Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2024-05-07 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 MAY 7, 2024, 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 PRESENTATION 1. National Police Week Proclamation (5 min) 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. Edmonds City Council Agenda May 7, 2024 Page 1 7. RECEIVED FOR FILING 1. Written Public Comments (0 min) 8. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Special Meeting Minutes April 16, 2024 2. Approval of Council Minutes April 16, 2024 3. Approval of Special Meeting Minutes April 18, 2024 4. Approval of Council Minutes April 23, 2024 S. Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments. 6. Approval of claim checks and wire payments. 9. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Options for City of Edmonds Fire/EMS Services (45 min) 10. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. Consent to Holdover Tenancy granting a holdover tenancy to T-Mobile West Tower, LLC (10 min) 2. Consent to Holdover Tenancy granting a holdover tenancy to Seattle SMSA Limited Partnership, d/b/a Verizon Wireless (5 min) 3. Ordinance to Adopt Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) Code (AMD2023-0004) (25 min) 4. Landmark 99 Update (45 min) 11. COUNCIL COMMENTS 12. MAYOR'S COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT Edmonds City Council Agenda May 7, 2024 Page 2 4.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/7/2024 National Police Week Proclamation Staff Lead: Carolyn LaFave Department: Mayor's Office Preparer: Carolyn LaFave Background/History In 1962 President Kennedy proclaimed May 15 as National Peace Officers Memorial Day and the calendar week in which May 15 falls as National Police Week. Staff Recommendation n/a Narrative This proclamation recognizes National Police Week and honors the service and sacrifice of those law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty while protecting our communities. Attachments: NPW 2024 Packet Pg. 3 4.1.a Prlarlamat,]Ll" City of Edmonds •Office of the Mayor National Police Week 2024 WHEREAS, In 1962, President John F. Kennedy signed a proclamation designating May 15t" as Peace Officers Memorial Day and the week in which it falls as National Police Week.; and WHEREAS, each year we pause to recognize the 900,000+ law enforcement officers serving across the United States and remember the more than 23,000 law enforcement officers who have made the ultimate sacrifice and have been killed in the line of duty since the first recorded death in 1786; and WHEREAS, Since Washington became a state in 1889, 319 officers have been killed in Washington State, the most recent being Washington State Patrol Trooper Christopher Gadd on March 2, 2024; and WHEREAS, in 2023, 136 federal, state, and local law enforcement officers lost their lives. And to date this year, 24 officers have given their lives in the line of duty; and c N WHEREAS, the names of these dedicated public servants are engraved on the walls of the National a Law Enforcement Officers Memorial in Washington, D.C.; and Z a� WHEREAS, the service and sacrifice of all officers killed in the line of duty will be honored during the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund's 36t" Annual Candlelight Vigil, on the evening of May 13, 2024; and a WHEREAS, May 15 is designated as Peace Officers Memorial Day, in honor of all fallen officers and their families; NOW THEREFORE, I, Mike Rosen, Mayor of the city of Edmonds, formally designate May 9 - 18, 2024, as Police Week in Edmonds, and publicly salute the service of law enforcement officers in our community and in communities across the nation. �G% Mike Rosen, Mayor I May 7, 2024 Packet Pg. 4 7.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/7/2024 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 April 16, 2024 and April 29, 2024. Attachments: Public Comment May 7, 2024 Packet Pg. 5 7.1.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — May 7, 2024 Online Form 2024-04-17 05:13 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 4/17/2024 8:13:07 AM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona FirstName Natalie LastName Seitz Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Comp Plan and SR99 Subarea Comments Good Evening. I am commenting today because I am deeply concerned about the Comp Plan engagement and neighborhoods along SR99. Right now the City has the worst -case in terms of protections for this area. Zoning was allowed in excess of the planned action, the planned action was repealed (but not the zoning), the City failed to undertake the SEIS and has removed it from the Comp Plan EIS budget. The Comp plan EIS will have the existing zoning as the baseline and therefore cannot capture impacts associated with the 2017 upzone to CG. I also want to personally express how difficult it is for me to participate in this process. As an engaged resident I know the repeal occurred, however it is shown on all the engagement maps and questions to the public. So how do I provide feedback when the information you are providing to engage me is wrong and you have not communicated your plan for resolving the issues identified for the SEIS? How do I talk to my neighbors to form a coalition? This is a ridiculous disadvantage to place on communities that are already underserved and face many barriers to public process. Thank you for your time and consideration of these comments. Online Form 2024-04-20 09:10 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 4/21/2024 12:10:11 AM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona FirstName Debbie LastName Winger Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic 100th Ave w Comments I am very confused about the traffic revision on 100th Ave wand 238th st sw. This is a huge to traffic back up now! Coming from the north there isn't enough space to turn on to 99th place where there are 30 homes. I cant imagine why this traffic change happened!? There was already a backup coming from the south with two lanes at this intersection ... now it's down to one lane? Why? I only see bad traffic accidents happening from this . Can I please get any clarity for this discussion? Packet Pg. 6 7.1.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — May 7, 2024 Online Form 2024-04-23 05:35 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 4/23/2024 8:35:42 AM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona FirstName Natalie LastName Seitz Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Traffic Safety Comments The City has many options for how to approach traffic calming, pedestrian and vehicle safety. I believe that one of the targeted intersections already has traffic calming plans in place as part of the WSDOT grants for the highway. All these options can be explored through the Comp plan in a way that collects feedback on the idea from folks in the areas identified. Traffic cameras don't represent a positive investment in the community. The camera itself is fully funded by a private company and the investments the Citywould make are all through the court system and not -within the areas impacted. There is a growing body of research about how municipal decisions shape the number and type of interactions diverse communities have with law enforcement. The cameras also came as a budget proposal, which makes this not just a safety but a revenue issue. I think both safety and revenue lenses need to be applied to this proposal. From the revenue side, the City has a long history of adopting codes that extract funds from outside the view corridor, and communities outside the view corridor have in many cases (not all - the Mee property with tree funds is a great exception) have not seen the corresponding City investment. If this is just about safety then dedicating the funding generated from the cameras into the intersections and streets most impacted would be a great way for the City to prioritize the safety of these areas! I remember many discussions about an intersection near Francis Anderson and the "near misses" that have happened there. How the City "hadn't quite gotten it right" with the several built versions of the traffic configuration. Why is that intersection and street not on the list the police put forward since the City has put so much tax -payer resources towards it? I don't wish an accident or harm on anyone but I can't help but feel the City has not been prioritizing the places most in need for traffic safety improvements. w a� E E 0 U 3 a _ m w e Packet Pg. 7 8.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/7/2024 Approval of Special Meeting Minutes April 16, 2024 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: 2024-04-16 Council Special Minutes Packet Pg. 8 8.1.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES April 16, 2024 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Rosen, Mayor Vivian Olson, Council President Chris Eck, Councilmember Will Chen, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER STAFF PRESENT Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator The Edmonds City Council special meeting was called to order at 5:59 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. 2. INTERVIEW CANDIDATES FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY BOARD OR COMMISSION 1. INTERVIEW PB CANDIDATE LEE HANKINS FOR APPOINTMENT Councilmembers interviewed Lee Hankins for appointment to the planning board (responses in italics) Mayor Rosen invited Mr. Hankin to tell the council about himself. We relocated to Edmonds 15 months ago from Portland, Oregon and like it here a lot better. I have a unique background: military, business and consulting. Due to my 33 years in the military, I believe in service and would like to give back. When I saw the planning board position open, I thought that was something I could certainly do so I submitted my application, had a good meeting with the mayor, and would like to serve on the planning board. Councilmember Paine expressed appreciation for his background and thanked him for his service, recalling a former planning board member, Todd Cloutier, had an identical background and left less than a year ago. She asked his experience and process for meshing policy and regulatory issues. My background is interesting because as a commanding officer of a nuclear submarine, tactical planning was an everyday/hour event. I also bring significant time at the Department of Defense in Washington D. C. where I worked on strategic issues, such as how to put a plan into action. Being a nuclear officer in the U.S. Navy, there is no better trained person on the planet to understand regulations. I research thoroughly, I understand regulations, and I seek ways to implement those policies to ensure they, a) are done, b) make sense, and c) fit what we're trying to do. I have a lot of experience doing that from an audit and regulatory standpoint, taking instructions/guidelines/rules/plans and implementing them into an executable strategy. That is what I've done in the past and look forward to do that with the planning board members in the future. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 1 Packet Pg. 9 Councilmember Tibbott referred to the planning board's consideration of regulations related to accessory dwelling units (ADU) and asked his thoughts on planning their development, and implementing strategies and policies by the end of the year. I read My Edmonds News daily and have been watching the planning board proceedings and comments on that topic. It's not a great thing to dive into the deep end when you don't understand how to swim. It is important that I read the regulations and understand what we're trying to achieve. I understand growth is a very importantpart of what theplanning board and council is working on and the planning board has provided the council with options for growth which includes ADUs. I was thinking about that today; how would that be implemented in my neighborhood, what does that look like, whether the utility companies were aware and ready to support increased development, is the parking sufficient, etc. There is a growth initiative and ADUs are part of that; it is important to research and work together to come up with a plan that works for the city and meets the goals for growth in the future. Councilmember Nand commented almost every person on the council was a volunteer for one of the City's boards, commission, or committees. As a member of the planning board, he will likely confront heated discussion in the community about growth and density. She asked him to address programs like Housing for Heros that provide affordable and more moderate means for home equity opportunities for active duty military, first responders or other civil servant roles who find it difficult to afford housing in the communities they serve. That is one of the things that interests me the most; how do you bring all the disparate pieces together and make it equitable for everybody? That is a real challenge. Having gone through the home buying process in Edmonds myself, I understand that very well; it is not cheap, but it is a beautiful place to live. I would try to include in discussions watching out for individuals such as veterans and others who chose to live here, but find it difficult. I'm not sure what that looks like, but having a diverse community should be a priority. I've taken my grandson to the fields across the street a number of times, it's a happy place with people of all types, colors, walks, etc. I really enjoy living here and would like to work on that in the future. Councilmember Eck said she has been on the Snohomish County planning commission and was certain he would find it rewarding. She honored his experience and was excited about the background he brings to the planning board. There is a lot of heaving lifting happening at the planning board. With his military background, she asked what experience he brings to a team of people who do not always see eye to eye and help break through inevitable disagreements. I ended my military career 11-12 years ago and then went into business where I was able to run a division of a construction company focused on saving energy. It was a rude awakening for me, as a captain previously, not being able to say this is the way we're going to do things and everybody makes it happen. I learned early on that about the collaborative nature of getting the best out of everybody and ensuring everyone is part of the team, but also keeping us on track. I'm very good at keeping the end result in mind. We can talk about this, but at the end of the day, we're tasked with doing this. I'm able to wind my way through things in a very collaborative, non -demonstrative way to get to an end result that everyone's satisfied with and makes sense for the long haul. Councilmember Chen said the planning board and the city are in a critical time with the comprehensive plan and one thing they have in common is they all love Edmonds. He asked whether he felt the centers and hubs strategy was the right one. I think it is the right way to go. One of most important things we used to keep in mind in the military was standards; the standards of operations and goals we must meet and performance below that wasn't acceptable. When standardizing things to some extent, it is easier to set a benchmark against which it can be measured; measuring is important to prove to people that stuff is getting done and things are happening. I think it is the right way to go, but in reading My Edmonds News, not everyone feels that way. It is a bit of a win -lose situation, but I think it is the right way to go for now. As I learn more in the future, I hope to understand it better and be able to participate in a way that achieves that goal. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 2 Packet Pg. 10 8.1.a Councilmember Dotsch said one of the things that tends to happen is one size fits all approaches from the state as well as within the City. Areas of Edmonds are unique and land use is a big factor the City is planning for. Being newer to Edmonds, she asked how he learned about the different areas of Edmonds. When I first moved to Edmonds, I found the Facebook group My Edmonds Neighbors which is a tremendous resource regarding the neighborhood. I have a hunting dog and hunt birds in the fall. I needed an unconfined place to run my dog and from that site, I learned about Edmonds Church of God on 220 which has a large area in the back. There is a wealth of knowledge in that group and I've met a lot of people in the community. I live off 76`h in Perrinville and am routinely at the waterfront with my dog. I love all the areas of Edmonds and have met a number of people who live in Esperance and other areas. Today when I was walking my dog, I was thinking about how narrow the walkway is on 76`h and assume there are areas in Edmonds that do not have sidewalks which brings up the idea of how to make the city equitable and safe. Mayor Rosen advised approval of candidates is on Consent Agenda during the regular meeting. 2. INTERVIEW ESCC CANDIDATE DR. KAREN REID FOR APPOINTMENT Councilmembers interviewed Dr. Karen Reid for appointment to the sister city commission (responses in italics). Mayor Rosen invited Dr. Reid to tell the council about herself. I am a retired educator, working with preschool to college students for 40 years. My passion has always been to enhance the lives of children and families. In my 40 years as an educator, I also worked with central office staff and the Association of Washington School Principals. My husband and I both appreciate Japanese culture. We have a lot of artwork and things in our home, have hosted students from Japan when our children were in high school and I would love to continue that through the Sister City Commission partnership. As an educator teaching on both sides of Highway 99 north and south, Edmonds is a diverse place and I'm hopeful the opportunity to work with students visiting Edmonds and visiting Hekinan will encourage kids throughout the city. Councilmember Nand asked about increasing diversity and outreach for young people in Edmonds. I have a lot to learn about the city's outreach, but it seems like it would be important to get the message out to schools, middle and high schools particularly. I would also like to explore opportunities for scholarships. Council President Olson thanked Dr. Reid for applying, commenting her enthusiasm for youth and international travel is a perfect confluence and will be a great addition to the SCC. Councilmember Paine recognized Dr. Reid's wealth of talent, commenting she will find many like-minded commissioners interested in incorporating youth in all they do and her background and love of Japanese culture will be a perfect fit for the SCC. She asked if there were other initiative she was interested in working on. I understand there is also an adult exchange. I'm interested in sharing the culture. I don't know a lot about what's happened in the past, but allowing the adult community to learn what youngpeople are doing would be helpful. My goal in life is building bridges and to help build understanding; when we know more about people, we tend to respect each other more. Councilmember Chen said he was hosted by a family in Iowa when he came to the United States when he was 24 years old so he knows the big heart it takes to host an international student. He thanked her for hosting international students and for applying for the SCC. Mayor Rosen advised approval of candidates is on Consent Agenda during the regular meeting. 3. INTERVIEW PB CANDIDATE STEVEN LI FOR APPOINTMENT Councilmembers interviewed Steven Li for appointment to the planning board (responses in italics). Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 3 Packet Pg. 11 Mayor Rosen invited Mr. Li to tell the council about himself. I have been the executive director of Habitat for Humanity of Snohomish County for three years. My education and background are in architecture; I worked as a licensed architect for several years as well as in the real estate construction industry. My background is in housing and spaces which is why the position on the planning board interested me. What drew me to Habitat and the nonprofit, in many of my previous roles, I was serving individuals, either homebuyers or people constructing or remodeling homes and I missed thinking about communities and how to strengthen communities through places, spaces and buildings which is both exciting and extremely challenging. I have been in Edmonds approximately six years and have lived in a number of places from the west coast to the east coast and experienced a lot of different communities from larger cities to smaller towns. There are a lot of similarities between sizes and scales, but the end of the day it is about ensuring there are communities that love their places and are willing to work together. Councilmember Eck commented on his unique skills of architecture and human services as well as his experience with Habitat for Humanities. She asked with that unique mix of executive leadership, architecture and nonprofit, what unique perspective he will bring to the planning board. In my role as the executive of a nonprofit, every day is filled with many priorities and very limited resources. I'm always trying to find the holistic picture of what is important now and tomorrow and what factors need to be considered to prioritize what we can do with the resources we have. I do that day to day, but it is not just about Humanity as an organization, but representing the community and what the community needs the most, and serving as a bridge between the community and our organization and what we can do with the resources we have contrasted with what is required and wanted of Habitat. I haven't figured out all the answers, but in that struggle I've learned the answers aren't always easy and we need to understand the bigger picture before tackling the minute details that often get lost. Councilmember Paine explained the planning board reviews a lot of regulations and policies before they reach the council, considering community input and board members' individual experience. She asked what in his background will help him address that, his experience in in doing that, and what was he looking forward to doing on the planning board. I asked Mayor Rosen what the planning board does. There is some flux in what the board does although a lot of their focus in the coming year will be regarding the comprehensive plan which will be very important and integral to development over the coming years. One of the things I bring from Habitat's mission and the way they way operate is most people know the organization as builders/developers of affordable housing, but I like to tell people we view housing as both a product and a process. Habitat brings people together to build homes; participating in the process and building community is almost as important. I see the comprehensive plan similarly; it will be a big stack of papers with a lot of policies and recommendations for moving the city forward, but I'm excited to see how thatprocess can be used to facilitate the right conversations. Everyone has very strong opinions about what they want the city to be and a lot of people want the same things, but the minutia and technicalities look different. The comprehensive plan process and conversation can be used to bridge the gap. Councilmember Nand recognized the unique perspective he brings to the planning board. The council talks about zoning a lot; she is passionate about providing affordable, equity opportunities for middle and working class neighbors to have stability and build intergenerational wealth for their families in a very high value real estate community like Edmonds. She is interested in things like residents owned manufactured housing communities, more condominiumization, DADUs/ADUs, etc. She asked about his ideas for building home equity opportunities for middle and working class community members. My answer would be to do all those things. If we want equity and diversity in Edmonds, we need diversity in housing types. Zoning historically over the last 100 years has been restricted to single family which is why Edmonds and other nearby cities look the same. Not all families have three kid and two parents that live in a four bed/three bath home. There needs to be single family studios as well as single family homes, cooperative housing, co - ownership, and ADUs. The conversation around how HB 1337 is implemented is important as well as HB Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 4 Packet Pg. 12 8.1.a 1110 related to middle housing. There needs to be housing between single family and large multifamily. When I talk to people about affordable housing, people only see one thing, large, towering multifamily housing that looks like public housing and brings with it the stigma of whatever public housing was over the last 60-70 years. They don't know that affordable housing can look like the house next door, like an ADU, a duplex, or a housing type we haven't seen yet. We need to provide more flexibility and adaptability in zoning and land use codes so people can be creative based on what people need. There are a lot of restrictions in the code that prevent that. I would like to see a conversation about how we can allow more flexibility and creativity in our zoning. Councilmember Chen explained the comprehensive plan focuses on the next 20 years of planning. To meet those growth targets, the City is looking at a hubs and centers strategy. He asked if he was familiar with that and did he think it was the right strategy. It is going in the right direction, creating more variability in the density in different places. There may still be some restrictiveness in determining this street needs to be X height or X stories. I know cursory about the concept, but not how it will be executed in different neighborhoods. Every neighborhood's personality, context and requirements are different. I would like to see a certain amount of adaptability of the plan and code to allow each neighborhood to grow more organically based on what the residents need. I don't know enough details to provide a concrete answer. Councilmember Dotsch referred to his comment about resources and asked about the top three resources in Edmonds that he valued and one resource Edmonds was lacking. Number I resource is the people; everyone is here because we love the city and care about the community. One of the reasons my family moved to Edmonds was the strong community identity and fabric. The next resource is the current infrastructure. Edmonds is one of the older cities in Snohomish County so it has the infrastructure that supports a certain urban development mixed with other amenities such as Puget Sound, the ferry, adjacency to other places, etc. There are also a lot of unique and established neighborhoods in Edmonds, something that does not exist in the rest of Snohomish County or even in parts of Seattle, that have an identity and cohesion that could be built on. The resource everyone needs more of is money. With fluctuations in the economy and Covid, Edmonds and other jurisdictions are influx. That is a challenge, but also creates an opportunity to discuss priorities. Mayor Rosen advised approval of candidates is on Consent Agenda during the regular meeting. 4. INTERVIEW ADB CANDIDATE TODD STINE FOR APPOINTMENT Councilmembers interviewed Todd Stine for appointment to the Architectural Design Board (responses in italics). Mayor Rosen invited Mr. Stine to tell the council about himself. I am a licensed architect, have been practicing for over 35 years and am the managing partner of ZGF Architects' Seattle office which has about 160 people and does primarily commercial institutional products including Seattle Children's Hospital, Fred Hutch Cancer Center, a lot of work for Microsoft including five buildings in their new expansion, new Expedia headquarters in Interbay and a lot of smaller scaleprojects such as the north clinic for Seattle Children near Providence Everett, and the newer tower at Providence Everett Hospital. I've been a resident of Edmonds for about 12 years; my wife grew up in Edmonds. I've grown to love Edmonds and wish we'd moved here sooner from Seattle. It is time for me to give back to the city. In my career I've often been on the applicant side of design review boards in Seattle, Bellevue and other jurisdictions so I'm familiar with the process and understand the give and take and compromise that needs to be found to make projects successful and to meet the community's needs as well as the owner's return on investment. I'm interested in being on the other side of the table and contribute to Edmonds. Councilmember Paine thanked him for his contributions to the way Seattle looks. The landscape has changed and design review boards are limited in what they are able to do. She asked his thoughts about Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 5 Packet Pg. 13 8.1.a how that will look when applied in Edmonds, acknowledging the projects in Edmonds will likely not be as large as the ones he has worked on. Making sure whatever is proposed fits into the place it is going, that it feels part of its immediate context. Downtown has a lovely scale, the waterfront has its own experience, SR 104 as a primary entrance needs some love to feel to more welcoming and feel like a gracious entry, and Highway 99 is a whole different ball of wax. There need to be different solutions for each of those that adjusts to the immediate context in terms ofscale, relationship to the street and becoming a more pedestrian friendly city, particularly on SR-104 and Highway 99. Councilmember Nand commented for laypeople the work of the ADB is impenetrable, but very important as it relates to zoning, permitting and building. She was in Orlando, Florida, recently where there are 3-4 story multifamily buildings with beautiful Spanish influence. If that type of building was more common in the Pacific NW, neighbors would be less annoyed when multifamily is proposed in their previously single family zoned neighborhood. The state mandates related to objective design standards limiting the ability to make a building look pretty and better integrate in a neighborhood. She asked his perspective on what standards the City should adopt for integrating multifamily, ADU, DADU and other housing into the community. There is a building on SR-104 has its back to SR-104 with a big retaining wall and fence. I understand from return on investment why the developer wanted to do that, but as a presence on the street and someone driving into the city, it doesn't look good. Housing is critical to making the city more equitable and toprovide opportunityfor intergenerational wealth. There needs to be ways to encourage more housing in ways that create an inviting environment, not just money -generating tool for the owner, but creating community. How do we create spaces and buildings that are backdrops to creating good communities. Councilmember Dotsch commented architecture can create a streetscape of interest and beauty if done thoughtfully. She asked him two things in architecture that bring this to reality. Certainly scale is incredibly important both in terms of how it relates to the context such as buildings on either side, the street width, the scale of the landscaping and most importantly to the scale of people. Having openness, whether that is windows or a colonnade or other way that makes it feel like it is penetrable because when an impenetrable fortress or wall is created, particularly on the streetscape, that defeats what we hope for the city. Mayor Rosen advised approval of candidates is on Consent Agenda during the regular meeting. 5. INTERVIEW EAC CANDIDATE BETH HENKES FOR APPOINTMENT Councilmembers interviewed Beth Henkes for appointment to the Edmonds art commission (responses in italics). Mayor Rosen invited Ms. Henkes to tell the council about herself. I come from a long and storied arts past. My first career was a production stage manager in professional theater for 10 years in New York City and regionally. While in New York, I also worked in casting for public theater, aka Shakespear in the Park, and worked in a talent agency. I was the Assistant Manager at Shakespeare and Company Booksellers which at the time was in the West Village near NYU. When I left New York at the behest of my now husband whose aunt lived in Sequim, the only thing I knew how to do was books. We met in a bookstore in the mid -west and Opened Third Place Books and then both went to the University Bookstore in Bellevue as the buyer and manager for several years. My book career was about 15 years long. I also spent about four years at a small independent publisher in Bellevue rooted in photography and conservation. I started a division there, partnering with conservation organizations all over the U.S. I also have the Idea Hound where I do a lot of process and event project work and have done several hundred events as well as a lot of marketing. Councilmember Nand was excited about her experience in creative oriented businesses, something Edmonds' arts district is known for. There are several aspects that would be a good fit for her such as marketing the arts corridor, arts walk and events like the free summer concert series. Public art helps highlight the cultural identities of the various neighborhood business districts such as Highway 99 which Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 6 Packet Pg. 14 8.1.a has the International District and a civil rights history that art could explain to future generations. She asked where her passion was as a member of the arts commission. Because I have such a vast background, I am usually interested in everything. If I had to choose a word, collaboration has always been my thing. I am big on taking solo factions that do not understand they can work together and introducing them to each other. That is something I've done my entire life personally as well as in the business world. When I moved to Edmonds 10 years ago, I did not understand how sprawling Edmonds is; Edmonds has large boundaries and it is important to incorporate all areas; Edmonds is not just the bowl. Council President Olson commented it seemed like she would have been eligible for any seat on the Arts Commission which will give her a unique opportunity to get the different areas working together like she has done in other places. Councilmember Eck commented her skills and talents are exciting. She asked about her ideas for intergenerational art and community to engage different age groups. As we talk about diversity, there are so many pieces to diversity and age is a big one. I've encountered that in my working life and know as you get older, you start to get ignored, but that also happens at the opposite end of the spectrum and needs to be incorporate into the arts. I'd love to see theater and music groups, no matter how small, start kid programs and do things to invite the community in. There are a couple local businesses starting to do that such as reviving story hour at the book store, and No Talent Art Night at Art Spot which incorporates many aspects of diversity. By pulling in diverse groups, we will be able to capture a different demographic. Mayor Rosen during regular meeting approval of candidates is on Consent Agenda. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, the special council meeting was adjourned at 6:55 pm. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 7 Packet Pg. 15 8.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/7/2024 Approval of Council Minutes April 16, 2024 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: 2024-04-16 Council Minutes Packet Pg. 16 8.2.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES April 16, 2024 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Rosen, Mayor Vivian Olson, Council President Chris Eck, Councilmember Will Chen, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Oscar Antillon, Public Works Director Susan McLaughlin, Planning & Dev. Dir. Rob English, City Engineer Mike De Lilla, Senior Utilities Engineer Mike Clugston, Senior Planner 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 Rosen in the Council Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember Nand 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. 4. PRESENTATION EARTH DAY 2024 PROCLAMATION Mayor Rosen read a proclamation proclaiming April 22, 2024 as Earth Day in Edmonds and encouraging residents, businesses and institutions to use Earth Day to celebrate the earth and commit to building a sustainable and green economy. Mayor Rosen presented the proclamation to Brittany Ahman, Sound Salmon Solutions. Ms. Ahman said it was an honor to receive the proclamation. She thanked the City for funding the Edmonds Stewards program and Sound Salmon Solutions who manages the program. The Edmonds Stewards are a passionate group of volunteers dedicated to the restoration of City of Edmonds parks through habitat restoration including invasive vegetation removal and planting native trees and shrubs. Their work ensures Edmonds parks are Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 1 Packet Pg. 17 8.2.a suitable not only for the community but also for native wildlife such as birds, amphibians, mammals and pollinators. To date, the Edmonds Stewards have successfully cleared over 10 acres of invasive vegetation within City parks and planted over 3,000 native trees and shrubs all through volunteer efforts. Anyone interested in contributing to these efforts is invited to join them this Saturday in celebration of Earth Day at events from 10-noon including beach clean-ups at Marina Beach and Brackett's Landing North and forest restoration projects at Pine Ridge Park and Yost Park. Full details and registration information is available at SoundSalmonSolutions.org/events. Ms. Ahman continued, Edmonds Stewards are true believers that every day should be in celebration of the earth; not only will they be out this Saturday in celebration of Earth Day, they also invite community volunteers to join them every Saturday at Yost Park, the second Saturday of the month at Pine Ridge Park and the third Saturday of the month at Hutt Park. In addition there is a free training program on June 2 where community members can learn more about the Edmonds Stewards program, what is required to be an Edmonds Steward, and what goes into habitat restoration projects. 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Bob Danson, General Manager, Olympic View Water and Sewer District, thanked the City for working with the district to protect the community's drinking water resources by adopting the City CARA code. He also thanked City staff for collaborating with OVWSD staff, commenting it had been a great experience, the code has come a long way and the code is pretty good although there are still some tweaks needed. He referred to the concern he voiced in the past about infiltration of stormwater in general terms and offered more specifics. Stormwater contains pollutants; for instance, a sample study completed at the Madrona School in Edmonds shows there is PFAS in the stormwater being sent down into UIC wells that ultimately go to the water aquifer layer. The EPA just lowered the maximum contaminant levels of some PFAS elements due to the recognized health risks and it will continue to get worse as the PFAS epidemic continues. The levels at the Madrona School stormwater right now are above those new EPA limits. In a Lake Washington study by Ecology on total PFAS readings done in 2022, the median concentration for atmospheric deposits (rainwater) is 2.0 and 30 in stormwater. PFAS bioaccumulates, does not break down, is considered a forever chemical, and a soil layer is not a good filter as it goes through soil layers. Allowing these substances to infiltrate into the ground risks polluting the drinking water aquifer. At a minimum, OVWSD asks for one final modification, to go back to the proposed code to include the original recommendation of no UICs in the most vulnerable exposed QVA areas. Ardeth Weed, Edmonds, said she has passionately believed in the value of a diverse community her entire life. Her experiences as a California teacher, a small school administrator and the parent of two mixed -race children added to her passion. When city leaders heard about the name-calling of a Black woman on Sunset Avenue years ago and formed a diversity commission, she began attending meetings as a community member. When Donnie Griffin's term was up and she had been attending meetings for about three years, he convinced her to apply for the vacancy on the commission. She joked she represents old white women in the community. The work the diversity commission does such as providing grants to community groups for projects supporting diversity, and the annual film discussion series is important. None of it would have been accomplished without the support of the talented city staff, Patrick Doherty and Cindi Cruz who were replaced by the equally talented Todd Tatum and Megal Luttrell. She finished her 3-year term last December and did not reapply because as a senior with an aging brain, she believed others could better serve the community. She was right; she attended the February meeting as a community member and was absolutely thrilled to listen to the conversations and interactions of continuing and new members as they Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 2 Packet Pg. 18 8.2.a worked through the agenda. Although believing in the case is important, these members have actual experience in their jobs and lives of making their beliefs a reality. The depth of discussion, sharing of ideas and raising of relevant questions was impressive. The discussion included working with neighboring cities, with Snohomish County and with other organizations in the community to continue the work of the diversity commission to improve life in Edmonds for all citizens. She walked home with a smile on her face but also tears in her eyes; she is proud and happy to live in Edmonds, Washington. Theresa Hollis, Edmonds, referred to the CARA code and recommended approving the 2023 version of the CARA ordinance. OVWSD provides her water and she supports their advice, not the Edmonds planning board advice this year. The planning board was given incomplete information during their deliberations. They were told PFAS aquifer contamination was rare in Washington state, two known instances, but they were not focusing on the additional facts that 30 water systems in Washington exceed the state limit and 200 exceed the more strict federal limit. The science on PFAS is lagging behind the regulations from state and local government. Edmonds does not gain anything significant by adopting the 2024 version of the code language in the packet. She encouraged the council to adopt the more strict regulation against drilled wells and infiltration systems. The lack of a stormwater pipe network in parts of south Edmonds is not justification to have more lax regulations. From her perspective, this is not a judgment decision because neither the council nor she has the technical knowledge to evaluate whether OVWSD's advice or the planning board's advice is best. She believed it was a strategic decision for council; make the regulation more strict today to buy time for the experts at the state Department of Ecology to define their regulations or make it more lenient and hope nothing bad happens during their watch. If the council is lenient now with regard to stormwater management issue, heaven help us when the council is evaluating citywide mitigations from Herrara's EIS; what strategy to protect the environment will the council use then? She found it ironic she had to make this argument to the council during the same meeting as the Earth Day proclamation. Diane Buckshnis, Edmonds, said she has made her point many times on media, at the planning board and at council. The council needs to rethink some of their opinions about the CARA code. She concurred with Theresa Hollis' comments. The environment will always be here and the council needs to realize that just one unintended consequence could ruin the aquifer. She learned a lot while on council for 13 years and on the Salmon Recovery Council and believed it would be in the City best interest to approve the 2023 code that restricts digging. Edmonds is very unique and she was sure there would be ramifications from new bills once they were set in stone. She recalled very tough laws were passed related to crumb rubber; this is almost worse than crumb rubber. Clint Wright, Edmonds, a resident at 81 & Bell, suggested councilmembers drive up the hill and look at what's going on up there to get a good look at future Edmonds. Next, he urged the council to vote against language in the packet and instead support the more strict 2023 planning board recommendation. It is important to think about the environment more than how many dozens or hundreds of people will be moving to Edmonds. Joe Scordino, Edmonds, a 44 year resident of Edmonds and retired biologist, recommended disallowing any and all UIC wells throughout the CARA, both Deer Creek and the one that extends outside the Esperance area due to great uncertainty. It may not be on the council's watch that those aquifers are polluted, but it may be on someone else's watch. He questioned whether the council wanted to be responsible for what happens in the future. He recalled when dealing with natural resources, if there was any uncertainty, they took the risk adverse approach where risk is considered in decisions to ensure protection, in this case protecting future generations. These pollutants affect infants and fetuses, and the last thing anyone wants to learn 20 years from now is kids are deformed due to what is allowed today. He urged the council to disallow any and all UIC wells over a CARA, commenting allowing them doesn't make sense. If in the future there is some proof there is no effect, the regulations can be changed. He preferred the council be cautious and not move hastily regarding something there is little known about. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 3 Packet Pg. 19 8.2.a 7. RECEIVED FOR FILING 1. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR FILING 2. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS 8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 26, 2024 2. APPROVAL OF SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 2, 2024 3. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 2, 2024 4. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS 5. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE PAYMENTS 6. SNOHOMISH COUNTY - CITY OF EDMONDS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR MEE PARKLAND ACQUISITION 7. HANKINS PB APPOINTMENT CONFIRMATION 8. LI PB APPOINTMENT CONFIRMATION 9. REID ESCC APPOINTMENT CONFIRMATION 10. STINE ADB APPOINTMENT CONFIRMATION 11. HENKES EAC APPOINTMENT CONFIRMATION 12. 2023 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE ANNUAL REPORT 13. APPROVAL OF 5-FT DEDICATION FOR 98TH AVE W RIGHT-OF-WAY ADJACENT TO 22214 98TH AVE W 14. APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR KPG/PSOMAS TO PROVIDE DESIGN ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE PHASE 5 STORM UTILITY REPLACEMENT/REHABILITATION PROJECT 15. COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE SECTION 8 16. COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE - SECTION 13 9. COUNCIL BUSINESS POTENTIAL ACTION ON CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREA CODE AMENDMENT Mayor Rosen relayed staff planned to display motions and amendments on the screen in real time. Senior Planner Mike Clugston introduced Senior Utilities Engineer Mike De Lilla and Planning & Development Director Susan McLaughlin. Mr. Clugston explained this agenda item related to the CARA code which has been under review for the past year in collaboration with Olympic View Water and Sewer District (OVWSD). Staff does not have any new information to present tonight; everything was in the packet. Staff is requesting council vote to adopt the draft ordinance in the packet with no substantive changes. The ordinance represents best available science (BAS) uncovered over the past year, and is consistent with and exceeds Department of Health and Department of Ecology standards. The critical area ordinance is updated every eight years. If the council adopts the draft ordinance tonight, this and other critical area chapters will need to be updated consistent with BAS in several years. As Mr. De Lilla stated previously, the stormwater portion will be updated as the Department of Ecology gets new information on new contaminates, for example PFAS, and the City would immediately adopt any new Ecology regulations via this ordinance. Councilmember Nand referred to 23.60.030 regulated activities stormwater (packet page 174), commenting the point of most controversy is A.2.a, All new bored, drilled, or driven shaft UICs for stormwater Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 4 Packet Pg. 20 8.2.a management purposes are prohibited. During the last presentation it seemed Mr. De Lilla anticipated any new infiltration would be quite shallow to ensure rainwater wouldn't be swamped. She asked how far into the aquifer this code would allow infiltration and did he anticipate it would allow PFAS into the CARA more quickly. Mr. De Lilla answered as far as ground water is concerned, no infiltration system is allowed to directly discharge into the aquifer. The distance from the actual aquifer is probably hundreds of feet. Ecology uses the term UIC well, in layman's terms, it is really an infiltration system. Ecology has a list of approved technologies; UICs are the vast majority of the approved technologies to help mitigation and infiltrate stormwater. Approving the previous version at the planning board would limit the City to only one way to try to solve problem, but would probably lead to surface flooding, much less buildable area, take water off site so it literally goes into Deer Creek which does not solve the problem; instead of decades for the water to get there, it is a matter of minutes. Infiltration would be shallow and it would not inject into the groundwater; the groundwater is 100s of feet down. Mr. De Lilla continued, although they say there are areas with exposed QVA, per the report the areas that are not exposed drain to the exposed portions so it is really the entire CARA that goes into that exposed water. The discussion about doing one versus the other does not make a lot of sense. This is just for developed lots; it does not include existing lots which will stay the same and will not be retrofitted. With regard to PFAS, some level of development is desirable so some work can be done. To restrict what is allowed will result in less development and things will continue to be infiltrated the old fashioned way which has absolutely no treatment. Councilmember Nand relayed Mr. Danson seemed to suggest that the critical area designation might not be comprehensive enough to protect the CARA. She asked if there was anything more that could be done with special permitting in this area to restrict what is allowed into the CARA. Mr. De Lilla answered not that he was aware of; this has been coordinated with Department of Ecology and Department of Health to get their buy -in and it is as stringent as it can be short of making stormwater drinkable. The available technologies to deal with PFAS are activated carbon and reverse osmosis; there is no other technology. Councilmember Eck referred to audience comments which included requests not to make changes and to adopt the 2023 code. She asked staff to share the implications to the City of doing that versus making the changes requested tonight. Mr. Lilla answered it would more than likely limit development so the footprint of what would be allowed would be much larger since everything would be at the surface. He was sure there would be legal ramifications and very unhappy people who were unable to develop which he saw as a big minus. If the council adopts what was proposed by planning board, there is a menu of approved technologies to do mitigation and pollution removal, standards that Ecology allows, that are measured according to metrics, etc. Otherwise, there is only one way to do it, treatment is on the surface in a grassy area and everything else is bad even though it is only about 1-2 feet below surface. He did not see the logic of not allowing intrusion 1-2 feet into the soil when there are roots and plants in the soil and the runoff can be in a much smaller footprint so everyone has an equal opportunity to do what they want to their home such as an addition, deck, etc. If all the treatment has to be at the surface, that hogties development. Some say no development is good, but actually it's not because there is no new treatment and everything stays the way it is which is actually worse. Some development is desirable so there can be mitigation. Councilmember Tibbott referred to Table 23.60.030.1, a very long list of CARA prohibited and restricted uses which he found very encouraging because it had been thought through and was a great reference for anyone doing development. He relayed his understanding that there was a difference between shallow UICs that utilize infiltration pipes versus very deep UICs and it was his understanding deep UICs would be prohibited. Mr. De Lilla answered deep UICs are not allowed anywhere. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding that shallow UICs aid in percolating water from the surface into the soil and from his perspective, eliminate water running down the street and downhill into wherever. He asked the depth of shallow UICs. Mr. De Lilla answered three feet at the most; it is well within the root zones so there is plant life, microbes, etc., that help with mitigation; there is still treatment before it infiltrates. It is not just putting Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 5 Packet Pg. 21 8.2.a water in the ground, the 20-30 technologies approved by DOE would be used for which they have metrics for treatment. Since nobody knows what technology can deal with PFAS to a level that makes sense, it would just arbitrarily coming up with something. Councilmember Tibbott summarized shallow UICs would be allowed, deep UICs would be prohibited. Mr. De Lilla agreed. Councilmember Dotsch commented she comes from a background of do no harm. She recalled at a planning board meeting last year someone remarking the City did not even know the Deer Creek CARA existed, so how is it still clean. She recalled Mr. Clugston mentioned the area is predominantly low density single family housing. If rainwater hits the ground, it is low risk; rainwater hitting a roof and then the ground has a 30 times higher risk. If density is increased to 3 units/lot, the idea of rainwater hitting a roof is multiplied instead of hitting the ground and having setbacks. She recalled former Stormwater Engineer Jerry Shuster talking about having quality setbacks. She was trying to understand if density was the goal at the risk of clean water because density will increase the chances of rain hitting PFAS in roofs and gutters and then going into ground and into the aquifer. She asked why change those areas to higher density. Mr. De Lilla answered because none of that is currently being treated. Mr. Clugston responded while the density question will come up over the next year or so, that is not the point of this ordinance. This ordinance is related to management of the two CARAs. There has been discussion about prohibiting some activities and regulating stormwater in a rational way. Density is a topic for 2024 and 2025, tonight is consideration of the CARA ordinance. Councilmember Dotsch pointed out the CARA is related to land use. Mr. Clugston said no land uses are changing with this ordinance. Councilmember Dotsch said there are discussions about changing land use in the future. If there is no contamination now and the City is blessed with two CARAs, the City should be doing the most possible to maintain that. The City has a history of annexing areas and doing nothing related to infrastructure. She questioned why improvement would be expected by increasing density. There is talk about stormwater mixing with wastewater all over Edmonds now during weather events and the aquifer is literally sand. She was trying to figure out the City's priorities. On Earth Day, the City is talking about clean air and clean water, so why would the City put itself in a situation with insufficient stormwater cleanup. Ms. McLaughlin explained growth and environmental protection are not at odds. The City is supporting density, complying with the state mandate, providing housing affordability and also protecting clean water. The draft code goes above and beyond and provides a nimble response to any regulation in the near future. There will be continued analysis at the federal and regional level that will inform OVWSD to make changes in their treatment as well as inform what can be done at the local level. She summarized the City is nimble, responsive, supporting density and actually protecting the environment and water quality. Just because density is being increased, one cannot assume that will multiply roof surface, the same size house can provide two units based on average square footage of average single family homes these days. She summarized density did not always mean a bigger footprint. Councilmember Dotsch commented ADUS can be 2,400 square feet which is pretty big. The aquifer is clean now, the area is low density, and although there are issues with flooding, this will not fix the stormwater issue. She was trying to understand why not do the things that would be the most protective. Mr. De Lilla answered it was either allowing one tool, or 30 ways to do it. None of these tools have been studied for removal of PFAS. There is some anecdotal efficiency, but no one knows exactly what that is and it needs to be studied. At the same time, things like PFOS and PFOA have been banned since the early 2000s. It is just question of what is actually in the environment. The feds are doing their job, seeing what they can get rid of. Everyone wants all the answers right now; this has been a problem since the 1930s- 1940s and is being worked on. There is no way anyone in this room can do all that science, decisions need to be based on existing science instead of fear. Great progress is being made, for example 3M stopping making anything that contains PFAS. Department of Ecology came out with regulations for food packaging. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 6 Packet Pg. 22 8.2.a The work is being done based on BAS. There may be missteps here and there, but it is trending in the right direction. At the same time, limiting technologies would be a disservice. The City doesn't want to say a raingarden is the only solution which ignores all the other potential tools. The planning board was not given the full picture that there are many other technologies. Everyone uses the term shallow UIC well, in every other engineering stormwater design guidance, those are called piped infiltration system. Water mains use PVC; about 5% of OVWSD's water mains are PVC which no one is talking about. In his opinion, limiting the toolkit to one solution was a grave mistake. Councilmember Chen observed Mr. De Lilla talked about pros and cons and the 2023 ordinance versus the code proposed today. He observed previously the City did not have any CARA codes. Mr. De Lilla agreed. Councilmember Chen observed this is the City's first step to regulate and protect the aquifer resources. Mr. De Lilla agreed. Councilmember Chen observed there are three approaches the council can take, 1) not adopt any code and leave things the way they are, 2) adopt the 2023 code which is more restrictive and prohibits any UICs, or 3) adopt the code in tonight's packet which allows shallow UIC for infiltration purposes. Mr. De Lilla said he would not call the 2023 more restrictive, he would call it less restrictive because it limited the mitigation technologies and allows flows to go directly to Deer Creek and other areas. It is more restrictive in the sense it did not allow the technology. Councilmember Chen observed it was more restrictive because it did not allow any UIC at all. Mr. De Lilla agreed, it did not allow that type of treatment. It was less restrictive, not more restrictive, because it was saying that one technology was the answer to fix everything for which there is absolutely no science. That was proposed in 2023, the change was what the planning board had asked for based on incomplete information. Councilmember Chen relayed his understanding that technologies are evolving as new technologies come out. Mr. De Lilla agreed, Ecology's TAPE program lists all the mitigation technologies; if the City is saying only one technology can be used, the City cannot defend itself against future possible incoming technologies. Councilmember Chen referred to Mr. De Lilla's comment that this has been a problem since the 1930s and 1940s. De Lilla said that is how long PFAS has been around. Councilmember Chen asked if there was any value in delaying adoption of a CARA code and waiting to see if newer technologies come up. Mr. De Lilla answered he did not see any value in that; he saw value in using Ecology's TAPE program, the menu of technologies and new technologies that will be added in the future. If no UICs are allowed, none of those technologies are allowed because they need to go in a catch basin in a pipe; as soon as there is a pipe, it's not allowed. He did not know of any storm drain system that was completely pipeless. Council President Olson said she has had discussion with the public and experts including Mr. Danson and City staff on this subject. She read this agenda item carefully, a lot of it was scientific sourced from Ecology. She recalled an exercise at a recent council retreat where councilmembers were asked their priorities and the most important things that could not be neglected when considering budget cuts; first on her list was clean water. She has been told the council needs to err on the conservative when it comes to what is done in CARAs. Anything can be taken to an extreme and the suggestions being made are of that nature. For example, everyone in the CARA could be asked to move out and provide a one mile berth which would be more protective. When looked at specifics in the appendix by scientific agencies, the one she paid the most attention to or that resonated with her the most was from Ecology. There are some things that should be done on an environmental front with regard to the CARA and making residents and businesses in those areas partners in protecting the CARA such as not washing cars in the driveway, and not using pesticides and herbicides. Council President Olson referred to Edmonds' moratorium on crumb rubber, recalling the documentation said crumb rubber was super dangerous for CARAs and it should not be used as a filler on turf if it washes into the CARA. She suggested crumb rubber be an express prohibition in the CARA code. She appreciated that as science, awareness and standards improve, they will automatically be incorporated into the City's Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 7 Packet Pg. 23 8.2.a code without this time consuming process. There was wonderful collaboration by many parties and she thanked them for being engaged in the process. With the caveat of expressly prohibiting crumb rubber, she was supportive of the code as proposed and suggested it go to consent if council was willing to make that change. Ms. McLaughlin referred to an email from Mr. Clugston which stated the moratorium on crumb rubber had been lifted; that may be something the council wants to add as a future agenda item. Mr. Clugston advised the crumb rubber moratorium expired in 2020; at this time crumb rubber can be used on any publicly owned sports fields. Council President Olson asked if there were any publicly owned sports fields in the CARA. Mr. Clugston answered yes, the playfields at the old Woodway High School and at Madrona School. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO PASS THE CARA CODE IN THE PACKET ON A FUTURE CONSENT AGENDA. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO AMEND TO ADD A PROVISION THAT THERE WOULD BE NO CRUMB RUBBER IN THE CARA OR THE CARA BUFFERS. Mr. Clugston suggested adding "crumb rubber in publicly owned athletic fields" under Use/Activity and under CARA restriction, add "prohibited in all CARA." Council President Olson asked if crumb rubber could be prohibited on private property as well. Mr. Clugston answered in theory, yes. Council President Olson said she wanted to have that happen. Councilmember Nand expressed support for the main motion but not the amendment. It was great that the council was having a public discussion about the use of certain chemicals in the City. For example, she doesn't like it when she saw her neighbors using Glyphosate in their lawns because it is a neurotoxin and the grates on City streets say Puget Sound starts here. She envisioned Glyphosate would be banned one day. Targeting the use of crumb rubber, especially not knowing existing conditions in the CARA would be unfairly targeting existing homeowners. She questioned what restrictions that would be placed on new development because it was her understanding with new development, underground infiltration -capturing systems would potentially remove more PFAS and other harmful chemicals from the environment. Councilmember Nand continued, this on the fly, last minute amendment regarding crumb rubber was too reactionary for her to support. She was in favor of a citywide ban on toxins that harm human, animals and the environment and would be happy to explore that further with the community, but did not want to confine that to only the CARA. It would make more sense if it were critical area, etc., but that would need to go through a public process through the planning board to have a better understanding of how it would impact property owners. Councilmember Paine expressed her support for the main motion and the amendment related to crumb rubber. She recalled the moratorium on crumb rubber expired during the pandemic and never rose to the top to be addressed again. She agreed there needed to be a citywide moratorium on crumb rubber. She asked if the technology that will be forthcoming would address other harmful chemicals to the water systems. For example, tire dust that kills salmon, 6PPD, is not regulated and other things such as legacy chemicals and new things that come up. She wanted to ensure the City was as nimble as possible with regard to technology and remediation. Mr. De Lilla said that is why the ordinance proposes the code be changed as science comes in which will allow it to be nimble instead of coming to council with every change. Ecology is actively studying things such as 6PPD that is affecting salmon. He was unsure of the timeline, but as soon as standards were developed, the City would automatically adopt them. Councilmember Paine relayed her understanding the way the code is written is as flexible as it needs to be to protect the environment. Mr. De Lilla agreed, relaying in many ways it exceeds what Ecology requires. Ecology has standards for residential units, the City's standards increase the amount of treatment provided. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 8 Packet Pg. 24 Councilmember Paine opined this an educational process for the community, because it is not just tire dust, but things people put on their lawn, put in their laundry, etc. With regard to the crumb rubber amendment, Councilmember Tibbott assumed that would apply to new installations, not current installations, and asked that the prohibition be written to reflect that. Mr. Clugston answered as described in the code, existing uses would be allowed to continue, new uses of crumb rubber would be prohibited. Councilmember Tibbott expressed support for the amendment and the ordinance in the packet. Councilmember Chen agreed with the spirit of the amendment as crumb rubber was a dangerous substance, but agreed a broader ordinance was needed that would apply citywide, not just in this defined area. He agreed with the spirit of the amendment, but preferred an approach that would have a bigger impact. He did not support the amendment, but would support a conversation with the entire community. Councilmember Eck commented the council's job is to deal with complexity so she supported the amendment because it is more protective of the environment and includes crumb rubber. She expressed interest in renewing the moratorium on crumb rubber throughout the City. She supports the ordinance because it keeps the City in sync with science and updates the code as the technology, innovation, and science gets sharper. Council President Olson pointed out the source for her amendment, page 166 of the OVWSD Water Supply Protection Guidelines which prohibit tire crumb rubber. Having a citywide moratorium on crumb rubber might be something for the council to consider, but the council is very busy and it is not on the extended agenda. She favored protecting the CARA and drinking water now and potentially considering a citywide prohibition in the future. AMENDMENT CARRIED (5-2) COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN AND NAND VOTING NO. MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED (6-1) COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH VOTING NO. 2. FITCH REPORT: FIRE SERVICES FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT William Sturgeon, Senior Associate and Project Team Leader, Fitch & Associates, explained he modified the presentation in the packet for clarity and brevity and included more high level math to explain the process based on briefings done with groups of councilmembers last week. He reviewed: • Introduction o Fitch and Associates Edmonds Project Team ■ Steve Knight, Ph.D., Partner ■ William Sturgeon, MPA, EFO, CPM, ICMA-CM, Senior Associate- Lead Project Manager ■ Dave Johnsen, MBA, EFO, CFO, NRP, Senior Consultant ■ Bruce Moeller, Ph.D., Senior Consultant ■ Dan Gorton, MS, NRP, Consultant o Purpose of the Presentation ■ Provide the City of Edmonds Council options to make an informed decision on continuing to provide a high level of emergency services to the citizens of the community. ■ Goals of the project: - Emergency services must support the existing and growing needs of the community. - Emergency services must operationally be citizen centric. - Emergency services must foster fiscal trust within the community. • Finding the Right Balance Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 9 Packet Pg. 25 8.2.a Risk Performance Demand Operations pectations cal Realities • High Risk Occupancies o Edmonds includes more than 19,471 housing units and more than 1,642 non-residential occupancies, including office, professional services, retail/wholesale sales, restaurantsibars, hotels/motels, churches, schools, government facilities, healthcare facilities, and other non- residential uses. Commercial occupancies are classified as (Low, Moderate, High, and Maximum). • Critical Facilities in Edmonds o South County Fire identified 155 critical facilities throughout the service area, 28 of which are located in Edmonds. A hazard occurrence with significant impact severity affecting one or more of these facilities would likely adversely impact critical public or community services. Critical 4 9 I 15 28 Facilitates • City of Edmonds: All calls 2019-2023 (FITCH) o Number of Calls Dis atched b Program, Call Type and Number of Calls 2o2t 41 Period EMS 3,126 2,702 2,946 3,358 2,882 EMS-ALS 1,563 1,552 1,627 1,695 2,417 Fire 517 433 463 568 500 Special Ops 15 17 8 13 13 Service Tota Calls per Day v^v c-owth 265 486-1 15.0 273 ,977 13.6 -9.5% 267 5311 14.6 7.0% 404 6,0381W,147 16.5 13.7% 335 16.8 t aervice i vne watts ❖ Busy time, or time on task, was measured from unit dispatch date and time to unit clear date and time. ❖ All units assigned to South County Fire for the City of Edmonds made 6,147 responses and were busy on calls for a total of 6,042 hours. The department ran an average of 16.8 calls for emergency services a day. ❖ 86.2% of the total call volume was requests for EMS. Data retrieved from South County Fire Annual Report to City of Edmonds April 2024 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 10 Packet Pg. 26 8.2.a • Call Volume — 3.01% annual increase in calls 12.05 % increase from 2019 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Chart and data mtneved "m South counly Fire Annual Report to City or Edmonds Apn12024 • Importance of fire and EMS services in Edmonds, WA SCF Fire Performance 90- Percentiles. Response Times 2022-2023 (FITCH) Dispatch Turnout Travel Total Response Type Time Time Time Response Sample Size Time All Emergency Calls -Total 1:24 2:42 6:12 8:56 1,416 EMS • Current resources in Edmonds — 3 fire stations o Fitch considers this a lean response model. I Station 16 Station 17 Maplewood Station Downtown Edmonds 8429 196th Street SW 275 Sixth Ave. North Edmonds, WA Edmonds, WA Resources: Resources: Engine I Medic Engine / Medic (cross -staffed) (cross -staffed) Personnel: 3 Personnel: 3 o Engines — 3 ■ Personnel per unit — 3 o Medic/Aid units — 3-5 ■ Personnel per unit — 2 o Water Rescue Boat ■ Located at Port of Edmonds • South County Fire — Current Deployment Model o Effective Response Force (ERF) Station 20 Esperance Station 23009 88th Avenue W Edmonds, WA Resources: Engine I Medic Personnel: 5 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 11 Packet Pg. 27 8.2.a 1- Patient EMS 1 Engine/ Ambulance or Ladder Ambulance 3-5 FF Vehicle Fire 1 Engine 3 FF 2 Battalion Chiefs, 1 Medic Unit, 1 BLS Unit, 3 Fire in Residential Engines, 1 Ladder, 1 Technical Rescue Unit and 1 22 FF Structure Medical Services Officer Fire in Same as "Residential Fire" with One Additional Commercial Engine 25 FF Structure Technical Rescue 2 Engines, 2 Ambulances, 1 Ladder, 1 Technical 17 FF Rescue and 1 Battalion Chief First Alarm- 2 Engines Hazardous Second Alarm and above: Materials Decon Unit, Battalion Chief, Hazardous Materials 16-19 FF Response Technical Units and Ambulances Based on Patients _ Table reftwed f m SouM County Fire Annual Report to City of Edmonds April 2024 The Fitch team assessed all possible outcomes to fulfill the purpose of the project. Four options were analyzed; three options presented themselves as the best options to analyze emergency services for the community. Annex into South Contract with Create Edmonds Fire Separate Fire and EMS Services County RFA Another Service Department Contract with EMS Provider o Separating Fire and Contracting out for EMS Collective bargaining agreements for Currently, no advanced life support Shoreline Fire Department and (ALS) private ambulances are Shoreline Firefighters Local 1760 operating within Snohomish County. South Snohomish County Fire & Rescue, Regional Fire Authority, and International Firefighters Local 1828 prohibit subcontracting for Emergency Medical Services. This approach has declined nationally due to decreased private EMS providers and communities needing to retain transport fees and may require subsidies. • FITCH-Financial Comparison of Options Based on Current Level of Service (LOS) Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 12 Packet Pg. 28 8.2.a Ilrnrfit Cha Zr-S77.SA 7.000 cq. °t. hi ediar hone 5761,300. 120201 SouthCwntyRre rrr LeRay 075 p S 570..75 EMS RrnrftClargr1T1,"I 032 S 243.52 DID S 7255 Annualcost 1.17 886.85 MonthlyCost 73.90 eft"et va 8hot M l u r lrnL I udrs baneL l c het ge; 127 or Vida S 966.4+ EMS;K Wount0 02' $ 159.81 Annual Cost 1A& 6 1.128.28 Monthl Cost 6 93.86 Form Cly Fio Omdmrd Ivrlindudm17 tL+IChargr; Annual Cost 125 OMrVdw S 551.69 S 951.69 Monthly Cost S 7991 • Estimated Capital and Start-up Costs Cost Arulysrs Pin HUM • 2824 IdNv fire f 11,514,698 [MS BeneRlCharge f 4,912,938 S 1,413,206 Contrast woo 8hnwllm Film - 28241 Fire (tncludesbeneftcharF•e) f 19,498,223 EMS (King County) $ 3,224,116 f 2,200.000 Debt ServIce- tacFltttes&apparatus" 24 Form a PersotxtrI A U ran f 18,000,000 Annual Aent Service - tar.drner. R apiparanrs-• Arn slanr-e Tramport fir: Annual Cost f 2,200,000 S (1,000,0001 i 18 080 Levy Equivalent 1.25 ftern Current Fire Appartaus 4- includes 1reserve Market Estimate $3,900,000 Ambulances(4)-includesl reserve $1,550,000 Command Staff vehicles 3 $250,000 Firefighter Protective Equipment-(2) sets per firefighter $401,000 Self Contained Breathin A aratus 24 $250,000 EKG- Monitor Defibrillator (4) $150,000 Radios 25 $250,000 -Total $6,751,000 • Summary of Projected Costs and Savings Annex into South County Fire RFA Contract with Shoreline Form Edmonds Fire Fire/EMS Department Reduce General Fund expenditures by: Annual operations and personnel Annual operations and pef-sonnel $6 million -Current contract savings cost-$22.7 cost-$18M $401,107-County 911 $83,000- OPEB annual Savings Debt Service- equipment and Debt Service- equipment and Total Savings= --$6,484.000 stations- $2.2M' stations- $2.2M' Relieved of $6.6 million- LEOFF1liability ' Amortized station relocation, ' Amortized station relocation. Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) repair. construction and other repair, construction and other Retiree medical benefits capital equipment. capital equipment. Annualized Cost- $83.000 Estimated Ambulance Billing Revenue= -SIM (offset) Annual Cost= $17.8M Annual Cost= $24.9M` Annual Costs=$19.2M' S6.5M reduction in general fund liabilities. $6.6M reduction in long term liability. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 13 Packet Pg. 29 8.2.a • Annexation into the RFA Pros and Cons Pros Cons ➢ Must be voter approved ➢ Level of service is governed by elected ➢ Maintains level of fire & emergency fire commission- not the City of Edmonds services. • Paramedic ambulances • Skilled all hazards response • Fire Marshal • Community Paramedicine • Contracting with Shoreline Fire Rescue o The Fitch team met with the Fire Chief of Shoreline Fire Department to assess the level of interest in entering a service contract with The City of Edmonds to provide Fire and EMS services. o Due to the City of Edmonds being surrounded by South County Fire response area, Shoreline Fire Department is the only logical service available for emergency response. ■ Many variables within this scenario provide uncertainty and the future cost to the City of Edmonds including debt service, replacement capital funding, and labor rates. ■ No formal request has been made to Shoreline Fire/EMS from the City of Edmonds. Pros Cons ➢ Shoreline is a professional all -hazards ➢ Annual cost department that provides services like ➢ Would require an interlocal agreement SCF. approved by several governing boards. ➢ Shoreline Fire already has an inter -local ➢ Initial capital purchases and renovation of agreement with Northshore to provide Fire facilities. and EMS services ➢ Hiring personnel (labor shortage) ➢ Ordering fire apparatus 20-36 months Forming Edmonds Fire Rescue Based on Current LOS o In 2009, the City of Edmonds dissolved its Fire Department, sold its assets, and merged its personnel to Snohomish County Fire Protection District NO. 1 (South County Fire). o For the City to continue to provide the same level of service as it is currently receiving, It will require 51 operational personnel* and five (5) administrative/ support positions for a total of 56 FTEs o There is a myriad options based on the acceptable level of risk in a community. o Estimated Capital and Start-up Costs Item Current Fire A artaus 4 - includes 1 reserve Market Estimate A $3,900,000 Ambulances(4)-includesl reserve $1,550,000 Command Staff Vehicles 3 $250,000 Firefighter Protective Equipment-(2) sets per firefighter S-10i.00o Self Contained Breathin Apparatus 24 $250,000 EKG- Monitor Defibrillator (4) S150,000 Radios (25) $250,000 Tota l $6,751,000 Pros Cons ➢ Citizens have direct input via the city ➢ Initial and ongoing costs. council on level of service. ➢ Recruiting, retaining, and hiring qualified personnel. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 14 Packet Pg. 30 8.2.a • station ana �itattmg moaeis Personnel and operating $ism 11-15 $12M 10.12 Annual Debt Service S2.21W Ambulance Transport fees -($1rQ Levy-req. AV) 1000 ➢ The City would need to purchase apparatus, radios, equipment, and firefighter protective gear. ➢ ❑New apparatus is currently taking 20-36 months for delivery sm 5-7 -05W 1 $0.47 Toll -- $$-- $7.1 • Considerations for Reduced Stations and Staffing Models o A minimum of 3 resources are needed 11 1.10 to handle current call volume IL 0.95 o [Stations (3) x 1.10= 3.3 Resources] !0.9 03„ 0.910.93 0.]8 0.79 o Average of 16.8 calls per day Kos 0.710.68 0.6 0 0.55 048 [ 05 i 0.40 0.4 .370.350340.310.310.35 a 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ■EMS ■fire/SeNke /Special Ops o A "One Station Model" would significantly impact RESPONSE TIMES o Add info from recording o Reliability of units (available for the next call) o Effective response force (ERF) — EMS-ALS (3-5 personnel), residential structure fire (14-22 personnel) o Critical tasks (fire -EMS moderate risk, high risk and max risk calls) o Reliance on mutual aid when units are tied up (could be a service charge per month) o Stations would have to be optimized (relocated $$) for maximum effectiveness • Implementation Average Calls Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 15 Packet Pg. 31 N O N r �L Q Q N r.+ 3 c 0 U 0 0 Q. a a to d C_ G U C 0 U co r O N O N c 0 E CU 2 ar a 8.2.a Annex into South County Fire RFA Contract with Shoreline Fire/EMS Form Edmonds Fire Department • Resolution requesting Make formal request Hire a Fire Chief, Deputy annexation. for proposal. Chief, and Administrative • Review of request by Initiate Contract Assistant. SCF Governing Board. negotiations. • Begin Negotiations with • Negotiations- Terms Ratify contract by all SCF on transition plan. and Conditions: Cost parties. Develop specifications sharing, contracts, fire for fire equipment and marshal services. Purchase capital trucks. assets. Order equipment. • Pre -annexation agreement. Negotiate transition Develop policies and with SCF. procedures. • Amendments to plan: Hire and train new Governance personnel. Boundaries • Transition plan. • Public referendum. Timeline: 18-24 months Timeline: 24-36 months Timeline: 36 Months Councilmember Tibbott referred to the slide regarding high risk occupancies (packet page 212) which indicates there are 109 total high risk occupancy buildings in the City spread fairly evenly in the response zone of the City's three stations. He asked if that was a good thing. Mr. Sturgeon answered in looking at a risk model, that is a good balance. Councilmember Tibbott referred to the next slide regarding critical facilities in Edmonds which is not quite as well balanced. He recalled Mr. Sturgeon mentioning if one or more stations were occupied with a call, there would likely be adverse impacts. He asked Mr. Sturgeon to elaborate on that. Mr. Sturgeon said he was referring to something happening to critical infrastructure such as a power station, a substation, the waste water treatment plant, information technology hubs, city hall, etc. which would impact the entire City. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding if 1-2 stations were occupied on a call, that could theoretically have an adverse impact on the ability to respond to another call. Mr. Sturgeon agreed, explaining with 1-2 stations, there is no depth. He assured there would be a response via mutual aid, but if the City's 1-2 stations were occupied, assistance would come from the next closest station such as Shoreline, or SCF which would result in a longer response and things escalating during that time. Councilmember Tibbott observed the adverse effects would be longer response and potentially not enough personnel at least immediately. Mr. Sturgeon referred to the 4-9 minute EMS window for saving brain and heart tissue and managing a structure fire to limit the economic impact on a family or the community. Councilmember Tibbott summarized it appeared three stations were somewhat essential for covering the whole City and being prepared for potential adverse situations. Mr. Sturgeon agreed. Councilmember Nand thanked Mr. Sturgeon for the time he took to meet with councilmembers individually prior to this presentation. She appreciated his confirmation that option 1 would be the most affordable. When the RFA was created, the rationale to the cities in Snohomish County who initially joined was there would be a cost savings to administrative consolidation. With regard to option 2, she recalled him saying several interlocal agreements (ILA) would be required to contract with Shoreline Fire up to a King County board and asked if that would be the King County Council. Mr. Sturgeon relayed his understanding that Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 16 Packet Pg. 32 8.2.a Shoreline is contracted by Medic 1 King County to provide fire and EMS and is a special fire district so their board would have to vote. Due to King County EMS's involvement, the City would have to pay King County's levy rate and King County would have to approve that. He did not think that would be a heavy lift, but it could be political. Councilmember Nand said she has heard that from friends in Shoreline that taxpayers are taxed at a different rate for EMS and fire than Snohomish County so Edmonds would have to make up that difference because they would not subsidize Edmonds. Mr. Sturgeon agreed, commenting that is why Shoreline is more expensive in the analysis. Councilmember Nand said she is on the Sno911 board and remembered seeing in the contract for Motorola radios that Sno911 was able to negotiate for replacement batteries, etc. due to the volume. She asked if Edmonds as a 2-3 fire station entity would lose the ability to negotiate with vendors based on volume. Mr. Sturgeon answered yes, likely the ability to negotiate special incentives would be lost although he assured everything was negotiable. Councilmember Nand commented this has been a high profile issue politically in Edmonds for a long time and she appreciated his data driven discussion regarding the options. Councilmember Paine pointed out Mr. Sturgeon's work history also includes working as a city manager in the past as well as in other aspects of public safety which is reflected in his well-rounded presentation. She noted the Implementation and the Summary of Projected Costs and Savings slides were not in the packet. She thanked Mr. Sturgeon for looking at the LEOFF 1 and LEOFF2 cost savings if the City joined the RFA. She asked about the timeline for training firefighter/EMS personnel. Mr. Sturgeon answered personnel are already qualified as Firefighter 1 and 2 and EMS/EMT/paramedic. The City would need to determine how many were needed based on the level of service. The challenge is to learn the newly written policies and procedures which is classroom work, rote memory, etc. Then there needs to be training on hands-on skills as a team. Personnel come qualified from the fire academy but the team has to learn to work together with new supervisors, etc. Personnel would also need to familiarize themselves with occupancies within the City, learn routes, hydrant and system locations, etc. He estimated a 4-6 month day schedule for that training. Any good fire department will also learn the mutual aid area. Councilmember Paine recalled Mr. Sturgeon saying in the Shoreline option, Edmonds would be in third position, contracting with a contractor so the City would not have a lot of authority. Mr. Sturgeon agreed it would water down the City's authority. Councilmember Paine agreed it would be Edmonds versus King County. She requested he send the council the Implementation and the Summary of Projected Costs and Savings slides. Mr. Sturgeon advised he will send the entire presentation to the clerk. Councilmember Chen commented the presentation provided a very clear comparison of the three options. In looking at the South County RFA versus Shoreline, he asked if the firefighters' schedules was similar. Mr. Sturgeon answered he did not know Shoreline's schedule. He offered to find out and email Councilmember Chen. Councilmember Chen observed in looking at the cost comparison, the cost to annex into South County Fire RFA is approximately $18 million, Edmonds' current cost via the contract with SCF is approximately $12 million in 2024. He asked about the difference in cost. Mr. Sturgeon answered Fitch used the RFA's budget to determine the cost; one of the reasons SCF wants to cancel the contract with Edmonds and get Edmonds to join the RFA is they do not believe the contractual amount the City is paying covers their costs. The first time Fitch met with SCF, he asked what it cost to run Edmonds fire stations and the fire chief said $17.7 million/year. When Fitch did the math, it was $17.8 million which includes personnel, services, operational costs, etc. He pointed out SCF's value added services such as their paramedicine program, community paramedics, fire prevention, public education, training academy, etc. If Edmonds went with a barebones fire department, there wouldn't be fire prevention, the City would still have to have a fire marshal, plans review of fire protection systems, inspections, etc. Councilmember Chen said one of contributing factors is the $1.25/$1,000 AV formula. When the same rate is applied in a community where property values are much higher like Edmonds compared to some other communities in the RFA, the cost is much higher. He suggested one of the points of negotiation could be Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 17 Packet Pg. 33 8.2.a adjusting the formula so Edmonds pays a fair rate instead of paying a heavier burden. Mr. Sturgeon agreed that would need to be figured out and negotiated. He said Councilmember Chen was referring to equity across the district, how to make it equitable so Edmonds was not covering costs of communities with lower property values. Councilmember Chen commented it was not fair for other communities to bear Edmonds' costs and vice versa. Mr. Sturgeon said he has never seen a totally fair way of doing that, but as he has said, everything is negotiable and that is the reason for entering into negotiations. It is not a done deal if the council passes a resolution to annex into the RFA; there are things that still have to be negotiated. The parties could reach an impasse and be unable to move forward. Councilmember Chen summarized a lot of details have to be negotiated. Mr. Sturgeon agreed this analysis was high level; the devil is in the details. Councilmember Eck appreciated Mr. Sturgeon's and Fitch's objective view in looking at this from an unbiased lens and bringing their expertise to this. She asked about the average days to hire, recalling the trend across the country that these positions are difficult to fill. Mr. Sturgeon said he did not have an average, he just knew it would be a heavy lift. He was not saying it couldn't happen but the City would need to incentivize, and pay at least comparable to other agencies and provide comparable benefits. He could not provide an average number of days to hire as it would depend on how much was invested in recruiting, marketing, etc. Some people might want to come to a start-up department, but it would be a difficult lift. Council President Olson thanked Mr. Sturgeon for his willingness to make a public presentation that reflected the council's input. For the sake of the public, she assured the council is still taking input and information. If there is something the public sees or hears that is important to this conversation, she encouraged them to inform the council and/or the administration. She often hears consulting is done to reaffirm the original choice, but the council has told Fitch repeatedly that that is not the council's mindset, the council really wants to know all the options and everything that is entailed in order to make the best decision for the community. Council President Olson explained one of the inputs from the community was whether formation of a smaller RFA with Edmonds and Woodway was a possible option. The council has spoken to Fitch about that option and she invited Mr. Sturgeon to comment on it. Mr. Sturgeon said it was a great question in trying to figure out the best path forward. The same things that apply to Shoreline and starting a new department exist such as the difficult hiring and purchasing apparatus. In his view of that scenario, Edmonds would be putting themselves in the position of being the big dog on the block, funding the equipment, etc. and responding to Woodway who pays $600,000/year now. It is an option, but high level, it would also be a difficult lift. Council President Olson commented one of distinctions that differs from Edmonds having its own department is the separate jurisdiction for taxation, it would not fall under the General Fund which is a significant distinction between the options. Councilmember Dotsch asked Mr. Sturgeon to explain the cons related to annexation to RFA that the level of service is governed by the elected fire commission. Mr. Sturgeon answered if the City passed a resolution to annex into the RFA, the City would appoint a non -voting member to their board until a fire commissioner was elected to represent the district that includes Edmonds. Councilmember Dotsch asked if there was a standard LOS that the RFA abides by or could they just say Edmonds is further out and the response would take longer. Mr. Sturgeon answered not that he knew of, the fire commission is governed by the laws of the State of Washington. Councilmember Dotsch asked if there was any ability to negotiate the level of service. Mr. Sturgeon reiterated everything is negotiable including the possibility of having another representative from the Edmonds area. His only experience with that was several years ago he was able to negotiate an extra seat and an ex officio member when a community's utilities were turned over to a regional water authority. He summarized there are options and he recommended considering an ex officio member who although they do not vote, could provide a voice. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 18 Packet Pg. 34 8.2.a Councilmember Nand referred to the information provided regarding timelines; in option 1 completing annexation would take 18-24 months, option 2 contracting with Shoreline would take 24-30 months, and option 3 reforming Edmonds' independent fire department would take 36 months. The RFA informed Edmonds last year they were pulling the contract for service and gave the City a two year timeline to entirely terminate service to Edmonds. Following on discussion at last week's Finance Committee, she stressed it incumbent on the council and administration to quickly put the question about annexation to the voters so they can inform the City of their decision. If they reject annexation, then the City will need to quickly explore options 2 and 3. When negotiating millions of dollars, the City does not want to be at the end of the rope in negotiations, but should have a lot of time for such major negotiations. To do a good service for community members, especially property tax payers, it is incumbent on the council and administration to put the ballot question to Edmonds voters as soon as possible and coordinate town halls, etc. with the fire chief who offered to participate prior to pulling the City's contract. Councilmember Chen said he appreciated the conversation on this important decision the City is about to make. Putting himself in SCF's shoes, they have structures, equipment and personnel in place serving Edmonds; if they discontinue service to Edmonds, they would have excess resources. So another option would be to come to the table with a win -win solution for both parties, continue a contract format, but increase the fee between $12 million and $17 million. Mr. Sturgeon said Fitch would be happy to continue to partner with Edmonds and advocate for Edmonds. He agreed the RFA would have excess equipment. Buying used fire trucks is an option, but they are usually junk and if the City bought trucks from the RFA to establish its department, they could be at 5-10 years of service life and quickly reaching end of life. The City would need to have a replacement cycle and there are criteria for replacing apparatus. The rule of thumb is first run 7 years, 7-15 years as reserve apparatus and then replacement. Funds need to be budgeted for replacement of apparatus as well as SCBAs, radios, etc. He reiterated everything is negotiable and Fitch could be an advocate for the City during that process. Councilmember Dotsch referred to the RFA's notification of intent to end the contract and asked Mr. Sturgeon to speak to the City not having any fire service. Mr. Sturgeon said he asked SCF's fire chief if they would leave Edmonds leave high and dry and his response was no, of course not. It would be immoral to leave a city without fire service due to the impact on people's lives and he did not think anyone in good conscience would do that and he was told SCF would not. Councilmember Nand commented while SCF might not end service in Edmonds after the contract ends, Edmonds would likely pay through the nose for service from them until renegotiations occur which is just an academic exercise. SCF pulled everyone's contracts in Snohomish County because they want everyone to annex into the RFA or find fire service elsewhere. The City has to be forward thinking and responsible to community members, especially property tax payers and coordinate with the RFA and put the ballot question to the voters as quickly as possible. The annexation process will take 18-24 months, contracting with Shoreline, even if the various bodies approve the ILAs, will take 24-36 months. People from Shoreline have already indicated they will not subsidize fire service for Edmonds when they are paying King County's higher tax rate. Restarting the City's own fire department will take 36 months. She feared the City's costs would go through the roof during an 18 month period without a contract with SCF or without being annexed into the RFA which she found very irresponsible. Mr. Sturgeon advised he will submit Fitch's final report by next Friday at 3 pm. 10. EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION, RCW 42.30.110(l)(1) At 8:59 pm, the Council convened in executive session to discuss pending or potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(l)(i) for a period of 45 minutes. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 19 Packet Pg. 35 8.2.a MEETING EXTENSION At 9:43 pm, Mayor Rosen announced that the executive session would be extended to 9:55 pm. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION The meeting reconvened at 9:54 p.m. 11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:54 pm. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 16, 2024 Page 20 Packet Pg. 36 8.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/7/2024 Approval of Special Meeting Minutes April 18, 2024 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: 2024-04-18 Council Special Minutes Packet Pg. 37 8.3.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING/TOWN HALL DRAFT MINUTES April 18, 2024 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Vivian Olson, Council President Chris Eck, Councilmember Will Chen, Councilmember Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Neil Tibbott, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER STAFF PRESENT Beckie Peterson, Council Executive Assistant Dave Rohde, Tech Support Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:59 pm by Council President Olson in the Public Works & Utilities Lunch Room, 7110 210t1i Street SW, Edmonds, and virtually. 2. INTRODUCTIONS/APPROVAL OF AGENDA Council President Olson commented councilmembers are residents of Edmonds first and foremost and come in the spirit of community to listen to the public, get ideas and work together to build the community. This town hall represents the council's commitment expressed during the retreat to elevate and do even better on community engagement than has been done in the past. It was difficult to find a date that worked for the entire council. Originally only four councilmembers indicated they could attend tonight but some were able to change their plans and attend. She introduced councilmembers, advising Councilmember Tibbott was unable to attend tonight as he was representing the City at Snohomish County Cities tonight. She acknowledged Mayor Rosen in the audience. She thanked Council Executive Assistant Beckie Peterson, City Clerk Scott Passey, Tech Support Dave Rohde, Facilities Receptionist Jerrie Bevington and Minute Taker Jeannie Dines. Council President Olson described the location of restrooms, water fountain and emergency exits. She reviewed the format for tonight's program, five audience questions followed by replies from three councilmembers, five questions from virtual attendees and replies from three councilmembers, five questions submitted in advance and replies from three councilmembers and then begin again with questions from audience, etc. Councilmembers may respond to questions asked during that round or to pervious questions. It was the consensus of the council to approve the agenda. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 18, 2024 Page 1 Packet Pg. 38 8.3.a 3. COMMUNITY DIALOGUE Robin Wright, Edmonds, thanked the council for providing this format. She has spoken at city council, but that is just one way communication with no feedback. She asked if thought had been given to how the city could better utilize volunteers. Some of groups she volunteers with want to help such as planting bulbs on Main Street or pulling weeds in Yost Park, but are not able to. She asked if there was a way to leverage volunteers so they can help out more. With no further questions from audience members, Council President Olson relayed a town hall question submitted in advance by Ron Wambolt: Our population has only grown by 3,000 in the last 20 years and is currently slightly below what it was in 2020. Has anyone in our city learned what assumptions were used to determine the figure of 13,000? Clearly that figure MUST BE CHALLENGED before the zoning in our city is screwed up. My belief is that the figure is a target and not a projection, and has been chosen to justify the zoning changes that enable the proposed increase in housing. There are many of us looking for a rational explanation of this 13,000 figure. With regard to utilizing volunteers better, Councilmember Eck recommended the administration take a hard look at that because a lot of people love to garden and their skills could be applied to helping make the City more beautiful. With regard to what the council can do in the boards and commissions they are liaisons to, she wonders at times if those volunteers are being as fully utilized as they could be or in some cases, she worries they are being over -utilized. With regard to Mr. Wambolt's question whether the City has confirmed the growth targets, her understanding was the state did their study and Snohomish County and all the cities were involved when the targets were created and agreed to. Edmonds was given its piece of the growth allotment that was provided to Snohomish County. With regard to whether it is the right number, she did not have the formula in front of her, it is the growth target that Snohomish County and the cities agreed to. With regard to whether the City can push back, she said the City could absolutely try and those conversations have been occurring by the administration and Snohomish County. If the City does not complete its plan, there is the risk the City would lose its ability to control how the growth is applied within the City's boundaries. If the City does not comply, it was her understanding the state can tell the City how to allocate the growth which no one wants to happen. It is important to continue working collaboratively with Snohomish County, ask questions, and keep moving forward in order to retain control of the City's growth plan. Councilmember Chen thanked everyone for sacrificing their beautiful evening to be here which means they care. Edmonds has awesome, dedicated volunteers who care about the City and donate their time, expertise and knowledge to help the City become the place everyone loves. It is critical that the City utilize its volunteers. With regard to how to better tap into those resources, there are many nonprofits that can offer assistance with gardening, childcare, the environment, etc. In the past the council discussed funding a volunteer coordinator to work with nonprofits and other groups. Mayor Rosen is supportive of volunteers and mentioned it during his campaign. He has been in office approximately 90 days and he expected there will be a lot of good plans coming from the administration's efforts. With regard to the 13,000 population growth, Councilmember Chen agreed with Councilmember Eck, it is a top down assignment approach; the state did a study to develop statewide growth predications, assigned a growth amount to Snohomish County which then trickles down to each community. Edmonds was assigned 13,000 population increase during that process. There will be adjustments in the future via the comprehensive plan; it is wise for the City to develop a plan to accommodate that growth. The administration is working with Snohomish County and the state to refine a more realistic number. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 18, 2024 Page 2 Packet Pg. 39 8.3.a With regard to volunteers, Councilmember Dotsch said that is one Edmonds' gifts, people are passionate about the community and want to help. She relayed her thoughts such as advertising opportunities for volunteers such as the Earth Day events this Saturday at Bracketts North and Marina Beach. If people don't know about those events, the City likely needs to do a better job advertising them such as a quarterly Facebook post or information on the website regarding volunteer opportunities, providing links to nonprofits, etc. Community members want to contribute and especially now when some areas may not receive as much funding, there may be opportunities for volunteers to fill the gap. With regard to the City's growth target, Councilmember Dotsch relayed she took a class today through Department of Commerce regarding GMA. The person conducting the class commented planning assumes 1.44 people/unit which is less than in the past; people don't need extra bedrooms, they need smaller lots and smaller homes. She recalled discussions by the housing commission about putting two houses on one lot that they are somehow half the price which they learned was not the case. She recalled an architect on the housing commission said each unit has a kitchen and bathroom, the two most expensive things to build; adding walls for bedrooms is not as expensive. As many people are in the sandwich generation, with children and aging parents, she wondered if the thought process regarding the number of people/unit was accurate. She assumed that is how the number of units and population got so high. Edmonds's growth in the past has been in the single digits and is now projected to grow very fast in the next 20 years. She summarized the City has to be very holistic in its planning because everything that is done relates to something else. Lynn Tressler said she was present at an Edmonds city council meeting in September 2023 where the council voted unanimously to work with Lynnwood and Snohomish County to include the homes in their Meadowdale neighborhood in Edmonds' MUGA instead of Lynnwood's. She was involved with a process where the city council voted in 2007 to annex their neighborhood after a petition was circulated and residents overwhelmingly wanted to be part of Edmonds instead of Lynnwood. The neighborhood has always had Edmonds mailing addresses; her family moved into their home in 1977. Lynnwood city council voted unanimously to work with Edmonds to start the process. Apparently there was an introductory meeting with both cities to start the process, but there hasn't been an update since the November 2023 meeting. She asked whether progress was being made on this possible annexation. Claudine [no last name given] inquired about the new building code from the state and how that will affect the Five Corners area and the Highway 99 corridor. As a lifetime resident of Edmonds, she did not want to see Edmonds turn into Lynnwood or Bellevue. Part of Edmonds' charm is the unique waterfront, small city, welcoming, family -friendly place. She was concerned that the new zoning that would add five stories would change Five Corners. She recognized the importance of change, but did not think it would change Five Corners for the better. With regard to the state housing density mandates, Councilmember Paine explained when the council voted to define the scope of the environmental study, it was to make it as broad as possible to get information through the EIS for the council to make decisions later this year. The height evaluated in the EIS is up to 5 stories with incentives, but that does not mean it is set in code, it is the basis for information the council will get to make decisions for the comprehensive plan update. She acknowledged that sounds like a lot, but the council needs the information via the EIS to make informed decisions regarding how to proceed. She acknowledged it may sound scary because for decades Edmonds has been human scale, manageable, neighborhood focused and appreciated the beauty of neighborhoods. She summarized the growth targets are a mandate from the state legislature and there are not very many options. With regard to volunteer opportunities, Councilmember Paine referred to an email she received about volunteer opportunities for people moving to Edmonds. She listed several volunteer opportunities including the waterfront dog park, the dive park, Edmonds Marsh, Bird Fest, several art groups, Cascadia Museum, Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 18, 2024 Page 3 Packet Pg. 40 8.3.a climate action groups, Edmonds Bicycle Advocacy Group, Girls on the Run of Snohomish County, Edmonds Floretum Club, Edmonds Chamber, Heros Cafe, churches with community activism groups, Edmonds Center for the Arts, Multicultural Association of Edmonds, etc. For those with questions, passion, and ideas, she encouraged them to find places to plug in because Edmonds is built on its volunteers. Councilmember Nand commented with local government, the struggle is to get new people involved and engaged so she was excited by the number of questions being asked and especially by new people. As other councilmembers have responded to questions, she will respond to some of the questions provided in advance. Everyone on council started as a volunteer; she contacted then -Mayor Earling encouraging him to opt Edmonds into the Paris Accord. Then Mayor-Earling met with her and put her on the Mayor's Climate Protection Committee. For those with a passion, she encouraged them to contact Mayor Rosen who will probably assign them to a City board, committee or commission. With regard to including the Meadowdale neighborhood in Edmonds' MUGA, she relayed Shoreline Councilmember Cheryl Lee told her Shoreline incorporated because they were terrified of being swallowed up by Seattle. She referred Ms. Tressler to Mayor Rosen regarding the timeline for proceeding with including their neighborhood into Edmonds' MUGA. She thanked Ms. Tressler for her passion and vision for their neighborhood, recognizing it takes a lot of work to annex or be included into another city's MUGA. With regard to Erica Miner's written question about zoning in Five Corners, Councilmember Nand said zone capacity is not market force. The market will determine what gets built on each privately owned parcel. It is very expensive to build and the area is in an economic downturn. The state, via Snohomish County, assigned Edmonds 13,000 additional people, there were 4,100 units allocated to Highway 99 in the last comprehensive plan update that were never built. The City is responsible for providing the zone capacity if someone wants to build as well as regulations regarding massing, shadowing, building heights, impact to the neighborhood, etc. It is the market's job to determine whether it is economically feasible to build or not. With regard to Claudine's question about building codes and impacts to the bowl and Highway 99, Councilmember Eck said the council has heard loudly and clearly from residents on Highway 99 that they do not want to continue accommodating the impacts of growth and taller buildings. No one wants to change the look of downtown and the waterfront. The intent of the EIS is to look broadly to see how to spread the impact so all the growth is not in the bowl or on Highway 99. Once everything is established, the growth will be very gradual, it will not occur overnight. With regard to ADUs, duplexes, etc., it will be very methodical and not everyone in Edmonds will sell their property, partake in the new zoning or build an ADU. Spreading the growth out minimizes impacts to the bowl and Highway 99. With regard to zoning at Five Corners, Councilmember Eck assured that is being thoroughly explored in the EIS. Once the council has all that information, they will take another look because nothing is set in stone. In the meantime, the council wants to hear from the public throughout the City. She applauded those spending their evening with the council tonight, either in person or via Zoom, noting this process is critical. With regard to the boundary change to the UGA, Council President Olson explained according to that boundary, that neighborhood, although it has an Edmonds address, was in Lynnwood's UGA so without a change in the boundary, that neighborhood would be annexed into Lynnwood. Lynnwood and Edmonds are on board with considering that change. She called Snohomish County in the last 1-2 weeks and learned they were waiting for Lynnwood and Edmonds to follow up with them. Mayor Rosen indicated he would check with planning & development. The administration is aware the comprehensive plan process is a window of opportunity to change the boundary. Darrol Haug, Edmonds, a 50 year resident of Edmonds, an Economic Development Commission (EDC) member but speaking as a citizen, recalled when the EDC made their presentation to council, there were remarks from council about the EDC looking at the city's existing buildings, some need repair or could be Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 18, 2024 Page 4 Packet Pg. 41 8.3.a used for other purposes. He asked for a further explanation regarding that direction. Next, he recognized maintenance of sidewalks was the responsibility of the adjacent property owner; however, the city has worked on sidewalks marked with trip hazards. He suggested the council clarify whether the city will repair trip hazards on existing sidewalks. Karen Barnes, Edmonds, said she was passionate around the zoning issue, but was late to party and was trying to get caught up. She asked who was responsible for assessing the capacity of the infrastructure such as wastewater, electricity, etc., to accommodate the growth target and whether that was done at the local or state level. She asked about the best resources for a resident to get up to speed. Joe Scordino, Edmonds, observed a DEIS is underway to look at the environmental consequences of the growth alternatives. He asked what level and what type of environment consequences would be too great and/or intolerable to undertake this many units. He has heard people say it's not appropriate to put more density on Highway 99. He asked if that was an environmental consequence that would be used in other areas, the people in the area don't want more development, or would the council base it on facts? With regard to Mr. Haug's question about the City's existing buildings, Councilmember Chen said there is a tremendous opportunity to consider how to better utilize the City's existing buildings and look at the City's needs. The City extends from the waterfront on the west to Highway 99 and Lake Ballinger on the east, Edmonds no longer ends at 9t1i Avenue. A lot of the City's infrastructure is centrally located in the downtown/waterfront/bowl area such as city hall, public safety complex, wastewater treatment plant, etc. With regard to public safety, 80% of the crime happens on the eastside of Edmonds along Highway 99, but the City's dedicated, hardworking police are situated in the bowl. It is time to take a holistic approach to considering reallocating City resources to meet the needs which is part of the strategy of using existing buildings. Considering the City's current financial position, there may be opportunities but it will take a lot of work and is likely something Mayor Rosen is already thinking about. With regard to sidewalks, Councilmember Chen said sidewalks are very expensive. There are existing sidewalks that need repair as well as areas that do not have sidewalks. In his personal opinion, taking care of sidewalks requires a public/private partnership. The sidewalk is the responsibility of the adjacent property owner, but the City can coordinate a program such as applying for state or federal funding. With regard to zoning, Councilmember Dotsch assured it wasn't too late; the zoning has not been changed. Things are going to be happening so she encouraged residents to stay engaged. With regard to the bookends for the EIS, in her opinion, the circles are small, medium and large and she supports broadening the circles. She worried if the DEIS says the tiny, high traffic, small lot circles such as the new north Firdale and north bowl cannot be developed, growth in the other circles will increase. Spreading the growth out further would have been more conductive to choices other than just the circles. She lives near Five Corners where the community had been very invested and vocal. Councilmember Dotsch continued, if property owners can build up to five stories, that becomes highest and best use. She supports lower impacts in those areas as well as on the environment. Five Corners is above Shell Creek whether a lot of destruction has already occurred due to high water events. She was unsure how creating more impervious surfaces helped the environment. She referred to the question about what it would take to increase the capacity of the City's infrastructure, commenting the WWTP is already at capacity in the winter when there are huge events, the treatment plant is not in compliance with Ecology, and Mountlake Terrace is increasing their flows to the City's treatment plan. It is important to take a more holistic view and being intentional about asking for detailed information to assist the council in making decisions. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 18, 2024 Page 5 Packet Pg. 42 8.3.a With regard to Mr. Haug's question about sidewalks, Councilmember Paine suggested going online to the Find It Fix It app on the City's website to report a broken sidewalk that needs attention, a downed stop sign, etc. With regard to the assessment of City owned buildings, she said that will be an interesting analysis. She encouraged the EDC to look at the study done by McKinstry that has been updated. With regard to Ms. Barnes' question regarding the best resources, she suggested there be a resource section on the comprehensive plan page so everyone has access to that information. The Department of Commerce's website has a lot of information regarding the GMA; the GMA is very complicated and deals with housing and transportation. Beginning next year, the City's comprehensive plan will need to address sustainability Joe Nolan, Edmonds, referred to the dilemma the city is facing with regard to a change in fire service. He read the Fitch & Associates' presentation, but the following issue was not specifically addressed although it is of significant interest to Edmonds' residents, property owners specifically. Any decision the council makes regarding the future of fire and EMS should consider the protection class change that would occur for properties in Edmonds. Most Edmonds' addresses are currently Protection Class 3. Factors such as road miles to the nearest responding fire station, etc. can affect the rating. Any significant degradation in protection class would likely result in a significant increase in homeowner and commercial insurance premiums. There are a number of areas in Western Washington that have undergone this rating change due to decommissioning of a fire station and the impact to property owners was substantial. He did not see a change in the protection class or its impact on property owners' insurance addressed in Fitch's presentation. He hoped the city council factored that potential premium impact in their decision. Chris McGuffin, a resident on the outskirts of Edmonds, asked if the council had considered hiring a third parry to analyze what areas are the most revenue positive for the city and using that data in combination with other data to determine the best lots to upzone beyond the ADU, duplex, etc. mandate placed by the state. He suggested bringing in Urban3 to give the city a financial breakdown to provide a better idea of how to comply with the state mandate. The financial health of the city should be one of the key points of consideration when thinking about growth. Sam [no last name given] asked, with regard to the growth alternatives, did the council have plans to add additional check -ins with the city planners and planning board to review the comprehensive plan going forward. He referred to the timeline in the April 9 presentation which indicated the EIS would be ready for review in late July and a meeting scheduled to review it. The next check -in is in October at which point the council would vote on a preferred alternative which would include zoning and building heights for specific neighborhoods. There was a lot of information to unpack in the two hour meeting on April 9 and the council also voted at that meeting. He inquired if the council was interested in having a monthly check -in with planning staff and the planning board regarding how the preferred alternative is taking shape. Next, he asked about the impact increased density in Five Corners will have on Yost Park. It seems stormwater runoff is already taking a toll on Shell Creek which runs through Yost Park and into Puget Sound. He asked if that aspect would be studied in the EIS. With regard to the question about fire service and the potential protection class change and impact on homeowner/commercial insurance, Councilmember Nand explained deciding the level of service the City wants to fund is what the council has been faced with for the two years. If the City annexes into the RFA, which she has publicly stated multiple times is her hope, the amount of property taxes that property owners pay will increase, but the level of service should not change so insurance premiums should not change as the responsiveness of fire and EMS to their property would not change. If the council or voters decide they do not want to annex into the RFA, the City could try to negotiate with Shoreline, but not only would Shoreline's fire commission have to sign an interlocal agreement with Edmonds, the King County Council would have to agree to take Edmonds into the special district with Shoreline. King County residents pay more property taxes than residents of Snohomish County and they are very unlikely to subsidize Edmonds' fire service so in her mind, that was an academic option but not likely to happen. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 18, 2024 Page 6 Packet Pg. 43 8.3.a Councilmember Nand continued, the same with the setting up its own fire department which she feared would result in a loss of service and result in a change in the premium property owners are paying, especially for commercial. Property owners will some experience pain in their pocketbook when the City is forced to make a change in the fire service as a result of the RFA pulling Edmonds' contract. She hoped the council would put annexation into the RFA to the voters and that the voters would agree to annex into the RFA. The RFA was originally created to reduce costs by consolidating the administrative burden. In every other city in the area that has faced the question of annexation, voters have decided they are better off annexing into the RFA. She was hopeful that could occur before the end of the contract at the end of 2025. With regard to Mr. McGuffin question about a third party assessing the most revenue positive areas of Edmonds to upzone, Councilmember Nand said there are established business districts that tend to be more lucrative for the City in terms of the amount of tax generated. People living in or proximate to those areas are also experiencing more traffic, more construction and often less investment by the City in their neighborhoods which is why the council wants to spread the density around. Regarding Mr. Nolan's question about fire protection classification, Councilmember Eck said she was not in favor of an option that would increase rates and decrease fire/EMS response time. With regard to Mr. McGuffin's question, the City's economic development staff and the EDC keep a close eye on the highest revenue generating areas of the City. She acknowledged his point of ensuring increased density did not jeopardize revenue and spreading the potential growth capacity. With regard to Sam's question about adding more check -ins with the planning department, she found that completely reasonable. She suggested that could be done during updates at committee meetings as well as updates at council. In regard to Sam's question about checking in with the planning department on a regular basis before making a final decision, Councilmember Chen agreed check -ins at committee were appropriate and suggested having a discussion at council followed by council making a decision in 1-2 weeks to provide amble time for public comment and thinking through the impacts of the growth alternatives. He suggested incorporating that into committee and council meetings. With regard to Mr. McGuffin's question about hiring a third party to analyze which areas of the City have more revenue generating power and using that as a basis for growth planning, Councilmember Chen said personally he did not think that was the right approach. The City needs to look at the environmental impacts on the entire City. In 2017, the Highway 99 corridor was upzoned to business zoning and a 75-foot building height. There are a lot of auto dealerships on Highway 99 and the majority of the City's sales tax is generated by Highway 99. Using the methodology of which area generates the most revenue and adding all the growth there would accelerate the imbalance. Nate Sugg, Edmonds, assumed some kind of passion brought each councilmember to the council. He asked for an update on the work that has done related to that passion. Jon Milkey, Edmonds, said he wished this town hall had been held a few months ago before the preliminary results for the comprehensive plan so residents could have had more input. In response to his written question regarding how many of the 9,000+ units would be affordable, one of the city's senior planners sent information to him that seemed to indicate no units would be dedicated as affordable housing. There are units that could be more affordable because they are mid -rise or low-rise or units in areas that typically cost less. He asked how many units the council anticipated would be affordable. A lot of the units in the comprehensive plan units are proposed with an assumption they will be affordable. If buildings are not 4-5+ stories, they may not pencil out for affordability. In response to Mr. Sugg's question, Councilmember Dotsch said like many in the audience, she started attending meetings, got curious and attended more meetings. One of her passions is Edmonds; the reason she ran for office is the people. Edmonds is so special, her sister couldn't wait to get out of Edmonds and Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 18, 2024 Page 7 Packet Pg. 44 8.3.a now lives in Switzerland, but loves coming back to Edmonds. One of things she found so interesting was residents' passion for community; people come to Edmonds because of the community. When she tells people she lives in Edmonds, they do not say oh I'm sorry, they say they love Edmonds. She has attended meetings in many areas of the City and has heard about how special Edmonds is. Another aspect that attracted her to the council was planning for the future; Edmonds is transitioning, there are strollers everywhere. For example, her neighbor who was a widower passed away and now a young family of four moved in. With regard to Mr. Milkey's question, at the end of the class on the GMA that she attended today, the presenter said units will not be affordable. HB 1110 was originally billed as affordability and changed to a variety of housing. At the class, Department of Commerce basically said realistically affordable housing will need to be subsidized or done regionally. Originally the thought was that smaller units would automatically be more affordable, but that is not the case. She referred to the ground breaking for the community center in Lynnwood, commenting there are opportunities on church properties for affordable housing that are subsidized by other means. In response to Mr. Nolan's question, Councilmember Paine said when the council met with Fitch & Associates regarding options for fire service, there was discussion about level of service and that information will be in the report that Fitch has promised to provide by the end of next week. She suggested asking that a comment about not changing the level of service be added. With regard to Sam's question about Yost Park, there are eight watersheds in Edmonds, all of which need special care. Critical area are out of bounds for growth, but that does not mean there aren't impacts to the watersheds. The City needs to ensure areas near creeks and streams are not overloaded. The council can decide whether the standard is protection at a 50 year or 100 year flood, knowing climate change will increase extreme storm events. Regarding Mr. Sugg's question about why she ran for office, Councilmember Paine explained her background is similar to where others get their experience, community groups, activism, etc. She moved to Edmonds for the school district and served on the school board for six years because she was unhappy with the services her children were getting. She found that fascinating and one of the best experiences in her life. The school board looks at policy, gets to see the complexity of how schools interact with the community, etc. She recommended residents serve on one of the City's boards or commissions. Her background is working in municipal government, courts and in regulatory for the City of Seattle. She has a master's degree in public administration and finds serving the community very satisfying. She has never been busier, it is a lot of fun, always interesting and she gets great perspective from the community. In response to Mr. Sugg's question, Councilmember Nand said she got involved in local politics when she lobbied then -Mayor Earling to pledge to commit to the Paris Accord at the City level because the Trump administration had backed out and she joined the Mayor's Climate Protection Committee. When she first got involved in, she started to understand that although what federal and state governments do might be on the evening news, what local government does impacts the public's daily life and they can have a lot of impact in their own community. She is the only millennial on the council and the only renter which allows her to provide a different perspective such as regarding housing. As a renter, she chose to live 3 blocks from her parents because her father is almost 80 and has dementia. She could have moved to New York and made lots of money, but whenever there were extreme weather events, she would be wondering if her parents were safe. Because of her more affordable housing option within blocks of her parents, she can walk to their house. She likes being able to share her lived experience and provide community feedback for neighbors. The council's job as local legislators is to use the public's input to impact the way the City is run and the way the community develops. With regard to Mr. Milkey's question, Councilmember Nand explained HB 1220 requires the City plan for low income housing to meet GMA. That will be challenging for Edmonds; people are intimidated by terms Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 18, 2024 Page 8 Packet Pg. 45 8.3.a like low income housing because it conjures negative views. It is also housing for college aged people leaving home for the first to go into the job market who want to stay close to home and have their kids babysat by their grandparents. Providing flexibility in zoning gives the market an opportunity for multiple generations to live in Edmonds. She wants to ensure everyone in the community feels represented by the council. Council President Olson read written questions submitted by Clinton Wright: 1. Exactly what is "equitable" housing in Edmonds and what will it look like in your view? 2. How are you going to assure that our sewer system and roads (infrastructure) can handle the increased density that we are being told we must accommodate if a supposed worst case scenario of people desiring to move here actually occurs? 3. Do you prefer cutting services to citizens as a way to save money or cutting salaries substantially by a percentage across the board or a combination of those things? In other words, what should the city administration do to save money and have a balanced budget going forward? 4. What made Plan A and Plan B presented by the administration acceptable and what made the Dotsch white paper unacceptable in your opinion? Councilmember Eck referred to Question 1 above, explaining she is fortunate to have a career in nonprofits and many on her team work in housing. Although not an expert, to her equitable housing is allowing a variety of housing types. In addition to college students, there are also seniors who want to downsize, but can't afford to move out of the house they've owned for decades. There needs to be a solution for them to stay in Edmonds where they have family and friends; maybe an ADU or shared housing would be an option. There are organizations that will do background checks for people interested in shared housing. She referred to an article in the Seattle Times about a program in another state where a background -checked college student shared a home with a senior and helped her with things she could no longer do. There are many different options that should be available to community members; it is not just college students or a single mom with kids, housing affordability impacts people of all ages. Micro housing is another potential. With regard to Question 2 above, Councilmember Eck explained the EIS related to the growth alternatives is vital and will consider and assess the infrastructure and help the council reach the best answer. Regarding Question 3, Councilmember Eck said in her job with a large nonprofit, she is responsible for millions of dollars for programs. Although she recognized government and nonprofit budgets are different, the principles are the same; look for funding, write grants, work with municipalities and governments to find program funds, and if those funds runs out, tough choices have to be made such as selling a building, cutting programs, etc. In her view, cutting staff was usually the last resort as that was dealing with people's lives. The staffing ratios in City of Edmonds compared to surrounding cities are very lean. She was not adverse to cutting staff if that was what had to be done, but that was not her go to. With regard to eliminating services, discussions with the public about what is important to them will be vital. In response to Mr. Sugg's question, Councilmember Chen explained he chose to serve on the city council because he loves the community. He was born and raised in China and had a very humble childhood. He had an opportunity go to school in Iowa, worked his way up from taking ESL classes to getting his accounting degree, passing the CPA exam and working as an internal auditor for Kimberly-Clark and ended up in Edmonds. He has traveled the globe three times and Edmonds is the place he fell in love with. He started a family, started his CPA firm, and got involved in the Chamber of Commerce, the Asian Service Center, and other great organizations. He has lived in his home close to Lake Ballinger the longest of anywhere and he has no plans to move. He ran for office to represent all of Edmonds; Edmonds does not end at 9t' Avenue anymore, the east side of the City contributes tremendously to the City's sales tax revenue, but there are issues with crime and infrastructure. A lot of progress has been made to uplift the entire City and he was proud of that progress. His third reason for running for office was an opportunity to use his experience in finance through his career as internal auditor and an auditor with one of the big five Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 18, 2024 Page 9 Packet Pg. 46 8.3.a accounting firms, a master's degree in accounting, and an MBA from Western Washington to serve the community. During the last year, the City has experienced financial challenges and he was the whistleblower. He was glad the community was able to rally together and that the current mayor is very transparent and recognized the problem. He looked forward to working with everyone to work toward financial stability and building a better, stronger community. In response to Sam's question about the calendar, Councilmember Dotsch explained council was given a lot of information at the meeting which also included a decision point, a very challenging way to make quality decisions. She noticed the same thing about the calendar, after that meeting, the next touchpoint is the end of October which is during the budget season. She had been thinking about requesting monthly or bimonthly updates. The more informed the council is, the better informed the public is and the community knows when to be engaged. She suggested having touchpoints sooner, even a touchpoint while the DEIS is underway to say whether the environmental impacts are greater than were originally thought to allow the council to begin thinking about other options. With regard to budgeting by priorities, Councilmember Dotsch wondered how the City was capturing the community's priorities. She recalled during one of the online open houses, 1,000 people visited it, but only 300 answered questions which shows something is missing. She wondered how the City could do better, provide more alternatives, be more statistically significant, have follow-up, etc. She noted the City of Bellevue does a good job with surveys that are very intentional. The council needs to hear from the community. Moving forward, she favors taking a holistic view because everything relates to everything else. The better the council understands the process, the better they understand the impacts their decisions have. Council President Olson read and responded to written comment from Christian Neau: ➢ What due diligence did the council and its consultants perform prior to proposing the plan? Council President Olson answered the planning board, planning department and council went through a lot of steps and filters about how to approach the growth targets. ➢ Did you walk through the proposed development area and neighborhood in addition to looking at satellite pictures? Council President Olson answered yes, pointing out all councilmembers and planning board members live in the community and are long term residents and have had their feet on the ground ➢ Did you talk to business owners and residents? Council President Olson said she had empathy for a restauranteur who spoke at a city council meeting about his investment in his business. She recognized there is some confusion about zoning decisions making certain development possible, but a business' lease will guide use of the space during the lease. The comprehensive plan does consider displacement of residences and businesses who might be adversely affected. ➢ Does your plan include a proposal for the relocation/indemnification of the business owners? Council President Olson assured there is no plan to relocate businesses and the City will not be involved in development to implement the zoning. ➢ Did you try to visualize how the proposed number of units could be built over the relatively small footprint of the five corner parcels? Underground parking? Council President Olson answered the "up to" of the bookend determines the environmental impact. No decision has been made at this point to allow that density in any specific location; it is just being studied. Janelle Cass, Edmonds, asked as the comprehensive plan is updated and there is a change in zoning, can the council promise that they would vote against taxing property owners at the highest value or usage. For example, someone owns a single family home in an area that is upzoned to allow a duplex and two DADUs, taxation at that higher densification and value could force people out of homes. As an experienced Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 18, 2024 Page 10 Packet Pg. 47 8.3.a environmental engineer who has done a lot of environmental assessments and impact analyses, she has never accomplished an EIS in three months. She has done smaller environmental assessments that took a minimum of eight months before the public outreach phase of the draft EIS. She asked what level of confidence the council will have in data that is completed in just three months. With regard to Ms. Cass's first question, Council President Olson cautioned councilmembers not to make promises that may not be within the council's control. Councilmember Paine referred to Ron Wambolt's written question about where the additional population will come from and how was the target of 13,000 was determined. For the past 10-15 years, the Puget Sound area has attracted a people from other parts of the country and from around world due to the strong economy particularly in the tech field and other large industrial companies such as Boeing. People who moved to Seattle 15 years ago are now venturing into areas further away from Seattle which has become a pretty challenging place to live. At a meeting with Roger Miller, CEO of WSDOT, he said WSDOT is planning transportation projects around the expectation that Snohomish County will have a 23% population increase in the next 20 years and most large transportation projects have a 15 year timeline. Of the 9,000 housing units the City is zoning for, capacity was already put in place by prior councils and prior comprehensive plans for 5,000 of those units so the current effort is only capacity for an additional 4,000 housing units. Councilmember Nand referred to Christian Neau's questions about decision making to get to this point in the comprehensive plan process. Last year the council considered a contract with VIA that cost $650,000. If changes that community members asked for were made, it would change the scope for work for the comprehensive plan update and the cost could increase to close to $1 million. To put that in perspective, the City pays the city attorney $1.1 million for a year's worth of work. Her preference is for the City to avoid paying the consultant more than $650,000 and still meet its legal obligation to have the comprehensive plan update completed by December 31, 2024. Once the consultant is done working with the planning department to aggregate all the information, it will come back to council and based on community input, the council will make final decisions related to the comprehensive plan update. The City is required to update the comprehensive plan every five years and between updates, zoning changes are made. She is a small business attorney, helping small businesses turn their dreams into reality. Often the zoning changes made between the state mandated comprehensive plan updates are the result of property owners' requests or the City is changing the zoning to accommodate changes in the market. To Ms. Cass's question whether the council could promise not to tax at highest and best use, Councilmember Nand referred to the presentation by Snohomish County Assessor Linda Hjelle to council last year about how each parcel is assessed; the assessment is incredibly mathematical and as equitable as they can make it. There will be potential impacts from things like lot splitting, for example if more lots are subdivided around a larger parcel and more density is occurring, that property owner could see a potential change. That is something property owners need to lobby the state delegation in the 21't and 32°d District about. Seniors and people with disabilities can apply for a property tax exemption. 4. CLOSING COMMENTS Council President Olson invited councilmembers to share how the public can engage with them in the coming weeks. Councilmember Nand said an in -person conversation is worth five email. She has office hours in the council office every Thursday at 4 pm. She has been lobbying the administration for a second opportunity for office hours at the neighborhood city hall on Highway 99 that councilmembers could staff on a rotating basis. There is nothing better than face-to-face and developing an in -person relationship with the council and the administration. She encouraged the public to email or call her, set up a time for coffee or visit during her office hours. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 18, 2024 Page 11 Packet Pg. 48 8.3.a Councilmember Paine said she has office hours on Wednesdays from 4-5 pm and will add extra hours on Fridays from 10 am - 12 pm. The public is always welcome to call her at 425-361-8844 or email her with questions. A lot of people think they know how councilmembers feel, but until they have a conversation, they may not get the background on the councilmember's thinking. She appreciated tonight's town hall, recognizing there were a lot of community events tonight including the Lynnwood community center ground breaking that several councilmembers attended. Councilmember Dotsch said she has business cards available and the City's website has councilmembers' emails and phone numbers. She was willing to go where residents are such as meet for coffee. If there was anything that wasn't answered tonight or someone wanted more information, she invited them to reach out to her. Councilmember Chen encouraged the public to reach out to council. Last year he started a citizen advisory group and he encouraged anyone interested in joining to let him know. He was also willing to meet with people wherever they are. Councilmember Eck said meeting with the public is one of her favorite things and she has met with everyone who has asked. She will make the time to meet in person or talk by phone. She is considering a monthly Coffee with Chris somewhere like Caffe Ladro. The Edmonds Civic Roundtable is having a councilmember at their meeting once a month. Council President Olson commented she purposely didn't speak too much tonight because she has been around longer and people have heard plenty from her. She always answers emails and accepts invitations to talk and she will continue doing that. She recalled during her campaign before the pandemic, she wanted to have regular, monthly meetings with neighbors. She is seeking neighbors who want to walk together once a week or she will come to their monthly meetings. Council President Olson thanked the audience from coming. The council is trying to be super engaged, recognizing a lot is happening very quickly this year. The council heard the public asking for more touchpoints, to slow things down and to engage the public at the right times and she assured the council and administration are doing their best to do that. She thanked Mayor Rosen for his support and involvement with council since he took office, noting it has been a great, collaborative effort. The City is working hard to have a great path forward. She expressed the council's appreciation for the public attending tonight's meeting and looked forward to talking with them about issues. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, the special council meeting was adjourned at 8:59 pm. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 18, 2024 Page 12 Packet Pg. 49 8.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/7/2024 Approval of Council Minutes April 23, 2024 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: 2024-04-23 Council Minutes Packet Pg. 50 8.4.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES April 23, 2024 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Rosen, Mayor Vivian Olson, Council President Chris Eck, Councilmember Will Chen, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Michelle Bennett, Police Chief Mike De Lilla, Senior Utilities Engineer Mike Clugston, Senior Planner 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 Rosen in the Council Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember Paine 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. 4. PRESENTATIONS 1. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING NATIONAL TRAILS DAY Council President Olson read a resolution recognizing National Trails Day which was brought forward to the council on behalf of the Edmonds Bicycle Advocacy Group (EBAG). Gordon Black, EBAG, thanked the council for acknowledging the role of trails in the community and agreeing to the resolution. Converting old railways into trails is a long-term vision and he was happy to report has already happened in the Edmonds community. He hoped long-term the full potential of the Interurban Trail will be realized. 5. JOINT MEETING Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 1 Packet Pg. 51 ANNUAL JOINT MEETING - SOUTH COUNTY FIRE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Acting Fire Chief Shaughn Maxwell introduced Board Chair Jim Kenny, Commissioner David Chan, Commissioner Edward Widdis, Vice Chair Mark Laurence, Commissioner Michael Fearnehough, Assistant Chief of Operations Jason Isotalo, Immediate Past Fire Chief Thad Hovis, and Assistant Chief in charge of the Fire Marshal's office Todd Anderson. Acting Chief Maxwell reviewed: • Proud to be Edmonds' fire department for the past 14 years, providing high -quality fire and emergency medical services. • In addition to fire and EMS services, SCF provides exception and unique services o Community resource paramedics o Whole blood for in -field transfusions o Home and business fire escape planning o Community outreach o ACT first aid and CRP o Falls prevention o Disaster preparedness • Life Saving Difference o SCF's overall cardiac arrest survival rate is double the national average ■ "I am alive thanks to you. My wife and two young boys will continue to have a father and husband, all thanks to you." - Galen Callahan, Cardiac Arrest Survivor • More Help is on the way o Legislature provided additional funding to address opioid crisis ■ $350,000 University of Washington grant will expand opioid outreach - Only agency in state awarded maximum amount • Fire Station Open House - EMS Week o May 18, 11 AM - 1 PM o Downtown Edmonds Station 17, 275 Sixth Ave N, Edmonds o Food Drive Bring food donations benefitting the Edmonds School District Nourishing Network Pantries Councilmember Tibbott thanked SCF personnel and commissioners for attending the meeting, remarking it was nice to see commissioners in person. He commented as the council is considering what to do with the fire contract and had a consultant look at options, a question arose regarding how commissioners determine an adequate and required level of service for the City of Edmonds. Acting Chief Maxwell answered there are standards of coverage and certain requirements and SCF looks at responses times and a multitude of things. He asked Operations Chief Isotalo to respond. Councilmember Tibbott said he wanted to hear from commissioners, recalling in the voters' pamphlet, several commissioners claimed to be fiscal conservatives and wanted to hold the line on expenses. For example, the opioid program was concerning to him; if it is completely funded via grants he was interested, but if it took personnel off the beaten track and putting them into "the deep woods," he was concerned. Acting Chief Maxwell answered the grant is structured to fund two FTEs and ancillary equipment and the funding is expected to continue. Chair Kenny answered SCF generally tries to respond with an initial unit on scene within 8 minutes 90% of the time for a basic call. There are a number of event categories up to a full-fledged fire. Operations Chief Isotalo responded SCF is consistently tracking data including time of dispatch, time to get en route, time to get first units on scene, etc. They work hard to get a paramedic, the most advanced life support level, there as quickly as possible. The goal is an initial response within 8 minutes 90% of the time followed by additional personnel to support the operation. Consideration is given to how busy units are, not just how long a response takes but how busy they are, how many calls they run and how many minutes/hours of the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 2 Packet Pg. 52 8.4.a 24 shift personnel are on a call and not available for a second or third call. As that number rises into the 23- 30% range, that is an important trigger to add staffing and apparatus. The goal is to dedicate fire engines with a minimum of 3 personnel, ladder trucks are the same. When there is extra staffing, that number is increased to 4. A myriad ALS and BLS units are staffed across the RFA as well. In Edmonds there is an engine company at Station 20 with 3 people, 3 people at Station 17, and 5 at Station 16. The 5 personnel were previously at Station 20 and were moved to Station 16 due to the need for additional coverage and quicker response times. SCF constantly watches the levels and has triggers for when staff goes to the board to request funds for additional positions. Councilmember Tibbott asked the commissioners to report on cost containment efforts. Chair Kenny responded firefighters are unionized and their contract is negotiated typically every three years, currently there is a five-year contract, which involves working with comparable agencies and negotiating with IAFF Local 1828, the union for firefighters at SCF. The commission tries to stay at the median of the comparables so neither too high nor too low, but have to pay a competitive wage to keep firefighters employed and to attract firefighters from across the region to work at SCF. Commissioner Laurence advised 80% of SCF's costs are labor. The state has set them up for failure with the collective bargaining act. It is a game of leapfrog with the uniformed personnel and matching other fire departments wages and benefits. The only way to reduce costs is to reduce services. He did not envy the council's task of telling citizens they will need to pay a lot more in taxes to have the fire service they have now. Commissioner Chan said he is a fiscal conservative and supports lower taxes by efficiency and improved services. He referred to dispatch time and turnout time on page 216 of the report, which are completely controlled by SCF, and need to be reduced. At one time, it took SCF three years to resolve the contract which shows the commission is not just rubber stamping the contract. He remarked only three people in the room were here when Edmonds began contracting for fire service. At that time SCF used a cost plus model for all the contract cities, labor costs plus administrative costs. SCF is not a for profit entity. He referred to the Fitch report which indicated one of the pros of Edmonds establishing its own fire department is citizen control, but SCF treats everyone in the system the same. Councilmember Nand commented for the record she is a fiscal conservative, something everyone will hear later in the meeting when the council discusses red light cameras. The council held a town hall last week where two community members stated their vote would be to remain in the RFA due to lifesaving calls they received from SCF firefighters and wanted the City to maintain that level of service. She wanted to pass on that compliment from the community SCF serves in Edmonds. She also complimented SCF for receiving the maximum grant. She relayed her partner used to be a homeless outreach coordinator with the Downtown Seattle Association Second Chance Employment, and he often described finding people dead and dying on the sidewalk to whom he administered water and Narcan until the fire department came. The opioid epidemic is a cost crisis, costing over 100,000 lives per year due to policy failures from the federal level down to the local level where cities and fire departments are trying to clean up the mess and save lives. She recognized SCF was trying to throw a bandaid on a gaping wound in society and she appreciated everything they do. Councilmember Nand recalled discussions last year of what to do with Edmonds' portion of the opioid settlement, about $70,000, and Acting Chief Maxwell's suggestion for wide distribution of Narcan. She expressed interest in funding voluntary entry into treatment for people experiencing homelessness due to opioid addiction. There is a lot of trauma associated with people afraid to go to sleep. She talked to someone today who said he has trauma when he wakes to someone standing over him after a friend woke up to an angry resident pouring acid on his face. She suggested the City use those funds to remove barriers for voluntary entry into treatment for people experiencing the crisis of homelessness. Acting Chief Maxwell Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 3 Packet Pg. 53 8.4.a agreed there is a co-occurring crisis of mental health issues that is woven into the issues of opioids and the unhoused which drives call volumes up. That was the catalyst for the community paramedic program with community healthcare workers funded by millions of dollars in grants. SCF runs a lean response and often there isn't time to slow down to help people that need more time. The community health workers can slow down and spend time to work through those issues and often they are willing to go into treatment. That is the approach and he envisioned it would be easy to collaborate with Edmonds' team on that. Councilmember Nand commented the City has human services in Parks that are doing targeted referrals. She thanked SCF for everything they do in the community, especially saving the lives of people experiencing opioid addiction as well as their friends, family and community. It is a weight that everyone bears. Acting Chief Maxwell explained the reason SCF was awarded the grant was due to the well thought out plan submitted by SCF to address these issues. Councilmember Paine commented it was great to have the two meetings close together to provide continuity between the information. Following onto Councilmember Tibbott's question about managing costs and programs, she asked if there was data showing ultimate savings as a result of the community resource paramedic program and were there other national models that do it differently. She recalled the program targeted people before they entered the hospital; she could envision people needing care after leaving the hospital and asked if there was support for that. She asked if there had been any decline in calls from residents participating in the community resource paramedic program. Acting Chief Maxwell answered SCF was one of the leaders in starting the community resource paramedic program over a decade ago and received a national award for innovation and creating a new best practice. For over a decade, on average both emergency room visits and 911 calls have been reduced by 50%. Emergency EMS response and emergency room visits are some of the most expensive aspects of healthcare. SCF has a decade of data showing a reduction in the number of calls for the people SCF works with. There are a lot of unseen consequences because the more overdoses SCF goes on means another medic unit or another fire engine is needed to keep up with concurrent calls. Keeping call levels down prevents the need for more emergency resources. Councilmember Paine expressed appreciation for all the work SCF does. She attended one of their events and will have an opportunity to do a ridealong with the community paramedics. Councilmember Chen expressed his appreciation for all the great work SCF is doing, all the emergency calls and even human services. He also thanked commissioners for their service. Edmonds is facing a decision about fire service such as contracting with another agency, joining the RFA or starting its own department. The City currently pays about $12 million for fire and EMS services; based on the calculations of $1.25/$1000 assessed value, residents will pay close to $19 million based on assessments for the entire City. He asked why the cost increased when Edmonds has the same three stations and receives the same high level of service. Chair Kenny responded as Mr. Sturgeon from Fitch stated during his presentation, it costs SCF around $18 million to provide service to Edmonds and Edmonds is paying about $12 million so SCF is picking up the difference in a subsidization and that has to come to an end. Other cities in southwest Snohomish County such as Lynnwood, Brier, Mountlake Terrace, Mill Creek and the unincorporated area are all part of SCF and it isn't fair to them to subsidize Edmonds in that manner. The cost is what it is and something needs to change and that is the reason for the increase in the cost. It is not suddenly more expensive; that is the cost and SCF needs to do something different because the full cost is not being covered. Councilmember Chen asked if an adjustment in the calculation of the cost per $1,000 AV could be considered for a higher value community like Edmonds. Chair Kenny answered the two cities that recently joined SCF, Brier and Mill Creek, have higher valuation than Edmonds. While Edmonds has a higher valuation than many other cities in Snohomish County, in south Snohomish County other parts of SCF have Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 4 Packet Pg. 54 8.4.a higher valuation. Commissioner Chan recalled when SCF first contracted with Edmonds and other cities, it was on a cost plus formula. SCF was expending a lot on programming such as prevention, etc. There is a misconception that SCF spend all the money they assess, SCF has established a reserve fund. With regard to property assessments, Mill Creek has the highest value. Some areas of Edmonds have high property values but areas near Highway 99 may be lower. He suggested Edmonds talk to Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace and Brier regarding why they agreed to join the RFA and why the voters approved it. Councilmember Eck commented the council must think about the cost to community members as well as their safety. She is a fan of the community resource team and had the pleasure of meeting with one of the team members recently and talking with him at length. It seems there are quite a few seniors that show up on their radar either because they are isolated, have mental health or medical issues, or a combination. People may have a stereotype of what someone who is an addict looks like, but in her view and from her human services experience, high school students, seniors, middle-aged people like herself, all walks of life and all income levels can be the victim of opioids. She was blown away that SCF's cardiac arrest survival rate was double the national average and SCF seems interested in ways to increase support to the community such as carrying blood and being one of the first to offer that because it is another way to save lives. There is a price attached to all those things and the question is whether the City wants to be equipped to keep everyone safe. Councilmember Eck recognized the number of overdoses are increasing, and asked if SCF was seeing a greater variety in the types of community members who overdose. Acting Chief Maxwell answered her assessment was spot on; the data from community paramedic shows there is a higher elderly population in the Edmonds area so they may get more of the community paramedic services. There is a hidden epidemic in the opioid issue; post pandemic kids are suffering from mental health issues which is melded into the opioid issue. Councilmember Eck commented in the end it was about empathy and making sure people are well taken care of and that the community is safe. Councilmember Dotsch asked how SCF determines if more staffing, trucks or stations are needed. Acting Chief Maxwell answered SCF has pretty sophisticated GIS modeling that looks at 5, 6, 8, 10 minutes from each station. As the consultant pointed out, services need to be started in at least 10 minutes, whether it is a fire or somebody who's heart has stopped, 10 minutes is the goal. GIS modeling considers speed limits, traffic density, etc., to determine the best station locations. Another consideration is what happens when there is a second call; for example, Edmonds has over 40,000 people and only 3 stations; consideration has to be given to what happens if 3 calls come in at the same time. For example in the summer when the weather is hot, SCF is inundated with calls. Station modeling is one issue, but calls stacking on top of each other is also an issue. Councilmember Dotsch referred to growth planned for south Snohomish County including a 13,000 increase in Edmonds population as well as people recreating in Edmonds. She asked how SCF's anticipates the needs of an increasing population. Acting Chief Maxwell answered there are pins on a map where every fire call, BLS call, ALS call is which can illustrate hot spots or higher call density and if personnel are not getting there in time and the call volume is increasing, that is used to strategically plan for future stations. Chair Kenny answered from a board level, they use that to consider what the future looks like and whether something can be done. Building a station is extremely expensive as it requires buying land, building the station, etc. Consideration can be given to adding a medic unit or transport unit at one of the current stations to avoid building a new station. The area around Swedish Edmonds has been identified for a future infill station because that area has the need and will continue to grow. A new station makes a difference and has repercussions across the region. Doing less expensive things to mitigate and still provide increased service are considered before building an infill station. At the end of the day, the area will continue to grow and the road system probably won't grow; dealing with that is a challenge that is considered regularly. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 5 Packet Pg. 55 8.4.a Councilmember Dotsch asked if the location and opportunity to expand existing stations is evaluated. Chair Kenny answered it is easier to leave a station where it is, but consideration has to be given to where growth is occurring and what makes sense for the future. The big challenge for Edmonds is there is no assistance from the west so everything has to come from the north, east or south. Keeping track of growth and infill station needs or more units in current stations is an ongoing consideration. Council President Olson thanked SCF staff and commissioners for the answers they have provided and for questions councilmembers have asked. Something she hoped SCF has heard from other cities that annexed into the RFA is there is only so much money in residents' wallets. It is a huge bonus when someone needs services that SCF offers such a platinum standard, but there are many things people value in the community and there is only so much money to pay for all those things. For example, the City cannot pay for its police force with what is collected in property taxes; the City's budget situation is real. To the extent it has not already been voiced as a source of concern, SCF has amazing programs, but at some point the residents of Edmonds and all members of the RFA cannot afford them and they may need to be prioritized. Recognizing that SCF is an elite troop and the best at everything, she wondered if at some point residents get so squeezed that they become homeless because they don't have enough left. Council President Olson hoped SCF commissioners were considering that and the reason the City feels such trepidation about losing control. She expressed appreciation for the level of service SCF provides; it's impossible to put a price tag on it, but yet the City and its residents only have so much money. Acting Chief Maxwell answered for example SCF's extremely high cardiac arrest save rate, that is focus and dedication to the training. A big part of that is choreography, efforts to shave off a second if that means the heart will come back when it's shocked. A lot of the costs are standard costs such as a fire truck or ladder, but the programs come from a dedication to the craft. SCF receives millions in grants for a lot of the programs; the staples of the service are what are really expensive. Council President Olson referred to the benefit charge currently on the ballot. She asked about the commission and fire leadership's openness to transferring to that model in the future. Chair Kenny answered the fire benefit charge is between 5-8% or $6-7 million of the budget which SCF has found to be a good level. That tool is about the future and a future recession because it can be increased by the board without a vote of the people if necessary. For example, if there were a huge recession and SCF faced huge budget cuts, the fire benefit charge would help mitigate the decline in revenue. It will not replace huge declines in revenue like were seen in the 2008/2009 recession but it would help. It is a tool that the voters approved in the past and SCF is going back to the voters for reapproval this year. It is a tool that reduces a certain amount of property tax. It is not a tax, it is a fee based on a formula of risk depending on the square footage of a structure, not the value. Council President Olson observed the formula considers the difficulty of fighting a fire in a building and equipment. Chair Kenny continued it also considers the type of occupancy, residential or commercial, which has more risk than single family. Councilmember Nand said Fitch validated the numbers SCF provided that the cheapest option by millions of dollars to maintain the current level of service would be for voters to approve annexation into the RFA. One topic that came up was if the ballot question wasn't put to the voters before the end of the contract and Edmonds was in a holdover situation, where would being out of contract with the RFA put Edmonds financially with the RFA. As a councilmember, she would feel the council had been derelict in its duty if it hadn't contracted or presented the annexation question to the voters. If the voters decide to turn down annexation, the City will have to look at Options B and C. She asked what happens to Edmonds' fire service if the voters did not have an opportunity to vote and the December 31, 2025 deadline is reached. Chair Kenny answered at a policy level, SCF does not want to leave Edmonds without fire and EMS services, but at that point the contract would need to be renegotiated. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 6 Packet Pg. 56 8.4.a Councilmember Nand observed contracting is no longer a model that the RFA commissioners support offering to any city in Snohomish County. Chair Kenny said he has encouraged the City many times to considering joining the RFA and that is what SCF would prefer. Councilmember Nand reiterated this is a decision for the voters. If the voters choose to annex into the RFA, what does representation look like. She recalled discussions in the past about town halls to discuss the impact to property taxes. With regard to representation, Chair Kenny explained if Edmonds voters approved annexation into SCF, the City would have one non -voting member on the board until the next odd year election which can be an elected official. There are currently two staff members from Mountlake Terrace and Brier who serve as non -voting members on the board. Prior to the next odd -year election, redistricting would be done. The board currently has 7 members and 7 districts with about 49,000 people in each district, and 2 at large positions. He explained the member does not represent only that district; they have to live in the district in order run for the position. Voters in the entire RFA vote in the primary and general election. The residency requirement ensures geographic representation from all the areas served by SCF and there are also two at -large seats. Chair Kenny continued, hypothetically if it were 2 years until the next redistricting, when that happened, at a minimum Edmonds would have one district representative due to its size and two at -large members so there could perhaps be three Edmonds residents on the board or even four depending on redistricting. Edmonds residents, just like residents of Mill Creek, Lynnwood, Brier and Mountlake Terrace, would vote on all seats at the primary and general elections. Board members do not represent just one district, they represent all residents served by SCF. For example, he is in District 5, the northeast part of SCF, but he represents everyone in SCF even though he has to live in District 5 to file for the position. Councilmember Nand commented some districts are more urbanized, primarily in proximity to King County, South Snohomish County is very urbanized versus the more rural parts of Snohomish County. She asked if there was any consideration in districting and how costs are allocated to property owners based on call volume. Chair Kenny answered no, the U.S. Constitution requires one person one vote. The districts are comparable such as within 1-2 percentage points of each other. Councilmember Nand asked if it was based on per capita. Chair Kenny answered it was solely based on population, not value or call volume. How stations are distributed or where stations are built is based on call volume, but voting is one person one vote. In response to Councilmember Nand's question if the council approves a ballot measure for annexation into the RFA, Commissioner Laurence explained SCF would be more than willing and would spend a lot of effort and time to help educate citizens about reasons to annex into the RFA. Councilmember Nand relayed her understanding the resolution the council passed previously did not trigger that process under the RCW. Chair Kenny answered that was his understanding. Councilmember Nand asked if the resolution the council approved last summer requesting information on annexation triggered the process of town halls and gathering information. City Attorney Jeff Taraday explained the resolution adopted by the council did not contain the exact language the statute contemplates and as a result, the RFA may not have followed through in the way the statute contemplates. He suggested the RFA respond to that question. Chair Kenny explained the council amended the resolution prior to passage and so it effectively did not move annexation forward. He assumed the council would need to pass a resolution that contained the magic language in order to activate the process which involves negotiations, scheduling a ballot measure, and other processes. It starts with the council indicating it wants to proceed. Councilmember Nand said she has been wondering when the town halls would start and now realizes the council would need to pass a resolution with the legally operative portion requesting annexation. She hoped the administration and council leadership would bring that forward soon so this can be handled in a responsible fashion before the end of the contract on December 31, 2025. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 7 Packet Pg. 57 8.4.a Commission Chan commented the Fitch report is very objective and the council should consider all its options. To Councilmember Dotsch's question, he said SCF thinks 10 years ahead in its strategic planning. SCF has a capital facilities plan and have been looking at options. The SCF purchased land in Mukilteo, are in the planning stages of the Value Village site on Highway 99, and the siting of Station 10 in Lynnwood is important for the entire region. The concept of RFA began 20 years ago with discussions of combining resources for all cities. To Council President Olson's comment about SCF's programs, every program helps SCF; prevention programs provide education. The idea is to eliminate the need for calls to be made; for example if a person doesn't fall or if a fire never starts, they don't need to call 911. Fire commissioners live in SCF and pay the same rate for fire service and are diligent about ensuring there is no fat in the budget. He relayed an experience from a Brier councilmember who had a heart attack and was thankful that SCF arrived in time and he wasn't thinking about the taxes he pays. Commissioner Widdis explained he was the fire chief when Edmonds first contracted with Fire District 1 and has enjoyed being a partner ever since. He lives in Mill Creek and a couple years ago their city considered annexing into the RFA, knowing with the city's high tax values, residents would hurt a little. The vote passed by 76%; the biggest thing many residents talked about was how to lower the property tax and raise the benefit charge. He wasn't sure how Mill Creek residents would respond because a lot of people were concerned about paying higher property taxes when they already pay the highest sales tax in the state. Everybody felt in their heart it was something that it was hard to put a price tag on a life. Councilmember Paine asked how the Mill Creek city council decided to allocated the cost to annex into the RFA, whether it was 100% paid by the residents or some kind of a split. Commissioner Widdis answered he was uncertain what Mill Creek did; if the city doesn't change anything, there is a significant extra amount the city retains. The biggest issue in Mill Creek was contracting with the fire department and every year costs increased, creating issues between the city and the fire service provider (not SCF at that time). It was an easier sell for Mill Creek to annex to SCF because they liked that fire department better even though it cost more, but there wasn't any argument about whose station it was, etc. It was a radical change after contracting with one agency for 20 years and totally changing to annex into another. Councilmember Paine said her interest was in how the dollars shifted from the city funding fire service through its budget to residents paying directly to SCF. Commissioner Widdis answered there is a point where it is entirely shifted to the taxpayers paying the RFA, he was unsure exactly how that worked as it depends on when the election is and when the change actually occurs. He recalled within a year, residents assumed the cost for fire and EMS. Councilmember Paine summarized 100% of the cost was paid by the residents. Mayor Rosen summarized this is a very important, serious issue to the community. He expressed appreciation for SCF personnel and commissioners spending time with the council. Although this was a joint meeting, he noted there had not been an opportunity for SCF to ask questions. He thanked them for indulging the council and looked forward to the next conversation. 6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Joe Scordino, Edmonds, said as he pointed out in his written comments which should be part of the administrative record, there is a serious obstacle to the council approving the CARA code as proposed in the consent agenda. Most of what the council has been presented regarding environmental health hazards is essential de facto hearsay because it has not been properly documented according to state law. Further, Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 8 Packet Pg. 58 8.4.a the statements made about the environmental consequences of the proposed stormwater allowances in the Deer Creek CARA are equivocal and not supported by science or the legal custodian of the CARA, Olympic View Water & Sewer District (OVWSD). OVWSD has voiced their concerns to the council and have not agreed to the exact wording of the proposed CARA code. There are serious deficiencies in the chronology of the SEPA Checklist used in the Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) dated November 29, 2023 which he understood the city was using as their SEPA documentation for this proposed action. First, the SEPA Checklist for the DNS is dated January 2023, over a year a half ago and a lot has changed since then. That change is noted in the November 29, 2023 planning board meeting packet which specifically states the proposed action had been changed in a number of ways since July 2023 to make the regulations more protective. Mr. Scordino asked why the SEPA Checklist wasn't updated to reflect those protective changes, how they make the environmental consequences less and how they justified not going that next step of a full blown Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). That is not documented anywhere and the council is relying on a 1'/2 year old document that is inadequate. Further the SEPA Checklist repeatedly states the proposed action is a non -site specific action. The proposed code provides very site specific actions in the Deer Creek CARA. The obvious question is since the proposed code is very site specific related to stormwater allowances into the Deer Creek CARA, how does this SEPA document even apply to what the council is considering. The council needs to ask where the required SEPA documentation is for this proposed regulation and how can the council legally proceed to approve the proposed code without applicable SEPA documentation in accordance with state law. With the city's current budget situation, he wondered if the council could take the risk of a costly lawsuit. Janelle Cass, Edmonds, a Port of Edmonds Commissioner, invited everyone to a ribbon -cutting ceremony this Friday, April 26 at 11 am at 471 Admiral Way where the Port along with federal, state and local elected officials and members of the community will gather for a brief speaking program and conclude with a ribbon -cutting. The completion of the administration and maintenance building is a key phase in the Port's multilayer effort to expand the public port walk and rebuild the failing seaway. Members of the community are invited to join in the celebration and learn more about project phasing and see the new building. The Port is in its 75t1i year. Diane Buckshnis, Edmonds, wished the Port a Happy 75' Anniversary. She referred to an email she sent the council and mayor today about the WRIA 8 walkabout that included five cities. She recommended the city not allow digging in the CARA and go back to the 2023 CARA code. One scientist on the WRIA 8 Walkabout asked whether the council realized the CARA was different dirt, an aquifer is an extremely unique soil and should be protected. Another said it's easier to keep something pure than try to fix it; if the aquifer is contaminated, it will not be easily restored. Another said there are new stormwater codes coming out and the council should wait until they see those new codes. Another said science is just now being brought forth as PFAS is just now coming to the federal and state governments and so the council should take a cautionary approach. She opined most of the major watershed in Edmonds have been destroyed, the most recent, Perrinville, which will cost a lot of money. She encouraged the council to listen to the experts, give it some time because no one will be building because interest rates are not going down anytime soon. She urged the council not to allow digging in the CARA. She recognized Mayor Rosen was deep into a lot of work and she prayed for him every night. The mayor can veto the CARA code. Staff needs to start giving the council complete, unbiased packets. She recalled former Mayor Earling vetoed the original CARA code. She commiserated with and recognized how ingratiated the council was in the city's financials, staffing, etc., and urged them to listen to the experts including the people she talked to today on the WRIA 8 walkabout. Edmonds is unique in terms of topography, but should be conscious of the fact that the city should take care of the aquifer and not allow building. 8. RECEIVED FOR FILING Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 9 Packet Pg. 59 1. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR FILING 2. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS 3. OUTSIDE BOARDS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS 4. SUMMARY OF MARCH 26, 2024 MEETING WITH GOVERNOR STAFF REGARDING EDMONDS MARSH 5. MOU FOR LOWER PERRINVILLE REACH PROPERTY OWNERS 6. FEBRUARY 2024 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT 7. MAYOR'S CLIMATE PROTECTION COMMITTEE 2023 ANNUAL REPORT 9. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. Councilmember Dotsch requested Item 9.8, Ordinance to Adopt Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) Code, be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed under Council Business at a place the council president deemed best. Council President Olson began describing where the item would be placed on the agenda. Councilmember Paine raised a point of order that this was not the time for discussion. Mayor Rosen ruled point taken, and asked where it should be placed on the agenda. Council President Olson said she needed to speak to staff to know where to place it on the agenda. She suggested bringing it to another meeting. City Attorney Jeff Taraday said until a motion made regarding where to put it on the agenda, anything pulled from Consent is taken immediately following the vote on the Consent Agenda. He recommended the council vote on the Consent Calendar and then decide whether to discuss the pulled item now or move it elsewhere on the agenda. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES APRIL 9, 2024 2. APPROVAL OF SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 9, 2024 3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT 4. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING NATIONAL TRAILS DAY 5. ARLINGTON AIRPORT USE AGREEMENT 6. CJTC CONTRACT FOR PART TIME INSTRUCTORS 7. ELECTRONIC FUNDS TRANSFER (EFT) POLICY ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT ORDINANCE TO ADOPT CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREA (CARA) CODE (Previously Consent Agenda Item 9.8 Senior Planner Mike Clugston advised he and Senior Utilities Engineer Mike De Lilla were present to answer council questions. Council President Olson asked whether staff felt adequately prepared to have this conversation today or if it should be postponed to another meeting. There were emails sent today and she had not received the reply so did not want to assume staff was prepared. Mr. Clugston answered they were comfortable answering any questions council may have if council is comfortable asking them. COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ARE REVIEWED AND RESOLVED, THE REMAINING ISSUES WITH OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT TO ALIGN WITH THE RECOMMENDATION. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-2-1), COUNCILMEMBERS Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 10 Packet Pg. 60 CHEN, TIBBOTT AND DOTSCH AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS ECK AND PAINE VOTING NO; COUNCILMEMBER NAND ABSTAINING. 10. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. OPIOID SETTLEMENT PARTICIPATION FORM Deputy Director of Administrative Services Kim Dunscombe explained for the City to participate and be eligible for compensation under the state's new settlement agreement with Johnson & Johnson, the City needs to be able to sign and submit their participation form. She requested the council authorize the mayor to sign and submit the form for the City to be eligible for the funds. COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO ACCEPT THE ONE WASHINGTON MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN WASHINGTON MUNICIPALITIES APPROVING THE PARTICIPATION OF EDMONDS IN THE BROADER OPIOID SETTLEMENT. Councilmember Paine commented this is a really good idea and she commended Ms. Dunscombe for bringing the participation form to council prior to the deadline. Councilmember Chen echoed Councilmember Paine's comments that this is a good thing for Edmonds to accept and to use the resources to do the work that needs to be done. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING ECC 8.10 TO INCLUDE STOPLIGHT INTERSECTION CAMERAS Council President Olson introduced this item, advising the subject matter experts are also available. The council passed ECC 8.10 February 2023 related to school zone speed cameras. That code did not specify an allowance for stoplight intersection cameras, a topic the council has revisited at several meetings and had robust discussion in the community, via email and in council chambers. She requested the city attorney speak to the most recent house bill passed by the legislature and signed by the governor that will become effective June 6, 2024 and how that effects how funds can be used. The topic is unchanged from previous conversations other than the recently approved bill and she anticipated council would want to have that information before voting. City Attorney Jeff Taraday referred to HB 2384, explaining he did not think there was anything in the bill that would require an amendment to the ordinance in the packet. There are potential consequences regarding the use of the traffic safety camera revenue; the bill speaks to how revenue can be used or how its use is limited in certain circumstances. He clarified he will preface many of his statements tonight with likely or probably because this is a brand new bill and there is no case law that interprets it and there are things in it that he finds ambiguous so he is unsure how it will ultimately be interpreted. The bill distinguishes programs, automatic traffic safety camera programs that are in effect before January 1, 2024 and those not in effect before January 1, 2024 but does not define the word program so some might ask whether the City's program was in effect. Mr. Taraday continued, he would argue it probably was in effect because the ordinance was approved in 2023, but he did not know exactly when the cameras were installed or whether that was relevant because the state legislature has not defined what a program is. It is unknown whether the program is the ordinance, the day the cameras are functioning or something else. Probably because the council adopted the ordinance in 2023, the program was in effect prior to January 1, 2024. Section 2, subsection 13(d)(1) of the bill speaks Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 11 Packet Pg. 61 to revenue limitations. For cities new to automatic traffic safety cameras, they can only use the revenue in limited ways; it cannot just go into the General Fund for general purposes. Because Edmonds started before the threshold cutoff date, the City probably has a continuing ability to use the revenue according to the council's discretion with the following limitation: for cities with programs in effect, up to a 10% increase in each kind of camera, distinguishing school zone versus red light cameras, and for those with fewer than 10 of each kind, they can add one camera of each kind. That is how he read the law. The City can quite clearly add one traffic safety camera for school zones because the City had its program in place but had fewer than 10 before January 1, 2024. With respect to red light cameras, any automated traffic safety camera program in effect before January 1, 2024 with fewer than 10 red light cameras in effect, the City had zero which is few than 10, but the City had a program in effect. He could see an argument that the City could add one red light cameras and retain the unlimited revenue discretion under this law, but it is clear there would be some limitation on use of revenue if more than one of either category is added. The law doesn't say whether the City gets to compartmentalize the old camera revenue from the new camera revenue and continue to have discretion on use of the old camera revenue; the new camera revenue is limited to what the state law states. It is possible if the City exceeds the one new camera of each kind threshold that the state would say the City had crossed the threshold and now all the revenue has to be used in accordance with these limited methods. Mr. Taraday continued, for all the cities that are just now doing traffic safety camera programs and those that will cross the threshold, the money must be used for traffic safety activities related to construction and preservation projects and construction and operation purposes including but not limited to projects designed to implement the Complete Streets approach as defined in RCW 47.04.010, changes in physical infrastructure to reduce speeds through road design, and changes to improve safety for active transportation users including improvements to access and safety for road users with mobility, sight or other disabilities. The second category of limitations on the use of the revenue is the cost to administer, install, operate and maintain the automated traffic safety cameras including the cost of processing infractions. He summarized cities limited in the way the revenue can be used can spend the money on road safety improvements or camera maintenance and infraction processing. Mr. Taraday continued, one might say if General Fund dollars were used for that anyway, isn't the net effect the same because it unburdens the General Fund by using the revenue to pay for things the General Fund would paid for anyway. He did not know if that was true with respect to the road safety improvements because it isn't always General Fund dollars that fund that, sometimes they are funded by grants. COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE IN THE PACKET AMENDING CHAPTER 8.10, AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERAS, TO INCLUDE STOPLIGHT INTERSECTIONS AT AUTHORIZED AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERA LOCATIONS. Council President Olson commented for her, the new law was immaterial. There are so many sidewalk, road and transportation improvements that need to be done, most of them speed abatement related so it ties in and segues nicely. Certainly at this point when the City is so strapped financially, she would not want to put limits on how it was used, assuming there is an option which the City most decidedly might not have. Regardless, she was personally in favor of having red light cameras at two intersections she purported in a different agenda memo, but this is a more general conversation about whether to have any red light intersection cameras at all. Councilmember Nand referred to Section 2, subsection 13 (b)(i) on page 7 of HB 2384. Councilmember Tibbott raised a point of order. Councilmember Nand asked if she was not allowed to ask questions. Councilmember Tibbott said he would like to follow Councilmember Nand's argument or point Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 12 Packet Pg. 62 8.4.a of information but the page numbers from the HB are covered by the packet numbers. He asked what packet page she was referring to in order to have a viable discussion. Mayor Rosen advised it was packet page 359. Councilmember Nand read the paragraph, "The automated traffic safety camera program revenue used by the county or city with a population of 10,000 or more for purposes described in (a)(i) of this subsection must include the use of revenue in census tracts of the city or county that have household incomes in the lowest quartile determined by the most currently available census data and areas that experience rates of injury crashes that are above average for the city or county. Funding contributed from traffic safety program revenue must be, at a minimum, proportionate to the share of the population of the county or city who are residents of these low-income communities and communities experiencing high injury crash rates. This share must be directed to investments that provide direct and meaningful traffic safety benefits to these communities. Revenue used to administer, install, operate, and maintain automated traffic safety cameras, including the cost of processing infractions, are excluded from determination of the proportionate share of revenues under this subsection (13)(b)." Councilmember Nand asked if this would be construed as a geographic restriction on at least a portion of the revenue generated. Mr. Taraday said subsection (b) begins with the phrase, "except as provided in (d) of this subsection:" Subsection (d) talks about the January 1, 2024 program creation threshold. That is what he was explaining previously. The school zone camera program existed prior to January 1, 2024 and it stands to reason that the school zone cameras would not be implicated in what subsection (b) is requiring unless the City were to add more than one of them. The City is allowed to add one, but cannot add more than one without triggering the requirement that Councilmember Nand just read. Councilmember Nand explained for the edification of the public, the school zone cameras were turned on January 1, 2024 and then there was a one month warning period. Mr. Taraday said he was not up to speed on those facts and was not sure they were relevant. The city council adopted an ordinance in 2023, contracted with a company in 2023; there is nothing in the law that states exactly when the program was put into effect. He cannot definitively conclude one way or the other whether the school zone camera is before or after the January 1, 2024 threshold date. He would assert it probably should be treated as before that threshold date given all the work done in 2023, but he cannot say definitively that that's how a court would interpret this or how the State of Washington would interpret it. Councilmember Nand thanked Mr. Taraday for his input, commenting she was not trying to cast him in the role of an adjudicator. Councilmember Nand continued, as a member of the public, she would expect the program was implemented when it started issuing tickets which was in 2024. In the state's update to the 2005 bill is directing that money be distributed proportionately toward the lowest quartile of average income according to the census. In the police department's previous presentation, the lowest quartile is clearly aggregated around the Highway 99 community in terms of income. This is where eight of the proposed nine red light traffic cameras are located. She interpreted this as direction from the state to ensure the city is equitably and proportionately redistributing any revenue collected through the red light or school zone cameras to benefit people experiencing the lowest quartile income in the community. In light of that, she offered the following amendments. Mr. Taraday commented at the risk of saving the council time, none of the limitation in subsection (b), however one might interpret them, are required to be specified in the ordinance. Councilmember Nand can proceed with her motion, but it is not a requirement that the ordinance contain any of the limitations. The state law, if it applies, will apply whether or not these items are in the ordinance. Councilmember Nand said she would like to bring the amendment forward for a discussion about equity with the council. In expanding the potential presence of this program throughout the state, the legislature wanted to acknowledge that red light and school zone camera programs, because the communities blighted by the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 13 Packet Pg. 63 8.4.a presence of state highways moving through them in the first place, were disproportionately bearing the burden of having to generate traffic safety camera revenue, but not proportionately receiving reinvestment into traffic safety in the intersections affected by the presence of the cameras. Mayor Rosen declared a five minute recess. Councilmember Nand explained in light of the geographic restriction recommended by the updates to the House Bill which she believed were intended to meet certain equity challenges about the desperate impacts of cameras when placed in working class and multiethnic neighborhoods, she made the following motion: COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CHEN, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ADD TO THE ORDINANCE SECTION G, REVENUE RESTRICTIONS. ALL OF THE EXCESS REVENUE GENERATED BY THE ADDITION OF AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERAS IN THE CITY OF EDMONDS SHALL BE RESTRICTED WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND AND MAY ONLY BE USED FOR THE PURPOSES OF TRAFFIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS AND TO FUND PUBLIC AMENITIES WITHIN 0.5 GEOGRAPHIC MILE OF THE LOCATION OF EACH OPERATIONAL TRAFFIC CAMERA. THE REVENUES IS TO BE DIVIDED PROPORTIONATELY AMONG THE LOCATIONS OF ALL OPERATIONAL CAMERAS IN EACH BUDGETARY CYCLE UNTIL THE REVENUE IS EXHAUSTED. Councilmember Nand clarified this would require the Edmonds Municipal Court to code all the revenue generated by the automated traffic cameras, both school zone and red light cameras, and for the Edmonds Finance Department to apply a project number to traffic safety camera revenue, divide the total amount of revenue generated by the number of operational cameras and earmark each of these funds for use in the neighborhoods affected by the presence of the cameras. For example, the revenue generated by the five operational school zone cameras would become restricted and would have to be divided in each budgetary cycle to fund traffic safety improvement and public amenities in each affected neighborhood. The Edmonds Public Works Department could only apply the restricted funds toward projects that improve traffic safety in the neighborhoods surrounding these intersections. Additionally these funds could be used to help fund publicly owned facilities in the neighborhood and the Edmonds Park Department could access these funds to finance open space acquisition and right-of-way improvements such as landscaping in those neighborhoods. If the red light cameras have to be pursued to enhance revenue in the City, she wanted to make sure the neighborhoods burdened by the cameras at the most dangerous intersections in the City receive dedicated funding to improve the traffic safety experience of residents, workers and visitors until such time the cameras are no longer necessary and the intersections will no longer be the most dangerous in the City. Councilmember Paine commented it would be very difficult to disaggregate all the information from all the infractions because all infraction revenue, whether a citation issued by an officer or a parking ticket, are all treated similarly and it is almost impossible to disaggregate it. She was not able to fully support the amendment, primarily because it is too administratively burdensome. The part she liked was the geographic locations around the traffic safety cameras and the school safety cameras; that is appropriate because it is allowed by HB 2384 for Complete Streets and active transportation and to recover the administrative cost related to the infractions. Instead of saying all excess revenue, she preferred 75% of the revenue which would be generous and would not strictly go to those programs and could also cover some of the City's overhead costs. She did not support the amendment as proposed. Councilmember Nand thanked Councilmember Paine for her conditional support for the concept. Under the new requirements in HB 2384, the administration, courts and finance will be required to go through a disaggregation process for the traffic camera revenue anyway. She would defer to the administration and would be happy to table the amendment until the administration could provide a presentation related to the new requirements under HB 2384 in terms of disaggregation so the council can understand its obligations. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 14 Packet Pg. 64 She reminded the council the state is responding to intense criticism from the perception that money is being generated in multiethnic and lower income neighborhoods and not being reinvested into those communities which is why Representative Donaghy included these geographic restrictions and these restrictions on revenue in expanding the scope of where cameras can be placed. As she stated in the letter she distributed to council, she had no problem voting for school zone cameras because there was a strong drive from the community and a lot of community members felt drivers in school zones were reckless and unsafe during those times. She hasn't been able to locate a single positive comment from anyone in any of the neighborhoods targeted for red light cameras in which they are requesting cameras to address red light runners. This could be a way to copy the model the state is adopting in reforming traffic camera programs to ensure the funding mechanism used to bolster the City's General Fund is being equitably restricted and reinvested in the communities that have to bear the burden of the presence of these cameras. Councilmember Dotsch asked with the new state law, would the City have to set up a new fund for the monies to go into instead of the General Fund. Mr. Taraday answered it depends on whether the City is implicated by the January 1, 2024 date or not, that is the first step of the analysis. Assuming for the sake of discussion that the City is and that the state will treat the City as instituting a program after that date, as long as there is a way to account for the money that comes from the cameras and the ways it's being used and as long as the City can demonstrate the funds are being used in the way that state law requires, he did not think a new fund would be required. He relayed Ms. Dunscombe agreed with him. He summarized a new fund would not be required, but there would need to be an accounting for the money as it is received and expended. Councilmember Dotsch asked due to the difficulty interpreting this bill at this time, would it be wise to wait to implement a program until more is known. Mr. Taraday answered he did not know when that would be. Legislatures draft ambiguous law all the time; that's what keeps him employed. If not for legislatures drafting ambiguous laws, lawyers wouldn't be necessary. Such laws can remain on the books for a long time and the legislature often lets courts correct their mistakes. Councilmember Dotsch asked the impact of being out of compliance. Mr. Taraday answered assuming the council went with the most reasonable in accordance with the best effort interpretation of the law and somebody later concluded the City was not in compliance, although he was unsure who that would be, he did not know what the remedy would be. He would need to research the remedy for being out of compliance. Councilmember Dotsch commented the new legislation kind of muddied the waters. She also concurred with Councilmember Nand that there has not been an outcry from the public for enforcement of red light runners. In reviewing the data, there were no injuries in any of the five accidents at the three intersections that were discussed. She was still trying to understand if those were the highest volume intersections or the riskiest intersections. Councilmember Eck raised a point of order, questioning whether the comments were germane to this agenda item. Mayor Rosen ruled point taken. Councilmember Dotsch concluded she felt the council did not have enough understanding about how funds from any red light cameras program would be distributed. Council President Olson said she understood the appeal of this idea, everyone cares about the equity and appearance of fairness the amendment would help solidify, but at the same time she had concerns; one is at this time staff is spread so thin and doing all this historical reconstruction along with day-to-day operations, it was a mistake to volunteer for more administrative work. Councilmembers need to be responsible and ensure the equity lens is used and could address this during the budget. She did not mind being on record saying 84' is one of her top priorities for speed abatement. She preferred to address this in a way that did not require a lot of additional staff time. She cautioned councilmembers on the concept of going down the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 15 Packet Pg. 65 8.4.a rabbit hole of trying to directly connect revenues and expenses. The City is currently just trying to keep the lights on and pay for the most basic services and it is to everyone's benefit that that happens. She concluded the amendment was not well timed and cautioned against volunteering for more administration. If the bill applies, it takes care of that without adding so much laborious separation and division, especially adding the 75% even though she liked that idea because it allowed for overhead, it is just another layer of work and math to get to the right numbers. Councilmember Paine relayed councilmembers have had about a dozen neighborhoods across Edmonds complain about speed and traffic safety; from the county line to the north end of Edmonds 76' is a hazardous road and there have been people injured in unregulated intersections. There may not have been complaints specifically related to red light cameras, but a dozen neighborhoods have complained about traffic safety and drivers not paying attention. Councilmember Eck relayed her understanding the recommendation is just to ensure the language is consistent with state law which the City will have to follow regardless. It seemed to her a little more straightforward if that is addressed tonight and then table the revenue piece and working out the long term plan should the council move forward with red light cameras. She agreed with Councilmember Nand that there are obvious areas of the City that have been historically underserved. With the revenue that is potentially gained, it is completely appropriate and she supported having that full conversation. It was not a conversation she wanted to have tonight without more opportunity for further discussion. In her mind, the council was tangling steps and tasks that need to be done and she preferred to keep it tidier and have the in- depth conversation that Councilmember Nand recommends. The council should absolutely have that conversation, but she was unsure it was an appropriate topic for tonight. Councilmember Chen applauded the concept of using the revenue generated by the red light cameras to improve traffic safety in the affected area. His concern was the difficulty with implementing it. He suggested tabling this discussion to allow staff time to develop a workable solution. COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO TABLE THE AMENDMENT. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS ECK, CHEN, DOTSCH, PAINE AND NAND VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH, TO TABLE AGENDA ITEM 10.2 UNTIL WE CAN GET FURTHER INFORMATION FROM THE ADMINISTRATION REGARDING OUR OBLIGATIONS TO DISAGGREGATE TRAFFIC CAMERA REVENUE UNDER HB 2384. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, TIBBOTT, DOTSCH, AND NAND VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS ECK AND PAINE AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON VOTING NO. 3. AUTHORIZING USE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERAS AT SPECIFIC SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN CONTRACT Councilmember Nand commented in light of council tabling the ordinance, she did not want to direct the mayor to sign a contract that is not yet legal in the City and offered the following motion: COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO TABLE ITEM 10.3 UNTIL SUCH TIME AS 10.2 IS BROUGHT BACK WITH INFORMATION AS REQUESTED BY THE COUNCIL FROM THE ADMINISTRATION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. ELECTED OFFICIAL TRAINING Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 16 Packet Pg. 66 8.4.a City Attorney Jeff Taraday requested councilmembers either make a motion to table and do not say anything after the word table or make a motion to postpone something until and fill in the blank after until. He explained it makes a difference; if the word table is used, it is interpreted as a motion to table which makes the motion non -debatable, but there really is not such thing as a motion to table until. A councilmember either tables something or postpones something until a date certain or until something else happens. A councilmember can postpone indefinitely or to a date certain. The distinction matters because there is a difference on whether the motion is debatable. Councilmember Paine asked how this training came about, whether it was in response to something the council did. Mr. Taraday answered the motion training was due to something the council just did. Councilmember Paine clarified, how did the Elected Official Training come about. Mr. Taraday said he was requested to provide training and suggested Council President Olson answer that question. Council President Olson said she felt the council needed training based on things that were occurring or that she was concerned would occur. Recognizing she was the guilty parry with regard to motions to table, Councilmember Nand asked if a motion to postpone required a certain date or could it be to a certain event like she attempted to articulate. Mr. Taraday answered there can be a motion to postpone to a date certain or to postpone indefinitely. City Clerk Scott Passey said a motion to postpone to a date certain is debatable and amendable; a motion to postpone indefinitely is debatable but not amendable and is often used to kill an item. A motion to lay on the table or table is not debatable or amendable. It must be taken from the table at the same meeting or the next regular meeting and is often used to kill an item incorrectly, but an item can be killed in that manner if it is not taken from the table at the next meeting. In response to Councilmember Paine's question, Councilmember Nand said she has been requesting training of this nature since she was a very new councilmember last year. She thanked Council President Olson and Mr. Taraday for scheduling it and looked forward to the training. With regard to Mr. Passey's explanation about taking a motion from the table at the same meeting or the next regular meeting, Mr. Taraday explained after that point, the motion to table no longer has any effect. Even if something was tabled, the council president could schedule it on the agenda at the second regular meeting after the motion to table whether the council had taken it from the table or not because each council meeting is a new session under Robert's Rules of Order and a lot of the rules that apply to continuous legislative bodies do not work as well with a legislative body like a city council. Mr. Taraday reviewed: • Presentation prepared by Beth Ford, Patricia Taraday and Jeff Taraday Topics o Councilmember use of social media (practical considerations and SCOTUS) o Serial meetings and the bcc field o Ballot measures Mr. Taraday commented he was most prepared to discuss serial meetings and the bcc field and ballot measures. It was the consensus of the council for Mr. Taraday to focus the training on those topics and have training on councilmember use of social media another day if there wasn't time tonight. Mr. Taraday continued: • Disclaimer: This training is not intended to be a replacement for newly elected official training or the Attorney General's OPMA training. You should seek complete training, as needed, outside of a city council meeting. Councilmembers are obligated to take OPMA training outside a council meeting and this not a substitute for that. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 17 Packet Pg. 67 8.4.a Serial Meetings o A quorum of councilmembers are not permitted to meet outside a council meeting ■ A serial meeting is when that occurs via progressive communications which essentially results in a meeting of four or more councilmembers ■ In the age of email, text messages, and telephones, it is easy to accidentally wade into serial meeting territory ■ The city strives for good governance and citizens expect a certain level of transparency. Serial meetings instead of debating on the dais, citizens do not get the transparency they expect o Citizens Alliance v. San Juan County ■ But [Plaintiff) asserts that a serialized e-mail and telephone exchange involving members of the Council constituted a "meeting" of the Council because four council members were "present" during the communications. ...The communications that [Plaintiff) describes as a "meeting" consisted of two a -mails and a telephone call that occurred over the course of a 14-hour period. ■ Council member Peterson, who did not attend any of the CAO Team's in -person meetings, sent the first e-mail on which [Plaintiff) relies; the recipients were Fralick and Miller, who were on the CAO Team. ■ Fralick responded to Peterson later the same day, copying Miller. In his e-mail, Fralick alluded to a telephone call between himself and Pratt (another CAO team member) that apparently had occurred earlier in the same day. Both the e-mails and Fralick's summary o Court's determination: ■ These communications did not constitute a meeting of the Council because they contain no indication that the participants had the requisite collective intent to meet - Subjective element is whether there was "collective intent to meet" o Mr. Taraday's evaluation/caution ■ Miller was only receiving information, according to standard, Miller did not have a collective intent to meet because they were a passive recipient ■ Unknown if "collective intent to meet" will be the standard the court uses to determine serial meetings for the next 20 years ■ This standard is somewhat problematic. Imagine a scenario where the arrows go to Miller and the three green ovals (representing the other 3 councilmembers) and the Peterson, Fralick and Miller continue their conversation, he would question whether the court's standard would hold up and regardless, it doesn't look good if three councilmembers are actively participating in email communication. He did not want councilmembers to be too comfortable in relying on the standard the court articulated in this case. Bad facts make bad law and he was uncertain this standard would be upheld in the future. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 18 Packet Pg. 68 8.4.a Egan v. City of Seattle o Plaintiff "contends city council members "met" serially between June 9 and June 11, 2018, in small groups or in one-on-one meetings, telephone calls, e-mails, and text messages, for the purpose of obtaining a collective commitment of a majority to vote in favor of repealing the EHT." o "To establish that this conduct constitutes an OPMA violation, [Plaintiff] must show (1) a majority of the council "met" (2) with the collective intent to transact official business, and (3) during the "meeting," the council members took "action" as defined by the OPMA— specifically, they discussed or deliberated on repealing the EHT." o "Extending the reasoning of Citizens Alliance to this case, the in -person meetings, e-mails, phone calls, and text messages between and among the city council members could constitute a "meeting" under the OPMA if there was evidence that at least five members (a quorum) participated in and were aware that four others were participating in conversations about repealing the EHT." o [T]here is evidence that ... seven council members signed on to a draft press release stating that the EHT repeal bill had "the support of a majority of the City Council." o Each of the seven council members submitted a declaration in which they stated that they "did not discuss with any other [c]ouncilmember the substance of the statement (whether in draft or final form)" and that by joining the June 11 press statement, they "did not understand or intend that doing so represented or indicated how [they] would vote with respect to proposed legislation." o The text of what each was asked to review and approve, however, seems to express a very different sentiment: ■ We heard you. It is time to hit reset. This week, instead of prolonging a fight, we are moving forward with legislation to repeal the current tax on large businesses to address the homelessness crisis — this bill has the support of a majority of the City Council. o There is certainly sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of fact as to whether the council members' decision to approve this press release constituted a collective decision on the part of more than five members to vote to approve the EHT repeal legislation. o We thus conclude if a quorum of a legislative body, such as the City Council, collectively commits or promises to each other to vote —as a group —in favor of or in opposition to a piece of pending legislation at a future public meeting, then such a commitment may be evidence that a majority of the body attended a "meeting" with the collective intent to take an "action" in violation of the OPMA. o There is sufficient evidence here from which a reasonable trier of fact could conclude that the seven members who agreed to join Mayor Durkan's press statement, indicating that the pending bill had the support of a majority of the council, were expressing their collective decision to vote to repeal the EHT outside of a public meeting. o Here, ... there is evidence to suggest that seven council members privately expressed to each other their collective intent to vote to repeal the EHT. If each individual council member "pre - decided," ahead of the June 12 public meeting, how they intended to vote, that fact would be insufficient to establish the collective intent to deliberate or discuss pending legislation. o But if [Plaintiff] can prove that, through their serial approval of a draft press release, they "pre - decided" how they intended to vote and then expressed that intent outside of a public meeting to a sufficient number of council members to constitute a quorum, then a trier of fact could reasonably conclude a majority of the council "met" with the collective intent to transact official business —specifically, to discuss or deliberate on repealing the EHT. o Mr. Taraday's evaluation: ■ The safest way for councilmembers to communicate with their constituents is from the dais. Communicating individually is probably fine, but anytime they communicate to constituents outside the dais and not as an individual but as a member of some subset of Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 19 Packet Pg. 69 8.4.a council, it is problematic in that there could be a fact pattern like in Egan v. City of Seattle where a trial would prove to a jury there was not an OPMA violation. Councilmember Paine asked the consequence of an OPMA violation, noting the City had already been sued once. Mr. Taraday recalled the last time he provided OPMA training there was information regarding the exact fine amounts. Councilmember Paine recalled $500 for the first violation. Mr. Taraday explained first, councilmembers face individual fine liability which he believed was $500 for the first violation which councilmembers are potentially paying out of their own pocket. Second, it has the effect of invalidating anything the council has done. For example, if the council passed an ordinance after pre -deciding outside an open meeting that they would pass the ordinance, the ordinance itself can be invalidated. Third, councilmembers can also be subject to a recall petition. Councilmember Nand commented councilmembers often use bcc to share information with each other. She asked about best practices to use that correctly so councilmembers do not fall into the serial meeting trap. Mr. Taraday answered he has long recommended the use of bcc because it prevents to some degree an accidental meeting from occurring. For example, if a councilmember sent an email to their fellow councilmembers via the cc field, and three councilmembers hit Reply All, that looks pretty bad, nice clean documentary evidence that maybe there was collective intent to meet. Putting councilmembers in the bcc field and someone replies, their reply is only going to the initial sender. If someone overrides the bcc field, the initial intent of initiating an email to a colleague and bcc'g councilmembers so they do not accidentally Reply All is lost. A councilmember responding and also adding a bcc to the entire council makes him nervous because it can look like collective intent to meet. If everyone responds to everybody and puts everyone in the bcc field, it still looks like collective intent to meet. Mr. Taraday continued, if the council wanted a black and white rule, if a councilmember sends a colleague an email alerting them to an ordinance in another city and suggesting it be discussed at a future council meeting and bcc's other councilmembers, that is a clean communication that will not get anyone in trouble. He recommended councilmembers not use the bcc field when responding to an email. He acknowledged his advice was conservative and he did not want to suggest that by responding and using the bcc field would be an OPMA violation; as a general rule of thumb, his conservative advice to keep councilmembers out of trouble would not to use the bcc field when responding to an email, and only respond to the one person they received the email from. He sometime encounters this himself; he receives an email from a councilmember asking for legal advice and asking him to inform the whole council. When receiving a request like that, he usually informs the council via email, but will generate a new email to all seven councilmembers saying here is some advice on this topic. He acknowledged these were marginal differences in practice, but those practices can keep councilmembers out of trouble and reduce the risk. Mr. Taraday continued the elected official training, relaying his hunch a ballot measure of some type was likely coming up although it was probably several months away. • Ballot Measures o RCW 42.17A.555 — The Rule (being recodified in new Title 29B) ■ No elective official nor any employee of his or her office nor any person appointed to or employed by any public office or agency may use or authorize the use of any of the facilities of a public office or agency, directly or indirectly, for the purpose of assisting a campaign for election of any person to any office or for the promotion of or opposition to any ballot proposition. Facilities of a public office or agency include, but are not limited to, use of stationery, postage, machines, and equipment, use of employees of the office or agency during working hours, vehicles, office space, publications of the office or agency, and clientele lists of persons served by the office or agency. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 20 Packet Pg. 70 8.4.a Council President Olson asked if that meant councilmembers were not to send emails on the City server on the subject, among other things. Mr. Taraday agreed. He referred to examples in RCW 42.17A.555 of facilities of a public office or agency. Although it does not expressly say email, he recommended if a councilmember ended up wanting to support a ballot measure in the future, not doing it from a City of Edmonds email address, but from a Gmail of some kind or other email set up by a campaign. Mayor Rosen suggested "equipment" would probably qualify. RCW 42.17A.555(1) — The Exception (being recodified in new Title 29B) o However, this does not apply to the following activities: Action taken at an open public meeting by members of an elected legislative body or by an elected board, council, or commission of a special purpose district including, but not limited to, fire districts, public hospital districts, library districts, park districts, port districts, public utility districts, school districts, sewer districts, and water districts, to express a collective decision, or to actually vote upon a motion, proposal, resolution, order, or ordinance, or to support or oppose a ballot proposition so long as (a) any required notice of the meeting includes the title and number of the ballot proposition, and (b) members of the legislative body, members of the board, council, or commission of the special purpose district, or members of the public are afforded an approximately equal opportunity for the expression of an opposing view; COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO EXTEND TO 10:15. MOTION CARRIED (6-1) COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT VOTING NO. With regard to the email, Council President Olson asked if an exception to discussing the ballot measure with residents or each other would be if it was an agenda item. Mr. Taraday answered it depends on the nature of the discussion. For example, if the council president and mayor were exchanging email about a resolution and it was just logistical such as who is drafting the resolution and agenda memo, that is not supporting or opposing the ballot proposing. However, if the communication was something that hinted toward having it done in a certain way so the ballot measure had a greater chance of passing, that could get murky and he recommended staying neutral in the use of public facilities except for the carefully prescribed exceptions in the statute. Council President Olson asked what happened if a resident told a councilmember they didn't want them to do something, was it okay to engage in conversation about the agenda item. Mr. Taraday suggested saying the city council wants to hear from its constituents on this issue and intends to hear from supporters and opponents of the ballot proposition and invite them to come to the council meeting to ensure their voice was heard; something neutral like that would not be problematic and would not be seen as supporting or opposing a ballot proposition. Council President Olson summarized councilmembers should direct the public to the public forum. • RCW 42.17A.555(2)&(3) — More Exceptions (being recodified in new Title 29B) o However, this does not apply to the following activities: (2) A statement by an elected official in support of or in opposition to any ballot proposition at an open press conference or in response to a specific inquiry; (3) Activities which are part of the normal and regular conduct of the office or agency. In further response to Council President Olson's question, Mr. Taraday explained if a councilmember received a specific inquiry from a constituent such as "do you support ballot measure such and such?" according to this exception, a councilmember could respond specifically to that inquiry. With regard to exception 3 above, Mr. Taraday did not think it would apply to councilmembers on a regular basis. For example, every year the mayor does a state of the city address which could be considered normal and regular Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 21 Packet Pg. 71 8.4.a conduct of the office so possibly a mayor at the state of the city could say something they were not allowed to say at other times. Councilmember Tibbott provided an example, if during the conduct of business he sent an email from his personal email to a listsery of 500 constituents in support of a topic. He asked if that would be allowed. Mr. Taraday answered yes, as long as no city facilities were used. Councilmembers can use their own mental energies as long as they are not using any city facilities. Councilmember Tibbott asked if that would be considered normal and regular conduct. Mr. Taraday answered it wouldn't matter because the normal and regular conduct is an exception to the city facility rule. The rule is no use of city facilities; the exception is normal and regular conduct. Because councilmembers do most of their work at the dais or privately, it was difficult for him to hypothesize a normal and regular conduct that would apply to a councilmember that would give them the ability to use a city facility to support a campaign. Councilmember Nand asked if Mr. Taraday recommended the council adopt best practices or communication policy related to social media or email. Mr. Taraday said the first part of the presentation that wasn't covered was regarding social media. Because it was prepared by Beth Ford and Patricia Taraday, he wanted to be more prepared before providing that information. The slides are in the packet; between now and when he is invited to do that part of the training, he encouraged councilmembers to read the slides and reach out to him with questions. If the question is regarding SCOTUS, he will put the councilmember in touch with Beth and if it's a more practical consideration, he can put the councilmember in touch with Patricia; they are the experts on those topics. The slides are fairly self-explanatory and may not warrant an in -person training but he was happy to do it if there was time on a future agenda. 11. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Nand relayed Arnie Lund, Edmonds Historical Museum, is seeking volunteers. Anyone interested in participating can visit HistoricalEdmonds.org/volunteer. Glen Douglas who is involved with implementing the new Housing Hope project at the Edmonds Lutheran Church asked her to relay that Housing Hope is seeking volunteers for all aspects of operating the project including offering wraparound services to people who need support in their housing journey. Anyone interested in volunteering can reach them at HousingHope.com. She recalled at the council's town hall, a community member asked how people interested in volunteering could engage with the City. The City is blessed to have wonderful non -profits like Housing Hope and the Edmonds Historical Museum. She encourage community members who have a passion or idea to reach out to councilmembers who would be happy to connect them with a community partner if there is not a City board, committee or commission serving that need. Councilmember Paine expressed her sincere thanks to the Mayor's Climate Protection Committee for their report in the council packet, a consolidated summary of all the activities they were involved in last year. The committee is interested in providing information and education to the community about the Climate Action Plan. She invited community members to attend their meetings most Thursdays at noon. Councilmember Dotsch commented on the great Earth Day events at the beaches last Saturday and great weather. She is enjoying being the council liaison to the youth commission and there was a good turnout of youth commission members to help clean the beaches. Council President Olson referred to the Memorandum of Understanding for Lower Perrinville Beach Property Owners in the packet this week under Received for Filing which represents a lot of work from many dedicated people. She gave a shoutout to Public Works Director Antillon, the City and Stormwater Engineers, the City Attorney and most of all, Mayor Rosen for getting this project unstuck. This is a huge environmental issue for the City that has been stuck for a long time. She thanked everyone who has been involved and did a great job and she encouraged everyone to read the MOU which is very comprehensive about the stakeholders and actions that will be taking place to move it forward. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 22 Packet Pg. 72 8.4.a Councilmember Chen thanked the community members who attended the council town hall last Thursday. The format allowed two-way conversation instead of just a one-way, three minute comment. He looked forward to having more dialogue like the town hall. Councilmember Eck gave a shoutout to community engagement, to the community members who attended the town hall either virtually or in person and encouraged everyone to spread the word regarding future town halls. She would love to see community members from all over Edmonds attend. She was excited to see the number of volunteers at Yost Park planting trees with her at the Earth Day event remarking she could only take credit for 6 of the 60 saplings that were planted that day. She commended the fantastic Edmonds community who continue to participate in such events. She thanked the Edmonds Stewards, Sound Salmon Solutions, Edmonds Tree Board and the City's Park Department. 12. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Rosen reminded there is no council meeting next Tuesday as the council does not normally meet on the 5' Tuesday of the month. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, the council meeting was adjourned at 10:13 pm. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes April 23, 2024 Page 23 Packet Pg. 73 8.5 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/7/2024 Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments. Staff Lead: Kimberly Dunscombe Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Lori Palmer Background/History Approval of payroll checks #66001 and #66002 dated April 19, 2024 for $1,740.44, direct deposit for $876,820.73, benefit checks #66003 through #66009 and wire payments for $862,503.03 for the pay period of April 1, 2024 through April 15,2024. Staff Recommendation Approval of payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments. Narrative In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance #2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or non -approval of payments. Attachments: benefit checks summary 04-01-2024 to 04-15-2024 payroll earnings summary 04-01-2024 to 04-15-2024 Packet Pg. 74 8.5.a Benefit Checks Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 1,145 - 04/01/2024 to 04/15/2024 Bank: usbank - US Bank Check # Date Payee # Name Check Amt Direct Deposit 66003 04/19/2024 bpas BPAS 7,636.80 0.00 66004 04/19/2024 chap1 CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE 175.00 0.00 66005 04/19/2024 epoa2 EPOA-POLICE 9,180.00 0.00 66006 04/19/2024 epoa3 EPOA-POLICE SUPPORT 2,400.00 0.00 66007 04/19/2024 icma MISSIONSQUARE PLAN SERVICES 6,315.51 0.00 66008 04/19/2024 flex NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS 5,363.01 0.00 66009 04/19/2024 teams TEAMSTERS LOCAL 763 6,900.00 0.00 37,970.32 0.00 Bank: wire - US BANK Check # Date Payee # Name Check Amt Direct Deposit 3663 04/19/2024 awc AWC 449,483.91 0.00 3669 04/19/2024 us US BANK 169,592.86 0.00 3670 04/19/2024 mebt WTRISC FBO #N3177B1 156,851.63 0.00 3671 04/19/2024 pb NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION 6,315.84 0.00 3673 04/19/2024 wadc WASHINGTON STATE TREASURER 41,583.47 0.00 3675 04/19/2024 oe OFFICE OF SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT 705.00 0.00 824, 532.71 0.00 Grand Totals: 862,503.03 0.00 4/18/2024 Packet Pg. 75 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 1,145 (04/01/2024 to 04/15/2024) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount 112 ABSENT NO PAY NON HIRED 128.00 0.00 118 ABSENT UNPAID L & 1 88.00 0.00 121 SICK SICK LEAVE 787.50 46,628.59 122 VACATION VACATION 1,404.25 82,765.03 123 HOLIDAY HOLIDAY HOURS -356.50 -22,746.51 124 HOLIDAY FLOATER HOLIDAY 47.00 2,250.18 125 COMP HOURS COMPENSATORY TIME 246.00 14,252.64 128 HOLIDAY Holiday Bank WWTP 13.75 717.15 129 SICK Police Sick Leave L & 1 27.00 1,491.83 131 MILITARY MILITARY LEAVE 33.00 1,799.02 141 BEREAVEMENT BEREAVEMENT 51.00 3,218.98 150 REGULAR HOURS Kelly Day Used 58.00 3,772.53 155 COMP HOURS COMPTIME AUTO PAY 204.00 13,191.63 158 VACATION VACATION PAYOFF 10.98 477.95 160 VACATION MANAGEMENT LEAVE 196.00 15,574.75 190 REGULAR HOURS REGULAR HOURS 19,312.00 1,041,252.47 194 SICK Emergency Sick Leave 39.50 1,991.89 196 REGULAR HOURS LIGHT DUTY 70.00 4,693.07 210 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME -STRAIGHT 13.00 630.73 215 OVERTIME HOURS WATER WATCH STANDBY 48.00 3,450.83 216 MISCELLANEOUS STANDBY TREATMENT PLANT 6.00 791.67 220 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME 1.5 299.50 29,654.22 225 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME -DOUBLE 22.00 2,217.09 400 MISCELLANEOUS MISC PAY 0.00 2,000.00 410 MISCELLANEOUS WORKING OUT OF CLASS 0.00 840.69 411 SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL 0.00 3,045.44 600 RETROACTIVE PAY RETROACTIVE PAY 0.00 -553.79 602 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP 1.0 249.75 0.00 604 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP TIME 1.5 79.50 0.00 606 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP 2.0 3.00 0.00 901 SICK ACCRUED SICK LEAVE 4.67 0.00 902 MISCELLANEOUS BOOT ALLOWANCE 0.00 562.50 acc MISCELLANEOUS ACCREDITATION PAY 0.00 351.82 acs MISCELLANEOUS ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORT 0.00 255.71 8.5.b P 04/18/2024 Packet Pg. 76 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 1,145 (04101/2024 to 04/15/2024) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount anc REGULAR HOURS Ancilary Duty Pay 0.00 98.77 anc2 REGULAR HOURS Ancilary Duty Pay 0.00 1,725.66 anc3 REGULAR HOURS Ancilary Duty Pay 0.00 1,303.66 cpl MISCELLANEOUS TRAINING CORPORAL 0.00 226.78 crt MISCELLANEOUS CERTIFICATION III PAY 0.00 118.83 ctr MISCELLANEOUS CTR INCENTIVES PROGRAM 0.00 300.00 det4 MISCELLANEOUS Detective 4% 0.00 1,301.62 ed1 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 2% 0.00 1,048.46 ed2 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 4% 0.00 661.16 ed3 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 6% 0.00 12,319.33 evap VACATION Exempt Vacation Premium 15.00 1,066.60 k9 MISCELLANEOUS K-9 Assiqnment 0.00 414.20 Ian MISCELLANEOUS LANGUAGE PAY 0.00 450.00 Iq1 LONGEVITY LONGEVITY PAY 2% 0.00 1,185.98 Ig11 LONGEVITY LONGEVITY PAY 2.5% 0.00 1,440.10 Ig12 LONGEVITY Longevity 9% 0.00 1,619.24 Ig13 LONGEVITY Longevity 7% 0.00 1,518.56 Ig14 LONGEVITY Longevity 5% 0.00 1,158.46 Iq2 LONGEVITY PAY LONGEVITY PAY 4% 0.00 166.92 Iq3 LONGEVITY PAY LONGEVITY 6% 0.00 289.83 Iq4 LONGEVITY Longevity 1% 0.00 1,235.21 Iq5 LONGEVITY Longevity 3% 0.00 3,254.74 Iq7 LONGEVITY Longevity 1.5% 0.00 582.94 pfmp ABSENT Paid Family Medical Unpaid/Sup 79.00 0.00 pfms SICK Paid FAMILY MEDICAL/SICK 40.00 2,865.59 pfmv VACATION Paid Family Medical Vacation 9.00 450.71 phy MISCELLANEOUS PHYSICAL FITNESS PAY 0.00 2,582.23 St REGULAR HOURS Serqeant Pay 0.00 246.44 str MISCELLANEOUS PSET Serqeant 0.00 246.44 tac MISCELLANEOUS TAC Officer 0.00 207.10 to MISCELLANEOUS Traininq Officer 0.00 207.10 traf MISCELLANEOUS Traffic Officer - Car 0.00 414.20 trafm MISCELLANEOUS Traffic Motorcyle 0.00 207.10 vap VACATION Vacation Premium 17.25 810.06 04/18/2024 Packet Pg. 77 Hour Type Hour Class whp HOLIDAY Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 1,145 (04/01/2024 to 04/15/2024) Description WWTP HOLIDAY Payoff Hours 1.80 23,246.95 Total Net Pay: Amount 78.35 $1,296,380.48 $878,561.17 8.5.b 04/18/2024 Packet Pg. 78 8.6 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/7/2024 Approval of claim checks and wire payments. Staff Lead: Kim Dunscombe Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Nori Jacobson Background/History Approval of claim checks #262229 through #262308 dated April 18, 2024 for $291,831.40 (re -issued checks #262277 $110.39, #262278 $22.09 & #262279 $9.91), claim checks #262309 through #262401 dated April 25, 2024 for $904,822.96 (re -issued check #262396 $5,000.00) and wire payments of $21,566.80, $14,554.73 & $4,953.89. 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 04-18-24 Agenda copy Claims 04-25-24 Agenda copy Packet Pg. 79 8.6.a apPosPay Positive Pay Listing Page: 1 4/18/2024 2:39:05PM City of Edmonds Document group: jacobson Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount 070322 A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC 262229 4/18/2024 170.00 069798 A.M. LEONARD INC 262230 4/18/2024 895.50 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 262231 4/18/2024 103.87 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 262232 4/18/2024 258.39 025217 ARG INDUSTRIAL 262233 4/18/2024 652.14 001795 AUTOGRAPHICS 262234 4/18/2024 1,536.50 001801 AUTOMATIC WILBERT VAULT CO 262235 4/18/2024 1,006.00 072577 BAURECHT, MAGRIT 262236 4/18/2024 450.00 069226 BHC CONSULTANTS LLC 262237 4/18/2024 19,665.70 075342 BORUCHOWITZ, ROBERT 262238 4/18/2024 1,885.00 077166 CADENA, MICHAEL 262239 4/18/2024 130.00 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 262240 4/18/2024 969.39 003328 CASCADE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA 262241 4/18/2024 4,700.00 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY 262242 4/18/2024 237.08 073249 CG ENGINEERING, PLLC 262243 4/18/2024 2,837.50 070323 COMCAST BUSINESS 262244 4/18/2024 54.64 076107 COMPASS HEALTH 262245 4/18/2024 10,586.64 072746 CONSOR NORTH AMERICA INC 262246 4/18/2024 20,335.50 079561 CUNNINGHAM, TONYA 262247 4/18/2024 100.00 067794 DALCOINC 262248 4/18/2024 2,961.94 079553 DEVIL DOG INSTALLATIONS LLC 262249 4/18/2024 1,029.44 070244 DUANE HARTMAN & ASSOCIATES INC 262250 4/18/2024 618.00 076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE 262251 4/18/2024 194.38 069523 EDMONDS P&R YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP 262252 4/18/2024 75.00 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 262253 4/18/2024 5,174.02 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 262254 4/18/2024 618.13 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD 262255 4/18/2024 65.36 075673 FARMER, MARIA 262256 4/18/2024 130.00 071472 FILCO COMPANY INC 262257 4/18/2024 144.90 072493 FIRSTLINE COMMUNICATIONS INC 262258 4/18/2024 292.83 012199 GRAINGER 262259 4/18/2024 1,956.24 074722 GUARDIAN SECURITY SYSTEMS 262260 4/18/2024 69.53 012560 HACH COMPANY 262261 4/18/2024 3,711.70 079559 HAYDEN, DANIELLE 262262 4/18/2024 100.00 079287 HERITAGE PROF PRODUCTS GROUP 262263 4/18/2024 136.36 079399 HERITAGE SEEDLINGS & LINERS 262264 4/18/2024 92.50 078923 HKA GLOBAL INC 262265 4/18/2024 6,352.50 076240 HM PACIFIC NORTHWEST INC 262266 4/18/2024 279.29 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 262267 4/18/2024 4,120.39 061013 HONEY BUCKET 262268 4/18/2024 4,327.12 074417 LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTIAN SMITH 262269 4/18/2024 900.00 078470 LEVESON, NANCYANN 262270 4/18/2024 130.00 074263 LYNNWOOD WINSUPPLY CO 262271 4/18/2024 317.71 075716 MALLORY PAINT STORE INC 262272 4/18/2024 211.43 079562 MARCUS, RUTH 262273 4/18/2024 100.00 077253 MAYES TESTING ENGINEERS INC 262274 4/18/2024 240.00 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 262275 4/18/2024 973.34 079076 MILLER MENDEL INC 262276 4/18/2024 0.72 079204 NAND, JENNA 262277 4/18/2024 110.39 079204 NAND, JENNA 262278 4/18/2024 22.09 079204 NAND, JENNA 262279 4/18/2024 9.91 075542 NORTHWEST LANDSCAPE SUPPLY 262280 4/18/2024 61.94 063750 ORCA PACIFIC INC 262281 4/18/2024 1,783.99 Page: 1 Packet Pg. 80 apPosPay Positive Pay Listing 4/18/2024 2:39:05PM City of Edmonds Document group: jacobson Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount 072507 PEACE OF MIND OFFICE SUPPORT 262282 4/18/2024 176.00 079464 PERKINS EASTMAN ARCHITECTS DPC 262283 4/18/2024 25,400.00 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY 262284 4/18/2024 25.74 079020 PRECISION LANGUAGE SERVICES 262285 4/18/2024 390.00 068697 PUBLIC SAFETY TESTING INC 262286 4/18/2024 418.00 030780 QUIRING MONUMENTS INC 262287 4/18/2024 725.00 079560 REHFELDT, SARAH 262288 4/18/2024 100.00 069477 ROTARY OFFSET PRESS INC 262289 4/18/2024 2,926.63 079523 RUSTED ELEMENT DESIGN 262290 4/18/2024 396.00 067076 SEATTLE PUMP AND EQUIPMENT CO 262291 4/18/2024 5,292.95 070495 SEPULVEDA, PABLO 262292 4/18/2024 276.25 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 262293 4/18/2024 1,766.46 006630 SNOHOMISH COUNTY 262294 4/18/2024 797.00 038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS 262295 4/18/2024 325.26 071827 SWANK MOTION PICTURES, INC 262296 4/18/2024 2,480.00 079185 SYSTEMS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY INC 262297 4/18/2024 55,730.00 065578 SYSTEMS INTERFACE INC 262298 4/18/2024 597.60 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 262299 4/18/2024 105.97 078914 TEAMVIEWER GMBH 262300 4/18/2024 8,559.33 075025 THE BRANDING IRON LLC 262301 4/18/2024 248.36 079547 TIETON CONSTRUCTION LLC 262302 4/18/2024 29,485.82 068141 TRANSPO GROUP 262303 4/18/2024 47,707.65 078842 ULTIMATE RAINBOW CONSULTING 262304 4/18/2024 400.00 064423 USA BLUE BOOK 262305 4/18/2024 613.17 079558 WARNER, CATHERINE J 262306 4/18/2024 100.00 071634 ZAYO GROUP LLC 262307 4/18/2024 2,919.53 011900 ZIPLY FIBER 262308 4/18/2024 126.07 GrandTotal: 291,973.79 Total count: 80 Page: 2 Packet Pg. 81 8.6.b apPosPay Positive Pay Listing Page: 1 4/25/2024 12:07:12PM City of Edmonds Document group: jacobson Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount 079330 76 INVESTMENT LLC 262309 4/25/2024 7,000.00 076135 800 MHZ GROUP 262310 4/25/2024 544.77 076040 911 SUPPLY INC 262311 4/25/2024 1,231.50 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 262312 4/25/2024 109.40 077610 ALBA PAINTING & COATINGS 262313 4/25/2024 16,575.00 063862 ALPINE PRODUCTS INC 262314 4/25/2024 19,365.13 001528 AM TEST INC 262315 4/25/2024 200.00 079537 AMERICAN TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS INC 262316 4/25/2024 23,750.00 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 262317 4/25/2024 366.72 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 262318 4/25/2024 404.22 077244 ARMOR INDUSTRIAL 262319 4/25/2024 640.70 072325 BATTERIES PLUS 262320 4/25/2024 1,034.94 028050 BILL PIERRE FORD INC 262321 4/25/2024 374.74 071421 BIO CLEAN INC 262322 4/25/2024 497.25 074307 BLUE STAR GAS 262323 4/25/2024 1,216.06 018495 CALPORTLAND COMPANY 262324 4/25/2024 947.14 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 262325 4/25/2024 1,427.14 077353 CAPITOL CONSULTING LLC 262326 4/25/2024 3,900.00 069457 CITY OF EDMONDS 262327 4/25/2024 177.00 076816 CITY OF EDMONDS VEBA TRUST 262328 4/25/2024 15,300.00 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 262329 4/25/2024 632,482.23 079062 COMCAST 262330 4/25/2024 1,260.00 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 262331 4/25/2024 1,550.40 073823 DAVID EVANS & ASSOC INC 262332 4/25/2024 18,984.90 079013 DEALERSHIP GLASS AUTO GLASS 262333 4/25/2024 922.42 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 262334 4/25/2024 644.00 076172 DK SYSTEMS 262335 4/25/2024 517.97 007253 DUNN LUMBER 262336 4/25/2024 511.33 068292 EDGE ANALYTICAL 262337 4/25/2024 1,080.00 076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE 262338 4/25/2024 198.18 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 262339 4/25/2024 2,687.99 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 262340 4/25/2024 368.91 065331 EMD MILLIPORE CORPORATION 262341 4/25/2024 771.17 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD 262342 4/25/2024 743.04 063137 GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTER 262343 4/25/2024 731.75 012199 GRAINGER 262344 4/25/2024 414.73 012560 HACH COMPANY 262345 4/25/2024 4,855.47 074966 HIATT CONSULTING LLC 262346 4/25/2024 200.00 013500 HINGSON, ROBERT 262347 4/25/2024 5,670.47 076240 HM PACIFIC NORTHWEST INC 262348 4/25/2024 2,060.82 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 262349 4/25/2024 194.16 072627 INTRADO LIFE & SAFETY INC 262350 4/25/2024 537.50 072976 KOMPAN INC 262351 4/25/2024 4,122.10 017050 KWICK'N KLEEN CAR WASH 262352 4/25/2024 755.43 067475 LANDSVERK QUALITY HOMES INC 262353 4/25/2024 281.68 067725 LES SCHWAB TIRE CENTER 262354 4/25/2024 1,709.87 079532 LESMAN INSTRUMENT COMPANY 262355 4/25/2024 3,270.97 075159 LIFE INSURANCE CO OF NO AMER 262356 4/25/2024 17,079.50 066064 LISTEN AUDIOLOGY SERVICE INC 262357 4/25/2024 1,695.00 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 262358 4/25/2024 415.44 068662 MINNIHAN, TERRY 262359 4/25/2024 2,696.80 075266 MORGAN MECHANICAL INC 262360 4/25/2024 10,069.87 018950 NAPA AUTO PARTS 262361 4/25/2024 338.83 Page: 1 Packet Pg. 82 apPosPay Positive Pay Listing 4/25/2024 12:07:12PM City of Edmonds Document group: jacobson Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount 067834 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTALS 262362 4/25/2024 39.78 024302 NELSON-REISNER 262363 4/25/2024 91.47 079563 NEMETH, SYLVIE 262364 4/25/2024 100.00 024960 NORTH COAST ELECTRIC COMPANY 262365 4/25/2024 121.31 072739 O'REILLYAUTO PARTS 262368 4/25/2024 22.66 076902 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CTR OF WA 262366 4/25/2024 246.00 070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER 262367 4/25/2024 13,815.91 068451 OSW EQUIPMENT & REPAIR LLC 262369 4/25/2024 25.03 078127 OWENS PUMP & EQUIPMENT 262370 4/25/2024 150.13 072507 PEACE OF MIND OFFICE SUPPORT 262371 4/25/2024 204.00 029117 PORT OF EDMONDS 262372 4/25/2024 4,567.65 029800 PRINZ, DANIEL 262373 4/25/2024 3,189.05 079448 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 262374 4/25/2024 252.00 062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL COMPANY 262375 4/25/2024 4,607.40 079387 SAYBR CONTRACTORS INC 262376 4/25/2024 2,113.49 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC 262377 4/25/2024 238.62 079527 SEATTLE SNOHOMISH MILL CO 262378 4/25/2024 381.98 079519 SECURITE GUN CLUB LLC 262379 4/25/2024 550.50 066918 SEDOR, NORMAN 262380 4/25/2024 7,000.00 063306 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 262381 4/25/2024 160.07 068132 SHORELINE CONSTRUCTION CO 262382 4/25/2024 4,953.75 036950 SIX ROBBLEES INC 262383 4/25/2024 157.15 078782 SMITH FIRE SYSTEMS INC 262384 4/25/2024 930.00 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 262385 4/25/2024 32,109.33 006630 SNOHOMISH COUNTY 262386 4/25/2024 58.00 070167 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER 262387 4/25/2024 198.54 037800 SNOHOMISH HEALTH DISTRICT 262388 4/25/2024 540.00 038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS 262389 4/25/2024 224.29 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 262390 4/25/2024 243.01 063796 TECHNOLOGY UNLIMITED INC 262391 4/25/2024 165.75 075025 THE BRANDING IRON LLC 262392 4/25/2024 244.17 072649 THE WIDE FORMAT COMPANY 262393 4/25/2024 232.05 068141 TRANSPO GROUP 262394 4/25/2024 5,433.75 064423 USA BLUE BOOK 262395 4/25/2024 846.33 075496 VALERIE INC 262396 4/25/2024 5,000.00 067917 WALLY'S TOWING INC 262397 4/25/2024 280.92 065568 WATER SERVICES NW INC 262398 4/25/2024 187.86 069691 WESTERN SYSTEMS 262399 4/25/2024 3,515.36 063008 WSDOT 262400 4/25/2024 43.05 011900 ZIPLY FIBER 262401 4/25/2024 1,697.96 GrandTotal: 909,822.96 Total count: 93 Page: 2 Packet Pg. 83 9.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/7/2024 Options for City of Edmonds Fire/EMS Services Staff Lead: City Council Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History In 2010, the City of Edmonds contracted fire and emergency medical services (EMS) with Snohomish Fire District 1. This contract was revised in 2017. In 2017, Snohomish Fire District 1 and City of Lynnwood formed a new Regional Fire Authority (RFA); South Snohomish County Regional Fire Authority. September 2023, Council passed Resolution 1531, requesting information about annexation into the South Snohomish County Regional Fire Authority. November 2023, Council contracted the services of Fitch and Associates to study the feasibility of fire and emergency service alternatives. December 19, 2023, South County Fire notified the City of Edmonds of its intention to terminate the interlocal agreement for fire and emergency medical services as of December 31, 2025. April 16, 2024 - Fitch and Associates presented to Council, Comparison of Fire and EMS Services Options in Edmonds WA. (presentation slides attached, draft minutes for this meeting are pending approval, and are in this agenda packet on the consent agenda. Video recording of this meeting is available on the city website) April 24, 2024 - Fitch and Associates submitted their final report, City of Edmonds Emergency Services Analysis. (attached) Recommendation 1) Open Public Hearing 2) Accept Public Comment 3) Close Public Hearing Council discussion as time permits. Narrative Council seeks input from the public regarding the options for future Fire/EMS services: Option 1: Join the RFA through annexation Option 2: Contract with Shoreline Fire Department Packet Pg. 84 9.1 Option 3: Create Own Department These options are summarized with implementation timelines on pages 26-29 of the Fitch final report. Attachments: City of Edmonds Council 4-16-24 Final - WES FITCH-Final Edmonds Report Packet Pg. 85 COMPARISON OF FIRE AND EMS SERVICE OPTIONS IN EDMONDS, WA Prepared for City Council April 2024 Packet Pg. 86 a INTRODUCTIONS Fitch and Associates Edmonds Project Team Steve Knight, Ph.D. Partner Bill Sturgeon, MPA, EFO, CPM, ICMA-CM Senior Associate- Lead Project Manager Bruce Moeller, Ph.D. Senior Consultant Prepared for City Council Dave Johnsen, MBA, EFO, CFO, NRP Senior Consultant Dan Gorton, MS, NRP Consultant April 2024 I packet Pg. 87 L 0 0 CL Introduction Purpose of the Presentation N 0 E W 4- 0 Provide the City of Edmonds Council options to make an informed decision on continuing to provide L high level of emergency services to the citizens of the community. 0 Goals of the project: CL o ❖ Emergency services must support the existing and growing needs of the community. ❖ Emergency services must operationally be citizen centric. ❖ Emergency services must foster fiscal trust within the community. Prepared for City Council April 2024 I Packet Pg. 88 9.1.a Finding the Right Balance Risk Performance Demand Operations Expectations Fiscal Realities 0 E W U L 0 N C 0 CL Packet Pg. 89 High Risk Occupancies Edmonds includes more than 19,471 housing units and more than 1,642 non-residential occupancies, including office, professional services, retail/wholesale sales, restaurants/bars, hotels/motels, churches, schools, government facilities, healthcare facilities, and other non-residential uses. Commercial occupancies are classified as (Low, Moderate, High, and Maximum). Risk Factors STATION RESPONSE ZONE TOTAL STATION STATION STATION High Risk 16 17 20 Occupancies 38 37 34 109 Risk Scoring Criteria • Type of occupancy • Sprinkler System • Age of the building • Square footage • Height of Building Data retrieved from South County Fire Standards of Cover O W 0 L, L 0 0 CL Prepared for City Council April 2024 I Packet Pg. 90 Critical Facilities in Edmonds South County Fire identified 155 critical facilities throughout the service area, 28 of which are in Edmonds. A hazard occurrence with significant impact severity affecting one or more of these facilities would likely adversely impact critical public or community services. STATION RESPONSE ZONE Risk Factors TOTAL STATION STATION STATION Critical 16 17 20 Facilities 4 9 15 28 � Data retrieved from South County Fire Standards of Cover 4 Prepared for City Council April 2024 I Packet Pg. 91 0 4- 0 CL City of Edmonds: All calls 2019=2023 (PITCH) Number of Calls Dispatched by Program, Call Type, and Reporting Period Number of Calls Call Category 2019 zozo 2021 zozz EMS 3,126 2,702 2,946 3,358 EMS-ALS 1,563 1,552 1,627 11695 Fire 517 433 463 568 Special Ops 15 17 8 13 Service 265 273 267 404 Total 5,486 4,977 5311 6,038 Calls per Day 15.0 13.6 14.6 16.5 YoY Growth -9.5% 7.0% 13.7% Prepared for City Council 2023 z,88z 2,417 500 1; 335 6,147 16.8 1.8% April 20 Packet Pg. 92 0 4- 0 CL SERVICE TYPE CALLS ❖ Busy time, or time on task, was measured from unit dispatch date and time to unit clear date and time. ❖ All units assigned to South County Fire for the City of Edmonds made 6,147 responses and were busy on calls for a total of 6,042 hours. ❖ The department ran an average of 16.8 calls for emergency services a day. ❖ 86.2% of the total call volume was requests for EMS. trieved from South County Fire Annual Report to City of Edmonds April 2024 Prepared for City Council April 2024 1 Packet Pg. 93 Call Volume- 3.01 % Annual Increase in calls 2019 2020 12.05% increase from 2019 2021 2022 Chart and data retrieved from South County Fire Annual Report to City of Edmonds April 2024 Prepared for City Council 2023 April 202 Packet Pg. 94 9 Introduction Importance of Fire and EMS Services in Edmonds, WA SCF Fire Performance 90t" Percentiles- Response Times 2022-2023 (FITCH) Dispatch Turnout Travel Total Response Type Time Time Time Response Sample Size Time All Emergency Calls -Total 1:24 2:42 6:12 8:54 1,416 EMS Fire Prepared for City Council April 2024 I Packet Pg. 95 Current Resources in Edmonds Station 16 Maplewood Station 8429 196th Street SW Edmonds, WA Resources: Engine / Medic (cross -staffed) Personnel: 3 3 Fire Stations Station 17 Downtown Edmonds 275 Sixth Ave. North Edmonds, WA Resources: Engine / Medic (cross -staffed) Personnel: 3 Prepared for City Council MMMIMI IMMINIM MININIII �_i ..w. Station 20 Esperance Station 23009 88th Avenue W Edmonds, WA Resources: Engine / Medic Personnel: 5 April 2 Packet Pg. 96 ru It Current Resources in Edmonds Engines- 3 Personnel per Unit- 3 Medic/ Aide Units- 3-5 Personnel per Unit - 2 Prepared for City Council 04 VA Water Rescue Boat Located at Port of Edmonds April 2 Packet Pg. 97 O E W 4- 0 L� L 0 0 CL South County Fire -Current Effective Response Deployment Model Force (ERF) isk Ty isk Ty inimum Type of Resources Sent nM Total.-.. Personnel Sent 1- Patient EMS 1 Engine/ Ambulance or Ladder Ambulance 3-5 FF Vehicle Fire 1 Engine 3 FF 2 Battalion Chiefs, 1 Medic Unit, 1 BLS Unit, 3 Fire in Residential Structure Engines, 1 Ladder, 1 Technical Rescue Unit and 1 22 FF Medical Services Officer Fire in Same as "Residential Fire" with One Additional Commercial Engine 25 FF Structure 2 Engines, 2 Ambulances, 1 Ladder, 1 Technical Technical Rescue Rescue and 1 Battalion Chief 17 FF First Alarm- 2 Engines Hazardous Second Alarm and above: Materials Decon Unit, Battalion Chief, Hazardous Materials 16-19 FF Response Technical Units and Ambulances Based on Patients Table retrieved from South County Fire Annual Report to City of Edmonds April 2024 Prepared for City Council April 201 Packet Pg. 98 0 L� L 0 0 CL The Fitch team assessed all possible outcomes to fulfill the purpose of the project. Four options were analyzed; three options presented themselves as the best options to analyze emergency services for the community. Annex into South Contract with Create Edmonds Fire Separate Fire and EMS Services County RFA Another Service Department Contract with EMS Provider A Prepared for City Council April I Packet Pg. 99 ru 9.1.a Separating Fire and Contracting Out for EMS ➢ Collective bargaining agreements for Shoreline Fire Department and Shoreline Firefighters Local 1760 ➢ South Snohomish County Fire & Rescue, Regional Fire Authority, and International Firefighters Local 1828 prohibit subcontracting for Emergency Medical Services. ➢ Currently, no advanced life support (ALS) private ambulances are operating within Snohomish County. ➢ This approach has declined nationally due to decreased private EMS providers and communities needing to retain transport fees and may require subsidies. Prepared for City Council N C O E M W w O r.+ U 0 U) r- O CL 0 U) w U- V N <D It April 2 Packet Pg. 100 FITCH-Financial Comparison of Options Based on Current Level of Service (LOS) Benefit Charge = $72.58 - 2,000 sq. ft. Median Home=$761,300. (2020) South County Fire (RFA)-2024levy Levy Rate Dollar Value Fire 0.75 $ 570.75 EMS 0.32 $ 243.52 BenefiitCharge (2023) 0.10 $ 72.58 Annual Cost 1.17 $ 886.85 Monthly Cost - $ 73.90 Contract with Shoreline Fire - 2024 levy Levy Rate Dollar Value Fire(includes benefit charge) 1.27 $ 966.47 EMS (King County) 0.21 $ 159.81 Annual Cost 1.48 $ 1,126.28 Monthly Cost - $ 93.86 Form City Fire Department Levy Rate Dollar Value Fire(includes benefit charge) 1.25 $ 951.69 Annual Cost S 951.69 Monthly Cost - S 79.31 Cost Analysis South County Fire RFA - 2024 levy Fire $ 11,514,698 EMS $ 4,912,938 Benefit Charge $ 1,413,205 Annual Cost $ 17,840,842 Contract with Shoreline Fire - 2024 levy Fire (includes benefit charge) $ 19,498,223 EMS (King County) $ 3,224,116 Debt Service- facilities & apparatus" $ 2,200,000 Annual Cost $ 24,922,338 Form City Fire Department Personnel & Operating* $ 18,000,000 Annual debt Service - facilities & apparatus*" $ 2,200,000 Ambulance Transport fees $ (1,000,000) Annual Cost $ 19,200,000 Levy Equivalent $ 1.25 L 0 c 0 a 9 *Includes ancillary and support services a ** Annual debt service 20-years at 3.5% ** Apparatus for 10-years at 3.5% Packet Pg. 101 Estimated Capital and Start up Costs Item Current market Estimate Fire Apparatsus (4)- includes 1 reserve $399009000 Ambulances (4)-includes 1 reserve $1,550,000 Command Staff Vehicles (3) $250,000 Firefighter Protective Equipment-(2) sets per fi refighter $4019000 Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (24) $250,000 EKG- Monitor Defibrillator (4) $150,000 Radios (25) �Tota l $250,000 $6,751, 000 Prepared for City Council 0 L� 0 0 CL April 20 Packet Pg. 102 Summary of Projected Costs and Savings Annex into South County Fire RFA Contract with Shoreline Fire/EMS Form Edmonds Fire Department Reduce General Fund expenditures by: Annual operations and personnel Annual operations and personnel $6 million -Current contract savings cost-$22.7 cost-$18M $401,107- County 911 $83,000- OPEB annual Savings Debt Service- equipment and Debt Service- equipment and Total Savings=-$6,484,000 stations- $2.2M* stations- $2.2M* Relieved of $6.6 million- LEOFF1 liability * Amortized station relocation, *Amortized station relocation, Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) repair, construction and other repair, construction and other Retiree medical benefits capital equipment. capital equipment. Annualized Cost- $83,000 Estimated Ambulance Billing Revenue= -$1 M (offset) Annual Cost= $17.8M Annual Cost= $24.9M* Annual Costs=$19.2M* $6.5M reduction in general fund liabilities. $6.6M reduction in long term liability. 9.1.a 0 W 0 U 0 0 CL April 2 Packet Pg. 103 Prepared for City Council Annexation into the RFA Pros & Cons Pros ➢ Must be voter approved ➢ Maintains level of fire & emergency services... • Paramedic ambulances • Skilled all hazards response • Fire Marshal • Community Paramedicine Prepared for City Council Cons ➢ Level of service is governed by elected fire commission- not the City of Edmonds April 20 Packet Pg. 104 Contracting with Shoreline Fire Rescue IV W w O �11'p 14 := The Fitch team met with the Fire Chief of Shoreline Fire Department to assess the level L of interest in entering a service contract with The City of Edmonds to provide Fire and EMS services. CL 0 Due to the City of Edmonds being surrounded by South County Fire response area, Shoreline Fire Department is the only logical service available for emergency response. • Many variables within this scenario provide uncertainty and the future cost to the City of Edmonds including debt service, replacement capital funding, and labor rates. • No formal request has been made to Shoreline Fire/EMS from the City of Edmonds. Prepared for City Council April I Packet Pg. 105 Contract with Shoreline Pros & Cons Pros ➢ Shoreline is a professional all -hazards department that provides services like SC F. ➢ Shoreline Fire already has an inter - local agreement with Northshore to provide Fire and EMS services. Prepared for City Council Cons ➢ Annual cost ➢ Would require an interlocal agreement approved by several governing boards. ➢ Initial capital purchases and renovation of facilities. ➢ Hiring personnel (labor shortage) ➢ Ordering fire apparatus (20-36 months) 0 U� L 0 N C Q CL April I Packet Pg. 106 Forming Edmonds Fire Rescue Based on Current Level of Service ➢ In 2009, the City of Edmonds dissolved its Fire Department, sold its assets, and merged its personnel to Snohomish County Fire Protection District NO. 1 (South County Fire). ➢ For the City to continue to provide the same level of service as it is currently receiving, It will require 51 operational personnel* and five (5) administrative/ support positions for a total of 56 FTEs. * There is a myriad of options based on the acceptable level of risk in a community. I Prepared for City Council 0 U� L 0 N C 0 CL April Packet Pg. 107 Forming Edmonds Fire Rescue Based on Current Level of Service Estimated Capital and Start up Costs WAppartaus Fire (4)- includes 1 reserve S3,900,000 Ambulances(4)-includesl reserve $1,550,000 Command Staff Vehicles (3) $250,000 Firefighter Protective Equipment-(2) sets per fi refighter $401,000 Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (24) $250,000 EKG- Monitor Defibrillator (4) $150,000 Radios (25) "-Tota l $250,000 $6,751,000 Prepared for City Council O L� 0 0 CL April 20 Packet Pg. 108 Forming the Edmonds Fire/EMS Pros & Cons Pros ➢ Citizens have direct input via the city council on level of service. 4 Prepared for City Council Cons ➢ Initial and ongoing costs. ➢ Recruiting, retaining, and hiring qualified personnel. ➢ The City would need to purchase apparatus, radios, equipment, and firefighter protective gear. ➢ New apparatus is currently taking 20- 36 months for delivery. 0 L� L 0 N C 0 CL April I Packet Pg. 109 Station and Staffing Models Personnel and operating $18M 11-15 $12M 10-12 $61VI 5-7 Annual Debt Service $2.21VI Ambulance Transport fees -($1 M) Levy-req. AW1000 $1.25 $2.1 K —($670K) $0.87 Total $19.21VI $13.4M* Prepared for City Council $1.7M —($500K) $0.47 $7.1 M* 0 E W 4- 0 L� L 0 N 0 a 9 w a April 20 Packet Pg. 110 9.1.a *Considerations for Reduced Stations and Staffing Models ❖ A minimum of 3 resources are 1.2 needed to handle current call 1.1 volume 1.0 p 0.9 0.8 ❖ [Stations (3) x 1.10= 3.3 v 0.7 Resources]0.6 E 0.5 z 0.4 ❖ Average of 16.8 calls per day a0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 Prepared for City Council Average Calls per day 1.10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ■ EMS ■ Fire/Service /Special Ops 0 E W 0 L� L 0 N 0 CL April 20 Packet Pg. 111 *Considerations for Reduced Stations and Staffing Models ➢ A "One Station Model" would significantly Impact RESPONSE TIIAFG ➢ Reliability of Units (available for the next call). ➢ Effective Response Force (ERF) — EMS-ALS (3-5 personnel), Residential structure Fire (14-22 personnel). ➢ Critical tasks (Fire -EMS moderate, risk high risk and max risk calls). ➢ Reliance on mutual aid when units are tied up (could be a service charge per unit). ➢ Stations would have to be optimized (relocated $$) for maximum. effectiveness Prepared for City Council April 20 Packet Pg. 112 9.1.a Finding the Right Balance Risk Performance Demand Operations Expectations Fiscal Realities 0 E W 4- 0 U L 0 i 0 CL Packet Pg. 113 Summary of Projected Costs and Savings Annex into South County Fire RFA Contract with Shoreline Fire/EMS Form Edmonds Fire Department Reduce General Fund expenditures by: Annual operations and personnel Annual operations and personnel $6 million —Current contract savings cost-$22.7 cost-$18M $401,107- County 911 $83,000- OPEB annual Savings Debt Service- equipment and Debt Service- equipment and Total Savings=—$6,484,000 stations- $2.2M* stations- $2.2M* Relieved of $6.6 million- LEOFF1 liability * Amortized station relocation, *Amortized station relocation, Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) repair, construction and other repair, construction and other Retiree medical benefits capital equipment. capital equipment. Annualized Cost- $83,000 Estimated Ambulance Billing Revenue= -$1 M Annual Cost= $17.8M Annual Cost= $24.9M* Annual Costs=$19.2M* $6.5M reduction in general fund liabilities. $6.6M reduction in long term liability. 9.1.a 0 W 0 U 0 0 CL Prepared for City Council Aprill Packet Pg. 114 IMPLEMENTATION Annex into South County Fire RFA Contract with Shoreline Fire/EMS Form Edmonds Fire Department • Resolution requesting 0 Make formal request • Hire a Fire Chief, Deputy annexation. for proposal. Chief, and Administrative • Review of request by 0 Initiate Contract Assistant. SCF Governing Board. negotiations. • Begin Negotiations with • Negotiations- Terms 0 Ratify contract by all SCF on transition plan. and Conditions: Cost parties. • Develop specifications sharing, contracts, fire for fire equipment and marshal services. a Purchase capital trucks. assets. • Order equipment. • Pre -annexation Develop policies and agreement. Negotiate transition with SCF. procedures. • Amendments to plan: • Hire and train new Governance personnel. Boundaries • Transition plan. • Public referendum. Timeline: 98-24 months Timeline: 24-36 months Timeline: 36 Months FITCH AT 0 E w 0 U L 0 _ 0 a Cn w _ i_ Iq N 4 U C 0 0 E M w 4- 0 U _ E r r Q Packet Pg. 115 Thank You Questions? William E. Sturgeon, MPA, CPM, EFO, ICMA-CM Senior Associate— Fitch & Associates 0 E M w 0 U L 0 i 0 Q Packet Pg. 116 9.1.b Executive Report n 2010, the City of Edmonds' governing board elected to transition from a municipal fire service provided by the city to a contracted service with then called Snohomish Fire District 1. In 2017, the City of Lynwood and Snohomish Fire District 1 formed a new Regional Fire Authority (RFA) called South County Fire. The City of Edmonds continues to contract with South County Fire Regional Fire Authority (RFA) for fire and emergency medical services (EMS). Even though the current contract with the RFA and City of Edmonds is set to expire in 2030, South County Fire sent the city an "intent to terminate inter -local agreement for fire and emergency medical services" in December 2023 with the understanding that the contract will be terminated on December 31, 2025. This report is a culmination of information developed from onsite-structured interviews with key stakeholders, budget analyses, staffing analyses, quantitative and temporal analyses. The FITCH team found South County Fire to be a high quality, innovative, and professional fire department organization. The management team was well versed in modern management and operational practices in the provision of emergency services and has provided exemplary service to the City of Edmonds. South County Fire has received multiple awards for innovative practices in emergency medical services and is providing efficient and effective services as prescribed at the inception of the current agreement between the city and the district. The recommendations in this report aim to guide future discussions for alternative emergency service options and negotiations between the City of Edmonds. They provide an objective, data - driven analysis of current performance and identify future opportunities. The city is interested in forecasting General Fund revenues and expenditures under multiple scenarios: continuation of a service contract, annexation into the RFA, contract services with another provider, and forming a municipal fire department. FITCH developed these scenarios reviewing historical financial data, forecasting General Fund revenues and expenditures under these different options, and estimating impacts to residential taxpayers. Professionals of the FITCH consulting team conducted onsite interviews in January 2024. The team met with elected officials of Edmonds and stakeholders, including South County Fire Authority, South County Professional Fire Fighters, IAFF Local 4683, and other community Fire Chiefs. Additionally, phone interviews were conducted with community members, as well as follow-up conversations. The team received documentation from all of the stakeholders, including the draft Berk Fire Annexation Financial Analysis completed in 2023 for the City of Edmonds. FITCH gathered and analyzed this data and it was determined that the City of Edmonds has three potential scenarios for providing fire and EMS services within their community: • Annex into the RFA • Contract with Shoreline Fire Department • Create a new Edmonds Fire and Rescue Department. • Separate fire and EMS services -contract with an EMS provider. Packet Pg. 117 9.1.b Description of Community Edmonds is located in the southwest corner of Snohomish County in Western Washington, facing Puget Sound and the Olympic Mountains to the west. The city is considered a suburb of Seattle, located 15 miles to the south and 18 miles southwest of Everett. With a population of 42,853 residents in the 2020 U.S. Census, Edmonds is the third most populous city in the county. The city is bordered to the west by Puget Sound and the city of Woodway, which lies south of Pine Street and west of 5th Avenue South. To the south of the county boundary at 244th Street Southwest is Shoreline in King County. The city's southeastern border with Mountlake Terrace is defined by the Interurban Trail, while the eastern and northern borders with Lynnwood run along 76th Avenue West, Olympic View Drive, and Lund's Gulch. The unincorporated area of Esperance, located in the southeast corner of the city, is an enclave of Edmonds and has resisted several attempts at annexation. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 18.42 square miles of which 8.90 square miles is land and 9.52 square miles is water. Edmonds has 5 miles of shoreline, which is crossed by several small streams. The Puget Sound makes up 86 percent of the city's drainage basin, with other streams flowing into Lake Ballinger to the southeast. The city's main commercial districts are Downtown Edmonds, situated in a valley known as the "bowl", and the State Route 99 corridor at its east end. The downtown area and "bowl" have views of Puget Sound and the Olympic Mountains. The city has several outlying suburban neighborhood with their own commercial centers, including Firdale, Five Corners, Perrinville, Seaview, Sherwood, and Westgate. Packet Pg. 118 9.1.b History of Relationship with RFA and Legal Basis In 2010, the City of Edmonds' governing board elected to transition from a municipal fire service provided by the city to a contracted service with then called Snohomish Fire District 1. In 2017, the City of Lynwood and Snohomish Fire District 1 formed a new Regional Fire Authority (RFA) called South County Fire. The City of Edmonds continues to contract with South County Fire Regional Fire Authority (RFA) for fire and emergency medical services (EMS). The RFA includes the cities of Brier, Edmonds, Lynnwood, Mill Creek, and Mountlake Terrace, and unincorporated areas in the southwest portion of Snohomish County. As the legislative branch of a mayor -council, non -partisan, representative form of government, seven part-time council members are elected directly by the people to staggered four- year terms. All positions represent the community at large. The City Council adopts the city budget, establishes law and policy, approves appropriations and contracts, levies taxes, and grants franchises. Council members also represent the city on boards and commissions and to other organizations. The City Council is the legislative body that establishes city policy. The Council's legislative authority is established by Title 35 of the Revised Code of Washington Laws of Cities and Towns. Section 35A.11.020 of the Optional Municipal Code sets forth the powers vested in legislative bodies of non -charter code cities. The South County Fire District's services within the City of Edmonds are appropriately resourced for the contractual requirements. In addition, the district has internally developed and adopted response standards by call type for travel time for the entire district. The elected body for the City of Edmonds is a partner with all of the RFA as a service provider, but also retains the responsibility to participate in a fluid standard setting process for the contracted services within the city, as occurred at the inception of the relationship. In other words, the city should have an expectation that they have input into the development of service expectations within the city and the flexibility to adjust said performance standards. For example, there may be greater value in adopting achievable performance standards within the city, rather than acknowledging continued deficiencies without the associated active planning efforts to improve service to meet the current standards. In 2022, voters in Mill Creek voted to annex into the RFA. In 2023, voters in Brier and Mountlake Terrace voted to annex, as well. Although the current contract with the RFA and City of Edmonds is set to expire in 2030, South County Fire sent the city an "intent to terminate inter -local agreement for fire and emergency medical services" in December 2023. Packet Pg. 119 9.1.b U.S Census Data Population I The City of Edmonds is located in Snohomish County, Washington with an estimated population in 2022 of 42,593. Spanning over 9 square miles, Edmonds has a population density of 4,806.3 people per square mile. Edmonds is the third most populous city in Snohomish County, behind Everett and Marysville. Since the 2010 Census, the population has seen an increase of around 9%. U. S. Census Estimates City of Edmonds Total Population Population Per Square Mile Land Area in Square Miles F Socioeconomic Characteristics' 42,593 (2022) 4,806.3 (2020) 8.92 (2020) For the City of Edmonds, the growth and age of the population are not the sole variables that influence demand for services. Additional factors, such as socioeconomic and demographic factors can ultimately have a greater influence over demand. For example, median household income in the community was evaluated to determine to the extent to which the city has socioeconomically challenged populations. According to the latest data provided by the U.S. Census Bureau Quickfacts in 2022, the City of Edmonds household income is almost double the national average. The median household income in the city is reported at $110,057, whereas the national average is $69,021. Edmonds per capita 2022 income was $68,793, with approximately 4.2% of the inhabitants below the poverty level. The United States per capita income is at $37,638 and poverty average is 11.6%. These types of monetary variability can impact personal healthcare and prevention practices which impact district services. U. S. Census Demographics FMedian Household Income FMedian Home Value Owner Occupied Households Persons in Poverty City of Edmonds $110,057 (2022) $761,300 (2020) 69.7% (2020) 18,269 4.2% 1, 2 https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/edmondscitywashington Packet Pg. 120 9.1.b Community Demographics Age Demographics' According to the United States Census Bureau, persons under 5 years of age account for 4.8% of the population in the City of Edmonds, persons under 18 account for 17.4% of the population, and persons over 65 for 22.8% of the population. Populations younger than 5 years and older than 65 years are considered by the U.S. Fire Administration at a high risk for injury and death from fires. The aging population poses significant risks for emergency services, as persons older than age 65 years utilize EMS services at a far greater rate than younger populations. This is due to chronic conditions and diseases including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, dementia and cognitive declines, and elderly falls. Years of Age City of Edmonds Snohomish County United States I L Under 5 4.8% 5.9% IF 5.6% Under 18 17.4% 21.8% 1 21.7% 65 and over 22.8% -IC 15.0% 1 17.3% Diversity 4 The City of Edmonds diverse population is as follows: White, alone 77.1% Black or African American alone 2.0% American Indian and Alaska Native alone 0.4% Asian alone 9.3% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0.7% Two or More Races 7.7% Hispanic or Latino 6.5% White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 74.8% 3,4 https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/edmondscitywashington Packet Pg. 121 9.1.b Community Characteristics Area Economics The City of Edmonds has an estimated workforce population of 22,152 and an unemployment rate of 6.2 percent. As of 2019, most of the city's employed residents commute to neighboring cities for work, including 11 percent to Seattle, 6 percent to Lynnwood, 6 percent to Everett, and 5 percent to Shoreline. Only 11.7 percent of residents work at employers within Edmonds city limits. The average one-way commute for Edmonds residents was approximately 31 minutes. The most common occupational industry for Edmonds residents is in educational and health services, employing 23 percent, followed by retail (13%) and professional services (12%). Transportation Features The city is connected to nearby areas by two state highways and the state ferry system, which operates a ferry route to Kingston on the Kitsap Peninsula. Public transit service in Edmonds is centered around the downtown train station, served by Amtrak and Sounder commuter trains, and includes several Community Transit bus routes that travel through outlying neighborhoods. The city's ferry terminal is located at the west end of Main Street at Brackett's Landing Park and is served by a ferry route to Kingston on the Kitsap Peninsula. From 1979 to 1980, Washington State Ferries also ran ferries to Port Townsend during repairs to the Hood Canal Bridge. The Edmonds train station lies a block southwest of the terminal and is served by Amtrak's intercity Cascades and Empire Builder trains, as well as Sound Transit's Sounder commuter train. These trains operate on the BNSF Railway, which runs along the Edmonds waterfront and is primarily used for freight transport. Two state highways, State Route 104 and State Route 524, connect the downtown area to eastern Edmonds and other points in southern Snohomish County and northern King County. An additional state highway, State Route 99, runs north -south in eastern Edmonds and connects the city's commercial district to Seattle and Everett. Public transportation in Edmonds is provided by Community Transit, which serves most of Snohomish County and covers 74 percent of Edmonds residents. Community Transit's local buses run on major streets and connect downtown Edmonds to transit hubs at Aurora Village, Lynnwood Transit Center, and Edmonds Community College. It also operates Swift on State Route 99, a bus rapid transit service connecting Aurora Village and Everett. Community Transit also operates three commuter routes that run from park and ride lots in Edmonds to Downtown Seattle and the University District. Packet Pg. 122 9.1.b South County Fire Organizational Overview The South County Fire Department provides high quality fire suppression, emergency medical, technical rescue, and hazardous materials services from 15 fire stations staffed with a minimum daily staffing level of 58 personnel. Additionally, the organization delivers a full spectrum of fire and life safety services supported by administrative staff and training officers to ensure the first responders are well prepared for any hazard or situation they may face. The department provides services to nearly 259,641 residents in southwest Snohomish County in an area of approximately 52 square miles. The department serves the cities of Lynnwood, Brier, Edmonds, Mountlake Terrace and surrounding unincorporated areas. The combined response coverage area consists of 922 miles of public roadways. The department's service area includes more than 97,000 housing units and more than 2,000 non-residential occupancies, including office, professional services, retail/wholesale sales, restaurants/bars, hotels/motels, churches, schools, government facilities, healthcare facilities, and other non-residential uses. Edmonds tl Manner Hilton Lsk• Lake Qs.,.�. Lake Mill ' SIkk—y Creek SII.., F irs NFNer's Comer Q Make Q Lake I -�- Lynnwood HilHop Mountlake Terrace Brier © S—e Coanty Fk• SW.— R.C.—I F•• AIR Ay S—d uaa•, C Packet Pg. 123 9.1.b South County Fire Organizational Overview Human Resources The Fire Chief is accountable to the district for the overall operations of the fire department and implementation of policy. As the department director, the chief oversees an annual budget of $110 million. The chief is responsible for the development and support of collaborative relationships with other fire and emergency services agencies, and the public. South County Fire is governed by a board of seven elected commissioners: five commissioners elected from districts of roughly equal population and two commissioners elected at -large. Commissioners are responsible for defining the agency's long-term vision and for adopting the budget and policies to be implemented by administrative staff. The department's service capacity consists of a daily on -duty response force of 70 personnel from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., staffing 12 engines, two ladder trucks, and six Advanced Life Support (ALS) / Basic Life Support (BLS) ambulances, as well as three Battalion Chiefs and one Medical Services Officer stationed at 15 strategically placed stations. Three aid/medic ambulances are out of service from 8:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m., reducing on -duty staffing to 64 personnel during those hours. Four platoons of firefighters work on a rotating schedule to provide 24-hour coverage. Battalion Chiefs oversee operations in three geographic zones, and captains provide supervision at the station level. Packet Pg. 124 9.1.b South County Fire Organizational Overview All station personnel are trained either to the Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) level to provide BLS pre -hospital emergency medical care or to the EMT -Paramedic (EMT-P) level to provide ALS pre -hospital emergency medical care. The department also provides both ALS and BLS ground ambulance transportation services. When needed, air ambulance services are provided by Airlift Northwest operating from Arlington and Boeing Field or the U.S. Coast Guard, as available. There are four hospitals with emergency services within the region, including one trauma center and burn center in Seattle. The department's dispatching service, Snohomish County 9-1-1, is part of a countywide joint dispatch partnership agency that allows the dispatching of the closest fire and ambulance resources countywide, regardless of agency boundaries. All response personnel are trained either to the U.S. Department of Transportation Hazardous Material First Responder Operational (FRO) level to provide initial hazardous material incident assessment, hazard isolation, and support for a hazardous material response team or to the Hazardous Materials Technician level. The department cross -staffs a Hazardous Materials Decontamination Unit as needed from Station 12 to support the regional Hazardous Materials Response Team sponsored by Boeing, City of Everett Fire Department, Marysville Fire Department, and many other jurisdictions in Snohomish County. Response personnel are also trained to the Confined Space Awareness, Low Angle Rope Rescue Operational, and Swift Water Rescue Awareness levels. The department cross -staffs a Technical Rescue unit at Station 21 in Lynnwood with confined space rescue, trenching/shoring, structural collapse, Urban Search and Rescue, high/low-angle rope rescue, and ice/water rescue capabilities. The department has two aluminum outboard water rescue boats, one cross -staffed by Station 16 personnel in Edmonds and the other cross -staffed by Station 19 personnel in Mountlake Terrace. Packet Pg. 125 9.1.b South County Fire Organizational Overview Fire Prevention The Fire Prevention Division provides a coordinated community risk reduction effort. The goal is to identify, prioritize and strategically plan to reduce risks and build healthy, safe and resilient communities. South County Fire provides fire marshal services in the City of Edmonds, including fire inspections and plan reviews. Properties with Edmonds addresses in unincorporated areas outside the city limits (Picnic Point, orth Meadowdale, Esperance, etc.) receive these services from the Snohomish County Fire Marshal. Community Outreach South County Fire offers online and in -person classes and programs to help citizens stay safe and informed. Classes offered include: ACT First Aid & CPR Aging in Place Car Seats Child Safety & CPR Disaster Preparedness Home Fire Safety Impact Teen Drivers Workplace Emergency Preparedness r�l now Residents who reside in the South County Fire service area can request a home safety evaluation. South County Fire conducts home safety evaluations which involve a visit from Outreach staff to assist with smoke and carbon monoxide alarms and to evaluate home fall hazards. Community Paramedic South County Fire's Community Resource Paramedic Program links patients with the community services needed. The main goal of the program is to help people stay safely at home - and out of the emergency room. This program is partially funded by a grant from Verdant Health Commission and a contract with North Sound Accountable Community of Health. Community paramedics follow up with at -risk patients through a telephone call or a home visit to find out what's behind multiple calls to 9-1-1. In addition to a medical assessment, there is a home safety survey to prevent falls and other risks. The program also assists patients with food issues, transportation for care, in -home care referrals, and mental and behavioral health services. m a� Cn Cn w W L_ U_ N 0 E w 4- 0 U 0 4- 0 _ 0 a O r_ 0 0_ m 0 E w _ ii x U H LL d E 0 a Packet Pg. 126 9.1.b Physical Resources- Apparatus Engine - A piece of fire apparatus that carries water, medical equipment, and tools to the scene of an emergency. The primary function of this crew at a fire is to establish a water supply, search for people in the interior of a structure and apply water with hose lines to extinguish the fire. Engines in Edmonds: 3 Medic/Aide Unit- This apparatus is equipped for basic or advanced life support medical care. Its primary purpose is to provide diagnostic assessment, treatment, and transport for patients experiencing medical emergencies. Medic/Aide units in Edmonds: 3-5 Packet Pg. 127 9.1.b Physical Resources- Apparatus Battalion Chief - This emergency response vehicle is staffed by a Battalion Chief who oversees emergency responses, line personnel, and some non -emergency programs. Rescue Boat - This emergency response vehicle is used to staff water rescue personnel to the scene of a water related emergency. Located at Port of Edmonds Brush Engine- A wildland or brush truck is specifically designed to assist in fighting brush, forest and wildfires by transporting firefighters to the scene and providing them with access to the fire, along with water or other equipment. Packet Pg. 128 9.1.b Physical Resources- Edmonds Fire Stations - L;6="- ran" W=== 00 nu+nna �f Station 16 Maplewood Station a� U) 8429 196th Street SW vn Edmonds, WA LU w d L Resources: U_ Engine / Medic (cross -staffed) 0 E w Personnel: 3 0 U L 0 Station 17 c Downtown Edmonds ° 0_ O 275 Sixth Ave. North r_ Edmonds, WA 0 CL Resources: Cn Engine / Medic (cross -staffed) 0 E w Personnel: 3 i� x U H _ Station 20 d Esperance Station 0 23009 88th Avenue W a Edmonds, WA Resources: Engine / Medic Personnel: 5 Packet Pg. 129 9.1.b Edmonds Emergency Call Volume 12.05% increase from 2019 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Chart and data retrieved from South County Fire Annual Report to City of Edmonds April 2024 SERVICE TYPE CALLS Calls volumes across the country have increased dramatically in the last decade. The residents in Edmonds are calling 9-1-1 and using emergency services 12% more than they did just five years ago In 2023, community demand requests for service totaled 6,147, averaging 16.84 calls per day. EMS calls totaled 5,299, or 86.2% of the total, averaging 14.5 calls per day. Fire related calls totaled 500 or 8.1 % of the total, averaging 1.37 calls per day. The third largest category is service calls, which totaled 335 or 5.4% of the total requests. Packet Pg. 130 9.1.b Edmonds Emergency Call Volume Busy time, or time on task, was measured from unit dispatch date and time to unit clear date and time. All units assigned to South County Fire for the City of Edmonds made 6,147 responses, and were busy on calls for a total of 6,042 hours. Overall, average busy minutes -per -response was 31.2 minutes, and average number of units responding per call was 1.9. The EMS program was the busiest program in the department, accounting for -84.5% of the department's total response volume, and 87.8% of the department's total busy hours. PP Call Category Number Number II Average of FD1 Responses Total Hours Avg. Busy of FD1 Busy Minutes Average Calls per Avg. Responses Avg. Busy Hours per M` of Calls Responses Unit Per Call Units Response per Day per Day Day Map from South County Fire Standards of Coverage Analysis Volume 2 March 2019 South County Fire Station Response Areas .�. ; 3�, .,. 13 i• 6 t.,,,, ,.... �_.� 21 • ;77 f• t - • 1B Legend i • zz • Fire Stations • EnginetMedk Geography west C113 14 • 1e ■ BC. Ladder/Engine. Medk. Aitl FreerayS 16 ' 4w...... i • Ladder. Medic Meer Sheets 16 117 ■ BC, Engin ,6, ColkctarstReh 16 - EngineRR, Medic. BC, MSO RestlenCY Sueeb Owv. Seem -11• •30 v� a •'9 i• {r 7} AuroAk sbtionS Fire Station Areas 121 — 1 11 22 u 3 2 Packet Pg. 131 9.1.b City of Edmonds Physical Assets Protected Sufficient data was available from the internal inspection records that provided specific building occupancy information. Individual buildings were rated by multiple variables such as number of stories, location, stories below grade, construction class, and the presence of automatic sprinklers. Although this information was utilized throughout the risk assessment process and calculations, the map on the following page shows specific locations of rated occupancies and the respective risk severity. Buildings, The department's service area in Edmonds includes more than 19,471 housing units and more than 1,642 non-residential occupancies, including offices, professional services, retail/wholesale sales, restaurants/bars, hotels/motels, churches, schools, government facilities, healthcare facilities, and other non-residential uses. Building Occupancy Risk Categories The CFAI identifies four risk categories that relate to building occupancy as follows: Low Risk - includes detached garages; storage sheds; outbuildings; and similar building occupancies that pose a relatively low risk of harm to humans or the community if damaged or destroyed by fire. Moderate Risk - includes detached single-family or aancies ,D'• ��-- too o o F., ° ° ° .+- o - o��w���K v • p °•" °o o o o ■�o o o�.. o — y°e" o . ° o ° # o o oo /o ,:„ Q " •• o •o oo _ ° 41 • .' .ems. ■ � ■r Map from South County Fire Standards of Coverage Analysis volume 2 March 2019 two-family dwellings; mobile homes; commercial and Risk Factors K Station Response industrial buildings less than 10,000 square feet without a high -hazard fire load; aircraft; railroad facilities; and similar building occupancies where loss of life or 7Hghsk 38 37 34 109 property damage is limited to the single building. cies High Risk - includes apartment/condominium buildings; commercial and industrial buildings more than 10,000 square feet without a high -hazard fire load; low -occupant load buildings with high -fuel loading or hazardous materials; and similar occupancies with potential for substantial loss of life or unusual property damage or financial impact. Maximum Risk - includes buildings or facilities with unusually high risk requiring an Effective Response Force involving a significant augmentation of resources and personnel, and where a fire would pose the potential for a catastrophic event involving large loss of life and/or significant economic impact to the community. Evaluation of the city's building inventory identifies 109 high- and maximum -risk building uses as they relate to the CFAI building fire risk categories. 5South County Fire Standards of Coverage Analysis Volume 1 March 2019 Packet Pg. 132 9.1.b City of Edmonds Physical Assets Protected Critical Facilities, The U.S. Department of Homeland Security defines critical infrastructure / key resources (CIKR) as those physical assets essential to the public health and safety, economic vitality, and resilience of a community, such as lifeline utilities infrastructure, telecommunications infrastructure, essential government services facilities, public safety facilities, schools, hospitals, airports, etc. South County Fire identified 155 critical facilities throughout the service area, 28 of which are located in Edmonds. A hazard occurrence with significant impact severity affecting one or more of these facilities would likely adversely impact critical public or community services. Risk STATION RESPONSE ZONE Factors Station Station Station TOTAL Critical 16 17 20 Facilities 4 1 9 15 28 RFA Critical Facilities "� •'' • ��.:. ..........'•.. i n i • i it 21 !!• f' • r. p— • i it n • • �� •• • • • • • • • • �n • ,Flre Legend n1u • Cri E-1— G.ognphy • ""'1 • • ..." • • • /1-V • • • • • %„ • r,�*xs � Sutton• same• • EnuinerMeee .e M ■BC. �• • .�c • Leo4er�Enpine M<(I(. Aga i• BC. Ene^e�M.mc ' • •• : �• . Eng—TR, M— BC M50 .............•........ ........................ 6 Krona suuo„ Map from South County Fire Standards of Coverage Analysis Volume 2 March 2019 rn a) m U) co 2 w a) L_ ILL 0 E w w 0 U L w _ 0 CL 0 0 a a) N _ 0 LU lC _ V _ d L :.i Q s south County Fire Standards of Coverage Analysis Volume 1 March 2019 Packet Pg. 133 9.1.b Current Deployment Model The South County Fire Department provides a high level of service within the City of Edmonds. This level of service includes three advanced life support ambulances and three engines. In addition to these resources stationed within the city, when various emergencies occur, the RFA sends the following resources described in the chart below. "W Type of Resources Sent T Total DepartmentMinimum Personnel Sent 1- Patient EMS 1 Engine/ Ambulance or Ladder Ambulance 3-5 FF Vehicle Fire 1 Engine 3 FF Fire in Residential 2 Battalion Chiefs, 1 Medic Unit, 1 BLS Unit, 3 Structure Engines, 1 Ladder, 1 Technical Rescue Unit and 1 22 FF Medical Services Officer Fire in Same as "Residential Fire" with One Additional Commercial Engine 25 FF Structure Technical Rescue 2 Engines, 2 Ambulances, 1 Ladder, 1 Technical 17 FF Rescue and 1 Battalion Chief First Alarm- 2 Engines Hazardous Second Alarm and above: Materials Decon Unit, Battalion Chief, Hazardous Materials 16-19 FF Response Technical Units and Ambulances Based on Patients Response Resources chart from South County Fire Standards of Coverage Analysis Volume 1 March 2019 As the emergency situation becomes more complex and creates increased risk for responders, South County Fire must utilize additional resources to mitigate these incidents. Packet Pg. 134 9.1.b Unit Hour Utilization (UHU) Time on task is necessary to evaluate best practices in efficient system delivery and for considering the impact the workload has on personnel. Unit Hour Utilization (UHU) values represent the proportion of the work period (e.g., 24 hours) that is utilized responding to requests for service. Historically, the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) has recommended that 24-hour units utilize 0.30, or 30%, workload as an upper threshold.? In other words, this recommendation would have personnel spend no more than 7.2 hours per day on emergency incidents. These thresholds take into consideration the necessity to accomplish non -emergency activities such as training, health and wellness, public education, and fire inspections. The 4th edition of the IAFF EMS Guidebook no longer specifically identifies an upper threshold. However, FITCH recommends that an upper unit utilization threshold of approximately 0.30, Or 30%, would be considered best practice. In other words, units and personnel should not exceed 30%, or 7.2 hours, of their work day responding to calls. These recommendations are also validated in the literature. For example, in their review of the City of Rolling Meadows, the Illinois Fire Chiefs Association utilized a UHU threshold of 0.30 as an indication to add additional resources a Similarly, in a standards of cover study facilitated by the Center for Public Safety Excellence, the Castle Rock Fire and Rescue Department utilizes a UHU of 0.30 as the upper limit in their standards of cover due to the necessity to accomplish other non -emergency activities 9 Every day, the agency staffs three units including one engine, one ALS unit, and one ladder truck. We combined the workload of two engines, three ALS units, and ladder/rescue units to calculate UHU since only three units were staffed daily. 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 o � Station 16 Unit Hour Utilization (UHU) IAFF Upper Threshold Station 17 Station 20 ■ Unit Hour Utilization (UHU) (UHU data from South County Fire Standard of Coverage March 2019- p. 57) The three stations which cover the city of Edmonds Station 16 (17.5%), Station 17 (14.3%) and Station 20 (19.8%). The average UHU for the stations in Edmonds is 17.2% The busiest unit in the department was the AILS units with a UHU value of 15.1 % (1,321 busy hours for 24 hours per day), followed by the engine unit with a UHU value of 8.6% (751 busy hours for 24 hours per day). The least utilized unit was the ladder with a UHU value of 1.0%. The three units combined had a UHU value of 8.2%. 7 International Association of Firefighters. (1995). Emergency Medical Services: A Guidebook for Fire -Based Systems. Washington, DC: Author. (p. 11) 8Illinois Fire Chiefs Association. (2012). An Assessment of Deployment and Station Location: Rolling Meadows Fire Department. Rolling Meadows, Illinois: Author. (pp. 54-55) 89Castle Rock Fire and Rescue Department. (2011). Community Risk Analysis and Standards of Cover. Castle Rock, Colorado: Author. (p. 58) Packet Pg. 135 9.1.b Option 1: Join the RFA Through Annexation eginning in 2003, the City of Edmonds and the South County Fire Authority have had a contractional relationship which provided a high level of fire and emergency medical services to the residents within their community. By supporting the annexation of the City of Edmonds into the Fire Authority, the community would continue to receive the high level of service the community has been provided. In addition, the community has many benefits with services that would be difficult to replicate and assign a quantitative cost to these services. Annexation into the RFA would reduce the general fund by -$6.5 million, which partially funds the current annual contract cost. This would strengthen Edmonds' general fund to address future projects and other city -provided services. Additionally, The City could potentially use these funds to lower the city's portion of the property taxes for their residents. In an annexation scenario, Edmonds would be relieved of the current firefighter portion of the LEOFFI ; South County would transfer that liability from Edmonds ($6.6M-OPEB); annual cost of $83,000. In addition, they would no longer be responsible for the fire dispatch fees payable to Snohomish County 9-1-1. In 2024, that amount is $401,107. Packet Pg. 136 9.1.b Option 2: Contract with Shoreline Fire Department FITCH met with the Fire Chief of Shoreline Fire Department to assess the level of interest in entering a service contract with the City of Edmonds to provide Fire and EMS services. In 2022, King County Fire Protection NOA (Shoreline Fire Department) and King County Fire Protection District NO.16 (Northshore Fire Department) entered into an inter -local agreement for fire and emergency medical services, where Northshore Fire Department contracts with Shoreline to provide fire and emergency medical services within their jurisdiction. Shoreline's response area is within King County except for the town of Woodway in Snohomish County. The Shoreline Fire Department Emergency Medical Services is governed by Medic One, King County Emergency Medical Services. Due to funding through King County for emergency medical services, it has been determined that Shoreline Fire Department could provide an EMS unit within the City of Edmonds. However, the Shoreline and King County EMS Levy would have to be applied ($1.48, AV/1000). Further discussions need to be facilitated with Shoreline Fire, King County, and medical directors to find out if this service can operate out of Snohomish County and within the jurisdiction of another medical system's direction and protocols. In 2023 and 2024, the costs to Northshore for contracted services: ( This is provided to demonstrate the increased cost in one year for contracted services). North Shore 2023 2024 Annual Contract Fee $9,551,329.00 $12,041,180 Under the current contractional agreement, Northshore is responsible for all the capital funding necessary to provide service within its area. The City of Edmonds needs capital equipment for fire and EMS services to explore and consider any option outside annexation within the RFA. Depending on the terms of the contract, Edmonds would likely be required to purchase the initial capital (-$6.7M) and renovate its facilities (-$20M). In addition, an annual capital replacement amount would be needed to replace items as they reach the end of their life cycle. Numerous variables in this scenario contribute to uncertainty regarding both its extent and the potential cost to the City of Edmonds. Debt service, replacement capital funding, and labor rates could feasibly exceed the price of the current contract with South County Fire. Packet Pg. 137 9.1.b Option 3: Create Own Department In 2009, the City of Edmonds dissolved its fire department, sold its assets, and merged its personnel to Snohomish County Fire Protection District NO. 1 (South County Fire). In total, 50 personnel were transferred from the City of Edmonds to South County. For the city to continue to provide the same level of service as it is currently receiving, it will require 51 operations personnel and five administrative/support positions for a total of 56 personnel. In discussions with South County Fire, they aim to retain all personnel assigned to the City of Edmonds contract. Given current labor challenges, Edmonds may experience difficulty recruiting and hiring qualified personnel to provide fire and EMS services to the community. Additionally, Edmonds will need to hire a complete command staff with support personnel to continue the present level of service. South County Fire employees are at the midpoint of the mutually agreed upon comparable agencies for collective bargaining purposes in comparing total compensation. Shift Firefighter/Paramedic Driver Company Battalion Total Staffing Operator Officer Chief Needs Edmonds Station 16 Fire 2 1 1 4 Suppression Unit EMS Unit 2 2 Battalion 1 1 Chief Edmonds Station 17 Fire 2 1 1 4 Suppression Unit EMS Unit 2 2 Minimum 8 2 2 1 13 Shift Staffing Staffing 4.5 2.5 3 3 Relief Factor 3 Platoon 36 6 6 3 51 System Administrative Position Fire Chief 1 Deputy Chief 2 Fire Inspector 1 Administrative Assistant 1 Suppression and EMS Personnel Total 51 Total FTEs 56 Packet Pg. 138 9.1.b Option 3: Create Own Department Capital Funding and Purchase South County purchased the assets utilized by the former Edmonds on a depreciated scale. According to the 2009 Inter -local Agreement for Services between Snohomish County Fire Protection District NO.1 and the City of Edmonds, dated 3 November 2009, the following values were agreed upon: Category Depreciated Purchase Price Rolling Stock Vehicles $1, 419,205.00 Attractive Assets (Equipment, PPE, Radios $248,399.00 On -Board Equipment $100, 253.00 Non -Built in, Non -Fixed Station Furnishings $30, 366.82 Total (2009) $1,798,223.82 Applying a conservative inflation rate of six percent (6%) to the 2009 agreement equates to $4,309,548.00 in 2024. Fire and EMS have experienced an inflation rate year after year, far exceeding the conservative value of six percent (6%) for rolling stock and attractive assets. The following illustration estimates what Edmonds may require for expenditures(-$6.7M) if they purchase capital assets to provide fire and emergency services. These figures are only estimates and formal Requests For Proposals (RFP) would be required to determine exact costs based on agency specifications. * Note: Build time for new apparatus is currently 20-36 months after the order is placed. Estimated Capital Start Up Costs Item Fire Appartaus (4)- includes 1 reserve Current Market Estimate $3,900,000 Ambulances(4)-includes1 reserve $1,550,000 Command Staff Vehicles (3) $250,000 Firefighter Protective Equipment-(2) sets per fi refighter $401,000 Self Contained BreathingApparatus (24) $250,000 EKG- Monitor Defibrillator (4) $150,000 Radios (25) Total $250,000 $6,751,000 * There is a myriad of options based on the acceptable level of risk in a community. Packet Pg. 139 9.1.b Option 3: Create Own Department Current facilities The current fire stations within Edmonds need remolding, rebuilding, and relocations. South County Fire has forecasted a project price of ~$20 million to complete this project. An updated needs assessment will be required to determine a refined cost estimate. Operational Costs In evaluating current and future service levels within the City of Edmonds, the operational costs would be $19.2M (which includes ancillary and support services such as, fire prevention, training academy access, community resource paramedic, medical officer, PIO, and public education) in addition to ongoing replacement funding for future capital expenditures. Packet Pg. 140 9.1.b Option 4: Contract with EMS Service Feasibility of Separate Fire and EMS Services for Edmonds Collective Bargaining Agreements for Shoreline Fire Department and Shoreline Firefighters Local 1760, South Snohomish County Fire & Rescue, Regional Fire Authority, and International Firefighters Local 1828, prohibit subcontracting for emergency medical services. Currently, no AILS private ambulances are operating within Snohomish County. The development of a single role (EMS -only Providers) would require additional research and development to determine the feasibility of the City of Edmonds. This approach has declined nationally due to decreased private EMS providers and communities needing to retain transport fees. Another consideration is that current economic conditions would necessitate the City of Edmonds to subsidize any private provider. Packet Pg. 141 9.1.b Summary of Options- Based on Current Level of Service Option 1: Annex into South County Fire-RFA Reduce General Fund expenditures by: -$6 million -Current contract savings Annual Cost= $17.8M $401,107- County 911 $83,000- OPEB annual Savings Total Savings=-$6,484,000 —$6.5M reduction in general fund liabilities Relieved of $6.6 million- LEOFF1liability Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) Retiree medical benefits $6.6M reduction in long Annualized Cost- $83,000 term liability Option 2: Contract with Shoreline Fire Department Annual operations and personnel cost- Annual Cost= $24.91VI $22.7M Debt Service: equipment and stations- $2.2M* "Amortized station relocation, repair, construction and other capital equipment. Option 3: Create Own Department Annual operations and personnel cost-$18M Debt Service- equipment and stations- Annual Cost= $19.2M $2.2M* Estimated Ambulance Billing Revenue= -$1M (offset) Amortized station relocation, repair, construction and other capital equipment. Option 4: Separate fire and EMS services -contract with an EMS provider Not a viable option due to CBA's and lack of 911 private services. Packet Pg. 142 9.1.b Station and Staffing Models: The City of Edmonds Forms Their Own Fire and EMS Service 3 Station On Duty On Duty Model Staffing Staffing M Personnel and operating $18M 11-1 55 $12M 10-12 $6M Annual Debt Service $2.2M $2.1K $1.7101 Ambulance Transport fees —($1 M)—($670K)—($500K) Levy-req. AV/1000 $1.25 $0.87 $0.47 Total $19.2M $13.4M* $7.1M"' Station and Staff inq Models -Considerations Additional considerations for reduced staffing or stations: • A "One Station Model" would significantly Impact RESPONSE TIMES. • Reliability of Units (available for the next call). • Effective Response Force (ERF) - EMS-ALS (3-5 personnel), Residential structure Fire (14-22 personnel). • Unable to complete critical tasks (Fire -EMS for moderate risk, high risk, and max risk calls). • Reliance on mutual aid when units are tied up (could include a service charge per unit by provider). • Stations would have to be optimized (relocated $$) for maximum effectiveness. I• A minimum of 3 resources are needed to handle current call volume • Stations (3) x 1.10 = 3.3 Resources • Average of 16.8 calls per day W LU N L_ um C O E M LU w O V w N C O a O O a O N O _E w �a c x c� a� E t a Packet Pg. 143 9.1.b Side by Side Comparison of Options Annex into South County Fire RFA Reduce General Fund expenditures by: $6 million —Current contract savings $401,107- County 911 $83,000- OPEB annual Savings Total Savings=—$6,484,000 Relieved of $6.6 million- LEOFF1liability Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) Retiree medical benefits Annualized Cost- $83,000 Annual Cost= $17.8M $6.5M reduction in general fund liabilities. $6.6M reduction in long term liability. Contract with Shoreline Fire Department Annual operations and personnel cost-$22.7M Debt Service- equipment and stations- $2.2M* * Amortized station relocation, repair, construction and other capital equipment. Annual Cost= $24.9M* SHORELINE Form Edmonds Fire Department Annual operations and personnel cost-$18M Debt Service- equipment and stations- $2.2M* * Amortized station relocation, repair, construction and other capital equipment. Estimated Ambulance Billing Revenue= ~$1M Annual Costs=$19.2M* Packet Pg. 144 9.1.b Implementation Tasks and Timelines Annex into South County Fire RFA Contract with Shoreline Fire/EMS Form Edmonds Fire Department • Resolution requesting Make formal request • Hire a Fire Chief, Deputy annexation. for proposal. Chief, and Administrative • Review of request by Initiate Contract Assistant. SCF Governing Board. negotiations. • Begin Negotiations with • Negotiations- Terms Ratify contract by all SCF on transition plan. and Conditions: Cost parties. - Develop specifications sharing, contracts, fire for fire equipment and marshal services. Purchase capital trucks. assets. - Order equipment. • Pre -annexation Develop policies and agreement. Negotiate transition with SCF. procedures. - Amendments to plan: • Hire and train new Governance personnel. Boundaries • Transition plan. - Public referendum. Timeline: 18-24 months Timeline: 24-36 months Timeline: 36 Months m a� U) W 2 w d L_ U_ N 0 70 w 0 U 0 0 _ 0 a O t: 0 0_ m 0 E 70 w c ii 2 U H w _ m E t v Q Packet Pg. 145 10.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/7/2024 Consent to Holdover Tenancy granting a holdover tenancy to T-Mobile West Tower, LLC Staff Lead: PW, Engineering, City Attorney Department: Public Works & Utilities Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History In 1997 the City leased space to Voicestream PCS III Corporation under the Lease for the purpose of allowing Voicestream to erect a monopole on which it would locate telecommunications equipment at the Five Corners Water Tank Site. By virtue of a series of assignments, Voicestream's interest in the Lease is now held by T-Mobile. The Lease expires on or about May 13, 2024. Recommendation City staff requests that Council authorize execution of the attached written Consent to Holdover Tenancy under the terms specified in the Lease. Narrative The Lease contemplates that Lessee may holdover after the expiration of the Lease with the written consent of the City, and states the terms applicable to the holdover at Section 26, including a month -to - month tenancy terminable by either party on 30 days written notice and that Lessee agrees to pay the annual rate of rental, prorated on a monthly basis, and "further agrees to be bound by all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions as herein specified, so far as applicable." The entirety of Section 26 of the Lease reads as follows: Section 26. Holdover. At such time as this Lease expires, or is revoked or terminated for any cause as provided for in the Lease, Lessee shall immediately remove Lessee' s Facilities from the Site subject to Section 5. If Lessee shall, with the written consent of the City, holdover after the expiration of the term of this Lease, the holdover tenancy shall be for a period of time on a month to month basis, which tenancy may be terminated by the provision of thirty (30) days advance written notice by the party seeking termination of the tenancy to the other party. During such tenancy, Lessee agrees to pay the City the then current Rental Fee, prorated on a monthly basis, and further both parties agree to be bound by all of the terms, covenants, agreements and conditions as herein specified, so far as applicable. The Lease is one of three leases at Five Corners. City staff are also recommending holdover status with Verizon Wireless by separate agenda memo. AT&T is already in holdover status pursuant to previous council authorization. Extending this Lease on a month -to -month basis as provided in the Lease will allow the City to continue to obtain rent and have a lease in place while the City continues to work out Packet Pg. 146 10.1 issues related to the renewals. A holdover tenancy does not relieve Lessee from its obligation to pay rents owed the city under the Lease. Alternative Require Lessee to remove its equipment and personal property from the premises or allow it to remain on the premises and negotiate without a lease in place. Attachments: T Mobile -Consent Letter to Holdover Tenancy Packet Pg. 147 10.1.a CONSENT TO HOLDOVER TENANCY RECITALS WHEREAS, T-Mobile West Tower, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, ("Lessee") holds a Facilities Lease for Communications Facilities with the City of Edmonds ("City") authorizing use of space at 8505 Bowdoin Way, as more particularly described in the lease, dated October 1, 1997, amended May 13, 2004, (the "Lease"); and WHEREAS, the Lease is managed and operated by its Attorney -in -Fact, CCTMO LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and WHEREAS, the Lease contemplates a holdover tenancy subject to the written consent of the City and outlines the terms of such a tenancy should the City consent; and WHEREAS, Lessee is one of three telecommunications companies holding leases authorizing use of space at 8505 Bowdoin Way, two leases expiring in May of 2024; and WHEREAS, the City has been addressing issues with each of the tenants that need be resolved before entering into renewal leases, some progress has been made, and a City consent to a holdover tenancy according to the terms of the Lease will provide some space to continue to make progress. NOW, THEREFORE, the City provides the following consent: City Consent Granted. Under Section 26 of the Lease, the City consents to a holdover tenancy according to the terms and conditions as set forth therein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Consent to Holdover Tenancy shall be effective as of the date signed below. 1 Packet Pg. 148 10.1.a CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR MIKE ROSEN Date: ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK SCOTT PASSEY 2 Packet Pg. 149 10.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/7/2024 Consent to Holdover Tenancy granting a holdover tenancy to Seattle SMSA Limited Partnership, d/b/a Verizon Wireless Staff Lead: PW, Engineering, City Attorney Department: Public Works & Utilities Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History In 2021 the city granted to Verizon Wireless a short-term Ground Lease expiring May 13, 2024, and granting authority to construct, maintain, and repair a fenced compound for the location of telecommunications facilities at the Five Corners Water Tank Site and to co -locate facilities on a monopole leased to Voicestream PCS III, whose interest is now held by T-Mobile, with written approval of T-Mobile of the co -location. Recommendation City staff requests that Council authorize execution of the attached written Consent to Holdover Tenancy under the terms specified in the Ground Lease. Narrative The Ground Lease contemplates that Lessee may holdover after the expiration of the Ground Lease with the written consent of the City, and states the terms applicable to the holdover at Section 27, including a month -to -month tenancy terminable by either party on 30 days written notice and that Lessee agrees to pay the annual rate of rental, prorated on a monthly basis, and "further agrees to be bound by all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions as herein specified, so far as applicable." The entirety of Section 27 of the Ground Lease reads as follows: Section 27 Holdover If Tenant shall, with the written consent of the City, holdover after the expiration of the term of this Lease, the holdover tenancy shall be for a period of time on a month to month basis, which tenancy may be terminated by the provision of thirty (30) days advance written notice by the party seeking termination of the tenancy to the other party. During such tenancy, Tenant agrees to pay to the City as Rent the then current annual sum, prorated on a monthly basis, and further agrees to be bound by all of the terms, covenants, agreements and conditions as herein specified, so far as applicable. This Ground Lease is one of three leases at Five Corners. T-Mobile who owns the tower on which Verizon Wireless co -locates holds a lease with the City that is managed and operated by Crown Castle. City staff are also recommending holdover status with T-Mobile by separate agenda memo. AT&T is already in holdover status pursuant to previous council authorization. Extending this Ground Lease on a Packet Pg. 150 10.2 month -to -month basis as provided in the lease will allow the City to continue to obtain rent from Verizon Wireless and have a lease in place while the City continues to work out issues related to the renewals. Verizon Wireless is current on its rent. A holdover tenancy does not relieve Verizon Wireless from its obligation to pay rents owed the city under the lease. Alternative Require Verizon Wireless to remove its equipment and personal property from the premises or allow it to remain on the premises and negotiate without a lease in place. Attachments: Verizon=Consent Letter to Holdover Tenancy Packet Pg. 151 10.2.a CONSENT TO HOLDOVER TENANCY RECITALS WHEREAS, Seattle SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless ("Lessee"), holds a Ground Lease with the City of Edmonds ("City") authorizing use of space at 8505 Bowdoin Way, as more particularly described in the lease, executed on or about July 13, 2021 (the "Lease"); and WHEREAS, the Lease contemplates a holdover tenancy subject to the written consent of the City and outlines the terms of such a tenancy should the City consent; and WHEREAS, Lessee is one of three telecommunications companies holding leases authorizing use of space at 8505 Bowdoin Way, two leases expiring in May of 2024; and WHEREAS, the City has been addressing issues with each of the tenants that need be resolved before entering into renewal leases, some progress has been made, and a City consent to a holdover tenancy according to the terms of the Lease will provide some space to continue to make progress. NOW, THEREFORE, the City provides the following consent: City Consent Granted. Under Section 27 of the Lease, the City consents to a holdover tenancy according to the terms and conditions as set forth therein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Consent to Holdover Tenancy shall be effective as of the date signed below. Packet Pg. 152 10.2.a CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR MIKE ROSEN Date: ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK SCOTT PASSEY 2 Packet Pg. 153 10.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/7/2024 Ordinance to Adopt Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) Code (AMD2023-0004) Staff Lead: Mike Clugston Department: Planning Division Preparer: Michael Clugston Background/History Council approved the CARA code language presented at their April 16 meeting but recommended one additional change: to add a prohibition to Table 23.60.030.1 regarding the use of crumb rubber in the CARAs. That language was added to the updated draft which is attached as Attachment 1. The ordinance and draft code was placed on the April 23 consent agenda for adoption; however, the item was pulled and tabled before any additional discussion with staff had occurred. The motion to table was stated to the effect: "Table until environmental issues are reviewed and resolved - remaining issues with Olympic View Water District align with the recommendation" (4 yes to table, 2 no, 1 abstaining). It is not clear what additional information Council needs in order to approve the ordinance in the packet. City staff have worked closely with staff at Olympic View and related experts at the Departments of Health and Ecology and used best available science to create the draft CARA code in Attachment 1. As noted previously, SEPA was issued on November 9, 2023 consistent with applicable codes and was not appealed. The draft CARA code that existed at the time SEPA was issued (and that the Planning Board forwarded) is the same draft the Council has before them now, which did not and does not include a prohibition on shallow UIC wells in the QVa soils in the Deer Creek CARA. Regarding environmental issues, there may be some confusion about the first two entries on the associated SEPA checklist under the Environmental Health. Because the checklist formatting was unclear, staff inadvertently responded to question 7a in 7a1 (see Attachment 2, page 11 of the checklist), while 7a1 did not get a direct response. While unfortunate, the error is not significant because Question 7a1 is a site -specific question about possible contamination on a project site. The response to that question would have included the 'non -project, non -site specific' language present in many of the answers on the checklist that are directed at site -specific projects (code amendments are not site -specific projects). In the end, Olympic View has indicated on several occasions that the Deer Creek water supply has not seen contamination, so it is known that their long-time drinking water resource is safe. The question of whether to allow shallow UIC wells in the QVa soils in the Deer Creek CARA has been a point of discussion since the Planning Board added a condition for that in their first recommendation to Council (the Board ultimately revised their recommendation against prohibiting shallow UIC wells in the QVa soils in Deer Creek after further research and expert testimony). Ultimately, it is a question of Packet Pg. 154 10.3 understanding the science that the experts have used to produce the recommended CARA code and balancing risk. While the QVa layer is unconfined in the Deer Creek CARA (i.e., it has no other soil above it), it is not to say that if water enters that soil it goes immediately straight to the wellhead. On the contrary, it is required to be treated prior to entering the soil. These requirements are to a standard that exceeds the current DOE and DOH standards for soils that have no assumed treatment capacity. After treatment, it takes between 6 months to more than 10 years for runoff to make it to the wellhead. This is shown in the mapping provided for use as best available science by Olympic View (Attachment 3, Figure 8). This mapping is based on groundwater modeling done by the consultant which is described in the Attachment. Regarding underground injection wells (UICs), the City proposed to prohibit all future deep injection wells, like those that currently exist at the Madrona School, in both the Deer Creek and 228th Street CARA (Attachment 4). The City would propose prohibiting shallow UIC wells in both CARAs as well if conditions in the two areas were similar; unfortunately, they are not. As has been described, the 228th Street CARA is served by existing City -owned stormwater infrastructure. New and existing development can and does tie into this infrastructure that then discharges outside of the CARA. Since stormwater runoff is currently piped outside of this CARA, the issue of decreasing groundwater recharge and well flow rates due to the lack of infiltration is minimal. On the other hand, due to existing soil conditions, enclosed drainage basins, and a lack of existing City - owned stormwater infrastructure, the majority of the Deer Creek CARA currently infiltrates stormwater into the soil. The only way to manage stormwater in this CARA is on -site, using existing techniques, methodologies, and soil treatment capacities approved by Ecology for surface and shallow sub -surface scenarios. This also ensures that the existing aquifer recharge rate is maintained and the existing well flow rates do not decrease. Regarding PFAS and the evolving science around that family of chemicals, regulation of that is outside the scope of this project because there is no best available science yet to reference. If Ecology adopts standards in the future to treat stormwater for PFAS, those will be automatically adopted in Edmonds stormwater code in Chapter 18.30 ECDC. The CARA code in ECDC 23.60 will be updated periodically as required by the GMA and as new best available science is produced, it will be incorporated into the critical area ordinance as needed. Staff Recommendation Approved the ordinance in Attachment 1. Narrative N/A Attachments: Attachment 1 - CARA ordinance and Exhibit A code Attachment 2 - AMD2023-0004 SEPA DNS and Checklist CARA code amendment Attachment 3 - Olympic View 2018 WHPA Delineation Report Attachment 4 - 3.19.24 CARA Council PH slides Packet Pg. 155 10.3.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING REGULATIONS RELATED TO THE PROTECTION OF CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS. WHEREAS, critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs) are established to protect groundwater and public drinking supplies from potential contamination and to ensure adequate groundwater availability; and WHEREAS, CARAs are treated as critical areas under the Growth Management Act (GMA) and defined in Chapter 23.60 ECDC, which was last updated in 2016; and WHEREAS, Edmonds became aware of the presence of CARAs within the City's jurisdiction in 2022; and WHEREAS, Olympic View provided best available science and mapping of their wellhead protection areas and buffer to the City, which were then added to the City's geographic information system (GIS); and WHEREAS, the adoption of new CARA regulations is the next step to further protect these critical areas; and WHEREAS, the agenda memo in the April 16, 2024 council packet provides other relevant background information; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 23.60 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC), entitled "Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 2. ECDC section 23.40.005, entitled "Definitions pertaining to critical areas," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Packet Pg. 156 10.3.a Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR MIKE ROSEN ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: Im JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 157 10.3.a SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2024, 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 REGULATIONS RELATED TO THE PROTECTION OF CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of 92024. 4840-7251-8158, v. 1 3 CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Packet Pg. 158 Exhibit A 10.3.a Chapter 23.60 CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS .. . , .•. . •. . .. .. . . . ... Sections: 23.60.010 Scope. 23.60.020 Administration. 23.60.030 Regulated Activities. 23.60.010 Scope. Critical aauifer recharge areas (CARAs) are those areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water as defined by WAC 365-190-030(3). CARAs have prevailing geologic conditions that create a high potential for contamination of ground water resources or contribute significantly to the replenishment of ground water. The Growth Management Act requires cities to adopt regulations to protect CARAs. The purpose of this chapter is to establish critical aquifer recharge area (CARA) and groundwater protection standards to protect aquifers from degradation and depletion. The intent is to minimize loss of recharge quantity, to maintain the protection of public drinking water sources, and to prevent contamination of groundwater. Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add Packet Pg. 159 10.3.a Exhibit A 23.60.020 Administration. A. Designation. Olympic View Water and Sewer District (Olympic View) has two wellhead protection areas in Edmonds: Deer Creek Springs and the 2281h Street Wellfield. Deer Creek Springs itself is located west of Edmonds in the Town of Woodway while the 2281n Street Wellfield is located in Esperance (unicorporated Snohomish County), which is surrounded by Edmonds. Both areas have been mapped and modeled using best available science and include four travel time zones (6 month, 1 year, 5 year, and 10 year) plus an additional buffer. An area of exposed highly sensitive soils (Qva aquifer) is also mapped. B. Classification. CARAs are classified using the following criteria: 1. Class 1 CARAs include those mapped areas located within the 6 month, one (1) and five (5) year capture zones of a wellhead protection area. 2. Class 2 CARAs include those mapped areas located within the ten (10) year capture zone of a wellhead protection area. Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add 2 Packet Pg. 160 Exhibit A 10.3.a 3. Class 3 CARAs include those mapped areas in the critical aquifer recharge area buffer. C. Applicability. The provisions of this chapter apply to regulated activities occurring within Class 1, Class 2 and Class 3 CARAs as identified in the City of Edmonds GIS, which may be updated as new information becomes available. D. Local consultation. The City of Edmonds will notify Olympic View when new development applications are submitted within the mapped CARAs. Typical applications will include but not be limited to: single family/multifamily/commercial building permits, and short/formal subdivisions- E. Hydrogeologic report. A hydrogeologic report is required for activities as noted in the table ECDC 23.60.030.C. The report must contain the following information: 1. The surface location of all critical aquifer recharge areas located on site or immediately adiacent to the site. and the Dermeabilitv of the unsaturated zone: 2. Groundwater depth, flow direction, and gradient based on available information; 3. Currently available data on wells and springs within one fourth mile of the site: 4. Currently available information on the location of surface waters within one fourth mile of the site; 5. Historic water quality data for the area to be affected by the proposed activity or use compiled for at least the previous five-year period; 6. Discussion of the effects of the Droposed Droiect on the groundwater aualitv and quantity, including: a. Predictive evaluation of groundwater withdrawal effects on nearby wells and surface water features; b. Predictive evaluation of contaminant transport based on potential releases to groundwater; c. Recharge potential of the site including permeability and transmissivity; and d. If water use is proposed for the development activitv. a description of the groundwater source of water to the site or a letter from an approved water purveyor stating the ability to provide water to the site; 7. Best management practices relevant to the proposed activity or use; 8. Provisions to monitor the groundwater quality and quantity; 9. A spill plan that identifies equipment and structures that could fail, resulting in an impact to the critical aquifer recharge area. Spill plans shall include provisions for regular inspection, repair, and replacement of structures and equipment with the potential to fail; Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add Packet Pg. 161 10.3.a Exhibit A 10. An assessment of how the development activitv meets the protection standards established in ECDC 23.60.030.D; 11. If the hydrogeologic report identifies impacts to critical aquifer recharge areas, the project applicant will be required to: a. Identify and provide an analysis of alternatives by which such impacts could be avoided or prevented; and b. Provide a detailed mitigation plan for any unavoidable impacts. The mitigation plan should include preventative measures, monitoring, process control and remediation and a contingency plan, as appropriate; 12. Recommendations for implementation and operation of activities, including size limitations, monitoring, reporting and best management practices (BMP); and 13. Anv other information necessary to determine compliance with this chapter. 23.60.030 Regulated Activities. A. Stormwater. 1. The use of stormwater infiltration best management practices (BMPs) including those that qualify as a Class V Underground Infection Control well (UIC), are prohibited for all land uses within all wellhead protection areas (WHPAs) associated with Olympic View Water and Sewer District's (OVWSD) 228th Street Wellhead, including the buffer. 2. Within all WHPAs associated with Olympic View's Deer Creek Springs, including the buffer, the following shall apply: a. All new bored, drilled, or driven shaft UICs for stormwater management purposes are prohibited. b. All other new stormwater infiltration BMPs that are not bored, drilled. or driven shaft UICs shall be regulated by: i. Chapter 173-218 WAC, that meet that chapter's definition of a Class V UIC well. The UIC regulations are implemented by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). ii. The requirements of ECDC 18.30 (Stormwater Management), including the Ecoloev stormwater manual adopted by ECDC 18.30. and the current Edmonds Stormwater Addendum. c. In addition, these requirements shall apply to the following allowed activities: i. All new UICs that replace any existing UIC that has reached its useful life. ii. Any area that proposes connecting to an existing City -owned and operated UIC. d. These requirements shall apply until Ecology approves a subsequent version of its stormwater manual that is more protective of the aquifers than the above requirements. At that time, the more protective requirements shall apply. Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add 4 Packet Pg. 162 10.3.a Exhibit A B. Table 23.60.030.1, CARA Prohibited and Restricted Uses, establishes land uses and related activities that are prohibited and restricted within a specific CARA classification. New land uses or activities that pose a hazard to the City's groundwater resources, resulting from storing, handling, treating, using, producing, recycling, or disposing of hazardous materials or other deleterious substances, are prohibited in Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas 1 and 2. Some uses are prohibited in all CARA classes. Uses and activities lawfully established prior to the effective date of this code, are considered to be legal nonconforming uses subject to Chapter 17.40 ECDC and may continue to operate within the scope of the existing use. Table 23.60.030.1. CARA Prohibited and Restricted Uses Use Activity I CARA Restriction All mineral resource uses Mining, processing and reclamation of any type below the water table or the uDDer surface of the CARA and in exposed QVa soils in Class 3 CARA. A hydrogeologic report is required for the use in Class 3 CARA outside of the area of exposed QVa. Cemeteries Cemeteries are prohibited in the Class 1 and 2 CARA and in exposed QVa soils in Class 3 CARA. Best management practices (BMPs) and integrated pest management (IPM) are required for the use in Class 3 CARA outside of the areas of exposed QVa. Hazardous liquid transmission pipelines As defined in Chapter 81.88 RCW, pipelines are prohibited in Class 1 and 2 CARA as well as in exposed QVa soils in Class 3 CARA. A hydrogeologic report is required for the use in Class 3 CARA outside of the area of exposed QVa. Hazardous waste storage and/or Hazardous waste storage and/or treatment facilities, treatment facilities and/or processing, or as defined bV Chapter 173-303 WAC are prohibited disposal of radioactive substances in all CARA classes. Storage, processing, or disposal of radioactive 3rohibited in all CARA classes, except for medical equipment and/or material and medical waste. efined by RC isoosal. is held for proper Aboveground storage tanks for hazardous substances or hazardous wastes with primary and secondary containment area(s) and swill Drotection Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add 5 Packet Pg. 163 10.3.a Exhibit A in exposed QVa soils in Class 3 CARA. A hydrogeologic report is required for the use in Class 3 CARA outside of the area of exposed QVa. Automotive uses Wrecking yards are prohibited in all CARA classes. Vehicle towing yards that store vehicles on permeable surfaces are also prohibited. Service stations are prohibited in Class 1 and 2 CARA as well as in exposed QVa soils in Class 3 CARA. In Class 3 CARA outside of the area of exposed QVa, vehicle repair and servicing must be conducted indoors over impermeable pads. For underground storage tanks (UST) with hazardous substances, applicants must demonstrate that the facility complies with federal and state laws. Dry cleaning Dry cleaning using chlorinated solvents or using solvent perchloroethylene is prohibited in all CARA classes. Large on -site sewage systems, as defined Prohibited in all CARA. in Chapter 246-272A WAC Solid waste landfills Prohibited in all CARA. Solid waste is defined in WAC 173-304-100. Solid waste transfer stations Prohibited in all CARA. Solid waste is defined under WAC 173-304-100. Petroleum refinement processes, including any related reprocessing or Prohibited in all CARA. storage Bulk storage facilities where flammable or Prohibited in all CARA. combustible liquids, solids, or gels are received bV pipeline or tank vehicle, and are stored or blended in bulk for the purpose of distributing such substances bV pipeline, tank vehicle, portable tank, or container Chemical manufacturing, including but not Prohibited in Class 1 and 2 CARA as well as in limited to organic and inorganic exposed QVa soils in Class 3 CARA. A hydrogeologic chemicals, plastics and resins, report is required for the use in Class 3 CARA outside pharmaceuticals, cleaning compounds, of the area of exposed QVa. Applicants must Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add 6 Packet Pg. 164 10.3.a Exhibit A paints and lacquers, and agricultural demonstrate that the facility complies with federal chemicals and state laws. Primary and secondary metal industries Prohibited in all CARA. that manufacture, produce, smelt, or refine ferrous and nonferrous metals from molten materials Commercial wood preserving and wood Prohibited in all CARA. products preserving Mobile fleet fueling operations Prohibited in all CARA. "Mobile fleet fueling" means the practice of filling fuel tanks of vehicles from tank vehicles. Mobile fleet fueling is also known as wet fueling and wet hosing. Mobile fleet fueling does not include fueling at construction sites. Permanent dewatering of the aquifer Prohibited in all CARA. when done as part of remediation action that is approved bV the Department of Ecology Irrigation and infiltration of greywater Prohibited in all CARA. Reclaimed or recycled water use with the Prohibited in all CARA. exception of uses that discharge to the sanitary sewer Rainwater collection and use Allowed in all CARA. Hydrocarbon extraction Prohibited in all CARA. Metal recycling facilities with outdoor Prohibited in Class 1 and 2 CARA as well as in storage and handling activities exposed QVa soils in Class 3 CARA. A hydrogeologic report is required for the use in Class 3 CARA outside of the area of exposed QVa. Crumb rubber (styrene-butadiene rubber) Prohibited in all CARA. for artificial turf installations C. ReL-ulation of facilities handlinL- and storine hazardous materials. Activities may only be permitted in a critical aquifer recharge area if the applicant can show, through providing a hydrogeologic report prepared by a qualified professional, that the proposed activity will not cause contaminants to enter the groundwater bV compliance with the best management practices (BMPs) for handling and storing hazardous materials. The Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add 7 Packet Pg. 165 10.3.a Exhibit A Citv may imaose develoament conditions in accordance with BMPs to Drevent deeradation of groundwater. 1. Best Management Practices for Handling and Storing Hazardous Materials. Any facility, activity, or residence in the City in which hazardous materials or other deleterious substances are present must be operated in a manner that ensures safe storage, handling, treatment, use, production, and recycling or disposal of such materials and substances and prevents their unauthorized release to the environment. Businesses. cemeteries and schools that store and/or handle hazardous materials must at a minimum, comply with the following BMPs: a. Waste disposal and record keeping of disposal and use activity; b. Spill containment supplies and an emergency response plan; c. An emergency response training plan for all employees; d. Hazardous materials must be stored using secondary containment measures at all times; e Periodic monitoring of the storage areas and methods used for containment must be reviewed: i. On a regular basis; ii. Whenever business Dractices change re2ardin2 hazardous materials: and iii. As required by laws and regulations; f. In no case may hazardous materials or other deleterious substances be stored, handled, treated, used, produced, recycled, or disposed of in a way that would pose a significant groundwater hazard within the City. 2. Hazardous Materials Inventory (HMI). The HMI statement is intended reflect all current and anticipated types and quantities of hazardous materials that will be stored, handled, treated, used, produced, recycled, or disposed of at a facilitv. The HMI must always be kept on site. New and existine commercial land uses, schools and cemeteries located in Class 1 and Class 2 CARAs must submit an HMI statement: a. Within 1 vear of the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chanter: b. With any new land use or building permit application; c. With a new business license; and d. At periodic intervals as needed to keep up with changing business practices. Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add 8 Packet Pg. 166 Exhibit A 10.3.a 3. Hazardous Materials Management Plan (HMMP). Hazardous materials quantities correspond to the aggregate total of all hazardous materials, not individual chemicals. Facilities that use aggregate quantities of hazardous materials equal to or greater than 20 gallons or the equivalent of 200 pounds, or that use hazardous materials that may be a potential risk to the WHPA, are reviewed to determine the potential risk to the groundwater and the need for an HMMP. Commercial land uses and activities using aggregate quantities of hazardous materials equal to or greater than 50 gallons or the equivalent of 500 pounds, or that use hazardous materials that are considered to be a potential risk to the groundwater in lower auantities. must submit an HMMP to the ON. a. The City requires an HMMP based on the type and aggregate quantity of inventoried material. The followine are exempt from an HMMP: Retail sale of containers 5 gallons or less in size when the business has fewer than 500 gallons on the premises at any one time; and ii. Hazardous materials of no potential risk to the wellhead protection areas. b. HMMPs must demonstrate imDlementation of BMPs. An HMMP must be comDleted by the facility operator and must always kept on site and include: i. A description of the facility including a floor plan showing storage, drainage and use areas. The plans must be legible and approximately to scale; ii. The plan must include and identify all hazardous materials containers, sizes, storage locations and methods of secondary containment of the hazardous materials; and iii. The plan must, at a minimum, include how the facility implements the BMPs as identified in this code. 4. Inspections. The City has the right to inspect a facility at reasonable times for the purpose of determining compliance with this chapter. Inspections may include, but are not limited to: a. Visual inspections of hazardous materials storage and secondary containment areas; b. Inspections of HMMP: and c. SamDlinR of soils. surface water and Rroundwater. 5. Third -Party Review. The City may employ a hydrogeologic consultant licensed in Washington State at the applicant's expense for third -party review for compliance with the BMPs, the HMI and the HMMP. 6. Enforcement. Whenever a person has violated any provisions of this chapter, the Planning and Development Director. in consultation with the Public Works Director as Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add Packet Pg. 167 10.3.a Exhibit A necessarv. may take code enforcement action based on the nature of the violation including, but not limited to, abatement, injunction, mitigation, fines and penalties as set forth in Section 18.30.100 ECDC. Stormwater Management. D. General reauirements. 1. A project applicant must make all reasonable efforts to avoid and minimize impacts to critical aauifer recharge areas according to the reauirements of this section, in the following sequential order of priority: a. Avoiding impacts altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; or when avoidance is not possible; b. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps, such as project redesign, relocation, or timing, to avoid or reduce impacts; and 2. Anv activity or use Specifically listed in this chanter must comDly with the best management practices and mitigation plan identified in the hydrogeologic report. 3. All development activities must comply with the groundwater quality standards contained in WAC Chanter 173-200 and RCW Chanter 90.48. 4. Where the Director determines that an activity or use not specifically listed in this chapter has the potential to harm water quality or quantity within critical aquifer recharge areas, the applicant must apply best management practices and all known and available reasonable technology (AKART) appropriate to protect critical aquifer recharge areas. Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add 10 Packet Pg. 168 10.3.a Exhibit A 23.40.005 Definitions pertaining to critical areas. For the purposes of this chapter and the chapters on the five specific critical area types (Chapters 23.50, 23.60, 23.70, 23.80 and 23.90 ECDC) the following definitions shall apply: "Adjacent" means those activities located on site immediately adjoining a critical area; or distance equal to or less than 225 feet of a development proposal or subject parcel. "Alteration" means any human -induced action which changes the existing condition of a critical area or its buffer. Alterations include, but are not limited to: grading; filling; dredging; draining; channelizing; cutting, pruning, limbing or topping, clearing, relocating or removing vegetation; applying herbicides or pesticides or any hazardous or toxic substance; discharging pollutants; paving, construction, application of gravel; modifying for surface water management purposes; or any other human activity that changes the existing landforms, vegetation, hydrology, wildlife or wildlife habitat value of critical areas. "Aquifer" means a body of soil or rock that contains sufficient saturated material to conduct groundwater and yield usable quantities of groundwater to springs and/or wells. Best Available Science. See ECDC 23.40.310. "Best management practices" means a system of practices and management measures that 1. Control soil loss and reduce water quality degradation caused by nutrients, animal waste, and toxics; 2. Control the movement of sediment and erosion caused by land alteration activities; 3. Minimize adverse impacts to surface and ground water quality, flow, and circulation patterns; and 4. Minimize adverse impacts to the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of critical areas. "Buffer" means the designated area immediately next to and a part of a steep slope or landslide hazard area and which protects slope stability, attenuation of surface water flows and landslide hazards reasonably necessary to minimize risks to persons or property; or a designated area immediately next to and part of a stream or wetland that is an integral part of the stream or wetland ecosystem. For critical aquifer recharge areas, the buffer is that area outside of the WHPA time of travel zones established by WAC 246-290, which defines the entire zone of contribution for the CARA. "Chapter" means those sections of this title sharing the same third and fourth digits. "City" means the city of Edmonds. City Council or Council. See ECDC 21.15.030. Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add 11 Packet Pg. 169 10.3.a Exhibit A "Class" or "wetland class" means descriptive categories of wetland vegetation communities within the wetlands taxonomic classification system of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Cowardin, et al., 1979). "Clearing" means the act of cutting and/or removing vegetation. This definition shall include grubbing vegetation and the use or application of herbicide. "Compensation project" means an action(s) specifically designed to replace project -induced critical area or buffer losses. Compensation project design elements may include, but are not limited to: land acquisition procedures and detailed plans including functional value assessments, detailed landscaping designs, construction drawings, and monitoring and contingency plans. "Compensatory mitigation" means replacing project -induced losses or impacts to a critical area, and includes, but is not limited to, the following: 1. "Creation" means actions performed to intentionally establish a wetland at a site where it did not formerly exist. 2. "Reestablishment" means actions performed to restore processes and functions to an area that was formerly a critical area, where the former critical area was lost by past alterations and activities. 3. "Rehabilitation" means improving or repairing processes and functions to an area that is an existing critical area that is highly degraded because one or more environmental processes supporting the critical area have been disrupted. 4. "Enhancement" means actions performed to improve the condition of existing degraded wetlands so that the functions they provide are of a higher quality. 5. "Preservation" means actions taken to ensure the permanent protection of existing high - quality wetlands. "Creation" means a compensation project performed to intentionally establish a wetland or stream at a site where one did not formerly exist. "Critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs)" are areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water, including areas where an aquifer that is a source of drinking water is vulnerable to contamination that would affect the potability of the water, or is susceptible to reduced recharge. These areas are identified on the Citv's GIS using information provided by Olympic View Water and Sewer District, as periodically updated. "Critical areas" for the city of Edmonds means wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas as defined in Chapters 23.50, 23.601 23.701 23.80 and 23.90 ECDC, respectively. Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add 12 Packet Pg. 170 10.3.a Exhibit A "Deleterious substances" include. but are not limited to. chemical and microbial substances that are not classified as hazardous materials per this chapter, whether the substances are in usable or waste condition, that have the potential to pose a significant groundwater hazard, or for which monitoring requirements or treatment -based standards are enforced under Chapter 246- 290 WAC. "Development proposal" means any activity relating to the use and/or development of land requiring a permit or approval from the city, including, but not limited to: commercial or residential building permit; binding site plan; conditional use permit; franchise; right-of-way permit; grading and clearing permit; mixed use approval; planned residential development; shoreline conditional use permit; shoreline substantial development permit; shoreline variance, short subdivision; special use permit; subdivision; flood hazard permit; unclassified use permit; utility and other use permit; variance; rezone; or any required permit or approval not expressly exempted by this title. "Director" means the city of Edmonds development services director or his/her designee. "Division" means the planning division of the city of Edmonds development services department. "Enhancement" means an action taken to improve the condition and function of a critical area. In the case of wetland or stream, the term includes a compensation project performed to improve the conditions of an existing degraded wetland or stream to increase its functional value. "Erosion" means the process in which soil particles are mobilized and transported by natural agents such as wind, rain, frost action, or stream flow. Erosion Hazard Areas. See ECDC 23.80.020(A). Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. See Chapter 23.90 ECDC. "Floodplain" means the total area subject to inundation by a "100-year flood" "100-year flood" means a flood having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. "Footprint of existing development" or "footprint of development" means the area of a site that contains legally established: buildings; roads, driveways, parking lots, storage areas, walkways or other areas paved with concrete, asphalt or compacted gravel; outdoor swimming pools; patios. Frequently Flooded Areas. See Chapter 23.70 ECDC. "Functions" means the roles served by critical areas including, but not limited to: water quality protection and enhancement; fish and wildlife habitat; food chain support; flood storage, conveyance and attenuation; ground water recharge and discharge; erosion control; wave attenuation; aesthetic value protection; and recreation. These roles are not listed in order of priority. Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add 13 Packet Pg. 171 10.3.a Exhibit A Geologically Hazardous Areas. See Chapter 23.80 ECDC. "Geologist" means a person licensed as a geologist, engineering geologist, or hydrologist in the state of Washington. For geologically hazardous areas, an applicant may choose a geologist or engineering geologist licensed in the state of Washington to assess the potential hazard. "Geotechnical engineer" means a practicing geotechnical/civil engineer licensed as a professional civil engineer in the state of Washington who has at least five years of professional employment as a geotechnical engineer in responsible charge including experience with landslide evaluation. "Grading" means any one or a combination of excavating, filling, or disturbance of that portion of the soil profile which contains decaying organic matter. "Habitats of local importance" means areas that include a seasonal range or habitat element with which a given species has a primary association, and which, if altered, may reduce the likelihood that the species will maintain and reproduce over the long term. These might include areas of high relative density or species richness, breeding habitat, winter range, and movement corridors. These might also include habitats that are of limited availability or high vulnerability to alterations such as cliffs, talus, and wetlands. In urban areas like the city of Edmonds, habitats of local importance include biodiversity areas and corridors, which are characterized by a framework of ecological components which provides the physical conditions necessary for ecosystems and species populations to survive in a human -dominated landscape. "Hazardous materials" means any material, either singularly or in combination, that is a physical or health hazard. whether the materials are in usable or waste condition: and anv material that may degrade surface water or groundwater quality when improperly stored, handled, treated, used, produced, recycled, disposed of, or otherwise mismanaged. Hazardous materials also include: all materials defined as or designated by rule as a dangerous waste or extremely hazardous waste under Chapter 70A.300 RCW and Chapter 173-303 WAC; hazardous materials also include petroleum or petroleum products that are in liquid phase at ambient temperatures, including any waste oils or sludges. "Hazardous materials inventory (HMI)" is an inventory of all current and anticipated types and quantities of hazardous materials that will be stored, handled, treated, used, produced, recycled, or disposed of at a facility as required in ECDC 23.60.030.C.2, Hazardous Materials Inventory (HMI). "Hazardous materials management plan (HMMP)" is a plan completed by the operator that demonstrates how the facility implements required BMPs as required in ECDC 23.60.030.C.3, Hazardous Materials Management Plan (HMMP). "In -lieu fee program" means a program which sells compensatory mitigation credits to permittees whose obligation to provide compensatory mitigation is then transferred to the in - lieu program sponsor, a governmental or nonprofit natural resource management entity. Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add 14 Packet Pg. 172 10.3.a Exhibit A Landslide Hazard Areas. See ECDC 23.80.020(B). "Mitigation" means the use of any or all of the following actions for activities and development on sites containing critical areas, except critical area aquifer recharge areas, which are listed in descending order of priority: 1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; 2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps such as project redesign, relocation, or timing to avoid or reduce impacts; 3. Rectifying the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, and habitat conservation areas by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to the historical conditions or the conditions existing at the time of the initiation of the project; 4. Minimizing or eliminating the hazard by restoring or stabilizing the hazard area through engineered or other methods; 5. Reducing or eliminating the impact or hazard over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; 6. Compensating for the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, and habitat conservation areas by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and 7. Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when necessary. "Native vegetation" means vegetation comprised of plant species which are indigenous to the Puget Sound region and which reasonably could have been expected to naturally occur on the site. "Native vegetation" does not include noxious weeds as defined by the state of Washington or federal agencies. "Normal maintenance of vegetation" means removal of shrubs/nonwoody vegetation and trees (less than four -inch diameter at breast height) that occurs at least every other year. Maintenance also may include tree topping that has been previously approved by the city in the past five years. "Noxious weeds" means any plant that is highly destructive, competitive or difficult to control by cultural or chemical practices, limited to those plants on the state noxious weed list contained in Chapter 16-750 WAC. "Planning staff" means those employed in the planning division of the city of Edmonds development services department. Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add 15 Packet Pg. 173 10.3.a Exhibit A "Qualified critical areas consultant" or "qualified professional" means a person who has the qualifications specified below to conduct critical areas studies pursuant to this title, and to make recommendations for critical areas mitigation. For geologically hazardous areas, the qualified critical areas consultant shall be a geologist or engineering geologist licensed in the state of Washington to assess the potential hazard. If development is to take place within a geologically hazardous area, the qualified critical areas consultant developing mitigation plans and design shall be a professional engineer licensed in the state of Washington and familiar with landslide and slope stability mitigation. For wetlands and streams, the qualified critical areas consultant shall be a specialist in botany, fisheries, wetland biology, and/or hydrology with a minimum of five years' field experience with wetlands and/or streams in the Pacific Northwest. Requirements defining a qualified critical areas consultant or qualified professional are contained within the chapter on each critical area type. For critical aquifer recharge areas, the qualified professional must be a currently licensed Washington State geologist holding a current specialty license in hydrogeology. "Reasonable economic use(s)" means the minimum use to which a property owner is entitled under applicable state and federal constitutional provisions in order to avoid a taking and/or violation of substantive due process. "Recharge" means the process involved in the absorption and addition of water from the unsaturated zone to Rroundwater. "Redeveloped land(s)" means those lands on which existing structures are demolished in their entirety to allow for new development. The director shall maintain discretion to determine if the demolition of a majority of existing structures or portions thereof constitute the redevelopment of a property or subject parcel. "Restoration" means the actions necessary to return a stream, wetland or other critical area to a state in which its stability, functions and values approach its unaltered state as closely as possible. For wetlands, restoration as compensatory mitigation may include reestablishment or rehabilitation. Seismic Hazard Areas. See ECDC 23.80.020(C). "Species of local importance" means those species that are of local concern due to their population status, their sensitivity to habitat manipulation, or that are game (hunted) species. (See ECDC 23.90.010(A)(4).) "Storm Water Management Manual" means the storm water manual specified in Chapter 18.30 ECDC. "Streams" means any area where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed which demonstrates clear evidence, such as the sorting of sediments, of the passage of water. The channel or bed need not contain water year-round. This definition is not meant to include Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add 16 Packet Pg. 174 10.3.a Exhibit A irrigation ditches, canals, storm or surface water runoff devices (drainage ditches) or other entirely artificial watercourses unless they are used by salmonids or used to convey streams naturally occurring prior to construction of such watercourse. Streams are further classified into Categories S, F, Np and Ns and fishbearing or nonfishbearing 1, 2 and 3. (See ECDC 23.90.010(A)(1).) "Title" means all chapters of the city of Edmonds Development Code beginning with the digits 23. "Undeveloped land(s)" means land(s) on which manmade structures or land modifications (clearing, grading, etc.) do not exist. The director retains discretion to identify undeveloped land(s) in those instances where historical modifications and structures may have existed on a property or subject parcel in the past. "Underground Injection Control Well" as defined in Chapter 173-218 WAC and associated idance documents. "Wellhead protection area (WHPA)" means protective areas associated with public drinking water sources established by water systems and approved or assigned by the state Department of Health. "Wetland functions" means those natural processes performed by wetlands, such as facilitating food chain production; providing habitat for nesting, rearing and resting sites for aquatic, terrestrial or avian species; maintaining the availability and quality of water; acting as recharge and/or discharge areas for ground water aquifers; and moderating surface water and storm water flows. "Wetland mitigation bank" means a site where wetlands are restored, created, enhanced, or in exceptional circumstances, preserved expressly for the purpose of providing compensatory mitigation in advance of authorized impacts to similar resources. "Wetlands" means those areas that are inundated or saturated by ground or surface water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street or highway. However, wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland areas created to mitigate conversion of wetlands if permitted by the city (WAC 365-190-030(22)). Wetlands are further classified into Categories 1, 2, 3 and 4. (See ECDC 23.50.010(B).) [Ord. 4026 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3952 § 1, 2013; Ord. 3931 § 2, 2013; Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004. Formerly 23.40.320]. Exhibit A 2024-04-09 Edmonds CARA ECDC 23.60 v8 4.16.24 - PB recommended w crumb add 17 Packet Pg. 175 10.3. b CITY OF EDMONDS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND SEPA THRESHOLD DETERMINATION `nc. 1,6911 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Planning Board will hold a public hearing on proposed amendments to Chapters 23.40 and 23.60 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) regarding critical aquifer recharge areas at a special meeting on November 29, 2023. NAME OF APPLICANT: City of Edmonds FILE NO.: AMD2023-0004 COMMENTS ON PROPOSAL DUE: November 29, 2023 Any person may comment on this application until the public hearing is closed. Relevant materials can be reviewed by visiting the City's website at www.edmondswa.gov (under the applicable Meeting Agenda or Public Notices), or by contacting the City contact noted below. Comments may be mailed, emailed, or made at the public hearing. Please refer to the application file number for all inquiries. PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION: A hybrid public hearing will be held by the Planning Board on November 29, 2023 at 7 p.m. The physical location is Edmonds City Hall, 121 5th Avenue N, 3rd Floor, Brackett Room. Or join the Zoom meeting at: https://edmondswa- Rov.zoom.us/I/87322872194?pwd=WFdxTWJIQmxlTG9LZkc3KOhuS014QT09 Or via phone by dialing 253-205-0468 Meeting ID: 873 2287 2194 Password: 007978 SEPA DETERMINATION: Notice is hereby given that the City of Edmonds has issued a Determination of Nonsignificance under WAC 197-11-340 for the above project. DATE OF ISSUANCE: November 9, 2023 PROJECT LOCATION: This is a non -project action. SEPA COMMENTS: Any comments regarding the SEPA determination are due November 29, 2023. SEPA APPEAL: This SEPA determination may be appealed by filing a written appeal citing the specific reasons for appeal with the required appeal fee no later than December 6, 2023 by 4:00 p.m. Only parties of record as defined in ECDC 20.06.020 have standing to initiate an administrative appeal to the Hearing Examiner. CITY CONTACT: Mike Clugston, AICP, Acting Planning Manager michael.clugston@edmondswa.gov 425-771-0220 Packet Pg. 176 10.3. b 4 of EDA, 0 s CITY OF EDMONDS r, ig�o 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220 DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of proposal: Amendments to Chapters 23.40 and 23.60 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) regarding critical aquifer recharge areas. Proponent: City of Edmonds Location of proposal, including street address if any: This is a non -project action. Lead agency: City of Edmonds The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030 (2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. The City of Edmonds has determined that the requirements for environmental analysis and protection have been adequately addressed in the development regulations and comprehensive plan adopted under chapter 36.70A RCW, and in other applicable local, state, or federal laws or rules, as provided by RCW 43.21C.240 and WAC 197-11-158 and/or mitigating measures have been applied that ensure no significant adverse impacts will be created. There is no comment period for this DNS. This DNS is issued after using the optional DNS process in WAC 197-11-355. There is no further comment period on the DNS. X This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by November 29, 2023. Project Planner: Mike Clugston, AICP, Acting Planning Manager Responsible Official: Mike Clugston, AICP, Acting Planning Manager Contact Information: City of Edmonds 1 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 1 425-771-0220 Date: November 9, 2023 Signature: XX You may appeal this determination to Mike Clugston, Acting Planning Manager, at 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020, by filing a written appeal citing the specific reasons for the appeal with the required appeal fee no later than December 6, 2023. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Mike Clugston to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. XX Posted on November 9, 2023, at City Hall and the Edmonds Public Safety Building. Published in the Everett Herald. Uploaded to the Department of Ecology's SEPA records portal. XX Distribute to "Checked" Agencies below. The SEPA Checklist, DNS, and associated documents can be obtained online at https://www.edmondswa.gov/services/public involvement/public notices/development notices under permit number AMD2023-0004, by emailing the project planner(michael.clugston@edmondswa.gov), or by calling the City of Edmonds at 425-771-0220. Page 1 of 2 AMD2023-0004 SEPA DNS FOR CARA CODE AMENDMENT 11/9/23.SEPA Packet Pg. 177 Distribution List: This DNS and SEPA checklist were distributed to the following: 10.3. b ❑ Applicant ❑ Parties of Record ❑ US Army Corps of Engineers ❑ US Fish and Wildlife ❑ Puget Sound Energy ❑ Snohomish PUD ❑X Olympic View Water & Sewer ❑ Alderwood Water District ❑ Edmonds School District ❑ Port of Edmonds ❑X South County Fire ❑ Swedish Hospital ❑ Community Transit pc: File No. SEPA Notebook ❑X Dept. of Ecology ❑ Dept. of Ecology - Shorelands ❑ Dept. of Natural Resources ❑X Dept. of Commerce ❑ WSDOT ❑ WSDOT— Ferries ❑ Dept. of Fish & Wildlife ❑X Dept. of Health — Drinking Water ❑ Dept. of Arch. & Historic Pres. ❑ Dept. of Parks and Rec. Commission ❑ Puget Sound Clean Air Agency ❑ Puget Sound Regional Council ❑ Puget Sound Partnership ❑X Tulalip Tribe ❑ City of Everett ❑ City of Lynnwood © City of Mountlake Terrace ❑ City of Mukilteo © City of Shoreline © Town of Woodway ❑ Snohomish Co. Public Works ❑X Snohomish Co. PDS © Snohomish Co. Health Dept. ❑ KingCounty-Transit ❑ King County— Environ. Planning ❑ Other Page 2 of 2 AMD2023-0004 SEPA DNS FOR CARA CODE AMENDMENT 11/9/23.SEPA Packet Pg. 178 10.3.b SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Purpose of checklist Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization, or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. Instructions for applicants This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision -making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Instructions for lead agencies Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B, plus the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions (Part-W. Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non -projects) questions in "Part B: Environmental Elements" that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 1 of 19 Packet Pg. 179 10.3.b A. Background Find help answering background questions 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Critical Area Ordinance Update for Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas (CARAs) 2. Name of applicant: City of Edmonds 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Mike Clugston, Acting Planning Manager City of Edmonds Planning Division 121 51h Ave. N Edmonds, WA 98020 4. Date checklist prepared: November 9, 2023 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Edmonds 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The Edmonds City Council is expected to consider the adoption of new critical aquifer recharge regulations in early 2024. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Critical area regulations must be updated at regular intervals consistent with state law. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. • Olympic View Water and Sewer District Wellhead Protection Area Delineation — Deer Creek Springs and 228th Street Wellfield (August 2018) • Washington State Wellhead Protection Program Guidance Document (DOH 331-018, January 2017) • Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Guidance, Department of Ecology Publication 05-10-028 (March 2021) • Critical Areas Handbook v3.0, Department of Commerce (2023) SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 2 of 19 Packet Pg. 180 10.3.b 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. We do not know of other pending proposals that affect the same geographic area requiring concurrent evaluation. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. The proposed critical area regulations need the following approvals: • Review of this checklist and issuance of a threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act for non -project actions; and • Adoption by the Edmonds City Council; 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The City of Edmonds completed a comprehensive review of its critical area ordinance (CAO) as required by the Growth Management Act in May 2016 with the adoption of Ordinance No. 4026. At that time, there were no known critical aquifer recharge areas in Edmonds and hence no substantive regulations in the Edmonds Community Development Code to protect such areas. In 2022, Edmonds became aware of the presence of CARAs within the City's jurisdiction when the Olympic View Water and Sewer District (OVWSD) appealed the City's SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for a stormwater code update. While OVWSD's appeal was denied by the hearing examiner, staff committed to updating its code to reflect the presence of CARAs within city boundaries. OVWSD provided mapping of their wellhead protection areas to the City, which were added to the City's geographic information system (GIS). This code update is a follow-up to that work and would establish local regulations for those areas consistent with the GMA in RCW 36.70A.020 and RCW 36.70.330. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The critical aquifer recharge area regulations would apply within the mapped wellhead protection areas and buffers of the Olypmic View Water and Sewer District's Deer Creek Springs and 2281h Street wellheads. The Deer Creek wellhead is in the adjacent Town of Woodway while most of the wellhead protection area and buffer are in the City of Edmonds. The 2281h Street wellhead is located in Esperance, SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 3 of 19 Packet Pg. 181 10.3.b a portion of unincorporated Snohomish County that is within Edmonds's designated Urban Growth Area. A portion of the wellhead protection area and buffer of the 228th Street wellhead are located in Edmonds. B. Environmental Elements 1. Eart Find help answering earth auestions a. General description of the site: The City of Edmonds is located in south Snohomish County on the western shores of Puget Sound approximately 14 miles north of Seattle. Situated within the urbanized Puget Sound region, the city encompasses approximately 8.9 square miles (5,700 acres) in area, including 5 lineal miles (26,240 feet) of marine shoreline. Roughly triangular in shape, the city is bounded by Puget Sound on the west; Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace on the east; unincorporated Snohomish County on the north; and the town of Woodway, unincorporated Snohomish County (the Esperance area), and King County on the south. The area that would be covered by the proposal is that portion of the City of Edmonds shown within the attached wellhead protection area and buffer maps. Circle or highlight one: Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: Topography varies throughout the City of Edmonds. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Greater than 40%. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them, and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. Hydrostratigraphic Unit Hydrogeologic Classification Unit Description Younger Alluvium (Qyal) Aquifer (when in direct Fluvial sands and gravels with lesser organic contact with Qva) material. Thin and limited lateral extent. For modeling purposes, this unit is grouped with the Qva aquifer when it is in direct contact with Qva materials. Vashon Recessional Aquifer (when in direct Sands and gravels with lesser clay and silt. For Outwash (Qvr) contact with Qva) modeling purposes, this unit is grouped with the Qva aquifer when it is in direct contact with Qva materials. Vashon Till (Qvt) Confining Unit Dense, unsorted clay -through gravel- and cobble -size material. This is the most extensive surficial deposit in the study area. It SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 4 of 19 Packet Pg. 182 10.3.b has a low permeability, is upwards of 100 feet thick, and forms a protective cap over the Qva aquifer. Vashon Advance Aquifer Sands with lesser gravel. Laterally extensive Outwash (Qva) across the study area with thicknesses ranging from 100 to 150 feet. This unit is partially saturated and considered an unconfined aquifer system. Transitional Beds (Qtb) Confining Unit Low permeability sequence of layered clay - through find sand -size material. This unit is relatively thick across the model area and forms the base of the model. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. There are no known unstable soils within the CARAs. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which will not require grading. f. Could erosion occur because of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which will not cause erosion. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which will not create new impervious surfaces. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which will not cause erosion and, consequently, will not require erosion and sediment control. 2. Air Find help answering air questions a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which will not create air emissions. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 5 of 19 Packet Pg. 183 10.3.b The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which will not be affected by any off -site emissions or odors. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which will not lead to air impacts. 3. Waxer Find help answering water questions a. Surface Water: Find hela answering surface water auestions 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The Deer Creek CARA includes Deer Creek Springs and Deer Creek in the Town of Woodway, which flows into Puget Sound. Several small wetlands exist near the Madrona K-8 School, which are located within the Deer Creek CARA buffer. The 228th Street CARA includes Halls Creek at the easternmost extent of the CARA buffer, which flows into Lake Ballinger (not in the CARA). 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which will not require work near water. 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which does not involve any fill or dredge. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give a general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which does not propose surface water withdrawals or diversions. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No portion of a 100-year floodplain in Edmonds is within either the Deer Creek or 228th Street CARAs. The 228th Street CARA buffer overlaps a portion of the Halls Creek floodplain north of Lake Ballinger within the City of Mountlake Terrace. 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action. The purpose of the new regulations is to establish CARAs together with groundwater protection standards to help protect aquifers from degradation and depletion to minimize loss of recharge quantity, to help protect supply wells for public drinking water, SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 6 of 19 Packet Pg. 184 10.3.b and to help prevent contamination of groundwater as much as is currently feasible. b. Ground Water: Find help answering ground water auestions 1. Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give a general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action that would not withdraw groundwater. Olympic View Water and Sewer District has two existing drinking water wells in/near Edmonds — Deer Creek Springs and 228th Street. No change to the District's wells would result from the updated CARA regulations, except to the extent that the proposal's regulations would protect those wells. 2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action that would not discharge waste material. There are no industrial or agricultural land uses within either CARA. It is unknown whether there are any remaining residential septic systems in the CARAs but the majority of both areas are served by public wastewater systems operated by the City of Edmonds or Olympic View. c. Water Runoff (including stormwater): 1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The source of the runoff will not change with this proposal. Runoff comes from precipitation falling on existing surfaces and being conveyed to existing on -site stormwater management systems or, where properties are connected, to the City's existing stormwater management system. New hard surfaces will be managed per item 4 below. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. The risk of waste materials entering ground or surfaces waters will not change with this proposal, except to the extent that the proposal reduces the likelihood of waste materials entering ground or surface waters. The land use restrictions in the proposed CARA, as well as managing the surface water runoff per item 4 below, are designed to help reduce the likelihood of waste material entering ground or surface waters. 3. Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. This proposal will not alter or change drainage patterns, except to the extent that the proposal reduces SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 7 of 19 Packet Pg. 185 10.3.b the likelihood of drainage entering ground or surface waters. 4. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any. The City will continue to enforce the provisions of its stormwater discharge permit issued by the Department of Ecology (Western Washington Phase 11 Municipal Permit) and associated vetted documents such as the 2019 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts. The City will maintain compliance with any future permits requirements and use future vetted documents to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 8 of 19 Packet Pg. 186 10.3.b 4. Plants Find help answering plants questions a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: ® deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ® evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other ® shrubs ® grass 0 pasture 0 crop or grain ❑ orchards, vineyards, or other permanent crops. ® wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ❑ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ❑ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which will not lead to alteration of plants and vegetation. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. No threatened or endangered plant species are known to be located within the City of Edmonds. Washington State Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage site data do not show any rare, threatened, or endangered plant species in the City of Edmonds. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which is not related to plants and vegetation e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. This is a not a site specific project; however, it is assumed that some noxious/invasive plants listed on the Snohomish County noxious week list exist within the City of Edmonds. 5. Animmic Find help answering animal questions a. List any birds and other animals that have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: • Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: • Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: • Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action. However, numerous fish and wildlife species depend on the Edmonds shoreline and adjacent shoreland habitats for either part or all of a life stage SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 9 of 19 Packet Pg. 187 10.3.b Shellfish resources include clams, mussels, crab, and shrimp. Eight species of salmonids use nearshore areas of Puget Sound at some point in their life cycle. These include Chinook, chum, coho, sockeye, and pink salmon and sea -run cutthroat, steelhead, and bull trout. Birds with priority habitats that occur within the City include bald eagle, purple martin, and great blue heron. b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action. However, several federally listed, threatened, or endangered species that may inhabit marine waters or adjacent habitats within the City are identified in the State database The threatened marbled murrelet are observed intermittently in inland Puget Sound waters; winter and summer surveys by WDFW conducted near Edmonds found no murrelets in winter and only a few birds in the Edmonds area in summer. Federally listed threatened fish species that may occur in or in the vicinity of Edmonds, including Puget Sound Chinook salmon and bull trout. Federally listed marine mammals (Steller sea lion and Puget Sound orcas) may be present in the Edmonds shore zone, but are not commonly observed. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. The shoreline of Puget Sound provides a migratory route for salmon and the City of Edmonds is located within the Pacific Flyway, which is a flight corridor for migrating waterfowl and other birds. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which does not require measures to preserve or enhance wildlife. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which will not impact animals. 6. rnergy and Natural Resources Find help answering energy and natural resource questions a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which is not related to energy and natural resources. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which is not related to solar energy. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 10 of 19 Packet Pg. 188 10.3.b The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which does not involve energy conservation. 7 Gn%i;rr%nr"gnn+nI "d 1+h Find help with answering environmental health questions a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur because of this proposal? If so, describe. 1. Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not lead to any environmental health hazards. The proposed code includes specific protections to ensure future environmental health hazards are limited within the CARAs. a. Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. According to the National Pipeline Mapping System (https://www.npms.phmsa.dot.gov/), there are no existing hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines within the CARAs. The proposed code includes specific restrictions against locating future hazardous liquid pipeplines within the CARAs. b. Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not lead to any storage of hazardous chemicals. The proposed code includes specific requirements for chemical storage and monitoring within the CARAs in the future. c. Describe special emergency services that might be required. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not lead to the need for special emergency services other than those that already exist. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. As noted above, the proposed code includes specific protections to ensure future environmental health hazards are limited within the CARAs. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 11 of 19 Packet Pg. 189 10.3.b b. Noise What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not lead to noise impacts. 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site)? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not lead to noise impacts. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not lead to noise impacts. 8. Land and Shorelines US4 Find help answering land and shoreline use questions a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. Land use within the Deer Creek Springs CARA is almost entirely single family residential (RS-8 zoned, approximately 1,100 parcels), together with associated uses like schools and a cemetery. There are approximately ten parcels zoned and developed with multifamily uses and ten parcels zoned and developed with business or commercial uses. The majority of the 228th Street CARA is located in Esperance and therefore under Snohomish County's zoning jurisdiction. The portions of the 228th Street CARA in Edmonds are a mix of single family residential parcels (RS-8 zoned, approximately 130), with approximately ten multifamily zoned and developed sites. Highway 99 runs through the eastern portion of the 228th Street CARA and is zoned for and developed with commercial uses (General Commercial zone, approximately 30 parcels). The CARA code amendment would restrict and prohibit certain higher intensity uses in order to better protect Olympic View's supply wells for public drinking water and to prevent contamination of groundwater. b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses because of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? 1. Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how? SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 12 of 19 Packet Pg. 190 10.3.b c. Describe any structures on the site. Nearly all parcels are built out with single family residences and appurtenences in the Deer Creek CARA, except for the few parcels zoned and developed for business/commercial. The 2281h Street CARA contains a mix of residential and commercial buildings. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not lead to the demolition of any structures. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The CARA areas in Edmonds's jurisdiction are zoned mostly Single Family Residential (RS-8), with a small number of parcels zoned Multifamily Residential (RM), Neighborhood Business (BN), Westgate Mixed Use (WMU), and General Commercial (CG). f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The CARA areas in Edmonds's jurisdiction are mostly designated Single Family Urban 1, with a small number of parcels designated Multi Family— High Density, Neighborhood Commercial, Edmonds Way Corridor, and Highway 99 Corridor. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? The CARAs are not in the shoreline jurisdiction. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. The critical aquifer recharge areas subject to the proposed code amendment are critical areas in accordance with Title 23 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not affect number of people living and working in the CARAs. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not lead to displacement. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not lead to displacement. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 13 of 19 Packet Pg. 191 10.3.b The critical area regulations are intended to protect critical areas in accordance with the Growth Management Act and through the application of best available science, as determined according to WAC 365-195-900 through 365-195-925 and RCW 36.70A.172. It is not the intent of the critical area regulations to make a parcel of property unusable by denying its owner reasonable economic use of the property nor to prevent the provision of public facilities and services necessary to support existing development. m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action. Edmonds has no areas of agricultural or forested areas. 9. Housing Find help answering housing questions a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact housing. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact housing. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact housing. 10. At!bU t!UCS Find help answering aesthetics auestions a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact aesthetics. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact aesthetics. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact aesthetics. 11. Light and Glare Find help answering light and glare questions a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not create light or glare. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 14 of 19 Packet Pg. 192 10.3.b b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not create light or glare. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not create light or glare. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not create light or glare. 12. Recreation Find help answering recreation questions a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact recreation. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact recreation. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact recreation. 13. Historic and r.,ltiirnI Droccrwation Find help answering historic and cultural preservation questions a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers? If so, specifically describe. There are numerous buildings through the City of Edmonds that are over 45 years. The City has a local historic register with 20 sites on the register. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. According to Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation's WISAARD tool, there are no known archeological sites within the CARA areas. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 15 of 19 Packet Pg. 193 10.3.b The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact historic sites. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact historic sites. 14. Transportatio Find help with answering transportation questions a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact transportation. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact transportation. c. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle, or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact transportation. d. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact transportation. e. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed projector proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact transportation. f. Will the proposal interfere with, affect, or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact transportation. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact transportation. 15. Public Serwirr Find help answering public service questions a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 16 of 19 Packet Pg. 194 10.3.b police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not increase the need for public services. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not increase the need for public services. 16. Utilities Find help answering utilities questions a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other: The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not impact utilities. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not trigger the need for additional utilities. C. Signature Find help about who should sign The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Type name of signee: Mike Clugston Position and agency/organization: Acting Planning Manager, City of Edmonds Date submitted: 11/9/2023 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 17 of 19 Packet Pg. 195 10.3.b D. Supplemental sheet for nonproject actions Find help for the nonproiect actions worksheet IT IS NOT REQUIRED to use this section for project actions. Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; pro- duction, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? The proposal would not directly increase discharges to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise. The updated critical aquifer recharge area regulations would provide additional protections to Olypmic View's two drinking water supplies in Edmonds by reducing the potential for groundwater contamination. • Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Since increased impacts are not anticipated, there are no specific measures are proposed. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The critical aquifer recharge area regulations would provide additional protections to Olypmic View's two drinking water supplies in Edmonds by reducing the potential for groundwater contamination. The additional protections would likely have a positive affect on fish and marine life over time as water quality is maintained and potential pollution avoided. • Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Since increased impacts are not anticipated, there are no specific measures are proposed. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? The proposed critical area regulations would not result in the depletion of energy or natural resources. • Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: Since no depletion of energy or natural resources is anticipated, no specific measures are proposed. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection, such as parks, SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 18 of 19 Packet Pg. 196 10.3.b wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? The updated regulations would provide additional protections for the two critical aquifer recharge areas in Edmonds — the Deer Creek Springs and 2281h Street wellhead protection areas and buffers operated by the Olympic View Water and Sewer District. This is consistent with the Growth Management Act. • Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: Since no negative impacts are anticipated to the CARAs are the result of the proposed regulations, no specific measures are proposed. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The updated CARA regulations would not apply within the shoreline jurisdiction in Edmonds. They would apply as an overlay to existing zoned areas and would restrict more intense land uses within the CARAs that have a greater potential for contamination and groundwater degradation. All other uses permitted by the underlaying zones would still be allowed. • Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: Since no negative impacts are anticipated to the CARAs as a result of the proposed regulations, no specific measures are proposed. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? The proposed critical area regulations would not increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities. More robust critical aquifer recharge area requirements would provide additional protections to Olympic View's drinking water supplies but not increase demand for those supplies. • Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: Since increased demands are not anticipated, no specific measures are proposed. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The critical area regulations are intended to protect critical areas in accordance with the Growth Management Act and through the application of the best available science, as determined according to WAC 365-195-900 through 365-195-925 and RCW 36.70A.172, and in consultation with state and federal agencies and other qualified professionals. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) January 2023 Page 19 of 19 Packet Pg. 197 10.3.c ROBINSON NOBLE OLYMPIC VIEW WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREA DELINEATION DEER CREEK SPRINGS AND 228" STREET WELLFIELD August 2018 by Max T. Wills, LHG Associate Hydrogeologist Max Thomas Wills 2105 South C Street 17625 130th Avenue NE, Suite 102 Tacoma, Washington 9UO2 www.robinson•noble.com Wwdinvilfe, Washington P- 253.475,7711 1 F: 253.472.5846 P. 425.488.0599 1 packet Pg. 198 10.3.c Olympic View Water and Sewer District Wellhead Protection Area Delineation Deer Creek Springs and 22811 Street Wellfield August 2018 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND................................................................................1 2.0 WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREA DELINEATION................................................................1 2.1 GENERAL...............................................................................................................................1 2.2 NUMERICAL GROUNDWATER MODEL.......................................................................................2 2.2.1 Previous Studies and Other Model Input Sources........................................................ 2 2.2.2 Conceptual Model.........................................................................................................3 2.2.2.1 Hydrostratigraphic Units.........................................................................................4 YoungerAlluvium (Qyal).................................................................................................5 Vashon Recessional Outwash (Qvr)...............................................................................5 VashonTill(Qvt)..............................................................................................................5 Vashon Advance Outwash (Qva).................................................................................... 5 Pre-Vashon Transitional Beds (Qtb)................................................................................6 2.2.2.2 Boundary Identification..........................................................................................6 2.2.2.3 General Flow System.............................................................................................7 2.2.3 Numerical Model Construction..................................................................................... 8 2.2.3.1 Numerical Model Inputs.........................................................................................8 2.2.3.2 Model Calibration.................................................................................................10 2.3 WELLFIELD AND SPRING SOURCE WHPA DELINEATION.......................................................... 10 3.0 SUMMARY...........................................................................................................................11 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................................12 5.0 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................12 FIGURES 1 . VICINITY MAP WITH SERVICE AREA 2. CONCEPTUAL MODEL 3. SURFICIAL GEOLOGY MAP 4. MODEL BOUNDARIES 5. MODEL CALIBRATION 6. POTENTIOMETRIC CONTOUR MAP 7. WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREA MAP 8. ADDITIONAL PRECAUTION AREA MAP TABLES 1. HYDROSTRATIGRAPHIC UNITS 2. MODEL CALIBRATION STATISTICS Robinson Noble, Inc. 1686-007A Packet Pg. 199 10.3.c Olympic View Water and Sewer District Wellhead Protection Area Delineation Deer Creek Springs and 22811 Street Wellfield August 2018 1.0 Introduction and Background The Olympic View Water & Sewer District (District) provides water to an estimated 13,000 cus- tomers within an approximately two square mile service area in southwestern Snohomish County (PACE, 2009). The District currently receives about 60% of their supply water through an intertie with the City of Seattle. The remaining 40% is derived from the District's water treatment plant at Deer Creek Springs. The District is also currently in the process of develop- ing an additional groundwater source at their 22811 Street wellfield. This wellfield will augment the supply from Deer Creek Springs and reduce dependency on the water purchased from Se- attle. The District recently completed the construction and testing of two supply wells at the 22811 Street site and is currently in the process of constructing site infrastructure. Figure 1 pre- sents a map of the District's service area and shows the locations of the Deer Creek Springs and 22811 Street wellfield source areas. In anticipation of bringing the new wellfield online, the District is updating their existing Well- head Protection Program (WHPP) to include the new wellfield source and a more current as- sessment of the spring source. As part of the WHPP update, Robinson Noble was retained to delineate wellhead protection areas (WHPAs) for the 2281" Street wellfield and to re -delineate and update the WHPAs for the spring source. This report documents the methods utilized to complete the delineation process and presents the new wellfield WHPAs and the updated WHPAs for the existing spring source. 2.0 Wellhead Protection Area Delineation 2.1 General The Washington State Department of Health's (DOH) Wellhead Protection Program Guidance (DOH, 2010) states that all Group A public water systems' must prepare a Water System Plan MAC 246-290-100), which will include a Wellhead Protection Program (WHPP). The WHPP will in turn include Wellhead Protection Areas (WHPAs) delineated for each well, wellfield, or spring source MAC 246-290-135). DOH requires that each source have three designated WHPAs, la- beled Zone 1, Zone 2, and Zone 3, based respectively on the one-year, five-year, and ten-year time -of -travel capture zones2. Per DOH guidance (DOH, 2010), Zone 1 (the one-year capture zone) should also include a six-month capture zone to focus greater protection on potential viral and microbial contamination that may pose a higher degree of risk to the drinking water supply. A Group A public water system is defined by WAC 246-290 generally as any pubic water system that serves 15 or more connections on a year-round bases. 2 The capture zone refers to the zone of groundwater contribution for a given source. Specific time -of -travel capture zones (i.e. one-year capture zone) refer to that portion of the total capture zone in which water will travel to the source within the specified travel time. Travel times to the source, and consequently the size and shape of the time -of -travel capture zone, will vary depending on the hydrogeologic properties associated with that specific zone (i.e. gradient, porosity, pumping rates, etc.). Robinson Noble, Inc. 1686-007A Packet Pg. 200 10.3.c DOH has also established the use of a buffer zone as required to provide additional source pro- tection up -gradient of the ten-year capture zone. According to DOH guidance (DOH, 2010), buffer zones may incorporate the entire capture zone for a given source or select portions of it and, as appropriate, may also include areas outside of a given capture zone. As described in this report, buffer zones which incorporate the entirety of the defined capture zones for both the 22811 wellfield and Deer Creek Spring sources are included with the WHPAs for each source. The WHPAs for both the 2281" Street wellfield and the Deer Creek Springs sources were delin- eated using a numerical groundwater model that was specifically developed for this project. Because there is a reasonably sufficient amount of geologic and hydrogeologic data available for the study area, a modeling approach for WHPA delineation was deemed to be more accu- rate (and more appropriate) than the standard calculated -fixed radius (CFR) method. Model de- velopment and calibration are described below in Section 2.2. WHPA delineation is described in Section 2.3. 2.2 Numerical Groundwater Model The development of a numerical groundwater model involves several key steps, starting with the review and compilation of data from existing studies and other sources, which provide in- formation pertaining to the various model inputs. Once the available data have been compiled and evaluated, model construction begins with the development of a conceptual model. The conceptual model, which is typically diagrammatic, provides a generalized overview of the ma- jor model components and guides the overall groundwater model construction. Once a basic groundwater model is constructed, it is then finalized by calibrating outputs to known data points (i.e. head values, discharge, etc.). The calibrated model can then be used to perform a number of analytical tasks, which for this project includes the delineation of the wellfield and spring source WHPAs. 2.2.1 Previous Studies and Other Model Input Sources Parameter inputs for the groundwater model developed for this project were obtained from a number of sources, including well construction and testing reports, geologic and hydrogeologic studies, government databases, and geologic maps. The following is a summary of the key data sources utilized for this project. King County, Department of Natural Resources and Parks, Wastewater Treatment Division, 2003; Brightwater Treatment Plant, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix 6-B (Geology and Groundwater). This study provides key data pertaining to subsurface geologic conditions and aquifer elevations. Groundwater monitoring data and potentiometric maps from this study were also utilized in part for final model calibration. Liesch, B.A., Price, C.E., and Walters, K.C., 1963; Geology and Groundwater Resources of Northwest King County, Washington. Washington State Department of Conservation, Wa- ter Supply Bulletin No. 20. This study provides key information for the southern portion of the modeled area, including recharge and model unit descriptions. Minard, J.P., 1983; Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Edmonds West Quadrangles, Washington; USGS Miscellaneous Field Studies, Map MF-1541. This map was utilized for a variety of model inputs, including the surficial distribution of geologic units, estimated re- charge values, and aquifer elevations. Newcomb, R.C., 1952; Groundwater Resources of Snohomish County, Washington; USGS Z Water Supply Paper 1135. This report provides detailed information about the geologic and a Page 2 1686-007A Robinson No Packet Pg. 201 10.3.c hydrogeologic units within the project area, as well as information pertaining to general flow characteristics of area aquifers. Robinson Noble, Inc., 2003; Olympic View Water & Sewer District, Modification and Testing of the 2281h Street Production Well (Shop Well). This report provides key model input data for the area around the 2281h Street wellfield. This includes hydraulic conductivity values and aquifer elevation data. Groundwater elevation data for this site was also utilized in part for final model calibration. Robinson Noble, Inc., 2015; Olympic View Water & Sewer District, 8605 228' Street Test Well. This report provides additional information pertaining to model feature elevations in the area of the 2281h Street wellfield, hydraulic conductivity values, and other hydrogeologic parameters. Survey data from this study also provided key information pertaining to the gradient and flow directions of groundwater in the area of the 22811 Street wellfield. Water level data from this study was also used for model calibration. Robinson Noble, Inc., 2018; Olympic View Water & Sewer District, Construction and Test- ing of Production Well 2. This report provides key model input data for the area around the 228' Street wellfield. This includes hydraulic conductivity values, production rates, and aqui- fer elevation data. Water level and drawdown data from this study were also used in part for final model calibration. Shannon and Wilson, Inc., 2016; Hydrogeolo_iq c Report New Madrona K-8 Project, 9300 236`h Street SW, Edmonds, Washington. This report provides specific model input data, in- cluding hydraulic conductivity values, water level data, and flow directions, in the up - gradient areas east of Deer Creek Springs. Monitoring data from this study was also used in part for final model calibration. Thomas, B.E., Wilkenson, J.M., and Embrey, S.S., 1997; The Groundwater System and Groundwater Quality in Western Snohomish County, Washington; USGS Water Resources Investigations Report 96-4312. This report provides detailed information regarding the char- acteristics of the hydrogeologic units within the project area. It also provides key infor- mation regarding aquifer elevations, recharge values, and flow data that was utilized in part for final model calibration. In addition to the reports and studies listed above, this project utilized a number of other mis- cellaneous sources to support model development. Between 2004 and 2010, in conjunction with the Brightwater sewer tunnel construction, Robinson Noble conducted extensive ground- water monitoring at the both the Deer Creek Springs site and the original shop well (located near the current 2281h Street wellfield). Hydrographs created during this monitoring were used for final model calibration, and precipitation data collected during the monitoring effort were used to evaluate the modeled recharge values. We also accessed the Washington State De- partment of Ecology's (Ecology) online well log data base. We estimate that this database con- tains approximately 1,200 well reports (well logs) for the study area. These logs were first screened for reliability, and then reliable logs were utilized for a variety of model input infor- mation (i.e. aquifer elevation, water levels for calibration, etc.). 2.2.2 Conceptual Model A hydrogeologic conceptual model is a representation of a groundwater flow system that sim- plifies and organizes various geologic and hydrologic information so that the flow system can be more readily analyzed (Anderson and Woessner, 1992). The conceptual model synthesizes available data (maps, cross -sections, hydrographs, well logs, etc.) into a generalized representa- Robinson Noble, Inc. 1686-007A Packet Pg. 202 10.3.c tion of the geology as it affects the groundwater flow system in a given area. Ideally, a concep- tual model should be as simple as possible but still contain all of the applicable components necessary to recreate flow system behavior. Once it is developed, the conceptual model serves as a guide for the construction of the final groundwater model. Figure 2 presents the conceptual model that was developed for this project as a schematic cross section. The conceptual model for this project contains three major components: hy- drostratigraphic units, model boundaries, and general flow system inflow and outflow infor- mation. These components are described in detail below. 2.2.2.1 Hydrostratigraphic Units A key step in developing the conceptual model is to define the various hydrostratigraphic units that will affect the flow system being modeled. Hydrostratigraphic units are groupings of sedi- ments that exhibit similar hydrogeologic properties. They are typically divided into two general groups which include aquifers and confining units and may or may not correspond with the area geologic units. Within the project area, the hydrostratigraphic units modeled do generally correspond with the area geologic units. Figure 3 shows the surficial geology within the study area (Minard, 1983). Table 1 summarizes the hydrostratigraphic units applicable to this project, which are listed from top to bottom in stratigraphic order (youngest to oldest or in general order of deposition). Table 1: Hydrostratigraphic Units Hydrostratigraphic Hydrogeologic Unit Description Unit Classification Aquifer (when in Fluvial sands and gravels with lesser organic mate - Younger Alluvium direct contact with rial. Thin and limited lateral extent. For modeling (Qyal) Qva) purposes, this unit is grouped with the Qva aquifer when it is in direct contact with Qva materials. Aquifer (when in Sands and gravels with lesser clay and silt. For Vashon Recessional direct contact with modeling purposes, this unit is grouped with the Outwash (Qvr) Qva) Qva aquifer when it is in direct contact with Qva materials. Dense, unsorted clay -through gravel- and cobble - size material. This is the most extensive surficial Vashon Till (Qvt) Confining Unit deposit in the study area. It has a low permeability, is upwards of 100 feet thick, and forms a protec- tive cap over the Qva aquifer. Sands with lesser gravel. Laterally extensive Vashon Advance Aquifer across the study area with thicknesses ranging Outwash (Qva) from 100 to 150 feet. This unit is partially saturated and considered an unconfined aquifer system. Low permeability sequence of layered clay - Transitional Beds Confining Unit through find sand -size material. This unit is relative- ly thick across the model area and forms the base of the model. Page 4 1686-007A Robinson No Packet Pg. 203 10.3.c Both the Deer Creek Springs and the 228t' Street wellfield derive groundwater from the Vashon advance outwash (Qva), which is referred to in this study as the Qva aquifer. As shown on Fig- ure 3, the Qva aquifer is exposed at the surface in several parts of the study area, but is largely overlain by Quaternary Vashon till (Qvt). As shown in Figure 2, the Qvt forms the upper surface of the model where it is present. In areas where the Qvt is absent, the Qva forms the upper surface of the model. The Qva aquifer is underlain across the study area by pre-Vashon transi- tional beds (Qtb). This unit constitutes the lower surface of the model (see Figure 2). A detailed description of the hydrostratigraphic units utilized for this project is presented below. Younger Alluvium (Qyal) As shown in Figure 3, the Qyal hydrostratigraphic unit has limited aerial extent within the study area, and is generally constrained to narrow zones along stream corridors. As described by vari- ous authors (see Section 2.2.1), the Qyal consists of fluvial sand and gravel deposits with some organic materials. The Qyal is relatively thin and typically underlain by adjacent map units. Be- cause the Qyal is relatively porous, when it is in direct contact with the Qva aquifer, it responds hydraulically as an extension of the aquifer. In these situations, the Qyal is considered part of the Qva aquifer. In situations where the Qyal is geologically isolated from the Qva, there isn't hydraulic continuity with the Qva aquifer, so it is grouped with the Qvt hydrostratigraphic unit. Vashon Recessional Outwash (Qvr) Similar to the Qyal, the Qvr has limited aerial extent within the study area and is relatively thin. The Qvr is comprised of stratified sands and gravels with lesser silt- and clay -size material, which were deposited by the receding Vashon continental glacier. Similar to the Qyal, the Qvr is relatively porous, so when it is in direct contact with the Qva aquifer, it responds hydraulically as an extension of the aquifer. As such, the Qvr is considered part of the Qva aquifer in these situations. Where the Qvr is geologically isolated from the Qva it is grouped with the Qvt hy- drostratigraphic unit. Vashon Till (Qvt) The Qvt consists of a dense, unsorted mixture of clay- through gravel- and cobble -size sedi- ments that were deposited in situ by the Vashon continental glacier. The Qvt is the predomi- nant surficial deposit within the study area, and typically extends to depths of over 100 feet. The Qvt has a low permeability, and where present, it impedes infiltration of precipitation. This provides a protective cap for the underlying Qva aquifer. The Qvt often contains isolated pock- ets of more permeable material, which may contain perched groundwater'. However, these perched zones are usually very limited in extent, and the Qvt hydrostratigraphic unit, for the purpose of modeling, is considered to be unsaturated. Vashon Advance Outwash (Qva) The Qva is comprised of stratified sands with lesser gravel- and silt -size materials, which were laid down by meltwater issuing from the advancing Vashon continental glacier. The Qva is lat- erally extensive within the study area, but there are a few isolated areas, primarily along the study area boundaries, where the Qva is not present. The thickness of the Qva within the study area generally ranges from between 100 to 130 feet. The Qva materials are not fully saturated within the study area, and the Qva aquifer is considered an unconfined aquifer system. As 3 Perched groundwater is groundwater that accumulates in isolated pockets of permeable material at elevations above that of the local water table (hence the term "perched"). Robinson Noble, Inc. 1686-007A Packet Pg. 204 10.3.c mentioned previously, the Ova aquifer is the groundwater source for Deer Creek Springs and the 22811 Street wellfield. Pre-Vashon Transitional Beds (Qtb) The Qtb is a layered sequence of very low permeability materials that were laid down in lakes and non -glacial fluvial systems prior to the deposition of the Ova sands. The Qtb consists of beds and laminae of clay-, silt-, and very fine sand -size material, with occasional zones of peat and organic material. The Qtb is consistently present across the study area and has an estimat- ed thickness of approximately 130 feet within the model area. As mentioned previously, the Qtb forms the base of the model for this project (see Figure 2). 2.2.2.2 Boundary Identification Generally there are two types of hydrologic boundaries: physical boundaries and hydraulic boundaries. Physical boundaries are formed by the presence of a physical impediment to groundwater flow such an impermeable geologic unit or the truncation/absence of an aquifer. Hydraulic boundaries are groundwater conditions that impede groundwater movement, such as a large lake or a groundwater divide. Ideally, model boundaries can be placed along naturally occurring boundaries such as groundwater divides or surface water bodies. However, this is not always feasible. Figure 4 presents the aquifer boundaries and how they were represented in the model. The western edge of the modeled area corresponds to the exposure of the Ova aquifer in the cliffs along Puget Sound and where the Ova drops to sea level and is bounded by Puget Sound (in the extreme southwest corner of the model area). In the real world, this is a discharge bounda- ry for the Ova aquifer. Water in the aquifer discharges through springs, as evapotranspiration to vegetation on the bluffs, and (where the boundary is below sea level) as underf low into Puget Sound. In the model, we've represented the western boundary with drain s4, set with relatively low conductance values along areas where minor seepage occurs and with relatively high con- ductance values at points were streams emanate from the exposed Ova aquifer. The most prominent of these is Deer Creek (which emanates from Deer Creek Springs), but also includes (to the north of Deer Creek) Shell Creek, Shelleberger Creek, and an unnamed creek. A similar aquifer boundary occurs in the southeast corner of the model area where Lyon Creek has eroded down to and through the base of the Ova. Here water discharges from the aquifer as springs, seepage, and evapotranspiration above the creek. Again, this natural discharge boundary is represented in the model with drains. Within the modelled area, there are a number creeks and lakes which are bedded in the Ova, or are in other ways in hydraulic continuity with the Ova (bedded in Qyal or Qvr materials that are in direct contact with the Ova). These include the before mentioned streams on the northwest and southeast sides of the model as well as Hall Creek, McAleer Creek, Hall Lake, and Lake Ballinger in the interior of the model. Where streams and lakes are in direct continuity with the aquifer, groundwater discharge or recharge naturally occurs depending on the head relationship 4 A drain is a model condition that allows water to flow out of the model if the groundwater level in the model cell containing the drain exceeds the drain's assigned elevation. The amount of flow out of the drain is controlled by a conductance value assigned to the drain as well as the groundwater elevation. Drains are often used to model springs and groundwater seepage. Drains only allow water to exit (discharge) from a model and not to enter (re- charge). Page 6 1686-007A Robinson No Packet Pg. 205 10.3.c of the surface water and the groundwater. These surface water bodies are represented in the model as general head boundaries'. The natural real -world northern, southern, and eastern boundaries of the Qva aquifer system are not present within the study area. In order to keep the size of the model reasonable, these distant boundaries are represented in the model as groundwater streamlines. Streamlines rep- resent a direction of groundwater flow (flow line) within an aquifer. Within the project area, flow in the aquifer in the northern and southern portions of the modeled area is generally east -west. Because these areas are distant from the portion of the model that will be affected by modeled production from the 228th Street wellfield, it is very unlikely that there is any significant contri- bution of flow into the aquifer from either the north or south sides of these streamlines. There- fore, in the model, they are represented by no -flow boundaries placed parallel to the general flow direction. Such no -flow boundaries are conceptually valid for the model as long as no modeled stresses are placed near the boundaries that would alter the direction of the natural flow lines that are essentially parallel to the boundaries. Consequently, the northern, southern and eastern model boundaries, were also purposely located a significant distance away from the main areas of in- terest, namely the Deer Creek Springs and 228th Street wellfield source areas. This was done specifically to minimize any significant boundary effect in these areas of the model. In the model, flow is generally parallel to these boundaries except for near the lower reaches of Hall Creek. However, this area is distant enough from the area of interest that it does not likely im- pact the model results. 2.2.2.3 General Flow System The final step in developing a conceptual model is to define the general flow system. This es- sentially amounts to diagraming the basic pathways by which water enters, passes through, and exits the model. Figure 2 presents the conceptual model that was developed for this pro- ject, which diagrams the various flow pathways in cross-section view. As shown on Figure 2, water enters the system primarily as precipitation. When precipitation falls on the land surface, only a portion of it actually infiltrates into the ground. The portion that is not infiltrated may flow overland as runoff or evaporate back to the atmosphere. Runoff may be infiltrated further down -slope or flow overland out of the model area. A portion of the water that infiltrates into the ground may be taken up through the roots of plants and trees and tran- spire back to the atmosphere through their leaves. Typically, the combined effects of evapora- tion and plant transpiration are considered together as evapotranspiration. That portion of water that infiltrates into the ground and is able to replenish the aquifer system is referred to as re- charge. Recharge is always a percentage of the total precipitation value and varies from place to place depending on specific conditions (i.e. plant cover, temperature, soil permeability, etc.). For this study, recharge is largely a function of the surficial geology. For the surface areas mapped with Qvt (see Figure 3), because the Qvt has relatively low permeability, recharge rates are fairly low and much of the precipitation that falls on these areas flows overland as runoff. Conversely, because the Qva is fairly permeable, in areas where the Qva is exposed at 5 General -head boundaries are model conditions that allow water to flow out of the model (discharge) if the ground- water level in the model cell containing the general -head boundary exceeds the assigned boundary elevation or into the model (recharge) if the groundwater level is lower than the assigned boundary elevation. The amount of flow into or out of the boundary is controlled by a conductance value assigned to the drain as well as the groundwater elevation. Robinson Noble, Inc. 1686-007A Packet Pg. 206 10.3.c land surface, infiltration (and recharge) is significantly higher. Furthermore, much of the precipi- tation that runs off in the Qvt covered areas is readily infiltrated when it reaches areas of ex- posed Qva. Additional recharge occurs where streams (or lakes) have losing reaches (when streams lose water through infiltration into the ground). As shown on Figure 2, groundwater that reaches the Qva aquifer flows primarily horizontally down -gradient through the aquifer. This occurs because the underlying Qtb has a very low permeability compared to the Qva, which impedes downward migration of water. As with most confining units, there is some vertical leakage from the Qva aquifer downward through the Qtb. However, it is minor and is not considered a significant out -flow for this modeling project. Aside from minor leakage to the underlying Qtb, groundwater exits the Qva aquifer through one of several routes. As shown on Figure 2, groundwater may be extracted from the system through production withdrawal from a well (i.e. the 2281h Street wellfield). It may also flow out of the system through one of the major springs (i.e. Deer Creek Springs), it may exit the sys- tem as minor seepage through the Qva exposures in the cliffs along the west side and south- east corner of the model, it can become stream (or lake) flow in gaining reaches, or it can be discharged into Puget Sound (which is not shown on Figure 2 and only occurs in the extreme southwestern corner of the model area). 2.2.3 Numerical Model Construction The numerical groundwater model developed for this project was constructed using the De- partment of Defense Groundwater Modeling System (GMS). GMS is a comprehensive graph- ical user program that serves as a pre- and post -processing interface for a variety of groundwa- ter modelling and analytical programs. For this project, GMS was used to interface with MOD - FLOW, which is an open -source and widely utilized finite -difference groundwater model' devel- oped and distributed by the USGS (Harbaugh, 2005). The model developed for this project was constructed as a steady-state groundwater model'. 2.2.3.1 Numerical Model Inputs Once a conceptual model is developed, the initial step for constructing the numerical model is to create a finite difference grid to cover the horizontal (aerial) and vertical space to be modeled. The horizontal model area for this project is shown on Figure 4, which covers the area within the model boundaries previously described in Section 2.2.2.2. Figure 4 also shows the finite difference grid (grid) used for the final model. As shown on Figure 4, horizontal dimensions of the individual grid cells are refined around the two primary source areas (Deer Creek Springs and the 2281h Street wellfield) to provide more detail in the near -field areas around these two sources. The horizontal dimension of the cells adjacent to the two sources is 50 feet square. The cell size was increased at increments of 10% away from the source areas to a maximum cell size of 250 feet square. The horizontal elements of the model are geographically referenced to NAD83/UTM Zone 101. For the vertical space, the model utilizes a single layer of grid cells (a one -layer model) to repre- sent the Qva aquifer flow system. Because the Qvt is unsaturated, it is not necessary to set up a separate layer to represent the till because there is no flow within the Qvt to simulate. As 6 The finite difference approach utilizes a grid system to represent individual flow cells, which are hydraulically (mathematically) connected to surrounding cells and manipulated together to simulate a flow system. 7 In a steady-state groundwater model, the magnitude and direction of flow is constant with time, versus a transient model where the magnitude and direction of flow varies with time. For a steady-state model, the volume of wa- ter within the model domain is constant (flow into the model is equal to the flow out of the model). "The North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)/Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) Zone 10; EPSG:26910. Page 8 1686-007A Robinson No Packet Pg. 207 10.3.c discussed previously in Section 2.2.2.3, leakage through the underlying Qtb is negligible, and the top surface of the Qtb was used to represent the base of the model. Cell elevations for the top of the model were incorporated into the model by importing LIDAR9 data available for the study area. Cell elevations for the base of model were derived by importing and interpolating data from a combination of sources, including published USGS maps of the top surface of the Qtb (Thomas, et al, 1997), the elevations of the exposed contact between the Qtb and the Ova (Minard, 1983), and several cross sections that traverse the study area generated by King Coun- ty during the construction of the Brightwater sewer tunnel (King County, 2003). Once the model grid was established, additional model inputs were incorporated into the mod- el. The elevations of the drains and general -head boundaries shown on Figure 4 were set re- spectively to the mapped elevations along the Qtb/Qva contact and the mapped elevations of the streams and lakes bedded in the Qva (see Section 2.2.2.2). There are no established con- ductance values for the drains and general -head boundaries for the study area. As such, some- what arbitrary conductance values were initially set for these features, and these values were adjusted during the calibration process. Initial conductance values for the drains corresponding to major springs (i.e. Deer Creek Springs) were set relatively high as compared to the other drain features without obvious discharge points. Similar proportions were maintained during the calibration process. As discussed in Section 2.2.2.3, recharge is largely a function of surficial geology, with highest recharge occurring in areas where the Qva is exposed at the surface, and lessor recharge oc- curring in areas covered by the Qvt. Aerial recharge values were applied to the model using this assumption by creating aerial cove rag e-polygons10 corresponding to the areas mapped as Qvt and Qva (Minard, 1983). During monitoring efforts conducted by Robinson Noble between 2004 and 2010 (see Section 2.2.1), it was established that the average annual precipitation for the study area is approximately 37 inches/year. This is in agreement with other area studies (see Section 2.2.1). Regression analyses conducted by the USGS (Woodward, et al, 1995) and other information provided specifically for Snohomish County (Thomas, et al, 1997) indicate recharge values of 13 and 26 inches/year, respectively for areas mapped as Qvt and Qva. These values were applied accordingly to the current model for the areas mapped as Qvt and Qva. Similar to the recharge, different values of hydraulic conductivity (K) were applied to the model (again using a series of polygons created in GMS). Pumping test data for the wells constructed at the 228' Street wellfield (Robinson Noble, 2003, 2015, and 2018) indicate K values of 50 feet/day for the near -field area around the wellfield. Testing of injection wells at the recently constructed Madrona Elementary School (Shannon & Wilson, 2016), which is located just south of the 2281" Street wellfield, indicate similar K values of 55 feet/day. These K values were ap- plied to these two areas of the model accordingly. Elsewhere, the K values are less known. However, the USGS (Thomas, et al, 1997) indicates that K values for the Qva in the southwest corner of Snohomish County ranges from 3 to 310 feet/day with a median value of 42 feet/day. This is comparable to the K values established for the 228' Street wellfield and the Madrona School site. Median K values were initially applied to all of the areas of the model, save for the areas around the 228t" Street wellfield and the Ma- drona School site, and then adjusted accordingly during the calibration process (see Section 2.2.3.2). For the final calibrated model, in 24 separate polygons used to designate K values 9 Light imaging, detection, and ranging (LIDAR) is a surveying method that uses lasers to produce high -resolution digital maps, including topographic maps. 0 GMS utilizes polygons that are created by the user to apply aerial or map -view features such a recharge and hy- draulic conductivity to groups of cells within the model area. Robinson Noble, Inc. 1686-007A Packet Pg. 208 10.3.c across the model area, K values ranged from 10 to 60 feet/day with a median value of 50 feet/day. This is comparable to the K values determined by the USGS for the Qva aquifer in this portion of Snohomish County. 2.2.3.2 Model Calibration Following initial model construction, the overall flow pattern simulated using the initial model inputs was compared to known flow patterns (potentiometric surface maps) developed for the area by previous workers. These include potentiometric maps created by the USGS (Newcomb, 1952; and Thomas, et al, 1997) and by King County during the construction of the Brightwater sewer tunnel (King County, 2003). The initial flow pattern simulated by the model was noted to approximate the general flow patterns and heads (water level elevations) of these other poten- tiometric maps. At this point, select model parameters were systematically modified to adjust simulated heads to approximate observed heads in a series of model observation wells". Select model parame- ters were also modified to adjust the modelled discharge rate for Deer Creek Springs to approx- imate actual rates recorded by the District. For this project, the model parameters available for calibration were limited to drain and general -head conductance values, and the K within the specified range of values determined by 1997 USGS study (Thomas, et al, 1997). Recharge, the known areas of K, and various elevation information are considered fixed values and were not modified during the calibration process. The final groundwater model was considered calibrated when the simulated heads and dis- charge rate from Deer Creek Springs were in general agreement with observed conditions. Fig- ure 5 presents a plot of the calibration results for the observation wells. It should be noted that the three outliers indicated in red on Figure 5 are for observation wells located along the north- ern and southern margins of the model, areas where the model might be expected to be less calibrated due to the boundary conditions. The calibration residuals" for the remaining observa- tion wells (disregarding the noted outliers) range from -13.1 to 8.7 feet, with a mean residual value of 1.5 feet and a root mean squared (RMS) error of the residuals of 5.1 (see Table 2). The calibrated residual value for the flow of Deer Creek Springs is 60 gpm. These are all considered acceptable calibration values. Figure 6 presents a potentiometric map of the Qva aquifer show- ing simulated heads that were generated from the final calibrated model. Table 2: Model Calibration Statistics Number of Water Level Mean Error of Water Level Observations 23 Residuals 1.5 Mean Absolute Error of Water Root Mean Squared Error of Level Residuals 3 2 Water Level Residuals 5.1 Deer Creek Springs Observed Deer Creek Springs Modeled Deer780 Flow 840 gpm gpm 2.3 Wellfield and Spring Source WHPA Delineation Using the calibrated groundwater model, WHPAs were delineated for the 228th Street wellfield and Deer Creek Springs sources using the MODPATH module of GMS. MODPATH is a particle - Observation wells are calibration points that are incorporated into the model at the corresponding locations of real - world wells with recorded water levels. 12 The difference between observed and computed head. Page 10 1686-007A Robinson No Packet Pg. 209 10.3.c tracking post -processing program13 designed to work directly within MODFLOW (Pollock, 2017). Within the MODPATH interface, a porosity value of 20% was set for the Qva aquifer. This value, which is near the lower end of typical porosity values for sand aquifers like the Qva (Heath, 2004), was used to generate conservative WHPAs. The WHPAs for the 22811 Street wellfield were delineated using a simulated withdrawal rate of 500 gallons per minute (gpm), which is the full instantaneous quantity (Qi) allocated by District's current water right 14. The current allocated annual quantity (Qa) for the water right is 560 acre- feet/year, so the wellfield can feasibly only be pumped at a maximum continuous rate of 347 gpm without exceeding the allocated Qa. However, there are only minimal deference's be- tween the WHPAs delineated using a rate of 347 gpm and those delineated using a rate of 500 gpm. Delineation at the higher rate results in slightly larger, more conservative WHPAs for the wellfield, which is intended to cover all conceivable pumping conditions. Using MODPATH, particles were introduced at the 228th Street wellfield and Deer Creek Springs, and then tracked up -gradient for specified time intervals. Particle tracking at both sources was conducted for six-month, one-year, five-year, and ten-year intervals. Additional par- ticle tracking was also conducted using the "to beginning" option in MODPATH to track the particles to their ultimate origin within the model. This allowed delineation of the entire zone of contribution for the two sources. MODPATH was then used to convert the particle tracks to specific time -of -travel capture zones (see Section 2.1) for the two sources. Figure 7 presents the time -of -travel capture zones (WHPAs) that were delineated for the two sources. In addition to the standard six-month, one-year, five-year, and ten-year WHPAs, the capture zones that were calculated for the entire zone of contribution for each of the two sources were used to define the recommended buffer zones. 3.0 Summary DOH requires the definition of wellhead protection zones based on travel rates of groundwater (DOH, 2010). DOH defines five zones for which wellhead protection strategies should be con- sidered. These include the following: • The sanitary control area: Typically the 100-foot radius of control around a wellhead or a spring (WAC 246-290-135). • Zone 1: The one-year time -of -travel capture zone. Zone 1 also includes an additional six- month time -of -travel capture zone to focus greater protection on potential viral and microbial contamination. • Zone 2: The five-year time -of -travel capture zone. • Zone 3: The ten-year time -of -travel capture zone. • The buffer zone: This zone may extend up -gradient of Zone 3 to include the entire zone of contribution for a given source. The first four of these zones are required components of a WHPP and define areas requiring differing levels of response to a contamination event based on the expected time of travel to a given groundwater source. The buffer zone is considered optional, but is often vital in planning 3 MODPATH mathematically tracks particles from a given source, up -gradient along the flow lines in a MODFLOW model for a user specified time -frame. 14 Water right G1-26021 allocates an instantaneous withdrawal (Qi) of 500 gpm and an annual withdrawal (Qa) of 560 acre-feet/year for the District's 228th Street wellfield. Robinson Noble, Inc. 1686-007A P Packet Pg. 210 10.3.c for comprehensive protection of the supply sources (DOH, 2010). These specific WHPAs, in- cluding buffer zones, have been delineated for the 22811 Street wellfield and the Deer Creek Springs sources and are presented in Figure 7. 4.0 Recommendations The recommended WHPAs, which correspond to the one-year, five-year, and ten-year time -of - travel zones (Zones 1, 2, and 3, respectively), for both the Deer Creek Springs and the 2281h Street wellfield are shown on Figure 7. However, the Qva aquifer is a relatively shallow system which is directly exposed at the surface in many places within the study area and extra protec- tion is recommended. As such, we also recommend the incorporation of a buffer zone as part of the WHPAs for both sources. The recommended buffer zones, which incorporate the entire zone of contribution up -gradient of Zone 3 for both sources, are shown on Figure 7. Within the recommended WHPAs presented on Figure 7, there is cause for additional concern in the areas where the Qva is mapped as the surficial geologic unit. Figure 8 presents a compo- site map that identifies these specific areas. The Qva aquifer has no natural geologic protection in these locations and is highly vulnerable to impact from various activities that may occur with- in these areas. As such, additional precautions are warranted for these specific areas. Additionally, the buffer zone (zone of contribution) for the 228th Street wellfield reaches Hall Creek (see Figure 8). This indicates that water from Hall Creek directly recharges a portion of the aquifer that supplies water to the wellfield. Based on the current modeling, water from the creek will reach the wellfield within an estimated period of about 18 years. It is recommended that the District interface with any agencies or entities monitoring water quality along this por- tion of the creek and request that the Department of Ecology and Snohomish County Environ- mental Health inform the District of any catastrophic pollution events that may occur in this reach of Hall Creek. 5.0 References Anderson, M.P., and Woessner, W.W., 1992; Applied groundwater modeling, simulation of o flow and advective transport; San Diego, Academic Press, Inc. a Golder Associates, Inc., 2008; Hydrogeologic conditions, greater Hall Lake, Hall Creek, a _ Chase Lake, Echo Lake, Lake Ballinger, and McAleer Creek watershed, Technical Mem- o orandum c N Harbaugh, A.W., 2005: MODFLOW-2005, the U.S. Geological Survey modular ground -water a�i model, the ground -water flow process; U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 6-Al 6 Heath, R.C., Basic groundwater hydrology, 2004; USGS Water Supply Paper 2220, (revised) 21 p King County, Department of Natural Resources and Parks, Wastewater Treatment Division, w 2003; Brightwater treatment plant, final environmental impact statement, Appendix 6-B (geology and groundwater) c� Liesch, B.A., Price, C.E., and Walters, K.C., 1963; Geology and groundwater resources of a northwest King County, Washington; Washington State Department of Conservation, Water Supply Bulletin No. 20. 3 plates Minard, J.P., 1983; Geologic map of the Edmonds East and Edmonds West Quadrangles, s Washington; USGS Miscellaneous Field Studies, Map MF-1541, scale 1:24,000 a Page 12 1686-007A Robinson No Packet Pg. 211 10.3.c Newcomb, R.C., 1952; Groundwater resources of Snohomish County, Washington; USGS Water Supply Paper 1135. 2 plates Pace Engineers, Inc., 2009; Olympic View Water & Sewer District, 2009 comprehensive water system plan Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc., and Robinson Noble, Inc., 1999; Olym- pic View Water & Sewer District, Deer Creek water supply protection plan Pollock, D.W., 2017; MODPATH v7.2.01, A particle -tracking model for MODFLOW; U.S. Geological Survey Software Release, 15 December 2017 Robinson Noble, Inc., 2003; Olympic View Water & Sewer District, modification and testing of the 2281 Street production well Robinson Noble, Inc., 2015; Olympic View Water & Sewer District, 8605 22811 Street test well Robinson Noble, Inc., 2018; Olympic View Water & Sewer District, construction and testing of Production Well 2 Shannon and Wilson, Inc., 2016; Hydrogeologic report new Madrona K-8 project, 9300 2361n Street SW, Edmonds, Washington Thomas, B.E., Wilkenson, J.M., and Embrey, S.S., 1997; The groundwater system and groundwater quality in western Snohomish County, Washington; USGS Water Re- sources Investigations Report 96-4312. 9 plates Washington State Department of Health, 2010; Washington State wellhead protection pro- gram guidance document, Washington State Department of Health, Environmental Health Programs, DOH 331-018 (revised) Woodward, D.G., Packard, F.A., Dion, N.P., and Sumioka, S.S., 1995; Occurrence and quali- ty of groundwater in southwestern King County, Washington; USGS Water Resources Investigation Report 92-4098. 4 plates The statements, conclusions, and recommendations provided in this report are to be exclusively used within the context of this document. They are based upon generally accepted hydrogeologic practices and are the result of analysis by Robinson Noble, Inc. staff. This report, and any attach- ments to it, is for the exclusive use of Olympic View Water & Sewer District. Unless specifically stated in the document, no warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Robinson Noble, Inc. 1686-007A P Packet Pg. 212 10.3.c Figures L 0 Q. NN� 6L 0 cu 0) 0 a a «w 0 N 3 d Q E Lol Q Packet Pg. 213 0' 4000' 1 1 r� Note: Basemap from PM: MTW ICI USGS Edmonds August 2018 West and East 1686-007A ROBINS0N Quadrangles NOBLE Y 10.3.c CL ��� � �`�•�r\ .- •+ram � .. •+� 'a _ , j,.C,'•• ;r •�-- ...:�. Yam, 1 =a � L ,Olympic View Water and Sewer District Service Area Deer Creek Springs V : i , i' Snohomish County T 27 N/R 3,4 E Scale 1" = 4000' 8th Str6et Wellfield LOU r j r .' fit•, .. Ir • r /to ' - j • '-~ttom 1 � � r. � �- T•. A V. 1 Figure a Vicinity Map with Service Are. c View Water and Sewer Dis ' Packet Pg. 214 I 10.3.c I Model Boundary �Precipitation Runoff Runoff `� Qvt Infiltration � Qvt _ Spring Discharge 4— Flow Direction Puget Sound ❑ PM: MTW Snohomish County August 2018 T 27 N/R 3,4 E ROBM)ON 1686-007A Drawing Not to Scale Well Discharge Qtb 'ii •L U CL O Q O r Precipitation Model = Boundary I O I 0 0 a m Runoff zi Infiltration Qvt o Stream _ _v_ _ ' - — - Water Table - 0 Qva -------- Q Leakage a x 00 r 0 N 3 a� Q E 21 O M _ d E L C> �4 r-. Q w _ d E t t1 Figure Q Conceptual Mods, mpic View Water and Sewer Dis Packet Pg. 215 Legend tb v ,� Model Boundary 1 Geological Symbols: ; JT 0 Qyal Holocene younger alluvium Qvr Vashon recessional outwash Qvt Vashon till Qva Vashon advance outwash i Qtb Pre-Vashon transitional beds t Ora Ol0` .,.i.,.r{St ■ hi �. /lQib j ; � 1L' ' Ovt t ..n Ola M' 1 Ova ` \ ,'i ou � Ow- � it O� ( OYaI I I i 1 Qvs y L i, / .. Ut O■1 f� • i or w, 0' 3200' ar. 1' Note: Geological PM: MTW Snohomish County Map from Minard August 2018 T 27 N/R 3,4 E 1983 USGS 1686-007A Scale 1" = 3200' ROBINSON Edmonds East and NOBLE West Quadrangles 10.3.cc CL O Oyal - -G' . •DNM�• COi Q Ott = O _ r _ lip •w-:J t d 00 t , r N J� • Ovl J >, 1� �Z 0 f - �� ` h ovt� •I � -- 1 c � � . � as � f ,, ao v • � �- .�i E ti `� csi r J1' t d E Ova � s Figure Q Surficial Geology MaN Olympic View Water and Sewer Dis Packet Pg. 216 380 360 340 320 � 300 a) m az 280 E 0 U WZ&I OWzrl] 220 200 ♦ Model Observation Well ♦ Outlier Perfect Correspondence ------------------------------------------------- - ♦------------------------------------------------ I I 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 Observed Head (feet) PM: MTW ROBINSON August 2018 NOBLE 1686-007A r �L U a 0 a 0 W 0 r- M r- L Figure 5 r Model Calibration a Olympic View Water and Sewer District: 2018 WHPA Packet Pg. 218 Legend Water Sources Groundwater Contours Groundwater Flow Direction Model Boundary Creek Spri 1 1 ' 3200' Note: Basemap from PM: MTW Snohomish County USGS Edmonds August 2018 T 27 N/R 3,4 E West and East 1686-007A Scale 1" = 3200' ROBINSON Quadrangles NOBLE n 3.c o i _ w CL 0 a 0 d 0 c � 0 0 igure Potentiometric Contour Ma. )ic View Water and Sewer Dis Packet Pg. 219 I 10.3.c I `\`�� � •'3 - Legend ' 'T`"' • • • L J 6 Month Travel Time Zone Rd QD . � _ Zone 1 (1 Year Travel Time Zone) `� , ' �T il•1�►/jl �+ Zone 2 (5 Year Travel Time Zone) V \-0 I f : ?�1_ ~ ' ` • �: L J Zone 3 (10 Year Travel Time Zone) L • .. 1 ►+ - --- - •• ,,• ) L J Buffer Zone V V ~' I 1 • , ,�� • �' Water Sources Q 1 Yi .ia Y, t • . o Edswds 'P�*% '� — tJ� ` ; ' `�'� •r Olympic View Water and Sewer District Service Ar Q .r ► r lea I •r• .ftp • •• C> 'T (I '113 0 _d • `• • • '"tom ?': , 5 r���� "��� •� r ;' 228t •., ` et Wellfwl •--ft''�` Deer Creek 0000, • :, '�r Springs�/ / f"'� .. �~ •;� -�' ao y \ ` • t' >~ C; cra Cd 21 ! •• / J.O of n I •1 1% i E i - - • • - , fi Note: Basemap from PM: MTW Snohomish County Figure USGS Edmonds August 2018 T 27 N/R 3,4 E Q West and East 1686-007A Scale 1" = 2000' Well Head Protection Area Ma. ROBINSON Quadrangles NOBLE Olympic View Water and Sewer Dis Packet Pg. 220 23 , Legend 10.3.c _ • `, _ � _ __ �- __ _ L J 6 Month Travel Time Zone r'• tl 8 Zone 1 (1 Year Travel Time Zone) Ut� V9/ ' >� Zone 2 (5 Year Travel Time Zone) ;, \� / �, 1 i" -• f� J -�-y _ Y ^� w L J Zone 3 (10 Year Travel Time Zone) L +: •''"� I w • • • .� L J Buffer Zone V Water Sources C /' S•�f •ti• rt ) r Additional Protection Areas for Exposed Qva Aquii Edwards. '' 7 • _ 1 •4• Q Ate► Sark �1 ` ! O Olympic View Water and Sewer District Service Ar 0 1 �_ `"" �` •-•.1�..�- . •30 Vr ?' . ; • • 0 CL • .! 2 Ij t `. Wf • .''I :. ;` WHPA 28 t Influenced 1 a -Dr.. -► 1 } •.� i, �.�' .. a eer Creek > X. Hall Creek � :'� `- LI ...... t /i i �. r,,Springs_.. �,c• • . .. •. ao 11�'••� `r ' ••311. ; • i of Ta r • • t) V. bon Wells s..~'!� � .•r . .>, tPI W►tq. r►►.► �'� ', !. , I F��'. 1•, • �. - '� ,� . - - - 't. Ballinger ' con--- �� It -� 1 r;; •F: w 'Nc�jHOM�.3`!� S� '-i _a 6 CU ��— Note: Basemap from PM: MTW Snohomish County Figure USGS Edmonds August 2018 T 27 N/R 3,4 E Q West and East 1686-007A Scale 1" = 2000' Additional Protection Area ROBINSON Quadrangles NOBLE Olympic View Water and Sewer Dis Packet Pg. 221 10.3.d OV tp 11 C �r 'CIO Cx /IN I l l t zn ww..rA75"R �L V Q 0 Q 0 Packet Pg. 222 7 Currently no CARA regulations in Edmonds Propose prohibition of new intensive uses in CARAs + buffers Exceeds Department of Health requirements Propose monitoring of existing intensive uses in CARAs + buffer Exceeds Department of Health requirements Stormwater management in CARAs + buffers Exceeds Department of Ecology requirements Planning Board recommended approval Packet Pg. 223 Neils • 220t" Street ,> N i�`�s . • S 10.3.d , , . • is • • :..-.v • 1 Woodwa Esperance .� Y Edmonds ~�•.: � ••• , • . + • � �� Terrace CL • - 1 �!r • / , 228th Street IVellfield. , • • WHPAJ ,, { .t.� •% Influences o >y Gelb"' . .. •��j '�� Hall Cre Deer Cree / , .... . Springs ��'�`� . •••. . _ 1&. f�: �1• ' . �•• \• • a U • r 1 . t�it .. c • .p`o O � ' CA cam ,,. .. • - ►' _ -. •` , • a • , � 00" \ d .art >' •. �• . .: Lakr w�; Ts�.: •. - �J _ • .. Legend M • �' ' '. � _ J 6 Month Travel Time Zone • t • !t . ; - •�--► Zone 1 (1 Year Travel Time Zone) E J \ C.N( ^ • , COZone 2 (5 Year Travel Time Zone) • . - � tiH M11: H � 2441" Street Zone 3 (10 Year Travel Time Zone) Q • - �� • . • • : •. ; S h o r6 n e L J Buffer Zone 2000' • .• • _ • _� �1 1 •', I .. Water Sources �—� •► (. NJ L (' {j `• 0 Additional Protection Areas for Exposed Ova A Q �r . 1••r3 . ram. • •• • Olympic View Water and Sewer District Service Area Note: Basemap from I PM: MTW tSno'omish County Packet Pg. 224 8 USGS Edmonds August 20187 N/R 3,4 E U/ocf onr! Cocf _-- __-- ___-. A 4,4,+i�v��t �r����+in•� n r�.�r� 10.3.d Planning Board Recommendation (revised) Moved approval of November 29, 2023 draft CARA code with two proposed changes Modification # 1 -Remove mitigation section in 23.60.030(d) (1) (c) Modification #2 - Disallow any UIC wells - shallow or drilled - in the QVa areas of the Deer Creek aquifer but allow shallow UIC wells in the other areas of that watershed 10.3.d 0' Meets the intent of the CARA... minimize loss of recharge quantity, maintain the protection of supply wells for public drinking water, and prevent contamination of groundwater Without modification, the stormwater management approach proposed by staff is more protective than required Protects DoH wellhead area AND buffer Buffer protection not required by DoH Meets and exceeds all Department of Ecology stormwater permit requirements Some treatment required regardless of soil treatment capacity Packet Pg. 226 10.3.d Willow Creek W Puget Sou Watershe �f SHOREUN Shellabarger Watershed i ----- ;t HaIrs-Creek i 228TH sT sw Watershed r i I � I4 Q H C onds Way Go ---;-- itershe4l 01 238TH ST SW P 02o �vt� -244TH ST'SW--------------'LANr BALLINGER WAY Lake Ballin9br Watershed Total Properties Located within Surficial QVa by Zone <Null> Count' BN Count RM-1.5 Count RS-8 Count WMU Count Grand Total t14rr.Iw Bufferzone 29 3 1 574 8 615 L j"Y.., zo^• EDMOND6 10 Year Zone 29 3 451 490 L_, 5 Y.., Z.- 5 Year Zone 29 1 Year Zone 23 198 30 227 53 L_jeN^^rnz.^. L_je.n.,z.^. - - - - 6 Month Zone 21 9 30 ®s°nr•' Qv Cityof Edmonds 'Null values are for properties not in City limits Deer Creek CARA Properties February 2024 ITS U U CL O Q 0 d 0 C u Packet Pg. 227 10.3.d Treatment Required per DOE Soil Treatment Capacity Pollutant Loading Insignificant High Medium Low Insignificant Two -Stage Drywell Two -Stage Drywell Two -Stage Drywell Two -Stage Drywell Low Two -Stage Drywell Pretreament Pretreament Remove Solids Medium Pretreament Remove Solids Remove Solids Remove Solids High Remove Oil Remove Oil Remove Oil and Solids Remove Oil and Solids Treatment Required per COE Soil Treatment Capacity Pollutant Loading High Medium Low Insignificant Insignificant Pretreatment Pretreament Remove Solids Remove Solids Low Remove Solids Remove Solids Remove Solids Remove Solids Medium Remove Oil and Solids Remove Oil and Remove Oil and Solids Solids Remove Oil and Solids High Remove Oil and Solids Remove Oil and I Solids Remove Oil and Solids Remove Oil and Solids U r •L U CL 0 a 0 0 _ 0 N d .y x a _ 0 U Q a U N M Iq Z 0) E r a _ E U a Packet Pg. 228 10.3.d 'rohfbftina Shalle deerC_...reel< C".'*AKP Closed stormwater basins Area lacks municipal stormwater infrastructure ► Could lead to increased flooding at Deer Creek WO Increased cost of compliance could lead to de facto moratorium within low -density residential areas in SW Edmonds No federal or state standards exist for PFAS If standards are adopted and contamination ever detected, OV would have to treat for it or buy additional water from another provider Packet Pg. 229 10.3.d \1 r-k 16 r \ J �e P.- 01116, Packet Pg. 230 10.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 05/7/2024 Landmark 99 Update Staff Lead: Susan McLaughlin Department: Planning & Development Preparer: Susan McLaughlin Background/History On December 5th, 2023, Council authorized Mayor Nelson to sign an amended Option to Purchase the Landmark Property, which amended the timeline for purchase, assignment language clause, and attached the negotiated purchase and sale agreement as an exhibit. The amended Option was signed by the seller on December 12th, 2023. Staff issued a Request for Proposals for development partners, which was published on or around January 25th, with a closing date of March 22nd. Staff received two submissions to the RFQ, both of which were evaluated by a committee consisting of: -Two staff members -One Planning Board member -One Economic Development Commission member -Two Council Members The evaluation consisted of a grading of both proposals followed by interviews. At the conclusion of interviews, the committee recommended that one proposal be given further consideration. Site visits to several representative properties were then undertaken to gain a better understanding of the character and quality of the developer's projects. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that Council place a "Landmark developer negotiations decision" on the extended agenda for June 4th. Narrative This agenda item provides an update to the developer selection process and discusses the steps ahead for a potential partnership and purchase of the property. The Option to Purchase requires the City and its partners (or assignees) to place $1,000,000 in earnest money down on the property by March 31, 2025, and close on the property no later than September 30, 2025. Packet Pg. 231 10.4 In order to determine whether this investment is feasible, staff must engage with a potential partner to: Conduct due diligence on the property such as environmental investigation, survey, and title research. Work with the partner to determine: Parcelization Phasing Shared siting costs Financing structure, sources, and repayment timings Final design concepts Finalize the planning for the city -retained portion of the property, which may include additional partnerships Staff will need to engage in negotiations with the potential partner to ensure that each party understands timelines, commitments, financing responsibilities, and milestones. These negotiations will lead to a document - tentatively described as a Memorandum of Agreement on Due Diligence - which will govern the steps leading to a decision to execute/not execute the Option. Staff will return to Council in June to request permission to engage in these negotiations. Financial impact There is no financial impact to tonight's presentation, as there is no decision requested. Upon a decision to direct staff to engage in the next phase of the project, financial impacts and the sources of funding for the negotiations and due diligence phase of this project are as described in the presentation to City Council on December 5th, 2023. Attachments: May 7 2024 Landmark99Presentation 20240429 Packet Pg. 232 10.4.a E1s[• a 14 N O N F- R J C d E t U fC a Packet Pg. 233 10.4.a Tonight's discussion Review of: • Option timeline • Previous Council action • P F P process • Preferred development team Next steps: • Upcoming decisions • Staff actions CU E CU J Packet Pg. 234 10.4.a 0 re n Master Planning Negotiating the Purchase and Sale Agreement w r, r-I rI ���MDecision Point Exercise the Closing not later option to than Sept 30, 2025 purchase RFP/s Partnership Development/Development Agreement Financing Plan Packet Pg. 235 10.4.a Previous decision City Council authorized the Mayor to sign the amended Option which attaches the negotiated PSA as an Exhibit and amends the timeline and "assignment clause" language. This action resulted in: • $100,000 becoming nonrefundable • Further consideration until we execute the option or we choose to discontinue pursuing this project • Staff advancing the project as described in Decem ber St"'s presentation L CU E C CU J Packet Pg. 236 10.4.a 2024 anticipated costs (from December Sth'S meeting) Activity Due Diligence: Alta survey, Title, Environmental Peal Estate consulting Development agreement Communication and outreach Total* *Partnership arrangements may impact individual line items Amount $100,000 $25,000 $10041507000 $15,000 $2459000-$2909000 CU CU J Packet Pg. 237 10.4.a 2024 Funding Options • $100,000- Snohomish County grant • $300,000- Currently available from Affordable and Supportive Housing Sales & Use Tax L CU E C cu J Packet Pg. 238 10.4.a • • The next decision L E C CU Authorize/not authorize staff to work with the preferred development team to draft a Memorandum of Due Diligence .N outlining the steps necessary to determine whether a partnership and purchase of a portion of the property are feasible. " a This action would result in: • Staff time devoted to negotiations with the preferred development team • An agreement outlining the process necessary to conduct due diligence on the partnership and the property Packet Pg. 239 10.4.a Actions taken since December Sth04 V N O N C 4) E t V �4 Q Packet Pg. 240 10.4.a Request for Proposal • Staff developed a Request for Proposal which went "live" in January • Pre -bid conference on February 12t" • Proposal closed on March 22nd • Staff received two bids L CU E C CU J Packet Pg. 241 10.4.a Evaluation process • Six -person evaluation committee was established • 2x staff • 2x board/commission members • 2x Council Members • Evaluation consisted of: • Evaluation of proposal • Interview • Post -interview site visits (by a reduced committee) L CU E C CU J Packet Pg. 242 10.4.a Evaluation process • Six -person evaluation committee was established • 2x staff • 2x board/commission members • 2x Council Members • Evaluation consisted of: • Evaluation of proposal • Interview • Post -interview site visits (by a reduced committee) L CU E C CU J Packet Pg. 243 10.4.a Preferred developer Development & Design Team Organization Chart aE - 0 W., Primary Development Developer Partner :.......Do* ....................... too Dogs ......... see* *fee ..... *go ...../ Architect General Contractor Packet Pg. 244 10.4.a Proposal • Workforce housing • 826 units with 648 units (80%) catering to 30-80% AMI • Mix of retail, apartments, and townhomes L CU E C CU J Packet Pg. 245 10.4.a Proposal E C J Proposed Multifamily Residences r 0 2 0 Building 2 336.517 SF o N O N Building 1 0 0 361,606 SF I Building 3 C 372.044 SF L a 1 E J N O N y � s Building 4 (Townhomes) 29,240 SF E a Packet Pg. 246 10.4.a Proposal Public/Private Development Division L CU E C CU J Packet Pg. 247 10.4.a Proposal Project Phasing 4� 4-+t J l %.0 . . - L CU E C Cu J Packet Pg. 248 Evaluation committee's reaction to proposal and interviewCU 9 • Affordability component ranked high • Financing model allows for options • Commitment to community and achieving public uses • Impressed with the team's willingness to work with our team toward mutual objectives Packet Pg. 249 10.4.a What is next? • Staff needs authorization to enter into negotiations with proposed developer towards a Memorandum of Due Diligence (or similar document) • Staff will bring this decision forward in early June • If approved, staff will work with J2 team to create " path forward" to get to answers about: • The details of the partnership • The due diligence on the property • The ownership and financing model L CU E C CU J Packet Pg. 250 10.4.a 40 Approximate timeline • June 2024: Approval to negotiate MOA on Due Diligence • July 2024: Approval of MOA on Due Diligence • November 2024: In progress report • December -February 202S: Hearings and decisions related to property ownership, financing, and phasing L CU E C CU J Packet Pg. 251 10.4.a 11 14 N O N F- R J C d E t U fC a Packet Pg. 252