned with the preservation of the natural shoreline resources, considering such characteristics as scenic vistas, linear park systems, waterway trail systems, estuarine areas for fish and wildlife protection, critical habitat, beaches and other valuable natural or aesthetic features. Assure preservation of the unique, fragile and scenic shoreline resources by carefully preserving the non-renewable resources and managing for the continued utilization of renewable resources. C. Conservation Policies 1. The City should work to maintain environmentally sensitive and critical areas for present and future generations, such as the Edmonds Marsh, the historically contiguous wetland east of SR-104, the Edmonds Underwater Park and the shoreline sanctuary. 2. Development in shoreline areas should be managed so that any adverse impacts on aquatic and land plants and animals are avoided or mitigated to result in no net loss of ecological function. 3. Where practicable, steps should be taken to enhance the shoreline area as a spawning ground for salmon, forage fish, and other species of fish and aquatic marine life. 4. Irreplaceable shoreline resources should be preserved for their intrinsic value and continued public enjoyment. 5. Beneficial use of shoreline resources should be provided for while respecting the natural shoreline environment. 6. Where practicable, restoration of damaged shoreline features and systems should be encouraged. 7. Limited improvements in public recreation areas should be permitted where such improvements would enhance public access to and public education and understanding of Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 16 of 159 Packet Page 319 of 494 the value of the shoreline resource (an example of which is the Edmonds Underwater Park). 8. Provide for the preservation of the natural shoreline resources through the protection of existing and the designation of potential public recreational areas. 9. Provide for the preservation of the natural shoreline resources through the continuation and expansion of interpretive and environmental education programs, and public outreach and involvement in stewardship. 10. The city, where practicable, should acquire key shoreline parcels that become available; such parcels are those integral to necessary expansion of existing prime beach areas. 24.20.070 Historic, Cultural, Scientific and Educational Element A. Purpose The historic, cultural, scientific and educational element provides for the protection and restoration of buildings, sites, and areas having historic, cultural, scientific, or educational values in accordance with RCW 90.58.100(2)(g). B. Historic, Cultural, Scientific and Educational Goal Identify, protect, preserve and restore important archaeological, historical, art and cultural sites located within the shoreline jurisdiction area for educational and scientific uses and enjoyment of the natural amenities by the general public. C. Historic, Cultural, Scientific and Educational Policies 1. Wherever practicable, shoreline development should recognize the former and current use of much of the city's shoreline area for such uses as boatyards, railroads, ferry landings, logging, and industrial sites, and recognize the earlier uses of the shoreline by Native American cultures. 2. The large, relatively undisturbed area known as the Edmonds Marsh should be preserved for, among other reasons, its educational and scientific value as well as its role in stormwater management. 3. Educational projects and programs including signage should be encouraged that foster a greater appreciation of the importance of shoreline management, maritime activities, environmental conservation, cultural and maritime history. 4. The city should develop signage and informational programs which identify and explain unique scenic and cultural opportunities. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 17 of 159 Packet Page 320 of 494 5. Important archaeological, historical and cultural sites located within the shoreline jurisdiction area should be identified, protected, preserved or restored for educational and scientific uses and enjoyment of the natural amenities by the general public. 6. Historical/cultural sites should be acquired through purchase or gift, so as to insure their protection and preservation. 7. Where practicable, buildings, sites and areas having historic, cultural, educational, or scientific value to the community should be protected and restored. 8. Where practicable, all buildings, sites, and areas which are placed on the State or Federal Historic Register should be preserved, protected and restored. 9. Where practicable, significant archeological features and data should be protected for scientific study and public observation. 24.20.080 Flood Damage Prevention Element A. Purpose The flood damage prevention element provides for protection against flood damage and the preservation and restoration of ecosystem wide ecological functions in accordance with RCW 9038.100. B. Flood Damage Prevention Element Goal It is a goal of the city to reduce the likelihood of flood damage by locating development away from flood -prone areas and by protecting and restoring shoreline ecological functions and ecosystem -wide processes. C. Flood Damage Prevention Policies Structural flood control devices should be allowed only after it is demonstrated that nonstructural solutions are not feasible to reduce the hazard. 2. Participate in watershed -wide programs to reduce flood hazards and improve the shoreline ecology. 3. Discourage new development in shoreline areas that are reasonably likely to be harmed by flood conditions, or which would create or intensify flood hazard impacts on other properties. 4. Ensure that flood hazard reduction measures do not result in a net loss of ecological functions in shoreline areas. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 18 of 159 Packet Page 321 of 494 24.20.090 Views and Aesthetics Element A. Purpose The views and aesthetics element provides for preservation and/or protection of public scenic vistas, public views of the water, and other aesthetic qualities of shorelines for enjoyment by the general public. B. Views and Aesthetics Goal It is the goal of the city to assure that the public's ability and opportunity to enjoy shoreline views and aesthetics is protected. C. Views and Aesthetics Policies 1. The scenic and aesthetic qualities of shorelines and public vistas should be preserved through development standards. 2. Public views from the shoreline upland areas should be enhanced and preserved. Enhancement of views should not be construed to mean excessive removal of vegetation which partially impairs views. 3. Public visual access should be maintained, enhanced and preserved on shoreline street ends, public utilities and rights -of -way and within public "view corridors" as designated by the city. 24.20.100 Urban Design Element A. Purpose The urban design element provides for the development between the shoreline and adjacent areas in manner that provides linkages that will enhance the beauty and visual identity of Edmonds. B. Urban Design Goal It is a goal of the city to encourage development within the shoreline area that is visually coherent, provides visual and physical linkage to the shoreline, enhances the waterfront, and is consistent with the Streetscape Plan. C. Urban Design Policies. The shoreline area within and south of the north boundary of the Brackett's Landing North Park, to the south city limits (generally the urban mixed -use shoreline environment) is one of the most scenic areas of the city. It also, to a large extent, Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 19 of 159 Packet Page 322 of 494 establishes the visual identity of Edmonds. As such, both public and private development in these areas should be controlled and regulated to provide an urban environment which preserves or enhances the opportunity for the public to enjoy the scenic quality of the shoreline. 2. Projects should be encouraged to provide "street furniture," public art, related interpretative signage, landscaping and other amenities within or adjacent to the right-of- way of Railroad Avenue and Admiral Way to complement a pedestrian promenade along the shoreline consistent with the streetscape plan. 3. Where possible, the owner of uplands abutting pedestrian waterfront activities should be encouraged to incorporate public art elements, public art and cultural amenities that promote aesthetic considerations consistent with the City of Edmonds Arts Commission goals. 4. New and remodeled developments should provide public view corridors adjacent to either the north or south property line to enhance public visual access to the Puget Sound and to provide for a visual link between the downtown and its waterfront roots. The location of the view corridor should be coordinated with the development of adjacent properties in order to maximize public visual access to the Puget Sound. Properties with significant frontage on the shoreline should consider providing view corridors in multiple locations so as to maximize public visual access to the shoreline. In the application of design standards, the preservation of public views shall be given priority over landscaping and fencing requirements. 5. Projects should minimize the amount of vehicular parking in the urban mixed -use I and II shoreline environments through use of joint use parking agreements (where permitted), and by locating employee parking off -site and outside the urban mixed -use I and II shoreline environments. 6. Projects should be designed to locate vehicular parking away from the shoreline, bulkhead, or areas of pedestrian circulation. 7. Developments should provide conveniently situated bicycle parking on site. 8. Projects should be designed to minimize impacts to existing shoreline ecological functions. 24.20.110 Restoration Element A. Purpose The restoration element provides for the timely restoration and enhancement of ecologically impaired areas within available economic resources in a manner that achieves a net gain in Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 20 of 159 Packet Page 323 of 494 shoreline ecological functions and processes above baseline conditions as of the adoption of the city's shoreline master programs. B. Restoration Goal It is the goal of the city to improve water quality, restore degraded and lost habitat corridors, and improve connectivity of the shoreline environments though voluntary and incentive - based public and private programs and actions consistent with the City of Edmonds Shoreline Master Program Restoration Plan. C. Restoration Policies 1. Protect and/or restore freshwater, nearshore, and estuarine habitat and habitat -forming processes. 2. Protect and restore wetland and restore salt marsh habitat to improve shoreline ecological functions. 3. Remove intertidal fill; restore beach deposits and processes and ecological functions. 4. Remove/replace creosote -treated logs, pilings, and debris. 5. Increase availability of large woody debris and opportunities for recruitment in the nearshore zone. 6. Protect and restore native species of vegetation, fish, and wildlife. 7. Remove or improve fish- and wildlife -passage barriers. 8. Manage and treat stormwater to improve water quality, decrease peak flow events, and increase implementation of low impact development (LID) practices. 9. Protect naturally eroding bluffs and associated ecological functions. 10. Protect and restore wildlife corridors. 11. Ensure that shoreline restoration projects do not degrade critical areas and water quality. 12. Establish incentives that could provide opportunities for new development to restore impaired shoreline ecological functions. 13. Work with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway to encourage nearshore restoration projects on the railroad right-of-way. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 21 of 159 Packet Page 324 of 494 Part III. Shoreline Environments 24.30.000 Introduction Local governments are required, under the Washington State Shoreline Management Act of 1971 through WAC 173-26, to develop and assign a land use categorization system of shoreline areas as a basis for effective Shoreline Master Programs. The intent of designating shoreline environment is to encourage development that will enhance the present or desired character of the shoreline. To accomplish this, segments of shoreline are given an environment designation based on existing development patterns, natural capabilities and limitations, and the aspiration of the local community. 24.30.010 Adoption Criteria Shoreline Designations have been determined after consideration of: A. The ecological functions and processes that characterize the shoreline, together with the degree of human alteration; and B. Existing development patterns together with ECDC Title 16 Zoning designations, the City Comprehensive Plan designations and other officially adopted plans; and C. The goals of the City of Edmonds citizens for their shorelines; and D. Other state policies in the Act and the Shoreline Master Program Guidelines (RCW 90.58.020 and WAC 173-26, respectively). 24.30.020 Shoreline Jurisdiction and Environments Designation Maps A. The location and extent of areas under the jurisdiction of the Master Program, and the boundaries of the various shoreline environments affecting the lands and waters of the City are shown in Appendix A of this Master Program. (ECDC 24.100.000) B. The purpose of the official shoreline maps in Appendix A is to identify Shoreline area designations. The map does not necessarily identify or depict the lateral extent of shoreline jurisdiction. Where uncertainty or conflict may occur in the exact location of jurisdictional or shoreline designation boundary line, the shoreline Administrator shall rely up the criteria contained in RCW 90.58.030(2) and chapter 173-22 WAC pertaining to determinations of shorelands, as amended, rather that the incorrect or outdated map. C. In the event that new shoreline areas are discovered (e.g. associated wetlands) that are not mapped and/designated on the official shoreline map, these areas will be designated in the following manner. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 22 of 159 Packet Page 325 of 494 1. If a newly discovered shoreline area is adjacent to a single shoreline area environment, then the newly discovered shoreline area will be assigned the same shoreline designation as the adjacent shoreline area. 2. If a newly discovered shoreline area abuts more than one shoreline area environment, the shoreline area environment that is most restrictive shall be assigned to the newly discovered shoreline area. 24.30.030 Aquatic Environment A. Purpose The purpose of the aquatic low -intensity environment (Aquatic I) is to protect, restore, and manage the unique characteristics and resources of the areas waterward of the ordinary high water mark. The purpose of the aquatic high -intensity environment (Aquatic II) is to protect the unique characteristics and resources of the aquatic environment by managing water -dependent use activities to prioritize preservation and restoration of natural resources, navigation, recreation, and commerce, and by assuring compatibility between shoreland and aquatic uses. B. Classification Criteria 1. General. These are lands waterward of the ordinary high water mark for both saltwater and freshwater bodies of water, including any submerged or inter -tidal areas. The Aquatic I and II environment designations include the water surface together with the underlying lands and the water column. Information from the shoreline inventory and characterization report was used in conjunction with the comprehensive plan and zoning information to determine the appropriate environment designation. 2. Aquatic I (Low Intensity). These areas are mostly characterized by aquatic ecosystems that have been modified by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad bed fill that covers the intertidal and transitional upland zones along the beach. The beach has been altered by seawalls or large -rock riprap. These shoreline areas generally exhibit low -intensity development and few over -water structures. In freshwater areas, there may be a significant number of docks and piers serving residential areas. 3. Aquatic II (High Intensity). These areas are more intensely developed areas with water - dependent uses. The marine nearshore has been significantly modified by commercial waterfront development, including the Port of Edmonds Marina and the Washington State Ferries pier. C. Area Designated Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 23 of 159 Packet Page 326 of 494 1. Aquatic I (Low Intensity): Applicable to all marine aquatic environments waterward of the ordinary high water mark between the southern boundary of the City and the old Union Oil dock, between the northern edge of the Edmonds fishing pier and the southern edge of the Main Street ferry terminal, between the northern edge of the Main Street ferry terminal and the northern boundary of the City, and Lake Ballinger. 2. Aquatic II (High Intensity): Applicable to those marine aquatic environments waterward of the ordinary high water mark between the old Union Oil dock and the northern edge of the Edmonds fishing pier, and between the southern and northern edges of the Main Street ferry terminal. D. Management Policies 1. New over -water structures should be limited and allowed only for water -dependent uses, public access, or ecological restoration. 2. The size of new over -water structures should be limited to the minimum necessary to support a structure's intended use. 3. Uses and activities within the Aquatic I and II environments should be compatible with the adjoining shoreline environments. 4. In order to reduce the impacts of shoreline development and increase effective use of water resources, multiple uses of over -water facilities should be encouraged, provided that use conflicts can be avoided. 5. All developments and uses on navigable waters or their beds should be located and designed to minimize interference with surface navigation and moorage. 6. Uses and activities within Aquatic I shoreline environments should be limited to public access, boat moorage, and necessary utility and transportation facilities. 7. All developments and uses should consider impacts to public views. 8. All developments and uses should allow for the safe, unobstructed passage of fish and wildlife, particularly those species dependent on migration. 9. Restoration opportunities associated with project impacts should be encouraged in the aquatic environment. 10. Uses that adversely impact the ecological functions of critical saltwater and freshwater habitats should not be allowed except where necessary to achieve the objectives of RCW 90.58.020, and then only when their impacts are mitigated according to the sequence described in WAC 173-26-201(2)(e) necessary to achieve no net loss of ecological functions. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 24 of 159 Packet Page 327 of 494 11. Dredging and dredge material disposal should be limited to the minimum amount necessary. Dredging operations should minimize impacts to other shoreline uses and functions. 12. Filling should be avoided if practicable and limited to the minimum amount necessary. Filling operations should minimize impacts to other shoreline uses and functions. 13. Ensure that piers and docks are compatible with the shoreline area where they are located and are designed and maintained to minimize adverse impacts to the environment. 14. Ensure that marinas are located, designed, constructed, and operated in a manner that will minimize damage to shoreline processes and functions, be compatible with adjacent uses, and protect the aesthetic qualities of the shoreline environment. 15. All developments and uses on navigable waters should be located and designed to minimize interference to navigation. 24.30.040 Natural Environment A. Purpose The purpose of the Natural environment designation is to protect those shoreline areas that are relatively free of human influence or that include intact or minimally degraded shoreline functions intolerant of human use. These systems require that only very low -intensity uses be allowed in order to maintain the ecological functions and ecosystem -wide processes. B. Designation Criteria A Natural designation should be considered for shoreline areas if any of the following criteria apply: 1. The shoreline is ecologically intact and therefore currently performing an important, irreplaceable function or ecosystem -wide process that would be damaged by human activity; 2. The shoreline is considered to represent ecosystems and geologic types that are of particular scientific and educational interest; or 3. The shoreline is unable to support new development or uses without significant adverse impacts to ecological functions or risk to human safety; Such shoreline areas include largely undisturbed portions of shoreline areas such as wetlands, estuaries, unstable bluffs, coastal dunes, spits, and ecologically intact shoreline habitats. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 25 of 159 Packet Page 328 of 494 Ecologically intact shorelines, as used here, means those shoreline areas that retain the majority of their natural shoreline functions, as evidenced by the shoreline configuration and the presence of native vegetation. Generally, but not necessarily, ecologically intact shorelines are free of shoreline structural modifications, structures, and intensive human uses. In forested areas, they generally include native vegetation with diverse plant communities, multiple canopy layers, and the presence of large woody debris available for recruitment to adjacent water bodies. Recognizing that there is a continuum of ecological conditions ranging from near natural conditions to totally degraded and contaminated sites, this term is intended to delineate those shoreline areas that provide valuable functions for the larger aquatic and terrestrial environments which could be lost or significantly reduced by human development. Whether or not a shoreline is ecologically intact is determined on a case -by - case basis. The term "ecologically intact shorelines" applies to all shoreline areas meeting the above criteria ranging from larger reaches that may include multiple properties to small areas located within a single property. C. Area Designated The Natural Designation includes all natural diverse wetland and riparian habitat areas within shoreline management jurisdiction. These include, but are not limited to: The Edmonds Marsh and the historically contiguous wetland to the east of State Route 104. 2. The Shell Creek wetland and lower riparian zone, and the wetlands which are now isolated on the east side of the railroad tracks, which are partially or entirely within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of Puget Sound. D. Management Policies 1. Any use that would substantially degrade the ecological functions or natural character of the Natural shoreline area should not be allowed. 2. The following new uses should not be allowed in areas designated Natural: a. Residential b. Commercial uses, c. Industrial uses, d. Non -water -oriented recreation, e. Roads, utility corridors, and parking areas that can be located outside Natural - designated shorelines. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 26 of 159 Packet Page 329 of 494 3. Scientific, historical, cultural, educational research uses, and low -intensity, water - oriented recreational access uses may be allowed, provided that no significant ecological impact on the area will result. 4. New development or significant vegetation removal that would reduce the capability of vegetation to perform normal ecological functions should not be allowed. Subdivision of property in a configuration that would, to achieve its intended purpose, require significant vegetation removal or shoreline modification that adversely impacts ecological functions should not be allowed. 5. Critical areas within shorelines designated as Natural should be protected pursuant to the Edmonds Critical Areas Ordinance, less the exceptions listed in ECDC 24.40.020.C. 6. Restoration opportunities should be encouraged in areas with a Natural designation. 24.30.050 Urban Conservancy Environment A. Purpose The purpose of the Conservancy designation is to protect and restore ecological functions of open space, floodplains, and other sensitive lands where they exist in urban and developed settings, while allowing a variety of compatible uses. B. Designation Criteria The Urban Conservancy environment is applied to shoreline areas within the City where any of the following characteristics apply: 1. They are suitable for water -related or water -enjoyment uses; 2. They are open space, flood plain or other sensitive areas that should not be more intensively developed; 3. They have potential for ecological restoration; 4. The retain important ecological functions, even though partially developed; or 5. They have the potential for development that is compatible with ecological restoration. C. Area Designated Areas generally lying upland of the ordinary high water mark and in between the southern boundary of the City and the south side of the old Union Oil dock, the Willow Creek outlet of the Edmonds Marsh, between the southern edge of the area known as Brackett's Landing South and the southern edge of the Main Street ferry terminal, and from the northern edge of Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 27 of 159 Packet Page 330 of 494 the Main Street ferry terminal to the northern boundary of the area known as Brackett's Landing North, including the spit, and to the east as far as the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad right-of-way. D. Management Policies Uses that preserve the natural character of the area or promote preservation of open space or sensitive lands either directly or over the long term should be the primary allowed uses in Conservancy areas. 2. Uses that result in restoration of ecological functions should be allowed if the use is otherwise compatible with the purpose of the Conservancy designation and the setting. Public access and public recreation objectives should be implemented in Conservancy areas whenever feasible. 4. Water -oriented uses should be given priority over non -water -oriented uses. For shoreline areas adjacent to commercially navigable waters, water -dependent uses should be given highest priority. 5. New development should be designed and located to preclude the need for shoreline armoring, vegetation removal, flood control, and other shoreline modifications. 6. Restoration opportunities should be encouraged in Conservancy areas. 7. Standards should be established for shoreline stabilization measures, vegetation conservation, water quality, and shoreline modifications within Conservancy areas. These standards shall ensure that new development does not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions or further degrade other shoreline values. 24.30.060 Shoreline Residential A. Purpose The purpose of the shoreline residential environment is to accommodate residential development and appurtenant structures that are consistent with this chapter. An additional purpose is to provide appropriate public access and recreational uses. B. Designation Criteria General. These are areas typified by residential development in areas where topography, transportation systems, and development patterns make it extremely unlikely that more intensive use would be appropriate. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 28 of 159 Packet Page 331 of 494 2. Shoreline Residential I: This designation is appropriate for shoreline areas with larger -lot residential development along the marine shoreline. 3. Shoreline Residential IL• This designation is appropriate for shoreline areas with smaller - lot residential development along the marine shoreline. 4. Shoreline Residential III: Designation for single-family residential development adjacent to freshwater (e.g., Lake Ballinger). C. Area Designated General. A shoreline residential environment designation has been assigned to shoreline areas that are predominantly single-family or multifamily residential development or are planned and platted for residential development. There are three levels of shoreline residential environment designations corresponding to the Edmonds zoning and comprehensive plan designations. The areas which are appropriate for this classification are as follows: 2. Shoreline Residential I: The upland area adjacent to the eastern boundary of the Urban Railroad environment designation which is zoned RS-12 and RS-20. 3. Shoreline Residential II: The upland area adjacent to the eastern boundary of the Urban Railroad environment designation which is zoned RS-6. 4. Shoreline Residential III: The upland area adjacent to the shoreline of Lake Ballinger which is zoned RSW-12. D. Management Policies Multi -lot residential and recreational developments should provide public access and joint use for community recreational facilities when consistent with statutory and constitutional limitations on development exactions. 2. Commercial development within the shoreline residential environment should be limited to water -oriented uses. Commercial development does not include lawful home occupations. 3. Structurally engineered shoreline modifications and stabilization should be prohibited except in cases of emergency as defined. 4. Steep slopes shall be protected per the requirements of ECDC 23.80, the building code, and this SMP. 5. Any new development or redevelopment should utilize low impact development techniques where feasible and appropriate. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 29 of 159 Packet Page 332 of 494 6. Standards for density or minimum frontage width, setbacks, lot coverage limitations, buffers, shoreline stabilization, vegetation conservation, critical area protection, and water quality shall be set to assure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions, taking into account the environmental limitations and sensitivity of the shoreline area, the level of infrastructure and services available, and other comprehensive planning considerations. 7. Access, utilities, and public services should be available and adequate to serve existing needs and/or planned future development. 24.30.070 Urban Mixed Use A. Purpose The purpose of the urban mixed -use environment is to provide for high -intensity, water - oriented commercial, transportation, and industrial uses while protecting existing ecological functions and restoring ecological functions in areas that have been previously degraded. B. Designation Criteria 1. General. These areas have been intensely developed with a mix of commercial uses, port facilities, multimodal transit facilities, railroad facilities, and limited light industrial uses. Two very distinct areas make up the three Urban Mixed -Use environments. The Edmonds waterfront area west of the railroad tracks which has the abilitv to nroN direct access to the navigable waters of the Puget Sound and the near waterfront area east of the railroad tracks with no direct access to Puget Sound. A policy of the Shoreline Management Act is to plan for and foster all reasonable and appropriate uses and the shoreline master program rules generally prohibit nonwater-oriented development unless navigability is severely limited. Given these two distinct areas, the Urban Mixed -Use environments west of the railroad tracks is appropriate for water -oriented development, while the area east of the railroad tracks may be appropriate for nonwater-oriented development ,given its separation from Puget Sound. The environmental differences between the Urban Mixed -Use environments are further emphasized by the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning applied to these areas. West of the railroad tracks the comprehensive plan designation and zoning encourage water -oriented type development and uses, while east of the railroad tracks the comprehensive plan designation and zoning encourage mixed -use type development, including mixed commercial -residential development. 2. Urban Mixed -Use I: This designation is appropriate to water -related and water - enjoyment commercial and recreational uses. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 30 of 159 Packet Page 333 of 494 3. Urban Mixed -Use II: This designation is assigned to areas that are suitable and planned for high -intensity, water -dependent uses related to commerce, transportation, and recreation. 4. Urban Mixed -Use III: The designation is appropriate for those areas that have been intensely developed and that have no direct access to navigable waters. This designation is assigned to areas that are suitable and planned for mixed -use development including high -intensity, commerce, transportation, recreation and residential development. C. Area Designated Urban Mixed -Use I: The upland area above ordinary high water north of the northern border of the Edmonds fishing pier to the southern edge of the area known as Brackett's Landing South. This area would include the waterfront commercial area. 2. Urban Mixed -Use II: The upland area above ordinary high water between the old Union Oil dock and the northern border of the Edmonds fishing pier and between the southern and northern edges of the Main Street ferry terminal. This area would include the Edmonds Marina and associated facilities, as well as the Main Street ferry terminal. 3. Urban Mixed -Use III: a. The upland areas beyond the tidally influenced portions of Edmonds Marsh including portions of Harbor Square on the north side of the marsh and portions of the former UNOCAL oil storage facility on the south side of the marsh. b. The six parcels near the existing ferry terminal bounded by the railroad right-of-way to the west, Main Street, Sunset Avenue North, Bell Street. D. Management Policies In regulating uses in the Urban Mixed -Use environments, first priority should be given to water dependent uses. Second priority should be given to water -related and water - enjoyment uses. Non -water oriented uses may be allowed as part of mixed use developments. Non -water oriented uses may also be allowed in limited situations where they do not conflict with or limit opportunities for water oriented uses or on sites where there is no direct access to the shoreline. 2. Full utilization of existing urban areas should be achieved before further expansion of intensive development is allowed. 3. Reasonable long-range projections of regional economic need should guide the amount of shoreline designated Urban Mixed -Use However, consideration should be given to the potential for displacement of non -water -oriented uses with water -oriented uses when Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 31 of 159 Packet Page 334 of 494 analyzing full utilization of urban waterfronts and before considering expansion of such areas. 4. Where feasible, visual and physical public access should be provided. 5. Aesthetic objectives should be implemented by means such as sign control regulations, appropriate development siting, screening and architectural standards, and maintenance of natural vegetative buffers. 6. Any new development or redevelopment should utilize low impact development techniques where feasible and appropriate. 7. Any new development shall include environmental cleanup, restoration of shoreline or other development techniques where feasible and appropriate to assure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions, and shall comply with any relevant state and federal law. 24.30.080 Urban Railroad A. Purpose The purpose of the Urban Railroad environment designation is to identify the 100-foot right- of-way for the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad along the Edmonds shoreline. This designation will provide for high -intensity transportation uses while protecting ecological functions. B. Designation Criteria This area has been historically developed and used as a dedicated railroad right-of-way and contains limited improvements which are designed to aid in the transportation of goods and passengers by rail. This shoreline environment area generally contains very few areas of undisturbed natural shoreline. With the exceptions of Lund's Creek estuary, Edmonds Underwater Park, Brackett's landing and part of Marina Beach Park, the entire Edmonds shoreline (more than 90 percent) is armored by the BNSF railroad bed and bulkheads. Most of the BNSF rail bed along the Edmonds shoreline consists of an armored berm with two sets of parallel tracks on top, comprising a top width of at least 24 feet or more and a wider base width. The waterward side of the berm is typically armored with large rock or granite blocks, placed vertically or on a 2:1 slope. C. Area Designated The area is defined as that area within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway right-of- way as established on the date of the adoption of this master program, from the northern Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 32 of 159 Packet Page 335 of 494 right-of-way line of Main Street to the northern city limits, and from the southern city limits north approximately 300 feet. D. Management Policies 1. Restoration opportunities associated with project impacts should be encouraged in areas designated Urban Railroad. 2. Aesthetic objectives should be implemented by means such as sign control regulations, appropriate development siting, screening and architectural standards, and maintenance of natural vegetative buffers. Part IV General Policies & Regulations 24.40.000 Applicability The provisions of this chapter shall be applied either generally to all shoreline areas or to shoreline areas that meet the specified criteria of the provision without regard to environment designation. 24.40.010 Archaeological and Historic Resources A. Applicability. The following provision apply to archaeological and historic resources whose presence are either recorded at the State Historic Preservation Office and/or by the City of Edmonds or such resources that are uncovered during development activities. Archaeological sites located both in and outside shoreline jurisdiction are subject to chapter 27.44 RCW (Indian graves and records) and chapter 27.53 RCW (Archaeological sites and records) and development or uses that may impact such sites shall comply with chapter 25-48 WAC as well as the provisions of this section. B. Regulations: 1. Where practicable, consistent with constitutional and statutory limitations, public or private developments shall be prevented from destroying or destructively altering potential or recognizable sites having historic, cultural, scientific, or educational value as identified by appropriate authorities. 2. The city may require that a site be redesigned or that development be postponed for a definite or indefinite period if this is reasonably necessary to protect a historic site or items of historic, archeological or cultural significance 3. Upon receipt of application for a shoreline permit or request for a statement of exemption for development on properties with 500 feet of a site known to contain an historic, cultural or archaeological resource(s), the City shall require a cultural resource site assessment; provided that, this requirement may be waived if the Administrator Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 33 of 159 Packet Page 336 of 494 determines that the proposed development activities do not include any ground disturbing activities and will not impact a known historic cultural or archaeological site. The site assessment shall be conducted by a professional archaeologist or historic preservation professional, as applicable, to determine the presence of significant historic or archaeological resources. The fee for the services of the professional archaeologist or historic preservation professional shall be paid by the landowner or responsible party. 4. Whenever historic, cultural or archaeological sites or artifacts are discovered in the process of development on shorelines, work on that portion of the development site shall be stopped immediately, the site secured and the find reported as soon as a possible to the Administrator. Upon notification of such find, the property owner shall notify the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and appropriate Native American Tribes. In such cases, the developer shall allow site inspection and evaluation by a professional archaeologist and tribal representative to ensure that all possible valuable archaeological data are properly salvaged. Work should not resume until approval is obtained from the Shoreline Administrator. 24.40.020 Critical Areas A. Applicability. Critical areas include the following areas and ecosystems: wetlands, areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, frequently flooded areas, and geologically hazardous areas. B. The City of Edmonds Critical Area Ordinance, as codified in Chapters 23.40 through 23.90 ECDC (dated November 23, 2004, Ord. 3527), are herein adopted as a part of this Program, except for the specific subsections list below in ECDC 24.40.020.C. All references to the City of Edmonds Critical Area Ordinance in this Program are for this specific version. As a result of this incorporation of the Edmonds Critical Area Ordinance, the provisions of Chapters 23.40 though 23.90 ECDC, less the exceptions listed in ECDC 24.40.020.C, shall apply to any use, alteration or development within shoreline jurisdiction whether or not a shoreline permit or written statement of exemption is required. In addition to the critical area regulations in Chapters 23.40 through 23.90 ECDC (-) of this Master Program), the regulations identified in this section also apply to critical areas within shoreline jurisdiction. Where there are conflicts between the City of Edmonds Critical Area Ordinance and this Shoreline Master Program, provisions of the Shoreline Master Program shall prevail. C. The specific provisions of the Critical Area Ordinance listed below may only be implemented within shoreline jurisdiction through the shoreline variance process; 1. Wetlands: a. ECDC 23.50.040.F.3. Any shoreline project that proposes going beyond a 25% buffer reduction through the mechanisms described in ECDC 24.40.020.E.3 would require a shoreline variance. No variance is required for wetland buffer reductions consistent with ECDC 24.40.020.E.3. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 34 of 159 Packet Page 337 of 494 2. Geologically Hazardous Areas: a. ECDC 23.80.040.B.I & 2: Allowed activities in geologically hazardous areas b. ECDC 23.80.070.A. Lb & A.2: Buffer reduction and alterations 3. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas a. ECDC 23.90.040.D.2: Reduced buffer widths b. ECDC 23.90.040.D.4: Additions to structures existing within stream buffers D. Exceptions. The specific provisions of the Critical Area Ordinance listed below shall not apply to development within shoreline jurisdiction. 1. General Provisions: a. Provisions of chapter 23.40 ECDC relating to reasonable economic use of property do not apply to property with shoreline jurisdiction; specifically ECDC 23.40.000 and ECDC 23.40.210(2). b. ECDC 23.40.130.D: Monitoring Program c. ECDC 23.40.210: Variance d. ECDC 23.40.220.C.8: Minor Site Investigation Work e. ECDC 23.40.230: Exemptions 2. Wetlands: a. ECDC 23.50.010.B: Wetland Ratings b. ECDC 23.50.040.F.1: Standard Buffer Widths c. ECDC 23.50.040.F.4: Wetland Buffer Width Averaging. d. ECDC 23.50.040.F.8.b: Passive Recreation e. ECDC 23.50.040.I: Exemptions f. ECDC 23.50.050.F: Mitigation Ratios g. ECDC 23.50.050.G: Wetlands Enhancement as Mitigation E. Development limitations. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 35 of 159 Packet Page 338 of 494 1. All uses, modifications and activities on sites containing marine shorelines, environmentally sensitive areas and/or critical areas must comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws pertaining to development in these areas unless in conflict with the provisions of this Master Program. 2. The site must be specifically designed so that hazards from or impact on the environmentally sensitive area and/or critical areas will be mitigated. 3. Mitigation sequencing. In order to comply with ECDC 24.40.020.E.2 above, a shoreline permit applicant or project proponent shall demonstrate all reasonable efforts have been taken to provide sufficient mitigation such that the activity does not have significant adverse impacts. Mitigation shall occur in the following prioritized order: a. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. b. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps, such as project redesign, relocation, or timing to avoid or reduce impacts. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to the historical conditions or the conditions existing at the time of the initiation of the project. d. Reducing or eliminating the impact or hazard over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action. e. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments. 4. Monitoring Program. Mitigation plans shall include a program for monitoring construction and for assessing a completed project. A protocol shall be included outlining the schedule for site monitoring (for example, monitoring shall occur in years 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 10 after site construction), and how the monitoring data will be evaluated to determine if the performance standards are being met. A monitoring report shall be submitted as needed to document milestones, successes, problems, and contingency actions of the compensation project. The compensation project shall be monitored for a period necessary to establish that performance standards have been met, but not for a period less than ten years. 5. Long-term Protection of Mitigation Sites. The City shall require documentation that a mitigation site has been permanently preserved from future development or alteration that would be inconsistent with the functions of the mitigation. The documentation may include, but is not limited to, a conservation easement, deed restriction or other agreement between the applicant and the owner of a mitigation site. Such documentation shall be recorded with the Snohomish County auditor. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 36 of 159 Packet Page 339 of 494 F. Wetlands. Wetlands are those areas, designated in accordance with WAC 173-22-035 that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland areas to mitigate the conversion of wetlands. Wetlands shall be rated according to the Washington State wetland rating system for western Washington (Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington — Revised, Ecology Publication #04-06-025) or as revised by Ecology. This document contains the definitions and methods for determining the criteria and parameters defining the following wetland rating categories: a. Category I. Category I wetlands are: 1) relatively undisturbed estuarine wetlands larger than 1 acre; 2) wetlands that are identified by scientists of the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR as high quality wetlands; 3) bogs; 4) mature and old - growth forested wetlands larger than 1 acre; 5) wetlands in coastal lagoons; or 6) wetlands that perform many functions well (scoring 70 points or more). b. Category IL Category II wetlands are: 1) estuarine wetlands smaller than 1 acre, or disturbed estuarine wetlands larger than 1 acre; 2) interdunal wetlands larger than 1 acres; 3) disturbed coastal lagoons or 4) wetlands with a moderately high level of functions (scoring between 51-69 points). Category III. Category III wetlands are: 1) wetlands with a moderate level of functions (scoring between 30 and 50 points); or 2) interdunal wetlands between 0.1 and 1 acre in size. d. Category IV. Category IV wetlands have the lowest levels of functions (scoring fewer than 30 points) and are often heavily disturbed. 2. Development in designated wetlands within shoreline jurisdiction shall be regulated in accordance with the following: a. Buffer Requirements. The standard buffer widths in ECDC 24.40.020.F.2.b below have been establish in accordance with best available science. The buffers are based on the category of wetland and the habitat score as determined by a qualified wetland professional using the Washington state wetland rating system for western Washington. i. The use of the standard buffer widths requires the implementation of the measures in ECDC 24.40.020.F.2.c, where applicable, to minimize the impacts of the adjacent land uses. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 37 of 159 Packet Page 340 of 494 ii. If an applicant chooses not to apply the mitigation measures in ECDC 24.40.020.F.2.c, than a 33% increase in the width of all buffer is required. iii. The standard buffer widths assume that the buffer is vegetated with a native plant community appropriate for the ecoregion. If the existing buffer is unvegetated, sparsely vegetated, or vegetated with invasive species that do not perform needed functions, the buffer should either be planted to create the appropriate plant community or the buffer should be widened to ensure that adequate functions of the buffer are provided. iv. Additional buffer widths are added to the standard buffer widths. For example, a Category I wetland scoring 32 points for habitat function would require a buffer of 225 feet (75 + 150). b. Wetland Buffer requirements for wetlands within City of Edmonds shoreline jurisdiction. Wetland Category Standard Buffer Additional Additional Additional Width buffer width if buffer width if buffer width if wetland scares wetland scares wetland scares 21-25 habitat 26-29 habitat 30-36 habitat points Points points Category I: Based on 75 ft Add 30 ft Add 90 ft Add 150 ft total score Category I: Bogs 190 ft NA NA Add 35 ft Category I: Forested 75 ft Add 30 ft Add 90 ft Add 150 ft Category I: Estuarine 150 ft NA NA NA Category II (all) 75 ft Add 30 ft Add 90 ft Add 150 ft Category III all 60 ft Add 45 ft Add 105 ft NA Category IV (all) 40 ft NA NA NA c. Required measures to minimize impacts to wetlands. Measures are required, where applicable to a specific proposal. Disturbance Required measures to Minimize Impacts Lights • Direct lights away from wetland Noise • Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland • If warranted, enhance existing buffer with native vegetation plantings adjacent to noise source • For activities that generate relatively continuous, potentially disruptive noise, such as certain heavy industry or mining, establish an additional 10' heavily vegetated buffer strip immediately adjacent to the out wetland buffer Toxic runoff • Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 38 of 159 Packet Page 341 of 494 while ensuring wetland is not dewatered • Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 feet of wetland • Apply integrated pest management Stormwater runoff • Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for roads and existing adjacent development • Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly enters the buffer • Use Low Impact Development techniques (per PSAT publication on LID techniques) Change in water regime • Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new runoff from impervious surfaces and new lawns Pets and human disturbance • Use privacy fencing OR plant dense vegetation to delineate buffer edge and to discourage disturbance using vegetation appropriate for the ecoregion • Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or protect with a conservation easement Dust • Use best management practices to control dust Disruption of corridors or • Maintain connections to offsite areas that are connections undisturbed • Restore corridors or connections to offsite habitats by replanting d. Where wetland or buffer alterations are permitted by the City of Edmonds, the applicant shall mitigate impacts to achieve no not loss of wetland acreage and functions. Compensatory mitigation shall be provided according to Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 2: Guidance for Protecting and Managing Wetlands, Appendix 8-C, Table 8-C11, Ecology Publication #05-06-008, or as revised by Ecology. Buffer width Reductions Though Buffer Enhancement. At the discretion of the Edmonds development services director, wetland buffer width reductions (or approval of standard buffer widths for wetlands where existing buffer conditions require increased buffer widths) may be granted concomitant to the development and implementation of a wetland buffer enhancement plan for Category III and IV wetlands only. Approval of a wetland buffer enhancement plan shall, at the discretion of the director, allow for wetland buffer with reduction to no less than 25 percent of the standard width; provided, that: i. The plan provides evidence that wetland functions and values will be increased or retained through plan implementation to at least the level provided by a standard buffer or through additional mitigation; Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 39 of 159 Packet Page 342 of 494 ii. The plan documents existing native plant densities and provides for increases in buffer native plant densities to no less than three feet on center for shrubs and eight feet on center for trees; iii. The plan requires monitoring and maintenance to ensure success in accordance with ECDC 24.40.020.E.4; and iv. The plan specifically documents methodology and provides performance standards for assessing increases in wetland buffer functioning as related to: 1. Water quality protection; 2. Provision of wildlife habitat; 3. Maintenance of wetland hydrology; and 4. Restricting wetland intrusion and disturbance. f. Wetland Buffer Width Averaging. The director may allow modification of a standard buffer width in accordance with an approved critical areas report and the best available science on a case -by -case basis by averaging buffer widths. Only those portions of a wetland buffer existing with the project area or subject parcel shall be considered for buffer averaging. Averaging of buffer widths may only be allowed where a qualified professional wetland scientist demonstrates that: i. It will not reduce the function and value of wetlands or associated buffers; ii. The wetland contains variations in sensitivity due to existing physical characteristics or the character of the buffer varies in slope, soils, or vegetation, and the wetland would benefit from a wider buffer in places and would not by adversely impacted by narrower buffer in other places; iii. The total area contained in the buffer area, or the total buffer area existing on a subject parcel for wetland extending off -site, after averaging is no less than that which would be contained within a standard buffer; and iv. The buffer width at any single location is not reduced to less than 25 percent of the standard buffer width. g. Physically Separated and Functionally Isolated Buffers. i. Areas which are both physically separated and functionally isolated from a wetland and do not protect the wetland from adverse impacts due to preexisting public roads, structures, or similar circumstances, shall be excluded from the buffers otherwise required by this subsection. ii. A critical area report prepared by a qualified professional is required to determine whether the buffer is functionally isolated. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 40 of 159 Packet Page 343 of 494 h. Passive Recreation. The following passive recreation facilities may be permitted within a wetland buffer provided the facilities are designed and in accordance with an approved critical area report: i. Walkways and trails; provided, that those pathways are limited to minor crossings having no adverse impact on water quality. They should be generally parallel to the perimeter of the wetland, located only in the outer twenty-five percent (25%) of the wetland buffer area, and located to avoid removal of significant trees. They should be limited to pervious surfaces no more than five (5) feet in width for pedestrian use only. Raised boardwalks utilizing non -treated piling may be acceptable; ii. Wildlife viewing structures; and iii. Fishing access areas down to the water's edge that shall be no larger than six feet. Additions to structures existing within wetlands and/or wetland buffers may be permitted pursuant to ECDC 23.50.040.H. Additions to structures within wetlands will also require state and federal approval. G. Geologically hazardous areas. Development in designated geologically hazardous areas shall be regulated in accordance with the following: New development or the creation of lots should not be allowed that would cause foreseeable risk from geological conditions to people or improvements during the life of the development. 2. New development should not be allowed that would require structural shoreline stabilization over the normal, useful life of the development. Exception may be made for instances where stabilization is necessary to protect allowed uses where no alternative locations are available and no net loss of ecological functions will result. The stabilization measures shall conform to ECDC 24.50.020, Shoreline stabilization. 3. Where no alternatives, including relocation or reconstruction of existing structures, are found to be feasible, and less expensive than the proposed stabilization measure, stabilization structures or measures to protect existing primary residential structures may be all in conformance with ECDC 24.50.020 requirements and then only if no net loss of ecological functions will result. H. Critical Saltwater Habitats. 1. Development shall not intrude into or over critical saltwater habitats except when all of the conditions below are met: a. The public's need for such an action or structure is clearly demonstrated and the proposal is consistent with protection of the public trust, as embodied in RCW 90.58.020; Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 41 of 159 Packet Page 344 of 494 b. Avoidance of impacts to critical saltwater habitats by an alternative alignment or location is not feasible or would result in unreasonable and disproportionate cost to accomplish the same general purpose. The project, including any required mitigation, will result in no net loss of ecological functions associated with critical saltwater habitat. d. The project is consistent with the state's interest in resource protection and species recovery. 2. Private, non-commercial docks for individual residential or community use may be allowed provided that: a. Avoidance of impacts to critical saltwater habitats by an alternative alignment or location is not feasible; b. The project, including any required mitigation, will result in not net loss of ecological functions associated with critical saltwater habitat. 3. Where inventory of critical saltwater habitat has not been completed, all over water and near -shore developments in marine and estuarine waters shall be required to conduct an a habitat assessment of the site and adjacent beach sections to assess the presence of critical saltwater habitats and functions. I. Critical Freshwater Habitats. 1. Existing hydrological connections into and between water bodies, such as streams and wetlands, shall be maintained. Obstructed channels shall be reestablished as a condition of nonwater-dependent uses, where feasible. J. Additional authority. In addition to any other authority the city may have, the city is hereby authorized to condition or deny a proposed use, modification or activity or to require site redesign because of hazards associated with the use, modification or activity on or near an environmentally sensitive and/or critical area, and/or the effect of the proposal on the environmentally sensitive area and/or critical area. 24.40.030 Flood Hazard Reduction A. Applicability. The following provisions apply to actions taken to reduce flood damage or hazard and to uses, development, and shoreline modification that may increase flood hazards. B. Regulations. 1. Development and redevelopment shall be located and designed to prevent the need for structural flood hazard reduction measures. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 42 of 159 Packet Page 345 of 494 2. Nonstructural flood reduction measures shall be given preference over structural measures. 3. Flood control works shall be permitted when it is demonstrated by engineering and scientific evaluations that: a. They are necessary to protect health/safety and or existing development; b. Non-structural flood hazard reduction measures are infeasible; and c. The flood control work will not result in a net loss of ecological function in the shoreline area. 4. New structural flood control works shall be placed landward of associated wetlands, and designated habitat conservation areas, except for works that improve ecological functions, such as wetland restoration. 5. Development within the shoreline environment shall meet the standards and provisions for protection of frequently flooded areas as provided to areas of special flood hazard in the current edition of the International Residential Code and International Building Code, as adopted in ECDC Title 19. 24.40.040 Public Access and Views A. Applicability. Public access includes the ability of the general public to reach, touch, and enjoy the water's edge, to travel on the waters of the state, and to view the water and the shoreline from adjacent locations. The public access provisions below apply to all shorelines within the City of Edmonds. B. Regulations 1. Except as provided in subsections 2 through 4 of this section, shoreline substantial developments or conditional uses shall provide public access where any of the following conditions are present: a. Where the use or modification will create increased demand for public access to the shoreline, the development shall provide public access to mitigate this impact. b. Where the use or modification will interfere with an existing public access way, the development shall provide public access to mitigate this impact. Where a use which is not a priority shoreline use under the Shoreline Management Act will locate on a shoreline of the state, the use or modification shall provide public access to mitigate this impact. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 43 of 159 Packet Page 346 of 494 d. Within the Edmonds shoreline jurisdiction, where a use or modification will interfere with a public use of lands or waters subject to the public trust doctrine, the development shall provide public access to mitigate this impact. e. New multifamily residential development. f. Where there is a subdivision of land into more than four parcels. 2. An applicant need not provide public access where one or more the following conditions apply: a. Unavoidable health or safety hazards to the public exist which cannot be prevent by any practical means; b. Inherent security requirements of the use cannot be satisfied through the application of alternative design features or other solutions; c. The cost of providing the access, easement or an alternative amenity is unreasonably disproportionate to the total long-term cost of the proposed development; d. Unacceptable environmental harm will result from the public access which cannot be mitigated; e. Significant undue and unavoidable conflict between any access provisions and the proposed use/modification and adjacent uses would occur and cannot be mitigated; or, 6. Statutory or constitutional requirements would prohibit the mandatory dedication of access without just compensation or compliance with statutory criteria. 3. In order to meet any of the conditions in subsection 2.a through 2.e of this section, the applicant must first demonstrate and the city determine in its finds that all reasonable alternatives have been exhausted, including but not limited to: a. Regulating access by such means as maintaining a gate and/or limiting hours of use; b. Designing separation of uses and activities (e.g., fences, terracing, use of one-way glazings, hedges, landscaping, etc.); and c. Developing provisions for access at a site geographically separated from the proposal such as street end, vista or trail system. 4. Exceptions. The following uses, developments, modifications and activities are exempt form providing public pedestrian access under this section: a. The construction, repair, remodeling and use of one detached single-family dwelling unit, as well as the construction, remodeling, repair, and use of bulkheads, docks and other Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 44 of 159 Packet Page 347 of 494 uses, modification and activities incidental to the use of the subject property as a detached single-family residence. b. All shoreline uses, modifications and activities in conservancy environments, or environmentally sensitive areas where the city determines that access would create distinct and unavoidable hazards to human safety or be contrary to city policies regarding the protection of unique and fragile environments. 5. Shoreline development by public entities, such as local governments, port districts, state agencies, and public utility districts, should provide public access measures as part of each development project, unless such access is shown to be incompatible due to reasons of safety, security, or impact to the shoreline. 6. Public Use Facilities. a. In addition to the public pedestrian areas required by subsection 1 of this section, the applicant may propose and/or the city may require that benches, picnic tables, a public access pier or boardwalk, or other public use facilities be constructed on the subject property. b. If public use facilities are required or proposed, the city will determine the size, location and other regulations (design considerations) on a case -by -case basis. 7. Timing. The public pedestrian access required by this section must be completed and available at the time of occupancy or completion of work; provided, however, that the city may on a case -by -case basis defer the physical availability of public access in the following cases: a. If shoreline development without public pedestrian access exists on both sides of the subject property and the city determines that the size, location and topography or the subject property does not warrant making public waterfront access available until additional adjacent waterfront access can be obtained. b. If pre-existing legal or nonconforming improvements on the subject property physically preclude the provisions of public waterfront access within a reasonable period of time. 8. Easements recorded. In each case where public pedestrian access is required, whether it is physically available at the end of development or deferred until a later date, all owners of the subject property must record a public pedestrian easement, in a form approved by the city attorney, establishing the right of the public to access, use and traverse that portion of the subject property. 9. Signs. The city shall require the posting of signs, obtained from the city at the city's cost, designating public pedestrian access. The planning manager or his/her designee is authorized to establish reasonable rules and regulations governing the public's use of public pedestrian Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 45 of 159 Packet Page 348 of 494 access and use areas under this chapter. Where appropriate, these rules and regulations shall be included within the document recorded under subsection 8 of this section. 10. Shoreline uses, modifications and activities shall be designed and operated to avoid blocking, reducing or adversely interfering with the public's existing physical and visual access to the water and shorelines. 11. v o, ,hied View Goffidor-sView Protection Regulations. a. Within the Urban Mixed Use I, Urban Mixed Use II and adjacent Aquatic I and Aquatic II shoreline designations no building or other major structure may be located within the following required view corridors: a-.i. Landward of the ordinary high water mark, a view corridor must be maintained across 30 percent of the average parcel width. The view corridor must be in one continuous piece. Within the view corridor, structures, parking areas, and landscaping will be allowed; provided, that they do not obscure the view from adjacent public right-of- way to and beyond the Puget Sound. This view corridor must be adjacent to either the north or south property line, whichever will result in the widest view corridor given development on adjacent properties. If the subject property has shoreline frontage in excess of 1,000 feet, the city may require a maximum of one-third of the required view corridor to be placed in a location between the north and south property lines, in a location which will provide for the greatest unobstructed view of the Puget Sound. ii. Waterward of the ordinary high water, view corridors which are required pursuant to this section must be maintained starting at a width equal to the adjacent upland view corridor and expanding in a conical fashion 30 degrees from the prolongation of the view corridor water of the ordinary high water mark. b. Within the Urban Mixed Use III designation i. Uses and activities must be designed and operated to avoid blocking or adversely interfering with visual access from public areas to the water and shorelines. 12. Public access provided by shoreline street ends, public utilities and rights -of -way shall not be diminished (RCW 35.79.035 and 36.87.130). 13. Public access sites shall be connected directly to the nearest public street and shall include provisions for disabled and physically impaired persons, where feasible. 14. Public access easements and permit conditions shall be recorded on the deed of title and/or on the face of a plat or short plat as a condition running contemporaneous with the authorized land use, at a minimum. Said recording with the county auditor's office shall occur at the time of permit approval (RCW 58.17.110). Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 46 of 159 Packet Page 349 of 494 15. The minimum width of public access easements shall be 25 feet, unless the administrator determines that undue hardship would result. In such cases, easement width may be reduced only to the minimum extent necessary, as determined by the administrator, to relieve the hardship. Provided the larger easement is not needed for emergency access. 16. Future actions by the applicant successors in interest or other parties shall not diminish the usefulness or value of the public access provided. 17. Visual access shall be maintained, enhanced and preserved on shoreline street ends, public utilities and rights -of -way and within public view corridors as designated by the city. 24.40.050 Shoreline Vegetation Conservation A. Applicability. 1. Vegetation conservation includes activities to protect and restore vegetation along or near marine and freshwater shorelines that contribute to the ecological functions of shoreline areas. Vegetation conservation provisions include the prevention or restriction of plant clearing and earth grading, vegetation restoration, and the control of invasive weeds and nonnative species. 2. Unless otherwise stated, vegetation conservation does not include those activities covered under the Washington State Forest Practices Act, except for conversion to other uses and those other forest practice activities over which local governments have authority. Vegetation conservation provisions apply even to those shoreline uses and developments that are exempt from the requirement to obtain permit. 3. Where new developments and/or uses are proposed, native shoreline vegetation should be conserved to maintain shoreline ecological functions and/or processes and mitigate the direct, indirect and/or cumulative impacts of shoreline development, where feasible. Important functions of shoreline vegetation include, but are not limited to: a. Providing shade necessary to maintain water temperatures required by salmonids, forage fish, and other aquatic biota. b. Providing organic inputs critical for aquatic life. c. Providing food in the form of various insects and other benthic macroinvertebrates. d. Stabilizing banks, minimizing erosion, and reducing the occurrence of landslides. e. Reducing fine sediment input into the aquatic environment through stormwater best management practices. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 47 of 159 Packet Page 350 of 494 f. Filtering and vegetative uptake of nutrients and pollutants from ground water and surface runoff. g. Providing a source of large woody debris into the aquatic system. h. Regulation of microclimate in the stream -riparian and intertidal corridors. Providing habitat for wildlife, including connectivity for travel and migration corridors. B. Regulations. 1. Alteration of native shoreline vegetation shall only be allowed as set forth below: a. Landscaping or maintenance associated with an existing legal use or new permitted shoreline use or development. The use of native plant species shall be encouraged. b. Removal of noxious weeds as listed by the state in WAC 16-750, provided such activity shall be conducted in a manner consistent with best management practices and native vegetation is promptly reestablish in the disturbed area. Modification of vegetation in association with a legal, nonconforming use provided that said modification is conducted in a manner consistent with this Master Program and results in no net loss to ecological functions or critical fish and wildlife conservation areas. d. Restoration activities conducted in accordance with an approved plan designed to improve ecological functions and values. 2. The removal or disturbance of existing vegetation and the alteration of topography shall be limited to the minimum necessary to accommodate approved shoreline development. 3. Exposed soils shall be immediately developed or revegetated to prevent erosion. 4. Revegetation must be planted such that complete coverage of exposed soils is attained within one growing season. 5. In all cases where clearing is followed by revegetation, native plants shall be preferred. 24.40.060 Water Quality, Stormwater, and Nonpoint pollution A. Applicability. The following provisions applies to all development and uses within shoreline jurisdiction that may affect water quality. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 48 of 159 Packet Page 351 of 494 B. Regulations. An erosion and sedimentation control plan shall be submitted with a permit application for activities that involve the removal of vegetation, stockpiling of earth or other materials, or any activity that could result in shoreline erosion or siltation. Said program shall conform to the City of Edmonds' stormwater code requirements, Engineering Design Standards and shall at a minimum, utilize Best management Practices (BMPs) to prevent shoreline erosion and siltation. 2. The bulk storage of oil, fuel, chemicals, or hazardous materials, on either a temporary or permanent basis, shall not occur in shoreline without adequate secondary containment and an emergency spill response plan in place. 3. All development approved under this Shoreline Master Program shall be designed and maintained consistent with the City's Stormwater Comprehensive Plan, all codes related to stormwater, and Engineering Design Standards. 4. New development is encouraged to employ Low Impact Development principles and practices such as setbacks, retaining land cover, and reducing impervious areas, and use special caution to avoid infiltration of stormwater in shoreline areas along marine bluffs. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 49 of 159 Packet Page 352 of 494 24.40.070 Shoreline Development Table: User Guide SDP Listed shoreline development permitted as a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. Pursuant to WAC 173-27-040 and ECDC 24.80.010, certain shoreline uses and modifications may be exempt from the requirements of the substantial development permit process. These exemptions shall be construed narrowly and only those developments that meet the precise terms of one or more of the listed exemptions may be granted exemption from the substantial development permit process. Developments meeting the exemption from the requirements of the substantial development permit process are still subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. SCUP Listed shoreline development may be permitted as Shoreline Conditional Use Permit subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. Shoreline developments requiring Shoreline Conditional Use Permits are not subject to the exemptions in WAC 173-27-040 or ECDC 24.80.010. X I Listed shoreline development is prohibited. * Prohibited shoreline development is subject to specific exceptions. See Shoreline Area Regulations section for the listed shoreline development. - Permitted shoreline development is subject to specific limitations on where and/or when development may be permitted. See Shoreline Area Regulations for the listed shoreline development. 24.40.080 Shoreline Development Table: Shoreline Development Permitted by Area Designation' Shoreline Development Shoreline Area Designation Urban Railroad Urban Mixed Use I Urban Mixed Use II Urban Mixed Use III Shoreline Residential I Shoreline Residential II Shoreline Residential III Aquatic I Aquatic II Conservancy Natural A uaculture X SCUP SCUP SCUP SPX SPX X SCUP XCCUP SCUP SCUP Artwork SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP X*Z X*2 SDP SDP Boating Facilities Launch Rams X SDP SDP X X X X X X X X Marinas X SDP SDP X X X X X X X X Covered Over -water structures X X X X X X X X X X X Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 50 of 159 Packet Page 353 of 494 Shoreline Shoreline Area Designation Development Urban Urban Urban Urban Shoreline Shoreline Shoreline Aquatic I Aquatic II Conservancy Natural Railroad Mixed Mixed Use Mixed Residential I Residential II Residential III Use I II Use III Commercial and Light Industrial Water - orientate X SDP SDP SDP X X X X X X X ed Nonwater- orient X SDP- SDP- SDP X X X X X X X ed Dredging SCUP SCUP SCUP X" X* X* SCUP SCUP SCUP SCUP X Landfill SCUP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SCUP SCUP SCUP SCUP - Moorage: Piers, Docks, and Floats Commercial X SDP SDP X X X X X SDP X X Private, Public, X SDP SDP X SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP X" and Shared Aircraft X X X* X X X X X X` X X" Recreation X SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP Residential Detached Residential X X X SIX SDP SDP SDP X X X X (Single-family) Attached or stacked Residential X X X SDP X X X X X X X (Multi -family) Shoreline Stabilization Groins SDP SDP SDP X X X X SCUP SCUP SCUP X Breakwaters jetties SDP SDP SDP X X X X SCUP SCUP SCUP X` and Bulkheads and similar SDP SDP SDP SCUP X X SDP X* X* SCUP X structures Bioengineering SDP SDP SDP SDP X X SDP SDP- SDP- SDP X Gabions X X X X X X X X X X X Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 51 of 159 Packet Page 354 of 494 Shoreline Shoreline Area Designation Development Urban Urban Urban Urban Shoreline Shoreline Shoreline Aquatic I Aquatic II Conservancy Natural Railroad Mixed Mixed Use Mixed Residential I Residential II Residential III Use I 11 Use III Signs SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP Transportation Railroads SDP SDP SDP X X X X X* X* X X Ferry Terminals SCUP SDP SDP SDP X X X SCUP SCUP X X Parking — supporting 40 associated SDP SDP SDP SDP X X X X SCUP- X water - de endantuse Parking — not supporting an associated SDP SCUP- SCUP- SDP X X X X X SCUP- X water - de endantuse Other SCUP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SCUP- SCUP - Utilities SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SDP SCUP In the event that there is a conflict between the development(s) identified in this Table 24.40.080 and the policies and/or regulations with the text of this Master Program, the policies and regulations within the text shall apply. z: Artwork associate with a permitted use in the Aquatic I or Aquatic II designation may by permitted; otherwise it is a prohibited use. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 52 of 159 Packet Page 355 of 494 24.40.090 Shoreline Bulk and Dimensional Standards The following table establishes shoreline -specific development standards in the different shoreline environment designations. Setbacks represent minimum bps distances and may be larger if a critical area is present consistent with ECDC 24.40.020 and Title 23 ECDC. Shoreline Shoreline Area Designation Development Urban Urban Urban Urban Shoreline Shoreline Shoreline Aquatic I Aquatic II Conservancy Natural Railroad Mixed Use Mixed Use Mixed Use Residential I Residential II Residential III I II III A uaculture - Over Water Structures Shore Setback' (w+rward N/A N/A N/A N/A 4-50ON/A 150ON/A N/A N/A N/A 4-500N/A N/A ordinary high) Maximum Hei ht above dec of 3 ft 3 ft 3 ft 3ft 3-€tN/A 344N/A N/A 3 ft �NWA3 ft. BEN/A 3 ft overwater structure Commercial and Light Industrial Development Water Dependent Commercial Use Shore Setback N/A 0' 0' 0' N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Sid4 Setback's N/A 0' z 0' z Varies N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ma imum N/A 30' 35' N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Hei ht16 Maximum N/A None None None N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Coverage All Other Commercial and Li ht Industrial Develo ment Shoe Setback N/A 15' 15' 2-5-150'" N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Side Setback (co ercial/ N/A 0'/152,3 0'/15' 2,3 Varies N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A res i ential 15 MaTimum N/A 30' 30' 35'4-6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Heiht He Maximum N/A None None None N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Coverage Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 53 of 159 Packet Page 356 of 494 Shoreline Shoreline Area Designation Development Urban Urban Urban Urban Shoreline Shoreline Shoreline Aquatic I Aquatic 1I Conservancy Natural Railroad Mixed Use Mixed Use Mixed Use Residential I Residential 11 Residential III I II III Recreation Shoe Setback N/A 15' 15' 15'17 N/A N/A 35' N/A N/A 50' N/Ala Maximum N/A 30'116 30916 35'16 25"' 25"' 25'16 154 15' 4 25' 25' Hei ht Maximum era e N/A None None None 35% 35% 35% N/A N/A 10% or 4,000 N/A Co s ware feet Maximum N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20% or 10,000 N/A imporvious sq uare feet Residential Development Shoe Setback N/A N/A N/A 2-i�150i17 N/A N/A 35' N/A N/A N/A N/A Bluff Setback N/A N/A N/A N/A 50' 13 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ma imum N/A N/A N/A 35'" 25' 25' 25' N/A N/A N/A N/A Hei ht— Minimum Lot N/A N/A Varies 11 6,000 sq ft 12,000 sq ft N/A N/A N/A N/A Area S . Ft.)N/A Maximum 6 N/A N/A N/ N/ Varies12 7.3 3.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A Densi Maximum N/A N/A N/A N/A 35% 35% 35% N/A N/A N/A N/A Covera e Transportation and Parkin Parkin Uncovered Parkin Shoe Setback 1 60' 1 60' 60'7 2S 50'17 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 60' N/A Structured Parkin Shoe Setback N/A I N/A N/A -2-5 150'17 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Max um N/A N/A N/A 35' 16 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ht HeiFerry Terminals Maximum Height 30' 30' 30' 30' N/A N/A N/A 35' 35' N/A N/A Railroads Maximum 25' 9 30' 9 30' 9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Height Property line 5' 5' 5' N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 54 of 159 Packet Page 357 of 494 10 Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 55 of 159 Packet Page 358 of 494 Shoreline Shoreline Area Designation Development Urban Urban Urban Urban Shoreline Shoreline Shoreline Aquatic I Aquatic II Conservancy Natural railroad Mixed Use Mixed Use Mixed Use Residential I Residential II Residential III I II III All Other Develo went Shoe Setback N/A 15' 15' 2-5150'17 N/A N/A 35' N/A N/A 50' N/A14 MaTimam 25' 30' 30' 35'16 25' 25' 25' 25' 35'/15' 10 25' 25' Heiht16 He Minimum Lot N/A None None None Varies" 6,000 sq ft 12,000 sq ft N/A N/A N/A N/A Area (Sq. Ft. Maximum N/A N/A N/A N/A Varies12 7.3 3.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A Maximum Coverage none none none None 35% 35% 35% N/A N/A 10% 10% 1 ' Aquaculture pens shall be no closer to the shoreline than the identified distance. 2 ' See ECDC 24.40.040.B.11 for view corridor requirements. 3 : No side setback is required from adjacent commercial property. A minimum 15-foot setback is required from lot line adjacent to shoreline residential environments. The area must be fully landscaped and include a minimum six-foot high fence or hedge. 4 ' Above ordinary high water mark. 5 Iddonabb- ' Thirty-five feet total of both sides, 10 feet minimum on either side. 6 : Densitymeans "dwelling units per acre" determined b dividing the total lot area b the density allowed b the underlying zoning; the number of lots or units ermitted shall be rounded g P Y g Y h' Y Y g g; P down to the nearest whole number. 7 ' In the Urban Mixed Use II zone, the 60-foot setback for parking maybe reduced by a maximum of 20 feet. See ECDC 24.60.080.D.2.c. 8 ' Subject to exceptions, see ECDC 24.60.070.C.10. 9 ' Subject to exceptions, see ECDC 24.60.078080.D.1.b.xiii.I through ECDC 24.60.070080.D.l.b.xiii.4. 10 . Accessory structures for the sale of gas, oil and live bait, shall not exceed 15 feet above the height of the dock or pier. 11 . Varies between 12,000 and 20,000 square feet per site depending on the underlying zoning. 12 : Varies between 3.7 and 2.2 dwellingunits per acre depending on the underlying zoning. Density means "dwelling units per acre" determined b dividing the total lot area b the density P P g Y g g• ty g P Y g Y h' allowed by the underlying zoning; the number of lots or units permitted shall be rounded down to the nearest whole number. 13 . May be reduced through the shoreline variance process pursuant to ECDC 24.40.020.C.3. 14 : Three areas within the City of Edmonds have the natural environment designation: Edmonds Marsh, Shell Creek Wetland, and Perrinville Creek Wetland. All three areas are separated from the Puget Sound by the railroad right-of-way. 15 . Side setback determined by the underlying zoning. No required side setback in the BD2, CG, or MP2 zones. Five foot side setback in the OR zone, 16 : The maximum height limit shall be determined b the underlying comprehensive planning document and zoning designation. Height limits greater than 35 feet shall be supported b view g Y Y g P P g g g g g PP Y analysis and structures designed to minimize impacts on public views. 17 Fences within the shore setback of the Urban Mixed Use III zone that create separate areas for public and private uses should not be allowed. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 56 of 159 Packet Page 359 of 494 Part V Specific Modification Policies & Regulations. 24.50.000 Applicability. Shoreline modification activities are structures or actions that permanently change the physical configuration or quality of the shoreline, particularly at the point where land and water meet. Shoreline modifications include but are not limited to structures such as bulkheads and piers and actions such as clearing, grading and removing vegetation. Generally, shoreline modifications are undertaken to prepare for a shoreline use, to support and upland use, or to provide shoreline stabilization or defense from erosion. 24.50.010 General Modification Policies and Regulations A. General Modification Policies. 1. Locate and design all new development in a manner that prevents or minimizes the need for shoreline modifications. 2. Ensure that shoreline modification, where permitted, are as compatible as possible with natural shoreline processes and character. 3. Regulate shoreline modifications to assure that modifications individually and cumulatively do not result in a net loss of ecological functions. Mitigation may be required to meet the no net loss standard. 4. Give preference to those types of shoreline modifications that have a less impact on ecological functions and require mitigation of identified impacts resulting from shoreline modifications. 5. Incorporate all feasible measures to protect ecological shoreline functions and ecosystem - wide processes in the placement and design of shoreline modifications. To avoid and reduce ecological impacts, the mitigation sequence in ECDC 24.40.020.EE.3 shall be utilized. B. General Shoreline Modification Regulations 1. Shoreline modification activities that do not support a permitted shoreline use are considered "speculative" and are prohibited by this Master Program, unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Shoreline Administrator that such activities are in the public interest and necessary and for the maintenance of shoreline environmental resource values. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 57 of 159 Packet Page 360 of 494 2. Structural shoreline modification measures shall be permitted only if nonstructural measures are unable to achieve the same purpose. Nonstructural measures considered shall include alternative site designs, increased setbacks, relocation, and bioengineering. 3. Shoreline modification activities, with the exception of restoration or enhancement efforts, are prohibited in wetlands, and undeveloped spits, hooks, bars, barrier beaches, or similar accretion terminals or accretion shore forms. 4. Proponents of shoreline modification projects shall obtain all applicable federal and state permits and shall meet all permit requirements. 4.5. Best Available Science. All reports prepared in support of a shoreline modification shall use scientifically valid methods and studies in the analysis of shoreline environment and field reconnaissance and reference the source of science used. 24.50.020 Shoreline stabilization A. Applicability. Shoreline stabilization includes actions taken to address erosion impacts to property and dwellings, businesses, or structures cause by natural processes, such as current, flood, tides, wind, or wave action. These actions include structural and nonstructural methods. Nonstructural methods include building setbacks, relocation of the structure to be protected, ground water management, planning and regulatory measures to avoid the need for structural stabilization. Structural methods can be "hard" or "soft". "Hard" structural stabilization measures structural stabilization measures refer to those with solid, hard surfaces, such as concrete bulkheads. These are static structures traditionally constructed of rock, concrete, wood, metal, or other materials that deflect, rather than absorb, wave energy. "Soft" structural measures rely on softer materials, such as vegetation, drift logs, and gravel. They are intended to absorb wave energy, mimicking the function of a natural beach. The following methods of shoreline stabilization are organized from "soft" to "hard": "Soft" • Vegetation enhancement; • Upland drainage control; • Biotechnical measures; • Beach enhancement; • Anchor tree; and • Gravel placement; "Hard" • Rock revetments; • Gabions; Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 58 of 159 Packet Page 361 of 494 • Groins; • Retaining walls and bluff walls; • Bulkheads; and • Seawalls. The following policies and regulations apply to all actions and developments that modify the shoreline for the purposes of preventing shore erosion. B. Shoreline Stabilization Policies 1. Discourage new development requiring structural shoreline defense works. 2. Relocating existing structures out of harm's way is preferable to construction of structural defense works. 3. Allow structural stabilization methods only: a. After it is demonstrated that nonstructural solutions would not be able to reduce the potential damage sufficiently, and b. Where it has been demonstrated to be necessary to support or protect a new use consistent with this Master program, a legally established, inhabited structure or ongoing shoreline use that is in danger of loss or substantial damage or when necessary for reconfiguration of the shoreline for hazardous substance remediation or restoration of ecological functions. c. Structural stabilization will not be permitted for the indirect purpose of creating land by filling. 4. Encourage "soft" stabilization and protection works over "hard" structural means. Furthermore, designs that do not interrupt net drift or migration of anadromous fish are preferred (for example, open poling construction is preferable to sold walls, and floating breakwaters are preferable to solid landfills.) 5. Consider the effect that proposed shore defense works have on ecosystem -wide processes (e.g. sand movement) and functions (e.g. habitat). Make provisions to avoid and minimize impacts where feasible. Mitigation must be provided to achieve no net loss. 6. Give special attention to the effect these structures will have on aesthetic qualities of the shoreline, public access, and use of the water. C. Shoreline Stabilization Regulations For the purposes of this section, standards on shoreline stabilization, "replacement" means the construction of a new structure to perform a shoreline stabilization function of an existing structure which can no longer adequately service its purpose. Addition to or Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 59 of 159 Packet Page 362 of 494 increases in size of existing shoreline stabilization measures shall be considered new structures. 2. Structural stabilization methods shall be permitted when necessary for reconfiguration of the shoreline for mitigation or enhancement purposes. 3. New development that would require shoreline stabilization which causes significant negative impacts to adjacent or down -current properties and shoreline areas should not be allowed. 4. New development on steep slopes or bluffs shall be set back sufficiently to ensure that shoreline stabilization in -is unlikely to be necessary during the normal, useful life of the structure, as demonstrated by a geotechnical analysis. 5. New structural stabilization measures shall not be allowed except when necessity is demonstrated in the following manner: a. To protect existing primary structures: i. New or enlarged structural shoreline stabilization measures for an existing primary structure, including residences, should not be allowed unless there is conclusive evidence, documented by a geotechnical analysis, that the structure is in danger from shoreline erosion caused by tidal action, currents, or waves. Normal sloughing, erosion of steep bluffs, or shoreline erosion itself, without a scientific or geotechnical analysis, is not demonstration of need. The geotechnical analysis should evaluate on -site drainage issues and address drainage problems away from the shoreline edge before considering structural shoreline stabilization. ii. The erosion control structure will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions. b. In support of new nonwater-dependent development, including single-family residences, when all of the conditions below apply: i. The erosion is not being cause by upland conditions, such as the loss of vegetation and drainage. ii. Nonstructural measures, such as placing the development further from the shoreline, planting vegetation, or installing on -site drainage improvements, are not feasible or not sufficient. iii. The need to protect primary structures from damage due to erosion is demonstrated through a geotechnical report. The damage must be caused by natural processes, such as tidal action, currents, and waves. iv. The erosion control structure will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 60 of 159 Packet Page 363 of 494 c. In support of water -dependent development when all of the conditions below apply: i. The erosion is not being caused by upland conditions, such as the loss of vegetation and drainage. ii. Nonstructural measures, planting vegetation, or installing on -site drainage improvements, are not feasible or not sufficient. iii. The need to protect primary structures from damage due to erosion is demonstrated through a geotechnical report. iv. The erosion control structure will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions. d. To protect projects for the restoration of ecological functions or hazardous substance remediation projects pursuant to chapter 70.105D RCW when all of the conditions below apply: i. Nonstructural measures, planting vegetation, or installing on -site drainage improvements, are not feasible or not sufficient. ii. The erosion control structure will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions. 6. Geotechnical reports pursuant to this section that address the need to prevent potential damage to a primary structure shall address the necessity for shoreline stabilization by estimating time frames and rates of erosion and report on the urgency associated with the specific situation. As a general matter, hard armoring solutions should not be authorized except when a report confirms that there is a significant possibility that such a structure will be damaged within three years as a result of shoreline erosion in the absence of such hard armoring measures, or where waiting until the need is that immediate, would foreclose the opportunity to use measures that avoid impacts on ecological functions. Thus, where the geotechnical report confirms a need to prevent potential damage to a primary structure, but the need is not as immediate as the three years, that report may still be used to justify more immediate authorization to protect against erosion using soft measures. D. Shoreline Stabilization Siting and Design Regulations. 1. When any structural shoreline stabilization measures are demonstrated to be necessary, pursuant to above provisions. a. Limit the size of stabilization measures to the minimum necessary. Use measures designed to assure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. Soft approaches shall Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 61 of 159 Packet Page 364 of 494 be used unless demonstrated not to be sufficient to protect primary structures, dwellings, and businesses. b. Ensure that publicly financed or subsidized shoreline erosion control measures do not restrict appropriate public access to the shoreline except where such access is determined to be infeasible because of incompatible uses, safety, security, or harm to ecological functions. Where feasible, incorporate ecological restoration and public access improvements into the project. c. Mitigate new erosion control measures, including replacement structures, on feeder bluffs or other actions that affect beach sediment -producing areas to avoid and, if that is not possible, to minimize adverse impacts to sediment conveyance systems. 2. Bulkheads and other shoreline protective structures may not be constructed within a marsh, bog, or swamp or between a marsh, bog or swamp aat-and the primary body of water (Puget Sound or Lake Ballinger). 3. Bulkheads and other shoreline protective structures may not be placed waterward of the ordinary height water mark, unless: a. It is to stabilize a fill approved under ECDC 24.50.040; or b. There has been severe and unusual erosion within one year immediately preceding the application for the bulkhead or other similar protective structure. In this event, the city may allow the placement of the bulkhead or other similar protective structure to recover the dry land area lost by this erosion. 4. Bulkheads and other shoreline protect structures shall be located landward of the ordinary high water mark and generally parallel to the natural shoreline unless geotechnical evaluation demonstrates the necessity for alternative design. In addition: a. Where no other bulkheads are adjacent, the construction of a bulkhead shall be as close to the eroding bank as possible and in no case shall it be more than six (6) feet from the toe of the bank. b. A bulkhead for a permitted landfill shall be located at the toe of the fill. c. Where permitted, a bulkhead must tie in flush with existing bulkheads on adjoining properties, except where the adjoining bulkheads extend waterward of the ordinary high water mark. 5. An existing bulkhead or other shoreline stabilization structure may be replaced with a similar structure if there is a demonstrated need to protect principal uses or structures from erosion caused by currents, tidal action, or waves. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 62 of 159 Packet Page 365 of 494 a. The replacement structure should be designed, located, sized, and constructed to assure no net loss of ecological functions. b. Replacement walls or bulkheads shall not encroach waterward of the ordinary high- water mark or existing structure unless the residential structure to which it is appurtenant was occupied prior to January 1, 1992, and there are overriding safety or environmental concerns. In such cases, the replacement structure may abut the existing shoreline stabilization structure. c. Where a net loss of ecological functions associated with critical saltwater habitats would occur by leaving the existing structure, remove it as part of the replacement d. Soft shoreline stabilization measures that provide restoration of shoreline ecological functions may be permitted waterward of the ordinary high-water mark. For purposes of this section standards on shoreline stabilization measures, "replacement" means the construction of a new structure to perform a shoreline stabilization function of an existing structure which can no longer adequately serve its purpose. Additions to or increases in size of existing shoreline stabilization measures shall be considered new structures. 6. Materials used in bulkhead construction shall meet the following standards: a. Bulkheads shall utilize stable, non-erodable materials such as concrete, wood, and rock that are consistent with the preservation and protection of the ecological habitat. b. Shore materials shall not be used for fill behind bulkheads, except clean dredge spoil from a permitted off -site dredge and fill operation. c. The extent and nature of any backfill proposed landward of a bulkhead or other shoreline protective structure shall comply with adopted City standards. 7. If hard stabilization methods are employed the following design criteria shall be meet: a. The size and quantity of the material shall be limited to that the minimum necessary to withstand the estimated energy intensity of the hydraulic system; b. Filter cloth must be used to aid drainage and help prevent settling; The toe reinforcement or protection must be adequate to prevent a collapse of the system wave action; and d. Fish habitat components shall be considered in the design subject to Hydraulic Project Approval by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 63 of 159 Packet Page 366 of 494 8. When hard stabilization measures are required at a public access site, provision for safe pedestrian access to the water shall be incorporated into bulkhead design. 9. Stairs or other permitted structures may be built into a hard stabilization structure but shall not extend waterward of it. E. Geotechnical Reports. Geotechnical reports required pursuant to this section shall address the need for shoreline stabilization and shall include the following. 1. A scaled site plan showing: a. The location of existing and proposed shore stabilization, structures, fill, and vegetation, with dimensions indicated distances to the ordinary high water mark. b. Existing site topography with two foot contours. 2. A description of the processes affecting the site, and surrounding areas that influence or could be influenced by the site, including areas in which lake or marine geomorphic processes affect the site, including, but not limited to: a. Soil erosion, deposition, or accretion; b. Evidence of past or potential erosion due to tidal action and/or waves; c. Littoral drift; and d. An estimate of shoreline erosion rates. 3. A description and analysis of the urgency and risk associated with the specific site characteristics. F. Shoreline Stabilization — Shoreline Area Regulations 1. Urban Railroad a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. b. Gabions are prohibited. 2. Urban Mixed Use I a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 64 of 159 Packet Page 367 of 494 b. Gabions are prohibited. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 65 of 159 Packet Page 368 of 494 3. Urban Mixed Use II a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. b. Gabions are prohibited. 4. Urban Mixed Use III a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. b. Gabions are prohibited. 5. Shoreline Residential I a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. b. Gabions are prohibited. 6. Shoreline Residential II a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. b. Gabions are prohibited. 7. Shoreline Residential III a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. b. Gabions are prohibited. 8. Aquatic I a. Bioengineering approaches are permitted on tidelands and shorelands when necessary to restore an eroding accretion shoreform or to retard erosion elsewhere subject to policies and regulations of this program. b. Bulkheads or revetments are prohibited except for an approved water -dependent development subject to policies and regulations of this Program. c. Gabions are prohibited. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 66 of 159 Packet Page 369 of 494 9. Aquatic II a. Bioengineering approaches are permitted on tidelands and shorelands when necessary to restore an eroding accretion shoreform or to retard erosion elsewhere subject to policies and regulations of this program. b. Bulkheads or revetments are prohibited except for an approved water -dependent development subject to policies and regulations of this Program. c. Gabions are prohibited. 10. Conservancy a. Bulkheads, revetments, and bioengineering approaches are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program b. Gabions are prohibited. 11. Natural: Shoreline stabilization is prohibited; except that, bioengineering approaches may be permitted as a conditional use when necessary to restore and eroding accretion shoreform or to retard erosion elsewhere. 24.50.030 Moorage: Piers, Docks, and Floats A. Applicability Docks are fixed structures floating upon water bodies. Piers are fixed, pile -supported structures. Floats are floating structures that are moored, anchored, or otherwise secured in the water that are not connected to the shoreline. Docks, piers, and floats that serve four or fewer boats regularly moored are reviewed a recreational facilities. Proposals for five or more boats are considered marinas and are regulated under ECDC 24.60.020, Boating Facilities. B. Moorage: Piers, Docks, and Floats Policies 1. A dock associated with a single family residence is considered a water -dependent use provided that it is designed and intended as a facility for access to watercraft and otherwise complies with the provisions of this section. 2. New pier or dock construction, excluding docks accessory to single-family residences, should be permitted only when the applicant has demonstrated that a specific need exists to support the intended water -dependent use. 3. Shared pier and dock facilities are preferred over single -user moorage where feasible. New subdivisions of more than two (2) lots should provide joint shared moorage. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 67 of 159 Packet Page 370 of 494 4. Piers and docks, including those accessory to single-family residences, shall be designed and constructed to avoid or to minimize and mitigate the impacts to ecological functions, critical areas resources such as eelgrass beds and fish habitats and processes such as currents and littoral drift. C. Moorage: Piers, Docks, and Floats Regulations The following piers, docks, and floating developments are prohibited in the shoreline jurisdiction: a. Aircraft moorage is prohibited, except that aircraft may be temporarily moored (not to exceed 36 hours) in the event of severe weather conditions. b. Covered moorage. 2. Size of Piers and Docks. Piers and docks may not be larger than is necessary to provide safe and reasonable moorage for the boats which can reasonably be expected to be moored. The city will specifically review the size and configuration or each proposed pier or dock to ensure that: a. The pier or dock does not extend waterward beyond the point necessary to provide reasonable draft for the boats to be moored and shall not extend beyond the outer harbor line; and b. The pier or dock is not larger than is necessary to moor the specified number of boats; and c. The pier or dock will not interfere with the public use and enjoyment of the water or create a hazard to navigation; and d. The pier or dock will not adversely affect nearby uses; and e. The pier or dock will not have a significant long-term adverse effect on aquatic habitats. 3. In order to minimize impacts on nearshore areas and avoid reduction in ambient light level: a. The width of piers, docks and floats shall be the minimum necessary and shall not exceed 4 feet in width, except where specific information on use patterns justifies a greater width. Marine floats shall not exceed 8 feet in width not more than 40 feet in length and freshwater floats shall not exceed 6 feet in width and 20 feet in length unless authorized by a variance. Exceptionally large vessels or vessels that require a relatively deep draft may be required to use a buoy, other alternative mooring scheme, or to moor in a marina. Materials that will allow light to pass through the deck may be required where width exceeds 4 feet. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 68 of 159 Packet Page 371 of 494 b. Dock surfaces designed to allow maximum light penetration shall be used on walkways or gangplanks in nearshore areas. c. Piers, docks and floats shall be located along a north/south orientation to the maximum extent feasible. d. The surface of new piers, docks and floats shall provide at least 50% functional grating. 4. Waterward of the ordinary high water mark, pier and dock height may not exceed a height of five feet above water level, except that pilings may extend a reasonable amount above dock height to provide for tidal conditions. 5. Prohibited substances. No part of a pier, dock or other components that may come in contact with the water may be treated with or consist, in whole or in part, of creosote, oil based paints, toxic chemicals, or other substances that would be harmful to the aquatic environment, unless specifically permitted and authorized by appropriate state and federal regulatory agencies. 6. If the pier, dock or float will extend waterward of the inner harbor line, the applicant must obtain a lease from the Department of Natural Resources prior to proposing this use. 7. No structure regulated under this section, other than moorage structures and sheds associated with gas and oil sales for boats, may be waterward of the ordinary high water mark. D. Moorage: Piers, Docks, and Floats - Shoreline Area Regulations 1. Urban Railroad: Moorage structures are prohibited. 2. Urban Mixed Use I: a. Private, shared, public and commercial moorage structures are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. b. Aircraft moorage is prohibited, except that aircraft may be temporarily moored (not to exceed 36 hours) in the event of severe weather conditions. Moorage structures and facilities located may not be located waterward of public parks, public beaches, or public facilities, nor may they be located so as to obstruct waterward view from these public uses. d. Permitted Accessory Uses: i. Boat and motor sales Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 69 of 159 Packet Page 372 of 494 ii. Boat repair and service, including dry docks, boat yards and similar activities iii. Boat motor/engine repair and service; provided, that commercial boat motor/engine repair involving complete engine overhaul or rebuilding shall take place within a building or be screened from public view. iv. Pumping facilities to remove effluent from boat holding tanks v. Dry land boat storage; provided, however, that stacked storage shall not be permitted to exceed the maximum permitted height in the Urban Mixed Use I shoreline environment. vi. Meeting and special event rooms. vii. Gas and oil sales for boats, if, A. All storage tanks are underground and located upland of the ordinary high water mark; and B. The use has facilities to contain and clean up gas and oil spills. C. Gas and oil sales may be conducted with an Overwater shed that is not more than 150 square feet in area and 15 feet in height as measured from the top of the deck. viii. Waste oil storage tanks not to exceed 500 gallons may be located above ground. Hazardous waste may be stored temporarily above ground in not more than nine 55-gallon drums. Such drums shall have secondary containment. Waste oil and hazardous storage tanks for the temporary storage of wastes and hazardous substances which exceed these standards, shall be placed underground. No tank of any kind intended for the permanent storage of waste or hazardous substances shall be permitted. 3. Urban Mixed Use II a. Private, shared, public and commercial moorage structures are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. b. Aircraft moorage, except that aircraft may be temporarily moored (not to exceed 36 hours) in the event of severe weather conditions. Moorage structures and facilities located may not be located waterward of public parks, public beaches, or public facilities, nor may they be located so as to obstruct waterward view from these public uses. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 70 of 159 Packet Page 373 of 494 d. Permitted Accessory Uses: i. Boat and motor sales 11. Boat repair and service, including dry docks, boat yards and similar activities iii. Boat motor/engine repair and service; provided, that commercial boat motor/engine repair involving complete engine overhaul or rebuilding shall take place within a building or be screened from public view. iv. Pumping facilities to remove effluent from boat holding tanks v. Dry land boat storage; provided, however, that stacked storage shall not be permitted to exceed the maximum permitted height in the Urban Mixed Use I shoreline environment. vi. Meeting and special event rooms. vii. Gas and oil sales for boats, if, A. All storage tanks are underground and located upland of the ordinary high water mark; and B. The use has facilities to contain and clean up gas and oil spills. C. Gas and oil sales may be conducted with an Overwater shed that is not more than 150 square feet in area and 15 feet in height as measured from the top of the deck. viii. Waste oil storage tanks not to exceed 500 gallons may be located above ground. Hazardous waste may be stored temporarily above ground in not more than nine 55-gallon drums. Such drums shall have secondary containment. Waste oil and hazardous storage tanks for the temporary storage of wastes and hazardous substances which exceed these standards, shall be placed underground. No tank of any kind intended for permanent storage of waste or hazardous substances shall be permitted. 4. Urban Mixed Use III: Moorage structures are prohibited. 5. Shoreline Residential I: Moorage structures are prohibited. 6. Shoreline Residential II: Moorage structures are prohibited. 7. Shoreline Residential III Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 71 of 159 Packet Page 374 of 494 a. Moorage structures and facilities may only be permitted and used accessory to detached dwelling units on waterfront lots. Use of the moorage structure and facilities is limited to the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which the moorage is accessory. Moorage space may not be leased, rented, sold, or otherwise made available to other than the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which the moorage is accessory. b. Accessory uses are not permitted in conjunction with moorage structure. c. Residential Moorage Structure Development Standards: i. Height. The height of a residential dock or pier shall not exceed five feet above the ordinary high water mark. The height of attendant pilings shall not exceed five feet above the ordinary high water mark or that height necessary to provide for temporary emergency protection of floating docks as determined in accord with generally accepted engineering practices. ii. Length. The length of any residential dock or pier shall not exceed the lesser of 35 feet or the average length of existing docks or piers within 300 feet of the subject dock or pier. iii. Width. The width of any residential dock or pier shall not exceed 25 percent of the lot width when measured parallel to the shoreline. A joint use dock located at the property line with another lot which shares the joint use dock may not exceed 25% the total of both lots. iv. Setbacks. All residential docks or piers shall observe a minimum 10-foot side yard setback from a property line or a storm drainage outfall. Joint use docks or piers may be located on the side property line; provided, that the abutting waterfront property owners shall file a joint use maintenance agreement with the Snohomish County auditor in conjunction with, and as a condition of, the issuance of a building permit. Joint use docks or piers shall observe all other regulations of this subsection. If such joint maintenance agreement is terminated, the dock or pier shall be brought into compliance with the bulk and set back provisions of this Master Program. v. Number. No lot shall have more than one dock or pier or portion thereof located on the lot. vi. Size. No residential dock or pier shall exceed 400 square feet. vii. Floats. Offshore recreational floats are prohibited. viii. Covered Buildings. No covered building shall be allowed on any residential dock or pier. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 72 of 159 Packet Page 375 of 494 8. Aquatic I a. Private, shared, and public moorage structures are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. b. If the subject property provides moorage for not more than two boats, the following setbacks apply: i. No moorage structure on private property may be within 25 feet of a public park. ii. No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on the subject property. iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet for moorage structures, provided that joint or shared moorage facilities may be located within the setback from the lot with whom the facility is shared. c. If the subject property provides moorage for more than two boats, the following setbacks apply: i. No moorage structure on private property may be within 100 feet of a public park. ii. No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on the subject property. iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet. 9. Aquatic 11 a. Private, shared, public and commercial moorage structures are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. b. No moorage structure on private property may be within 100 feet of a public park. No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on the subject property. d. The side property line setback is 10 feet. 10. Conservancy a. Moorage structures and facilities may only be permitted and used accessory to detached dwelling units on waterfront lots. Use of the moorage structure and facilities is limited to the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which the moorage is accessory. Moorage space may not be leased, rented, sold, or otherwise Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 73 of 159 Packet Page 376 of 494 made available to other than the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which the moorage is accessory. b. Moorage structures and facilities may not provide moorage for more than two boats; provided, however, that waterfront lots are encourage to develop joint or shared moorage facilities. If this occurs, the joint or shared moorage facility may contain up to two moorages for each waterfront lot participating in the joint or shared moorage facility. c. Accessory uses are not permitted in conjunction with moorage structure. d. If the subject property provides moorage for not more than two boats, the following setbacks apply: i. No moorage structure on private property may be within 25 feet of a public park. ii. No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on the subject property. iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet. e. If the subject property provides moorage for more than two boats, the following setbacks apply: i. No moorage structure on private property maybe within 100 feet of a public park. ii. No moorage structure may be with 25 feet of another moorage structure not on the subject property. iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet for moorage structures, provided that joint or shared moorage facilities may be located within the setback from the lot with whom the facility is shared. 11. Natural. Moorage structures are prohibited. 24.50.040 Landfill A. Applicability. 1. Landfill is the creation of or addition to the surface of the land by the filling, placement or depositing of sand, soil, or gravel, or other material on land covered by water, or in a wetland, march, bog, swamp, or similar water detention area. Landfill is normally done for and, in this Master Program, must be associated with a specific purpose or use such as the development of a commercial site, construction of roadways or a jetty. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 74 of 159 Packet Page 377 of 494 2. When backfill of bulkhead involves over one cubic yard per lineal foot, such bulkheads shall be evaluated under both this section and ECDC 24.50.020, Shoreline stabilization. B. Fill Policies Landfill should only be permitted to the minimum extent necessary to accommodate an approved shoreline use or development and with assurance of no net loss of shoreline ecological functions and processes. Enhancement and voluntary restoration of landforms and habitat are encouraged. 2. Allow landfills waterward of the ordinary high water mark, in those limited circumstances where permitted, only when necessary to facilitate water -dependent uses or ecological restoration projects that are consistent with this program and the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plans. Where feasible, public access to the shoreline and the water should be incorporated into the design. C. Landfill Regulations 1. Landfill water ward of the ordinary high water mark may be permitted as a conditional use in limited instances for the following purposes only, with due consideration given to specific site conditions, and only in conjunction with approved shoreline use and development activities that are consistent with this program: a. Water -dependent use permitted under this Master Program. b. To create public use or public recreation areas. c. Cleanup and disposal of contaminated sediments as part of an interagency environmental clean-up plan. d. Disposal of dredged material considered suitable under, and conducted in accordance with the dredged material management program of the Department of Natural Resources. Expansion or alteration of transportation facilities of statewide significance currently located on the shoreline and then only upon a demonstration that alternatives to fill are not feasible. f. Mitigation action, environmental restoration, beach nourishment or enhancement projects. 2. Landfills shall be permitted only where it is demonstrated that: a. The project has been located, designed, and constructed in a manner that minimizes impacts to ecological processes and functions and where impacts cannot be avoided, mitigation is provided to achieve no net loss. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 75 of 159 Packet Page 378 of 494 b. The fill will not result in erosion of the shoreline or undermine stability of neighboring properties. c. The fill is the minimum necessary to reasonably accomplish the purpose for the fill under subsection C.1 of this section. d. Where existing public access will be reduced, equivalent public access has been provided on or off site as part of the project. e. Fill material consists only of soil, sand, rock, or gravel. The fill material must not contain organic or inorganic materials that would be detrimental to water quality or existing habitats. f. Placement of landfill will be timed so as to minimize damage to water quality and aquatic life. 3. The applicant must stabilize exposed fill areas with vegetation. 4. Landfills, beach nourishment and excavation shall be designed to blend physically and visually with existing topography whenever possible, so as not to interfere with long term appropriate use including lawful access and enjoyment of scenery. 5. A temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) plan shall be provided for all proposed landfill and excavation activities. 6. The fill shall be designed and supervised by a civil engineer or similarly qualified professional. The professional shall certify that the fill meets the following requirements: a. The fill is designed and executed to minimize adverse impacts on neighboring properties and the environment, and is fully integrated into an otherwise approved facility. b. The fill is designed and executed to provide permanent structural integrity for the fill and surrounding areas. D. Applications for landfill projects shall include the following information: 1. Proposed use of the landfill area. 2. Analysis of the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the fill material demonstrating that the fill is of such quality that significant water quality, ecological impacts, and public health problems would not occur from its placement. 3. Fill must meet all state standards. Assessment of water quality impacts shall be included as an attachment. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 76 of 159 Packet Page 379 of 494 4. Source of the landfill material. 5. Location of the landfill relating to natural or existing drainage patterns. 6. Location of the perimeter of the landfill relating to the ordinary high water mark and critical areas. The applicant should consult with the Department of Ecology in determining the location of the ordinary high water mark. For development proposals at or water ward of the ordinary high water mark, an OHWM field determination by a qualified professional shall be provided with the application. The field determination shall be consistent with guidance development by the Department of Ecology and is subject to verification by the city of Edmonds and the Department of Ecology. 7. Perimeter erosion control or stabilization means, and schedule for implementation. 8. Type of surfacing and run-off control and treatment devices. E. Shoreline Area Regulations Urban Railroad: Landfill may be allowed as a conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. 2. Urban Mixed Use L• Landfill is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this program. 3. Urban Mixed Use II: Landfill is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this program. 4. Urban Mixed Use III: Landfill is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this program. 5. Shoreline Residential I: Landfill is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this program. 6. Shoreline Residential IL• Landfill is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this program. 7. Shoreline Residential III: Landfill is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this program. 8. Aquatic I: Landfill may be allowed as a conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. 9. Aquatic II: Landfill maybe allowed as a conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 77 of 159 Packet Page 380 of 494 10. Conservancy: Landfill may be allowed as a conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. 11. Natural: Landfill may be allowed as a conditional use when necessary to protect or restore shoreline ecological functions subject to policies and regulations of this program. 24.50.050 Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs A. Applicability: A breakwater is a protective structure usually built offshore to protect harbor areas, moorage, navigation or beaches from wave action. A jetty, groin or weir is a structure usually built singly or in pairs perpendicular to the shore to prevent shoaling or accretion of sediment drift. Projects the requiring fill must also meet the requirements of ECDC 24.50.040, Landfill. B. Breakwaters, Jetties, Groins, and Weirs Policies 1. Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs located waterward of the ordinary high watermark shall be allowed only where necessary to support water -dependent uses, public access, shoreline stabilization, or other specific public purpose. 2. Open pile or floating breakwater designs are preferred. 3. Solid rock or fill -based weirs, groins and jetties should not be constructed unless it can be demonstrated that they are part of a larger system that will reduce the need for overall shoreline modification and that they are intended to prevent damage to existing structures. They should not be proposed to protect new structures. C. Breakwaters, Jetties, Groins, and Weirs Regulations 1. Breakwaters, Jetties, Groins and Weirs may be allowed provided that: a. Jetties and breakwaters are permitted where they are an integral component of a professionally designed harbor, marina, or port. Where permitted, floating portable or submerged breakwater structures, or small discontinuous structures are preferred where physical conditions make such alternatives with less impact feasible. b. Groins are permitted as a component of a professionally designed community or public beach management program that encompasses an entire drift sector or reach for which alternatives are infeasible. Or where installed to protect or restore shoreline ecological functions. c. The breakwater is essential to the safe operation of a moorage facility. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 78 of 159 Packet Page 381 of 494 d. The city determines that the location, size, design and accessory components of the moorage facility to be protected by the breakwater provide a public benefit and are within the public interest. e. The breakwater, jetty, groin, or weir is designed to protect critical areas and where impacts are unavoidable, mitigation will be provided to ensure no net loss of ecological functions and processes. 2. Public Access: a. Where appropriate projects shall be required to maintain, replace or enhance existing public access opportunities by incorporating physical or visual access areas and/or facilities into the design of the project. b. Publicly financed or subsidized projects shall not restrict appropriate public access to the shoreline and shall proved new public access except where such access is determined to be infeasible because of incompatible uses, safety, security, or harm to shoreline ecological functions. 3. All breakwaters, jetties, groins, or weirs must be designed and constructed under the supervision of a civil engineer or similarly qualified professional. As part of the application, the engineer or other professional designing the project must certify that: a. The project is designed to meet the requirements of this Program and accomplish the purpose of the project using the best available science. b. The project is designed to be the minimum necessary to accommodate the proposed purpose. The project is designed to have the minimum feasible adverse impacts upon the environment, nearby waterfront properties, and navigation. d. Any unavoidable impacts have been mitigated to ensure no net loss of ecological functions and processes. D. Breakwaters, Jetties, Groins, and Weirs — Shoreline Area Regulations. Urban Railroad: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. 2. Urban Mixed Use I: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. 3. Urban Mixed Use II: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 79 of 159 Packet Page 382 of 494 4. Urban Mixed Use III: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. 5. Shoreline Residential I: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs are prohibited. 6. Shoreline Residential II: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs are prohibited. 7. Shoreline Residential III: a. Bulkheads are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. b. Jetties, groins, and weirs are prohibited. 8. Aquatic I: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. 9. Aquatic II: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. 10. Conservancy: a. Breakwaters and jetties maybe permitted as a conditional use if accessory to a water - dependent use and littoral sediment transport is not significantly disrupted. b. Groins may be permitted as a conditional use when necessary to protect or restore shoreline ecological functions subject to policies and regulations of this program. 11. Natural: Breakwaters, jetties, groins, and weirs may be permitted as a conditional use when necessary to protect or restore shoreline ecological functions subject to policies and regulations of this program. 24.50.060 Dredging and dredge material disposal A. Applicability. Dredging is the removal or displacement of earth such as gravel, sand, mud, or silt from lands covered by water. Lands covered by water include tidelands, marinas, and wetlands. Dredging is normally done for, and in this Master Program must be associated with, a specific purpose or use such as maintaining navigation channels, developing/expanding marinas, constructing bridge footings, laying submarine cable and in some cases aquaculture (See Aquaculture Section ECDC 24.60.010). Dredging to restore preexisting contours within a designated and authorized navigation channel, marina or basin is considered normal maintenance and is exempt from the requirement for a substantial development permit. Dredging is only maintenance where there Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 80 of 159 Packet Page 383 of 494 is a designated and authorized facility such as a marina, federal navigation channel or berth authorized by permit. If an operation expands an existing the channel or basin, a permit is required even if the marina or similar project has been operation for years. Dredge spoil is the material removed by dredging. Dredge spoil disposal is the depositing of dredge materials on land or into water bodies for the purpose of either creating new or additional lands or for disposing of the dredge material (See also, Landfill Section, ECDC 24.50.040). B. Dredging and dredge material policies 1. Site and design new development to avoid or, if that is not possible, to minimize the need for new and maintenance dredging. 2. Dredging waterward of the ordinary high water mark for the primary purpose of obtaining fill material shall not be allowed, except when the material is necessary for the restoration of ecological functions. 3. Dredging should be permitted for water -dependent uses of economic importance to the region and/or essential public facilities only when necessary and when alternatives are infeasible or less consistent with this Program. 4. Plan and conduct dredge and dredge disposal operations in a manner that avoids or minimizes interference with navigation and significant ecological impacts. Impacts which cannot be avoided should be mitigated in a manner that assures no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. S. Minor dredging for fill materials as part of ecological restoration or enhancement, beach nourishment, public access or public recreation should be permitted if consistent with this Program. C. Dredging and dredge material regulations 1. Dredging shall only be permitted for the following activities: a. Development of approved wet moorages, harbors, ports and water -dependent industries of economic importance to the region only when there are no feasible alternatives. b. Maintenance dredging for the purpose of restoring a lawfully established development. c. Establishing, expanding, relocating or reconfiguring navigation channels where necessary to assure safe and efficient accommodation of existing navigational uses. Maintenance dredging of established navigation channels and basins shall be Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 81 of 159 Packet Page 384 of 494 restricted to maintaining previously dredge and/or existing authorized location, depth, and width. d. To remove silt or sediment deposited because of severe and unusual erosion or resulting from the existence of a bulkhead on nearby property. e. To provide sufficient draft for boat moorage. f. Restoration or enhancement of shoreline ecological functions and processes benefiting water quality and/or fish and wildlife habitat. g. Dredging waterward of the ordinary high water mark for the primary purpose of obtaining fill material shall not be allowed, except when the material is necessary for the restoration of ecological functions. When allowed, the site where the fill is to be placed must be located waterward of the ordinary high water mark. The project must be either associated with a MRCA or CERCLA habitat restoration project or, if approved through a shoreline conditional use permit, any other significant habitat enhancement project. 2. The existing physical alignment and ecological function and processes shall be maintained, except to improve hydraulic function, water quality, fish or wildlife habitat, or fish passage. 3. New development shall be sited and designed avoid or, if that is not possible, to minimize the need for new and/or maintenance dredging. 4. Dredge Spoils. a. Dredge spoil disposal in open waters may be approved only in accordance with the Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis (PSDDA) evaluation procedures for managing in -water disposal of dredge material; when approved by applicable agencies, which may include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to section 109Rivers and harbors ActO and Section 404 (Clean Water Act) permits, and Washington State Department of fish and Wildlife hydraulic Project approval (HPA); and when found to meet the following conditions. i. Land disposal is infeasible, less consistent with this Program, or prohibited by law. ii. Nearshore disposal as part of a program to restore or enhance shoreline ecological functions and processes is not feasible. iii. Offshore habitat will be protected, restored, or enhanced. iv. Adverse effects on water quality or biologic resources from contaminated materials will be mitigated. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 82 of 159 Packet Page 385 of 494 v. Shifting and dispersal of spoil will be minimal. vi. Water quality will not be adversely affected. b. Dredging spoils may be used as fill or landscape material for a development in the shoreline areas that is otherwise approved by the city under this Program (ECDC 24.50.040). c. The city may permit dredging spoils to be temporarily deposited in the shoreline area for transfer and removal to an approved disposal site. The dredging spoils may not be stored in the shoreline area longer than is reasonably necessary and must be stored in a manner that will protect the environment and neighboring properties from undesirable effect and adverse impacts. d. Dredge spoil disposal is prohibited on marine shorelines between the line of extreme low tide and the ordinary high water mark, and on Lake Ballinger shorelines or beds; except that, dredge spoil may be used in approved projects for the restoration or enhancement of shoreline ecological functions and processes, such as beach nourishment. e. The City may impose reasonable limitation on dredge disposal operating periods and hours and may require provision for buffer strips at land disposal sites. 5. Proposals for dredging and dredge spoil disposal, when permitted, shall: a. Be kept to the minimum necessary to accommodate the proposed use. b. Include all feasible mitigating measures to protect habitats and to minimize adverse impacts such as turbidity, release of nutrients, heavy metals, sulfides, organic materials, or toxic substances, depletion of oxygen, disruption of food chains, loss of benthic productivity, and disturbance of fish runs and important localized biological communities. Be scheduled so as to not materially interfere with the migratory movements of anadromous fish. d. Utilize techniques that cause minimum dispersal and broadcast of bottom material. e. Not interfere with geohydraulic processes. £ Be found, through analysis by qualified professional, to be nonpolluting or shall have no significant negative pollution impact. g. Meet all requirements of applicable regulatory agencies. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 83 of 159 Packet Page 386 of 494 h. Not result in erosion of the shoreline or undermine the stability of neighboring properties. D. Dredging and Dredge Material Application. Applications for shoreline dredging and dredge spoil disposal shall provide, at a minimum, the following information: 1. A description of the purpose of the proposed dredging and an analysis of compliance with the policies and regulations of this Program. 2. A detailed description of the existing physical character, shoreline geomorphology and biological resources provided by the area proposed to be dredged, including: a. A site plan map outlining the perimeter of the proposed dredge area. The map must also include the existing bathymetry depths based on Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) and have data points at a minimum of 2-foot depth increments. b. A habitat survey must be conducted and WDFW must be contacted to ensure the survey is conducted according to the most recent WDFW eelgrass/macroalgae survey guidelines. c. Information on stability of bedlands adjacent to proposed dredging and spoils disposal areas. 3. A detailed description of the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of the dredge spoils to be removed, including: a. Physical analysis of material to be dredged: material composition and amount, grain size, organic materials present, source of material, etc. b. Chemical analysis of material to be dredged: volatile solids, chemical oxygen demand (COD), grease and oil content, mercury, lead and zinc content, etc. c. Biological analysis of material to be dredged. 4. A description of the method of materials removal, including facilities for settlement and movement. a. Dredging procedure: length of time it will take to complete dredging, method of dredging and amount of materials removed. b. Frequency and quantity of project maintenance dredging. 5. Detailed plans for dredge spoil disposal, including specific land disposal sites and relevant information on the disposal site, including but not limited to: a. Spoils disposal area: Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 84 of 159 Packet Page 387 of 494 i. Physical characteristics including location, topography, existing drainage patterns, surface and ground water; ii. Size and capacity of disposal site; iii. Means of transportation to the disposal site; iv. Proposed dewatering and stabilization of spoils; v. Methods of controlling erosion and sedimentation; and vi. Future use of the site and conformance with land use policies and regulations. b. Total initial spoils volume. c. Plan for disposal of maintenance spoils. 6. Hydraulic modeling studies sufficient to identify existing geo-hydraulic patterns and probable effects of dredging. E. Dredging and dredge material disposal — Shoreline Area Regulations 1. Urban Railroad: Dredging may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 2. Urban Mixed Use I: Dredging may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 3. Urban Mixed Use II: Dredging may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 4. Urban Mixed Use III: Dredging is prohibited except that dredging is permitted as an essential element of an approved shore restoration or enhancement plan, subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. 5. Shoreline Residential I: Dredging is prohibited except that dredging is permitted as an essential element of an approved shore restoration or enhancement plan, subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. 6. Shoreline Residential II: Dredging is prohibited except that dredging is permitted as an essential element of an approved shore restoration or enhancement plan, subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. 7. Shoreline Residential III: Dredging may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and regulations of this Program. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 85 of 159 Packet Page 388 of 494 8. Aquatic I: Dredging may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and regulations of this Program. Maintenance dredging pursuant to ECDC 24.50.060.C. Lb and .c is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Program without a conditional use permit provided the original constructed bottom contours have been established and documented in a prior shoreline permit authorization. 9. Aquatic II: Dredging may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and regulations of this Program. Maintenance dredging pursuant to ECDC 24.50.060.C. Lb and .c is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Program without a conditional use permit provided the original constructed bottom contours have been established and documented in a prior shoreline permit authorization. 10. Conservancy: Dredging may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. 11. Natural: Dredging is prohibited except that dredging is permitted as an essential element of an approved shore restoration or enhancement plan, subject to the policies and regulations of this Program. 24.50.070 Shoreline habitat and natural systems restoration and enhancement projects A. Applicability. Shoreline habitat and natural systems enhancement projects include those activities proposed and conducted specifically for the purpose of establishing, restoring, or enhancing habitat for priority species in shorelines. B. Shoreline Habitat and Natural Systems Restoration and Enhancement Projects Policies This program recognizes the importance of the restoration of shoreline ecological functions and processes and encourages cooperative restoration efforts and programs between local, state and federal agencies, tribes, non-profit organizations, and landowners to address shorelines with impaired ecological functions and/or processes. 2. Restoration and enhancement actions should restore shoreline ecological functions and processes as well as shoreline features and should be targeted towards meeting the needs of sensitive and/or locally important plant, fish and wildlife species. 3. Priority should be given to restoration and enhancement actions that: a. Create dynamic and sustainable ecosystems. b. Improve water quality. Restore native vegetation and natural hydrologic functions of degraded and former wetlands. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 86 of 159 Packet Page 389 of 494 d. Restore nearshore ecosystems processes, such as sediment transport and delivery and tidal currents that create and sustain habitat. e. Restore freshwater, nearshore, and estuarine habitat and habitat -forming processes. f. Mitigate erosive and associated impacts caused by stormwater runoff. g. Protect and restore wildlife corridors. h. Protect and restore native species of vegetation, fish, and wildlife. C. Shoreline Habitat and Natural Systems Restoration and Enhancement Projects Regulations. Restoration shall be carried out in accordance with the approved shoreline restoration plan and in accordance with the policies and regulation of this Program. D. Shoreline Habitat and Natural Systems Restoration and Enhancement Projects — Shoreline Area Regulations 1. Urban Railroad: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 2. Urban Mixed Use 1,• Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 3. Urban Mixed Use II: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 4. Urban Mixed Use III: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 5. Shoreline Residential I: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 6. Shoreline Residential 11: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 7. Shoreline Residential III: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 8. Aquatic I: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 9. Aquatic II: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 87 of 159 Packet Page 390 of 494 10. Conservancy: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 11. Natural: Restoration activities are permitted subject to policies and regulations of this Program. Part VI Specific Use Policies & Regulations 24.60.000 Applicability Shoreline use and development shall be classified by the Administrator and regulated under one or more of the following applicable sections of this Chapter. Unless otherwise stated, all use and development shall also comply with all of the General Policy and Regulations in Part IV of this Program and all of the Specific Modification Policies and Regulations in Part V of this Program. 24.60.010 Aquaculture A. Applicability Aquaculture is the farming or culture of food fish, shellfish, or other aquatic plants or animals any may require development such as fish hatcheries, rearing pens and structures, and shellfish rafts, as well as use of natural spawning and rearing areas. Aquaculture does not include the harvest of free-swimming fish or the harvest of shellfish not artificially planted or maintained. B. Aquaculture Policies Aquaculture is a water -dependent use and, when consistent with control of pollution and avoidance of adverse impacts to the environment and preservation of habitat for resident native species, is a preferred use of the shoreline. 2. Potential locations for aquaculture activities are relatively restricted because of specific requirements related to water quality, temperature, oxygen content, currents, adjacent land use, wind protection, commercial navigation, and salinity. The technology associated with some forms of aquaculture is still experimental and in formative states. Therefore, some latitude should be given when implementing the regulations of this section, provided that potential impacts on existing uses and shoreline ecological functions and processes should be given due consideration. 3. Preference should be given to those forms of aquaculture that involve lesser environmental and visual impacts and lesser impacts to native plant and animal species. In general, projects that require no structures, submerged structures or intertidal structures are preferred over those that involve substantial floating structures. Projects the involve little or no substrate modification are preferred over those that involve Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 88 of 159 Packet Page 391 of 494 substantial modification. Projects that involve little or no supplemental food sources, pesticides, herbicides or antibiotic application are preferred over those that involve such practices. 4. Aquaculture activities should be designed, located and operated in a manner that supports long term beneficial use of the shoreline and protects and maintains shoreline ecological functions and processes. 5. Aquaculture should not be permitted where it would resulting a net loss of shoreline ecological functions; adversely affect the quality or extent of habitat of native species including eelgrass, kelp, and other macroalgae; adversely impact other habitat conservation areas; or interfere with navigation or other water -dependent uses. 6. Aquaculture facilities should be designed and located so as not to spread disease to native aquatic life, establish new nonnative species which cause significant ecological impacts, or significantly impact the aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. 7. The City should actively seek substantive comment on any shoreline permit application for aquaculture form all appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies; affected tribes; and the general public regarding potential adverse impacts. Comments of nearby residents or property owners directly affected by a proposal should be considered and evaluated, especially in regard to use compatibility and aesthetics. C. Aquaculture Regulations 1. Aquaculture that involves little or no substrate modification shall be given preference over those that involve substantial modification. The application/proponent shall demonstrate that the degree of proposed substrate modification is the minimum necessary for feasible aquaculture operations at the site. 2. The installation of submerged structures, intertidal structures, and floating structures shall be allowed only when the applicant/proponent demonstrates that no alternative method of operation is feasible. 3. Aquaculture proposals that involve substantial substrate modification or sedimentation through dredging, trenching, digging, mechanical harvesting, or other similar mechanisms, shall not be permitted in areas where the proposal would adversely impact existing kelp beds or other macroalgae, eelgrass beds or habitat conservation areas. 4. Aquaculture activities, which would have a significant adverse impact on natural dynamic shoreline processes or which would result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions, shall be prohibited. 5. Aquaculture practices shall be designed to minimize use of artificial substances and shall use chemical compounds that are least persistent and have the least impact on plants and animals. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 89 of 159 Packet Page 392 of 494 6. If uncertainty exists regarding potential impacts of a proposed aquaculture activity, and for all experimental aquaculture activities, baseline and periodic operational monitoring by a City -approved consultant (unless otherwise provided for) may be required, at the applicant's/proponent's expense, and shall continue until adequate information is available to determine the success of the project and/or the magnitude of any probable significant adverse environmental impacts. Permits for such activities shall include specific performance measures and provisions for adjustment or termination of the project at any time if monitoring indicates significant, adverse environmental impacts that cannot be adequately mitigated. 7. New aquatic species that have not previously been cultivated in Washington State shall not be introduced into City of Edmonds waters without prior written approval of the Director of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Director of the Washington Department of Health. 8. For aquaculture projects using over -water structures, storage of necessary tools and apparatus waterward of the ordinary high water mark shall be limited to containers of not more than 3 feet in height, as measured from the surface of the raft or dock. 9. No processing of any aquaculture product, except for the sorting or culling of the cultured organism and the washing or removal of surface materials or organisms after harvest, shall occur in or over the water unless specifically approved by permit. All other processing and processing facilities shall be located on land and shall be subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 10. Aquaculture wastes shall be disposed of in a manner that will ensure strict compliance with all applicable governmental waste disposal standards, including but not limited to the Federal Clean Water Act, Section 401, and the Washington State Water Pollution Control Act (RCW 90.480. No garbage, wastes or debris shall be allowed to accumulate at the site of any aquaculture operation. 11. Predator control shall not involve the killing or harassment of birds or mammals. Approved controls include, but are not limited to, double netting for seals, overhead netting for birds, and 3-foot high fencing or netting for otters. The use of other non- lethal, non -abusive predator control measures shall be contingent upon receipt of written approval form the National Marine Fisheries Service and/or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, as required. 12. All floating and submerged aquaculture structures and facilities in navigable waters shall be marked in accordance with U.S. Coast Guard requirements. D. Aquaculture Application Requirements Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 90 of 159 Packet Page 393 of 494 1. Applications for aquaculture use or development shall include in their applications all information necessary to conduct a thorough evaluation of the proposed aquaculture activity, including but not limited to the following: a. A site plan map including: i. The perimeter of the proposed aquaculture operations area. ii. Existing bathymetry depths based on Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW datum). iii. Adjacent upland use, vegetation, presence of structures, docks, bulkheads and other modifications. If there are shore stabilization structures, provide the beach elevation at the toe of the structure and the top of the structure (MLLW datum). iv. Areas where specific substrate modification will take place or structures will be constructed or installed. v. Access provisions for barges or track equipment. vi. Location of storage or processing structures or facilities. b. A baseline description of existing conditions, including best available information on; i. Water quality. ii. Tidal variations. iii. Prevailing storm wind conditions. iv. Current flows. v. Flushing rates. vi. Littoral drift. vii. Areas of differing substrate composition. viii. Areas of aquatic, intertidal, and upland vegetation complexes. ix. Existing shoreline or water uses and structures. x. Aquatic and benthic organisms. xi. A vegetation habitat survey must be conducted. The WDFW must be contacted prior to the survey to ensure it is conducted according to the most current WDFW eelgrass/macroalgae survey guidelines. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 91 of 159 Packet Page 394 of 494 xii. Further baseline studies including surveys and sampling may be required depending upon the adequacy of available information, existing conditions, and the nature of the proposal. c. A detailed description of the project proposal including: i. Species to be reared. ii. Substrate modification or vegetation removal. iii. Planting, harvest and processing location, method and timing, including work proposal and construction techniques proposed, type of work, frequency, and duration. d. Anticipated use of any feed, pesticides, herbicides, antibiotics, vaccines, growth stimulants, antifouling agents, or other chemicals, and an assessment of predicted impacts. No such materials shall be used until approval is obtained from all appropriate State and Federal agencies, including but not limited to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and the Washington State Departments of Ecology, Fish and Wildlife, and Agriculture, as required, and proof thereof is submitted to the City. Compounds with the least persistence shall be used. Number of employees/workers necessary for the project, including average and peak employment. f. Methods of waste disposal and predator control. g. Methods to address pollutant loading, including biological oxygen demand (BOD). h. Assessment of potential impacts on shoreline ecological functions and processes addressing the baseline conditions identified, including but not limited to indirect cumulative effects. i. For floating culture facilities or other structures, the City may require a visual impact analysis. Depending on the size and complexity of the proposal, such analysis may be prepared by the applicant/proponent, without professional assistance, provided that it includes an adequate assessment of impacts. j. Information demonstrating that the site has natural potential for the type(s) of aquaculture proposed, due to necessary substrate or other conditions, as well as water quality suitable for the type(s) of aquaculture proposed. k. Information demonstrating that the proposed aquaculture activities will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions or processes or adversely affect habitat conservation areas. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 92 of 159 Packet Page 395 of 494 1. Information demonstrating that the proposed aquaculture activities will not substantially and materially conflict with areas devoted to established uses of the aquatic environment. Such uses include but are not limited to navigation, moorage, sport or commercial fishing, log rafting, underwater utilities, and scientific research. Existing public opportunities for gather wild stock aquatic resources on public lands shall be address in any application for aquaculture on public tidelands or bedlands. Compensation for loss of public access to public aquatic resources may be required. 2. Application for aquaculture activities must demonstrate that the proposed activity will be compatible with surrounding existing and planned uses. a. Aquaculture activates shall comply with all applicable noise, air, and water quality standards. All projects shall be designed, operated and maintained to minimize odor and noise. b. Aquaculture activities shall be restricted to reasonable hours and/or days of operation when necessary to minimize substantial, adverse impact from noise, light, and/or glare on nearby residents, other sensitive uses or critical habitat. c. Aquaculture facilities shall not introduce incompatible visual elements or substantially degrade the aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. Aquaculture structures and equipment, except navigation aids, shall be designed, operated and maintained to blend into their surroundings through the use of appropriate colors and materials. E. Aquaculture - Shoreline Area Regulations Urban Railroad: n ,,,,,,ettltur-e may be permitted ., a eenditional use „bjeet to ,,olieies and fegtilatiens of this Aquaculture is prohibited. 2. Urban Mixed Use I: Aquaculture may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 3. Urban Mixed Use II: Aquaculture may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 4. Urban Mixed Use III: Aquaculture may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 5. Shoreline • d_ polieies and r-egulations of this Program. Proposals eentaining net pen f4eilifies shall be leeated no eloser- than 00 feet ffem the • _ N4 of this environment, ifie Otherlesser- distanee is detefmified to be appropriate based Won a Visual ypesmay� ffeet. of the 614AWN4 Wit prohibited.in stieh eases a visual analysis shall be fnanda4of�-.-_Aquaculture is Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 93 of 159 Packet Page 396 of 494 6. Shoreline Residential II: loea4ed no eloser- than 1,500 feet from the OHWN4 of this polieies and r-egulations of this Pr-ogr-afn. Proposals eofAaining net pen f4eilifies shall be lose,- disc nee ;s detefmined to be appropriate based ,pon a vistial imp aflalysis-.Aquaculture is prohibited. 7. Shoreline Residential III: Aquaculture is prohibited. 8. Aquatic I: Aquaculture may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 9. Aquatic II: Aquaculture may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 10. Conservancy: Aquaculture may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and regulations of this Program. Proposals ^ ntai ing not pen f edifies shall be 10eatea r 11. Natural: Aquaculture activities that do not require structures, facilities, or mechanized harvest practices, and that will not result in the alteration of natural systems or features may be permitted as a conditional use subject to policies and regulations of this Program. 24.60.020 Boating Facilities A. Applicability The section applies to facilities that provide launching, storage, supplies, moorage, and other services for five or more pleasure and/or commercial watercraft. Commercial development, not accessory to the operation of a marina, shall comply with ECDC 24.60.030, Commercial Development. For the purposes of this section, boating facilities excludes docks serving four or fewer single family residences which are subject to the policies and regulations of ECDC 24.50.030, Piers, Docks and Floats. B. Boating Facilities Policies 1. Boating facilities, including marinas and launch ramps, are water -dependent uses and should be given priority for shoreline location. Boating facilities should contribute to public access and enjoyment of waters of the state. 2. Boating facilities should provide physical and visual public shoreline access and provide for multiple use, including water -related use, to the extent compatible with shoreline ecological functions and processes and adjacent shoreline use. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 94 of 159 Packet Page 397 of 494 3. Accessory uses to boating facilities should be limited to water -oriented uses, or uses that provide physical or visual shoreline access for substantial number of the general public. 4. Boating facilities shall be located, designed, constructed and operated in a manner that will minimize damage to shoreline processes and functions. When impacts cannot be avoided, impacts must be mitigated to assure no net loss of ecological function necessary to sustain shoreline resources. 5. Boating facilities should be located, designed and operated so that other appropriate water -dependent uses are not adversely affected. 6. Location and design of boating facilities should not unduly obstruct navigable waters and should avoid adverse effects to recreation opportunities such as fishing, pleasure boating, commercial aquaculture, swimming, beach walking, picnicking and shoreline viewing. 7. Boating facilities should be located, designed, constructed and maintained to avoid adverse proximity impacts such as noise, light and glare; aesthetic impacts to adjacent land uses; impacts to public visual access to the shoreline. C. Boating Facilities Regulations 1. The following moorage structures are prohibited in the shoreline jurisdiction: a. Aircraft moorage, except that aircraft maybe temporarily moored (not to exceed 36 hours) in the event of severe weather conditions. b. Covered moorage. 2. Marinas or launch ramps shall not be permitted within the following marine shoreline habitats because of their scarcity, biological productivity and sensitivity unless no alternative location is feasible, the project would not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions, and the proposal is otherwise consistent with this Program. a. Marshes, estuaries and other wetlands; b. Tidal pools and rock shores; c. Kelp beds, eelgrass beds, spawning and holding areas for forage fish(such as herring, surf smelt and sand lance); d. Subsistence, commercial and recreational shellfish beds; and e. Other critical saltwater habitats Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 95 of 159 Packet Page 398 of 494 3. Boating facilities and accessory uses shall be designed so that lawfully existing or planned public shoreline access and/or navigation rights are not unnecessarily blocked, obstructed or made dangerous. 4. The boating facility shall be designed to avoid the need for maintenance dredging. 5. Boat Storage: a. Marinas shall provide dry upland boat storage with a launch mechanism to protect shoreline ecological functions and processes, efficient use shoreline space and minimize consumption of public water surface area unless: i. No suitable upland locations exist for such facilities; or ii. It can be demonstrated that wet moorage would result in fewer impacts to ecological functions and processes; or iii. It can be demonstrated that wet moorage would enhance public use of the shoreline. b. Dry moorage and other storage areas should be located away from the shoreline and be landscaped with native vegetation to provide a visual and noise buffer for adjoining uses. 6. Waste Disposal. a. Marinas shall provide pump out, holding, and/or treatment facilities for sewage contained on boats or vessels. b. Discharge of solid waste of sewage into a water body is prohibited. Marinas and boat launch ramps shall provide adequate restroom and sewage disposal facilities in compliance with applicable health regulations. c. Garbage or litter receptacles shall be provided and maintained by the operator at several locations convenient to users. d. Marina operators shall post all BMP's pertaining to handling, disposal and reporting of waste, sewage, fuel, oil or toxic materials where all users may easily read them. 7. Oil Product Handling, Spills, and Wastes. Fail safe facilities and procedures for receiving, storing, dispensing, and disposing of oil or hazardous projects, as well as a spill response plan for oil and other products, shall be required of new marinas and expansion or substantial alteration of existing marinas. Compliance with Federal or State law may fulfill this requirement. Handling of fuels, chemicals or other toxic materials must be in compliance with all applicable Federal and State water quality laws as well as Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 96 of 159 Packet Page 399 of 494 health, safety and engineering requirements. Spill prevention and response, including report requirements, follow applicable Federal and State requirements. 8. Public Access. Marinas and boat launches shall provide public access for as many water - dependent recreational uses as possible, commensurate with the scale of the proposal. Features for such access could include but are not limited to docks and piers, pedestrian bridges to offshore structures, fishing platforms, artificial pocket beaches, and underwater diving and viewing platforms. 9. Prohibited substances. No part of a boating facility that may come in contact with the water may be treated with or consist of creosote, oil based paints, toxic chemicals, or other substances that would be harmful to the aquatic environment, unless specifically permitted and authorized by appropriate State and Federal regulatory agencies. 10. If the boating facility will extend waterward of the inner harbor line or extended mooring on waters of the state is proposed, the applicant must obtain a lease from the Department of Natural Resources prior to proposing this use. 11. No structure regulated under this section, other than moorage structures, boat gear storage lockers, and sheds associated with gas and oil sales for boats, may be waterward of the ordinary high water mark. D. Boating Facilities — Shoreline Area Regulations 1. Urban Railroad: Boating facilities are prohibited. 2. Urban Mixed Use I a. Boating facilities are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. b. Permitted Accessory Uses: i. Boat and motor sales ii. Boat repair and service, including dry docks, boat yards and similar activities iii. Boat motor/engine repair and service; provided, that commercial boat motor/engine repair involving complete engine overhaul or rebuilding shall take place within a building or be screened from public view. iv. Pumping facilities to remove effluent from boat holding tanks v. Dry land boat storage; provided, however, that stacked storage shall not be permitted to exceed the maximum permitted height in the Urban Mixed Use I shoreline environment. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 97 of 159 Packet Page 400 of 494 vi. Meeting and special event rooms. vii. Gas and oil sales for boats, if, A. All storage tanks are underground and located upland of the ordinary high water mark; and B. The use has facilities to contain and clean up gas and oil spills. C. Gas and oil sales may be conducted with an Overwater shed that is not more than 150 square feet in area and 15 feet in height as measured from the top of the deck. viii. Boat launch ramps that meet the following requirements: A. The ramp is paved with concrete. B. There is sufficient room on the subject property for maneuvering and parking so that traffic impact on the adjacent public right-of-way will not be significant. C. Access to the ramp is not directly from the adjacent public right-of-way. D. The design of the site is specifically approved by the city. ix. Waste oil storage tanks not to exceed 500 gallons may be located above ground. Hazardous waste may be stored temporarily above ground in not more than nine 55-gallon drums. Such drums shall have secondary containment. Waste oil and hazardous storage tanks for the temporary storage of waste or hazardous substances which exceed these standards must be place underground. No tank of any kind intended for the permanent storage of waste or hazardous substances shall be permitted 3. Urban Mixed Use II a. Boating facilities are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. b. Moorage structures and boating facilities may not be located waterward of public parks, public beaches, or public facilities, nor may they be located so as to obstruct waterward view from these public uses. c. Permitted Accessory Uses: i. Boat and motor sales Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 98 of 159 Packet Page 401 of 494 ii. Boat repair and service, including dry docks, boat yards and similar activities iii. Boat motor/engine repair and service; provided, that commercial boat motor/engine repair involving complete engine overhaul or rebuilding shall take place within a building or be screened from public view. iv. Pumping facilities to remove effluent from boat holding tanks v. Meeting and special event rooms. vi. Gas and oil sales for boats, if, 1. All storage tanks are underground and located upland of the ordinary high water mark; and 2. The use has facilities to contain and clean up gas and oil spills. 3. Gas and oil sales may be conducted with an Overwater shed that is not more than 150 square feet in area and 15 feet in height as measured from the top of the deck. vii. Boat launch ramps that meet the following requirements: 1. The ramp is paved with concrete. 2. There is sufficient room on the subject property for maneuvering and parking so that traffic impact on the adjacent public right-of-way will not be significant. 3. Access to the ramp is not directly from the adjacent public right-of-way. 4. The design of the site is specifically approved by the city. viii. Waste oil storage tanks not to exceed 500 gallons may be located above ground. Hazardous waste may be stored temporarily above ground in not more than nine 55-gallon drums. Such drums shall have secondary containment. Waste oil and hazardous storage tanks for the temporary storage of waste or hazardous substances which exceed these standards must be placed underground. No tank of any kind intended for the permanent storage of waste or hazardous substances shall be permitted. 4. Urban Mixed Use III: Boating facilities are prohibited. 5. Shoreline Residential I. Boating facilities are prohibited. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 99 of 159 Packet Page 402 of 494 6. Shoreline Residential II. Boating facilities are prohibited. 7. Shoreline Residential III a. Boating facilities are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. b. Accessory uses are not permitted in conjunction with moorage structure. c. Moorage structures and boating facilities may only be developed and used accessory to detached dwelling units on waterfront lots. Use of the moorage structure and facilities is limited to the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which the moorage is accessory. Moorage space may not be leased, rented, sold, or otherwise made available to other than the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which the moorage is accessory. 8. Aquatic I a. Boating facilities are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. b. If the subject property provides moorage for not more than two boats, the following setbacks apply: i. No moorage structure on private property may be within 25 feet of a public park. ii. No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on the subject property. iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet, provided however that joint use moorage facilities may be located within the setback with the lot which shares the facility. c. If the subject property provides moorage for more than two boats, the following setbacks apply: i. No moorage structure on private property may be within 100 feet of a public park. ii. No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on the subject property. iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet, provided however that joint use moorage facilities may be located within the setback with the lot which shares the facility. d. Boat gear storage lockers shall not exceed 18 square feet in area and three feet in height as measured from the top of the deck. Only one storage locker is permitted per boat slip. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 100 of 159 Packet Page 403 of 494 9. Aquatic II a. Boating facilities are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. b. No moorage structure on private property may be within 100 feet of a public park. No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on the subject property. d. The side property line setback is 10 feet, provided however that joint use moorage facilities may be located within the setback with the lot which shares the facility. e. Boat gear storage lockers shall not exceed 18 square feet in area and three feet in height as measured from the top of the deck. Only one storage locker is permitted per boat slip. This provision does not apply to under covered moorage structures. 10. Conservancy a. Boating facilities are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. b. Accessory uses are not permitted in conjunction with boating facilities. c. Moorage structures and boating facilities may only be developed and used accessory to detached dwelling units on waterfront lots. Use of the moorage structure and facilities is limited to the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which the moorage is accessory. Moorage space may not be leased, rented, sold, or otherwise made available to other than the residents and guests of the waterfront lots to which the moorage is accessory. d. Moorage structures and boating facilities may not provide moorage for more than two boats; provided, however, that waterfront lots are encourage to develop joint or shared moorage facilities. If this occurs, the joint or shared moorage facility may contain up to two moorages for each waterfront lot participating in the joint or shared moorage facility. e. If the subject property provides moorage for not more than two boats, the following setbacks apply: i. No moorage structure on private property may be within 25 feet of a public park. ii. No moorage structure may be within 25 feet of another moorage structure not on the subject property. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 101 of 159 Packet Page 404 of 494 iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet, provided however that joint use moorage facilities may be located within the setback with the lot which shares the facility. f. If the subject property provides moorage for more than two boats, the following setbacks apply: i. No moorage structure on private property may be within 100 feet of a public park. ii. No moorage structure may be with 25 feet of another moorage structure not on the subject property. iii. The side property line setback is 10 feet, provided however that joint use moorage facilities may be located within the setback with the lot which shares the facility. 11. Natural. Boating facilities are prohibited. 24.60.030 Commercial Development and Light Industrial A. Applicability Commercial development means those uses and facilities that are involved in wholesale or retail trade or business activities. Examples include but are not limited to restaurants, hotels, shops, offices, and recreation facilities. Industry applies to those businesses or uses involved in the production, processing, manufacturing, or fabrication of goods. Warehousing and storage of materials or products is considered part of the industrial process. This is a broad category that mostly applies to the downtown Commercial Waterfront (CW) where development must also comply with ECDC 16.55. Uses and activities associate with commercial development that are identified as separate use activities in this Master Program, such as Boating Facilities, Piers and Docks, Utilities, etc. are subject to the regulations established for those uses in addition to the standards for commercial development. The design, layout and operation of certain commercial uses directly affects their classification with regard to whether or not they qualify as water related or water enjoyment uses. B. Commercial Development and Light Industrial Policies 1. In securing shoreline locations for commercial and light industrial use, preference should be given first to water -dependent commercial uses, then to water -related, water - enjoyment commercial uses. 2. Restoration of impaired shoreline ecological functions and processes should be encouraged as part of commercial and light industrial development. 3. Commercial and light industrial development should ensure visual compatibility with adjacent noncommercial properties. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 102 of 159 Packet Page 405 of 494 4. Commercial and light industrial uses located in the shoreline should provide public access in accordance with constitutional or other legal limitations unless such improvements are demonstrated to be infeasible or present hazards to life and property. 5. Commercial and light industrial development should be encouraged to locate where environmental cleanup and restoration of the shoreline area can be incorporated. C. Commercial Development and Light Industrial Regulations 1. Commercial and light industrial uses are allowed subject to the policies and regulations of ECDC 24.40.020 and the specific criteria below: a. Water -dependent commercial and light industrial uses shall be given preference over water -related and water -enjoyment commercial uses. Prior to approval of water dependent uses, the Administrator shall review a proposal for design, layout and operation of the use and shall make specific findings that the use qualifies as a water - dependent use. b. Water -related commercial and light industrial uses may not be approved if the use displaces existing water -dependent uses. Prior to approval of water -related commercial uses, the Administrator shall review a proposal for design, layout and operation of the use and shall make specific findings that the use qualifies as a water - related use. c. Water -enjoyment commercial uses may not be approved if they displace existing water -dependent or water -related uses. Prior to approval of water -enjoyment uses, the Administrator shall review a proposal for design, layout and operation of the use and shall make specific findings that the use qualifies as a water -enjoyment use. d. Nonwater-oriented commercial and light industrial uses may be permitted where located on a site physically separated from the shoreline by another property in separate ownership or a public right-of-way such that access for water -oriented use is precluded. All other nonwater-orientatedoriented uses are prohibited in the shoreline unless the use provides significant public benefit with respect to the objectives of this Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act and is: i. Part of a mixed use project that includes a water-oruse; or ii. Proposed on a site where navigability is severely limited. 2. Over -water construction of commercial and light industrial uses is prohibited except as follows: Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 103 of 159 Packet Page 406 of 494 a. Only those portions of water -dependent commercial and light industrial uses that require over -water facilities shall be permitted to locate waterward of the ordinary high-water mark. b. Nonwater-dependent commercial and light industrial uses shall not be allowed over water except in limited instances where they are appurtenant to and necessary in support of water -dependent uses. D. Commercial Development and Light Industrial— Shoreline Area Regulations 1. Urban Railroad: Commercial and light industrial use and development is prohibited. 2. Urban Mixed Use I: a. Water-eQoriented commercial and light industrial use and development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. Nonwater- orientate commercial use and development may be permitted subject to the criteria for such uses in ECDC 24.60.030.C. Ld. b. A minimum of 15-foot setback is required from lot lines adjacent to shoreline residential environments. This area must be fully landscaped and include a minimum six-foot high fence or hedge. 3. Urban Mixed Use II: a. Water -oriented commercial and light industrial use and development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. Nonwater- orientate commercial use and development may be permitted subject to the criteria for such uses in ECDC 24.60.030.C. Ld. b. A minimum of 15-foot setback is required from lot lines adjacent to shoreline residential environments. This area must be fully landscaped and include a minimum six-foot high fence or hedge. 4. Urban Mixed Use III: Commercial and light industrial use is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. Nonwater-oriented commercial use and development shall be permitted. 5. Shoreline Residential I: Commercial and light industrial use and development is prohibited. 6. Shoreline Residential II: Commercial and light industrial use and development is prohibited. 7. Shoreline Residential III: Commercial and light industrial use and development is prohibited. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 104 of 159 Packet Page 407 of 494 8. Aquatic I: Commercial and light industrial use and development is prohibited, except that water -dependent uses and appurtenant structures may be permitted subject to the use and development regulations of the abutting upland shoreline area designation. 9. Aquatic II: Commercial and light industrial use and development is prohibited, except that water -dependent uses and appurtenant structures may be permitted subject to the use and development regulations of the abutting upland shoreline area designation. 10. Conservancy: Commercial and light industrial use and development is prohibited. 11. Natural: Commercial and light industrial use and development is prohibited. 24.60.040 Forest Practices A. For the purposes of this Master Program, preparatory work associated with the conversion of land to non -forestry uses and/or developments shall not be considered forest practices and shall be reviewed in accordance with the provisions for the proposed non -forestry use, the general provisions of this Master Program, including vegetation conservation, and shall be limited to the minimum necessary. B. All forest practices undertaken on shorelines shall comply with the applicable policies and provisions of the Forest Practices Act, Chapter 76.09 RCW as amended, and any regulations adopted pursuant thereto (WAC 222), as administered by the Department of Natural Resources and local provisions contained in Title 20 ECDC. 24.60.050 In -stream Structures A. Applicability. "In -Stream structure" means a structure place by humans within a stream or river waterward of the ordinary high water mark that either causes or has the potential to cause water impoundment or the diversion, obstruction, or modification of water flow. B. In -stream Structure Policies In -stream structures should provide for the protection and preservation of ecosystem - wide processes, ecological functions, and cultural resources, including, but not limited to, fish and fish passage, wildlife and water resources, shoreline critical areas, hydrogeological processes, and natural scenic vistas. C. In -stream Structure Regulations. The location and planning of in -stream structures shall give due consideration to the full range of public interests, watershed functions and processes, and environmental concerns. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 105 of 159 Packet Page 408 of 494 2. In -stream structures shall be constructed and maintained in a manner that does not degrade the quality of affected waters. 3. In -stream structures shall allow for normal ground water movement and surface runoff. 4. In -stream structures shall preserve valuable recreation resources and aesthetics values. 24.60.060 Recreational Development A. Applicability Recreational development provides opportunities for play, sports, relaxation, amusement, or contemplation. It includes facilities for passive recreational activities, such as hiking, photography, viewing, and fishing. It also includes facilities for active or more intensive uses such as parks, campgrounds, and golf courses. This section applies to both publicly and privately owned shoreline facilities intended for use by the public or a private club, group, association, or individual. Commercial recreational development must be consistent with he provisions of this section and the provisions of ECDC 24.60.030 for commercial uses. This Master Program gives priority to recreational development that is primarily related to access to, enjoyment and use of the water and shorelines of the state. B. Recreational Development Policies Encourage the coordination of local, state, and federal recreation planning so as to mutually address recreational needs. Shoreline recreational development should be consistent with all adopted park, recreation, and open space plans. 2. Encourage the linkage of shoreline parks, recreation areas, and public access points in a linear system, such as hiking paths, bicycle paths, and scenic drives. 3. Locate and design recreational developments in a manner that preserves, enhances, or creates scenic views and vistas. 4. Locate and design recreational facilities to minimize adverse impacts including those related to stormwater runoff, water quality, visual qualities, public access, and vegetation and habitat maintenance. 5. Encourage physical and visual access to shorelines and surface waters. 6. Locate golf courses outside of the shoreline area. 7. Prohibit use of recreational off -road vehicles within the shoreline area, except by public agencies for maintenance operations and emergency services. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 106 of 159 Packet Page 409 of 494 C. Recreational Development Regulations Where significant adverse impacts are adequately mitigated resulting in no net loss of ecological processes or functions, recreational development is a priority use for shoreline location, subject to the following: 1. The following recreational uses and developments are prohibited: a. Golf courses; b. Use of recreational off -road vehicles is prohibited within the shoreline, except by public agencies for maintenance operations and emergency services; c. Campgrounds; and d. Overnight recreational spaces or sites located within the shoreline. 2. Recreational facilities shall make adequate provisions for: a. Vehicular and pedestrian access, both on -site and off -site; b. Vehicular traffic, both inside and outside the facility; c. Vehicular parking; d. Water supply, sewage disposal, and garbage collection; e. The prevention of overflows and trespasses onto adjacent properties; f. Screening, buffer strips, fences, and signs to prevent park overflow and to protect the value and enjoyment of adjacent or nearby private or public properties; g. Security; and h. Maintenance. 3. Valuable shoreline resources and fragile or unique areas, such as wetlands and accretion shore forms, shall be used only for non -intensive recreation activities. 4. Encourage recreational facilities to provide signage and enforce regulations that prohibit tree cutting and limit the taking of marine life, driftwood, and the like. 5. Signs associated with recreational facilities shall be kept to a minimum in number and size and shall be erected as informational or directional aids only. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 107 of 159 Packet Page 410 of 494 6. Stairways and landings shall be located upland of existing bulkheads, banks, and the ordinary high water mark unless integral to a water -dependent use or Overwater structure permitted by this Master Program. D. Recreational Development — Shoreline Area Regulations 1. Urban Railroad: Recreational development prohibited. 2. Urban Mixed Use I: Water-eQoriented recreational use and development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 3. Urban Mixed Use II: Water-or-iontateaoriented recreational use and development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 4. Urban Mixed Use III: Water-efientate recreational use and development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 5. Shoreline Residential I: Water -oriented recreational use and development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 6. Shoreline Residential II: Water-efiefftate recreational use and development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 7. Shoreline Residential III: Water -oriented recreational use and development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 8. Aquatic I: Water -oriented recreational use and development is permitted, subject to the use and development regulations of the abutting upland shoreline area designation; provided that, underwater parks may be permitted as a conditional use. 9. Aquatic II: Water -oriented recreational use and development is permitted, subject to the use and development regulations of the abutting upland shoreline area designation; provided that, underwater parks may be permitted as a conditional use. 10. Conservancy: Low intensity water -on recreational use and development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of the Master Program and the following criteria: a. Structures will not result in more than ten percent (10%) building coverage or 4,000 square feet, whichever is greater and total impervious surface will not exceed twenty percent (20%), or 10,000 square feet, whichever is greater. b. Alteration of topography shall be limited to the minimum necessary to accommodate allowed development. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 108 of 159 Packet Page 411 of 494 Use of areas or facilities will not result in use patterns that lead to degradation of shoreline ecological functions and processes. 11. Natural: Low intensity water -oriented recreational use and development consisting of primitive trails may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program and the following criteria: a. Essential minor structures such as trails, boardwalks, piers, stairs, small picnic areas, viewpoints, restrooms, interpretive facilities, or development that will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions and processes are permitted, subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. b. Any necessary landscaping shall use native or similar self -maintaining vegetation. c. Recreational development requiring extensive structures or substantial alterations to topography or native vegetation is prohibited. 24.60.070 Residential Development A. Applicability Residential development refers to one of more buildings, structures, lots, parcels, or portions of parcels that are used or intended to be used to provide a dwelling for human beings. Residential development includes single-family residences, duplexes, other detached dwellings, multifamily residences, apartments, townhouses, mobile home parks, group housing, condominiums, subdivisions, planned unit developments, and short subdivisions. Residential development also includes accessory uses and structures such as garages, sheds, tennis courts, swimming pools, driveways, parking areas, fences, cabanas, saunas, and guest cottages, when allowed by the underlying zoning. Single-family residential development is identified as a priority use the shoreline area when developed in a manner consistent with control of pollution and prevention of damage to the natural environment. A Substantial Development Permit is not required for construction of a single-family residence by an owner, lessee, or contract purchaser for his own use of the use of his family. However, such construction and all normal appurtenant structures must otherwise conform to this Master Program. In addition, when applicable, all residential development is subject to the variance and conditional use requirements of this Master Program. Uses and facilities associate with residential development, which are identified as separate use activities or modifications in this Master Program, such as clearing, grading and landfill are subject to the regulations established for those uses in this Master Program. B. Residential Development Policies Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 109 of 159 Packet Page 412 of 494 1. Discourage residential structures or accessory structures in areas waterward of the ordinary high water mark, within nearshore management areas, or within wetlands, habitat conservation areas, flood hazard areas or their respective buffers. 2. Allowable density of new residential development should comply with applicable comprehensive plan goals and policies, zoning restrictions, and shoreline area designation standards. The density of development should be appropriate to the local natural and cultural features. 3. Structures or development for uses accessory to residential use should preserve shoreline open space, be visually and physically compatible with adjacent shoreline features, be reasonable in size and purpose, and result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions and processes. 4. New residential development should be planned and built in accordance with the policies and regulations in ECDC 24.50.020 and to minimize the need for shoreline stabilization and flood hazard reduction measures. 5. Measures to conserve native vegetation along shorelines should be required for all residential development. Vegetation conservation may include avoidance or minimization of clearing or grading, restoration of areas of native vegetation, and/or control of invasive species. 6. Consider additional design features for new Planned Residential Developments, subdivisions and short subdivisions that: a. Cluster dwelling units in order to preserve natural features, minimize physical impacts, and provide for public access to the shoreline. b. Maintain usable waterfront areas for the common use of all property owners with the development. 7. Encourage joint use of shoreline facilities, including access stairs. C. Residential Development Regulations Clearing and grading associated with a single-family residence may be exempted from the shoreline substantial development permit requirement, provided the following conditions are met: a. The clearing and grading activity is confined to the construction site; and b. Grading does not exceed 250 cubic yards. 2. New over -water residences, including floating homes, are prohibited. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 110 of 159 Packet Page 413 of 494 3. Residential development shall be: a. Located and designed to avoid the need for structural shore defense and flood protection works in the foreseeable future. b. Designed to minimize potential conflicts with the use of adjacent public lands and areas of public access. This may include providing a physical separation to reinforce the distinction between public and private space, achieved by providing adequate space, through screening with landscape planting or fences, or other means. 4. Subdivisions: a. Shall comply with local plans, codes, and ordinances. b. Shall be designed to exemplify the definition and policy of the applicable shoreline designation as well as the environmental and physical capabilities of the subject site. c. Shall be designed, configured and developed in a manner that assures no net loss of ecological functions results from the plat or subdivision at full build -out of all lots. d. Shall be prohibited if flood control or shoreline protection measures are necessary to create a residential lot or site area. Shall provide a community recreation and/or open space area for the benefit of all residents or property owners in the development; provided that such provisions shall not apply to lot line adjustments or lot consolidation. f. Public access for the subdivision of a property into 4 or more lots shall be considered in accordance with ECDC 24.40.040 Public Access and Views. g. May be required to cluster residential units and structures to avoid wetlands, habitat conservation areas or landslide hazards that are located on the development site. h. Shall be designed to minimize potential conflicts with the use of adjacent public lands and areas of public access. This may include providing a physical separation to reinforce the distinction between public and private space, achieved by providing adequate space, through screening with landscape planting or fences, or other means. i. Shall comply with the applicable policies and performance standards of this Master Program, with regard to roads, utilities, and other improvements. 5. New multifamily residential development should provide community and/or public access in accordance with ECDC 24.40.040 Public Access and Views. D. Residential Development — Shoreline Area Regulations Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 111 of 159 Packet Page 414 of 494 1. Urban Railroad: Residential development is prohibited. 2. Urban Mixed Use I: Residential development is prohibited. 3. Urban Mixed Use II: Residential development is prohibited. 4. Urban Mixed Use III: Single family and multifamily residential development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 5. Shoreline Residential I: Single family residential development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 6. Shoreline Residential II: Single family residential development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 7. Shoreline Residential III: Single family residential development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 8. Aquatic I: Residential development is prohibited. 9. Aquatic II: Residential development is prohibited. 10. Conservancy: Residential development is prohibited. 11. Natural: Residential development is prohibited. 24.60.080 Transportation and Parking A. Applicability Transportation facilities are those structures and developments that aid in land and water surface movement of people, goods, and services. They include roads and highways, bridges and causeways, bikeways, trails, railroad facilities, ferry terminals, float plane terminals, airports, heliports, and other related facilities. B. Transportation and Parking Policies 1. New or expanded public transportation facility route selection and development should be coordinated with related local and state government land use and circulation planning. 2. Transportation system plans and transportation projects within shorelines should provide safe travel ways for non -motorized traffic such as pedestrians and bicyclists. Space for such uses should be required along roads on shorelines, where appropriate, and should be considered when rights -of -way are being vacated. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 112 of 159 Packet Page 415 of 494 3. Transportation system route planning, acquisition, and design within the shoreline should provide, where possible, for compatible uses such as utility lines, pedestrian shore access or view points, or recreational trails. 4. Avoid unnecessary duplication or roads by making use of existing roads where practicable. 5. Public transportation routes, particularly arterial highways and railways, should be located, designed, and maintained to permit safe enjoyment of adjacent shore areas and properties by other appropriate uses such as recreation or residences. Vegetative screening or other buffering should be considered. 6. Parking is not a preferred use in shorelines and should only be allowed to support authorized uses where no feasible alternatives exist. C. Transportation and Parking Regulations 1. Transportation and parking facilities shall be planned, located, and designed so that routes will have the least possible adverse effect on unique or fragile shoreline features, will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions or adversely impact existing or planned water -dependent uses. 2. Roads shall be located to avoid critical areas. Landfills for transportation facility development are prohibited in water bodies, wetlands, and on accretion beaches, except when all structural and upland alternatives have been proven infeasible and the transportation facilities are necessary to support uses consistent with this program. Such landfill may be permit as a Conditional Use Permit and must comply with the provisions of ECDC 24.50.040. Where impacts cannot be avoided, impacts must be mitigated to assure no net loss of ecological function necessary to sustain shoreline resources. 3. Culverts, bridges and similar devices shall be designed to pass water, sediment, and debris loads anticipated under appropriate hydraulic analysis. 4. All roads and drainage systems shall be maintained to prevent erosion and/or water quality degradation. 5. Road routes shall make provisions for pedestrian, bicycle, and other non -motorized modes of travel whenever feasible. 6. Parking facilities are not a water -dependent use and shall only be permitted within the shoreline to support an authorized use where it can be demonstrated that there are no feasible alternative locations away from the shoreline. 7. All uses must provide sufficient off-street parking spaces in order to accommodate the reasonably anticipated number of vehicles that will be coming to the subject property. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SNIP Page 113 of 159 Packet Page 416 of 494 Specific parking standards for uses are identified in the ECDC 17.50, as now or hereafter mended. 8. Parking layouts must be designed efficiently to use the minimum amount of space necessary to provide the required parking and safe and reasonable access. Parking should not be located between the building(s) on the subject property and the shoreline. Exterior parking areas, other than for detached dwelling units, must be attractively landscaped with vegetation that will not obstruct view of the shoreline from adjacent public areas or adjacent public rights -of -way. 9. Transportation facilities shall be constructed of materials that will preclude or minimize adverse affects on water quality or aquatic plants and animals over the long term. Elements within or over water shall be constructed of materials approved by applicable state agencies for use in water for both submerged portions and other components to avoid discharge of pollutants from splash, rain or runoff. No part of a transportation facility that may come in contact with the water may be treated with or consist, in whole or in part, of creosote, oil based paints, toxic chemicals or other substances that would be harmful to the aquatic environment, unless specifically permitted and authorized by appropriate state and federal regulatory agencies. 10. Maintenance activity including vegetation control and erosion control shall be carried out consistent with this Master Program. Necessary minor resurfacing of existing roadways and replacement of culverts that improve shoreline ecological functions may be exempt from substantial development permit requirements as provided by ECDC 24.80.010. 11. Ferry Terminals: a. The maximum permitted height of structures waterward of the ordinary high water mark shall not exceed 35 above the OHWM, except as provided below: i. Structures related to the loading of pedestrian passengers shall be permitted to exceed the maximum permitted height limit when necessary to perform the intended function. ii. Buildings and structures which house pedestrian passengers, employees and equipment storage shall be permitted to be 20 feet above the height of the ferry loading dock. iii. View analysis shall be conducted for ferry structures exceeding 35 feet above the OHWM and structures designed to minimize impacts on view corridors. b. The maximum permitted height of structures landward of the ordinary high water mark shall not exceed 30 feet above the average grade level except that bridge and overpasses may exceed the maximum height limit when necessary to perform their intended function. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 114 of 159 Packet Page 417 of 494 12. Railroads: a. Overwater Structures are prohibited. b. Accessory buildings shall be located on the landward side of the railroad tracks and a minimum of five feet from the property line. c. The size and configuration of structures shall conform to this program unless federal safety standards require a different size or configuration. D. Transportation and Parking — Shoreline Area Regulations 1. Urban Railroad a. The principal use permitted in this shoreline area is the use of the subject property by the railroad for its tracks (i.e., single main track, double main tracks and team tracks), yards and buildings. b. The following accessory uses structures and facilities are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program: i. Subgrade and road bed; ii. Railroad track/road crossing signals; iii. Slide fences; iv. Railroad signals; v. Bridges (i.e. pedestrian overpass bridges, vehicular overpass bridges and pipeline overpass bridges); vi. Railroad signage (i.e., speed, track, whistle, etc.); vii. Drainage facilities, including culverts; viii. Railroad crossings; ix. Buildings for housing of maintenance people not to exceed 600 square feet in area; x. Storage of items for maintaining the area; xi. Railway loading platforms; xii. Underpasses; and Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 115 of 159 Packet Page 418 of 494 xiii. Pedestrian safety fencing provided it does not exceed six feet in height above grade and is not constructed of solid sight -obscuring material. If the proposed fence is to exceed either six feet in height, or is constructed of solid sight obscuring material, then a shoreline conditional use permit is required. xiv. The Maximum permitted height of structures is 25 feet above grade level, except as specified below: 1. Accessory buildings shall not exceed 15 feet in height above average grade level. 2. Bridges and overpasses may exceed the maximum height limit when necessary to perform their intended function. 3. Slide fences shall not exceed fix feet in height. 4. Signal devices and signage shall be determined on a case -by -case basis according to the goals and policies of this Shoreline Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act and when required by federal law or regulation. c. Ferry terminals may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 2. Urban Mixed Use I: a. Railroads are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program consistent with ECDC 24.60.070.D.1, except that the maximum permitted height of structures is 30 feet, subjects to the same exception listed in ECDC 24.60.070.D.l.b.xiii.I through ECDC 24.60.070.D.l.b.xiii.4. b. Transportation facilities (including ferry terminals and railroads) are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. Parking areas not serving a specific approved water dependent use may be permitted as a conditional use, provided there is no feasible location outside of the shoreline. 3. Urban Mixed Use II: a. Railroads are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program consistent with ECDC 24.60.070.D.1, except that the maximum permitted height of structures is 30 feet, subjects to the same exception listed in ECDC 24.60.070.D. l.b.xiii.I through ECDC 24.60.070.D.1.b.xiii.4. b. Transportation facilities (including ferry terminals and railroads) are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. Parking areas not Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 116 of 159 Packet Page 419 of 494 serving specific approved water dependent uses may be permitted as a conditional use, provided there is no feasible location outside of the shoreline. Parking facilities. In the Urban Mixed Use II environment, the 60-foot setback for parking established in ECDC 24.40.090 may be reduced by a maximum of 20 feet if a public walkway or publicly accessible open space is provided waterward of the bulkhead. The parking setback may be reduced by one foot for every one foot of public walkway or publicly accessible open space that is provided waterward of the OHWM, to a maximum of 20 feet. The minimum setback for parking facilities shall be no less than 40 feet from the bulkhead. 4. Urban Mixed Use III: a. Unless permitted as an essential public facility, the following transportation facilities are prohibited in this shoreline area designation: i. Railroads. b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 5. Shoreline Residential I a. Unless permitted as an essential public facility, the following transportation facilities are prohibited in this shoreline area designation: i. Railroads; ii. Ferry Terminals; and ill. Parking. b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 6. Shoreline Residential II a. The following transportation facilities are prohibited in this shoreline area designation: i. Railroads; ii. Ferry Terminals; and Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 117 of 159 Packet Page 420 of 494 iii. Parking. b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 7. Shoreline Residential III a. The following transportation facilities are prohibited in this shoreline area designation: i. Railroads; ii. Ferry Terminals; and iii. Parking. b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 8. Aquatic I a. The following transportation facilities are prohibited in this shoreline area designation: ii7i_Parking. b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. c_Ferry terminals may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. c,d. Transportation facilities of statewide significance currently located on the shoreline may be expanded or altered as a conditional use upon demonstration that alternatives to expanding in or alteration of the Aquatic I environment are not feasible. 9. Aquatic II a. The following transportation facilities are prohibited in this shoreline area designation: Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 118 of 159 Packet Page 421 of 494 ii-.i. Parking. b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above are permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. c_Ferry terminals may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. d. Transportation facilities of statewide significance currently located on the shoreline may be expanded or altered as a conditional use upon demonstration that alternatives to expanding in or alteration of the Aquatic II environment are not feasible. 10. Conservancy a. The following transportation facilities are prohibited in this shoreline area designation: i. Railroads; and ii. Ferry terminals. b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program, provided there is no feasible location outside of the shoreline. c. Parking facilities may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 11. Natural a. The following transportation facilities are prohibited in this shoreline area designation: i. Railroads; ii. Ferry terminals; and iii. Parking. b. Transportation facilities not specifically prohibited above are may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program, provided there is no feasible location outside of the shoreline. 24.60.090 Utilities Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 119 of 159 Packet Page 422 of 494 A. Applicability Utilities are services and facilities that produce, convey, store, or process power, gas, sewage, communications, oil, waste, and the like. On -site utility features serving a primary use, such as a water, sewer or gas line to a residence, are "accessory utilities" and shall be considered a part of the primary use. B. Utilities Policies 1. Solid waste disposal activities and facilities are prohibited in shoreline areas. 2. New public or private utilities should be located inland from the land/water interface, preferably out of the shoreline jurisdiction, unless this location is reasonably necessary for the efficient operation of the utility facility or service. 3. Utilities should be located and designed to avoid negative impacts to public recreation and public access areas and significant natural, historic, archaeological or cultural resources. 4. Utilities should be located such that shoreline defense works will not be required for the life of the project. 5. All utility development should be consistent with and coordinated with all local government and state planning, including comprehensive plans and single purpose plans to meet the needs of future populations in areas planned to accommodate growth. Site planning and rights -of -way for utility development should provide for compatible multiple uses such as shore access, trails, and recreation or other appropriate use whenever possible; utility right-of-way acquisition should also be coordinated with transportation and recreation planning. 6. Utilities should be located in existing rights -of -way and corridors whenever feasible. 7. Utilities serving new development should be located underground, wherever feasible. 8. Development of pipelines and cables on aquatic lands and tidelands, particularly those running roughly parallel to the shoreline and development of facilities that may require periodic maintenance which would disrupt shoreline ecological functions should be discourage except where no other feasible alternative exists. When permitted, provisions shall assure that the facilities do not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions or significant impacts to other shoreline resources and values. 9. Utilities should be designed and development to preserve scenic views and aesthetic qualities of the shoreline area. C. Utilities Regulations Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 120 of 159 Packet Page 423 of 494 Prohibited Pipelines. Except for gas or oil pipelines, city -approved sanitary sewer, stormwater outfall lines, or other conveyance systems for on -site drainage collection systems for approved boat wash -down to special on -site treatment facilities otherwise permitted in this section, no pipeline for the transmission of any substance that would be hazardous to the aquatic environment may be constructed within the shoreline area. 2. Except where infeasible, all utility lines, pipes, conduits, meters, vaults and similar infrastructures and appurtenances must be placed underground consistent with the standards of the serving utility. 3. Utilities may not be located waterward of the ordinary high water mark unless no practicable alternative exists and this location is essential to the operation of the utility. 4. Utilities shall be located adjacent to or within existing utility or circulation easements or rights -of -way whenever feasible. Joint use of rights -of -way and corridors is encouraged. 5. Utility production and processing facilities, such as power plants and sewage treatment plants, or parts of those facilities, that are not water -dependent shall be located outside of shoreline jurisdiction unless alternative locations are demonstrated to be infeasible and it is demonstrated that the facilities do not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions and processes or significant adverse impact to other shoreline resources and values such as parks and recreation facilities, public access and aesthetic resources. 6. Outfall pipelines and diffusers are water -dependent, but should be located only where there will be no net loss in shoreline ecological functions and processes or adverse impacts upon shoreline resources and values. 7. Facilities for processing, storage and disposal of solid waste are not normally water - dependent. Components that are not water -dependent shall not be permitted in shoreline jurisdiction. 8. Temporary storage of solid waste in suitable receptacles is permitted as an accessory use to a primary permitted use, or for litter control. 9. When feasible, utility development shall include public access to the shoreline, trail systems, and other forms of recreation, providing such uses will not unduly interfere with utility operations, endanger the public health, safety, and welfare, or create a significant and disproportionate liability for the owner. 10. Utility developments shall be located and designed so as to avoid, to the extent practicable, the need for any structural or artificial shoreline modification works for the life of the project. D. Utilities Application Requirements Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 121 of 159 Packet Page 424 of 494 Applications for new or expanded shall be accompanied by adequate documentation that the proposal meets the policies and regulations of this Master Program, including but not limited to: 1. Description of the proposed facilities; 2. Reasons why the utility facility requires a shoreline location; 3. Alternative locations considered and reasons for their elimination; 4. Location of other utility facilities in the vicinity of the proposed project and any plans to include the other types of utilities in the project; 5. Plans for reclamation of areas disturbed both during construction and following decommissioning and/or completion of the useful life of the utility; 6. Plans for control or erosion and turbidity during construction and operation; and 7. Identification of any possibility for locating the proposed facility at another existing utility facility sire or within an existing utility right-of-way. E. Utilities — Shoreline Area Regulations 1. Urban Railroad: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 2. Urban Mixed Use I: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 3. Urban Mixed Use II: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 4. Urban Mixed Use III: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 5. Shoreline Residential I: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 6. Shoreline Residential II: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 7. Shoreline Residential III: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 8. Aquatic I: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 122 of 159 Packet Page 425 of 494 9. Aquatic II: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 10. Conservancy: Utility development is permitted subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. 11. Natural: Utility development may be permitted as a conditional use subject to the policies and regulations of this Master Program. Part VII Nonconforming Development 24.70.000 Purpose The purpose of this section is to allow certain nonconforming uses, buildings, signs and lots within shoreline jurisdiction to continue while limiting the continuation of certain aspects of nonconformity. Other nonconforming uses, buildings, signs and lots, which are declared to be nuisances, are required to be eliminated. 24.70.010 Nonconforming Uses A. Nonconforming uses are shoreline uses which were lawfully established prior to the effective date of the Shoreline Management Act or this Master Program, or amendments thereto, but which do not conform to present regulations or standards of this Master Program or policies of the act. B. A use which is listed as a conditional use but which existed prior to adoption of this Master Program or any relevant amendment and for which a conditional use permit has not been obtained shall be considered a nonconforming use. A use which is listed as a conditional use but which existed prior to the applicability of this Master Program to the site and for which a conditional use permit has not been obtained shall be considered a nonconforming use. C. A nonconforming use may continue, unless required to be abated by subsection (D) of this section, but it may not be expanded in any way, including additional lot areas, floor area, height, number of employees, equipment, or hours of operation, except as otherwise provided in ECDC 24.70.050. D. Lapse of Time. 1. If a nonconforming use is discontinued for 6 consecutive months or for 12 months during any two-year period, any subsequent use shall be conforming. It shall not be necessary to show that the owner of the property intends to abandon such nonconforming use in order for the nonconforming rights to expire. Uses such as agricultural or aquiculture, which Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Packet Page 426 of 494 Page 123 of 159 vary seasonally, shall be deemed abandoned if the seasonal use is not utilized during one full season consistent with the traditional use. 2. If a nonconforming uses ceases because its building is damaged in excess of 75 percent of its replacement cost, the use may be reestablished if, but only if, an application for a building permit which vests as provided in ECDC 19.00.015, et seq., is filed within six months of the date such damage occurred. After the application has been filed, only one 180-day extension may be granted. 3. The right of reestablishment of use described in subsection D.2 of this section shall not apply if: a. The building or structure was damaged or destroyed due to the unlawful act of the owner or the owner's agent; or b. The building is damaged or destroyed due to the ongoing neglect or gross negligence of the owner or the owner's agent. In the event that subsection D.3.a or .b of this section apply, the nonconforming use shall be abated if damage exceeds 25 percent of replacement cost. "Replacement cost" shall be determined as proved in ECDC 24.70.020. E. A nonconforming use shall not be changed to another nonconforming use, regardless of the conforming or nonconforming status of the building or structure in which it is housed. 24.70.020 Nonconforming development, building and/or structure A. Nonconforming development means a shoreline development which was lawfully constructed or established prior to the effective date of the Shoreline Management Act or this Master Program, or amendments thereto, but which does not conform to present regulations or standards of the program. B. A nonconforming building is one which once met bulk zoning standards and the site development standards applicable to its construction, but which no longer conforms to such standards due to the enactment or amendment of the zoning ordinance of the city of Edmonds or the application of such ordinance in the case of a structure annexed to the city. Subject to the other provisions of this section, an accessory building that is not an accessory dwelling unit shall be presumptively nonconforming if photographic or other substantial evidence conclusively demonstrates that the accessory building existed on or before January 1, 1981. In the case of a property that was annexed after January 1, 1981, then the date shall be that of the effective date of the annexation of the city of Edmonds. Such presumption may be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 124 of 159 Packet Page 427 of 494 C. A structure for which a variance has been issued shall be considered a legal nonconforming structure and the requirements of this section shall apply as they apply to preexisting nonconformities. D. A nonconforming development, building and/or structure which is moved any distance must be brought into conformance with this Master Program. E. Nonconforming development, building and/or structure may be maintained and continued, unless required to be abated elsewhere in this chapter or section; provided, that it is not enlarged, intensified, increased, or altered in any way which increases its nonconformity except as expressly provided in subsection F though L of this section. F. Historic Buildings and Structures. Nothing in this section shall prevent the full restoration by reconstruction of a building or structure which is either listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the Washington State Register of Historic Places, the Washington State Cultural Resource Inventory, or the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, or is listed in a council -approved historical survey meeting the standards of the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. "Restoration" means reconstruction of the historic building or structure with as nearly the same visual design appearance and materials as is consistent with full compliance with the State Building Code and consistent with the requirements of Chapter 20.45 ECDC, Edmonds Register of Historic Places. The reconstruction of all such historic buildings and structures shall comply with the life safety provisions of the State Building Code. G. If a nonconforming development, building and/or structure is destroyed or damaged to an extent not exceeding 75 percent replacement cost at the time of destruction, it may be restored to its former size, shape and lot location as existing immediately prior to the time the structure was damaged, so long as restoration is either: 1. Completed within one year of the date of damage; or 2. Completed within one year of the date of issuance of all required permits, so long as applications for such permits are vested within six months of the date of damage and are pursued in a timely manner. H. Determination of replacement costs and the level of destruction shall be made by the building official and shall be appealable as Type II staff decision under the provisions of Chapter 20.06 ECDC. I. The right of restoration described in subsection E of this section shall not apply if: 1. The development, building and/or structure was damaged or destroyed due to the unlawful act of the owner or the owner's agent; or 2. The development, building and/r structure is damaged or destroyed due to the ongoing neglect or gross negligence of the owner or the owner's agents. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 125 of 159 Packet Page 428 of 494 J. Residential Buildings in Commercial Zones. Existing nonconforming buildings in commercial zones in use solely for residential purposes, or structures attendant to such residential use, may be remodeled or reconstructed without regard to the limitations of subsections D, E and G of this section, if, but only if, the following conditions are met: The remodel or reconstruction takes place within the footprint of the original building or structure. "Footprint" shall mean an area equal to the smallest rectangular area in a plane parallel to the ground in which the existing building could be placed, exclusive of uncovered decks, steps, porches, and similar features; and provided, that the new footprint of the building or structure shall not be expanded by more than 10 percent and is found by the city staff to be substantially similar to the original style and construction after complying with current codes. 2. All provisions of the State Building and Electrical Codes can be complied with entirely on the site. No nonconforming residential building may be remodeled or reconstructed if, by so doing, the full use under state law or city ordinance of a conforming neighboring lot or building would be limited by such remodel or reconstruction. 3. These provisions shall apply only to the primary residential use on site and shall not apply to nonconforming accessory buildings or structures. 4. A nonconforming residential single-family building may be rebuilt within the defined building envelope if it is rebuilt with materials and design which are substantially similar to the original style and structure after complying with current codes. "Substantial compliance" shall be determined by the city as a Type II staff decision, except that any appeal of the staff decision shall be to the ADB rather than the hearing examiner. The decision of the ADB shall be final and appealable only as provided in ECDC 20.07.006. K. Subject to the other provisions of this section, an accessory building that is not an accessory dwelling unit shall be presumptively nonconforming if photographic or other substantial evidence conclusively demonstrates that the accessory building existed on or before January 1, 1981. In the case of a property that was annexed after January 1, 1981, then the date shall be that of the effective date of the annexation to the city of Edmonds. Such presumption may be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence. L. BD5 Zone. The BD5 zone was created in part to encourage the adoption and reuse of existing residential structures for live/work and commercial use as set forth in ECDC 16.43.030.B.5. In the BD5 zone, conforming and nonconforming buildings may be converted to commercial or other uses permitted by ECDC 16.43.020 and this Master Program without being required to come into compliance with the ground floor elevation requirements of ECDC 16.43.030.B. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 126 of 159 Packet Page 429 of 494 24.70.030 Nonconforming Lots A. A noncornforming lot is one which met applicable zoning ordinance standards as to size, width, depth and other dimensional regulations at the date on which it was created but which, due to the passage of a zoning ordinance, the amendment thereof or the annexation of property to the city, no longer conforms to the current provisions of the zoning ordinance. A lot which was not legally created in accordance with the laws of the local governmental entity in which it was located at the date of the creation is an illegal lot and will not be recognized for development. B. Continuation. A nonconforming lot may be developed for any use allowed by the zoning district in which it is located, so long as such development conforms to other requirements of this Master Program, the Shoreline Management Act, and all other applicable site use and development standards are met or a variance from such site use or development standards has been obtained. In order to be developed a nonconforming lot must meet minimum lot size standards established by the provisions of this code, subject to the provisions of subsection D of this section. C. Combination. If, since the date on which it became nonconforming due to its failure to meet minimum lot size or width criteria, an undeveloped nonconforming lot has been in the same ownership as a contiguous lot or lots, the nonconforming lot is to be and shall be deemed to have been combined with such contiguous lot or lots to the extent necessary to create a conforming lot and thereafter may only be used in accordance with the provisions of this Master Program, the Shoreline Management Act, and the Edmonds Community Development Code, except as specifically provided in subsection D of this section. D. Exception for Single -Family Dwelling Units. An applicant may build on single-family residence consisting of no more than one dwelling unit on a lot or parcel regardless of the size of the lot or parcel if, but only if, one of the following exceptions applies: In a Shoreline Residential environment, such nonconforming lot may be sold or otherwise developed as any other nonconforming lot pursuant to the following conditions and standards: a. The lot area of the nonconforming lot is not less than the minimum lot areas specified in the table below for the zoning district in which the subject property is located; and b. Community facilities, public utilities and roads required to serve the nonconforming lot are available concurrently with the proposed development; and c. Existing housing stock will not be destroyed in order to create a new buildable lot. Lot Area Table % Needed for Lot Size Needed Zone Legal Lot for legal lot 1 RS-20 60% 12,000 Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 127 of 159 Packet Page 430 of 494 (2) RS-12 70% 8,400 3 RS-10 75% 7,500 4 RS-8 80% 6,400 (5) RS-6 90% 5,400 2. An applicant applies for necessary permits to construct the unit within five years of the date the lot or parcel was annexed into the city and the lot or parcel was lawfully created under provisions of Snohomish County subdivision and zoning laws as well as the laws of the state of Washington; or 3. An applicant may remodel or rebuild on residence on a nonconforming lot without regard to the 75 percent destruction requirement of ECDC 24.70.020.G if a fully completed building permit application is vested within six months of the destruction of the residence and all other development requirements of this Master Program, the Shoreline Management Act, and the Edmonds Community Development Code are complied with; or 4. The lot lines defining the lot or parcel were recorded in the Snohomish county recorder's office prior to December 31, 1972, and the lot or parcel has not at any time been simultaneously owned by the owner of a contiguous lot or parcel which fronts on the same access right-of-way subsequent to December 31, 1972, and the lot or parcel has access to an access right-of-way which meets the minimum requirements established by the Edmonds Community Development Code. 24.70.040 Nonconforming Signs Nonconforming signs are injurious to health, safety and welfare and destructive of the aesthetic and environmental living conditions which this Master Program and zoning ordinances are intended to preserve and enhance. Nonconforming signs shall be brought in to compliance with the provisions of Chapter 20.60 ECDC under the following terms and conditions: A. No nonconforming sign shall be expanded, extended, rebuilt, reconstructed or altered in any way, except as provided below. The following acts are specifically permitted and shall not in and of themselves require conformance with the provisions of this Master Program of Chapter 20.60 ECDC 1. Normal maintenance of the sign; 2. A change in the name of the business designated on the sign; or 3. Any action necessary to preserve the public safety in the event of damage to the sign brought about by an accident an act of God. B. Any nonconforming sign shall be brought into immediate compliance with the code in the event that it is expanded in violation of subsection A of this section. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 128 of 159 Packet Page 431 of 494 C. None of the forgoing provisions relating to permitted maintenance, name change or preservation of the sing under subsection A of this section shall be construed so as to permit the continuation or preservation of any nonconforming off -premises sign. 24.70.050 Nonconforming local public facilities Existing legal nonconforming local public facility uses, buildings, and/or signs, owned and/or operated by local, state, or federal governmental entities, public service corporations, or common carriers (including agencies, districts, governmental corporations, public utilities, or similar entities) may be expanded, enlarged, altered, or modified, subject to the policies and provisions of this Master Program and review under Chapter 20.16 ECDC, Essential Public Facilities. Part VIII Administration — Shoreline Permits 24.80.000 Purpose This chapter establishes the permit review procedure for shoreline permits, in accordance with the Shorelines Management Act, Chapter 90.58 RCW and Chapter 173-27 WAC. All proposed uses and development occurring within shoreline jurisdiction must conform to Chapter 90.58 RCW, the Shoreline Management Act, and this Master Program, regardless of whether a shoreline permit, statement of exemption, shoreline variance, or shoreline conditional use permit is required. 24.80.010 Exemptions from Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Process A. Application and interpretation Exemptions shall be construed narrowly. Only those developments that meet the precise terms of one or more of the listed exemptions may be granted exemption from the substantial development permit process. 2. An exemption from the substantial development permit process is not an exemption from compliance with the Shoreline Management Act or the City of Edmonds' Shoreline Master Program, or from any other regulatory requirements. To be authorized, all uses and developments must be consistent with the policies and provisions of this Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act. 3. When a development or use is proposed that does not comply with the bulk, dimensional and performance standards of the master program, such development or use can only be authorized by approval of a variance. 4. A development or use that is listed as a conditional use pursuant to this Master Program or is an unlisted use, must obtain a conditional use permit even though the development or use does not require a substantial development permit. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 129 of 159 Packet Page 432 of 494 5. The burden of proof that a development or use is exempt from the permit process is on the applicant. 6. If any part of a proposed development is not eligible for exemption, then a substantial development permit is required for the entire proposed development project. 7. The City of Edmonds may attach conditions to the approval of exempted developments and/or uses as necessary to assure consistency of the project with the Shoreline Management Act and this Master Program. B. Exemptions Listed. The following developments shall not require substantial development permits: Any development of which the total cost or fair market value, whichever is higher, does not exceed five thousand seven hundred eighteen dollars ($5718), if such development does not materially interfere with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state. The dollar threshold established in this subsection must be adjusted for inflation every five years consistent with WAC 173-27-040(2)(a). For purposes of determining whether or not a permit is required, the total cost or fair market value shall be based on the value of development that is occurring on shorelines of the state as defined in RCW 90.58.030(2)(c). The total cost or fair market value of the development shall include the fair market value of any donated, contributed or found labor, equipment or materials. 2. Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including damage by accident, fire or elements. "Normal maintenance" includes those usual acts to prevent a decline, lapse, or cessation from a lawfully established condition. "Normal repair" means to restore a development to a state comparable to its original condition, including but not limited to its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance, within a reasonable period after decay or partial destruction, except where repair causes substantial adverse effects to shoreline resource or environment. Replacement of a structure or development may be authorized as repair where such replacement is the common method of repair for the type of structure or development and the replacement structure or development is comparable to the original structure or development including but not limited to its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance and the replacement does not cause substantial adverse effects to shoreline resources or environment. 3. Construction of the normal protective bulkhead common to single-family residences. A "normal protective" bulkhead includes those structural and nonstructural developments installed at or near, and parallel to, the ordinary high water mark for the sole purpose of protecting an existing single-family residence and appurtenant structures from loss or damage by erosion. A normal protective bulkhead is not exempt if constructed for the purpose of creating dry land. When a vertical or near vertical wall is being constructed or reconstructed, not more than one cubic yard of fill per one foot of wall may be used as backfill. When an existing bulkhead is being repaired by construction of a vertical wall Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 130 of 159 Packet Page 433 of 494 fronting the existing wall, it shall be constructed no further waterward of the existing bulkhead than is necessary for construction of new footings. When a bulkhead has deteriorated such that an ordinary high water mark has been established by the presence and action of water landward of the bulkhead then the replacement bulkhead must be located at or near the actual ordinary high water mark. Beach nourishment and bioengineered erosion control projects may be considered a normal protective bulkhead when any structural elements are consistent with the above requirements and when the project has been approved by the department of fish and wildlife. 4. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements. An "emergency" is an unanticipated and imminent threat to public health, safety, or the environment which requires immediate action within a time too short to allow full compliance with this chapter. Emergency construction does not include development of new permanent protective structures where none previously existed. Where new protective structures are deemed by the administrator to be the appropriate means to address the emergency situation, upon abatement of the emergency situation the new structure shall be removed or any permit which would have been required, absent an emergency, pursuant to chapter 90.58 RCW, these regulations, or the local master program, obtained. All emergency construction shall be consistent with the policies of chapter 90.58 RCW and the local master program. As a general matter, flooding or other seasonal events that can be anticipated and may occur but that are not imminent are not an emergency. 5. Construction or modification of navigational aids such as channel markers and anchor buoys. 6. Construction on shorelands by an owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single-family residence for their own use or for the use of their family, which residence does not exceed a height of twenty-five feet above average grade level and which meets all requirements of the state agency or local government having jurisdiction thereof, other than requirements imposed pursuant to chapter 90.58 RCW. "Single-family residence" means a detached dwelling designed for and occupied by one family including those structures and developments within a contiguous ownership which are a normal appurtenance as defined in 24.90.010.F. Construction authorized under this exemption shall be located landward of the ordinary high water mark. 7. Construction of a dock, including a community dock, designed for pleasure craft only, for the private noncommercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of single- family and multiple -family residences. A dock is a landing and moorage facility for watercraft and does not include recreational decks, storage facilities or other appurtenances. This exception applies if either: a. In salt waters (Puget Sound), the fair market value of the dock does not exceed two thousand five hundred dollars; or Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 131 of 159 Packet Page 434 of 494 b. In fresh waters (Lake Ballinger) the fair market value of the dock does not exceed ten thousand dollars, but if subsequent construction having a fair market value exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars occurs within five years of completion of the prior construction, the subsequent construction shall be considered a substantial development for the purpose of this chapter. 8. Operation, maintenance, or construction of canals, waterways, drains, reservoirs, or other facilities that now exist or are hereafter created or developed as a part of an irrigation system for the primary purpose of making use of system waters, including return flow and artificially stored ground water from the irrigation of lands. 9. The marking of property lines or corners on state-owned lands, when such marking does not significantly interfere with normal public use of the surface of the water. 10. Operation and maintenance of any system of dikes, ditches, drains, or other similar drainage or utility facilities existing on September 8, 1975, which were created, developed or utilized primarily as a part of an agricultural drainage or diking system. 11. Any project with a certification from the governor pursuant to chapter 80.50 RCW. 12. Site exploration and investigation activities that are prerequisite to preparation of an application for development authorization under this chapter, i£ a. The activity does not interfere with the normal public use of the surface waters; b. The activity will have no significant adverse impact on the environment including but not limited to fish, wildlife, fish or wildlife habitat, water quality, and aesthetic values; The activity does not involve the installation of any structure, and upon completion of the activity the vegetation and land configuration of the site are restored to conditions existing before the activity; d. A private entity seeking development authorization under this section first posts a performance bond or provides other evidence of financial responsibility to the local jurisdiction to ensure that the site is restored to preexisting conditions; and e. The activity is not subject to the permit requirements of RCW 90.58.550. 13. The process of removing or controlling aquatic noxious weeds, as defined in RCW 17.26.020, through the use of an herbicide or other treatment methods applicable to weed control that are recommended by a final environmental impact statement published by the department of agriculture or the department of ecology jointly with other state agencies under chapter 43.21 C RCW. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 132 of 159 Packet Page 435 of 494 14. Watershed restoration projects as defined in WAC 173-27-040(2)(o). The administrator shall review the projects for consistency with the shoreline master program in an expeditious manner and shall issue its decision along with any conditions within forty- five days of receiving all materials necessary to review the request for exemption from the applicant. No fee may be charged for accepting and processing requests for exemption for watershed restoration projects as used in this section. 15. A public or private project that is designed to improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish passage, when all of the following apply: a. The project has been approved in writing by the department of fish and wildlife; ; b. The project has received hydraulic project approval by the department of fish and wildlife pursuant to chapter 77.55 RCW; and; c. The City has determined that the project is substantially consistent with the local shoreline master program. The City shall make such determination that in a timely manner and provide it by letter to the project proponent. . 24.80.020 Letter of Exemption A. The Administrator is hereby authorized to grant or deny requests for letters of exemption from the shoreline substantial development permit requirement for uses and developments with shorelines that are specifically listed in ECDC 24.80.010.B. The letter of exemption shall indicate the specific exemption of this Program that is being applied to the development, and shall provide a summary of the Administrator's analysis of the consistency of the project with this Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act. As appropriate, such letters of exemption may contain conditions and/or mitigating measures of approval to achieve consistency and compliance with the provisions of this Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act. A denial of an exemption shall be in writing and shall identify the reason(s) for the denial. The Administrator's actions on the issuance of a letter of exemption or a denial are subject to appeal pursuant to ECDC 24.80.110.C. B. A letter of exemption shall be prepared addressed to the applicant/proponent and the Washington State Department of Ecology, pursuant to the requirement of WAC 173-27-050 when the project is subject to one or more of the following Federal permitting requirements: 1. A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers section 10 permit under the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899; (The provisions of section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act generally apply to any project occurring on or over navigable waters. Specific applicability information should be obtained from the Corps of Engineers.); or 2. A section 404 permit under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972. (The provisions of section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act generally apply to any project which may involve discharge of dredge or fill material to any water or Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 133 of 159 Packet Page 436 of 494 wetland area. Specific applicability information should be obtained from the Corps of Engineers.) C. Apart from the activities listed in ECDC 24.80.020.13, no letter of exemption shall be required for other uses or developments exempt pursuant to ECDC 24.80.010 unless the Administrator has cause to believe a substantial question exists as to qualification of the specific use or development for the exemption, an applicant requests a letter of exemption, or the Administrator determines there is a likelihood of adverse impacts to shoreline ecological functions. 24.80.030 Review Criteria for All Development No authorization to undertake use or development on shorelines of the state shall be granted unless upon review the use or development is determined to be consistent with the policy and provisions of the Shoreline Management Act and the City of Edmonds Shoreline Master Program. 24.80.040 Substantial Development Permit Criteria A. A substantial development permit shall be required for all proposed use and development of shorelines unless the proposal is specifically exempt pursuant to ECDC 24.80.010. B. In order for a substantial development permit to be approved, the decision maker must find that the proposal is consistent with the following criteria: All regulations of the City of Edmonds Shoreline Master Program appropriate to the shoreline designation and the type of use or development proposed shall be met, except those bulk and dimensional standards that have been modified by an approval of a shoreline variance under ECDC 24.80.060. 2. All policies of the City of Edmonds Shoreline Master Program appropriate to the shoreline designation and the type of use or development proposed shall be considered and substantial compliance demonstrated. 24.80.050 Conditional Use Permit Criteria A. The purpose of a conditional use permit is to provide greater flexibility in the administering of use regulations of this Master Program in a manner consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020. In authorizing a conditional use, special conditions may be attached to the permit by the City or the Department of Ecology to prevent undesirable effects of the proposed use and/or to assure consistency of the project with the Shoreline Management Act and this Master Program. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 134 of 159 Packet Page 437 of 494 B. Uses specifically classified or set forth in the Master Program as conditional uses may be authorized provided that the applicant demonstrates all of the following: 1. That the proposed use is consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and the master program; 2. That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of public shorelines; 3. That the proposed use of the site and design of the project is compatible with other authorized uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive plan and shoreline master program; 4. That the proposed use will cause no significant adverse effects to the shoreline environment in which it is to be located; and 5. That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. C. Uses which are not specifically identified as an allowed use or uses which are specifically prohibited by this Master Program may not be authorized pursuant to either subsection B of this section. D. In the granting of all conditional use permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area. For example, if conditional use permits were granted for other developments in the area where similar circumstances exist, the total of the conditional uses shall also remain consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and shall not produce substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment. 24.80.060 Variance Permit Criteria A. The purpose of a variance permit is strictly limited to granting relief from specific bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in this Master Program where there are extraordinary circumstances relating to the physical character or configuration of property such that the strict implementation of this Master Program will impose unnecessary hardships on the applicant or thwart the policies set forth in RCW 90.58.020. Variances from the use regulations of this Master Program are prohibited. B. Variances will be granted in circumstances where the denial of the permit would result in a thwarting of the policy enumerated in RCW 90.58.020. In all instances the applicant must demonstrate that extraordinary circumstances exist and that the public interest shall suffer no substantial detrimental effect. C. Variance permits for development and/or uses that will be located landward of the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) may be authorized provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the following: Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 135 of 159 Packet Page 438 of 494 1. That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in the applicable master program precludes, or significantly interferes with lawful, reasonable use of the property; 2. That the hardship described in 1 of this subsection is specifically related to the property, and is the result of unique conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural features and the application of this Master Program, and not, for example, from deed restrictions or the applicant's own actions or those of a predecessor in title; 3. That the design of the project is compatible with other authorized uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive plan and shoreline master program and will not cause adverse impacts to the shoreline environment; 4. That the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by the other properties in the area; 5. That the variance requested is the minimum necessary to afford relief, and 6. That the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect. D. Variance permits for development and/or uses that will be located waterward of the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) may be authorized provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the following: 1. That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in the applicable master program precludes all reasonable use of the property; 2. That the proposal is consistent with the criteria established under subsection ECDC 24.80.060.C.1 through 6 of this section; and 3. That the public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be adversely affected. E. In the granting of all variance permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area. For example if variances were granted to other developments and/or uses in the area where similar circumstances exist the total of the variances shall also remain consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and shall not cause substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment. 24.80.070 Minimum Application Requirements A complete application for substantial development, conditional use, or variance permit shall contain as a minimum, the following information: Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 136 of 159 Packet Page 439 of 494 A. The name, address and phone number of the applicant. The applicant should be the owner of the property or the primary proponent of the project and not the representative of the owner or primary proponent. B. The name, address and phone number of the applicant's representative if other than the applicant. C. The name, address and phone number of the property owner, if other than the applicant. D. Location of the property. This shall, at a minimum, include the property address and identification of the section, township and range to the nearest quarter, quarter section or latitude and longitude to the nearest minute. All applications for projects located in open water areas away from land shall provide a longitude and latitude location. E. Identification of the name of the shoreline (water body) that the site of the proposal is associated with. This should be the water body from which jurisdiction of the act over the project is derived. F. A general description of the proposed project that includes the proposed use or uses and the activities necessary to accomplish the project. G. A general description of the property as it now exists including its physical characteristics and improvements and structures. H. A general description of the vicinity of the proposed project including identification of the adjacent uses, structures and improvements, intensity of development and physical characteristics. I. A site development plan consisting of maps and elevation drawings, drawn to an appropriate scale to depict clearly all required information, photographs and text which shall include: 1. The boundary of the parcel(s) of land upon which the development is proposed. 2. The ordinary high water mark of all water bodies located adjacent to or within the boundary of the project. This may be an approximate location provided, that for any development where a determination of consistency with the applicable regulations requires a precise location of the ordinary high water mark the mark shall be located precisely and the biological and hydrological basis for the location as indicated on the plans shall be included in the development plan. Where the ordinary high water mark is neither adjacent to or within the boundary of the project, the plan shall indicate the distance and direction to the nearest ordinary high water mark of a shoreline. The precise location of the ordinary high water mark shall be field verified by the City of Edmonds and/or the Department of Ecology. 3. Existing and proposed land contours. The contours shall be at intervals sufficient to accurately determine the existing character of the property and the extent of proposed Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 137 of 159 Packet Page 440 of 494 change to the land that is necessary for the development. Areas within the boundary that will not be altered by the development may be indicated as such and contours approximated for that area. 4. Existing critical areas as together with any supporting information consistent with the reporting requirements of ECDC 23.40.090. 5. A general indication of the character of vegetation found on the site. 6. The dimensions and locations of all existing and proposed structures and improvements including but not limited to; buildings, paved or graveled areas, roads, utilities, septic tanks and drainfields, material stockpiles or surcharge, and stormwater management facilities. 7. Where applicable, a landscaping plan for the project. 8. Where applicable, plans for development of areas on or off the site as mitigation for impacts associated with the proposed project shall be included and contain information consistent with the requirements of this section. 9. Quantity, source and composition of any fill material that is placed on the site whether temporary or permanent. 10. Quantity, composition and destination of any excavated or dredged material. 11. A vicinity map showing the relationship of the property and proposed development or use to roads, utilities, existing developments and uses on adjacent properties. 12. Where applicable, a depiction of the impacts to views from existing residential uses and public areas. 13. On all variance applications the plans shall clearly indicate where development could occur without approval of a variance, the physical features and circumstances on the property that provide a basis for the request, and the location of adjacent structures and uses. 24.80.080 Notice of Application A. Upon receipt of a fully completed shoreline substantial development permit, shoreline conditional use permit, or shoreline variance application, the City shall issue a Notice of Application in the manner set forth in ECDC 20.90.010.E. B. The public comment period for a shoreline substantial development permit, shoreline conditional use permit, or shoreline variance shall be thirty (30) days following the date of notice of application. Public comments may be submitted at any time prior to the closing of Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 138 of 159 Packet Page 441 of 494 the record of an open record predecision hearing or, if no open record public hearing is required, prior to the decision on the project permit. C. If an open record predecision hearing, as define in RCW 36.70B.020, is required for the requested project permits, the notice of application shall be provided at least fifteen (15) days prior to the open record hearing. The public hearing shall not be closed to the receipt of written comments prior to thirty (30) days following the date of the notice. 24.80.090 Special Procedures for Limited Utility Extensions and Bulkheads A. An application for a substantial development permit for a limited utility extension or for the construction of a bulkhead or other measures to protect a single-family residence and its appurtenant structures from shoreline erosion shall be subject to all of the requirements of this chapter except that the following time periods and procedures shall be used: The public comment period shall be twenty days. The notice provided shall state the manner in which the public may obtain a copy of the local government decision on the application no later than two days following its issuance; 2. The local government shall issue its decision to grant or deny the permit within twenty- one days of the last day of the comment period specified in subsection (2)(a) of this section; and 3. If there is an appeal of the decision to grant or deny the permit to the local government legislative authority, the appeal shall be finally determined by the legislative authority within thirty days. B. For purposes of this section, a limited utility extension means the extension of a utility service that: 1. Is categorically exempt under chapter 43.21 C RCW for one or more of the following: Natural gas, electricity, telephone, water, or sewer; 2. Will serve an existing use in compliance with this chapter; and 3. Will not extend more than two thousand five hundred linear feet within the shorelines of the state. 24.80.100 Public Hearings A. The Administrator shall determine whether an application requires a public hearing pursuant to the criteria below no later than fifteen (15) days after the minimum public comment period provided by ECDC 24.80.080.B. An open record public hearing shall be required for all of the following: Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 139 of 159 Packet Page 442 of 494 One or more interested persons has submitted to the administrator, with 15 days of the final publication notice of the application, a written request for such a hearing together with a statement of the reasons for the request; or 2. The proposal is determined to have a significant adverse impact on the environment and an Environmental Impact Statement is required in accordance with the State Environmental Policy Act; or 3. The proposal requires a variance and/or conditional use approval pursuant to this Master Program; or 4. The use or development requires an open record public hearing for other City of Edmonds approvals or permits. 24.80.110 Notice of Decision, Reconsideration, and Appeals A. Notice of Decision 1. Within five days of a decision for action on a shoreline substantial development permit, shoreline conditional use permit, or shoreline variance, the Administrator shall mail or hand deliver a copy of the final decision to the following: a. The applicant/proponent; b. Any person(s) who have filed a written request for a copy of the decision; c. All persons who submitted substantive written comments on the application.; and d. The Department of Ecology. 2. The notice of decision to ECDC 24.80.110.A.1.a through c shall include findings and conclusions, and a statement of the SEPA threshold determination and the procedures for an appeal (if any) of the permit decision or recommendation. 3. Decisions filed with the Department of Ecology shall contain the following information: 1. A copy of the complete application; 2. Findings and conclusions that establish the basis for the decision including but not limited to identification of shoreline environment designation(s), applicable Master Program policies and regulations and the consistency of the project with appropriate review criteria for the type of permit(s). 3. The final decision of reached by the City of Edmonds on the proposal; Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 140 of 159 Packet Page 443 of 494 4. A completed permit data sheet in the form provided in WAC 173-27-990 or hereafter amended. 5. Where applicable, the City of Edmonds shall also file the applicable documents required by SEPA, or in lieu thereof, a statement summarizing the actions and dates of such actions taken under RCW 43.21C. B. Reconsideration. The applicant/proponent or any party of record may request reconsideration of any final action by the decision maker within (10) days of the decision. Grounds for reconsideration must be based upon the content of the written decision. The decision maker is not required to proved a written response or modify his/her original decision. He/she may initiate such action as he/she deems appropriate. The procedure of reconsideration shall not pre-empt or extend the appeal period for a permit or affect the date of filing with the Department of Ecology, unless the applicant/proponent requests the abeyance of said permit appeal period in writing with ten (10) days of a final action. C. Appeals 1. Local appeals of decision by the Shoreline Administrator or the Hearing Examiner shall be pursuant to the procedure and timelines of ECDC 20.01, ECDC 20.06, and ECDC 20.07.. 2. Appeals of a final decision of the City of Edmonds or the Department of Ecology shall be filed within 21 days of the date of filing of the final permit and shall be heard by the Shorelines Hearings Board pursuant to the procedures and timelines of RCW 90.58.180. 24.80.120 Initiation of Development A. Development pursuant to a shoreline substantial development permit, shoreline conditional use permit, or shoreline variance shall not begin and shall not be authorized unit twenty-one (2 1) days after the "date of filing" or until all review proceeding before the Shoreline Hearings Board have terminated. B. Date of filing: 1. "Date of filing" of a substantial development permit is the date of actual receipt of the decision by the Department of Ecology. 2. The "date of filing" for a shoreline conditional use permit or a shoreline variance shall mean the date the permit decision rendered by the Department of Ecology is transmitted by the Department to the City of Edmonds and the applicant/proponent. 24.80.130 Revisions A. A revision is required when an applicant proposes substantive changes to the design, terms, or conditions of an approved permit. Changes are "substantive' if they materially alter the Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 141 of 159 Packet Page 444 of 494 project in a manner that relates to its conformance to the terms and conditions of the permit, this Master Program, or the Shoreline Management Act. Changes, which the Administrator determines are not substantive, do not require approval of a revision. B. When a permit revision is required, the applicant shall submit detailed plans and text describing the proposed changes. If the Administrator determines that the revisions proposed are within the scope and intent of the original permit, the Administrator may approve the revision as a Type II decision. C. "Within the scope and intent of the original permit" means all of the following: 1. No additional over water construction is involved except that pier, dock, or float construction may be increased by five hundred square feet (500) or ten percent (10%) from the provisions of the original permit, whichever is less; 2. Ground area coverage and height maybe increased a maximum often percent (10%) from the provisions of the original permit; 3. The revised permit does not authorize development to exceed height, lot coverage, setback, or any other requirements of the applicable master program except as authorized under a variance granted as the original permit or a part thereof; 4. Additional or revised landscaping is consistent with any conditions attached to the original permit and with the applicable master program; 5. The use authorized pursuant to the original permit is not changed; and 6. No adverse environmental impact will be caused by the project revision. D. If the sum of the proposed revision and any previously approved revisions do not meet the criteria in ECDC 24.80.130.C, an application for a new Shoreline Permit must be submitted. E. If the revision involves a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit or Shoreline Variance, which was conditioned by the Department of Ecology, the revision also must be reviewed and approved by the Department of Ecology. Under the requirements of WAC 173-27-110(6), the Department of Ecology shall render and transmit to the City of Edmonds and the applicant its final decision with fifteen (15) days of the date of the department's receipt of the submittal from the City of Edmonds. The City of Edmonds shall notify parties of record of the department's final decision. F. Revision approvals, including the revised site plans, a detailed description of the authorized changes, and the final ruling on consistency with this section shall be filed with the Department of Ecology. In addition, the City of Edmonds shall notify parties of record of the revision. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 142 of 159 Packet Page 445 of 494 G. Revisions to shoreline permits may be authorized after the original authorization has expired. Revisions made after the expiration of the original permit shall be limited to changes that are consistent with this Master Program and that would not require a permit under this Master Program. If the proposed change is a substantial development as defined by this Master Program, then a new permit is required. The provisions of this paragraph shall not be used to extend the time requirements or to authorize substantial development beyond the time limits or scope of the original permit. H. Appeals on revisions shall be in accordance with RCW 90.58.180 and shall be filed within twenty-one days from the date of receipt of the City of Edmonds' action by the Department of Ecology or, when appropriate under subsection E of this section, the date the Department of Ecology's final decision is transmitted to local government and the applicant. Appeals shall be based only upon contentions of noncompliance with the provisions of subsection C of this section. Construction undertaken pursuant to that portion of a revised permit not authorized under the original permit is at the applicant's own risk until the expiration of the appeals deadline. If an appeal is successful in proving that a revision is not within the scope and intent of the original permit, the decision shall have no bearing on the original permit. 24.80.140 Time requirements of Shoreline Permits A. The following time requirements shall apply to all substantial development permits and to any development authorized pursuant to a shoreline conditional use permit or shoreline variance: 1. Construction activities shall be commenced or, where no construction activities are involved, the use or activity shall be commenced within two (2) years of the effective date of a substantial development permit. However, the City of Edmonds may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one (1) year based on reasonable factors, if a request for extension has been filed before the expiration date and notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record on the substantial development permit and to the Department of Ecology 2. Authorization to conduct development activities shall terminate five (5) years after the effective date of a substantial development permit. However, the City of Edmonds may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one (1) year based on reasonable factors, if a request for extension has been filed before the expiration date and notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record and to the Department of Ecology. 3_The effective date of a substantial development permit shall be the date of filing as provided in ECDC 24.80.120.B. The permit time periods in subsections 1 and 2 of this section do not include the time during which a use or activity was not actually pursued due to the pendency of administrative appeals or legal actions or due to the need to obtain any other government permits and approvals for the development that authorize the development to proceed, including all reasonably related administrative or legal actions on any such permits or approvals. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 143 of 159 Packet Page 446 of 494 3-.4.Authorization to conduct development activities pursuant to a shoreline permit issued by the City of Edmonds shall expire five (5) years after the date of issuance provided the activity was not pursued due to the pendency of administrative appeals or legal action. However, the City of Edmonds may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one (1) year based on reasonable factors. B. Notwithstanding the time limits established in ECDC 24.80.140.A.1 and .2, upon finding of good cause based on the requirements and circumstances of the proposed project and consistent with the policies and provisions of this Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act, the Administrator or Hearing Examiner as appropriate may set different time limits for a particular substantial development permit as part of the action to approve the permit. The Hearing Examiner may also set different time limits on specific conditional use permits or variances with the approval of the Department of Ecology. The different time limits may be longer or shorter than those established in ECDC 24.80.140.A.1 and .2 but shall be appropriate to the shoreline development or used under review. "Good cause based on the requirements and circumstances of the proposed project" shall mean that the time limits established for the project are reasonably related to the time actually necessary to perform the development on the ground and complete the project that is being permitted, and/or are necessary for the protection of shoreline resources. C. The Administrator or Hearing Examiner as appropriate shall notify the Department of Ecology in writing of any change to the effective date of a permit with an explanation of the basis for approval of the change. Any change to the time limits of a permit other than those authorized ECDC 24.80.150.A and .B shall require a new permit application. 24.80.150 Administrative Authority and Responsibility A. Shoreline Administrator The Shoreline Administrator shall be the planning manager or his/her designee and is vested with the following authority and responsibility to: 1. Have overall administrative responsibility for this Master Program; 2. Determine if a public hearing should be held on a shoreline permit application by the Hearing Examiner pursuant to ECDC 24.80.100; 3. Grant or deny written Permit Exemptions from shoreline Substantial Development Permit requirements of this Master Program; 4. Authorize, approve or deny shoreline Substantial Development Permits, except for those for which a public hearing is required pursuant to ECDC 24.80.100; 5. Make written recommendation to the Hearing Examiner or City Council as appropriate and insofar as possible, in order to assure that all relevant information, testimony, and Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 144 of 159 Packet Page 447 of 494 questions regarding a specific matter are made available during their respective reviews of such matter. 6. Review and evaluate the records of project review actions (permits and exemptions) in shoreline areas and report on the cumulative effects of authorized development of shoreline conditions at a minimum every seven years when this Master Program is updated. The administrator shall coordinate such review with the Washington State Department of Ecology, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, and other interested parties. 7. Advise interested citizens and project proponents of the goals, policies, regulations and procedures of this Master Program; and 8. Make administrative decisions and interpretations of the policies and regulations of this Master Programs and the Shoreline Management Act. B. Hearing Examiner The Hearing Examiner is vested with the following authority: 1. To grant or deny shoreline Substantial Development Permits requiring public hearings pursuant to ECDC 24.80.100; 2. To grant or deny shoreline Conditional Use Permits under this Master Program; 3. To grant or deny variances form this Master Program; and 4. To decide on appeals of administrative decisions issued by the Administrator of this Master Program in accord with procedures set forth in Title 20 of this code. C. City Council 1. The Edmonds City Council is vested with the authority to hear closed record appeals of determinations of the Hearing Examiner and approve any revisions or amendments to this Master Program in accordance with the applicable requirements of the Shoreline Management Act and the Washington Administrative Code. 2. To become effective any amendment to this Master Program must be reviewed and adopted by the Department of Ecology pursuant to RCW 90.58.190 and Chapter 173-26 WAC. 24.80.160 Compliance Failure to comply with the conditions of approval associated with a shoreline permit shall cause the permit to immediately become void and any continuation of the use activity shall be Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 145 of 159 Packet Page 448 of 494 considered a violation of this Master Program and a public nuisance subject to enforcement proceedings. 24.80.170 Enforcement Procedures for investigation and notice of violation, compliance, and the imposition of penalties for the violation of any requirements of this Master Program shall be consistent with provisions in ECDC 20.110.040, Part II 173-27 WAC, RCW 90.58.210, and RCW 90.58.220. Part IX Definitions 24.90.000 General Information A. For the purpose of this Master Program, certain terms and their derivations shall be construed as specified in this section. Some terms used in this Master Program may have a different definition and application under other City of Edmonds regulations. Words in the singular include the plural, the plural the singular. The words "shall"17a*&"will" and "must" are mandatory; the word "may" is permissive. "Should" means that the particular action is required unless there is a demonstrated, compelling reason, based on policy of the Shoreline Management Act and this Master Program, against taking the action. Additional definitions applicable to this master Program and adopted by reference herein, are found in RCW 90.58 and Chapters 173-26 and 173-27 WAC. The following definitions apply throughout this Program, unless otherwise indicated. B. If a definition is not included here, the city shall rely on definitions found in applicable citations in the Revised Code of Washington (RCW), Washington Administrative Code (WAC), the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC), and finally a standard dictionary, in that order. In case of conflict with the ECDC, the definition within the RCW, WAC, and/or this Master Program shall prevail. 24.90.010 Definitions: A to B A. "Abandoned" means knowing relinquishment of right or claim to the subject property or structure on that property. B. "Accessory" means a use, activity, structure or part of a structure which is demonstrably subordinate and incidental to the main activity or structure on the subject property. C. "Accessory building" means one which is subordinate to the main building, and is incidental to the use of the main building on the same lot. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 146 of 159 Packet Page 449 of 494 D. "Alteration(s)" means a change or rearrangement of the structural parts of existing facilities or an enlargement by extending the sides or increasing the height or depth or the moving from one location to another. E. "Applicant" means a person who applies for any permit or approval to do anything governed by this code and who is either the owner of the subject property, the authorized agent of the owner, or the city. F. "Appurtenance" means a structure or development which is necessarily connected to the use and enjoyment of a single-family residence and is located landward of the ordinary high water mark and also of the perimeter of any marsh, bog, or swamp. See also "Normal appurtenances." G. "Aquaculture" means the farming or culture of food fish, shellfish, or other aquatic plants or animals any may require development such as fish hatcheries, rearing pens and structures, and shellfish rafts, as well as use of natural spawning and rearing areas. Aquaculture does not include the harvest of free-swimming fish or the harvest of shellfish not artificially planted or maintained. H. "Aquaculture practices" means any activity directly pertaining to growing, handling, or harvesting or aquaculture produce, including, but not limited to, propagation, stocking, feeding, disease treatment, waste disposal, water use, development of habitat and structures. Excluded from this definition are related commercial or industrial uses such as wholesale and retail sales, or final processing and freezing. I. "Average grade level" means the average of the natural or existing topography of the portion of the lot, parcel, or tract of real property which will be directly under the proposed building or structure: In the case of structures to be built over water, average grade level shall be the elevation of the ordinary high water mark. Calculation of the average grade level shall be made by averaging the ground elevations at the midpoint of all exterior walls of the proposed building or structure. J. "Average parcel depth" means the average of the distances from the ordinary high water mark to the street providing direct access to the subject property as measured along the side property lines or the extension of those lines where the water frontage of the subject property ends, the center of the ordinary high water mark of the subject property and the quarter points of the ordinary high water mark of the subject property. K. "Average parcel width" means the average of the distances between side property lines as measured along the ordinary high water mark and the front property line. L. "Backfill" means material placed into an excavated area, pit, trench or behind a constructed retaining wall, rockery or foundation. M. "Boat launch or ramp" means graded slopes, slabs, pads, planks, or rails used for launching boats by means of a trailer, hand, or mechanical device. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 147 of 159 Packet Page 450 of 494 N. "Buoy" means a floating object anchored to the bottom of a water body. O. "Breakwater" means an offshore structure generally aligned parallel to shore, sometimes shore -connected, that provides protection from waves. P. "Buffer" mems the designated afea immediately next to and a paft of a steep slope -of !a-ndslide hazard afea and whieh pr-eteets slope stability, attefmmien of suffaee watef flews designated afea immediately next to and paft of a stfeam of wetland that is an integfal paA of means the area adjacent to a critical area and/or shoreline that is required for the continued maintenance, function, and/or structural stabili . of the critical area and/or shoreline. Buffer widths vary depending on the relative quality and sensitivity of the area being_ protected. Unlike soning or shore setbacks, buffer areas are intended to be left undisturbed, or may need to be enhanced to support natural processes, functions and values. Q. "Building" means any structure having a roof, excluding all forms of vehicles even though immobilized. R. `Bulkhead" means a retaining wall whose primary purpose is to hold or prevent the backfill from sliding while providing protection against light -to -moderate wave action. 24.90.020 Definitions: C to F A. "City" means the City of Edmonds, a municipal corporation. B. "Commercial use" means an activity with goods, merchandise, or services offered for sale or rent. C. "Comprehensive plan" means the comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds and all elements thereof as amended or, if repealed, its successor document, listing the goals and policies regarding land use within the city. D. "Contour line" means a line on a map or on the earth representing a specific elevation above sea level or an elevation relative to a specific datum point. E. "Coverage" means the total ground coverage of all buildings or structures on a site measured from the outside of external walls or supporting members or from a point two and one-half feet in from the outside edge of a cantilevered roof, whichever covers the greatest area. F. "Critical areas" include the following areas and ecosystems: (a) wetlands; (b) areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water; (c) fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas; (d) frequently flooded areas; and (e) geologically hazardous areas designated through the Edmonds Critical Area Ordinance. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 148 of 159 Packet Page 451 of 494 G. "Cross-section (drawing)" means a visual representation of a vertical cut through a structure or any other three-dimensional form. H. "Dedication" means the deliberate granting of an interest in land by an owner for public use or purpose, reserving no other rights than those that are compatible with the full exercise and enjoyment of the public use or purpose to which the property has been devoted. I. "Development" means a use consisting of the construction or exterior alteration of structures; dredging; drilling; dumping; grading; filling; removal of any sand, gravel, or minerals; bulk heading; driving of piling; placing of obstructions; or any project of a permanent or temporary nature which interferes with the normal public use of the surface of the waters overlying lands subject to the act at any stage of water level. I "Development permit" means any permit or approval under this code or the ECDC that must be issued before initiating a use or development activity. K. "Dock" means a structure designed to protrude overwater or float upon the water, and which is attached to the shoreline and is used for moorage or other water -related activity such as swimming or diving. L. "Dredging" means removal of earth and other materials from the bottom of a body of water or from a wetland. M. "Dredging spoils" means the earth and other materials removed from the floor of a body of water or wetland by the dredging process. N. "Drift cell," "drift sector," or "littoral cell" means a particular reach of marine shore in which littoral drift may occur without significant interruption and which contains any natural sources of such drift and also accretion shore forms created by such drift. O. "Dry land" means the area of the subject property landward of the ordinary high water mark. P. "Dwelling unit" means a building providing complete housekeeping facilities for one family. Dwelling unit does not include recreational vehicles or mobile homes. Q. "Dwelling unit, attached" means a dwelling unit that has one or more vertical walls in common with or attached to one or more other dwelling units or other uses and does not have other dwelling units or uses above or below it, excluding lawfully permitted accessory dwelling units. R. "Dwelling unit, detached" means a dwelling unit that is not attached or physically connected to any other dwelling unit or other use. S. "Dwelling unit, stacked" means a dwelling unit that has one or more horizontal walls in common with or adjacent to one or more other dwelling units or other uses and may have one Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 149 of 159 Packet Page 452 of 494 or more vertical walls in common with or adjacent to one or more other dwelling units or other uses, excluding lawfully permitted accessory dwelling units. T. "ECDC" means the "Edmonds Community Development Code." U. "Easement" means land which has specific air, surface or subsurface rights conveyed for use by an entity other than the owner of the subject property or to benefit some property other than the subject property. V. "Ecological functions" or "shoreline functions" means the work performed or role played by the physical, chemical, and biological processes that contribute to the maintenance of the aquatic and terrestrial environments that constitute the shoreline's natural ecosystem. See WAC 173-26-200 (2)(c). W. "Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC)" means Ordinance 2182 as amended or, if repealed, its successor document. X. "Enhancement" means alteration of an existing resource to improve or increase its characteristics and processes without degrading other existing functions. Enhancements are to be distinguished from resource creation or restoration projects. Y. "Environmentally sensitive areas" means an area designated and mapped by a city under WAC 197-11-908, as now or hereafter amended. Certain categorical exemptions do not apply within environmentally sensitive areas (WAC 197-11-305 and 197-11-908, as now or hereafter amended). Z. "Erosion and deposition" means the removal of soils and the placement of these removed soils elsewhere by natural forces such as wind or water. AA. "Excavate(tion)" means the mechanical removal of soils and/or underlying strata. BB. "Feasible" means, for the purpose of this chapter, that an action, such as a development project, mitigation, or preservation requirement, meets all of the following conditions: 1. The action can be accomplished with technologies and methods that have been used in the past in similar circumstances, or studies or test have demonstrated in similar circumstances that such approaches are currently available and likely to achieve the intended results; 2. The action provides a reasonable likelihood of achieving its intended purpose; and 3. The action does not physically preclude achieve the project's primary intended legal use. In cases where this Master Program requires certain actions unless they are infeasible, the burden of proving infeasibility is on the applicant. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 150 of 159 Packet Page 453 of 494 In determining an action's infeasibility, the City of Edmonds may weigh the action's relative public costs and public benefits, considered in the short- and long-term time frames. CC. "Ferry terminal" means a combination of waterward and upland improvements providing the interface between public/private waterborne transportation and public/private ground transportation. DD. "Fill" means the addition of soil, sand, rock, gravel, sediment, earth retaining structure, or other material (excluding solid waste) to an area waterward of the OHWM, in wetlands, or on shoreland in a manner that raises the elevation or creates dry land. EE."Fill material" means dirt, structural rock or gravel, broken concrete and similar structural substances customarily used to raise the level of the ground, but excluding topsoil, bark, ornamental rocks or gravel placed on the surface of the ground. FF. "Float, recreational" means an offshore platform/buoy used for water -dependent activities such as, but not limited to, swimming and diving. 24.90.030 Definitions: G to O A. "Gabions" means structures composed of masses of rocks, rubble or masonry held tightly together, usually by wire mesh, so as to form blocks or walls; sometimes used on heavy erosion areas to retard wave action or as foundations for breakwaters or jetties. B. "Geotechnical report" or "geotechnical analysis" means a scientific study or evaluation conducted by a qualified expert that includes a description of the ground and surface hydrology and geology, the affected land form and its susceptibility to mass wasting, erosion, an other geologic hazards or processes, conclusions and recommendations regarding the effect of the proposed development on geologic conditions, the adequacy of the site to be developed, the impacts of the proposed development, alternative approaches to the proposed development, and measures to mitigate potential site -specific and cumulative geological and hydrological impacts of the proposed development; including the potential adverse impacts to adjacent and down -current properties. Geotechnical reports shall conform to accepted technical standards an must be prepared by qualified professional engineers or geologists who have professional expertise in both regional and local shoreline geology and processes. C. "Government facility" means the movement or redistribution of the soil, sand, rock, gravel, sediment, or other material on a site in a manner that alters the natural contour of the land. D. "Grading" means the movement or redistribution of the soil, sand, rock, gravel, sediment, or other material on a site in a manner that alters the natural contour of the land. E. "Haines Wharf' means Lots 7 through 11 in the plat of Meadowdale Tidelands. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 151 of 159 Packet Page 454 of 494 F. "Hotel" means any building containing five or more separately occupied rooms that are rented out for sleeping purposes. A central kitchen and dining room and interior accessory shops and services catering to the general public can be provided. Not included are institutions housing persons under legal restraint or requiring medical attention or care. G. "Improvement" means any structure or manmade feature. H. "Inner harbor line" means the line designated as such by the State Harbor Line Commission pursuant to Article XV, Washington State Constitution. "Land surface modification" means the clearing or removal of trees, shrubs, ground cover and other vegetation, and all grading, excavation and filling of materials. The removal of overhanging vegetation and fire hazards as specified in ECDC 18.45.030(E) shall not be deemed to be land surface modifications. J. "Landscaping" means the planting, removal and maintenance of vegetation along with the movement and displacement of earth, topsoil, rock, bark and similar substances done in conjunction with the planting, removal and maintenance of vegetation. K. "Landward" means upland from the ordinary high water mark. L. "Lot" means a single tract of land legally created as a separate building site with frontage on a street or access easement. For purposes of this code the area of the lot used to calculate lot area shall be the area of the lot which is upland of the OHWM and adjoining lots under common ownership which were created without subdivision or short subdivision approval from applicable city or county governments. This lot area shall be considered as one lot and subject to the regulations contained herein. The terms of this section shall apply regardless of whether the individual adjoining lots meet current zoning requirements. M. "Low Impact Development (LIDY' means a stormwater and land use management strategy that strives to mimic pre -disturbance hydrologic processes of infiltration, filtration, storage, evaporation and transpiration by emphasizing conservation, use of on -site natural features, site planning, and distributed stormwater managementpractices that are integrated into a project design. N. "LID Principles" means land use management strategies that emphasize conservation, use of on -site natural features, and site planning to minimize impervious surfaces, native vegetation loss, and stormwater runoff. O. "Low impact development best management practices" means distributed stormwater management practices, integrated into a project design, that emphasize pre -disturbance hydrologic processes of infiltration, filtration, storage, evaporation and transpiration. LID BMPs include, but are not limited to, bioretention/rain gardens, permeable pavements, roof downspout controls, dispersion, soil quality and depth, vegetated roofs, minimum excavation foundations, and water re -use. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 152 of 159 Packet Page 455 of 494 #EP. "Marine launcher" means a mechanical device that can hoist vessels off trailers and transport them into the water and often is associated with dry land moorage facilities. N-.Q"Master plan" means a complete development plan for the subject property showing placement, dimensions and uses of all structures as well as streets and other areas used for vehicular circulation. Q-.R. "Mean sea level" means the level of Puget Sound at zero tide as established by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. gS. "Minor appurtenant building" means minor buildings associated with overwater structures including but not limited to the following: storage buildings less than 150 square feet in area, ferry terminal passenger shelter, covered moorage, etc. 4Q-.I. "Mixed -use developments" are shoreline developments which combine more than one separate but related activity into a coordinated package. Activities usually include one or more water -dependent uses with non -water -dependent uses. Drive-in businesses are not permitted. R-.U. "Modification" means an action undertaken in support of or in preparation for a shoreline use that modifies the physical configuration or qualities of the shoreline area. SV. "Moorage" means a place to tie up or to anchor a waterborne craft. T-.W. "Mooring buoy" means a floating object anchored to the bottom of a water body that provides tie up capabilities for waterborne craft. UX. "Moorage facility" means a pier, dock, dolphin, buoy or other structure providing docking or moorage space for waterborne craft. VL.Y. "Motel" means a building containing units which are used as individual sleeping units having their own private toilet facilities and sometimes their own kitchen facilities, designed primarily for the accommodation of transient automobile travelers. Accommodations for trailers are not included. This term includes tourist court, motor lodge, auto court, cabin court, motor hotel, motor inn and similar names. WL.Z. "Multimodal terminal (facility)" means a terminal (facility) designed for the co -location of transportation loading and unloading by multiple forms of transportation including land, water or rail. AAA. "Nonconformance" means any use, structure, lot, condition, activity, or any other feature or element of private property or the use or utilization of private property that does not conform to any of the provisions of this code or that was not approved by the city through the appropriate decision -making process required under this code and/or was established prior to the original Edmonds shoreline master program. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 153 of 159 Packet Page 456 of 494 BBB. "Normal appurtenances" normal appurtenances include a garage; deck; driveway; utilities; fences; installation of a septic tank and drainfield and grading which does not exceed two hundred fifty cubic yards and which does not involve placement of fill in any wetland or waterward of the ordinary high water mark. Local circumstances may dictate additional interpretations of normal appurtenances which shall be set forth and regulated within the applicable master program. ACC. "Office (use)" means a place of employment in a building or separately defined space within a building providing services other than production, distribution or sale or repair of goods or commodities. The following is a nonexclusive list of office uses: accounting, architectural, engineering, consulting or other similar professional services; management, administrative, secretarial, marketing, advertising, personnel or other similar personnel services; sales offices where no inventories or goods are available on the premises; real estate, insurance, travel agent, brokerage or other similar services. The following uses are specifically excluded from the definition of office: medical, dental, or other health care; veterinary; banks, loan companies and similar financial institutions. ADD. "Off-street parking" means motor vehicle parking facilities within the lot area of a private lot or public lot established for that purpose. SEE. "Official newspaper of the city" means the publication designated by ordinance or resolution to contain official newspaper publications for the city government. CUFF. "Official notification boards of the city" means the bulletin boards in the public areas of the city of Edmonds Community Services Building, the Edmonds Main Post Office Branch, and the Edmonds Public Library. EGG. "OHWM" means ordinary high water mark (see ECDC 24.90.030.FF). €E-.HH. "Open space" means land not covered by buildings, roadways, parking areas or other surfaces through which water cannot percolate into the underlying soils. €III. "Ordinary high water mark" on all lakes, streams, and tidal water is that mark that will be found by examining the bed and banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, as to mark upon the soil a character distinct from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation as that condition existing on June 1, 1971, as it may naturally change thereafter, or as it may change thereafter in accordance with permits issued by the City of Edmonds or the Department of Ecology; PROVIDED, that in any area where the ordinary high water mark cannot be found, the ordinary high water mark adjoining salt water shall be the line of mean higher high tide and the ordinary high water mark adjoining fresh water shall be the line of mean high water. GG JJ. "Oriented" means facing or directed toward. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 154 of 159 Packet Page 457 of 494 KKK. "Outer harbor line" means the line designated as such by the State Harbor Line Commission pursuant to Article XV, Washington State 24.90.040 Definitions: P to R A. "Parking area" means any area designed and/or used for parking of vehicles. B. "Parking space" means an area which is improved, maintained and used for the sole purpose of temporarily accommodating a motor vehicle that is not in use. C. "Pedestrian orientation" pertains to facilities which encourage pedestrian movement and are designed and oriented toward use by pedestrians. D. "Pier" means a fixed structure which abuts the shoreline and is used for moorage or other water -related activities such as fishing, swimming and diving. E. "Planning division" means the planning division of the community services department of the City of Edmonds. F. "Planning manager" means the manager of the planning division of the City of Edmonds or the acting manager of that division. G. "Planning official" means the manager of the planning division or his/her designee. H. "Port" means a special purpose unit of local government created for the purpose of managing port -related lands, facilities and activities. For the purposes of this document, "port" refers to the port of Edmonds and its facilities and operation. "Property line" means those lines enclosing a lot, its developable area and those lines defining a recorded vehicular access easement. The following are categories of property lines: 1. "Front property line" is any property line that is adjacent to a street or easement more than 20 feet in width, except that the Burlington Northern right-of-way shall not be considered a front property line. 2. "Rear property line" is any property line that is farthest from and essentially parallel to a front property line except on a lot which contains two or more front property lines. 3. "Side property line" is any property line other than a front property line or a rear property line. I "Public access" is the physical ability of the general public to reach and touch the water's edge and/or the ability to have a view of the water and the shoreline from upland locations. There are a variety of types of public access including picnic areas, pathways and trails Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 155 of 159 Packet Page 458 of 494 (including disabled), floats and docks, promenades, viewing towers, bridges, boat launches, street ends, ingress and egress, parking and other similar facilities or locations. K. "Public access pier or boardwalk" means an elevated structure or floating structure which is constructed waterward of the ordinary high water mark and intended for public use. L. "Public park" means an area provided by a unit of government to meet the active or passive recreational needs of people in the water and on the upland shoreline. M. "Public right-of-way" means land dedicated to the movement of vehicles and pedestrians and providing for primary access to adjacent parcels and or public waterborne transportation. Secondarily, the land provides space for utility lines and appurtenances and other publicly owned devices. N. "Public use area" means a portion of private property that is dedicated to public use and which contains one or more of the following elements: benches, tables, lawns, gardens, piers, exercise or play equipment or similar improvements or features. These elements are to provide the public with recreational opportunities in addition to the right to traverse or stand in this area. O. "Public utility" means a private business organization such as a public service corporation, including physical plant facilities, performing some public service and subject to special governmental regulations, or a governmental agency performing similar public services, the services by either of which are paid for directly by the recipients thereof. Such services shall include but are not limited to: water supply, waste water treatment, stormwater treatment, electric power, telephone, cablevision, gas, and transportation for persons and freight. P. "Railroad right-of-way" means the land occupied by a railroad for its tracks, yard, buildings, and related structures. Q. "Restaurant" means a building where food is sold to the public for on -premises consumption or to go. It may include alcoholic beverage service only pursuant to a Class "C," "D," or "H" state liquor license. R. "Restore," restoration" or "ecological restoration" means the reestablishment or upgrading of impaired ecological shoreline processes or functions. This may be accomplished through measures including, but not limited to, revegetation, removal o intrusive shoreline structures and removal or treatment of toxic materials. Restoration does not imply a requirement for returning the shoreline area to aboriginal or pre -European settlement conditions. S. "Retail establishment" means a commercial enterprise which provides goods or services directly to the consumer and whose goods are available for immediate purchase and removal from the premises by the purchaser or whose services are traditionally not permitted within an office use. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 156 of 159 Packet Page 459 of 494 24.90.050 Definitions: S to T A. "Shore setback" means the minimum distance between a structure or use and the shoreline ordinary high water mark. A-. B. "Shoreline areas" and "shoreline jurisdiction" means all "shorelines of the state" and "shorelands" as defined in RCW 90.58.030. &C. "Shoreline conditional use" means a use or development which is specifically listed by this master program as a conditional use within a particular shoreline environment or a use which is not addressed by this master program within any shoreline environment. ED. "Shoreline Management Act (SMA)" means Chapter 90.58 RCW as now or hereafter amended. D-.E. "Shoreline master program (SMP)" means the ordinance of the City of Edmonds adopted under authority of Chapter 90.58 RCW. E-. F. "Shoreline modifications" means those actions that modify the physical configuration or qualities of the shoreline area, usually through the construction of a physical element such as a dike, breakwater, pier, weir, dredged basin, fill, bulkhead, or other shoreline structure. They can include other actions, such as clearing, grading, or application of chemicals. F-. G. "Shoreline variance" means a procedure to grant relief from the specific bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in this master program, and not a means to allow a use not otherwise permitted within a shoreline environment. FAH. "Silt or sediment" means the soil particles mobilized and deposited by the processes of erosion and deposition. ICI. "Street" means the public or private right-of-way or access easement which provides vehicular access to more than three lots. LJ_"Structure" means anything which is built or constructed; an edifice or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially built-up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner. Not included are fences less than six feet in height, retaining wall, rockeries, and similar improvements of a minor character less than three feet in height. kK. "Structural alterations" means any change in a supporting member of a building or structure. ILL. "Subject property" means the entire lot, series of lots or parcels on which a development or use is or will locate and that is otherwise subject to the provisions of this code. For the purposes of this chapter, land leased from the Department of Natural Resources, which is contiguous to the applicant's property, shall also be considered the "subject property." Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 157 of 159 Packet Page 460 of 494 24.90.060 Definitions: U to Z A. "Use, development and/or activity" means "development" as that term is defined in Chapter 90.58 RCW. "Use" also means the nature of the activities taking place on private property or within structures thereon. B. "Vehicle holding area" means any area designated by the city or state for holding vehicles prior to loading onto a ferry. C. "Water -dependent use" means a use or a portion of a use which is dependent on the water by reason of the intrinsic nature of its operations and can not exist in any other location. Examples of water -dependent uses may include ferry and passenger terminals, marinas and sewer outfalls. D. "Water -enjoyment use" means a recreational use, or other use facilitating public access to the shoreline as a primary characteristic of the use; or a use that provides for recreational use or aesthetic enjoyment of the shoreline for a substantial number of people as a general characteristic of the use and which through the location, design and operation assures the public's ability to enjoy the physical and aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. In order to qualify as a water -enjoyment use, the use must be open to the general public and the shoreline -oriented space within the project must be devoted to the specific aspects of the use that fosters shoreline enjoyment. Primary water -enjoyment uses may include, but are not limited to, parks, piers, scuba diving facilities and other improvements facilitating public access to shorelines of the state; and general water -enjoyment uses may include but are not limited to, restaurants, museums, aquariums, scientific/ecological reserves, resorts and mixed -use commercial; provided, that such uses conform to the above water -enjoyment specifications and the provisions of the master program. E. "Water -oriented use" refers to any combination of water -dependent, water -related, and/or water -enjoyment uses and serves as an all -encompassing definition for priority under the SMA. "Non -water -oriented" serves to describe those uses which have little or no relationship to the shoreline and are not considered priority uses under the SMA. Examples include professional offices, automobile sales or repair shops, mini -storage facilities, multifamily residential development, department stores and gas stations. F. "Water -related use" means a use or a portion of a use which is not intrinsically dependent on a waterfront location but whose economic viability is dependent upon a waterfront location because: Of a functional requirement for a waterfront location such as the arrival or shipment of materials by water or the need for large quantities of water; or 2. The use provides a necessary service supportive of the water -dependent commercial activities and that the proximity of the use to its customers makes its services less expensive and/or more convenient. Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 158 of 159 Packet Page 461 of 494 G. "Waterward" means toward the body of water on the waterside of the ordinary high water mark. H. "Wetlands" means areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland areas to mitigate the conversion of wetlands. Part X Appendices 24.100.000 Maps of Shoreline Environments and Jurisdictions OTHER APPENDICES? Planning Board Recommended DRAFT City of Edmonds SMP Page 159 of 159 Packet Page 462 of 494 Lake Ballinger Inset Legend SMP Designations Aquatic 1 - Aquatic 11 - Conservancy - Natural Shoreline Residential I Shoreline Residential II - Shoreline Residential III Urban Mixed Use I - Urban Mixed Use II - Urban Mixed Use III - Urban Railroad t • Planning Segement Break OHW `..... Edmonds City Limits Railroad Stream City of Lynwood Sewage Treatment) City of Edmonds Shoreline Master Plan Update r •1 1111111 =1911119 Environmental Designations: Marine�iorre ine (North jl Figure 2 Frf r�k C J' '.I' �Y�,� Q> AV . I1 ri .i9F�-.-- ,i V fi. I Legend SMP Designations Aquatic I Shoreline Residential II • Planning Segement Break - Aquatic 11 - Shoreline Residential III �' OHW ' Edmonds City Limits City of Edmonds - Conservancy Urban Mixed Use I ..• Railroad - Natural Urban Mixed Use 11 �� Stream Shoreline Master Plan Update p Shoreline Residential 1 Urban Mixed Use III - Urban Railroad ti i x WIT 16 5i 'rytil1 ..`' t p.R F* Legend SMP Designations Aquatic I Shoreline Residential II • Planning Segement Break - Aquatic 11 - Shoreline Residential III-' OHW `'•' .� Edmonds City Limits - Conservancy Urban Mixed Use I Railroad - Natural - Urban Mixed Use 11 Stream Shoreline Residential 1 - Urban Mixed Use Ill - Urban Railroad �t. 1 City of Edmonds Shoreline Master Plan Update AM-5685 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 04/23/2013 Time: 15 Minutes Submitted For: Council Department: City Council Review Committee: Type: Action Information Submitted By: 13. Jana Spellman Committee Action: Cancel Subject Title Possible action regarding draft Resolution adopting Robert's Rules of Order as the City Council's new Rules of Procedure. Recommendation Previous Council Action This agenda item was discussed at the 2013 Council Retreat and forwarded to the Public Safety/Personnel Committee for further discussion. Below is an excerpt from those minutes: Edmonds City Council Retreat Approved Minutes February 1-2, 2013 Page 2 "4. CITY COUNCIL PROCESSES A. ROBERT'S RULES Councilmember Johnson explained the Council has been operating for the past 39 years under Resolution No. 292. She acknowledged there are other ways, but she feels Robert's Rules is the best alternative. She referred to Attachment 4, a decision tree for determining whether to continue using Resolution No. 292 or adopt Robert's Rules. City Attorney Jeff Taraday suggested the City Council adopt a complete set of Robert's Rules as its official rules and distribute a shorter primer on the rules to Councilmembers to allow the Council to familiarize themselves with the rules. Councilmember Johnson suggested training on Robert's Rules be provided during a work session. Summary: Schedule a work session and have an ordinance prepared for review by the Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee." This agenda item was discussed at the 2/12/2013 Public Safety and Personnel Committee. (Attachment 5: Feb. 12, 2013 PS/Personnel Committee Minutes). The action taken by the PS/P Committee is in the excerpt below: "Presentation to Council on Robert's Rules of Order is on the extended agenda for our April 16 Council Packet Page 467 of 494 Meeting. Council President Petso will be asked to put the draft resolution adopting Roberts Rules of Order on the agenda for discussion and vote at a Council Meeting following this (April 23 or later)." During the April 16, 2013 Council Meeting, Ann Macfarlane from Jurassic Parliament made a presentation regarding Robert's Rules of Order. Attached to the agenda memo was a draft Resolution regarding the Council adopting Robert's Rules of Order as the City Council's new rules of procedure which the Council did not take any action on but moved it to the April 23, 2013 Council agenda. Narrative Before the Council tonight is a draft Resolution entitled A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REPEALING RESOLUTION 292, WHICH ADOPTED RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCT OF COUNCIL MEETINGS; ADOPTING ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER AS THE CITY COUNCIL'S NEW RULES OF PROCEDURE which is on this agenda for possible Council approval. Attachment 7: Resolution 292 Attachments Attachment 1 - Should Council Adopt Robert's Rules of Order Attachment 2 - Which Parliamentary Authority Should Council Choose Attachment 3 - A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making Attachment 4 - Decision Tree Attach 5: 2/12/13 PS/P Committee Minutes Attach 6: Draft Resolution regarding Robert's Rules of Order Attach 7: Resolution 292 Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Jana Spellman Final Approval Date: 04/18/2013 Form Review Date 04/18/2013 01:35 PM 04/18/2013 03:18 PM 04/18/2013 03:23 PM Started On: 04/17/2013 10:55 AM Packet Page 468 of 494 Jurassic ATTACHMENT 9 Should Our Council Adopt Robert's Rules of order? Ann G. Macfarlane, Professional Registered Parliamentarian "Council/Commission Advisor" published by the Municipal Research S�Services Center of Washington, April 2011 The State of Washington gives city councils wide authority to decide how they will carry on their business: "The council shall determine its own rules and order of business, and may establish rules for the conduct of council meetings and the maintenance of order." RCW 3$A.12,120 Some councils have adopted, by resolution or ordinance, a set of guidelines for this purpose, and others have not. Many of these guidelines include reference to Robert's Rules of order, using such language as "meetings shall be governed by Robert's Rules of Order and these council rules of procedure. In case of conflict, the council rules of procedure shall prevail." Recently it was suggested to Jurassic Parliament that Robert's Rules of order is too complicated for small cities and towns, and they would do better not to adopt it. We agree that the book is complicated, but we believe that Robert's Rules still provides the best and most useful set of rules of order for civic bodies in our state —provided that folks are willing to do a little work and learn how to use Robert's Rules properly. our argument runs like this: 1. The fundamental principles in Robert are common to all our civic discourse and are not hard to learn. Everyone participating in council debate and discussion should understand that the majority will rule, that the minority have rights that must be respected, that members have a right to information to help make decisions, that courtesy and respect are required, that all members have equal rights, privileges and obligations, and that members have a right to an efficient meeting. z. The use of written motions and amendments provides an efficient and fair way to consider proposals and modify them in accord with the group's preferences. The method is a little unusual, in that amendments are taken up before the motion is voted on, but once groups get used to it, the system works well. 3. Robert's rule that no one may speak a second time until everyone who wishes to do so has spoken once is vital to equalizing power imbalances and giving everyone a fair shake in discussion. We believe that it should be observed by all groups, whether or not they have formally adopted Robert. I+ over A °W Packet Page 469 of 494 4. Robert provides "special rules for small boards" that can be useful for smaller councils, should they choose to apply them. 5. Robert also allows groups to develop and apply their own "special rules of order," so if a body wishes to change something in Robert, it is perfectly free to do so. 6. In sticky situations, "do-it-yourself" rulemaking can lead to ad hoc invention of rules, likely supplied by the chair on his own authority. A chair who makes up rules or improvises on the basis of vague memories from student government days is a sure path to problems, especially if the rule -maker has an air of authority about him (or her). 7. While councils often rely on their attorney for advice in this arena, in our experience few attorneys have had serious training in parliamentary procedure and few correct the common and widespread misunderstandings about Robert's Rules. 8. A body cannot do its work without some guidelines. Failing to adopt Robert doesn't mean that there are no guidelines —but without a specific "parliamentary authority," in times of conflict a group will be driven back to rely on "common parliamentary law.' Finding out what "common parliamentary law" requires and how it applies to a given situation is likely to be complicated and expensive, requiring time and attention from legal counsel and qualified parliamentary consultants. Far better to have set the terms of discourse in advance, so that everyone knows and agrees to the way they will consider matters. We believe that adopting a set of common-sense guidelines based on Robert's Rules, incorporating Robert by reference for the more unusual or complicated situations that may arise, and then committing to the education necessary to get everyone on the same page, will pay big dividends for every council willing to make the effort. That education can be quite affordable. Every city budget ought to be able to provide a copy of Robert's Rules of order Newly Revised in Brief to each council member. This little book is a splendid summary of the rules applicable to all but the most exceptional situations. At $7.Oo it's an amazing buy, and you can read it in an evening. Should our council adopt Robert's Rules of order? O Jurassic Parliament 2011. All rights reserved. TERMS OF USE This material is provided for your personal use Permission is hereby granted to make electronic or paper copies provided that the material Is left unchanged_The purchaser may not otherwise modify, copy, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, create derivative works from, transfer or sell any information or services contained in this publication or obtained from our website, or use the content of our website for public or commercial purposes, including any text, images, audio or video, without the written permission of Jurassic Parliament- Jurassic Parliament reserves the right to update our website at anytime without noticetoyou. If you would liketo use or quote this material for any purpose other than expressly as authorized herein, contact the Jurassic Parliament office. DISCLAIMER This material is provided for general educational purposes. Jurassic Parliament makes no representation about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published as part ofthese servicesfor any purpose_ All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind.Jurassic Parliament herebydisdaims all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all warranties and conditions of merchantability, whether express, implied or statutory, fitnessfor a particular purpose,title and non -infringement- Nothingwritten here constitutes legal or business advice. Readerswith specific questions are advised to seek an appropriate credentialed authority to address their issue,. 603 Stewart Street, Suite 6io, Seattle, WA 98iox TEL 206.542.8422 I FAX 206.626.0392 info@jurassicparliament.com E www.jurassicparliament.com Packet Page 470 of 494 ATTACHMENT 2 Q Jurassic Which Parliamentary Authority Should We Choose? Organizations intending to choose a parliamentary authority to guide their meetings have several different choices. This article describes some common authorities. We welcome feedback from our readers who use any of these authorities about the good points or disadvantages they find in them. Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised. This is the most commonly used authority in the United States. By some estimates about ninety percent of the voluntary associations in our country use Robert. Widespread use, breadth of coverage, and the availability of many excellent resources on Robert make this book our first choice. However, be warned that over the years, the book has become extremely detailed. At first glance, it is quite intimidating - the current official version is over 800 pages long. Jurassic Parliament offers many tools to help you get the most out of Robert and apply it in a pragmatic way to your meetings. Current version: iith edition. Be sure to use the official text, and not some publisher's knock -off based on earlier, out-of-date versions. See our article "Which Robert's Rules of order Should I Buy?" for guidance on this point. It is also useful to refer to Robert's Rules of Order In Brief - a short volume which is not an authority, but which serves as an introduction to Robert. The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure. Alice Sturgis wrote the original version of this authority, referred to as "TSC" or "Sturgis" It is well -written and easy to follow. Many medical associations use Sturgis as their authority. However, the book does not cover as many situations as Robert, and it shifts some authority from the group itself to the person running the meeting (the presider). This seems more efficient at first glance, but the added authority may go to the presider's head, and cause him or her to behave in a dictatorial fashion. Sturgis also differs from Robert in some parliamentary actions like "to reconsider" or "to fill a blank." Current version: gth edition The Modern Rules of Order. Donald Tortorice prepared this slim volume for the American Bar Association, though the ABA does not use it during its own meetings. A mere 6o pages long, it may seem a tempting choice. However, Michael Malamut, an attorney and professional registered r► over Price S0.99 May not be photocopied Contact our office for mu Packet Page 471 of 494 parliamentarian, has given it a poor review in one of the leading parliamentary journals. He states that the author derived his expertise from sitting through business corporation meetings, not meetings of nonprofit associations, and the result shows in his work. This book includes "typical minutes" and a chart of motions. Current version: 3rd edition. The Democratic Rules of Order. Fred and Peg Francis of British Columbia, Canada wrote these rules, 76 pages. It seems a good compilation of standard procedure, without a lot of detail. Includes a two - page summary and an example of a meeting governed by these rules. Current version: 9th edition. Rosenberg's Rules of Order. Dave Rosenberg, a Superior Court Judge in California, has prepared these rules, available as an eight -page PDF on the World Wide Web. The rules seem unobjectionable but obviously do not provide the detail that may be needed in complex situations. We found the mathematics on voting given in the addendum to be rather peculiar. Many legislatures in the U.S. use Mason's Manual of Legislative Procedure. Professional parliamentar- ians may turn to Demeter's Manual of Parliamentary Law and Procedure and Riddich's Rules of Procedure. Bourinot's Rules of order is widely used in Canada. Hugh Cannon has written Cannon's Concise Guide to Rules of order, a lively introduction. And if all else fails, you can turn to Thomas Jefferson for A Manu al of Parliamentary Procedure. We welcome suggestions about adding to this list or modifying the descriptions. Contact us at info @jurassicparliament.com. Which Parliamentary Authority Should We Choose? © Jurassic Parliament 2011. All rights reserved. TERMS OF USE This material is sold for the personal use of the purchaser. Permission is hereby granted to make electronic or paper copies in number according tothe license which you have purchased. The purchaser may not otherwise modify, copy, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, create derivative works from, transfer or sell any Information or services contained in this publication or obtained from our website, or use the content of our website for public or commercial purposes, including any text, images, audio or video, without the written permission of Jurassic Parliament. Jurassic Parliament reserves the right to update our website at anytime without notice to you. If you would liketo use or quote this material for any purpose other than expressly as authorized herein, contact the Jurassic Parliament office, URi-wwwJurassicparliament,com. DISCLAIMER This material is provided for general educational purposes. Jurassic Parliament makes no representation about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published as part of these services for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided `as is" without warrantyof anykind. Jurassic Parliament hereby disclaims ail warranties and conditions with regard to this information, indtiding all warranties and conditions of merchantability, whether express, implied or statutory, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non -infringement. Nothing written here constitutes legal cr business advice. Readers with specific questions are advised to seek an appropriate credentialed authorityto address their issues. urass1C 603 Stewart Street, Suite 6io, Seattle, WA 983oa TEL 206.542.8422 1 FAX 206.626.0392 info@jurassicparliament.com I www.jurassicparliament.com Packet Page 472 of 494 A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making I MRSC Insight Page 1 of 3 ATTACHMENT 3 A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making Posted on November 5. 2012 by Byron Katsuyame One of the things that has always fascinated me as a student and observer of local government has been the process that local legislative bodies use to discuss, debate, and formulate policy decisions. To my- mind, much of what constitutes "good government" is a direct consequence of an open, fair, and effective legislative decision - making process. The open and fair parts are regulated by state laws relating to issues such as campaign finance reporting, public records disclosure, and open public meetings. Effectiveness, on the other hand, is Ieft to the local legislative body. While there are a lot of moving parts in this process and, therefore, lots of opportunities to improve it, one critical aspect, and the focus of this blog post, has to do with the way local legislative bodies deliberate on the policy issues that come before them. When acting in their formal legislative capacity, local councils come together for a very specialized purpose — to discuss, debate, and finally decide on important issues affecting their communities. It is at this point during the give and take of their policy discussions, where arguments are put forth, opinions are swayed, and votes are taken. It's not true that councilmembers always come to such meetings with their minds already made up, as some citizens and members of the press seem to think. So, it is important not only that these discussions take place, but that they be conducted in ways that promote the best possible exchange of information and ideas. To this end, one simple but effective technique designed to improve this process was suggested by Ann Macfarlane, one of MRSC's long-time Council/Commission Advisors, in her 2009 column, "Using the Round Robin Method for Efficient Council Meetings." Ann's column contains some sage advice for local legislative bodies interested in improving both the efficiency and the quality of their meetings. In it she argues that the "round robin method" for council deliberation contained in Roberts Rules of Order is one of the best ways to promote a "fair and judicious discussion of issues in which each member has an equal opportunity to participate." Of course, local government advisory boards and commissions can also benefit from this type of discussion format. In a round robin format, each council or board member participating in key policy discussions is given the opportunity to speak once, going around the table, before anyone can speak a second time. While this may seem like a minor procedural issue, anyone who has spent any amount of time participating on a council, board, or commission knows that who speaks, when, and for how long, can often have profound impacts on the outcomes of many important policy discussions. The round robin format seeks to level the playing field a bit by ensuring that all council and board members have the opportunity and, in fact, are prompted to weigh in on particular issues. Councils or boards that have no rules of procedure or that do not pay attention to the details of how their meetings are conducted are more prone to falling into habits and routines that can reduce their effectiveness as decision - making bodies. How many times have you been at a meeting where one or two members dominate the discussion, either because they are always the ones who speak up first or because they feel compelled to answer every challenge to their point of view? Members don't have to be rude or inconsiderate to end up dominating the discussion. They may just be enthusiastic, which, unfortunately, can have the same negative impact. In either case, to the extent that other members who have valuable opinions to share become less inclined or able to add their thoughts to the mix, the quality of the discussion and ultimately the decision itself can stiffer. Then there are situations where, for whatever reasons, some members may just be reluctant to jump in and offer their opiniomi. http://insigpht.mrsc.orR12012111105la-simple-technique-for-improving-council-decision-ma... 1 /24/2013 Packet age 473 of 494 A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making I MRSC Insight Page 2 of 3 Sometimes this is because they may feel that they are not as well-informed as they should be on an issue, or perhaps because they are concerned that their opinion will be rejected by the rest of the group, or may be unpopular with a wider audience. Ironically, when called upon, these same individuals often end up making key contributions to the overall discussion. In my experience as a member of the city of Kirkland's Planning Commission for the past eight years, including a year as the chair, I know that we make our best decisions when all our members have taken the opportunity to weigh in on whatever issue is before us. When, on the other hand, we have just one or two members who dominate the discussion, or where, for whatever reasons, some members are reluctant to offer their own point of view, then we become less effective. Particularly in our role as an advisory body to the city council, it is always more helpful to have a thorough discussion of the issues that will, in turn, provide a stronger record of our deliberations for the benefit of the city council as they go on to make their final policy decisions. To be effective, councils and boards should conduct their meetings in ways that promote the fullest discussion of the issues with the broadest possible participation by all of the council or board members. One of the simplest ways to ensure that this takes place is to make use of the round robin discussion format. I'm not suggesting that this approach is necessary for every single discussion. It is intended simply as a tool. Experienced mayors and board chairs know when their council or board will benefit most from a more structured discussion format. Share this: Twitter Facebook Email Like this: *Like Be the first to like this. About AByron Katsu ' Byron has over 30 years of experience in local government police and administration research including such areas as forms of government, strategic planning, performance measurement, and general local government management. In his ov+n community of Kirkland, Byron is a member of the city'S planning commission. C icw ,ill past. by 13} ron Kat�oy.nna -- This entry was posted in Best Practices. Governance. Polity, ©ookmark the permalink. 2 Responses to A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making KHstiana Johnson says: Noveinber 16. 2012 at 3 45 pm Byron, Thank you for this timely post. We at the City of Edmonds are working to review our City, rules and procedures for our 2013 Council Retreat. i really appreciate your comments about the round robin approach in Roberts Rules of Order. i have been tasked with finding a modern and brief set of RRoO. Can you let me kno+, which publication you use? Kristian Johnson Reply Byron Katsuyama says: November 26, 2012 at 11.58 am Kristiana, Follow http�ll1'n ' ht.p�rsc. r /2012/11/05/a-simple-technique-for-improving-council-decision-ma... 1/24/2013 Packet Kge 474 of �94g A Simple Technique for Improving Council Decision Making I MRSC Insight Page 3 of 3 I asked Ann Macfarlane, Professional Registered Parliamentarian, Jurassic Parliament, who is one of our Council/Commission Advisors, and an expert on Robert's Rules, what she recommends and she provided the following response and attachments: We recommend that everybody use Robert. The best strategy is to have the presider and clerk buy the "big book," Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised rFth edition, and also provide every member v ith a copy of the "little book," Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised In Brief, znd edition. This latter volume costs $7 and can be read in an evening. It covers most situations. However, it cannot be adopted as an authority in itself. It is a signpost to the big book. By purchasing both, a city council is sure to have at hand what is needed for any situation. Attached are three articles that you are welcome to share with Kristiana (or anybody- else) on this topic: ■ Which "Robert's Rules" Should I Buy? ■ Which Parliamentar\ Authority Should We Choose? ■ Should Our Council Adopt Robert's Rules of Order? Repay MRSC Insight 'llwmrploy at S4 ordPrvss.cojn. FoH ow http://insigsht.mrse.or /2012/11105/a-simple-technique-for-improving-council-decision-ma... 1/24/2013 Packet Page 475 of 494' DECISION TREE Rules of Procedures for Conduct of Council Meetings Should the City Council continue using: Resolution 292 YES Action: • Add Resolution 292 to Council web page as a reference for City Council procedures. • Add Resolution 292 to the new Council Reference Manual. Adoptin Rules of Procedure, 1974 NO Should the City Council adopt procedures based on Robert's Rules of Order? Yes Action: IBC • Work Session on Procedures • MRSC — Robert's Rules revised summary. Packet Page 476 of 494 MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE MEETING FEBRUARY 12, 2013 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT: STAFF PRESENT: Councilmember Joan Bloom Councilmember Strom Peterson The meeting was called to order at 6:09 p.m. Edmonds City Code Updates Al Compaan, Chief of Police Jim Lawless, Assistant Chief of Police Debbie Dawson, Animal Control Officer Carrie Hite, HR Reporting Director Councilmember Bloom requested clarification on Item D. Even though this is the current language, she wanted to clarify the current practice. She would like to amend this to say "Council President approves travel and training for Councilmembers and Boards and Commissions." Councilmember Peterson agreed. This will be amended, and forwarded to City Council for approval on the consent agenda. 2. Robert's Rules Jeff recalled that council agreed to adopt Roberts Rules in its entirety, and use a shortened version. He also suggested that we may want to get training through Jurassic Parliament or perhaps MRSC. There are also self study options that could be purchased for Council library. We agreed to schedule training to be put on agenda for a work session. Suggest someone from MRSC be asked to present. 3. Amendment to Edmonds City Code Chapter 5.14 — Marijuana The Committee discussed a proposed ordinance amending the provisions of Edmonds City Code Chapter 5.14 relating to controlled substances, Paraphernalia, poisons and toxic fumes. The Committee forwarded the ordinance to City Council to place on the Consent Agenda with an approval recommendation. 4. Animals Roaming at Large With Al Compaan and animal control officer, Debbie Dawson, discussed adding "with the exclusion of licensed, spayed and neutered cats" to the animals roaming at large ordinance. Agreed that Debbie Dawson will bring information related to licensing of cats to next Public Safety/Personnel Committee meeting. 5. Discussion Regarding Language to Include on Agendas Related to Public Comment Agreed to adopt Frank Yamamoto's suggested language into the Council Meeting Procedures on the city website 6. Public Comment Bruce Witenberg: Re: questions at end of committee meeting- if not allowing, articulate what has been the problem in the past. Re: Adoption of Roberts' rules. Pointed out that there is a way to re -consider a vote. Can be brought back by someone on the opposing side of the issue. Don't know about time frame. Suggests training be held in council chambers so public can become educated about new rules as well. Roger Hertrich: Mr. Hertrich agreed with every one of Mr. Witenberg points. Re: roaming at large, suggested starting with a simple change such as licensing of cats. Evaluate the results. Re: Roberts' rules- Don't feel adoption of full rules is necessary. Like casual aspect of meeting, don't get too sticky about procedure. Re: Boards and commissions- choice of Mayor, sometimes in conflict with Council. Suggests applications be available to all (Council and Mayor) prior to final selection. Council members Peterson and Bloom explained to Mr. Wittenberg that it was not our intention to eliminate the option of citizens asking questions at a committee meeting. The intent was that the council members at the meeting would ask staff to answer the question(s), if the council member felt it was appropriate to do so. Meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m. Public Safety and Personnel Committee February 12, 2013 Page 1 of 1 Packet Page 477 of 494 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, REPEALING RESOLUTION 292, WHICH ADOPTED RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCT OF COUNCIL MEETINGS; ADOPTING ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER AS THE CITY COUNCIL'S NEW RULES OF PROCEDURE. WHEREAS, the city council adopted Resolution 292 in 1974, which adopted rules of procedure for conduct of council meetings; and WHEREAS, Resolution 292 did not adopt Robert's Rules of Order; and WHEREAS, it has been recommended that the city council use Robert's Rules of Order, now therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. REPEALER. Resolution 292 is hereby repealed. Section 2. ADOPTION OF ROBERT'S RULES. The city council hereby adopts Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, 11t" Edition, as its official rules for conducting council meetings. The city council intends that the city official serving as parliamentarian should consult this version of Robert's Rules when asked to provide guidance on a procedural question. City council members wishing to use a shorter version of Robert's Rules for their own convenience should use Robert's Rules of Order In Brief, but the council does not recognize this volume as an authority nor as the city council's official rules. RESOLVED this day of April, 2013. CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR, DAVE EARLING ATTEST: CITY CLERK, SANDRA CHASE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. 4851-5533-3898, v. 1 Packet Page 478 of 494 RESOLUTION NO. 292 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCT OF COUNCIL MEETINGS. WHEREAS, it has been determined by the City Council that more formal rules of procedure are necessary for the efficient and orderly conduct of public meetings, now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, that the rules of procedure attached hereto; identified as Exhibit A and incorporated in full by this reference are hereby adopted as the rules of procedure for all meetings of the City Council of the City of Edmonds, Washington. RESOLVED this 5th day of Februar , 1974. APPROVED: ATTEST JL"C/J CIT CLERK PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: MAYOR February 5, 1974 February 1, 1974 1 Packet Page 479 of 494 A. GENERAL RULES OF PROCEDURE. 1. 'Obtainingfloor. Before a member can make a motion or address the body upon any question, it is necessary that he obtain the floor by being recognized by the chairman. If'two or more members shall request the floor -at the same time the chairman shall recog- nize the first member requesting recognition. 2. Second. When a member obtains the floor and Makes a motion, that is in order, the chair should immediaLely inquire if the motion is seconded; if sec- untied the maker of the motion should then be regarded as having the refusal of the floor in preference to all oth-_,r members. 3, 1404-lification of motion. Before any subject is open to debate it is necessary, first, that a :notion be made by a member who has .the floor; second, that it be seconded; and third, that it be stated by the chairman. This does rot prevent suggestions of alterations, be- fore the question is statE:d by the chairman. The chair- man may consult: the members before stating the question tO clarify the motior:. The member who offers the motion, until it has been stated by.the chairman, can modify his motion, or withdraw it entirely; after it is stated he can do neither, without the consent of the body (major-. ity) . For example, the mover may starer, - "With the con - EXHIBIT A 2 Packet Page 480 of 494 sent of the body I will modify my motion to state as follows, * * *" If no one objects it shall be deemed that he has the consent of the body to modify his motion. When the mover modifies his motion, the one who seconds,it can withdraw his second. 4. Statinq the question. After a question has been stated by the chairman, it is in the possession of the body For debate; the mover cannot withdraw or modify it except by obtaining leave from the body as just described, or by moving an amendment. 5. Wi thdrawa 1 or. _ substitution of motion.- When a question is before the body and the mover wishes' to withdraw or modify it, or substitute a different one in its place, with consent of the body, the chairman shall grant perm tision; if any objection is made, it will be necessary to obtain leave to withdraw by a motion for that purpose. This motion cannot be debated cr amended. When a motion is withdrawn, the effect is the same as if it had never been made. 6. A`: stention f r-cin votincT . Any member may abstain from voting on any question, provided, at the time of declaring his abstention he shall 'state the reason. 7. Standin to question procedures. These rules shall govern the parliamentary procedures of the members _2_ 3 Packet Page 481 of 494 and by the members only. Procedures may be questioned only by members of the body, and then only in accordance with these rules. The decision of the chair will be final and conclusive as to all, subject. only to a motion by a member of the body, duly and timely made, in which case the ruling of the body shall be final and conclusive. Nothing in these rules will be construed to prevent the chairman or a member from requesting aid in the inter- pretation of these rules or other matters from the City staff or cfficials. 8. Precedence.. Motions having precedence are those that may be made while another motion is pending. -9. ToTield. Motions yield when they are pending and another matter can be considered while the yielding motion still pends. 10. Ahfalied. %here a motion can have no subordinate motion applied to it, the fact is stated. For example, the motion to continue may not be applied to the motion to 13y on the table. 11. Debate. Debate shall not take place until the chair has stated the question. Debate shall be limited to the immediately pending question, except that the main question is also open when the following motions are pending; postpone indefin.itely,.or reconsider a debatable question. -3- 4 Packet Page 482 of 494 12. Putting the c esL,on. When the debate appears to have closed the chair will ask, "Are you ready for the question?" If no one asks for the floor he shall put the question to vote, making it clear what the question is. 13. Majority_. A majority of those present shall constitute a majority of the body assuming a quorum is present. The chairman has the tie breaking vote, B. SPECIFIC RULES OF PROCEDURE. The following motions are permissible in considering any matter on the agenda, and unless otherwise specified shall rank in precedence and apI)lication as set forth numerically below. 1. UNDEEATABLE MOTIONS. a. (question of order and anneal. A question of order takes precedence of the question giving rise to it, may be put when another member has the floor, needs no second, and must be decided by the chairman without debate. If a member objects he may appeal, which if seconded, will immediately be put to the body. An appeal is waived if riot made immediately. On appeal the decision of the chair is sustained on a tie vote. b. SusDens.ion of rules. This motion may not be amended, nor another motion be applied to it, -4 -- 5 Packet Page 483 of 494 nor a vote on it reconsidered. Rules of the body may not be suspended except for a definite and specific purpose and by a vote of one more than a majority present. Nothing else may be done under the suspension. It may not be renewed at the same meeting if once defeated. It shall be in order to change the order of the agenda without suspending the rules. No rule can be suspended when the negative vote is as lafge as the minority protected by that rule. c. To lav_on the table. This motion may not be used for purposes of continuance of a matter which has been specially called for pub- lic hearing, which is done by a motion to con- tinue. It may not be amended nor an affirmative vote on it be reconsidered. If carried the subject tabled may not be considered again until the body votes to take it from the table, which motion is also undebatable. The object of the motion is to postpone the subject in such a manner 't:;at it can be taken up at any time, either at the same or some future meeting. It may be used to supress a question for that meeting, but not for a matter for which a public meeting has been specially set. The -5- 6 Packet Page 484 of 494 effect of the motion is to place on the table everything that adheres to the subject, so'that if an amendment be ordered to -lie on the table, the subject which it is proposed to amend is also tabled. Hawever, it may be limited to the par- ticular pending matter and if so adopted the remaining matters shall still be before the body. After demand for the previous question up to the time of taking final action under it, it is in order to move that the main question be laid on the table. Passage requires the vote of one more than a majority of the members present. d. The previous question. This motion is not amendable and applies to any debatable question, but is not debatable itself. It re- quires the vote of one more than a majority of the members present for its adoption. When called, and seconded, the chair shall immediately put the question. If the motion fails to carry by a majority plus one of the members present, the debate will continue as if the motion had not been made. If adopted the chair shall immed- iately bring the body to vote upon the pending question. If applied to an amendment to a pending 7 Packet Page 485 of 494 t. question it brings to a vote not only the motion to amend but also the question to be amended. However, the motion for the previous question may be limited.to the pending amendment, and, if adopted, debate will be closed only to the motion to amend. It shall be proper for a member to submit a motion and move the previous question thereon and thus cut off debate on the motion. In this case the chair shall first put the motion for previous question to vote. 2. DEBATABLE MOTIONS. a. Continue to a certain day. This motion yields to all undebatable motions, and take precedence of all other debatable motions, except that it may be amended by altering the time, and the previous question can be applied to it with- out affecting any other motions pending. b. To commit or refer. This motion is to commit or refer a matter to a committee.- It can he amended by altering the committee, or giving the committee instructions. The debate on the motion opens the.debate on the main question it is proposed to commit. c. To amend. This motion takes precedence 8 Packet Page 486 of 494 over nothing but the question to which it is proposed to amend and yields to all questions except to postpone indefinitely. It can be applied to all but undebatable questions, an amendment of an amendment, to postpone indef- initely or to reconsider. It can be amended itself, but an amendment of an amendment cannot be amended. An amendment may be inconsistent with the one already adopted, or may be directly in conflict with the spirit of the original motion, but it must have a direct bearing upon the"subject of that motion. A motion to amend by inserting new words once passed may not be the subject matter of a new amendment to change the same words. The proper motion is the motion to reconsider the vote by which the words were inserted. A motion to amend may be made to "divide the question" into two or more questions as the mover specifies, so as to get a separate vote on any particular point or points. d. To nostoone indefinitely. This motion takes precedence of nothing except the question to which it is applied and yields to all motions except to emend. It cannot be amended, and opens 9 Packet Page 487 of 494 to debate the entire question which it is proposed to postpone. Its effect is to entirely remove the question from the body for that session. The previous question, if ordered when this motion is pending, applies only to it without :-effecting the main question. It cannot be applied to a matter that has been specially set for public hearing. A negative vote on it cannct be reconsidered. e. Princit}al cLue_sti-on. The main or principal question is a motion to bring before the body for its consider_aticn any partical)r subject. No principal motion can be mare when, any other motion is before the body. It takes precedence over nothing and yields to all. C. MISCET. fAN'FCt:1S MOTIONS. 1. To rescind. This motion cannot he made for a matter that has been voted upon for which a matter has been specially called for public hearing. However, for other. matters tr, whim it is appropriately addressed,, as wnere it is too late to reconsider the vote, :,.e motion is the course to pursue to rescind an objectionable policy, order or motion; it is debatable. 2. Tc reconsider. This motion is not in order after the body :.as votes: upon the principal question which is H= 10 Packet Page 488 of 494 the subject matter of a specially called public hearing unless made immediately after thereon and before any mem- ber of the public has left the public hearing. It is otherwise in order at and• time, even when another member has the floor, but not after that session has adjourned. It must be made by a member who voted with the pre- vailing side. It can be applied to the vote of every other question, except as Noted above, and except to 5u_ ljt:nd t:h% rules and an affirmative vote: to lay on the table or to take from the table. The motion may not be amended. Whether or not it is- debit-,ule depends upon whether the question to be recon- sidere:1 is debatable or undebatable. It may be laid on the table:, in which case, the reconsideration, like any other question, can be tziken from the table. 3. Roll calt. Any member may demand a roll call vote any time before or after any question is put. The demand needs no second and the chairman must ask for a roll call_ vote on demand. It is not debatable and may be applitA tc. any question. It is waived if after the vote it is not ir•„^.iediately made and prior to the next matter bei nq considered. 10. 11 Packet Page 489 of 494 c (V 04 0 c 0 -i 41 aj U)-P o M z .� .O .� 14 m 0 Z 44 UNDEBATABLE a. Question of Order - Appeal b. Suspension of Rules C. Lay on Table d . Previous Question DEBATALUE a. ContinLIO to Certain Day b. Comnit or Refer c. Amend d. Postpone Indefinitely e. Principle Question MISCELLANEOUS a. Rescind b. Reconsider C. Roll Call 1 A.V. N.V. c 0 0) ro 4j ro � m >t :. •-4 v) r-4 M +J M Q O -14 Q1 m, U vai Packet Page 490 of 494 12 SUGGESTED FORMS 1. UNDEBATABLE MOTIONS a. Question of order. Member: "I raise a point of order." Chair: "State your point of order." Member: States his point of order Chair: Ruling by the chairman, who may dive reasons. Member: "I appeal from the decision of the chair." Chair: (If seconded) "Shall the decision of the chair stand as the decision of the -body?" b. Susnei►sion of rules ari�ority` Aus (nee) Member: "I move to suspend the rules requiring..." c. To lay on table (majority plus one) Member: "I move to lay the question (stating it) on the table." Member: "I move to take the question (stating it) from the table." d. Previous question (majority plus ene) Member: "I call (demand or move) for the previous question." Chair: (If seconded)`, "Shall the main question be now put?" Member: "I call for the previous question on the amendment." 13 Packet Page 491 of 494 Chair: (If seconded) "Shall the question be now put on the amendment?" 2. DEBATABLE MOTIONS a. Continue to a certain d��majori_}�y) Member: "I move to continue the question of (stating it) to the next regular for recessed] meeting of (date) . NOTE: (1) Zoning matters must be decided and re- ported by the planning commission within 90 days of the application. (2) Plats and subdivisions must be approved, disapproved or returned to applicant for mod- ification or correction within 60 days from elate of filing, unless applicant files written consent for longer period in which to act. b. To commit or refer (majority) Member: "I move to refer the subject to a committee." C. To amend (majority) Member: "I move to amend the motion to 'add', or 'insert', to 'strike', to 'strike out and insert ', to 'divide the question' (into two or more questions), etc." d. To postpone indefinitely tma 'orit�) Member: "I move to postpone the question indefinit-ley." -2- 14 Packet Page 492 of 494 e. Principal question - (majority, unless otherwise indicated) Member: "I move that . [REZONE] "...proposed Ordinance No. 1234 be passed." [REZONE DENIED] "...Planning Commission Resolution No. 123 be affirmed and.the requested rezone denied." [AMENDMENT TO "...proposed Ordinance No. 1234 COMPREHENSIVE be passed." PLAN] [DENIAL OF "...Planning Commission AMENDMENT TO Resolution No. 123 be affirmed COMPREHENSIVE and the --requested amendment to PLAN] the comprehensive plan be denied." [LID -RESOLUTION "...proposed Resolution of OF INTENTION] Intention No. 123 be passed establishing the public hearing on the day of 196 NOTE : If health issue, must be passed unanimously. [LID -ORDINANCE "...that proposed Ordinance No. FORMING LID] 1234 be passed." NOTE: If health issue, must be passed unanimously. [STREET "...that the public hearing on the VACATION -SET proposed street vacation be fixed HEARING DATE] on the day of J 196 and that proposed Resolution No. 123 be passed." NOTE: Date must be not less than 20 nor more than 60 days from the date of passage of Resolution. [STREET °'...proposed Ordinance No. 1234 VACATION- be passed." APPROVAL] [STREET "...the proposed street vacation be VACATION- denied." DISAPPROVAL] 15 Packet Page 493 of 494 [ANNEXATION- "...a public meeting be set with the RECEIPT OF iniating parties to determine whether INTENTION TO the city will accept the proposed ANNEX BY 10%] annexation and whether it shall - require the assumption of existing city indebtedness by the area to be annexed for the day of 196_ . " NOTE:Must not be more than 60 days after the filing of the request." [ANNEXATION- "...a public hearing be set for RECEIPT OF the day of 196_ PETITION FOR for the hearing on the proposed ANNEXATION-75%] annexation." (ANNEXATION- "...that` proposed Ordinance No. FINAL APPROVAL] 1234 be passed." [ANNEXATION- "...that the proposed annexation FINAL DENIAL] be denied." 3. MISCELLANEOUS MOTIONS. a. To rescind (majority) Member: "I move to rescind that motion, policy, etc." b. To reconsider (majority) Member: "Having voted on the prevailing side, I move that we reconsider the vote on the motion to (stating it) and have such__ motion entered on the record." c. Roll call (an member) Member: "I demand a roll call vote." No second needed. Chairman: "The secretary will please call the roll." 16 Packet Page 494 of 494