Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2023-12-05 City Council Packet
2 3 4 5 6 of c�,y s Agenda Edmonds City Council REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 DECEMBER 5, 2023, 7:00 PM PERSONS WISHING TO JOIN THIS MEETING VIRTUALLY IN LIEU OF IN -PERSON ATTENDANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING AUDIENCE COMMENTS CAN CLICK ON OR PASTE THE FOLLOWING ZOOM MEETING LINK INTO A WEB BROWSER USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE: HTTPS://ZOOM. US/J/95798484261 OR COMMENT BY PHONE: US: +1 253 215 8782 WEBINAR ID: 957 9848 4261 THOSE COMMENTING USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE ARE INSTRUCTED TO RAISE A VIRTUAL HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED. PERSONS WISHING TO PROVIDE AUDIENCE COMMENTS BY DIAL -UP PHONE ARE INSTRUCTED TO PRESS *9 TO RAISE A HAND. WHEN PROMPTED, PRESS *6 TO UNMUTE. WHEN YOUR COMMENTS ARE CONCLUDED, PLEASE LEAVE THE ZOOM MEETING AND OBSERVE THE REMAINDER OF THE MEETING ON THE COUNCIL MEETINGS WEB PAGE. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS BEGINNING AT 7:00 PM ARE STREAMED LIVE ON THE COUNCIL MEETING WEBPAGE, COMCAST CHANNEL 21, AND ZIPLY CHANNEL 39. "WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE ORIGINAL INHABITANTS OF THIS PLACE, THE SDOHOBSH (SNOHOMISH) PEOPLE AND THEIR SUCCESSORS THE TULALIP TRIBES, WHO SINCE TIME IMMEMORIAL HAVE HUNTED, FISHED, GATHERED, AND TAKEN CARE OF THESE LANDS. WE RESPECT THEIR SOVEREIGNTY, THEIR RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION, AND WE HONOR THEIR SACRED SPIRITUAL CONNECTION WITH THE LAND AND WATER. - CITY COUNCIL LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AUDIENCE COMMENTS THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT REGARDING ANY MATTER NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA AS CLOSED RECORD REVIEW OR AS A PUBLIC HEARING. SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. PLEASE STATE CLEARLY YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE. RECEIVED FOR FILING Edmonds City Council Agenda December 5, 2023 Page 1 1. Written Public Comments (0 min) 2. Budget Queries - Council Budget Questions and Adminstration/Staff Responses (0 min) 7. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Special Meeting Minutes November 20, 2023 2. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes November 21, 2023 3. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes November 28, 2023 4. Approval of Special Meeting Minutes November 30, 2023 S. Approval of claim checks and wire payments. 6. 2023 Board and Commission Retirements 7. 2024 Board and Commission Reappointments 8. Ordinance to rezone 9530 and 9620 Edmonds Way (PLN2023-0024) 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. Adopt the 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan & Capital Improvement Program (10 min) 2. Landmark 99 Option Amendment (40 min) 3. Council 2024 Budget Deliberations (120 min) 9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT 10:00 PM Edmonds City Council Agenda December 5, 2023 Page 2 6.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/5/2023 Written Public Comments Staff Lead: City Council Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Acknowledge receipt of written public comments. Narrative Public comments submitted to the web form for public comments <https://www.edmondswa.gov/publiccomment> between November 22, 2023 and November 29, 2023. Attachments: Public Comment December 5, 2023 Packet Pg. 3 6.1.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — December 5, 2023 Submitted on: 11/22/2023 12:54:22 PM Name: Matthew Spaziani City of Residence: Edmonds, WA Agenda Topic: Landmark 99 Project Comments: I am writing in support of the Landmark 99 project and strongly urge council members to continue their exploration of this project. As you know, Edmonds is sometimes referred to as the Gem of the Pacific Northwest, and for good reason. It has a long history of conservation and preservation, and we need to continue to keep that legacy alive. Something is going to be built in that space, and we do not need another car dealership or storage facility. The government of Edmonds has the opportunity to create something lasting there, something that will be allocated for the people of Edmonds and its surrounding neighborhoods. I particularly like the idea of setting some space aside for public parks or recreational areas and dedicating the rest to apartments or homes that can help tackle the growing housing problem. I am vehemently opposed to the idea of putting a gun range or a police station there, as was suggested at a recent council meeting, and hope that the council will make a decision for the good of the residents of Edmonds and our neighbors. Submitted on: 11/22/2023 4:07:06 PM Name: Joe Wack City of Residence: Edmonds Agenda Topic: 99 Landmark Site Comments: I'm writing to speak in support of the city moving ahead with the process of determining whether or not to purchase the property on Highway 99 between 242nd SW and 240th SW. I live in this neighborhood. I have attended the two community meetings at Edmonds Woodway this fall as well as the past summer's walking tour of the neighborhood. I have listened to the people speaking against moving forward and it seems like their arguments fall into one of two general areas: either they feel like the project will cost the city too much money or they feel like this part of Edmonds is the wrong place for such development. I disagree with both of these arguments. It is too early in the process for us to have any real idea of how much it would cost, but we can look to similar developments in towns like Edmonds and we can see that those cities ended up paying a small portion of the overall costs. The second argument is more problematic for me, because people don't seem to have the same hesitation backing projects in The Bowl. People like me, who live closer to 99 have been made to feel like second- class citizens. If we want to see improvement in this area, we need to invest in it. I am for this project because the people in my neighborhood should have a community space that we can walk to. We should have an arts space or a library or aquatic center that we don't have to drive to. We should have walkable retail instead of yet another car dealership. We should have a project like this that would hasten the addition of sidewalks to our streets. This project would be a boon to my neighborhood and I want to see it happen. I urge the city council to approve moving forward with it. Thank you. m E E 0 U v 3 a _ d e Packet Pg. 4 6.1.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — December 5, 2023 Submitted on: 11/22/2023 5:13:07 PM Name: MJ Joplin City of Residence: Edmonds Agenda Topic: Highway 99 Landmark Project Comments: I am in support of the Landmark 99 project. I urge City Council members to vote to proceed with the project. The site could fulfill a community need for community space in this area and could include art spaces, a library, multi -use buildings, a plaza, retail, restaurants, and a community center. If City Council votes to proceed, the City can start putting out a request for proposals for partners to join the City in developing and paying for the project. If the City is not authorized to proceed, the site will likely be sold to a developer who has no interest in community need. Submitted on: 11/22/2023 5:22:39 PM Name: Veramis Spaziani City of Residence: Edmonds Agenda Topic: Supporting 99 Highway Landmark Comments: I'm writing to the City of Edmonds to reiterate my support for purchasing the Highway 99 Landmark. I'm a neighbor in South Edmonds. I love to be part of this community and I think this would be a great opportunity to reactivate South Edmonds / 99 Highway, adding more civic places for the locals to enjoy. Edmonds is known for spreading culture, arts, and love for nature in the Pacific Northwest. The Bowl Edmonds, as beautiful as it is, shouldn't be the only area where we can enjoy and cultivate these things. As an artist in Edmonds, I'm part of Artists Connect, a free art group that enables local artists to network and add to the culture in Edmonds. We need to have other public places where we can keep spreading culture and connect with one another. Community -minded spaces in South Edmonds like a Community Resource Center, a library, recreation center, playgrounds/urban plaza, or market streets will allow us to keep doing this not just for our group but for other arts, like theater, or other recreational activities, like sports, for families and people that are part of the community. We need more walkable areas that bring the people together and also keep our trees and greenery alive. For these and many other reasons please move forward with this project that will bring so much joy to Edmonds. I understand that this needs to happen with the help of other investments outside the city and they might need to choose a public/private split. I just ask for the higher percentage of square footage to be for the public space and have enough traffic lights and crossing paths for pedestrians in the area. Lastly, I am adamantly opposed to placing a police station at that site. Let's keep our community safe in other ways. Submitted on: 11/22/2023 5:40:04 PM Name: Shanna Hobbs City of Residence: Edmonds Agenda Topic: Landmark 99 Project m E E 0 U v 3 a _ d e Packet Pg. 5 6.1.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — December 5, 2023 Comments: Hello, I am a homeowner in Edmonds and live within walking distance of the Landmark 99 project. Our neighbors and community are unbelievably kind, generous, and caring. I want to see this section of Edmonds thrive, and to do that, the city needs to invest. Therefore, I strongly support the Landmark 99 property acquisition. I implore the council members to proceed with this project, and consider all of the benefits it would bring, not just now, but envision the area in 10 or 20 years. Do we really want that area to become another car dealership or gas station? The visions for the area have included shops and community centers - amenities that bring numerous socio-economic benefits to residents. Revamping this property to a place for the whole community would benefit generations to come. Finally, this acquisition would be an enormous asset to a largely underserved community. If you observe the demography of the Landmark 99 area, you will see it is 54% white on the east side of Highway 99 and 67% white on the west side. Compare this to the Bowl, which sits at 83-85% (source: 2020 Census data: https://maps.geo.census.gov/ddmv/map.html). I want to see Edmonds grow and thrive as a community, and this includes ALL corners of the city. Please continue to work towards purchasing the Landmark 99 site. Thank you for reading and for your consideration. Submitted on: 11/22/2023 5:47:28 PM Name: Ivan Cvitkovic City of Residence: Edmonds Agenda Topic: Landmark 99 Project Comments: Hello, I am a homeowner in Edmonds, residing near the Landmark property. I strongly support the city to continue to consider the purchase of this property. It would bring enormous benefit to the area, and the opportunity transform a large, derelict lot to an asset that would benefit families for generations. I urge the council to continue to evaluate the property for all the benefits it could bring and strongly consider continuing to work towards a purchase. Thank you, Submitted on: 11/27/2023 2:58:17 PM Name: Robin Wright City of Residence: Edmonds Agenda Topic: Put Small Town Feel in Comp Plan Vision Statement Comments: I am very disappointed that the Planning Board voted to strike "A Small Town Feel" from the Comp Plan vision statement. If Planning is going to pick and choose what they want the vision to be then there's no point in going through the motions of soliciting public input. I'm a senior and a homeowner. I have lived in Edmonds for over 30 years. I hope to stay in my home the rest of my life but the way Edmonds is changing I'm beginning to realize it may not be a place I'll want to live. I have always appreciated the small town atmosphere in Edmonds. The phrase is a way to capture in a few words the feeling of community, respect, and engagement I have with other residents (my neighbors). The perception of a Small Town is that they don't have big city problems such as homelessness, crime, inadequate parking, etc. Small towns are self-contained and offer the majority of services their residents require. They are not acres of housing developments with cul-de-sacs that require people to drive for an hour to get to work, shop, medical, etc. Please respect the comments of residents who m E E 0 U v 3 a _ d e Packet Pg. 6 6.1.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — December 5, 2023 made an effort to follow the planning process and reinstate A Small Town Feel to guide our future growth. Submitted on: 11/27/2023 8:22:06 PM Name: Kim Gunning City of Residence: Edmonds Agenda Topic: Landmark 99 project Comments: I submit these comments in support of the Landmark 99 project and to encourage councilmembers to vote to move forward with next steps, including putting out an RFP for partners, both in the private and public sector, to join the City in development (and paying for) the project. My family and I live several blocks north of the Landmark site and a couple blocks east of 99. There are E E many good things about our corner of Edmonds. But there are also things missing. Our 99 community C U does not have "Third Places". These are places that aren't home or work, but public places where V people meet formally or informally, where community is built, and where services are provided. Places 3 where family and friends can reserve a multipurpose space for low or no cost, to celebrate birthdays, a anniversaries, and memorials for those who've left us. A place where a condo HOA can meet. Where kids can have an indoor trick or treat event. Block parties when we're in the midst of the cold and rainy months. A place where seniors can meet for lunch or play cards orjust connect. Our 99 community also does not have safe indoor space where kids and adults can exercise and play and learn new things and o attend the type of classes and events offered by Parks & Recreation and held at the Waterfront Center and Frances Anderson Center. Folks in our neighborhood have been told that for now, we should be happy that we have 'Welcome to Edmonds' signs and decorative lamp posts in the International District. Signs and lamps are not enough. There's also the troubling reality that large portions of the 99 neighborhood were, for far too long, the only neighborhoods in Edmonds where people of color could buy residential property. Racial covenants, and, after racial covenants were officially outlawed, redlining, ensured that people of color'stayed in their place.' If you take a map that demarcates the redlined areas and place it over a map that indicates Edmonds neighborhoods with a larger percentage of non -white folks, you'll see that the same racialized boundaries remain. Do you want to perpetuate this shameful history? Please don't hide behind finances as a reason to say no. By voting to move forward, you are not committing the City to spend millions of dollars. The options presented by City staff rely in large part on private funds, which has been ignored by many public commentators and some electeds Saying 'we can't afford it' has always been a reason to think small. We urge you to think big. Submitted on: 11/28/2023 6:47:08 PM Name: Tamara Nelson City of Residence: Edmonds Agenda Topic: Landmark Proposal Comments: I urge you to vote now on the Landmark project and retract any funds not already lost in this research time. I attended the "Community Conversation " sales event at the high school. The larger portion of the comments responded in the negative. The taxpayers are hurting right now and our city Packet Pg. 7 6.1.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — December 5, 2023 council seems to be absolutely oblivious. You have declared a fiscal emergency, yet you want to go into development. Have you not learned your lesson with the Civic Park over runs? Have you not learned your lesson with the hooker hotel on 99 that is so damaged by drugs and waste that it is far too toxic to proceed without spending copious amounts of unexpected money? The Landmark property is clearly over priced, as any business person can see. The owner himself says it has poor access. Just stop. This is not the site and it is not the time. Please vote no. Submitted on: 11/28/2023 9:46:23 PM Name: Mary Anne Dillon City of Residence: Edmonds N Agenda Topic: Landmark 99 Site Project E E Comments: I am writing tonight to support the Landmark 99 Project. This is a perfectly situated property C U with incredible TOD potential. The possibility to combine recreation and community space with housing V could help increase safety and strengthen community in that area. Many Edmonds residents would 3 benefit from this, including, but not limited to, low-income families, seniors and veterans. This is a rare 0. opportunity that would transform this neighborhood for the better. •L Submitted on: 11/29/2023 2:19:52 PM Name: Joan Bloom City of Residence: Edmonds Agenda Topic: Landmark 99 property Public Hearing Council, Please end consideration of "Landmark 99", for the following reasons. Site constrictions: (1) Challenging traffic issues require access through surrounding neighborhoods. Edmonds Beacon 4-7-2016 https://www.edmondsbeacon.com/story/2016/04/07/news/whats-your-vision-for-the-revitalization-of- highway-99/16244.html comments by Robert Siew, owner of this property: "Getting in and out of our property, either going north or south on 99 is a challenge, especially during rush hour." "With the newer on -ramp design merging into 99 heading north from westbound [SR] 104, and together with the heavy main 99 northbound traffic, there are no breaks in traffic for our customers to go in or out of the property without serious risk every time." (2) Adequate "structured" public parking is essential to site viability. Proposed designs assume parking beneath buildings. Structured parking is excessively expensive. 4-7-2016 Beacon article: "Siew said the potential for more "intense" development also is limited by parking challenges. "If we were to consider mid -rise hotels, apartments or mixed -use developments, we have to have structured parking," he said. "With the current land price in the area, structured parking is just too expensive at this time." (3) Elimination of forested area (back of property) is projected. Designs appear to cover the entire property. Removal of trees is contrary to Climate Action Plan goals. 4-7-2016 Beacon article, Siew again quoted: "Currently, 7.5 acres are developed, with about 3 acres of undeveloped land at the back of the property. "We would like to consider the back vacant property for development in the next few years" Budgetary issues (1) To date, $137,700 was allocated. Council denied transfer of $250,000 ARPA funds to vet the property, yet over half of that amount has already been spent. (2) Council declared a financial crisis and hasn't received a balanced budget from Packet Pg. 8 6.1.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — December 5, 2023 Mayor Nelson. Additional funds in 2024 and 2025 (when $1,000,000 earnest money is due) are not available. (3) The refundable $100,000 earnest money could be applied to other budgetary expenses in 2024 if Council votes against this purchase. Staff "bandwidth" (1) Directors report excessive staff workload, thus need for additional consultation funds. Due to Edmonds' precarious financial status, funds are not available for consultation. (2) In addition to $1,000,000 Council allocated consultant fees to update the Comprehensive Plan by the end of 2024, many hours of staff time will be required. This update is extremely important and even more critical due to State legislature's newly enacted housing bills. Stop bleeding taxpayer money, recover our $100,000, and find a truly viable location to serve South Edmonds. Submitted on: 11/29/2023 10:31:07 PM Name: Valerie Stewart City of Residence: Port Townsend Agenda Topic: Landmark 99 project Comments: Dear Esteemed Council members, I am submitting a comment regarding the Landmark 99 project since I was unable to respond at last night's meeting when called upon during the public hearing. My apologies. As many of you know, I am a former Edmonds resident. While I appreciate the work staff has done on presenting 3 possible scenarios for the property, I found it seeming like a sales pitch. The plans struck me as grandiose. Community center, park, and mixed use makes the most sense to me. Definitely keep and protect mature trees and take the pool option off the table since there is a YMCA down the road on 99. From the beginning, Citizens should have been given the option to not go forward at all with the aquisition process. These are hard times and a fiscal emergency has been declared. Edmonds' reserves are dangerously low, and as discussed it will take several years to restore an appropriate balance. The risks are huge when the City takes on the lead role in developing such a large parcel in a location like this. There are many unpredictable variables that could make this potential project go sideways. Just look at what happened to the Woodinville Schoolhouse District you cited. I'm so glad a citizen brought up the latest on that one. I agree with what Janelle Cass said. She brought up some points that hadn't been mentioned before, such as the City offering tax deferral or tax relief to incentivize a developer to allocate community space. That would limit the financial cost to the City, since it wouldn't have to own the property. I also liked the creative suggestions from Council member Nand; pass on the option now and let things play out on the open market. If the intent of the seller is to sell by 2025, that buys some time for the City to get its financial house in order. Even if the City missed out on the purchase, it could still play an influential role while not being on the hook for unpredictable sums of money. Somehow I think the Development Services, Public Works, and Planning staff with all their expertise, could guide desirable development. Meanwhile, giving staff the direction and time away from a risky project like this could get the City further down the road with Code updates and get the Comprehensive Plan done, since both of those guide what the City wants to see for the future. Think of all the time taken away from essential services and basic needs of the City while staff was working on this project. Please take a deep breath, admit reality, and shift course to guaranteeing the City has sufficient funds for basic services, safety, and wellbeing for all citizens. Thank you for all you do and the countless hours you spend on your job. It's so important. Happy holidays! m E E 0 U v 3 a _ d e Packet Pg. 9 s.z City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/5/2023 Budget Queries - Council Budget Questions and Adminstration/Staff Responses Staff Lead: City Council Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History To help streamline and manage the many budget questions and emails from councilmembers to staff, a consolidated question/answer process has been coordinated by Council Staff. Published Queries with Responses are sent to Councilmembers by email, published under received for filing, and posted to the Budget 2024 section of the Council webpage; https://www.edmondswa.gov/government/city_council/budget_2024 Recommendation For Information Only. Narrative N/A Attachments: Budget Query 5.0 Packet Pg. 10 6.2.a Budget Query 5.0 Councilmember Budget Questions and Responses as of November 30, 2023 Administrative -..Budget Q8 Page 61 8 What does the increase in salaries and benefits represent on that page? (CM Buckshnis) A8 The majority of the increase to salaries and benefits that you see when comparing the 2023 adopted 8 budget to the 2024 proposed budget are the result of the budget amendment approved by the Edmonds City Council on April 18, 2023. This budget amendment authorized budget authority for the AFSCME contract that had been approved by the City Council, as well as similar increases approved for Non -Represented staff. In addition, the budget for the Public Works Accountant was moved from PW to Admin Services; this reporting change was also approved by Council. A very small portion of his change (less than $5K) is from council -approved Step increases to new staff members that occur during the year. Q8Overtime for non reps 9 Can we do comp time instead to save money this year? I see in council, court and admin services. May show up in others too. (CM Olson) A8 The non -represented positions are already exempt from overtime, so we can't do comp time 9 instead. All of the overtime budgets apply to represented people, with minor exceptions like your legislative assistant position. Beckie is on contract, so technically speaking she is not non -rep, which is why there is a small OT budget in your Council department. Q9 Via Email November 30 0 I've asked a few times but can we have the September financial report that is part of the quarterly reports the one page summation? I have the June one and showed a picture of the example? Can we get a new projection page rather than that shorthand calculation and can you help answer he following question? 1) the $3.2 million represented by the vacancy rate calculation is embedded in the salaries and benefits: is this the correct statement? 2) the under -anticipated $2.4mm represent the excess amounts in other general fund accounts: is his a correct statement? If not what does it represent now? Packet Pg. 11 6.2.a Budget Query 5.0 Councilmember Budget Questions and Responses as of November 30, 2023 ) in the shorthand calculation that you gave us this week, you did not include that unanticipated mount and can you explain why? ) does the new revenue calculation correct the $15 million that you had miscalculated for the roperty tax? t would be very helpful to have this information by tonight, and if we can get that memorandum m the bond council regarding the bond funds that would be helpful too. CM Buckshnis) Ve don't have the one -page September report available. Please bear with me, and I ask Council to nderstand how much we have on our plate at this time. We are still working on our three audits - nancial, federal, and accountability - with the State Auditor's Office. We normally aren't working on hese audits this late in the year but they were delayed this year due to circumstances outside of my ontrol. My office already runs very lean, we have half of the finance staff that Lynnwood has, for xample. As you know this has been an unusual budget year, and that has created a lot of extra work or me and my staff. In addition we have an unusually high number of public disclosure requests oming in for people requesting financial information. Some of those you may already know about. 'his is also not normal, and responding to these takes significant amounts of time from me and my taff. All this together means that we have had to prioritize some work over other work. The ummary page you are requesting is something that we take to finance committee, it is not a part of he 2024 budget process. We have had to prioritize budget work, audit work, and responding to iublic disclosure requests over monthly work. As such we likely won't have this available until later n the year. ;egarding question 1 - the vacancy rate adjustment was put into "non -departmental" as one lump um. It has not been distributed to various departments yet, and although it is part of the overall iudget, it is not included in the overall salary and benefits lines yet. It will be much more accurate or everyone involved - including council - for us to allocate this to various departments in December �r in January. For example, if we had allocated the vacancy adjustment in July, I would have Ilocated a significant amount to the departments with the Climate Action Manager and the Grants Aanager, because those would not have been filled immediately. Since council removed those iositions, we would have had vacancy adjustments made for positions that don't exist. We will make he allocation when we can do it intelligently, based on actual vacancies, rather than guesses made ve months ago. Packet Pg. 12 6.2.a Budget Query 5.0 Councilmember Budget Questions and Responses as of November 30, 2023 Regarding question 2 - the under -anticipated $2.4 million represents under -spending by the general fund as a whole. It is not tied to specific accounts or departments. Remember that number is NOT part of the 2024 proposed or adopted budgets. It is a component of predicting fund balances in future years. Regarding question 3 - I was asked to provide an updated estimate of year-end fund balance for 2023. The $2.4 million anticipated under -expenditure you reference is for 2024, not 2023. The estimate I provided would naturally take into account the anticipated under -expenditure for 2023. Regarding question 4 - the new revenue calculation is based on the most up to date and accurate data that we had through September 30, 2023. Your final comment regarding the memo from bond counsel - the Council took the transfer of bond money out of the budget, so that point is now moot. Are you thinking of introducing a decision package to reinstate a transfer from 016 to the general fund? Q9 Court budget estimate for 2023 higher than the budget amount 1 Does this mean that we did a budget amendment for this department during the year? I do remember there was one, something grant funded Or does this ever happen because they spend money they don't have? (CM Olson) A9 A significant part of the budget preparation process is for departments to analyze their current year 1 spending - 2023 in the case - and make estimates of how much they are going to spend by the end of he year. This is a function that has to be done at the department level, because they are responsible for their own budgets and know their own spending patterns better than we do in finance. Court's estimate being higher than budget this year tells me that they did not take the time to provide accurate estimates when we were preparing the budget. They are still under budget for the year, regardless of what they put in the estimate column. Incidentally, people at the department level not giving us accurate estimates is the biggest reason why the year-end estimate changed so much from the proposed budget to the updated estimate I Packet Pg. 13 6.2.a Budget Query 5.0 Councilmember Budget Questions and Responses as of November 30, 2023 provided recently. I have to rely on the departments to provide us with accurate information, and when they don't it makes the overall estimates less accurate. Then when I come in the fall with an updated estimate, and that estimate is significantly worse, I get blamed and accused of providing bad information to council. I can only provide council with the best information I have, and sometimes the information the departments give to me turns out to be inaccurate. ublic Works: acil' Q8 DP20 Armadillo Tracker —Traffic Data Collector 3 It isn't clear if this is a replacement or a Second (so that we have two traffic data collectors in operation instead of one). If it is a replacement, does the first still work? If it is a second: With the public and council all prioritizing pedestrian safety, I assume that the bigger budget for traffic calming will pass and that more of these Projects will be addressed in a More permanent way; in light of that, can we get by with the one system we bought in 2019 for another year or two? (CM Olson) A8 This unit will pay for itself by the additional capability provided, it will result in saving labor and 3 increase our customer response. The 2nd unit isn't a replacement but an additional unit. We have had very good success with the initial unit so we decided to purchase another one. The purchase of the 2nd unit will allow all the peed studies to be completed in a more timely manner (allowing the installation of the traffic calming devices to be completed faster as well). Considering the high number of requests received each year, the delay then becomes quite considerable (using only one unit compared to having two). Q8 DP 37 and DP 38 4 1 am not tracking the numbers in "fiscal details" on either of these. Can you please explain? (CM Olson) A8 DP 37 Storm and Surface water comp plan, Utilities (stormwater) fund, built into the model for utility 4 rates. This is a regulatory requirement, in addition is necessary for proper planning for flood prevention, and climate action goals of protecting the environment. DP 38: Perrinville Creek Basin Analysis, Stormwater fund ($150K & Grants) Required to make our stormwater system more resilient and prevent flooding as much as possible, it will also help in long erm goal of restoring critical salmon habitat. Q8 DP 19, 24, 25, 52, 60 5 There are quite a few FTEs being added this year (when we are in financial crisis). In addition to the three above, we added the auto mechanic off cycle in a budget amendment. None of these Positions are GF dollars, but residents pay them by virtue of higher utility rates (which hen compete for the dollars in their wallet that we may be asking them to pay us for necessary services in the context of a levy lid lift. Thanks for considering whether any can be pushed a year. Or whether the new records administrator can do any of the $100K in professional services we are asking for in DP 29? The type of work sounds similar DPs: 19 and 29. In addition to the FTE DIPS (19,24,25): Missed one, and with a big salary: DP 52a Packet Pg. 14 6.2.a Budget Query 5.0 Councilmember Budget Questions and Responses as of November 30, 2023 Also, DP 60. We have been briefed on the overall shortage of trained members of this industry. If unable to hire for this trained position, will you have the option of taking on an OIT at the lower level of salary?(CM Olson) A8 DP 19: PW Reckords administrator, Utility Funds, included on our model for utility rates. 5 DP 24: Utility Locator, Utility Funds, included in our model for utility rates. DP 25: Phase 15 WL Replacement, Utility (Water) fund, delaying it will cost more in the future and higher risk of failure, already included on model for utility rates. DP 52: Asset/Project Management Specialist, Utility (Sewer) fund existing position => convert to ermanent, with the increased need at the WWTP this position is critical to keep up with aging infrastructure and new regulatory requirements. DP 60: Position Upgrade OIT=>operator, Utility (Sewer) Fund, Increase complexity of plant systems requires a more experienced group of operators, OIT is a great idea and it will be on the table this rovides ability to hire an experience operator that can hit the ground running, we can always downgrade the position to OIT if we feel there is a highly capable candidate that cand grow into the position. 85 These positions or initiatives will improve our efficiency, for example digitizing our records can result in substantial savings for our staff and our customers, we improve our customer service and we free time for our project managers to focus on other important issues. Comment Re Mechanics: With the growth of the fleet especially on vehicles that require lots of attention (PD), the new mechanic is a necessity, and we have already seen the results in making rogress on the backlog of maintenance, if that position was not filled, and with the possibility of having some vehicles operating longer than intended the need for repairs will only increase and the cost to send vehicles out for repairs will result in a higher cost than the new position and reduced level of service for our PD, vehicles that go out for repairs are taking a lot longer than expected and there is not much we can do about it. Sometimes saving in one position can result in increased operational cost and reduced level of service, having the right staff for the organization is the most fiscally sound decision. Delaying or changing any of the utilities funded positions will not result in savings where we need them (in the GF) and instead can backfire and make us more inefficient and result in increased cost... that would inevitably impact future rates. Q8 DP 63 6 Can we get by with a cheaper railing replacement in the main stairwell? I am sure it is nicer than options that cost less, but most guests use the elevator.... Can you share options and option costs with council so we can consider the cheaper alternatives? This one is $80k! (CM Olson) A8 This is only a budget authority to start the design process, it will likely require a separate package for 6 construction. The handrail in question at City Hall is 3+ stories high with an open atrium facing West, the railing is a grandfathered in feature from the original building. The seismic retrofit and remodel the City Packet Pg. 15 6.2.a Budget Query 5.0 Councilmember Budget Questions and Responses as of November 30, 2023 performed when gaining occupancy of the building would have triggered code compliance as part of he seismic scope and I believe this was overlooked. I have serious safety concerns during a seismic event for anyone on the staircase as the railing does not meet the breakaway impact requirement for a fall restraining device or fall protection system for a guard railing that is above 4' high. The budget figure is going to be dependent on engineering costs. I don't think $80,000 gets us to construction of a new railing just an engineered design for bidding purposes. Since this is a know safety hazard it is my responsibility to ask for funding to correct the issue and limit the City's potential liability. Q8 DP77 7 What would the cost increase be if we replaced the sidewalk in cement instead of asphalt? (CM anonymous) A8 It depends on many factors, concrete sidewalks require additional labor and materials (Forms, 7 grading and base materials, concrete) Seattle estimates that it cost four times more than what an effective sidewalk cost. They define effective sidewalks as any other alternative to traditional concrete sidewalks. "Traditional concrete sidewalks cost $400,000 or more per block to construct, whereas cost effective walkways can often be installed for under $100,000 per block." htt s: www.seattle. ov Documents De artments SDOT Pedestrian Pro ram Sidewalk%20Dev%20 Pro ram Cost Effective Walkway FactSheet v4. df Packet Pg. 16 7.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/5/2023 Approval of Special Meeting Minutes November 20, 2023 Staff Lead: Council Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Recommendation Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda. Narrative Council meeting minutes are attached. Attachments: 20231120 Special Meeting Packet Pg. 17 7.1.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES November 20, 2023 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Neil Tibbott, Mayor Pro Tern Vivian Olson, Council President Pro Tern Will Chen, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Mike Nelson, Mayor 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Dave Turley, Administrative Services Director Dave Rohde, GIS Analysis Angela Tinker, City Attorney's Office Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 4:30 p.m. by Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott in the Council Chambers, 250 5t1i Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Council President Pro Tern Olson read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water." 3. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of Councilmember Buckshnis and Mayor Nelson. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. RECEIVED FOR FILING Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 20, 2023 Page 1 Packet Pg. 18 7.1.a MEMO TO COUNCIL 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Carl Zapora, Edmonds, former member of the salary commission, said he has been the CEO of multimillion -dollar nonprofits, a governmental entity with over $100 million in assets and two small businesses. He mentioned his background because the City is clearly in a budget crisis and he wanted to speak to that. It appears the City will have a deficit of $10-15 million without the use of one-time funds; one-time funds are not a good way to balance a budget as it digs a hole in a spiral that is often very difficult to get out of. He encouraged the council to freeze all non -essential expenditures, a prudent thing to do to reverse the curve. He did not believe the problem could be solved with just additional revenue which means raising taxes. In light of the City facing very sizeable funding and deficit challenges, he also encouraged the council to consider a 14-month moratorium on new programs. He clarified his comments were his own and not those of any organization. By freezing non -essential expenditures and having a moratorium on new programs, he asked all entities of the City's government to be laser focused on getting the budget balanced including the administration, the mayor, city council, all department heads and all staff by reducing expenses where possible and holding off on new expenditures and new programs. He encouraged the city council to make great use of citizens in the community; there are many residents willing to volunteer, himself included, as the council looks for ways to work through this budget challenge. Nora Carlson, Edmonds, urged the council to ensure community safety is fully addressed in the budget. She has frequently spoken to council about ongoing issues of speeding in various areas of the community, including her neighborhood near Westgate Elementary. This includes drivers rushing through stop signs and signals. There have been numerous near misses with vehicles and pedestrian and recent injury accidents involving pedestrians. These issues need to be addressed to effectively ensure public safety to avoid a memorial intersection due to a future fatality. With the installation and upcoming activation of the school zone safety cameras near the intersection of 96' & 220t'', a dangerous intersection near Westgate Elementary, she was confident drivers would slow down and abide by the posted speed limit to ultimately keep pedestrians safe. When she has observed the end of school day crossing at the intersection, crossing guards do their best with the supplies provided to offer safe crossing for children and adults. At times she has witnessed an Edmonds motorcycle police officer pulling over and ticketing speeding drivers. Due to the urgent need for additional police officers in the Edmonds Police Department, this approach is not sustainable. To effectively provide for the safety of all Edmonds residents, she hoped the council would be united in their budgetary decisions to wisely utilize available funding. Lora Hein, Edmonds, referred to the memo in the packet signed by directors and urged the council to consider what the City's capable staff said. City staff is charged with carrying out council direction and have done an admirable job during trying and difficult times and their recommendations deserve the council's serious consideration. Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, referred to the budgetary process and the lack of transparency that is becoming prevalent in the process. For example, the September financial report should have been available to citizens for review prior to this meeting, either posted on the administrative services website or at least in the packet particularly since the quarterly report is included. Likewise, he questioned why the staff proposed changes to the 2024 budget were not included in the packet for review and comment prior to tonight's meeting. Those are two examples of a recuring theme at council meetings, lack of foresight for the public to be involved in the conversation. He took the suggestions in the memo from staff as an insult, in essence their recommendation is to work with staff outlining a collaborative process beginning in the first quarter of 2024. He questioned why wait until the first quarter of 2024 and recommended using a collaborative process now. The problem exists now and the letter is indicative of the lack of coordination and cooperation between the council and the administration. As he stated in an earlier public comment, the City has a real problem. The memo refers to spending cuts already made by council, however, the only thing the council has done Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 20, 2023 Page 2 Packet Pg. 19 7.1.a is decline two new hires. He was bothered by the memo from staff and suggested it should bother council as well. Finis Tupper, Edmonds, spoke in favor of the school zone safety cameras, commenting he was involved in an accident on 220t' at 96t1i where he was not at fault although it was not during school hours. Standing at a bus stop near Edmonds-Woodway High School during the snow last November, he found the driving appalling. The resolution regarding school zone cameras was adopted in February and council was told earlier it would start in December which has been updated to January. He questioned why it took so long to implement that program, suggesting it should have been activated with the start of the school year. That demonstrated the lack of priority until there is a budget crisis and then all of sudden the council is asked to reconsider their vote opposing red light cameras. He did not think staff was listening to citizens and hoped the council would represent the citizens. He wished all a Happy Thanksgiving. 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. 2024 BUDGET STAFF PROPOSED CHANGES Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott announced this item had been removed from the agenda and postponed to a later date. 2. COUNCIL 2024 BUDGET DELIBERATIONS Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott suggested starting with decision package in the proposed budget. He advised the council will consider amendments proposed by Councilmember Buckshnis when she is present. Councilmember Teitzel advised this is a new item related to Olympic Beach Park Restroom at the fishing pier (CIP/CFP R7). On November 6, 2023 the council approved moving funding from 2025 to 2024 where it was originally. This amendment memorializes moving funds into the 2024 budget. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM OLSON, TO APPROVE ADVANCING $20,000 IN FUNDING FROM 2025 BACK INTO 2024 FOR THE OLYMPIC BEACH PARK RESTROOM. Councilmember Teitzel provided the following rationale for this amendment: This item relates to CIP/CFP item R7 regarding renovation of the Olympic Beach Park restroom (this is the restroom at the Fishing Pier). This item was previously in the CIP/CFP to commence work in 2024, but was moved back to commence in 2025 in the proposed CIP/CFP. This work Is needed now, as this restroom is heavily used by waterfront visitors and fishing pier users. According to Parks Director Feser, the work was delayed so it could be coordinated with needed roof repairs at the restroom. But in further discussions with Council, it appears that coordination can still be accomplished if this project is moved forward into 2024. Funding source is REET 2 revenue. Councilmember Paine said she was leery about moving anything into 2024 until it is clear there are enough resources in the 2024 budget so she will not support motion. Councilmember Nand spoke in favor of the motion. Public restrooms are a dire matter of public safety and cleanliness. For the first time during the pandemic, she saw human waste on sidewalks in Edmonds, mostly in the area where she lives, the Highway 99 community. If staff, the Port and the parks director who frequently interface with the public say this is necessary, she supported moving it to 2024. Councilmember Teitzel reminded the council already approved this on November 6, 2023 as part of deliberation on the CIP/CFP. This is simply a housekeeping item to ensure it is included in the 2024 budget. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 20, 2023 Page 3 Packet Pg. 20 7.1.a Council President Pro Tem Olson expressed her support for the motion. In that prior meeting it seemed like REET funds were available to fund that work and with job order contracting (JOC), it was possible to move it into the prior year. She appreciate her council colleagues being very conservative and the comment that was made. Councilmember Chen expressed support for the proposal because REET funds are separate from the General Fund and as Councilmember Nand said, this is related to public safety and is very important. MOTION CARRIED (5-1), COUNCILMEMBER PAINE VOTING NO. Councilmember Chen referred to his proposed new decision package on packet page 9, 2024 Overall Expenditure Reduction Cut of $4 million. In looking at September's financial results, the General Fund is down to $2 million; the requirement is $8.9 million so the City is already dipping $7 million into the reserve and there are three months of expenditures ahead, primarily payroll and benefits. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO PROPOSE AN OVERALL EXPENDITURE CUT IN THE 2024 BUDGET BY $4 MILLION. Angela Tinker, City Attorney's Office, said City Attorney Jeff Taraday would like this decision package to be deferred until tomorrow when he can be present to comment on it. Observing this was an important conversation to have, Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott suggested Councilmember Chen complete his explanation and then determine if there was additional action the council wanted to take. Councilmember Chen recommended the council have a conversation about this. Based on the financial reports, the City is nine months into the year and $7 million into the reserve. With three months remaining, he estimated the City may have to dip into the contingency reserve by year end. There are one-time funds that can be moved to plug the hole for the time being, but that would not address the root cause and the council needs to look into cutting some nonessential expenditures. The council needs to show the citizens they are doing what they can to control expenditures before proposing a tax increase. Councilmember Nand thanked Councilmember Chen for the motion, commenting it is an important discussion to have. However, there are key players missing tonight, not only the city attorney but also Mayor Nelson and Councilmember Buckshnis. Approving such as motion would signal to staff that a majority of council is asking them to make significant cuts to the 2024 budget. It would make more sense to give the department directors a chance to respond and for council to review their proposed revisions tomorrow. She was hopeful Councilmember Chen would consider that this would be a more impactful vote to take tomorrow. Council President Pro Tem Olson said one of the issues the city attorney may advise the council on tomorrow is with regard to this motion being executable so she agreed with the idea of waiting until Mr. Taraday was present. She reminded the hole in the reserves cannot be plugged with ARPA funds, there is an express prohibition on the use of those funds for that purpose. They can be used for a direct expense in the General Fund, but not to restore reserves. Conceptually, she was in favor of the motion, whether it was across the board, noting council will be considering how its budget can be reduced such as decreasing training, equipment, etc. The concept is appropriate and she was sure council could work collaboratively with staff to find places to make cuts whether that was in professional services or in other areas. Councilmember Paine said she was in favor of having this discussion later after hearing from everyone. It is council's job, not the administration's, to make strategic decisions. She wanted to ensure the council had Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 20, 2023 Page 4 Packet Pg. 21 7.1.a adequate time and information provided by the professionals who work for the City. She was in favor of delaying this to a future date. Councilmember Teitzel spoke in favor of this approach, because it was not prescriptive and instead sets a target that could be achieved by the administration; the administration could be asked the best way to achieve this. As Council President Pro Tem Olson said, council could come up with budget amendments to cut professional services by a certain amount such as 50%, a broad gauge approach without the knowledge of why staff needs those services. He preferred to let staff identify where reductions could happen to make this work. He reminded the council recently took action to increase revenue by raising property taxes the maximum amount allowed by law and so the council needs to show the citizens they are doing everything possible to tighten their belts to make the numbers work. Councilmember Chen commented due to the situation, it was good to bring this forward for discussion. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN WITHDREW MOTION UNTIL TOMORROW WHEN ALL THE ELECTED OFFICIALS AND CITY ATTORNEY ARE PRESENT. THE SECONDER AGREED. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO INCLUDE $2M FROM ARPA FUNDS TO POTENTIALLY BUY THE 7-ELEVEN SITE ON HIGHWAY 99 AT 8101 238TH STREET SW. Councilmember Chen commented the majority of crimes experienced in the City occur on Highway 99. The 7-Eleven site has been closed for 2+ years due to crime. The site is very visible, located on Highway 99 across the street from the Safeway which the police department reports has the highest theft, shoplifting in the county. It is a wise investment. In 2023 the council included $70,000 in the budget to search for a potential police substation site on Highway 99. He invited Public Works Director Oscar Antillon to provide update on that search; Mr. Antillon was not present. Councilmember Nand said it is a common misconception that the former 7-Eleven site where Nagendiram Kandasamy was murdered is not being utilized; it is used as an office at this time. She suggested this may be premature and it would make more sense to allocate funds for the Longbay contract to inquire whether the property owner is interested in selling before the council approves a budget amendment authorizing the purchase. Council President Pro Tern Olson said this issue has been on her radar for a long time and she has been concerned about having the necessary public safety presence in the Highway 99 neighborhoods and corridor. She relayed her objections to acting at this time, noting some of the issues mentioned were not on her list of objections. The study of locations has not been concluded and it would premature to take action on a site without considering others that have been identified. In addition to asking about a police department annex, that study was to consider moving the entire police station. As she has delved further into this issue, that is the better answer, moving the entire station somewhere central or in the 76th/Hwy 99 area. Doing that might free up facilities that could be sold and further assist with the budget crisis. As a short term solution, the city hall annex that the council funded a few years ago could be better utilized for the police. She recalled a second remodel to make the space more police friendly and add barriers between the court and police rooms. The City needs to get by with existing assets and resources at that site. At the Landmark community engagement events, there have been discussions about a police substation that would have training facilities and meeting rooms which was not what she envisioned. She was unsure everyone was on same page about what a police substation would be. It is one of her priorities and she was grateful it was a priority for the entire council. Councilmember Paine said she would like to see the analysis from law enforcement and the study being done regarding possible sites. That will be critical for making decisions about law enforcement services Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 20, 2023 Page 5 Packet Pg. 22 7.1.a along the on corridor and throughout Edmonds. She would not support the motion now, and looked forward to receiving the study. Councilmember Chen said everyone prioritizes safety, but without action, nothing gets done. There was $70,000 budgeted in 2023 for a site search, but the council has not had a formal report from the team conducting the search. If councilmembers say they prioritize public safety but do not take action, he questioned how they could say they prioritized public safety. COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED TO AMEND TO ALLOCATE $50,0000 TO LONGBAY, THE CONSULTANT DIRECTOR FESER HAS SUCCESSFULLY WORKED WITH, TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE AVAILABILITY OF THE FORMER 7-ELEVEN SITE. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Councilmember Teitzel said he loved this idea, agreeing a more visible presence on the corridor, which is a high crime area, was needed. However, it may be premature because availability of the property and the owner's interest in leasing versus selling the property has not been investigated. He suggested investigating those issues and having this come back as midyear budget amendment in 2024 after the council has those answers . Councilmember Chen said based on a public source, the site is available for sale which is why he wanted to hear the report from the team working on the search. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (2-4), COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN AND NAND VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL AND PAINE, COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM OLSON, AND MAYOR PRO TEM TIBBOTT VOTING NO. Councilmember Nand withdrew her proposal for small business support grants until staff presents their proposed adjustment to the budget on the excellent suggestion from Council President Pro Tern Olson to reduce the amount of ARPA by $250,000, $6.5 million to $6.25 million and hold that money until the end of the budget process and see if it would be feasible to distribute those funds to the community in the form of small business grants. Councilmember Nand began to address the memo from directors. Councilmember Paine raised a point of order regarding whether that was appropriate as it was not part of the agenda. Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott advised that was not related to deliberations on decision packages and suggested Councilmember Nand address that during council comments tomorrow night. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED TO ADJOURN. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Councilmember Chen asked if the council preferred to discuss 2025 and out years at a later time or discuss those budget amendments now. Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott advised he was amenable to discussing those tonight. Councilmember Chen referred to a proposed new decision package, Labor Expenditure Inflation Factors of 7% in 2025,6% in 2026, 5% in 2027 and 5% in 2028 should be replaced with 4% assumption for each year. (Strategic Outlook, 2024 Proposed Budget, pg. 16) COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM OLSON, TO APPROVE A NEW DECISION PACKAGE, LABOR EXPENDITURE INFLATION FACTORS OF 7% IN 2025, 6% IN 2026, 5% IN 2027 AND 5% IN 2028 SHOULD BE REPLACED WITH 4% ASSUMPTION FOR EACH YEAR. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 20, 2023 Page 6 Packet Pg. 23 7.1.a Councilmember Chen explained staff s assumption of labor expenditure inflation rates is documented in the proposed 2024 budget and outyears, 7% in 2025, 6% in 2026, 5% in 2027, and 5% in 2028. He believed these inflation assumption were overly conservative; the federal inflation rate is 2.2%-4% which is why he selected 4%, a conservative approach and a more reasonable outlook for 2025-2028. Council President Pro Tem Olson said she had a similar decision package that she pulled because it was more complicated to execute. Her decision package was the high end of the federal reserve rate for each of those years plus 1% which is also a conservative approach based on federal reserve forecasts. The percentages she calculated were somewhat similar to the numbers Councilmember Chen has in his decision package but his approach would be easier to implement. Councilmember Nand commented given the way the City has been unexpectedly smacked by inflation this year, it would be better to assume labor will more expensive and be wrong and have some wiggle room in the budget rather than being too conservative. National averages for labor are one thing, Edmonds is within driving distance of Amazon, Boeing and some of the strongest, wealthiest companies in the world and the local labor market is quite different than the national average. She did not support the motion. Councilmember Paine said she forwarded to council HR Director Neill Hoyson response to an email she sent earlier this evening with details about the labor contracts that have already been negotiated and when she expects to have the EPOA mediation and binding arbitration completed. The percentages for out years are based on existing contracts. She agreed with being super conservative and if there is money left over in 2024, amendments/adjustments can be made then. Councilmember Teitzel found this a reasonable approach. Inflation is easing and interest rates are falling and a period of normalcy can be expected. He was supportive of the proposed approach. Council President Pro Tem Olson said good points have been made by council and by staff for the more conservative approach. The council is trying to gauge how to operate and make decisions in the future and it seemed like the high end of the federal reserve forecast plus 1 % was already conservative and was about the same as the numbers proposed by Councilmember Chen. She said this is similar to the approach of assuming there are some vacancies, but not being so overly conservative that good decisions are not made in the budget. She acknowledged it was a balancing act. Councilmember Paine pointed out when talking about percentages, it is important to remember these are staff providing services to community. She did not support the motion as she wanted to be conservative to ensure funds were available to pay staff. Councilmember Chen pointed out when the council adopted the 2023 budget, the inflation rate was 1% which clearly was not enough to keep up with true inflation rates in 2023. Things are slowing now and the feds have adjusts interest rates up so inflation is going down. The fed is also continuing to monitor national inflation rates. Going from 1% to 7% swings from one extreme to another; 4% is reasonable given the economy and federal predictions. Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott reminded these are projections and not the actual budget. Councilmember Nand commented she and Councilmember Chen are both small business owners; he has employees, she does not. Everyone understands how incredibly expensive it can be administratively and logistically to add employees so she preferred a higher range of 5%-7% to give wiggle room for things like a step up, progressions, etc. Jurisdictions are conducting national searches to find people to fill niche roles. She preferred for example when the community asks the council to hire a FTE like the climate action Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 20, 2023 Page 7 Packet Pg. 24 manager, the council has a better understanding of the budget allocation. She preferred to retain the 7% and hopefully be too conservative and having extra money at the end of the budget cycle. Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott asked Administrative Services Director Dave Turley if he wanted to comment. Mr. Turley said he had nothing specific to add, this is not a 2024 budget amendment, it is related to the strategic outlook and future estimates. He acknowledged the difficulty the council was having coming up with estimates; the council asked him for estimates for 2023 and he has done the best he can, but it is not as easy as looks. Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott asked how the projections relate to budget planning for 2024. Mr. Turley answered estimates for 2023 result in an estimated ending funding balance for 2023 that becomes the beginning fund balance for 2024. Revenues and expenses are budgeted which results in an ending fund balance for 2024 so looking at future years might impact decisions the council makes in the 2024 budget. If the future looks good, the council may be less conservative in the 2024 budget. He was confused with the motion to change the labor percentage estimates, as the explanation refers to labor and benefits. Absent clarification, if he were to implement this, he would not be sure whether it applied only to labor or to labor and benefits. As soon as changes like hiring freezes or eliminating positions are made, that has a big impact on the future which throws off the estimates. As soon as an estimate for future years is calculated, he feared council would approve another amendment to the budget that would change it again. He suggested the council focus on the 2024 budget numbers. Although it is nice to look into the future, that is not what he came to talk about; he came to talk about the 2024 budget. Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott found it difficult to support the motion because it is related to an out year and something the council can revisit in the future. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-3), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL AND CHEN AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM OLSON VOTING YES; MAYOR PRO TEM TIBBOTT AND COUNCILMEMBERS PAINE AND NAND VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO REMOVE ANNEXATION INTO RFA FROM 2025 AND THE OUT YEARS. Councilmember Chen explained in the proposed budget for 2025 and out years, the expenditure for contract services for South County Fire (SCF) has been entirely removed. That assumes the City will join the RFA, but the council has not done its due diligence about the best option for sourcing fire services. The City could contract with a different service provider, start its own fire department, continue to contract with SCF, or join the RFA. Including the assumption that the City will join the RFA in the budget before those studies have been done is premature. He recommended removing that assumption and allowing the council to do their due diligence. Councilmember Paine commented the administration has not heard anything as a result of the resolution presented to SCF and agreed it was premature to make this decision. The City of Edmonds was on SCF's November 14 agenda, but the minutes and video are not yet available to the public. She preferred to put this off until more information was available from SCF. The City of Edmonds is also on SFC's November 21 agenda. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED TO POSTPONE TO DECEMBER 5. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Councilmember Nand said the question she has been asking about the RFA in various meetings with SCF, administration and council is if Edmonds voters chose to annex into the RFA and submit themselves to a new taxing authority, will the City reduce property taxes commensurately or will the City retain it. That Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 20, 2023 Page 8 Packet Pg. 25 7.1.a will be a very complex, high profile and nuanced discussion that the incoming administration and the council will need to have in conjunction with town halls and opportunity for comment from the public. Councilmember Teitzel expressed support for the motion because it is premature to presume the City will be annexed into the RFA by 2025 as that would require the ballot measure go to the voters in early 2024. There is a lot of analysis that needs to be done to determine benefits and risks to residents of making that move. There will be a lot of analysis in 2024 by the new council, work that needs to be done before decisions are made regarding annexing into the RFA. Council President Pro Tern Olson agreed with Councilmember Teitzel, regardless of what needs to happen between now and when decisions are made, it is premature to make an assumption that it will happen in 2025. That may certainly be the council's decision in the end, but that decision is unlikely to occur in 2025 because too much needs to be done between now and then. She agreed with changing this assumption so plans can be made for paying the bills in 2025 which will be right on the heels of 2024 and it is important not to assume that expenditure will no longer occur. To continue funding operations, either the council will have to ask the voters for more taxes or when the City joins the RFA, keep the money that is currently expended on fire services. There will be a lot more information provided to the public including transparency regarding how funds are spent so the public can feel confident there aren't additional cuts that should be made. Councilmember Chen said he was not opposed to joining the RFA. SCF has provided excellent service. His proposal is to provide time to do the work and reach a decision that is transparent to the residents who will end up picking up the bill via a SCF expense on their property tax bill. Residents need information, answers to their questions such as whether the City will keep or refund EMS and property tax revenue, etc. All that information needs to be transparent to residents. Assuming the City will join the RFA and removing the expenditure in 2025 before any communication has occurred is premature. Councilmember Nand was troubled the council passed a resolution to begin the process of information gathering from the RFA, but those discussions has not yet begun. She wondered what the impact would be of removing this from the budget assumptions and whether it would signal to the RFA that the City does not plan to pursue annexation and be unable to have those discussions with the RFA. She supported getting as much information from the RFA about impacts to the community, taxpayers and property owners. She was opposed to the motion. Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott reminded the motion is to remove this as an assumption for 2025 and does not preclude further discussion on the matter. MOTION CARRIED (4-2), COUNCILMEMBERS PAINE AND NAND VOTING NO. 8. ADJOURNMENT COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO ADJOURN. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The Council meeting was adjourned at 5:39 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 20, 2023 Page 9 Packet Pg. 26 7.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/5/2023 Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes November 21, 2023 Staff Lead: Council Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Recommendation Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda. Narrative Council meeting minutes are attached. Attachments: 20231121 Regular Meeting Packet Pg. 27 7.2.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES November 21, 2023 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Neil Tibbott, Mayor Pro Tern Vivian Olson, Council President Pro Tern Will Chen, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Mike Nelson, Mayor 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Dave Turley, Administrative Services Director Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., & Human Serv. Dir. Susan McLaughlin, Planning & Dev. Dir. Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7 p.m. by Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott in the Council Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember Teitzel read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water." a� as 3. ROLL CALL N City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of Mayor N Nelson. N r� 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA d E COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. Q COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM OLSON, TO ADD AN ITEM TO COUNCIL BUSINESS 8.2, PRESENTATION REGARDING A THANK YOU FROM CHASE LAKE ELEMENTARY. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 1 Packet Pg. 28 7.2.a 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Marlin Phelps, Marysville, reported he came to the courtroom last week on Monday as Judge Rivera was holding video court. He attempted to observe court, but the doors were locked. He asked the clerk why the courtroom doors were locked and was told there was no security guard. He looked this up in the RCW and conferred with Kathleen Kyle and learned those defendants' constitutional rights were violated. He asked the court the number of trials this year and was told one. He asked how many jury summons had been sent and was told 1,650; those were sent out for trials that did not exist. People receiving a jury summons have to take a day off work, some get babysitters, etc. The summons make it look like there is a working court when in fact the court violates constitutional rights every time an innocent defendant has no path to prove their innocence. He plans to make motion so that any time a jury summons is sent out, there has to be a corresponding case number and a trial date. He also plans to make a motion so all the defendants in video court last week and all defendants seen at a court where the doors are locked have their cases dismissed, receive proper reparations for time served, and have their fines returned. He summarized this City continues its corruption; it is time to honor the people's constitutional rights and the law as it is written. Jay Grant, Edmonds, Port of Edmonds Commissioner, speaking as commissioner, congratulated everyone who was elected in the recent election and thanked those who lost, noting the importance of democracy. He thanked Jim Orvis, a retired captain of the US Navy who is retiring after serving as a Port Commissioner for 20 year, for his service, noting the Port will lose a lot of knowledge with his retirement. He thanked Councilmember Teitzel for serving as the council's liaison to the Port. The Port and Councilmember Teitzel have had a good dialogue and he has been very valuable in helping Port with several things this year. He wished everyone a happy holiday season. Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, gave a shoutout to Councilmember Teitzel and everything he has done, stepping in during a difficult time and helping lead the way. He wished him good luck in whatever he planned to do next. With regard to the budget, the council has done the hard work; establishing the revenue stream and determining how much to allocate to the budget was a monumental task. The next step is expenditures, but those cannot exceed revenues unless the council plans to expend more of the City's financial reserves which he strongly discouraged in order to replenish reserves. The timeframe for replenishing reserves will be part of the council's discussion. The replenishment plan in the agenda packet is not a plan at all. Jerry Whitmarsh, Edmonds, thanked council for serving, recognizing it was a difficult job. He especially thanked the councilmembers who would be leaving the council after the election. During the transition, he hoped the council would more readily and successfully address budget concerns, the outdated code, and citizens' comments and questions. David Preston, Edmonds, Port Commissioner, thanked Councilmember Teitzel for serving as the council liaison to the Port and for filling the huge shoes of the late-Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, one of the better long term councilmembers. She was balanced and would listened to both sides and if she didn't like your opinion, she would tell you. He trusted that the Councilmember Eck will be able to fill those shoes. He announced Holiday on the Docks at the Port of Edmonds (in front of Anthony's) on December 14 starting at 6 pm. Boats will be lit up, and there will be Santa, and at least one band. He looked forward to whoever would be the Port liaison in 2024. Trisha Evilad observed "small town feeling" was removed from the comprehensive plan vision statement. That is part of Edmonds and what people want to see in Edmonds. She referred to planners like Frederick Olmstead or architects like Alvarado who talk about nature, space, and breathing room which is the way people have lived for thousands of years. Changing that because it is no longer fashionable is ridiculous. Residents try to do what's good to be healthy and live well; no one ever says they want to live in a crowded place where they're anonymous and no one knows them. People choose to live in cities because they work Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 2 Packet Pg. 29 r a 7.2.a there, but Edmonds is not that kind of a city. People like to live in Edmonds, not just exist. She urged the council to return that part of the vision statement because it is important to residents. Natalie Seitz, Edmonds, expressed support for the City's continued evaluation of the Burlington Coat Factory property for a potential public -private partnership to bring cost-effective City services to the SR 99 corridor sooner rather than later. There are currently more people living on the east side of Edmonds than the west side. The most densely populated areas are no longer downtown, they are along the SR 99 corridor. The 2017 upzone of the SR 99 corridor expanded and intensified this trend. She has heard a lot about fiscal responsibility and the need for Landmark to have a fully conceived financial plan at this early stage. She hears people say it is too expensive. She requested the council ponder the following questions during budget deliberations: knowing growth has been allowed on the south and east sides of the City, why is there no financial plan to support the large scale investments needed for growth? Why is there no budget to pursue these opportunities? Ms. Seitz continued, density and population are not an accident. The 2017 upzone to meet the City's growth targets wasn't an oversight. Why does the City feel it is not a good idea to take the lead in manifesting the planned action vision? Everything downtown has been manifested by staff time and resources. Why would the same not be required in the SR 99 corridor? Who has the responsibility to provide essential services to all Edmonds residents? Even if the Landmark property fails in the next round of evaluations, the need for local government services in the SR 99 corridor is real and the costs do not go away. Just because the City has not budgeted to support growth does not mean a price is not paid, it is just paid by the community in the form of crime, displacement, and lack of public spaces for the community and their families to thrive. She expressed support for the removal of "small town feel" from the comprehensive plan vision statement. She thanked Councilmember Teitzel for his service and coming back to council. Councilmembers all donate a great amount of time and although they do always agree, she appreciated each of them who stepped forward when called to serve the city. 6. RECEIVED FOR FILING 0 1. BUDGET QUERIES - COUNCIL BUDGET QUESTIONS AND ADMINISTRATION / a STAFF RESPONSES 0' Q 2. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS `J a� c 7. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS m a� COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 6, 2023 04 2. APPROVAL OF SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 14, 2023 M 3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS c 4. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE N PAYMENTS = 5. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE E PAYMENTS 6. SNOHOMISH COUNTY JAIL CONTRACT EXTENSION 7. CITY OF LYNNWOOD/MEADOWDALE PLAYGROUND EXPENDITURE REQUEST r Q 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS RESOLUTION THANKING DAVE TEITZEL FOR SERVICE ON THE CITY COUNCIL Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 3 Packet Pg. 30 7.2.a Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott read a resolution of the Edmonds City Council thanking Councilmember Dave Teitzel for his service on the city council. Councilmember Teitzel thanked council for the nice words, commenting it is amazing how fast the last year and three months have gone by, but a lot had been accomplished. He was appointed to briefly occupy the late-Councilmember Kristiana Johnson's seat. She set very high standards on council and was very collaborative, even tempered, data driven and nonpartisan, great standards for all councilmembers to keep in mind while serving on council. He was sure Chris Eck would do a great job. It has been great, rewarding and a privilege to work with the citizens and an honor to work with the City's professional, talented staff who do great things for the City. He also thanked his fellow councilmembers, commenting it had been very rewarding to work with them although they agreed and disagree at times. There is a talent and skill to disagreeing in an agreeable way and he hoped the council would continue in that regard. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM OLSON MOVE SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE RESOLUTION THANKING COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL FOR HIS SERVICE ON CITY COUNCIL. Council President Pro Tem Olson expressed her gratitude to Councilmember Teitzel and to Kathy Teitzel who saw very little of Dave as he literally squeezed four years of work into a spectacular year of service to the City of Edmonds. It was a gift to her that he put in his name in the hat and was appointed by council. The vacancy left by Councilmember Kristiana Johnson's death left voids of process, parliamentary knowledge, and friendship. While she was irreplaceable, Councilmember Teitzel leapt in on day one, proceeded as the experienced councilmember he was, and contributed immensely to council's success during the time he served. He is an amazing colleague and an amazing Edmonds councilmember. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. THANK YOU FROM CHASE LAKE ELEMENTARY Councilmember Paine read a thank you from the students of Chase Lake Elementary School and referenced the compassion award the council received for providing the needed funds to support the student intervention coordinator position in their school; ARPA funds allocated for those positions helped over 1000 students in Edmonds. Chase Lake Elementary has a set of beliefs that guide their school culture: take care of yourself, take care of others and take care of this place. The council received the compassion certificates because they have those beliefs in common with the student body. 3. PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION ON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VISION STATEMENT Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott advised the council was not taking action tonight. The intent is to hear the planning board's recommendation, continue to gather community input, and take action at a subsequent council meeting. Planning & Development Susan McLaughlin explained the planning & development department worked collaboratively with the community during summer 2022 to develop a draft community vision statement meant to guide the work of the comprehensive plan. Via resolution 1529, the council asked for the vision statement to be returned to the planning board for their consideration. Based on discussion at the planning board on October 11, 2023, a slightly modified version of the vision statement was proposed, discussed and recommended to the city council. She read the revised vision statement: "Edmonds is a welcoming city offering outstanding quality of life for all with vibrant and diverse neighborhoods, safe streets, parks, and a thriving arts scene shaped in a way to promote healthy lifestyles, climate resiliency, and access to the natural beauty of our community." Staff supported the modifications as they reflected on the commonly Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 4 Packet Pg. 31 r a used words for each of the phrases in the vision statement and determined it was consistent with the 8500 comments received. Councilmember Nand asked Ms. McLaughlin to speak to the phrase "small town feel," on which council has received a significant volume of comments. As a person of color, she understood some people felt this statement was exclusionary, however, when a councilmember in another city disparagingly referred to Edmonds as quaint and small town, she laughed and said that was what people like about Edmonds. She recognized in terms of density, housing justice, history of redlining and racial segregation, this is a very fraught topic. On the surface a small town feel is not a controversial term. She asked staff to speak on that and why the planning board felt that could be misconstrued and should be removed. Ms. McLaughlin answered there is a lot of subjective to interpretation; the planning board student rep strongly objected to small town feel as she did not feel it represented the youth or a 20-year vision of Edmonds. The student rep put her objections in writing which Ms. McLaughlin offered to share with council. Upon receipt of that youth perspective, it was discussed at the planning board and some members agreed and some disagreed, but ultimately the board felt because of that reaction and perhaps the subjectivity and interpretation of that phrase, if it needed further definition or explanation, maybe it was not the best phrase for universal understanding. She recalled the vision statement went through a pretty robust interpretation process to ensure it was understood in a variety of languages with easy to understand phrases that wouldn't be misconstrued. Small town feel was not used initially and would need to go through that process to understand if it was understandable in multiple languages. Councilmember Buckshnis spoke in favor of restoring the small town feel language. In reading the source data, there were a lot of comments about small town feel. She found it interesting that one youth's comments were used to represent all youth in Edmonds. Another approach would have been to ask the youth commission and she offered to ask them at Wednesday's meeting. She found it unfortunate that the vision statement was changed based on one person's comments when the council's suggestion to include gem of the Puget Sound was rejected. She did not view the proposed statement as a vision statement. In her opinion, small town feel should be restored to the vision statement as one student does not represent all youth in the City. Ms. McLaughlin said the role of the planning board's student rep is to represent the youth perspective for the planning board in their discussions which is what she did. Council President Pro Tem Olson said some people may think small town feel is colloquial, small and undeveloped. She said Washington DC has a small town feel although it is definitely an urban environment. It has a small town vibe, people know each other and there is a welcoming feeling so small town feel portrayed something very different to her. She referred to a comment by Planning Board Member Nutsch that it seemed like what they were trying to get at is that Edmonds is a place you want to live and where you want to be, not just where you have your address. She said that was an expression of what small town feel meant to her. Council President Pro Tem Olson recalled one of the original vision statements referenced engaged residents. Ms. McLaughlin said it was in the original vision statement. Council President Pro Tem Olson missed that phrase in the version that the planning board recommended because that is an identifier that separates Edmonds from others in the current day as well as into the future. That is one of the City's best traits and something she wanted to build on and expand. Councilmember Teitzel expressed support for including small town feel in the vision statement. A vision statement is aspirational in nature so small town feel is where the City is now and where residents want to go. He doubted anyone on the dais aspired to be Bellevue, Seattle or Ballard; they aspire to be Edmonds which has small town charm, not only downtown but Firdale Village, Perrinville, Westgate, Five Corners, the International District, the Hospital District, etc., each of which has its own small town charm. He reiterated that phrase should be included because that is what residents aspire to be. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 5 Packet Pg. 32 r a 7.2.a Councilmember Nand liked Councilmember Teitzel's use of the phrase small town charm because Edmonds is famous for its charm. That is what people talk about, a quality that is not necessarily linked to density or size because Edmonds is one of densest, largest cities in Snohomish County. Given consideration of the 8500 comments, the discussion between the subcommittee and the planning board and their recommendation, she did not necessarily want there to be more process and preferred to finalize the vision statement and proceed. She recalled a lot of people liked the phrase gem of Puget Sound and Council President Pro Tern Olson wanted to have engaged citizens included and she would like to have the word charm included because she thinks of Edmonds as a charming place. In considering the allocation of staff resources and volunteer time, it would behoove the council to adopt some version of the vision statement tonight. Although she would like to add small town charm to the vision statement, she did not want it to be a point of contention that takes more time. Councilmember Chen commented small town charm is what everybody loves and wishes the City would continue to be, but the reality is there are different parts of Edmonds with different demographics and that feel different. Highway 99 is very dense and the crime rate is higher than other parts of the City. If the council wants to be all inclusive, they needed to face reality. Councilmember Paine appreciated the efforts of staff, the planning board and the community to get this right. The vision statement is a profound statement for the next 20 years. She agreed with Councilmember Chen that there are differences in the City. The proposed vision statement is 95% accurate and further wordsmithing will gain very little. She will be curious to hear what the youth commission says and looked forward to the vision statement coming back to council for action. Councilmember Chen commented the council has spent so much time on the vision statement, something that is not required. He suggested tabling it because it was too controversial. Councilmember Buckshnis supported Councilmember Chen's suggestion to table, noting branding and the vision statement are not required. If the correct language cannot be found, perhaps it should be left out. Councilmember Nand disagreed with tabling the vision statement because she wanted to respect the work of the planning department, volunteers, and citizen activists. The reason this discussion has become so fraught and absorbed a lot of time and attention and has been more controversy than anyone anticipated is because it is of high value to the community. The vision statement won't be branded on city hall, it will be included in the comprehensive plan. The community felt this was an opportunity to announce a common identity for Edmonds and the council needs to respect that. Council President Pro Tern Olson commented the resolution was written to be passed by the end of the year. She did not anticipating having any difficulty doing that so there was no reason to table. Councilmembers can listen to each other, digest what was said tonight, and finish it in early December. 4. REPLENISHMENT REPORT Administrative Services Director Dave Turley presented a Replenishment Report in accordance with the Fund Balance the Fund Balance Reserve Policy adopted in July 2019. He reviewed: • Introduction o What is this report tonight? ■ Fund Balance Reserve Policy Article III — If any use of the General Fund Operating Reserve has occurred, the Finance Director must present to Mayor and City Council an annual Replenishment Report during the month of November. The Replenishment Report must be presented each year, until the reserves are fully replenished. The Replenishment Report must include the following information: Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 6 Packet Pg. 33 a 7.2.a 1) Amount of Reserves used Citing the information provided in the September quarterly report, our current estimate shows that end of year fund balance will be about $3, 047, 446. The amount currently required by policy is $8, 067,160, which means we are estimated to have used 62% of the General Fund Operating Reserve by December 31, 2023. 2) Whether it is anticipated additional Reserves will be needed in the following budget cycle Based on the actions taken by Council last week to remove significant revenues from the Proposed Budget, we do anticipate that the use of General Fund Operating Reserves will be required in the 2024 budget cycle. 3) If no additional Reserves are needed, then the Replenishment Report must include a plan for replenishing the Reserve to policy mandated levels. See the Budgetary Plan included in a later slide. Article III also states: - "If the reserve is drawn down by 26-50% of the reserve fund balance, then a budgetary plan shall be implemented to return the reserve level to between 75% and 100% of the minimum balance over a 5 to 7 year period." (Note the specific usage of the term "budgetary plan") - To be clear, we are not required to bring the reserve balance back to 100% of policy requirements immediately; rather we are supposed to implement a budgetary plan that would accomplish that within 5 to 7 years. Budgetary Plan o "If the reserve is drawn down by 26-50% of the reserve fund balance, then a budgetary plan shall be implemented to return the reserve level to between 75% and 100% of the minimum balance over a 5 to 7 year period." o The budgetary plan presented by the Administration was included in the Proposed Budget, and included a combination of 1) increasing property taxes by the allowable 1% plus recapturing banked capacity, 2) transferring $6.5 million of ARPA money to the General Fund, 3) transferring $2.0 million from Fund 016 to the General Fund, and 4) installing red light cameras to both improve public and pedestrian safety as well as increase infractions revenue. o If taken by Council, these four actions would bring the General Fund Operating Reserve back into full compliance with Policy by December 31, 2024. Replenishment Report - Recap o The Replenishment Report must include the following information 1) Amount of Reserves used - Estimated amount for 2023 was provided. 2) Whether it is anticipated additional Reserves will be needed in the following budget cycle - It is currently anticipated that Reserves will be needed in the 2024 budget cycle. 3) If no additional Reserves are needed, then the Replenishment Report must include a plan for replenishing the Reserve to policy mandated levels - The Budgetary Plan created by the Administration and included in the 2024 Proposed Budget was provided. Council President Pro Tem Olson said she wanted to share with the community the Q&A she and Mr. Turley had via email, envisioning it would be enlightening and helpful for them. She had asked whether the replenishment plan would reflect the action that council supports, for example the council did not support some of the revenues. Mr. Turley's reply to her inquiry was the replenishment plan is effectively altered by the budget process and that the replenishment plan would, of course, change. By policy, an updated replenishment plan would be expected by November 2024, but perhaps via collaboration with the administration and the mayor it could be done sooner. Mr. Turley said the policy states a replenishment plan is provided every November. The administration presented a plan as required by the policy; the council doesn't have to like or accept the plan and clearly the council did not like all aspects of the plan, but the administration is not required to provide an updated plan. When council adopts the budget, that effectively Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 7 Packet Pg. 34 a presents the new plan, finances are monitored throughout the year, and a new plan is provided next November. Council President Pro Tern Olson said she wanted to assure the public that attention will be paid to the structural imbalance and that the imbalance between revenues and expenditures will be addressed. This plan does not address that because the council did not approve some of the revenues proposed by the administration and the process of fixing the structural imbalance is still ahead. Mr. Turley said the replenishment plan did address everything, it was just that the council did not accept the plan. Councilmember Teitzel commented what was presented did not address the issue because it used ARPA funds to plug the gap which does not fix the structural imbalance, an issue that still needs to be addressed. He observed the replenishment plan refills the utilization of reserve funds in 2023, but it appears the reserves will also be drawn down in 2024 as well. He asked how that worked from a process standpoint, replenishing the reserves at the same time they were being used. Mr. Turley answered it's estimated by the time the 2024 budget is adopted, there won't be enough of a revenue increase or expense reduction to return to the full 20% reserve so reserves will still be used in 2024. Councilmember Teitzel relayed his understanding there would be another replenishment report next November to describe how the gap will be filled. Mr. Turley agreed, unless something happens between now and then. A replenishment report will be done every November until the reserves are fully replenished. Councilmember Paine observed the administration was relying on council to develop additional revenue sources for the coming year to replenish the reserve and that gap is more than 1%. The council needs to look at increasing revenue either via a levy, joining the RFA, or finding other revenue sources such as red light cameras after further study occurs. The council needs to talk about those so ideas can be presented to the administration to fill that gap. It also means holding the line on additional spending. Mr. Turley agreed with those comments. Councilmember Paine relayed there are few opportunity to generate revenue beyond a levy which will require a long discussion with the community and will take until 2025. Councilmember Nand said as many community members have communicated to council, she was also deeply troubled that the City will not have $6.5 million in ARPA funds next year to plug into the structural gap and that the City will not be issuing 29,000 red light camera tickets to generate $3.5 million in revenue because the council already voted that down although the administration is still pushing for that. She asked where that left the City next year with regard to the structural gap assuming the red light cameras are not approved next year. Mr. Turley answered it left the City worse off than it was with the proposed budget where the gap was small and got bigger. The council removed $5.5 million in revenue from the General Fund last week which will make things more difficult. The City is still expected to have a balanced budget, but it will be an ugly budget. There is still work to be done before the 2024 budget is adopted. Councilmember Nand thanked Mr. Turley for his hard work, recognizing this was a difficult conversation that the council and administration was forced to have. Councilmember Buckshnis recommended bringing back the long range financial planning committee to update this policy. When the policy was initially written, it was never anticipated that the administration would burn through $15 million in a couple years. She commented lines were being blurred, with the council president serving as mayor pro tem, he can technically tell staff to make changes. She relayed her concern with policy decisions that were made in the projections on things the council had not yet decided on which is the reason some revenues were removed from the proposed budget. She relayed if $2 million in bond proceeds had been transferred, it would have resulted in arbitrage and there has not been any work done related to the red light cameras. The council rejected revenues that were in the projected budget, but cannot direct staff to prepare a revised replenishment report. The council can work on revising the legislative policy next year. She concluded this is serious stuff and the council needs to look at the reserve policy as well as the administrative and legislative roles. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 8 Packet Pg. 35 a 7.2.a Councilmember Chen agreed the council had voted down quite a few of the revenues in the replenish plan including red light cameras and the transfer of $2 million in bond funds. The council cannot wait until next November for another replenishment plan; consideration of a replenishment plan should start now or at least January 2nd when the doors open for business. Mr. Turley commented there have been so many misstatements tonight he was unable to keep up. No one said work on a replenishment plan wouldn't start until next November. The policy states the next time a presentation needs to be made to discuss the plan will be next November. He agreed as soon as the budget is adopted, the administration plans to work with the council throughout the year and much closer financial monitoring will be done. No one said staff will sit around until next November before looking at the next year; that was a gross mischaracterization of what the administration has said and what council has said. Councilmember Chen responded that was great, the administration and council were on same page. Councilmember Chen referred to packet page 257 which states the reserve amount currently required by policy is $8,067,160 and asked if that was based on the 2023 adopted budget. Mr. Turley answered it was based on the adopted operating expenditure budget for 2023. Councilmember Chen observed total expenditures in the adopted 2023 budget are $55,741,788 and 16% of that is $8.9 million. Mr. Turley said he did not have that information in front of him, but he was confident the numbers in the report were correct. Councilmember Chen suggested checking the math. Councilmember Nand observed multiple revenue sources cited in replenishment plan have already been voted down by council. She relayed hearing a level of frustration in Mr. Turley's response and mirrored by council, that there doesn't seem to be communication about how to create a feasible, workable plan to address the fiscal structural gap. She was still hopeful use of the term fiscal emergency in its full force could be avoided before the end of year. She wondered if this budgetary plan was the work product of the seven directors working independent of the mayor or was the mayor still weighing in on these suggestions. She felt there was a complete void and was trying to get information and find a way to work collaboratively as the directors stated in their memo to council. Mr. Turley answered the proposed budget that is presented to council is a monumental effort undertaken by 7 department directors and 50 people in the departments as well as the mayor and this year embodies the plan to replenish reserves. He did not think he should be taken to task for not developing a new replenishment plan as it had only been one week since the council began deliberations on the 2024 budget. Councilmember Nand assured she was not attempting to take Mr. Turley to task, she was only trying to get more information about the situation on the ground. Mr. Turley said it has only been one week since council began deliberations. Staff is doing their best to keep up with questions on the budget and does not have a lot of new information at this point. Councilmember Nand thanked Mr. Turley and the other directors for their hard work, recognizing this was a very politically fraught time, politics were affecting staffs jobs even though they was not supposed to. She was hopeful the council and administration could work together collaboratively and not end up with hurt feelings this year. Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott relayed his understanding the City was likely to use reserves next year to work through fiscal requirements in 2024. He asked if that was acceptable, legal, and a useful way to work through the process of identifying either budget cuts or new sources of revenue during 2024. Mr. Turley responded there were about five questions in Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott's question. The policy says the City can dip into reserves for 5-7 years because the council has declared a fiscal emergency and has 5-7 years to replenish the 20% reserve. He acknowledged it wasn't pleasant to be using reserves, he wanted big, fat reserves, but to Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott's question whether it was legal, he said yes and it was within policy. Nobody wants to be scrapping the bottom, everyone wants to replenish the reserve and work together to either increase revenues or cut expenses and at this point the budget is still balanced. Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott relayed everything he has heard from staff is this is something that could be worked on during the first and second quarter of 2024 to bring more of a balance to the reserves and theoretically Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 9 Packet Pg. 36 a 7.2.a be in the black. Mr. Turley said he really looked forward to working closely with council in the coming year. There will also be a new mayor next year and he has no idea what Mayor -elect Rosen will bring to the table so it is difficult to address what will happen in the next six months. After January 1, 2024, Mayor - elect Rosen will provide direction to directors and he was confident Mayor -elect Rosen will work collaboratively. Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott said from everything he has heard, the directors and mayor -elect are interested in digging in right away to deal with the issues that are uppermost in everyone's mind. Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott asked, in light of this conversation, does the council need to pass a balanced budget this year where expenses do not exceed revenues. City Attorney Jeff Taraday commented the phrase balanced budget can be used differently. He defined a balanced budget as revenues matching expenses, not revenues plus fund balance matching expenses. Assuming Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott's question was whether revenues had to match expenses, he said that had never been the case and more often than not recently, the council adopts a budget where expenses exceed revenues so that would be nothing new if the council did that this year. The fund balance policy does not require the council, even in the case of a fiscal emergency, to adopt a budget where revenues do not exceed expenses or to adopt a budget where revenues match expenses because there can be circumstances where even in the face of a fiscal emergency and having already dipped into the reserves, the City may need to dip into them further. These are policy questions for the council to ultimately decide, how much, if any, of additional reserves it wants to use next year. The council is not required to adopt a balanced budget this year. Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott asked if that was according to RCWs. Mr. Taraday responded the City cannot have a negative fund balance. As long as there is fund balance, the City would be compliant with the RCWs. Mr. Turley said the last time Edmonds adopted a budget where revenues were greater than expenses was 1988. Councilmember Teitzel said the council has heard the City's workforce is very concerned about use of the term layoff or force adjustments. He assured everyone including the unions that council and the administration were doing everything they can to fix the structural imbalance to avoid layoffs so he wanted to assure that was not on the horizon at least in the near term. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the City was in the best financial shape it had ever been in 2020 when then -Mayor Earling left with at least $12-14 million in reserves. When she joined the council in 20210, right after Great Recession, the fund balance was $2.3 million. The City then sold the fire department, but the onetime hit couldn't sustain the City so there were layoffs and furloughs in 2012. She expressed concern with blurring administrative and legislative roles. The union sent council a letter telling them not to do layoffs, but that is something the mayor should be addressing. She pointed out the council president has been acting as the mayor pro tern for four meetings. She asked if Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott, who is acting as the mayor, could ask staff to revise the reports so council could see where the budget is instead of waiting until the entire budget process is completed. As she explained to a union person, it is not council's role as policy makers to say what will happen. All the council can do is tell the administration to fix it. With Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott serving as mayor, Councilmember Buckshnis asked if he could ask Mr. Turley to revise the projections sooner rather than later. She has heard that the budget needs to be completed before the projections can be revised. She spoke with one of the City's former finance directors today who said the City has $12 million in fund balance and she explained that was not true as the projections were made with policy decisions the council had not approved. She was trying to figure out how to navigate getting this corrected so the council can get through the budget process and figure out where the City's budget really is. She asked if Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott could direct staff to do that since he was acting in the mayor's capacity now. Mr. Taraday said he did not know when Mayor Nelson returns from vacation and did not want to speculate. He was hesitant to recommend Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott do that because he if he directed staff to do something different than Mayor Nelson wanted done, it ends up being wasted energy. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 10 Packet Pg. 37 a 7.2.a He summarized it did not seem to be a good idea, but he would not tell Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott how to exercise his discretion as mayor pro tem. It seems like there should be some collaboration. Councilmember Buckshnis agreed there should have been collaboration all year. She referred to the memo the council received from the directors asking the council to work collaboratively with them, which the council has been trying to do, but that memo should have gone to the mayor asking him to work collaboratively with them. Her biggest concern is who is driving the car now. She has policy issues that the council should be addressing, but they are not and the numbers need to be changed so the council can see where the City stands and citizens can see that there is not $12 million in fund balance. Councilmember Buckshnis reiterated her question, who is driving the car? Mr. Taraday said he cannot answer that question the way it's phrased. Mr. Turley said Mayor Nelson is still acting as mayor, he spoke to him about three hours ago and discussed several budgetary topics. Council President Tibbott is acting as mayor pro tem during this meeting. The insinuation that Mayor Nelson is not doing his job is incorrect. The administration cannot implement layoffs without council approval so the council cannot say the administration has to do everything and they sit back and watch. The administration has not done anything that hasn't been approved by council which Councilmember Buckshnis accused them of. Councilmember Buckshnis said the council approves the budget and did not approve furloughs; that was done by administration under the budget approved by council. Mr. Turley said administration cannot do furloughs without council approval; it requires labor negotiations with the labor unions and a new contract that the union would have to agree to. That cannot be done by the administration without council approval. Councilmember Buckshnis said furloughs were not done for union employees in the past. Mr. Turley said he was talking about 2023, not 2010. Councilmember Buckshnis agreed furloughs for union employees would require council approval. Mr. Turley said layoffs and furloughs would require council approval, that cannot be done unilaterally by the administration. Councilmember Buckshnis said the administration would need to come to council with a package. Mr. Turley was unsure that was correct per RCW. Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott relayed in discussions with Mr. Turley, he is prepared to provide a list at the o meeting on November 28 or 30 of what has been passed and the impact that has on the projections. There Q- a will be several more council motions on decision packages between now and then that can be included on a that list and illustrate how it impacts the budget. a, c Councilmember Nand said some of confusion by councilmembers was because it has been made very clear by Mayor Nelson that he directs staff, not the council. When the council is asking for changes to the L budgetary assumptions and the replenishment report to reflect votes council has already taken, the council has no way to direct staff to do that because that is Mayor Nelson's job. In his absence, the council was trying to figure out how to properly channel those communications to Mr. Turley and other members of the administration in ways that don't put him or council in an inappropriate position. She was heartened to hear that Mayor Nelson was responding to Mr. Turley's communications because he was not responding to r, council communications and council is confused about how to proceed. Mr. Turley said with regard to the c budget tracking worksheet that he spoke with Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott about presenting, in the past the `V council would have 4-6 budget deliberation meetings; the first 4 were discussions and votes occurred during the last 2 meetings. Preparing the tracking spreadsheet takes a lot of time and he wasn't prepared for voting E on the first night of council deliberations. Staff will provide a budget tracking spreadsheet at the November U 30 meeting. The council has only made about 6-7 changes that affect the General Fund. a 5. THIRD QUARTER FINANCIAL UPDATE TO COUNCIL Administrative Services Director Dave Turley presented the 2023 Third Quarter Financial Update and end of year projection: • Some items to note 3/4 of the way through the year are: Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 11 Packet Pg. 38 7.2.a o Sales Tax revenue is up $280,697 from this point last year, which is 3.4% higher than this time last year, and behind budget by $102,571. o Property Tax revenues are up $279,507, which coincidentally is also 3.4% higher than this time last year. o Sales Tax and Property Tax combined make up over 50% of General Fund Revenues. With inflation ranging between 4% to nearly 10% over the last three years, our General Fund Revenues are significantly lagging behind inflation. o Interest revenues are up $435,097 from this point last year, a 57% improvement. o Year-to-date revenues in the General Fund for the 9 months ended September 30 are $1,023,859 under budget (2.95%) ■ If this holds true through the end of the year, the ending GF Revenue for 2023 would be $51,008,345 ($52,558,830 X 97.05%) o Year-to-date expenses in the General Fund for the 9 months ended September 30 are $2,982,210 under budget (6.42%). ■ If this holds true through the end of the year, the ending GF Expenses for 2023 would be $59,863,832 ($63,970,754 X 93.58%) o Year-to-date Real Estate Excise Tax Revenues for the 9 months ended September 30 are $290,386 behind last year, and $967,976 under budget. Slowing development in Edmonds and high interest rates everywhere are negatively affecting Real Estate Purchase/Sale transactions. o Conversely, high interest rates everywhere mean that our interest revenue is improving. ■ Our investment portfolio this year will return the highest amount of interest income ever for the citv. Annual Interest Income $1,400,000 $1 200 000 $1 236 875 $1,197,609 $1,000,000 947 931 5950,684 1 091 709 $g82556 $800,000 $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 YTD 2023 o YTD Sales Tax Revenue for the 9 months ended September 30 are $280,697 (3.4%) ahead of last year, and $102,571 (1.18%) under budget. The Consumer Price Index for the Seattle region over the last 12 months advanced 4.8%. This means that our sales tax growth is lagging 1.4% behind area inflation. ■ The city is going to need to explore new revenue sources just to keep up with inflationary pressures. Breakdown by business category of the change in Sales Tax revenue for first three quarters of 2023 compared to first three quarters of 2022 rr Q Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 12 Packet Pg. 39 7.2.a • Strategic outlook from the 2024 proposed budget book. Beginning. Fund Balanc, Revenue Property Taxes Retail Saks Taxes Other Saks Taxes Utility Taxes Other Taxes LicettscvP ennts,f ram hsc Construction Prnttits Grants State Rnrnrs Charges fur Goods & saviors Inter6ind Service Charges Fees & For kms Macccllarcau Reverars Transfers Total Revenues Rcvnue ". Change YOY Expenditures Labor Bcncfirs Supplies Services Capital Debt Service Transfers Total Expenses Expense % Change YOY Change in Ending Fund Bal uice Antxpaled Under-Expendturc Ending Fund Balance STRATEGIC OUTLOOK CITY OF EDMONDS GENERAL FUND REVENUES, EXPENDIT11RE:S, AND FUND BALANCES% 2021 - 2028 ANALYSIS 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2626 2027 2028 Actual Actual Estimate Budget Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook 13343.806 15,915319 11.902.933 6,664 -';94 12,10&006 15.905.000 19.121.000 21.960.000 14,654.572 14.943,369 15.905.100 15,905.5(N I 11,480,000 11.606.000 11.734.000 11,863,000 10-509.460 11,313,760 12,100.000 12-M.01M 13,039,000 13.690.000 14.375.000 14,950.000 977.315 1,041,146 1.150.000 1.150,01M 1,242,000 1.304.000 1.369.000 1,437.000 6.463.896 6,599,936 7314,500 7.473,652 8,072,000 8.476.000 8.900,000 9.345.000 375.461 410.894 421,550 416,150 441,000 463.000 486.000 510,000 1,761.282 1.790243 1,869,102 1.833.7541 1,925,000 2.021.000 2.122 000 2,228,000 691.905 769,928 390.000 160,0041 168,000 1760)0 185.000 194,000 368,376 259,347 1,960.929 6,541,104, 200,000 2000)0 200.000 200,000 1.240.271 1,107,943 1.188.610 1.163.614, 1,187,000 1.211.(N)0 1.235.000 1260.000 2.792.824 3,020,628 3.903.302 4.093.512 3,216,000 3.312.000 3.411.000 3,513.000 3.120.735 - 3,427,765 4.032314 4,194,000 4,404,000 4.624.000 4.855.000 272303 182,884 302,350 4.402.3541 4,946,000 4,995,000 5.045.000 5,095,000 469.739 1.074,351 1,582.518 1,009,13: 1,029,000 1.050.000 1.071.000 1,092,000 413547 26.300 97.726 2.011,701 40.000 40.000 40.000 40.000 44,110.686 1 42,440,729 51,613,452 62,492,771 51,179,000 52,948.000 54,797,000 56,582.000 4% -4% 22% 21% -18% 3% 7% 7% 17.919.401 17,498,086 22.675.683 24,086.45^ 25,773.000 27,319,000 28,685,000 30,119,000 6.279.943 6,076,441 7,615,630 8,151-W 9,722,000 9,245.000 9.800.000 10,388.000 708590 837.672 1,062,576 1,031.51(, 1,062,000 1,094.000 1.127,000 1.161.000 16.145 255 18.736.558 22,701,765 24.703,50h 13,445,000 13.848.000 14.263.000 14.691.000 268.886 1,597,773 1.130.565 - - - - 60.228 391.523 323.590 90IAN MOW 800.000 800,000 800,000 657.870 1,315,062 1341.992 655.004, 600.(l00 600.000 600.000 600,000 42.039.173 46.453.115 56.951,791 59.429234 1002,000 52.906.000 55275.000 57.759.000 -5% 10% 22% 5'/. -151. 5". 4•. 4% 2.071.513 (4,012,386) (5.238.339) 3.063537 776,000 42.000 (478,0001 11.177.000) - - - 2376.869 3,024,000 3.174.000 3317.000 3.466.000 I 91 1! 11.902,933 1 6.664 �94 12,105,000 15,90'01110 1 19.121.04)(1 21 960.0(N) Z4,Z49,0/10 Start with original beginning fund balance estimate: $11,902,933 o Remove the revenue and expense estimates that were prepared in July of $51,613,452 and $56,851,791 o Replace with updated revenue and expense estimates of $51,008,345 and $59,863,832 o Gives you an updated estimate for Ending Fund Balance of $3,047,446 instead of $6,664,594 Updating the estimate for 2023 o Ending Fund Balance by $3,617,148 ■ ($6,664,594 minus $3,047,446) carries forward to the 2024 Beginning Fund Balance and should be taken into account during 2024 budget deliberations. o After the 2024 budget is formally adopted, the Strategic Outlook will be updated to reflect current estimates for 2023. Councilmember Buckshnis said she asked for the General Fund changes in fund balance which is typically part of the quarterly report, but she hasn't received it so she did her own calculations. It appears revenues were approximately $33,627,000 and expenses were approximately $43,450,000 which results in a net change in position of approximately $9,822,000, bringing the ending fund balance to about $2 million as of September. She recognized revenues would be coming in from property taxes and asked if Mr. Turley was only anticipating $1 million more in property taxes to bring the ending fund balance to the projected $3 million. Mr. Turley answered the projections carry out three months beyond this report. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the projected ending fund balance would be approximately $3,047,000. Mr. Turley agreed that was the current estimate. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 13 Packet Pg. 40 r a 7.2.a Councilmember Buckshnis observed property taxes are received in November but it appears expenses are outpacing those revenues. Mr. Turley advised by December 31, there will be more revenues than just property taxes as well as a lot of additional expenses. Property taxes are just one factor in calculating the ending fund balance at the end of the year. The City receives the cash for property taxes in November; due to changes in accounting rules, that deposit is recorded in October because it is technically available in October even though it has not been deposited. If that journal entry is made October 1, September 30 is the absolute worst looking day for the City of the entire year because it is when most of the money has been spent and one day before another $5.5 million in revenue can be recorded. He joked that was some of the fun of doing monthly reporting which is different than budgetary reporting and financial reporting and trying to reconcile the three. Councilmember Teitzel referred to the slide regarding sales tax, relaying Edmonds' local sales tax rate is .001 lower than Lynnwood's sales tax rate and evening that out to increase the rate would create additional revenue for 2024. That requires a vote and he asked how soon that could happen. Mr. Turley said he had not research it but believed the next time it could be on the ballot was April. If it were approved by voters, he was unsure the amount of time between approval and implementation. Councilmember Teitzel asked if he recalled how much that .001 would generate annually. Mr. Turley recalled the deputy administrative services director calculated it would be approximately $1.1-1.2 million. Councilmember Teitzel encouraged councilmembers to pursue that as early as possible next year. Councilmember Nand thanked Mr. Turley for the presentation, noting people were eagerly awaiting report this time of year. She recognized it was a lot of work to prepare the quarterly report while working on the annual budget. In response to Councilmember Teitzel's suggestion, she pointed out Lynwood has the highest sales tax rate in the state. She disliked using Lynnwood as a comparator because they have the regional attraction of the Alderwood Mall. If Edmonds had the highest sales tax in the state, people would be more likely to purchase vehicles and high volumes sales in other jurisdictions. She pushed back on the suggestion to raise the sales tax rate, preferring to have Edmonds' rate be less than Lynnwood's. Council President Pro Tern Olson referred to a cultural access tax that is already allowed by the state via a councilmanic decision. The City supports several things in the community that are culturally enriching such as the low rent for the Driftwood Players and other art institutions. The tax would raise $1.1 million. She appreciated Councilmember Nand's comment about the sales tax rate, citing sales tax collection regulations related to origin versus designation. The cultural access tax would be a way to generate additional revenue without a ballot measure along with a community conversation about preferences for generating additional revenue. Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott declared a brief recess. 6. COUNCIL 2024 BUDGET DELIBERATIONS COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, THAT THE COUNCIL SUPPORT $6.25 MILLION IN ONE TIME ARPA FUNDS TOWARD THE BUDGET THIS YEAR, A REDUCTION OF DECISION PACKAGE 65 OF $250,000. Council President Pro Tem Olson commented the council is becoming more familiar with the dire situation the City is in now. At the end of the budget process, the additional $250,000 may need to be added to the budget to support City operations. However, all along there has been a strong desire by council to support businesses impacted by the pandemic. Making those funds available for that purpose is the intent of this temporary commitment to $6.25 million with the hopes of using the $250,000 in this way. Councilmember Nand thanked Council President Pro Tern Olson for this excellent suggestion in response to her original decision package to take the $250,000 in ARPA funds that was allocated in 2022 and 2023 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 14 Packet Pg. 41 a budgets and use it for the fagade improvement program. There has been zero spending in the small business support category of ARPA funding for 2023. When the three directors working on the Landmark 99 property proposed converting the $250,000 in ARPA funds that council had intended be devoted toward small businesses to help them recover from the financial impacts of the pandemic, the council strongly stated that was not an appropriate use of those ARPA funds. In light of the plan to retain $6.5 million in ARPA funds at the City level, the proposed use of $250,000 is minor. Obviously the council does not want to cut any City staff, but these grants could potentially help small businesses that provide identity and cultural significance and small businesses are one of the main economic drivers of prosperity for the middle and working class to retain employees. The way Council President Pro Tem Olson brilliantly structured this compromise would reserve the $250,000 for now, not use that small amount to plug the budget hole, and see if it was possible to spent ARPA funds to support the small businesses in Edmonds who have done so much to financially and psychologically carry the community through the pandemic with inadequate support from most levels of government. Councilmember Paine expressed her full support for moving $6.25 million into the General Fund. She was not ready to commit until she heard more details about the small business grant program and to understand from Director Tatum how that would be rolled into the work of his department. She appreciated making the commitment to $6.25 million and looked forward to hearing more about the business community's needs. Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her understanding that ARPA funds could not be used to replenish reserves. City Attorney Jeff Taraday answered that is correct, ARPA funds cannot be used to replenish reserves. He sought clarification regarding the motion, recalling it said to support the General Fund and was unsure if the intent was to transfer the money into the General Fund or allow certain General Fund expenses to be paid from the ARPA funds. He recommended the latter as it is more risk free from the perspective of compliance with federal rules related to not using ARPA for reserve replenishment. Paying certain General Fund expenses such as part of the fire contract from the $6.25 million directly from the ARPA fund to the fire contract would accomplish Council President Pro Tern Olson's objective and unburden the General Fund by $6.25 million of expense. He summarized it would have the same result, but the ARPA funds are specifically used for fire services as required by the federal rule. Councilmember Buckshnis said her understanding was the ARPA funds would be dedicated to fire services, but that would be done once the fire contract is received or a separate resolution so there is a trail for the auditor that the funds are designated for the fire contract. Mr. Taraday said if the 2024 fire contract is paid with $6.25 million from the ARAP fund, that accomplishes the objective of the motion and keeps the City in compliance with the federal rule. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if that needed to be stated specifically in a resolution or could that specific payment be incorporated into the budget to ensure it is not interpreted by the auditor as being used to replenish reserves. Mr. Taraday explained the $6.25 million would never be transferred into the General Fund; it would go straight from the ARPA fund to South County Fire. If it never goes into the General Fund, there can be no argument the City is using it to replenish General Fund reserves. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested not mentioning General Fund in the motion, but rather that it will be used for the fire contract. Mr. Taraday said the motion stated support the General Fund which could be interpreted the way he and Councilmember Buckshnis were discussing. Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott asked how this would be executed and whether an ordinance would identify the amount and its purpose. Mr. Taraday explained in the budget ordinance the General Fund expenditure line would be reduced by $6.25 million and the ARPA fund expenditure line would be increased by $6.25 million. If the council wanted to "belt and suspender" that, the previously adopted ARPA ordinance that identified how the funds would be spent could be amended to make it crystal clear where the ARPA funds are going. Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott asked if that would be done in 2023 or 2024. Council President Pro Tern Olson answered as part of the 2024 budget process. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 15 Packet Pg. 42 a 7.2.a Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott observed the council would direct staff to include this measure in the proposed budget for 2024. Mr. Taraday said when Mr. Turley prepares the spreadsheet for November 30, it can reflect the $6.25 million reduction in General Fund expenditures for 2024. Councilmember Chen said in general this discussion is good, but the council needs to pay particular attention to the accounting. As of now, the money is in the investment pool, but there is a liability in unearned revenue which the auditors had an issue with. The council needs to be careful how they recognize revenue and there needs to be a motion to remove the $6.25 million in the proposed budget that is recognized as revenue in 2024. If that is done now, the $6.25 million is not available in 2024. Council President Pro Tern Olson raised a point of clarification, the council is deliberating on the 2024 budget and the discussion is related to altering a decision package in the 2024 budget. It is not related to ordinances or anything happening in 2023. This is a decision package alteration, a decrease in DP65 from the proposed $6.5 million to $6.25 million in ARPA funds. Councilmember Paine expressed support for the belt and suspenders approach and asked to have an ordinance prepared to amend the ARPA ordinance for the spending specifically outlining $6.25 million for the fire services contract. She will send an email requesting that. Councilmember Buckshnis said it can be done as part of budget ordinance as was done last year. She agreed the council needed to specify the ARPA funds would be used for the fire contract. Council President Pro Tern Olson explained the reason she wanted to take this action now was so it can be reflected in the spreadsheet the administration prepares and the council can see the impact of that decision versus the $6.5 million. She recommended waiting to approve an ordinance until the budget is final because until the budget process is complete, the council will not know for certain about using the $250,000 in another way. Council President Pro Tem Olson commented confusion may be caused by the wording of DP65 which says transfer money from 016 and ARPA to the General Fund which makes it sound like the money is being moved into the General Fund. Administrative Services Director Dave Turley completely agreed with Councilmember Buckshnis and Council President Pro Tern Olson's comments about the decision package being in 2024 and how to handle it. The decision package in the proposed budget proposes to move $6.5 million to the General Fund. Based on the discussion tonight, he understood the council's intent to take that decision package out and instead leave the funds in Fund 142 and designate $6.25 million for the fire contract, leave $250,000 for future designation and include lines in the budget ordinance clarifying that. Staff understands council's intent and can show it in the spreadsheet next week. Councilmember Nand asked if the original ARPA ordinance should be amended and wait for the $6.25 million or $6.5 million to be reflected in the overall budget ordinance. If the council wanted to ensure the ARPA ordinances continue to accurately reflect the actual spending of ARPA funds, Mr. Taraday recommended that be done. He also agreed with the suggestion that the ordinance come to council after the budget has been finalized. It could be at the same meeting where the budget is finalized, but recommended the budget be finalized first and the ARPA ordinance conform with the finalized budget. Councilmember Chen commented the intent of moving the $6.25 million is good, but DP65 combines Fund 016 and ARPA funds. He suggested a cleaner way would be to remove DP65 and create a new budget amendment for the $6.25 million. Council has already rejected the $2 million from Fund 016 in DP65. Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott asked the best way to proceed. Mr. Turley agreed with Councilmember Chen, advising staff could draft that decision package as part of what is provided to council next week. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 16 Packet Pg. 43 r a COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM OLSON WITHDREW THE MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, THAT $6.25 MILLION OF THE ARPA FUNDS WILL BE DEDICATED TO THE FIRE SERVICE CONTRACT IN THE 2024 BUDGET. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO REMOVE DP65. Councilmember Chen explained both funds identified in DP65 have been redirected or rejected during council deliberations so it is appropriate to remove the decision package. Councilmember Nand relayed her understanding the administration planned to amend DP65. She spoke in favor of allowing the administration to do that in the next iteration of the proposed budget. Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott advised council directed staff to prepare a new decision package so what Councilmember Chen is proposing is a cleaner method. Councilmember Teitzel said removing DP65 may not be necessary but it will be cleaner to remove it and have staff return with a decision package to replace DP65. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO HAVE AN OVERALL 2024 EXPENDITURE REDUCTION BY $4 MILLION. Councilmember Chen commented as the council went through the September financial report, it was clear the City's financial position is now using reserves to a greater extent and reserves are down to $2 million which is $7 million below the required level. Correcting that budget imbalance will require a combination of approaches including raising more revenue from various sources, possibly from residents via a tax levy. In order for that to be successful, the council needs to express its sincerity in managing the City's budget by looking at ways to reduce expenditures. That is the whole purpose of this proposal. Like Councilmember Teitzel mentioned earlier, the council's intent is not have any negative impact on City employees, just opportunities for reducing non -essential expenditures. He would leave it to the administration to determine what reductions were appropriate. Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott asked Mr. Taraday to speak regarding the motion and the impact it could have on budget deliberations. Mr. Taraday responded this was a somewhat unorthodox motion and he wanted to ensure council understood its ramifications. He felt it would be helpful to start with reviewing how budgets control spending at the administrative level. Historically in Edmonds, the city council has adopted a budget at the fund level. What that means is, for example, when the city council adopts a General Fund expenditure appropriation of $X million, that fund level appropriation tells the administration they can spend $X million from the General Fund and as long as that money is not overspent, there is flexibility within the administration's contract limits to use that as they sees fit. The council receives a budget book at the beginning of the process, the mayor's proposed budget, but that is not a line item budget; fund level budgeting and line item budgeting are two totally different things. The budget book is a summary of how the administration intends to spend the General Fund money, but it is not a line item budget that controls spending. For example, if the mayor's proposed budget says the public works department get Y dollars and the planning department gets Z dollars, those are not fixed in stone. Some of the Y money can flow over to Z and vice versa. What is set in stone is the General Fund appropriation cannot be exceeded. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 17 Packet Pg. 44 a 7.2.a Mr. Taraday continued, the reason he was going into this background before he addressed Councilmember Chen's motion was the same thing is true with this motion in that the council has an opportunity to decide as elected officials where that money will be cut from. If the council doesn't want to do that, they are essentially leaving to administration the ability to figure out for itself as 2024 rolls along where to spend and not spend, which positions to fill and not fill, etc. and as long as the total General Fund dollar amount is not exceeded by the end of 2024, then the administration will have complied with the budget. If this motion passes, the administration is not required to file an approved budget book at the end of the year that specifies exactly how that $4 million in cuts would be reflected in the budget. The council could do that via motions, but if the council decides not to do that and just tells the administration not to spend a chunk of money, there won't be an approved budget book at the end of the year that articulates the breakdown of the General Fund expenditure which is a sharp departure from what has happened in the past. In the past, councilmembers have made budget amendments to the mayor's proposed budget and the finance department uses those amendments to create an approved budget book that conforms with the actual adopted budget and councilmembers can generally see where the money is supposed to be spent. Mr. Taraday continued, the council can pass this motion, but he wanted to ensure the council understood what this motion did not do. It does not and cannot direct the administration to bring back an approved budget book at the end of the year that shows $4 million in cuts. Instead, the council will have a budget book with numerous asterisks saying the administration was directed to cut $4 million, we're not sure how that will be done, but we will figure it out as 2024 progresses. Councilmember Nand said she was going to ask a question about delegation of council authority and was thinking about how congress interacts with the executive branch. With this motion, it seemed like council would be delegating some of its authority and would not be customary to ask the administration to make these cuts rather than the council targeting cuts it would like to see on specific decision packages. She asked if it would more appropriate for Councilmember Chen to identify $4 million in cuts to specific decision package and bring those forward for the council to vote on. Councilmember Buckshnis said she was unsure she would support the motion, commenting in the past the council has made amendments. She referred to page 117 of the budget book where planning & development professional services budget in 2024 $1.604,000 in 2023 and last year the council approved $963,000 and somehow that budget increased to $1.6 million. As professional services have increased 31% this year, she suggested the council could make cuts in the departments with huge professional service budgets and if more professional services are needed, they can request a budget amendment. If the council gives direction to make $4 million in cuts, there is no way to know where those cuts will be made although she recognized the cuts could not be made in utilities and enterprise funds. She recognized it would be tedious to find areas to cut; she tried to do that last year and the only one that supported her cuts was Councilmember Teitzel because he understood what she was trying to do. Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott asked Mr. Taraday to comment on Councilmember Buckshnis' approach to reducing the budget by focusing on professional service contracts. Mr. Taraday said at the end of the day, his overarching goal as city attorney is to ensure the council is making informed decisions; the council gets to decide whether they are good or bad decisions. He was unsure that cutting professional services without knowing what is in that line item is making an informed decision. There may be some professional services that the council chose to cut, but until they knew what is included in that line item, it's a bit like throwing darts blindfolded and you don't necessarily know what you'll hit. He encouraged the council to ask the department heads what is in each line item and what would go away if the professional service budget was cut. Most of the things being done via professional services are relatively mission critical things. The council might prioritize things slightly differently, but most of the things in the professional services budget are needed. For example the city attorney, the city needs an attorney either way; the council could cut professional services, but would still have to hire a city attorney. He summarized it was important to understand what would be cut. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 18 Packet Pg. 45 a 7.2.a Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott observed the point Mr. Taraday was making was there may be a more nuanced way to handle this, but the question is whether to handle it in 2023 or wait until 2024 and work with the directors. An evaluation of all the professional services was done this morning and with the exception of the SCF and the city attorney contracts, $2.6 million were directly related to staff functions. Councilmember Paine commented the first part of tonight's meeting included discussion about the problem to be resolved and doing it collaboratively and with informed decision making. The council also has the role of oversight and can work with the administration to ensure they are not going beyond what the council is comfortable with particularly in light of the 2024 budget. That role can be particularly important in ensuring directors are not spending wildly or in ways that do not align with the council's intent and goals. She was not in favor of taking $4 million out of the budget untracked. She preferred to know where cuts could be made rather than just telling the administration to cut $4 million which she felt was a dangerous way to budget. She did not support the motion. Council President Pro Tern Olson thanked Mr. Taraday for that background as she did not have a deep understanding between fund level and line item. She has had conversations with residents who have been staff in government agencies that used line item who thought the council had more authority and control to fund and defund specific things. Mr. Taraday emphasized Edmonds has historically done fund level budgeting and that is what has historically been done in most other cities Edmonds' size. That is not to say that is the only way to adopt a budget. The council could adopt a departmental budget for example. The MSRC website has a template for a departmental budget; it looks similar to Edmonds' budget but instead of General Fund being one line, it would have lines for each department. That is a way to budget; it reduces administrative flexibility somewhat. Before doing that, he wanted the council to understand the ramifications on the administration. He did not know a city that did line item budgeting; it would be highly unusual and extremely burdensome on the administration to track and he did not know how it could be done realistically. Council President Pro Tern Olson said this conversation has been significant enough that she needs more time to process it and would not be prepared to vote on the motion tonight. If she did vote tonight, she should have to vote no because she needed more time to think about it. She wondered if there was as much authority, control and value to not taking that approach because it requires giving up control and authority that the council otherwise has by preparation and receipt of the budget book. The council had a budget book last year that said certain things were funded by council, and funds were spent by the administration that were never discussed with council and did not have council approval, hopefully within the spending authority, and funding was pulled from other things. One example is the Yost Park RFP for design and planning, a high priority of council. She recalled during the pandemic, the code rewrite was defended in order to use those funds for the emergency response to the pandemic, again without any conversation with council. She asked what authority was actually being protected. It's included in the budget book, but the administration doesn't follow it and there is no consequence. Mr. Taraday answered that is a fair question and why Councilmember Chen's motion is strictly speaking legal and not improper. He just wanted council to understand the ramifications of the motion. To Council President Pro Tem Olson's point of whether there are ramifications, his sense has always been when the council has specifically voted against a decision package, the administration has respected that decision and not spent money in pursuit of a decision package that was expressly rejected by the city council even if theoretically they had the legal authority to do so. It is not the city attorney's role to oversee the administration in that way and determine whether every single dollar is being spent the way it is stated in the budget so he was unable to represent that that has or has not happened. His sense has been that generally speaking when the council expressly disapproves a decision package, the administration respects those votes and the council is not wasting its time when it provides that direction. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 19 Packet Pg. 46 a 7.2.a Councilmember Chen responded to some of the points being raised and describe his reasoning for this approach. This is a special year in terms of the budgeting process and one of the things that led to this point is the imbalance in spending that outpaces revenue. If the council takes the traditional approach of reviewing and making changes to budget decision packages, the budget will end up in the same place because that approach does not look at overall control of spending which is what led to the dip into reserves and potentially dipping into the contingency reserve in the future. This approach to overall expenditure control was his attempt to prevent that from happening. He felt it would be dangerous for the council to identify what to cut, because as Mr. Taraday said, there are professional services that cannot be cut. The council simply does not have the knowledge that the administration has; the City has brilliant department heads who know their jobs and know exactly where there are opportunities to cut. In terms of timing, he appreciated Mr. Taraday's comment that the council may not know what was cut until the end of the year, that was not his intent. His intent was to identify the cuts before the adopted budget book is printed which could be January 15 or January 31. When the council receives the adopted budget book, all the cuts would be identified and the $59 million expenditure would be cut and become $55 million. He summarized that is the way to control the budget. Mr. Taraday explained the mayor delivered his proposed budget and it is now the council's budget to amend and adopt. To his knowledge, there was no statutory process that would require the mayor to produce essentially a second budget within the next 30-60 days that would be $4 million lighter. There would obviously need to be some internal evaluation of spending to ensure the General Fund is not exceeded by the end of 2024 so at some point, internally at least, there would need to be work done to figure out how to not overspend. Councilmember Chen expressed appreciation for that feedback, pointing out the need to work together as a team to identify opportunities. If that was not done, he feared the City would go bankrupt. With the SCF's $12 million contract increasing to $13 million in 2026 and the way wages and benefits are increasing, that is not sustainable. Councilmember Nand asked if the council directed staff to cut professional services in the planning department would that put the City in breach of contract for example with the VIA contract. Mr. Taraday said it was difficult to speak generally with regard to all the contracts the City has already executed. He would like to believe that in most contracts, there was contract language that provides for the City's right of termination and that there would be a way the City would not be obligated for the full amount of the contract, but that may depend on the nature of the services being provided. Some contracts, like the SCF contract, has a 2 year out, some may have a 30 day out. There probably would not be an issue with breach of contract, but certain contracts may need to be terminated. Councilmember Nand observed that would be quite an extraordinary step for council to direct department heads to do that. Mr. Taraday reminded that the council has contracting authority so particularly for contracts over $100,000, those are the council's contracts and the council can terminate them. The contracts would need to be considered on a case by case basis to determine the cost to the City of terminating, what services the City will not receive if the contract is terminated, for example what is the consequence of not adopting the comprehensive plan on time. Councilmember Nand commented the council finds itself in quite an unpleasant place, certain political commentators have said in the media that this council is the tax and spent council. She understood the impetus of Councilmember Chen's motion to communicate to the public that the majority of this council would not support a tax and spend model. Since she joined the council, the council has tried to be fiscally conservative. In response to a reaction from the audience to her comment, Councilmember Nand said she hears laughter from the peanut gallery. She continued, it has been a very difficult year with midseason budget proposals and amendments. She would be more comfortable if Councilmember Chen would identify specific decision packages proposed by the administration that he would reduce via the amendment process to effectuate $4 million in cuts. Councilmember Teitzel commented there could be unintended consequences if the council asks for a broad $4 million reduction. For example, staff may discontinue work on the Perrinville Creek restoration, an Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 20 Packet Pg. 47 a 7.2.a action that would not be acceptable to council. He feared the council would waste time working through those types of disputes. He recommended the council be more specific with their requests. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO STATE COUNCIL REQUESTS THE ADMINISTRATION TO, BY DECEMBER 5, 2023, DEVELOP A DETAILED PROPOSAL TO BE PRESENTED TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL TO REDUCE 2024 PROJECTED EXPENDITURES BY $4 MILLION. THE DETAILED PROPOSAL SHOULD BE AT THE LINE ITEM LEVEL OF DETAIL TO IDENTIFY SPECIFIC EXPENSE ITEMS TO BE REDUCED. Councilmember Teitzel commented the amendment would solve the problem the council is struggling with; it would provide staff the latitude to identify items that could be reduced to fit within the budget without council being prescriptive. The council does not have the level of detailed knowledge that staff has of their operations and they are in a better position to do this than council. Asking for a detailed report gets around the problem of being too broad gauged. Council President Pro Tem Olson raised a point of order, asking whether this was an alternative motion rather than an amendment. Mr. Taraday answered from a procedural standpoint, it's easier to treat it as an amendment. This is a Robert's Rules question, the council will get to the same substantive result either way. The council doesn't use the substitute process often enough to not be confusing so he felt it was better to treat the motion as an amendment. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the council was spending a long time discussing something that councilmembers need more time to think about. She has been very thoughtful with her recommendations for professional services amendments. Last year the development services department's professional services had decision package for $600,000 and yet the council gave them $900,000. Now their budget is $1.6 million, $650,000 of which was the VIA contract which could technically be pulled back and parts of it removed such as the work related to the housing bills which does not need to be done now. If the council doesn't like what staff proposes on December 5, the council can look at the large professional services contracts and attempt to break them up. In her opinion, the EIS needs to be done now before land use. She expressed support for the amendment. Councilmember Paine relayed her understanding the motion was to ask staff to provide a list and not approving a $4 million cut. Councilmember Teitzel said that was correct. Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott advised the list would total $4 million. Councilmember Nand said she had several concerns with this amendment. During the course of the year the administration attempted to identify ways to reduce spending department by department. The proposal to defund the Meadowdale preschool received huge backlash. If the council wants to reduce spending, councilmembers need to bring forward budget amendments. She was frustrated by this becoming a political football in that no one wants to take responsibility for the deep and unpopular cuts that need to be made to have a balanced budget. There has already been a process where directors tried to identify spending curbs and in response to a large public outcry regarding the proposal to cut the Meadowdale Preschool, Mayor Nelson committed to finding money in the budget to continue funding the preschool. The council also gave $200,000 in ARPA funds to the Edmonds School District to fund the student intervention coordinators when the district made that request. Defunding any program is unpleasant and deeply politically unpopular, but the council needs to take responsibility for that through the budget amendment process. She was not necessarily opposed to the motion, but felt it would be iterative to force directors to do what they have been doing throughout the year in looking at the budget forecast. Council President Pro Tern Olson observed everyone is making good points. She agreed it will need to be a collaborative process because the council does not have the knowledge to know what a good cut would be and staff doesn't want to spin their wheels proposing cuts the council would not find acceptable. There Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 21 Packet Pg. 48 r a 7.2.a was a previous plan for council to work with staff and the mayor. Perhaps returning to that original proposal would make more sense to have the council, staff and mayor work together to figure out how to make those cuts. Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott relayed his concern with the amendment is that December 5 is just a couple weeks away and it would be a tremendous amount of work for staff to identify potential cuts that make sense to their work as well as to the line item. This is probably more appropriately handled in the first quarter of 2024. A balanced budget where revenues match expenses is not required by law, what is required by law is that the City remain in the black. He would support asking staff to reduce the $2.6 million in professional services by a certain amount such as 25% or 50%. The council is reaching the point with this budget where no one will be completely happy, but there are decision package in the proposed budget that are completely at the council's discretion to act on. In the first quarter of 2024, there will be a completely different atmosphere of collaboration, not only budget cuts and also postponing projects into future years. He was optimistic about that process and did not support amendment. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO TABLE. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), MAYOR PRO TEM TIBBOTT, COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM OLSON, AND COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, PAINE AND NAND VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL AND CHEN VOTING NO. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO EXTEND TO 10:15. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Buckshnis commented one of her amendments is awaiting a public hearing. She referred to DP89, the fire contract in the 2023 budget was approximately $11,571,000 and the estimated actual is $10,071,000 so there is $1.5 million carryforward. She asked if that was correct. Mr. Turley said that was correct, explaining an amendment was made in 2023 to bring it to the level needed but it wasn't entered as ongoing so that needs to be carried forward into 2024 which is what that decision package represents. If that decision package was not approved, it would have to be requested next year. Councilmember Buckshnis observed only $500,000 in revenue is projected from school zone cameras. Mr. Turley agreed that was the amount included in the 2024 budget. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the $700,000 is the new TBD. Mr. Turley agreed. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the $3.2 million which in her opinion was a policy issue related to the GFOA. On page 65, Non -departmental, the salary and benefit contra account shows a $3.2 million credit or unanticipated surplus. That is a policy decision for council to determine how the surplus or vacancy rate from the budget and budget estimate is handled. Under GFOA, the prudent thing to do is vacancies should be reflected in the budget. Those funds are identified in the strategic outlook as anticipated under - expenditures. The council should decide how to calculate the vacancy rate adjustment and what it should represent, for example, should it include the police department, only General Fund funded positions, etc. The budget includes $2 million in salary savings and $1 million in benefit savings with no explanation other than they are following the GFOA prudent practice. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM OLSON, TO REMOVE DP96, VACANCY RATE ADJUSTMENTS, BECAUSE IT IS A POLICY ISSUE THAT COUNCIL SHOULD REVIEW NEXT YEAR. Mayor Pro Tem Tibbott asked Mr. Turley to address why DP96 was in the budget and the impact of removing it. He recalled from his discussion with Mr. Turley it was because over the course of the year, there is about a 10% vacancy rate and Mr. Turley assigned an average salary and benefits, multiplied by 25 to determine the amount. He recalled that was Mr. Turley's method of expressing what happens in a typical year. Mr. Turley said it is a way of more accurately quantifying salary and benefit expenses for the year. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 22 Packet Pg. 49 r Q 7.2.a He agreed with Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott's description. He agreed with Councilmember Buckshnis that was a policy decision. Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott asked the impact to the budget. Mr. Turley answered $3.2 million. Councilmember Buckshnis reiterated this is a policy issue, there have been budgets where the anticipated under -expenditure is only $750,000. She preferred the council determine the policy and not just accept staff s calculation. Council President Pro Tem. Olson recalled staff saying there hadn't been a budget since 1988 where revenues and expenditures match. That is fine when there is a cushion like this built in, but as soon as the GFOA accounting practice adjustment is made, it makes it more important that revenues and expenses line up because this cushion no longer exists. She did not have a strong opinion whether to keep this in the budget this year or not, but agreed it was a policy decision which council does not like to have slipped into the budget without council first dealing with the policy. If there in fact would be a significant vacancy rate, and there was a hiring freeze, the vacancy rate would be bigger instead of smaller, it was not lacking in financial conservativism to do it this way and the council could still address the policy in the coming year. Councilmember Nand recalled the PSPHSP committee has had significant discussions and has requested this information from Directors Turley and Neill Hoyson to help them understand how much flexibility there was in each department's budget due to vacant positions. The reason multiple councilmembers have been trying get this information is to figure out how much wiggle room there is with regard to labor shortages and how much breathing room that provided in the budget. For that reason, she did not support removing DP96, but agreed the council needed to have a better understanding of the amount of surplus due to vacancies so the council doesn't feel a level of comfort with adding new spending throughout the year because positions haven't been filled and then find themselves in a very uncomfortable position. As Council President Pro Tem Olson pointed out, this is a GFOA recommended best practice and reflective of several long discussions at the PSPHSP committee. Councilmember Chen commented this is a way to document the anticipated under -spending, but it is like looking at a crystal ball. He referred to the quarterly budget, relaying when the 2024 budget was developed this summer, the reserve was identified as $6.6 million and now it is $3 million which he felt had something to do with this, anticipating a portion of it was the anticipated under -expenditure which was less than originally anticipated. This is a way to document that under -expenditure but it needs to be looked at more closely so there is a better estimate. He did not support removing DP96. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; MAYOR PRO TEM TIBBOTT AND COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, PAINE AND NAND, AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM OLSON VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO EXTEND 5 ADDITIONAL MINUTES TO 10:20. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER CHEN VOTING NO. 9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Buckshnis recognized Councilmember Teitzel would be leaving the council and recognizing that both the policy wonks who voted the correct way will be retiring. She hoped the council would reengage the long range financial planning group. The addition of Councilmember Teitzel to the council has taken the away some of the grief of the loss of Kristiana Johnson and he had filled her shoes well. They have had many very productive conversations in the early morning hours. She wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 23 Packet Pg. 50 r a 7.2.a Councilmember Teitzel said approaching Thanksgiving he was feeling very thankful to live in Edmonds. He moved to Edmonds in 1987 and raised his family here and has no intention of leaving because there is no place in the world he would rather be. It is not just the City, but the citizens, councilmembers and staff. He was feeling very thankful to live in such a great place, was thankful he got to serve on council again and work with the council again and wished them the best. Council President Pro Tern Olson wished everyone a very Happy Thanksgiving. She reminded that November 25 is Small Business Saturday and encouraged those who were in better financial shape than the City to have a good time spending money in Edmonds. She referred to a November 17 article in My Edmonds News regarding a new operating agreement between what was the Mountlake Terrace Senior Center and now is the Lake Ballinger Center that will be under the same umbrella as the Edmonds Waterfront Center and will do a better job with the Edmonds catchment area. That is an exciting development and she encouraged everyone to read that article. Councilmember Chen wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving and wished those who are traveling safe travels. He thanked Councilmember Teitzel for not only being a good councilmember, but also being a good mentor and a good friend. Councilmember Nand highlighted whereas clauses from the resolution honoring Councilmember Teitzel's service: Councilmember Teitzel has taken incredible steps to mentor and advice newly elected officials. When she was appointed last year and received a 1000 page packet and a gigantic budget book, Councilmembers Teitzel and Chen sat down with her for three hours to explain everything. The reason the council looks more diverse than when Councilmember Teitzel first joined the council in 2016 is due to his direct mentorship and commitment to increasing the pipeline for diverse candidates in Edmonds. Diversity does not happen in a vacuum; it happens due to allies who walk the walk and don't virtue signal. When it comes to diversity, equity and inclusion, Councilmember Teitzel walks the walk. In the future as councilmembers looks to making the council a more diverse body that reflects all members of the community, they should look to Councilmember Teitzel's example. Councilmember Paine thanked Councilmember Teitzel for his service and said it has been a pleasure Q- a working with him. She appreciated him waiting to call her until 7:01 when the subcommittee was reviewing a the city attorney contract. Councilmember Teitzel's contributions have advanced discussions in Edmonds. a, She wished him the best and wished everyone a very happy holiday weekend, enjoying good food and good shopping. Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott commented it had been an extreme privilege to work with Councilmember Teitzel; L they served their first term together and connected and collaborated every week regarding information in the packet. He definitely benefited from having a colleague like Councilmember Teitzel. He recalled how difficult it was to get Councilmember Teitzel to agree to apply for appointment to the council and was glad he agreed. For the citizens watching, Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott said there is a lot of a lot of esprit de corps r, among councilmembers and even though they have vigorous debate, it is a privilege to work together. There c will be some new people coming on board in a few weeks and that onboarding will be interesting. He `V wished everyone a wonderful Thanksgiving holiday, noting many are planning to have out of town guests or traveling out of town and he wished them safe travels. E 11. ADJOURNMENT Q With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:18 pm. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 21, 2023 Page 24 Packet Pg. 51 7.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/5/2023 Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes November 28, 2023 Staff Lead: Council Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Recommendation Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda. Narrative Council meeting minutes are attached. Attachments: 20231128 Regular Meeting Packet Pg. 52 7.3.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES November 28, 2023 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Nelson, Mayor Neil Tibbott, Council President Vivian Olson, Councilmember Will Chen, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Chris Eck, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Susan McLaughlin, Planning & Dev. Dir. Todd Tatum, Comm., Culture & Econ. Dev. Dir. Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7 pm. by Mayor Nelson in the Council Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember Buckshnis read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water." 3. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH OF OFFICE FOR NEWLY ELECTED COUNCILMEMBERS Mayor Nelson administered the oath of office to Councilmember Jenna Nand. Mayor Nelson administered the oath of office to Councilmember Chris Eck. 4. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 1 Packet Pg. 53 Carl Zapora, Edmonds, congratulated the newly elected councilmembers. He was representing himself, not any companies or organizations. He reminded the city council they declared a financial emergency a few weeks ago in the millions of dollars and will take 3-5 years to get the reserves back to the minimum level to get the City out of that state of emergency. He asked how much of a priority it is for the city council to put together a plan to replenish reserves. No city the size of Edmonds should have reserves as low as the City will have in 2024. He requested the council consider freezing all non -essential expenditures, the prudent thing for any organization or company to do under major financial duress. He also recommended placing a moratorium on all new programs or new ventures. It is looking likely that in 2024 the council will have to seek a voter approved tax increase. He envisioned it would be difficult to get citizens to approve a tax increase unless the City has demonstrated major strides in tightening its belt every way possible. He implored the council to do that as much as possible when planning the 2024 budget and beyond. Joel Steinke, Edmonds, spoke regarding the proposed red light camera installation, exegesis of panopticism, a term coined by Foucault to represent the increasing surveillance state inspired by the prison design put forward by Jeremy Bentham. Effectively, there is a central pillar surrounded by a circle of cells wherein the guards in the pillar can view into every cell without the inmates knowing. Foucault found in this architectural marvel a metaphor which described the presiding rationality of the state. He did not need to convince the council or anyone of the growing efficacy of public and private surveillance by the state and private means, it's self-evident at this point. He suggested automatically monitored cameras actually move an automatically panoptic relationship and into something called perfect surveillance, effectively making real and omnipotent states the like of which were previously reserved only for theoretical discussion and pieces of fiction. It is clear that the City is unknowingly becoming bedfellows with a particularly hobbesian galilean notion of freedom. He strongly recommended reading Quentin Skinner; liberty is not merely the absence of interference, we are not doing our best work. How might perfect surveillance go beyond the panoptic relationship between the surveilled and the state. Are we reflecting upon the psychological affects resulting from the existence of an omnipotent state. Image if the whole of Edmonds was perfectly surveilled, every speeding infraction was accounted for and dispatched accordingly. If someone knows that their evert action is watched, is not the deeper truth of panopticism destroyed? The self-regulating behavior arises because you know not if the guard in the tower is watching or in this instance, if the cop is around the corner. When one knows they are being monitored perfectly and at all times, the responsibility for my engagement with the possibility of being watched becomes subsumed, now the only concern is whether one wishes to violate the law and pay the fine or drive in an economically avowed manner? He wanted to invoke the economic dimension in greater detail and filter surveillance qua safety through it because he knew the city wished to present the proposal as one ostensibly concerned with safety. Mr. Steinke continued, asking if the concern was absolutely with safety? No, instead it is delineating a more conditional notion of public safety that is subordinate to an already existing economic rationality that is fundamental, a type of economic rationality that produces the very possibility for such a notion to exist. Hence we can resolve the apparent paradox between the state ostensibly concerned with safety that wants you to dive safe but will allow you to drink yourself to death in your home, the disavow of one and the avow of the other resolved within the broader framework of profitability. Is it the role of government to condition behavior? With such a question, we are squarely within the biopolitical horizon that [inaudible] wrote extensively about. When we invoke ideas of protection as both the justification and the means toward desired conditioned behavior, we should consider deeply our perceived understanding of the origin of both civility and moral decency. Tocqueville was clear that over 300 years ago it was the role of the church and the clergy, what we would today consider the public institutions of education, to provide the proper moral edification of the public. The nongovernmental yet public education of citizens is foundational to democracy. Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, congratulated the newly elected councilmembers. He echoed Mr. Zapora's comments regarding the budget. He recalled a couple weeks ago the council discussed forming a taskforce; Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 2 Packet Pg. 54 7.3.a he was waiting to hear the results of that taskforce which apparently has yet to be disclosed to the public. The hope was by using a taskforce there would be discussions about a stabilized budget; unfortunately, all decisions the council has made to date have destabilized the budget further and made the City more susceptible to bankruptcy. He encouraged the council to listen to Councilmember Chen who said the City is on the path toward bankruptcy. By Mr. Ogonowski's analysis, unless the City borrows money, the City will be insolvent by the 2024. He did not see any path that said otherwise; borrowing is the last resort but the council is quickly heading toward that unless they make some really tough budgetary decisions. That is what councilmembers were elected to do and what the citizens expect. Citizens, staff and the council are frustrated, but he did not see a council vision or path; it is just ad hoc. He hoped the council gets its act together because time is running out. 7. RECEIVED FOR FILING 1. SEPTEMBER MONTHLY REPORT 2. BUDGET QUERIES - COUNCIL BUDGET QUESTIONS AND ADMINISTRATION / STAFF RESPONSES 3. OUTSIDE BOARDS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS 8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 14, 2023 2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT. 9. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. LANDMARK 99 PROJECT UPDATE Community, Culture & Economic Development Director Todd Tatum said the council has reached the first major decision point since voting to pursue this option in June. Since that time an incredible about of conversation has occurred around the Highway 99 corridor and the long standing opportunities and concerns. In staff s opinion, this has been a very positive development and he hoped that continued. There has been much work done to bring structure to this very unstructured opportunity. A project plan has been developed since June as well as research conducted as well as outreach to staff of cities and municipalities across the region who have undertaken similar projects. Staff has learned quite a bit and broadened their horizons. There have been plenty of conversations with council and with the development community in the meantime as well as a lot of discussions with community members in official meetings, one on one and in small group settings. There has been a lot of site planning done as well as negotiations with the seller. He summarized a lot of work, thought and effort has been done in the past five months to get to this point which tonight's presentation will try to distill. Consideration of Landmark 99 is scheduled for two meetings, tonight and December 5 so there is time to discuss, hear from the public, think and come together on a decision. Mr. Tatum continued, the option required two main things by December 31, 2023: negotiate a purchase and sale agreement (PSA) and execute an addendum to the option replacing Exhibit B which originally included the terms of 75% and 25%, with the PSA. He reviewed: • Decision for December 5m o Authorize the Mayor to sign an amended Option attaching the negotiated PSA as Exhibit B, and amending the timeline and "assignment clause" language. o This action results in: Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 3 Packet Pg. 55 7.3.a ■ $100,000 becoming nonrefundable ■ The option continuing, thereby allowing further consideration until we execute the option or we choose to discontinue pursuing this project ■ Staff advancing the project as described in this presentation Major changes o Staff heard council's comments and concerns and worked with the property owner on some critical changes ■ The language in the original option required assignees to agree that "at least 75% of the acreage of the property will be for public purposes" - The PSA language replaces this with "an assignment of the Purchaser's entire interest in the Agreement shall only be allowed if the assignee is a public entity." ■ The original option required us to exercise by December 31, 2024 and close by June 30, 2025 - The PSA and amended option replace those dates with March 31, 2025 to exercise and no later than September 30, 2025 to close ■ We've retained the finance, due diligence, and title contingencies between the two dates Planning & Development Director Susan McLauglin commented in addition to understanding the decision at hand, it is important to understand the why and what's possible to help council and the community to consider the information that Mr. Tatum reviewed and to make an educated decision. She commented community amenity space, civic use, public open space in the Highway 99 corridor has been a goal for a long time. There are policies and plans in place to support not only pursuing this property but other properties and other strategies to achieve that goal. That is a collective goal in the community and one the council and staff are committed to. She reviewed: • Policy Framework: Promoting partnerships o Comprehensive Plan ■ Economic Development Goal B.9 Work with property owners, developers and investors to seek appropriate redevelopment in underdeveloped and/or emerging business districts... ■ Economic Development Goal C.5 Pursue available incentives to foster appropriate redevelopment, where possible. ■ Sustainability Goal G. Develop housing policies, programs, and regulations designed to support and promote sustainability. Support and encourage a mix of housing types and styles which provide people with affordable housing choices geared to changes in life style. Seek to form public and private partnerships to retain and promote affordable housing options. ■ Comp Plan Econ Dev Element: - Appropriately sited and sized development/redevelopment projects increase: - Property tax receipts through the "new construction" provision that captures new construction value -based property tax for the first year a project is brought on line and adds that value to the city's future property tax baseline. o PROS Plan ■ "Combining a park/recreation facility with a much -needed community center and multi- family (affordable) housing development could be a potential approach, as would other public -private ventures" PROS Plan page 45, Gap Analysis ■ Recommendation #1: Acquisitions to Fill Park System Gaps: - "Explore options for acquiring property to create a satellite community center in the Lake Ballinger or South Edmonds area". -PROS Plan page 114, Project Recommendations/Action Initiatives o Subarea Plan Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 4 Packet Pg. 56 7.3.a A sampling of relevant Hwy 99 Sub Area Plan Planned Action EIS mitigation measures: • Encourage and promote public open spaces through public/private partnerships where possible. • Implement pedestrian and bicycle transportation improvements to provide greater access • Acquiring park land in the Highway 99/SR 104 areas to provide adequate park service in redeveloping areas. • Create new civic spaces to enhance investment and revitalization while meeting recreation needs • Increasing connections to the Interurban Trail, using signage, sidewalks, curb extensions, and other pedestrian/bicycle enhancements o Community renewal plan Edmonds Highway 99 Community Renewal Plan FACILITATEAMI%ED-USE. MI%ED-INCOME DEMONSTRATION PROJECT exIoresseciaStrongdesire for agatiam y... A distinct — - transition point in and out of Ethmrlds' �� wno.1•.: a" '-'�^•-°^-°+ -Subarea Plan Page - 15, community feedback on the Gateway District „. .,.. EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN 4. ` � � -Subarea Plan, Page 65 Implementation Public —Private Partnership Public -private partnerships for economic development typically involve the use of public financial assistance programs and other public levers or interventions n partnershipwRh the private sector to facilitate development outcomes. Typically, these partnerships are used to support projects that align with public policy objectives, but that are not feasible without pudic participation or support (such as with infrastructure Investment). These partnerships can advance community development but should be tamed out with a partnership structured responsibly and with support from project stakeholders. These partnerships can be more effective if the following Is addressed: 1. Identify a compelling development strategy with demonstrable public benefit. 2. Generate support for development objectives from elected officials and stakeholders. 3. Identify priority sites and lay the groundwork for development through prrdevelopmenI activities (preparing the site for development). 4. Get to know the development community, find a capable development partner, and form a public -private partnership team. S. Identify pudic assistance tools and further understanding on the range of tools available. 6. Right size the amount of public assistance. 7. Structure a fair deal and monitor project performance. if this partnership will help advance the construction of a community facility, there are other considerations to address including an analysis of the she factors that will influence the facility use, such as access, proximity to complementary uses, infrastructure, and utilities. etc The ownership models of a community facility vary and could include nowroht ownefship or public ownership such as through a Public Development Authority. Edmonds Highway 99 Community Renewal Plan V • Early Community Input: Poll Results o Online poll conducted by the City in Aug -September 2023 0 1,232 responses were received o To the comment the poll did not include an option to do nothing, intent was to explore what was Dossible on the site. uD to elected officials to decide whether to move forward �6 18i 138 145 45 198 176 t O a 203 137 135 13 132 124 62 1� 97 `, 0'6P roni�G9P^Pa' °°j/CP9 Oa'fsA SO°s; HPra�=97i�a ���P�d yo�io. % c ova/X Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 5 Packet Pg. 57 7.3.a • First Community Conversations Event- October 21st o Held at Edmonds - Woodway High School on Oct 21 st, 2023 o - 60 attendees 0 60% from Highway 99/ Lake Ballinger neighborhoods 0 7 small group discussions o Topics list Community Conversations Event o What should the site be used for? ■ Common themes: - Senior housing - Low-income housing - Work force housing - Retail - Coffee Shops me Community Center -flexible space Hotel Public Spaces and Streets ■ Common themes: - Connection to Inter -urban trail - Stormwater drainage Improvements to 242nd / 240th - No through traffic - Streetlights and traffic calming - Concerns on accessibility to the site (Choose a more central location) o Partnership Models ■ Common themes: - How much will community/city contribute to the redevelopment? ■ Concerns: - What control does city have on the private development with/without being part of the project? Making a community focused development o Responding to the communities along Hwy 99: ■ Community anticipating growth ■ Lack of amenities and community facilities along the corridor Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 6 Packet Pg. 58 7.3.a ■ Learning from precedent studies ■ Established "International District" with specialized markets and commercial areas • Site Overview 0 10 Acres o Large format retail use, high vacancy o Zoned General Commercial o Current access from north and west, potential access from south • Summary of Site Principles o Normalized intersections o Site Access o Not to preclude integration of existing Auto Dealer • Landmark 99: Opportunity for placemaking and added value • Master Plan Design Options o Concept Development The Town Square The Village Green o Site Plan The Town Square The Village Green eatlen antl wvuatic center unitya dwvuatk center yur•hy Pv .cv cvr•mr carte Center xum wN ou p— ktetlical OHice aulltling aeV raetllcs� Onke BUIM�ng ': rk / gaYgreuM taNgM1OorM1ooe aerk / Olaygroun rz kr..Yn sauce Community Uses Retail Uses Open Space Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and subject to change with further design study • Comparison: Community Facilities The Neighborhood The Neighborhood / unit' v..aurce curter v� netali ana Besleentlar arYlp.ygrvuna Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 7 Packet Pg. 59 7.3.a Total BUA 123 Million SF Total BUA 1.09 Million SF Total BUA 0.92 Million SF C. space 90,900 SF (7Z5%) Civic space 70,500 SF (G.4%) Civic space 41,400 SF (4.5%) Public Open Space 2Acres Public Open Space 1.8Acres Public Open Space 0.9Acres Metrics are approximate, conceptual onlyand subject to change with further design study • Comparison: Built Up Area The Town Square The Village Green The Neighborhood 322,000 SF� 9&43O SF 149,000 SF S� 375,700 SF SF �•� SF 370,000 SF 362,000 30 SF 203,0 SF %. r 105,000 SF 239.100 SF 30,900 SF ® 90,5U SF gpspp SF 37,6005E CMC USE CMC USE (7.3S%) (GA%) Range of DUs: 8SO-900 • Public Activation 11 � Public Art Stage/Food truck a, pavilion Amphitheater & gardens Community Center Promenade & cafes f 114" ra to:- -,I • Public Investment Options 1 Auto arrivalival nad pick-up 4"00 SF 349,9505E CIVIC USE (4.5%) Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 8 Packet Pg. 60 7.3.a o Negotiable Elements 1) Extent and Type of Public Uses & Amount of Property 2) Infrastructure - Utilities and Streets 3) Open Space- scale, ownership, asset management 4) Land Price & Terms, Timing, Phasing 5) Development Standards 6) Housing affordability Mr. Tatum reviewed: • Precedent Studies: Prol Tukwila Village Area: 6.4 Acres • Communityevent pavilion, plaza and new 8000 SF library . 280 senior housing units, 3200 SF Retail, • Civic Uses ,ram Elements Woodinville Schoolhouse District 0 � sap�ll�u:E �wi__ Area: 4 Acres Upgraded YMCA Public spaces for Farmers market and festivals 34,000 SF food and "Wine Walk Row" retail 264 units of market rate housing Precedent Studies: Implementation Tukwila Village ; Woodinville Schoolhouse District 2• % -r I 9�. • Site acquired through powers of urban renewal Non-profit senior housing developer lead $131 million: $7M (City) $1M (WA Transportation grant) $113M: Developer financing ($20M low- income housing credits) Ms. McLaughlin reviewed: Site: City acquired elementary school Developer RFP Property value: $14M; offset by $8M to get civic uses built by developer Burien Town Center �7 Area: 8 Acres Centered on a 1-acre town square New City hall with libra • + -300 housing units (seniors and condo), 40,000 SF Retail Federal Way Town Center al Area:10 Acres Centered around 1 acre town square - public park & indoor -outdoor event pavilion. New City Hall with Community Center (Classrooms and Meeting space) 1000+ housing units, 30,000 SF Retail, hotel option Burien Town Center Federal Way Town Center I 1 — I 1 � 1 � 1 111� L • 1, _ 1 i+jam 1 a 1 �1 S f �.� r• 1 �1 1 al I i . Catalyst pilot project for Site- City owned with 1 downtown 1 existing performing arts • Developer lead RFP facility Catalyst pilot project in an "Opportunity Zone" Developer lead - 4 phase Development Agreement Second Community Conversation Feedback on design options o Received 47 responses, 32 generally positive but 24 of those still had questions, 9 opposed o "There is too much residential" o "I'm excited about the possibility of this development" o "they are all nice, but in this economy it won't work" o "Do not want access through 242"' o "Love the possibility of getting sidewalks" o "More housing = good" Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 9 Packet Pg. 61 7.3.a o "Don't do it" o "Giving the community the level of walkability that is missing right now" o "This area of Edmonds is often neglected; most people don't realize the area between H-99 and Lake Ballinger is also part of Edmonds" o "All options will serve the community" • Second Community Conversation Feedback o Common preferences ■ Desire for more green space and pedestrian -friendly areas. ■ Emphasis on creating a balance between civic space, commercial space, and housing. ■ Support for local businesses ■ Need for sidewalks on the adjacent streets o Concerns/Suggestions ■ Traffic and access issues —especially on 242" d and 240th ■ Affordability ■ Parking ■ Requests for clarity on the use of spaces and how they would benefit the community. ■ Suggestions for involving non -profits in funding community development to reduce the financial burden on the city. ■ Concerns about the lack of information, financial plans, and validity of the proposed prices. ■ Safety Mr. Tatum reviewed: • Exnenditures to Date Purpose Amount Spent Option negotiation, appraisals, PSA negotiations $ 62,700 Communications, advertising, printing $ 30,200 Conceptual alternatives and public meetings $ 44,800 Total $137,700 • Outside Funding available o $75,000- In negotiations for Snohomish County grant o $300,000- Currently available from Affordable and Supportive Housing Sales & Use Tax • Appraisal and comparables o Two companies — SOVA and CBRE conducted the appraisal and review appraisal respectively o The Landmark property's $37m price comes to a cost of $84.43/sq ft. COMPARABLE SALES SUMMARY AND LOCATION MAP Comparable Land Sales Sob We Silt Pirko/ Sdb tlenlMadWLOation a" Prim ld) 31. 1 20907 Hlgbwar 99 05/05122 $2.350,000 39.640 $5919 CG 2 22315 HigAwav 99 04/13/22 $4.150,000 74,488 $55.71 CG 3 19022 Aurora Avenue N 12/17/21 $6.750.000 71.981 $93 77 MB 4 20102 61st Place 10/13/21 $1.700,000 32,669 552A4 RML 5a 13551 Aurora Avenue N 04/30/21 $3,400,000 31,737 $107.13 MB 5b 12/12/19 59,500,000 73,606 $129.07 MB Total AssenWage S12.900,000 105,343 $12246 6 19S33 Aurora Avenue N_ Pending $3100.000 37,710 $94.86 MB Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 10 Packet Pg. 62 7.3.a Mr. Tatum commented the negotiated price needs to be viewed in the context of a partnership which is the focus of the project. A development partner will bring their thinking in term of hundreds of millions of dollars so their calculation of price is different than the City's. While people have speculated about the market and the price of this property, a development partner will have a clear, up-to-date understanding of the feasibility of a project which includes the purchase of this property. A Request for Expression of Interest was sent out to many in the development community and is due by November 30. The REI stated the City has an option to purchase, options for what could be built on the site and seeking their level of interest in becoming a partner. By the December 5 meeting, staff will have information to share with council about the level of interest in the development community. Mr. Tatum continued: • What do comparables look like on the corridor? Sale 1 Sale 3 Sale 5 Sale 6 Smaller, awkward Massing potential, but Adequate massing Adequate massing lot awkward lot potential potential, but small lot size 0.91 acres 1.65 acres 2.42 acres 0.87 acres $59.28/sq ft $93.77/sq ft $122.46/sq ft $84.46/sq ft Priced below Priced above Landmark Priced above Priced in the range of Landmark Landmark Landmark Roadmap: Public/Private Partnership o PSA and Option Amendment o Request for Proposals o Due Diligence o Negotiate terms o Assignment of portion of right to purchase o Development agreement o Secure financing o Earnest money and closing Ms. McLaughlin reviewed: • Opportunities 1. This property's development WILL shape the future of the corridor 2. Deliver on City commitments in the Highway 99 neighborhoods 3. Community -centered design 4. Foster tax generating uses where they have stalled, on the property AND on the corridor 5. Enable the partnerships and development we want, rather than leave it to the market 6. Lower overall cost of acquisition and development — partner construction, impact fees, other financial tools 7. We get to leverage a developer's expertise and resources during planning and construction 8. Faster project delivery Mr. Tatum reviewed: Risks 1. This property's development WILL shape the future of the corridor 2. Opportunity cost of not pursuing other avenues if this fails to achieve a partnership 3. Partnership fails to achieve desired results 4. Market downturn before construction 5. Political and regulatory risks 6. Financial risks: cost overruns and revenue fluctuations • Where we are heading Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 11 Packet Pg. 63 7.3.a Decision for December 51h o Authorize the Mayor to sign an amended Option attaching the negotiated PSA as Exhibit B, and amending the timeline and "assignment clause" language. o This action results in: ■ $100,000 becoming nonrefundable ■ The option continuing, thereby allowing further consideration until we execute the option or we choose to discontinue pursuing this project ■ Staff advancing the project as described in this presentation Councilmember Nand said her comments are not intended to undercut the amount of work staff has done on this project. She has been taking a lot on the chin from the public because she grew up in the Highway 99 community and has a very personal perspective on changes to the corridor over the years. When thinking about the Highway 99 community, she compared it to other developments. Most people don't know Icicle, Washington, but many have heard of Leavenworth which was the result of two business owners in the 1960s who went to the University of Washington Community Development Bureau and expressed a desire to save their dying town. They came up with the idea of rebranding themselves as a Bavarian village. Business owners started remodeled building by building and doing tree lighting ceremonies; it was entirely driven by the community who were concerned their town was dying because they no longer had the salmon fishery economy they used to. Councilmember Nand continued, most people have not heard of Jodhpur, Indonesia, but they may have seen pictures on social media of the Color Village which is very popular and gets millions of shares. Everyone in that humble little village decided to paint their houses different colors to try to attract Instagrammers and now it is a huge tourism destination. The point of her comments is that was entirely community driven, the community approaching government and the private sector and asking for resources, help, guidance and leadership to save their town from poverty, crime and a lot of dire circumstances. She hoped to add to the conversation about the corridor, noting she has seen extremely ugly comments online; including people saying things like the whole of Highway 99 should be made illegal or there will be 11,000 illegal immigrants on Highway 99 when they add 11,000 people. As a counter narrative, she explained this property owner's story is not available because they requested privacy, but they approached the City saying this part of town is dying and expressing interest in revitalizing it. This is similar to the Mee property which could have been sold for development, but the owners wanted to contribute to the vision for parks and open space for the community. Councilmember Nand continued, Edmonds has such a grounded history and identity in its different nodes, from Perrinville to Firdale to the International District to the historic downtown district. Before Edmonds was incorporated into one jurisdiction, those were separate towns and they still have that identity. She hears so many voices from the Highway 99 community, a community that has been largely silent in the larger Edmonds discussion, that is starting to assert itself and say, we want to change things in our part of town, we feel like it's dying and want it reborn. That is not to knock the leadership that staff has provided in Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 12 Packet Pg. 64 7.3.a responding to these property owners and these community activists expressing interest in making things better. Councilmember Nand continued, she is enthusiastic about project. She has been accused of wanting to go into commercial development; that is not true, her perspective is the Highway 99 and Lake Ballinger community where she grew up, people don't feel safe letting their kids walk to Mathay Ballinger Park, a park she played in as a child. She clarified she was not one of the negotiators on the project, but she is a lawyer and negotiates by trade. She has talked and spit -balled with her fellow councilmembers about scenarios. If the council exercises the option for $100,000, how concrete are the deal terms at that point. She referred to the offer that started this conversation, purchasing the three acres of open land, and asked if there would be the flexibility to potentially acquire the other parcels in the future. Mr. Tatum answered he did not know, that question would have to be asked. Councilmember Nand asked if there is a plan to possibly acquire the other 11 parcels in the future instead of in one fell swoop which could potentially be more expensive for the City. Mr. Tatum responded he did not want to speak for the owner, but his understanding of the owner's intent was to get the property sold by the City's timeline so splitting up the properties may be more problematic. Councilmember Nand asked if it would be possible to counter offer, tell the owner that the City is not interested in proceeding, request they shop the property on the open market and see if they get a firm offer for $37 million and come back and renegotiate with the City. That would address the concerns about the economic downturn potentially affecting real estate prices which she noted did not appear to be happening. Mr. Tatum said that would put the option beyond the December 31, 2023 timeline and without the council taking action, the option would be void. Councilmember Nand reviewed that scenario, the option is void, the property owner goes to the open market, if the property owner does not get another firm offer for $37 million, renegotiate a possibly more favorable price for the City for all 11 tax parcels. Mr. Tatum reiterated the owner wants to have the property sold by the end of 2025. If the council said no, the option is void, the property goes on the market, the seller still plans to sell by the end of 2025, the City still has the same amount of work to do such as finding a partner. The timeline would be seriously constricted which would increase the level of risk and result in a lot of unknowns with regard to a partnership at that point. Councilmember Buckshnis commented this process was handled incorrectly. The City does not have the money to pursue this. The citizens have been provided a false sense of hope and taxpayers' money is being gambled. The presentation states only $137,000 has been spent; she asked the amount of staff salaries for the past five months. Mayor Nelson requested councilmembers express their questions with courtesy and respect to all who are participating in meetings and not make personal attacks on City staff. Councilmember Buckshnis said she was not making personal attacks, she wanted to know the amount of money that has truly been spent. She recalled Councilmember Teitzel asking whether the amount spent was under $100,000 and staff said yes. The $137,000 didn't take into account the time spent by three directors on this project for all these months. She appreciated the work that has been done, the project looks wonderful, but the City does not have the money which is the bottom line. If the City doesn't have the money, this false sense of hope cannot continue to be provided to the citizens. She observed more than $137,000 had been spent considering the bandwidth it has taken to put all this together. To address Councilmember Buckshnis' comment about providing a false sense of hope and pointing that at staff, Mr. Tatum said the council voted in favor of the option. Staff investigated the option and are presenting that to council tonight. Councilmember Buckshnis said she did not intend to point at staff. Mr. Tatum said he felt it was pointed at them. Councilmember Buckshnis reiterated it is a false sense of hope. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 13 Packet Pg. 65 7.3.a She has never received so many emails from citizens in the 13 years she has been on council. Mr. Tatum explained the option stops with a no vote from council. To the comment that directors have spent a lot of time in a concerted effort to figure out a way to do what the plans have asked for and compel development in a way that fits the community character along Highway 99, staff has certainly done that. If staff has spent too much time, the council can vote and tell them to stop working on it. He agreed here had been staff time spent on this. Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out Article 9 is an as -is PSA which means the property will potentially be purchased as -is and if there is any contamination on the property, the City is buying it as -is. City Attorney Jeff Taraday answered Article 9.1 is almost a full page long. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed concern this is the first time the council has seen the PSA. The council is being led to believe they are all up to date, yet some of the information, some of which is very important, hasn't been provided. She asked Mr. Taraday to read Article 9 and provide an opinion in the future. Considering that council supposedly told staff to move forward, council did not see the PSA until now and that is serious thing to have in a PSA. Mr. Taraday answered one of the reasons the PSA is in the packet is to understand what questions the council has and get those questions answered. The PSA is 30 pages long and it would be helpful to understand what the questions are so he can respond to council before next week. Councilmember Buckshnis said when this was originally presented, the council was not given all the data and council was under the impression that everything would be great, but didn't really understand the City would probably have to borrow money next year to fund the workforce. Council needs to realize right now that the City does not have the cash to pursue this. The project looks great and it is a great sense of prosperity that could happen in the future, but the City does not have the money right now. Councilmember Paine expressed appreciation for the presentation which clarified some of her questions. In looking at the risks, she was pleased to see that there are options and if the City were in the driver's seat, it could shape what was ultimately included in the development agreement (DA). It is a very true statement that this property, no matter who purchases it, will shape one of the most visible gateways into Edmonds. She asked how many 10 acre properties with easy access to Highway 99 and 1-5 there are in the region. She recalled during the November 18 meeting she heard options that gave her very great pause, an Amazon fulfillment/distribution center would be the opposite of what she would like to see, and she was unsure how the neighbors or community would like that. The other option mentioned was an Ikea which would kill a lot of local economic development. The biggest international business in Edmonds is a handful of Starbucks, everything else is hyper local which everyone takes pride in. She reiterated her question about how many 10 acre sites there in Snohomish County with this level of proximity to major freeways. She acknowledged there are some large car lots in Lynnwood on Highway 99 but did not think they were for sale. One of the risks that is not identified is things that could be built on that site that could have a negative impact. She suggested the consultant research that for the Puget Sound region. Mr. Tatum advised that could be researched. Councilmember Paine referred to the old Lynnwood High School site, 30 acres across from a large mall, the biggest site on the west coast during 2008/2009 when there was interest in redeveloping it when she was on the school board. That made the school board pause and think through exactly what they did and did not want see there. The board had envisioned something like University Village, but the downturn happened. She asked about the timeline for that level of development and hoped that would be provided by the letters of interest. She envisioned a 10 year timeline. Councilmember Eck found the presentation extremely helpful and holistic. With any significant potential endeavor like this, it is prudent to spend time doing due diligence. It appears if staff weren't taking time to work with the appropriate folks to dig in and understand the potential, they wouldn't be doing an adequate job. She thanked staff for the deep dive they have done over the last few months. This potential investment Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 14 Packet Pg. 66 7.3.a in this community and neighborhood meets many of the identified needs she had heard. She has heard people say the council doesn't have to be desperate, this won't be the only chance to potentially build something like this on Highway 99. She asked how often this size property on Highway 99 in Edmonds comes up for sale. Ms. McLauglin displayed the slide, What do comparables look like on the corridor, commenting that is an indicator of the type of parcels on the corridor and the challenges associated with some of them. The parcels are a range, Sale 1 is a small awkward lot which is often the case due to the way Highway 99 was cut through resulted in awkward size parcels with oblique angles that are challenging to development. Sale 3 is also an awkward lot. Sale 5 has adequate massing potential, but is quite small at 2 acres so it would not accommodate this integrated community development. Sale 6 is also a small lot. The Landmark 99 site is unique for many reasons, but particularly the size, it does not have as many oblique angles, and wouldn't be as difficult to develop. Councilmember Chen expressed appreciation for Ms. McLaughlin and Mr. Tatum's time and effort to explore the opportunities and risks associated with this project. As Mr. Tatum said, it was a council majority decision that directed staff to do this work. Councilmember Chen disclosed he lives in the area and his business is located in the area, but he is a councilmember for the entire city so his questions and decisions are based on the entire city, not just one area. He referred to the sales price of $37 million, relaying his understanding there were 2 appraisals were done, but no negotiations have occurred with regard to the asking price. Mr. Tatum agreed there have not been any negotiations with regard to price. There was negotiation regarding the price prior to developing this option that negotiated the price of $37million. Councilmember Chen continued, he has voiced concern about the price since the beginning and had hoped there would be some development in the price negotiations during the past five months. In the original purchase option documents, the seller demanded that 75% of the space be for public uses and 25% for private uses. Going from 75% to the best of the three design concept which is 7.6% is a dramatic reduction in the space for public use. He pointed out selecting any one of the design concepts which have 7.6%, 6.4% and 4.5% public space already violates the original option. Mr. Tatum agreed it would violate the original option that the council approved in June, but the option as amended and the PSA as negotiated removes the 75%/25%. Councilmember Chen commented the revised option and the PSA have not yet been signed. Ms. McLaughlin commented while the percentage of civic uses range from 4% to 7%, that does not take into consideration affordable housing. Housing was one of public uses that would have been eligible in that 75%. She displayed the slide with comparisons of the built up area, recognizing opportunities for housing on the site. The level of diverse housing types was not specified in the original option. The benefit of public uses was broadly or not defined in the 751/o/25% split, so based on these concepts, if housing were considered as a public benefit, it would be close to the 75%/25% split. That calculation has not been done because it is no longer relevant. Councilmember Chen said that was not his original understanding. If one uses that logic, a design with 100% housing could be considered public use which would exceed the 75% public use. The original understanding was 75% would be for public uses such as community center, open space, etc. Mr. Tatum answered staff heard the council's concern with the 75%/25% and raised that with the land owner. The PSA and the amended option have been discussed with the seller for some time. When the master planning options were prepared, staff had already spoken with the seller about the 75%/25% split and reached an understanding with the seller who was amenable to changing that. Mr. Taraday recalled when the option was first presented to council in June, it was acknowledged that the parties had not yet agreed upon what constituted a public or private use and that there was a possibility that affordable housing could be considered a public use and that that would be worked out over the next six months. In the course of those negotiations it became apparent to the seller that to get into the weeds of Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 15 Packet Pg. 67 what constitutes a public versus a private use would be so complicated that the seller agreed to completely eliminate that requirement. He concluded there is no longer that constraint in the option or the PSA. With regard to the funds spent so far, $137,700, Councilmember Chen observed that was for the first 5 months. Staff salaries are already paid so he did not include that. He asked the estimated additional consultant costs for due diligence, community outreach, design, etc. through March 2025 if this moves forward to the next phase. Ms. McLaughlin said she would not be able to provide an exact dollar amount. The first step as Mr. Tatum mentioned is a RFP for a development partner. That exercise doesn't come at a cost. The amount of work that has been done so far created a great package to share with a development partner for a RFP. When a development partner comes on, then costs for due diligence, and other work that needs to be done to advance this proposal will be negotiated. She did not envision a lot of consultant fees in the first or second quarter and by the time a development partner comes on, those fees will be more transparent. There are funding sources available that were not previously realized in 2023 such as $300,000 currently available from Affordable and Supportive Housing Sales & Use Tax. In addition, there is the potential for $75,000 via a Snohomish County grant. The $375,000 for 2024 would absolutely cover the consulting costs, particularly with a development partner on board. With regard to the cost of staff time, Mr. Tatum acknowledged if the council votes to continue, this will certainly be a lot of work for staff, the directors will be engaged, so that is something the council will continue to see. Councilmember Chen referred to the $300,000 affordable housing grant via funds collected by Snohomish County, asking if those funds are not spent on this project, would the City still be entitled to those funds for use on other projects. Ms. McLaughlin answered yes, advising the $300,000 is from the state's Affordable and Supportive Housing Sales and Use Tax; the $75,000 is potentially available from the Snohomish County. Councilmember Chen asked if those funds would be available for use on other projects even if this project does not move forward. Ms. McLaughlin answered yes, if there was an affordable housing component; for example, exploration of a community center would not qualify. Councilmember Olson validated staff s indication that their time and effort has been spent on this in accordance with the council vote. She questioned the amount of money exceeding the contracting authority over $100,000, but that is a conversation for another day. She has a lot of reservations and concerns about the money and the money this will continue to obligate the City to in the long term; not just the initial expense of getting up and running, but bond service for the City's share of participation in this and depending on the uses, and the more uses the community wants, the more it will cost the City. She felt if there was ever a time to do this, this is most definitely not that time. To the extent that the council doesn't want staff to spend time on this going forward, council needs to take that into consideration when voting next week whether to proceed. She relayed two other areas of reservation, having a parcel to fit things into during the upcoming comprehensive plan versus going through the comprehensive plan update and identifying needed amenities and where they'd best be located and then looking for the right places to locate those uses. She felt this process was the cart driving the horse instead of the other way around. With this being such an imminent moment in time for the comprehensive plan process, she feared an opportunity would be missed by forcing things to happen in this place instead of letting the process unfold organically and finding the right places for those uses. Councilmember Olson continued, regarding the opportunity for 10 acre parcel, many of the uses in the concepts are not public uses so 10 acres is not necessary for public use. She appreciated and understood the opportunity for synthesis and being a part of the development process and how that might make the City's share of the public use less expensive. When the City gets to the point where it can afford a project, she could understanding considering that, but in fact a 10 acre parcel is not required for public amenities to meet the needs of the community. With regard to asking the public what they want, it is a naked question Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 16 Packet Pg. 68 7.3.a unless the question includes the cost and how long it will take. She referred to the public conversation about the Ebb Tide connection, and although people are interested in having that connection, they may not understand the cost. Councilmember Olson continued, when people are asked if they want an indoor aquatics center, they are not told the City won't have the money to continue the Yost Park pool. If the pros and cons of an indoor aquatics center are provided to the community, they might agree it is time to make that change, but they can't be asked if they want something and rely on their affirmative response without them knowing everything that question encompasses. That is a huge reservation for her; she asked that question in the context of 2021 budget conversations, how attached are you to Yost Pool because it will be a huge investment to redo the pool on that site, and it was unanimous in all five neighborhoods where she did budget talks that people wanted to retain that amenity. Those questions have to be asked on the front end of a process like this, not at the back end when the City proceeds with an aquatics center and there is an uproar because people did not know what that meant. In terms of the policy framework, Ms. McLaughlin explained there is direction regarding where and what from decades of planning that talks about the southern gateway and the need for a community center; the collective community voice has been heard and been documented over time. With regard to the community conversation, some assumptions were made with regard to square footage and building footprints. Community outreach asked for desirable uses and the footprints were developed for site orientation and how things could fit together. With regard to actual uses in the building footprint, that is malleable. For example the recreation center could be scaled down or coupled with a children's museum or another use the community wants. That will be part of the 15 month conversation that would occur if the project is pursued post December 5'. Councilmember Olson said this is not a discussion for today, but she felt council should hear and have a further conversation regarding what it will mean to the Edmonds community that the Edmonds Waterfront Center is going into a management partnership with the Lake Ballinger Center. She was aware their board has discussed the catchment area in Edmonds, the upgrades, amenities, and new offerings there and what, if anything, that will mean to the Edmonds community in terms of meeting that community center need. Mr. Tatum appreciated Councilmember Olson's comment about not knowing all the financial details upfront. To the public, he apologized if that didn't seem very upfront at the beginning. It was a big lift to understand how this project would come together, how to put a framework together and there were a lot of internal conversations which may have prevented the amount of outward public facing conversation to manage expectations at the beginning of the project. Staff has been very aware of that and are trying to get that part to the front as quickly as possible. Council President Tibbott expressed appreciation for staff s work on behalf of the City and on behalf of a potential project. He looked forward to hearing what the public has to say so his comments will focus on questions that help him and others. When this effort first started, the concept of Landmark 99 was largely a blank slate and unknown what the public would say. Since then, affordable housing, senior housing and workplace housing and other uses have emerged as desirable uses. As a result, some grant funding has surfaced that could be used to help move this project forward. He asked what kind of partnerships might be available if the City pursued that type of housing, whether the City would be doing it on its own or fighting tooth and nail to get it or were there partnerships and grant funding available. Ms. McLaughlin answered affordable housing is arguably the region's greatest need and the state also recognizes the need. There is a lot of grant funding available that has not yet been explored. The availability of local funds was a welcome find. She was optimistic there would be grant funding available particularly for affordable housing. Edmonds has a record of building great partnerships such as development of the Waterfront Center, Civic Park, contributions from the Hazel Miller Foundation, etc. The City has a track record of securing grants as well as partnerships. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 17 Packet Pg. 69 7.3.a Mr. Tatum responded there could be a number of different ways this project comes together; one of those could be a master developer who brings in other partners, or a partnership of partnership which is the way several projects have happened in the past. For example, there is a master planned site and there are partners for market rate housing, low income housing, etc. Staff is not exactly sure how it will come together; more will be known once the RFP responses are received. Ms. McLaughlin advised Matthew Roewe is available online; his background is in developing public - private partnerships in the local area. It would be helpful for him to speak to that prior to the public hearing so the public can hear his perspective. Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, asking that staff announce who this person is. Ms. McLaughlin advised he is the master planning consultant who helped develop the design concepts and can speak to his experience in developing partnerships. Matthew Rowe referred to Councilmember Chen's comment about 7% of the total constructed project being civic uses in the town center option. That is based on the entire square footage, calculating the percentage of public uses or open space in the site area that would be 20-30% of the property. In response to the question about public -private partnerships, in the ones he has been involved in, a variety of things are negotiated as Mr. Tatum stated when reviewing the precedent projects. For example in Federal Way, the city is selling the parcel to a developer, but getting back $5 million because they want to own and build the park. The developer is building all the internal streets and paying for the park design and many utilities. A lot of moving parts arise in negotiations and until the RFP is out and responses and proposals are received, it is a bit of a moving target. The City would have to see what developers bring to the table and who they want to partner with such as a nonprofit affordable housing developer or a senior housing developer. A medical office building would make sense at this location and there is interest in that. The RFI process will provide that information by the end of the month. Related to mitigating risks, Council President Tibbott said the slide regarding risks did a good job of outlining six items that would be negotiated. There are a lot of moving parts that represent risk and in order to make this viable, those risks need to be mitigated. He asked staff to address points of negotiation and how the city has done that in the past on other projects such as Civic Field, where a lot of negotiations occurred before reaching an action plan. That is what everyone is anxious about, what actions will be required and how much will it cost. Ms. McLaughlin answered there are some local examples, but they are all unique and may not provide comparables. She offered to come back on December 5 with details regarding the City's contribution versus the partners' contributions related to the Waterfront or Civic Field. Landmark 99 is a different scale, more complex, and would have a different level of private investment that previous examples did not. For example, the Waterfront Center is largely a community center and Civic Field is a park. Council President Tibbott observed the complexity is why the City would want a master developer on board as early as possible to bring that expertise to the project. Otherwise, the City could get to end of 15 months and not have mitigated any of the risks and the negotiations could be up in air and the City would walk away. Ms. McLaughlin agreed, advising this is step zero in the exploration because what's feasible is unknown until the City knows what a developer is willing to do, the value for them on the site, what the City could gain, and balancing those opportunities and risks. There have been efforts to talk to the community about what they want and where their values lie, so if council votes to proceed, the starting line is known in January, and the type of civic uses and public spaces and the community's concerns such as access from 242" d would be negotiated. The conversation starts when the City engages a developer. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 18 Packet Pg. 70 7.3.a With regard to risks, Mr. Tatum advised the way the RFP is designed will shape responses. The RFP needs to be thoughtful about what the City wants to get from the partnership. Those risk mitigation measures can be included in the RFP in the way it is presented to the development community and before negotiations begin on the DA, there needs to be a clear understanding of the absolute objectives. He summarized one of the biggest risk mitigation measures is getting everyone on the same level of understanding of available tools and the end product. Council President Tibbott summarized there are a lot of moving parts. Councilmember Nand requested staff provide information regarding timelines. Councilmember Buckshnis commented she hasn't seen the second appraisal. Mr. Tatum advised it was included in the same email; he will send it to her tomorrow. 10. PUBLIC HEARING 1. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE LANDMARK 99 PROPOSAL Mayor Nelson opened the public hearing. Carl Zapora, Edmonds, representing himself, said he has a lot of concerns about expenses. When he hears $137,000 has been spent already and another tiptoe into this project commits another $100,000, that $237,000 equates to the salary for 1-2 staff members. He was concerned about that level of irreversible spending especially in a budget year or two when funds will be really tight. He asked about the process; relaying he has heard interest in a police substation, a community center, meeting rooms, etc. There are a lot of ways to accomplish that versus buying one big parcel. He agreed with the council comment that the City should have started with what do we need, what's available, how could we best meet that need versus buying one huge parcel and undertaking a massive expenditure. There are underutilized spaces in the Highway 99 corridor. For example SCF may take ownership of the Valley Village property; if that comes to fruition, has the City discussed with SCF sharing space as there are a lot of synergies of a police department working side by side with a fire department. The second floor of the 5-6 year old Swedish Edmonds emergency room building is vacant. There is a lot of free parking and it would be located next to hopefully a new fire station. There are synergies working with the hospital district, SCF, or Swedish Edmonds. He asked whether the City had considered those types of options rather than looking at one big parcel for all kinds of uses. He recalled 5-6 year ago the hospital district gave the City of Edmonds, in partnership with the school district, $1.5 million to rebuild the playfields at the old Woodway High School. Those are the kind of partnerships the City should be looking for and not necessarily in one big parcel. He questioned whether there was other space available, not necessarily in Edmonds. It could be in Esperance or in Mountlake Terrace; the use of Ballinger Park is a good example of a partnership. He summarized the council should choose the best option, should not buy now, and should not borrow money or raise taxes to make this happen. Theresa Hollis, Edmonds, commented she was here out of frustration. Staff told the council they gathered public opinion on possible uses of the site, but it is the council's job to know whether the public wants the project. She didn't buy that line; as part-time councilmembers the council has no staff for public interaction and no analysists assigned to support their work efforts. Councilmembers filter through their emails but have no scoresheet that compiles the hundreds of emails sent to seven different councilmembers that tally the go or no go preference of the residents who email council. She has led a small group effort to design and test an online public opinion survey on this project that just asks about a go or no go decision. She launched the English version of it from her phone during tonight's meeting; the Chinese and Korean versions are coming. She brought flyers to distribute to residents with a QR code that can be used to take the survey. The survey is simple and takes about two minutes to complete. She encouraged the council to use the survey results in their decision making next week. She will provide a report late December 4t' or early December 5'. She relayed one councilmember told her not to do a public survey as every Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 19 Packet Pg. 71 7.3.a councilmember had made up their mind already and made comments from the dais. If true, that's too bad and she assured many residents want this poll and are eager to learn the tabulated results. It's a shame this grassroots neighborhood effort was needed to get this done because the City chose not to do it. She thanked the individuals who helped her create the survey. Joel Steinke, Edmonds, said if the council is effectively engaging in real estate speculation, it is in the council's best interest to understand the current economic cycle. For example, it is late in the economic cycle. He comes from a family of successful real estate professionals. There is something called the 18 year real estate cycle that says land prices peak right before a downturn. The last downturn was in 2008/2009 so it soon will be 18 years. The theory of an 18 year real estate cycle says it is about this time in the cycle that municipalities look for lavish expenditures which he found very poetic and recommended the council read the book. If the council is engaged in real estate speculation, they should look to buy low, when the market is depressed and the cost of capital is low. The current economy has the highest cost of capital since 2003/2004. He summarized if the council is engaging in real estate speculation, the council should probably be knowledgeable about real estate and economic cycles. Matt Spaziani, Edmonds, said he and his wife moved to Washington from New Hampshire and were drawn to Edmonds' artistic downtown and it's beautiful sites and the community has embraced them. They have since learned that Edmonds is sometimes known as the gem of the Pacific Northwest; there is very good reason for that because it is very beautiful and they often joke their goal if they move in the future is just to get closer to the ocean but stay generally in the same area. Edmonds is known as the gem due to its long legacy of preservation and conservation. Urban sprawl is becoming more wide spread and faster growing than natural sprawl in recent years. Conservation/preservation has not happened without very strong efforts from advocacy groups and council. This is an opportunity to preserve land and create natural spaces for citizens of Edmonds and their children to enjoy which is part of the reason he and his wife came to Edmonds. There is obviously a long timeline on this project, but he referred to the saying, the objective of society is to plant the seeds for trees whose shade you will never sit beneath. This is an opportunity to do that. He recognized the concerns about money, but with financial consideration in mind, if there is a way to do this. He is strongly in support of the Landmark 99 project and strongly encouraged the council to take any steps necessary to make sure there are more public spaces and more shade for future generations to sit in. Strom Peterson, Edmonds, the City's representative on the Snohomish County Council and state representative for the 21 st District, congratulated Councilmember Eck on being sworn in tonight. To Councilmember Chen's question, he was here to present the council $75,000 from the Snohomish County Council to help in this effort, to do the due diligence. To Council President Tibbott, he asked great questions about the unknowns which is where a partnership with Snohomish County can come into play. Staff mentioned public -private partnerships a number of times for good reason; there are also opportunities for public -public -private partnership. There are a lot of opportunities to engage public investment in projects like this including funds from Snohomish County to get started. A lot of work is being done at the state as well the federal level related to the critical issue of affordable housing. One of the terms often used in Olympia is community oriented development. This is a perfect example of what could be in that philosophy; having the community drive this project and ensuring the community provides input, not just a private developer steering the ship. It is important to look at risks, certainly there are risks to the community and elected officials with moving forward with a project like this, but there are significant risks if the City does not; a project will move forward with input from for -profit investors, not from the community. This is an opportunity to create open spaces, places for future generations as well as build housing that is needed now. The area is in a housing crisis, especially affordable housing, and it is imperative on elected officials to have that vision, take this opportunity, and do the work they were elected to do. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 20 Packet Pg. 72 Patti Whitmarsh, Edmonds, said she was discouraged to see the amount of advancement in this project. She was at the November 18 meeting with more than 9 people who opposed Landmark 99. She suggested Ms. McLaughlin adjust her numbers and give the public the truth; there are more people opposed to this than what council is hearing. She opposes the project for several reasons including ingress/egress between SR 104 and SR 99 and the nightmare that construction would create as well as getting to I-5 or onto Highway 99. Staff is presenting this like this is a utopia, it's not; crime has not been mentioned. If a project like this moved forward, there would need to be structured parking which are very expensive and exceed what the City doesn't have in funding. Tree removal on the site would violate the City's climate action plan goals and the necessary canopy for Edmonds. The bottom line is the City doesn't have the money and she questioned why the City would spend money it did not have. Even if the $100,000 doesn't come from Edmonds, it is irresponsible to proceed with a project the City cannot afford. The concept is great, but the wrong place at the wrong time. She encouraged councilmembers to listen to the citizens and be respectful and mindful of the feedback they provide. She expressed appreciation to Theresa Hollis for doing a survey as it is important to hear from citizens. The City doesn't have the money, it's common sense and you cannot buy what you can't afford. She strongly encouraged the council not to proceed with this project. Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, said he liked the presentation and the graphics and hoped the comprehensive plan had half as much of that. He was disappointed the staff table didn't include the economic development commission and planning board members who were supposed to have been partners in this discussion. He would like to heard their input about the project. From a risk standpoint, he agreed with some of the previous comments and questioned whether the City was assuming too much risk for only 7% or less in civic uses on the site, a disproportionate amount of risk for the space the City would potentially achieve. He questioned how much of this was included in the 2024 budget and if not, how much will staff be asking for. Janelle Cass, Edmonds, an environmental engineer, said she has always made decisions in accordance with SEPA and NEPA, a good framework and methodical process for considering big decisions for government. When comparing alternatives, those process require consideration of a no action alternative to compare and contrast the impacts of the proposal to not doing anything. That should be part of the preliminary discussions and public outreach as it is important data in making a decision. When these questions were being asked, which of these designs do you like, it limited the data that was provided to council as decision makers, a big flaw in what was presented tonight that did the council and the people at the top of the City's organizational chart a huge disservice. One of the things to consider is if there were a no action alternative and the council abandoned this project, there are small businesses in that space now. She questioned where they would go when this site was redeveloped into housing. If the site remained commercial, the City could offer tax deferral or tax relief if the developer allocated a percentage to the City as community space. That way a developer takes on the financial risks and the costs. There are ways to achieve the feel of a public -private partnership without the City taking on the burden, especially when facing such a dismal financial future. Asking the public about specific uses limits the creativity of the private sector and the people making comments. It seems intimidating to have a big box store on that site, but those provide jobs. Many Edmonds residents cross the street into Shoreline to shop at Costco and Home Depot and most of the small businesses in Edmonds are doing quite well. She suggested other uses could bring in good, local jobs which would also reduce commute times in accordance with the climate action plan. She urged the council to ensure their data was more inclusive when making decisions. Kevin Fagerstrom, Edmonds, encouraged the council to read the article in today's Seattle Times about the Woodinville project that is lauded as an example to follow. That project just blew up today to the point where the mayor says the city is considering pulling the permit on the entire project and shutting it down. This would be an enormous risk and given the City's current financial circumstances, the council is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. He urged the council to think long and hard about that and to put this project to rest as soon as possible. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 21 Packet Pg. 73 7.3.a Erik Nelson, Edmonds, commented the site is an absolutely beautiful property and many agree it could be made into something amazing. He attended two fabulous sales meetings on what it could be with beautiful pictures, verbal renditions of all the what ifs followed by a few doldrum bad things like big box stores that might be built there if the City doesn't act. He struggled with the council having discussions about a fiscal emergency at one meeting, real challenges and the need to raise taxes, but then tonight the council is talking about this level of spending and risk; the two don't mesh. He suggested the council remember that every dollar from all these free sources, money just raining down, came from the citizens in the city, county and state. He suggested sometimes the council forgets how hard people work to provide those taxes. He asked the council to consider one of the big risks that was not talked, the risk of the unknown. Highway 99 will never be like the bowl, Highway 99 is part of Edmonds and has its own personality and has a 4-5 lane highway running through the middle of it. He strongly recommended the council not sign anything that does not have the current landowners on the hook for any future pollution that is found. An as -is covers a lot of things; it shouldn't cover 30-year old pollution found below grade later. There has been a lot of conversation about developing Highway 99 with better community. He wishes the council and Representative/Snohomish County Councilmember Peterson had felt this strongly when Snohomish County hammered in the drug hotel that is opening cross the street from his business, a use that will be hugely detrimental to Highway 99. If the council feels this way about Highway 99 and wants to spend money to make it nice, they should have fought having a drug hotel down the street from this beautiful new project. He opposed the project and asked the council to vote no on December 5. Greg Brewer, Edmonds, said he attended the public outreach presentation for the Landmark property on November 18. The presentation put on by staff and VIA, the paid consultant, was underwhelming and alarming. It was his understanding the property was to be developed with a much higher civic function. Citizens near the proposed site anticipated amenities that would improve their quality of life; instead the presentation included three versions with civic amenities ranging from 5% to 8% of the total project. When looking at the development model as a whole, 90% of the property appeared to be private apartment buildings with approximately 800 units, some with commercial spaces. The public amenity portion of the project, which the City would be on the hook for building and maintaining, looked like an oversized clubhouse for the apartment complexes. He questioned why the City would sign on for that, whether it was the kind of incentive needed to lure a partner, and why citizens would settle for such a small piece of the pie. The access and parking would severely impact the surrounding neighborhood if built out to capacity with code complaint parking. Hundreds of cars will fill the adjacent streets and thousands of daily car trips would flow through 242nd Street SW which currently dead ends into the property to the south and 240`h Street SW, a through street to the north. He wondered if the neighborhood fully realized and understood the impacts. The price of this property and the initial proposals are not giving citizens proper value. The price isn't worth it and the timing financially for the city couldn't be worse. He recommended regrouping, continuing to dream big for the Highway 99 as it has great potential and deserves careful planning. With the coming increased density along the corridor, amenity needs will also increase so this conversation is far from over. The need is there and it will only increase with time. To do the right thing, the entire City needs to participate. If only 6%-8% of the 10 acres was civic use, that was only 1-2 acres. This is a big risk for the City and he votes no. Tamara Nelson, Edmonds, urged the council to vote no on this project. The short timeline is very concerning, the presenters are pushing to rush and councilmembers who are in favor are pushing to rush. This is a lot of money and she didn't see anyone beating down the door to pick up this property if the council let the option go and continue to think about it. She did not recommend the council continue to think about it because it is financially irresponsible and rushing is crazy. She was at the sales event at Edmonds-Woodway High School and concurred with Patti Whitmarsh that the vast majority were dissenting comments, not approval. The presentation asked attendees whether they liked this or this, like they were toddlers choosing what to wear. This is not a project residents want for the most part, especially those who are already burdened by taxes. Everything single pocket the City wants to pick from is a citizen's Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 22 Packet Pg. 74 pocket. The projects she has seen Edmonds do most recently haven't turned out very well; they've been over budget, over time, and poor decisions. She urged the council to vote no, and questioned what they were doing in view of the City not having any money. Luke Distelhorst, Edmonds, a HASCO commissioner, said he also attended the November 18 meeting and had a very different feeling than the other commentors. He appreciated the opportunity City staff provided for that community forum to discuss the options, look at potential uses and have open, free form discussion with neighbors, many of whom do not live in the bowl but live in areas that do not have community assets, have not received as much City investment, and do not have the public spaces that downtown Edmonds has. He expressed appreciation to the 4-5 councilmembers who attended the meeting and engaged with citizens and got a holistic picture of the discussion. Having worked with some councilmembers and well as City staff, if this moves forward, he trusted them to negotiate the hardest bargain for the City. City staff are professionals and are conscious of taxpayer funds and want to see them put to good, public use. If this moves forward, and he hoped it would, he trusted staff to negotiate with the property owners and any potential development partners. In his role as a HASCO commissioner, he knew the executive director has approached the City about potential partnerships for affordable housing. Unfortunately HASCO lost the bid for a property in Edmonds and are very interested in partnering with the City on future affordable housing developments. He hoped the council would move forward and continue the community conversations to develop a new property and new vision and start to build assets throughout the city limits of Edmonds to benefit residents. Brook Roberts, Edmonds, spoke in support of the acquisition of the Burlington Coat Factory property. As Councilmember Paine mentioned, the council has to look at the possibility of what happens if the City does not acquire this property. A large factory or warehouse could come in and worsen the area for visitors and surrounding residents. Many people love the feel of downtown Edmonds, but what about the feel of Highway 99? The consequences of what happens if a private developer or big corporation takes complete control of this site and the impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods and the future of the City need to be considered. He questioned the City putting its full trust into a business whose goal was to do whatever possible to make a profit, to take complete control of a large parcel in an area the City is actively trying to make better and reshape. That would be the case if the City doesn't purchase this property. Purchasing this property is a long term investment for the City and will play a major role in attracting visitors, residents and businesses to Edmonds. The City has options for financing the property and it is important to explore all opportunities and partnership available. Natalie Seitz, Edmonds, commented on growth, zoning and encouraged the City to continue evaluation of the Landmark property. She referred to the City's past investments and current planning such as the Waterfront Center - complete, Civic Field - $19 million, complete, the Marsh — planned, wastewater treatment plant — planned, cultural corridor — planned, Yost Pool — planned, all adjacent to the view corridor, all high value investments, some contaminated sites and projected to be well in excess of the City's portion of the Landmark site if it were to proceed. She referred to where the City has allowed the vast majority of growth for many decades, the SR 99 and SR 104 corridors, which are currently experiencing some of the greatest per capita disparities in City services. The Highway 99 planned action called for walkable communities, commercial development, and 3-4 story apartment buildings and taller with mixed use. She feels the constant need to remind the council of these promises. The City rezoned the corridor CG which allows all these things and more importantly allows parcels to be developed as none of those things. The City has to take the lead in implementing the promises made to the Highway 99 community regardless so there is no loss of staff time or effort. The Landmark can help keep the vision of the promised walkable, enlivened commercial community, but more importantly it can help get the police annex that is so desperately needed and a desperately needed community center to prevent displacement currently underway and intensifying due to the city and state's actions. Landmark may not be the right solution, but the city should continue investigating this option and others that can help areas of the City most in need of attention. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 23 Packet Pg. 75 7.3.a Ken Reidy, Edmonds, said earlier this evening Councilmember Buckshnis was asking questions about internal costs on this matter. The presentation stated $137,000 but her questions about internal costs were not answered and there was an uncomfortable moment where the director indicated staff is responding to council's direction in taking a deep dive on this project. He suggested looking at council's direction. The city has had a difficult time with decisions made under the provision of false, misleading, or incomplete information. During the November 6 council meeting, former Councilmember Teitzel explained on June 27, 2023 when the council approved pursuing the potential purchase of the 10 acre Burlington Coat Factory property, now called the Landmark property, he was the swing vote, voting in favor of pursuing it because he perceived it to be fairly low risk, requiring only a $100,000 refundable deposit that would be returned if the City backed out by December 31, 2023. He was not aware of the extent of the expense and the risk of the potential purchase, expenses such as legal costs, the city attorney has spent quite a bit of time on this, real estate experts, land use consultants and a lot of staff time by three directors. Mr. Reidy said that is a great example of the council voting under misleading, incomplete understanding of the situation. To the question of who many councilmembers voted on June 27t' to move forward, a motion was made by Councilmember Nand and then suddenly council decided to go into executive session in the middle of a meeting without voting to enter executive session so that act of entering executive session really needs to be looked at. After the council came out of executive session, a different although similar motion was made, and the vote was 3-1-2, three councilmembers voted in favor and now one is saying he would not have done so had he known more about what was in front of him. He encouraged council to ensure they are provided with complete information before voting. He suggested requiring a majority vote of full council before pursuing a path like this; only three councilmembers got this thing started. Lora Hein, Edmonds, thanked staff and councilmembers who brought this compelling opportunity to this point. This City has been kicking the Highway 99 can down the road for decades and are beginning to see some long overdue improvements in that area of Edmonds. This is an incredibly golden opportunity. She is a resident of Westgate where residents have searched for a place to hold a public meeting and there is no such place; they have to go downtown into the bowl, the same situation from Westgate to the east Edmonds boundary. The potential partnership is a golden opportunity; she loved Councilmember Nand's comparison of the Landmark to Leavenworth. This an opportunity to be a benefit to the City. There will have to be some investment upfront, but there are all sorts of opportunities for partnerships. It is a potential revenue source, a community gathering space, and would provide pedestrian access along Highway 99 to an appealing and attractive place. With regard to the 5%-8% dedicated to civic uses, she clarified that is the built property, it is actually about 20% of the property if public open space, greenery, park and playgrounds are included. She urged the council not to close the door on this opportunity as it is unlikely to come again without cobbling together properties. She urged the council to continue exploring this possibility. With no further public comment, Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing. 10. COUNCIL BUSINESS - CONTINUED APPROVAL OF CONTRACT FOR FIRE SERVICES FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO POSTPONE TO THE NOVEMBER 30 MEETING. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. COUNCIL 2024 BUDGET DELIBERATIONS COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO POSTPONE TO THE NOVEMBER 30 MEETING.. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 24 Packet Pg. 76 7.3.a Mayor Nelson had no comments. 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Paine hoped everyone had a great holiday weekend, commenting hers was action packed. Councilmember Nand thanked all the passionate voices who participated in tonight's meeting. The council needs a variety of opinions and to hear from all the stakeholders, that is how democracy works. She was proud of everyone in the City, especially for being civil in their civic engagement. She attend the Port of Edmonds Commission meeting yesterday and was able to see some of the commissioners in tonight's audience in action including Jay Grant and Janelle Cass. It is good to go to different organization's meetings and see them working hard to make this a great community. There are tough times ahead with the City's budget, the national economy, and global pressures, but as long as everyone keeps respecting each other and working together to make it a better community for ourselves and future generations, it can be done. Councilmember Chen wished everyone a happy holiday season. Although everyone is super busy with work and activities, he urged them to take time out of their busy schedule to call or visit their loved ones while they are healthy and before it's too late. Council President Tibbott commented tonight had been a long evening with a lot of input and he took a lot of notes. He echoed the appreciation for everyone's opinions and those who have been involved and studied the information. This is a very important decision for the future of Edmonds and very gratifying for the council to this type of community event. He referred to a card that he provided to councilmembers from the organization, yellowribbonsd.org, about suicide prevention. This is the time of year when it is dark and cloudy and people start missing their families. He encouraged people to be there for each other and if needed, the yellowribbonsd.org is a resource. Mayor Nelson welcomed Councilmember Eck. Councilmember Eck shared in the spirit of gratitude and thanksgiving for the opportunity to serve the residents of Edmonds highlighted by the deep engagement she sees across the City. She loved hearing from people who live in the neighborhood of the project being discussed and the opportunity to work with her new colleagues on council. Councilmember Olson welcomed Councilmember Eck. It was great seeing everyone enjoying the tree lighting ceremony in downtown Edmonds last Saturday. She thanked the Chamber of Commerce who hosted that event and the many vendors who participated, supported and contributed to making that a special event. Councilmember Buckshnis welcomed Councilmember Eck. She appreciated all the comments that are being made. She wanted to make it clear that the City is in a problematic financial situation. She has been hearing gossip that the council is called a tax and spend council; for the last nine years, the council has not been a tax and spend council. When she joined the council, the City had a fund balance of $2.3 million, by the time Mayor Earling left with Scott James at the helm as the finance director, the City had about $17 million and now at yearend the City will have about $800,000. She emphasized that is serious stuff. The idea and information in the presentation regarding Landmark 99 is great, but as Ken Reidy said, when this first came to council in June, the council did not know all these facts. Some councilmembers did know the facts and voted no. The City is in a serious financial situation and she wanted to be sure when the council thinks about moving forward on a $37 million purchase price that they realize that represents 3 years of police services. The council needs to be conscientious about spending taxpayers' money and take the budget very seriously. She had a very happy Thanksgiving in Oregon. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 25 Packet Pg. 77 7.3.a 13. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, the council meeting was adjourned at 10 pm. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 26 Packet Pg. 78 7.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/5/2023 Approval of Special Meeting Minutes November 30, 2023 Staff Lead: Council Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Recommendation Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda. Narrative Council meeting minutes are attached. Attachments: 20231130 Special Meeting 530PM Packet Pg. 79 7.4.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES November 30, 2023 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Neil Tibbott, Mayor Pro Tern Vivian Olson, Council President Pro Tern Will Chen, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Chirs Eck, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER STAFF PRESENT Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Oscar Antillon, PW Director The special Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Mayor Pro Tern Tibbott in the Council Chambers, 250 5t1i Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. 2. EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION, RCW 42.30.110(1)(1) The Council then convened in executive session to discuss pending or potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) for approximately 25 minutes. The executive session concluded at 5:55 p.m. 3. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION The meeting reconvened at 5:55 p.m. 4. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 5:55 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes November 30, 2023 Page 1 Packet Pg. 80 7.5 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/5/2023 Approval of claim checks and wire payments. Staff Lead: Dave Turley Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Nori Jacobson Background/History Approval of claim checks #260303 through #260393 dated November 30, 2023 for $4,142,940.45 and wire payments of $369.49, $4,558.60 & $8,937.63. Staff Recommendation Approval of claim checks and wire payments. Narrative The Council President shall be designated as the auditing committee for the city council. The council president shall review the documentation supporting claims paid and review for approval by the city council at its next regular public meeting all checks or warrants issued in payment of any claim, demand or voucher. A list of each claim, demand or voucher approved and each check or warrant issued indicating the check or warrant number, the amount paid and the vendor or payee shall be filed in the city council office for review by individual councilmembers prior to each regularly scheduled public meeting. Attachments: Claims 11-30-23 agenda copy Packet Pg. 81 7.5.a apPosPay Positive Pay Listing Page: 1 11/30/2023 11:02:44AM City of Edmonds Document group: jacobson Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount 079330 76 INVESTMENT LLC 260303 11/30/2023 7,000.00 078469 AGUIRRE, RAUL 260304 11/30/2023 130.00 079429 ALL ABOUT FENCE LLC 260305 11/30/2023 8,784.75 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 260306 11/30/2023 561.38 078237 ARIAS, ADRIAN 260307 11/30/2023 130.00 079382 ATWELL LLC 260308 11/30/2023 34,605.00 072577 BAURECHT, MAGRIT 260309 11/30/2023 125.00 069226 BHC CONSULTANTS LLC 260310 11/30/2023 10,065.83 071421 BIO CLEAN INC 260311 11/30/2023 469.63 002840 BRIM TRACTOR CO INC 260312 11/30/2023 2,554.91 072571 BUILDERS EXCHANGE 260313 11/30/2023 45.00 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 260314 11/30/2023 1,609.36 077353 CAPITOL CONSULTING LLC 260315 11/30/2023 3,900.00 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY 260316 11/30/2023 332.05 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 260317 11/30/2023 42,307.00 072746 CONSOR NORTH AMERICA INC 260318 11/30/2023 44,260.45 079468 CRANK, ALICIA 260319 11/30/2023 500.00 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 260320 11/30/2023 523.20 073823 DAVID EVANS & ASSOC INC 260321 11/30/2023 5,872.48 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 260322 11/30/2023 680.00 075153 DOPPS, MARIA 260323 11/30/2023 1,300.00 007253 DUNN LUMBER 260324 11/30/2023 42.48 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 260325 11/30/2023 21.82 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 260326 11/30/2023 1,078.91 075200 EDUARDO ZALDIBAR 260327 11/30/2023 130.00 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 260328 11/30/2023 848.81 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD 260329 11/30/2023 442.04 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY 260330 11/30/2023 265.40 065427 FCS GROUP 260331 11/30/2023 5,227.37 076436 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION CO 260332 11/30/2023 124,070.00 012560 HACH COMPANY 260333 11/30/2023 26,399.05 074804 HARLES, JANINE 260334 11/30/2023 300.00 078272 HARRINGTON, SHEILAANNE 260335 11/30/2023 130.00 066575 HERC RENTALS INC 260336 11/30/2023 2,735.07 074966 HIATT CONSULTING LLC 260337 11/30/2023 200.00 076240 HM PACIFIC NORTHWEST INC 260338 11/30/2023 571.16 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 260339 11/30/2023 6,122.80 061013 HONEY BUCKET 260340 11/30/2023 3,745.22 079469 HOUSING HOPE 260341 11/30/2023 1,004,984.56 075966 HULBERT, CARRIE 260342 11/30/2023 2,851.67 069733 ICONIX WATERWORKS INC 260343 11/30/2023 1,012.73 076917 JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP INC 260344 11/30/2023 3,098.95 075062 JAMESTOWN NETWORKS 260345 11/30/2023 543.38 070576 JB ASPHALT PAVING 260346 11/30/2023 58,746.44 078250 KAUFER DMC LLC 260347 11/30/2023 300.00 071137 KIDZ LOVE SOCCER 260348 11/30/2023 2,392.00 079069 KISHA POST 260349 11/30/2023 2,345.00 075942 KNOWBE4INC 260350 11/30/2023 637.03 066522 LAKESIDE INDUSTRIES INC 260351 11/30/2023 1,700.60 074158 LASER UNDERGROUND & EARTHWORKS 260352 11/30/2023 499,554.20 075149 LIM, VANNARA 260353 11/30/2023 260.00 076177 MCKINSTRY LOCKBOX 260354 11/30/2023 79,823.66 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 260355 11/30/2023 256.87 Page: 1 Packet Pg. 82 apPosPay Positive Pay Listing 11/30/2023 11:02:44AM City of Edmonds Document group: jacobson Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 260356 11/30/2023 1,951.11 075266 MORGAN MECHANICAL INC 260357 11/30/2023 1,966.90 075520 NOBLE, LINDA 260358 11/30/2023 260.00 024960 NORTH COAST ELECTRIC COMPANY 260359 11/30/2023 5.83 075542 NORTHWEST LANDSCAPE SUPPLY 260360 11/30/2023 110.60 078285 NPDESPRO LLC 260361 11/30/2023 6,574.75 076902 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CTR OF WA 260362 11/30/2023 118.00 079180 PARK, KELLY 260363 11/30/2023 4,087.50 072507 PEACE OF MIND OFFICE SUPPORT 260364 11/30/2023 112.00 073231 POLYDYNE INC 260365 11/30/2023 37,004.24 079020 PRECISION LANGUAGE SERVICES 260366 11/30/2023 260.00 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 260367 11/30/2023 2,607.10 062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL COMPANY 260368 11/30/2023 4,133.43 068657 ROBERT HALF 260369 11/30/2023 2,310.00 076328 SCJ ALLIANCE 260370 11/30/2023 478,312.36 071655 SHI INTERNATIONAL CORP 260371 11/30/2023 2,302.57 068132 SHORELINE CONSTRUCTION CO 260372 11/30/2023 557,949.42 075543 SNO CO PUBLIC DEFENDER ASSOC 260373 11/30/2023 3,153.46 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 260374 11/30/2023 32,863.93 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE 260375 11/30/2023 36,346.58 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE 260376 11/30/2023 1,600.00 006630 SNOHOMISH COUNTY 260377 11/30/2023 295.00 037303 SO SNOHOMISH CO FIRE & RESCUE 260378 11/30/2023 917,042.00 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 260379 11/30/2023 2,599.85 074797 SUPER CHARGE MARKETING LLC 260380 11/30/2023 650.00 075649 TEITZEL, DAVE 260381 11/30/2023 117.90 071666 TETRA TECH INC 260382 11/30/2023 512.50 075025 THE BRANDING IRON LLC 260383 11/30/2023 2,756.98 068141 TRANSPO GROUP 260384 11/30/2023 26,591.26 070774 ULINE INC 260385 11/30/2023 167.41 064423 USA BLUE BOOK 260386 11/30/2023 3,190.52 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 260387 11/30/2023 38.50 069816 VWR INTERNATIONAL INC 260388 11/30/2023 110.69 065568 WATER SERVICES NW INC 260389 11/30/2023 471.30 069691 WESTERN SYSTEMS 260390 11/30/2023 14,562.39 063008 WSDOT 260391 11/30/2023 200.67 079243 YOUNG MARKETING 260392 11/30/2023 2,000.00 011900 ZIPLY FIBER 260393 11/30/2023 1,010.44 G randTotal : 4,142,940.45 Total count: 91 Page: 2 Packet Pg. 83 7.6 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/5/2023 2023 Board and Commission Retirements Staff Lead: {Type Name of Staff Lead} Department: Mayor's Office Preparer: Carolyn LaFave Background/History This year we have eight community volunteers retiring from various City boards and commissions: 1. Joseph Herr, Architectural Design Board 2. Lauri Strauss, Architectural Design Board 3. Lisa Palmatier, Arts Commission 4. Alison Alfonzo Pence, Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility Commission 5. Ardeth Week, Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility Commission 6. Pat Moriarty, Lodging Tax Advisory Committee 7. Joe Mclalwain, Lodging Tax Advisory Committee 8. Greg Lange, Sister City Commission Staff Recommendation Narrative Mayor Nelson would like thank the retiring board and commission members for their service to the City of Edmonds and the community. Attachments: 2023 Board Commission Retirements REV 2 Packet Pg. 84 7.6.a 2023 COE Board & Commission Retirements Architectural Design Board - term limits: 2 consecutive 4-year terms 1. Joseph Herr, Position #2 Builder, 2016 - 2023 2. Lauri Strauss, Position #5 Architect, 2016 - 2023 Arts Commission - term limits: 2 consecutive 4-year terms 1. Lisa Palmatier, Position #1 Visual, 2020 - 2023 2. Rhonda Soikowski, Position #4 Performing, 2018 - 2023 Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility Commission - term limits: 3-year terms, no term limits 1. Alison Alfonzo Pence, Position #5, 1 term, 1/5/202 - 12/31/2023 2. Ardeth Weed, Position #6, 1 term, 1/5/2021 - 12/31/2023 Lodging Tax Advisory Committee - term limits: 1-year terms, no term limits 1. Pat Moriarty, Position #2 Provider, 2013 - 2023 2. Joe Mclalwain, Position #6 Tax User, 2007 - 2023 Sister City Commission - term limits: 3-year terms, no term limits 1. Greg Lange, Position #3, 2017 - 2023 11/30/2023 2:30 PM Packet Pg. 85 7.7 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/5/2023 2024 Board and Commission Reappointments Staff Lead: Carolyn LaFave Department: Mayor's Office Preparer: Carolyn LaFave Background/History Community volunteers are essential to the operation of the City's various boards & Commissions. They provide knowledge and experience to the Mayor, City Council, and staff on a variety of issues. They also organize community events and help influence and shape our community. Edmonds is fortunate to have such a dedicated and hard working group of volunteers and we thank them for their willingness to serve the Edmonds Community. Staff Recommendation Reappointment of the attached list of board & Commission members. Narrative The attached list of board and commission members have requested reappointment. All members and positions have been vetted for eligibility. Attachments: 2024 Board_Commission_Reappointments_REV 1 Packet Pg. 86 7.7.a 2024 COE Board & Commission Reappointments Architectural Design Board - term limits: 2 consecutive 4-year terms 1. Maurine Jeude, Position #3 Layman, 2019 - 2023. Final term will expire on 12/31/2027 2. Kim Bayer, Position #6 Layman, 2019 - 2023. Final term will expire on 12/31/2027 Arts Commission - term limits: 2 consecutive 4-year terms 1. Paul Cogley, Position #7 Literary, 2023 - 2023 (partial term). First full -term appointment will expire on 12/31/2027 Cemetery Board - term limits: 4-year terms, no term limits 1. Ashley Robinson, Position #7, 2020 - 2023. New term will expire on 12/31/2027 Diversity Commission - term limits: 3-year terms, no term limits 1. Jeanett Quintanilla, Position #4, 2022 - 2023 (partial term). New term will expire on 12/31/2026 Historic Preservation Commission - term limits: 3-year terms, no term limits 1. David Preston, Position #6 Citizen, 2018 - 2023. New term will expire on 12/31/2026 Lodging Tax Advisory Committee - term limits: 1-year terms, no term limits 1. Cystal Berclaz, Position #1 Provider, 2023 - 2023. New term will expire on 12/31/2024 2. Frances Chapin, Position #4 Tax User, 2000 - 2023. New term will expire on 12/31/2024 Planning Board - term limits: 4-year terms, no term limits 1. Jeremy Mitchell, Position #3, 2023 - 2023. New term will expire on 12/31/2027 2. Richard Kuehn, Position #4, 2021 - 2023. New term will expire on 12/31/2027 Sister City Commission - term limits: 3-year terms, no term limits 1. Michele Fellows, Position #8 - reappoint to 4t" term. New term will expire on 12/31/2026 2. Yuri Nishiyama, Position #9, 2022 - 2023, (partial term). New term will expire on 12/31/2026 3. Karyn Heinekin, Position #10, 2014 - 2023. New term will expire on 12/31/2026 11/30/2023 10:40 AM Packet Pg. 87 7.8 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/5/2023 Ordinance to rezone 9530 and 9620 Edmonds Way (PLN2023-0024) Staff Lead: Amber Brokenshire Department: Planning & Development Preparer: Amber Brokenshire Background/History On September 13, 2023, the Planning Board held a public hearing on the rezone proposal and recommended that the City Council approve the rezone request. On October 17, 2023, City Council held a closed -record review of the rezone proposal and voted unanimously to approve the request (Attachment 2). Staff Recommendation Adopt ordinance as included in Attachment 1. Narrative Edmonds Way LLC (Matt Driscoll, rep.) and Shaun Leiser have applied to rezone two parcels located at 9530 and 9620 Edmonds Way from Multiple Residential - Edmonds Way (RM-EW) and Multiple Residential (RM-1.5) to Community Business - Edmonds Way (BC-EW). A site -specific rezone is a "Type IV" application reviewed for consistency with the criteria in ECDC 20.40.010. Staff makes a recommendation to the Planning Board who conducts a public hearing and forwards a recommendation to the City Council, who makes the final decision after a closed -record review. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Rezone Ordinance and Exhibit A Zoning Map Attachment 2 - Council Minutes 10.17.2023 Packet Pg. 88 7.8.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS AND APPROVING A CHANGE IN ZONING FOR ONE PARCEL ADDRESSED 9530 EDMONDS WAY FROM RM-EW TO BC-EW AND ONE PARCEL ADDRESSED 9620 EDMONDS WAY FROM RM-1.5 TO BC-EW; AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT OF THE CITY' S OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, Matt Driscoll of d/Arch LLC and Shaun Leiser have applied for a rezone of two property located at 9530 Edmonds Way (Tax Parcel Number 27033600117600) and 9620 Edmonds Way (Tax Parcel Number 27033600114000; and WHEREAS, the requested rezone would change the zoning of the property at 9530 Edmonds Way from Multiple Residential Edmonds Way (RM-EW) to Community Business Edmonds Way (BC-EW); and WHEREAS, the requested rezone would change the zoning of the property at 9620 Edmonds Way from Multiple Residential (RM-1.5) to Community Business Edmonds Way (BC- EW); and WHEREAS, a site -specific rezone is a "Type IV" application where staff makes a recommendation to the Planning Board who then conducts a public hearing and ultimately forwards a recommendation to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board held an open record public hearing on September 13, 2023 and unanimously recommended approval; and -1- Packet Pg. 89 7.8.a 17, 2023; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a closed -record review of the project on October WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the full record before the Planning Board, including the Planning Division Advisory Report, Findings, Analysis and Recommendation for file number PLN2023-0024, dated August 18, 2023, and the various attachments thereto; and WHEREAS, the City Council preliminarily voted to approve the rezone on October 17, 2023 and directed the City Attorney to prepare this ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. For its findings and conclusions in support of the rezone effected by this ordinance, the City Council hereby adopts by this reference the findings and conclusions contained in the Planning Division Advisory Report, Findings, Analysis and Recommendation for file number PLN2023-0024, dated August 18, 2023. Section 2. Two lot of record addressed 9530 and 9620 Edmonds Way, Edmonds, Washington and shown on the map from file number PLN2023-0024, attached as Exhibit A hereto, are hereby rezoned from Multiple Residential Edmonds Way (RM-EW) to Community Business Edmonds Way (BC-EW) and Multiple Residential (RM-1.5) to Community Business Edmonds Way (BC-EW). Exhibit A is hereby incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full Section 3. The Planning and Development Director or her designee is hereby authorized and directed to make appropriate amendments to the Edmonds Zoning Map in order to properly designate the rezoned property as BC-EW pursuant to Section 2 of this ordinance. -2- Packet Pg. 90 7.8.a 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. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. APPROVED: MAYOR MIKE NELSON -3- Packet Pg. 91 7.8.a SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2023, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS AND APPROVING A CHANGE IN ZONING FOR ONE PARCEL ADDRESSED 9530 EDMONDS WAY FROM RM-EW TO BC-EW AND ONE PARCEL ADDRESSED 9620 EDMONDS WAY FROM RM-1.5 TO BC-EW; AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT OF THE CITY' S OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2023. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY -4- Packet Pg. 92 7.8.a Exhibit A See attached zoning map -5- Packet Pg. 93 Iq__- City of Edmonds PLN2023-0024 REZONE I r M � I RS_P e � i BG-EW ,D I I - I ' lP I' 1.5 1 d �b N OF/ L'017 a ',,r rn t'V9529_ 4 - - 9508 -230.24=" '2�t3�10i27`. rc= —96G1 1: 1,516 O 0 126.30 252.6 Feet 188.1 This ma is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site anc 2,257 p � B p pp B reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be act WGS_1984_Web-Mercator _Auxiliary -Sphere current, or otherwise re © City of Edmonds THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUC Legend ReZones & PRD RoW Zoning . RS-6 RS-8 RS-10 RS-12 © RSW-12 RS-20 RS-MP RM-3 ■ RM-2.4 ■ RM-1.5 RM-EW 13131 BD2 13133 13134 BD5 OR WMU ® BP BN ® FVMU BC Notes ZONING MAP Packet Pg. 94 M CD Cl) L0 0 N d 0 m C C L V 7.8.b 5. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS 6. APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH WSP FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES ON THE 76TH AVE OVERLAY PROJECT 7. APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH SCJ FOR HIGHWAY 99 STAGE 2 8. APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH WSP FOR HIGHWAY 99 REVITALIZATION & GATEWAY PROJECT 9. AMENDING ECC 5.05.122 F.1-AMMENDING THE DANGEROUS DOG STATUTE 10. AMENDING ECC 5.01.010-ADOPTION OF RCW 9.94A.835 (SPECIAL ALLEGATION - SEXUAL MOTIVATION) 11. AMENDING ECC 5.36.045-CREATION OF THE CRIME OF VEHICLE TRESPASS 12. VERDANT GRANT ACCEPTANCE 8. CLOSED RECORD REVIEW 1. PLN2023-0024 REZONE AT 9530 & 9620 EDMONDS WAY [Due to technical difficulties, staff s PowerPoint was not displayed. The PowerPoint was provided in the council packet.] Mayor Nelson read the procedures for the Closed Record Review. The closed record hearing is on the planning board's recommendation to approve a rezone for two parcels located at 9530 and 9620 Edmonds Way from Multiple Residential Edmonds Way (RM-EW) and Multiple Residential (RM-1.5) to Community Business Edmonds Way (BC-EW), He opened the hearing on file number PLN2023-0024. Mayor Nelson continued, an open record public hearing has already been held before the planning board. This hearing is a closed record hearing which means the council's consideration is limited to the record created before the planning board. Only those who participated at the planning board hearing will be given an opportunity to be heard during this closed record hearing. Anyone who participated at the open record hearing who wishes to speak again during the closed record hearing may not introduce new facts that were not presented to the planning board. The city council will be acting in a quasi-judicial capacity on this agenda item. In other words, for this item, the councilmembers will be acting like judges, not legislators. Because councilmembers will be acting like judges, the hearing must be fair in form and substance as well as appearance. In order to assure the hearing is both fair and appears to be fair, he will ask all councilmembers to make certain disclosures if applicable in response to a series of questions. With regard to bias, Mayor Nelson asked if any councilmember had interest in this property or issue. Councilmembers Nand, Buckshnis, Olson, Chen, Paine and Teitzel and Council President Tibbott answered they did not. Mayor Nelson asked if any councilmember stands to gain or lose any financial benefit as a result of the outcome of this hearing. Councilmembers Nand, Buckshnis, Olson, Chen, Paine and Teitzel and Council President Tibbott answered no. Mayor Nelson asked if each councilmember could hear and consider this in a fair and objective manner. Councilmembers Nand, Buckshnis, Olson, Chen, Paine and Teitzel and Council President Tibbott answered they could. With regard to ex parte contact, Mayor Nelson asked if any member of the council had engaged in communication outside the public hearing with opponents or proponents on the issue to be heard. If so, the member must place on the record the substance of any such communication so other interested parties may have the right to rebut the substance of the communication. Councilmembers Nand, Buckshnis, Olson, Chen, Paine and Teitzel and Council President Tibbott answered they had not. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 17, 2023 Page 6 Packet Pg. 95 7.8.b Mayor Nelson asked if any councilmember would be recusing themselves for any reason and if so, the recusing councilmember should state the reason for their recusal. No councilmembers recused themselves. Mayor Nelson asked if any audience member objected to his or any councilmembers' participation in the hearing. If objection exists, the objector must state the reason for the objection. There was no one in the audience that objected to the mayor or council's participation. Associate Planner Amber Brokenshire reviewed: Overview o Applicant requested rezone from Multiple Residential — Edmonds Way (RM-EW) to Community Business — Edmonds Way (BC-EW) for property at 9530 Edmonds Way ■ Addition of adjacent PUD substation (zoned RM-1.5) at 9620 Edmonds Way ■ The adjacent parcel, the PUD substation at 9620 Edmonds Way was added to the proposal o Recommendation ■ Following a public hearing on August 23 and September 13, the planning board recommended approval of the rezone of both parcels. Senior Planner Mike Clugston advised packet pages 153 and 154 contain a zoning map of the area and an aerial photo for orientation. Ms. Brokenshire continued: Addition of PUD Substation at 9620 Edmonds Way o Parcel was not originally part of the applicant's proposal o During the July 26 introduction to the proposal, planning board members inquired about adding the adjacent PUD substation to provide a consistent zoning in this portion of Edmonds Way o City staff reached out to PUD on July 27 asking about including the property as part of the rezone proposal o PUD confirmed in an August 7 email (Attachment 9) that they had no objections to the proposed zoning change o Proposal boundaries have been expanded to include both properties Site Context o The proposal includes two parcels fronting Edmonds Way o Both parcels are largely level toward Edmonds Way o The eastern site, 9530 Edmonds Way, has remained undeveloped after being rezoned from RM-1.5 to RM-EW in 2022 Rezone Review Criteria o Per ECDC 20.40.010, the planning board review shall at least consider the following factors in reviewing a proposed rezone ■ Comprehensive Plan ■ Zoning Ordinance ■ Surrounding Area ■ Changes ■ Suitability ■ Value Mr. Clugston advised the rezone review criteria is summarized on packet pages 115 and 116. The packet includes the planning board's minutes with their analysis. Their final decision is on packet page 197. Ms. Brokenshire continued her presentation: • Comprehensive plan and compatible zoning Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 17, 2023 Page 7 Packet Pg. 96 7.8.b o Comprehensive Plan Designation - Edmonds Way Corridor o Compatible Zoning - BP, BN, BC, or similar commercial zone and RM zones o A rezone to BC-EW for both parcels would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation and would not require SEPA review for the rezone ■ SEPA review required at project stage • Zoning Analysis o A rezone to BC-EW would allow for increased densities, reduced setbacks, a smaller floor area ratio, and an increased height allowance with additional site development standards for buildings fronting Edmonds Way. o The rezone request is consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and would be consistent with the comp plan while helping to achieve a variety of housing types. • Surrounding Area o Western lot is developed with a PUD substation o Eastern lot is undeveloped o Design review is underway for the lot included in last year's rezone (not included in this rezone) o Multi -family zoning east and west of the subject properties o Properties to east could be developed with a mix of MF & SF, could develop to MF with the current RM designation. o Edmonds Way north of sites. o Single family residential south (approx. 26' change in elevation) o BC-EW allows buildings fronting Edmonds Way to increase height to 40 feet with additional development requirements. (ECDC 16.30.020) o Sites north of Edmonds Way have already been rezoned to BC-EW • Rezone is consistent with the six criteria in ECDC 20.40.010. • Design standards and development regulations will ensure the public health, safety and welfare are protected • Planning board recommended council approve the zone from RM-EW and RM- 1.5 to BC-EW. Applicant Shawn Leiser, Shoreline, explained he grew up in Edmonds attended Edmonds schools, is invested in the Edmonds community, and spends many evenings with his family in Edmonds. He applied for a rezone in 2022 which was approved. At that time, comments were positive and had a similar outcome. One of the comments made by council in 2022 was an interest in increased density, a goal this rezone will achieve by adding density which is lacking in Edmonds. The property is in the Edmonds Way Corridor and meets all the comprehensive plan goals. Public Comments There were no participants in the open record hearing who wished to provide comment. Mayor Nelson relayed the council may ask clarifying questions but may not ask for information outside the record. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the planning board was concerned about traffic and ingress and egress as a result of this new density and she did not see a resolution to that. She asked whether a traffic impact study would be done. Mr. Leiser answered his parcel and the abutting parcel to the east plan to co -develop in the future and the current plan is to have shared driveway access so multiple parcels share a single ingress/egress which will help with the impact to Edmonds Way. Ms. Brokenshire answered any transportation impacts will be addressed during the development phase, not during the rezone phase. A traffic study will be required with the development. Councilmember Teitzel referred to the parcel at 9620 Edmonds Way, the PUD parcel adjacent to 9530 Edmonds Way and asked why staff decided to rezone the PUD site at the same time. He asked if it was Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 17, 2023 Page 8 Packet Pg. 97 envisioned the substation would be eliminated and the property developed at some point in the future. He asked the logic for rezoning the PUD site. Ms. Brokenshire answered the planning board asked whether that parcel could be included in the proposal to create consistent zoning to the corner. There are no development proposals for the PUD substation and there is no intent to sell or redevelop the parcel, it was just to create consistent zoning. Councilmember Paine assumed part of requirements for the development are public benefits and she recognized that would be addressed in the development phase. Council President Tibbott asked how building heights in that area affect neighbors, especially those on top of the hill and how that has been addressed. Mr. Leiser answered there is an approximately 26 foot height difference between the top of hill and his parcel so there is already a large gradient between the two which helps with abutting land and zones. With regard to Councilmember Teitzel's question about zoning, he commented it is helpful to have similar zones next to each other so there are consistent setbacks. There is a large grade difference between the parcel and the back half of the property is treed. The goal would be to retain trees to create additional buffer. Ms. Brokenshire referred to specific site development standards for the zone on packet page 141. While it states the height limit may be increased to 40 feet, there are several site development standards they have the option to opt into and a few that are required. The setbacks of any proposed building shall be 15 feet in depth from the street. The property abuts a RS zoned property so there should be modulation of the design. There would need to be a 15-foot setback from rear property line, however, the site is sloped toward the back of the property so if development on or near the slope was proposed, a geotechnical report would be required. She summarized there would be additional requirements to develop to that height. Mr. Clugston advised the maximum height for the BC-EW zone can be up to 40 feet with those other design standards. The maximum height for the current zone, RM-EW, is a base of 25 feet which can be increased to 35 feet with additional design standards. Council President Tibbott asked if the top of the hill was 26 feet higher than the building or were the buildings 26 feet higher than the hill. Ms. Brokenshire answered the hill is 26 feet higher at the top. Councilmember Buckshnis observed there appears to be a pocket forest on the site and asked if he planned to retain as many trees as possible. Mr. Leiser answered that is the plan. Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing, advising the council may now deliberate and take action. Councilmember Olson advised during the opportunity for public comment, Mayor Nelson checked and there was no one on Zoom who wished to participate, but that had not been stated for the record. Mayor Nelson agreed no one on Zoom wished to speak during the public hearing. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION BY THE PLANNING BOARD AND APPROVE THE REZONE FOR THIS PARCEL. Councilmember Teitzel questioned whether the council could approve the application tonight and suggested the council could direct staff to create a resolution to approve at a future meeting. Mr. Taraday advised Councilmember Teitzel was correct, if the council concurs with the planning board, the recommended action is to direct staff to prepare an ordinance for adoption on a future consent agenda. Council President Tibbott restated the motion: DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE FOR ADOPTION ON A FUTURE CONSENT AGENDA Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 17, 2023 Page 9 Packet Pg. 98 7.8.b MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. PUBLIC HEARING 2024 BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING #1 Administrative Services Director Dave Turley advised the proposed budget was delivered to council a little over two weeks ago so it is early in the process. Three public hearings are required for the budget process. This year, in the interest of transparency and providing additional opportunity for the public to provide comment and to have direct interaction with the council, there will be four public hearings. Although the budget has only been out two weeks, that is enough time for citizens to look through it and begin to form opinions to share with council. This public hearing is on the entire City budget including utilities, CIP, etc., not just the General Fund. Mayor Nelson opened the public hearing. Jay Grant, Edmonds, advised the 2024 budget had $53,000 for the restrooms at the fishing pier which are not in good condition; $20,000 was delayed to 2025 and $30,000 to 2026 with no increase. He suggested if the project was delayed, which he hoped it would not be, it would likely cost more than $53,000. The budget is proposing a reduction in property taxes assuming the City will join South County Fire (SCF) which would alleviate money paid by the City. He urged caution, advising that is a tax tradeoff to the consumer. He was not opposed to the Regional Fire Authority (RFA), but everything needs to be considered including losing the ability for the council to have direct impact on what SCF does, giving up the City's voice with regard to fire and EMS. With regard to the enforcement cameras, he observed $24 million was budgeted for enforcement. Lynnwood has 11 cameras, 2 for schools, and 8 for intersection, and they issue 36,000 red light citations and project $12.5 million in revenue. He urged the council to look carefully at the revenue projections. Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, suggested the budget discussions start with an understanding of the beginning fund balance which is less than what the reserve policy requires; the City is already in the hole which the council needs to recognize and acknowledge. It was his understanding only the council can approve the administration spending emergency reserves to cover General Fund expenditures. After that starting point, he recommended the council ensure they understood the imbedded assumptions in the budget such as a property tax increase that uses banked capacity to supplement budget. The budget also assumes payments for fire and EMS services will be eliminated starting in 2025; there is no decision package related to that assumption. The budget also assumes revenue from red light cameras. There is no basis for the inflationary factors imbedded in the budget and inflationary factors have a pronounced effect as they compound year over year. The budget also uses ARPA funds to bail out the General Fund. Assumptions should be part of the decision packages and the council should determine whether they agree with those assumptions, and if not, determine alternate assumptions and have the budget rerun based on the assumptions the council agrees to. He personally did not consider the 2024 budget barebones; it was tailored to scare the council into making decisions in a non -transparent manner and he believed there were reasonable alternatives to the budget as proposed. Grant Gladow, Edmonds, expressed his appreciation to the council for their dedication to serving the needs of the community. He extended his thanks to the council for their unanimous approval of the City's 2023 climate action plan. Good intentions 13 years led to the adoption of Edmonds' first climate action plan in 2010. Unfortunately, due to the lack of an implementation plan, none of the goals in the private sector of the plan were met. Now it is imperative that the same good intentions initiated by this council last March with approval of the 2023 CAP be enacted. To do so, the City needs to hire a climate action manager and a grants manager as proposed in the 2024 budget. Volunteers including the climate protection Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 17, 2023 Page 10 Packet Pg. 99 8.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/5/2023 Adopt the 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan & Capital Improvement Program Staff Lead: Rob English, Oscar Antillon, Angie Feser & Shannon Burley Department: Engineering Preparer: Rob English Background/History On September 19, 2023, staff presented the proposed 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan & Capital Improvement Program in a joint meeting with the City Council and Planning Board. On October 10, 2023, a public hearing was held for this item. On October 24, 2023, this item was forwarded to a future City Council meeting for further discussion. On November 6, 2023, City Council continued discussion and approved amendments to the proposed 2024-2029 CFP-CIP documents. On November 14, 2023, City Council continued discussion on the proposed 2024-2029 CFP-CIP documents. Staff Recommendation Approve Ordinance. Narrative The Public Works and Utilities Department 2024-2029 CFP/CIP is included as Attachment 1. The Parks, Recreation & Human Services Department 2024-2029 CFP/CIP is included as Attachment 2. The presentations for Public Works & Utilities and Parks, Recreation and Human Services are attached. (Attachments 3 & 4). The Planning Board held a public hearing on September 27, 2023 (see Attachment 5 for the minutes). The Planning Board prepared a memo to the City Council after their review of the CFP-CIP documents (see Attachment 6). The Planning Board Chair notified City staff of a typo in the letter regarding the reference to the sidewalks on 236th St. SW in the third paragraph. The limits on 236th St. SW should have been 84th Ave W and State Route 104 (not HWY 99). The Planning Board minutes from the October 11, 2023 meeting are attached (Attachment 7). Public Works and Parks staff have responded to council member questions since the initial presentations were made in September. Responses to council member questions are attached (Public Works - Attachments 8 & 9 and Parks Attachments 10). Packet Pg. 100 8.1 The amendments and changes discussed at the November 6th and 14th City Council meeting are attached (Public Works - Attachment 11 and Parks Attachment 12). Attachments 13 and 14 are proposed amendments submitted by council members Teitzel and Buckshnis. Attachment 16 is the proposed ordinance to adopt the 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan and Capital Improvement Program for the Public Works & Utilities Department and Parks, Recreation and Human Services Department. BACKGROUND: The City's Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Element is updated annually and identifies capital projects for at least the next six years, which support the City's Comprehensive Plan. CFP projects are capital improvement projects that expand existing facilities/infrastructure or provide new capital facilities in order to accommodate the City's projected population growth in accordance with the Growth Management Act. Thus, capital projects that preserve existing capital facilities are not CFP projects. These preservation projects are part of the six -year capital improvement program (CIP) along with capital facility plan projects that encompass the projected expenditure needs for all city capital related projects. Attachments: Attachment 1 - 2024 Public Works CIP.CFP FINAL Attachment 2 - 2024 Parks CIP.CFP FINAL Attachment 3 - Public Works Presentation Attachment 4 - Parks Presentation Attachment 5 - Planning Board Minutes 09.27.23 Attachment 6 - Planning Board Memo Attachment 7 - Planning Board Minutes 10.11.2023 Attachment 8 - Public Works Q and A Matrix 10.03.2023 Attachment 9 - PW CIP CFP Q and A Matrix 11.06.2023 Attachment 10 - Parks Capital Q and A Matrix 2023.11.08 Attachment 11 - PW CFP-CIP Amendments 12.05.23 Attachment 12 - Parks CIP-CFP 2024-2029 REVISIONS Attachment 13 - Teitzel CIP CFP amendments 10 29 23 Attachment 14 - Buckshnis CFP-CIP Amendments Attachment 15 - COE PW CIP Overview Attachment 16 - Ordinance Packet Pg. 101 8.1.a TRANSPORTATION & UTILITY PROJECT MAP..............................................................ii FACILITIES & WWTP PROJECT MAP............................................................................iii TRANSPORTATION...........................................................................................................1 . PRESERVATION/MAINTENANCE PROJECTS............................................................6 SAFETY/CAPACITY ANALYSIS......................................................................................5 NON -MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS.........................................39 as FERRYPROJECTS....................................................................................................62 TRAFFIC CALMING 64 ................................................................................................ TRAFFICPLANNING.............................................................................................. 66 GREENSTREETS......................................................................................................69 WATER........................................................................................................................... 71 STORMWATER.............................................................................................................. 76 EDMONDS MARSH ESTUARY RESTORATION RELATED PROJECTS.....................78 PERRINVILLE CREEK BASIN PROJECTS..........................................................................80 STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS................................................84 ANNUALLY FUNDED PROJECTS...........................................................................87 COMPLIANCE RELATED PROJECTS......................................................................90 SEWER........................................................................................................................... 92 FACILITIES...................................................................................................................... 99 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT.........................................................................121 CFP-CIP COMPARISON(2024-2029)....................................................................133 Packet Pg. 103 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 8.1.a PWT-05 FPW,I,��T-07 PWT-65 �X-.� PWT-04 ,— PWT-51 PWT-25 PWT-20 • PWT-03 PWT-09 PWT-12 W. 6 PWT-35 "PVUT-3Z PWT-19 PWT-16 • PWT-11 PWT-15 PWT-08 PWT-21 �_ PWT-�9 • PWT-30 PWTI20 PWT-13 PWT-14 PWT-47 P.WT 3? PWT-3i PWT-06 PWT-23 PWTi64 PWT-50 PWT-06 PWS-11 '� = � �� ►� PWD-06 J WP PWT-26 P ��' PWT-10 *Site specific projects only. Citywide/annual citywide projects not shown. PWT-43 •L Packet Pg. 104 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 ii 8.1.a Sq/N , PWF-07 PWF-01 � 44b Zak PWF-16 ^� '► PWF-03 0 f�lj 'i�11 : �I o yJ=y PWF-100 !ii-09 W*417 �iiif ������ Fit Fa-r;- jmwmvvvmw�r�vr-ca� .O Y v li "rp-mem o q PWF-13�� mr . ,, �k IOU J92M. .L. 11 ELTi PWF-09 M fF-03 IP • PW 3 PWF-10 14 RUB' IEPF-23 F PWF=13�� 0 * Site specific projects only. Citywidefa-nnual citywide 2024 PW CFP/CIP 1 November2023 M PWF-08 • --TWA �-A rolects no sown." Packet Pg. 105 iP_ 8.1.a 0] s Packet Pg. 106 16 TRANSPORTATION Preservation / Maintenance Projects PWT-01 Annual Street Preservation 81 $1,525,000 $2,400,000 $1,300,000 $2,630,000 $2,630,000 $2,630,000 $13,115,000 $39,450,000 $52,565,0( N Program 0 PWT-03 76th Ave. W Overlay from 196th 67 $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $0 (14 $20,0( 4 St. SW to Olympic View Dr. 04 PWT-04 Main St. Overlay from 6th Ave. to 68 $789,553 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $789,553 $0 N $789,5,, 4 gth Ave. PWT-05 Puget Dr. / OVD Signal Upgrades $0 $0 $0 $90,000 $496,000 $0 $586,000 $0 0 $586,0( Q PWT-06 Signal Upgrades - 100th Ave / $0 $0 $0 $165,000 $773,000 $0 $938,000 $0 $938,0( 238th St. SW c PWT-07 Main St. / 3rd Signal Upgrades $0 $0 $0 $0 $110,000 $383,000 $493,000 $0 $493,0( .� d PWT-61 Olympic View Dr Overlay - 196th / $0 $200,000 $1,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $0 $1,500,0( SR-524 to Talbot Rd —J PWT-68 88th Ave Overlay and Sidewalk 77 $150,000 $1,350,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $0 $1,500,0( Z Repair K a Safety / Capacity Analysis LL L) PWT-08 X 228th St. SW from Hwy 99 to 95th $0 $0 $0 $1,447,000 $2,500,000 $13,100,000 $17,047,000 $0 $17,047,0( a PI. W Corridor U PWT-09 X Hwy 99 Revitalization &Gateway - 69 $114,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $114,000 $0 $114,0( o Stage 2 PWT-10 X Hwy 99 Revitalization - Stage 3 70 $1,290,000 $1,630,000 $1,612,000 $13,000,000 $13,752,000 $0 $31,284,000 $0 $31,284,0( .2 PWT-11 X Hwy 99 Revitalization - Stage 4 71 $1,290,000 $1,500,000 $4,000,000 $2,369,000 $0 $16,434,000 $25,593,000 $16,000,000 $41,593,0( v N O PWT-12 X Hwy 99 Revitalization - Stage 5 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,500,000 $43,673,000 $47,173,0( N PWT-13 X Hwy 99 Revitalization - Stage 6 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,160,000 r $21,160,0( E PWT-14 X Hwy 99 Revitalization - Stage 7 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,430,000 $40,430,0( 0 PWT-15 X Hwy 99 Revitalization - Stage 8 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35,242,000 .r .r $35,242,0( Q c aD PWT-16 X Hwy 99 Revitalization - Stage 9 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,277,000 $21,277,0( E s PWT-17 X SR 524 (196th St. SW) / 88th Ave. W $0 $0 $0 $263,000 $238,000 $788,000 $1,289,000 $0 $1,289,0( Q Intersection Improvements PWT-18 X Main St. / 9th Ave. Intersection $0 $0 $0 $198,000 $1,092,000 $0 $1,290,000 $0 $1,290,00u Improvements Packet Pg. 107 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 2 TRANSPORTATION PWT-19 X 76th Ave. W / 220th St. SW - 72 $650,000 $774,100 Intersection Improvements PWT-20 SR-104 Adaptive System 73 $186,575 $0 PWT-21 X SR-104 /100th Ave W. Intersection $0 $0 Improvements PWT-22 X SR-104 / 95th PI. W Intersection $0 $0 Improvements PWT-23 X SR-104 / 238th St. SW $0 $0 Intersection Improvements PWT-24 X Olympic View Dr. / 76th Ave. W $0 $0 Intersection Improvements PWT-25 X 84th Ave. W (212th St. SW to $0 $0 238th St. SW) PWT-26 X SR-104 / 76th Ave. W Intersection $0 $0 Improvements PWT-27 X Olympic View Dr. / 174th St. SW $0 $0 Intersection Improvements PWT-28 175th Slope Repair $0 $0 PWT-59 2024 Traffic Signal and Safety 74 $30,290 $0 Upgrades PWT-67 Waterfront Emergency Response 83 $0 $0 Study Non -Motorized Transportation Projects PWT-29 X 232nd St. SW Walkway from $0 $0 100th Ave. to SR-104 PWT-30 X 236th St. SW Walkway - Madrona $0 $0 Elementary to 97th Ave. W PWT-31 X 236th St. SW Walkway from Hwy. $0 $0 99 to 76th Ave. W PWT-32 X 84th Ave. W Walkway from 238th $160,000 $1,350,000 St. SW to 234th St. SW PWT-33 X 80th Ave. W Walkway from 212th $0 $0 St. SW to 206th St. SW PWT-34 X 80th Ave. W Walkway from 188th $0 $0 St. SW to Olympic View Dr. PWT-35 X 218th St. SW Walkway from 76th $0 $0 Ave. W to 84th Ave. W $50,000 $6,670,000 $0 $0 $8,144,100 $0 $8,144,1( U $0 $4,400,000 $0 $0 $4,586,575 $0 $4,586,5, c N $0 $180,000 $720,000 $1,600,000 $2,500,000 $0 $2,500,0( c N $0 $42,000 $228,000 $0 $270,000 $0 $270,0( a $0 $227,000 $1,292,000 $0 $1,519,000 $0 $1,519,0( Q r $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,347,000 $1,347,0( c A $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $17,615,000 $17,615,0( $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,424,000 $3,424,0( Q z $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $715,000 $715,0( a u_ U $0 $1,000,000 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,0( a U $0 $0 $0 $0 $30,290 $0 $30,2f .12 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 a v $0 $0 $284,000 $1,572,000 $1,856,000 $0 $1,856,0( c N $0 $296,000 $1,692,000 $0 $1,988,000 $0 $1,988,0( r c m $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,937,000 $1,937,0( E t v $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,510,000 $0 $1,510,0( Q 4� $0 $110,000 $120,000 $1,352,000 $1,582,000 $0 $1,582,0( C E $0 $482,000 $1,851,000 $0 $2,333,000 $0 $2,333,0( 5 r r $0 $264,000 $1,474,000 $0 $1,738,000 $0 $1,738,0( Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 3 1 Packet Pg. 108 TRANSPORTATION Walnut St. Walkway from 6th Ave. PWT-36 X S to 7th Ave S PWT-37 X 216th St. SW Walkway from Hwy. 99 to 72nd Ave W Citywide Bicycle Improvements PWT-39 X Project 78 PWT-40 X Maplewood Dr. Walkway from Main St. to 200th St. SW 95th PI. W Walkway from 224th PWT-41 X St. SW to 220th St. SW PWT-43 X SR-104 / 76th Ave. W Non - Motorized Trans Improvements PWT-45 X SR-104 Walkway - HAWK Signal to Pine / Pine from SR-104 to 9th PWT-46 X 191 st St. SW from 80th Ave. W to 76th Ave. W 104th Ave. W / Robinhood Lane PWT-47 X from 238th to 106th PWT-48 X 80th Ave. W from 218th St. SW to 220th St. SW 84th Ave. W from 188th St. SW to PWT-49 X 186th St. SW PWT-50 X 238th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 76th Ave. W Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave. PWT-55 X S to 9th Ave. S 80 PWT-60 2024 Pedestrian Safety Program 75 PWT-66 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor Ferry Projects PWT-51 X Ferry Storage Improvements from Pine St. to Dayton St. Traffic Calming PWT-52 Traffic Calming Program 79 $0 $0 $0 $290,000 $0 $0 $290,000 $0 $290,0( U $0 $0 $0 $220,000 $0 $0 $220,000 $0 $220,0( c N $15,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,000 $0 $15,0( N 0 N $0 $0 $0 $220,000 $220,000 $2,511,000 $2,951,000 $0 $2,951,0( a $0 $0 $0 $131,000 $731,000 $0 $862,000 $0 $862,0( Q $0 $0 $0 $261,000 $1,310,000 $0 $1,571,000 $0 $1,571,0( c .y $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,276,000 $3,276,000 $0 $3,276,0( $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $719,000 $719,0( Q z $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,124,000 $1,124,0( a LL U $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $344,000 $344,0( a U $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $348,000 $348,0( Y 0 $0 $0 $0 $199,000 $1,164,000 $0 $1,363,000 $0 $1,363,0( .. $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 $10,0( a v $80,770 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $80,770 $0 $80,7, N $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $0 $8,000,0( r .r c m E I- $0 $0 $0 $380,000 $0 $0 $380,000 $0 $380,0( 'M r a c aD $100,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $210,000 $330,000 $540,0( E r r Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 4 1 Packet Pg. 109 8.1.a TRANSPORTATION Traffic Planning ADA Transition Plan (Right -of- PWT-53 $0 $440,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $440,000 $0 0 $440,0( Im Way) c N PWT-54 Transportation Plan Update 66 $236,085 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $236,085 $0 $236,M N Green Streets 0 a PWT-64 X Green Streets 236th St SW - 84th $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $0 D $3,500,0( -a Ave W to Highway 99 Q TOTAL EXPENDITURE $6,647,273 $9,666,100 $8,284,000 $37,524,000 $36,619,000 $55,168,000 $153,908,373 $245,135,000 $396,655,3� r C O SOURCEFUNDING 124 2025 2026 2027 2028I' SUBTOTALN 1 1 ' 11 • , 5 G1 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi - $251,570 $105,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $356,570 $0 $356,5; modal revenue Q REET Fund 125 $1,224,345 $850,000 $950,000 $1,190,000 $750,000 $750,000 $5,714,345 $11,250,000 z $16,964,3, LL a REET Fund 126 $975,905 $872,000 $1,614,300 $1,212,000 $772,000 $772,000 $6,218,205 $11,580,000 $17,798,2( U a Transportation Impact Fees $423,361 $466,229 $1,033,475 $0 $0 $0 $1,923,065 $0 $1,923,0( U rn Y General Fund $0 $335,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $335,000 $0 $335,0( Water Utility Fund 421 $18,000 $18,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $36,000 $0 $36,0( •2 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $69,000 $225,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $294,000 $0 $294,0( N Sewer Utility Fund 423 $0 $40,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,000 $0 $40,0( N Federal Grants $2,070,355 $744,871 $2,716,525 $0 $0 $0 $5,531,751 $0 $5,531,7! State Grants $1,572,237 $2,630,000 $1,969,700 $13,000,000 $6,688,000 $0 $25,859,937 $0 m $25,859,9, v Other (Sound Transit Grant) $7,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,500 $0 $7,5( Q ARPA $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 aai E Unsecured Funding $85,000 $3,380,000 $0 $22,122,000 $28,409,000 $53,646,000 $107,557,000 $222,305,000 $329,862,0( r TOTAL REVENUE $6,647,273 $9,666,100 $8,284,000 $37,524,000 $36,619,000 $55,168,000 $153,908,373 $245,135,000 $399,043,3� Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 5 1 Packet Pg. 110 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 Packet Pg. 111 Annual pavement preservation program to maintain City streets. Maintains the City's pavement infrastructure and reduces the need for larger capital investment to rebuild City steets $1,600,000 (2024) Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total 8.1.a $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $130,000 $130,000 $130,000 $1,95O,OOC $1,450,000 $2,250,000 $1,150,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $37,5OO,OOC $1,600,000 $2,400,000 $1,300,000 $2,630,000 $2,630,000 $2,630,000 $39,450,000 $800,000 $750,000 $650,000 $750,000 $750,000 $750,000 $11,25O,OOC $800,000 $750,000 $650,000 $750,000 $750,000 $750,000 $11,25O,OOC $900,000 $1,130,000 $1,130,000 $1,130,000 $16,95O,OOC $1,600,000 $2,400,000 $1,300,000 $2,630,000 $2,630,000 $2,630,000 $39,450,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 7 1 Packet Pg. 112 185th PI SV! II 'Il "I' P1 w > s = a 00 = o H 00,5t 192nd St SW 184th St SW 186th St SW 187th St SW 188th St SW 3 r, Q spy Q 187th P1 SV! T IR 3 �0 v i 189th PI S/✓ a>190th St SW f OPT � o 1 191st St SW Sib 8014 192nd PI SW I)r 193rd PI S 3 a a 194th St ss _ 196TH ST SV s s 7 103rd PI SW F, � o a' O Q rn � 113ah St SW 185th St SW - �.-'o P v O - 4y ^� '� v 3: 185th PI � � MP Q SW I � �c- Q 1861h StSW Stith St I e Sw � 187th P1 SW�, Q 188TH ST SW= � 1881h=P1. —Penny� _Penny Ln d 189th- PI-Shla9thalsv, a 190th=St=SWs 190th_St=SW iw, N191 st PI SW Da/P 192nd St PI SW sW NI192nd ¢ 3 W192nd PI=SW-Park Wa} S 193rd PI SW�a -. -193rdSt SW 193rd St SW 194r3P1 SW ; 194th SI SW a a N A A pavement overlay of 76th Ave from 196th St. SW (SR-524) to Olympic View Dr was completed in 2023. The project close- out and required federal documents for the transportation grant will be completed in 2024. The east side of the street is within the City of Lynnwood and was included in the project. Improve pavement condition and upgrade pedestrian curb ramps to meet ADA standards. In addition to the existing southbound bike lane, the project may add a new northbound bike lane as outlined in the City's Transportation Comprehensive Plan. $2,583,000 Design Right of Way Construction $20,000 Expense Total $20,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- $7,500 REET Fund 125 $5,000 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Other $7,500 Funding Source Total $20,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 8 1 Packet Pg. 113 Z > Q �L ST E O L Q Mw r iIINsS�T 0 Z cc w kn > DAYTON ST Pavement overlay along Main St. from 6th Ave. to 8th Ave. with pedestrian curb ramps upgrades. The project will be fundE with a federal grant and City funds for a local match. Improve pavement conditions and pedestrian accessibility (with ADA curb ramps) on this segment of Main Street. Estimated Project Cost prior year expenditures $937,500 Project Cost Design $9,000 Right of Way Construction $780,553 Expense Total $789,553 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- $672 REET Fund 125 $158,001 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants $630,880 State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $789,553 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 9 1 Packet Pg. 114 8.1.a < 0 fir; S� J 2 Excelsior PI cu wood Ch a' <`G E J o rn � O PUGET DR w > a Puget WayW U >, Edmonds d QElementary 0 i Puget Way — OJ -1— _ _ The project will rebuild the existing traffic signal and remove the signal heads currently on span wire and install standard traffic signal poles with mast arms. Vehicle detention will also be upgraded as part of this project. This upgrade will provide safer roadway conditions since the hanging signal heads will be replaced with fixed signal heads c mast arms. The new vehicle detection will guarantee that all vehicles will be detected. $586,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $90,000 $496,000 $90,000 $496,000 $90,000 $496,000 $90,000 $496,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 10 1 Packet Pg. 115 W -C1 O^+ N - SW i 0 0 1— 237th PI; w CD c V— 238th St SW 3 • a = > Q a � i Faith au o Community Q o . 238th St SW u Church s� N o 2 N c �h is � Install new traffic signal and vehicle detection system. The existing traffic signal is near the end of its anticipated service life. $938,000 Design $165,000 Right of Way Construction $773,000 Expense Total $165,000 $773,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding $165,000 $773,000 Funding Source Total $165,000 $773,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 11 1 Packet Pg. 116 Brackett s Landing as aS� = Post St South Office Railroad M'qi Station 'v tST IT •=� Sp � Mini Park • JZ1-Cli Q' �7 �O Sr Install new traffic signal and vehicle detection system. The existing traffic signal is near the end of its anticipated service life. $493,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total Edmonds Polic UP/ and Municipa Court Veteran' Edmonds Centennial Plaz City Hall Plaza Fountain MAIN ST 2028 $383,000 $110,000 $383,000 $110,000 $383,000 $110,000 $383,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 12 1 Packet Pg. 117 Pavement overlay along Olympic View Dr, from 196th St. SW / SR-524 to Talbot Road, along with ADA curb ramp upgrades. Improve pavement condition and improve accessibility for pedestrians of all abilities. $1,500,000 Design $200,000 Right of Way Construction $1,300,000 Expense Total $200,000 $1,300,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 $100,000 $300,000 REET Fund 126 $100,000 $300,000 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants $700,000 State Grants Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $200,000 $1,300,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 13 1 Packet Pg. 118 Public Works - Transportation 88th Avenue Overlay and Sidewalk Repair a ••, .. �� .r. ■ .� f Lrr r � 1 �•• � �' � :' s.• s i r• i r ... f ■� Ir•„a •.� I...� •,I r, & �• 1 l •f fir L�,►+ �, I r��ll 1 / all ■ • o all16ra • �) � ram•, a� low axe:': L 4� .� 1 4 • - PUGETOR �■ ti• 'W. • �Y■ 1 This project will resurface 88th Ave and improve the existing asphalt sidewalk on the east side of 88th Ave from 196th St S\ to 185th PI SW in the Seaview neighborhood. All City utilities along this section of 88th Ave have been upgraded in recent years and the street is ready to pave. The existing curb is in poor condition and varies in height. The project will install 6" concrete vertical curbs and repave the existing asphalt sidewalk. Improve pavement conditions, pedestrian accessibility (with ADA curb ramps) and pedestrian safety. $1,500,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Sewer Utility Fund 423 State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 $150,000 $1,350,000 $150,000 $1,350,000 $65,000 $65,000 $20,000 $180,000 $40,000 $1,130, 000 $150,000 $1,350,000 14 Packet Pg. 119 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 15 i-. . t I + +•� r�-== �'rlra, ESPERANCE .• Sth St SW 224th St SW ` 224th St S . � rP ~ 4 1`'•., ``TM r■ +� �.' NoI�m.I ` _ '—i I� �.' _ _ - - — `24d St;SW g a zaxnPisw 1 R . �� r ■ ■ a� . . Ir . � %'i iY!■ Sr..w 46 s I �' !'' ,■ * 1 v�`, i2athPlsw ■ 1• •■� i.L�v. aq ■} 1 !""�.■ �',+ 1 S �7 a - >y �, ■ !�l� ■ yl� «r.f C225Ih-sw1� i �■l•...3 ■ �.ir°D 11 - �Ic■ ilm r ,�a■ yJ 7� �—i� /''Y Ne - > ,■ P11•�Q ■ ■2r7P. _ t-_---- _ Q I �� a 226th St SW,--__ _226thrSt SW in G � > -� '` gym* L Q�.s .�1 �._�. 1L�M MIX %i .�'rn -1 .e.* w �} a.A'• itg1 n::�i� ! is111i 1I1 nnns sW . 3 m at a 228TH ST S� c-e .► �i➢� 4 -rm CIS.- ■.'1, iJJ-uw■■!'� A • �_'i�s� +dam F * )_ ■ i `` a 229th St- �■«1 QP. !� )� ��`y■ it 7Lu J _.♦ 1m� �27 v 1 ■' ■. - ■ter �g—.r• J■ �� _ • ■r-r a' n �} - a-- m 230th St SW - �,230th St SW�_ !+s �% ' �r 3 231st■St■SW a' .�a Q r i ,� ■� �a d. 232nd St SW L y a J ■���■■�■■ I,I �_ •� �i.. n ,r♦ r 2s2 ai Sw—m 1' ■ �r1E wr.k,-. Widen 228th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 95th PI. W to three lanes (with center two-way left turn lane), with curb and gutter, sidewalk, and bike lanes. This project would improve active transportation safety and traffic flows along this corridor. Community Transit will evalua the possibility of creating a new east -west bus route along 228th St. SW, if this project moves forward (connecting Edmond Transit Station to Mountlake Terrace Transit Station). Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures 1� 111 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $1,447,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $13,100,000 $1,447,000 $2,500,000 $13,100,000 $1,447,000 $2,500,000 $13,100,000 $1,447,000 $2,500,000 $13,100,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 16 1 Packet Pg. 121 V) N � > > w a a o = a _ M l~n H p, 3 Q� > Q = a a o A. o �P 0 O O 3 &OW,DOIIM 244TH ST 212TH S1 SW w a Z Ln Ln w > a a 3 w 3 — � a .c = > 3 a~o Q Ln = w %0 Q Ln 2 F- 236TH ST SW 244TH ST SW c In 2023, the project constructed landscaped center medians on Highway 99 from 244th St. SW to 212th St. SW, a HAWK signal — 600' north of 234th St. SW, and gateway signs on both ends of the corridor. Plant establishment and project close- out will continue in 2024. The conversion of the center two-way left turn lane to a landscaped raised median will improve corridor safety along this Highway of Regional Significance (HRS), with an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of — 35,000 vehicles per day. The new HAWK signal will provide a signalized pedestrian crossing between the existing traffic signals at 238th St and 228th St. $9,300,000 Design Right of Way Construction $114,000 Expense Total $114,000 REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants $114,000 Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $114,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 17 1 Packet Pg. 122 D r� 2 iH[h 99 S[ SW 238th St SW F A Q�� i 240th St SW Mathay Batt. 9e' 3 Park a o n c �c .. 242nd St SW v v F Edmonds wdy tw N 205th St 2.1nth St SW N 205th St N 20501 St 243rd PI SW The Stage 3 Highway 99 project limits are from 244th St SW to 238th St. SW. The project will widen the intersection of Highway 99 and 238th St SW to provide a second northbound left turn lane. Additional improvements will include ADA compliant sidewalks, a landscaped planter strip to separate sidewalk from adjacent traffic, enhanced street lighting, bike lanes, ADA compliant pedestrian curb ramps and utility improvements (with potential undergrounding of overhead utility lines). Improve aesthetics, safety, and user experience along this segment of the Hwy 99 corridor. $32,500,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $1,075,000 $630,000 $409,000 $215,000 $1,000,000 $1,203,000 $13,000,000 $13,752,000 $1,290,000 $1,630,000 $1,612,000 $13,000,000 $13,752,000 $1,290,000 $1,630,000 $1,612,000 $13,000,000 $6,688,000 $7,064,000 $1,290,000 $1,630,000 $1,612,000 $13,000,000 $13,752,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 18 1 Packet Pg. 123 220th St SW 223rd St SW 224th St SW 3 D W C �e c 0 m C 2 220th St SW 224th St SL 3 The Stage 4 Highway 99 project limits are from 224th St SW to approximately 500 feet north of 220th St. SW. The project will widen the intersection of Highway 99 and 220th St. SW to provide a second left turn lane for the northbound, southbound and westbound movements. Highway 99 corridor improvements will include wider ADA compliant sidewalks, landscaped planter to separate sidewalk from adjacent traffic, enhanced street lighting, bike lanes, ADA compliant pedestrian curb ramps and utility improvements (with potential to underground overhead utility lines). Improve aesthetics, safety, and user experience. In addition, future economic development would be improved $42,534,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees Water Utility Fund 421 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Sewer Utility Fund 423 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $1,075,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $484,000 $215,000 $500,000 $3,000,000 $1,885,000 $1,290,000 $1,500,000 $4,000,000 $2,369,000 $642,300 $29,025 $67,500 $1,020,975 $1,092,738 $432,500 $1,979,025 $168,237 $1,000,000 $357,700 $2,369,000 $1,290,000 $1,500,000 $4,000,000 $2,369,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 19 $16,434,000 $16,000,000 $16,434,000 $16,000,000 $16,434,000 $16,000,000 $16,434,000 $16,000,000 Packet Pg. 124 __- a a _216th St Sw 3 3 v W a' Q H �D 3 G a 214th St SW V o�N� c� 216th St SW - - - 2161h A Along Hwy 99 from 216th St SW to 212th St. SW, the project will add a planter strip on both sides of the street, new street lighting, better stormwater management, targeted utility replacements, potential undergrounding of overhead utilities, landscaping and other softscape treatments to identify the area as being in Edmonds. Improve aesthetics, safety, and user experience. In addition, future economic development will be improved along the corridor. $47,173, 000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,593,000 $500,000 $3,951,000 $ 38,129, 000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $43,673,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $43,673,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $43,673,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 20 1 Packet Pg. 125 wfi-O&PIal Madrona Ln +7 ��,A 16 ESPEKANCE _ 234th St SW 235th PI SW � 3 s W 236th St SW x Q 236th St SW 3 = a> ono -- -- A 238TH ST SW 3 3 3 U 0 00 o 238th St SW-- 234th St SW v a ro 236th St S'W s 3 n a � 3 a> r 28 th Along Hwy 99 from 238th St. SW to 234th St. SW, the project will add a planter strip on both sides of the street, new street lighting, better stormwater management, targeted utility replacements, potential undergrounding of overhead utilities, z landscaping and other softscape treatments to identify the area as being in Edmonds. _ Improve aesthetics, safety, and user experience. In addition, future economic development would be improved along the corridor. $21,160,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $2,275,000 $1,519,000 $17,366,000 s $21,160,000 C $21,160,000 $21,160,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 21 1 Packet Pg. 126 ESPERANCE iM t�w'�' a -"■ F ■ti Ia tirrf"i� �.V P, as Q, _, 228 H=ST =SW,' �•,�� �. "Pan /. w ■ i£I#moo �; Mill tit ' t SW' i 1� 229th—S7 q. 0 N7 �� _ 229ih St SW ° �1 * frr! 13i is 719h P4 W �/ c a ra ■■ 31r 1�31 aJq�i30.�dlSW a—_ 230th-St SW sou, srsva� w LU 23.1'stlStlSW� Q .I � a '.'Z � � %y Q � W W Jr. ri "16 101 1 V.'a 233rd St SW _ Q S , a �q a ,• Maple Ln : � Q—� ,Ab _ 3 N rtr 234th St SW `�� 234th St SW Madrona Ln Along Hwy 99 from 234th St. SW to 228th St. SW, the project will add a planter strip on both sides of the street, new street lighting, better stormwater management, targeted utility replacements, potential undergrounding of overhead utilities, landscaping and other softscape treatments to identify the area as being in Edmonds. Improve aesthetics, safety, and user experience. In addition, future economic development would be improved along the corridor. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures 1 1 111 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $4,254,000 $5,675,000 $30,501,000 $40,430,000 $40,430,000 $40,430,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 22 1 Packet Pg. 127 7 JPr� hd qr ir 'MIS= 225th PI SWMth - 226th St SW -S 0 ,_• 81salog , 'f a 3 - 228TH ST SW`C� I 224th St SW 224tfi St SW in 40 12 y L a � M EDMONDS WQ M0UNTLAKELU ^ a 226TH PL 3W � v r � - ^a N Along Hwy 99 from 228th St. SW to 224th St. SW, the project will add a planter strip on both sides of the street, new street lighting, better stormwater management, targeted utility replacements, potential undergrounding of overhead utilities, landscaping and other softscape treatments to identify the area as being in Edmonds. Improve aesthetics, safety, and user experience. In addition, future economic development would be improved along the corridor. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures Its Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $3,596,000 $2,439,000 $29,207,000 $35,242,000 $35,242,000 $35,242,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 23 1 Packet Pg. 128 J tv Z Ea 216th st sW 99 e Q t 0 c 220th St SW c T Along Hwy 99 from approximately 500 feet north of 220th St. SW to 216th St. SW, the project will add a planter strip on bo sides of the street, new street lighting, better stormwater management, targeted utility replacements, potential undergrounding of overhead utilities, landscaping and other softscape treatments to identify the area as being in Edmonds Improve aesthetics, safety, and user experience. In addition, future economic development would be improved along the corridor. $21,277,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $1,978,000 $2,159,000 $17,140, 000 $21,277,000 $21,277,000 $21,277,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 24 1 Packet Pg. 129 196TH ST SW N� Install traffic signal at the intersection of 196th St. SW @ 88th Ave. W. The modeling in the 2009 Transportation Plan indicated that restricting northbound and southbound traffic to right -turn -only (prohibiting left -turn and through movements) would also address the deficiency identified at this location through 2025. This is same alternative as one concluded by consultant in 2007 study but not recommended by City Council. This could be implemented as an alternate solution, or as an interim solution until traffic signal warrants are met. The existing LOS is F (below City Standards: LOS D). This project was ranked #6 in the Roadway Project Priority in the 2015 Transportation Plan. Improve traffic flow characteristics and safety at the intersection. The improvement would modify LOS to A, but increase tf• delay along 196th St. SW. $1,289,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 $263,000 $238,000 $788,000 $263,000 $238,000 $788,000 $263,000 $238,000 $788,000 a $263,000 $238,000 $788,000 25 1 Packet Pg. 130 Bell St z aU Q 00 Anderson Center n Field W Bell St MAIN ST I♦ Dayton Sty t1J > Q 2 Dayton St a Yost Park Bell A Installation of a traffic signal or mini -roundabout. The project ranked #4 in the Roadway Project Priority of the 2015 Transportation Plan. The preliminary cost estimate for a new traffic signal is $1,290,000. A conceptual cost estimate for a mini -roundabout is $500,000. The existing intersection is stop -controlled for all approaches and the projected intersection LOS in 2035 is LOS F (below thl City's concurrency standards: LOS D). The installation of a traffic signal would improve the intersection delay to LOS B. $1,290,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $198,000 $1,092,000 $198,000 $1,092,000 $198,000 $1,092,000 $198,000 $1,092,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 26 1 Packet Pg. 131 219th St SW U � I N � m LO oo oo Q �- a 21919 00 ao a t Lf 1 220TH ST SW Q 7514 ■ I ��M 4& ESPERANCE (V2st PI SW WINCO �*r_1N: M]M--I 01 s Reconfigure eastbound lanes to a left turn lane and through/ right turn lane. Add eastbound and westbound dedicated left turn lanes with a protected -permitted phase. Provide right turn overlap for westbound movement during southbound left turn phase. (Additional improvements include wider sidewalk, bike lanes, and various utility improvements (including potential conversion overhead utility lines to underground). ROADWAY PROJECT PRIORITY #1 in 2015 Transportation Plan . Reduce the intersection delay and improve the LOS. The projected LOS in 2050 would be improved from LOS F to LOS D. Improve active transportation conditions for pedestrians and bicycle riders. $8,700,000 Design $148,000 $326,100 Right of Way $502,000 $448,000 Construction Expense Total $650,000 $774,100 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees $394,336 $398,729 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $45,000 $45,000 Water Utility Fund 421 $18,000 $18,000 Federal Grants $192,664 $312,371 State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $650,000 $774,100 $50,000 $6,670,000 $50,000 $6,670,000 $12, 500 $37,500 $6,670,000 $50,000 $6,670,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 27 1 Packet Pg. 132 ,t — 225th P1SW quip 226th St S'l S� > —J a r L a Z a ¢> v a u> — 226th St SW' "x�... 2 > L pY 10 a, - "'CO ,� 'CD � r +� T i �' � S ! . a` �:' 228th St . ■ �' - 228TH ST SW ...$ Ea" -1 Deet_�f N.:. �. :�,s s. i J yJ �� • a �.� 229th st S<. ee� Ot i -Oft ilri+" +co ° 230th DQ o n J a tiQ� �i. <y V� ; �,� a e 231 st St 0 31.Q 232nd St SW 9� �a d sr • i.?�} r r r H CO ° a� r a 5 ¢> zaznarww: Holly Ln �)..2 —Wachusett Rd � m `Maple Ln rPI"—v234th St SW ° ':`� ;4 mNottingham Rd �o > ` 234th 'ct S o a ¢ M adrona Lno Z 235th PI SW a e��a N Om m s 6 aY ay! Sth°� P'� ° 236th St SW 236th St SW 236rt 3 W The project will add a traffic signal adaptive system on a 1.25-mile segment of SR104 from 236th St to 226th St. The syster will monitor and synchronize the timing of five existing signalized intersections (SR104 @ 236th St, SR104 @ 232nd St, SR1( @ 95th PI, SR104 @ 100th Ave, SR104 @ 226th St) and improve traffic flows along SR104. Improve traffic flows along this regional corridor with a current Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of - 25,000 vehicles per day Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures $4,810,000 Design $186,575 Right of Way Construction $4,400,000 Expense Total $186,575 $4,400,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- $7,313 REET Fund 125 $25,189 $440,000 REET Fund 126 $440,000 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants $154,073 State Grants Unsecured Funding $3,520,000 Funding Source Total $186,575 $4,400,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 28 1 Packet Pg. 133 m QFC PCC NATURAL d MARKET > n �C, 0 i �y Y 76 GA: - a WALGREEN'S �Q, d PARKING s BANK o ry C. a S EDMONDS WAY "�, o Ave w W O 00 t0 N 00 a) N CD 0 0 O O� co 00 W O (n N O � + ` BANK co 00 W co CD(n(n r- rnrnrnm mrnrnmrn CD F- NF- N N r, r- i � IVARS = o u "s p N BARTELL'S O c c Implement Westgate Circulation Access Plan, install mid -block pedestrian crossing along 100th Ave. W, improve safety to access the driveways within proximity to the intersection, and re -striping of 100th Ave. W with the potential addition of bik lanes. This project was identified in the SR-104 Completed Streets Corridor Analysis (completed in 2015). _ Improve access and safety at the intersection and improve active transportation safety. Estimated Project Cost prior year expenditures $2,500,000 Design $180,000 $195,000 Right of Way $525,000 Construction $1,600,000 Expense Total $180,000 $720,000 $1,600,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding $180,000 $720,000 $1,600,000 Funding Source Total $180,000 $720,000 $1,600,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 29 1 Packet Pg. 134 227th p/ S� 227th St s � 2 o Q �o V M Lam_ Ln _ � I I 228tn St sw 228TH ST SW y I � 9 6th P� • � V o o = ~ 5vWestgate �w^ �O Chapel w w i VO i f PU D c Sub Station < c Upgrade all ADA Curb Ramps; and add C-Curb for access management. This project was identified in the SR-104 Complete Streets Corridor Analysis (completed in 2015). Improve intersection safety for pedestrians and vehicles. $270,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $42,000 $228,000 $42,000 $228,000 $42,000 $228,000 $42,000 $228,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 30 1 Packet Pg. 135 1 Q Y Y Vi 238th St SW 238TH ST SW,, 000 �/ a' Os �L q` N S Korean C Presbyter c Church 5 Install traffic signal. This project was identified in the SR-104 Complete Street Corridor Analysis (completed in 2015) Improve vehicular and pedestrian safety. $1,519,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $1,292,000 $227,000 $1,292,000 $227,000 $1,292,000 $227,000 $1,292,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 31 1 Packet Pg. 136 Seaview Park 9 rol 186th St SW„ Post Office �• t NM0N LU N��4D 185th PI SW 2 F- 184th PI SW OLYMPIC V1EV pR Lynndale Park �I Install traffic signal (the intersection currently stop controlled for all movements). (ROADWAY ROJECT PRIORITY in 2015 Transportation Plan: #11). The improvement will reduce the intersection delay. The projected Level of Service is LOS F in 2035, which is below the City ; concurrency standards (LOS D). The project will improve the Level of Service to LOS B. Estimated Project Cost prior year expenditures $1,347,000 I I Project Cost 2024 2025• •27 2028 I 2029• • Design I $230,000 Right of Way Construction $1,117,000 ' Expense Total $1,347,000 ; Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 ' REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding $1,347,000 Funding Source Total $1,347,000 ' 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 32 1 Packet Pg. 137 U w > a > Cn SOWD Qy — � 2125 HST SW 3 LU = E c > a p/ < > > M i T w Q N 22OTH ST SWr= w a J a w > w C a 4LO Q i 3 228TH ST SW Fo `�° 228TH Sr > a G s �0 � w I �o s'� a Ln s 'z Li 236TH ST� N S � c c c Widen 84th Ave. W to (3) lanes with curb, gutter, bike lanes, and sidewalk on each side of the street. (part of this project w ranked #6 in the Long Walkway list of the 2015 Transportation Plan). _ Improve traffic flow, access and active transportation uses by installing a center two way left turn lane, sidewalks, bike IanE 'i and street lighting. i $17,615,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $2,245,000 s $15,370,000 $17,615,000 s $17,615,000 $17,615,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 33 1 Packet Pg. 138 i a a Seattle W 243rd PI SW Lake Baptist > Ballinger 4Q r` Church Q tilp� F H Os,�MONO 11, s wA Y �Nt20.51H ST - �z N205THST` W N 204TH PL -§� �4TH PL a W Z 0 0 _ 0 C� N N z 73RD p J a Add a second westbound left turn lane along SR-104. This project was identified in the SR-104 Complete Street Corridor Analysis (completed in 2015). Improve access, safety and delay at the intersection. $3,424,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $510,000 $2,914,000 $3,424,000 $3,424,000 $3,424,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 34 1 Packet Pg. 139 ";� O DALE BEgC N'QO 174th St SW 69 v p�swe OR 7�3rd St SW 174th St SW St. Thomas Moore School A Widen Olympic View Dr. to add a northbound left turn lane for 50' storage length. Shift the northbound lanes to the east tc provide an acceleration lane for eastbound left turns. Install traffic signal to increase the LOS and reduce intersection delay (ROADWAY PROJECT PRIORITY in 2015 Transportation Plan: #13) Improve intersection efficiency and safety of drivers accessing either street. $715,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $120,000 $595,000 $715,000 $715,000 $715,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 35 1 Packet Pg. 140 f aim 1 J1 On No M%-OM 175th St SW Snohomish .--.—., o_..1, The project will stabilize the roadway subgrade and embankment and rebuild the damaged pavement on 175th St. SW Repair roadway and stabilize slope embankment. $1,000,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 N S A` C c c 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 36 1 Packet Pg. 141 This program started in 2019 and will provide new signal upgrades, such as vehicle detection at intersections, new vehicle/pedestrian head equipment and other signal -related upgrades. These improvements will improve the safety of the City's transportation system. Improve reliabilityof traffic signal operation. Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures $30,290 P Design $500 Right of Way Construction $29,790 Expense Total $30,290 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 $30,290 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $30,290 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 37 1 Packet Pg. 142 The City Council added this study to the 2023-2028 CFP-CIP during the 2023 budget deliberations and postponed the study for future discussion. This study will re-evaluate alternatives identified in the 2016 Edmonds Waterfront Alternative Access Study and potential new alternatives for improving the reliability of emergency responses to the Waterfront. Both through and stopping trains can simultaneously block Main Street and Dayton Street impacting emergency response times to the Waterfront. The many amenities along the Edmonds Waterfront (including the new Waterfront/Senior Center dive park, marina, whale watching service, off leash dog park, restaurants, etc.) on the west side of the BNSF train tracks ar drawing an increasing number of visitors —meaning the potential for accidents and health emergencies is ever-increasing. The study will develop potential solutions to address this issue. Project Cost 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030-44 Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 38 1 Packet Pg. 143 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 39 1 1 Packet Pg. 144 WIVIUNUJ WAY ■ v I Q r � lu a Q o, 2 O O y a , �S e � L' a 23l st PI s64 a' rn 233rd St SW v Q L 1 a Q 234th St SW tSNtKANU Ll ` s O Q' 231 st S[ SW IL�O� r ',��~� { L �O"Y � a IL 3 232nd St SW �� � 3 v Q m 2.34th PI 32nd PI S Install sidewalk along 232nd St. SW from 100th Ave. W to SR-104. This project ranked #3 in the Long Walkway List of 2015 Transportation Plan. _ This project would improve pedestrian safety. $1,856,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $284,000 $1,572,000 $284,000 $1,572,000 $284,000 $1,572,000 $284,000 $1,572,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 40 1 Packet Pg. 145 S:1 Elementary N iviaa ro na 236th St S� School Install sidewalk with curb and gutter along 236nd St. SW from Madrona Elementary to 97th Ave. W. This project ranked #4 Long Walkway list of the 2015 Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $296,000 $1,692,000 $296,000 $1,692,000 $296,000 $1,692,000 $296,000 $1,692,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP 1 November 2023 41 1 Packet Pg. 146 hStSW i c > > a Q = 00 r ` MMMMJ c a 2.3'6'th St SIN 236 th ` D a a = - z 00 ' u a 00 s c c Install sidewalk along 236th St. SW from Hwy 99 to 76th Ave. W. This project ranked #10 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $1,937,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $276,000 $1,661,000 i e $1,937,000 $1,937,000 $1,937,000 s 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 42 1 Packet Pg. 147 � 7�Jrt 1 ESPERANCE N •� °0 f �*'sw ' � J z z � i 16 ■ _ 234th St SW 234th ct ciry Q PARK EDMONDS WHIRLV BALE o v APTS W Rs i I earn ` w Christ " LL NORTH 88 ■r0� 235th 3 o Lutheran HAVEN MANOR w " �� d *� 60 Ama, a RIST LUTHERAN q L CHURCH -hurch TRAILER 230h St SIN 236th St SW Park and Ride 236th StESW 3� COURT s 236th St SW 23601 23603 SAFEWAY @ ' J y •� 2,. . 23605 L KJIHG CF 23607 M-N F SUNSET a QN n ICJ 23619 0 i P WILLOW LL PARK PL o 0 CONDOS BROOK '9 B1-10 D APT F uJ R AURORA 23701-32 o oLYMPIC m EDWINDS WATER C E S MARKETPLACE m CRE ST B G Q T 78L cj Q m A = U FAMILY PANCAKE J N 8901 23ath St sw H 238TH H ST SW 00 v "7-11" u o�o� r 2asth st sw3 23e00 zsaoaz3alo w SEOUL� Jim III ■ 1 — 'rr The walkway project proposed approximately 1,000 LF of new sidewalk on the east side of 84th Ave W with ADA compliant pedestrian curb ramps. City Council has programmed $75,000 in 2024 to complete preliminary design. The City Council will evaluate the project cost (anticipated in 2nd qtr of 2024) after the preliminary design is completed and decide whether to fund final design. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $1,510,000 Design $160,000 Right of Way Construction $1,350,000 Expense Total $160,000 $1,350,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 $37,500 REET Fund 126 $37,500 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 ARPA Funds Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding $85,000 $1,350,000 Funding Source Total $160,000 $1,350,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 43 1 Packet Pg. 148 206th St a � > a 207ih St S v; 208th SY -. �W 208th PI S' li D; PI SW III a � v O Y N AG IL• _ E -- a E - - LYNNWOOD EDMONDS 208TH-ST SW C. - � a w S Q� = 0 210th St SW r v > > f s a G i m v 212TH ST SW c c c c n Install sidewalk along 80th Ave. W from 206th St. SW to 212th St. SW with curb and gutter. This project ranked #1 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. The improvements will improve active transportation safety (including for school kids due to proximity of several schools). Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures $1,582,000 i Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $110,000 $120,000 $1,352,000 $110,000 $120,000 $1,352,000 $110,000 $120,000 $1,352,000 $110,000 $120,000 $1,352,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 44 1 Packet Pg. 149 • sr4 Q"C OLYM sahst.sw, `180th St SW r � 05 181st PI SW �c 7ps stir o W > 78 2nd S SW PI SW 1 m Q Q y 3 n W a o d9e WaY Mco 84th S Q ° 184th St SW> (b o e f Q co .smss• V C J Q� --m f o m 1185th PI SW I sr.: P 186th St SW v tijO i 87th PI SW a N�c� co` LYNNWOOD a 3 a 187th St SW a a o mc %;. a > co 0 ° _Q 188th St SW-_ 187th PI SW -187th P_I-SW C C ' 188th PI SW c Install sidewalk along 80th Ave. W from 188th St. SW to OVD. This project ranked #13 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $2,333,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $482,000 $1,851,000 $482,000 $1,851,000 $482,000 $1,851,000 $482,000 $1,851,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 45 1 Packet Pg. 150 em a nta ry Chase Lake School Q c N 00 216th St SW3 a i a� 0 00 -Edmonds Woodway High School > Swedis ?� Edmorn W Q 2 St 00 W N d s 7 > a 9 ve W 9 u, s _ `L 219th St SW F- 5 N GO = — Edmonds kNCE Church of God 220TH ST SW F_ A Install sidewalk along 218th St. SW from 76th Ave. W to 84th Ave. W with curb and gutter. This project ranked #2 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. The improvements will improve pedestrian safety. $1,738,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $264,000 $1,474,000 $264,000 $1,474,000 $264,000 $1,474,000 $264,000 $1,474,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 46 1 Packet Pg. 151 Public Works - Transportation Walnut St Walkway from 6th Ave S to 7th Ave S THE MARINER Alder St w COMMODORE ¢w a w O o �KEGORY +- > Holly Dr .. ID J �3 O O� Cedar Gt _ i L c C Install sidewalk on the south side of Walnut St. from 6th Ave. S to 7th Ave. S. This project is ranked #9 in the Short Walkway List (from 2015 Transportation Plan). z This project will improve pedestrian safety along this stretch. $290,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $50,000 $240,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP 1 November 2023 47 1 Packet Pg. 152 MCDONALD'S 4NT a a STEVENS COURT AEGIS VALUE O� Swedish ----- VILLA GEO Edmonds 216th St SW EDMONDS q� MEDICAL PAVILION 21605 KRUGER CLINIC =N'S rH ER 216th St S W vP0� N OJT Install 150' sidewalk on north side of 216th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 72nd Ave. W (completing a missing link on north side of 216th St. SW). This project is ranked #3 in the Short Walkway List (from 2015 Transportation Plan). To provide a safe and desirable walking route. $220,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total im $33,000 $187,000 $220,000 $220,000 $220,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 48 1 Packet Pg. 153 The project will add bike lanes or sharrows on the following streets: • 100th Ave/9th Ave from 244th St to Walnut St • Walnut/Bowdoin Way from 9th Ave to 84th Ave • 228th St. from 76th Ave to 80th Ave • Bike sharrows on 80th Ave from 228th St. to 220th St. Pedestrian crossing improvements including curb ramps, rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB) and signing will be installed at 100th Ave & 224th St, 9th Ave & Pine St, Bowdoin Way& 96th Ave and Bowdoin Way & Pioneer Way. The proje is currently in the construction phase and completion will be subject to available weather in Fall 2023. Staff assumes grant funds will be spent in 2023. Project close-out is scheduled for 2024. This project will create new bike connections to various destination points throughout the City (such as schools, parks, Downtown, Sound Transit Station). Sound Transit awarded the grant to fund improvements that will provide more convenient access so that more people can use Sound Transit services. $3,000,000 Project Cost Design Right of Way Construction $15,000 Expense Total $15,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 $10,095 REET Fund 126 $4,905 Funding Source Total $15,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 49 1 Packet Pg. 154 s a a CASP-ERS-ST� - -- — ------200th-St-SW�-- Mountain Ln z Vista PI a > a $o 3 m L ¢ a 201PI SW CO > Q b -P 'ha Z Carol Way 3 202nd St SW__ � St Sierra PI a v -o c: j W = n Z 2nd PI SW Q ' - > > a - a Q H Glen St Glen St U Q s ^ ° O+ Da\e N St SWco p 20a m z 1O -'04h Sr Daley St Daley St J 10, .3 a O W = SPr,i-si Sprague St PIN 205th PI SW a n a „iasSt Edmonds St E6111L"jdl sr Edmonds St m �,-206th - o 3St-SWr Bell St Fm�,a���lls Bell St o x207th 1207thPI SW St N a a m N - -- - - - - - MAIN ST- - - - - 208th PI SW Construct sidewalk on Maplewood Dr. from Main St. to 200th St. SW (- 2,700'). A sidewalk currently exists on 200th St. SW from Main St. to 76th Ave. W, adjacent to Maplewood Elementary School (rated #18 in the Long Walkway list of the 2015 Transportation Plan). Create pedestrian connection between Maplewood Elementary School on 200th St. SW and Main St., by encouraging kids t use non -motorized transportation to walk to / from school. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures • 111 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $220,000 $220,000 $2,511,000 $220,000 $220,000 $2,511,000 $220,000 $220,000 $2,511,000 $220,000 $220,000 $2,511,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 50 1 Packet Pg. 155 - — — 220TH W ST S - LU a O V 3 3 Z 7 ■ a a Z■ ■ OW ALA• LU IF a, m o d t St S� S z W W 221s ti. r A a 221 st P a �� M1 �■- Q CD sCO 01 M a -a 7 it � �►��;�� �'� �' 3' N zzacn St sw sw A ati — zzatn St Q • ��� 6 �, L Install sidewalk along 95th PI. W from 224th St. SW to 220th St. SW with curb and gutter. This project ranked #8 in the Lon€ Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $862,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $131,000 $731,000 $131,000 $731,000 $131,000 $731,000 $131,000 $731,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 51 1 Packet Pg. 156 a Seattle : 243rd PI SW Baptist W Lake FQMo 0 Church Q Ballinger QMo /VOS tv t• N 205TH ST N 205TH ST z N 204TH PL Q �04TH PL - Z Z W 0 Q > z Q NERD p� I a W O�i02N� , -n�ao sr m Extend bike lanes within proximity of the intersection in northbound and southbound directions. Install APS on all corners and new ADA curb ramps. Improve active transportation safety along this section of the Interurban Trail and across SR-104. $1, 571, 000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $261,000 $1,310,000 $261,000 $1,310,000 $261,000 $1,310,000 $261,000 $1,310,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 52 1 Packet Pg. 157 Public Works - Transportation SR-104 Walkway HAWK to Pine/Pine from SR-104 to 9th Edmonds moomm Marsh } licI r. Q 0 ,� s 1020Z Howell-Way- ���, Irk, a' + I I F J 1II '■ — i! fn LJJ Erben Dr a v o a' v Holly -Dr ,llL�w� � ! r Ap- �' ! Magna, M� .---- -7 Spruce St Han el and DT - i O• �uj !� •� i Spruce PI ` r = JV■�~ Ida R J L Hemlock WayY- Hemlock St Lu r� ; ■ ! N �. 1 Clow Laurel Wa' Q Q Seamont Ln r > a Laurel St v A� C% _ a' i i J �� «2046i - a } N Forsyth Ln 0 Z Fir PI a 00 02 On Fir PI LU c a' a' a D Q m U f ■ fir st c IL Installation of sidewalk with ADA curb ramps along SR-104 from the HAWK signal to Pine Stand along Pine St from SR-1041 9th Ave S ? This project will improve pedestrian connectivity between the residential areas along 3rd Ave. S to Downtown Edmonds an City Park. $3,276,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $546,000 $2,730,000 $3,276,000 $3,276,000 $3,276,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 53 1 Packet Pg. 158 r 00 c z o C. Q -;� a z s c 0 uJ J t w f > u a = N C � c Install sidewalk along 191th St. SW from 80th Ave. W to 76th Ave., with curb and gutter. This project ranked #8 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $719,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $1.06,000 t $613,000 $719,000 , $719,000 i $719,000 S 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 54 1 Packet Pg. 159 Ja-W �*P 232nd St SW Salem _ t s aobin Hood Dr Edmonds Lutheran Heights Church ' a _ • K-12 Wachusett-Rtl= c � I w a _ Scriber Lake, ■ , ,r 9 QN 0 �Z High School" C a a E MO t 0 :E y. ■ 3 c O j 0 --an.Pisw — >Lu - Q 236th P1_SW 05tn Hickman 236th PI SW�� O 3 a � Park a u r y T o s a a a o 1 23 p� SW Tv t o V c Edmonds Faith C , s Q� a Memorial 238th St Community SW c c 0 237th Cemetery rY Church c Install sidewalk along 104th Ave. W from 238th ST. SW to 106th Ave. W, with curb and gutter. This project ranked #10 in tl Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. _ This project would improve pedestrian safety. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures $1,124,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $170,000 u $954,000 i e $1,124,000 $1,124,000 $1,124,000 f 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 55 1 Packet Pg. 160 Public Works - Transportation 80th Ave W from 218th St SW to 220th St SW 218thi SW 219th St SW a L W Edmonds Church of God ESPERANCE Install sidewalk along 80th Ave. W from 218th ST. SW to 220th ST. SW, with curb and gutter. This project ranked #7 in the Short Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $344,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $63,OOC $281,OOC $344,000 $344,OOC $344,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 56 1 Packet Pg. 161 ii PI SW s 4 r Ln 00 Seaview Elemental 186th St SW a a=i 188th St SW 187th St SW A Install sidewalk along 84th Ave. W from 188th St. SW to 186th St. SW., with curb and gutter. This project ranked #5 in Shor Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $348,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $53,000 $295,000 $348,000 $348,000 $348,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 57 1 Packet Pg. 162 lit -r Y � � 6 c o o ; OD ao � ^� SD S 2.38th St SW � { 3 . Otq a, > I w Q< r Z 00 LU c T 3 ^ U a S� s Q� 1 sm � , fir N00 S 2401h St SW 3 Mathay ti3 Ballinger c in A Park 5 Install sidewalk along 238th St. SW from Hwy 99 to 76th Ave. W. This project ranked #10 in Long Walkway List of the 2015 Transportation Plan. This project would improve pedestrian safety. $1,363,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $199,000 $1,164,000 $199,000 $1,164,000 $199,000 $1,164,000 $199,000 $1,164,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 58 1 Packet Pg. 163 C M 7th and C A\je °' W 1'ista PI Q Elm Park 2 H O� Elm 5t 220TH ST SW CO (U a C t F CO /raj W A OOOOOF > Elm PI CD , �. 0 O p°A/ar � Goo � aY i I A The walkway project is ranked #6 on the short walkway list from the 2015 Transportation Plan. The project will install approximately 700 feet of new sidewalk, six pedestrian curb ramps and modify the existing stormwater system on Elm Wa) between 8th Ave. S and 9th Ave. S. This project will complete an important missing sidewalk link. The project is currently in the construction phase and completion will be subject to available weather in Fall 2023. Project close-out is scheduled for 2024. The project will improve pedestrian safety and provide a missing link of sidewalk on Elm Way between 8th Ave and 9th Ave $1,100,000 Design Right of Way Construction $10,000 Expense Total $10,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 $6,000 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $4,000 Funding Source Total $10,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 59 1 Packet Pg. 164 =. i This program started in 2019 and will provide pedestrian safety improvements, such as RRFB's and flashing LED's around stop signs. These improvements will improve the safety of the City's transportation system. Improve safety at pedestrian crossings. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures :1 1 r LDesign Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030-44 111 $79,770 $80,770 $80,770 $80,770 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 60 1 Packet Pg. 165 Final design of 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor to include site design and construction documents for a safe, pedestrian friendly, and art enhanced corridor in the public right of way which provides a strong visual connection along 4th Avenue N between Main Street and Edmonds Center for the Arts. Interim work on this project since the concept was developed includes a 2015 temporary light artwork "Luminous Forest", as well as preliminary design development through 2020-21. Funding for this project has not been secured at this time. The 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor Project is managed by the Community Services/Economic Development Department. The corridor improvements in the public right of way will encourage pedestrian traffic and provide a strong visual connecti( between the ECA and downtown retail. Improvements will enhance connectivity as an attractive walking corridor and contribute to the economic vitality in downtown. The project has been supported by the community in the 2014 Communii Cultural Plan and in the goals and priorities for the State certified Creative District. This project is supported by the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. $9,206,600 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 General Fund Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $1,000,000 $500,000 $500,000 $6,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $6,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $6,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $6,000,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 61 1 Packet Pg. 166 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 Packet Pg. 167 W Da ton St_ - v -- Dayton St - Dayton St _ - Dayton St Puget Sound G Q i c > Maple St a Alder St I � Alder St a In 0 r w " w Q -- Walnut_st C Edmonds Marsh M N Holly Dr Howell Way <n a',a . Un"O� }, Homel3�d Dr c L O„ CIO 3 ��dy a rr n p�i ow Hemlock Way N d O 94 Erben Dr 0 W Seamont Ln e Modify existing lane channelization on SR104 to add vehicle storage for ferry users. Reduce conflicts between ferry storage and access to local driveways. $380,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $57,000 $323,000 $380,000 $380,000 $380,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 63 1 Packet Pg. 168 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 64 1 1 Packet Pg. 169 Install traffic calming devices along selected stretches throughout the City with speeding issues (through completion of detailed evaluation). This ongoing annual program started in 2015 and is included in the City's 6-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Reduce vehicle speeds on City streets that qualify under the City's Traffic Calming Policy. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures $100,000 (2024) Design $11,000 Right of Way Construction $89,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $330,000 Expense Total $100,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $330,000 s Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- REET Fund 125 e c REET Fund 126 $100,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $330,000 c Transportation Impact Fees T = General Fund i Stormwater Utility Fund 422 s Federal Grants State Grants s Unsecured Funding I E Funding Source Total $100,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $330,000 i 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 65 1 Packet Pg. 170 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 66 ' Packet Pg. 171 The 2017 Transition Plan completed an ADA evaluation and prioritization of the City's street right-of-way. This decision package will update the 2017 plan and expand the evaluation to include City Buildings and Parks facilities. The Plan will inventory physical barriers preventing accessibility and develop actions and preliminary cost estimates to address ADA non compliance. Inventories and prioritizes ADA issues in the City right of way, as well as City buildings and parks facilities. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures � � 1 111 Design $440,000 Right of Way Construction Expense Total $440,000 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- $105,000 REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees General Fund $335,000 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Federal Grants State Grants Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $440,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 67 1 Packet Pg. 172 The Transportation Plan serves as the transportation element of the City's Comprehensive Plan and is being updated in coordination with the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update. Based upon existing and projected future land use and travel patterns, the Transportation Plan describes street, pedestrian, bicycle and transit infrastructure and services and provides assessment of existing and projected future transportation needs. The Plan will establish the transportation priorities and guides the development of the six -year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), Capital Improvement Program (CIP) an Capital Facilities Plan (CFP). The plan was last updated in 2015. The Transportation Plan serves as the transportation element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Transportation Plan is being updated in coordination with the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update. Based upon existing and projected future land use and travel patterns, the Transportation Plan describes roadway pedestrian, bicycle and transit infrastructure and services and provides an assessment of existing and projected future transportation needs. The Plan will establish the transportation priorities and guides the development of the six -year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), Capital Improvement Program (CIP), Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) and introduce Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS). $406,000 Planning $236,085 Right of Way Construction Expense Total $236,085 Street Fund 112 - Gas Tax & Multi- $236,085 REET Fund 125 REET Fund 126 Transportation Impact Fees Funding Source Total $236,085 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 68 1 Packet Pg. 173 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 69 Packet Pg. 174 The City of Edmonds proposes the development of this project to demonstrate how green infrastructure can both address stormwater flows and enhance the streetscapes to benefit the Hwy 99 neighborhood and the downtown core. This project includes the following elements: • Roadway narrowing to reduce traffic speeds and to reduce impervious surface (vehicular capacity retained) • Sidewalks and planting strips added • Bioretention cells collect runoff from the road through curb cuts • Bioretention cells collect runoff directly from sidewalks • Public private partnership potential with Housing Hope and Terrace Place developments. Incorporating green streets into the urban fabric of the City of Edmonds is intended to demonstrate how trees, vegetation, engineered green stormwater solutions, physical and visual narrowing of vehicular lane widths, and shortening pedestrian crossings with curb bulbs help to slow traffic, ameliorate climate change impacts, and reinforce desired land use and transportation patterns on appropriate street rights -of -way. This project is intended to increase the livability of a diverse, growing city. $3,500,000 Design $350,000 Right of Way Construction $3,150,000 Expense Total $3,500,000 Unsecured Funding $3,500,000 Funding Source Total $3,500,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 70 1 Packet Pg. 175 8.1.a O Q. E PWW-01 2024 WL Overlay 27 $225,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $225,000 $0 $225,000 U PWW-02 Phase 13 Annual Replacement Program (2023) 30 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 rn $10,000 c N PWW-03 Phase 14 Annual Replacement Program (2024) 31 $3,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,300,000 $0 $3,300,000 c N PWW-04 Phase 15 Annual Replacement Program (2025) 25 $426,000 $3,666,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,092,000 $0 Q $4,092,000 0 Q PWW-05 Phase 16 Annual Replacement Program (2026) $0 $547,000 $3,813,000 $0 $0 $0 $4,360,000 $0 $4,360,000 c PWW-06 Phase 17 Annual Replacement Program (2027) $0 $0 $569,000 $3,966,000 $0 $0 $4,535,000 $0 $4,535,000 •y PWW-07 Phase 18 Annual Replacement Program (2028) $0 $0 $0 $592,000 $4,124,000 $0 $4,716,000 $0 N $4,716,000 w J Q PWW-08 Phase 19 Annual Replacement Program (2029) $0 $0 $0 $0 $616,000 $4,289,000 $4,905,000 $0 $4,905,000 Z M PWW-09 Phase 20 Annual Replacement Program (2030) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $641,000 $641,000 $102,677,000 0. $103,318,000 LL &Future Programs U a_ PWW-11 Yost & Seaview Reservoir Repairs & Upgrades 26 $850,000 $4,500,000 $3,850,000 $0 $0 $0 $9,200,000 $0 $9,200,000 U N Y TOTAL EXPENDITURE $4,811,000 $8,713,000 $8,232,000 $4,558,000 $4,740,000 $4,930,000 $35,984,000 $102,677,000 $138,661,OOC p v SOURCEFUNDING 124 2025 20261 128 2029 TOTAL.0 2030-44• 7 1 1 a v Water Fund -421 $4,811,000 $8,713,000 $8,232,000 $4,558,000 $4,740,000 $4,930,000 $35,984,000 $102,677,000 $138,661,OOC C N r r C d t V ftf r.+ r.+ Q a: C N t C� r r Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 72 1 Packet Pg. 177 m E m Per the approved 2017 Water Comprehensive Plan, the project will replace/maintain pipe and related appurtenances at various locations throughout the City due to old age, being undersized, need to increase flow or pressure, or more prone tc breakage due to its material properties. Road pavement overlays will cover areas of roadways that were excavated and patched in previous years as part of the Waterline Replacement Projects. Improve overall pavement condition in locations that were excavated and patched due to the Annual Waterline Replaceme Projects. $225,000 Design $20,000 Right of Way Construction $205,000 Expense Total $225,000 Water Fund 421 $225,000 Funding Source Total $225,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 73 1 Packet Pg. 178 Per the approved 2017 Water Comprehensive Plan, the projects will replace/maintain pipe and related appurtenances at various locations throughout the City due to old age, being undersized, need to increase flow or pressure, or more prone tc breakage due to its material properties. Maintain a high level of drinking water quality, improve overall system reliability, decrease probability of breakages and leakage, improve fire flows, and decrease overall day to day maintenance costs. $2.1 to $4.9 million/year Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Water Fund 421 Funding Source Total $461,000 $547,000 $569,000 $592,000 $616,000 $641,000 $13,348,O1C $3,525,000 $3,666,000 $3,813,000 $3,966,000 $4,124,000 $4,289,000 $89,328,99C $3,986,000 $4,213,000 $4,382,000 $4,558,000 $4,740,000 $4,930,000 $102,677,000 $3,736,000 $4,213,000 $4,382,000 $4,558,000 $4,740,000 $4,930,000 $1O2,677,OOC $3,736,000 $4,213,000 $4,382,000 $4,558,000 $4,740,000 $4,930,000 $102,677,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 74 1 Packet Pg. 179 Public Works - Water P Yost & Seaview Reservoir Repairs & Upgrades 185th PI SW Q Yost Park rn SC 186th PI SW Seaview 0 Water Tank a IiO0 G' y y W l� Q 2 00 00 This work is being done to provide structural upgrades, repair leakages, and upgrades to our two underground potable wat storage reservoirs. Preliminary findings completed in early 2023 were used to determine order of magnitude/preliminary costs and next steps for the now planned repairs and upgrades project. The Yost Reservoir report shows that it will need a major structural and seismic retrofit, plus repairs to address leakage from the reservoir. The report for the Seaview Reservoir shows similar issues as the Yost Reservoir, with a less serious leakage issue. Maintain a high level of drinking water quality, improve overall system reliability, decrease probability of leakage, retrofit structures so that they meet current structural codes to improve their resiliency during earthquakes, and decrease overall day to day maintenance costs. $9,659,430 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Water Fund 421 Funding Source Total $850,000 $650,000 $3,850,000 $3,850,000 $850,000 $4,500,000 $3,850,000 $850,000 $4,500,000 $3,850,000 $850,000 $4,500,000 $3,850,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 75 1 Packet Pg. 180 00, lk cl, it 8.1.a E (D > 0 Q. E CL m u 06 m •IL U) A) m U. 8.1.a STORMWATER Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration Related Projects 1° a PWD-01 X Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Improvements 34 $90,000 $644,843 $0 $0 $0 $0 $734,843 $0 $734,8 U Perrinville Creek Basin Projects rn c PWD-03 Perrinville Creek Flow Management Projects 41 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $600,000 $1,400,000 $2,000,CIV PWD-04 X Lower Perrinville Creek Restoration Phase 1 35 $275,000 $4,105,000 $3,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $7,380,000 $0 N $7,380,C N PWD-23 Perrinville Creek Basin Analysis Update 38 $594,390 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $594,390 $0 $594,3 0 Q Storm Drainage Improvement Projects .. PWD-06 Lake Ballinger Regional Facility Design & Construction $0 $0 $200,000 $3,000,000 $0 $0 $3,200,000 $0 $3,200,C c O PWD-22 7317 Lake Ballinger Way Floodplain Purchase & 43 $120,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,000 $0 $120,C •LA Structure Removal W Annually Funded Projects W PWD-11 Phase 4 Annual Storm Replacement Project (2023) 42 $1,377,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,377,000 $0 J $1,377,C Z PWD-12 Phase 5 Annual Storm Replacement Project (2024) 36 $324,000 $1,687,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,011,000 $0 $2,011,C E 0. LL PWD-13 Phase 6 Annual Storm Replacement Project (2025) $0 $337,000 $1,755,000 $0 $0 $0 $2,092,000 $0 $2,092,C a PWD-14 Phase 7 Annual Storm Replacement Project (2026) $0 $0 $351,000 $1,825,000 $0 $0 $2,176,000 $0 $2,176,C N Y L PWD-15 Phase 8 Annual Storm Replacement Project (2027) $0 $0 $0 $365,000 $1,898,000 $0 $2,263,000 $0 $2,263,C 0 PWD-16 Phase 9 Annual Storm Replacement Project (2029) $0 $0 $0 $0 $380,000 $1,974,000 $2,354,000 $0 $2,354,C •2 PWD-18 Phase 10 Annual Storm Replacement (2030) & $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $395,000 $395,000 $49,360,000 $49,755,C Future Projects 0. PWD-19 2024 SD Overlays 39 $315,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $315,000 $0 N $315,C N Compliance Related Projects r PWD-17 Storm and Surface Water Comprehensive Plan 37 $350,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $350,000 $0 r $350,C y E TOTAL EXPENDITURE $3,545,390 $6,873,843 $5,406,000 $5,290,000 $2,378,000 $2,469,000 $25,962,233 $50,760,000 $76,722,2 v SOURCEFUNDING 1 1 2026 1 1 2029 TOTAL 1 1 • Q (2024-2029) Stormwater Utility Fund - 422 $2,871,750 $3,683,611 $3,156,000 $3,040,000 $2,378,000 $2,469,000 $17,598,361 $50,760,000 $68,358,3 y ARPA Funds $114,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $114,000 $0 $114,C s Secured Grants $524,450 $575,632 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,100,082 $0 $1,100,C r City of Lynnwood $35,190 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $35,190 $0 r $35,1 Q Unsecured Grants $0 $2,614,600 $2,250,000 $2,250,000 $0 $0 $7,114,600 $0 $7,114,6uu TOTAL REVENUE $3,545,390 $6,873,843 $5,406,000 $5,290,000 $2,378,000 $2,469,000 $25,962,233 $50, Packet Pg. 182 2024 PW CFP/CIP 1 November 2023 77 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 78 1 1 Packet Pg. 183 Public Works - Stormwater Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Improvements Edmonds Marsh 4 �i N C 0 O y C WI Wildlife Refuge City Park Howell Way T -0-M a A i iW �t 'A The project will be improving water quality of stormwater runoff by replacing existing catch basins along the west side of S 104 funded via a DOE grant and on the east side of SR-104 via a state funded appropriation. The catch basins will be replaced with catch basins that include water filter cartridges. Staff proposes this effort in order to provide water quality mitigation for all discharges that directly enter the marsh from these locations. Improve water quality of stormwater discharging into the Edmonds Marsh from the west portions of SR-104 located near tl marsh. The improvements will provide better habitat for the return of salmon to the marsh. $876,000 Design $90,000 Right of Way Construction $644,843 Expense Total $90,000 $644,843 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $11,250 $69,211 ARPA Funds Secured Grants $78,750 $575,632 Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $90,000 $644,843 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 79 1 Packet Pg. 184 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 80 1 1 Packet Pg. 185 8.1.a Reducing scouring flows to reduce sediments load in Perrinville Creek was identified in a previous basin report completed ii 2015 as a critical element of restoring this creek which has been significantly impacted by urban development. The project! funded by this program are incremental steps toward recovering this stream run as adequate fish habitat. These efforts ha) become even more critical given recent challenges around the Perrinville Creek outfall area. This program is a fund for implementing projects within the Perrinville Creek basin to reduce scour flows in the creek. It allows staff flexibility to respond to ad -hoc opportunities such as rain garden cluster projects, or ensure matching funds are available for chasing grant applications for flow reductions projects. The project will reduce peak flows in Perrinville creek, improve fish passage and decrease creek bed scour during peak flow events. $100,000/year Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Stormwater Utility Fund 422 ARPA Funds Secured Grants Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $140,000 $90,000 $90,000 $90,000 $90,000 $90,000 $90,000 $1,260,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $1,400,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $1,400,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $1,400,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 81 1 Packet Pg. 186 The purpose of this project is to improve the environmental health of the creek necessary to support fish habitat, and to restore the storm water capacity. The project consists of the modifications to three structures that currently prevent fish passage and are undersized for the flows on the creek, (1) the culvert at the BNSF track, remove and replace with a fish - friendly culvert or bridge with adequate flow capacity, (2) return flow to the creek between the diversion structure and the BNSF culvert by blocking the structure and restoring creek capacity and (3) culvert at Talbot Road, remove and replace witl- fish-friendly culvert or bridge that provides adequate fish passage and storm water flow capacity. This project will increase the resiliency of the watershed by building the structures that mimic the natural channel performance necessary for fish habitat and stormwater flow capacity. The project also includes time and effort to research and apply for supplemental/additional funding sources for construction. Due to the project complexity and number of stakeholders, the planning and design phase is estimated to be 2-years. The project will reduce City maintenance needs in the future and improve fish passage. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures $7,636,000 Project Cost ■ Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Stormwater Utility Fund 422 ARPA Funds Secured Grants Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total 2024 PW CFPICIP 1 November 2023 $275,000 $1,305,000 $2,800,000 $3,000,000 $275,000 $4,105,000 $3,000,000 $161,000 $1,490,400 $750,000 $114,000 $2,614,600 $2,250,000 $275,000 $4,105,000 $3,000,000 82 Packet Pg. 187 City of Edmonds and Lynnwood joint project to supplement/update the Perrinville Creek 2015 basin analysis that determined possible locations for projects that would help decrease the peak storm flows during high rain events. Project will be updated to reflect projects completed and also determine if there are other locations within the basin to aid in the reduction of peak flows in the basin. Improve overall basin and stream health, by using green stormwater infrastructure methods. This will make it so that rainf is not simply collected and conveyed downstream and instead behaves as close as possible to natural conditions. This includes infiltrating rainfall runoff as close as possible to where it fell. This will also decrease stream peak flows, which will decrease stream erosion and improve the overall stream habitat for aquatic life. $649,200 Design $594,390 Right of Way Construction Expense Total $594,390 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $141,000 ARPA Funds Secured Grants $418,200 City of Lynnwood $35,190 Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $594,390 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 83 1 Packet Pg. 188 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 84 1 1 Packet Pg. 189 Public Works - Stormwater P Lake Ballinger Regional Facility Design & Construction a �- 1W > coco 24Oth St SW 79th P' Mathay Ballinger Park fe a a 0 242nd St SW 24Oth PI SW J W = 241 st St SW F— %O r` A Lake Ballinger suffers from urban flooding & seasonal algae blooms along with other water quality impairments. The Highway 99 corridor is an area of high development, including a future City project which will require stormwater mitigation. By creating a regional facility, the City can improve the stormwater mitigation achieved by development, addressed stormwater mitigation needs for the future Highway project, and treat runoff from one of the City bigger polluti generating areas. The City can drastically improve Lake Ballinger water quality. The project proposes to implement water quality and flow control improvements at City -owned Mathay-Bal linger Park as green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) whic would significantly benefit the Lake ecology and habitat conditions and enhance a valued neighborhood, but underutilized, park. The project proposes to implement water quality and flow control improvements at City -owned Mathay-Ballinger Park as green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) which would significantly benefit the Lake ecology and habitat conditions and enhan a valued neighborhood, but underutilized, park. $3,200,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Stormwater Utility Fund 422 ARPA Funds Secured Grants Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $200,000 $200,000 $2,800,000 $200,000 $3,000,000 $200,000 $750,000 $2,250,000 $200,000 $3,000,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP 1 November 2023 85 1 Packet Pg. 190 The project purchases an existing single family residential property in 2023 located within the Lake Ballinger flood plain. Th City secured a $500,000 Department of Ecology grant to aid in this process. The home is the lowest property on the lake w is badly damaged from previous flooding to the point it is generally uninhabitable. The City intends to remove the home and any pollution generating surfaces from the site in 2024 as part of the initial 2023 purchase. The grant has restrictions that prevent this parcel to be used for public use. After demolition of the structures an impervious surfaces, the planned site use would be for public utility benefit only. Because the City storm drain line for SR-1 cuts through in an easement immediately adjacent to this parcel, the City plans to pursue a future project to split appropriate flows from the City storm drain system and provide water quality treatment to the maximum extent feasible. The future project would provide water quality treatment for a very heavily trafficked highway (SR-104) and would make significant improvement in water quality to Lake Ballinger and its downstream course to Lake Washington via McAleer Cre( Improve the health and water quality of Lake Ballinger by removing hard surfaces and a home that is generally uninhabitable. Project will also provide a future location to treat stormwater runoff from portions SR-104. $750,000 �IYZI Design Right of Way $10,000 Construction $110,000 Expense Total $120,000 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $92,500 Secured Grants $27,500 Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $120,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 86 1 Packet Pg. 191 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 87 1 1 Packet Pg. 192 Annual storm drain replacement/maintenance projects. Projects propose to replace or rehab storm drain infrastructure in several locations throughout the City. Locations of work identified by City crews and staff via firsthand knowledge or video inspection results. Much of Edmonds stormwater infrastructure is past its useful lifespan and requires routine replacement or repair to preserve the function of the storm drain system. Failure to conduct annual maintenance projects will increase chances of storm drain system failure. Improve system reliability and capacity, decrease breakages, and decrease overall day to day maintenance costs $1.7 to $2.4 million/year Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Stormwater Utility Fund 422 Funding Source Total $354,000 $337,000 $351,000 $365,000 $380,000 $395,000 $8,230,139 $1,347,000 $1,687,000 $1,755,000 $1,825,000 $1,898,000 $1,974,000 $41,129,861 $1,701,000 $2,024,000 $2,106,000 $2,190,000 $2,278,000 $2,369,000 $49,360,000 $1,701,000 $2,024,000 $2,106,000 $2,190,000 $2,278,000 $2,369,000 $49,360,000 $1,701,000 $2,024,000 $2,106,000 $2,190,000 $2,278,000 $2,369,000 $49,360,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 88 1 Packet Pg. 193 Road pavement overlays to cover areas of roadways that were excavated and patched in previous years as part of the Annual Storm Maintenance Projects. Improve overall pavement condition in locations that were excavated and patched due to the Annual Storm Replacement Projects. Estimated Project Cost prior year expenditures $315,000 Design $25,000 Right of Way Construction $290,000 Expense Total $315,000 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $315,000 ARPA Funds Secured Grants Unsecured Grants Funding Source Total $315,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 89 1 Packet Pg. 194 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 Packet Pg. 195 WOODWAv nkt rv� '. EDMONDS 4 ssswsrsw u"Woavaut cou"w r = MOUNTLAKE rtsnfu¢e TERRACE �Y ...in.�x. OdG COIIN7Y 1MN13 W ..... The City of Edmonds (City) owns and operates an extensive system of drainage pipes, ditches, and other assets to convey stormwater runoff into streams, lakes, and Puget Sound to prevent and minimize damage to private property, streets, and other infrastructure. The City is faced with the challenge of conveying this runoff safely and cost-effectively while preventir or minimizing the adverse impacts of high flows (erosion, flooding, and sediment deposition) and of stormwater pollutants on water quality and aquatic habitat. In addition, recent state and federal stormwater regulations make it technically and financially challenging to address these issues while balancing utility ratepayer costs. To proactively address these challeng and remain in compliance with the State -mandated National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit (NPDES Phase II permit) and other increasing regulatory requirements, the City is updating its current comprehensive storm and surface water management plan. This permit has and will continue to have significant impact on the workload and operational budget of both the Engineering Division and the Storm Crews within the Public Works Department. Per the State Department of Ecology, the plan will also include the work findings from their required (stormwater Management Action Plan) SMAP process of City drainage watersheds. Project will also include recommendations for stormwater utilities rates to be adjusted at the discretion of Council. A holistic summary of the City's Stormwater system with recommended priorities for selecting future capital maintenance and improvements projects. $733,000 Design $350,000 Right of Way Construction Expense Total $350,000 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $350,000 Funding Source Total $350,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 91 1 Packet Pg. 196 i W-W IL 282,t.QkCF -i Packet Pg. 197 8.1.a SEWER PWS-01 2024 SS Overlays PWS-02 Phase 10 Annual Sewer Replacement (2023) PWS-03 Phase 11 Annual Sewer Replacement (2024) PWS-04 Phase 12 Annual Sewer Replacement (2025) PWS-05 Phase 13 Annual Sewer Replacement (2026) PWS-06 Phase 14 Annual Sewer Replacement (2027) PWS-07 Phase 15 Annual Sewer Replacement (2028) PWS-08 Phase 16 Annual Sewer Replacement (2029) PWS-09 Phase 17 Annual Sewer Replacement (2030) & Future Projects PWS-10 Annual Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehabiliation PWS-11 Lake Ballinger Sewer PWS-13 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehabilitation Phase 4 TOTAL EXPENDITURE Sewer Fund - 423 51 $60,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $60,000 $0 $60,0C U 46 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 $10,0C N 49 $2,005,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,005,000 $0 0 $2,005,0( le 47 $363,498 $2,043,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,406,498 $0 $2,406,4� N $0 $378,000 $2,125,000 $0 $0 $0 $2,503,000 $0 $2,503,0( O Q $0 $0 $393,000 $2,210,000 $0 $0 $2,603,000 $0 $2,603,0( v r $0 $0 $0 $409,000 $2,299,000 $0 $2,708,000 $0 $2,708,0C C $0 $0 $0 $0 $425,000 $2,391,000 $2,816,000 $0 y $2,816,0C 5 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $442,000 $442,000 $58,991,000 $59,433,0( J Q $0 $542,000 $565,000 $587,000 $611,000 $636,000 $2,941,000 $13,228,000 $16,169,0C ,Z a $0 $0 $1,000,000 $6,000,000 $0 $0 $7,000,000 $0 $7,000,0( U 50 $522,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $522,000 $0 $522,0C a $2,960,498 $2,963,000 $4,083,000 $9,206,000 $3,335,000 $3,469,000 $26,016,498 $72,219,000 $98,235,4E lox O v (L TOTALv 029CD N $2,960,498 $2,963,000 $4,083,000 $9,206,000 $3,335,000 $3,469,000 $26,016,498 $72,219,000 $98,235,4C c am E t v O .r .r Q c W E s v O r r Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP 1 November 2023 93 1 Packet Pg. 198 Road pavement overlays to cover areas of roadways that were excavated and patched in previous years as part of the Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects. Improve overall pavement condition in locations that were excavated and patched due to Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects. $60,000 roject Cost i 2024 Design $2,000 Right of Way Construction $58,000 Expense Total $60,000 Sewer Fund 423 $60,000 Funding Source Total $60,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 94 1 Packet Pg. 199 Per the approved 2013 Sewer Comprehensive Plan, the projects will replace pipe and related appurtenances at various locations throughout the City due to old age, being undersized, need to increase capacity, or more prone to breakage due t its material properties. Improve system reliability and capacity, decrease infiltration and inflow, decrease breakages, and decrease overall day to day maintenance costs. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures • • Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Sewer Fund 423 Funding Source Total $378,000 $378,000 $393,000 $409,000 $425,000 $442,000 $9,203,679 $2,000,000 $2,043,000 $2,125,000 $2,210,000 $2,299,000 $2,391,000 $49,787,321 $2,378,000 $2,421,000 $2,518,000 $2,619,000 $2,724,000 $2,833,000 $58,991,000 $2,378,000 $2,421,000 $2,518,000 $2,619,000 $2,724,000 $2,833,000 $58,991,000 $2,378,000 $2,421,000 $2,518,000 $2,619,000 $2,724,000 $2,833,000 $58,991,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 95 1 Packet Pg. 200 Per the approved 2013 Sewer Comprehensive plan and current video inspections of sewer mains, the project will line existing sewer mains that are subject root intrusion, infiltration and inflow, and damage that can be repaired by this trenchless method. Improve system reliability and capacity, decrease infiltration and inflow, decrease breakages, and decrease overall day to day maintenance costs. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures 1 111 • 1 111 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Sewer Fund 423 Funding Source Total $81,000 $85,000 $88,000 $92,000 $96,000 $1,996,679 $461,000 $480,000 $499,000 $519,000 $540,000 $11,231,321 $542,000 $565,000 $587,000 $611,000 $636,000 $13,228,000 $542,000 $565,000 $587,000 $611,000 $636,000 $13,228,000 $542,000 $565,000 $587,000 $611,000 $636,000 $13,228,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 96 1 Packet Pg. 201 tbrtKANUL. ,�■ e4sw Ln a- i� i.• Mi s �aHolly Maple 234th`St SW— 3Q 234th St SW Q Q Madrona Ln Zw z N 236th St SW Q 236th St SW 2361h St SN' �z = 00 �t v h St SW, 238TH ST SW __ 238th St sw _ a 9Ni 3 i aW Oth St SW 240th St SW -01 M, 79th� -i w .:/i b _Ire, 244TH ST SW 3: 3: 242nd St SWa a F c V%S WAY 0- Lake Ballinger 232nd st sw 232nd St SW �232 a. fN V) % a 'd Y o Pf «« L Ss i9 ' I- N N ` a.v 235thStSW s�sw 235TH PL.SWhW 236TH ST SW a��'i, h ow Ln OJ M 0 LLINGER_WAY_ —244TH=ST SW Per the approved 2013 Sewer Comprehensive plan and current video inspections of sewer mains, the sewer pipe along Lak Ballinger will require additional flow capacity in the near future. These improvements are needed to account for populatio growth, reduce Infiltration and Inflow from the pipe and improve maintenance and emergency access for this major trunk system. Improve system reliability and capacity, decrease infiltration and inflow, and decrease overall day to day maintenance cost. Improved access will help ease maintenance and access for emergencies, which will further decease any chance of potentiz sewer spills into Lake Ballinger. $7,000,000 Design $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Right of Way Construction $5,000,000 Expense Total $1,000,000 $6,000,000 Sewer Fund 423 $1,000,000 $6,000,000 Funding Source Total $1,000,000 $6,000,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 97 1 Packet Pg. 202 Per the approved 2013 Sewer Comprehensive plan and current video inspections of sewer mains, the project will line existing sewer mains that are subject root intrusion, infiltration and inflow, and damage that can be repaired by this trenchless method. Improve system reliability and capacity, decrease infiltration and inflow, decrease breakages, and decrease overall day to day maintenance costs. Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures 111 Design $70,000 Right of Way Construction $452,000 Expense Total $522,000 Sewer Fund 423 $522,000 Funding Source Total $522,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 98 1 Packet Pg. 203 Z�- so . A( LLJ H I S r U K I C A L -MUSEUM I I 10 how JY _ ' -. • `ALA 8.1.a r c a) E m 0 L Q E r Q 06 C en 8.1.a FACILITIES PWF-02 Cemetery Building PWF-03 City Hall PWF-04 Fishing Pier/Beach Ranger Station PWF-05 Frances Anderson Center PWF-06 Fire Station 16 PWF-07 Fire Station 17 PWF-08 Fire Station 20 PWF-09 Historic Log Cabin PWF-10 Historical Museum PWF-11 Library Library Plaza Deck Waterproofing PWF-23 Project PWF-12 Meadowdale Club House PWF-13 Old Public Works PWF-14 Parks Maintenance Building PWF-15 Public Safety PWF-16 Public Works O&M PWF-17 Wade James Theater PWF-18 Yost Pool House PWF-19 Fire Life Safety Communications II[Q El0*/»k,IQk01 N 0- 0• •�� 63 $24,048 $8,414 $3,377 $818 $1,000 $0 $37,657 $0 $37,6! U 63 $80,000 $279,064 $70,949 $108,628 $80,000 $0 $618,641 $0 $618,6, c N $2,971 $2,918 $5,628 $1,043 $1,500 $0 $14,060 $0 $14,01 N 0 N 63 $110,000 $98,892 $1,020,934 $113,029 $80,000 $0 $1,422,855 $0 $1,422,8! -a- $49,280 $69,388 $30,107 $31,631 $35,000 $0 $215,406 $0 0 $215,41 Q $50,000 $221,922 $27,575 $122,245 $45,000 $0 $466,742 $0 $466,7, 0 $36,274 $94,248 $69,782 $23,765 $20,000 $0 $244,069 $0 $244,012A d $30,000 $546 $1,361 $6,469 $1,500 $0 $39,876 $0 $39,8' 63 $65,000 $10,000 $4,621 $10,199 $5,000 $0 $94,820 $0 J $94,8; Z 63 $100,000 $53,325 $45,038 $35,000 $0 $0 $233,363 $0 $233,310- U $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,900,000 $0 $4,900,000 $0 $4,900,01 a U $97,091 $7,985 $4,446 $1,159 $5,000 $0 $115,681 $0 $115,61 .12 $132,051 $25,000 $25,000 $24,519 $25,000 $0 $231,570 $0 0 $231,5' � 63 $40,320 $9,349 $5,177 $69,228 $20,000 $0 $144,074 $0 $144,0' ':, a 63 $220,000 $55,169 $151,481 $515,071 $80,000 $0 $1,021,721 $0 $1,021,7; c N 63 $180,000 $80,315 $79,348 $43,821 $50,000 $0 $433,484 $0 $433,41 r $99,077 $43,880 $115,734 $21,872 $25,000 $0 $305,563 $0 .r $305,51 E $26,128 $8,409 $19,127 $30,389 $30,000 $0 $114,053 $0 t $114,0! $125,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $125,000 $0 .r .r $125,01 Q c $1,467,240 $1,068,824 $1,679,685 $1,158,886 $5,404,000 $0 $10,778,635 $0 $10,778,6: 0 s 0 r r Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 100 1 Packet Pg. 205 FACILITIES Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) $605,000 $452,796 $1,000,000 $0 $0 Fund 016(non-bond proceeds) $0 $591,028 $276,729 $76,592 $31,500 General Fund $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Water Utility Fund 421 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Stormwater Utility Fund 422 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Sewer Utility Fund 423 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Unsecured Funding $862,240 $25,000 $402,956 $1,082,294 $5,372,500 TOTAL REVENUE $1,467,240 $1,068,824 $1,679,685 $1,158,886 $5,404,000 $0 $2,057,796 $0 $975,849 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,744,990 $0 $10,778,635 $0 $2,057,7f U $0 $975,8, N 0 N $0 N $0 O N a 0 $0 Q $0 r c 0 $0 $7,744,94 'y d $0 $10,778,6: W J Q Z U. a U_ U a_ U Y L 0 V a v N O N r Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 101 Packet Pg. 206 r -i This small structure houses the Edmonds Cemetery funerary services and the cemetery Sextant office. The building is in relatively good condition and has little deferred maintenance backlog. Minor security and communications updates will be needed as technology dictates. Projects: Minor repair and maintenance Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well -maintained facility creates a safe work environmei that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $24,048 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $24,048 $8,414 $3,377 $818 $1,000 Expense Total $24,048 $8,414 $3,377 $818 $1,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) $20,000 Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) $8,414 Unsecured Funding $4,048 $3,377 $818 $1,000 Funding Source Total $24,048 $8,414 $3,377 $818 $1,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 102 1 Packet Pg. 207 1 ylil U f1�; (r.. I Y i'f�..f City Hall was built in 1979 and was operated as a private business office center until the City purchased and renovated the building in the 1990s. The City has operated Edmonds City Hall from this location since the renovations were completed. Th building is in near original condition and needs substantial repair and maintenance. Projects: All Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing systems need replacement, Restroom remodels w/gender neutral consideration, Center Stairway Code updates and replacement, Lobby remodel, Entry Awning re -glazing, Interior Painting, ADA accessibility improvements. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well -maintained facility creates a safe work environmei that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $80,000 (2024) Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $80,000 $279,064 $80,000 $279,064 $80,000 $129,064 $150,000 $80,000 $279,064 $70,949 $108,628 $80,000 $70,949 $108,628 $80,000 $70,949 $108,628 $80,000 $70,949 $108,628 $80,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 103 1 Packet Pg. 208 The Pier was recently renovated and is generally in good condition. The Beach Ranger Office is a 1200 square foot office an restroom facility located near the east end of the pier. There are season programs and visitor support functions that operas out of this facility. Projects: Electrical panel clean up and safety inspection, minor repairs, and maintenance, Beach Ranger Station/restroom roof replacement. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $2,971 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $2,971 $2,918 $5,628 $1,043 $1,500 Expense Total $2,971 $2,918 $5,628 $1,043 $1,500 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) $2,918 Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding $2,971 $5,628 $1,043 $1,500 Funding Source Total $2,971 $2,918 $5,628 $1,043 $1,500 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 104 1 Packet Pg. 209 The Frances Anderson Center serves as the City's main recreation center offering arts, athletic and cultural programing yea round. Due to the age and high usage of the building there are many building systems that are in need of replacement or restoration. Projects: Replacement of Heating Boilers with Electric alternatives that will add ventilation, cooling and heating Investment grade audit approved by City Council, Replacement of all exterior doors scheduled for 2024, ADA accessible door closures, Plumbing drainage collector, Restroom remodels (w/ gender neutral consideration), Replacement of all plumbing fixtures, Addition of building security card readers, Building HVAC controls to maximize efficiency, Fire Sprinkler replacement, and clean building act compliance efforts will be addresses by IGA.) Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $110,000 (2024) Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $110,000 $98,892 $1,020,934 $113,029 $80,000 $110,000 $98,892 $1,020,934 $113,029 $80,000 $110,000 $98,892 $1,000,000 $20,934 $113,029 $80,000 $110,000 $98,892 $1,020,934 $113,029 $80,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 105 1 Packet Pg. 210 8.1.a This facility is operated by South Snohomish County Fire and Rescue and was built in 2003 and has a building area of 10,70( square feet. The building is in fair condition and will require some infrastructure updates or replacements to remain operationally ready for the needs of the City. Projects: Roll -up Bay door controller replacements, HVAC unit assessment, Gutter replacement, interior coatings updates Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $49,280 (2024) Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $49,280 $69,388 $49,280 $69,388 $69,388 $49,280 $49,280 $69,388 $30,107 $31,631 $35,000 $30,107 $31,631 $35,000 $30,107 $31,631 $35,000 $30,107 $31,631 $35,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 106 1 Packet Pg. 211 db r .._A>M■ 101001000-MW MINSIMPM: MOMMINNIIIII This building is operated by South Snohomish County Fire and Rescue, was built in 1999 and has a building area of 9,800 square feet. This building has had some updates but will need some infrastructure upgrades to remain operationally ready Projects: Bay Door assessment, Electrical infrastructure updates, roof soffit enclosure, interior painting. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $50,000 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $50,000 $221,922 $27,575 $122,245 $45,000 Expense Total $50,000 $221,922 $27,575 $122,245 $45,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) $221,922 Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding $50,000 $27,575 $122,245 $45,000 Funding Source Total $50,000 $221,922 $27,575 $122,245 $45,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 107 1 Packet Pg. 212 PVC kh J This building is the eldest of the City's three fire stations and is operated by South County Fire and Rescue. This station sery Esperance and supports the other two fire stations in Edmonds. The building is 6400 square feet and was built in 1990. Th( building has had significant updates to the exterior envelope and is in need of interior and HVAC system updates. Projects: interior painting, restroom fixture replacement Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $36,274 (2024) Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $36,274 $94,248 $36,274 $94,248 $94,248 $36,274 $36,274 $94,248 $69,782 $23,765 $20,000 $69,782 $23,765 $20,000 $69,782 $23,765 $20,000 $69,782 $23,765 $20,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 108 1 Packet Pg. 213 PVC J This Historic log cabin is home to the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce visitor center, the structure was a purpose built cabi from the turn of the century. The structure is professionally maintained on a three year cycle by a log cabin specialist and requires only minor maintenance and upkeep annually. Projects: new thick cut shingle replacement, chinking of exterior log finish, interior lighting. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $30,000 (2024) Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total r $30,000 $546 $1,361 $6,469 $1,500 $30,000 $546 $1,361 $6,469 $1,500 $30,000 $546 $1,361 $6,469 $1,500 $30,000 $546 $1,361 $6,469 $1,500 2024 PW CFPICIP 1 November 2023 109 1 Packet Pg. 214 The 110-year-old original Carnegie Library building is home to the Edmonds Museum. The building is on the State of Washington Historic registry and has been well maintained over the last several years. Buildings of this age require specialized maintenance and coordination with the state historic architect to maintain the historic status. Structural stabilization, weatherproofing, and updating the restroom to meet ADA compliance are the most significant priorities to maintain this facility. Projects: minor structural reinforcement, entry fagade masonry repair, lower entry restoration Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $45,000 (2024) FIA Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $65,000 $10,000 $4,621 $10,199 $65,000 $10,000 $4,621 $10,199 $65,000 $10,000 $4,621 $10,199 $65,000 $10,000 $4,621 $10,199 2029 2030-44 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 110 1 Packet Pg. 215 - Facilit Public Works Library The Edmonds Library is operated by the Sno-Isle Library system with exception of the Second floor Plaza room rental space The library is a 19,000 square foot building built in 1982. The building hosts special event rentals and daily Library programming and community services. This is one of the City's most heavily used buildings by the public and has significant deferred maintenance needs, including the building fagade and plaza deck waterproofing. Projects: window replacement, ADA access device upgrades or replacement, gender inclusive public restroom creation, Pla Room restroom/changing facilities, Plaza Room A/V installation, building masonry restoration or building cladding, exterior stairway restoration, HVAC ventilation fan assessment, building breezeway remodel, flood damage restoration, and plaza level green roof now on CIP. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $100,000 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $100,000 $53,325 $45,038 $35,000 Expense Total $100,000 $53,325 $45,038 $35,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) $100,000 Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) $53,325 $45,038 $35,000 Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $100,000 $53,325 $45,038 $35,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 ill I Packet Pg. 216 MMM This 4000 square foot facility was built in 1965 as a community theater facility and later was transformed into the Meadowdale community club house. The building is currently owned and maintained by the City of Edmonds and houses tl City operated Meadowdale pre-school and the 1500 square foot Meadowdale club house rental facility. This facility while dated has been well maintained and only requires minor maintenance and repairs. Projects: minor maintenance and repairs, interior flooring and painting, and bath fixture replacement. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $97,091 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $97,091 $7,985 $4,446 $1,159 $5,000 $5,000 Expense Total $97,091 $7,985 $4,446 $1,159 $5,000 $5,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) $7,985 $4,446 $1,159 $5,000 Unsecured Funding $97,091 Funding Source Total $97,091 $7,985 $4,446 $1,159 $5,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 112 1 Packet Pg. 217 This facility was built in 1965 to house the City's Public Works Department, the building was converted in 1995 to tenant space and City storage, as well as Edmonds Police large evidence storage. This is a vital piece of property adjacent to the Waste Water Treatment Plant, and could be converted for utility use if regulatory requirements dictate. Building is primaril used as storage and will need some updates to maintain current operational readiness. Projects: HVAC updates, roll -up door replacement, security camera system. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $132,051 (2024) Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $132,051 $25,000 $132,051 $25,000 $132,051 $25,000 $132,051 $25,000 $25,000 $24,519 $25,000 $25,000 $24,519 $25,000 $25,000 $24,519 $25,000 $25,000 $24,519 $25,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 113 1 Packet Pg. 218 This facility was built in 1967 by Ed Huntley who at the time was the City Facilities supervisor. The 4800 square foot facility now houses all City Facility Operations staff(11) and all of Park and Rec Parks Maintenance Staff(12+ seasonal help) This Facility is home to the City Carpentry Shop, Key Shop, City Flower program, Parks engine repair shop and Parks and Facilitie maintenance supply storage as well as Parks and Facilities Manager offices. This Facility is near end of life and is undersized to support the departmental staffing that are assigned to this facility. Projects: maintenance and repair to maintain operational capacity, ADA restroom updates, shop floor replacement, Pine St facility exit, exterior painting. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $40,320 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $40,320 $9,349 $5,177 $69,228 $20,000 Expense Total $40,320 $9,349 $5,177 $69,228 $20,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) $25,000 Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) $9,349 Unsecured Funding $15,320 $5,177 $69,228 $20,000 Funding Source Total $40,320 $9,349 $5,177 $69,228 $20,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 114 1 Packet Pg. 219 The Public Safety building houses Edmonds Police Department, Edmonds Municipal Court and the City Council Chambers. The building was built in 1999 encompassing 30,000 square feet of office, court and municipal government uses. The buildi houses one of the City emergency operations centers, large police training, simulator facilities and evidence processing anc storage. The building has had minimal system updates over it's life and has a significant amount of deferred maintenance and should be retrofitted with new fire sprinklers. Projects: air handler and outdoor ventilation unit replacements, new solar plant installation, parking lot reconfiguration to meet current usage, fire sprinkler installation, interior hallway renovation and painting, sleeping room remodel and gender specific/neutral accommodations, gender inclusive public restrooms, operable windows is specific locations, courts flat roo replacement. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $220,000 (2024) Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $220,000 $55,169 $151,481 $220,000 $55,169 $151,481 $140,000 $55,169 $151,481 $80,000 $220,000 $55,169 $151,481 $515,071 $80,000 $515,071 $80,000 $515,071 $80,000 $515,071 $80,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 115 1 Packet Pg. 220 tA I Am E y E E Q M U 06 _ ca This building built in 1995 houses four Public Works divisions and the auxiliary City Emergency Operations Center. This building is 28,000 square feet and is capable of operations 24/7 during weather emergencies and natural disasters. The building has significant deferred maintenance needs and infrastructure updates. Projects: vehicle yard leveling, HVAC unit replacements, roof system for material bunkers, ventilation fan replacements, firs alarm system replacement, lobby remodel, restroom remodel with gender inclusivity considerations, electric vehicle charging and maintenance infrastructure, emergency communications updates, interior hallway flooring thresholds, utility bay HVAC replacement, water main replacement (building connection). Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. $285,000 (2024) Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) General Fund Water Fund 421 Stormwater Fund 422 Sewer Fund 423 Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total 2024pWCFP/CIP 1 November2023 $180,000 $80,315 $79,348 $43,821 $50,000 $180,000 $80,315 $79,348 $43,821 $50,000 $35,000 $80,315 $145,000 $79,348 $43,821 $50,000 $180,000 $80,315 116 $79,348 $43,821 $50,000 Packet Pg. 221 8.1.a This community theater was built by the Driftwood Players theater group in 1967 and was deeded to City ownership at a later date. The facility is 6,300 square feet in size and houses the Driftwood Players theatrical performances and City meetings. The City's maintenance responsibilities are limited to large infrastructure, parking lot, roofing, and grounds. Projects: parking lot repair and recoating, minor repair, and maintenance. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer L that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance L reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected c lifespan. $99,077 (2024) Construction\Professional Services $99,077 $43,880 $115,734 $21,872 $25,000 `r Expense Total $99,077 $43,880 $115,734 $21,872 $25,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) c E Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) $43,880 M Unsecured Funding $99,077 $115,734 $21,872 $25,000 Q Funding Source Total $99,077 $43,880 $115,734 $21,872 $25,000 c a� E s Q CFP/CIP Packet Pg. 222 2024 PW I November 2023 117 MMMMMI PVC a J r r- This recreational facility houses the City's aquatic programing and some Parks and Recreation programs. Built in 1971 the pool house historically was only operated seasonally. The tenant run aquatic programing is currently expanding to year round lap and team aquatic activities and will continue to support summer open swim programing. The facility requires minimal maintenance to remain operational and is subject to tenant lease terms of use. Projects: security updates, roof replacement, gutter replacement, plumbing fixture updates, exterior door replacements, operational repair and maintenance to accommodate 365 operations. Public owned facilities and properties are maintained to assure safe and property operating conditions and to assure the protection of the physical asset throughout an expected lifespan. A well maintained facility creates a safe work environmer that is clean and sanitary which promotes workplace efficiency and confidence. Routine and preventative maintenance reduces energy consumption and provides for building systems to operate as designed during manufacturer expected lifespan. roject Cost 2024 2025 2028 Construction\Professional Services $26,128 $8,409 $19,127 $30,389 $30,000 Expense Total $26,128 $8,409 $19,127 $30,389 $30,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) $8,409 Unsecured Funding $26,128 $19,127 $30,389 $30,000 Funding Source Total $26,128 $8,409 $19,127 $30,389 $30,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 118 1 Packet Pg. 223 All fire and life safety systems are required to be monitored 24/7 in case of emergency. Previously this monitoring has beer done by traditional phone lines (POTS). This infrastructure is aging in place and is not required to be maintained by the telecommunications providers as of 2020. In 2022 we have had 3 catastrophic communications failures that resulted sever; thousand dollars expense and lack of compliance with fire code. The City has eleven facilities with life safety monitoring, ar six locations with elevators, making a total of 17 locations with monitoring requirements that will need to be updated. Maintaining and updating aging infrastructure allows the City to continue to operate older buildings by staying compliant with fire code and L&I regulations. $125,000 Construction\Professional Services $125,000 Expense Total $125,000 Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (non -bond proceeds) Unsecured Funding $125,000 Funding Source Total $125,000 2024 PW CFPICIP 1 November 2023 119 1 Packet Pg. 224 m E m The Library Plaza Deck is essentially a green roof on the second floor of the Edmonds Sno-Isle Library. The deck surface was waterproofed and remodeled in 2003, since that project continuous water intrusion has occurred through the waterproof membrane. This water intrusion has been successfully mitigated over the years and has not been deemed a project of significance previously. In 2018 Western Specialty Contractors inspected the water intrusion and offered an initial ROM price to demolish and waterproof the existing plaza deck. Rebuilding the plaza deck and replacement of landscape, planter! grass, pavement, flashing and hand railings would be a separate construction project. The Parks Director in 2018 offered ar estimate to replace landscaping and irrigations systems. In 2021 a draft structural report was performed by MLA Engineerir to discover any structural consequences from the years of water intrusion, building was deemed structurally sound and water intrusion not factoring in to building structural stability. Maintaining building in operational and safe condition, in order to maintain partnership with Sno-Isle Library system. Preservation of the City's physical assets in appropriate condition vs. the age of the facility and historic capital investment $4,900,000 Construction\Professional Services Expense Total Fund 001 (Repair & Maint, Prof Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Fund 016 (2021 Facilities Bond) Unsecured Funding Funding Source Total $4,900,000 $4,900,000 $4,900,000 $4,900,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 120 1 Packet Pg. 225 _, Packet Pg. 226 8.1.a WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT PWP-01 WWTP Annual Capital Replacement In House $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,250,000 $1,250,000 $5,000,000 $18,750,000 $23,750,00 Projects to U PWP-02 Carbon Recovery Project 56 $500,000 $500,000 $500,00 rn N O PWP-04 Nutrient Removal Project 59 $350,000 $750,000 $750,000 $20,000,000 $20,000,000 $41,850,000 $41,850,00 N le PWP-08 Gasification Bypass (Class A Solids Production) 55 $300,000 $300,000 N $300,00 N PWP-09 WWTP Asset Criticality Ranking and Condition 57 $150,000 $150,000 $150,00 p Assessment PWP-10 VFD Upgrades 58 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $750,000 $750,00 Q PWP-11 Primary Clarifier 2 Rehab 54 $600,000 $600,000 r $600,00 O PWP-12 Primary Clarifier 3 Rehab $950,000 $950,000 $950,00 2 PWP-13 ODS (Primary Sludge) Pump Replacement $350,000 $250,000 $600,000 $600,00 PWP-14 Chlorine Contact Channel Sluice Gates $375,000 $375,000 J $375,00 Z Replacement TOTAL EXPENDITURE $2,650,000 $2,450,000 $1,850,000 $21,250,000 $21,6259000 $1,250,000 $5190759000 $189750,000 $69,825,00 a U a_ U rn Y FUNDING SOURCETAL 1 1 1 1 1 1• 1 1-44 TOTA. 0 (2024-2029) Edmonds Sewer Fund 423 - 50.79% ( ) $1,345,935 $1,244,355 $939,615 $10,792,875 $10,983,338 $634,875 $25,940,993 $9,523,125 v $35,464,11 Mountlake Terrace - 23.17% $614,005 $567,665 $428,645 $4,923,625 $5,010,513 $289,625 $11,834,078 $4,344,375 $16,178,45 a le Olympic View Water Sewer District - 16.55% $438,575 $405,475 $306,175 $3,516,875 $3,578,937 $206,875 $8,452,912 $3,103,125 $11,556,03 c N City of Shoreline - 9.49% $251,485 $232,505 $175,565 $2,016,625 $2,052,212 $118,625 $4,847,017 $1,779,375 $6,626,39 r TOTAL REVENUE $2,650,000 $29450,000 $19850,000 $219250,000 $219625,000 $1,2509000 $519075,000 $189750,000 $69,825900 = d E t v Iv .r .r Q C N s c� O r r Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 122 1 Packet Pg. 227 The WWTP Annual Capital Replacement In -House Projects is intended to maintain infrastructure and equipment to ensure that the treatment plant is well maintained. This project ensures that critical infrastructure is maintained and equipment is replaced in order to reduce risk to the City Estimated Project Cost *Includes prior year expenditures 11 111 1 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Sewer Fund 423 Mountlake Terrace Olympic View Water Sewer District City of Shoreline Funding Source Total $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $200,000 $250,000 $250,000 $3,750,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $800,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $15,000,OOC $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,250,000 $1,250,000 $18,750,000 $253,950 $253,950 $253,950 $507,900 $634,875 $634,875 $9,523,125 $115,850 $115,850 $115,850 $231,700 $289,625 $289,625 $4,344,375 $82,750 $82,750 $82,750 $165,500 $206,875 $206,875 $3,103,125 $47,450 $47,450 $47,450 $94,900 $118,625 $118,625 $1,779,375 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,250,000 $1,250,000 $18,750,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 123 1 Packet Pg. 228 To cover any carryover or close-out costs associated with the Carbon Recovery Project that occur in FY 2024. To complete and close out all items associated with the Carbon Recovery Project. $500,000 Design Right of Way Construction $500,000 Expense Total $500,000 Sewer Fund 423 $253,950 Mountlake Terrace $115,850 Olympic View Water Sewer District $82,750 City of Shoreline $47,450 Funding Source Total $500,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 124 1 Packet Pg. 229 The WA Dept of Ecology has imposed the Puget Sound Nutrient General Permit upon us. It is anticipated that our current process will not be able to meet these new permit requirements. This decision package will allow us to team with an engineering firm to study our current process and design a solution that will allow our plant to meet the new PSNGP requirements as well as accommodate projected service area growth over the next decade. To meet new permit requirements and increase capacity for projected 20-year service area expansion. $41,850,000 Project , Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Sewer Fund 423 Mountlake Terrace Olympic View Water Sewer District City of Shoreline Funding Source Total $350,000 $750,000 $750,000 $20,000,000 $20,000,000 $350,000 $750,000 $750,000 $20,000,000 $20,000,000 $177,765 $380,925 $380,925 $10,158,000 $10,158,000 $81,095 $173,775 $173,775 $4,634,000 $4,634,000 $57,925 $124,125 $124,125 $3,310,000 $3,310,000 $33,215 $71,175 $71,175 $1,898,000 $1,898,000 $350,000 $750,000 $750,000 $20,000,000 $20,000,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 125 1 Packet Pg. 230 This allows the ability to continue production of class A solids if/when the gasification system is shut down for repairs or preventative maintenance. The ability to produce and haul class A solids will eliminate a temporary but substantial cost increase hauling as this product is essentially the same in volume as biochar or concentrated minerals and is accepted at th local transfer station whereas if this option is not available, sludge will need to be loaded into trailers and hauled to Oregor as was done during the Carbon Recovery Project at a cost of up to $200,000 per month. This redundant solids processing mode was an option to add to the Carbon Recovery Project and was rejected by previous administration. Along with the savings in hauling costs, there will be no additional odor issues or daily sludge truck traffic in the adjacent neighborhood. Allow solids handling system redundancy and the ability to run the dryer unit independently in the event of a gasification system failure or repair. The dryer is capable of producing Class A biosolids, which would negate the need for temporary hauling and disposal of wet cake at a rate of up to $200,000/month. $300,000 Design $50,000 Right of Way Construction $250,000 Expense Total $300,000 Sewer Fund 423 $152,370 Mountlake Terrace $69,510 Olympic View Water Sewer District $49,650 City of Shoreline $28,470 Funding Source Total $300,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 126 1 Packet Pg. 231 Work with engineering firm to develop a comprehensive asset management system which includes an asset condition assessment as well as asset criticality ranking. This will allow the WWTP to develop a 5 and 10 year asset repair and replacement and CIP schedule which will improve overall plant reliability. Develop a short and long term plan to improve plant reliability by ranking critical assets and creating a capital improvemen plan. As the majority of this facility is coming to the end of its useful life, the planned replacement/repair of failing equipment and structures will be much more cost effective than replacing upon failure and ensure that the plant maintains its ability to meet discharge permit requirements. This will also be valuable in future rate studies. $150,000 Design $150,000 Right of Way Construction Expense Total $150,000 Sewer Fund 423 $76,185 Mountlake Terrace $34,755 Olympic View Water Sewer District $24,825 City of Shoreline $14,235 Funding Source Total $150,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 127 1 Packet Pg. 232 ■ ;_; The WWTP has several VFD's (variable frequency drives) on various critical equipment influent pumps, effluent pumps, RAS/WAS pumps, aeration blowers, etc. These VFD's have an expected useful life of 15-20 years. Several of the VFD's here at the plant range in age between 20-30 years old. There have already bees some failures and replacements made. These outdated VFD's need to be replaced to avoid a catastrophic failure event that could happen to these weakened state VFD's for any number of reasons, including abrupt starting and stopping due to power bumps/loss, switching from grid to generator power supply or just a parts failure. If multiple critical components fail simultaneously, then the plant may lose it ability to treat wastewater that meets NPDES permit requirements resulting in pollution of our receiving waters and possib fines by our governing agency. To keep critical equipment reliable and in working condition. $250,000 Design $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 Right of Way Construction $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 Expense Total $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 Sewer Fund 423 $126,975 $126,975 $126,975 Mountlake Terrace $57,925 $57,925 $57,925 Olympic View Water Sewer District $41,375 $41,375 $41,375 City of Shoreline $23,725 $23,725 $23,725 Funding Source Total $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 128 1 Packet Pg. 233 Primary Clarifier #2 cage, center column, feedwell, corner sweeps, weir, counterweight, skimming device and rake arms ne replacement due to severe corrosion. The steel has not been replaced since the original construction. The limited access wi require that pieces be assembled inside the tank. The concrete structure also needs to be inspected and repaired as neede as corrosion of the concrete in spots has led to exposed rebar and may have compromised the structural integrity of the clarifier. Improve reliability of critical infrastructure as it is in a state of imminent failure. Ensure WWTP's ability to treat wastewate up to its rated capacity and meet discharge permit requirements. Design $100,000 Right of Way Construction $500,000 Expense Total $600,000 Sewer Fund 423 $304,740 Mountlake Terrace $139,020 Olympic View Water Sewer District $99,300 City of Shoreline $56,940 Funding Source Total $600,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 129 1 Packet Pg. 234 r-- Primary Clarifier #3 (dual drive) cages, center columns, feedwells, corner sweeps, weirs, counterweights, skimming devices and rake arms need replacement due to severe corrosion. The steel is in a highly corrosive environment and has not been replaced since the original construction approximately 30 years ago. The limited access will require that pieces be assembl( inside the tank. The concrete structure also needs to be inspected and repaired as needed as corrosion of the concrete in spots has led to exposed rebar and may have compromised the structural integrity of the clarifier. Improve reliability of critical infrastructure as it is approaching a state of imminent failure. Ensure WWTP's ability to treat wastewater up to its rated capacity and meet discharge permit requirements. $950,000 Design $150,000 Right of Way Construction $800,000 Expense Total $950,000 Sewer Fund 423 $482,505 Mountlake Terrace $220,115 Olympic View Water Sewer District $157,225 City of Shoreline $90,155 Funding Source Total $950,000 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 130 1 Packet Pg. 235 The ODS pumps are over 30 years old and are at the end of their useful life. The maintenance, reliability and efficiency of t primary sludge pumping system would be greatly improved by replacing the current diaphragm pumps with progressive cavity pumps. During this pump replacement, piping modifications would also be done to allow pumps to support more th one clarifier, improving system redundancy along with reliability. Improve reliability, redundancy and efficiency of the primary sludge and scum pumps by replacing 30+ year old pumps and improving piping system. $600,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Sewer Fund 423 Mountlake Terrace Olympic View Water Sewer District City of Shoreline Funding Source Total $100, 000 $250,000 $250,000 $350,000 $250,000 $177,765 $126,975 $81,095 $57,925 $57,925 $41,375 $33,215 $23,725 $350,000 $250,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 131 1 Packet Pg. 236 Replace two gate valves and actuators at the inlets of the two chlorine contact channels. These gates have repeatedly failed. Repair is often expensive and time consuming, as access is an issue, so it is necessary to rent scaffolding and other equipment to make repairs. When a gate fails, it effectively cuts the disinfection capacity of the plant in half. These are critical pieces of equipment and need to be replaced with a different technology to improve performance and reliability. To replace problematic, yet critical valves with more reliable technology that helps to ensure disinfection system functionality and the ability to continue to meet NPDES discharge permit requirements. $375,000 Design Right of Way Construction Expense Total Sewer Fund 423 Mountlake Terrace Olympic View Water Sewer District City of Shoreline Funding Source Total $75,000 $300,000 $375,000 $190,463 $86,888 $62,062 $35,587 $375,000 2024 PW CFPICIP I November 2023 132 Packet Pg. 237 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 133 8.1.a CFP / CIP COMPARISON (2023 TO 2024) PROJECTS ADDED Transportation PROJECTType 2024 Traffic Signal and Safety Upgrades • Estimated future costs for transportation project. Transportation 2024 Pedestrian Safety Program Estimated future costs for transportation project. Transportation 88th Ave. Overlay and Sidewalk Repair Estimated future costs for transportation project. Water 2024 Waterline Overlays Estimated future costs for road repairs due to waterline replacements. Water Phase 20 Annual Replacement Program (2030) Estimated future costs for waterline replacements. Storm 2024 Stormwater Overlays Estimated future costs for road repairs due to storm replacements Storm Phase 10 Annual Storm Replacement (2030) Estimated future costs for stormline replacements Sewer Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehabilitation Phase 4 Estimated future costs for sewer project. Sewer 2024 Sanitary Sewer Overlays Estimated future costs for road repairs due to sewer line replacements. Sewer Phase 17 Annual Sewer Replacement/Rehab (2030) Estimated future costs for sewerline replacements WWTP Gasification Bypass Class A Solids Production Estimated future costs for waste water treatment plant project. WWTP WWTP Asset Criticality Ranking and Condition Assessment Estimated future costs for waste water treatment plant project. WWTP VFD Upgrades Estimated future costs for waste water treatment plant project. WWTP Primary Clarifier 2 Rehab Estimated future costs for waste water treatment plant project. WWTP Primary Clarifier 3 Rehab Estimated future costs for waste water treatment plant project. WWTP ODS (Primary Sudge) Pump Replacement Estimated future costs for waste water treatment plant project. WWTP Chlorine Contact Channel Sluice Gates Replacement Estimated future costs for waste water treatment plant project. CFP / CIP COMPARISON (2023 TO 2024) PROJECTS REMOVED Transportation PROJECTType 2023 Guardrail Program • to be completed in late 2023 Transportation 2023 Traffic Signal Upgrades to be completed in late 2023 Transportation 2023 Pedestrian Safety Program Completed Transportation Citywide Lighting Study to be completed in late 2023 Water 2023 Waterline Overlays Completed Water Phase 12 Annual Replacement Program Completed Storm 2023 Stormwater Overlays Completed Sewer 2023 Sewer Overlays Completed Q M U a� N 0 N N Co N w Q 0 Q c 0 m J a z U- a U- U a_ U L 0 3.1 L) a N O N w Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 134 1 Packet Pg. 239 8.1.a Sewer PROJECTType Phase 9 Annual Sewer Replacement/Rehab Completed • Sewer Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehabilitation Phase 3 Completed Facilities Parks Restrooms Maintenance Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 removed Facilities Public Works EV Conduit Addition Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 removed Facilities City Park Gazebo Roof Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 removed WWTP Primary Clarifier Completed WWTP Joint Sealant lCompleted WWTP I Vacuum Filter lCompleted CFP / CIP COMPARISON (2023 TO 2024) PROJECTS REVISED .- PROJECT Transportation Puget Dr. @ OVD Signal Upgrades Cost and funding moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation Signal Upgrades - 100th Ave @ 238th St. SW Cost and funding moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation Main St. @ 3rd Signal Upgrades Cost and funding moved from 2026-2027 to 2028-2029 Transportation 228th St. SW from Hwy 99 to 95th PI. W Corridor Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2028 to 2027-2029 Transportation Hwy 99 Revitalization & Gateway Project - Stage 3 Cost and funding revised, moved from 2022-2027 to 2023-2028 Transportation Hwy 99 Revitalization & Gateway Project - Stage 4 Cost and funding revised, moved from 2022-2028 to 2023-2029 Transportation SR 524 (196th St. SW) / 88th Ave. W - Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved form 2026-2028 to 2027-2029 Transportation Main St. @ 9th Ave. Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation 76th Ave. W @ 220th St. SW - Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2023-2026 to 2024-2027 Transportation SR-104 Adaptive System - 236th to 226th Cost and funding revised, moved from 2023-2025 to 2024-2027 Transportation SR-104 @100th Ave W. Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation SR-104 @ 95th PI. W Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation SR-104 @ 238th St. SW Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation SR-104 @ 76th Ave. W Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2029-2043 to 2030-2044 Transportation Olympic View Dr @ 76th Ave. W Intersection Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2029-2043 to 2030-2044 Transportation 175th St SW Slope Repair Cost moved from 2026 to 2027 Transportation 232nd St. SW Walkway from 100th Ave. to SR-104 Cost and funding revised, moved from 2027-2028 to 2028-2029 Transportation 236th St. SW Walkway from Madrona Elementary to 97th Ave. W Cost and funding revised, moved from 2027-2028 to 2028-2029 Transportation 84th Ave. W Walkway from 238th St. SW to 234th St. SW Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2028 to 2027-2029 Transportation 80th Ave. W Walkway from 212th St. SW to 206th St. SW Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation 80th Ave. W Walkway from 188th St. SW to Olympic View Dr. Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2028 to 2027-2029 Transportation Walnut St. Walkway from 6th Ave. S to 7th Ave S Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026 to 2027 Transportation 216th St. SW Walkway from Hwy. 99 to 72nd Ave W Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026 to 2027 Transportation Maplewood Dr. Walkway from Main St. to 200th St. SW Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2028 to 2027-2029 Transportation 95th PI. W Walkway from 224th St. SW to 220th St. SW Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation SR-104 @ 76th Ave. W Non -Motorized Trans Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2028 to 2027-2029 .Q U rn N 0 N le N 0 N a 0 Q r 0 .y d J Q z a U_ tU a_ U 0 Y L 0 0 a v N 0 N r Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 135 1 Packet Pg. 240 8.1.a .- PROJECT Transportation Downtown Lighting Improvements Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2027 to 2027-2028 Transportation SR-104 Walkway: HAWK to Pine / Pine from SR-104 to 9th Cost and funding revised, moved from 2026-2028 to 2027-2029 Transportation Ferry Storage Improvements from Pine St. to Dayton St. Moved from 2026 to 2027 Transportation Transportation Plan Update Cost and funding revised Transportation Green Streets 236th St SW - 84th Ave W to Highway 99 Cost and funding revised, moved from 2023-2024 to 2025-2026 Water Yost & Seaview Reservoir Repairs and Upgrades Added estimated construction costs to 2025 and 2026 Storm Perrinville Creek Basin Analysis Update Added grant funding for project to 2024 Storm 7317 Lake Ballinger Way Purchase & Structure Removal Move $120,000 from 2023 to 2024 Storm Lake Ballinger Regional Facility Design and Construction Moved project funding from 2024/2025 to 2026/2027 Storm Storm and Surface Water Comprehensive Plan Cost revised from $315,000 in 2023 funds moved to 2024 Sewer Annual Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehabilitation Cost and funding 2025-2029 revised Sewer Lake Ballinger Sewer Cost and funding shifted from 2024-2025 to 2026-2027 WWTP Nutrient Removal Project Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Cemetery Building Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities City Hall Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Fishing Pier/Beach Ranger Station Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Frances Anderson Center Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Fire Station 16 Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Fire Station 17 Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Fire Station 20 Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Fire Life Safety Communications Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Historic Log Cabin Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Historical Museum Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Library Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Library Plaza Deck Waterproofing Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Meadowdale Club House Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Old Public Works Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Parks Maintenance Building Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Public Safety Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Public Works O&M Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Wade James Theater Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised Facilities Yost Pool House Six -year cost and funding 2024-2029 revised a U rn N O N N O N a 0 Q c 0 .y d J Q z LL a U- U a_ U 0 Y L 0 a v N O N r Q 2024 PW CFP/CIP I November 2023 136 1 Packet Pg. 241 �w - kt- EDMONDS PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES 2024-2029 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ��i'�. � .] mil', � �r �a.�''l' �_ .rlA •..� 7' r �I • _ t , ... �• fig - .+ III�IIILvIIBItf114EIII11iiI11111inmm�mm�mnnuum , 4 � ` NOVEMBER 2023 FINAL "EDMONDS PARKS. RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES Table of Contents Director's Letter................................................................ 2 CIP/CFP Worksheets.......................................................3-7 Project Distribution Map ................................................. 8 Project Descriptions......................................................9-31 Program Descriptions...................................................32-34 Acquisition Descriptions...............................................35-37 FundDetail..................................................................... 38 Fund 332 (Capital Const. & Impact Fee) Detail ............39-40 Fund 125 (REET 11) Detail ................................................ 41 Fund 126 (REET 1) Detail ................................................. 42 Fund 143 (Tree) Detail .................................................... 43 Fund 137 (Cemetery) Detail ........................................... 44 Annual Project Comparison ............................................ 45 'N, Pw .", lf"" ,iR =�t L tir _ 8.1.b ti EDMONDS PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES September 19, 2023 Members of the City Council, Parks & Planning Board, Staff and Citizens of Edmonds, The following document outlines the 6-year Parks Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP). The CIP/CFP serve as a planning guide identifying parks capital projects and related funding sources and reflects the priorities established in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan based largely on citizens' priorities. The CIP/CFP is updated annually through a public process including presentations and Public Hearings hosted by both the Parks & Planning Board and the City Council. There were several significant Parks Capital project accomplishments in 2023 to include: 1. Completion of the 8-acre Civic Center Playfield two-year construction project with a June 23rd Grand Opening. 2. Completion of the 96th Avenue Infiltration project required for Civic Center Playfield which will significantly reduce the contaminated water run-off into Shell Creek in Yost Park. 3. An Interlocal Agreement with City of Mountlake Terrace supporting the Ballinger Park Phase 3 development to provide improved park access for Edmonds residents. The 2023 projects in process include: 1. Demolition of the structures on the property donated by Shirley Johnson (abatement completed). 2. Improvements to the Edmonds Lake Ballinger Access (McAleer) area. 3. Improvements to Mathay Ballinger Park — engineering completed, and permit submitted for paved path, shade structure, permanent restroom and parking improvements. 4. Tree maintenance for large oak trees at 5th and Main. 5. Many deferred maintenance projects throughout the park system. After completing two significant multi -million -dollar park projects consecutively (Edmonds Waterfront Center and Civic Center Playfield), the Parks, Recreation & Human Services Department will turn our focus on deferred maintenance throughout the city's existing parks system and recreation facilities. Further, the department will remain focused on acquisition of additional parkland to fill system gaps in park services and to address inequities in parkland distribution as identified in the 2022 PROS Plan. Your Parks, Recreation & Human Services Department is proud to serve the citizens and visitors of Edmonds and we look forward keeping the Edmonds parks safe, accessible, and enjoyable for all. Sincerely, Angie Feser Edmonds Parks, Recreation & Human Services Director 425-771-0256 Angie.Feser@EdmondsWA.gov Page 2 Packet Pg. 244 8.1.b 2024-2029 SIX -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Costs inflated at 3% per year Project CFP Project Site & Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Tot: # Lake Ballinger Park Mountlake Terrace ILA *CARRYFORWARD* D19 Funding to support City of Mountlake Terrace Ballinger Park Phase III $ 200,000 $ $ $ $ $ $ 200,0( Development. Payment due upon completion of project. D5 Mathay Ballinger Park *CARRYFORWARD* D6 Construction of improvements including permanent restroom, paved trail, picnic $ 271,300 $ $ $ $ $ $ 271,3( D7 shelter ADA access and other amenities. Shell Creek Restoration R19 Stream health and erosion control of Shell Creek in Yost Park, scope TBD based $ 250,000 $ 380,000 $ $ $ $ $ 630,0( on existing conditions analysis in 2024. Design, permitting and construction work in 2025. Yost Playground & Pool R6 Park enhancements, repair and maintenance to include playground replacement $ $ 1,296,400 $ $ $ $ $ 1,296,4( R11 and pool upgrades in 2025. Columbarium Expansion - Phase II D8 Expansion of the current columbarium. Funding provided through the Cemetery $ $ 159,100 $ $ $ $ $ 159,1( Trust Fund 137. Woodway Campus Athletic Complex - Phase I - Lighting X D20 In cooperation with the Edmonds School District, complete a community park $ $ 1,500,000 $ $ $ $ $ 1,500,0( and athletic complex at Former Woodway High School to include lighting and future construction of two additional fields. Neighborhood Park SE 1 X D13 Master plan and development of a new neighborhood park in South Edmonds $ $ 79,600 $ 819,500 $ $ $ $ 899,1( (funding is in Parkland Acquisition program for purchase). R8 Sierra Park $ $ - $ 415,000 $ $ $ $ 415,0( Playground replacement and upgrade to inclusive standards. Olympic Beach Park R7 Replacement of failed ventilation system in coordination with roof replacement $ 20,000 $ 33,000 $ - $ $ $ $ 53,0( (by Facilities / PW) Project Type: A: Acquisition - R: Replacement/Upgrade - P: Master Planning - D: Development (new) 2D v M LL R .r .Q M V CD N O N V N O N r O 13 Q Page 3 Packet Pg. 245 8.1.b 2024-2029 SIX -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Costs inflated at 3% per year Project CFP Project Site & Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Tot: # D10 Pine Street Park D11 Park enhancements to include the addition of a small shelter with picnic tables, $ $ 40,000 $ 124,400 $ $ $ $ 164,4( D12 canopy shade trees and a paved connecting pathway. Johnson Property R2 Master plan for future park use. Site development not included in estimate. $ $ $ 82,000 $ $ $ $ 82,0( P5 Demolition, debris removal and site security completed in 2023. Neighborhood Park SR99 X D15 Master plan and development of a new neighborhood park in Southeast $ $ $ 82,000 $ 844,100 $ $ $ 926,1( Edmonds (funding is in Parkland Acquisition program for purchase). x P1 Parks & Facilities Maintenance and Operations Building $ $ $ 1,125,500 $ 4,637,100 $ $ $ 5,762,6( D2 Replace and/or renovate shop facilities located in City Park. R12 Maplewood Hill Park $ $ $ - $ 347,800 $ $ $ 347,8( Playground replacement. Neighborhood Park SE 2 X D18 Master plan and development of a new neighborhood park in Southeast $ $ $ $ 84,400 $ 869,500 $ $ 953,9( Edmonds (funding is in Parkland Acquisition program for purchase). Waterfront Walkway P3 Connecting the waterfront walkway from Brackett's Landing North to $ $ $ $ $ 515,000 $ 819,500 $ 1,334,5( D14 Marina Beach Park by adding missing section in front of the Ebb Tide _ Condominiums, to provide ADA improvements. R16 Seaview Park $ $ $ $ $ 417,900 $ - $ 417,9( Replacement of permanent restroom to provide ADA upgrades. Elm Street Park D1 6 D1 Park enhancements to include the addition of a nature playground, $ $ $ $ $ 100,000 $ 340,370 $ 440,3; small shelter with picnic tables, habitat restoration and public process to consider R14 possible off -leash dog park area. Project Type: A: Acquisition - R: Replacement/Upgrade - P: Master Planning - D: Development (new) 2D v M LL R .r .Q M V CD N O N V N O N O 13 Q Page 4 Packet Pg. 246 8.1.b 2024-2029 SIX -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Costs inflated at 3% per year Project CFP Project Site & Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Tot: # X R15 Pool Replacement $ $ $ $ $ $ 23,881,000 $ 23,881,0( Replacement of the existing Yost pool. Design, location, and funding TBD. Meadowdale Playfields R3 Renovations as suggested by the City of Lynnwood and consistent with re TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD $ negotiated and updated Interlocal Agreement. May include addition of dugout - roofs, athletic field light replacement and turf. Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Willow Creek Daylighting) Master Plan development and implementation of the Edmonds Marsh to daylight X P4 D9 the waterway connection of Puget Sound to the Edmonds Marsh and two fresh TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD $ water creeks providing restoration of fresh water/salt water estuary and natural - D1 tidal exchange. (All expenses are TBD per Council direction in December 2022). Acquisition funding identified in Parkland Acquisition program. (A) SUBTOTAL PARKS CIP/CFP PROJECTS $ 741,300 $ 3,488,100 $ 2,648,400 $ 5,913,400 $ 1,902,400 $ 25,040,870 $ 39,734,4; Costs inflated at 3% per year Project PARKS CIP PROGRAMS 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Tot: Citywide Park Improvements / Capital Replacement Program R17 Ongoing program of funding allocation for regular and deferred maintenance, $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 2,700,0( repair and replacement of parks amenities, structures and equipment. Signage & Wayfinding R10 Replacement of aging signage to improve accuracy and provide a $ 75,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 75,0( consistent City of Edmonds Parks visual identification system. Parkland Acquisition Support $ $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 250,0( Funds utilized to evaluate potential acquisitions and complete due diligence. Debt Service and Interfund Transfers Debt service on Civic Park $1.6M bond (2021) and Interfund transfers to $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 738,0( Engineering for Capital Project Support. (B) SUBTOTAL - PARKS CIP PROGRAMS $ 648,000 $ 623,000 $ 623,000 $ 623,000 $ 623,000 $ 623,000 $ 3,763,0( Project Type: A: Acquisition - R: Replacement/Upgrade - P: Master Planning - D: Development (new) Q Page 5 Packet Pg. 247 8.1.b 2024-2029 SIX -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Costs inflated at 3% per year Project PARKLAND ACQUISITION 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Tot: X A2 Neighborhood Park SE 1 $ 1,500,000 $ - $ $ $ $ $ 1,500,0( Acquisition of parkland in South Edmonds. X A3 Neighborhood Park SR99 $ - $ 1,545,000 $ - $ $ $ $ 1,545,0( Acquisition of parkland near SR 99. X A4 Neighborhood Park SE 2 $ $ - $ 2,185,500 $ $ $ $ 2,185,5( Acquisition of parkland in South Edmonds. A5 Interurban Trail $ $ $ $ $ $ 895,585 $ 895,5E Acquisition for trail extension. Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Willow Creek Daylighting) X Al Acquisition of the Unocal property in support of greater Edmonds Marsh TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD $ restoration. (C) SUBTOTAL - PARKLAND ACQUISITION $ 1,500,000 $ 1,545,000 $ 2,185,500 $ - $ $ 895,585 $ 6,126,01 U) 2D v M u_ R .r .Q cv V N O N 4 N O N r O 13 Q r c O .T d J Q Z (D) TOTAL PARKS CIP/CFP EXPENDITURES (A+B+C) $ 2,889,300 $ 5,656,100 $ 5,456,900 $ 6,536,400 $ 2,525,400 $ 26,559,455 $ 49,623,5! E—L a PARKS CIP REVENUE 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Tot: Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) I - Fund 126 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 1,200,01 Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) II - Fund 125 $ 2,000,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 9,500,0 Park Impact Fees - Fund 332-100 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 1,800,0 Tree Fund 143 - Land Acquisition $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 1,290,0 Cemetery Trust Fund 137 - Columbarium Expansion $ 159,100 $ 159,1( ARPA Contribution $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ Investment Interest (3%) $ 18,918 $ 24,795 $ 30,849 $ 37,085 $ 43,507 $ 50,122 $ 205,2. Donations $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ Bond Proceeds $ - $ $ $ $ $ $ Secured Grants (Snohomish County Conservation Futures) $ 880,000 $ $ $ $ $ $ 880,0( Unsecured Grants/Funding - Land Acquisition $ 175,000 $ $ $ $ $ $ 1750 Unsecured Grants/Funding - non -land acquisition $ - $ 1,500,000 $ 1,945,000 $ 5,481,200 $ 869,500 $ 24,756,800 $ 34,552,5( (E) TOTAL PARKS CIP REVENUE $ 3,788,918 $ 3,898,895 $ 4,190,849 $ 7,733,285 $ 3,128,007 $ 27,021,922 $ 49,761,8, u_ V a_ U N Y lyC a N O N N C N E s ct O .r Q C N E t Project Type: A: Acquisition - R: Replacement/Upgrade - P: Master Planning - D: Development (new) v O Q Page 6 Packet Pg. 248 2024-2029 SIX -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 8.1.b Parks Fund 6-Year Overview 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 (F) Beginning Fund Balance $ 3,150,795 $ 4,050,413 $ 2,293,208 $ 1,027,157 $ 2,224,042 $ 2,826,649 (E) Revenue $ 3,788,918 $ 3,898,895 $ 4,190,849 $ 7,733,285 $ 3,128,007 $ 27,021,922 (D) Expenditures $ 2,889,300 $ 5,656,100 $ 5,456,900 $ 6,536,400 $ 2,525,400 $ 26,559,455 (G) Ending Fund Balance (F+E-D) $ 4,050,413 $ 2,293,208 $ 1,027,157 $ 2,224,042 $ 2,826,649 $ 3,289,117 Project Type: A: Acquisition - R: Replacement/Upgrade - P: Master Planning - D: Development (new) Page 7 Packet Pg. 249 8.1.b P5 Johnson Property R3 Meadowdale Playfields D6 Mathay Ballinger Park R6, R11 Yost Playground & Pool D19 Lake Ballinger Park (MLT) D8 Columbarium Expansion - Phase II i R7 Olympic Beach Park D10, D11, D12 Pine Street Park R8 Sierra Park P3, D14 Waterfront Walkway R12 Maplewood Hill Park P4, D9, D1 Edmonds Marsh Restoration _ D16, D17, R14 Elm Street Park P1, D2 Parks Maintenance Building R16 Seaview Park R15 Pool Replacement Al Edmonds Marsh Restoration A5 Interurban Trail �; I R19 Shell Creek Restoration D20 Woodway Campus Athletic Complex EN * Non -site specific projects A2 , P2, D13 Neighborhood Park SE 1 A3, P6, D15 Neighborhood Park SR99 A4, P7, D18 Neighborhood Park SE 2 R17 Citywide Park Improvements R10 Signage & Wayfinding F D 1 P4 •D1 Al • D9 P1 ID2 MrA XV14 E&M * Site specific projects only. Citywide/annual citywide projects not shown DRAFT I Packet Pg. 250 2024-2029 Parks Capital Improvement & Capital Facilities Plan PROJECTS -. It*--. - - W&`r--am "L- •' 4EDMONDS PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES Page 9 Packet Pg. 251 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Lake Ballinger Park/Mountlake Terrace ILA — D19 Interurban Trail ° Improved Park Entry y <_ dill Proposed Crossing by the U.S. 41 Army Corps of Engineers Senior Center Proposed Channel by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers i 6 ft Wood Chips Path 6 ft Gravel Path% F— Boardwalk & Viewing Platform Lake Ballinger Lake Ballinger Park, City of Mountlake Terrace k x ii Proposed Boardwalk by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Project Summary: Through an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Mountlake Terrace, the City of Edmonds will support the construction of the planned improvements in the northwest area of Lake Ballinger Park including a park entry, pathways and access to Lake Ballinger. The project is underway and payment is due upon completion of the project. Project Justification: This western boundary of the park is Edmonds city limits and these improvements will provide better access to Lake Ballinger Park for Edmonds residents. The revenue contribution supports the construction of the improvements which will benefit the City of Edmonds. This project is supported by the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan including 3 Recommendations, 1 Goal and 3 Objectives. Recommendation 1.2 Expand partnerships and agreements with other nearby jurisdictions. Recommendation 3.6 Explore options for access to Lake Ballinger with the City of Mountlake Terrace to include possible joint development and consideration of a fishing pier. Recommendation 5.2 Repair and improve or extend trails and boardwalks to allow improved public access to natural areas for nature/wildlife viewing, hiking and outdoor experience. PROS Goal 3, Objectives 3.2, 3.8 and 3.11. Estimated Cost: $200,000 Page 10 Packet Pg. 252 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Mathay Ballinger Park - D6 24100 78th Place West Project Summary: Park improvements to Mathay Ballinger Park began in 2023 and are continuing into 2024. Improvements include the addition of a permanent restroom, a shelter with picnic tables and a paved pathway to provide ADA accessibility to the playground as well as connect the paved Interurban Trail spur. Approximately $228,000 was expended in 2023 for the engineering, permitting and restroom procurement. Project Justification: Upgrades to this park are supported by 5 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 8 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 3.3 is to prioritize improvements to Mathay Ballinger Park and upgrade, enhance or replace park amenities, specifically the play amenities. Recommendation 3.5 is to add amenities to existing parks, such as picnic shelters to Mathay Ballinger Park... and paved pathway connections in Mathay Ballinger Park. Recommendation 6.4 is to install permanent restrooms at Marina Beach Park and Mathay Ballinger Park. PROS Plan Goal 2, Objective 2.6, Goal 3 Objectives 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.8 and 3.9 Goal 9 Objective 9.1 and Recommendations 3.1 and 6.2 also align with these upgrades. Estimated Cost: $499,300 (approx. $228,000 expended in 2023) Page 11 Packet Pg. 253 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Shell Creek Restoration — R19 Shell Creek, Yost Park Project Summary: The overall goal of this project is the restoration of Shell Creek ecosystem in Yost Park. Phase 1 is the completion of a preliminary Existing Conditions Analysis scheduled to be conducted in 2024 which will determine what improvements are needed to support a healthy environment for the natural ecosystem within the park as it relates to Shell Creek in its entirety within park boundaries including stream bank and bed erosion. Phase 2 is the restoration work as identified and prioritized in the Analysis including design, permit and construction and may include habitat and environmental protection and enhancement, mitigation opportunities, and bridge, trail and boardwalk replacement/relocation, concrete structure removal or modification. Project Justification: The 45-acre Yost Park, containing a portion of Shell Creek, has a need to prevent erosive conditions. With Shell Creek being a salmon -bearing stream silting issues caused by erosion within Yost Park impact spawning habitat. Erosion has caused closure of a pedestrian bridge in the upper creek corridor in the park, causing significant impact to trail users by lack of ability to cross the creek to access both sides of the park. In addition, other pedestrian bridges are deteriorating and in short order, require replacement. 2022 Parks, Recreation & Open Space (PROS) Plan - Goal 3: Parks, Trails & Open Space, Objectives 3.7, 3.8 and 3.9; Goal 4: Waterfront Use & Access, Objectives 4.2 and 4.4; Goal 5: Natural Resource & Habitat Conservation Objectives, 5.1, 5.3 and 5.4; Goal 6: Climate Change, Adaptation & Resiliency, Objective 6.5; and Goal 9: Park Operations & Administration Objectives 9.1 and 9.2. Estimated Cost: $630,000 Construction (R19) — Creek Restoration $250,000 2026 2027 2028Total $250,000 Construction (R4) — Bridge, Trail, Stream $380,000 $380,000 Total Expenses $250,000 $380,000 $630,000 Real Estate Excise Tax II — Fund 125 $250,000 $380,000 $630,000 Total Revenue $250,000 $380,000 $630,000 Page 12 Packet Pg. 254 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Yost Playground & Pool - R6 & R11 fry 96th Ave W & Bowdoin Way, Yost Park Project Summary: Future park enhancements, repair, and maintenance to include a playground replacement and pool. The playground at Yost Park has reached the end of its lifecycle being 27 years old having been installed in 1995, and is not ADA accessible. Both playground replacement and pool improvements including re -plastering are scheduled for 2025. Project Justification: To maintain safety amenities should be repaired and/or replaced as supported in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan Recommendation 3.1 which is to maintain, renovate or replace aging or damaged infrastructure in existing City properties to ensure public accessibility, use and safety and Recommendation 3.4 replace the playgrounds at... Yost Memorial Park. In addition, this work is supported by PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1 and 1.4; Goal 3, Objective 3.6, 3.8 and 3.9; Goal 4, Objective 4.4, Goal 5, Objective 5.4; Goal 6, Objective 6.5; Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendation 3.10 and 6.2 for a total of 4 Recommendations, 6 Goals and 9 Objectives. Estimated Cost: $1,296,400 Page 13 Packet Pg. 255 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Olympic Beach Park - R7 200 Admiral Way, Entrance of the Fishing Pier Project Summary: Replacement of non -operable ventilation system while roof replacement project is completed (Public Works — Facilities Division) Project Justification: This work is supported by 3 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 3 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 6.3 is to replace or renovate restrooms at Olympic Beach, Seaview Park and Brackett's Landing North. PROS Plan Goal 3, Objective 3.8; Goal 4, Objective 4.1; Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendation 6.3 also align with these upgrades. Estimated Cost: $53,000 Planning (R7) — Restroom Renovation 0- $20,000 $20,000 Construction (R7) — Restroom Renovation $33,000 $33,000 Total Expenses $20,000 $33,000 $53,000 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $20,000 $33,000 $53,000 Total Revenue $20,000 Mr $33,000 $53,000 *Project moved earlier to 2024 per Council direction. Page 14 Packet Pg. 256 8.1.b Parks & Recreation D20: Woodway Campus Athletic Complex Phase I Lighting 23200 1001h Ave. W Project Summary: This project consists of two components: Phase I lighting addition, Phase II renovation of existing underdeveloped athletic field and would be coordinated with the property owner, Edmonds School District. Project Justification: By adding lighting to the renovated Phase I year-round field, usage of the multi -use facility would significantly increase. Phase II would renovate a currently poorly maintained and underutilized large athletic field to provide community significantly more multi -sport use of an existing facility. This Athletic Complex serves a densely populated area of more than 150,000 residents within 5-mile radius. Future maintenance costs could be offset by user fees. Phase I without lighting installation was completed in 2015 for $4.2M, Phase II estimated at $6-8M with funding and timing undetermined. This partnership improvement is supported by a Recommendation, 2 Goals and 5 Objectives in the 2022 PROS Plan including Recommendation 3.2 "expand partnerships and agreements with Edmonds School District ... to provide public access and opportunities for outdoor recreation". And PROS Plan Goal 3, Objectives 3.3, 3.9, 3.10 and 3.11; and Goal 9, Objective 9.4. Estimated Cost: Phase I Lighting: $1,500,000; Phase II: $6 — 8M Construction (D20) - Lighting $1,500,000 $1,500,000 Total Expenses $1,500,000 $1,500,000 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 Park Impact Fees — Fund 332-100 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $0 ($1,500,000) $0 ($1,500,000) Page 15 Packet Pg. 257 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Neighborhood Park SE 1— P2, D13 Project Summary: Acquire and develop an additional neighborhood park in the SE Edmonds area to address an existing gap in park services and inequities in parkland distribution. Once an acquisition has been authorized (see Land Acquisition Section for details) a Master Plan will be developed in collaboration with the surrounding community. Development of the park will be based on the Master Plan. Project Justification: The addition of a new park is supported by 2 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 11 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 1 is to fill the park system gaps, 1.1 Acquire property for neighborhood parks in underserved areas such as the south Edmonds area and the SR 99 corridor. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 2, Objectives 2.1 and 2.3, Goal 3, Objectives 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9 and 3.10 and Recommendation 6.2 also align with the development of a new park. Estimated Cost: $899,100 + Parkland Acquisition Planning— Neighborhood Park SE 1 (P2) $79,600 $79,600 Construction — Neighborhood Park SE 1 (D13) $819,500 $819,500 Total Expenses $79,600 $819,500 $899,100 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $79,600 $79,600 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $79,600 $0 00 $79,600 i0 *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Page 16 Packet Pg. 258 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Sierra Park — R8 81st Ave W & 190th St SW Project Summary: Replacement of the playground and fall surfacing at Sierra Park. The playground is 27 years old and is currently the smallest and most limited playground in the park system. The new playground is intended to be inclusive level design. Project Justification: These improvements are supported by 2 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 3 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 3.4 is to replace the playgrounds at Maplewood Hill Park, Sierra Park and Yost Memorial Park. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 3, Objective 3.8, Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendation 3.1 also align with these improvements. Estimated Cost: $415,000 *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Page 17 Packet Pg. 259 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Pine Street Park - D10, D11 & D12 r Project Summary: Park improvements to include the addition of a small shelter with picnic tables, canopy shade trees and a paved interior connecting pathway. Project Justification: These improvements are supported by 2 Recommendations, 2 Goals and 2 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 3.5 is to add amenities to existing parks, such as picnic shelters to Mathay Ballinger Park, Elm Street Park and Pine Street Park and paved pathway connections in Mathay Ballinger Park and Pine Street Park. PROS Plan Goal 3, Objective 3.8; Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendation 6.2 also align with these improvements. Estimated Cost: $164,400 Planning (D10, 11, 12) $40,000 2028 2029 Total $40,000 Construction (D10) — Shelter w/Picnic Tables $59,600 $59,600 Construction (D11) — Paved Pathway $38,300 $38,300 Construction (D12) — Canopy Shade Trees $26,500 $26,500 Total Expenses $40,000 $124,400 $164,400 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $40,000 $124,400 $164,400 Total Revenue $40,000 $124,400 $164,400 Page 18 Packet Pg. 260 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Maplewood Hill Park — R12 19800 89th PI W Project Summary: Replacement of the existing playground installed in 1985. This playground is 38 years old and is the oldest in the park system. Project Justification: This improvement is supported by 2 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 3 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 3.4 is to replace the playgrounds at Maplewood Hill Park, Sierra Park and Yost Memorial Park. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 3, Objective 3.8; Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendation 3.1 also align with this improvement. Estimated Cost: $347,800 Page 19 Packet Pg. 261 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Neighborhood Park SR 99 — P6 & D15 Project Summary: Design and development of an additional neighborhood park in the SR 99 area to address an existing gap in park services and inequities in parkland distribution. Once an acquisition has been authorized (see Land Acquisition Section for details) a Master Plan will be developed in collaboration with the surrounding community. Development of the park will be based on the Master Plan. Project Justification: The addition of a new park is supported by 2 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 11 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 1 is to fill the park system gaps, 1.1 Acquire property for neighborhood parks in underserved areas such as the south Edmonds area and the SR 99 corridor. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 2, Objectives 2.1 and 2.3, Goal 3, Objectives 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9 and 3.10 and Recommendation 6.2 also align with the development of a new park. Estimated Cost: $926,100 + Parkland Acquisition Planning— Neighborhood Park SR99 (P6) $82,000 $82,000 Construction — Neighborhood Park SR 99 (D15) $844,100 $844,100 Total Expenses 7 $82,000 $844,100 $926,100 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $82,000 $82,000 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $82,000 $0 00 $82,000 00 *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Page 20 Packet Pg. 262 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Johnson Property - P5 9309 Bowdoin Way Project Summary: This project is to design a master plan for this 1-acre property donated by Shirley Johnson in 2021. The house and outbuildings were removed in 2023. The site includes historic fruit and nut trees which have all been neglected for years. The master planning process uses a combination of park system -wide goals (PROS Plan), property opportunities and constraints and community input on future design and usage for the space and provides supporting documentation for potential grants for future improvements. Project Justification: This project is supported by 1 Recommendation, 5 Goals and 11 Objectives of the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 3.1 — Maintain, renovate, or replace aging or damaged infrastructure in existing City properties to ensure public accessibility, use and safety. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 3, Objective 3.7, 3.8 and 3.10; Goal 5, Objective 5.1; Goal 6, Objectives 6.1, 6.4 and 6.5; Goal 9, Objectives 9.1, 9.3 and 9.5 also align with this project. Estimated Cost: $82,000 Page 21 Packet Pg. 263 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Parks & Facilities Maintenance Building - P1 & D2 600 3rd Avenue South, City Park Project Summary: Replacement of 40+ year old Parks and Facilities Maintenance building and renovation of the yard area in City Park. Currently undersized to accommodate staff, vehicles and equipment, mechanical work spaces and employee facilities and the facility is reaching the end of its useful life. Project Justification: Parks and Facilities Divisions have long outgrown this existing facility and need additional work areas and fixed equipment storage in order to more efficiently maintain City parks and Capital facilities. The city's small equipment repair garage is used as the Park Maintenance locker room, daily meeting room, computer access (two for 17 FTEs) and work preparation space. It is insufficient for work efficiency and creates a conflicting work space of small machinery repair and gathering space. This project is supported by 1 Goals, 3 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. PROS Plan Goal 9, Objectives 9.1, 9.3 and 9.9 align with this project. Estimated Cost: $5,762,600 Planning & Design (P1) $1,125,500 $1,125,500 Construction (D2) $4,637,100 $4,637,100 Total Expenses $1,125,500 $4,637,100 $5,762,600 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 Park Impact Fees — Fund 332-100 Bond Proceeds Operating Contribution — General Fund Park Donations Total Revenue Unsecured Funding 00 00 .00 *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Page 22 Packet Pg. 264 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Columbarium Expansion Phase II — D8 820 15th St SW, Edmonds Memorial Cemetery Project Summary: Expansion of the Edmonds Memorial Cemetery Columbarium. Funding provided through the Cemetery Trust Fund 137 which accumulates fund balance based on Cemetery usage and revenue generated. Project Justification: As the existing columbarium continues to fill up, it is appropriate to begin planning for the Phase II expansion. The design is complete and since it is continuation of phase improvements, could be relatively simple to implement. Estimated Cost: $159,100 Page 23 Packet Pg. 265 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Waterfront Walkway Completion — Ebb Tide Section - P3 & D14 t ice' e ti yy L4 Beachfront in front of Ebb Tide Condominiums (200 Beach Place) Project Summary: This improvement would provide a continuous ADA accessible waterfront walkway from Brackett's Landing North to Marina Beach Park ensuring all individuals, including those with mobility challenges and those using wheeled carriers can safely enjoy the waterfront. The final missing piece is a constructed pathway beach side of the Ebb Tide condominiums in the easement owned by the City of Edmonds. Project Justification: To provide public ADA access along the waterfront for all individuals. Completion of the walkway would meet ADA requirements, support efforts to keep dogs off of the beaches and was recognized as a high priority by residents participating in the development of the 2022 Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan. This project is supported by 1 Recommendation, 3 Goals and 5 Objectives in the PROS Plan. Recommendation 6.2 is to implement upgrades and improvements to park facilities to conform with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) and ensure universal accessibility to include required parking, providing ramped entrances and site furnishings. PROS Plan Goal 3, Objective 3.8; Goal 4, Objectives 4.1, 4.2 and 4.4, Goal 6, Objective 6.7 also align with this project. Estimated Cost: $1,334,500 Planning & Design $515,000 $515,000 Construction $819,500 $819,500 Total Expenses $515,000 $819,500 $1,334,500 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $515,000 $515,000 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $515,000 $515,000 ii 00 Page 24 Packet Pg. 266 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Neighborhood Park SE 2 — P7, D18 rlto'oa Project Summary: Design and development of an additional neighborhood park in the SE Edmonds area to address an existing gap in park services and inequities in parkland distribution. Once an acquisition (see Land Acquisition Section for details) has been authorized a Master Plan will be developed in collaboration with the surrounding community. Development of the park will be based on the Master Plan. Project Justification: The addition of a new park is supported by 2 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 11 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 1 is to fill the park system gaps, 1.1 Acquire property for neighborhood parks in underserved areas such as the south Edmonds area and the SR 99 corridor. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 2, Objectives 2.1 and 2.3, Goal 3, Objectives 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9 and 3.10 and Recommendation 6.2 also align with the development of a new park. Estimated Cost: $953,900 + Parkland Acquisition *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Page 25 Packet Pg. 267 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Seaview Park Restroom — R16 80th Ave W & 186th St SW Project Summary: Improvements to include renovation or replacement of the permanent restroom to provide ADA compliant facilities. Project Justification: These improvements are supported by 3 Recommendations, 2 Goals and 2 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 6 is to make improvements to existing parks as needed to ensure proper maintenance, usability and quality of park features and grounds to remove barriers and improve universal access. Recommendation 6.3 is to replace or renovate restrooms at Olympic Beach, Seaview Park and Brackett's Landing North. PROS Plan Goal 3, Objective 3.8; Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendations 3.1 and 6.2 also align with these improvements. Estimated Cost: $417,900 Page 26 Packet Pg. 268 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Elm Street Park- D16, D17 & R14 7th & Elm Street Project Summary: Park enhancements to include the addition of a nature playground, small shelter with picnic tables, habitat restoration and pubic process to consider possible off -leash dog park area. Project Justification: These improvements are supported by 2 Recommendations, 2 Goals and 2 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 3.1 is to add amenities to existing parks, such as picnic shelters to Mathay Ballinger Park, Elm Street Park and Pine Street Park. PROS Plan Goal 6, Objective 6.5; Goal 9, Objective 9.1; and Recommendation 3.5 also align with these improvements. Estimated Cost: $440,370 Planning (R14, D16, D17) $100,000 $100,000 Construction (R14) — Habitat Restoration $56,300 $56,300 Construction (D16) — Nature Playground $199,670 $199,670 Construction (D17) — Shelter w/Picnic Tables $84,400 $84,400 Total Expenses $100,000 $340,370 $440,370 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $100,000 $284,070 $384,070 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $100,000 $0 $284,070 0i $384,070 00 Page 27 Packet Pg. 269 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Yost Pool Replacement — R15 96th Ave W & Bowdoin Way, Yost Park Project Summary: Yost Pool was built nearly 50 years ago and continues to provide recreational opportunities for many residents and visitors. In addition to teaching youth lifesaving water safety, the pool serves as an opportunity for community members of all ages to lead healthy and active lifestyles. Funding for this project has not been identified and would likely require voter approval. Project Justification: Replacing Yost Pool is supported by 4 Recommendations, 4 Goals and 6 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 4 is to replace Yost Pool. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 3, Objective 3.7, 3.8 and 3.9; Goal 7, Objective 7.4; Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendations 3.1, 4.1, 4.2 and 6.2 also align with this replacement. Estimated Cost: $23,881,000 Planning & Construction (1115) 2027 2028 2029 $23,881,000 Total $23,881,000 Total Expenses $23,881,000 $23,881,000 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 Fund 332 Balance + Park Impact Fees Secured Grants Bonds Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $0 000($23,881,00011 $0 *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Page 28 Packet Pg. 270 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Meadowdale Playfields - R3 1681h ST SW, Lynnwood Project Summary: Currently identifying potential budget allocation for shared improvements and related expenditures dependent upon pending Interlocal Agreement negotiations. Project Justification: The cities of Lynnwood and Edmonds and Edmonds School District currently have an Interlocal Agreement (ILA) for Meadowdale Park for shared cost of capital improvements, renovations, and ongoing maintenance. This work is supported by 2 Recommendations, 3 Goals and 5 Objectives of the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 1.2 — Expand partnerships and agreements with the Edmonds School District, Snohomish County, and other nearby jurisdictions (cities of Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, Woodway, and Shoreline) to improve public access and opportunities for outdoor recreation and Recommendation 6.2 - Implement upgrades and improvements to park facilities to conform with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) and ensure universal accessibility to include required parking, providing ramped entrances and site furnishings. PROS Plan Goal 2, Objective 2.6; Goal 3, Objective 3.8, 3.10 and 3.11 and Goal 7, Objective 7.2 also align with this work. Estimated Cost: TBD, negotiations are ongoing with the City of Lynnwood. 0- Construction (R3) TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Total Expenses TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Ending Fund Balance/Impact Fees - 332 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Total Revenue TBD TBD TBD TBD i TBD TBD TBD Page 29 Packet Pg. 271 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Edmonds Marsh -Estuary Expansion & Restoration - Al, P4, D9 & D1 Edmonds Marsh - City of Edmonds Marsh, Marina Beach Park and property owned by Unocal (Chevron) Project Summary: Reconnect the Puget Sound with the Edmonds Marsh near -shore estuary by restoring the natural tidal exchange. This project will impact the existing Marina Beach Park and its proposed renovation including daylighting of Willow Creek within the park and the Edmonds Marsh. In addition, this project encompasses the possible acquisition or use of the adjacent 21-acre parcel known as the Unocal property to support a larger estuary restoration project. Once acquired, an integrated restoration plan can be developed to restore functioning conditions of the tidal wetland for salmon recovery, wildlife conservation and improved public access for recreational use, environmental education and wildlife viewing. Project Justification: The marsh estuary restoration project will allow for and provide a natural tidal exchange, allow salmon to again migrate into Willow Creek, support migratory birds and waterfowl, provide a natural redistribution of saltwater -freshwater flora and fauna and address sea level rise impacts. This project is supported by 3 Recommendations, 5 Goals and 8 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 2.2 — Expand the Edmonds Marsh/Estuary to include the Unocal property. Develop funding strategy for purchase of the Unocal property or negotiate with the State of Washington to have the property become part of the Edmonds Marsh/Estuary. PROS Plan Goal 1, Objective 1.1; Goal 4, Objective 4.3; Goal 5, Objectives 5.1, 5.3 and 5.4; Goal 6, Objective 6.5 and 6.7; Goal 9, Objective 9.1; Recommendation 2.1 and 3.11 also align with this project. Estimated Cost: TBD Acquisition and Planning + Restoration + Marina Beach Park renovation Continued on next page. Page 30 Packet Pg. 272 8.1.b Edmonds Marsh -Estuary Expansion & Restoration— continued. . 2027 2028 2029 Total Land Acquisition (Al) TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Master Plan (134) TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Master Plan Implementation (D9) TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Restoration (D1) - TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Total Expenses TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 Real Estate Excise Tax I — Fund 126 Fund 332 Balance + Park Impact Fees Bond Proceeds Secured Grants Tree Fund 143 — Land Acquisition Park Donations Operating Contribution — General Fund Stormwater — Fund 422 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Project Accounting #M070 *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Expense estimates and funding sources changed to TBD per Council direction December 2022. Page 31 Packet Pg. 273 2024-2029 Parks Capital Improvement & Capital Facilities Plan PROGRAMS v EDMONDS PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES O N J Q Z a a_ U a_ U N L a N O N N C d E t 0 R Q w _ d E V Q Page 32 Packet Pg. 274 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Citywide Park Improvements / Capital Replacement Program - R17 ...W. f Project Summary: The 2022 Parks, Recreation & Open Space (PROS) plan identified a significant list of deferred park maintenance projects. With the addition of a Parks Capital Project Manager, hired in 2022 and the Job Order Contracting program, the Parks Department will continue to make progress on the numerous system -wide repairs, renovations and replacements of an aging parks infrastructure. Project Justification: Insufficiently maintained parks and related assets lead to higher deferred maintenance costs, increased City liability and decreased level of service and community satisfaction. This program is supported by 5 Recommendations, 6 Goals and 21 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Opens Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 3.1 is to Maintain, renovate, or replace aging or damaged infrastructure in existing City properties to ensure public accessibility, use and safety. PROS Plan Goal 2, Objectives 2.1 and 2.3; Goal 3, Objectives 3.6, 3.7, 3.8 and 3.9; Goal 4, Objectives 4.1, 4.2, 4.4; Goal 5, Objective 5.1, 5.3, and 5.4; Goal 6, Objective 6.1, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5 and 6.7; Goal 9, Objective 9.1, 9.2, 9.3 and 9.9 and Recommendations 3.7, 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4 also align with this program. Estimated Cost: $2,700,000 (6-year total) 2024 2025i Repair & Maintenance $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $1,800,000 Professional Services $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $900,000 Total Expenses $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $2,700,000 Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $2,700,000 Total Revenue $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $2,700,000 Unsecured Funding i i i Page 33 Packet Pg. 275 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Signage & Wayfinding — R10 • VIEW POINT PLAY STRUCTURE NATURAL AREA&DOG WALK PARK OPEN DAWN TO DUSK Project Summary: Update park and recreation facilities signage system -wide to include uniform and accurate trail identification information, orientation markers, safety and regulatory messaging, park hours, park rules and etiquette, interpretive information and warning signs. Project Justification: A comprehensive and consistent signage system is necessary to inform, orient and educate park users. This program is supported by 2 Recommendations, 4 Goals and 6 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Opens Space (PROS) plan. Recommendation 6.5 is to develop and provide consistent graphics and citywide signage to improve communication on access, usability and "branding" of the city's park and open space system. PROS Plan Goal 2, Objectives 2.1 and 2.3; Goal 3, Objective 3.6; Goal 5, Objectives 5.3 and 5.4; Goal 9, Objective 9.1 and Recommendation 6.2 also align with this program. Estimated Cost: $75,000 Page 34 Packet Pg. 276 2024-2029 Parks Capital Improvement & Capital Facilities Plan PARKLAND ACQUISITION EDMONDS PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES Page 35 Packet Pg. 277 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Parkland Acquisition — Neighborhood Park SE 1, SR 99 & SE 2 - A2, A3 & A4 Project Summary: Acquisition of parkland that will benefit citizens and support the priorities identified in the PROS Plan. Currently, $1,100,000 is reserved for parkland and open space acquisition. These funds were accumulated from 2019 through 2023. There is no specific request to purchase a particular parcel as opportunities are somewhat limited in a mostly built -out city, but staff continues to search for, develop and negotiate opportunities. Project Justification: Parkland Acquisitions are supported by 1 Recommendation, 2 Goals and 5 Objectives (land purchase only, see previous projects for development) in the 2022 Parks, Recreation & Open Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 1 is to fill the park system gaps, 1.1 Acquire property for neighborhood parks in underserved areas such as the south Edmonds area and the SR 99 corridor. PROS Plan Goal 2, Objective 2.1; Goal 3, Objective 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.9 also align with the acquisition of parkland. Estimated Cost: $5,230,500 i Acquisition — Neighborhood Park SE 1 (A2) $1,500,000 $1,500,000 Acquisition — Neighborhood Park SR99 (A3) $1,545,000 $1,545,000 Acquisition — Neighborhood Park SE 2 (A4) $2,185,500 $2,185,500 Total Expenses $1,500,000 $1,545,000 $2,185,500 $5,230,500 Real Estate Excise Tax I - Fund 126 $325,000 $200,000 $200,000 $725,000 Tree Fund 143 - land acquisition - TBD $120,000 $120,000 Snohomish County Conservation Futures $880,000 $880,000 Total Revenue $1,325,000 $200,000 $200,000 $1,725,000 *Project is both in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Page 36 Packet Pg. 278 8.1.b Parks & Recreation Interurban Trail Expansion — A5 24100 78th Place West Project Summary: Acquisition of additional lands, easements and/or right-of-ways to continue the Interurban Trail, including more off -road segments. Project Justification: This Expansion is supported by 3 Recommendations, 2 Goals and 6 Objectives in the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Opens Space (PROS) Plan. Recommendation 5 is to improve trail connections including sidewalks and bike lanes to help link destinations across the community. Recommendation 5.1 suggests the City peruse opportunities to acquire additional lands, easements and/or right of way to continue the Interurban Trail. Goal 2, Objective 2.1; Goal 3, Objective 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5 and 3.6 and Recommendations 1.1 and 5.2 also align with this expansion. Estimated Cost: $895,585 2024 2025 2026Total Land Acquisition — Park Facilities (A5) $895,585 $895,585 Total Expenses $895,585 $895,585 Real Estate Excise Tax I - Fund 126 Tree Fund 143 - Land Acquisition Total Revenue Unsecured Funding ($895,585) ($895,585) Page 37 Packet Pg. 279 2024-2029 Parks Capital Improvement & Capital Facilities Plan FUND DETAIL v EDMONDS PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES O N J Q Z M a a_ U a_ U N L a N O N N C d E t 0 R Q E s 0 ca r r Q Page 38 Packet Pg. 280 Fund 332 8.1.b Costs inflated at 3% per year Fund 332 Expenditures 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total D9 Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Master Plan Implementation) $ D1 Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Restoration) $ - R14 Elm Street Park Habitat Restoration $ 56,300 $ 56,300 D6 Mathay Ballinger Park Permanent Restrooms $ - R3 Meadowdale Playfields (Renovations, City of Lynnwood ILA) $ - A2 Neighborhood Park -SE1 (Park Acquisition) $ 1,055,000 D13 Neighborhood Park -SE1 (Park Development) $ 819,500 $ 819,500 D15 Neighborhood Park - SR99 (Park Development) $ 844,100 $ 844,100 D18 Neighborhood Park -SE2 (Park Development) $ 869,500 $ 869,500 R15 Pool Replacement $23,881,000 $ 23,881,000 P1 Parks Facilities M&O Building (Design) $ 1,125,500 $ 1,125,500 D2 Parks Facilities M&O Building (Construction) $ 4,637,100 $ 4,637,100 D14 Waterfront Walkway (Construction) $ 819,500 $ 819,500 D20 Woodway Campus Athletic Complex - Phase I - Lighting $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 Interfund Services $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 150,000 Debt Service Civic Park $1.6M (2021) $ 98,000 $ 98,000 $ 98,000 $ 98,000 $ 98,000 $ 98,000 $ 588,000 (C) TOTAL Fund 332 Expenditures $ 1,178,000 $ 1,623,000 $ 2,068,000 $ 5,604,200 $ 992,500 $24,879,800 $35,290,500 Fund 332 Revenue 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Park Impact Fees (Fund 332-100) $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 1,800,000 Investment Interest (3%) $ 18,918 $ 24,795 $ 30,849 $ 37,085 $ 43,507 $ 50,122 $ 205,277 Miscellaneous Park Donations $ - Bond Proceeds $ - Conservation Futures Grant - Neighborhood Park SE 1 (Acquisition) $ 880,000 $ 880,000 Unsecured Funding - Neighborhood Park SE 1 (Acquisition) $ 175,000 Unsecured Grants - Neighborhood Park SR99 (Development) $ 819,500 Unsecured Funding - Woodway Campus Athletic Complex Phase 1 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 Unsecured Grants - Marsh Estuary Restoration $ - Unsecured Grants - Elm Street Park Habitat Restoration $ 56,300 $ 56,300 Unsecured Grants - Neighborhood Park SR99 (Development) $ 844,100 $ 844,100 Unsecured Grants - Neighborhood Park SE 2 (Development) $ 869,500 $ 869,500 Unsecured Funding (Bonds, Levy, Misc.) Pool Replacement $ 23,881,000 $ 23,881,000 Unsecured Funding Park Facilities M&O Building $ 1,125,500 $ 4,637,100 $ 5,762,600 Unsecured Grants - Waterfront Walkway (Construction) $ 819,500 $ 819,500 (D) TOTAL Fund 332 Revenue $ 1,373,918 $ 11824,795 $ 2,275,849 $ 5,818,285 $ 1,213,007 $25,106,922 $36,618,277 N O LL .r .Q R U CD N O N N O N O 13 Q r c O .y d d' J Q Z LL a ILL a_ U N Y i co a N 0 N N c N E t 0 R Q w C N E t c� M w r Q Page 39 Packet Pg. 281 Fund 332 8.1.b Fund 332 Parks Fund 6-Year Overview 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 (E) Beginning Fund Balance (332 + 332-100) $ 630,594 $ 826,512 $ 1,028,308 $ 1,236,157 $ 1,450,242 $ 1,670,749 (D) Revenue $ 1,373,918 $ 1,824,795 $ 2,275,849 $ 5,818,285 $ 1,213,007 $25,106,922 (C) Expenditures $ 1,178,000 $ 1,623,000 $ 2,068,000 $ 5,604,200 $ 992,500 $24,879,800 (G) Ending Fund Balance (E+D-C) $ 826,512 1 $ 1,028,308 1 $ 1,236,157 1 $ 1,450,242 1 $ 1,670,749 1 $ 1,897,871 Project Type: A Acquisition P Master Planning D Development - New R Replacement / Upgrade Page 40 Packet Pg. 282 REET II Fund 125 8.1.b Costs inflated at 3% per year REET II(Fund 125)Expenditures 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total P4 Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Master Plan) $ - D16 Elm Street Park (Nature Playground) $ 100,000 $ 199,670 $ 299,670 D17 Elm Street Park (Shelter w/Picnic Tables) $ 84,400 $ 84,400 R2 Johnson Property (Demo & Secure Site) $ P5 lJohnson Property (Master Plan) $ 82,000 $ 82,000 R12 Maplewood Hill Park (Playground Replacement) $ 347,800 $ 347,800 D5 Mathay Ballinger Park (Paved Loop Pathway) $ D7 Mathay Ballinger Park (Shelter w/Picnic Tables) $ - D6 Mathay Ballinger Park Permanent Restrooms $ 271,300 $ 271,300 D19 Mountlake Terrace ILA (Lake Ballinger Park)* $ 200,000 $ 200,000 P2 Neighborhood Park - SE1 (Master Plan) $ 79,600 $ 79,600 P6 Neighborhood Park - SR99 (Master Plan) $ 82,000 $ 82,000 P7 Neighborhood Park - SE2 (Master Plan) $ 84,400 $ 84,400 R7 Olympic Beach Park (Restroom Upgrade) $ 20,000 $ 33,000 $ 53,000 D10 Pine Street Park (Shelter w/Picnic Tables) $ 20,000 $ 59,600 $ 79,600 D11 Pine Street Park (Paved Connecting Pathway) $ 20,000 $ 38,300 $ 58,300 D12 Pine Street Park (Canopy Shade Trees) $ 26,500 $ 26,500 R16 Seaview Park (Restroom Replacement) $ 417,900 $ 417,900 R19 Shell Creek Restoration (Yost Park) $ 250,000 $ 380,000 $ 630,000 R8 Sierra Park (Playground Replacement) $ 415,000 $ 415,000 P3 Waterfront Walkway Design Completion $ 515,000 $ 515,000 R11 Yost Pool Upgrades & Renovation $ 546,400 $ 546,400 R6 Yost Park (Playground Replacement - Inclusive) $ 750,000 $ 750,000 R10 Signage and Wayfinding $ 75,000 1 1 1 1 $ 75,000 R17 Citywide Park Improvements / Capital Replacement Program $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 2,700,000 (C) TOTAL PARKS REET II (Fund 125) Expenditures $ 1,266,300 $ 2,279,000 $ 1,153,400 $ 882,200 $ 1,482,900 $ 734,070 $ 7,797,870 REET II(Fund 125)Revenue 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) II - Fund 125 $ 2,000,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 9,500,000 (D) TOTAL PARKS REET I (Fund 126) Revenue $ 2,000,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 9,500,000 REET II (Fund 125) Parks Fund 6-Year Overview 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 (E) Beginning Fund Balance $ 1,222,000 $ 1,955,700 $ 1,176,700 $ 1,523,300 $ 2,141,100 $ 2,158,200 (D) Revenue $ 2,000,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 (C) Expenditures $ 1,266,300 $ 2,279,000 $ 1,153,400 $ 882,200 $ 1,482,900 $ 734,070 (G) Ending Fund Balance (E+D-C) $ 1,955,700 $ 1,176,700 $ 1,523,300 $ 2,141,100 $ 2,158,200 $ 2,924,130 Page 41 *Project added via Council amendment in 2023 Packet Pg. 283 REET I Fund 126 8.1.b Costs inflated at 3% per year REET I (Fund 126) Expenditures 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Al Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Acquisition) $ - A5 Interurban Trail (Expansion/Acquisition) $ 895,585 $ 895,585 A2 Neighborhood Park - SE1 (Acquisition) $ 325,000 $ 325,000 A3 Neighborhood Park - SR99 (Acquisition) $ 1,545,000 $ 1,545,000 A4 Neighborhood Park - SE2 (Acquisition) $ 2,185,500 $ 2,185,500 Land Acquisition Services $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 300,000 (C) TOTAL PARKS REET I (Fund 126) Expenditures $ 375,000 $ 1,595,000 $ 2,235,500 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 945,585 $ 5,251,085 REET I(Fund 126)Revenue 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) I - Fund 126 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 1,200,000 (D) TOTAL PARKS REET I (Fund 126) Revenue $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 1,200,000 REET I (Fund 126) Parks Fund 6-Year Overview 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 (E) Beginning Fund Balance $ 872,136 $ 697,136 $ (697,864) $ (2,733,364) $ (2,583,364) $ (2,433,364) (D) Revenue $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 (C) Expenditures $ 375,000 $ 1,595,000 1 $ 2,235,500 $ 50,000 1 $ 50,000 $ 945,585 (G) Ending Fund Balance (E+D-C) $ 697,136 1 $ (697,864) $ (2,733,364) $ (2,583,364) $ (2,433,364) $ (3,178,949) rn N U M u_ .r .Q M U CD N O N Iq N O N r O_ O Q r c O .y d J Q Z M a IL U a_ U N Y i Ci M N O N r Q Page 42 Packet Pg. 284 CEMETERY Trust Fund 137 8.1.b Costs inflated at 3% per year CEMETERY Trust (Fund 137) Expenditures 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total D8 lColumbariurn Expansion -Phase II $ 159,100 $ 159,100 Repair & Maintenance $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 125,000 (C) TOTAL CEMETERY Trust(Fund 137) Expenditures $ 25,000 $ 184,100 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 284,100 CEMETERY Trust (Fund 137) Revenue 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Cemetery Trust - Fund 137 Investment Interest (@5%) $ 62,673 $ 65,306 $ 60,117 $ 62,623 $ 65,254 $ 68,016 $ 315,972 F I Cemetery Trust - Fund 137 Sales Revenue $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 90,000 (D) TOTAL CEMETERY Trust (Fund 137) Revenue $ 77,673 $ 80,306 $ 75,117 $ 77,623 $ 80,254 $ 83,016 $ 405,972 CEMETERY Trust (Fund 137) 6-Year Overview 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 (E) Beginning Fund Balance $ 1,253,456 $ 1,306,129 $ 1,202,335 $ 1,252,452 $ 1,305,075 $ 1,360,328 (D)Revenue $ 77,673 $ 80,306 $ 75,117 $ 77,623 $ 80,254 $ 83,016 (C)Expenditures $ 25,000 $ 184,100 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 (G) Ending Fund Balance (E+D-C) $ 1,306,129 $ 1,202,335 $ 1,252,452 $ 1,305,075 $ 1,360,328 $ 1,418,345 Page 43 Packet Pg. 285 TREE Fund 143 8.1.b Costs inflated at 3% per year TREE (Fund 143)Expenditures 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Park and Open Space Acquisition Program $ 120,000 $ 120,000 Tree Maintenance - Oak Tree's 5th & Main* $ - (C) TOTAL TREE (Fund 143) Expenditures $ 120,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 120,000 TREE (Fund 143)Revenue 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Tree - Fund 143 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 1,290,000 (D) TOTAL TREE (Fund 143) Revenue $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 1,290,000 TREE (Fund 143) 6-Year Overview 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 (E) Beginning Fund Balance $ 426,065 $ 521,065 $ 736,065 $ 951,065 $ 1,166,065 $ 1,381,065 (D) Revenue $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 (C) Expenditures $ 120,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - (G) Ending Fund Balance (E+D-C) $ 521,065 $ 736,065 $ 951,065 $ 1,166,065 $ 1,381,065 $ 1,596,065 *Added via Council Budget Amendment Dec. 2022 Page 44 Packet Pg. 286 8.1.b CFP / CIP COMPARISON (2024 TO 2029) PROJECTS ADDED Type I PROJECT NAME CFP DESCRIPTION None CFP / CIP COMPARISON (2024 TO 2029) PROJECTS REMOVED Type PROJECT NAME CFP DESCRIPTION Parks Lake Ballinger Access (McAleer) Project completion scheduled in 2023 Parks Johnson Property Demolition Demolition to be complete in 2023 Parks Playground Upgrade Program Playground upgrades identified each year, no need for additional program Parks lYost Park Tennis Court Re -Surface Will be completed as part of the Public Works reservoir project Parks IYost Park Bridge Repairs lCombined with Shell Creek Restoration Project CFP / CIP COMPARISON (2024 TO 2029) ,EVISED Type PROJECT NAME CFP CHANGE Parks Columbarium Expansion - Phase II Funded through Cemetery Trust Fund 137 - scheduled in 2025 vs. 24 Parks Elm Street Park Improvements Separated into planning in 2027 and construction in 2028 vs. 2026 Parks Interurban Trail Expansion Moved to 2029 vs. 28 Parks Johnson Property Master Plan Removed demolition, master plan scheduled in 2026 vs. 25 Parks Lake Ballinger Park Mountlake Terrace ILA ILA completed in 2023; payment due upon construction completion in 2024, carryforward Parks Maplewood Hill Park Playground replacement moved to 2027 vs. 25, significant price increase Parks Mathay Ballinger Park Improvements permanent restroom installation scheduled to take place in 2024, carryforward Parks Neighborhood Park SE1, SR99, SE2 X Master plan and construction of all three parks pushed back one year (must acquire first) Parks Olympic Beach Park Improvements Separated into planning in 2024 and construction in 2025 per Council Amendment Parks Parkland Acquisition/Neighborhood Parks X JAII three bumped back one year to 2024, 2025 and 2026. Funding identified for 2024. Parks Pine Street Park Improvements Separated into planning in 2025 and construction in 2026 vs. 24 Parks Seaview Park Improvements Restroom replacement moved to 2028 vs. 27 Parks Shell Creek Restoration Study funding increased to $250,000 in; restoration in 2025 vs. 24 per Council Amendment Parks Signage and Wayfinding Price increase to $75K vs. $51,500 Parks IYost Park & Pool Improvements Playground replacement moved to 2025 vs. 23, significant price increase due to topography Page 45 Packet Pg. 287 8.1.c Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) & Capital Improvement Program (CIP) City Council— October 3, 2023 2 M U N O N N O N rr Q O Q _ O ca _ d N d L a r✓ N Y L O ci � M Op EDA, �y t a E L V rr Q Packet Pg. 288 8.1.c CIP 6-year maintenance 6-year capital projects w/fundin projects w/ sources funding sources OComponents found only in the CIP OComponents found only in the CFP O Components found in both the CIP & CFP CFP Long-range (20-year) capital project needs Packet Pg. 289 8.1.c Public Works & Utilities 2024-2029 CFP Combined CFP & CIP Document • Transportation • Utilities • Water • Stormwater • Sewer • Facilities • Wastewater Treatment Plant • Comparison to previous year 3 Packet Pg. 290 8.1.c Public Works & Utilities CFP & CIP Citywide Project Maps PWW-09 P' 1 PWT-a -PWT-17 P'A'T 24 -05 IT 44 PWT p3 PWT 4G do[ Packet Pg. 291 r .Q U 06 c a CFP & CIP Format In 2 oject List Capital 2024 Buc o Facilities Decision Pa et LL Nun Project Numb nt AmoBudunt U N PROJECTD' 2024 2025 20261 128 2029 TOTAL (2024-2029) 2030-"• O N IV N O N Preservation / Maintenance Projects a PWT-01 Annual Street Preservation $1,600,000 $2,400,000 $1,300,000 $2,630,000 $2.630,000 $2,630,000 $13,190,000 $39,450,000 $52,64 Q 0 Program .... PWT-03 76th Ave. W Overlay from 196th $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $0 $2 c 10 St. SW to Olympic View Dr. PWT-04 Main St. Overlay from 6th Ave. to $789,553 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $789,553 $0 = $78 y 3 gth Ave. m PWT-05 Puget Dr. / OVD Signal Upgrades $0 $0 $0 $90,000 $496,000 $0 $586,000 $0 $58 N 0 Y PWT-06 Signal Upgrades - 100ttt Ave / $0 $0 $0 $165,000 $773,000 $0 $938,000 $0 L $93 3 0 238th St. SW PWT-07 Main St. / 3rd Signal Upgrades $0 $0 $0 $0 $110,000 $383,000 $493,000 $0 $49 3 0 a PWT-61 Olympic View Dr Overlay - 196th / $0 $200,000 $1,300,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $0 $1,50 �0 SR-524 to Talbot Rd PWT-68 88th Ave Overlay and Sidewalk $150,000 $1,350,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,500,000 $0 $1,50 E i0 Repair �a Safety / Capacity Analysis r a w c >_ 5 U Q Packet Pg. 292 8.1.c Public Works & Utilities CFP & CIP Project Sheets Annual pavement preservation program to maintain City streets Mamtains the City's pavement infrastructure and reduces the need for larger capital investment to rebuild City steels. 0mgn 5350,000 SI50,000 5150.000 5130,000 5330,000 5130p00 51.950,000 mgbt of way Conitruttpn S1,a5a,000 52,250,00a 51,150000 52,SOD,000 52,SOD,00a 52,50apW 53],500,00a Earenae Teml Sa,Em.00a $irk00.Uaa St,3mPaa S2,63Q111110 $2,53a111100 S2faap0o S3%MDM street Fnmd 132 -GES tat & bUti mt, Fund 125 S1100,000 51150,00(1 565b" 5>50,000 S150.— 5—00a S31.250,000 0.Fe*Fund L6 $&10,000 $)50,000 5650,000 51.000 St50,000 `v)50,000 531.250.000 mnsportatbn �mpaa Fels Ge— Fund stormuvter u01Ry Flmtl A22 Federal Grants state Grains umecved FUMing 590a,00a 51.130,000 51.13a.00a 51,330,0oa 516.950,000 f—din9 aewce Ural S1,500,000 S2,a0o,000 $1300,000 S2530,000 S2.M.000 $2,630,OW S39,a50,OW Parks & Recreation Lake Ballinger Park/Mountlake Terrace ILA —D19 as"i, tr ' AA Y lake Ballinger Park, City of Mountlake Terrace Project Summary: Through an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Mountlake Terrace, the City of Edmonds will support the Construction of the planned improvements in the northwest area of Lake Ballinger Park including a park entry, pathways and access toLake Ballinger. The project is underway and payment is due upon completion of the projeR. Project Justification: This western boundary of the park is Edmonds dry limits and these improvements will provide better access to Lake Ballinger Park for Edmonds residents. The revenue contribution supports me construction of the improvements which will benefit the City of Edmonds. This project is supported by the 2022 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan including 3 Recommendations. 1 Goal and 3 Objectives. Recommendation 12 Expand partnerships and agreements wah other nearby jurisdictions. Recommendation 3.6 Explore optransfor access to Lake Ballinger with the Crty of Mountlake Terrace to include possible joint development and Consideration of o fishing pier. Recommendation 52 Repair and imprave or extend trails and boardwalks to allow improved public access to natural arepsfar narure/wildlrfe viewing, hiking and outdoor experience. PROS Goal 3, Objec —3.2, 3.6 and 3.11. Estimated Cost: $200,000 Construction 1019)—IIA 5200.000 5200,000 Total E�evn $200,000 $200.000 Real Ertate Excise Tax ll - Fund 125 5200,000 5200,000 Total Revenue $200,000 $200,000 It r .Q U o�S c a as U LL flf .r Q M U 0) N O N N O N Q O Q 10 Packet Pg. 293 2024 Public Works Comprehensive Plan Updates Transportation & Stormwater/Surface Water A F E H R %PEERS STORM AND SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT o s COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WORK IN City of Edmonds PROGRESS of E�Mo�Q City of Edmonds Public Works Department/Engineering Division Approved by City Council on July 6, 2010 October 2010 r Q U 06 a a� LL .Q R ci N O N qq N O N a 0 7 Packet Pg. 294 8.1.c Public Works & Utilities —Transportation 2024 Pavement Preservation Projects • 2024 Pavement Preservation Program ($1.5M) • Construction - 6 Lane Miles • 2025 Pavement Preservation Program ($100K) • Design 2024; Construction 2025 • Main St. Overlay 6t" Ave — 8t" Ave ($790k) • 2024 Construction • $750K Federal Grant • 11 New ADA Ramps • 88tn Ave Overlay &Sidewalk Repair ($150K) • Design 2024 • 76th Ave Overlay Close-out ($20k) r•s .Q U 06 c a as U LL 71 M U N O N N O N rr CL 0 a 1.1 Packet Pg. 295 8.1.c Public Works & Utilities —Transportation 2024 Safety &Capacity Projects • Hwy 99 Revitalization/Gateway ($114K) • Hwy 99 Stage 3 2441"St-238t"St ($1.2M) • Hwy 99 Stage 4 224thSt-220t"St ($1.2M) • 76th Ave/220th St Intersection ($650K) • SR-104 Adaptive System ($186K) • Traffic Signal Upgrades ($30K) � N o N N O N L O 13 E Packet Pg. 296 8.1.c Public Works & Utilities —Transportation 2024 Active Transportation Projects & Planning • Transportation Plan Update($236K) • Citywide Bicycle Improvements($15K) • Elm Way Walkway($10K) • Traffic Calming Program($100K) • Pedestrian Safety Program ($80K) N O N Q O Q 0 CO L a N Y L O a M C d E t � V f� Q LO C t V R a� a+ Q Packet Pg. 297 8.1.c Public Works & Utilities — Utilities 2024 Water Utility • 2024 Replacement Program ($3.3M) • Construction 2024 • 41000 ft of Watermain Replacement • 2025 Replacement Program ($426K) • Design 2024; Construction 2025 • Yost & Seaview Reservoir Final Design ($850K) • $3.5M-$4M rehabilitation cost for each Reservoir • 2025-26 Construction • Waterline Overlays ($225K) o..` y .Q U 06 c a as U U- M U N O N N O N rr Q 0 a i L1 Packet Pg. 298 8.1.c Public Works & Utilities — Utilities 2024 Stormwater Utility • Storm &Surface Water Comp Plan ($350K) • Perrinville Creek Basin Projects • Lower Perrinville Creek Restoration ($275K) • Perrinville Creek Flow Mgmt ($100K) • Perrinville Creek Basin Update ($594K) • Edmonds Marsh Water Quality Impr ($90K) • Lake Ballinger Floodplain Purchase ($120K) • 2024 Replacement Program ($1.3M) • Stormwater Overlays ($315K) • 2025 Replacement Program ($324K) am Packet Pg. 299 8.1.c Public Works & Utilities — Utilities 2024 Sewer Utility • 2024 Replacement Program($2.01VI) • 800 ft of Sewerline Replacement • 2025 Replacement Program($363K) • Cured in -place pipe rehabilitation ($522K) • 41000 ft of sewer CIPP rehab • Sewerline Overlays($60K) 2024 WWTP • WWTP Annual Capital Replace ment($500K) • Carbon Recovery Project($500K) • Nutrient Removal Project($350K) • Gasification Bypass($300K) • Condition Assessment ($150K) • Variable Frequency Drives(VFD) Upgrades ($250K) • Primary Clarifier 2 Rehabilitation ($600K) - 7- .Q U ojS c a. as U LL M U N O N N O N CL 0 a 13 Packet Pg. 300 8.1.c Public Works & Utilities — Facilities • Boys & Girls Club • Cemetery Building • Historic Museum • Library • City Hall • Meadowdale Club House • Fishing Pier • Old Public Works • Frances Anderson Center • Parks Maintenance Bldg • Fire Station 16 • Fire Station 17 • Fire Station 20 • Historic Log Cabin • Public Safety • Public Works O&M • Wade James Theater • Yost Pool House go N 14 Packet Pg. 301 8.1.c -ured Funding $862,240 4% bond $585,000 3% )ortation Impact Fees $423,361 2% 112 $251,570 1.1% =unds $114,000 0.5% General Fund 0.4% City of Lynnwood Other Packet Pg. 302 8.1.c Q U 06 c '_,550 4% a General Fund Fund112 Other 0.3% ARPA City of Lynnwood a i Other N O N Facilities 016 bond/non-bond $2,013,645 0.7% o N rr Q Transportation Impact Fees $1,923,065 1% a Packet Pg. 303 8.1.c CIP/CFP Schedule July • City staff begins development of capital budgets August • Submit proposed Capital budget to Finance • Prepare draft CFP and CIP September • Joint Presentation City Council/Planning Board (September 19tn) • Planning Board Public Hearing (September 27tn) October • City Council Public Hearing (October 3rd) • Planning Board Recommendations/Approval (October 11tn) • City Council Discussion (October 17th) • City Council Discussion/Approval (October 24tn) \• -Ia•-I • Adopt CFP w/ Budget into the Comprehensive Plan (November 21st) Q U ojS c a as U U- .Q M U N O N N O N CL 0 a 17 Packet Pg. 304 8.1.c Questions Q Packet Pg. 305 8.1.d Parks, Recreation & Human Services Parks 2024-2029 CIP / CFP Angie Feser, Director September 27, 2023 Packet Pg. 306 8.1.d Parks 2024-2029 CIP / UP Overview Framework for CIP/CFP Current/Ongoing Projects Capital Projects — 2024 Highlighted Projects Programs Acquisition Changes Packet Pg. 307 8.1.d 2024-2029 Parks CIP / CFP- FRAMEWORK Department Staff Resources PROS Plan Capital Recommendations 1. Acquisition to Fill Park System Gaps - Secure additional land for neighborhood parks to address gaps 2. Open Space & Conservation Acquisitions - Pursue acquisitions that adjoin city properties or conserve unique natural areas 3. Park Development & Enhancements — significant repairs needed for aging infrastructure 4. Yost Pool Replacement - Refine options for the replacement of Yost Pool 5. Trail Connections — Needed to help link destinations across the community 6. ADA, Accessibility & Other User Convenience Enhancements - Remove barriers and improve universal access Packet Pg. 308 8.1.d 2024-2029 Parks CIP / CFP - FRAMEWORK PROS Plan Goals (9) 1. ENGAGEMENT - Encourage and facilitate meaningful public involvement in park and recreation planning. 2. DIVERSITY, EQUITY & INCLUSION - Decrease barriers and provide increased opportunities for participation and representative cultural, heritage and art programs, events representing the diversity of Edmonds demographics. 3. PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - Provide an interconnected park system that offers a wide variety of year-round recreation opportunities and experiences which support and enhance Edmonds' cultural identity and the natural environment. 4. WATERFRONT USE & ACCESS - Preserve and pursue opportunities to expand public access and enjoyment of Edmonds' waterfront. 5. NATURAL RESOURCE & HABITAT CONSERVATION - Conserve and provide access to natural resource lands for habitat conservation, recreation, and environmental education. Packet Pg. 309 8.1.d 2024-2029 Parks CIP / CFP FRAMEWORK PROS Plan Goals (Cont.) 6. CLIMATE CHANGE, ADAPTATION & RESILIENCY -Adopt to climate change and increase local park system resiliency by improving environmental conditions, stewardship and sustainability in parks, trails, open spaces and recreation facilities within planning, development, maintenance, and operations. 7. RECREATION PROGRAMS & FACILITIES -Provide a varied and inclusive suite of recreation opportunities and experiences to promote health and wellness, year-round activity and social engagement. 8. CULTURAL SERVICES -Provide arts and cultural opportunities and experiences to promote an engaged and vibrant community. 9. PARK OPERATIONS & ADMINISTRATION - Maintain and operate a modern, efficient park system that provides a high level of user comfort, safety and aesthetic quality, and protects capital investments. PROS Plan G2—Obj2.6 G3—Obj3.8,3.10,3.11 G7— Obi 7.2 Rec. — 1.2, 6.2 Packet Pg. 310 8.1.d 2024 - 2029 Parks CIP / UP Geographic Distribution Ps Johnson Property R3 Meadowdale Playllelds D6 Mathay Ballinger Park 119,114 R6, RIl Yost Park & Pool D19 lake Ballinger Park (Min DS [alumharium Expansion - Phase ll R7 Olym plc Beach Park DSD, D11, D32 Pine street Park RB stets Park PI, D14 WMertron[ Walkway R12 Maplewood Hill Park P4, D9, DI Edmonds Marsh Restoration D36, D17, RI4 Elm street Park PI, D2 Parks M.1—nonce Building R16 Seavlew Park R35 Pool Replacement Al Edmonds Marsh Restoration AS Interurban Troll R19 Shell Creek Restoration D20 Woodwey Campus Athletic Complex 14,"te specHic projects A2, P2, D23 Nelghborhoad Park SEI A3, P6, Dls Neighborhood Park SR99 A4, P7, DSa Neighborhood Park sE 2 R27 Cltywlde Park Improvements RIO Signege B WWfinding P4 •D1 D9 F, A2, P2, D13 7 A3,P6,D15 A4, P7, D18 R16 R17 �� R10 VP * Non -site specific projects Neighborhood Park SE 1 Neighborhood Park SR99 Neighborhood Park SE 2 Citywide Park Improvements Signage & Wayfinding R4 RB R11 R19 R[S • 7 R14 �R6 010 • D12 ;' 2024 Projects • •D17 :8 L,-/ I?19 2025 - 2029 Projects • D6 • \ 7l6 Site specific projects only. Citywide/annual citywide projects not drown. A of EDAf /1C. 1890 Q M U 015 a a) LL Q M U N O N N 0 N Q O a Packet Pg. 311 8.1.d Parks 2024-2029 CIP / UP - FORMAT Costs inflated at 3% per year Project CFP Project Site& Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Lake Ballinger Park Mountlake Terrace ILA *CARRYFORWARD* D19 Funding to support City of Mountlake Terrace Ballinger Park Phase III $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 Development. Payment due upon completion of project. DS Mathay Ballinger Park *CARRYFORWARD* D6 Construction of improvements including permanent restroom, paved trail, picnic $ 271,300 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 271,300 D7 shelter ADA access and other amenities. Shell Creek Restoration *CARRYFORWARD* R19 Stream health and erosion control of shell Creek in Yost Park, scope TBD based $ 120,000 $ 380,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 500,000 on study. Study in 2024, work in 2025. R9 Yost Park & Pool R4 Park enhancements, repair and maintenance to include resurface of tennis courts $ 154,300 $ 1,296,400 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,450,700 R6 and trail, bridge and boardwalk repairs/replacement in 2024, inclusive R11 iplaVground and pool upgrades in 2025. Columbarium Expansion - Phase II D8 Expansion ofthe current colum barium. Funding provided throughthe Cemetery $ - $ 159,100 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 159,100 Trust Fund 137. Woodway Campus Athletic Complex - Phase I - Lighting X D20 In cooperation with the Edmonds School District, complete a community park $ _ $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,500,000 and athletic complex at Former Woodway High School to include lighting and future construction of two additional fields. Neighborhood Park SE 1 X Master plan and development of a new neighborhood park in South Edmonds $ - $ 79,600 $ 819,500 $ - $ - $ - $ 899,100 D13 (funding is in Parkland Acquisition program for purchase). Sierra Park R8 $ _ $ - $ 415,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 415,000 Playground replacement and upgradeto inclusive standards. R7 Olympic Beach Park $ $ 20,000 $ 33,000 $ $ $ $ 53,000 Renovation of existing restrooms. Packet Pg. 312 8.1.d Parks 2024-2029 CIP / CFP Funding Overview PARKS CIP REVENUE 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) I - Fund 126 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 1,200,000 Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) II - Fund 125 $ 2,000,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 9,500,000 Park Impact Fees - Fund 332-100 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 1,800,000 Tree Fund 143 - Land Acquisition $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 215,000 $ 1,290,000 Cemetery Trust Fund 137-ColumbariumExpansion $ 159,100 $ 159,100 ARPA Contribution - Shell Creek Study $ 120,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 120,000 Investment Interest (3%) $ 18,918 $ 24,795 $ 30,849 $ 37,085 $ 43,507 $ 50,122 $ 205,277 Donations $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Bond Proceeds $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ Secured Grants $ $ $ - $ $ $ $ L(E)TOTAL Unsecured Grants/Funding- non -land acquisition $ $ 1,500,000 $ 1,945,000 $ 5,481,200 $ 869,500 $ 24,756,800 $ 34,552,500 PARKS CIP REVENUE $ 2,853,918 $ 3,898,895 $ 4,190,849 $ 7,733,285 $ 3,128,007 $ 27,021,922 $ 48,826,877 Parks Fund 6-Year Overview 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 (F) Beginning Fund Balance $ 3,150,795 $ 3,061,113 $ 1,316,908 $ 17,857 $ 1,214,742 $ 1,817,349 (E) Revenue $ 2,853,918 $ 3,898,895 $ 4,190,849 $ 7,733,285 $ 3,128,007 $ 27,021,922 (D) Expenditures $ 2,943,600 $ 5,643,100 $ 5,489,900 $ 6,536,400 $ 2,525,400 $ 26,559,455 (G) Ending Fund Balance (F+E-D) $ 3,061,113 $ 1,316,908 $ 17,857 $ 1,214,742 $ 1,817,349 $ 2,279,817 Packet Pg. 313 Current/Ongoing Capital Projects .Q U 06 m a a� )emolition Q m U :s (2023-2024) N N O N r Q O a Packet Pg. 314 8.1.d Current/Ongoing Capital Projects , Q M U 06 M a W A) Ballinger Park Mountlake Terrace ILA M LL .ram+ Parkland Acquisition Program M U rn N Deferred Maintenance/Small Capital Projects N BLN Shower replacement N Cemetery Gate repair o Mathay Ballinger Apollo Swing replacem( a Park Restroom Doors (12) — automatic Ic c > Viewer repairs OUTS I OR INSIDE IN9DE OUTSIDE In T 21/a In. ■ ht m� i -43I6In_� Y4 �2Y18 F.ti ■ 1 Packet Pg. 315 8.1.d Parks, Recreation and Human Services Parks 2024-2029 CIP / UP PROJECTS Highlight — 2024 projects IL In L a E s Ot EQ41 10 i 04 �+ ��a•. I Kai- C�,1 Q Packet Pg. 316 CL .. . U, c Ballinger Park/Mountlake Terrace ILA- D19 DP y M U- I Boardwalk & Viewing Platform Lake Ballinger 1= O • Interlocal agreement to support development PROS Plan of phase 3 which includes improved access for G3—Obj. 3.2, 3.8, 3.11 i G5 — Obj 5.2 Edmonds residents Rec.- 3.6 Y • Estimated Cost $200,000 a E t V t of Eb4f04 +�O+ r.i C cd G r.+ Packet Pg. 317 Mathay Ballinger Park —D6 (CarryforwardlDP) • ADA parking and paved pathway • Shelter with Picnic Tables • Permanent Restroom • Estimated Total Cost: $499,300 a PROS Plan G2— Obj 2.6 G3 — Obj 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.8, 3.9 G9 — Obj 9.1 Rec.— 3.1,3.3,3.5, 6.2, 6.4 A of EDAf /Ic. 1890 Packet Pg. 318 8.1.d Shell Creek Restoration- x19 (Carryforward) Construction (1119) — Creek Restoration $120,000 $380,000 i $500,( Total Expenses $120,000 $380,000 $500,( Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $380,000 $380,( ARPA Funding Transfer $120,000 $120,( Total Revenue Funding M��Mffw $120,000 $380,000 $500,Unsecured • Study to determine scope & obtain permits - 2024 • Restorative work - 2025 • Estimated Cost $500,000 PROS Plan G3 - Obj 3.7, 3.8, 3.9 G4 - Obj 4.2, 4.4 G5 - Obj 5. 1, 5.3, 5.4 G6 - Obj 6.5 G9 - Obj 9.1, 9.2 sa., M U c a A) LL Q M U rn N O N N O N Q O 13 a Packet Pg. 319 8.1.d Yost Park &Pool - R9, R41 R6, R11 (DP) Construction (R4)—Trail/Bridge Repair ,. $80,000 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 $8 Construction (R6)—Playground Replacement $750,000 $75i Construction (R9)—Tennis Court Resurface $74,300 $7 Construction (R11) — Pool Upgrades $546,400 $54 Total Expenses $154,300 $1,296,400 $1,45, Real Estate Excise Tax II - Fund 125 $154,300 $1,296,400 $1,45 Total Revenue Unsecured Funding $154,300 $0 $1,296,400 i $1,45, • Trail / Bridge Repair— 2024 • Tennis Court Resurface — 2024 • Playground Replacement - 2025 • Pool Upgrades — 2025 • Estimated Cost: $1,450,700 PROS Plan G1 — Obj 1.1, 1.4 G3 — Obj 3.6, 3.8, 3.9 G4 — Obj. 4.4 G5— Obj 5.4 G6 — Obj 6.5 G9 — Obj. 9.1 Rec.— 3.1,3.4,3.10 Rec. — 6.2 Q., M U c a U_ Q M U N O N 4 N O N r Q O a Packet Pg. 320 8.1.d Parks 2024-2029 CIP / UP - PROJECTS Costs inflated at 3% per year Project CFP Project Site& Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Lake Ballinger Park Mountlake Terrace ILA *CARRYFORWARD* D19 Funding to support City of Mountlake Terrace Ballinger Park Phase III $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 Development. Payment due upon completion of project. DS Mathay Ballinger Park *CARRYFORWARD* D6 Construction of improvements including permanent restroom, paved trail, picnic $ 271,300 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 271,300 D7 shelter ADA access and other amenities. Shell Creek Restoration *CARRYFORWARD* R19 Stream health and erosion control of shell Creek in Yost Park, scope TBD based $ 120,000 $ 380,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 500,000 on study. Study in 2024, work in 2025. R9 Yost Park & Pool R4 Park enhancements, repair and maintenance to include resurface of tennis courts $ 154,300 $ 1,296,400 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,450,700 R6 and trail, bridge and boardwalk repairs/replacement in 2024, inclusive R11 iplaVground and pool upgrades in 2025. Columbarium Expansion - Phase II D8 Expansion ofthe current colum barium. Funding provided throughthe Cemetery $ - $ 159,100 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 159,100 Trust Fund 137. Woodway Campus Athletic Complex - Phase I - Lighting X D20 In cooperation with the Edmonds School District, complete a community park $ _ $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,500,000 and athletic complex at Former Woodway High School to include lighting and future construction of two additional fields. Neighborhood Park SE 1 X Master plan and development of a new neighborhood park in South Edmonds $ - $ 79,600 $ 819,500 $ - $ - $ - $ 899,100 D13 (funding is in Parkland Acquisition program for purchase). Sierra Park R8 $ _ $ - $ 415,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 415,000 Playground replacement and upgradeto inclusive standards. R7 Olympic Beach Park $ $ 20,000 $ 33,000 $ $ $ $ 53,000 Renovation of existing restrooms. Packet Pg. 321 8.1.d Parks 2024-2029 CIP / UP - PROJECTS Costs inflated at 3% per year Project CFP Project Site & Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total D10 Pine Street Park D11 Park enhancements to include the addition of a small shelter with picnic tables, $ - $ 40,000 $ 124,400 $ - $ - $ - $ 164,400 D12 canopy shade trees and a paved connecting pathway. Johnson Property R2 Master plan forfuture park use. Site development not included in estimate. $ - $ - $ 82,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 82,000 PS Demolition, debris removal and site security completed in 2023. Neighborhood Park SR99 • Master plan and development of a new neighborhood park in Southeast $ - $ - $ 82,000 $ 844,100 $ - $ - $ 926,100 D15 Edmonds (funding is in Parkland Acquisition program for purchase). X P1 Parks & Facilities Maintenance and Operations Building $ _ $ - $ 1,125,500 $ 4,637,100 $ - $ - $ 5,762,600 D2 Replace and/or renovate shop facilities located in City Park. R12 Maplewood Hill Park $ _ $ _ $ - $ 347,800 $ - $ - $ 347,800 Playground replacement. Neighborhood Park SE 2 X D18 Master plan and development of a new neighborhood park in Southeast $ - $ - $ - $ 84,400 $ 869,500 $ - $ 953,900 Edmonds (funding is in Parkland Acquisition program for purchase). Waterfront Walkway P3 Connectingthe waterfront walkwayfrom Brackett's Landing North to $ $ $ $ 515,000 $ 819,500 $ 1,334,500 D14 Marina Beach Park by adding missing section in front of the Ebb Tide - _ _ S _ Condominiums, to provide ADA improvements. R16 Seaview Park $ - $ - $ - S - $ 417,900 $ - $ 417,900 Replacement of permanent restroom to provide ADA upgrades. D16 Elm Street Park D17 Park enhancements to include the addition of a nature playground, $ - $ - $ - S - $ 100,000 $ 340,370 $ 440,370 R14 small shelter with picnic tables and habitat restoration. Packet Pg. 322 8.1.d Parks 2024-2029 CIP / CFP - PROJECTS Costs inflated at 3% per year Project CFP Project Site & Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Pool Replacement X R15 $ _ $ _ $ _ $ _ $ - $23,881,000 $ 23,881,000 Replacement ofthe existing Yost pool. Design, location, and funding TBD. Meadowdale Playfields R3 Renovations as suggested by the City of Lynnwood and consistent with re- TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD $ negotiated and updated Interlocal Agreement. May include addition of dugout - roofs, light replacement and playground upgrade. Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Willow Creek Daylighting) Master Plan development and implementation of the Edmonds Marsh to daylight P4 the waterway connection of Puget Sound to the Edmonds Marsh and two fresh X D9 water creeks providing restoration of fresh water/salt water estuary and natural TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD $ - D1 tidal exchange. (All expenses are TBD per Council direction in December 2022). Acquisition funding identified in Parkland Acquisition program. (A) SUBTOTAL PARKS CIP/CFP PROJECTS 1 $ 745,600 $ 3,475,100 $ 2,6874 00 $ 5,913,400 $ 1,902,400 $ 25,0 00,870 $ 33,070,070 Packet Pg. 323 8.1.d Parks, Recreation and Human Services Parks 2024-2029 CIP / UP PROGRAMS Highlight — 2024 projects IL In L a E s Ot EQ4, 10 E ��a•. I Kai- V Q Packet Pg. 324 8.1.d Signage & Wayfinding - R10 (DP) 0 r Trail identification, orientation markers, safety & regulatory messagin park hours, park rules and etiquette, interpretive information and warning signs. a Estimated Cost: $75,000 PROS Plan Y G2 — Obj. 2.1, 2.3 a G3 — Obi. 3.6 y G5 — Obi. 5.3, 5.4 G9 — Obi. 9.1 t b Rec. — 6.2, 6.5 w° y +r 11"c�1191 V O Q Packet Pg. 325 Parks 2024-2029 CIP / CFP - PROGRAMS Costs inflated at 3% per year Project (4) Programs PARKS CIP PROGRAMS 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total R17 Citywide Park Improvements / Capital Replacement Program Ongoing program of funding allocation for regular and deferred maintenance, repair and replacement of parks amenities, structures and equipment. $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 2,700,000 signage m waynnamg R10 Replacement of aging signage to improve accuracy and provide a consistent City of Edmonds Parks visual identification system. Parkland Acquisition Support Funds utilized to evaluate potential acquisitions and complete due diligence. Debt Service and Interfund Transfers Debt service on Civic Park $1.61M bond (2021) and Interfund transfers to Engineering for Capital Project Support. I SUBTOTAL- PARKS CIP PROGRAMS $ 75,000 $ - $ - $ - $ $ $ 75,000 5 50,000 $ 50,000 5 50,000 5 .50,000 $ 50,000 5 50,000 $ 300,000 $ 123,000 j $ 123,000 j $ 123,000 1 $ 123,000 j $ 123,000 j $ 123,000 1 $ 738,000 .Q U 015 a A) i� LL R r .Q M U N O N r N O N r Q O a Packet Pg. 326 8.1.d Parks 2024-2029 CIP / UP - PROGRAMS Costs inflated at 3% per year Project � PARKS CIP PROGRAMS 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total Citywide Park Improvements / Capital Replacement Program R17 Ongoing program of funding allocation for regular and deferred maintenance, $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 2,700,000 repair and replacement of parks amenities, structures and equipment. Signage & Wayfinding R10 Replacement of aging signage to improve accuracy and provide a $ 75,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 75,000 consistent City of Edmonds Parks visual identification system. Parkland Acquisition Support $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 300,000 Funds utilized to evaluate potential acquisitions and complete due diligence. Debt Service and Interfund Transfers Debt service on Civic Park $1.61M bond (2021) and Interfund transfers to $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 123,000 $ 738,000 Engineering for Capital Project Support. (B)SUBTOTAL- PARKS CIP PROGRAMS $ 698,000 $ 623,000 $ 623,000 $ 623,000 $ 6237000 $ 623,000 $ 3,813,000 (4) Programs Packet Pg. 327 8.1.d Parks, Recreation and Human Services Parks 2024-2029 CIP / CFP PARKLAND ACQUISITIONS Highlight — 2024 project 0 w L E s Ot E041 10 i 04 �+ lid, Inc. I Sad- Csi Q Packet Pg. 328 8.1.d Parkland Acquisition - a2, A3, A4 (No DP -Council Authorization) Acquisition — Neighborhood Park SE 1 (A2) $1,500,000 Acquisition —Neighborhood Park SR99 (A3) Acquisition — Neighborhood Park SE 2 (A4) Total Expenses $1,500,000 Real Estate Excise Tax I - Fund 126 $1,300,000 Tree Fund 143 - land acquisition - TBD Total Revenue $1,300,000 • Neighborhood Parks SE1 • Acquisition as Feasible • Estimated Cost: $1,500,00 pant pin., G2 — Obj. 2.1 G3 — Obi. 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3A Rec. —1.1 sa., M U c a u_ .Q M U rn N O N N O N r Q O M a Packet Pg. 329 8.1.d Parks 2024-2029 CIP / CFP Costs inflated at 3% per year Project tf PARKLAND ACQUISITION 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Total X A2 Neighborhood Park SE 1 $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,500,000 Acquisition of parkland in South Edmonds. X A3 Neighborhood Park SR99 $ - $ 1,545,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,545,000 Acquisition of parkland near SR 99. X A4 Neighborhood Park SE 2 $ - $ - $ 2,185,500 $ - $ - $ - $ 2,185,500 Acquisition of parkland in South Edmonds. AS Interurban Trail $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 895,585 $ 895,585 Acquisition for trail extension. Edmonds Marsh Estuary Restoration (Willow Creek Daylighting) X Al Acquisition ofthe Unocal property in support of greater Edmonds Marsh TBD TED TED TED TED TED $ - restoration. (C)SUBTOTAL- PARKLAND ACQUISITION $ 1,500,000 $ 1,545,000 $ 2,185,500 $ $ $ 895,585 $ 6,126,085 Packet Pg. 330 8.1.d Changes to CIP/CFP UP / CIP COMPARISON (2024 TO 2029) PROJECTS ADDED Type PROJECT NAME CFP r DESCRIPTION None UP / CIP COMPARISON (2024 TO 2029) PROJECTS REMOVED Type PROJECT NAME CFP I DESCRIPTION Parks Lake Ballinger Access (McAleer) Project completion scheduled in 2023 Parks Johnson Property Demolition Demolition to be complete in 2023 Parks Playground Upgrade Program IPlayground upgrades identified each year, no need for additional program UP / CIP COMPARISON (2024 TO 2029) Type PROJECT NAME CFP CHANGE Parks Columbarium Expansion - Phase II Funded through Cemetery Trust Fund 137 - scheduled in 2025 vs. 24 Parks Elm Street Park Improvements Separated into planning in 2027 and construction in 2028 vs. 2026 Parks Interurban Trail Expansion Moved to 2029 vs. 28 Parks Johnson Property Master Plan Removed demolition, master plan scheduled in 2026 vs. 25 Parks Lake Ballinger Park Mountlake Terrace ILA ILA completed in 2023; payment due upon construction completion in 2024, carryforward Parks Maplewood Hill Park Playground replacement moved to 2027 vs. 25, significant price increase Parks Mathay Ballinger Park Improvements permanent restroom installation scheduled to take place in 2024, carr forward Parks Neighborhood Park SE1, SR99, SE2 X Master plan and construction of all three parks pushed back one year must acquire first Parks Olympic Beach Park Improvements Se arated into planning in 2025 and construction in 2026 vs. 24 Parks Parkland Acquisition/Neighborhood Parks X All three bumped back one year to 2024, 2025 and 2026 Parks Pine Street Park Improvements Separated into planning in 2025 and construction in 2026 vs. 24 Parks Seaview Park Improvements Restroom replacement moved to 2028 vs. 27 Parks Shell Creek Restoration IPlayground Plan carried forward to 2024, restoration in 2025 vs. 24 Parks Si na e and Wayfinding Price increase to $75K vs. $51,500 Parks Yost Park & Pool Improvements replacement moved to 2025 vs. 23, significant price increase due to topography F E Packet Pg. 331 8.1.d Questi, ons? Packet Pg. 332 8.1.d Parks, Recreation & Human Services Parks 2024-2029 CIP / CFP Angie Feser, Director October 3, 2023 Packet Pg. 333 8.1.e CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Minutes of Hybrid Meeting September 27, 2023 Chair Gladstone called the hybrid meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. at Edmonds City Hall and on Zoom. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The Land Acknowledgement was read by Board Member Maxwell. Board Members Present Staff Present Judi Gladstone, Chair Mike Clugston, Senior Planner Lauren Golembiewski Rob English, City Engineer Richard Kuehn (online) Mike De Lilla, Senior Utilities Engineer Susanna Martini Angie Feser, Parks, Recreation, & Human Services Director Nick Maxwell Shannon Burley, Parks, Recreation, & Human Services Deputy Director Jeremy Mitchell Beth Tragus-Campbell, Vice Chair Board Members Absent Emily Nutsch (alternate) Lily Distelhorst (student) - excused READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR TRAGUS-CAMPBELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MARTINI, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 13. MOTION MADE BY CHAIR GLADSTONE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER GOLEMBIEWSKI, TO APPROVE THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS. • On page 3 of 9 of the minutes, in the second full paragraph, the second sentence should be corrected to: Replacement trees wem could be triggered when the property owner has the last two or three trees on the property. • Page 3 of 9, the fourth full paragraph, delete the third sentence starting with, "Chair Gladstone. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENTS. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS AMENDED. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2023 Page 1 of 7 Packet Pg. 334 8.1.e THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Sue Oskowski, Edmonds resident, asked why the sidewalk on 84th (from 238 h to 234th) in the Public Works planned schedule for 2027. When Public Works presented their transportation plan to the City Council in June of this year the sidewalk was scheduled to be built in 2024. Her neighbor drives an electric wheelchair in the road because there are no sidewalks on 84t'. She urged the City to put that section of the sidewalk in the plan for 2024. It is definitely needed now. Teresa Hollis, Edmonds resident, had the following comments for Public Works: 1. She stated that this plan uses priorities for walkways that were set in 2015 which is before the City Council decided to put almost all of the new housing growth in the Highway 99 subarea. This CFP mostly ignores the planning decisions that were made by the City Council about where future density would be. She requested that in future cycles staff pays attention to where the housing density is planned. 2. She referred to the EIS for the Highway 99 subarea plan which says to build flexibility into each cycle of the 6-year Transportation Improvement Program to modify the priority and the funding of capital projects serving the study area as new development occurs and creates opportunities for matching funds from private development. A building permit was issued for the Apollo apartments at 236t` and Highway 99. It's waiting for the developer to pick it up and pay the big fees. So where are the city infrastructure projects for that neighborhood? 3. She said she doesn't support the amount of spending in the Green Streets demonstration project. A Green Street is a Tesla, but they would be happy with a used Prius. She suggested the City just provide some sort of walkway so they don't have to walk in the street, especially when they walk their kids to school. Also, please add a project for a paved walkway on 236 h between 84th and Edmonds Way since that's a route to Madrona School. It would also support the neighborhood where development will eventually happen on the empty lot at 236th and 84th. 4. She expressed support for the big increase in traffic calming programs for 2024. She had the following comments for Parks: 1. She supports the emphasis on working down the maintenance and repair backlog. 2. She expressed concern that the Burlington Coat Factory site project is missing from the portfolio. She wondered why there wasn't at least a placeholder for it in this CFP cycle for some reasonable estimate of the city spending. Angela Winzen, Mayor's Climate Protection Committee member and Edmonds Climate Advisory Board member, commented on behalf of both of the groups to convey their shared desire for a climate action manager to be part of the City's new budget. Climate mitigation is not a task that should be on a list of many others. It deserves, at minimum, a dedicated individual who can take the lead on implementation of the 2023 Climate Action Plan and the writing of future plans, including adaptation plans and all business related to climate mitigation in the City of Edmonds. Edmonds needs a leader in the city office who is able to focus their efforts entirely on the goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2050. They cannot wait another 13 years to begin when they are already years behind. A climate action manager for this city is long overdue and needs to be part of the new budget. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2023 Page 2 of 7 Packet Pg. 335 8.1.e None PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Public Hearing City Engineer Rob English introduced staff members and explained the difference between the CFP and the CIP and how they have been combined into one document. He highlighted the project lists and explained the way they are prioritized and organized. He also reviewed the layout of the project sheets. He explained that the Transportation Plan Update will be coordinated with the Comprehensive Plan Update. The Storm and Surface Water Management Comprehensive Plan is just beginning an update. Chair Gladstone asked for confirmation that the priorities established in the CIP are based on the 2015 Plan. Mr. English confirmed that is true. Mr. English reviewed Pavement Preservation Projects, Safety and Capacity Projects, Active Transportation Projects and Planning, Water Utility Projects, and Stormwater Projects. There was discussion about waterline overlays and patches. Staff explained the importance of coordinating between departments to determine the prioritization of projects. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell asked if the City is on track for water utility replacement. Mr. English replied that they are. The utility rate analysis currently underway will reassess the utility rates that are needed to maintain the city's infrastructure. Mr. English continued to review 2024 projects and programs including the Stormwater Utility, Sewer Utility Projects, Wastewater Treatment Plant, and Facilities. Comments/Questions: Board Member Golembiewski asked how coordination happens with other agencies if it is a road that has other ownership. Mr. English explained it depends on the project and gave some examples. Sometimes there are joint projects where jurisdictions share costs. Highway 99 is a state route. The state's responsibility on a state route is the pavement condition. The local agencies are responsible for any improvements. Sometimes there are state dollars available for this too. Board Member Mitchell asked if the estimated project cost is an engineer's ROM (rough order of magnitude) type estimate from a cost consultant. Mr. English replied that it is. When the Comprehensive Plan updates are done there is typically a high-level engineer's estimate attached to each project. Board Member Mitchell asked how many projects end up with leftover contingency funds and what happens with leftover funds. Mr. English said it depends on the scope of the project. Mr. English explained that complex projects tend to use more of the contingency funds, while the pavement preservation program rarely touches the contingency fund. If it is a local funding source like REET, the money gets put back into the fund and is part of the balance available for subsequent year projects. Board Member Golembiewski asked how private development influences prioritization of projects, particularly transportation and sidewalk projects. For example, there could be an area where they want to encourage development and the City takes the lead in doing some frontage work or an area that has some developable, Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2023 Page 3 of 7 Packet Pg. 336 8.1.e attractive land where they want the developer to do some of those sidewalk projects. Does that lead into the City's decision making and prioritization? Mr. English affirmed that it can. He referred to Highway 99 as an example of a high priority investment area by the current administration. On that corridor, projects will be done to beautify the corridor as well as subsequent frontage improvements that would typically be required by a developer. These improvements save costs for the developers and help to spur redevelopment. Chair Gladstone noted that the CIP is based on the 2015 Transportation Plan and asked how the prioritization of the CIP is impacted by the passage of the subarea plan. Was that evaluated and incorporated at all? Mr. English noted they will have an opportunity to do that with the current update. At the planning level, they go through the Transportation Plan each six years, and this is the big effort to look at overall planning and tie that into the Comprehensive Plan. Chair Gladstone asked if the Transportation Plan will come to the Planning Board. Mr. English replied that it would. Chair Gladstone said it didn't seem like there were really any new sidewalks before 2027. Why is that? Mr. English said there is no funding. The first three years are projects that have secured money or are reasonably expected to have secured money. There is no dedicated funding for sidewalks. Chair Gladstone asked what the replacement rate is for replacing the utility system with the dollar amounts that are in the budget for replacement. Mr. De Lilla replied it would be about 100 years. Mr. English commented that for transportation, at a rate of $2.8 million per year they could repave the streets in 25 to 30 years. The City is only currently funding about half that amount. He explained that traffic impact fees are restricted to growth related projects that address level of service. With this update they will be changing the way they do impact fees by looking at a multimodal level of service. Part of that will be looking at sidewalks and bike lanes in an effort to have a more holistic complete street approach. Board Member Mitchell referred to areas that don't have sidewalks and asked about the possibility of taking away some of the right-of-way that the City owns to incorporate some pedestrian right of way. Mr. English noted that a local impact district would be one way to fund a sidewalk on a local street if all the neighbors agreed to it. Board Member Mitchell explained that the City of Shoreline sometimes will put in temporary delineator curbs into the right of way. This is a way to provide a community that doesn't have any sidewalks with a designated area while funding for sidewalks is being generated. Mr. English said they don't have any active programs like this. They are already $1.3 million short on paving, so to pave something like that takes them further away from preservation efforts. He noted that there have been occasions where they have a wider shoulder and have striped it in a way so that pedestrians could walk there. However, they don't have an active program where they go look for wider shoulders to make a temporary path. Chair Gladstone asked if this could potentially be a temporary solution for the area on 236' brought up by a resident today that had no place for school kids to walk, not even a shoulder. Mr. English expressed concern that it could trigger stormwater requirements related to detention and water quality. They typically look for opportunities where there is existing pavement to maintain what they have so they don't have the stormwater triggers. Director Feser suggested that some of these ideas might be able to be addressed with the new Transportation Improvement Plan's multimodal transportation focus. Mr. England concurred. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell referred to packet page 154 and stated that they need to figure out how to prevent the massive block of sidewalk projects continuing to be pushed out because of lack of funding. She asked why parks restrooms maintenance funding had been removed. Director Feser stated that might just be a facilities budget issue. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell asked staff to provide clarification on that. Director Feser noted that there is a $450,000 program for projects like that. They are still doing the restroom projects; it just isn't under the facilities budget. Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2023 Page 4 of 7 Packet Pg. 337 8.1.e Director Feser presented the Parks, Recreation, and Human Services 2024-2029 CIP/CFP. She introduced Deputy Director Shannon Burley and expressed appreciation for the large role she plays in the budget process. She also thanked Public Works and Rob English for working with them. She presented the framework for the CIP/CFP; current and ongoing projects; capital projects (2024 highlighted projects, programs, and acquisitions); and a summary of changes in the program from last year's capital program. Public Testimony: None Questions/Comments: Board Member Martini referred to signage and wayfinding and encouraged the City to include accessibility Director Feser concurred and stated they intend to do that. Board Member Golembiewski asked if Parks is responsible for the maintenance of all street trees. Director Feser replied that they are, and it is a challenge. They need to do an inventory of all trees so they know what they have and how they are working with it. Chair Gladstone referred to parkland acquisition and asked what the minimum size is for a neighborhood park. Director Feser replied that there is no minimum or maximum; it is more about the location and what it provides. Board Member Martini referred to the waterfront walkway and asked if the apartments agreed with the City to finally put in an accessible walkway. Director Feser explained they had not, but the courts said yes. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell referred to the ADA restroom upgrade at Seaview Park and asked if they could use REET funding for that one since they are increasing access. Director Feser said they could use REET funding, but that doesn't have to do with increasing access. She didn't think they could use park impact fees because it isn't about increasing capacity. Board Member Martini argued that it would increase capacity for her. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell encouraged staff to move this project up earlier with the justification that they can't fully utilize the existing structure they have built and paid for because it doesn't have an ADA restroom. Director Feser asked for suggestions about what in exchange could get pushed back. Vice Chair Tragus- Campbell suggested pushing back the Maplewood Hill Park playground replacement one year because then you are swapping playground for playground and increasing access to the playground you have. Board Member Golembiewski pointed out that Sierra Park desperately needs to be replaced. As far as neighborhood concerns, Seaview has access to Seaview Park so they aren't lacking a park space. This could be another potential swap. Chair Gladstone asked if there are any concerns about recommending the CIP for approval to the Council. She stated that the Council needs to understand that the way that this CIP is set up perpetuates the inequities in the city. She appreciates the philosophy that the priority is that they need to maintain what they have before they put new things in, but if the Council wants to walk the walk about leveling the playing field here, there is some real hard thinking they need to do. She understands that there are funding issues, but how you direct your REET dollars is somewhat discretionary. She is unhappy that they are not seeing any new sidewalks until 2027 when they have kids walking down a street where there is no place to walk. There are people using wheelchairs on an arterial that is becoming busier by the day, and it is not being addressed. That overall philosophy flies in the face what Council has been talking about in terms of trying to address some of the inequities in the City. Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2023 Page 5 of 7 Packet Pg. 338 8.1.e Board Member Golembiewski asked if there is a breakdown of the amount of money being spent on maintenance of existing facilities versus money towards new facilities each year. She also commented that it appears that a large chunk of the improvement funds toward new items are being dedicated towards the Highway 99 revitalization stages 3 and 4, and that maybe some of the smaller neighborhood sidewalks and streets are getting pushed out further to prioritize this area. She acknowledged that Highway 99 is underserved so they are putting funds there, but maybe those aren't the streets that the community is actually wanting to improve. Maybe the issue with prioritization isn't necessarily between maintenance of existing and development of new. In 2024 and 2025 it appears that most of the capital facilities budget is going toward Highway 99. Maybe if some of those funds were diverted towards areas like 84" or 236th off the main arterial, you would have more support. Chair Gladstone said in her mind it isn't an "either/or" issue; it's probably an "and". Mr. English noted that the majority of the funding for Highway 99 is grant funding so they can't move it to local streets. He acknowledged that it is a complex issue. Board Member Golembiewski agreed and spoke to the importance of communicating that sort of thing well. The neighborhoods around there don't understand these issues. Chair Gladstone reiterated that it's more about the BEET dollars and impact fees and where they are used. Board Member Golembiewski recommended highlighting to Council the way impact fees for the transportation program can be used is going to change. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell said she would be comfortable recommending support of this with the caveat that the City Council needs to find additional funds to get at least one of those sidewalk projects done every year because it's important to the community. Board Member Mitchell spoke in support of the Green Streets program but suggested taking some of the funding and first putting it towards sidewalks or at least delineating walkways to give these communities a safe walking space. After those needs are met there might be more support from the community for the program. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell said she also supports the Green Streets program but is concerned about the safety of people walking or riding their bikes down the street. She is very pleased about the traffic calming program in the plan because people are going down streets way too fast, especially with the growing population. Having calming measures, sidewalks, and bike lanes to make it safer outside of the bowl areas is something she would recommend. Chair Gladstone suggested a couple board members could work on a draft memo to be reviewed by the Planning Board at the October 11 meeting. Director Feser noted that the memo would need to be ready to go into the Council packet on October 12. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER GOLEMBIEWSKI, SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR TRAGUS-CAMPBELL, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THAT A SMALL GROUP PREPARE A DRAFT MEMO. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Chair Gladstone and Board Member Mitchell volunteered to work on the memo. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2023 Page 6 of 7 Packet Pg. 339 8.1.e NEW BUSINESS None PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA Senior Planner Clugston noted he would be on vacation from October 6 through October 15. Michelle Martin is also on leave right now, so logistically it will be difficult to get things done. He pointed out that the Tree Code was already bumped to October 11. Tonight, the Board added the discussion regarding the CIP/CFP memo to that meeting as well. Director McLaughlin was going to be at the October 11 meeting to talk about the Comprehensive Plan, Highway 99 Community Renewal Program Update, and the Highway 99 Landmark Site Discussion. Chair Gladstone noted they also need to have the discussion about the vision statement. Mr. Clugston indicated that would be part of the Comprehensive Plan discussion on October 11. Chair Gladstone proposed bumping the presentation to City Council to Monday, November 6 and doing it in person. There was discussion about having a small group work on a recommendation for trees similar to what they are doing for the CIP/CFP recommendation. Board Members Golembiewski, Maxwell, and Tragus-Campbell volunteered to have a memo ready for discussion at the October 11 meeting. There was discussion about using the Comprehensive Plan discussion time for the vision statement and pushing the Highway 99 Community Renewal Program Update out. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Gladstone noted she would be available but would be on east coast time on October 11. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS None ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:34 p.m. Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 27, 2023 Page 7 of 7 Packet Pg. 340 8.1.f October 11, 2023 Memo To: Edmonds City Council Members From: Edmonds Planning Board Members Subject: 2024 CIP/CFP The Planning Board received a presentation from the Public Works and Parks Departments outlining the projects that make up their recommended 2024 CIP/CFP at the September 27 Planning Board meeting. While some of the Board members had attended the Council briefing on September 19, some had not. However, a copy of the CIP/CFP had been provided to Planning Board members by Planning Department staff in early September. The presentation provided to the Planning Board and Council was similar to those provided in past years Individual and groups of projects were reviewed without background on how project decisions were made. It was a list of what projects would be done, when, at what cost and from what funds. We presume a lot of thought went into developing this, yet the document does not include any analysis or ranking criteria that provides an understanding of how projects were prioritized. We believe Council and the community needs to understand those ranking criteria to assess if the CIP/CFP is accomplishing desired policies, objectives, and priorities. The one policy direction that staff indicated is prioritizing the maintenance and repair of existing infrastructure over installing new. The current CIP/CFP prioritization of existing and new projects is likely to perpetuate and exacerbate the inequities that exist in the city that the Council has indicated they want to improve upon. Project prioritization in the current CIP/CFP results in those parts of the city that already have infrastructure amenities getting better ones and those without continuing to not have any. This becomes a glaring inequity when most all of the REET dollars are spent on street preservation in the near future in lieu of expanding sidewalk networks. No new sidewalks are planned to be constructed until 2028 at the earliest. Some of the badly needed sidewalks, like 2361h St. SW between 84th Ave. W. and HWY 99 where children walk to school every day on this arterial, are not in the 2024 CIP/CFP. We recommend that Council seek from staff the ranking criteria of how the projects within the CIP/CFP were selected. In addition, if the Council is serious about addressing infrastructure inequities, then the information provided to the Council needs to be organized and analyzed differently for better informed decision - making. This can be done by organizing the revenues and expenditures for specific projects to more easily see which projects are benefiting from the most discretionary of funding sources- REET. It would also be informative to see a list of projects that are being funded by development impact fees. This will give Council a better picture of what can be moved around to accomplish Council objectives to improve equity. The Parks CIP/CFP has information organized this way; Public Works portion of the document does not. To accomplish equity goals, we also recommend that select projects in the current CIP/CFP be deferred to address community needs. One example is the Green Streets project (PWT-64). While it does not have any current secured sources of funding, the fact that it is listed in the CIP indicates where staff resources Packet Pg. 341 8.1.f will go to secure funding. For example, instead of seeking grants or other funding sources for that, they could reallocate the projected estimate dollars of that project towards seeking funding for sidewalks that are critical for pedestrian safety and wheelchair bound residents trying to navigate arterials without any form of walkway. To meet the timeline for Council's approval of the CIP/CFP the Planning Board is providing recommendations for how you can make a better -informed decision rather than making a recommendation to approve or not approve this CIP/CFP. In previous years the Planning Board has requested to get information earlier about the criteria and policy direction for identifying projects and their timing. Perhaps next year we will be better able to provide a more conclusive recommendation to you. Packet Pg. 342 8.1.g CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Minutes of Hybrid Meeting October 11, 2023 Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell called the hybrid meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. at Edmonds City Hall and on Zoom. She announced she would be serving as administrator of the meeting since Chair Gladstone was online in a different time zone and might need to drop off. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The Land Acknowledgement was read by Board Member Mitchell. ROLL CALL Board Members Present Judi Gladstone, Chair (online) Lauren Golembiewski (online) Richard Kuehn (online) Susanna Martini Nick Maxwell Jeremy Mitchell Beth Tragus-Campbell, Vice Chair Lily Distelhorst (student rep) Board Members Absent Emily Nutsch (altemate)(excused) APPROVAL OF MINUTES Staff Present Susan McLaughlin, Development Services Director Deb Powers, Urban Forest Planner Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell noted that Chair Gladstone had submitted amended comments to the group prior to the meeting. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MITCHELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2023 AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA VICE CHAIR TRAGUS-CAMPBELL MOVED, CHAIR GLADSTONE SECONDED, TO ADD A BRIEF DISCUSSION REGARDING THE TREE CODE AND SOME OF THE CONCLUSIONS THE Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Pagel of 8 Packet Pg. 343 8.1.g GROUP CAME TO BEFORE THE CURRENT FIRST ITEM IN UNFINISHED BUSINESS. THE MOTION PASSED. BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL MOVED, CHAIR GLADSTONE SECONDED, REMOVING THE PARKS, RECREATION & HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT - 2023 Q3 ACCOMPLISHMENTS FROM THE AGENDA IN LIEU OF BOARD MEMBERS READING THE REPORT ON THEIR OWN AND FORWARDING QUESTIONS TO STAFF. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. AUDIENCE COMMENTS None ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A. Parks, Recreation & Human Services Department - 2023 Q3 Accomplishments - REMOVED PUBLIC HEARINGS None UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Brief Tree Code Discussion Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell explained the subcommittee discussed all the various proposals and public comments on the tree code and submitted a document with suggested language for the code. Board Member Maxwell didn't think it was appropriate to discuss the code language specifically, just the summary table of the guiding principles. There was concern about discussing this at all since it was not included in the packet. Director McLaughlin commented that it was not an accident this item was not included on the agenda. The project is on pause at the staff level for legal review and director review. Chair Gladstone expressed a concern about waiting too long to discuss this and having to start over again. Vice Chair Tragus- Campbell suggested putting it on the agenda for the next meeting so they can stay updated on the staff review. She thinks it is important for this to stay on the agenda every meeting until they can get an answer and move forward. Board Member Maxwell suggested that legal review would be easier if they actually had some clear language to review. He also pointed out that there was no legal review of the step back ordinance. Board Member Martini asked what triggered this. Director McLaughlin said she was not able to answer that. Board Member Martini did not like the prospect of repeatedly pushing this down the road. Board Member Golembiewski expressed the concern about delaying this too long and ending up with a Council that proposes an emergency ordinance. She hopes they get to a point where they stop ruling by emergency ordinance. Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 2 of 8 Packet Pg. 344 8.1.g MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR TRAGUS-CAMPBELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL, THEY HAVE A REVIEW OF THE PLANNING BOARD SUBCOMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION MEMO AND RECEIVE AN UPDATE FROM STAFF ABOUT STATUS OF THE REVIEWS PROCESS AT THE OCTOBER 25 MEETING. Board Member Kuehn expressed frustration about the situation. He doesn't understand why they can't even have a discussion about this to keep the ball moving forward. Board Member Maxwell noted that they could continue to share the key concepts tonight. Other board members disagreed because the public didn't have a chance to review the documentation ahead of time. Chair Gladstone expressed concern about having any process violations on this important topic. It was noted there would need to be continued discussion about how all of this would impact the extended agenda. MOTION PASSED WITH BOARD MEMBER MITCHELL ABSTAINING. B. Planning Board Action on 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) & Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell referred to a memo drafted by another subcommittee regarding the Planning Board's recommendation. The memo states that the Board does not have sufficient information to make a clear recommendation. Chair Gladstone added that in the memo they tried to capture the concerns raised at the last meeting around the CIP/CFP. She explained that they had primarily tried to characterize what the concerns were around equity. They recognized there were gaps in the information that was provided in order to make a solid recommendation. Board Member Mitchell commented that there is a time crunch to present this to Council. It would take significant staff work to provide that backup information in time for the Board to make a formal decision. For that reason, they have left it open and recommended that specific questions be asked. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell thought the memo captured what was discussed at the last meeting and also during the last year. Mainly, they were raising questions about how items were prioritized. The public has consistently brought up concerns around sidewalks, and there was concern about not having any of that in the plan. She encouraged the Council to ask questions around prioritization and how they can make some progress toward addressing inequities in the infrastructure. Board Member Golembiewski asked if the intent was for these priorities to be presented to Council or for this to come back to Planning Board before making a recommendation to Council. Chair Gladstone did not think there was time for this to come back to the Planning Board which is why the memo ends up with things the Board thinks the Council should look at to make an informed decision. Board Member Martini thought that providing the Council with what they collectively agree on would be useful. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell concurred and noted that the memo outlines that. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MARTINI, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MITCHELL, TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION MEMO TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE CIP/CFP AS WRITTEN. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 3 of 8 Packet Pg. 345 8.1.g NEW BUSINESS A. Landmark 99 Project Overview Director McLaughlin made the presentation regarding the Landmark 99 project. She expressed appreciation to Board Members Mitchell and Golembiewski for sitting on the advisory committee for this project and representing the Planning Board. The site is located at the southern gateway of Edmonds at 24111 Highway 99. It is ten acres, owned by one owner, and zoned General Commercial. She reviewed details about the site and noted it is ideally situated for frequent transit by BRT and in close proximity to the upcoming light rail in Mountlake Terrace. Burlington has a lease on the property until 2029. Board Member Maxwell asked about the ownership of the cloverleaf. Director McLaughlin explained that is owned by WSDOT. She added that one of the recommendations in the Community Renewal Plan is to pursue rationalizing or removing that cloverleaf which would do a great deal to revitalize open space and perhaps provide new parcels. Director McLaughlin continued the presentation and explained that initially this site acquisition was led by Parks for the purpose of seeking parks space. Parks did the zoning and massing study which shows how much could be on that site. There has been interest from the community for years on revitalizing the southern gateway and providing housing, open space, and community amenities. She reviewed illustrations about possibilities for the site. She then discussed project organization, research/education, the community poll, tasks, timeline, and co -dependencies. Staff is pursuing a master plan process on this site. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell asked about the possibility of this remaining greenspace. Director McLaughlin explained that given the price tag, the location, and the fact that the City could not carry the costs alone she doesn't anticipate that it would be a significant amount of green space. Plus, the location affords itself to something a bit more dynamic that could absorb a lot of people on the site. However, this will be part of the community conversation. Board Member Golembiewski commented that it is likely that the project would not proceed if there were not a strong private development partnership established before the decision deadline. Director McLaughlin concurred and reviewed examples of public -private partnerships including Tukwila Village, Federal Way, and Woodinville. She discussed poll results and noted there is strong support for a community center, recreation facility, a police annex, park space, housing, retail, and dining. Chair Gladstone asked if the respondents to the poll were self-selected or random. Director McLaughlin replied they were self-selected. Chair Gladstone commented that the other category was quite large. Director McLaughlin agreed and noted 120 of the 351 other comments said not to buy the property. Chair Gladstone also asked if they knew where the respondents came from. Director McLaughlin said they did not. The first broad community conversation will be held on October 21 from 10-12 at Edmonds Woodway High School. For the October 21 public meeting, staff mailed the invitation to properties in the adjacent area and in multiple languages. They will also be posting in the local papers, posting yard signs, running Facebook ads, etc. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell asked about the notification radius. She hasn't received anything in the mail but lives very close to this. Director McLaughlin commented that since Council did not approve funding for this, they have a very limited amount to spend. Chair Gladstone said she received an invitation in the mail. Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 4 of 8 Packet Pg. 346 8.1.g Board Member Golembiewski asked if it is safe to assume they would not see groundbreaking until 2029 since Burlington has a lease through that date. Director McLaughlin thought they would probably need that much time, and relocation prior to a lease expiration tends to be very expensive. Board Member Martini asked about Council support for this. Board Member Mitchell explained they voted to do the purchase agreement. Advisory committees and the team were formed to give them the best information possible to make that decision in December. He encouraged the Planning Board to look at the project in the context of the good it will be for the city and how it will benefit that area node. The price tag is a small thing in his mind because he works in that area and is aware of all the tools available for cities to do that. The big part of this is the partnership. He is excited for the potential, but he thinks there is a lot of work to do. Chair Gladstone wondered how the location of this property compares to the geographic location of the example properties in relation to what else is going on in their cities. Director McLaughlin explained that Tukwila is on the northern boundary of city limits. In other ways, the consultant has indicated that both the Tukwila and Federal Way examples are nearly identical to Edmonds. Chair Gladstone asked if the property would be rolled into the community renewal area to take advantage of those funding opportunities. Director McLaughlin replied that the community renewal plan affords more powers by municipalities in the realm of land development. The City has the draft plan, which is not adopted, but if they did adopt it, they would become a community renewal agency and would have a lot of flexible powers associated with that. Pursuing site acquisition is not entirely relevant right now. They may want to consider adopting it next year if they decide to exercise the purchase option. Tax increment financing (TIF) is a state tool that is available to all municipalities. You are restricted to having two TIF areas in your jurisdiction, but the size is not limited in area as much as it is in anticipated revenue. Federal Way created a very large TIF area, and their project is right in the middle of it. There are a lot of opportunities with the Edmonds project as well. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell asked that staff provide plenty of examples to the public of how they are not just planning on raising property taxes to come up with the $37 million. Director McLaughlin agreed. Chair Gladstone referred to the comparisons and noted that each had a fair amount of housing associated with it. She wondered how that related to housing goals for that area and for the rest of the city. Director McLaughlin replied that they have consistently heard that housing, especially affordable housing, is of high demand. Right now, it is more feasible to build housing than it is to build commercial. Board Member Mitchell clarified that regarding meeting housing goals, all they are required to do per the GMA is to make adjustments in zoning to provide that capacity. That parcel is already zoned for the capacity anyway, so it's already in the GMA projections. Director McLaughlin concurred. She stressed that they are focusing on building the community and finding the right balance of uses, not just the number of units. Chair Gladstone asked if the repeal of Ordinance 4079 would affect this property at all. Director McLaughlin replied that it would. SEPA is costly. It also elevates the risk for the developer because of the unknowns associated with not only the environmental analysis, but the public process associated with an environmental review. Chair Gladstone said she was surprised to learn that there was Planning Board representation on the advisory group. Director McLaughlin explained the members were recently chosen by the Mayor in collaboration with Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 5 of 8 Packet Pg. 347 8.1.g the Council President, and they got off to a bumpy start. They just had their first meeting two weeks ago. They anticipate keeping the advisory group going until final decisions are made on the property. Vice Chair Tragus- Campbell suggested adding a section to the agenda for an advisory board report out. Board Member Maxwell said it is somewhat important to acknowledge that the success of the Civic Park indicates that they have some talent at creating public spaces which matters. Based on other public spaces in the City, it is very promising that it would work out well. Board Member Martini concurred and added that the accessibility for the new Civic Park is amazing. B. Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement Review Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell said the City Council requested that the Planning Board review the original vision statement and associated word cloud and make a recommendation to the Council by November 30. Director McLaughlin provided some background on the Comprehensive Plan branding process and the six -week targeted public outreach process. Throughout the process, 8500 comments were received and categorized. From this, a draft vision statement was created along with a graphic illustration of the process. The statement was put through a multilingual review process to make sure that words weren't misinterpreted or not understood by different languages. Draft community vision statement: Edmonds is a welcoming city offering outstanding quality of life for all. We value environmental stewardship, vibrant and diverse neighborhoods, safe and healthy streets, and a thriving arts scene. We are engaged residents who take pride in shaping our resilient future. A survey was put in the city newsletter to see if they generally got the statement right. 51 % of those who responded were supportive of the statement. 49% were not. Director McLaughlin reviewed how each of the phrases correspond to the most commonly used words. She explained that Council had specific concerns about the phrase "healthy streets". While "healthy" was not a word that was necessarily represented, staff thought it did represent the other words used such as walkability, green, biking, pedestrian, kids, etc. She summarized the Council resolution as previously discussed by Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell with the request that Planning Board provide feedback and recommendations to the City Council about which of the versions to adopt ("as is" or with suggested revisions) as soon as possible. Director McLaughlin stated she is confident in their process and believes that the draft community vision statement is representative of the comments. She thinks if they have to revisit the statement for an extended period of time, they risk delaying the plan itself. She pointed out that the State does not require a vision statement to be part of the comprehensive plan for the Growth Management Act. It was something staff wanted to use to energize people around in high level conversation. They did that and were able to categorize key themes to be used moving forward. If the Board wishes to advance another version, staff recommend striking the word "healthy" and just keeping it to "safe streets". Discussion: Board Member Mitchell pointed out that the Council wouldn't have drafted the resolution if they were happy with it. He assumed they wanted the Board to revise it. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell concurred. Board Member Mitchell said he didn't like how the resolution was drafted in the first place, pinning the original draft vision statement to the Bloom version. A more appropriate resolution would have been to send it to a steering committee of some kind to evaluate the data, come up with two versions, and bring those two versions to the Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 6 of 8 Packet Pg. 348 8.1.g Planning Board. It seems like a step was missed in the process engagement by just picking Ms. Bloom's version. He suggested making the revisions to the original statement rather than just sending one or the other back. Board Member Maxwell thought that Director McLaughlin's approach was reasonable rather than jumping to rewriting the vision statement. Vice Chair Tragus Campbell asked the Board if they wanted to tackle any sort of revision or if they support going with the staff recommendation of just moving forward. Chair Gladstone recalled they had discussed the vision statement earlier in the year and that there was a general feeling that it wasn't really a vision statement; instead, it was more of a statement of values. She thought that the phrases in the vision statement were fair representations of the comments they received. In her mind, it would be improved by voicing it as a vision statement and not a value statement, but she didn't know if this was what Council had in mind. She thinks to go without a value statement is going to plague the process of the comprehensive plan with various residents. She recommended spending time on this at a different meeting to try to coalesce around a vision statement that contains most of the concepts here. Board Member Golembiewski said she thinks this vision statement is very close to acceptable. She thinks it accurately reflects the comments received. She thinks it could be as simple as, "Edmonds strives to be a welcoming city ..." She agrees that the word "healthy" associated with streets is a little weird although she understands the thought process behind it. Health is something they value as far as being an active, healthy community that takes pride in outdoor spaces and walkability and things like that. Board Member Kuehn agreed with Chair Gladstone that this seems more like a statement of values rather than a vision statement. He also agreed that it was very close and could use some tweaking to voice it as a vision statement. He would like to tweak it at a future meeting and send a recommendation to Council. Board Member Martini expressed concern about kicking this down the road. She recommended establishing a timeframe in which to finish this. Student Representative Distelhorst said she was surprised they were still talking about the vision statement. She doesn't understand why this has taken so long. Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell recommended forming another subcommittee. Director McLaughlin commented that staff would want to be part of that to make sure that all those statements are taken into account. The translation issue is also very important. They do not have any consultant funding at all for this right now. Board Member Kuehn thought that if they just tweak some of the wording to make it a vision statement, but don't change the message, it could be good enough. It wouldn't need to be anything that changes from the word cloud. Director McLaughlin explained it was intended to be written in the present tense as if you were already in the future. Board Member Golembiewski asked if they could just call it a value statement since a vision statement isn't a required element of the comprehensive plan. Board Member Kuehn said he recommended that months ago. Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 7 of 8 Packet Pg. 349 8.1.g MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MARTINI TO DECLARE THIS TO BE A VALUE STATEMENT INSTEAD OF A VISION STATEMENT AND THAT THE PLANNING BOARD CONSTRUCT MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO IT AT THE NEXT PLANNING BOARD MEETING. THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. MOTION MADE BY CHAIR GLADSTONE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER KUEHN, THAT THEY WORK WITH STAFF TO TWEAK THIS AND COME BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD NO LATER THAN TWO MEETINGS FROM NOW. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA There will be a tree code update at the next meeting. There will also be a discussion or recommendation on the Critical Aquifer Recharge Zone and a comprehensive plan discussion. Highway 99 community renewal program update is being removed from the 25th. If there are any comments regarding the Parks, Recreation & Human Services Department - 2023 Q3 Accomplishments, they should be sent to Director Feser. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Gladstone said it was nice to see Director McLaughlin at the meeting. She thanked Ms. Powers for filling in for Mike Clugston. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Vice Chair Tragus-Campbell thanked everyone for their participation. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:17 p.m. Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 11, 2023 Page 8 of 8 Packet Pg. 350 8.1.h # CM Question/Response 1 DT PWT-01: When Council approved the $20 car tab increase earlier in 2023, we did so with the understanding the incremental $700k in revenue would be applied to the 2024 street preservation budget on top of the 2023 level of investment in the program. At $1.6m, the 2024 proposed investment level shown in the CIP/CFP appears to fall short of that understanding. Why? PW The tab fees is for street preservation "solely for transportation improvements that preserve, maintain and operate the existing transportation infrastructure of the city" Since established, the city has used this revenue to fund our in-house maintenance and repair efforts not the annual CIP. CIP pavement preservation funds use mostly REET funds, and to maximize these funds engineers coordinate pavement preservation projects with utilities to "repair once" a section of our transportation network. 2 DT PWT-31: the 236th walkway appears to be considered for investment beyond 2030. Can this be moved forward in the schedule? With revitalization of the subarea, there will be far more residents walking in that neighborhood. Also, is there any way the walkway can be installed at a lower cost? For instance, in the Sherwood neighborhood, the walkway is generally on one side of the street and is simply asphalt with a painted white line —similar to a bike lane. Where we are lacking walkways, can we consider installing asphalt sidewalks rather than concrete to stretch our dollars and deliver sidewalks earlier than now planned? PW Council can direct staff to change the priority, will need to identify what project will not be completed or a new revenue source to fund the project. Alternate methods to meet pedestrian needs can be considered during the design process, in addition the council can direct staff to develop new standards for new construction and adopt those standards. That said the best surface has been proven to be concrete sidewalks, all other possible options would have to be evaluated to our conditions. 3 DT PWT 64: total cost is shown as $3.5m: many times more expensive than standard sidewalks. I'd recommend moving this entire concept back into the "2030-2044" column until the city can determine how we can integrate green streets into the budget without delaying much needed sidewalks where they are most needed. PW There are no funds identified for this project, design can only start when funds become available, it will keep sliding to the right until funded. However if we show that we are not committed to do something until 2030-2044 we will not be able to compete for grants. 4 DT PWT 36: If there is already a sidewalk on one side of Walnut, I'd recommend moving this project back into the "2030-2044" column and reserve this investment for areas of the city with no sidewalks on either side of the street. PW Same answer as PWT 64. There is no sidewalk on either side. U) aD 0 U_ M .r .Q t� 0 N 0 N v N 0 N a 0 a M N 0 N ri 0 0 x �L Q c 0 CY U) Y L0 2 a 0 c d E z 0 r r Q r c m E M U 0 w r Q Packet Pg. 351 8.1.h 5 DT PWT-04: Why is the Main St overlay not being done all the way to 9th Ave, when Main St has been excavated for storm sewer upgrades between 6th and 9th? PW The City received a federal grant for a pavement overlay between 6th Ave to 8th Ave. The grant has a specific deadline to meet to obligate construction funds. Changing the project limits would require a PSRC amendment and supplement agreement with the consultant to modify the project which will slow progress and risk meeting the grant timeline and advertising the project in the first quarter of 2024. The section on Main St. between 8th Ave to 9th Ave will be paved in a following year as part of the City's locally funded paving program. 6 DT PWT-12: It appears the project on Highway 99 on the east side of the highway is either in MLT or Lynnwood. Are either of those cities contributing to the cost of installing the planter strip on the east side of the highway? Same question for PWT-16. PW During the planning stages (prior to Federal / State grant application submittals), discussions with the different agencies impacted will be held in order to determine the local funding contributions for the project phases. 7 DT PWT-21: Minor issue: the project description refers to Completed Streets. Should say Complete Streets. And a general question: are we still working toward the goals the city earlier defined about Complete Streets? I've seen nothing in recent planning discussion about Complete Streets, yet things like bicycle lanes, safer pedestrian crossings, etc. all fall within that concept. PW Typo has been corrected. Yes on complete streets, it is a work in progress and part of our comprehensive transportation plan update. Good to see that you are paying attention on what a complete street is. 8 1 DT PWT-25: Much of this project appears to lie within Esperance. Is the County splitting the project costs with Edmonds? Packet Pg. 352 8.1.h # CM Question/Response PW This project along 84th Ave. W is shared between Edmonds and Snohomish County. During the planning stages (prior to submitted grant applications). discussions will be held with Snohomish County to determine local contributions for this project (serving as local match). 9 DT PWT-26: This is a traffic project on SR-104 involving an additional turning lane. Is the state contributing to the cost of this project? PW WSDOT will most likely not fund this type of improvement project. Since the intersection is shared between Edmonds and Shoreline (signal owned by Shoreline), Federal / State grant applications will need to be submitted to fund this project (combined with local funding contributions / serving as local match). 10 DT PWT-67: What will be achieved with expenditure of $50k? If this item involves a review of the work done in 2016-2017 that led up to the Waterfront Connector proposal, can't a citizen/city task force be assembled to review those options? Also, I believe the scope should be expanded to include more than emergency waterfront access, should involve the Port and should examine what more can be done to ensure health/safety on the west side of the tracks (e.g., training additional personnel on use of the fire boat stationed at the marina, placing aid kits at regular intervals for use in quick response to injuries, identifying landing sites for a helicopter to evacuate an injured person if the tracks are blocked, etc.) PW Council requested this, and it can change if that is the goal. 11 DT PWT-31: Please move up the schedule for this project to 2026. Also, does this project involve a sidewalk on both sides of 236th? If so, can we consider placing a sidewalk on one side of the street (such as now exists in many parts of Edmonds) to deliver a much needed sidewalk amenity sooner and at lower cost? PW Will wait for council to provide direction in moving the project forward. The cost reflects sidewalk on one -side of the street. Too early to know what is possible, the design will determine if there is enough right of way, issues with utilities, parking etc. 12 DT PWT-32: Please move this project up to 2026 or earlier. PW Staff can move it forward at council's direction if City Council identifies a funding source. The ARPA funds identified for design have been transferred to the General Fund. 13 DT PWT-33: This is the top rated long walkway project identified in the 2015 transportation plan, yet it is not yet complete. Please move this project into the 2025 schedule. PW Funding? Identify a source of funding and these projects can be moved forward. 14 DT PWT-39: This item is shown as only $15k for 2024, yet the total project cost for these bike lanes is estimated at $3m. The narrative doesn't explain the discrepancy. Is the $15k just project close out costs? If so, that should be explained. PW lComment addressed in revised PW CIP-CFP draft. 15 DT Please move this item out to the 2030-2044 column, pending further discussion about a pedestrian/bicycle overpass near this IPWT-43: site, which may eliminate the need for this item. U) aD 0 U_ .r .Q 0 0 0 N O N v N O N a 0 a M N O N ri 0 0 x �L M 2 Q c 0 CY U) Y L0 2 a r a Packet Pg. 353 8.1.h # CM Question/Response PW Several unsuccessful grant applications have been submitted for this project over the last 5 years (through joint Federal / State grant applications with Shoreline since shared intersection). As part of the 2024 Transportation Plan, the pedestrian / bicycle overpass project will be discussed to determine its inclusion into the plan. Staff recommends keeping the project in the six year plan until completion of the 2024 Transportation Plan update. 16 DT PWT-50: This project addresses a serious and long-standing pedestrian safety problem along 238th from 76th to Highway 99. This is one of the primary walking routes from 76th to the amenities at the Safeway complex —including the new neighborhood city hall. There have been no sidewalks along 76th for decades and this area simply must have them. Please move this project up to begin in 2025 as a priority. PW Funding? Identify a source of funding and this project can be moved forward. 17 DT PWT-55: The 2024 project cost shows $10k, but the overall project cost shows as $1.1m. I presume the $10k cost is for project close out, but the narrative doesn't indicate what the cost is for. Please clarify. PW Comment addressed in revised PW CIP-CFP draft. The $10k in 2024 is for project close-out. 18 DT PWT-60: RFIB signals are needed at the crosswalk on 7th Ave between Daley and Bell Streets. The new Civic Field is very heavily used, with many more cars now parked on both sides of 7th. When cars are parked near the sidewalk, pedestrians aren't visible until they are well out into the crosswalk. Please program RFIB signals at that location for 2024. PW As part of the 2024 Pedestrian Safety Program (if approved as part of 2024 Budget), RRFB's will be added at selected locations. A list of potential locations has already been created and this specific crosswalk will be included in the evaluation (with the highest ranked locations to be funded / based on funding available). 19 DT PWT-69: this project is for replacement of deteriorated sidewalk on the east side of Civic Field on 7th Ave. The funding is shown as being spent in 2027 and 2028. However, my understanding is this project will be undertaken in 2024 and that funding has been fully identified to cover the cost. Please revise this item to show the project commencing in 2024 and that funding is secured. PW Project has been removed from document and will start in spring 2024. 20 DT PWT-51: this project is for restriping SR-104 to accommodate additional ferry vehicle storage space. This project is 100% on a state highway and provides no benefit to Edmonds. The state should be responsible for 100% of the cost of this project. It is now shown as "unsecured funding." Please explain why Edmonds taxpayers would be responsible for this $380k cost. And if the state is responsible, please revise the project cost matrix accordingly. PW This project was identified in SR-104 Study (completed in 2015). This project is 100% within WSDOT Limited Access. WSDOT recently completed Ferry Storage Improvements within the opening of one of their STORAGE lanes and through striping improvements. However in order to further reduce queues going up SR-104 (impacting driveways along this corridor), additional improvements are needed. The project sheet shows funding unsecured. The project could be funded by WSDOT or a future grant and is shown in this document since there may be an opportunity for the City to secure a future grant to complete the work. a� 0 U_ .r .Q C.� N O N v N 0 N a 0 Q M N O N ri 0 0 x �L Q c 0 CY U) Y L0 2 a 0 c d E z 0 r Q c m E M U 0 w r a Packet Pg. 354 8.1.h # CM Question/Response 21 DT PWT-52: Edmonds residents living in the area of 76th Ave. W. and Meadowdale Beach Road have been complaining for years about drivers travelling southbound on 76th at high rates of speed to get their vehicles airborne at the dip and rise in the road there. During the past decade, there have been 15 documented vehicular accidents there, some of them with injuries (Chief Bennett provided documentation of these accidents —this information has been forward to Director Antillon). 76th Ave. W. between Haines Wharf and Olympic Ave. is nearly two miles of straight road and is highly prone to speeding. Since the street is straight for such a long stretch, it is highly unusual that there would be that many accidents in that area. One suggestion is to make the 76th Ave. W and Meadowdale Beach Road intersection (a T intersection) a three way stop to prevent drivers from accelerating all the way from Haines Wharf to Perrinville. Please strongly consider this suggestion, which could be implemented at relatively low cost and would be much appreciated by the area residents as a means of keeping them and drivers safer. PW As part of the 2023 Traffic Calming Program, this specific stretch was evaluated. However following the speed study, the 85th percentile speeds didn't meet the threshold (less than 5 mph over the speed limit) / stretch didn't move forward in evaluation. The conversion of 76th Ave. @ Meadowdale Beach Rd to an ALL -WAY stop would be warranted if the volumes along 76th Ave. W were — 2X greater than along Meadowdale Beach Rd (since 3 approach roadway / based on MUTCD requirements). A study was completed in 2022 and the warrant wasn't met. Another traffic county will be completed in 2023. 22 DT PWT-53: The city is behind schedule on addressing ADA issues citywide. This proposal shows $440k in funding to do an evaluation and prioritization of ADA issues in 2025. Please move this up to 2024 and allocate ARPA funds for the update. Also, the DEIA commission is working to identify the highest priority ADA issues that need to be completed and will be providing that input to Council and Public Works. This input can feed directly into the ADA transition plan update. PW I Funding? Staff can move it forward at council's direction if the City Council identifies a funding source. 23 DT PWT-64: Council has not yet approved implementation of Green Streets, as the cost of these projects is very high and the city needs to first prioritize pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular safety projects where they are sorely needed and have been lacking for decades. Please treat Green Streets as a concept that should be further investigated and move the $3.5m funding shown in this item out to the 2030- 2044 column. However, elements of green streets (such as rain gardens, proper street tree planting, permeable paving, etc.) should be pursued incrementally as budget allows. PW City Council can decide to move this project to the out years. 24 DT PWD-04: funding sources as shown indicate nearly half of the cost of this project will be from local and/or ARPA funds. However, we have discussed that BNSF and federal funds will be available for a significant portion of this project, as well as contributions by Lynnwood. If this is correct, please update the cost matrix accordingly. If nearly $2m of the project cost will be actually be charged to the Stormwater Fund, it will create continued upward pressure on stormwater rates charged to Edmonds citizens. U) aD 0 U_ M .r .Q t� 0 N O N v N 0 N a 0 a M N 0 N M 0 0 �L r.+ 0 Q c 0 CY U) Y L 0 a 0 c d E z 0 r r Q r c m E M U 0 w r a Packet Pg. 355 8.1.h # CMI Question/Response PW This reflects the best available information that we have for the funds needed to complete the project at this time. Any funding not covered by ARPA will need to be grant funds which historically requires at least a 25% local matching fund source. Contributions from the City of Lynnwood for this project are highly unlikely, since this system is not part of their MS4. BNSF does not use their own funds for projects. They will build/retrofit these types of projects if they get grants. Matching funds need to be available to allow us to pursue and qualify for grants. If these funds are not available, we would not be able to apply or qualify and/or improve our standing for the vast majority of grants that need to be pursued to complete this project and any other project that is pursuing grant funds. If council decides it does not desire to use stormwater funds for matching funds, council would need to determine the alternate source. 25 DT PWD-04: In addition to a watershed analysis for Perrinville Creek, we need to identify a similar analysis for Shell Creek, which has been identified as the second highest priority restoration focus (Perrinville Creek is the highest priority restoration focus). The Shell Creek analysis can be funded, in part, by the $120k carryforward Council allocated for Yost Park restoration. If additional funding is needed, please show ARPA as the funding source, and show this analysis as beginning in 2024. PW A project can be added, but council needs to identify a funding source. ARPA funds may not be available. This study can be considered for future funding/prioritization as part of the Stormwater Comprehensive Plan update. 26 DT PWD-23: Please update the cost matrix to indicate Lynnwood's contribution to the Perrinville Creek basin analysis cost. PW Comment addressed in revised PW CIP-CFP draft. 27 DT PWF-10: The Edmonds Museum restroom is not ADA-compliant. The toilet in the single restroom in the building is raised off the floor, making it extremely difficult for a wheelchair -bound person to use. Please add this needed upgrade to this item. PW Noted, please provide direction, at this point we don't have an ADA transition plan for facilities but this can be prioritized. The building is old and it might be difficult to meet ADA. 28 DT PWF-18: the costs shown in the expense matrix seem very low for the scope of work identified in the narrative for the Yost Pool pool house. For instance, the highest cost shown in any of the five years in the matrix is $30k. Yet, the narrative shows roof and gutter replacement is needed. Please verify the cost numbers as shown are correct. PW These are preliminary estimates, once a more detail investigation is completed possibly partnering with JOC contractors the estimates will be updated. U) aD 0 U_ M .r .Q t� 0 N O N v N O N a 0 a M N O N ri 0 0 x �L .r 0 Q c 0 CY U) Y `0 2 a r a Packet Pg. 356 8.1.h # CM Question/Response 29 DT PWF-23: As discussed in the project narrative, the library roof membrane has been leaking for over 20 years since it was initially installed. The newly -refurbished library (which was severely damaged by a major water leak) will reopen in late 2023. It is simply unwise to reopen the library to the public without a near -term plan to permanently address the chronically leaking roof, as continued water leakage may lead to mold -related public health issues in the building. As stated in the narrative, the city obtained an estimate in 2018 for demolish and replace the entire roof membrane. Additionally, a structural assessment was completed in 2021. This project can and should be broken into two components: first, the current "green roof" structures should be demolished and the roof membrane replaced to make the library roof waterproof. The cost of this item is shown as $4.9m, with the project apparently initiated and completed in 2029. Please revise this item to show the project commencing with final design in 2024 with project completion in 2026. This item can be funded via ARPA funds, since the city has remaining approx. $8m in unused ARPA funds (and our contract with Snolsle shows they will contribute a portion of the cost of this project, so they should be shown as a partial funding source). The ARPA guidelines state these funds must be fully expended by the end of 2026. The second phase of this project is rebuilding of the planters and surface features on the library roof. That portion of the project should be shown as commencing during or after 2026, as determined by design. PW There are no funds assigned for the project, if council prioritizes this project funding will have to be identified for the design 30 DT PWP-04: This project cost is shown as over $40m across a five year period. However, litigation is pending about the level of nutrient removal required of the cities. If the cities are given legal relief from Dept. of Ecology's standards, will that relief reduce the cost estimates shown? PW Preliminary costs. Once design has been completed we will have a more accurate estimate. 31 DT PWP-10: the total estimated project cost is shown as $250k. Yet, the expense matrix below shows he cost as $250k for each of the years of 2024, 2025 and 2026. Is the total cost actually $750k? PW Comment addressed in revised PW CIP-CFP draft. Cost is for 2024. 32 VO 76th street by Meadowdale road and/or by 171- too long a stretch without a signal or traffic calming PW As part of the 2023 Traffic Calming Program, this specific stretch was evaluated. However following the speed study, the 85th percentile speeds didn't meet the threshold (less than 5 mph over the speed limit) / stretch didn't move forward in evaluation. The conversion of 76th Ave. @ Meadowdale Beach Rd to an ALL -WAY stop would be warranted if the volumes along 76th Ave. W were — 2X greater than along Meadowdale Beach Rd (since 3 approach roadway / based on MUTCD requirements). A study was completed in 2022 and the warrant wasn't met. Another traffic count will be completed in 2023. 33 VO 100th and SR 104- c page 29 CIP/CFP- no right of way purchase expense is detailed when infrastructure can/should be improved so bike lanes can be added without losing driving lanes (packet page 35) PW Comment addressed in revised PW CIP-CFP draft. Preliminary right of way cost added. 34 VO 76th and OVD- is this a shared cost between COL and COE? Is it in their CFP too (our CFP page 32, packet page 38). Same with OVD at Meadowdale beach rd and 174th, CFP page 35, packet page 41) Also, shared with COShoreline? 104 and 76 at 205 (CFP/CIP page 52) U) aD 0 U_ M .r .Q t� 0 N O N v N O N a 0 a M N O N M 0 0 x �L Q c 0 CY U) Y L 0 2 a 0 c d E z 0 r Q c m E M 0 w Q Packet Pg. 357 8.1.h # CM Question/Response PW Yes, 76th @ OVD is a shared intersection. During the planning stages (prior to submitted grant applications). discussions will be held with Lynnwood to determine local contributions for this project (serving as local match). 35 VO Isn't some part of 84th sidewalk (CFP page 33) being prioritized in 2024 budget? Yes sidewalk design (from 234-238th) in 2024 1 see on CFP page 43 but work not until 2027. Is this timing acceptable? PW Staff can move it forward at council's direction if City Council identifies a funding source. The ARPA funds identified for design have been transferred to the General Fund. 36 VO DT street lighting- how about pedestrian street lighting needed near Inter urban trail? CIP Page 53 PW A Citywide Lighting Study is currently being completed. The Interurban Trail is one of the stretches being evaluated. Further lighting evaluation may be included in the Safety Action Plan (if city receives federal grant). 37 VO 4th Ave corridor- private funding/ capital campaign or move back in timeline PW Keeping the project in the six -year list will make it eligible to pursue public/private grant funding in the future. 38 VO I am confused by the numbers on CFP page 88 (7317 Lake Ballinger away Floodplain purchase and structure removal): secured 500k ecology grant is referenced in narrative (which also says that the purchase is intended/ not yet done) ward project costs are 750k and 2024 costs are only ones there (and 120k) PW Narrative clarified to show that the current schedule is to purchase the property in 2023. So the majority of funds will be expended before 2024, which is when the site demolition and revegetation will take place. 39 VO Update references to RFA (from South Sno Co Fire) CIP/CFP pages 108, 109, 110 for fire stations PW Noted 40 VO Meadowdale clubhouse page 114, PWF-12- almost 100k in 2024 unsecured funding. Does this mean no more bonding for deferred maintenance or doesn't that qualify? PW Noted, will evaluate if these fit the bond requirements 41 VO Old Public Works- page 115 do the 2024 and 2025 expenditures make sense in the context of upcoming change in use being talked about? See page 127 with construction (probably on that same site) in 2027. Also same as above. What does it mean to have work planned in 2024 and no secured funding? Also- wade James theater (2024 work and no secured funding) Also fire life safety communications PWF 19 on page 121— don't we need to prioritize this? PW Roll up door is dangerous, and HVAC system need to be repaired since the building is still occupied, and eligible for bonds funds. Not included on list for Bonds project, these projects are typically funded with Facilities General Funds. 42 VO Library Plaza roof deck waterproofing project PWF 23, page 122 move design to 2024 and construction to 2025 ARPA PW There are no funds assigned for the project, if council prioritizes this project funding will have to be identified for the design 43 VO Will the restroom/showers at the Bracketts landing waterfront get addressed? (This was covered 1. Todays presentation- I am glad this is being prioritized in the maintenance budget). What about the signage at Bracketts landing that says marine sanctuary overhead? U) aD 0 U_ M .r .Q t� 0 N O N v N 0 N a 0 Q M N O N M O 0 x �L Q c 0 CY U) Y `0 2 a 0 c d E z 0 r Q c m E M 0 w r a Packet Pg. 358 8.1.h # CM Question/Response PW Parks led projects 44 VO 175th slope repair- when was the problem first established/id'd? In 2019, it was said that the temporary fix (cones) had already been there for years). How many years is acceptable number for something like this to be unaddressed? What does 2023 construction cost moved to 2026 to 2027 mean? PW Based on documents, the issue dates back to at least 2004. Staff will continue to monitor the slope. Staff can move the project forwarc if City Council identifies a funding source. 45 VO 232nd from 100th to 105 timing move may not be okay (from2027-28 to 28-29). PW IStaff can move it forward at council's direction if City Council identifies a funding source. 46 VO Same Re 84th from 238 to 234 (move from 26-28 to 27-29) PW Staff can move it forward at council's direction if City Council identifies a funding source. U) aD r 0 U- M .r .Q t� CD N O N v N O N a 0 a M N O N M O O x �L r.+ C� C Q C ry� V U) Y L 0 U (L 00 c a) E z 0 r r Q r c m E U R El Packet Pg. 359 8.1.i # JCM Question/Response Submitted 11/2/23 47 SP When the updated Transportation plan is approved, will all of these out year projects get reassigned in order of community priority? Could you describe that process? (CM Paine) PW As part of the 2024 Transportation Plan (currently being worked on), all proposed projects will be ranked based on a set of criteria. Following this evaluation, the ranking will be reviewed by the Transportation Committee and the public during Open Houses. Revisions might be made based on Committee and public comments. The prioritized project list will be included in the draft plan when it is presented to the Planning Board and City Council for review and discussion. 48 SP PWT 68 Is there any opportunity for utility coordination/undergrounding? (CM Paine) PW The 881h Ave Overlay/Sidewalk repair is a follow-up project after the City completed water and stormwater replacement work in 88th Ave. Staff has not pursued expanding the scope of work to include the conversion of overhead utilities to underground due to cost. 49 SP PWT 08 This project will need extensive community input and I would like to see significant funding from County and Sound Transit to support this project. (CM Paine) PW During the Planning Phase / prior to the submittal of grant application for this project (228th St from Hwy 99 to 95th), coordination and many discussions will need to take place between the City and the County (since the ROW for the entire project is split 50 / 50 between both Cities). In order to reduce the total grant request (possible contribution toward local match of future grant application), the City can discuss with the County to see if they have available funding. 50 SP PWT 12 Will we coordinate with Lynnwood?(CM Paine) PW Since this project (Hwy 99 from 216th St to 212th St) is partially within City of Lynnwood ROW, discussions with Lynnwood will occur during the Planning Phase (prior to grant application submittal). 51 SP PWT 181 would like to see the placement of a stop light rather than a small roundabout. There are some challenges about how to use a roundabout. In addition, those are quite expensive due to ROW needs. (CM Paine) PW As part of the 2024 Transportation Plan, this intersection will be re-evaluated based on the existing traffic conditions / projected growth rate. A new intersection delay / Level of Service will be determined. The proposed improvements at this intersection will also be identified (based on comparing different intersection configuration modeling results). 52 SP PWT 19 I'd like to have more discussion regarding active transportation being included there and I'd also like to have any utility work coordinated for the purpose of undergrounding PUD and telecom facilities. (CM Paine) PW The active transportation improvements at this intersection (76th Ave/220th St) include adding bike lanes to the intersection (currently ends — 300' from the intersection for the eastbound and southbound movement) and adding bike lanes both approaching and departing the southern portion of the intersection (currently not existing). Planter strips will be added in front of sidewalk along certain sections of the intersection and sidewalks will be widened (improving pedestrian safety conditions). w m M u. Ta CL M U rn N 0 N le N 0 N a 0 a M N 0 N to 0 X �L a a M a a LL U I U a rn d E t �a Q 0 E a Packet Pg. 360 8.1.i # JCM I Question/Response 53 SP PWT 24 76th and OVD — Can this be moved up to 2027? (CM Paine) PW As part of the 2024 Transportation Plan , this intersection is being re-evaluated based on the existing traffic volumes and projected growth rate. As previously indicated, all proposed projects will be ranked based on a set of criteria. This new priority ranking will help determine the year(s) each project will be identified within future planning documents (such as CIP / TIP). 54 SP PWT 32 84th sidewalks — Will the design proposed for this sidewalk placement help get additional funding sources opportunities. (CM Paine) PW Completing design and environmental review prior to submitting a grant application can increase the score for grant applications that include points for project readiness. Completing design work also improves the accuracy of cost estimates that are submitted with grant applications. 55 SP PWT 45 The neighbors using 5th and Pine would like to have a more secure/safer crossing going across 5th. (CM Paine) PW Pedestrian -Actuated Flashing Beacons will be installed at 5th Ave. S @ Pine St. before the end of this year. 56 SP PWT 69 7th Ave curb and gutter - need more information on the critical nature of this project and the prior decisions made by Council, source of funding for the work and how transferable are these funds to go towards other projects. (CM Paine) PW The proposed source of funding is bond proceeds since the sidewalk is adjacent to City property and $100k in stormwater utility funding. 57 SP PWT 53 ADA Transition Plan — Citywide I'd love to see this moved forward. As I understand the dimension- we need the funding and it's not due to staff constraints. (CM Paine) PW A funding source needs to be identified to include it in the 2024 Budget. Waiting until 2025 may provide an opportunity to fund a portion ($100k-$1SOK) of the Plan related to public right of way with grant funds from Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) program in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). 58 SP PWW 01 Can there be utility coordination with the PUD & telecom with the replacement projects? (CM Paine) PW Staff coordinates all projects with utility providers in Edmonds during the design phase to identify potential conflicts and reduce the possibility of incurring extra costs during construction. 59 SP PWF — general question for the Facilities projects These will need the bond money to proceed?(CM Paine) PW Submitted 60 VO Per resident Liz Smalley, the worst parts of 238th are from 104 (Westgate Chapel) to 84th. My sense is that this walkway project is the Edmonds section and the rest is Esperance. Does this sound right? Dir Antillon, do you know if Snohomish County has the rest of this walkway identified in their plan? If not, how do we go about making the request for them to add it? Packet Pg. 361 8.1.i # JCM Question/Response PW The street referenced in the question is misidentified as 238th St. It appers the question is related to 228th Stand is project PWT-08 in the CIP / CFP. Discussions have previously been held with Snohomish County about this project. Follow-up discussions need to be held with the County in order to confirm this stretch is within their plan as well. During the preliminary planning phase of the project (prior to submitting the grant applications), meetings will be held with the County (in order to determine if they have any funding available / serving as local match for future grant applications). 61 VO I know we have know money, but these residents have had cones marking breakage on their street so they don't drive into the part that falls off... it will be for 20 years in 2024! What is the best we can offer them in the CIP/CFP? This year moved it another year out which is definitely unacceptable. Can we do any better than putting it back in 2026 where it was before this year's revision? I at least need to get it back in 2026. PW A funding source is needed to move the project forward. The project was moved back to 2027, since the first 3 years of the plan are for projects that have secured funding or at least funding that is reasonably expected to be secured. 62 VO One was about need for sidewalk on 80th Ave between Seaview Park at 188th and OVD due to limited sight from hills, and people with strollers commuting on foot from the park (in the street when it had been raining and the shoulder was muddy PW The 2015 Transportation Plan includes a walkway on 80th Ave from 188th St to OVD. Staff has submitted several grant applications for this project, but none have scored high enough to receive funding. This project will be included in the evaluation of walkway projects with the current Transportation Comprehensive Plan update. 63 VO Another was asking about why in PWT-68 the sidewalk improvements were not being made in concrete? My guess is that much of the existing is in okay shape and being left as is so rather than redoing whole project at much greater cost? Could you confirm this though? If it is just (or close to) the upgrade cost to cement, we should look at that. PW The preliminary scope of work for sidewalk replacement is to install concrete vertical curb and asphalt concrete sidewalk to replace the existing deteriorating asphalt concrete curb and sidewalk. Some sections of the sidewalk have been replaced with concrete sidewalk as part of private development work. During the design phase, staff will evaluate the cost difference between concrete and asphalt concrete sidewalk to determine if there is sufficient funding 64 VO The other comment that person made was about PWT 17 (making it a complete streets approach adding a short sidewalk to the Maplewood Hill park entrance). PW This segment of sidewalk can be added to the upcoming walkway evaluation as part of the Transportation Comprehensive Plan update. 65 DB I have heard this for a number of years about Olympic view Drive in terms of the speeding, but also in terms of the pedestrian safety on that intersection of OVD and 76 where we have the Edmonds parcels and then the one Lynnwood parcel? Is the state still giving out grant money for roundabouts? Would it be feasible to do a small roundabout at that location or would it be difficult because of the Lynnwood connection to that one parcel? m M u_ M Q M U rn N O N le N O N a 0 a M N O N O O •L M a M a a LL U I U a rn r d E t �a w a 0 E a Packet Pg. 362 8.1.i # CM Question/Response PW As part of the 2024 Transportation Plan, this existing / future intersection delay / Level of Service (LOS) at this intersection will be evaluated. For roadway projects with failing LOS (LOS E or LOS F in existing and / or out -years), the proposed improvements will be identified (roundabout is definitely a possibility / has been identified as alternative solution as part of prior plans). Those projects will then be ranked based on a set of different criteria. Considering this project will remain in the list of projects within the 2024 Transportation Plan (very good chance since existing LOS is LOS D), future grant applications could be submitted for this project. Anytime a grant funding opportunity comes out, the City determines which project from the list is the best candidate for submitting a grant application (not always the highest ranked project). Grant programs to improve intersection LOS and / or pedestrian safety frequently come up at the State and Federal level. Communication with Lynnwood would also be needed since this intersection is shared with Lynnwood. Packet Pg. 363 8.1.j Parks 2024-2029 Capital Program - Questions and Answers Updated as of. November 7, 2023, New items in blue Council- Q&A member (intial) Councilmember question or statement Staff response Budget program revision (if applicable) 1 DT P. 7 of six year fund overview: revenue is Page 7 is a continuation of the table at the shown as increasing by approx. $3m from bottom of page 6. On page 6 the revenue 2026 to 2027. What is the source of this breakdown shows the biggest difference is additional $3m? in "unsecured grants/funding". Specifically there is a large project programmed in 2027 which will require securing extra funding. The source of the funding is not yet determined, as is the case with most large projects in out years. This specific project is the construction of a new Parks/Facilities maintenance shop. In absence of funding, this project will likely continue to be bumped farther out in the schedule. As a reminder, the CIP/CFP is a planning document and not a budget document. It is important to list projects without funding to remain eligible for funding and keep on the planning horizon. Page 1 Packet Pg. 364 8.1.j 2 DT R-19: the narrative states "...erosion within (A) A study on the entire length of Shell (1319) Yost Park may impact spawning habitat." Creek within Yost Park is staff's Shell Creek Restoration Please revise to state "...within Yost Park recommended next step. This will help *rAIR ovFnR�NAIR D* that impacts spawning habitat." Also, the identify sources of erosion, more Stream health and erosion control of Shell narrative states "near term actions are effeciently prepare and submit for Creek in Yost Park, scope TBD based on needed to address severe erosion issues in necessary permits for any project in the study. Study in 2024, work in 2025. Funding the creek." We agree. However, waiting stream corridor including the weirs, bridges for 2024 TBD. until 2025 to begin remediation is a missed and trails for the entire length of the opportunity. Please consider updating this stream. It will also determine if the weir item to, at a minimum, reflect removal of removal is the highest priority and best the two concrete weirs in 2024 as a course of action for long-term stream proactive step toward minimizing health. Staff's professional opinion is the continued severe erosion and destruction most fiscally responsible approach is to of salmon spawning habitat. study the stream bed as a whole which would then enable all necessary projects (bridge replacement, trail enhancements, weir removal) to begin the over- and in - water repair work (and required permits) as prioritized by the study. (B) The Study is not currently funded due to a recent hold on all remaining 2023 unspent ARPA funded projects. 0 d r U_ Q M U rn N 0 N 4 N 0 N Q. 0 Q 0 0 ri N 0 N X a c 0 Cl r .Q 0 U Y L M IL .r a Page 2 Packet Pg. 365 8.1.j 2B Council Item: R19 (p. 12): Shell Creek Restoration Staff recommendation is to eliminate R9 (R19) Proposed change: This item requests tennis court resurfacing (project with Public Shell Creek Restoration approx.. $500k in funding for 2024 and Works in 2025), move R4 trail, bridge and *PARRVFO- RIMARW 2025 to study and remediate erosion boardwalk repair to R19 and add REET Stream health and erosion control of shell problems in Shell Creek within Yost Park. funds to allocate $250,000 for an Existing Creek in Yost Park, scope TBD based on $120k of that amount is programmed for Conditions Analysis of the entire length of study. Study existing condition analysis in 2024 for a professional study of this issue, Shell Creek in Yost Park. 2024. Design, permitting and construction with $380k programmed in 2025 for actual work in 2025. remediation work. However, apparently $ 74,300 R9 Tennis Court surfacing direction has been given by the $ 80,000 R4 Yost trail and bridges repair (R9, R4, R6, R11) Administration to remove the ARPA Yost Park & Pool funding for 2024 for the professional study. 95,700 REET funding Park enhancements, repair and Council does not agree with this, and $250,000 maintenance to include re -surface ^f *^^^ wishes the $120k to remain in this DP as it , is currently shown. Further, please revise ..S�Feplaeement On 2Q24 the project summary narrative to state playground and pool upgrades in 2025. "...stream silting issues caused by erosion within Yost Park impact salmon spawning (See Parks CIP/CFP Amendments as of habitat" rather than "...stream silting issues 11/8/2023 for full revisions) caused by erosion within Yost Park may impact salmon spawning habitat." Impact Project narrative (page 12 of the Parks on other projects: Council will vote in its CIP/CFP) was significantly revised to reflect 2024 budget deliberation on how to proposed changes of the Analysis and preserve $120k in funding for the restoration work. professional study of the critical erosion issues within Yost Park. Until Concil holds that vote, funding should continue to be shown in this item for 2024. a Page 3 Packet Pg. 366 8.1.j 2C DB R19 Shell Creek Restoration and DP 82 The CIP/CFP listed R19 as $120,000 funded See above - What is the total 2024 number? by ARPA and a carryforward from 2023. However, after the CIP/CFP was drafted, The CIP has the $120 carryforward ARPA funds were paused and no longer from 2023 but yet, DP 82 has $154,300 available. The corresponding DP was not and both seem to address Yost which if advanced in the Mayor's budget due to lack you read the CFP, some of the DP is of funding. captured in the text regarding second phase. Please reconcile this amount for us in addition to answering Dave Tetzel's questions. 3 DT R-7: the project summary doesn't describe R7 is the renovation of the existing (117) Olympic Beach Park Renewatien ^F what work is being done. Please expand to restroom. The scope of work specifics will a)(siting FestFeemsReplacement of failed state the scope of work. be determined closer to permitting and ventilation system in coordination with bidding process. Typically, this includes roof replacement (by PW - Facilties). improvments such as ADA compliance, replacement of fixtures, partitions, ventilation systems , etc. 3B DT Item: R7 ( p 14)—Olympic Beach Park CIP/CFP amendment motion passed during Moved one year earlier in CIP/CFP to 2024 (fishing pier restroom) Proposed change: 11/6/2023 Council meeting (design/permit) and 2025 (construction). This item requests approx. $53k for renovation of the fishing pier restroom. However, this project has been moved from 2024 back to 2025. Funding is fully secured via REET Fund 125. This restroom is heavily used by visitors to Olympic Beach and the fishing pier, and it is in strong need of renovation. Please move this item up to begin in 2024.. 0 2 r LL Q. M U 0 N 0 N It N 0 N Q. 0 Q 0 0 M N 0 N x a c 0 Cl 0 U Y L 0 IL .r a Page 4 Packet Pg. 367 8.1.j 4 DT D-20: I recall, when the Woodway Campus This project will have community outreach athletic fields were built in approx. 2015, and require a conditional use permit. To there was discussion of installing field meet the increased demand for athletic lighting. However, the residents living near field opportunities, it is more feasible to the field complained loudly that lighting light existing fields rather than building would be very intrusive, and the plan to new ones. This athletic field complex is add field lighting was shelved. Has significantly underutlized most of the year outreach been done to the residents living due to only being accessible a few hours near the field to resolve their concerns? after school until dark. As demontrated at Civic Field, modern lighting technology is very efficient, direct and limited to the playing field. 5 DT P2, D-13: will this project item be updated Yes, if a park is purchased in 2024, the goal if potential park/open space in SE Edmonds of the current plan would be to Master comes to fruition in 2024? The expense Plan the Park in 2025 and renovate in 2026. matrix shows expenditures in 2025 and The extend of the planning and 2026. improvements to provide access determined by the site conditions of the purchase. 6 DT P3 and D14: the estimated construction This estimate was developed as part of the costs for the Ebb Tide walkway seems feasibility process. The walkway has yet to extremely low. Please review this estimate be fully designed and there is still potential and update as appropriate. to work with the Ebb Tide. As such, it is too premature to pay for an engineers estimate for the project. The CIP/CFP is a planning document creating placeholders for projects up to six years on the horizon. This projects funding is unsecured and will likely require grant funding. .r a Page 5 Packet Pg. 368 8.1.j 7 DT R-16: the city installed an ADA-compliant When the playground at Seaview Park The Parks & Planning Board suggested playground at Seaview Park in approx. when the playground was built, pathway moving the 2028 restroom ADA compliance 2018. However, access by kids in improvements were made made. It is project to be a year or two earlier. wheelchairs is very difficult. In the project recognized, even with access from 184th justification for this item, the narrative and 185th which are more direct than the states "..make improvements to existing parking lot, there is opportunity for an parks as needed to ensure proper enhanced approached to the playground. maintenance, usability and quality of park This project is being considered in the 2024 features and grounds...." Requiring kids in city-wide improvement project list. In wheelchairs to travel across a grass field to addition, the draft CIP/CFP does list a 2028 access the playground equipment means improvement to replace the existing that playground is not as usable as is restroom (adjacent to the playground) to necessary. Please revise this item to show provide ADA complicance. improvements to access to the play equipment. As a point of clarification, the three points of access to the playground are all on paved surfaces and do not require children to travel across grass to reach the playground. 8 DT R-10: please specify in the project summary The "dog prohibited" signs are scheduled to that updated signage will include be installed this year, so excluded from the prominent signage at Brackett's Landing 2024 R-10 "Signage & Wayfinding" project. North that dogs are not allowed anywhere in that park, per the recent ordinance approved by Council. 9 VO Trash can and Service for trash pickup at OPERATING BUDGET SW county park by county or ILA with This would be a new program and would Snohomish county for us to be able to have require Council direction through a vote - a can there (city code says trash can at all either requesting the County to provide parks in edmonds) trash service or trash can service provided by City of Edmonds. Staff will need more direction to determine the level of service impacts to other city parks if Edmonds were to perform this service. 0 d r U_ .Q c� tU rn N O N 4 N O N .r Q. 0 Q 0 0 ri N O N X a c 0 Cl r .Q 0 U Y a a Page 6 Packet Pg. 369 8.1.j 10 1 VO (Volunteer coordinator 11A I VO 11B I VO Parks and Rec kiosk for renting paddle boards and kayaks at Lake Ballinger VO follow-up (10/26/2023) "I was referring to the Lake Ballinger (Edmonds side) boat launch when I made the inquiry about having paddle boards available to rent (like you have at Marina beach). OPERATING BUDGET This is a general fund expense proposed in the 2023 budget as a part time position for $42,249 per year. Staff supports the addition of this position. OPERATING BUDGET Clarification needed - hand -carry rental kiosk at the City of Edmonds Lake Ballinger access at McAleer Street or on Lake Ballinger through City of Mountlake Terrace? OPERATING BUDGET The kayak rental service at Marina Beach Park is provided through a vendor using a Request for Proposals (RFP) process. Vendors typically approach the city and submit through the RFP process based on their desire to locate their concessionaire It doesn't take much room, only seasonal Iservices at a particular park. The city has and no permanent fixtures. I know there are grant related restrictions but with the above characteristics it seems like it should be okay. Would it be worth trying? Wouldn't they just tell us to stop if the grantors had a problem with it?" not been approached to provide rental services at the McAleer Access (Lake Ballinger/Edmonds side). Page 7 Packet Pg. 370 8.1.j 12 VO Overhead signage and art at Bracketts Dogs prohibited signs are in process this landing to include Signage for marine year, the 2024 Signage and Wayfinding sanctuary and no dogs project in the CIP will address additional park signage. Art installation is lead by the Cultural Arts Division in the Cultural and Arts Services and Economic Development Department. 13 VO Safety lighting in areas we have been made This is a Public Works department project aware they are needed including by and it is listed in the PW CIP/CFP as a interurban trail lighting study as a first step. 14 VO Where is funding for lighting near See above. interurban trail? 15 VO improvements to Yost pool in 2025 are The pool will require a full tank replastering over 1M- should we make this investment project in 2025 (the last few were patches) without knowing outcome of decision Re and that will take a majority of the $1M. If landmark and possible aquatics center? the re -plastering is not completed, the pool (Yost replacement decision for another is no longer operational. There will be 24M is in 2029) additional information about the Landmark 99 project in 2024 that will available to inform the 2025 pool expenditures. 16 VO Do the dollars look right for Yost There are two projects that impact this considering the work needed there park, Project R19 which is the Shell Creek Restoration Project and the Yost Park & Pool Project (119, R4, R6 and R11). Without completing a Stream Study, it is difficult to determine all expenses until projects are identified. a Page 8 Packet Pg. 371 8.1.j 17 VO Moving the playfield lighting project to This project will require planning, 2027 from 2026 is disappointing. Any community engagement, design and option to move back? coordination with the Edmonds School District (which will more than likely manage the construction). Currently, funding is unsecured. RCO grant funding cycle is every two years, so application in 2026 and if successful, funds available in 2027 for construction. 18 VO Elm street playground - residents have Yes, revision to the to the description of (D16, D17, R14) asked for it to be a dog park. Where did the the Elm Street renovation in the final Elm Street Park specific improvements for this park (per the version of the CIP/CFP will note Park enhancements to include the addition CIP/CFP) come from? Can the desires of the consideration of a potential dog park of a natural playground, small shelter with local community for one amenity versus amenity (with public engagement). picnic tables, a+�d habitat restoration, and the other be verified before proceeding? consideration of a dog park amenity with public design process. 19 VO We have a lot of professional services Professional services encompass associated with deferred park maintenance contracted work such as tree abortist projects now that we have full time parks services, on -call maintenance services, as capital project manager (150k per year)? well as engineering, design, site surveys, geotech testing, etc. These services are necessary to provide required materials for project permits. 20 VO Is this the same amount as in past years This is actually an increase (previously $50K before we had this position? for both professional services and materials and equipment). With the Parks Capital Project Manager we are able to perform work that requires professional services and contractors to complete major maintenance projects that the parks maintenance crew does not skills or time capacity to do. 0 d r U_ Q M U rn N 0 N It N 0 N r., CL 0 Q 0 0 ri N 0 N X a c 0 Cl r .Q 0 U Y E IL a Page 9 Packet Pg. 372 8.1.j 21 VO Where are the Landmark and green belt The entire Landmark 99 project is not a proposals? parks capital project. However, there are park capital projects such as parkland acquisition, design and improvements as well as Interurban Trail expansion which could be part of the Landmark 99 project. Assuming the "green belt" proposal being referred to is the Edmonds Greenway Loop, that is not a project that is found in the Parks CIP/CFP, but either in Planning & Community Development (during project development) or Public Works (Street improvements) 22 VO I am noting that the Interurban trail Correct, the acquisition of easements or expansion is being put off to 2029 from property to expand the Interurban trail is 2028 even without adding the trails from long-term planning and identified as a green belt idea potential future project. At this time, that project is unfunded and may need grant funding to complete. 0 d r U_ Q M U rn N 0 N It N 0 N Q. 0 Q 0 0 ri N 0 N X a c 0 Cl r .Q 0 U Y L a .r a Page 10 Packet Pg. 373 8.1.j P3 and D14 Ebb Tide Section - remove Voted on by Council at 11/6/2023 meeting. entirely Motion did not pass. We have spent probably more than a million in attorney's fees on this project that we know will never happened because of environmental issues and/or costs and/or 23 DB equity issues that the money should be sent elsewhere and/or we have a work -around where the sidewalk between the two buildings can be painted or highlighted to afford those that need the ADA access can move easily on the East side of the three parcels and connect again at Olympic Beach. Add Interlocal Agreement with Snohomish OPERATING BUDGET County for Esperance Park for animal control and park maintenance (grass Animal control services are managed by the cutting) I realize that we are very short of Edmonds Police Department and this funding for new positions, but we could engage in workforce help via animal control request for services outside of the city for their dog park (which is heavily used by limits needs to be answered by EPD. Edmonds citizens) and grass cutting or minor assistance since we are leasing a Performing parks maintenance tasks place up there for the highway 99 area. outside of the City of Edmonds park system 24 DB Again, lots of Edmonds Citizens use this will require a decrease in levels of service park, heavily. for existing Edmonds parks and facilitites. As guidance for the Interlocal Agreement, please provide what maintenance services would be provided at Esperance Park and related estimated number of annual hours per service. In addition, please suggest what Edmonds parks will have decreased levels of service. 0 d r U_ Q M tU rn N 0 N It N 0 N r., Q. 0 Q 0 0 ri N 0 N X a c 0 Cl 'a 0 U Y L 0 IL a Page 11 Packet Pg. 374 8.1.k c M a as 2024-2029 CFP-CIP Amendments LL 1 .Q CFP-CIP Amendments N 0 N Project 2024 2029 N Item CFP CIP +, No. No. Project DP# Action Change 0 1 PWT-32 84th Ave Walkway (238th St — 234th St) New Program $75k in 2024 for Pre -design and Construction in 2025 Yes a 2 PWT-39 Citywide Bicycle Improvement Project 78 Revise narrative to clarify staff has assumed grant funds will be Yes M LO spent in 2023. o N 3 PWT-44 Downtown Lighting Improvements N/A Delete project from CFP-CIP Yes r" w 4 PWT-45 SR104/Pine St Walkway N/A Move expenditures/unsecured funds to 2029 Yes c (SR104 to Pine St & Pine St-9th Ave) Green Streets 236th St a 5 PWT-64 th (84 Ave — Hwy 99) N/A Move expenditures/unsecured funds to 2029 Yes a. 3 Add $20k in 2024 budget to upgrade existing restroom to CL U_ 6 PWF-10 Historical Museum New meet ADA compliance Yes 3: 7 PWT-50 238th St. SW Walkway N/A Move expenditures/unsecured funds to 2027 (design) and Yes a th (Hwy99 — 76 Ave) 2028 (construction) T" a� E 0T,dL fC rt+ Q CEO t t� w w Q Packet Pg. 375 2024-2029 SIX -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 8.1.1 Parks CIP/CFP Amendments as of 111812023 Project CFP Project Site & Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 6-Year Tot Shell Creek Restoration * * R19 Stream health and erosion control of shell Creek in Yost Park, scope TBD based $gin 099 $ 380,000 $ $ $ $ $ 630,0( on study. Study existing condition analysis in 2024. Design, permitting and $ 250,000 - - - - construction work in 2025. A9 Yost Park & Pool R4 Park enhancements, repair and maintenance to include resurface of tenRis courts rd trail bridge h r rs/reps -, rnp..t i.. ?n?n ,,G'us",, r 154,3A0 $ 1,296,400 $ $ $ $ $ 1,296,4( R6 @Rd arrtwalk R11 playground and pool upgrades in 2025. Olympic Beach Park $ 28 Qgg R7 ReRE)Vat'^^ of ^)('St'^^ restFoams. Replacement of failed ventilation system in $ 20,000 93,000 $ $ $ $ 53,0( $ 33,000 coordination with roof replacement (by Facilities/PW) Elm Street Park D1 6 Park enhancements to include the addition of a nature playground, D1 $ $ $ $ $ 100,000 $ 340,370 $ 440,3; small shelter with picnic tables a -Rd habitat restoration, and consideration of a R14 dog park amenity with public design process. Q Packet Pg. 376 8.1.m TEITZEL CIP/CFP AMENDMENTS Item: PWT-32 (P. 43): 84" Ave walkway from 2381h SW to 2341h SW Proposed change: The estimated project cost for this project is $1.5 million. Please revise this project to show design in 2024 with construction in 2025 (rather than 2027), with $750k in secured funding being transferred from PWT-69 and the remaining $750k funded by ARPA funds. Impact on other projects: Requires $750k of new funding to be identified for design/completion of the 7th Ave walkway (PWT 69) Item: PWT-39 (P. 49)—Citywide bicycle lanes Proposed change: The estimated project cost for the citywide bike lane project is $3 million. Yet, there is no discussion about this project being grant funded by a Sound Transit grant. Rather, it shows $15k in 2024 construction cost, to be funded by REET revenue. Please either revise this item to show the $15k cost funded by the Sound Transit grant with zero impact to REET, or explain that the entire $3 million was spent in 2023 and the $15k is residual cost that must be covered by city funds. Impact on other projects: N/A Item PWT-44 (p. 53)—Downtown Lighting Improvements Proposed change: This item requests approx. $1.6m in unsecured funding to install additional street lighting in downtown Edmonds in 2027 and 2028. The narrative does not provide sufficient justification for this investment. Please delete PWT-44 and reserve this funding for more urgent lighting improvements in other parts of Edmonds (such as Matthay Ballinger Park, the Interurban Trail, the north Edmonds/Meadowdale area, etc). If additional downtown lighting is determined to be needed, this request can be resubmitted at a later time with appropriate justification. Impact on other projects: This change frees up $1.6m in city resources for more urgent lighting improvements in Edmonds Packet Pg. 377 8.1.m Item PWT-45 (p. 54)—SR 104 walkway on Pine St. to 9th Proposed change: This item requests funding of $3.3 million for a new walkway with ADA-complaint curb ramps on Pine St. from SR 104 to 9th Ave. While a worthy concept, there are areas in Edmonds with no sidewalks at all (Pine St. already has sidewalks along most of its length from 9th Ave to SR 104). Also, the narrative for this item does not indicate its priority ranking. Please move this entire funding request back to 2029 until it can be ranked in priority order with other funding needs for sidewalks in Edmonds. Impact on other projects: This change frees up $3.3 million for use earlier in the planning period for other sidewalk priorities. Item: PWT-50 (p. 59)—sidewalk from 238th SW from SR 99 to 76th Ave W Proposed change: The estimated project cost for this project is $1.4 million, and is scheduled for the 2030-2044 time frame. It is ranked #10 in the long walkway priority list in the most recent Transportation Plan. Please move the schedule for this project up to begin in 2025. The Highway 99 subarea is undergoing redevelopment, this route is one of the primary walking/biking routes for residents of SE Edmonds to transit and amenities on SR 99, is a major walking/biking route to the soon -to -be improved Mathay Ballinger Park and will be a major walking/biking route to the new Edmonds access to the Ballinger Park. It is a dangerous walking route with insufficient or non-existent sidewalks and needs to be reprioritized for sooner sidewalk construction. Impact on other projects: Will require reprioritization of funding for capital projects elsewhere in Edmonds. Item: PWT-69 (p. 63)-7th Ave sidewalk project Proposed change: This item requests $750k in funding, and has now been advanced in the 2024 city budget to occur in 2024. The full $750k in funding has now been secured by Public Works from existing sources. Please remove the secured funding for this project and transfer it to PWT-32 (84th Ave. walkway from 238th St. SW to 230 St. SW). This project may stay in the CIP/CFP as it is currently shown, with design scheduled for 2027 and construction in 2028, with funding shown as "unsecured" Impact on other projects: Transfers secured funding of $750k to PWT-32 for 2024 construction costs of that project. Packet Pg. 378 8.1.m Item: PWT-51 (p 65)—ferry storage improvements from Pine St. to Dayton St Proposed change: This item requests $380k in unsecured funding to add vehicle storage for ferry users. However, this project involves restriping of a section of SR-104: a state highway. This project should not be shown as suggesting funding is a city obligation. Rather, it is a WSDOT obligation. Please modify this item to either show the funding source as a state grant or remove this item entirely from the CIP/CFP. Impact on other projects: Removes $380k from city funding obligations for 2027 so this funding can be dedicated to other city purposes. Item: PWT-64 (p. 72)—Green Streets 236th SW Proposed change: This item requests approx.. $3.5 million in funding for a green street project on 236th St. SW, with design beginning in 2025. This is premature and dedicates scarce city resources to a project that should take lower priority in favor of other high priority sidewalk installation projects. Please move funding for this project back to the 2030 category, with funding shown as "unsecured" Impact on other projects: Frees up $3.5 million for other high priority city sidewalk projects requiring investment in 2025 and 2026. Item: PWF-10 (p. 112): Historical Museum Proposed change: This item requests approx.. $75k in funding from 2024 through 2028 for upgrades and maintenance of the Edmonds museum building. However, there is no reference to the need for upgrades to the only restroom in the building to be ADA complaint (which it currently is not). Please add $20k in 2024 (showing as "unsecured funding" pending identification by Council of funding sources) in funding for this item to upgrade the restroom to bring it into ADA compliance. Impact on other projects: Requires identification of 2024 funding source for the additional $20k cost. 3 Packet Pg. 379 8.1.m Item: R19 (p. 12): Shell Creek Restoration Proposed change: This item requests approx.. $500k in funding for 2024 and 2025 to study and remediate erosion problems in Shell Creek within Yost Park. $120k of that amount is programmed for 2024 for a professional study of this issue, with $380k programmed in 2025 for actual remediation work. However, apparently direction has been given by the Administration to remove the ARPA funding for 2024 for the professional study. Council does not agree with this, and wishes the $120k to remain in this DP as it is currently shown. Further, please revise the project summary narrative to state "...stream silting issues caused by erosion within Yost Park impact salmon spawning habitat" rather than "...stream silting issues caused by erosion within Yost Park may impact salmon spawning habitat." Impact on other projects: Council will vote in its 2024 budget deliberation on how to preserve $120k in funding for the professional study of the critical erosion issues within Yost Park. Until Concil holds that vote, funding should continue to be shown in this item for 2024. Item: R7 ( p 14)—Olympic Beach Park (fishing pier restroom) Proposed change: This item requests approx. $53k for renovation of the fishing pier restroom. However, this project has been moved from 2024 back to 2025. Funding is fully secured via REET Fund 125. This restroom is heavily used by visitors to Olympic Beach and the fishing pier, and it is in strong need of renovation. Please move this item up to begin in 2024.. Impact on other projects: n/a 2 Packet Pg. 380 8.1.n 1. Bond maintenance projects. A big issue that seems to have fallen through the cracks is how many of projects in 2023 and then in 2024 will qualify for the bond maintenance ordinance? Last year (May 2023) you gave CM Chen and I over $1.2MM in repairs that would qualify? Dave Turley says none of the bond money has been used since issuance in 2121? Please help us understand this issue on this issue and has your total costs of items on your list since last year increased? In DP 63, it appears that $660K was a total given that would quality - is this accurate reflection or is there more? 2. 3. PWT-64 Green Streets - remove entirely I am recommending removing this entire PWT as it is not only premature but we have no code. I have consistently asked for code since Green Streets appeared in the budget in 2121 and have been ignored. Instead an expense "manual" was created" to provide examples of Green Streets but manual are not code and enforcement cannot happen. We have heard consistentlyto have more sidewalks and that is a lot of money (regardless if partially funded by grants) and Council must START looking at the costs to our taxpayer's utility rates for expensive projects like this one. 3. P3 and D14 Ebb Tide Section -remove entirely We have spent probably more than a million in attorney's fees on this project that we know will never happened because of environmental issues and/or costs and/or equity issues that the money should be sent elsewhere and/or we have a work -around where the sidewalk between the two buildings can be painted or highlighted to afford those that need the ADA access can move easily on the East side of the three parcels and connect again at Olympic Beach. 4. R19 Shell Creek Restoration and DP 82 -What is the total 2024 number? The CIP has the $120 carryforward from 2023 but yet, DP 82 has $154,300 -and both seem to address Yost which if you read the CFP, some of the DP is captured in the text regarding second phase. Please reconcile this amount for us in addition to answering Dave Tetzel's questions. 5. PWT 67 and DP 83 Waterfront Emergency- is this a carryforward? These funds are coming from REET or so the DP states. Why would this not come from Transportation Impact fees? Packet Pg. 381 8.1.n 6. PWT 32 - 8411 AVE walkway- move timeline up to 2024-2025 We have heard a lot about this busy street and the lack of sidewalks or having sidewalks on the wrong side of the street away from bus stop? Let's try and get this right and I know for a while the sidewalk issue was going to be picked up by the developer - which fell through. 7. PWP 02 Carbon Recovery Project -reject this cost to complete as is this not an all- inclusive build? This entire project is becoming clearly a expensive mess and Council is not up to date about the all -in contract that was approved. If we need to have an executive session on this fine, but I cannot believe the amount of time and costs we have spent on this project and it's just now being operational. Also, was there not a management fee included? This is all too confusing to me and the City of Edmonds' utility ratepayers should not be required to pay for their errors. 8. R7 Olympic Beach Park - move entire $53K to 2024 We have heard numerous complaints regarding this restroom both from citizens and the Port. There is no reason why this project cannot be prioritized to accommodate getting both the planning and construction done in one year. 9. Add InterlocalAgreement with Snohomish County for Esperance Park for animal control and park maintenance (grass cutting) Packet Pg. 382 8.1.0 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM OVERVIEW Packet Pg. 383 8.1.0 TABLE OF CONTENT CapitalImprovement Program Purpose............................................................................................................................3 Introduction.......................................................................................................................................................................3 CapitalPlanning Policies....................................................................................................................................................3 AssetPreservation.........................................................................................................................................................4 Project Cost Estimate Review and Validation Process...................................................................................................5 Capital Improvement Program Funding.............................................................................................................................5 DebtFinancing...............................................................................................................................................................5 Public Utility Funding (Enterprise Funds).......................................................................................................................6 RealEstate Excise Tax (REET).........................................................................................................................................6 Edmonds's Recent History — New Revenue Sources and Debt Finance.........................................................................6 NewRevenue Sources...............................................................................................................................................6 DebtFinancing...........................................................................................................................................................7 Funding Dynamics for Significant Future Capital Projects.................................................................................................7 PublicSafety Facilities....................................................................................................................................................7 Transportation...............................................................................................................................................................7 Projects......................................................................................................................................................................8 Utilities...........................................................................................................................................................................8 CurrentProjects.........................................................................................................................................................9 2024-2029 Proposed Capital Improvement Program Summary......................................................................................10 2024-2029 Proposed CIP by Department....................................................................................................................10 Background of Capital Improvement Program Policy Drivers.........................................................................................11 City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan.........................................................................................................................11 UtilitiesMaster Plans...................................................................................................................................................11 Comprehensive Transportation Plan...........................................................................................................................11 Federal and State Regulatory Requirements...............................................................................................................12 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan.................................................................................................12 ClimateAction Plan......................................................................................................................................................13 Packet Pg. 384 8.1.0 The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is a six -year financial planning tool that identifies future capital investments and potential strategies for funding those investments. The CIP also satisfies various requirements of city planning under Washington State's Growth Management Act. The City of Edmonds owns and operates a variety of physical assets, ranging from community parks, roadways, and public facilities including, City Hall a library building, fire stations, maintenance yard and wastewater treatment plant, utilities infrastructure and more. The City must properly maintain these assets to ensure they are safe, lasting, and provide a welcoming and usable space to serve their intended purposes. The City's capital infrastructure supports City operations, direct public services and programs, and in some cases, provides direct public benefits themselves. Every year during the annual budget process, the city adopts a six -year CIP, which outlines anticipated investments over that timeframe. The 2024-2029 Proposed CIP totals $301.7 million over six years, with approximately $22.1 million of that amount designated for the 2024 budget year. CAPITAL PLANNING POLICIES The City has historically based capital planning efforts on a set of criteria that help set priorities among potential capital programs. Each department has its own policies to prioritize projects based on Council Priorities and specific department needs. Specifically for public works, Facilities, Transportation and Utility infrastructure the department utilizes a number of planning documents including the Comprehensive Transportation Plan, Comprehensive Water System Plan, Comprehensive Sewer Plan, Storm and Surface Water Comprehensive Plan and Facilities condition assessment, other planning documents include the ADA transition plan. For the Public Infrastructure Public works primary goal is to protect the city's investment by maintaining its assets and investing at the right time. Most capital assets when properly maintained can continue to provide a high level of service throughout their life, but if not maintained it can turn into the proverbial money pit, in which minimum investment reduces the level of service and require higher cost to bring back to adequate level of service. The criteria used to prioritize projects include: • Risk to Health, Safety and Environment and Regulatory or Mandated Requirement • Asset Condition, Annual Recurring Costs and Asset Longevity • Level and Quality of Service • Sustainability and Conservation • Funding Availability • Project Readiness Packet Pg. 385 8.1.0 Multiple Category Benefit and Bundling Opportunities Preserve and maintain existing Capital Assets Support the goals of the City's Plans Support Economic Development Seek regional funding for Regional Projects Pursue cost -saving commitments; and, Pursue conservation and sustainability investments. ASSET PRESERVATION Legend 2022 Pavement Condition 70-65 i 60 - 70 50-60 40-50 >5-40 0 - '5 Network Average 66 tTy "NNWOOD T� ',_._ I d r MOUNTLAKE Y TERRACE 10x..W , 1 � 1 W.r Asset Preservation studies are required for all utilities, the city also completes these for facilities and pavement system. The studies include analysis to determine the condition of the asset and predict the level of deterioration of all systems. This results in the recommended level of investment on preservation efforts and in some cases the replacement schedule for an asset. 4 Packet Pg. 386 8.1.0 As result of facilities condition assessment, the council approved a bond to invest in the backlog of facilities maintenance and is expected that it will take 2-3 years to complete recommended projects. The utilities teams continuously rate the infrastructure, for example the operations team perform video inspection of sewer and storm drainpipes and rates those to update the on -going annual replacement program and performs leak detection of the water system to identify what pipes are failing and plan for the repair or replacement. The team also tracks age of all systems and failures to determine what must be replaced to prevent emergency repair and higher costs. The pavement preservation program is completed every other year and provides the condition of our network and generates the recommended investment to maintain our network in a safe and reliable condition. The most current Pavement Condition Index (PCI). PROJECT COST ESTIMATE REVIEW AND VALIDATION PROCESS Estimated cost for CIP is a difficult process that requires extensive due diligence to adequately reflect the expected cost of a project. The first year is the most accurate while years 2-3 can be costs based on conceptual or early designs and years 4-6 can be only a rough order of magnitude based on conceptual design or other engineering knowledge of similar project costs in our area. In general, as projects get closer to construction the estimates improve as designs get finalized and estimates include the most recent cost factors that can affect a project. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FUNDING Like all municipalities, Edmonds relies on a variety of sources to pay for capital projects. These include locally generated revenues (taxes, fees, voter -approved levies, utility rates, and user fees), intergovernmental revenues (including state and federal grants), private funding (franchise utilities, philanthropy) and debt issuance. These traditional sources continue to provide the majority of funding for capital facility investments. The City's level of capital investment is based on the mix and amount of financial resources available to the City. DEBT FINANCING For public works projects the city traditionally has used debt finance only for projects that are not part of the normal maintenance or planned replacement program. These projects include high -cost projects or programs to meet new regulatory requirements or projects that require significant investment and new or unexpected needs, examples of this are the replacement of the incinerator at the wastewater treatment plant and the seismic upgrades to the Yost and Seaview water reservoirs, in both cases the debt payment is built into the utility rate fees. Other financed projects must be repaid from the same limited resources used to fund the operation and maintenance of the specific infrastructure, for example facilities maintenance projects use the same general fund sources to pay that debt. Packet Pg. 387 8.1.0 PUBLIC UTILITY FUNDING (ENTERPRISE FUNDS) Edmonds Water, Wastewater and Storm drain projects are funded with revenues from utility rates (Enterprise Funds). Each utility is in the process of drafting, and eventually adopting, formal financial policies that determine what share of their capital investments are funded through cash, and what share from debt. Currently, the annual utility upgrades, maintenance and replacement projects are financed through cash since this annual investment needs to be made in perpetuity. This provides a measured process to ensure long term system reliability for the respective utility and at the same time helps decrease the volatility of utility rate increases due to inflationary factors and decreases in maintenance and upkeep levels. Large projects like the reservoir improvements or the replacement of the incinerator at the WWTP will be financed from debt. REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX (REET) Funding of the City's general government capital program is highly dependent on revenue from Real Estate Excise Tax, which is an excise tax imposed on the sale of real property. REET is a relatively volatile revenue source that generally tracks closely to local economic activity. REET funds are shared between Public Works and Parks, Public Works uses these primarily to fund the pavement preservation program. In addition to fuel tax and general funds, REET revenue has been a significant source to fund the pavement preservation program. Over the last few years general fund contributions have declined, causing the pavement preservation program to invest only a fraction of what is recommended. The effects of reduced preservation efforts are not immediately evident, but the City is starting to see those impacts in current pavement condition index, declining from mid-70's to mid-60's. EDMONDS'S RECENT HISTORY — NEW REVENUE SOURCES AND DEBT FINANCE In addition to reliance upon general tax sources, Edmonds has recently taken major capital projects that required debt finance. Projects include improvements to Civic Field, construction of a new system to replace the incinerator at the wastewater treatment plant, and facilities backlog of maintenance and repair needs. The following is a list recent funding sources that contribute to the CIP and projects that are expected to be financed with debt. NEW REVENUE SOURCES • Vehicle tab fees: The vehicle tab fee was increased from $20 to $40; this provides for approximately $700K increase per year that is used to fund the in-house maintenance and preservation efforts of our street infrastructure, this increase is a welcome revenue to keep up with the costs of growth of our infrastructure and systems and increased salaries, materials, and equipment costs. While it is not directly contributing to our annual pavement preservation program it provides some relief by providing ongoing maintenance and repair and preventing Packet Pg. 388 8.1.0 significant degradation of our roadway infrastructure. As our preservation program continues to struggle with adequate funding it is critical that funding for our in-house crews is available, the less invested in preservation the more the city will have to invest in frequent calls for repairs. • Utility Rate Fees: Utilities rates studies are completed every three years to keep up with the cost of inflation, regulatory requirements, and infrastructure repair or replacement needs. During the last four years the average increase has been 4.37% for water, 5% for Storm drain and 8.12% for Sewer. DEBT FINANCING • Reservoir Improvements: It is expected that debt finance will be required for the repairs and improvements necessary for this project. • Nutrient Removal (WWTP): This is a long-term project that will require significant changes to the treatment process and will require debt financing. Given general resource funding challenges, the City will continue to rely on mix of general government resources, grants, and debt funding packages to complete major capital projects and to secure needed funding for basic asset preservation. The City has identified several major priority areas for which significant capital investments will be needed. The following sections describe these priority areas at a high level. PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES Planning for the future of Edmonds's public safety facilities is critical to maintaining the high level of service expected of Edmonds Police Department (EPD). The department has grown significantly and outgrown the existing facility, in addition there is a need to establish a facility that better serves the area around HWY 99 and options for that are being explored. This includes neighborhood precinct projects that will accommodate police staffing growth. TRANSPORTATION The City's existing transportation network faces an extensive backlog of major maintenance. Current funding is insufficient to maintain the City's roads, traffic signals, signs, etc. In addition, the city is in the process of updating the Transportation Comprehensive Plan. This will provide better CIP needs for investments in a transit network, bicycle facilities, and pedestrian -oriented infrastructure. As funding becomes available the city will need to update the ADA transition plan and find funding sources to make progress on correcting ADA deficiencies. Over the last five years with a combination of strategies including grant funding and bundling of ADA projects in our pavement preservation the city has made significant improvement, updating approximately 10% of the identified deficiencies, however at that rate it will take 50 years to correct all deficiencies. Packet Pg. 389 8.1.0 PROJECTS • Highway 99 Corridor: This is the City's largest project — the Highway 99 Corridor — Gateway project is a multiyear project. Highway 99 is a key regional corridor that extends into Edmonds from 244th Street SW to 210th Street SW. It is comprised of a 2.25-mile stretch of Highway 99 (a state highway) and the land area around it. Parts of this corridor are adjacent to the jurisdictions of Shoreline, Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, and Snohomish County. It is also within WSDOT's limited access at the SR 104 interchange. The City of Edmonds has been working with the community, business owners, and other stakeholders on planning for the future revitalization of the Highway 99 Corridor for several years now. Several major projects have been undertaken toward revitalizing this corridor. • Pedestrian Safety: The Pedestrian Safety Program is designed to assist City staff in responding to resident concerns related to improving pedestrian safety at specific locations throughout the City. The Implementation of a pedestrian safety program allows local pedestrian concerns to be addressed, with the goal of improving pedestrian safety and increasing the number of pedestrians using our non -motorized transportation facilities. • Traffic Calming: The City of Edmonds Traffic Calming Program is designed to assist residents and City staff in responding to neighborhood traffic issues related to speeding, cut -through traffic, and safety. Implementation of a traffic calming program allows local traffic concerns to be addressed consistently, and traffic calming measures to be efficiently developed and put into operation. • Pavement Preservation: Our in-house street maintenance and operations crew perform maintenance for all transportation systems, these include pavement repairs, striping for all roads, striping on all city crosswalks and maintenance of streetlights and signs. In addition to this work the city evaluates pavement condition as part of our asset management program to determine what sections of our pavement require additional pavement preservation treatments, most will be pavement overlays. This program has been underfunded as the funding sources (Fuel tax, REET, and GF) are not enough to fund the recommended amount to maintain our road network in good condition. Investing now will save money later, as regular maintenance extends the lifetime of pavement. If pavement condition declines too much, the roadways require rebuilding — which is both costly and disruptive to traffic flow. UTILITIES The utilities enterprise funds are used for all utilities projects, both cash and financed projects. In addition to enterprise funds, the city seeks grants for some utilities projects that have significant environmental benefits and are competitive on grants. Two examples are the Perrinville Creek and Edmonds March projects. • Carbon Recovery Project: The City Wastewater Treatment Plant is nearing the completion of the Carbon Recovery Project; this project replaces the old incinerator. Packet Pg. 390 8.1.0 • Nutrient Removal Project: To stop the flow of nitrogen pollution and improve the health of Puget Sound, the Department of Ecology is requiring wastewater treatment plants to monitor discharges, optimize operations, and plan for infrastructure investments. Excess nitrogen is the main pollutant causing low, unhealthy oxygen levels in Puget Sound, and a cascade of problems for fish and other marine life. The Department of Ecology is in the process of establishing new nutrient removal standards for all Puget Sound wastewater treatment plans. To meet the new standards the Edmonds plant will require significant treatment process modifications, initial studies have been completed and further research is required to select the right alternative for the plant. the Peugeot sound will have to comply with new nutrient removal standards, this will require significant investment to meet the new requirements. • Perrinville Creek restoration: This is a multiyear restoration project necessary to restore the habitat in the creek and prevent as much as possible the flooding of the neighboring properties and scouring of the creek bed. The project establishes fish passage structures in two locations, establishes a new alignment for the creek, and allows full surface flow to the sound. The project relies on a combination of funding sources including stormwater fund and grants. • Reservoir repairs: The city has completed upgrades to two above grade reservoirs. In addition, a recent inspection and condition assessment resulted in required seismic upgrades to the two below ground concrete reservoirs. The projects will be designed in 2024 with the goal to complete construction in 2025-2026. • Edmonds Marsh: The city is working with the state to potentially purchase the Unocal property and eventually restore the entire marsh as a true estuary with improved fish habitat and to mitigate flooding in the surrounding area. CURRENT PROJECTS The largest project —the Carbon Recovery project —construct a new system to replace the incinerator and is nearing completion. Annual pipe replacement projects for water and sewer systems and annual projects to update or improve the stormwater system are planned every year to keep up with the need to replace systems that are past their life expectancy that have records of failure or need additional capacity. FUNDING All utility projects are funded by the respective utility's Enterprise fund. The funds are generated from monies collected from each user of the respective utility. These projects are either cash financed (e.g., annual replacement/rehab projects) or financed via bonds for larger multi -year capital projects. Packet Pg. 391 8.1.0 The 2024-2029 Proposed CIP totals $250 million for six years and includes approximately 60 projects Approximately $87 million of the six -year total, or 35 %, are utility projects funded by utility rates. The Edmonds Transportation's CIP totals $152 million (61%) over the six -year period, and Facilities total is $9.7 Million (4%). 2024-2029 PROPOSED CIP BY DEPARTMENT Department 2023 Adopted 2024 Proposed 2023- 2027Proposed CIP 2024-2029 Proposed CIP Total Storm Water $ 3,236,843 $ 3,545,390 $ 23,781,768 $ 25,962,233 Sewer $ 2,692,439 $ 2,960,498 $ 25,128,359 $ 26,016,498 Water $ 3,041,128 $ 4,811,000 $ 25,016,658 $ 35,984,000 Utilities Total $ 8,970,410 $ 11,316,888 $ 73,926,785 $ 87,962,731 Transportation $ 10,750,891 $ 6,612,273 $165,922,741 $ 152,670,373 Facilities $ 1,367,539 $ 1,183,845 $ 12,206,046 $ 9,758,635 Total $ 21,088,8401 $ 19,113,006 $252,055,572 $ 250,391,739 2024-2029 Proposed CIP Total $9,758,635 , 4% ■ Utilities Total ■Transportation Facilities 2023 & 2024 $12,000 $10,000 t $8,000 H $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 .�c ■ 2023 Adopted ■ 2024 Proposed Note: 2021 Adopted totals are based on the 2024-2029 Adopted CIP. Not all funds above are appropriated; see the 2024 Proposed Budget for a list of capital appropriations by department. 10 Packet Pg. 392 8.1.0 As described above, City investments in capital projects are guided by a set of key policies reflecting the City's values and priorities. These policies shape how the City takes care of buildings and infrastructure, invests in capital projects in areas that have accepted growth as envisioned in the City's Comprehensive Plan, preserves the City's buildings, supports sustainable building practices, and ensures that all members of the community have access to the economic opportunities capital projects create. The following section details some of these key policies. CITY OF EDMONDS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan is a 20-year vision and roadmap for Edmonds's future. The plan guides City decisions on where to focus development for new jobs and households, how to improve our transportation system, and where to make capital investments such as utilities, sidewalks, and other public facilities. The Plan is the framework for most of Edmonds's big -picture decisions on how to grow. The latest update of the City's Comprehensive Plan was completed in 2020. The City began the process of updating its Comprehensive Plan in 2023 and the work is scheduled to be complete in 2024. The current Comprehensive Plan helped inform the development of the 2024-2029 Proposed CIP. This effort is intended to make sure areas receiving growth have the appropriate physical infrastructure to accommodate such growth, while balancing the major maintenance of existing facilities, such as adequate transportation systems, utilities, and other public facilities. UTILITIES MASTER PLANS The three utilities have plans to ensure the utility is keeping up with the growth and is being properly operated to ensure its safety and reliability, the three plans are: Comprehensive Water System Plan, Comprehensive Sewer Plan, Storm and Surface Water Comprehensive Plan COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN The Comprehensive Transportation Plan was updated in July 2015 and the previous Transportation Plan was completed in 2009. The plan includes both short-range and long-range strategies that will lead to the development of an integrated multimodal transportation system that facilitates the safe and efficient movement of people and goods, while addressing current and future transportation demand as well as land use. The plan identifies all existing conditions for the various modes of transportation, as well as proposed safety and mobility improvements. Those projects consist of projected improvements through 2035 (20-year plan), including roadway (intersection and corridor), transit, and non -motorized 11 Packet Pg. 393 8.1.0 improvements. The document conforms with all requirements for comprehensive planning listed in the Washington State Growth Management Act Chapter 36.70A.RCW and is consistent with PSRC Transportation 2040. FEDERAL AND STATE REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS The City's utilities have several facility projects in their Capital Improvement Programs to meet federal and state regulatory requirements. The City of Edmonds must abide by the City's two National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, one for storm water and one for our publicly owned treatment works (POTW permit) for the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). The City is required, for example, to invest in the WWTP/storm water system to control and meet state and federal requirements for city generated flows into receiving bodies of water, including creeks and Puget Sound. This work is necessary to meet Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Ecology (DOE) requirements, regarding sewage releases from the city conveyance system. AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) TRANSITION PLAN In an effort to make the City of Edmond's public right-of-way facilities accessible to all, the City is in engaged in developing an American with Disabilities Act (ADA) ADA transition plan for the Public Right -of -Way. The ADA Transition Plan for the Right -of -Way demonstrates the City of Edmond's commitment to providing equal access to all its public programs, services, facilities, and activities for citizens with disabilities. This plan is focused on pedestrian access routes within the right-of-way and includes sidewalks, curb ramps, street crossings, driveway crossings, rail crossings, hazards, and pedestrian activated signal systems. The Plan includes the following: Program accessibility guidelines, standards, and resources Physical obstacles that limit the accessibility of facilities to individuals with disabilities Methods to be used to make the facilities accessible Prioritization and scheduling process Estimated budget for barrier removal Identification of the ADA Coordinator Public outreach process for plan development • ADA grievance procedure 12 Packet Pg. 394 8.1.0 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN In 2010, the City adopted its first Climate Action Plan (CAP) to substantially reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The City hired local consultants in 2018 to prepare a new GHG inventory and advise the City on updating its CAP for 2023 and beyond. This updated plan focuses on the most important steps Edmonds can take to address climate change. City Council adopted the 2023 Climate Action Plan on March 21st, 2023, via Resolution 1518. The 2023 Plan serves as Edmonds' guide to climate neutrality for municipal and community greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. This goal aligns with the maximum average global temperature increase of 1.5°C/2.7°F aspired to in the 2016 Paris Climate Accords. 13 Packet Pg. 395 8.1.p ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE 2024-2029 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AS AMENDMENTS TO THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN ELEMENT OF THE EDMONDS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, on September 19, 2023, staff presented the proposed 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan & Capital Improvement Program in a joint meeting with the City Council and Planning Board; and WHEREAS, on October 10, 2023, a public hearing was held for this item; and WHEREAS, on October 24, 2023, this item was forwarded to a future City Council meeting for further discussion; and WHEREAS, on November 6, 2023, City Council continued discussion and approved amendments to the proposed 2024-2029 CFP-CIP documents; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, City Council continued discussion on the proposed 2024-2029 CFP-CIP documents; and WHEREAS, the City Council expressly finds that, consistent with RCW 36.70A.130, the adoption of these amendments to the Capital Facilities Plan are the only 2023 amendments to the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan, thereby satisfying the general rule requiring concurrent review of all amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, NOW THEREFORE -1- Packet Pg. 396 8.1.p THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Capital Facilities Plan element of the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended to incorporate the 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan and Capital Improvement Program to read as set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth herein. Section 2. 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, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: LI-M, JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. APPROVED: MAYOR MIKE NELSON -2- Packet Pg. 397 8.1.p SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2023, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE 2024- 2029 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AS AMENDMENTS TO THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN ELEMENT OF THE EDMONDS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2023. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY 4814-2355-3038,v. I -3- Packet Pg. 398 8.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/5/2023 Landmark 99 Option Amendment Staff Lead: Susan McLaughlin and Todd Tatum Department: Community Services Preparer: Todd Tatum Background/History On June 27th, 2023, the City Council voted to authorize the Mayor to sign an Option to Purchase (Option) an approximately 10-acre property along the intersection of SR 104 and Highway 99, commonly known as the Burlington property. City staff has engaged the community to ask: what is possible on the site, what are community concerns and what civic uses should be prioritized? The feedback from these meetings, along with a community poll, informed the three potential site design options which have been included in the packet. The site designs exemplify how much development this property could yield and how the program could achieve a mix of uses, including a variety of civic space. The current option agreement consists of several key components and milestones: 1. The option term commenced on the effective date and expires on December 31, 2024 unless executed. 2. The consideration for this Option is $100,000. Within 180 days of the effective date, the city must negotiate a Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA) and REPLACE it as Exhibit B in the Option. If not done, the Option will terminate and the $100,000 consideration will return to the City. 3. The current Option may be exercised at any time but must be exercised by December 31, 2024. Upon exercising the Option, the city must pay $1,000,000 in earnest money, whereupon the city enters into several contingencies. *This timing is extended to March 31, 2025 in the amendment. 4. Closing shall occur on or before June 30, 2025. *This timing is extended to September 30, 2025 in the amendment. A factor in the existing Option Agreement is a clause which states that we (the purchaser) may assign all or part of our interest in the Purchase Agreement, but that if we assign our right to purchase to another, they must agree that at least 75% of the acreage of the property will be used for public purposes. Council Members expressed concern over this language. Staff approached the property owner with these concerns, and the property owner was willing to dramatically change this language. Upon the Mayor signing the Option, staff created a project plan which: Packet Pg. 399 8.2 1. Focuses on creating the conditions to form a public -private partnership. 2. Focuses on reducing the purchase and construction costs to the city. 3. Maximizes the public uses available, given the constraints on the city's budget. 4. Gets the answers city leaders need to make decisions throughout the life of the Option. As required by the Option Agreement, staff and the city's legal team began negotiating with the property owner on the terms of the PSA. Those negotiations have proceeded smoothly and collaboratively. Some key details from the negotiations are: The property owner agreed to give an additional three months to the Option, pushing the date the Option must be exercised (and $1,000,000 earnest money deposited) to March 31, 2025, and closing to September 30, 2025. This gives the city an additional 3 months to plan and develop partnerships. The property owner agreed to change the "75/25" language in the "Assignments" section of the Option. This language reads "an assignment of the Purchaser's entire interest in the Agreement shall only be allowed if the assignee is a public entity." This language allows the city to assign an amount less than all of the property to a potential partner. Staff issued a Request for Expression of Interest to the development community, with responses due November 30th. These responses will help us to gauge the likelihood of the city attracting partners which will help us achieve our vision. Staff requested funds from Snohomish County to help defray the expenses associated with the project. Work must be done to define the details of the potential grant. That being said, the target amount is $75,000 to be available in 2024. City Council approved Ordinance 4159 in September of 2019 which authorizes participating cities to receive a small portion of the State's sales tax revenue for certain housing purposes. This is a fund source that can be used for acquiring or constructing affordable housing, amongst other allowances. The fund has accrued approximately $300,000 which would be available to use in 2024 for expenditures on this project. Before December 31, 2023, the city must do the following to continue into 2024 with the Option: 1. Negotiate a purchase and sale agreement. 2. Authorize the Mayor to sign an amended Option attaching the negotiated PSA as Exhibit B, and amending the timeline and "assignment clause" language. This action will be brought before Council on December 5th. This action will result in the extension of the Option through close of escrow, or about 21 months. Staff Recommendation Packet Pg. 400 8.2 Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor to sign the amended Option, which includes the Purchase and Sale Agreement as an Exhibit, in order to allow for further consideration and due diligence on the property. Narrative The decision requested on December 5th accomplishes the two technical objectives discussed in the Background section above. The larger context, however, given a vote to proceed with the Option, is that staff will continue with the project plan. The key components of this are: 1. Advertise a Request for Proposals (RFP) to the development community seeking a partner in the purchase and construction of the site. 2. Select a partner, or partners. 3. Continue to master plan the site. 4. Negotiate a Development Agreement which outlines the terms of the agreement and the public benefits to be provided through development. 5. Negotiate the assignment of a portion of our right to purchase to the developer/s. 6. Develop, and secure approval for, a financing plan based off of the items negotiated in the Development Agreement and any net costs. This project plan requires continued outreach and communication with community members throughout the phases and key milestones. Community members will have opportunities to participate if the master planning process continues, and provide feedback as the financing strategy is developed. Council will have several opportunities to vote on the items in the project plan above, and to receive public feedback in an open meeting. Attachments: Addendum and Amendment to Option Agreement Negotiated Purchase and Sale Agreement Original Burlington Coat Factory Option to Purchase Packet Pg. 401 8.2.a ADDENDUM AND AMENDMENT TO OPTION AGREEMENT between Eastern Investment Corporation and Southeast 888 Investment LLC and CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON dated as of December 6, 2023 Packet Pg. 402 ADDENDUM AND AMENDMENT TO OPTION AGREEMENT This ADDENDUM AND AMENDMENT TO OPTION AGREEMENT ("Addendum") dated as of the day of December, 2023 is an addendum to and amends the July 1, 2023 Option Agreement ("Agreement") between EASTERN INVESTMENT CORPORATION, a Washington Corporation and SOUTHEAST 888 INVESTMENT LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company (collectively "Optionor"), and CITY OF EDMONDS, a Washington municipal corporation ("Optionee"). WHEREAS, the parties have negotiated the complete Purchase Agreement contemplated in Section 4(a) of the Agreement, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements set forth herein and in the Agreement and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Addendum. As contemplated in Section 4(a) of the Agreement, Exhibit B to the Agreement is hereby converted into and replaced by the Purchase Agreement set forth in Exhibit A to this Addendum. The execution of this Addendum signifies that the parties have completed the negotiation of the Purchase Agreement. This Addendum does not constitute Optionee's exercise of the Option. If Optionee exercises the Option during the Option Term, the parties will be obligated to execute the Purchase Agreement as Exhibit A hereto pursuant to Section 4 of the Agreement. With the mutual execution of this Addendum, the Option Payment becomes nonrefundable. 2. Option Term Amended. Section 2 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in stfikethr-oug ): The term of the Option (the "Option Term") shall commence on the Effective Date and automatically expire at 11:59 pm PACIFIC TIME Deeember-1, 2024March 31, 2025 (the "Option Termination Date"), unless duly extended, exercised, or sooner terminated as provided for in this Agreement. 3. Optionee's Right to Inspect Amended. Section 7 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in tr-ikethfo gh): (a) In conducting inspections related to due diligence or feasibility or otherwise accessing the Property, Optionee shall at all times comply with all laws and regulations of all applicable governmental authorities. In connection with such inspections, neither Optionee nor any of Optionee's representatives shall: (i) unreasonably interfere with or permit unreasonable interference with any person occupying or providing service at the Property; or (ii) unreasonably interfere with the business of Optionor (or any of its tenants) conducted at the Property or unreasonably disturb the use or occupancy of any occupant of the Property. (b) Optionee shall schedule and coordinate all inspections or other access thereto with Optionor and shall give Optionor at least FIVE (5) business days' prior 2 Packet Pg. 403 8.2.a notice thereof. Optionor shall be entitled to have a representative present at all times during each such inspection or other access. Optionor shall allow the Optionee's representatives unlimited access to the Property and to other information pertaining thereto in the possession or within the control of Optionor for the purpose of the inspections and any due diligence undertaken by the Optionee. (c) In the event of termination of the Option, Optionee shall provide to Optionor at no cost, electronic copies of any reports, studies or written conclusions made by Optionee during the Option Period. (d) Optionee shall not be entitled to perform any reasonable invasive testing including, but not limited to, environmental inspections beyond a Phase 1 assessment OF ' . Optionee shall restore the Property and all improvements to substantially the same condition they were in prior to the inspection and/or invasive testing. (e) Optionee shall not contact the tenants without obtaining Optionor's prior written consent. 4. Except as otherwise expressly stated above, the terms of the Agreement remain unchanged and the Agreement remains in full force and effect. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] 3 Packet Pg. 404 8.2.a IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Optionor and Optionee hereto have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date. OPTIONOR: EASTERN INVESTMENT CORPORATION, a washington corporation go Name: Title: SOUTHEAST 888 INVESTMENT LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company By: Name: Title: OPTIONEE: CITY OF EDMONDS, a Washington municipal corporation Name: Mike Nelson Title: Mayor 0 Packet Pg. 405 8.2.a EXHIBIT A COMPLETE PURCHASE AGREEMENT a� r a as 0 L a rn L CU E C J r� C d E d d L CD Q C Q Q. 0 0 w+ C d E C d E Q C Cu G C d Q C d E t 0 Q Packet Pg. 406 8.2.a as r a a� 0 L a rn L CU E C J r� C d E d d L CD Q C O Q. 0 0 w+ C d E C d E Q C u C G C d Q C d E t 0 Q Packet Pg. 407 8.2.b REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN EASTERN INVESTMENT CORPORATION AND SOUTHEAST 888 INVESTMENT LLC AND CITY OF EDMONDS Packet Pg. 408 8.2.b REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT THIS REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT (the "Amement") is made as of the 31" day of March, 2025 (the "Effective Date"), by and between EASTERN INVESTMENT CORPORATION, a Washington Corporation and SOUTHEAST INVESTMENT 888 LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company (collectively, "Seller") and the CITY OF EDMONDS, a Washington municipal corporation, ("Purchaser"). ARTICLE I 1.1 Property Description. Seller owns that certain real property located at 24111 SR 99, Edmonds, Washington, and as more particularly described on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the "Real Property"). 1.2 Agreement of Purchase and Sale. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, Seller agrees to sell, convey, transfer, and assign, and Purchaser agrees to purchase, all of Seller's right, title and interest in and to the Real Property, together with all of Seller's right, title and interest in and to the following (collectively, the "Property"): (a) Real Property Rights. Any and all land lying in the bed of any street, road, highway or avenue, open or proposed, in front of, or adjoining all or any part of the Real Property, and all strips, gores or rights -of -way, lakebeds, streams, riparian rights, appurtenances, rights, licenses, and easements, in any way benefitting or otherwise in front of or adjoining all or any part of the Real Property (the "Real Property Rights"). (b) Improvements. Any and all buildings, fixtures, structures, landscaping, parking areas, and related improvements or amenities erected or located on, over, or beneath the Real Property (the "Improvements"). (c) Leases. Any and all leases of the Real Property, if any, including all leases, work letter agreements, improvement agreements, and other rental agreements with respect to occupancy or use of the Real Property by tenants, and such other leases, work letter agreements, improvement agreements, and other rental agreements as may be approved by Purchaser in accordance with the terms of this Agreement (the "Leases"). (d) Contracts. Any and all contracts, agreements, commitments, employment agreements, service contracts, utility contracts, construction contracts, maintenance agreements, leasing and brokerage agreements and all other contracts, agreements and obligations, whether or not in writing, which relate in any way to the ownership, development, operation, management, maintenance, use or occupancy of the Real Property (the "Contracts"). (e) Personal Property. Any and all apparatus, equipment, appliances, systems, tools, furniture, furnishings of any kind, goods, supplies, materials, components, or any other personal property, located on the Real Property, and used in any way in the ownership, development, operation, management, maintenance, use, or occupancy of the Improvements or the Real Property (the "Personal Property"). -2- as a a� 0 L a a E J Packet Pg. 409 8.2.b (f) Intangible Property. Any and all plans and specifications relating to the Property, engineering, soil, land use, pest control and other studies or reports concerning the Property, the Improvements and/or the Personal Property, pre -paid fees, utility agreements, and connections for water and sewer, if any, all rights to reimbursements and credits pertaining to the Real Property, including without limitation, all those from any governmental jurisdiction, all rights to development impact fee credits pertaining to the Real Property and the development thereof, all awards or payments made or to be made for or with respect to any taking in condemnation or eminent domain (including awards or payments for damage resulting from change of grade or impairment of access) of any part of the Property, the Improvements and/or the Personal Property prior to, on or after the date hereof, all rents, issues and profits therefrom and to the extent, if any, approved by Purchaser pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, all consents, licenses, franchises, permits, entitlements, approvals, utility and/or subdivision bonds or deposits, purchase or construction warranties or guarantees (the "Intangible Property"). 1.3 Purchase Price. The purchase price for the Property is Thirty -Seven Million Dollars and Zero Cents ($37,000,000.00) (the "Purchase Price"). 1.4 Purchaser's Deposit; Escrow. Within five (5) business days after the Effective Date, Purchaser shall deliver to the Everett, Washington office of Chicago Title Insurance Company located at 3002 Colby Ave., Everett, Washington 98201 ("Escrow Agent" or "Title Company"), a cash deposit in the amount of One Million Dollars and Zero Cents ($1,000,000.00) (which, together with any interest earned thereon, is the "Earnest Money"). Escrow Agent shall invest the Earnest Money in an interest -bearing account. The Earnest Money shall be applicable to the Purchase Price at Closing, except as specifically provided elsewhere in this Agreement. The Escrow Agent shall not distribute the Earnest Money to the Seller until all Contingencies have been waived by the Purchaser or otherwise satisfied. If the Closing does not occur as the result of a breach or default by Seller, all of the Earnest Money, and all accrued interest thereon, shall be immediately refunded to the Purchaser, notwithstanding the non -ref indability provisions elsewhere in this Agreement, and the parties shall promptly execute and deliver cancellation instructions to the Escrow Agent. 1.5 Earnest Money Refundability. Upon removal of the Title Contingency, described in Section 2.1 and 2.2 below, within sixty (60) days from the Effective Date, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars and Zero Cents ($ 500,000.00) shall become non-refundable but applicable to the Purchase Price, except as otherwise expressly provided for in this Agreement. The remaining Five Hundred Thousand Dollars and Zero Cents ($ 500,000.00) of Earnest Money shall become non-refundable but applicable to the Purchase Price, pursuant to Section 3.5, below, except as otherwise expressly provided for in this Agreement. ARTICLE II TITLE REVIEW; SELLER'S CONDITIONS 2.1 Title Examination; Commitment for Title Insurance; Survey. Within two (2) business day after the Effective Date, Purchaser shall order from the Title Company a commitment for an extended coverage A.L.T.A. Policy of Title Insurance (the "Title Commitment"), and -3- as a a� 0 L a L E c J Packet Pg. 410 8.2.b copies of all recorded instruments referenced in the Title Commitment, if any. Purchaser shall have thirty (30) days after the Effective Date to examine title to the Property (the "Title Review Period"). Purchaser shall and at Purchaser's sole cost and expense during the Title Review Period, obtain an ALTA or other survey of the Property as required to obtain extended coverage (the "Survey"). 2.2 Title Obiections, Cure of Title Objections. (a) Purchaser shall have until the expiration of the Title Review Period to give written notice to Seller of such objections as Purchaser may have to any exceptions to title insurance coverage as disclosed in the Title Commitment. Any such exception to title disclosed in the Title Commitment to which Purchaser does not object by timely written notice shall be a "Permitted Exception." Purchaser shall not be required to object to any mortgage or deed of trust liens, the lien of any financing of Seller, any exceptions related to Seller's authority to convey the Property, and the same shall not be deemed Permitted Exceptions for any purposes at any time under this Agreement. Following delivery of the Title Commitment, Seller shall not alter the condition of title to the Property without the written consent of Purchaser. (b) In the event Purchaser gives timely written notice of objection to any exceptions to title, Seller shall have the right, but not the obligation, to elect to remove, satisfy or otherwise cure ten (10) days prior to Closing any exceptions to title or matters identified on the Survey so objected to by Purchaser. Within five (5) business days after receipt of Purchaser's notice of objection, Seller shall give written notice to Purchaser informing Purchaser of Seller's election with respect to such exceptions. If Seller fails to give written notice of its election within such five (5) business day period, Seller shall be deemed to have elected not to cure any such exceptions or matters. (c) If Seller elects or is deemed to have elected not to cure any exceptions to title or matters identified on the Survey as objected to by Purchaser or if, after electing to cure, Seller determines and provides written notice to Purchaser that it is unwilling or unable to remove, satisfy or otherwise cure any such exceptions or matters by Closing, Purchaser's sole remedy hereunder in such event shall be either (i) to accept title to the Property subject to such exceptions as if Purchaser had not objected thereto and without reduction of the Purchase Price, or (ii) to terminate this Agreement, in which case the Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser by the Escrow Agent, and neither parry hereto shall have any further rights, obligations or liabilities hereunder except to the extent that any right, obligation or liability set forth herein expressly survives termination of this Agreement. Purchaser shall provide Seller with written notice of its election pursuant to this Section 2.2(c) prior to the end of the Inspection Period. If Purchaser fails to provide Seller with timely notice of its election to terminate this Agreement prior to the end of the Inspection Period pursuant to this Section 2.2(c), Purchaser shall be deemed to have elected to purchase the Property in accordance with and as contemplated in this Agreement. Any exceptions to title to which Purchaser has objected and that Seller has elected or is deemed to have elected not to remove, satisfy or otherwise cure which is not otherwise removed from the Title Commitment or final Title Policy shall also be a "Permitted Exception." 2.3 Supplemental Title Report. If there are any changes or additions to the Title Commitment after the expiration of the Title Review Period, Title Company shall deliver to Packet Pg. 411 8.2.b Purchaser a supplement to the Title Commitment (the "Supplemental Report"). Purchaser shall have the right to review and approve any new items appearing in the Supplemental Report. Purchaser shall deliver notice of approval or disapproval of the items set forth in the Supplemental Report to Seller within five (5) business days after the delivery of the Supplemental Report. The failure of Purchaser to deliver notice of disapproval within said five (5) business day period shall be deemed to be Purchaser's approval of the Supplemental Report. In the event Purchaser delivers notice of disapproval, Seller shall have three (3) business days after receipt of Purchaser's notice to deliver notice as to whether Seller intends to remove, satisfy or otherwise cure any or all of the items in the Supplemental Report disapproved by Purchaser by Closing. Seller shall conclusively be deemed to have elected not to cure or remove each such item ("Disapproved Exceptions") for which Seller fails to notify Purchaser of its intention to cure or remove within such three (3) business day period. If Seller does not elect to cure or remove any Disapproved Exception within such three (3) business day period, Purchaser shall elect by notice to Seller within two (2) business days after expiration of such three (3) business day period to either (i) waive the Disapproved Exception, in which event the Disapproved Exception shall become a Permitted Exception (and failure of Purchaser to provide such notice within the two (2) business day period shall be deemed to be Purchaser's election to proceed under this clause (i)), or (ii) terminate this Agreement, in which case the Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser by the Escrow Agent or Seller, depending on who possesses the Earnest Money at that time, and neither party hereto shall have any further rights, obligations or liabilities hereunder except to the extent that any right, obligation or liability set forth herein expressly survives termination of Agreement. Closing shall be extended as necessary to provide for the notice and response periods set forth above. 2.4 Conveyance of Title. At Closing, Seller shall convey and transfer to Purchaser title to the Property by Deed (as defined in Section 4.2(a) subject only to the Permitted Exceptions and the standard preprinted exceptions in the Title Company's standard form of owner's title policy. At Closing, Seller shall cause the Title Company to issue to Purchaser an A.L.T.A. Owner's Policy of Title Insurance (or the Title Company's irrevocable commitment to issue such policy) in the same form as the Title Commitment, unless revised in accordance with this Agreement or otherwise upon Purchaser's prior written approval (the "Title Policy"), covering the Property in the full amount of the Purchase Price, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions and the standard preprinted exceptions in the Title Company's extended form of owner's title policy. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary specified herein, Purchaser shall be responsible for providing the Survey, delivering the same to the Title Company and providing any other information or documentation required by the Title Company in order for the Title Company to issue to Purchaser at Closing an extended coverage A.L.T.A. Owner's Policy of Title Insurance (the "Extended Coverage Conditions"). Seller shall deliver to Escrow Agent such additional documents as the Title Company reasonably requires from Seller in order to issue Purchaser the Title Policy, including, but not limited to, an owner's/seller's affidavit. -5- Packet Pg. 412 8.2.b ARTICLE III PROPERTY DOCUMENTS; PURCHASER CONTIGENCIES 3.1 Property Documents. Within three (3) business days after the Effective Date, Seller shall provide to Purchaser, at a minimum, disclosure materials as set forth on Exhibit C (collectively, the "Property Documents"). 3.2 Due Diligence and Financing Contingency. Commencing on the Effective Date and continuing until 11:59 P.M., Pacific time on the date that is one hundred and twenty (120) days after the Effective Date (hereinafter referred to as the "Inspection Period"), Purchaser shall have the right, at Purchaser's expense, to make physical inspections of the Property pursuant to Section 3.3 below and to evaluate the availability of appropriate financing. 3.3 Property Inspection Conditions. Upon reasonable prior notice to Seller, Purchaser shall have the right, at Purchaser's expense, to make physical inspections of the Property at times and at locations reasonably convenient to Purchaser in order to make the determination of suitability as provided in this Section 3.3, provided that such inspection activities do not unreasonably interfere with Seller's use of, or obligations relating to, the Property. In addition, Purchaser and Purchaser's representatives and authorized agents shall have the right, upon reasonable prior notice to Seller, to enter on the Property from the Effective Date to the Closing Date (defined below) or the earlier termination of this Agreement, to undertake inspections and investigations and make such tests, surveys and other studies of the Property as Purchaser deems appropriate, provided that such inspections, investigations or tests do not unreasonably interfere with Seller's use of, or obligations relating to, the Property. Purchaser's physical inspection and testing activities of the Property shall be conditioned upon the following: (a) Purchaser shall cooperate with and adhere to all reasonable requirements of Seller that affect the timing of all such activities; (b) Purchaser shall not conduct any drilling or other invasive testing on the Property without the prior written consent of Seller, not to be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed; provided, however, that Purchaser may perform a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment and standard invasive geotechnical evaluations; and (c) Seller shall provide Purchaser and Purchaser's representatives with reasonable access to the Property at reasonable business hours for such purposes; (d) Purchaser shall bear the entire cost of all tests and studies performed by Purchaser or at Purchaser's direction; and (e) Purchaser agrees at its sole cost to restore the Property to substantially the condition it was in immediately prior to such inspections, including, but not limited to the immediate removal of anything placed on the Property in connection with such inspections (Sections 3.3(a)(e) shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Property Inspection Conditions"). Seller shall permit and provide access for Purchaser, at Purchaser's sole cost and expense, at a minimum, to contact and have discussions with any contractors or consultants who have performed any work relating to the Property Documents listed in Exhibit C, as well as any other contractors or consultants, if any, who have been discovered, through Purchaser's own due diligence efforts, to have worked on the Property. Seller shall permit Purchaser to contact and discuss development of the Property with the permitting jurisdiction and all relevant governmental agencies. Purchaser shall pay all fees, costs and expenses of any contractors or consultants contacted by Purchaser as contemplated herein. Following Seller's written request, copies of any appraisals, reports, letters or other written information, if any, generated as a result of such inspections or Purchaser's due diligence shall be provided to Seller if the sale contemplated by this Agreement does not close for any reason. mom a� a a� 0 a a E J Packet Pg. 413 8.2.b 3.4 Property Indemnity Conditions. Purchaser shall defend, indemnify and hold Seller and the Property harmless from any and all costs, expenses, claims, losses, liabilities and demands arising from the exercise of these rights referred to in this Section 3.4, except with respect to Property conditions that existed before Purchaser's exercise of these rights (but, with respect to any such pre-existing conditions, Purchaser's indemnification obligations shall include any liabilities and expenses arising out of the exacerbation of such conditions caused by Purchaser's activities). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, Purchaser's liability under this Section 3.4 shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 3.5 Right of Termination or Confirmation of Purchase. Seller agrees that in the event Purchaser determines (such determination to be made in Purchaser's sole discretion, and which may be made for any reason or no reason at all) that the Property is not suitable for Purchaser's purposes or that appropriate financing is not available (such determination also to be made in Purchaser's sole discretion, and which may be made for any reason or no reason at all), then Purchaser shall have the right to terminate this Agreement prior to the expiration of the Inspection Period. If Purchaser fails to give a notice of approval of its review of the Property ("Approval Notice") to Seller within the Inspection Period, Purchaser shall be deemed to have elected to terminate this Agreement and refundable Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser. If Purchaser does deliver to Seller the Approval Notice prior to the expiration of the Inspection Period, the remaining Five Hundred Thousand Dollars and Zero Cents ($500,000.00) of Earnest Money shall be non-refundable and applicable towards the Purchase Price, except as otherwise expressly provided herein and this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. 3.6 Seller Disclosure Statement PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 64.06 RCW, WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY, PURCHASER HEREBY WAIVES ITS RIGHT TO RECEIVE THE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. THIS WAIVER DOES NOT EXTEND TO THE SECTION OF THE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ENTITLED "ENVIRONMENTAL" as attached as Exhibit B. Purchaser agrees that any information discovered by Purchaser concerning the Property prior to Closing will not obligate Seller to prepare and deliver to Purchaser a revised or updated Disclosure Statement. Purchaser hereby waives any right to receive an updated or revised Disclosure Statement, regardless of the source of any new information. PURCHASER HEREBY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMISSIBLE BY LAW, THE RIGHT TO RESCIND THIS AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO ANY PROVISION OF CHAPTER 64.06 RCW. IT IS PURCHASER'S INTENT THAT ANY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT PROVIDED BY SELLER WILL NOT BE RELIED UPON BY PURCHASER AND WILL NOT GIVE PURCHASER ANY RIGHTS WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. THIS WAIVER OF THE RIGHT TO RESCIND APPLIES TO THE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT PROVIDED TO PURCHASER AND APPLIES PROSPECTIVELY TO ANY UPDATED OR REVISED DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS THAT MAY BE PROVIDED BY SELLER TO PURCHASER.NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO RELIEVE SELLER OF ITS DUTY TO MAKE ACCURATE REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES AS STATED ELSEWHERE IN THIS AGREEMENT. 4.1 Time and Place. ARTICLE IV CLOSING 7- Packet Pg. 414 8.2.b (a) The consummation of the transactions contemplated hereunder ("Closing") shall occur on a date mutually agreed upon by Seller and Purchaser, but not later than September 30, 2025, (the "Closing Date"). 4.2 Seller's Obligations at Closing. At Closing, Seller shall deliver or cause to be delivered to Purchaser, the following executed, certified, and acknowledged by Seller, as appropriate: (a) One (1) original statutory warranty deed (the "Deed") in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit [TBDI, subject to any encroachments or exceptions as shown on the survey and title report, duly executed with the appropriate acknowledgment form and otherwise in proper form for recording so as to convey title to the Property to Purchaser as required by this Agreement. (b) A duly executed real estate excise tax affidavit. (c) A bill of sale (the "Bill of Sale") in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit [TBDI, executed by Seller, conveying to Purchaser good and marketable title to the Personal Property as described in Paragraph 1.2(e) without specifically listing each item, free and clear of all encumbrances and adverse claims. Purchaser shall be responsible for all state and local sales tax returns, and payment of all sales taxes payable in connection with such conveyance of Personal Property. (d) In connection with the Leases, Seller shall deliver to Purchaser: 1. Copies of all Leases, if in Seller's possession, or copies certified by Seller as being true, correct, and complete; 2. An updated and current rent roll certified by Seller as being true, correct, and complete along with a list of any tenants who are delinquent in their payment of rent and the amount of rent that remains outstanding, if any, dated no more than FIFTEEN (15) days prior to Closing; 3. An updated and current schedule of all security deposits under the Leases along with a check, or credit to Purchaser, in the amount of any cash security deposits, including any interest thereon payable to Purchaser, held by Seller pursuant to the Leases on the Closing Date; and if any security deposit is in the form of a letter of credit, Seller shall coordinate for the transfer of any such letter of credit to Purchaser on the Closing Date; 4. An executed counterpart to an assignment and assumption agreement relating to the Leases, in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit Tf BDI (the "Assignment of Leases"), and specifically providing: (A) Seller's assignment of the Leases and Purchaser's assumption of the Leases; (B) Seller's agreement to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Purchaser from and against all claims, actions, proceedings, losses and liabilities, and expenses arising from Seller's failure to perform its obligations under the Leases as landlord, accruing prior to the Closing Date; and (C) Purchaser's agreement to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Seller from and against Packet Pg. 415 8.2.b all claims, actions, proceedings, losses and liabilities, and expenses arising from Purchaser's failure to perform its obligations under the Leases as landlord accruing from and after the Closing Date; 5. Originally executed tenant notice letters in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit [TBDI to each of the tenants under the Leases advising them of the sale of the Property to Purchaser, the transfer of the tenants' security deposits to Purchaser (where applicable) and directing the tenants to thereafter deliver all notices to Purchaser and pay all rents or other payments directly to Purchaser, or its agent, as provided in the notice letter; and 6. An executed tenant estoppel certificate from each tenant in the form attached as Exhibit [TBDI for each Lease in effect on the Closing Date, dated no more than thirty (30) days prior to the Closing Date, and which show no material differences from the rent rolls. If Seller is unable to obtain an executed tenant estoppel certificate from a particular tenant, Seller shall terminate that tenant's Lease no less than thirty (30) days prior to the Closing Date, PROVIDED THAT this sentence shall only apply to month -to -month tenants, and FURTHER PROVIDED THAT Seller shall confer with Purchaser before terminating any month -to -month tenancy pursuant to this sentence. (e) A certification that Seller is not a "foreign person" as such term is defined in Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended and the regulations thereunder (collectively, the "Code"), which certification shall be signed under penalty of perjury. (f) Originals, or copies certified by Seller as being complete, of all applicable bills, invoices, fuel readings, and other items that shall be apportioned as of the Closing Date. (g) An original seller's affidavit in a form reasonably acceptable to the Title Insurance Company. (h) A resolution/consent of the members/manager of Seller authorizing the transaction contemplated hereby and the execution and delivery of the documents required to be executed and delivered hereunder. (i) A written certificate stating that all representations and warranties contained in Section 5.1 remain, as of the Closing Date, true, correct, and complete in all material respects as when first made hereunder, subject only to permitted changes occurring in accordance with this Agreement. 0) A counterpart of a closing statement jointly prepared by Seller and Purchaser reflecting the prorations and adjustments required under Section 4.4 of this Agreement and the balance of the Purchase Price due Seller. (k) All keys, key cards, and access codes to any portion of the Property. (1) An original assignment and assumption of contracts, warranties, guarantees, permits, and licenses ("Assumed Contracts") in substantially the form attached Packet Pg. 416 8.2.b hereto as Exhibit [TBDI, executed by Seller and assigning to Purchaser all Seller's right, title, and interest in the Assumed Contracts. (m) An original notice to each vendor under the Assumed Contracts, if required by the terms of such Assumed Contracts. (n) Evidence of termination of all service contracts, except for the Assumed Contracts which Purchaser has elected to assume pursuant to Section 4.2 (1) hereof, together with proof of payment in full by Seller of any and all liabilities, fees, costs, or other expenses of Seller resulting from the service contracts, the termination thereof and the release of the counterparties thereto. (o) Evidence of termination of any management agreement pertaining to the Property and payment in full by Seller of any and all liabilities, fees, costs, or other expenses of Seller due thereunder. (p) Originals or, if originals are not in the possession or control of Seller, copies of Plans and Surveys, to the extent same are in Seller's possession or under Seller's control. (q) All other documents reasonably necessary or otherwise required by the Escrow Agent and Title Insurance Company to consummate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. 4.3 Purchaser's Obligations at Closing. On or before the Closing Date, Purchaser shall: (a) Pay to Escrow Agent the full amount of the Purchase Price as increased or decreased by prorations and adjustments as herein provided, less the Earnest Money, and less interest accrued thereon, by wire transfer of immediately available federal funds; (b) Deliver to Escrow Agent and Seller such evidence as the Title Company may reasonably require as to the authority of the person or persons executing documents on behalf of Purchaser; and (c) Deliver to Escrow Agent and Seller such additional documents as shall be reasonably required to consummate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. 4.4 Credits and Prorations. The following shall be apportioned as of 11:59 p.m. of the date immediately preceding the Closing Date, unless expressly provided for otherwise: (a) All rents, additional rents, and other charges (collectively, "Rents") collected from the tenants under the Leases and all other income the Property generates shall be apportioned. All Rents received by Seller after Closing shall be immediately delivered to Purchaser. Purchaser has no obligation to collect any delinquent Rents on behalf of Seller after the Closing. Nothing herein shall preclude Seller from asserting separate and independent claims against tenants owing rent to which Seller is entitled hereunder, including, without limitation, the institution of such actions and proceedings as Seller shall deem necessary or advisable for the purpose of collecting such rent, except after the Closing Date, Seller shall not institute any -10- Packet Pg. 417 8.2.b summary dispossession, eviction, or similar proceedings which affect the possessory rights of any tenant. (b) All real estate taxes based on the fiscal year for which they are assessed and any assessments, provided, however, that if any such charges are payable by any tenant under the Leases, such charges shall not be apportioned. If the Property shall be, or has been, affected by any assessments or special assessments payable in a lump sum or which are, or may become, payable in installments, of which the first installment is then a charge or lien, or has already been paid, then at the Closing such amounts shall be paid in full by Seller. (c) All water and sewer charges based on the fiscal year for which they are assessed, unless the meters are read on the date immediately preceding the Closing Date; provided, however, that if any such charges are payable by any tenant under the Leases, such charges shall not be apportioned. (d) Utilities, fuel, gas, and electric charges based on most recently issued bills, unless the meters are read on the date immediately preceding the Closing Date; provided, however, that if any such charges are payable by any tenant under the Leases, such charges shall not be apportioned. (e) Administrative fees allowable by law on tenant security deposits. (f) All other items customarily apportioned in connection with sales of buildings substantially similar to the Property in the State of Washington. 4.5 Closing Costs. (a) Seller shall pay (i) the fees of any counsel representing Seller in connection with this transaction; (ii) one-half (1/2) of any escrow fee which may be charged by the Escrow Agent or Title Company; (iii) the standard coverage portions of the Title Policy to be issued to Purchaser by the Title Company at Closing; (iv) any real estate commissions owed by Seller pursuant to Section 8.1 below, (v) and all Real Estate Excise Taxes owned in association with this transaction. (b) Purchaser shall pay (i) the fees of any counsel representing Purchaser in connection with this transaction; (ii) the extended coverage portion of the Title Policy to be issued to Purchaser by the Title Company at Closing as well as any additional endorsements issued by the Title Company; (iii) one-half (1/2) of any escrow fees charged by the Escrow Agent or Title Company; and (iv) the cost of any recording fees for recording the Deed. (c) All other costs and expenses incident to this action and the Closing shall be apportioned by the parties equally in accordance with local custom. ARTICLE V REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, COVENANTS AND INDEMNITIES 5.1 Representations and Warranties of Seller. Seller hereby makes the following representations and warranties to Purchaser as of the Effective Date and at Closing, except as -11- Packet Pg. 418 8.2.b otherwise disclosed to Purchaser in the Property Documents or discovered by Purchaser in connection with its inspections during the Inspection Period: (a) Authority and Ownership. Seller has the full right and authority to enter into this Agreement, to transfer all of the Property to Purchaser, and to consummate, or cause to be consummated, the transactions contemplated herein. The person or persons signing this Agreement on behalf of Seller are authorized to do so. (b) Pending Actions. To Seller's actual knowledge, there are no actions, suits, arbitrations, unsatisfied orders or judgments, or governmental investigations pending or threatened 0 in writing against the Property or the transaction contemplated by this Agreement, except as disclosed in writing to Purchaser. :3 (c) Leases. The Property is subject to one and only one lease with a term that o extends beyond the Closing Date and that lease terminates on January 31, 2029. All other tenants a on the Property are month -to -month tenants. c L (d) Property Documents. The documents to be delivered to Purchaser under this E Agreement, including the Property Documents, are complete and correct copies of the same. Seller has no actual knowledge of any other documents, correspondence, or other materials that could have a material impact on the Property except for the Property Documents. (e) Outstanding Agreements. There are no outstanding agreements of sale, options or any other rights of third parties to acquire or use the Property or to any interest therein, except for the Permitted Exceptions. There are no contracts applicable to the Property that will survive Closing. (f) Hazardous Materials. Except as provided to Purchaser with the Property Documents, to Seller's actual knowledge, there are no, and have been no, releases of Hazardous Substances on or about the Property. To Seller's actual knowledge, there are no pending proceedings or inquiries by any governmental body with respect to the Property. For purposes of this Agreement, "Hazardous Substances" shall refer to the definition provided under the Model Toxics Control Act, Chapter 70.105D RCW and Chapter 173-340 WAC, as amended or revised after the Effective Date. (g) Mechanic's Liens. There are no contractors, subcontractors, materials suppliers, or any other third parties that are unpaid, that have provided Seller with notice of a claim of lien, or that otherwise have any other rights to impose, enforce, file, record, or foreclose a lien against the Real Property pursuant to RCW 60.04 or otherwise. (h) New Leases. Seller will not renew or enter into any new leases with terms that would extend the lease expiration past the Closing Date, provided however that the Purchaser acknowledges there is one existing lease with a term expiring on January 31, 2029. 5.2 Representations and Warranties of Purchaser. Purchaser hereby represents and warrants to Seller that Purchaser has the full right, power and authority to purchase the Property as provided in this Agreement and to carry out Purchaser's obligations hereunder, and all requisite actions necessary to authorize Purchaser to enter into this Agreement and to carry out its -12- Packet Pg. 419 8.2.b obligations hereunder have been, or by Closing will have been, taken. The person signing this Agreement on behalf of Purchaser is authorized to do so. 5.3 Indemnification by Seller. Seller agrees to indemnify, defend and hold Purchaser, its successors and assigns, members, managers, shareholders, officers, directors and/or employees of each of them, harmless for, from and against any and all claims, demands, liabilities, costs, expenses, damages and losses, cause or causes of action and suit or suits of any nature whatsoever, including, without limitation, attorneys' fees, arising from any misrepresentation or breach of any warranty or covenant by Seller in this Agreement. 5.4 Survival. The provisions of this Section 5 shall survive Closing and the delivery of the Deed for twelve (12) months. ARTICLE VI CONDEMNATION 6.1 Purchaser's Elections. In the event condemnation proceedings are commenced, by another entity other than the Purchaser, against all of the Property or any material portion thereof (and for this purpose, "material" is defined as a proposed condemnation which would reasonably be expected to be valued at more than Fifty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($50,000.00)) or would have a material adverse impact on Purchaser's intended development or use of the Property as communicated by Purchaser or Purchaser's Broker (as defined below) to Seller on or before the Effective Date hereof, Purchaser may elect, on notice to Seller within fifteen (15) days after receipt of notice of the commencement of such proceedings either: (i) to terminate this Agreement in which case the Earnest Money shall be returned to Purchaser by the Escrow Agent, and neither party hereto shall have any further rights, obligations or liabilities hereunder except to the extent that any right, obligation or liability set forth herein expressly survives termination of Agreement; or (ii) to proceed to Closing in which case Seller shall at Closing assign to Purchaser all of Seller's right, title and interest to any claims and proceeds Seller may have with respect to any condemnation awards relating thereto, less any costs and expenses reasonably incurred by Seller from the date of the commencement of such condemnation through the date of Closing relating to such condemnation. If Purchaser does not make such an election within fifteen (15) days after the commencement of condemnation proceedings, Purchaser shall be deemed to have elected to proceed under clause (ii) above. ARTICLE VII DEFAULT 7.1 Liquidated Damages. IF THE CLOSING IS NOT CONSUMMATED DUE TO ANY DEFAULT BY PURCHASER HEREUNDER, AND PURCHASER FAILS TO CURE SUCH DEFAULT WITHIN FIVE (5) BUSINESS DAYS AFTER PURCHASER'S RECEIPT OF WRITTEN NOTICE FROM SELLER SPECIFYING SUCH BREACH (PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT THE FOREGOING NOTICE AND CURE RIGHTS SHALL NOT APPLY TO PURCHASER'S FAILURE TO CLOSE ON THE CLOSING DATE), THEN SELLER, AS ITS SOLE REMEDY, SHALL RETAIN THE EARNEST MONEY AS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES, WHICH RETENTION SHALL OPERATE TO TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT AND RELEASE PURCHASER FROM ANY AND -13- Packet Pg. 420 8.2.b ALL LIABILITY HEREUNDER, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE EXPRESSLY PROVIDED IN THIS AGREEMENT. THE PARTIES HAVE AGREED THAT SELLER'S ACTUAL DAMAGES, IN THE EVENT OF A FAILURE TO CONSUMMATE THIS SALE DUE TO PURCHASER'S DEFAULT, WOULD BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT OR IMPRACTICABLE TO DETERMINE. AFTER NEGOTIATION, THE PARTIES HAVE AGREED THAT, CONSIDERING ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING ON THE DATE OF THIS AGREEMENT, THE AMOUNT OF THE EARNEST MONEY IS A REASONABLE ESTIMATE OF THE DAMAGES THAT SELLER WOULD INCUR IN SUCH EVENT. EACH PARTY SPECIFICALLY CONFIRMS THE ACCURACY OF THE STATEMENTS MADE ABOVE AND THE FACT THAT EACH PARTY WAS REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL WHO EXPLAINED, AT THE TIME THIS AGREEMENT WAS MADE, THE CONSEQUENCES OF THIS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES PROVISION. THE FOREGOING IS NOT INTENDED TO LIMIT PURCHASER'S SURVIVING OBLIGATIONS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ITS INDEMNIFICATION OBLIGATIONS, UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. 7.2 Seller Default. In the event of a Seller Default, Purchaser shall provide Seller with written notice of such default and Seller shall have five (5) business days after Seller's receipt from Purchaser of such written notice to cure such default, or if such default cannot be cured in such period, to commence the cure during such period and thereafter diligently complete such cure. If after such notice, the Closing fails to occur due to such Seller Default, Purchaser may elect to either (i) terminate this Agreement and receive the return of the Earnest Money and any Extension Option Fees paid to Seller, including Earnest Money that was otherwise non-refundable; or (ii) commence an action against Seller for specific performance of its obligations under this Agreement. Any such action for specific performance must be commenced within sixty (60) days after the then scheduled Closing Date. In no event shall Seller be liable to Purchaser for any lost profits or other consequential or special damages. If Purchaser elects to terminate this Agreement, (a) this Agreement shall not be terminated automatically, but only upon delivery to Escrow Agent and Seller of written notice of termination from Purchaser; (b) Escrow Agent shall return all sums (including the Earnest Money still in the possession of the Escrow Agent and all interest earned thereon while held in escrow) deposited by Purchaser; and (c) Seller shall return any Earnest Money distributed to Seller and all interest earned thereon while held by Escrow Agent or Seller. As used in this Agreement, a "Seller Default" shall mean (i) the failure by the Seller to deliver the Deed; (ii) the failure by the Seller to discharge, satisfy, release or terminate the matters of record Seller is required to remove from title as set forth herein above; (iii) any material breach of representation, warranty or covenant of Seller hereunder, or (iv) the failure by the Seller to perform any of Seller's other obligations under this Agreement. ARTICLE VIII BROKERS 8.1 Brokers. Purchaser represents to Seller that Long Bay Enterprises Inc., ("Purchaser's Broker") is the only real estate broker that Purchaser has engaged or dealt with in connection with this transaction, and that Purchaser is compensating Purchaser's Broker pursuant -14- Packet Pg. 421 8.2.b to a separate agreement. Seller represents to Purchaser that Seller has not engaged or dealt with a Broker for this transaction. Each parry shall indemnify, defend and hold the other harmless with respect to claims for real estate brokerage commissions or finder's fee for which such party is allegedly obligated. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Seller shall indemnify, defend and hold Purchaser harmless with respect to any claims by Seller's Broker for real estate brokerage commissions or finder's fees. The provisions of this Section 8.1 shall survive Closing. ARTICLE IX AS -IS PURCHASE AND SALE 9.1 At or before the end of the Inspection Period, Purchaser will have approved the physical and environmental characteristics and condition of the Property, as well as the economic characteristics of the Property. Purchaser hereby waives any and all defects in the physical, environmental and economic characteristics and condition of the Property which would be disclosed by such inspection. Purchaser further acknowledges that neither Seller nor any other person or entity acting on behalf of Seller, except as otherwise expressly provided in Section 5.1, have made any representations, warranties or agreements (express or implied) by or on behalf of Seller as to any matters concerning the Property, the economic results to be obtained or predicted, or the present use thereof or the suitability for Purchaser's intended use of the Property, including, without limitation, the following: the size or acreage of the Property; the suitability of the topography; the availability of water rights or utilities; the present and future zoning, subdivision and any and all other land use matters; the condition of the soil or groundwater; the purpose(s) to which the Property is suited; drainage; flooding; access to public roads; or proposed routes of roads or extensions thereof. Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that the Property is to be purchased, conveyed and accepted by Purchaser in its present condition, "AS -IS" and that no patent or latent defect in the physical or environmental condition of the Property whether or not known or discovered, shall affect the rights of either party hereto. Any documents furnished to Purchaser by Seller relating to the Property including, without limitation, service agreements, management contracts, maps, surveys, reports and other information shall be deemed furnished as a courtesy to Purchaser but without warranty from Seller. All work done in connection with preparing the Property for the uses intended by Purchaser including any and all fees, studies, reports, approvals, plans, surveys, permits, and any expenses whatsoever necessary or desirable in connection with Purchaser's acquiring, developing, using and/or operating the Property shall be obtained and paid for by, and shall be the sole responsibility of, Purchaser. Purchaser has investigated and has knowledge of operative or proposed governmental laws and regulations including land use laws and regulations to which the Property may be subject and shall acquire the Property upon the basis of its review and determination of the applicability and effect of such laws and regulations. Purchaser has neither received nor relied upon any representations concerning such laws and regulations from Seller. Except for claims of fraud or willful misrepresentation on the part of Seller, and except for those representations and warranties expressly set forth herein, Purchaser, on behalf of itself and its employees, agents, successors and permitted assigns, attorneys and other representatives, and each of them, hereby releases Seller from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, obligations, damages and liabilities of any nature whatsoever, whether alleged under any statute, common law or otherwise, directly or indirectly, arising out of or related to the condition, operation or economic performance of the Property. -15- Packet Pg. 422 8.2.b ARTICLE X MISCELLANEOUS 10.1 Public Disclosure. Prior to Closing, any release to any third parry, except for the Escrow Agent, the Title Company, the permitting jurisdiction and all relevant governmental agencies, or Seller's or Purchaser's attorneys, accountants, engineers and confidential advisors, of information with respect to the sale contemplated herein or any matters set forth in this Agreement, will be made only in the form approved by Purchaser and Seller and their respective counsel; provided, however, that Seller acknowledges that Purchaser is a public entity, that Purchaser will have already held public hearings concerning this transaction, and that Purchaser may be required to disclose or otherwise release information about this Agreement and this transaction pursuant to applicable public disclosure or other laws in the State of Washington. 10.2 Notices. Any notice pursuant to this Agreement shall be given in writing by (i) personal delivery, (ii) nationally recognized overnight delivery service with proof of delivery, or email. Notice shall be given at the address set forth herein below for the parry to whom notice is given. Unless changed in accordance with the preceding sentence, the addresses for notice given pursuant to this Agreement shall be: If to Purchaser: Todd Tatum Todd.tatum@edmondswa.gov With a copy to: Jeff Taraday By email to: jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com If to Seller: Robert Siew By e-mail to: robsiew@comcast.net With a copy to: Shannon Sperry/Andrew Goodrich Lasher Holzapfel Sperry and Ebberson Goodrich@lasher.com 10.3 Binding Effect. This Agreement shall not be binding in any way upon Seller and Purchaser unless and until Seller and Purchaser shall execute and deliver this Agreement. 10.4 Modifications. This Agreement cannot be changed orally, and no executory agreement shall be effective to waive, change, modify or discharge it in whole or in part unless such executory agreement is in writing and is signed by the parties against whom enforcement of any waiver, change, modification or discharge is sought. 10.5 Business Days. References to "business days" herein shall mean any day except Saturday, Sunday or day on which commercial banks located in Seattle, Washington, are authorized or required by law to be closed for business. If the Closing Date or the day for performance of any act required under this Agreement falls on a day which is not a business day, then the Closing Date or the day for such performance, as the case may be, shall be the next following regular business day. The final day of any such period shall be deemed to end at 5:00 p.m. Pacific time unless otherwise specifically stated. -16- Packet Pg. 423 8.2.b 10.6 Successors and Assigns. The terms and provisions of this Agreement are to apply to and bind the permitted successors and assigns of the parties hereto._ Purchaser may assign part or all of its interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the Seller, provided that: (a) Purchaser shall give Seller written notice of such assignment within THIRTY (30) days after such assignment; and (b) Purchaser's assignee shall execute an instrument in form substantially the same as that attached to this Agreement as Exhibit [TBDI agreeing to be bound by all the terms and conditions of the Agreement; and (c) an assignment of the Purchaser's entire interest in the Agreement shall only be allowed if the assignee is a public entity. 10.7 Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including the exhibits and documents to be delivered at Closing, contains the entire agreement between the parties pertaining to the subject matter hereof and fully supersedes all prior written or oral agreements and understandings between the parties pertaining to such subject matter. 10.8 Further Assurances. Each party agrees that it will, without further consideration, execute and deliver such other documents and take such other action, whether prior or subsequent to Closing, as may be reasonably requested by the other party to consummate more effectively the purposes or subject matter of this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Purchaser shall, if requested by Seller, execute acknowledgments of receipt with respect to any materials delivered by Seller to Purchaser with respect to the Property. The provisions of this Section 10.9 shall survive the Closing. 10.9 1031 Exchange Cooperation. At Seller's request, Purchaser shall cooperate with Seller in effectuating a tax -deferred exchange under Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code and related regulations; provided, however, that the Closing shall not be delayed, and Purchaser shall incur no greater expense or liability in connection with the transactions contemplated under this Agreement than Purchaser would have incurred without said exchange. Purchaser shall execute all documents reasonably requested by Seller or any "Qualified Intermediary" as that term is defined by Internal Revenue Service Regulations, Rev. Proc. 2017-15 (IRS RPR), to effectuate said exchange (including Seller's assignment of its rights and obligations under this Agreement to the Qualified Intermediary), provided that such documents are in a form reasonably satisfactory to Purchaser, and further provided that the form of said documents are delivered to Purchaser for review not less than THIRTY (30) days prior to the Closing Date. Purchaser shall take all further actions reasonably necessary to effectuate said exchange, provided, however, that Purchaser shall not be obligated to: (a) sign a promissory note, deed of trust, or any other document that might impose liability on Purchaser; or (b) acquire title to any exchange property. 10.10 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and all such executed counterparts shall constitute the same agreement. It shall be necessary to account for only one such counterpart in proving this Agreement. Electronic copies of signatures shall be treated for all purposes as original signatures. 10.11 Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall nonetheless remain in full force and effect. -17- as a a� 0 a a E J Packet Pg. 424 8.2.b 10.12 Applicable Law. This Agreement is performable in the state in which the Property is located and shall in all respects be governed by, and construed in accordance with the substantive federal laws of the United States and the laws of the State of Washington. Seller and Purchaser hereby irrevocably submit to the jurisdiction of any state or federal court sitting in the state in which the Property is located in any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement and hereby irrevocably agree that all claims in respect of such action or proceeding shall be heard and determined in a state or federal court sitting in the state in which the Property is located. Purchaser and Seller agree that the provisions of this Section 10.13 shall survive Closing. a� 10.13 No Third Party Beneficiary. The provisions of this Agreement and of the documents to be executed and delivered at Closing are and will be for the benefit of Seller and Purchaser only and are not for the benefit of any third party, and accordingly, no third party shall have the right to enforce the provisions of this Agreement or the documents to be executed and o delivered at Closing. a 10.14 Survival. The terms of this Agreement shall not survive the Closing, or any termination of this Agreement prior thereto, and shall not be merged into the execution and -Ea delivery of the Deed; provided, however, that the representations and warranties of Seller and Purchaser in Article 5 shall survive the Closing for a period of twelve (12) months. —J- 10.15 Attorneys' Fees. In the event any dispute between Purchaser and Seller should result in litigation, arbitration or mediation, the substantially prevailing party shall be reimbursed for all reasonable costs incurred in connection with such action, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees. 10.16 Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement and each of its provisions. [Remainder of page intentionally left blank; separate signature page attached.] -18- Packet Pg. 425 8.2.b IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date. PURCHASER: By: City of Edmonds Name: Its: mayor Date: SELLER: By: Name: Date: -19- Packet Pg. 426 8.2.b EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description ForAPWParcel ID(s): 004911-000-003-02, 004911-000-003-03, 004911-000-003-04, 004911-000-003-05, 004911-000-001-05, 004911-000-001-06, 004911-000-001-07, 004911 -000-001 -10, 004911-000-003-06, 004911-000-003-07 and 004911-000-003-08 Parcel A: A portion of Tracts 1, 2, and 3, Lake McAleer Five Acre Tracts, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 5 of Plats. cage 48, records of Snohomish County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of above said Tract 3; Thence North 0"45'50" East along the East line of said Tract 3, 634.13 feet to a point 10 feet South of the Northeast corner of lot 3; Thence North 88"29'56" West parallel to the North line of said plat, 201.64 feet; Thence South 0°43'57" West parallel to the West line of above said Tract 3, 176.96 feet to a point 135.00 feet North of the South line of North one-half of said Tract 3, Thence North 88`28'07" West parallel to said South line 130.00 feet to the East line of above said Tract 2; Thence North 0°43'57" East along said East line 176.89 feet to a point 10.00 feet South of the Northeast corner of said Tract 2; Thence North 8W29'56" West parallel to the North line of above said Plat 130.00 feet, Thence South 0°43'57" West parallel to the East line of said Tract 2, 125.00 feet; Thence North 88°29'56" West parallel to the North line of said Plat 218.43 feet to an intersection with a curve on the Easterly right of way line of Highway 99 (center point which bears South 64'1 T03" East a distance of 2814.79 feet); Thence Southwesterly along the arc of said curve to the Left, consuming a central angle of 9"56'56" a distance of 488.72 feet, Thence South 74°13'56" East on a radial line of said curve, a distance of 10.00 feet to an intersection with a curve on the Easterly right of way line of Highway 99 (center point which bears South 74'1356" East a distance of 2804.79 feet); Thence Southwesterly along the arc of said curve to the left, consuming a central angle of 0°56'39" a distance of 46.22 feet to the South line of Tract 1 in above said plat, Thence South 88`26'18" East along the South line of Tracts 1, 2, 3 in above said Plat, a distance of 848.72 feet to the true point of beginning, Except those portions acquired by or conveyed to the State of Washington for SR 104. Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington. Parcel B: That part of the North 135 feet of Tracts 1 and 2, Lake McAleer Five Acre Tracts, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 5 of Plats. page 48, records of Snohomish County, Washington, lying Easterly of State Road No. 1 (U.S. Highway 99); Except the East 130 feet, And except the North 10 feet thereof conveyed to Snohomish County for road by deed recorded under Auditor's File Number 693550; And except that portion conveyed to the State of Washington for Primary State Highway No. 1 by deed recorded under Auditor's File Number 1646398. -20- Packet Pg. 427 8.2.b EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington. Parcel C: That portion of Tracts 1 and 2, Lake McAleer Five Acre Tracts, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 5 of Plats, page 48, records of Snohomish County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the Southeasterly right of way line of State Highway Route 99, as said right of way line existed prior to March 12, 1970, with the South line of the North 135 feet, as measured parallel with the East line of said tract 1; Thence Westerly along said South line to a point which is 51 feet Southeasterly, when measured at right angles from the R line survey of State Highway Route 104; Thence Northeasterly parallel with said R line survey to a point opposite Highway Engineer's station R 113+81.36. Thence along a curve to the right having a radius of 40 feet to a point on the South line of 240th St. S.W. opposite Highway Engineer's Station 240th 10+64.85 and 30 feet Southerly therefrom; Thence Easterly along said South line to the Southeasterly right of way line of State Highway Route 99; Thence Southwesterly along said right of way line to the point of beginning. Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington. Parcel D: That portion of Tract 1, Lake McAleer Five Acre Tracts, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 5 of Plats. page 48 records of Snohomish County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning at a point opposite Highway Engineer's Station (hereinafter referred to as H.E.S.) 1188+66 on the I line survey of SR 104, 236th Street S.W. to Meridian Avenue, and 365 feet Northeasterly therefrom, said point also being on the Southeasterly right of way line of SR 99, as said right of way existed prior to March 12, 1970; Thence Northwesterly to a point opposite H.E.S. 109+65 on the R line survey of said highway and 42 feet Southeasterly therefrom; Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point opposite H.E.S. R 109+82 and 42 feet Southeasterly therefrom; Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point opposite H.E.S. R 110+00 and 42 feet Southeasterly therefrom; Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point opposite H.E.S. R 110+50 and 41 feet Southeasterly therefrom; Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point opposite H.E.S. R 111+00 and 41 feet Southeasterly therefrom; Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point opposite H.E.S. R 111+50 and 41 feet Southeasterly therefrom; Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point opposite H.E.S. R 112+00 and 41 feet Southeasterly therefrom; Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point opposite H.E.S. R 112+50 and 41 feet Southeasterly therefrom; Thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the South line of the North 135 feet, as measured parallel with the East line, of said tract, which point is 41 feet Southeasterly, when measured at right angles, from the R line of said highway; Thence Easterly, along said South line, to the Southeasterly right of way line of SR 99, as said right of way line existed prior to March 12, 1970; Thence Southwesterly, along said right of way line, to the point of beginning. Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington. Parcel 004911-000-003-02; Parcel 004911-000-003-03; Parcel 004911-000-003-04; Parcel 004911-000-003-05; Parcel Parcel 004911-000-001-05, Pal 004911-000-001-06, Paroel 004911-000-001-07. Parcel 004911-000-001-10; Parcel 004911-000-003-06; Parcel 004911-000-003-07; Parcel 004911-000-003-08 -21- Packet Pg. 428 8.2.b EXHIBIT B FORM OF COMMERCIAL REAL PROPERTY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT (ENVIRONMENTAL ONLY) INSTRUCTIONS TO THE SELLER Please complete the following form. Do not leave any spaces blank. If the question clearly does not apply to the property check "NA." If the answer is "yes" to any (*) item(s), please explain on attached sheets. Please refer to the line number(s) of the question(s) when you provide your explanation(s). For your protection you must date and initial each page of this disclosure statement and each attachment. Delivery of the disclosure statement must occur not later than five (5) business days, unless otherwise agreed, after mutual acceptance of a written purchase and sale agreement between Purchaser and Seller. NOTICE TO THE PURCHASER THE FOLLOWING DISCLOSURES ARE MADE BY SELLER ABOUT THE CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 24111 SR 99, Edmonds, WA (Snohomish County Parcel #s 00491100000110, 00491100000106, 00491100000105, 00491100000107, 00491100000308, 00491100000307, 00491100000306, 00491100000302, 00491100000304, 00491100000305, 00491100000303) ("THE PROPERTY"), OR AS LEGALLY DESCRIBED ON ATTACHED EXHIBIT A. SELLER MAKES THE FOLLOWING DISCLOSURES OF EXISTING MATERIAL FACTS OR MATERIAL DEFECTS TO PURCHASER BASED ON SELLER'S ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE PROPERTY AT THE TIME SELLER COMPLETES THIS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. UNLESS YOU AND SELLER OTHERWISE AGREE IN WRITING, YOU HAVE THREE (3) BUSINESS DAYS FROM THE DAY SELLER OR SELLER'S AGENT DELIVERS THIS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT TO YOU TO RESCIND THE AGREEMENT BY DELIVERING A SEPARATELY SIGNED WRITTEN STATEMENT OF RESCISSION TO SELLER OR SELLER'S AGENT. IF THE SELLER DOES NOT GIVE YOU A COMPLETED DISCLOSURE STATEMENT, THEN YOU MAY WAIVE THE RIGHT TO RESCIND PRIOR TO OR AFTER THE TIME YOU ENTER INTO A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT. THE FOLLOWING ARE DISCLOSURES MADE BY SELLER AND ARE NOT THE REPRESENTATIONS OF ANY REAL ESTATE LICENSEE OR OTHER PARTY. THIS INFORMATION IS FOR DISCLOSURE ONLY AND IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A PART OF ANY WRITTEN AGREEMENT BETWEEN PURCHASER AND SELLER. FOR A MORE COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION OF THE SPECIFIC CONDITION OF THIS PROPERTY YOU ARE ADVISED TO OBTAIN AND PAY FOR THE SERVICES OF QUALIFIED EXPERTS TO INSPECT THE PROPERTY, WHICH MAY INCLUDE, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS, PLUMBERS, ELECTRICIANS, ROOFERS, BUILDING INSPECTORS, ON -SITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT INSPECTORS, OR STRUCTURAL PEST INSPECTORS. THE PROSPECTIVE BUYER AND SELLER MAY WISH TO OBTAIN PROFESSIONAL ADVICE OR INSPECTIONS OF THE PROPERTY OR TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE PROVISIONS IN A CONTRACT BETWEEN THEM WITH RESPECT TO ANY ADVICE, INSPECTION, DEFECTS OR WARRANTIES. Seller O is/ 0 is not occupying the Property. -22- Packet Pg. 429 I. SELLER'S DISCLOSURES *If you answer "YES" to a question with an asterisk (*), please explain your answer and attach documents, if available and not otherwise publicly recorded. If necessary, use an attached sheet. ENVIRONMENTAL YES NO DON'T N/A KNOW *A. Have there been any flooding, standing water, or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ drainage problems on the property that affect the property or access to the property? *B. Does any part of the property contain fill dirt, waste, or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ other fill material? *C. Is there any material damage to the property from fire, ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ wind, floods, beach movements, earthquake, expansive soils, or landslides? *D. Are there any shorelines, wetlands, floodplains, or ❑ ❑ O ❑ critical areas on the property? *E. Are there any substances, materials, or products in or on ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ the property that may be environmental concerns, such as asbestos, formaldehyde, radon gas, lead -based paint, fuel or chemical storage tanks, or contaminated soil or water? *F. Has the property been used for commercial or industrial ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ purposes? *G Is there any soil or groundwater contamination? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ *H Are there transmission poles or other electrical utility ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ equipment installed, maintained, or buried on the property that do not provide utility service to the structures on the property? *I. Has the property been used as a legal or illegal dumping ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ site? *J. Has the property been used as an illegal drug ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ manufacturing site? *K Are there any radio towers in the area that cause ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ interference with cellular telephone reception? The foregoing answers and attached explanations (if any) are complete and correct to the best of Seller's knowledge and Seller has received a copy hereof. Seller agrees to defend, indemnify and hold real estate licensees harmless from and against any and all claims that the above information in inaccurate. Seller authorizes real estate licensees, if any, to deliver a copy of this disclosure statement to other real estate - 23 - m a a� 0 a rn cLa E c Packet Pg. 430 8.2.b licensees and all prospective buyers of the property. DATE: SELLER: -24- Packet Pg. 431 8.2.b NOTICES TO PURCHASER 1. SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION INFORMATION REGARDING REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS MAY BE OBTAINED FROM LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES. THIS NOTICE IS INTENDED ONLY TO INFORM YOU OF WHERE TO OBTAIN THIS INFORMATION AND IS NOT AN INDICATION OF THE PRESENCE OF REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS. f► 9 ' 0m 10 11 MA CI] V.1901 THIS NOTICE IS TO INFORM YOU THAT THE REAL PROPRETY YOU ARE CONSIDERING FOR PURCHASE MAY LIE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO A FARM OR WORKING FOREST. THE OPERATION OF A FARM OR WORKING FOREST INVOLVES USUAL AND CUSTOMARY AGRICULATURAL PRACTICES OR FOREST PRACTICES, WHICH ARE PROTECTED UNDER RCW 7.48.305, THE WASHINGTON RIGH TO FARM ACT. 3. OIL TANK INSURANCE THIS NOTICE IS TO INFORM YOU THAT IF THE REAL PROPERTY YOU ARE CONSIDERING FOR PURCHASE UTILIZES AN OIL TANK FOR HEATING PURPOSES, NO COST INSURANCE MAY BE AVAILABLE FROM THE POLLUTION LIABILITY INSURANCE AGENCY. II. PURCHASER'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT PURCHASER HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT: A. Purchaser has a duty to pay diligent attention to any material defects that are known to Purchaser or can be known to Purchaser by utilizing diligent attention and observation. B. The disclosures set forth in this statement and in any amendments to this statement are made only by the Seller and not by any real estate licensee or other party. C. Purchaser acknowledges that, pursuant to RCW 64.06.05(2), real estate licensees are not liable for inaccurate information provided by Seller, except to the extent that real estate licensees know of such inaccurate information. D. This information is for disclosure only and is not intended to be a part of the written agreement between the Purchaser and Seller. E. Purchaser (which term includes all persons signing the "Purchaser's acceptance" portion of this disclosure statement below) has received a copy of this Disclosure Statement (including attachments, if any) bearing Seller's signature(s). F. If the house was built prior to 1978, Purchaser acknowledges receipt of the pamphlet Protect Your Family From Lead in Your Home. DISCLOSURES CONTAINED IN THIS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ARE PROVIDED BY SELLER BASED ON SELLER'S ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE PROPERTY AT THE TIME SELLER COMPLETES THIS DISCLOSURE. UNLESS PURCHASER AND SELLER OTHERWISE AGREE IN WRITING, PURCHASER SHALL HAVE THREE (3) BUSINESS DAYS FROM THE DAY SELLER OR SELLER'S AGENT DELIVERS THIS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT TO RESCIND THE -25- Packet Pg. 432 AGREEMENT BY DELIVERING A SEPARATELY SIGNED WRITTEN STATEMENT OF RESCISSION TO SELLER OR SELLER'S AGENT. YOU MAY WAIVE THE RIGHT TO RESCIND PRIOR TO OR AFTER THE TIME YOU ENTER INTO A SALE AGREEMENT. PURCHASER HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES RECEIPT OF A COPY OF THIS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE DISCLOSURES MADE HEREIN ARE THOSE OF THE SELLER ONLY, AND NOT OF ANY REAL ESTATE LICENSEE OR OTHER PARTY. DATE: PURCHASER: 2. PURCHASER'S WAIVER OF RIGHT TO REVOKE OFFER Purchaser has read and reviewed the Seller's responses to this Seller Disclosure Statement. Purchaser approves this statement and waives Purchaser's right to revoke Purchaser's offer based on this disclosure. DATE: PURCHASER: 3. PURCHASER'S WAIVER OF RIGHT TO RECEIVE COMPLETED SELLER DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Purchaser has been advised of Purchaser's right to receive a completed Seller Disclosure Statement. Purchaser waives that right. However, if the answer to any of the questions in the section entitled "Environment" would be yes, Purchaser may not waive the receipt of the `Environmental" section of the Seller Disclosure Statement. DATE: PURCHASER: -26- Packet Pg. 433 8.2.b EXHIBIT C 1.Copies of all current Leases 2.Environmental site assessment report dated June 3, 2014 3.Underground Storage Tank Removal Assessment Report dated April 25, 2014 4.Blueprint copy of partial survey dated June 28, 1987 27 - Packet Pg. 434 8.2.c OPTION AGREEMENT between Eastern Investment Corporation and Southeast 888 Investment LLC and CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON dated as of July 1, 2023 Packet Pg. 435 8.2.c OPTION AGREEMENT This OPTION AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") dated as of the 1 st day of July, 2023 (the "Effective Date") is entered into between EASTERN INVESTMENT CORPORATION, a Washington Corporation and SOUTHEAST 888 INVESTMENT LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company (collectively "Optionor"), and CITY OF EDMONDS, a Washington municipal corporation ("Optionee"). WHEREAS, Optionor is the owner of that certain real property located at 24111 SR 99, Edmonds, in SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON, which is more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, Optionor wishes to grant to Optionee, and Optionee wishes to obtain from Optionor, an irrevocable and exclusive option to purchase the Property, subject to the terms and conditions set forth below. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the Option Payment (defined in Section 3 below) and the other mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Grant of Option. Subject to Optionee's timely payment of the Option Payment (defined in Section 3 below), Optionor hereby grants to Optionee an exclusive and irrevocable option to purchase the Property on the terms and conditions set out in this Agreement (the "Option"). 2. Option Term. The term of the Option (the "Option Term") shall commence on the Effective Date and automatically expire at 11:59 pm PACIFIC TIME December 31, 2024 (the "Option Termination Date"), unless duly extended, exercised, or sooner terminated as provided for in this Agreement. Option Payment. (a) The Option is granted in consideration of Optionee's payment to Optionor, concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS $100,000 (the "Option Payment"), the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged. (b) Optionee acknowledges and agrees that the Option Payment constitutes consideration to Optionor for Optionor's agreement to: (i) enter into this Agreement with Optionee; (ii) not advertise, market the Property for sale, and/or sell the Property to another purchaser while this Agreement is in effect; and (iii) sell the Property to Optionee on the terms and conditions and for the Purchase Price (as defined in the Purchase Agreement (defined below in Section 4)), provided that Optionee has exercised the Option in the manner provided in Section 4 below. The Option Payment shall be nonrefundable to Optionee. 4. Exercise of Option. At any time during the Option Term, Optionee may exercise the Option by timely sending Optionor a written notice of Optionee's intention to exercise the 2 Packet Pg. 436 8.2.c Option (the "Exercise Notice") accompanied by three (3) executed copies of the purchase and sale agreement certain material terms of which are attached as Exhibit B (the "Purchase Agreement"). Optionor shall promptly execute the Purchase Agreement and return two (2) fully executed originals to Optionee. If Optionee does not timely exercise the Option in the manner described herein on or before the Option Termination Date, the Option will automatically terminate. Thereafter, neither party shall have any further obligations hereunder except for those obligations that expressly survive termination of this Agreement. (a) Within ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY (180) days of the Effective Date, Exhibit B hereto shall be converted into an approved Purchase Agreement consistent with the material terms and subject to approval by both Optionor and Optionee in their sole discretion. Once the parties agree upon the form of the complete Purchase Agreement, that agreement shall be finalized by the parties executing an addendum to this Agreement which will have the effect of replacing Exhibit B with the complete Purchase Agreement. If the parties have not executed such an addendum, for any reason, within ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY (180) days of the Effective Date, Optionor shall return the entire Option Payment to Optionee and this Agreement shall terminate. Failure of the parties to execute the above addendum in a timely manner renders the Option Payment refundable notwithstanding any other language to the contrary in this Agreement. 5. Default by Optionor. If Optionor fails to perform any of its obligations or is otherwise in default hereunder, Optionee shall have the right to terminate this Agreement, obtain a refund of the Option Payment paid by Optionee, and/or to seek such other relief Optionee may have at law or in equity, including, without limitation, seeking injunctive relief to prevent a sale of the Property to a party other than Optionee and the filing of an action for specific performance. Default by Optionor renders the Option Payment refundable notwithstanding any other language to the contrary in this Agreement. 6. Notices. Unless specifically stated otherwise in this Agreement, all notices, waivers, and demands required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing and delivered to the addresses set forth below, by one of the following methods: (a) hand delivery, whereby delivery is deemed to have occurred at the time of delivery; (b) a nationally recognized overnight courier company, whereby delivery is deemed to have occurred the business day following deposit with the courier; (c) registered United States mail, signature required and postage -prepaid, whereby delivery is deemed to have occurred on the third business day following deposit with the United States Postal Service; or (d) electronic transmission (email) provided that the transmission is completed no later than 11:59 p.m. Pacific time on a business day and the original also is sent via United States Mail, whereby delivery is deemed to have occurred at the end of the business day on which electronic transmission is completed. To Optionor: Name: Robert Siew Address: 15310 SE 43rd Place, Bellevue, WA 98006 Telephone: 425-643-3 83 8 Email: Robsiew@comcast.net 3 Packet Pg. 437 8.2.c With a copy to: Name: Andrew Goodrich Address:601 Union Street, Suite 2600 Seattle, WA 98101-4000 Telephone: 206.654.2428 Facsimile: 206.340.25 63 Email: Goodrich@lasher.com To Optionee: Name: Angie Feser City of Edmonds Parks, Recreation & Human Services Director 700 Main Street Edmonds WA 98026 Telephone: 425-771-0256 Email: angie.feser@edmondswa.gov with a copy to: Name: Jeff Taraday Lighthouse Law Group PLLC Address: 600 Stewart Street, Suite 400 Seattle, WA 9101 Telephone: 206-273-7440 Email: Jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com 0 a� CU a� 0 L a rn L cu E CU J Packet Pg. 438 8.2.c Any parry to this Agreement may change its address for purposes of this Section 6 by giving written notice as provided in this Section 6. All notices and demands delivered by a party's attorney on a parry's behalf shall be deemed to have been delivered by said party. Notices shall be valid only if served in the manner provided for in this Section 6. 7. Optionee's Right to Inspect. (a) In conducting inspections related to due diligence or feasibility or otherwise accessing the Property, Optionee shall at all times comply with all laws and regulations of all applicable governmental authorities. In connection with such inspections, neither Optionee nor any of Optionee's representatives shall: (i) unreasonably interfere with or permit unreasonable interference with any person occupying or providing service at the Property; or (ii) unreasonably interfere with the business of Optionor (or any of its tenants) conducted at the Property or unreasonably disturb the use or occupancy of any occupant of the Property. (b) Optionee shall schedule and coordinate all inspections or other access thereto with Optionor and shall give Optionor at least FIVE (5) business days' prior notice thereof. Optionor shall be entitled to have a representative present at all times during each such inspection or other access. Optionor shall allow the Optionee's representatives unlimited access to the Property and to other information pertaining thereto in the possession or within the control of Optionor for the purpose of the inspections and any due diligence undertaken by the Optionee. (c) In the event of termination of the Option, Optionee shall provide to Optionor at no cost, electronic copies of any reports, studies or written conclusions made by Optionee during the Option Period. (d) Optionee shall not perform any invasive testing including environmental inspections beyond a Phase 1 assessment or contact the tenants without obtaining Optionor's prior written consent. Optionee shall restore the Property and all improvements to substantially the same condition they were in prior to the inspection. 8. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which when taken together shall constitute one and the same document. 9. Time of Essence. Optionor and Optionee hereby acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term, condition, obligation, and provision hereof and that failure to timely perform any of the terms, conditions, obligations, or provisions hereof by either party shall constitute a material breach of and a non -curable (but waivable) default under this Agreement by the party so failing to perform. 10. Entire Agreement; No Representations. This Agreement constitutes the sole and entire agreement of the parties to this Agreement with respect to the subject matter contained herein and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous understandings and agreements, both written and oral, with respect to such subject matter. This Agreement is entered into after full 5 Packet Pg. 439 8.2.c investigation by each party and neither party is relying upon any statement or representation made by the other party not set forth in this Agreement. 11. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. 12. Attorney Fees. If either Optionor or Optionee institutes suit against the other concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party is entitled to reasonable attorney fees and costs. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] 0 Packet Pg. 440 8.2.c IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Optionor and Optionee hereto have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date. OPTIONOR: EASTERN INVESTMENT CORPORATION, a washington corporation an Name: Title: SOUTHEAST 888 INVESTMENT LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company By: Name: Title: OPTIONEE: CITY OF EDMONDS, a Washington municipal corporation an Name: Mike Nelson Title: Mayor 7 Packet Pg. 441 8.2.c A A EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description A portion of Tracts 1, 2, and 3, Lake McAleer Five Acre Tracts, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 5 of Plats, page 48, records of Snohomish County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of above said Tract 3; Thence North 0°45'50" East along the East line of said Tract 3, 634.13 feet to a point 10 feet South of the Northeast corner of lot 3; Thence North 88°29'56" West parallel to the North line of said plat, 201.64 feet; Thence South 0°43'57" West parallel to the West line of above said Tract 3, 176.96 feet to a point 135.00 feet North of the South line of North one-half of said Tract 3; Thence North 88°28'07" West parallel to said South line 130.00 feet to the East line of above said Tract 2; Thence North 0°43'57" East along said East line 176.89 feet to a point 10.00 feet South of the Northeast corner of said Tract 2; Thence North 88°29'56" West parallel to the North line of above said Plat 130.00 feet; Thence South 0°43'57" West parallel to the East line of said Tract 2, 125.00 feet; Thence North 88°29'56" West parallel to the North line of said Plat 218.43 feet to an intersection with a curve on the Easterly right of way line of Highway 99 (center point which bears South 64017'03" East a distance of 2814.79 feet); Thence Southwesterly along the arc of said curve to the Left, consuming a central angle of 9°56'56" a distance of 488.72 feet; Thence South 74'1356" East on a radial line of said curve, a distance of 10.00 feet to an intersection with a curve on the Easterly right of way line of Highway 99 (center point which bears South 74013'56" East a distance of 2804.79 feet); Thence Southwesterly along the arc of said curve to the left, consuming a central angle of 0°56'39" a distance of 46.22 feet to the South line of Tract 1 in above said plat; Thence South 88'26'18" East along the South line of Tracts 1, 2, 3 in above said Plat, a distance of 848.72 feet to the true point of beginning; Except those portions acquired by or conveyed to the State of Washington for SR 104. Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington. B That part of the North 135 feet of Tracts 1 and 2, Lake McAleer Five Acre Tracts, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 5 of Plats, page 48, records of Snohomish County, Washington, lying Easterly of State Road No. 1 (U.S. Highway 99); Except the East 130 feet; And except the North 10 feet thereof conveyed to Snohomish County for road by deed recorded under Auditor's File Number 693550; And except that portion conveyed to the State of Washington for Primary State Highway No. 1 by deed recorded under Auditor's File Number 1646398. m a a m 0 a rn rn Y E _ �a J Packet Pg. 442 8.2.c EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description it ate in t e o nt o no o is tate o as ington at portion o racts an La e c leer i e cre racts accor ing to t e plat t ereo recor a in of e o lats page recor s o no o is o nt as ington escri a as ollo s eginning at t o intersection o t e o f easterl rig t o a line o tate ig a o to as sai rig to a line e iste prior to arc it t e o t line o t e ort eet as eas re parallel it t e ast line o sai tract a ence esterl along sai o t line to a point is is eet o t easterl en eas re at rig tangles ro t e w lines r e o tate ig a o to ence ort easterl parallel it sai line s r e to a point opposite ig a ngineers station o ence along a c r e to t o rig t o ing a ra i s o eet to a point on t o o f line o t t opposite ig a a ngineers tation t an eet o t erl t ere ro rn ence asterl along sai o f line tot e o t easterl rig to a line o tate ig a o to L ence o t esterl along sai rig to a line to t e point o eginning E it ate in t e o nt o no o is tate o as ington J m U) �a at portion o ract La e c leer i e cre racts accor ing to t e plat t ereo recor a in of e o lats page recor s o no o is o nt as ington escri a as ollo s a eginning at a point opposite ig a ngineers tation ( ereina ter re erre to as ) I on t e I line s r e o 0 t treet to eri ian en a an eet ort easterl t ere ro sai point also eing on t e c o f easterl rig to a line o as sai rig to a e iste prior to arc .2 ence ort ester) to a point opposite on t e lines r e o sai ig a an eet o t easterl a O t ere ro ence ort easterl in a straig t line to a point opposite an eet o t easterl t ere ro 0 ence ort easterl in a straig t line to a point opposite an eet o t easterl t ere ro ence ort easterl in a straig t line to a point opposite an eet o t easterl t ere ro U- ence ort easterl in a straig t line to a point opposite an eet o t easterl t ere ro 0 ence ort easterl in a straig t line to a point opposite an eet o t easterl t ere ro c) ence ort easterl in a straig t line to a point opposite an eet o t easterl t ere ro 0 ence ort easterl in a straig t line to a point opposite an eet o t easterl t ere ro a� ence ort easterl in a straig t line to a point on t e o t line o t e ort eet as eas re parallel it t e ast line o sai tract is point is eet o t easterl en eas re at rig tangles ro t e line o sai ig a aster) along sai o f line to t o o f easterl rig t o a line o as sai rig to a line a iste CO prior to arc c ence o t ester) along sai rig to a line tot a point o eginning •L O it ate in t e o nt o no o is tate o as ington c a) arcel - - - arcel - - - arcel - - - arcel - - - arcel E - - - arcel - - - arcel - - - arcel - - - arcel - - - arcel - - - arcel - - - �a Packet Pg. 443 8.2.c EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION ^F:Fi� fib Packet Pg. 444 8.2.c EXHIBIT B PURCHASE AGREEMENT — CERTAIN MATERIAL TERMS The following are certain material terms of the purchase and sale agreement ("Purchase Agreement") as described in Section 4 of this Agreement: 1. Subject Property: The Property shall be the same Property that is the subject of this Agreement. 2. Purchase Price: The Purchase Price shall be THIRTY-SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS AND ZERO CENTS ($37,000,000.00) all cash at closing. The Option Payment shall not count toward the Purchase Price. 3. Earnest Money Deposit: The Earnest Money Deposit shall be: a. ONE MILLION DOLLARS AND ZERO CENTS ($1,000,000.00); b. credited toward the Purchase Price; c. deposited with the escrow agent within FOURTEEN (14) days of mutual execution of the Purchase Agreement; d. non-refundable as to FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.) upon release of title contingency (see 4.c, below); e. non-refundable as to the remaining FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.) upon release of the due diligence / feasibility contingency (see 4.b, below). 4. Contingencies: The Purchase Agreement shall be subject to the following contingencies: a. A financing contingency, which shall be released no later than ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY(120) days after mutual execution of the Purchase Agreement; b. A due diligence / feasibility contingency, which shall be released no later than ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY (120) days after mutual execution of the Purchase Agreement; c. An acceptable title contingency, which shall be released no later than SIXTY (60) days after mutual execution of the Purchase Agreement. 5. Closing: The closing of the transaction shall occur on or before June 30, 2025. 6. Title: Title shall be conveyed by statutory warranty deed, subject to any exceptions shown on a survey provided by Optionee. The title company shall be Chicago Title Insurance Company in Everett, WA. 7. Leases: Seller shall not renew or enter into any leases in a manner that would extend the lease expiration past the closing date, provided, however, that Optionee understands that there is a current lease which terminates on Jan. 31, 2029. 8. Brokers: Seller represents and warrants to Purchaser that it dealt with no broker in connection with, nor has any broker had any part in bringing about, this transaction and that no commissions are owed by either party. Purchaser represents and warrants to Seller that the broker it used to facilitate this transaction was engaged by the Purchaser on a 0 Packet Pg. 445 consulting basis and that no commission is owed to that broker in connection with this transaction. 9. Excise Tax: Seller shall pay all excises taxes associated with the transaction. 10. Assi ng ment: Purchaser may assign part or all of its interest in the Purchase Agreement without the prior written consent of the Seller, provided: (a) Purchaser gives Seller written notice of such assignment within THIRTY (30) days after such assignment; and (b) Purchaser's assignee executes an instrument in form substantially the same as that attached to the Purchase Agreement agreeing to be bound by all the terms and conditions of the Purchase Agreement and agreeing that at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the acreage of the Property will be used for public purposes. 11. AS IS. The sale shall be "as is". 12. 1031 Exchange. If Optionor intends for this transacton to be a part of a Section 1031 like -kind exchange, then Optionee agrees to cooperate in the completion of the exchange so long as they incur no additional liability or expense. 10 Packet Pg. 446 8.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 12/5/2023 Council 2024 Budget Deliberations Staff Lead: City Council Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History On October 2, Mayor Nelson presented the proposed 2024 City Budget. On October 17 and November 6, Council held public hearings on the 2024 budget. Recommendation N/A Narrative City Councilmembers will have discussion on the budget and amendments they would like to consider for the 2024 City Budget. Packet Pg. 447