The URL can be used to link to this page

2024-06-04 Council Special Packet1. 2. 41 OE LUMG do Agenda Edmonds City Council REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 JUNE 4, 2024, 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS BEGINNING AT 7:00 PM ARE STREAMED LIVE ON THE COUNCIL MEETING WEBPAGE, COMCAST CHANNEL 21, AND ZIPLY CHANNEL 39. TO ATTEND VIRTUALLY, CLICK ON OR PASTE THE FOLLOWING ZOOM MEETING LINK INTO A WEB BROWSER USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE: HTTPS:HZOOM.US/J/95798484261 BY PHONE: +1 253 215 8782 WEBINAR ID: 957 9848 4261 CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 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 4. PRESENTATIONS 5. 6. 7. 1. LGBTQ+ Pride Month Proclamation (5 min) 2. Resolution Recognizing Ride Transit Month (5 min) 3. Youth Commission Annual Presentation & Senior Recognition (15 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. IF USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE, RAISE A VIRTUAL HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED. IF USING A DIAL - UP PHONE, PRESS *9 TO RAISE A HAND. WHEN PROMPTED, PRESS *6 TO UNMUTE. RECEIVED FOR FILING 1. Written Public Comments regarding ADU Code Amendments (0 min) Edmonds City Council Agenda June 4, 2024 Page 1 2. Outside Boards and Committee Reports (0 min) 3. Written Public Comments (0 min) 8. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Committee Meeting Minutes May 14, 2024 2. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes May 21, 2024 3. Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes May 21, 2024 4. Approval of claim checks and wire payment. 5. Resolution Recognizing Ride Transit Month 9. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. Accessory Dwelling Unit Code Amendment to allow for Detached Accessory Dwelling Units — "Expanding housing options by easing barriers to the construction and use of accessory dwelling units in accordance with HB 1337." (20 min) 2. Landmark 99- Financing Options/Developer Negotiations (25 min) 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS 11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT Edmonds City Council Agenda June 4, 2024 Page 2 4.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/4/2024 LGBTQ+ Pride Month Proclamation Staff Lead: Carolyn LaFave Department: Mayor's Office Preparer: Carolyn LaFave Background/History Pride month is an annual celebration of the many contributions made by the LGBTQ+ community to history, society and cultures worldwide. It is celebrated throughout the month of June in commemoration of its roots in the Stonewall Riots of June 1969. Staff Recommendation No action, reference only. Narrative Pride Month both honors the movement for LGBTQ+ rights and celebrates LGBTQ+ culture. Attachments: LGBTQ+ Pride Month 2024 Packet Pg. 3 OPrVIrlamatTILl" City of Edmonds •Office of the Mayor JUNE 2024 IS LGBTQ+ PRIDE MONTH WHEREAS, our nation was founded upon the declaration that all people are created equal; that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are among the inalienable rights of every person; and that each person shall be accorded the equal protection of the law; and WHEREAS, the LGBTQ+ community has made great strides forward, but equality, inclusion, and acceptance have not yet been fully achieved. We must practice these values and teach them to future generations; and WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds supports the rights of every citizen to enjoy equality and freedom from discrimination; and WHEREAS, on June 28, 1969, patrons of the Stonewall Inn in New York City rose up and resisted police harassment that had become all too common for members of the LGBTQ+ community. Out of this resistance, the LGBTQ+ rights movement in America was born. During LGBTQ+ Pride Month, we commemorate the events of June 1969 and commit to achieving equal justice under the law for the LGBTQ+ community. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Mike Rosen, Mayor of the City of Edmonds, do hereby proclaim June 2024 as LGBTQ+ PRIDE MONTH in the City of Edmonds and encourage all residents to celebrate the progress within our society towardsjustice, equality, and full civic recognition for LGBTQ+ persons and to join together in the struggles that remain to achieve true justice and equality. ." "41z-- Mike Rosen, Mayor I June 4, 2024 Packet Pg. 4 4.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/4/2024 Resolution Recognizing Ride Transit Month Staff Lead: Councilmember Susan Paine Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History This resolution is brought forward to recognize the important benefits of using our local transit systems. Recommendation Receive a resolution recognizing Ride Transit Month. Narrative June is Ride Transit Month when the community is encouraged to use their local transit options, recognizing the broad benefits of transit options that link communities and services together. This year, 2024, will see major transit improvements in our region that improve access to locales, goods, and services throughout the south Snohomish County region. Attachments: 2024-06-04 resolution for Ride Transit Month Packet Pg. 5 4.2.a RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DESIGNATING DUNE 2024 AS "RIDE TRANSIT MONTH". WHEREAS Edmonds is a multi -modal hub with a ferry terminal and Sound Transit Sounder commuter rail station; and WHEREAS Community Transit operates the Swift Blue Line and Routes 102, 119, 130, 166, and 416, connecting Edmonds to Lynnwood, Everett, Silver Firs, and Seattle; and WHEREAS Community Transit recently opened the Swift Orange Line, connecting Edmonds College with Lynnwood City Center and Mill Creek, and in its first month of operation, the new bus rapid transit line provided 50,355 trips; and WHEREAS Sound Transit will begin operating light rail service from Nortbgate to Lynnwood City Center on August 30, 2024; and WHEREAS Community Transit will implement its largest service change ever on September 14, 2024, increasing local fixed -route service and connectivity to the light rail system; and WHEREAS more than 8 percent of Edmonds residents commute to work by transit; and WHEREAS approximately 25 percent of Washingtonians cannot or do not drive and may rely on public transit; and WHEREAS recent research shows that 1 in 4 adults in the United States suffers from transportation insecurity, suggesting thousands of Edmonds residents cannot regularly move from place to place in a safe or timely manner because they lack the resources necessary for transportation; and WHEREAS a 2021 study from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine concluded that the energy saved by passengers in the United States using public transit rather than personal vehicles saved 63 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2018—roughly the equivalent of taking 16 coal-fired power plants offline for a year; and WHEREAS Community Transit and Washington State Ferries are committed to converting to zero -emission fleets, improving the air and sound quality of our communities, and addressing climate change; and Packet Pg. 6 WHEREAS public transportation investments generate 31 percent more jobs per dollar than new construction of roads and bridges. Investment in transit can yield 49,700 jobs per $1 billion invested and offers a 5 to 1 economic return; and WHEREAS transit -oriented development of housing and businesses is an essential economic and climate strategy for the City of Edmonds and the region; and WHEREAS greater transit use is associated with higher levels of physical activity, which is associated with lower health risks and better health outcomes; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Edmonds City Council designates June 2024 as Ride Transit Month and urges all people to join in observance and to ride transit. RESOLVED this day of June, 2024. CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR, MIKE ROSEN ATTEST: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. Packet Pg. 7 4.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/4/2024 Youth Commission Annual Presentation & Senior Recognition Staff Lead: Casey Colley Department: Parks, Recreation & Human Services Preparer: Shannon Burley Background/History The Youth Commission was established in June 2018, appointing the first members in December 2018 and January 2019. There are eleven (11) seats on the Youth Commission, nine (9) voting and two (2) alternates; each Council member appoints one (1) voting seat and the Mayor appoints two (2) voting seats and two (2) alternates. The City of Edmonds Youth Commission is a youth -led commission whose mission is to protect, preserve, and enhance the quality of life for Edmonds youth by advising City Council and the public on issues relating to youth policies, programs, and opportunities. The Youth Commission provides a place for teen -aged youth to advocate for themselves and to bring attention to issues that affect them; while providing youth an opportunity to gain governing skills; accountability and learn the structure of local government. Staff Recommendation N/A Presentation Only Narrative 2023-24 was a busy and successful year for the Edmonds Youth Commission. The Youth Commission annual presentation (attached) highlights the work completed this year. 2023-24 accomplishments are centered around connecting with the community, community service and providing youth centric feedback to multiple planning efforts. The commission recognizes six seniors all graduating from Edmonds-Woodway High School: Lucy Calabro - has served on the commission for three years and is attending College of William and Mary, majoring in Public Policy. Eemaan Bhatia -has served on the commission for three years and is attending the University of Washington to study engineering. Cassidy Otis -has served on the commission for one year and plans to work in the medical field, attending community college working to become an E.M.T. Mariana Yenter -Chair of the Edmonds Youth Commission serving on the commission for four years, plans to study business management at the Stern School of Business at NYU. Packet Pg. 8 4.3 Sophie Gerdes -Co-chair of the Edmonds Youth Commission serving on the commission for three years, is attending the University of Washington studying Biology Pre-Med. Joanna Na - Secretary of the Edmonds Youth Commission serving on the commission for three years, is attending Boston University, majoring in Neuroscience. The graduating seniors will be missed as their leadership skills have all grown significantly during their terms. Attachments: 2024 Youth Commission Presentation Packet Pg. 9 Edmonds pF ED/y °"�s Youth YOUTH COMMISSION w o� L� \ RESERv� , Commission Annual Report 2024 S Lucy Calabro • Attending the College of William and # Mary, majoring in Public Policy Aspiring to work in Public Relations and Law r Eemaan Bhati*a • Attend the University of Washington — Engineering • Favorite part of EYC: promoting change and diversity to the City of Edmonds an, working with and meeting new people • Hoping to stay involved with local government • C',assidiT • Otis • Planning to work in the medical field, attending community college working to become an E.M.T • Favorite part of EYC: group problem solving and the dynamic conversations r Mariana Yenter • Study business management at the Stern School of Business at NYU. • Favorite part of EYC: Meeting new people and having an active role in the community. 1 4,6 -Jggs� Pei Sophic Gerdes • Going to attend University of Washington, planning on majoring oring in Biology Pre-Med • Favorite part of EYC- Working with nature 4.3.a V a/JOL k . - -7 6.. 0 Packet Pg. 16 Best wishes for your future endeavors! City of Edmonds Youth Commission is a youth -led commission whose mission is to protect, preserve, a nd en ha nce the q ua I ity of I ife for Ed monds youth by advising City Council and the public on issues relating to youth policies, programs, and opportunities. Basics • Youth Commission had 3 open seats to fi I I with over 10 applicants • Focused on connecting with our community this year through events and I nstag ra m • Assigned a new City Council liaison Been a productive and fun year Logo Change G� OF EDM0\ YOUTH COMMISSION oT � Planning and Development Department Susan McLaughlin, Planning and Development Department Director Todd Tatum, Economic Development Director Angie Feser, Parks Recreation and Human Services Director Susan McLaughlin Navyusha Pentakota, Urban Design Planner Youth Senior Speed kil 77 Talking ) I I;_- Fr " 4w _v, M� ua � You Are Not Alone IOU ARE NOT ALONE ft"TUc"ICIDE PREVENTION EVENT ROSEHILL COMMUNITY CENTr ER 04 9 Am AT, FEB 3R"Av-- Community Transit Presentation YOUTH communitytransit � e 4.3.a c � . r Packet Pg. 25 t ,0 Annual Pine Ridge Park Ivy Pull Mf A"" M Sys t -F� I. ,may ; . M-mm- ,% TOOLBOX: Planning The Next Generation of Planners April 26, 2024 4.3.a ML Puget Sound Regional Council EVERETT "Ailkil:1 0 �. q Edmonds 0 . Youth } Commission Pine Ridge Park Invasive Ivy Removal Join the Edmonds Youth Commission on MAY 18TH to remove invasive English Ivy from the park! Snacks and supplies will be provided. Pine Ridge Park, 20330 83rd Ave W. Edmonds, WA 98026 MAY 18TH 10 A.M. TO NOON Oka WILL YOU BE 18 BY 11/7? Register to VOTE If you are or will be 18yrs old by 11/7/23 (Election Day) get registered to VOTE! Don't miss this democratic opportunity. Visit the link in bio to register to vote in WA State. To all those celebrating dW,j- K W , #, o� 4 happy holidays from your EVC III1111 LOOKING FOR VOLUNTEER HOURS? Set up & break down needed with some other tasks that may arise. WINTER MARKET 1/27 2/24 3/30 4/27 LUNAR NEW YEAR 2/10 PRIDE EVENT 6/22 If interested contact mega n.luttrell@ed mondswa.gov MH )MONDS PARKS April 20 loam - Noc >- JOIN A WORK PARTY AND MAKE A DIFFERENCE Beach cleanups E 0 ' Habitat Restoration Tree planting Learn more and register at soundsalmonsolutions.org y VAL10 * HERE'S A COUPLE FRIENDLY REMINDERS: * BRING A COAT/ JACKET AS ITS GOING TO BE COLD r0• LOOK BOTH WAYS BEFORE CROSSING THE STREET HAVE A SAFE PLAN OF GETTING r HOME CHECK YOUR C Packet Pg. 28 AND HAVE FUN! :) Members to Retur Next Year: Charlie Morgan Vivian Liao Lydia Abuni Lucy Lakefish joelle Walworth 4.3.a Goal for Next Year We hope to continue to exist as a commission as we believe we are vital to connect and advocate for the youth in Edmonds. We are an asset. Packet Pg. 30 Questions ? 7.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/4/2024 Written Public Comments regarding ADU Code Amendments Staff Lead: City Council Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History Recommendation N/A Narrative Written public comments regarding the proposed ADU Code Amendments, provided to Council via email from Planning Department on May 21, 2024. Attachments: ALL COMMENTS TO DATE Packet Pg. 32 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Jon Milkey <jpmilkey@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2023 3:29 PM To: Planning Cc: Council; JPM Subject: DADU's Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Good afternoon, Please include our comments below for the DADU discussion. Hoping that Edmonds adopts a code that accommodates BOTH the citizens that will build DADU's and the citizens that chose not to, or cannot afford to... As you may know, it is much easier to take a "wrecking ball" to neighborhoods and implement the most stringent form of a requirement than to draft a code that balances many of the reasons our citizens live in Edmonds or have moved to Edmonds. Less housing density, parking, lack of light pollution, tree canopy are only a few reasons people chose to live in Edmonds. I suspect that Planners know many more reasons why people chose to live in Edmonds and we are hoping you can make the necessary effort to adapt DADU requirements to minimize impacts to citizens and the environment. 1. There are steep hills in the area and with a 24' height, the ADU may extend 10 feet or more above the primary residence roof line and obstruct neighbor Lu views. The current height of the primary residence should be taken into account. 2. a All setback should be the same as the primary residence although backing to an o alley may make sense. Decreased side setbacks for ADU's should not impact ° neighbors who have lived in the area or moved to the area for certain neighborhood layouts. w 3. Separate sale of ADU's - should this be delayed until all zoning is changed form single family to multi -family (or 2 -4 townhomes, apartments...), this essentially 0 has the same neighborhood impact especially with two ADU's. Hope the off-street J parking spot comes with the sale as well as the required easement to access the a property. 4. More development = less tree canopy. E 5. More development = less stormwater infiltration due to impervious surfaces 6. More development = more light pollution a 7. Two ADU's per lot will have a significant impact to existing neighborhoods and the environment as mentioned above. Minimum of 1 off-street parking space per ADU would help neighborhood crowding. 8. Parking should be required no matter the distance from a transit stop. Citizens living in these areas may already have parking issues and this would only increase the impact i Packet Pg. 33 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Pentakota, Navyusha Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2023 3:05 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: FW: Comments 2023-12-01 11:19 PM(MST) Submission Notification From: notification@civiclive.com <notification@civiclive.com> Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 10:20 PM To: Pentakota, Navyusha <navyusha.pentakota@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Comments 2023-12-01 11:19 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2023-12-01 11:19 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/2/2023 1:19:31 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value ADUs will be built in Edmonds for the purpose of short term rental (AirBnB, VRBO, etc.) unless the code prohibits or restricts the short term rental industry from expanding into our textarea-1700597715163-0 neighborhoods. There are negative consequences of allowing unlimited short term rentals all over town, including a shortage of long term rentals and a quality of life impact on neighboring streets and residents. As an example, please review the short term rental restrictions recently implemented in Chelan County. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=19947015&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 34 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2023 1:58 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2023-12-26 02:57 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2023-12-26 02:57 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/26/2023 4:57:58 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I served on the ECHC 2019 - 2021. 1 was on one of the task groups looking at the ADU issue. have talked with many citizens about building these units. I find most residents completely unaware of the process of building and the need to consider the "lay of the land". This knowledge undergirds my comments. 1. Please keep size limits to 1000 SQ Ft as required by '1337. Do no go larger. 2. Please keep setbacks and % permeable surface coverage requirements as they currently are. 3. Only take away parking requirement where mandated by 1337. 4. Be clear that ADU/DADU allowed only in PRD where there are no codes and covenants on structures. These homeowner already have smaller lots that zoned textarea-1700597715163-0- land taken from their lots in creating the common lot which is non -buildable. 5. Be cautious in your phrasing. Much in the current briefing on ADU/DADUs gives the impression that units can somehow skirt the engineering codes and safety requirements for sewers and water and electrical lines . You will have a lot of unhappy people with the city staff if you are not clearer. 6. BE clear that ADUs/DADUs are not cheap to build. 7. Give some wording that discusses the "good neighbor" ethic of concern over view protection and the like. I know you cannot mandate that but we can have the moral/ethical discussion about it. 8. Please do not rush all this in changing to comply with 1337 that no thought is given to our uniqueness in topography and environmental concerns considering we are a small city on the waters of Puget Sound. Thank you for the change to provide comments. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=19993559&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 35 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2023 6:40 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2023-12-27 07:40 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2023-12-27 07:40 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 12/27/2023 9:40:13 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I'm a former member of Edmond's Citizens Housing Committee and an architect with my own firm. I'm concerned with HB 1337 and the direction the City is pursuing with increased housing. I understand Increased housing is a necessity. Housing is difficult due to the size of Edmonds. I hope the City tree ordnance isn't compromised by increased housing. During my time on the Housing Committee we provided a multi -family design package to the City Council. This included vertical and horizontal modulation; multiple siding types and differing colors. These items will add interest and visually lessen building scale. Pre -approved plans for ADU's I hope will be re -considered. These plans cannot respond to existing homes textarea-1700597715163-0they're attached to or detached from. These pre -approved plans will not be in character with the neighborhood. Cookie cutter housing will result from this type of construction. Impervious surfaces will be greatly increased. The new waste water treatment plant may not be able to process the increased combination of rain run off and sewage. Increased traffic will result in long wait times at traffic lights. Side streets with increased density in combination with less off street parking will reduce these streets to single lane roads or impassable roads. The City will become a parking lot. Off street parking will be an important part of the housing solution. I hope the City establishes a global approach to resolving the increased housing problem; factoring in the everyday functions that occur. Thank you. Keith Soltner To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=19993875&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions i Packet Pg. 36 7.1.a From: notification (cbciviclive.com To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-01-04 11:46 AM(MST) Submission Notification Date: Thursday, January 4, 2024 10:46:50 AM Comments 2024-01-04 11:46 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 1/4/2024 1:46:17 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value My mother is 68 years old and an Edmonds residence. She is lower income and cannot afford a single family home and will textarea-1700597715163-0 soon need to live in a structure without stairs. We have purchased a home with a large lot hopeful to build her a DADU that she can not only afford, but meets her aging needs. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https:Hedmondswa.gov/fonn/one.aspx? obj ectld=20008710&contextld=19931715 &returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 37 7.1.a The Alliance of Citizens for Edmonds [ACE] provides the following comments regarding the Accessory Dwelling Unit Code Update first presented in a webinar on November 30, 2023. A copy of these comments will be submitted to the Planning Board as well. ACE believes that only one code update to align with EHB 1337 should be done. It will be easier for the public to understand rationale and the proposed changes if changes are presented only once within a given 2-year period. Furthermore, doing just one code revision saves city staff time. Rushing to produce interim changes to current ADU/DADU code also increases the possibility that unintended consequences get codified and then are harder to remove from the code because "well, they are in the code now...," "we should have thought this one through better...," or "we never should have rushed to get something out there..." Additionally, since EHB 1 337 is a major departure from past practice that will alter the landscape and perhaps have unintended consequences, as a guiding principle, ACE believes that it is a wise course of action to implement the requirements of law without going beyond said law's mandates. Overall, there are several areas left unaddressed by the Summary of changes: • The Summary of changes does not address impact fees. EHB 1337 allows for impact fees no greater than 50% of the home on the lot. Whether a person bikes, walks to transit, or drives a vehicle, this additional ADU/DADU housing will have an impact on our streets for pedestrian and traffic safety as well as maintenance of streets. So, an impact fee for streets and utilities is appropriate in a ratio proportionate to the home already on the lot. • When referring to nationalized "best practices," that offer cookie -cutter approaches from agencies such as AARP, briefings and the like should acknowledge the uniqueness of the topography of Edmonds with its hillsides and critical areas that may limit the use of DADUs or even ADUs on some lots. • No mention is made that engineering, stormwater management, setbacks, and impermeable surface limits will remain in place as environmental and climate change buffers. Thus, as listed, the changes in the Summary seem to offer a "free- for-all" approach to building ADU/DADUs. Packet Pg. 38 7.1.a • No mention is made of how height limits, especially on sloped lots, will be measured or giving reference to how those measurements are done so applicants wishing to build can ascertain if they really can do what they want. • The issue of view corridor impacts is not addressed. Since homeowners with water views are assessed extra property taxes for views, allowing a new building that diminishes that view has an adverse impact on view homeowners. If possible, ACE suggests that it might be a "good neighbor" practice to include in the permit packet a summary of comments from neighbors on the proposed building. Doing so would mean that those seeking to build would have engaged their neighbors in the planning stages and hopefully addressed neighbors' concerns. • Clarity in all areas in this code update is truly critical so that the changes result in homeowners wishing to add ADU/DADU may do so with clear guidance. Failure to do so will only create confusion, requests for variances or clarifications that uselessly tie up staff time, a precious resource. Now follows comments on specific parts of the Summary of changes provided as the last handout of the slide presentation: • Under Permit needed — the statement on PRDs should be strengthened by clearly stating PRDs that have no HOA's or CCRs. • Under Number of Units: this is unclear with respect to how ADU/DADUs will be counted in relation to EHB 1337 and E2SHB 1 1 10. In other words, will ADU/DADUs be counted as a unit under the middle housing designation? • Under size: o ACE does not support reducing rear setbacks because of the impact such reduction would/could have on views, light in all homes around the new unit, loss of trees. o ACE supports keeping the bedroom limit at two bedrooms. More bedrooms than that in a small unit would reduce the quality of living space and the functionality for those with mobility issues. o ACE would like to see the size limit reduced to1,000 square feet which is in line with EHB 1 337 and in line with the size of current new 2-bedroom Packet Pg. 39 7.1.a apartments in Edmonds. [Note: The Hazel 2-bedroom units range from 920 — 1040 sq feet. Westgate 2-bedroom units range from 815-885 sq feet.] • Under Design: ACE recommends addressing rooftop decks in this section, preferably not allowing them on 2-story buildings that are at the 24-foot height limit. • Under Parking: ACE is pleased to see that off-street parking will be required if lot is further than '/Z mile from a major transit hub but believes this should be stipulated clearly in the Summary of changes for clarity. Thank you for considering these comments from ACE. ACE wishes to see a code finalized that aligns with EHB 1 337 and allows homeowners who wish to build on lots that can accommodate these ADU/DADUs units a minimum of frustration because the code is clear and responsive to the needs of the residents. Karen Haase Herrick, LTC, USA, RET, RN, MN President Alliance of Citizens for Edmonds [ACE] Board of Directors Packet Pg. 40 7.1.a January 10, 2024 City Council of Edmonds/Planning Board, I had planned to attend the meeting tonight but am feeling a bit beat up after a doctor's appointment today so I am expressing my concerns here: ADUs in neighborhoods can, if done well, be a help with housing. Size is important, ADUs should not be over 1000 square feet, preferably less, one level. There are three in our neighborhood that have been done well, blend into the property and the neighborhood and aren't obtrusive. One ADU allowed per property. Available off street parking is a requirement. It is critical that the primary home owner reside in the main house on the property. This allows for oversight, neighborhood continuity and prevents multiple rentals on a single piece of property in a single family neighborhood. In the rush to approve legislation that dismantles single family zoning the State has failed to take in to consideration the people and properties that have been in place for decades, the ones who pay taxes, who pay their salaries and the ones who, having worked to support themselves and their neighborhoods want to be able to enjoy their neighborhood. One ADU per property and owner occupied main dwelling are a must. Edmonds is special, please keep it that way. ristie Simard 425 743 2743 Packet Pg. 41 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: David Bratt <david.bratt@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2024 9:33 PM To: Planning Subject: questions and comments regarding your meeting on January 24 Attachments: Screenshot 2024-01-24 210344.png Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Some people who received this message don't often get email from david.bratt@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Hi there, I was an online participant in the planning board's meeting on January 24. 1 submitted two questions using the Q&A function on Zoom. When you saw my questions, you choose to dismiss them for some reason. I've attached a screenshot of my questions to this email. Would you please send me responses when you have the bandwidth to answer my questions? A few additional points. First, a comment on the maximum square footage for D/A ADUs: I hope that you will keep the 1200 square foot maximum size limitation for DADUs/ADUs, rather than reverting to the 1000 sq ft max mandated by SB 1337. Nearby municipalities such as Kirkland have shown that such a higher limit on DADUs can work. Edmonds can do it too! Larger possible sizes of ADUs/DADUs doesn't mean that all such units will be built to the maximum size. But a higher upper limit on the size of a DADU/AADU does mean that more living and working arrangements will be possible for those who build them out and/or reside in them. Given the fact that some folks work from home for some or all of their work week, larger -sized D/A ADUs make a home office more feasible. We in Edmonds should want to compel such folks to call Edmonds their place of home/business. Miscellaneous comments Thanks, Dave I would encourage the board to prioritize an abundance of housing (meaning, in the case of Edmonds, smoothing the path to D/A ADU construction) over the goal of a percentage of tree canopy coverage. Should the board maintain its commitment to a particular % of canopy coverage, please give property owners/developers an option to offset the cutting down of trees for the purpose of building construction by planting trees elsewhere. Packet Pg. 42 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 5:31 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-07 06:30 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-07 06:30 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/7/2024 8:30:49 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value We've designed a number of DADUs & ADUs in many Jurisditions and Edmonds is the only textarea-1700597715163-0one that requires a CUP whichs adds time and money at the expense of the Homeowner as well as keeping staff from working on more important issues at the expense of taxpayers.. MGabbert, AIA & AICP To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20083929&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 43 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Friday, February 9, 2024 7:04 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-09 08:03 PM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-09 08:03 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/9/2024 10:03:48 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value 1. There shouldn't be a restriction on the sq footage of the ADU or DADU. This should be a decision of the property owner(s). 2. There shouldn't be a requirement for an "EV-ready' parking space for new DADUs. The new code will not require parking for ADUs, so requiring textarea-1700597715163-0 parking for a new DADU is contradictory. It also contradicts the AARP conclusions regarding parking. 3. When will the new code be enacted? Inquiries to the Planning Department regarding the date have gone unanswered. 4. What process and fees will be associated with permitting an ADU? That has not been addressed in the presentation. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20088663&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 44 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2024 10:37 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-10 11:36 AM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-10 11:36 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/10/2024 1:36:32 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Please pass. With the increased cost of housing, and living, our community would benefit. textarea-1700597715163-0The regulations surrounding this proposal are sound and could only help the people of Edmonds Oshuna Oma To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20088805&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions 1 Packet Pg. 45 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2024 4:22 PM To: Planning Subject: Contact Planning and Development 2024-02-10 05:22 PM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Contact Planning and Development 2024-02-10 05:22 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/10/2024 7:22:14 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Your Name Kelly Harvill Your Email Sail4homer@gmail.com Subject Construction on apt bldg Type of Inquiry Building Permit Comment or Question Hello, I am a renting tenant at 410 Pine Street. I am writing to ask if a permit for completion of the building construction has been issued. I live on the top floor apt in this building and there have been temporary wooden supports holding up the stair landings in the eastern stairwell since October. In Message addition to the inconvenience of using the front stairs when carrying anything, I'm concerned about possible mold growth in the wall due to a large cutout in the siding being left exposed to the elements through all the rain we've had. I'd like to know the status of the permit for this project to be completed. Thank you. Acknowledgement I agree To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20088937&contextld=17263725&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 46 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2024 11:43 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 12:43 AM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-11 12:43 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 2:43:01 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-01 do not think the EV ready parking space should be mandated To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089009&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 47 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 3:50 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 04:50 AM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-1104:50 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 6:50:13 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I fully support ADUs and DADUs. However, if it is not mandated by the state, I do not support the requirement for the parking spot and for it to be EV ready. I have an existing textarea-1700597715163-0ADU in my house and have plenty of street parking where my tenant parks. If I were to add a DADU, I would still have plenty of street parking and that would not be compatible with EV parking. Adding EV parking would require a major remodel of my house so that the tenant would not have access to the main house. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089019&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 48 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 6:20 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 07:19 AM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-1107:19 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 9:19:47 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I am totally against this proposal. Edmonds is it's own unique area. We do not need to textarea-1700597715163-0clutter the space with tiny type housing to accommodate this new law! What about parking? To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089047&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions 1 Packet Pg. 49 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 9:47 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 10:46 AM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-11 10:46 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 12:46:55 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I am strongly in support of this updated policy. Increasing the amount of affordable housing means keeping families in neighborhoods, kids off the streets, and raises the density of our textarea-1700597715163-0city without having to turn every empty lot into a condo complex. There are too many abandoned and derelict houses, yet few can afford the houses that are availability available. Let's get new housing options out there! To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089093&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 50 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Greg Babinski <gbabinski@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 10:35 AM To: Planning Subject: City of Edmonds Accessory Dwelling Unit Code Update Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Some people who received this message don't often get email from gbabinski@gmail.com. Learn why this is important I support the general direction that the Edmonds Planning Board outlined in a recent slide deck, related to changes to ADU's in Edmonds. I am a long time Edmonds resident, living in the bowl for more than 15 years on either 3rd Ave S or 3rd Ave N During this period I have seen slow but continual change for the better. The future changes to Edmonds code requirements related to ADUs seem reasonable to me and should help Edmonds to continue to evolve in a planned and positive manner. We have to comply with the requirements in HB 1337. We have to recognize that the population of the US, Washington, Snohomish County, and Edmonds will all continue to grow throughout the 21st Century. And there is a huge issue with housing affordability for young people across the Puget Sound region. I was recently speaking with a young UW Associate Professor who teaches at the Seattle campus, but has to live in Everett because he cannot afford closer housing. He is the perfect example of the type of situation that the proposed updated ADU code changes would help. One caution I would have is related to allowing manufactured ADUs. This is a good idea to keep costs contained, but I r hope the code would include design requirements for manufactured ADUs that would ensure against shabby��` construction or appearance. w Q Although it is outside the purview of the Planning Board, I would also encourage the City to advocate to both o Community Transit and Sound Transit for better transit services that both supports an integrated City and also connects 0 us to the entire region with fast and frequent Edmonds -centric transit. Cn z w I encourage the Planning Board and the Council to pursue the recommended code changes. I look forward to a more dense population in Edmonds and a thriving community of both long-time and new residents. p U J Sincerely, J Q Greg Babinski, MA, GISP, EthicalGEO Fellow 201 third Ave N., Suite 316 c� r r Q Packet Pg. 51 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Friday, February 9, 2024 7:04 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-09 08:03 PM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-09 08:03 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/9/2024 10:03:48 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value 1. There shouldn't be a restriction on the sq footage of the ADU or DADU. This should be a decision of the property owner(s). 2. There shouldn't be a requirement for an "EV-ready' parking space for new DADUs. The new code will not require parking for ADUs, so requiring textarea-1700597715163-0 parking for a new DADU is contradictory. It also contradicts the AARP conclusions regarding parking. 3. When will the new code be enacted? Inquiries to the Planning Department regarding the date have gone unanswered. 4. What process and fees will be associated with permitting an ADU? That has not been addressed in the presentation. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20088663&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 52 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2024 10:37 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-10 11:36 AM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-10 11:36 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/10/2024 1:36:32 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Please pass. With the increased cost of housing, and living, our community would benefit. textarea-1700597715163-0The regulations surrounding this proposal are sound and could only help the people of Edmonds Oshuna Oma To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20088805&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions 1 Packet Pg. 53 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2024 11:43 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 12:43 AM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-11 12:43 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 2:43:01 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-01 do not think the EV ready parking space should be mandated To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089009&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 54 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 3:50 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 04:50 AM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-1104:50 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 6:50:13 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I fully support ADUs and DADUs. However, if it is not mandated by the state, I do not support the requirement for the parking spot and for it to be EV ready. I have an existing textarea-1700597715163-0ADU in my house and have plenty of street parking where my tenant parks. If I were to add a DADU, I would still have plenty of street parking and that would not be compatible with EV parking. Adding EV parking would require a major remodel of my house so that the tenant would not have access to the main house. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089019&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 55 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 6:20 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 07:19 AM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-1107:19 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 9:19:47 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I am totally against this proposal. Edmonds is it's own unique area. We do not need to textarea-1700597715163-0clutter the space with tiny type housing to accommodate this new law! What about parking? To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089047&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions 1 Packet Pg. 56 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 9:47 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 10:46 AM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-11 10:46 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 12:46:55 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I am strongly in support of this updated policy. Increasing the amount of affordable housing means keeping families in neighborhoods, kids off the streets, and raises the density of our textarea-1700597715163-0city without having to turn every empty lot into a condo complex. There are too many abandoned and derelict houses, yet few can afford the houses that are availability available. Let's get new housing options out there! To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089093&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 57 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 11:51 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 12:51 PM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-11 12:51 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 2:51:01 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0 Whatever final rules or regulations are adopted, it is crucial that they be enforced to legitimize the rules and regulations. Otherwise, it's all a farce. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089119&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions 1 Packet Pg. 58 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 12:04 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 01:03 PM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-1101:03 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 3:03:53 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value permits needed. YES Attached or detached OK. 1 per lot only. Any configuration? NO Explain textarea-1700597715163-0 planned residential zones. NO prefab for rentals or occupancy. NO on 24 ft. NEED rear setbacks. NO on 1200 Sq feet. too big. Want design restrictions, Owner occupancy required. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089123&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions 1 Packet Pg. 59 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 12:04 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 01:04 PM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-1101:04 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 3:04:11 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value As single family home owners in Edmonds, we strongly support these changes. Allowing textarea-1700597715163-0 DADUs will increase property owner flexibility in allowing more housing options for all. The ability to add a DADU instead of an attached unit makes sense for us and many others. The parking spot provision is spot on. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089125&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 60 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 4:42 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 05:41 PM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-1105:41 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 7:41:49 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value On the channel 5 news a few days ago was some great look back and resident interviews about the Lahaina / Maui fire. It seems much of the neighborhood fires spread uncontrollably because of the urban density — the neighborhood streets were so crowded with parked cars and boats that fire engines and the like were not able to get to the fires, textarea-1700597715163-0 resulting in the horrible devastation. Edmonds was not designed and planned for ADU / DADUs and high density — parking, sewer, water, power, public transportation and other infrastructure. I am also very concerned with predictable increase in crime that always comes with density. While changes in the density code are apparently required, specific strict requirements and fees are not. Please keep the Lahaina deaths and devastation in mind. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089213&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 61 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 8:14 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 09:14 PM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-1109:14 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 11:14:14 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value A DADU would be a wonderful thing for my family to be able to add to our property. We textarea-1700597715163-0 have a child who will likely never be fully independent due to developmental delays and this would allow him some independence. This will open up so many housing options in Edmonds. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089233&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 62 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2024 8:58 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-11 09:57 PM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-1109:57 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/11/2024 11:57:58 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-01 am against allowances to increase allowances accessory dwellings. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089251&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 63 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 8:19 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-12 09:18 AM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-12 09:18 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/12/2024 11:18:52 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Any approach to allowing for additional housing in a fixed space without an accompanying plan and funding to provide additional city infrastructure will lead to a reduction of services and impact the quality of life for all residents. The city council has been told this numerous textarea-1700597715163-0times, yet continues to repackage the concept, while providing only supporting arguments. Who is the council representing; what is their motivation; why aren't they listening? Please go back to the Edmonds housing survey results of a couple years ago or issue a new objective survey, then act on the majority's response. Thank you To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089681&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 64 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 8:30 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-12 09:29 AM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-12 09:29 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/12/2024 11:29:35 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value We live in unincorporated Esperance, thank god. When my stepdad died, my mom was as suddenly looking for an affordable place to live. The best of her options was going to bankrupt her in just a few years. I discovered DADUs were allowed, so she had a tiny home on our property. Mom is now safe and happy, and the whole family is relieved. When she is textarea-1700597715163-0gone, my brother will move in, and when he is gone, perhaps my kids will move in. We don't ever plan to rent it. This wouldn't have been possible if we were incorporated. DADUs saved my mother a lot of money, and kept this family together and stable. It also prevented us from having to sell our lot to a developer that would put six homes on it. A vote for DADUs is a vote for less traffic, it is a vote to fight sprawl and crowding, and it is a vote for families who need a better option. Thank you. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20089712&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 65 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 11:23 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-12 12:22 PM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-12 12:22 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/12/2024 2:22:53 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Two ADUs makes every property a TRlplex- avoid at every cost. PARKING must be included textarea-1700597715163-0for all residents. EV not necessary. Require designated garbage can areas, preferably near street. Screened or fence. 600 size max for ADUs. Starting with this size or smaller is the best way to begin. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20090405&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 66 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 2:56 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-12 03:55 PM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-12 03:55 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/12/2024 5:55:48 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0 Not crazy about decreased set backs. Fences with space makes good neighbors To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20091398&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 67 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 5:07 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-12 06:06 PM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-12 06:06 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/12/2024 8:06:41 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I feel like this is being shoved down our throats weather we want it or not! We worked hard to buy into a SFR 30 plus years ago, If you think for one second this is a cure to affordable housing you need serious help! We have no parking as it is, no sidewalks to walk safely, No textarea-1700597715163-0design requirements this is total BS all the city is looking for is MORE TAX DOLLARS!. You can remove "Edmonds mind of day" under the current GMA we already meet the requirements, don't think for a minute that my neighbor that spent 75k on her ADU is going to rent it out for less than current rate or turn it in to a air BNB you have to put in restriction s. EV charger is a joke there needs to be a stand against this whole mess that is being forced on us. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20091581&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 68 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2024 2:47 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-15 03:46 PM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-15 03:46 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/15/2024 5:46:42 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I am all for allowing detached ADUs as long as they are prohibited from becoming short- term rentals. The goal should be increased housing availability for multi -generational textarea-1700597715163-0families and others who want to live and/or work in Edmonds, and not increased accommodations for tourists. I am also in favor of the development of converting a single- family lot into a mini tiny home complex where friends can age in place together but all have their privacy and separate self-contained space when needed. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20098757&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 69 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Jon Milkey <jpmilkey@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2024 7:36 AM To: Planning Cc: JPM Subject: Fwd: ADU Comments Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Some people who received this message don't often get email from jpmilkey@gmail.com. Learn whV this is important Good morning, Please include my comments below in your review. I believe the City is able to do BOTH 1) use ADU's as a tool to increase alternative housing, and 2) align the ADU policy with the Edmonds charm, vibe, feel... Hope we are diligent/smart/tenacious enough to prevent Edmonds from resembling the mistakes, oversights or collateral damage (crime, lack of neighborhood character, pollution, environmental damage...) of increasing housing density. 1. 24' height limit will obstruct views - please protect the view shed. Specifically, an ADU built in the backyard on the west facing hillside, will W obstruct the view of the neighbor to the east, north and south. A 1-story a primary residence constructs a 2-story ADU - a view that previously o existed is now obstructed. 2. Does the 24' height limit include chimneys, railings, vents, skylights, roof W decks or solar panels 3. I did not see any off street parking requirements for ADU's. Street o parking reduces areas for bikes, impacts the safety of pedestrians and vehicle passage. Drive down the side streets in Ballard - they are a essentially one-way streets and cars often have to back for a long distance to permit passage of cars in the alternate direction. 4. Will the max coverage rate of 35% still apply. Does this include all a impervious surfaces. 5. ADU can be zero lot line in alleys. Request a minimum of 5' for a setback since usable access, egress, and entrance may be occurring in the alley - this is a safety issue since cars are permitted to use alleys and often work is completed from the alley access including landscaping. Will the Packet Pg. 70 7.1.a City take back the City alley property where homeowners have extended their lots into the alley? 6. Can a home business be run out of an ADU - customers may visit the ADU and further impact the parking issues 7. Can a roof deck be built on an ADU potentially further impacting the neighbors view - people, umbreallas and trellises extend the roof height well beyond 24' and further impact views... 8. Can an ADU be wider than the primary residence (width extends beyond Y the width of the primary residence)- this will change the neighborhood appearance if visible from the street. 9. Is ADU required to resemble the appearance of the primary residence in a any way - color, appearance, architecture... 1o.Can the ADU be a "mobile home" 0 11.Appears that your earlier discussion about being able to separate and o possibly sell the ADU from the primary residence is not currently on the table. I would anticipate that separate utilities would be required for gas, water, sewer, storm and electricity. Can Edmond's utility system handle the increased loads or are existing "pipes" (water, sewer, storm and N power) able to handle the increased load 12.Will there be additional storm water detention or storage requirements or E will all new stormwater be discharged to the existing system - can our 0 system handle the increased load 13.Is there a requirement to maintain tree cover a 14.Can ADU's be rented as Air BnB's or short term rentals r 15.Are the same number of people permitted to reside in an ADU as a primary residence W 16.EV charging stations required for ADU's o 17.Will fire sprinklers be required if fire department access to the ADU is o limited due to primary residence Cn 18.Possible environmental requirements for ADU's - no gas, energy star z appliances, heat pumps, local sourcing of materials W 5 Jon and Kelli Milkey 206.334.4318 z Packet Pg. 71 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Friday, February 16, 2024 4:20 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-16 05:20 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-16 05:20 PM(M5T) was submitted by Guest on 2/16/2024 7:20:18 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0I am in favor of ADUs in Edmonds. As a resident it is comforting to have this option for our children if they should ever need it and also as a great option for seniors. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20101635&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 72 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2024 8:43 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-17 09:42 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-17 09:42 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/17/2024 11:42:52 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Dear Edmonds Planning Division, I live in the south most part of Edmonds on Maple Lane/84th on a flat lot with 1/4 acre. My hope is to build an ADU in the back SW corner for textarea-1700597715163-0flex space: office, visiting guests, sons returning from east coast, etc. The current set back from the rear is 15 ft which would push the unit much closer to my primary home. I hope that this will be amended in your upcoming code adjustments. I have assumed it would be 5 ft. yours, Lucy Smith 206-972-4276 To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20102256&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 73 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Wally Danielson <oilcanw@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2024 1:43 PM To: Planning Subject: ADU Code Update ISome people who received this message don't often get email from oilcanw@gmail.com. Learn why this is important I am extremely disappointed in how the state legislature has removed land use control from Edmonds. There appears to be little remaining leeway. Please make the new updates as restrictive as you can to preserve the look and feel of existing Edmonds. Packet Pg. 74 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2024 11:56 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-19 12:55 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-19 12:55 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/19/2024 2:55:40 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0Can a DADU be placed in a large front yard if the primary home is set back against the property line. We are on a corner lot and would like to use the front yard for this purpose To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20103275&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 75 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: esskar@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 3:58 PM To: Planning Subject: For your consideration regarding the size of DADUs ISome people who received this message don't often get email from esskar@aol.com. Learn why this is important Greetings, The planning board as well as the city council should adopt the recommendation of staff and allow DADUs to be up to 1200 sq feet in size. There are a number of reasons why this recommendation should be adopted. A maximum of a 1000 sq foot DADU is too small for most families with children that wish to reside in Edmonds. A larger DADU could have two or even three bedrooms. Most DADUs of 1000 sq. feet or less would most likely have only one bedroom. The state legislation addressing DADUs established 1000 sq. feet as the absolute minimum size to be constructed. In doing so, they envisioned larger DADUs. 1200 sq. feet is still very close to the minimum but will be more useful in meeting the goals of increasing affordable housing. Almost all of the residential parcels in Edmonds other than in the downtown core are at least 8000 sq feet, and many residential parcels are much larger. Single family residential parcels in Edmonds can easily accommodate 1200 sq. foot DADUs without losing the Edmonds' "small town feel". It is more expensive to construct smaller DADUs than larger ones. This is as a result that it is more u, expensive to construct bathrooms and kitchens as compared to bedrooms and living rooms. With a a larger DADU, construction costs would be less expensive per square foot, and owners would better 0 0 recoup their investment with higher rent for a larger and more functional DADU. Cn In addition, a larger DADU would result in more homeowners willing to relocate to the DADU, and LU renting their larger houses out to families that need the extra space and can afford the rent. That E would be a win/win for all concerned. 0 U J J Most DADUs will probably be two floors rather than one. It is less expensive to go up rather than out a when building. As a result, the footprint for a 1200 sq. foot DADU would be minimal as compared to a 1000 sq foot DADU. That is a minor increase in size in order to increase affordable housing and E make it more worthwhile for more owners to construct DADUs. a I thank you for taking the above into consideration Eric Soll Edmonds, WA Packet Pg. 76 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 10:15 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-20 11:14 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-20 11:14 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/21/2024 1:14:39 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I'm for the use of adu's within certain guidelines. The adu should be limited to 1000sf unless textarea-1700597715163-0the adu is within the existing primary residence. Additionally an attached or detached adu should not be more than 10% higher than the primary residence up to a maximum 25ft height. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20107484&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 77 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 10AS AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-21 11:45 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-21 11:45 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/21/2024 1:45:03 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I am in strong support of Edmonds expanding access and relaxing codes to allow more textarea-1700597715163-Oconstruction of detached accessory dwelling units. Please do everything you can to expand housing options in our city! To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20108430&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 78 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 12:40 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-21 01:40 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-2101:40 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/21/2024 3:40:21 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I think the allowance for ADU's on private home property is a wonderful idea, I like the idea textarea-1700597715163-Oof being able to care for family members and earn extra income. I would like to see this allowed as long as the restriction is one unit per lot and the current guidelines are met. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20108759&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 79 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2024 5:02 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-21 06:01 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-2106:01 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/21/2024 8:01:49 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value We are in a housing crisis, and need to consider all housing options for Edmonds! ADU's allow elderly residents to downsize and age in place, younger families to have a home, textarea-1700597715163-0single parents and individuals to have a smaller rental unit, more affordable housing options for our workforce that cannot afford to live here, as well as strengthens the community overall! To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20109799&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 80 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 2:49 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-22 03:49 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-22 03:49 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/22/2024 5:49:03 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I am a home owner in Edmonds and support the proposals listed above. Not only for the textarea-1700597715163-0aging population but for family members wanting to support their adult, mentally ill children but need space separation. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20111889&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 81 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2024 8:01 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-28 09:00 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-28 09:00 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/28/2024 11:00:39 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Height limit is way to high for a view community, no parking requirement is not thoughtful. Neighbor builds a new structure in backyard, blocks my. textarea-1 700597715163-0 View then parks in front of my house forever. Awesome recommendation city. Livability of existing residents once again marginalized by focusing all on positive, never any negatives when it comes to expanding tax base. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20125587&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 82 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Greg Brewer <edmondsremodel@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2024 2:S8 PM To: Planning; McLaughlin, Susan; Council; Public Comment (Council); Rosen, Mike Subject: DADU Public Comments To Planning Board, Planning Department, City Council and Mayor Rosen, HB 1110 and 1337 go a long way to allow additional housing in the state. Maybe too far. Many municipalities are struggling to understand how these two laws will work together. Nobody knows exactly how these policies will look when built out. Edmonds, with its diverse landscape, lot sizes, terrain and view corridors will be adversely affected. The pending density will not be equitably placed for these very reasons. It will already be nearly impossible to guide with the State blanket up zones. The City has much to consider before proposing additional code changes. Why with all the unknowns would the City go above and beyond the State requirements? We can always adjust as needed after we digest this massive mandated shift in our housing policies. These new laws appear to be for adding density at any and all costs, streamlining the process with reduced fees with little or no thought to needed infrastructure. Any good builder or developer knows infrastructure comes first, then density can follow. For example, we are currently lacking a fully functional sewage plant. We cannot add more density without solving our current sewage problem! Additionally, our roadways will be adversely affected with more density and the addition of bike lanes, a bulb outs and other traffic calming measures. The City is continually constricting our arterials while at = m the same time proposing more density and less parking. These two opposing philosophies do not r L jibe. This will inevitably lead to the degradation of our city's livability and quality of life. w In watching last night's presentation to Council, another concern comes to mind -- the fact that the City o will not allow for separate metering by the Edmonds' water department and is requiring property owners 0 to meet this need on their own property. This could become messy as rentals or when the properties are ~ Cn divided and sold separately. As a builder, I know that separate metering is the preferred way to go. Z Furthermore, Olympic Water District, which serves part of Edmonds, requires a separate meter. It would Lu behoove the City to align with Olympic and have one policy for all. Shortcutting the infrastructure 2 0 process in the beginning will lead to problems down the road. 0 J J Q I say pull back and absorb the State's initial mandate before forging ahead with even more liberal code changes. We need to take the time to get it right. Our special city deserves this consideration. m E Sincerely, a Greg Brewer Packet Pg. 83 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2024 12:17 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-28 01:16 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-28 01:16 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/28/2024 3:16:59 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value These amendments are long overdue. I do object to the size limit being raised from 800 sq. ft. to 1200. Considering 1200 square feet is the average size of many of the ramblers built in the 1950's, that represents the size of a complete second house on a single lot. If two 1200 sq. ft. additional structures are allowed, that leaves far too little space for living oxygen - emitting carbon dioxide -sequestering plants. I am already alarmed at how textarea-1700597715163-0lot-filling giant boxes are already devouring green space in the dividing of larger lots into parcels that produce little other then separating occupants from nature and natural light as well as eliminating any green growing space to satisfy the greed of developers. Also, if an EV ready parking space is mandated, so ought solar power generation be required for same. One of the best uses of solar electricity generation is to power a vehicle and the best way to power an EV is with solar power. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20135064&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 84 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 9:47 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-26 10:47 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-26 10:47 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/27/2024 12:47:01 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I am very appreciative of all the effort that went into this comprehensive plan for Edmonds. Well done. As a long-time resident of Edmonds currently residing in downtown, I am all in favor of adu's and dadu's. This somewhat, affordable housing will make our town more accessible to more diverse people. As a realtor, I am very aware of the impact the height of a building plays in the overall aesthetics of a neighborhood especially with adu's and dadu's . I would like to limit the maximum heights as much as we can given the GMA. Having attended the Feb 14th meeting and seeing the two main proposals on the table I would textarea-1700597715163-0advocate for the downtown area to be able to include two adu's per SF lot, it appeared both proposals only included one unit per lot? Also make some additional tradeoffs and incentives if a proposed adu is a single story home it could get a setback trade-off to increase the adu's sq footage. Not just at the rear if there is an alley but the side or even into the front setback could be lessened..) noticed your assumption is all adu's are behind the primary home but they could also be in front?.. Having an incentive to keep the facade low or what is in keeping with the neighborhood character will help us maintain our urban village feel while increasing our capacity. I look forward to hearing the outcome. Diane Ellis 625 Alder St To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20117314&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 85 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Karen Haase Herrick <karenherrick@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 S:12 PM To: Planning Subject: Proposed Red -line changes to ADU/DADU Code Some people who received this message don't often get email from karenherrick@msn.com. Learn why this is important Dear Planning Board members: I am unable to attend the public hearing tomorrow evening [2/28/2024] regarding the proposed revisions to the ECDC regarding ADU/DADU's in Edmonds and so am submitting my comments in writing. I believe the proposed code overall does a good job in allowing for DADUs in Edmonds. I would like to see several changes, however: 1. Please keep the maximum size to 1000 square feet. 1000 sq ft is in line with current building practices for apartments in the area for 2BR/1BA units. These accessory dwelling units are not meant to be full- sized single family homes with a bathroom for every bedroom. 2. Please align the off-street parking requirements with HB 1337. While I understand that current urban planners across the country desire that we all use transit in the future, the reality is that it is not going to happen in an area like Edmonds with all the hills, rain, and unlighted areas without sidewalks. Additionally, the people most likely to live in these units other than elderly or mobility challenged individuals will be young tech workers. Their work schedules are such that they drive when they have to go into their offices because transit does not meet their needs. Additionally, there are so many areas in Edmonds with cul-de-sac type developments where there is very little street room for street parking. Having to park blocks away and walk to one's home in the dark is no longer a safe undertaking. We can protect the environment without endangering the safety of our residents. 3. Please keep the setback requirements as in current code and align as needed with HB 1337 for those ADUs on alleys. Thank you for considering my comments. Karen Haase Herrick Packet Pg. 86 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: ACE President <aceedmondspr@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 4:14 PM To: Planning Subject: Hearing Comments on ADU/DADU Red -line Code Update ISome people who received this message don't often get email from aceedmondspr@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Planning Board Members: RE: ADU/DADU Code Update — The Alliance of Citizens for Edmonds [the Alliance] is pleased that the Edmonds Department of Planning and Development [the Department] has not, with a few exceptions, gone beyond what was in HB 1337. The Department has successfully married residents' input with the requirements and language in the bill to design a thoughtful, revised ADU code. For instance, current setback and permeable coverage requirements were kept in the proposed code. It meets the letter of the law and takes into account residents' concerns and environmental and climate change needs. The Alliance supports a vote by the Planning Board to recommend adoption of the revised code if several revisions and clarifications are made. (see below) Specific Areas That Need to Be Adjusted in the Proposed Code: The proposed code goes beyond what is required by HB1337 for the maximum square footage allowed in sub districts RS10 — RS20 (larger lots), up from 1,000 to 1,200 square feet. While 1K sq. ft. is ample to allow two bedrooms, there is reason to support the greater square footage if the structure is kept to one story. A one-story ADU would make it more accessible for people with mobility issues and would be more aesthetically appealing to the neighborhood, as it would enhance light and views. ACE recommends using the additional floor space only as an incentive to avoid a second story. The second proposed change with which we do take issue is parking. The proposed code would allow for the construction of two ADU units with no required off-street parking spaces at all. HB1337 does not mandate the elimination of all off-street parking in Washington cities. ACE believes that one off-street parking spot per ADU or DADU should be required unless the unit is within % mile walking distance of a major transit stop. Additionally with respect to parking, Edmonds Community Development Code requires all new construction to have at least one electric vehicle charging station (17.115.40). The Planning and Development Department states that one EV ready parking space is mandated for each new DADU. (P&D's assumption here is that the EV parking space will be created from one of the two existing parking spaces already assigned to the principal dwelling, not a new space.) ACE believes that EV charging capacity should be made available not only to DADUs, but to both ADUs and DADUs. Many ADU's will be rented to young single professionals who realistically will have a car, likely an electric one. They will need a place to park and charge it. Accommodating electric vehicle usage is important for the environment as well. ACE recommends that (1) HB1337 be followed for parking, namely that off-street parking be required for ADU/DADUs throughout Edmonds, except for lots within one-half mile of a major transit stop and (2) that EV charging capability be required for both DADUs and ADUs. Additional thoueht for enhancine the code revision: w Q 0 O t— Cn z w O U J J Q m E r r Q Packet Pg. 87 7.1.a The Alliance proposes a two-step process using the new code to set a baseline for what works and what doesn't work in ADU/DADU construction for the Edmonds community. This should allow the city to create a baseline or starting point for deciding what works and what doesn't in future development and where code revisions may be needed. It will allow the city to thoughtfully direct future growth by keeping track of why people are or are not building ADU's. Step one in this process would involve collecting data on how many Edmonds' residents inquire about building an ADU, how many of those actually apply for a permit, and how many complete the build. We would be looking for what kinds of things stop people from moving forward. What works and what doesn't? The data compiled then would drive what code revisions would be needed in future. Step two is to revise the ADU code to reflect what we learned from our data collection. Integrating ADU and DADU's into our community is an encouraging development for many Edmonds' residents. The Alliance offers these comments in an effort to work collaboratively to make sure that including DADUs in our housing stock is done in a way that protects the beauty of our town and the environment. Karen Haase Herrick Alliance of Citizens for Edmonds (ACE) President ACE Website: aceedmonds.org ACE Housing Website: housing.aceedmonds.org Packet Pg. 88 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 3:10 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-27 04:10 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-27 04:10 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/27/2024 6:10:13 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I'm particularly troubled with allowing DADUs in environmentally or geologically "critical areas" as defined on our GIS map. HB1337 allows for this exception, yet we're not addressing it. Allowing DADUs in Planned Residential Development zones seems like government overreach. These developments typically come with restrictive property use requirements in their deeds. The city should research all plots which may have restrictions in their covenants and deeds to assure what is being proposed is legal. Reducing setback requirements on small lots to 5-feet is problematic. Two lots with a common rear property textarea-1700597715163-0line could have DADUs ten feet from one another. Is this what we really want? Along these same lines, to sell their proposal, all the graphics in the presentation show only one ADU per lot. What does it look like with two? Here may be a better example to help visualize how proximity of these structures may impact a neighborhood: Can we envision the greenspace lost? I would start with the most restrictive code the new law allows to see what that looks like. Then we can add the "Edmonds touch" to it overtime as we learn more. Right now, I feel like we're being led down a predetermined path guided by urban densification "best practices". Jim Ogonowski Edmonds resident To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20119965&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 89 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 2:08 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-27 03:07 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-27 03:07 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/27/2024 5:07:44 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Please consider these ideas for the expansion of ADU/DDU in Edmonds. I am sharing from a presentation by Karen Haase Herrick, and ACE on this topic, as I agree with their assessment and they said it better than I can! Specific areas that need to be adjusted in the proposed code: One instance where the proposed code goes beyond what is required by HB1337 is maximum square footage allowed in sub districts RS10 — RS20 (larger lots), up from 1,000 to 1,200 square feet. While 1,000 square feet is ample to allow two bedrooms, there is reason to support the greater square footage if the structure is kept to one story. A one-story ADU = M would make it more accessible for people with mobility issues and would be more M cr aesthetically appealing to the neighborhood, as it would enhance light and views. ACE recommends using the additional floor space only as an incentive to avoid a second story. One area with which we do take issue is parking. The proposed code would allow for the construction of two ADU units with no required off-street parking spaces at all. HB1337 E E does not mandate the elimination of all off-street parking in Washington cities. ACE believes v that one off-street parking spot per ADU or DADU should be required unless the unit is textarea-1700597715163-0within half -mile walking distance of a major transit stop. Additionally with respect to 3 parking, Edmonds Community Development Code requires all new construction to have at a least one electric vehicle charging station (17.115.40). The planning and development r department states that one EV ready parking space is mandated for each new DADU. (Planning and development's assumption here is that the EV parking space will be created from one of the two existing parking spaces already assigned to the principal dwelling, not a W new space.) ACE believes that EV charging capacity should be made available not only to 0 DADUs, but to both ADUs and DADUs. Many ADUs will be rented to young single O professionals who realistically will have a car, likely an electric one. They will need a place to co park and charge it. Accommodating electric vehicle usage is important for the environment Z as well. ACE recommends that (1) HB1337 be followed for parking, namely that off-street w parking be required for ADU/DADUs throughout Edmonds, except for lots within one-half 0 mile of a major transit stop and (2) that EV charging capability be required for both DADUs 0 and ADUs. I urge the planning board to consider and adopt these measures. Rosemary � FRaine 9425 Bowdoin Way Edmonds, WA 98020 — Q m To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: E c� r https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20119826&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Q Packet Pg. 90 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 1:35 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-27 02:35 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-27 02:35 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/27/2024 4:35:10 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value My family and I are eager for the opportunity to build a DADU on our property. We are in a not so unique situation, as are many in our generation, where we're faced with caring for both our parents and our children simultaneously. Even more so for us, since one of our children is Autistic and may not be able to live independently. The option of being able to textarea-1700597715163-0 build a small dwelling on our property will give him some privacy and independence, but we will still be able to be close by should he need us. Then, if he is ready to launch, we can care for our parents. Allowing flexibility in housing, like DADUs, will take pressure off of families, retirees who want to age in place and perhaps rent their larger home - there are so many positive possibilities. We are very much hoping this can become a reality for our family. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20119750&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 91 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Ryan Petty <ryanpettywrites@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 12:19 PM To: Planning Subject: Comments for the Planning Board Meeting of 2/28/24 re the Draft ADU Code Amendment Some people who received this message don't often get email from ryanpettywrites@gmail.com. Learn why this is important I offer two points for the City's consideration regarding revision of ordinances to accommodate the ADU-related policy changes under HB 1337• 1/ If the City is going to use the half -mile distance from "major transit stops" rule as a determining factor for eliminating its off- street parking requirement for the permanent construction of up to two residences on heretofore single-family lots, then it makes sense to define how the half -mile distance is to be measured... precisely. A functional test should set the standard based on the human experience of walking from one's ADU residence to the nearest bus stop —in Edmonds' case. A requirement should be that the half -mile distance be measured by following a path of public streets and rights -of -way, in accordance with the law and using crosswalks for safety (no use of approximations or "as -the -bird -flies measurements" or crossings of private property). This functional standard should be defined in ordinance so as to make the standard concrete, since quite a bit hinges on it. Then go one steD further: aDDly the rule to the man of Edmonds and communicate the result to the public. Let property owners and their citizen neighbors know precisely which lots are in and which are out. 2/ My second point is that... if the City intends to actively encourage ADU development, it should undertake a formal review to clarify its W F_ a 0 0 F_ U) F_ Z W 0 0 J J Q E a Packet Pg. 92 7.1.a parking rules and provide supportive signage for public streets particularly in those areas within half a mile of a major transit stop. Not everyone will take the bus and not every time. We can anticipate that some will have cars and park them on the street. Parking rules are clear in some neighborhoods (for example, "The Bowl") but not in others. The Seaview neighborhood north of 196th, where my wife and I live, provides an example of a neighborhood that needs its parking rules clarified —and it's not the only one. Seaview is a wonderful place of large lots and casual design, but it's worth noting that it has a mix of street types —some wide and some narrow, some with curbs and gutters, and others that are simply unmarked blacktop paths of varing widths with bar ditches as occasional features in the rights of way. No one's likely to pass a test on where you can park or what you must do to comely with the law. There are stretches of street, long and short, where individual homeowners block the rights of way from the possibility of parking by growing shrubs to the edges of the pavement and/or by planting rocks of discouraging size (a threat to the underside of any car attempting to park off of the pavement). And it's not obvious whether parking on the pavement is legal either —the situation being confusing for those who would like to abide by the law and get along with their neighbors. Clarifying parking rules in affected neighborhood areas will encourage property owners, who do not themselves directly benefit, to at least accept with grace the changes that are likely to come. Impacts can be managed and should not be ignored. z Packet Pg. 93 7.1.a Whether citizens can legally park in the rights of way is as unclear as whether property owners have the right to block them with physical obstacles... and there doesn't seem to be a city ordinance on point and no signage providing guidance either. Defining a geography where ADUs are permitted with no off-street parking requirement is sure to lead to parking confusion and a lack of social cohesion —unless the City anticipates this problem and clarifies its parking rules and communicates them with signs. I ask you please to make the effort and to do so on a timely basis, before issues are joined and problems multiply. Thank you for considering these thoughts. -Ryan Petty 8932 192nd St. SW Edmonds W P.S. Perhaps it's not necessary to say this, but any ordinance on o removing obstacles to parking from public rights of way, should be applied equally citywide, not just within the half -mile limit. W Outcomes should be communicated to all adjacent property owners in neighborhoods as they're reviewed. J J Q C d E t V ca r r-+ Q 3 Packet Pg. 94 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 11:37 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-27 12:36 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-27 12:36 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/27/2024 2:36:36 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value It appears that the requirements of the HB 1337 very much limit what the city can disallow textarea-1700597715163-0 in terms of outright sale or rental of these ADUs and DADUs in city code. In other words, if you can put it within current setback code and don't go over 24 ft., it's legal and you can sell it or rent it out as you please? Not much wiggle room as I read the law. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20119088&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 95 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 10:28 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-27 11:28 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-27 11:28 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/27/2024 1:28:06 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Smaller homes are the future! ADU's allow for people starting out in life and those textarea-1700597715163-0downsizing in later life to have housing options that are currently not found in our community. They also allow for multi -generational families to have flexibility and independence. Please expand ADU's in Edmonds! To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20118650&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 96 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 8:44 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-27 09:44 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-27 09:44 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/27/2024 11:44:06 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I am in favor of the draft code amendments. I would like to build a DADU for my aging textarea-1700597715163-0 mother to move into. My current house is too small to house another person but with a DADU on my property I will be able to look after my mom instead of sending her to a nursing home. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20118287&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 97 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Business Manager <manager.svp@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 7:50 AM To: Planning Subject: Feedback on new ADU Requirements ISome people who received this message don't often get email from manager.svp@gmail.com. Learn why this is important If a property will have 2 ADU units, require 1 of the units to be ADA compliant or accessible. This will help the aged population of Edmonds, where an owner can later have an option for aging in place. Scale back or remove current tree placement policy to allow all tree removal necessary for ADU and/or main house protection from tree damage to promote housing development within the city (avoid a repeat of the Nathan Rimmer case) Reduce ADU setback from back yard border to 10 ft min 10 feet side set back ADU up to 1300 sf for two stories. Add'I Parking: allow street parking with 1 permit for each ADU. Require up to 6-feet tall fences between the lot and adjacent properties. Eaves projecting into the setback region don't count toward setback up to 30 in Chimneys don't count up to 30 in projecting into setback space. Require bushes, tree row, and/or hedges to be no taller than 6 feet if they are wider than 4 feet and located within 5 feet of the property border. Packet Pg. 98 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 6AS AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-27 07:45 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-27 07:45 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/27/2024 9:45:20 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0Are we considering SEDU s for Edmonds favorably also ? To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20117460&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 99 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 6:35 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-26 07:35 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-26 07:35 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/26/2024 9:35:26 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0ADU and DADU as well as SEDU s ,look to be the future considering the projected influx population for Edmonds To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20115085&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 100 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Joan Bloom <joanbloom@hey.com> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 9:23 AM To: Planning; McLaughlin, Susan Cc: Council Subject: Public Comment ADUs/DADUs Planning Board and Director McLaughlin, I submitted my comments through the website, but received no confirmation they had been accepted. Thus, this may be a duplicate. I will be referencing https://cdnsm5- hosted.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server 16494932/File/20240208%20Public%20Outreach%20PP T.pdf State housing mandates are meant to support more affordable homes/dwelling units near transit. New ADU/DADU code (link above Pg. 4, What are the benefits of ADUs?) are meant to, among other things, "Support aging in place." One way to ensure that our code enhances affordability, encourages transit use, supports aging in place, and maintains livability of our neighborhoods is to focus on the allowed size of the ADUs/DADUs. Current and proposed code excludes garage/storage from allowed square footage. Pg. 25 (link a bove): "Gross Floor Area will be defined as the "interior habitable area of an accessory dwelling unit, including basements and attics but not including unconditioned space, such as a garage or non - habitable accessory structures." More cars, larger ADUs translates to decreased livability in neighborhoods. If we include garages in allowed square footage, we could have fewer cars per neighborhood and attract ADU residents inclined to use transit, or smaller vehicles for transportation. Our ADU code should require that garages and "unconditioned space" be included in allowed square footage, which would mean less non -livable space per ADU. Examples of 1200 as maximum square footage allowed: • Avg garage space for car is 240 sq ft, leaving 960 sq ft living space. • Avg garage space for SUV is 352 sq ft, leaving 848 sq ft living space • Space for - wheelchair, bicycle, e-bike, would leave more livable square footage. ADU's maximum size could then be 1200 square feet (depending upon lot size) and would be less intrusive to neighborhoods and less expensive to build. t Packet Pg. 101 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Valerie Stewart <vstewart.edmonds@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 10:16 PM To: Planning Subject: comment on amendments to ADU code ISome people who received this message don't often get email from vstewart.edmonds@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Dear Planning Board members, I am a former resident of Edmonds of over 30 years and am now a resident of Port Townsend. I was on Planning Board for 8 years. During that time, DADU's were considered but never got traction. Now the State is requiring Cities to take action thankfully. My husband and I moved out of Edmonds because we couldn't build a DADU on our 1/3 acre lot. We eventually divided the property to create a separate building lot and designed a small green home for it. This proved to be very expensive and the permitting process was very challenging so we chose not to develop our plans. In Port Townsend, we were allowed to build a carriage house in addition to the main house. By doing this we could provide affordable housing. I think you should also list carriage houses as a DADU option in the code. Even converting a garage to an ADU ought to be a consideration. I am very pleased to see these draft code amendments thus far. I wanted to make a few suggestions for you to consider: • Incentivize a smaller footprint (green building principle). An elevator could be designed into the plans to accommodate mobility issues so that a second level could be accessed. • 1 like the idea of templates for DADU's to expedite permitting and save on building costs for property owners. Check out this website: https://housingsolutionsnetwork.org/ for ideas. • 1 think owners should be required to occupy one unit on the property. This promotes a neighborhood feel which I think is the biggest issue that has kept DADU's out of the City Code • 1 do not think DADU's should be sold separately. I believe this would drive market prices of these smaller dwellings up. • 1 think DADU's should be designed to go with the character of the main house, thus keeping with the neighborhood feel and consistency. A variety of templates could be provided to choose from or maybe a pre-fab home with lots of design options (https://mykabin.com/) . This has been one of the biggest sticking point with DADU's during my time on Planning Board. • Perhaps allow one ADU to be a THOW (Tiny House on Wheels). Port Townsend just updated their code in March of 2023 to allow two ADU's per property and one can be a THOW: https://cityofpt.us/sites/default/files/fiLeattachments/planning and community development/p age/22440/thow_faq_final, _6 27_23.pdf Packet Pg. 102 7.1.a • Allow exterior entrance to DADU to be in the front of the Unit. • Consider some flexibility of footprint placement on the lot if significant native trees or a mature complex ecosystem exists and could be worked around. Tree code could address this. Thank you all for your due diligence on this very important code update. Kind regards, Val Stewart Valerie Stewart ACSM Certified Exercise Physiologist 425-420-8816 Packet Pg. 103 7.1.a This would also be a built-in disincentive to those (mostly developers) who might build two-story DADUs with a 1200 sq.ft footprint, and the first story, a 1200 sq ft garage/storage space. A stairway to the second floor is likely also considered "unconditioned space." I urge the Planning Board and Council to seriously consider this suggestion. Respectfully, Joan Bloom Edmonds Council 2012-2015 Joan Bloom Packet Pg. 104 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 2:05 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-26 03:05 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-26 03:05 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/26/2024 5:05:02 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I have tried to wade through all of the documents and may have missed this BUT please textarea-1700597715163-0 please please require that the property owner live in either the main dwelling or the ADU/DADU, preventing the property from being full of rentals. Off street parking is critical and appears to be included. Kristie Simard 7207 176th ST SW Edmonds 98026 425 743 2743 To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20116586&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 105 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 10:49 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-26 11:49 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-26 11:49 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/26/2024 1:49:00 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Easing restrictions on ADUs would have a significant positive impact for my family. As a single mom I work two jobs to be able to keep my kids in the house they have known since textarea-1700597715163-0 birth and in their Edmonds school. It would be a huge financial help for me to be able to generate income from an ADU. So often I find that the Edmonds that the council cares about is the Bowl. There are a lot of us in the "other Edmonds." We are the people this would help. Don't forget about us. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20115787&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 106 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Carol Seiler <carolseilernp@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 10:25 AM To: Planning Subject: ADU discussion and feedback Edmonds ISome people who received this message don't often get email from carolseilernp@gmail.com. Learn why this is important I have concerns about the proposal and presentation as follows: 1. Parking restrictions must be considered with at least one additional space provided. There are already 4-5 vehicles in front of homes that do not have ADU's. 2. A square foot % of the primary house must be included and restricted, or the additional building is just another house and not an ADU. At 1200 square feet as proposed, the DADU would be almost the same size as many of the existing homes which are 1100-1500 sq feet 3. A restriction on the relationship of the owner of the primary home and the DADU should be included - especially if the focus is aging in place and the availability of multi -generational housing. Otherwise it is just increased density with either rental units or condos. 4. A restriction on permitting for the size of the lot or the number of lots on a block should be included somehow Unrestricted additions would seriously diminish the community. 5. Single -level DADU's only - if the focus is "aging in place" and/or multi -generational housing. There must be clarity on the intention - it appears to just be sliding to high density housing. 6. Pre -approved design options could be helpful. 7. Utility capacity is obviously an issue and the city is already stretched. Carol Seiler, MPH, MSN CarolSeilerNP@gmail.com Packet Pg. 107 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 10:06 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-26 11:06 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-26 11:06 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/26/2024 1:06:04 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0 Permitting DADUs is vitally important to support us, as we intend to continue aging in place Please enact these amendments to the code. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20115621&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 108 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 9:29 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-26 10:28 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-26 10:28 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/26/2024 12:28:57 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value You need to Vote "NO"on HB1337, Do not destroy the City of Edmonds, by adding textarea-1700597715163-0 DADU'S..... Please, Please, Please keep our City Safe and the way it IS!!!!!Edmonds is one of the finest places to live in the State of Washington, Vote NO!!!!! sorry that I am unable to be there and Speak after living here for 38 Years Gene J Ericson To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20115524&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 109 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 8:46 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-26 09:45 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-26 09:45 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/26/2024 11:45:50 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0Terrible idea for Edmonds. Will change the city forever in a negative way. No mention of infrastructure or parking. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20115425&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 110 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Judy McCoid <mccoidjudy@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 8:27 AM To: Planning Subject: ADA code update ISome people who received this message don't often get email from mccoidjudy@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Dear Planning Biard Members, I think the revisions proposed in the ADA code to allow DADUs are well thought out, fitting the need for more housing while meeting neighborhood needs. I do think the code should include provisions for off street parking for areas more than half a mile from transit centers. People in the ADUs/DADUs will still be driving and need to be able to park off the street. Please include parking requirements in the plan. Thank you, Judy McCoid Packet Pg. 111 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Leigh Harvey <Ibharvey@windermere.com> Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2024 9:55 PM To: Planning Subject: HS bill 1337 --comments ISome people who received this message don't often get email from Ibharvey@windermere.com. Learn why this is important I have been following this for a number of years —going back to the many public comment sessions that became so hostile it was disheartening to attend. Thank you for continuing in the process. Looking at the slide presentation and the many proposals to streamline the process, allow ADU's and DADU's and condominiumizing process as well, you are on the right track. As the State of WA and the Puget Sound area in particular has grown so exponentially these last number of years, and the house prices have far exceeded people's income, I continually come across a Buyer who really desires some ability to rent portions of their property out in order to afford to live here. They may or may not use it, but a primary request is that the potential is available. The other need is for aging parents. In numerous if not almost all of my open houses for properties that are on the market, I have people come in saying that at some point they might be taking in one of their parents and want a home that allows for that. Aging in place, MIL's, allowable rent, all the bulleted items in the slide presentation I heartily agree and find them paramount in people's search for housing. I also know that not everyone is going to run out and add an ADU or DADU to their property —I have no concerns that this will fundamentally change the look or feel of Edmonds that some people fear will be a result of the changes —It will continue to be a hugely desirable community —will be welcoming— will allow long time residents to stay and live in the community they know and love and are familiar with. There is room for a few more. I applaud your work. Streamlining the process couldn't be more important; putting up less barriers to the process has been needed for decades. Could you make it sooner than July of'25! Regards, L,eg�iBuc%ian �arvetJ Managing Broker, Branch Manager AHWD , CNE Windermere Real Estate/M2,LLC 206.730.1319 1 Ibharvey@windermere.com Real Estate Opens Doors... V 1 f Packet Pg. 112 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2024 9:37 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-25 10:36 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-25 10:36 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/26/2024 12:36:52 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0I will email my comment. And BRAVO! I am excited to see this come to fruition. We need it badly --Thank you for your work and hours of research! To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20114913&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 113 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2024 4:55 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-25 05:54 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-25 05:54 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/25/2024 7:54:50 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0 No more ADU's, they'll turn a beautiful city into a congested slum, no parking. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20114717&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 114 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2024 2:29 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-24 03:29 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-24 03:29 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/24/2024 5:29:15 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0Support HB 1337. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20114461&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 115 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Friday, February 23, 2024 9:00 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-23 10:00 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-23 10:00 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/23/2024 12:00:01 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value This is a very good and important step for the City of Edmonds. Parents or grown kids can textarea-1700597715163-0live nearby and create more affordable options, as well as income sources. Definitely need to get this done. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20112708&contextld=19931715&returnto=submissions Packet Pg. 116 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2024 3:36 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-28 04:35 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-28 04:35 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/28/2024 6:35:30 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value The city is pitching the ADU/DADU code updates as beneficial for Aging in Place. This may be true for some, but for many others such as myself it may price us out of our long standing homes (unless we go to the effort and expense to build a ADU/DADU.). I'd like to see some financial protection for citizens who have lived in their homes for 20 - 30 years and whose property values and corresponding taxes will go up as a result of upzoning in their textarea-1700597715163-0 neighborhoods. I think the City should do the minimum required under the new law. This means we should take all the exceptions allowed and only allow 1000 square foot units. I like the idea of preapproved designs and other incentives to encourage decent looking units. I think short-term ADU/DADU rentals are a bad idea and will not accomplish your goal of higher density. I don't think it should be allowed, but if it is, there needs to be some compensation to neighbors who have to put up with additional noise, activity, traffic, etc. Robin Wright Edmonds citizen To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20135527&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 117 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Joan Bloom <joanbloom@hey.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2024 IS7 PM To: Haas, Rose Cc: McLaughlin, Susan; Council; Planning Subject: Re: Public Comment ADUs/DADUs You don't often get email from joanbloom@hey.com. Learn why this is important Planning Board and Council, I referenced the incorrect page number regarding the Gross Floor Area definition. The definition is on Pg. 15 of the link, not Pg. 25. Thanks for considering my comment. Rose, Sounds like a complaint. You wouldn't have received 4 comments from me if I had been notified by the server that my comment was received. What do you mean by "generating autoreply receipts for each anonymous comment received"? Respectfully, Joan Bloom Joan Bloom On February 28, 2024, "Haas, Rose" <rose.haas@edmondswa.gov> wrote: Ms. Bloom, Attached is your comment that will be submitted to Planning Board. I received 4 duplicate comments from you, gave you a confirmation to your email, and I generated a `receipt' for your comment from the Civic Live portal. I am happy to speak to IT about generating autoreply receipts for each anonymous comment received on the platform. Thankyou, i Packet Pg. 118 7.1.a Rose Haas I Planner Planning & Development Department City of Edmonds, WA Desk (425) 771-0220, ext. 1239 1 Mobile (425) 758-1058 Rose, Thanks for your reply. What I was asking was why there was no confirmation of receipt of my comments, either on line, or in an email response. This formatting of my comments is disconcerting. I carefully write my comments, and having them lumped into one long paragraph, making them difficult to read and understand is, in my opinion, disrespectful of the commenter. Not asking you to do anything about it, because you likely can't. This is the same way online comments to Council are formatted. I'll be writing my comments directly to the planning board from now on. Regards, Joan Joan Bloom On February 26, 2024, "Haas, Rose" <rose.haas@edmondswa.gov> wrote: Here is the Civic Live Notification. Thank you, z Packet Pg. 119 7.1.a Rose Haas I Planner Planning & Development Department City of Edmonds, WA Desk (425) 771-0220, ext. 1239 1 Mobile (425) 758-1058 The Permit Center is open M-F 8:00am to 4:30pm for Telephone and Digital access. In -Person walk-in service is currently available M-F 8:30am-12:00pm and 1:00pm-2:0Opm For general service: Phone 1 425.771.0220 Email I devserv.admin@edmondswa.gov GIS I www.maps.edmondswa.gov From: notification@civiclive.com <notification@civiclive.com> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 9:01 AM To: Haas, Rose <rose.haas@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Comments 2024-02-26 10:00 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-02-26 10:00 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/26/2024 12:00:31 PM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I will be referencing https://cdnsm5- hosted.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server 16494932/File/20240208%20Public%20 State housing mandates are meant to support more affordable homes/dwelling units ne, ADU/DADU code (link above Pg. 4, What are the benefits of ADUs?) are meant to, among; "Support aging in place." One way to ensure that our code enhances affordability, encou supports aging in place, and maintains livability of our neighborhoods is to focus on the;- 1700597715163- textarea-ADUs/DADUs. Current and proposed code excludes garage/storage from allowed squarf 0 above): "Gross Floor Area will be defined as the "interior habitable area of an accessory ( including basements and attics but not including unconditioned space, such as a garage accessory structures." More cars, larger ADUs translates to decreased livability in neigh[ include garages in allowed square footage, we could have fewer cars per neighborhood residents inclined to use transit, or smaller vehicles for transportation. Our ADU code sh w a 0 0 Y) z w 0 L) rep J Q an: ier es Nei eta a alir 1911 ioc att garages and "unconditioned space" be included in allowed square footage, which would mri livable space per ADU. Examples of 1200 as maximum square footage allowed: - Avg gam _ sp Packet Pg. 120 7.1.a 240 sq ft, leaving 960 sq ft living space. - Avg garage space for SUV is 352 sq ft, leaving 848 sq ft Space for - wheelchair, bicycle, e-bike, would leave more livable square footage. ADU's r Jm then be 1200 square feet (depending upon lot size) and would be less intrusive to neighbi roc expensive to build. This would also be a built-in disincentive to those (mostly developers io r two-story DADUs with a 1200 sq.ft footprint, and the first story, a 1200 sq ft garage/storai pa to the second floor is likely also considered "unconditioned space." I urge the Planning E? -d seriously consider this suggestion. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?ob-iectld=20115466&contextld = l 9931715&returnto=submiss ions <—WRD0000 jpg> From: Haas, Rose Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 9:51 AM To: Joan Bloom <joanbloom@hey.com> Subject: RE: Public Comment ADUs/DADUs Ms. Bloom, Thank you for your comment. We received the online submission as well as your email. I will also add you to our mailing list regarding the ADU updates. Rose Haas I Planner Planning & Development Department City of Edmonds, WA Desk (425) 771-0220, ext. 1239 1 Mobile (425) 758-1058 The Permit Center is open M-F 8:00am to 4:30pm for Telephone and Digital access. In -Person walk-in service is currently available M-F 8:30am-12:00pm and 1:00pm-2:OOpm Packet Pg. 121 7.1.a For general service: Phone 1 425.771.0220 Email I devserv.admin@edmondswa.gov GIS I www.maps.edmondswa.gov From: Joan Bloom <ioanbloom@hey.com> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 9:23 AM To: Planning <planning@edmondswa.gov>; McLaughlin, Susan <susan.mclaughlin@edmondswa.gov> Cc: Council <council@edmondswa.gov> Subject: Public Comment ADUs/DADUs Planning Board and Director McLaughlin, I submitted my comments through the website, but received no confirmation they had been accepted. Thus, this may be a duplicate. I will be referencing https://cdnsm5- hosted.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server 16494932/File/20240208%20Public%200utreach%20PP T.pdf State housing mandates are meant to support more affordable homes/dwelling units near transit. New ADU/DADU code (link above Pg. 4, What are the benefits of ADUs?) are meant to, among other things, "Support aging in place." One way to ensure that our code enhances affordability, encourages transit use, supports aging in place, and maintains livability of our neighborhoods is to focus on the allowed size of the ADUs/DADUs. Current and proposed code excludes garage/storage from allowed square footage. Pg. 25 (link a bove): "Gross Floor Area will be defined as the "interior habitable area of an accessory dwelling unit, including basements and attics but not including unconditioned space, such as a garage or non - habitable accessory structures." w F- Q 0 0 F- U) F- z w 0 U J J Q C E a 5 Packet Pg. 122 7.1.a More cars, larger ADUs translates to decreased livability in neighborhoods. If we include garages in allowed square footage, we could have fewer cars per neighborhood and attract ADU residents inclined to use transit, or smaller vehicles for transportation. Our ADU code should require that garages and "unconditioned space" be included in allowed square footage, which would mean less non -livable space per ADU. Examples of 1200 as maximum square footage allowed: • Avg garage space for car is 240 sq ft, leaving 960 sq ft living space. -Avg garage space for SUV is 352 sq ft, leaving 848 sq ft living space • Space for - wheelchair, bicycle, e-bike, would leave more livable square footage. ADU's maximum size could then be 1200 square feet (depending upon lot size) and would be less intrusive to neighborhoods and less expensive to build. This would also be a built-in disincentive to those (mostly developers) who might build two-story DADUs with a 1200 sq.ft footprint, and the first story, a 1200 sq ft garage/storage space. A stairway to the second floor is likely also considered "unconditioned space." I urge the Planning Board and Council to seriously consider this suggestion. Respectfully, Joan Bloom Edmonds Council 2012-2015 Joan Bloom 6 Packet Pg. 123 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Bruce Wallace <bruce@avahomesllc.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2024 5:12 PM To: Planning Subject: HB 1337 - comments ISome people who received this message don't often get email from bruce@avahomesllc.com. Learn why this is important Dear Edmonds Planning, after reviewing the slide display presented to the city council on February 27th, 2024, 1 have several comments: a) I would urge that there not be a maximum square footage on ADUs - all this does is create higher prices due to market manipulation. In all practicality, the lot coverage, height, and setback requirements will limit the size of any ADU/DADU. However, there are some situations when built on vacant or. oversized lots that a larger unit makes sense. From a builder/developer standpoint, there is minimal incremental cost on increasing square footage from 1000/1200 to 1600 - the largest sunk costs are foundation, utilities, and kitchen. At 1600 sq feet the ADUs can serve young families who are currently squeezed out of the market. If left at a maximum or 1000/1200 s.f. there will be price inflation on larger townhome units, as they will face less competition. b) In last night's council meeting I heard a council member comment that the WA Dept of Commerce has stated that HB1110 and HB1337 do not need to be additive. The council member stated something to the effect that "...we can hit our target by doing. one or the other..." It's that type of limiting thought process that has caused the current high -cost and missing middle environment. Rhetorically, why would the city want to hit a minimum target? If lot coverages, setbacks, and height restrictions allow it, why not encourage more housing if possible? c) While I am encouraged by Planning's desire to build out neighborhood hubs, to help allow a "fifteen minute city", I find it a bit ironic that many of these surrounding areas identified by planning are zoned RS-10. Higher densities will allow for the creation of more robust commercial amenities and more frequent transit - it's a virtuous circle. Doing one without the other won't get very far, in my opinion. In closing, I would assess the initial plans for 1337 implementation as "not bad". But I think the city can do more. Let's face it - we live in a high demand area with a growing population. These new households have to live somewhere. Better near job centers and mass transit than to keep pushing further north into Snohomish County, which only adds to the 1-5 misery. I look forward to continued dialogue, Bruce Wallace Ava Homes Ilc Packet Pg. 124 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2024 8:06 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-02-28 09:05 PM(MST) Submission Notification Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Comments 2024-02-28 09:05 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 2/28/2024 11:05:45 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value We drove to the city hall this evening hoping to hear the presentation and the building was dark with no one around! We are curious about the DADU proposed requirement to provide an EV hook up. Will the hook up be standard as Not All EV vehicles can use the same charging hookups!! Also, with new housing in Edmonds that has been constructed, many have less textarea-1 700597715163-0 than 25 feet setbacks. Please reduce the 25 ft rear requirement to 10 feet. We are in the Edmonds R12 zone and back up to another housing development called Meadowmere in Lynnwood. There is no ally between our properties. No right of way either. Our rear fence line has been the same for30 years. There is no need to waste 15-20 ft from the rear property line. Please reduce the rear setback to 10 feet or less to match the side setback. Thankyou. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20136002&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 125 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Haas, Rose Sent: Friday, March 1, 2024 12:51 PM To: John Weiss Subject: RE: Planning Board Meeting Feb 28 Thank you for your comments. I will pass them onto the Planning Board for their consideration. HB 1337 is a state mandate, and all of its requirements must be met. City staff believes that going above and beyond the requirements of HB1337 is the equitable best choice for the City of Edmonds. City staff also believes that the market should dictate parking space requirements for ADU additions and requiring a 3rd parking space may limit a homeowner's ability provide an ADU. City staff are not legislators and ultimately policy recommendations will be made by the Planning Board to City Council, who will make the final policy decision. Rose Haas I Planner City Hall 1 121 5th Ave N I Edmonds WA 98020 425.771.0220 ext. 1239 (office) 1425.758.1058 (mobile) rose.haas@edmondswa.gov www.edmondswa.gov The Permit Center is open M-F 8:OOam to 4:30pm for Telephone and Digital access. In -Person walk-in service is currently available M-F 8:30am-12:OOpm and 1:OOpm-2:OOpm -----Original Message----- L From: John Weiss <j rweiss98020@comcast. net> Sent: Thursday, February 29, 2024 5:49 PM W To: Haas, Rose <rose.haas@edmondswa.gov> o Subject: Re: Planning Board Meeting Feb 28 0 Please ensure all functions are operational for Zoom participants in the future, and ensure all chat and Q&A inputs are Z recorded, saved, and responded to. Lu 1 didn't save a copy, of the Q&A, but below is what I can remember: 0 U J J Many of your proposals state "required by 1337". Is that a global requirement, or can the city restrict application as long Q as SOME of the ADUs meet the requirement. e.g., are 2 ADUs per property required to be allowed in all cases? _ m E Allowing ADUs for short-term rentals (AirBnB and similar) goes directly counter to the purpose of 1337 - to increase availability of "affordable housing". A vacation rental is NOT affordable housing, and should be discouraged in residential a areas of Edmonds whenever possible. Why is the city going beyond the requirements of 1337? The city is currently in the process of REDUCING on -street (bike lane project 9th Ave S, Walnut, Bowdoin, etc) AND off- street (Edmonds Packet Pg. 126 7.1.a Commons) parking availability throughout the city. Community Transit has also reduced its route structure within the city (e.g., route that formerly along 9th Ave S, Walnut, 96th Ave W), making many areas a much farther walk to a bus stop. How can it justify exemptions for parking spots for ADUs or any other new construction? Exemptions for EV charging accommodations for parking spots in new construction goes counter to the Governor's push for EVs. How can the city justify exemptions? On 02/29/24 15:29, Haas, Rose wrote: > Mr. Weiss, > I apologize for missing your questions/ comments last night. I cannot retrieve the comments from the Q&A box from last night's meeting. If you respond to this message with your questions and comments, I would be happy to answer them and pass your comments onto the Planning Board. > Thank you, > Rose Haas I Planner > City Hall 1 121 5th Ave N I Edmonds WA 98020 > 425.771.0220 ext. 1239 (office) 1425.758.1058 (mobile) > rose.haas@edmondswa.gov www.edmondswa.gov > The Permit Center is open M-F 8:OOam to 4:30pm for Telephone and Digital access. > In -Person walk-in service is currently available M-F 8:30am-12:OOpm > and 1:OOpm-2:OOpm > -----Original Message----- * From: John Weiss <j rweiss98020@comcast. net> > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2024 7:59 PM > To: Haas, Rose <rose.haas@edmondswa.gov> > Subject: Planning Board Meeting Feb 28 > Importance: High > I have logged in twice, and do not have the capability to chat, see > other participants, or make a comment. > I have entered several questions in the Q&A box, which is the only > other function that is enabled. > Please answer my questions via e-mail or phone. > John Weiss >10139thAve S > 206-484-0372 Packet Pg. 127 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, March 3, 2024 5:15 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-03-03 06:14 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-03-03 06:14 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/3/2024 8:14:53 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Thank you for providing a forum to discuss development proposals that fundamentally change our neighborhoods and town. I think that everyone (almost) can agree that home prices are too high and that there is a housing shortage that drives much of the unaffordability. In that spirit, I welcome exploring zoning and building regulation ideas. Some of the following issues require more in-depth review: — Will we permit 24 foot homes anywhere on a property, even when the new home blocks neighbors views and sunlight? — Does the lack of total home square footage (current home of X square feet + textarea-1700597715163-01,000 square feet for each of the 2 new DADU's) size create more run-off and block out daylight from gardens — public and private? — What keeps a DADU from being another garage? — Are all areas of Edmonds appropriate for DADU's — especially in neighborhoods with small lots that already have crowded housing? — How do we incentivize developers to build townhouses that people can buy instead of renting? - How will the City of Edmonds defend preferential treatment for homeowners with an HOA restricting DADU's? There are certainly more creative ideas to build housing than simply stating: No rules apply. Developers have at it. Hank Turner Edmonds To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20141067&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 128 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, March 4, 2024 9:25 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-03-04 10:24 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-03-0410:24 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/4/2024 12:24:40 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value For comparing accessory units to apartments, has the City of Edmonds texta rea-1700597715163-0 confirmed that 2 br apartments in Western Washington actually average 1,200 sf? I work in the industry and 1,200 sf would be considered very large for a new 2 br apartment in this area. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20142038&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 129 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Al Snapp <AI.Snapp@lakesideschool.org> Sent: Monday, March 4, 2024 12:57 PM To: Planning Cc: Eck, Chris; Chen, Will; Tibbott, Neil; Olson, Vivian; Paine, Susan; Nand, Jenna; Dotsch, Michelle Subject: planning for growth Some people who received this message don't often get email from al.snapp@lakesideschool.org. Learn why this is important I have been following presentations to the city council concerning the best way to alter current code to incorporate ADU and DADU's to better achieve necessary housing growth. I am writing to support this planning and to raise a strong caution. Recently at a meeting Susan McLaughlin, city planner, shared that the Unocal property next to the Edmonds Marsh was designated as a potential site for residential housing. There have been many reports previously about why that is a very poor use of the Unocal property. It would be very unsuitable in several ways for residences and very much a poor use of the property for the city compared with acquiring and using the Unocal site to expand the Marsh and in the process revive a true estuary for the benefit of salmon habitat restoration and stormwater handling. So again, I heartily support using other means to expand housing in Edmonds including maximizing thoughtful guidelines for incorporating ADU's and DADU's into the city code. Thanks for the great efforts to support best interest of the broad community of Edmonds residents. Al Snapp Edmonds resident Packet Pg. 130 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, March 4, 2024 6:11 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-03-04 07:10 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-03-04 07:10 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/4/2024 9:10:57 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0 Please do not ease the parking spaces per dwelling requirement. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20141247&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 131 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2024 10:59 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-03-10 10:58 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-03-10 10:58 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/10/2024 1:58:30 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I support the expansion of HB1337. 1 support the flexibility to build new ADUs or convert existing structures in order to provide additional income opportunities, increase the availability of affordable housing, and support textarea-1700597715163-0 aging in place. As the parent of an adult child with MS this would allow me to have my daughter close to home while still allowing her the independance of her own living space. Martha Karl 830 Olympic Ave. Edmonds WA 98020 To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20152894&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 132 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Dawn Malkowski <dmmalkowski@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2024 1:25 PM To: Planning Subject: ADU's, DADU's Some people who received this message don't often get email from dmmalkowski@gmail.com. Learn why this is important March 13, 2024 Dear Planning Board Members, I'm writing to let you know how concerned I am, as well as many, many of our citizens are, about the your plans to alter the very fabric of our town, and what makes it such a fabulous place to live. I have attended several of the Board meetings on these housing changes, and I urge you to read and reconsider some of these changes. The current information that I have received from attending these meetings is 224 pages, not including dozens and dozens of emails that we were given to read. If these are changes are implemented, we can all kiss this lovely town good-bye. My husband and I moved here 11 years ago from downtown Kirkland, where we lived in the downtown area for 10 years. Kirkland's planning Director decided they should increase density in downtown Kirkland, along with height limits. Kirkland is similar to Edmonds in that they are a waterfront (lake) community with the small-town feel. They went up 5 plus stories, thinking that people living downtown without ample or sufficient parking, would forgo their cars and use mass transit. That did not happen. What did happen was a traffic nightmare. The infrastructure was unable to handle the thousands of people that moved into these places with their cars. Traffic and parking became a very unpleasant experience. Due to the fact that like Kirkland, Edmonds is pretty much, a built -out city, and it will be difficult to incorporate these massive changes. These ideas might work well in an area that is not yet established and built out. This brings me to another problem. You are discussing eliminating the need for parking for the ADU's and DADU's. I do not want my town to look like West Seattle, Ballard, or the Wedgewood neighborhoods. If the members haven't been to those areas recently, I urge you all to take a field trip to visit those neighborhood streets, and see what a trashy, congested mess they are. No parking requirements is a seriously bad idea. Accessory, by definition means, "a thing of secondary or lesser importance, an object or device that is not essential in itself, but adds beauty, convenience, or effectiveness of or to something else". The ADU's and DADU's that are being proposed, are too large to be an accessory unit. They are in and of themselves, full size homes using the streets as permanent parking places! 1200 square feet with a 24-foot height is not an accessory unit. It's a full-size home. I'm a baby boomer and I grew up in a home smaller than that. It was perfectly fine. Just imagine, worst case scenario, everyone in Edmonds builds another home on their property, and our population essentially doubles. That's 85,516 people. Worst case scenario, but, it's not inconceivable. How many cars does that add? Lots. Can our sewer and water systems handle that? I think not. What about pollution? It will dramatically increase. For example, car tire residue, "6PPD-quinone", running off the roads into the sound is toxic to Coho salmon, Chinook salmon, and Steelhead. 40% of Coho salmon deaths in Puget Sound have been attributed to the toxic tire runoff. It's at unhealthy levels now, imagine what will happen if we continue to increase density, especially in the bowl area. Adding to that problem of runoff, is the removal of trees, grass, shrubbery, all things green and permeable surfaces to build these structures. This will only add to toxic water runoff into the sound. Without permeable surfaces, i.e., grass, dirt, tree roots, all plant roots, to absorb and filter the water runoff, we will have more flash floods, and filthy, polluted water running into our marsh and sound. The other issue with more hard structures, i.e. wood, concrete, asphalt, metal, etc. is Global Warming. All those materials absorb and hold heat, thus raising the temperature. I find it difficult to understand the contradiction when the Packet Pg. 133 7.1.a tree board and other city officials want to increase the tree canopy, protect the sound, yet, builders and developers are permitted to literally bulldoze large amounts of mature trees in Edmonds. Imagine a 24-foot-tall building in your neighbor's backyard right next to your fence -line, that takes away any view you might have, either territorial, mountain, or water view, or the openness of the sky and sunshine. The value of your home has just dropped. If my neighbor built a 1200 sq ft, 24 ft high home in their backyard, I would not be able to have a garden as it would take all the sunlight from my yard, plus the water runoff would flood my backyard. We have already had to put in two French drains to alleviate flooding. You have also discussed allowing these structures to be sold as a separate property from the main house. Also, you discussed eliminating the need for owner occupied main house. On a final note, I do think there is a need for ADU'S and DADU'S, but on a smaller scale. Example, I have aging parents who would benefit from a small 700 sq ft dwelling in my backyard so that I could help them avoid a very expensive assisted living facility. Remember, these are accessory dwellings, not separate entities and should be treated as such. I don't envy you. This will be a tough road to navigate. The people planning to profit from this plan, are going to push hard. Most Sincerely, Dawn Malkowski Edmonds, WA 98020 425-213-2545 Sent from Mail for Windows Packet Pg. 134 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2024 12:45 PM To: Planning Subject: Contact Planning and Development 2024-03-17 12:44 PM(MST) Submission Notification Contact Planning and Development 2024-03-1712:44 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/17/2024 3:44:29 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Your Name Gerry Gibson Your Emailbonger@comcast.net Subject Density Type of Inquiry Zoning/Land Use Comment or Question First I completely agree with the comments made by Diane Buckshnis in the Beacon. Edmonds is unique in many ways, none are addressed by the Growth Management Act. As I understand , Edmonds is on target for the required growth planning. The growth of Edmonds was based upon a long standing plan and now that plan is required to change. The environment, infrastructure, and property use of Edmonds is now turned upside down. Changing density and adding ADUs are offensive to say the least. Who is to pay for the complications, infrastructure changes, Message environmental consequences of such density. Edmonds was not designed for such density. There are traffic, parking, sewer, water, and a never ending number of other matters to consider and figure out who is going to pay for this. I certainly do not want to pay for these changes. I understand the city cannot refuse to make the mandated requirements, but I recommend the amounts the city can charge for permits, use and other fees could possibly detour much density development by making such fees high enough. However, it can be done, I am against the density increases and urge the city to do whatever it can to keep Edmonds Edmonds. Acknowledgement I agree To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20166262&contextld=l 7263725&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 135 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 3:26 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-03-18 03:26 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-03-18 03:26 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/18/2024 6:26:21 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I support HR 1337. 1 bought a SFH in Edmonds with a basement at the end of 2023. My mortagage is very high at the moment. Creating an ADU in the textarea-1700597715163-0 basement and renting it out would be a great help. That in turn will help someone to have a living space. I think it's a win -win situation for all involved. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20168578&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 136 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2024 6:11 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-03-26 06:10 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-03-26 06:10 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/26/2024 9:10:32 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I support these measures and believe it will help increase housing textarea-1700597715163-0 availability and allow people to age in place. I had one at an only property in Seattle and plan to build one for my mom to age into. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20189675&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 137 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2024 10:10 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-03-26 10:09 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-03-2610:09 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 3/26/2024 1:09:32 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value Pleaseeeeeee pass the ADU and DADU construction in City of Edmonds, textarea-1700597715163-Owould really help the owners and generational growth of Edmonds. Thank you! To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20181233&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 138 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Robert Chaffee <robertgchaffee@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2024 3:46 PM To: Planning Subject: ADU's and DADU's Some people who received this message don't often get email from robertgchaffee@gmail.com. Learn why this is important I have many problems with HB1337. Unfortunately, we're stuck with it. That said, we must use every "loophole" to preserve our City. First a question. There appear to be 2 different statements regarding the requirement for off street parking. The first says it can't be required within 1/4 mile of a major transit stop and another says 1/2 mile. What am I missing? Further, what sense does it make to enforce this requirement for our ferry terminal/train station. Most people who use the ferry need a car even if they don't take it on the ferry. Also this will encompass Sunset North to Casper. What happens to parking on Sunset, 3rd Ave etc? Where will all the bike lanes go with all this on street parking? One of the biggest fallacies in this bill and the other two is that cars are going away. Our infrastructure will be overwhelmed with 2 accessory dwellings on all these single family lots. This will result in more "sewage" discharge into the sound and flooding from our overmatched storm water system. Furthermore, allowing the cutting down of trees throughout our City will harm the environment. Please use these real problems, to restrict the damage that can and will be done by HB1337. Bob Chaffee Edmonds Packet Pg. 139 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: votepetso <votepetso@aol.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2024 4:56 PM To: Planning Cc: Council; Rosen, Mike Subject: ADU/DADU [Some people who received this message don't often get email from votepetso@aoI.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ] These comments are my own, and not as a member of any government or group. Please table ADU/DADU changes based upon 1-1131337/RCW 36.70A.680 and .681, until after the comprehensive plan updates, and associated environmental review, are completed. The ADU ordinance does not need updated until 6 months AFTER the new plan is adopted. Today, the Biden administration/EPA made their "proposed" standards for PFAS in drinking water "official" and enforcable. RCW 36.70A.680(4) allows the City to restrict ADU's and/or DADU's in locations where development is restricted under other laws, rules, or ordinances due to a proximity to ... critical areas ... or other unsuitable charasterics of a property. Until both you and the State have adequate critical area regulations and stormwater regulations, together with the GMA environmental review, it would be premature and potentially dangerous to act on the ADU/DADU regulations. Lora Petso, as an individual and not as a member of any government or group. Packet Pg. 140 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2024 12:35 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-04-10 12:34 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-04-10 12:34 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 4/10/2024 3:34:50 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0This sounds like a fantastic idea and I wouldn't change a thing about it. I hope this moves forward as proposed. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20212080&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 141 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2024 11:55 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-04-16 11:54 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-04-1611:54 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 4/16/2024 2:54:41 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value after watching your meeting about ADU's on May 7th ,the draft on paper looks good but the back and forth bickering of of some counsel members on subjects that they are not experts at is disturbing I hope that they won't be textarea-1700597715163-0 making the decisions! I think off street parking is a must in a town like this with ferry boats, trains, bike lanes its already so congested with people Leaving there cars .please watch the meeting again and reflect on what I'm saying To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20221277&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 142 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2024 12:40 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-04-16 12:40 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-04-1612:40 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 4/16/2024 3:40:05 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value As a long time resident of Edmonds I would like to see ADU's added. Affordable rents are really hard to find in our area. This would allow current homeonwners to do many things: * The ability to downsixe and move into a ADU and rent out the existing home. * Provide extra income for seniors. textarea-1 700597715163-0 * Increase more affordable housing for young people and low income wage earners. *Still maintain Edmonds charm without needing to build taller buildings to house people. *Maximize property values. *Provide space for older parents or relatives to have affordable housing and allow us to be close enough to provide care, while still maintaining some privacy in our own homes. Thank you! Alan Thiemens 272 4TH AVE N Edmonds, WA 98020 To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20221411 &contextld=19931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 143 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: ACE President <aceedmondspr@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2024 4:02 PM To: Planning Subject: ADU/DADU Code Revision Comments ISome people who received this message don't often get email from aceedmondspr@gmail.com. Learn why this is important The Alliance of Citizens for Edmonds [ACE] previously supplied comments on the ADU/DADU Code revisions. ACE now provides the following additional comments regarding the Planning Board article titled "From parking to density, Edmonds Planning Board gets down to details of accessory dwelling units" posted April 14, 2024, in My Edmonds News (MEN). We highly recommend the Planning Board implement a "Good Neighbor" approach [framework parameters identified throughout content following] when you finalize the proposed code updates because of HB 1337. The article in MEN included Board member comments including DADU's and ADU's (units) being used for aging parents, considering neighbor's privacy, not blocking views and aesthetics (not looking out of place), requiring off street parking for larger units and "by promoting that one-story height, it also takes care of some of that look and feel and have things being cohesive". We greatly appreciate your recommending "If property owner's limit ADU's height to 15 feet, they would receive "setback reduction incentives" which is allowing a minimum of a 5-foot rear setback. These might all be considered Good Neighbor units. Good neighbor units might also include a 15-foot height, similar construction materials and color of the primary residence, windows located to maximize neighbor privacy, no roof decks, and maintaining a minimum 10' rear setback incentive on smaller lots. Department of Commerce guidance also identifies that a local government may choose to require an owner to occupy either the primary or an accessory unit when a unit is used as a short-term rental (STR) [Commerce Final ADU Guidance 2023.pdf (wa.gov), p.12]. Incentives for good neighbor considerations might include reduced impact and permit fees and priority permit review. Approving a standard ADU/DADU design (possibly smaller to minimize impacts and costs) with good neighbor consideration could greatly reduce your permit review time. Good neighbor considerations are in -line with Department of Commerce guidance (Guidance for Accessory Dwelling Units in Washington State v3.4) which identifies the following benefits (not all inclusive) of ADU's: provide a housing type that blends in well with existing low density residential neighborhoods; cater to our state's changing demographics, including more seniors and smaller household sizes; provide housing that is typically more affordable; and reduce climate impacts because ADUs tend to be smaller and use less energy. ADU and DADU gross floor areas (GFA) could be much larger than 1,200 sf since outside bays/docks/spaces, garages, balconies, decks, and patios are not included in the GFA calculation. A larger unit with a 2nd story may not enable seniors to age in place, would not be more affordable, and would contribute to climate impacts and use more energy. These larger, 1200 sf units, then, do not appear to be aligned with the rationale guidance referenced earlier in the paragraph. ACE continues to support our recommendations provided in the article titled "Commentary: Accessory development code draft update a good start" posted February 25, 2024, in MEN. We still recommend a two-step process. Step one would involve collecting data to identify lessons learned to drive what code revisions may be needed in the future. Step two would be to revise the ADU Code to reflect what we learned from our data collection. We also identified specific areas we recommend be adjusted in the proposed code: allowing 1,200 sf units on larger lots as an incentive if the structure is kept to one-story (15 feet), requiring one off-street parking spot per unit unless the unit is within'/2 mile of a major transit stop, EV charging stations should be made available to both ADU's and DADU's. w Q 0 O H Cn H z w O U J J Q m E r r Q Packet Pg. 144 7.1.a Thank you for allowing us to share our comments in order to expand on our previous input. Respectfully, Karen Haase Herrick Alliance of Citizens for Edmonds (ACE) President ACE Website: aceedmonds.org ACE Housing Website: housing.aceedmonds.org Packet Pg. 145 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Jon Milkey <jpmilkey@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, April 22, 2024 12:25 PM To: McLaughlin, Susan; Planning; Council Cc: J PM Subject: Proposed ADU Update Considerations - Neighborhood Friendly Code and Pre -Approved ADU Plan Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged We hope you consider implementing "neighborhood friendly" concepts when proposing your ADU code update and when designing a pre -approved ADU plan. A pre -approved ADU plan could be one story (no stairs for aging in place and minimizes obstructing views), locate windows for privacy, be similar in color and materials as principal residence, and be optimally sized for rental and purchase affordability and minimal environmental impact. We reviewed the Department of Commerce guidance (Guidance for Accessory Dwelling Units in Washington State v3.4) and note below where your proposed code updates (April 14 post in My Edmonds News) exceed/differ from the requirements in HB 1337: 1. No off-street parking requirements 2. 1,200 sf gross floor area (GFA) maximum 3. Reducing rear setbacks from 15' to 5' (in some instances) on smaller lots 4. Not restricting the use of ADU's for short term rentals (STR, RCW 36.70A.680(5)(a)) 5. Design standards: "In some cases, standards may be used to address privacy, for example, making sure that the ADU's windows are located to preserve privacy between the ADU and neighboring properties of private open space." Your proposed code updates, even though they exceed/differ from the requirements in HB 1337, may have less a neighborhood impact in some areas. However, it is possible, that an owner could construct a 2,400 sf ADU (1,200 sf = living space over a 1,200 sf "garage" that could be converted at a later date), with a roof deck and a 5' rear setback and? use it as a short-term rental. Noise, traffic, lack of privacy, minimal separation, lights at night and further obstructing a view greatly disrupt a neighborhood. w Parking: possible off-street parking requirements for larger ADU's, if unit will be used as a STR or if ADU's will be sold as a a condo. Could "no required off-street parking" be used as an incentive for a neighborhood friendly design concept. o O Maximum Size: 1,200 sf GFA — the ADU gross floor area may be much more than 1,200 sf once a garage, deck or U j balcony is constructed since these are not included in the GFA calculation. An ADU constructed to this size may be larger z than many single-family homes (SFH). Department of Commerce guidance states "... the ADU is accessory to a primary Lu residential unit. As a result, the ADU will be smaller, typically have fewer people living in it, and have a reduced demand for municipal services." Larger ADU's may have similar impacts as a single-family home yet only 50% of impact fees are O required. The cost of construction in the area is extremely high which will preclude renting or selling ADU's at an U "affordable" cost. � Q Rear Setbacks: Reducing rear setbacks for smaller lots has a greater potential to obstruct views or preclude c privacy. Reducing a rear setback to 10' for a single story ADU on smaller lots would provide more privacy than the E proposed 5' rear setback. r r Short Term Rentals (STR): An ADU used as an STR is no longer a potential asset as an affordable rental or purchase. A Q short-term rental could significantly impact the character of a neighborhood Design Standards: Preserving privacy and using similar building materials and colors may help an ADU "blend in well with existing low density residential neighborhoods". Also, roof top decks may impact the neighborhood... Pre -approved ADU plans Packet Pg. 146 7.1.a "The design process can add significant time and expense to a project. To streamline this step, some local governments offer detached ADU plan designs that have been pre -approved for compliance with building codes. ADU applications with pre -approved plans are typically approved in a shorter timeframe and with reduced permit fees since the designs have been vetted by staff. Even though the designs have been pre -approved all other code provisions, like site -specific standards, still apply." Question: The Department of Commerce guidance states "Actions taken by a city or county to comply with new requirements are exempt from legal challenge under GMA or SEPA". Does this also include actions that exceed/differ from HB 1337 and possibly expose the city to lawsuits. Question: Does the city propose to "Create a program to encourage legalization of unpermitted ADUs". "Creating a program to allow legalization of unpermitted ADUs can help promote safe, legal structures and open them up to rental opportunities." Thank you in advance for your review and response. Jon and Kelli Milkey Packet Pg. 147 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: zipperje@comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2024 4:08 PM To: Planning Cc: Council; McLaughlin, Susan; 'Joan Bloom'; 'ROGER PENCE' Subject: ADU code review (April 24, 2024) Public Comment Some people who received this message don't often get email from zipperje@comcast.net. Learn why this is important Planning board members, I do not support any incentives to build ADU's taller or with increased lot coverage. The use of incentives to allow taller and bigger ADUs for "green building" is too much, too soon for the following reasons: • Building an ADU taller thank the state ADU law allows is not "green"...it uses more resources to build it and it will use more energy to heat/cool it compared to a code -minimum height. • More lot coverage is not "green". More impervious surface causes mor storm runoff. More lot coverage means more trees cut down. More lot coverage means less room for on -site parking. • By incentivizing street parking rather than on -site parking, the code will cause added paving in the numerous street sides of Edmonds that are presently too narrow to allow parking. All that added paving around town is not "green". In fact, paving on site by an ADU builder will require code -compliant "green" storm runoff treatment for that parking. It was alarming to read that the Board is considering "Green Building" incentives to allow a five foot height bonus and 40 percent lot coverage. It seems that the Board has ignored the numerous public comments hoping to minimize the impact of state -mandated ADUs on our neighborhoods. The best way to respond to the public concerns is to allow for the minimum sizes of ADU mandated by the state but incentivize smaller ADUs, one story ADUs, on -site parking, view preservation, and other means of minimizing the impact of the new ADUs on Edmonds infrastructure, environment, and neighborhoods. Please note that I am a supporter of responsible ADU infill of selected lots in Edmonds. I am alarmed at the direction this draft code is taking and urge the Board to slow down on "juicing up" the code. Please stick to the basic framework to allow some low impact ADUs to pop up over the next few years before incentivizing any bigger structures. I'd also like to see the Board address the possibility of banning short term rentals in Edmonds. This has been discussed in my prior comments and by others. Banning AirBnB and VRBO has the potential to have the greatest immediate impact on housing affordability in Edmonds by opening up numerous rentals to the market. Thank you, John Zipper 9111 Cascade Drive Edmonds, WA 98026 425-478-7748 Packet Pg. 148 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Joan Bloom <joanbloom@hey.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2024 1:18 PM To: Planning Cc: Council; McLaughlin, Susan Subject: ADU code review (April 24, 2024) Public Comment Planning board members, You're going the wrong way on the ADU code. Please consider the following four requests: • Developers do NOT need incentives to build in Edmonds. Green building should be built into our CODE, not used as an incentive for developers to get a 5 foot building height increase. Please, please vote AGAINST the "Green Building Incentives Plan"- Draft proposal (for existing single family parcels - IRS zoning) for green building incentives includes 5' building height increases, reduced setbacks, only 1 off street parking space, and DADU's on smaller lots may have 40% coverage (5% increase). • Please consider INCLUDING "unconditioned space" in allowed ADU square footage. Current and proposed code EXCLUDES garage/storage from allowed square footage: "Gross Floor Area will be defined as the "interior habitable area of an accessory dwelling unit, including basements and attics but not including unconditioned space, such as a garage or non -habitable accessory structures." More cars, larger ADUs translates to decreased livability in neighborhoods. If we INCLUDE garages in w allowed square footage, we could have fewer cars per neighborhood and attract ADU residents inclined a to use transit, or smaller vehicles for transportation. Our ADU code should require that garages and 0 0 "unconditioned space" be included in allowed square footage, which would mean less non -livable space per ADU. z w For more detail, see my Reader View in myedmondsnews: 0 U https://myedmondsnews.com/2024/02/reader-view-when-it-comes-to-accessory-dwelling-units-think- a small/ a� E • Please revise your "incentives" to incentivize property owners to build ADUs to provide multi -generational housing. a "Aging in place" is desired by most elders. Assisted living settings are very expensive, thus unsuitable/unaffordable for many elders. In conjunction with incentivizing property owners use of their property for multi -generational housing, a survey should be completed of how many homes currently have ADUs that have not been grandfathered, how many of those provide below market rate housing to their residents, and how many current property owners would consider building an ADU for "aging in place." Packet Pg. 149 7.1.a Please consider retaining the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) requirement for ADUs. Retaining CUPs would allow surrounding property owners to submit concerns related to light, air, proximity to their homes, view blockage, etc, which will very likely be issues faced by surrounding property owners. Respectfully, Joan Bloom Joan Bloom Edmonds is a gift. Let's show our appreciation. Packet Pg. 150 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2024 8:21 AM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-04-25 08:20 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-04-25 08:20 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 4/25/2024 11:20:31 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-OWould like ADUs to be used as rentals. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20237962&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 151 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Friday, May 10, 2024 2:47 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-05-10 02:47 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-05-10 02:47 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 5/10/2024 5:47:16 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I have two high schoolers and when they talk about the future it's entirely negative. They blame the generations before them for ruining their chances to ever own a home and save for retirement. They're bewildered by the statistics they're fed showing >50% of their pay will be going to housing. I believe DADUs create opportunities for families to stay close, both young and old, to feel safe and supported. Recently I met a grandmother who had textarea-1700597715163-0 moved into a DADU her son had delivered onto his property in nearby Esperance. She was gleaming with pride to have her own place. She felt close enough to be able to help with her grandchildren and have her son nearby in case she ever felt unsafe. But at the same time far enough away that she still felt independent. I can envision a similar scenario for my children, and possibly my future housing choices. This policy change may densify our community but it will also create opportunities that otherwise would not be available. Yes on DADUs. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20267884&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 152 7.1.a From: Sent: To: Subject: notification@civiclive.com Saturday, April 27, 2024 2:39 AM Haas, Rose Comments 2024-04-27 02:39 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-04-27 02:39 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 4/27/2024 5:39:25 AM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0 https://youtubelom/shorts/n5akn4sarPg?si=Px_06x5s63ga- EQ20This is what edmonds would look like To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswalov/form/oneM3spx?objectld=20244164&contextld=l 9931715&returnt o=submissions Packet Pg. 153 7.1.a From: Sent: To: Subject: notification@civiclive.com Saturday, April 27, 2024 10:04 AM Haas, Rose Comments 2024-04-27 10:03 AM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-04-27 10:03 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 4/27/2024 1:03:47 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I have lived in Edmonds for over 10 years now, so probably more of a new comer0l really like this proposal and sincerely hope it passesOThere are a lot of opportunities to help the textarea-1700597715163-0 housing in the area, and this is a good first step0l would also like to see if get easier to build some of the mid -density housing like duplexes and quad-plexes to help incrementally increase housing availability without going to high rise apartments0 To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswal!ov/form/onelbspx?objectld=20244324&contextld=19931715&returnt o=submissions Packet Pg. 154 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2024 12:44 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-05-16 12:43 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-05-1612:43 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 5/16/2024 3:43:57 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0 Ensure protections and codes for any critical area and shoreline areas supercede allowances foe ADUs. Thank you. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20284070&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 155 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2024 2:10 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-05-16 02:10 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-05-16 02:10 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 5/16/2024 5:10:11 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I strongly support changing the codes and permitting ADUs and DADUs with textarea-1700597715163-0 no additional parking. This will make it easier for me to remain in Edmonds throughout my life and have my family stay. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20284284&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 156 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: BUCK <stewart98026@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2024 10:40 AM To: Planning Subject: ADU = Not for Sale I apologize for not researching regarding my idea/ opinion. I believe all ADUs must be kept a part of the original home's property and NOT SOLD SEPARATELY. That's the idea of Aging in Place, isn't it? I have some of them in my (Seaview) and also see them in Maplewood. The houses look out of place and smooshed on a small part of the original owner's front yards. (or backyards obviously) Packet Pg. 157 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: klein20311 @comcast.net Sent: Friday, May 17, 2024 6:44 AM To: Planning Subject: ADU Good morning. Appreciate getting the updates on issues coming up in the city. We understand the need for an occasional ADU for aging parents or adult children trying to save money for their own home, but are very concerned about the proposed "wide" allowances for ADU's and how some might take advantage of the proposed allowances (thinking investors who have money to buy a house, put up two additional ADU's, rent all 3, and become absent landlords). A reality. It looks like some of these are related to HB 1337. Is every city required to allow these changes or can a city decide for itself what will be allowed? If required, we would encourage the city to allow just the minimum required and protect individual homeowners who purchased their homes. We didn't purchase our house in Edmonds to live in a high density area, surrounded by structures that weren't there when we bought the home. Afew questions: U -No design restrictions? So they could look like anything? What happened to building codes in 2 Edmonds? We put up a replacement deck and had to go through detailed plans and inspections 3 (including distance from property lines, streets, height, etc.) _ -will there be a required distance from property lines or can a building be right next to the property line or r L fence? -with a height limit of 24 feet, that is 3 times the allowed fence height. No way to block what could bean W unsightly structure. We bought our home in Edmonds because of the neighborhood feel and open space o between houses. o -if two ADU's are allowed on property are there restrictions based on the lot size, or can 2 additional Cn buildings be placed on a small lot? Up to 1,200 sq feet? 24 ft height? Yikes. Z Lu -with no parking provision will the current limit of cars per household remain the same on the property? 4 on the property and 2 within a specific distance and moved every 72 hours? o -how will the city assure homeowners that their property values won't decrease? For many homeowners U J their home is their greatest investment. People who have spent time and money to maintain their homes Q and property (including their yards) don't want to be surrounded by random structures that aren't taken care of (biggest concern). Makes "gated communities" (which are exempt from this bill) more appealing, unfortunately. -if ADU's are rented, and homeowners aren't required to live on the property, what conditions will be in a place for assuring neighbors that care for property, disturbances, etc will be taken care of in a timely manner. -is this another "done deal" in the city of Edmonds? With so few restrictions this could be a nightmare for homeowners. Packet Pg. 158 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2024 12:20 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-05-19 12:19 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-05-1912:19 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 5/19/2024 3:19:49 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value I have a question. Our home is in a residential 20,000 zone. It was originally built in 1947 and extensively remodeled starting in 2018. The daylight basement contains 1339 square feet and has its own entry, kitchen, bath, textarea-1700597715163-0 utility room, bath, bedroom plus single -car garage. The basement has never been used as an ADU. Since it is 139 square feet over the allowed square footage, would we have to get a conditional -use permit or a variance or block off some square footage to be able to rent it out? What would be the best and easiest route? To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20286508&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 159 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Brenda <brendalee131 @hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2024 9:24 AM To: Planning Subject: ADU Some people who received this message don't often get email from brendalee131 @hotmail.com. Learn why this is important Please SLOW DOWN and think about what you are doing. I can see nothing but fighting amongst neighbors, overcrowded streets, lack of privacy and light for those who have developed their gardens and yards into a peaceful refuge. There is no hurry to make these major, permanent changes to our community. State mandates have yet to be challenged in court. This could all go away. Slow down please and don't make any decisions until that time. Thank you. Brenda Elston Packet Pg. 160 7.1.a Haas, Rose From: Mona Carter <mikenmona2@att.net> Sent: Monday, May 20, 2024 9:24 PM To: Planning Subject: Comments on ADU Code Amendment Some people who received this message don't often get email from mikenmona2@att.net. Learn why this is important = m 1. Allow up to two ADU's on a single-family lot in any configuration w/few exceptions.Only one ADU should be allowed on a E single-family lot. Any configuration is anathema to the aesthetics of different neighborhoods. It will look like a mishmash of disjointed = housing. Design elements should be consistent with what is currently in place for a cohesive look. 2. Allow ADU's in all zones that allow for single-family uses. Q This says nothing about lot size and whether an ADU can be crammed onto a lot even though there may not be an architectural fit. 0 3. No Design restrictions. V This is ridiculous! This is counter to having a neighborhood aesthetic. This will allow for eyesore ADU's. p Q 4. Owner occupancy not required. c The biggest concern here is short-term rental such as, Air BnB; VRBO, etc. S L 5. Allow sale as condominiums. a An ADU is not a condominium and a condominium is not an ADU. A sale as a condo will subdivide the lot which may not be the owner's original intention. Yes, a sale would raise more property tax dollars for the city which is probably the intent. w c m 6. No additional parking required for ADU's. E This should be a non-negotiable item. The streets are already crowded with cars parked on the street. A parking spot should be required for E every ADU. o tU 7. Allow ADU's up to 1200 square feet. 2 This square footage is too large. The maximum should be 1,000 square feet. 3 (L 8. Decrease rear setback requirements. _ By decreasing from 15 ft. To 5 ft. Will create privacy issues for neighbors. Also, if there is an alley behind the property this will be too close; r causing noise issues. Once again it goes back to aesthetics of the neighborhood. 9. Allow prefabricated units. uJ This too may go against neighborhood aesthetics. It appears the goal of this allowance is to get something built as fast as possible perhaps Q without regard for design consistency. Nowhere in HB 1337 is infrastructure mentioned and the cost of upgrading this. They force these edicts upon the public without regard to costs 0 to taxpayers. It appears our elected officials did not think this through as thoroughly as they should have instead of appeasing developers. C/) H Z W 0 U J J Q C d E t V ca r r-+ Q Packet Pg. 161 7.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/4/2024 Outside Boards and Committee Reports Staff Lead: Council Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History Outside Boards and Committee Reports will be submitted to the Received for Filing portion of the agenda for last meeting of the month. Staff Recommendation N/A Narrative The Council is asked to review the attached committee reports/minutes from the following organizations: WRIA8 Snohomish County Tomorrow Port of Edmonds Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Seashore Transportation SnoCom 911 Community Transit Attachments: WRIA8 Jan Meeting notes WRIA8 March Meeting notes SCT_03272024-2216 SCT_04242024-2224 Commission Meeting Minutes 4-8-24 - Port Of Edmonds Commission Meeting Minutes 4-29-24 - Port Of Edmonds pfd-board-special-meeting-minutes-03-19-2024 pfd-boa rd-meeting-minutes-03-28-2024 2024-05-02 SeaShore presentation 05.03.2024 - SeaShore Minutes SN 0911-Boa rd-Agenda-20240516 05.02.24 Comm Transit Innovative Svcs presentation 05.02.24 Comm Transit meeting minutes April 05.02.24 CEO Report Packet Pg. 162 7.2.a WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes Zoom Video Conference I January 18, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm 43) Denise Di Santo King County 44) Joan Lee King County 45) Rosa Mendez -Perez King Conservation District 46) Amani Moyer -Ali Mid Sound Fisheries Enhancement Group 47) Charlotte Spang Seattle Aquarium 48) Dani Kendall Seattle Aquarium 49) Peter Lundberg US Army Corps of Engineers 50) Ryika Hoshangi WA Association of Sewer and Water Districts 51) Michael McDonald Washington State Department of Transportation 52) Diane Buckshnis Public 53) Carrie Byron WRIA 8 Projects and Funding Coordinator 54) Renee Leichliter WRIA 8 Administrative Coordinator 55) Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager Welcome and Introductions - Councilmember (CM) Stokes, Chair, called the January 18, 2024, Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) meeting to order. Chair Stokes welcomed everyone and established quorum by conducting a roll call. Public Comment: No public comment at this time. Consent Agenda: SRC meeting minutes from the November 16, 2023 meetings were discussed. No edits were received prior to this meeting. Action: The SRC voted unanimously to approve the November 16, 2023 meeting minutes. IV. Updates & Announcements —Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager • Jason MK provided an update on regional salmon recovery activities and discussions, including major meeting topics for the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council and South Central Local Integrating Organization. • Carrie provided an update on the 2024 grant round. The Notice of Intent deadline is Friday, January 26th . Notice of Intent review will begin shortly after to let applicants know if they will be invited to submit a full proposal. Site visits will begin in March and go through April. Funding recommendations will be brought to the SRC at the May meeting. Check the WRIA 8 Funding Opportunities page or reach out to Carrie Byron (cbyron@kingcounty.gov) for more information. • King County is updating its flood hazard management plan and the public review draft is expected to go out at the end of January. Visit the webpage to stay informed or to sign up for the email list. • Jason provided a staff update, the WRIA 8 Technical Coordinator position opening has closed and interviews will begin shortly. V. 2023 Partner Satisfaction Survey Results (Information) — Renee Leichliter, WRIA 8 Administrative Coordinator and Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager Renee provided an update on the client survey that was adminstered at the November Salmon Recovery Council meeting. This survey is done annually to provide feedback to King County, as service provider, to the WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council, on the services provided by the WRIA 8 team during the prior year. Renee shared the results of the 2023 survey including ways WRIA 8 Packet Pg. 163 7.2.a WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes Zoom Video Conference I January 18, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm could better assist organizations in advancing salmon recovery efforts and future meeting topic ideas. VI. Legislative Priorities Update and Letter to State Legislators (Decision) —Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager and Legislative Subcommittee members Jason presented an update on the 2024 legislative priorities and highlighted additional salmon recovery related topics that weren't included at the November meeting. It is expected that the Climate Commitment Act will be a major topic this session and is facing possible repeal. Given the boost in funding from CCA revenues for salmon recovery, it is a priority for WRIA 8 to continue to emphasize and demonstrate the strong linkage between salmon recovery and achieving climate change resilience goals. To date, new revenue generated from this act has been directed to salmon recovery grants and will hopefully continue. Jason added supplemental appropriations for salmon recovery funding programs from the Governor's proposed budget which includes $25 million for the Salmon Recovery Funding Board, $11 million for the Estuary and Salmon Restoration Program, and $22 million for the Brian Abbott Fish Barrier Removal Board. Other important priority funding requests that relate to WRIA 8 priorities include $24 million for WSDOT stormwater retrofits and $700,000 for WDFW suppression of predatory fish project in the Lake Washington basin. A coalition of salmon recovery groups is convening for "Salmon Day in Olympia" on January 315Y and several members of the WRIA 8 Legislative Subcommittee are planning to participate and share WRIA 8 priorities with legislators. Jason highlighted bipartisan salmon recovery bills that WRIA 8 is tracking. Jason reviewed the draft letter for legislators to share WRIA 8 state budget and policy priorities for salmon recovery in 2024, including supplemental capital and operating budget appropriations mentioned above. If approved by the SRC today, Jason will send the letter to legislators as soon as next week. Ditruttinn- • CM O'Halloran asked about compost treatments that have shown positive signs in addressing 6PPD-q and how can the SRC try and get these connected to roadways in the area? Jason noted he has heard of these roadway treatments as well but highlighted that these treatments are still being piloted and studied, and work is ongoing to understand where 6PPD-q hotspots are that would serve as priorities for treatment. • Angela Bolton added her experiences with 6PPD-q monitoring with the Stormwater Action Monitoring Subgroup through the Department of Ecology and some pilot scale testing of high-performance soil mix that has shown some small-scale potential at attenuating 6PPD-q. Larry Franks added there is work being done to prioritize areas in the watershed that most need these services. • CM Frantz asked if 6PPD-q tends to deteriorate over time or does it stay in the environment for long periods of time? Jason clarified his understanding is the oxidation of this compound does stay in the environment for quite some time. He also added it could be a good idea to add an agenda item solely about this topic in the future since Packet Pg. 164 7.2.a WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes Zoom Video Conference I January 18, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm there is strong interest and it is a significant problem in the watershed. Angela Bolton added the benthic material in streams serves as a reservoir for 6PPD-q, storing it for a long time. • CM Frantz suggested it could be a good idea to highlight the use of carbon tax funds for the use of salmon recovery in communications with legislators since the public doesn't have a good picture of where that money goes. • Vice Chair Kritzer added how important it is to continue advocating for correct information to be spread regarding the carbon tax funds. Action: The SRC voted unanimously to approve the letter to state legislators to share WRIA 8 budget and policy priorities. VII. Representative to Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council (Decision) —Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager Jason presented options for selecting a representative(s) to the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council which sets regional priorities for recovery actions and provides recommendations for future projects and funding. The WRIA 8 representative position was previously held by City of Edmonds Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, who has retired. Jason presented the following options for consideration (Note, under both options Jason would continue to serve as WRIA 8's staff alternate): • Option 1 (recommended) — approve Deputy Mayor O'Cain and Councilmember Frantz as co -representatives, each serving as the "lead" for half the year's meetings. • Option 2 — approve either Deputy Mayor O'Cain or Councilmember Frantz as the primary delegate and the other as the alternate. Action: The SRC voted unanimously to approve Option 1 approving Deputy Mayor O'Cain and Councilmember Frantz as co -representatives for WRIA 8 to the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council. Vill. Letter to New U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District Commander, Colonel Sanborn — Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager Jason presented the draft letter for Colonel Sanborn to welcome her to her new role and highlights the work WRIA 8 does in the watershed and the critical role the Ballard Locks plays in that work, specifically in the assessing alternative solutions for addressing elevated water temperatures in the Ship Canal, pinniped predation, and effective fish passage at the Locks. Discussion: • Larry Franks suggested adding the need to improving the accuracy of fish counts at the Locks to the letter, which would help improve decision -making on management and measures of success. Jason stated he will add that to the letter. • Alison Agness asked if kokanee could be added to the list of salmonids that benefit from Chinook focused recovery in WRIA 8. Jason will make that addition. Packet Pg. 165 7.2.a WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes Zoom Video Conference I January 18, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm • Tor Bell suggested including language emphasizing the need for streamlined and faster permitting for restoration had projects. Jason will add that point to the letter. • David Bain suggested adding language about the need to reconsider how the USACE regulates the Sammamish River as a flood control structure, specifically make allowances for riparian planting and habitat restoration projects. Jason said he would add this to the letter. Action: The SRC voted unanimously to approve the letter with suggested amendments to new U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District Commander, Colonel Sanborn. IX. Lake Sammamish Kokanee recovery update (Information) —Alison Agness, King County Alison presented on the progress made in the past year through the Lake Sammamish Kokanee recovery program. The kokanee recovery strategy stems from work being done by the Kokanee Work Group which is a mix of residents, local jurisdictions, community organizations, and agencies that formed in 2007 and a 2019 interlocal agreement (ILA) between the jurisdictions that surround Lake Sammamish. Alison shared some highlights from the past year and the work done by the Kokanee Technical Workgroup. Monitoring of the 2023-2024 spawning escapements was completed in early winter and resulted in an estimate of 279 spawners in all streams which is a big improvement from last year's escapement of 81 spawners. While this is a relative improvement from the prior year the overall numbers the past year have been of very low abundance. This underscores the importance of integrated hatchery supplementation and captive broodstock programs while the habitat is continuing to be improved. In July of 2023 Cohort 4 of the captive broodstock program was initiated and 300 Kokanee fry were transferred from the Issaquah Hatchery to Lake Sammamish. Cohort 3 is nearing completion in February of this year and an estimated 20,000 eyed eggs should return to the Issaquah Hatchery to be raised and be part of the 2024 fry release. Program planning and priorities for the future include an ecological survey and to reevaluate program priorities. The ecological survey, which was last published in 2016, is the backbone of the scientific and ecological information about Lake Sammamish Kokanee and the update will be the framework that will be used to adaptively manage program priorities. Discussion: • CM Hunt asked how new streams are being monitored if historically kokanee haven't been present in them? Alison clarified the monitoring program for spawners has expanded and local jurisdictions, tribes, and federal and state agencies all monitor the surrounding creeks. CM Frantz asked why there is such a big discrepancy between 8,000 fry being released in 2023 and 20,000 fry expected to be released in the next years? Were some of the big escapement numbers in prior years due to large egg releases from the supplementation program? Alison clarified not all eggs are expected to survive but they are anticipating continuing to grow the supplementation program. The supplementation program is new so the large escapement numbers in previous years were from natural variation. Packet Pg. 166 7.2.a WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes Zoom Video Conference I January 18, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm Jason MK asked if there are escapement or productivity goals that would inform the future need for the supplemental program? Alison clarified the program is evaluated on an annual basis and has benchmarks. There have been years in the past when decisions were made not to put new fry into the program. X. Success Story: Cedar River Salmon Journey Program (Information) — Charlotte Spang, Seattle Aquarium Charlotte presented on the work and success of the Cedar River Salmon Journey Program (CRSJ) this past year. The CRSJ program provides multiple opportunities for people to engage with salmon and reduce barriers to participation in salmon recovery. In 2023, 110 volunteer naturalists and 15 staff engaged visitors in conversations about salmon lifecycle, interconnectedness of salmon, other animals, and people, habitat needs, and more! The fall program is the longest running component of CRSJ. It was piloted in 1998 and spans five locations over weekends in October when salmon are spawning and visible, rain or shine. Over 10,000 visitors, the highest number of visitors to date, came out to one or more of these five locations in 2023. Additionally, CRSJ has provided programming at the Ballard Locks in partnership with the USACE for the past 27 years, and even increased dates in 2023 that engaged over 17,000 visitors and provided the opportunity to share different talking points and spread the word about the fall program. In addition to these standing yearly programs CRSJ tables a variety of other events in the watershed and works with community partners to make the program more accessible to marginalized communities and reduce barriers to participation. The Seattle Aquarium Connections program currently has 400+ organizations, tribes, and other groups enrolled as partners, and works to tailor outreach programs to fit community needs. One partnership that has come from this is with Mexam, an organization that celebrates the Mexican diaspora in the Pacific Northwest and has piloted tours in Spanish at the Locks and on the Cedar River. CRSJ programming is closely aligned with WRIA 8's education and outreach priorities and is specifically referenced in the recovery plan. In 2023, CRSJ reached 30,843 visitors, which was a 73% increase in engagement from 2022. Next Meeting: Chair Stokes noted the next SRC meeting is March 21, 2024, from 2:00 p.m. — 4:15 p.m. The meeting will be held virtually. Packet Pg. 167 7.2.b WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes Zoom Video Conference I March 21, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm Members Present # Name Affiliation 1) Councilmember (CM) John Stokes, Chair City of Bellevue 2) CM Vanessa Kritzer, Vice Chair City of Redmond 3) CM Carston Curd City of Bothell 4) CM Kim Muromoto City of Clyde Hill 5) CM Michelle Dotsch City of Edmonds 6) Dana Zlateff City of Everett 7) CM Victoria Hunt City of Issaquah 8) Deputy Mayor Melanie O'Cain City of Kenmore 9) CM Tracy Furutani City of Lake Forest Park 10) CM Valerie O'Halloran City of Renton 11) CM Roisin O'Farrell City of Sammamish 12) CM Maritza Rivera City of Seattle 13) CM Annette Ademasu City of Shoreline 14) CM Ted Frantz Town of Hunts Point 15) CM John Brock Town of Woodway 16) Corinne Helmer Cedar River Council 17) Larry Reymann Environmental Science Center 18) Larry Franks Friends of Issaquah Salmon Hatchery (FISH) 19) Kirstin Haugen King Conservation District 20) Noel Gilbrough Mid Sound Fisheries Enhancement Group 21) Bill Derry Pilchuck Audubon Society 22) David Kyle Trout Unlimited 23) Hank Myers Washington Policy Center 24) Cleo Neculae Washington State Department of Ecology 25) Stewart Reinbold Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife 26) Thomas Mortimer Washington Association of Sewer and Water Districts Alternates Present 27) Mike Mactutis City of Kent 28) Martha Neuman City of Seattle 29) Tracy Banaszynski Mid Sound Fisheries Enhancement Group 30) Josh Thompson Snohomish County 31) David Bain Sno-King Watershed Council Other Attendees 32) Ella Williams City of Bellevue 33) Janet Geer City of Bothell 34) Allen Quynn City of Issaquah 35) Richard Sawyer City of Kenmore 36) Rachel Konrady City of Kirkland 37) Meiring Borcherds City of Mukilteo 38) Tom Hardy City of Redmond 39) Peter Holte City of Redmond 40) Kristina Lowthian City of Renton 41) Toby Coenen City of Sammamish 42) Brent Lackey City of Seattle - Seattle Public Utilities 43) Will Terry City of Seattle 44) Alison Agness King County Packet Pg. 168 7.2.b WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes Zoom Video Conference I March 21, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm 45) Judy Blanco King County 46) Chris Brummer King County 47) Denise Di Santo King County 48) Joan Lee King County 49) Natalie Seitz King County 50) David St. John King County 51) Susan O'Neil Environmental Science Associates 52) Rosa Mendez -Perez King Conservation District 53) Amani Moyer -Ali Mid Sound Fisheries Enhancement Group 54) Mike Mahovlich Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 55) Joe Scordino NOAA (Retired) 56) Don Gourlie Puget Sound Partnership 57) Peter Donaldson Sustainability Ambassadors 58) Jenna Leverich Sustainability Ambassadors 59) Mary O'Kerns US Army Corps of Engineers 60) Glen Mejia WA State Department of Transportation 61) Whitney Neugebauer Whale Scout 62) Mike Krautkramer Public 63) Carrie Byron WRIA 8 Projects and Funding Coordinator 64) Renee Leichliter WRIA 8 Administrative Coordinator 65) Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager 66) Mary Ramirez WRIA 8 Technical Coordinator I. Welcome and Introductions - Councilmember (CM) Stokes, Chair, called the March 21, 2024, Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) meeting to order. Chair Stokes welcomed everyone and established quorum by conducting roll call. II. Public Comment: Peter Donaldson with Sustainability Ambassadors shared the work they have done to develop middle and high school curriculum focused on habitat restoration, stormwater, tree canopy, and salmon safe farming. They have been working in WRIA 9 and the hope to expand this work to WRIA 8 teachers and schools. Through the curriculum students analyze case studies based on salmon recovery, green stormwater infrastructure, etc. while teacher -fellows create problem -based, place -based curriculum pathways surrounding various stewardship actions. The case studies serve as real projects that are finished or in process enough that students can research the engineering benefits and more. Peter requested help with identifying potential case study sites and identifying potential teacher -fellows in WRIA 8. For more information please reach out to, peter@sustainabilityambassadors.org; ienna@sustainabilityambassadors.org. III. Consent Agenda: SRC meeting minutes from the January 18, 2024 meeting were discussed. No edits were received prior to this meeting. Action: The SRC voted unanimously to approve the January 18, 2024 meeting minutes. IV. Updates & Announcements — Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager • Jason MK provided an update on regional salmon recovery activities and discussions, including major meeting topics for the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council and South Central Local Integrating Organization. CM Ted Frantz and Deputy Mayor Melanie O'Cain are the new WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council representatives to the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council. • Jason welcomed new WRIA 8 Technical Coordinator, Mary Ramirez, who gave a brief introduction. Packet Pg. 169 7.2.b WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes Zoom Video Conference I March 21, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm • Carrie provided an update on the 2024 grant round. Site visits began this month and go through April, and funding recommendations will be brought to the SRC at the May meeting. Check the WRIA 8 Funding Opportunities page or reach out to Carrie Byron (cbyron@kingcounty.gov) for more information. • Jason reminded the SRC the Interlocal Agreement (ILA) is up for renewal in 2026 and provided an updated timeline beginning with getting the draft updated in the third quarter of 2024 to have a final document to bring to partners in 2025 for approval. • Larry Franks shared the Washington Department of Ecology is proposing updates to their aquatic life toxics criteria that would establish an acceptable level for 6PPD-q. Larry urged the SRC to submit formal comments on the proposed rule, https://ecology.wa.gov/regulations-permits/laws-rules-rulemaking/rulemaking/wac- 173-201a-aquatic-life-toxics-criteria (due May 71h ). The SRC directed WRIA 8 staff to review Ecology's proposal and consider comments. Since the comment period closes prior to the next SRC meeting, any comments will be relayed to the SRC via email for review and approval. V. Update on King County Flood Control District Project Planning and Implementation (Information) — Chris Brummer and Natalie Seitz, King County Chris presented on the Cedar River work program including the Cedar River Capital Investment Strategy (CIS) adopted by the Flood Control District in 2017. This is a sequenced action plan for 22 capital projects and programmatic efforts. A flood event in February 2020 set this plan back as well as a November 2020 district motion that re -prioritized Cedar CIS projects using a multi benefit approach. Now, King County is updating the Flood Management Plan which just completed public review. Chris shared ongoing and completed implementation projects on the Cedar River work program • State Route 169 Flood Reduction (2021 completion) • Riverbend/Cedar River Trail Site 2 2020 flood repair • Jan Road 2020 flood repair • Cedar River Trail Site 5B 2020 flood repair • Dorre Don 2020 avulsion assessment • Lower Cedar River feasibility study (Renton) • Lower Cedar River levee certification (Renton) • Lower Cedar River gravel removal (Renton) • Acquisitions — over 14 at risk properties plus easements since 2017 • Herzman to Camp Freeman 2020 flood repair • Tabor-Crowall/Brodell 2020 flood repair • Belmondo 2020 flood repair • CRT5 2020 flood repair Chris shared some upcoming projects in the Flood Control District's 6-year CIP plan: • Lower Jones Road neighborhood improvements project • Byer's Road neighborhood improvements feasibility study • Dorre Don neighborhood improvements 2020 damage location Packet Pg. 170 7.2.b WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes Zoom Video Conference I March 21, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm Chris then provided a Sammamish River Basin overview. All 13 miles of the Sammamish River are a federal flood control facility under the Army Corps of Engineers to protect agricultural land after spring flooding. King County has maintenance responsibility funded by the Flood Control District as the local sponsor. The Sammamish Watershed work program focuses on: • Sammamish River Transition Zone (ZT) Maintenance • Lake Sammamish Grant Program • Willowmoor Floodplain Restoration Project • Sammamish River Basin Corrido Investment Strategy (CIS) Natalie Seitz presented on the Issaquah Creek Basin work program which is focused on 2020 flood damage repairs as well as three studies currently in progress as part of a capital investment strategy (CIS). The Issaquah Creek CIS goal is to reduce flood risks in the Issaquah Creek basin through an integrated floodplain management approach and consideration of multiple benefits. nitruttion- • Larry Franks asked if there is a requirement or commitment to navigability on the Cedar for kayaks, canoes, etc.? Chris clarified there is a public process for recreational users to provide feedback that gets integrated in project designs. • CM Frantz asked what does "Flood Risk Reduction" strategy involve? Is it to move homes and hard edges? Natalie clarified strategies can involve many parts, and acquisitions are a priority. She said awareness is also a huge investment for folks to make small changes that would change the impact of flooding. VI. Recommendations Report — Technical Workshop on Pinniped Predation on Salmon at the Ballard Locks (Information) —Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager, Joe Scordino, NOAA (retired, Mike Mahovlich, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe and Susan O'Neil, Environmental Science Associates Jason presented background on pinniped predation in the watershed, which has been a long standing and complex issue and has now become a priority topic in WRIA 8. A technical workshop was hosted last year to review and synthesize available information on pinniped management and make technical recommendations for reducing/eliminating predation at the Locks and to prevent losing another salmon species from pinniped predation in the watershed. The purpose of the recommendations report is to provide technical recommendations for state/federal/tribal managers and policymakers to utilize and prevent further decline of salmon populations as they migrate through the Ballard Locks. Recommendations summary (concurrent actions): • Pinniped removal • Pinniped deterrence • Structural and operation changes at Locks • Comprehensive monitoring • Outreach and education • ESA consultation on Locks Packet Pg. 171 7.2.b WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes Zoom Video Conference I March 21, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm The recommendations report was distributed to key management agencies in January. The intended use of the report and next steps include serving as a framework to inform WRIA 8 grant proposal review for efforts to address pinniped predation, informing state/federal/tribal managers and policymakers on an effective and adaptive strategy, and providing another site - specific assessment for this priority issue in Puget Sound. Jason proposed suggested next steps for consideration by the SRC including using this recommendations report as a framework for WRIA 8 review of grant proposals, pursuing fish passage improvements at the Ballard Locks with USACE and Congress to reduce predation impact, and to engage with state and tribal entities to identify avenues to address this problem Discussion - • Larry Reymann asked why a device or cage can't be used to prevent pinniped predation in the Locks fish ladder? Jason MK said some devices and facility changes have been tested at other facilities. Workshop participants agreed there is something that could be done as a facility upgrade while making sure it's not a device that deters salmon from the entrance as well. • CM Frantz added if conditions are changing and we are seeing more predation than in the past, action to address increased predation needs to be taken as soon as possible. Jason noted the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe's leadership in salmon recovery and specifically on working to reduce pinniped predation. • Joe Scordino commented that in the past at the Ballard Locks pinnipeds have learned it is an easy place to gorge on salmon and all past efforts to detour them have failed and caused issues with the salmon themselves. Mike Mahovlich added the pinniped populations learns fast and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) has been a big bottleneck to addressing increased predation on salmon because it doesn't allow effective management of marine mammals. Studies have shown pinnipeds are doing more damage to salmon populations than previously thought. • Thomas Mortimer asked why removal and euthanasia of pinniped can't be expedited in trouble areas? Additionally, how vigorously have efforts been to contact Senators on the unintended outcomes of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)? Jason said the Columbia River is the only part of Washington state where managing pinnipeds is authorized . Joe Scordino added that in the past when agencies were granted authorization to act to manage pinnipeds there were so many restrictions it prevented any real outcomes. • CM Frantz asked if tribes are currently prevented from hunting pinnipeds? Mike Mahovlich confirmed that they are. VI I. Success Story: Royal Arch Reach Floodplain Restoration (Information) — Brent Lackey, Seattle Public Utilities Brent presented on the Cedar River Upper Royal Arch Floodplain and Habitat Restoration project that is located just downstream of Maple Valley. In total the project cost $4 million in funding and $3.5 million of that came from state/local grant funding, including WRIA 8 grants. The project built 4000 feet of additional side channel, created 3 acres of new wetland, and added Packet Pg. 172 7.2.b WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes Zoom Video Conference I March 21, 2024, 2:00 pm — 4:15 pm 600 pieces of large woody debris and 13 acres of planting all around the project. Brent shared a series of project photos . Discussion: • CM Frantz shared how inspiring it is to see how quickly fish utilize these restored areas. Vill. Legislative Priorities Update (Information) —Jason Mulvihill -Kuntz, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager and Don Gourlie, Puget Sound Partnership Don shared some reflections from the past state legislative session including major new investments towards salmon recovery programs from Climate Commitment Act (CCA) revenue. This funding is contingent on the CCA not being repealed this November and will not come through until January 2025. If the CCA is repealed, we would not see this funding. There were several high -profile retirements in the legislature this session and new leadership, so it will take time to educate new leadership and committee chairs about salmon recovery priorities. Jason added updates from the WRIA 8 Legislative Committee and Salmon Day in Olympia which provided the opportunity for salmon recovery entities across the state to highlight salmon recovery in the legislative session and appeal to legislators for their support. Jason summarized how WRIA 8 budget priorities did in the recent legislative session: • Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRFB) ask was $62 million and received $25 million • Estuary and Salmon Restoration Program (ESRP) ask was $11.3 million and received $11.1 million • Brian Abbott Fish Passage Barrier Removal Program ask was $22 million , which was received • Operating budget - Based on a request led by Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife will receive $700,000 for removal of predatory fish in the Lake Washington basin, which builds on funding allocated in the previous legislative session. • Transportation budget includes support for stormwater retrofits and fish passage barrier corrections Jason reiterated that if the CCA is repealed, this funding will go away. Lastly, Jason shared state and federal legislation geared towards salmon recovery as well as Congressional appropriation requests WRIA 8 staff submitted to offices of several members of the state's Congressional delegation. Next Meeting: Chair Stokes noted the next SRC meeting is May 16, 2024, from 2:00 p.m. — 4:15 p.m. The meeting will be held virtually. Packet Pg. 173 Stanwood Darrington I 7.2.c I Snohomish County Tomorrow A GRO WTH MANAGEMENT AD VISOR COUNCIL 1 2. 3 STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING Wednesday, March 27, 2024 Via Zoom 4:00 p.m. MEETING MINUTES Particiaatina Jurisdictions/Members Tulalip Arlington Tribes Marysville Granite Falls Everett Lake Stevens ukilteo Mill Creek Lynnwood Snohomish Edmonds Mountlake Monroe Terrace Sultan Gold Index Woodway Brier Bothell Bar City of Arlington Mayor Don Vanne City of Edmonds Vivian Olson City of Everett Councilmember Ben Zarlin o City of Lynnwood Mayor Christine Frizzell City of Marysville Max Phan, ICC Co -Chair City of Mill Creek Councilmember Stephanie Vi nal City of Monroe Councilmember Jacob Walker, Kyle Fisher City of Mountlake Terrace Mayor Pro Tern Bryan Wahl Snohomish County Council Councilmembers Nate Nehrin Snohomish County Executive Josh Dugan Community Representative Allan Giffen Community Representative Peter Battuello Community Representative Linda Hoult Community Representative Easton Craft Community Representative Mike Appleby CAB Representative Alice Armstrong Other Attendees/Presenters: Port of Everett Lisa Lefeber, Adam LeMieux Snohomish County A Boungjaktha, Samantha Paxton, Trudy Soriano, Lacey Harper City of Mill Creek Justin Horn City of Monroe Lance Bailey SCT Manager Ann Larson EASC Wendy Poischbeg Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 4:00 pm by Bryan Wahl Introductions/Roll Call Roll call was taken (as listed above). Citizen Comments No comments. Packet Pg. 174 7.2.c 4. Approval of Meeting Minutes (2-28-24) Nate Nehring moved to approve the minutes. Josh Dugan seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 5. Update Items a. 2024 Legislative Update, Lacey Harper Harper provided an overview of the 60-day Legislative session that ended March 7. There were a record number of bills considered. There were also six initiatives that came before the legislature this session. The legislature had a couple of options in terms of the initiatives. One option was to adopt the initiates to advance to the November ballot for voter consideration. The initiatives adopted by the legislature could be fully amended by legislatures with a simple majority. Initiates approved by the voters at the ballot can only be amended with a two-thirds vote of the legislature after two years of approval. Of the six initiates, Harper reported that there were three the legislature did not act on. Those initiatives will appear on the November ballot for vote consideration. ). PSRC Board Actions and Activities, Ben Bakkenta Bakkenta shared the Board of Directors will also receive a 2024 Legislative Session recap. The board will also be briefed on regional climate work which includes developing an application for a $200 million grant funded through the federal IIJA in 2022. PSRC has been working in collaboration with regional transit agencies, Ports, and the Northwest Seaport Alliance. The board is also scheduled to have a conversation with Steve Nevey, the new Assistant Secretary for Washington State Ferries. The board is also scheduled to be briefed on PSE's community solar program. The Transportation Policy Board will also meet in April. The board will also continue the discussion on their next Regional Transit Authority plan, which will be adopted in 2026. c. Countywide Economic and Workforce Development; Snohomish Co. Update Samantha Paxton/Trudy Soriano/ EASC, Wendy Poischbeg Paxton shared that they recently held an Economic Development event March 19t" that has about 400 students participated in the three week tour. In April, there will also be a youth aerospace program through Everett Community College. The aerospace program will be a two year program fir high school seniors funded with ARPA federal funds. Soriano shared an update on tourism initiatives including a strategic tourism update that concluded at the end of 2023. County tourism functions as a destination management organization or known as a DMO. The two main duties of the DMO include countywide marketing strategies and countywide tourism management. Poischbeg provided an update on a project EASC is working on related to business retention and expansion. In working with the business community, they have identified automation as area of interest. In meeting with local companies, EASC heard that automation has helped local companies meet their market depends on and workforce issues that have plagues advanced manufacturing section in the last couple years. Automation has transformed the workforce leading to job evolution and job creation. The shift is leading to the emergence of new job roles such as automation engineers, data analysts and robotic technical skills and knowledge. 6. Action Items a. Election of Citizen Representative Packet Pg. 175 7.2.c A MOTION nominating Easton Craft as the Community Representative was made by Councilmember Ben Zarlingo and seconded by Josh Dugan. The motion passed unanimously. 7. Briefings, Discussion Items a. Port of Everett, Lisa Lefeber, CEO Lefeber provided a Port overview, including that the port was formed in 1918 by a vote of the people. Currently, there are about 110,000 people within the ports district. The Port of Everett is the third largest container port in the state. It also supports anywhere between 21 and 30 billion dollars. The port is also supports over 40,000 jobs in the region and are home to the Naval Station Everett, supporting sailors and military functions. They are also one of only 18 seaports in the nation that are designed a strategic seaport. The port is the largest port in the state that's not countywide. They are currently not permitted to do business outside of their boundaries. As part of their strategic plan, a key focus was for the port was the strategic seaport designation that added a 1,200-foot berth. Lefeber also highlighted the ongoing development at the port including restaurants and housing. She also spoke about the port's boundary enlargement proposal. Funds collected for the port by property taxes are invested right back into the community. During the port's 2020 strategic plan update, the Commissioners discussed enlarging the port's boundaries. In December, the commissioners unanimously approved the effort. The effort was approved by county council; giving the community the chance to weigh in for the first time in 105 years. The effort now goes to the voters in the August primary. b. SCT Manager's Report SCT Manager Ann Larson shared the SCT Committee's Report and a reminder about the SCT annual meeting. 8. Go -Round 9. Next Meeting Date April 24, 2024 10. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 5:32 pm by Bryan Wahl Packet Pg. 176 7.2.c All presentations given, discussions held, and actions taken at this meeting are kept on file (via recording) in PDS until six years from December 315t of this year. O Q O O O E E O U c ca N L O m .y 3 O w T" N N 4 N O N r- N M O I H U U) w c N E M t� ca r Q Packet Pg. 177 I 7.2.d I Stanwood Barrington Tu,alip Arlington Tribes Granite Falls Marysville Snohomish County Tomorrow Everett Lake Stevens Mill Creek Lynnwood Lynnwood Snohomish A GR O WTH MANA GEMENT ADVISORY COUNCIL Edmonds Mountlake Monroe Terrace Sultan Gold Index Woodway Brier Bothell Bar 1 2 STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING Wednesday, April 24, 2024 Via Zoom 4:00 p.m. MEETING MINUTES Participating Jurisdictions/Members City of Arlington Mayor Don Vanne Town of Darrin ton Mayor Dan Rankin City of Edmonds Councilmember Vivian Olson City of Everett Councilmember Ben Zarlin o City of Gold Bar Councilmember Chuck Lie City of Lynnwood Councilmember David Parshall City of Marysville Councilmember Peter Condyles City of Mill Creek Councilmember Stephanie Vi nal City of Monroe Councilmember Kyle Fisher, Jacob Walker City of Mountlake Terrace Mayor Pro Tern Bryan Wahl City of Mukilteo Councilmember Jason Moon Snohomish Count Council Councilmembers Jared Mead Snohomish County Council Councilmembers Nate Nehrin Snohomish County Executive Josh Dugan Community Representative Mike Appleby Community Representative Linda Hoult Other Attendees/Presenters: PSRC Ben Bakkenta Snohomish County Amber Piona HASCO Duane Leonard City of Everett Frank Hong City of Granite Falls Brent Kirk City of Monroe Lance Bailey SCT Manager Ann Larson Snohomish County Doug McCormick Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 4:01 pm by Nate Nehring Introductions/Roll Call Roll call was taken (as listed above). 0 a a� a� a� w E E 0 U _ to L 0 m a� 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 I H U a� E a Packet Pg. 178 7.2.d 3. Citizen Comments No comments. 4. Approval of Meeting Minutes (3-27-24) Bryan Wahl moved to approve the minutes. Dan Rankin seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 5. Update Items a. PSRC Board Actions and Activities, Ben Bakkenta Bakkenta shared that the Executive Board will be meeting on April 251h and will potentially be taking action recommending the 2024-2025 supplemental budget and work program, but the bulk of the meeting will be a briefing on the Climate Commitment Act. The Executive Board will also receive a Federal legislative update. The Growth Management Policy Board will be meeting on May 2" and there will be a discussion of racially disparate impacts in housing, an overview of a transfer of development rights technical assistance opportunity, and a briefing on the update to the regional industrial lands inventory analysis that will be released later this month. The Transportation Policy Board will have its meeting on May 9th and the focus will continue to be on the regional transportation plan scope and work program. Bakkenta also reminded the group that the deadline for applications for the PSRC's second Annual Summer Planning Academy for Youth is coming up on May 15th and that PSRC's Annual General Assembly will be held at the Seattle Convention Center on May 30th from 10:30 to 1:00 pm. 6. Action Items No action items. 7. Briefings, Discussion Items a. Inclusionary Zoning, Planning Development Services, Amber Piona Piona, Snohomish County PDS, gave an overview of inclusionary zoning and the proposed Mixed Use Corridor zone. Piona gave some background on housing affordability issues and housing supply issues and the goal of addressing these issues. During the presentation, Piona discussed the background of inclusionary zoning programs, what goes into the programs, the requirements, and the proposed Mixed Use Corridor. Following the presentation there was some discussion and questions on topics including how best to address inclusionary zoning in comprehensive plans, potential unintended effects, if people would grow out of the ability to rent in these areas, anti -displacement measures, the effect of school districts, and financial models. b. Housing Authority of Snohomish County (HASCO), Duane Leonard Leonard gave a presentation on the housing choice voucher program. The program is a Federal rental assistance program that is administered by HASCO and the Everett Housing Authority where the tenant pays what they can afford to pay, and the housing assistance pays the rest. Leonard gave an overview of eligibility requirements and how the process works. Packet Pg. 179 7.2.d c. SCT Manager's Report SCT Manager Ann Larson took suggestions on meeting topics for the upcoming meeting with PUD and gave an overview of the committee report. Requested meeting topics include power supply for EV cars and EV infrastructure in general. At PAC's April meeting, they covered school impact fees and the growth monitoring report. They also set up a subcommittee to discuss Countywide Centers. ICC's April 12th meeting included an update from WSDOT. 8. Go -Round a. Mike Appleby asked to consider a discussion around UGA lines and Alternative 2 and 3 being added to an upcoming agenda. b. Jacob Walker asked for feedback from local builders or the MBA on the likelihood of projects similar to those presented today. 9. Next Meeting Date May 22, 2024 10. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 5:10 pm by Nate Nehring. All presentations given, discussions held, and actions taken at this meeting are kept on file (via recording) in PDS until six years from December 3111 of this year. Packet Pg. 180 7.2.e PORT COMMISSION OF THE PORT OF EDMONDS MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING APRIL 8, 2024 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Jay Grant, President David Preston, Vice President y It 0 Janelle Cass, Secretary 0_ Steve Johnston d m Selena Killin E E STAFFPRESENT 0 U Brandon Baker, Deputy Executive Director Brittany Williams, Manager of Properties and Economic Development 0 Tsz Yan Brady, Director of Finance and Administration m as y r� OTHERS PRESENT O� Jordan Stephens, Port Attorney W c John Brock, Town of Woodway 0 I. CALL TO ORDER President Grant called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. FLAG SALUTE All those in attendance participated in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag. III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COMMISSIONER CASS MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGENDAAS SUBMITTED. COMMISSIONER JOHNSTON SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS (Each comment shall generally be limited to 3 minutes or less and shall be limited to Port business) There were no public comments. V. CONSENT AGENDA COMMISSIONER JOHNSTON MOVED THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA BE APPROVED TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. COMMISSIONER PRESTON SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH Packet Pg. 181 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7.2.e A. Approval of March 25, 2024 Meeting Minutes B. Approval of Payments in the amount of $254,788.23 VI. POSSIBLE ACTION There were no action items on the agenda. VII. INFORMATION A. 1st Quarter Commercial Portfolio Report The Manager of Properties and Economic Development gave an overview of the first quarter Commercial Portfolio report. This included reviewing new and ending leases, lease extensions/expansions, projects, incidents, and financials. She also read in a declaration of emergency. In compliance with the Delegation of Authority Resolution No. 23-11 adopted by the Commission on November 27, 2023, Waiver of Competitive Bidding Requirements and Washington state statutes RCW 39.04.020, RCW 39.04.280, and RCW 53.08.120, the Executive Director of the Port of Edmonds declared an emergency on March 29, 2024 for the accident on February 12, 2024. Therefore, the Executive Director waives the competitive bidding requirements and authorizes the award of all necessary contracts to take actions deemed necessary to mitigate and prevent impacts and potential impacts to staff and publicly owned infrastructure and authorizes staff to implement the emergency response procedures. B. Boatyard Filtration Update Deputy Executive Director Baker gave an update on the boatyard filtration including copper benchmarks, monitoring requirements, planned 2024 updates, and plans for early 2025. Vill. CITY OF EDMONDS AND WOODWAY REPORTS There were no reports provided. IX. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT • Manager of Properties and Economic Development Williams provided an update on rebranding and the phased launch approach. • Deputy Executive Director Baker reminded everyone that Annie Packet Pg. 182 7.2.e Crawley will be pertorming the Spring cleanup dive on April 28. He also mentioned that all Port attendees are focused on electrification for vessels and permitting difficulties for projects. X. COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS • Commissioner Johnston will be in person on April 26 for the ribbon cutting, April 28 for the Annie Crawley Spring cleanup dive, and the April 29th Strategic Planning Workshop. • Commissioner Killin had no comments. • Commissioner Preston will attend the Economic Alliance of Snohomish County meeting where Port of Everett will be discussing their expansion. He also recently attended the City of Edmonds State of the City. He will also attend the ribbon cutting and the Spring cleanup dive. He mentioned that there may be more time needed on the strategic plan finalization. • Commissioner Cass mentioned that at the City of Edmonds Council meeting on April 9th they will be considering the draft growth alternatives for the EIS and she will be attending. • Commissioner Grant attended the Town of Woodway meeting and has been following the Blue -Ribbon panel for the City of Edmonds and attended the State of the City as well as the Edmonds Civic Roundtable for updates on the City financials. Commissioner Grant mentioned that on Thursdays he works with the Executive Director to finalize the agenda and if any commissioner has agenda topics, they can provide those to him the Wednesday before the Commission meeting. He too mentioned that the strategic plan may require additional time. XI. EXECUTIVE SESSION There was no Executive Session. XII. ADJOURNMENT The Commission meeting was adjourned at 7:47pm. Janelle Cass, Port Commission Secretary TAGS: 1st Quarter Commercial Portfolio Report, 2024 Port of Edmonds Commission Meetina Minutes. Annie Crawlev Packet Pg. 183 Clean -Up Dive, Boatyard Filtration Update Packet Pg. 184 7.2.f Port Commission of the Port of Edmonds Minutes of Regular Meeting April 29, 2024 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Jay Grant, President David Preston, Vice President Janelle Cass, Secretary Steve Johnston Selena Killin 0 a m m m r E STAFF PRESENT c U Angela Harris, Executive Director -a c� 0 Brandon Baker, Deputy Executive Director m a� r Tsz Yan Brady, Director of Finance and 03 Administration w 1. CALL TO ORDER President Grant called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. OTHERS PRESENT Jordan Stephens, Port Attorney John Brock, Town of Woodway 1. FLAG SALUTE All those in attendance participated in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag. ADDDrnini nr- nr_P:ninn Packet Pg. 185 COMMISSIONER CASS MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS SUBMITTED. COMMISSIONER JOHNSTON SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS (Each comment shall generally be limited to 3 Q. minutes or less and shall be limited to Port business) a� a� a� • Joe Scordino thanked Commissioner Preston for volunteering to help with Perrinville creek salmon release. He also suggested we o U could collect data by adding a camera pointing to the Edmonds = Marsh from our building and provided ideas/suggestions (such as a W L bait shop) for the commercial space in the new admin building. o m • Alan Townsend — Vice Chair of the Economic Development � Commission was excited to be part of the ribbon cutting and thanked 0 Commissioners Killin and Preston for their service on the Economic Development Commission. 1. CONSENT AGENDA COMMISSIONER JOHNSTON MOVED THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA BE APPROVED TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. COMMISSIONER KILLIN SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. Approval of April 8, 2024 Meeting Minutes 2. Approval of Payments in the amount of $2,014,826.77 1. POSSIBLE ACTION There were no action items on the agenda. • INFORMATION 1. 15` Quarter Financial Report Director of Finance and Administration Brady reviewed the 151 quarter 2024 financial highlights, including: • The combined Port gross revenue increased from Q1 2023 by --- Packet Pg. 186 7.2.f �iu.l minion or 5uio ana aecreasea trom Q1 2U24 Duagetea amount Dy $73K or 3%. • The combined Port gross margin (revenue less cost of goods sold) increased from Q1 2023 by $0.1 million or 6% and decreased from Q1 2024 budgeted amount by $28K or 1%. • The combined Port operating expenses (before depreciation and amortization) increased from Q1 2023 by $0.3 million or 21% and c decreased from Q1 2024 budgeted amount by $0.3 million or 18%. a • The Port has spent $10.5 million current to date on the new a administrative and maintenance building with anticipation of finalizing r E E our occupancy in Q2 2024. c0 • The Port has spent $0.7 million current to date on the North CU Portwalk and Seawall Reconstruction and is currently in the design phase. m° 1. 151 Quarter Marina Operations Report a� r Deputy Executive Director Baker reviewed the 15` quarter 2024 0 marina operations highlights, including: • In the 1st quarter, the Port experienced 15 terminations and assigned 22 spaces. The waitlist has 360 total applications on file, compared to 352 in the 1st quarter of 2023. • During the 1st quarter, Dry Storage had an 81.7% occupancy rate compared to 80.7% in the 1st quarter of 2023. 50 trailers are currently stored in the Dry Storage area. • The total number of guest boats increased by 12% (22 boats), and the total number of nights increased by 2% (6 nights) during the 1st quarter of 2024. • Total Gallons pumped: increased by 37% or 7,923 more gallons compared to 2023. • He also reviewed boat moves and equipment updates and repairs, as well as document compliance, public launch statistics, boatyard and Travelift activity, and environmental updates. • CITY OF EDMONDS AND WOODWAY REPORTS • Council member Brock thanked the Port for the invitation to the ribbon cutting and noted that on May 20 there is a required public hearing for the Point Wells annexation. Packet Pg. 187 7.2.f 1. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT Executive Director Harris provided the following updates: • An update on the North Portwalk and Seawall Reconstruction project funding and permitting status and next steps. • Atrium windows contract has been awarded based on commission approval to proceed with this portion of the project. We will work closely with tenants as construction is planned. 1. COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS • Commissioner Johnston — thanked staff for the ribbon cutting, mentioning it was a great event. • Commissioner Cass — thanked staff for the ribbon cutting preparation. She also attended Annie Crawley's dive event on Sunday and has attended a couple of city council meetings since the last Port meeting. • Commissioner Killin — thanked staff for the ribbon cutting and preparation. She also attended the Economic Development Commission meeting and is working on building those relationships. • Commissioner Preston — attended the city council meeting last week. Thanked staff for the great ribbon cutting — it exceeded his expectations with all the well thought out details. He commented it was great to see the coho release with Joe Scordino and that on May 25 at 10:30 am there will be another release at Yost Park. He also attended the Annie Crawley dive event and appreciates all she does and the way she weaves education, safety and security into her events. • Commissioner Grant— mentioned he is watching the fire service's planning process and appreciated the atmosphere of the new building on the day of the event — it was a very positive and nice event. Packet Pg. 188 7.2.f 1. WORKSHOP 1. Strategic Plan Draft #2 — Commissioner Review and Discussion The Port of Edmonds began a strategic plan update in December of 2023 led by Helmsman Strategic LLC. The first strategic plan workshop occurred on January 31, 2024. After reviewing the Port's keystone documents, conducting commission and staff interviews, and holding this joint commission -staff interactive workshop, 0 CL Helmsman Strategic LLC provided a draft of the strategic plan on March 11, 2024, to the commission. In April, the commissioners m r E provided their individual feedback on the draft to incorporate it into E the next draft of the plan. 0 v In this workshop, Helmsman Strategic LLC provided a walkthrough of this second draft of the plan. The commission discussed the draft and worked towards a final version. The next steps were discussed, with the goal of finalizing the plan on May 13, 2024. • EXECUTIVE SESSION There was no Executive Session. • ADJOURNMENT The Commission meeting was adjourned at 9:32pm. Janelle Cass, Port Commission Secretary TAGS: 1st quarter 2024 marina operations report, 1st Quarter Financial Report, 2024 Commission Meeting Minutes, Strategic Plan Draft #2 — Commissioner Review and Discussion Packet Pg. 189 7.2.f O Q. a� a: a� a� r E E O U c W L MO W d .N 0 O E W 4- 0 ++ O a r Q Packet Pg. 190 7.2.g Edmonds Public Facilities District Board of Directors Special Meeting with Philanthropy Committee March 19, 2024 The Edmonds Public Facilities District Board hybrid meeting convened at 9 a.m. in the Edmonds Center for the Arts Green Room, 410 4th Avenue North, Edmonds, and via Zoom. EPFD Board Members Present Bill Willcock, Vice President Suzy Maloney (arrived 9:04 a.m.) Wayne Grotheer EPFD Board Members Absent Ray Liaw, President David Brewster Call to Order ECA Staff Present Kathy Liu, Executive Director Katherine Smith, Development Manager Amy Stagno, Director of Major Gifts Gracelynn Shibayama, Event Planner & Stewardship Asst. Mgr. Brent Gibbs, Development Assistant Philanthropy Comm. Members Present Vicki O'Gorman David Schaefer Rick Canning Jeanne Thorsen Nancy Fleck Cheryl Foster EPFD Board VP Willcock called the meeting to order. 2. Land Acknowledgement & Equity Statement Committee Member Canning read the Land Acknowledgement and Equity Statement. 3. PFD Board Business • Philanthropy Committee Meeting February Development Report Katherine Smith reviewed the Development Revenue Report February 2024, advising actual 2024 reflects contributed revenue raised as of February 29 including individual gifts, performance sponsorships (Center Stage), corporate, foundations, government, special events/other. Questions and discussion followed regarding opportunities for season sponsorships, efforts to solicit sponsorships, suggested businesses to contact, businesses that encourage employees to volunteer, corporate season versus special event sponsorship, special event sponsorships, staff providing milestones/periodic check -in on actual versus projected early in the year, whether projections are accurate or overly ambitious, staff resources when the budget was developed, involving the Philanthropy Committee in budget development in future years, growing the donor base, legacy giving, major gift prospecting, and selection of a CRM software. Kathy Liu invited members to advise staff of any businesses to contact for sponsorship. ➢ Review Philanthropy Goals and Committee Operations Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes March 19, 2024 Page 1 Packet Pg. 191 7.2.g Ms. Liu reviewed goals for individual gifts, performance sponsorships (Center Stage), Gala, seat campaign, corporate, foundations, government special events/other. Questions and discussion followed regarding how the budget for each category was established, whether a Gala event will be held this year, and YTD February budget versus actual. ➢ Grants Update Amy Stagno provided an update on grants, reviewing grant applications submitted, upcoming grant applications, and grants received and declined. Questions and discussion followed regarding a suggestion to add to the grant spreadsheet the date a decision is expected, Verdant grants, a suggestion to regularly provide the PFD Board the grants spreadsheet, and results of grants submitted and/or awarded in 2023. ➢ Greater Giving to eTapestry Migration Update Brent Gibbs reported on transfer of data and tracking information back to 2017 and benefits of the eTapestry software. ➢ Spring Appeal Update Mr. Gibbs provided an update on the Spring Appeal which will coincide with the GiveBIG campaign. ❖ Charter - Equity & Inclusion Statement Committee Chair O'Gorman referred to her email regarding what additional skills and expertise are needed on committees to advance their effectiveness and a statement from the IDEA Committee about including equity and inclusion statement in the charter. The most common feedback has been members with fundraising and philanthropy backgrounds. She invited members to inform her of any potential members with a fundraising background. Discussion followed regarding potential new members which can include community members who are not on the ECA Board, and recruitment of ECA board members. Committee Chair O'Gorman referred to feedback from committee members regarding changes to the Equity & Inclusion Statement recommended by the IDEA Committee, advising she will submit the revised statement to the IDEA Committee. ❖ Center Stage Planning Gracelynn Shibayama reported planning is underway, mailed invitations have gone out, RSVPs are due April 29. She described event details including auctioneer Matt Lorch, Pacific NW Catering, admission charge, strategic comps, benefit changes, finalizing the show inventory, pricing the show inventory, revamping the mystery show process, testimonials from past mystery show sponsors, and developing a season trailer video. Questions and discussion followed regarding the goal for attendance; telling the story regarding education and outreach; flow of the event; dividing fundraising into the main season, mystery shows, and education and outreach and having a video and testimonial for each; levels where the meet and greet benefit will be offered; ability to purchase extra tickets; feedback on admission charge; response to invites; and event planning. ❖ Gala ➢ New Format — Artists Ms. Liu recalled at last month's meeting, the committee was interested in exploring an artist centric performance format for the Gala that would eliminate most of the auction, and incorporate a ticket Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes March 19, 2024 Page 2 Packet Pg. 192 7.2.g price that includes a donation. She shared a list provided by the programming team of potential Gala artists at the $50,000 level. If the committee is interested in changing the format, the team will reach out to the artists regarding their availability. A decision needs to be made soon regarding changing to an artist centric Gala in 2024 or waiting until 2025 when there would be more flexibility regarding the date. Questions and discussion followed regarding the team exploring the availability of artists and reporting at the next Philanthropy Committee meeting, whether to include any auction items, having different ticket levels, marketing the event to people not engaged with ECA in the past, and whether to match the artist to the audience that typically attends the Gala, (EPFD Board Member Maloney left the meeting at 10:03 a.m. and a quorum of the EPFD Board was lost.) ➢ Decision on Format for 2024 A majority of committee members were in favor (one opposed) of an artist centric performance. Ms. Liu will send the list of potential Gala artists to committee members for input. Staff will explore the availability of artists for discussion at the next Philanthropy Committee meeting. Questions and discussion followed regarding how a $50,000 artist fee was determined, whether it was preferable to have an artist that has performed at ECA in the past or not, having an artist that hasn't performed in the past year, possibility a community member would be interested in assisting with a big name artist, reaching out to Gala attendees about potential artists, whether to include a silent auction and/or online auction in advance of the event, evaluating the time and effort an auction requires versus the return, ticket prices, devoting time and effort to planned giving versus an auction, ticket pricing to achieve same net fundraising, the ECA's grand opening event, potential criticism for changing the format of the Gala event, and considering a live stream component with a reduced price ticket to provide accessibility. ➢ Procurement Discussion on this item was postponed pending a decision regarding a change in the format. Committee Member Cheryl Foster provided an update on the Fashion Show on April 10 at 5 p.m. in the lobby. After the show, the clothes will available on the stage for sale. Board members were encouraged to attend An Evening with Jonathan Evison, bestselling and award -winning author, on June 11. Tickets are $50 and include wine and dessert. Agenda items for next month's meeting: ✓ Gala ✓ Center State update ✓ Update on major gifts, corporate season sponsor, planned giving, endowment program ✓ Quarterly review of budget, key milestones/variance report, whether on track with strategies, any support staff needs from the Philanthropy Committee ✓ Update on grant writer ✓ Suggestions for potential Development Committee members and ECA board members 4. Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 10:24 a.m. Next EPFD Board Meeting: Thursday, March 28, 2024 - 7:30 AM Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes March 19, 2024 Page 3 Packet Pg. 193 7.2.h Edmonds Public Facilities District Board of Directors Meeting March 28, 2024 The Edmonds Public Facilities District Board hybrid meeting convened at 7:33 a.m. in the Edmonds Center for the Arts Green Room, 410 4th Avenue North, Edmonds, and via Zoom. EPFD Board Members Present ECA Staff Present Ray Liaw, President Kathy Liu, Executive Director Bill Willcock, Vice President Lori Meagher, Associate Executive Director Suzy Maloney Kingston Prescott, Production Manager David Brewster Wayne Grotheer Guests Chris Eck, City Council Liaison ECA Board Members Present David Schaefer, Immed. Past President 1. Call to Order Board President Liaw called the meeting to order. 2. Land Acknowledgement & Equity Statement Board Member Grotheer read the Land Acknowledgement and Equity Statement. 3. Agenda Review and Approval BOARD VP WILLCOCK MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA. BOARD MEMBER BREWSTER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. Board President's Comments Board President Liaw relayed March is Women's History Month. She acknowledged the great things happening on the ECA stage and in the world that are often made possible in part by the good of work of women including the ECA staff. 5. Public Comment There were no public comments. 6. Consent Agenda • EPFD Disbursement Report: February 2024 BOARD MEMBER MALONEY MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. BOARD MEMBER BREWSTER SECONDED THE MOTION. BOARD MEMBER BREWSTER MOVED AMEND TO PULL EPFD BOARD MINUTES — FEBRUARY 29, 2024 FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA. BOARD MEMBER GROTHEER SECONDED THE MOTION. AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes March 28, 2024 Page I Packet Pg. 194 7.2.h The February 29, 2024 minutes were added to the agenda under New Business. 7. Old Business • Prior Action Items Review Ms. Meagher reviewed progress on action items from the previous meeting and identified outstanding items (see Action Items below). • March Staff Report — Questions/Comments? A brief discussion followed regarding a season sponsor. 8. PFD Board Business • Board Designated Funds (BDF) Policy Ms. Meagher reported the policy was shared with the Admin & Finance Committee yesterday. The EPFD Board passed a resolution in 2022 to establish the BDF policy and procedures for moving sales tax revenue traditionally held for debt service from LGIP to a BDF account for future capital needs and how funds would be transferred when necessary. She described revisions made to the policy such as replacing Director of Finance and Operations which no longer exists in the org chart with chief financial position, streamlining accounting language, and defining what an emergency situation when funds could be transferred funds out of the BDF prior to EPFD Board approval. She displayed the revised policy that she emailed the EPFD Board this morning that incorporated input from Admin & Finance. Questions and discussion followed regarding definition of the chief financial position, whether an external group has reviewed the policy, vetting of the policy by the auditor in 2022, the auditor auditing for compliance with the policy, whether the policy needed to be reviewed by legal counsel, and why emergency use language was originally included in the policy. Board President Liaw suggested if there were no substantive changes, she and Ms. Meagher would make minor procedural changes to the policy and place it on the Consent Agenda for approval next month. • FY2023 Board Designated Funds Vote Ms. Meagher advised the packet includes a recent version of the Cash Flow report. As discussed at last month's meeting, she recommended moving $500,000 from the LGIP account which contains debt service funds received from sales tax to the Board Designated Reserve line in compliance with the policy. Board President Liaw relayed the recommendation was supported by the Admin & Finance Committee. BOARD MEMBER BREWSTER MOVED TO ACCEPT ADMIN & FINANCE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION TO MOVE $500,000 TO BOARD DESIGNATED RESERVE LINE. BOARD MEMBER MALONEY SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. • Approval of Update to Land Acknowledgement Ms. Meagher displayed the proposed updated language. The IDEA Committee has discussed several versions to acknowledge the relationship with the Tribes and acknowledge there is work to be done establishing and building those relationships. The ECA Board approved this version this month and the next step was to bring it to the EPFD Board for approval to begin using it. BOARD MEMBER GROTHEER MOVED TO APPROVE THE UPDATED LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. BOARD VP WILLCOCK SECONDED THE MOTION. Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes March 28, 2024 Page 2 Packet Pg. 195 7.2.h Discussion followed regarding support for the revised acknowledgement, appreciation to the IDEA Committee for ensuring the Land Acknowledgement reflects input from indigenous communities, and audience applause when it is stated at performances. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. PFD Board Committee Reports Board Member Brewster reported the Association of WA State PFDs received an update from Betty Erickson, the current association lead, which included the legislative lobbyist's final report. Some members have concerns about how the association is managed and governed and he anticipated collaboration and discussion among the PFDs to make improvements. The date for the annual conference is September 23-25. Board Member Brewster reported he was unable to attend the last Education & Outreach Committee meeting. He encouraged board members to attend a launch of the ninth anthology of student writings from Scriber Lake High School students at the Edmonds Waterfront Center on April 30. Board members' attendance illustrates the ECA's support and provides a boost of confidence to these young writers. Board Member Brewster provided updates from the monthly Creative District Advisory Committee. The district received two grants from Arts Washington, $7500 for marketing which will be used to stage a media tour of Edmonds to show examples of the creative district which will include the ECA. There will be a Sketcher Fest in July; Seattle Times Sketcher Gabriel Campanario invites travel sketchers to sketch things in Edmonds. The Edmonds Creative District plans to have a table at the event and be included the introductory materials. The other grant the district received for $60,000 will be matched by the Edmonds Arts Foundation and is intended to update and add public art to Anway Park by the ferry holding lanes to identify Edmonds as a Creative District to ferry users. The Department of Commerce Creative Economy Director plans to ask for $5 million in the governor's budget next year dedicated to creative districts. There are 15 creative districts; if approved, Edmonds' share would be $300,000. Creative Districts are encouraged to identify ways to use the funds such internships to create paths for high school and college students. Board VP Willcock reported the Philanthropy Committee meeting included a review of the status of grants and other revenue generation, review of overall goals and the operations of the team, update on the spring appeal, finalizing the charter, an update on Center Stage planning, and an overview regarding revising the Gala format. Board Member Maloney added the meeting also included discussion on minor changes to the Center Stage format. Ms. Liu added the video will be truncated to keep interest and energy high and so the videos can be reused for other purposes. Ms. Liu described the proposed change to the Gala format to be more performance centric with a star performer where the ticket price includes a donation (to replace Raise the Paddle) and may include a few auction elements. The Philanthropy Committee is very interested in exploring that format, but because the date for the Gala has already been set for 2024 (October 18), it requires securing an appropriate artist who is available. She provided a list of artists to the committee; staff is in the process of reaching out to the artists to confirm fees and availability. The Philanthropy Committee will make a decision at their next meeting whether to move forward with the new format or wait to make a change in 2025. Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes March 28, 2024 Page 3 Packet Pg. 196 7.2.h Questions and discussion followed regarding whether the performance would be open to the public, whether a ticket price could replace Raise the Paddle, Ms. Liu's experience with this model, and larger Seattle arts organizations that utilize this model. Board VP Willcock reported items reviewed by the Admin & Finance Committee are on the agenda for the EPFD Board meeting. Board Member Grotheer reported neither the IDEA Committee nor the Universal Access Task Force have meet since the board's last meeting. The Music Building Taskforce continues looking at various combinations of repair or demolition/replacement. The Facilities & Operations Committee discussed the three highest priority universal access projects; replacing a CO2 sensor for the HVAC system which the committee approved, assisted listening devices for which grants are being pursued, and ADA doors (push button for inner and outer theater entrance doors). There are grants available and facilities staff has gotten updated bids. There will be a national conference on disability in the arts sponsored by the Kennedy Center in Seattle on July 29-August 2. The Music Building Taskforce plans to provide a recommendation in mid -April. Board President Liaw requested that be added to the April EPFD board agenda. Board President Liaw relayed the Hosting Committee did not meet. Admin & Finance discussed a resolution related to GASB 96 and vacation time around 4tn of July. The Mithun group is discussing scheduling a presentation in April. 10. Associate Executive Director Update • Finance Update o February Draft Financials Ms. Meagher advised the packet included draft February financial reports. All the reports are draft until they are finalized for the audit. She displayed and reviewed the financial dashboard, highlighting operating revenue for presented events, rentals, contributed revenue, and ticket donations. She highlighted operating expenses related to presented events, marketing, payroll, facilities maintenance and utilities and continued due diligence to control expenses. She reviewed non -operating revenues and expenses, highlighting sales tax, accounts payable, and unearned ticket revenue. Questions and discussion followed regarding finalizing the 2023 financials for the audit scheduled in August, a suggestion to gray out future months on KPI Dashboard report (similar to Cashflow Projections by Month), and a suggestion to include a one page grant funding spreadsheet in future finance updates. • Human Resources Update o Policy Updates Ms. Meagher reported she and Ms. Liu are discussing risk tolerance for the previously drafted policies and will present the policies to the EPFD Board next month. The current HR handbook is being updated to incorporate new laws related to accommodations during pregnancy. The GASB 96 policy related to information technology agreements will come to the EPFD board next month to establish a $2,000 threshold. Ms. Meagher relayed the packet included an updated org chart. A part time rental assistant has been hired; a part-time grant writer position, to replace the consultant, will be posted on Friday; the tech lead and a stage hand gave notice and those positions will be posted this week. Both are Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes March 28, 2024 Page 4 Packet Pg. 197 7.2.h willing to be in an over -hire role and contract with the ECA for Center Stage. It was recommended the org chart with employee names be distributed to the EPFD Board. • Facilities Update See Board Member Grotheer's update under PFD Board Member Reports. 11. Executive Director Update • Development Update Ms. Liu reported she and Amy Stagno are scheduling board philanthropy reviews. Ticket add-ons are outperforming budget expectations. Invites have been sent for May 15 Center Stage. Planning for Center Stage and the Spring Appeal are underway and although they are happening somewhat concurrently, they target different groups. The departments building their annual work plan at the beginning of the year has helped with pacing and project management. A few more Gala buy -in events are coming up including an Edmonds Kind of Fashion Show on April 11 and there will be a Center Circle reception on April 18, a preshow to Red Hot Chili Peppers. There was a great Emeritus Board event last night to relaunch and reengage that group and plans to make that a quarterly gathering. A light edit/evaluation is being done of the Emeritus Board charter and requirements for appointment. • Education & Community Engagement Update Diana Ortega -Chance and Nick Williamson are confirming their season and completing preparations for the Educator Preview and summer camps. • Programming/Revenue Update Ms. Liu commented the doubleheader last weekend of Radical System Art and Neko Case was inspiring and spoke to the range and quality of ECA programming. She displayed and reviewed the Ticket Sales report. Ms. Meagher encouraged board members to attend Pamyua. Ms. Liu advised of a preshow event for Pamyua, an onstage workshop. She hoped to do 6-8 preshow events during the 2024-2025 season. Twenty-four shows have been confirmed for 2024-2025 season and more offers are pending. Staff is looking at audience development and would like to do at least two family friendly matinees. Summer shows are being finalized and staff is exploring the ECA participating in Porchfest in September. • Strategic Planning Timeline & Elements Ms. Liu advised the Strategic Plan outline included in the packet is a rough draft that will be further refined. The Steering Committee reviewed the outline last month and will continue providing feedback to ensure there is agreement on the scope of organization objectives before formulating a draft RFP for distribution in May, hiring a strategic planning consultant by September, and beginning work no later than the start of 2025. She invited board members to provide input on goals and objectives. 12. Senior Staff Update — Production Manager Ms. Liu introduced Production Manager Kingston Prescott who described his background; originally from the east coast, most recently from Spokane, worked at smaller venues in Spokane, family members are musicians, went from playing shows to booking shows, running shows, promoting, talent buying, etc. After nine years in Spokane, he began looking elsewhere and is happy to be at the ECA. Board members welcomed him. Mr. Prescott relayed the production team is wonderful and some additional staff will be hired such as a dedicated A2 (assistant sound Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes March 28, 2024 Page S Packet Pg. 198 7.2.h engineer) who knows the system well instead of using over -hire. He relayed goals related to saving money, strengthening relationships, changing the way deposits are handled to be in line with industry standards, holding strong on offer and contract language and charging for additional requests, and strengthening tenant relationships and communications with CCF and CSO. 13. New Business • EPFD Board Minutes — February 29, 2024 Ms. Liu requested the following amendment: page 5 under Education - Kidstock!, change Educator Preview to June (instead of March). BOARD VP WILLCOCK MOVED TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 29, 2024 MINUTES AS AMENDED. BOARD MEMBER BREWSTER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 14. Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 8:59 a.m. Next EPFD Board Meeting: Thursday, April 25, 2024 - 7:30 AM ACTION ITEMS: 1. Amend February 29, 2024 EPFD Board Meeting Minutes: page 5 under Education - Kidstock!, change Educator Preview to June (instead of March) 2. Schedule presentation regarding findings of Mithun's Building Envelope & Seismic Assessment 3. Following Mithun presentation, create list of short and long term capital projects organized by dollar amount that identifies priorities for 2024 and 2025 4. Add board member assignments to external committees to committee list and distribute list 5. Pets at the Workplace and Children at the Workplace policies 6. Gray out future months on KPI Dashboard report (similar to Cashflow Projections by Month) 7. Include grant funding spreadsheet with Financial Reports 8. Distribute org chart with staff names to EPFD Board 9. April EPFD Board meeting a. Approval of Board Designated Funds Policy on Consent Agenda b. Recommendation regarding music building c. GASB 96 policy Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Draft Minutes March 28, 2024 Page 6 Packet Pg. 199 o •Ti WSDO9r Amtrak Cascades reliminary Service Development Plan SeaShore Transportation Forum May 3, 2024 .0 Packet Pg. 200 7.2.i • Corridor overview • Federal planning requirements for rail • Preliminary Service Development Plan • Preliminary Purpose and Need statement • Alternative Development and Recommendations Report • Next steps Packet Pg. 201 7.2.i mtrak Cascades overview Linking Vancouver, BC, Seattle, Portland and Eugene • 461-mile corridor • Serving 18 cities along the corridor • More than 800,000 annual riders prior to the pandemic • Operate on railroad tracks owned by BNSF, Sound Transit, and Union Pacific • Ridership and revenue nearing 2019 levels Seattle - Portland 6 Seattle - Vancouver 2 Portland - Eugene 2 ncouver, B.C. i b.c Bellingham Mount Vernon Stanwood Everett Edmonds Seattle Tukwila Tacoma WA Olympia/Lacey Centralia Kelso/Longview Vancouver, WA Portland Oregon City *Salem ,Albany Eugene O w E 0 U _ O m .N O _ 0 L Q d L O L Cn O d N N 0 u7 0 v N O N r-� E U r Q Packet Pg. 202 7.2.i Whorl ' a Service Development Flar14, A Service Development Plan is a strategic plan for improving, expanding or initiating service on an intercity passenger rail corridor that includes: • an operating plan • a capital plan • an investment case Required as part of the new Corridor Identification and Development Program — 49 USC 25101(d) Tied to federal funding opportunities Amtrak Cascades is here --,I Development Stages Implementation Stages Project Project Planning Development Final Design Construction Operation --VEngineering/rNEPA Pr D• Corridor ID Program Restoration & Enhancement Fed State Partnership National / Other Federal Funding Programs Program Packet Pg. 203 7.2.i Why are we doing a Preliminary SDP? V 0 Why are we doing a Preliminary SDP? w r • 2006 Long -Range Plan needs to be replaced E 0 • Analysis based on 20+ year old data • New federal requirements and expectations N L • Funded by FRA grant (50%) — negotiated to foc 0 CO on alternative development with available funds 2' • Address uncertainty about post -pandemic trave 0 tre nds w • Explore effect of different service concepts on N ridership and travel time �- 0 L Work products for use in future SDP Cn 0 Cn development N N O • Preliminary Purpose and Need statementLO IT N • Alternatives for future Amtrak Cascades service N 0 E r a Packet Pg. 204 7.2.i Preliminary Purpost The purpose of the proposed Project is to enhance intercity passenger rail service for travelers along the existing route used for the Washington state segment of the Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor (PNWRC). The Project would: • Meet growing intercity travel demand with more frequent, reliable and customer - focused service • Strengthen multimodal connections to improve accessibility and provide better travel options • Support greenhouse gas reduction goals • Support the economic vitality of communities served by PNWRC passenger service • Address transportation system equity issues along the corridor • Ensure the rail corridor has the capacity to support needs of all passenger and freight rail service providers Additionally, the project will: • Avoid or minimize negative community and environmental impacts • Be a cost-effective investment Packet Pg. 205 d to WSDOT and its consultant team looked at: • Current ridership data • Demographic data for the corridor • Projected population and employment growth • Travel patterns in the region, post - pandemic • Public comments and interviews with employers • Markets that may not be fully serviced (i.e. latent demand) • Carry-over data and information from previous planning efforts, such as 2019 State Rail Plan and 2006 Amtrak Cascades Long -Range Plan 7.2.i identify options Population growth in the PNWRC corridor °L Q 8,000,000 - 50% 7,000,000 45% N 40%' 6,000,000 35% E 5,000,000 30% O 4,000,000 25% U 3,000,000 20% _ 2,000,000 --. 15% to 10% 1,000,000 5% L to 0 Oregon Washington British Columbia m �2020 3,377,625 6,036,519 3,501,631 2045 4,183,179 7,569,479 5,098,192 y Growth 24% 25% 46% 3 0 _ 0 Change in percentage of trips by distance, 2019 to 2022 a Distance Band (Miles) _ <1 1-3 3-5 5-10 10-25 25-50 50-100 100-250 250.500 > 500 N 60% L CL 40% L O 20% CO I I 0% N N O -20% to -40% N O N -60^% r Q E -80% i ■ Washington Oregor 20-50% increase in short and mid -distance trips Q between 2019 and 2022 ii Packet Pg. 206 7.2.i Service option cha icteristic4m Service frequency 0 Frequencyfrom 2006 Long -Range Plan (13 daily Increased frequency beyond 2023 round trips between Seattle and Portland) levels 0 Lower service frequencyoptions (minimum of 8 daily round trips for Seattle -Portland, 3 for Seattle — Vancouver BC) ■ Higher service frequency options (up to 16 daily round trips for Seattle-Porland) Stopping patterns 0 Local (stop at all stations) Skipping intermediate stops for ■ Express (non-stop) shortertrip times orintroducing 0 Limited (stops in Tacoma and Vancouver, WA) integrated bus/rail service 0 Partial rail service for new Seattle —Vancouver, BC trips (rail for Seattle —Bellingham, bus for Bellingham —Vancouver) Speed increases 0 Increasing maximum speed from 79 mph to 90 Fasteroperating speeds to reduce mph in straight sections travel times 0 Increasing minimum speeds (to be considered in next phase of SDP work) Packet Pg. 207 7.2.i Preliminary Alternative A All preliminary alternatives are subjectto further analysis and refinement Schedule Highlights Travel Time Roundtrips • Projected ridership 54% over baseline Seattle ' • • Highest speeds of 79 mph Local 3h 11 m 7 Limited n/a o • Need at least 6 more trainsets Express 2h 51m 1 • At least 12 infrastructure improvements • needed to address capacity needs Local 3h 46m 2 Express n/a 0 • Travel time reduction via service patterns Rail / bus 4h 7m 2 • Potential building block service option EUG PDX SEA VAC 8 RT 2 RT HRT EL The travel times listed above are not the anticipated schedule times and only should be used for comparing the alternatives Schedules will need to be negotiated with Amtrak and the host railroads prior to adding new service. All options include six roundtrips between Eugene and Portland, as identified in ODOT's Service Development Plan 0 w E 0 U 0 CO a� 0 C 0 w a� L CL 0 0 M Cn a� Cn N O LO 0 ICT O N r-� C d E L U 2 r a Packet Pg. 208 7.2.i Preliminary Alternative B All preliminary alternatives are subjectto further analysis and refinement Schedule Local Limited Express Local Express Rail / bus EUG PDX 6 RT1 Travel Time Roundtrips 3h 11m 10 n/a 0 n/a 0 r � 3h 46m n/a 4h 7m SEA 10 RI Highlights • Projected preliminary ridership 78% over baseline • Highest speeds of 79 mph • Need at least 6 more trainsets • At least 13 infrastructure improvements 3 needed to address capacity needs 0 2 • Potential building block service option :L VAC The travel times listed above are not the anticipated schedule times and only should be used for comparing the alternatives Schedules will need to be negotiated with Amtrak and the host railroads prior to adding new service. All options include six roundtrips between Eugene and Portland, as identified in ODOT's Service Development Plan Packet Pg. 209 7.2.i Preliminary Alternative C All preliminary alternatives are subjectto further analysis and refinement Schedule Highlights Travel Time Roundtrips • Projected preliminary ridership 112% over Seattle . baseline Local 3h 05m 13 • Highest speeds of 90 mph Limited n/a 0 Express n/a 0 • Need at least 9 more trainsets 0 Local 3h 39m 3 Express n/a 0 Rail / bus 4h 00m 3 EUG PDX SEA 6 RT1 13 RT 3 RT • At least 16 infrastructure improvements needed to address capacity needs • Second highest ridership performance • Travel time reduction via track improvements The travel times listed above are not the anticipated schedule times and only should be used for comparing the alternatives Schedules will need to be negotiated with Amtrak and the host railroads prior to adding new service. All options include six roundtrips between Eugene and Portland, as identified in ODOT's Service Development Plan 0 0_ 0 0 w E 0 U 0 m a� .N 0 C 0 w a� 0. 0 0 M Cn m Cn N O LO O lzr O N r-� C d E L r a Packet Pg. 210 7.2.i Preliminary Alternative D All preliminary alternatives are subjectto further analysis and refinement Schedule Travel Time Roundtrips Local 3h 11 m 9 Limited 2h 57m 2 Express 2h 51 m 2 Seattle -Vancouver Local 3h 46m 2 Express 3h 33m 1 Rail / bus 4h 07m 3 EUG PDX SEA VAC 3 RT 3 RT BEL Highlights • Projected preliminary ridership 89% over baseline • Highest speeds of 79 mph • Need at least 11 more trainsets • At least 16 infrastructure improvements needed to address capacity needs • Travel time reduction via service patterns • Express and limited trains serve major markets in both directions in morning and evening • Potential for phased travel time reductions The travel times listed above are not the anticipated schedule times and only should be used for comparing the alternatives Schedules will need to be negotiated with Amtrak and the host railroads prior to adding new service. All options include six roundtrips between Eugene and Portland, as identified in ODOT's Service Development Plan 0 0 0 w E 0 U 0 CO a� .N 0 C 0 r c a� a� C. 0 0 M Cn 0 Cn N 0 LO 0 ICT O N r-� C d E L U 2 r a Packet Pg. 211 7.2.i Preliminary Alternative E All preliminary alternatives are subjectto further analysis and refinement Schedule Highlights Travel Time Roundtrips • Projected preliminary ridership 140% over Seattle . baseline Local 3h 05m 16 • Highest speeds of 90 mph Limited n/a 0 Express n/a 0 • Need at least 9 more trainsets M • At least 18 infrastructure improvements Local 3h 6 39m needed to address capacity needs Express n/a9m 6 Rail / bus 4h 00m 0 • Highest overall ridership growth EUG I PDX SEA 6 RT VAC The travel times listed above are not the anticipated schedule times and only should be used for comparing the alternatives Schedules will need to be negotiated with Amtrak and the host railroads prior to adding new service. All options include six roundtrips between Eugene and Portland, as identified in ODOT's Service Development Plan 0 0_ 0 0 w E 0 U 0 CO a� .N 0 C 0 w a� L CL 0 0 M Cn m Cn N O LO O ICT O N r-� C d E L U 2 r a Packet Pg. 212 7.2.i WSDOT worked with service partners to examine current and future capacity on the route, identify areas expected to be over -capacity, and develop preliminary infrastructure needs to support each of the identified service options. 2045 capacity north of Seattle with Alternative E 280 260 240 220 200 k 180 W L 160 U `O 140 .° •� 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 GG8 f. f a f W o 6 f > c 0 K W m O Track Segment Over Capacity Unallocated Capacity M Consumed Capacity Packet Pg. 213 Preliminary capacity improvements _ Controlled siding (0.5 miles) White Rock, BC BNSF `/ Extend double track (2.3 miles) Custer BNSFNorth of Extend double track (2.2 miles) Ferndale BNSF / V I/ / Extend siding (2 miles) South Bellingham BNSF V I/ V I/ I/ Expand yard facilities Everett (Delta Yard) BNSF I/ V Controlled siding (3.3 miles) Seattle (Georgetown/Boeing Field) BNSF I/ V Controlled siding (2.9 miles) Seattle (Boeing Field/Renton) BNSF / Extend triple track (2.8 miles) Kent —Auburn BNSF I/ V Expand yard facilities Auburn Yard BNSF I/ V Extend triple track (8.5 miles) Sumner —Tacoma BNSF V I/ Controlled siding (2.2 miles) Tacoma ST V V Vgouth of Controlled siding (0.2 miles) geattle DuPont ST Controlled siding (2.9 miles) Chehalis BNSF Extend triple track (3.1 miles) Longview BNSF Extend triple track (2 miles) Vancouver, WA (Vancouver Yard) BNSF Expand yard facilities Vancouver Yard BNSF Reconfigure junction Portland, OR (North Portland Junction) BNSF V V V Extend triple track (1.9 miles) Portland, OR (Willbridge Yard) BNSF / * This listing of infrastructure improvementsdoes not constitute funding availabilityor endorsementofthe improvements by the host railroads *"Does not include any necessaryimprovements in Canada between the Fraser River Bridge and Pacific Central Station in Vancouver, BC Q Packet Pg. 214 7.2.i Puk, V%qIy sis • Final step of the analysis to looked at potential travel market scenarios that could affect Amtrak Cascades ridership w • "What if" analysis to assess the range of potential impacts on system performance w E o measures under various service options and plan for uncertainties U • Major factors considered to define scenarios: o • External trends CO .N ■ Post -pandemic travel behavior change o ■ Emerging technologies o w ■ Land use changes • Supporting service enhancements �. ■ Additional transit service 0 ■ Station accessibility Cn N • Policy initiatives N LO ■ Vehicle mile traveled (VMT) pricing O o ■ Parking restrictions N • Future investment ■ Current air travel forecasts a Packet Pg. 215 7.2.i %arios and I indins • Two plausible scenarios as bookends intended to represent extremes • Higher demographic growth and improved rail and transit services • Lower demographic growth and improved highway travel condition • Four additional scenarios addressing the following major factors • Urban growth shifts to suburban and rural areas • Potential improvements to enhance rail service (station accessibility, reliability, amenities) • Possible improvements to enhance transit service • Air travel increases as forecasted in the corridor Change in Amtrak Cascades ridership ranged from a 39% decrease to a 43% increase, depending upon specific scenarios Key factors increasing ridership growth: • Higher population and employment growth • Supportive rail and transit service improvements Key factors limiting ridership growth: • Continuation of the current teleworking trend • Technology trends such as vehicle automation Packet Pg. 216 0 d we conduct outreach? Preliminary Purpose and Need • WSDOT conducted extensive outreach, receiving over 4,000 responses via webpage content, webinars, social media posts, and major employer interviews • Information shared in multiple languages • Input incorporated to strengthen the purpose and need statement and inform the development of preliminary alternatives Alternatives Development and Recommendations Report • Pre -publication webinars • Public comment period ended on April 18, 2024 • WSDOT received nearly 800 comment letters and emails Packet Pg. 217 7.2.i Preliminary Service Development Plan • Revise and publish final report in June FRA Corridor ID Program process • Step 1: Scoping — scheduled for completion in Fall/Winter2024 • Step 2: Service Development Plan (full corridor, including Oregon) • Step 3: Preliminary engineering / NEPA For more information about the FRA Corridor ID Program visit: https://raiIroads.dot.aov/corridor-I D-proara m Packet Pg. 218 7.2.i nformatiov For more information, please contact: Jason Beloso Freight and Rail Planning Manager Rail, Freight and Ports Division BelosoJ(a-wsdot.wa.gov Paul Krueger Systems Planning Engineer Rail, Freight and Ports Division Kruege P(@wsdot.wa . gov Packet Pg. 219 7.2.j 05.03.2024- Seashore Minutes Genevieve Jones shared that live captioning was being offered for this month's meeting. Participants can view them by hovering their mouse over the lower part of the Zoom screen until they see the toolbar, selecting "more", selecting "captions" and then selecting "show captions." The meeting was called to order at 7:33am. CM Paine shared that the Community Transit Board met last night and are looking at doing zip transit at three additional locations. They are also considering community van. Genevieve shared that at last month's Regional Transit Committee (RTC) Metro gave an overview of safety efforts and a presentation on flexible services including Community Van, Metro Flex, and Vanpool/Vanshare. At this month's RTC meeting, Metro will give an update on ridership recovery, trends, and service planning. Amanda Pleasant -Brown shared that Metro is recruiting Student Transit Champions. They asked participants to please share this opportunity with constituents. Amanda also shared that Metro is restoring service to nine Hopelink-operated DART routes - 204, 630, 901, 903, 906, 915 - on May 13. One technical correction was made to the minutes. Then they passed unanimously. Robin Koskey began the Post -Session Report by stating that transportation budget writers had to grapple with cost increases and bleak forecasting. The transportation budget will be a big topic of conversation in the next session. Overall, the budget was $14.6B. Total appropriations for the Climate Commitment Act (CCA) are $3.25B. Transportation budget writers will go back to drawing board if the CCA is repealed. Mega projects had significant cost increases and House and Senate Transportation projects were very different at start of session. Of particular focus was the West End/Portage Bay mega project in Seattle. Legislators directed WSDOT to seek tax deferral and cost reductions and report back by the end of the year. Ferries did pretty well in the budget with additional money for the five new vessels, preservation and maintenance, and passenger ferries. Some of this funding is tied up in CCA. Other transportation budget increases include safety, highway preservation, fish passage barrier removal, port electrification, ZEVs and infrastructure, active transportation, and more. A budget proviso funded a road user charge report to legislature. The Transit Oriented Development bill didn't pass, but a proviso was included in the budget to review TOD conditions. The results due in two years. CM Paine asked if there are any municipalities that are looking at large vehicle road user charges, like Washington D.C.? A— Giving authorities to counties to do regional road user charge is something that's been talked about. CM Paine clarified that she was asking specifically about large vehicles. A— I have not heard much about that. But have heard about delivery charges. Robin concluded the presentation by stating that she will share the PSRC presentation about the CCA as well as her PowerPoint for today. Jason Beloso kicked off the Amtrak Cascades Preliminary Service Development Plan presentation with an overview of the corridor. This route links Vancouver, BC, Seattle, Portland, and Eugene. Seeing over a million users — so, good demand. Anticipating brand new train sets will be received in 2026. Packet Pg. 220 7.2.j Service Development Plan (SDP) is a strategic plan for improving, expanding or initiating service on an intercity passenger rail corridor. Required by federal IIJA and sets up pathway to federal funding. WSDOT is doing a preliminary SDP because the long-range plan from 2006 needs to be replaced. They began this process before IIJA passed and required the SDP. This cost of planning is split between Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) grant and WSDOT. Preliminary purpose and need to guide process including meeting the need, strengthening intercity connections, lowering carbon emissions, and coordinating with freight. Information used to identify options included ridership and demographic data, projected growth, travel patterns, markets, carryover data from old plans, and public comments. Service option characteristics include service frequency, stopping patterns, and speed increases. WSDOT came up with five alternatives through this SDP (please see presentation slides for full description of each alternative). Preliminary capacity improvements are being identified with partners. WSDOT also conducted a scenario analysis, looking at how potential travel trends could affect Amtrak ridership. Resulted in six different scenarios with two representing extremes and four in-between scenarios. Outreach was conducted via survey, webpage, webinars, social media, and major employer interviews. Information was shared in multiple languages. Received over 4,000 responses via webpage. Top priority is for more frequent service. Some asking for expanded service. Some asking for decreased travel times. The next steps are to finalize the preliminary study report by June. CM Paine asked when double tracking will happen in downtown Edmonds? A — We don't know much. They have heard that BNSF is interested in a double track project around waterfront area. Our office continues to ask what's going on. CM Paine shared that BNSF owns half of the road that is along the waterfront. CM Paine asked how is Amtrak preparing for the World Cup in 2026 given that games are along NW corridor? A — Secretary Millar attended a recent meeting with the World Cup planning committee. Putting a strategy plan for the agency together. On the rail side, WSDOT continues to engage partners and there are some improvements on the Vancouver side. Especially with the advent of the new trains. Working with federal partners on pre -clearance over the border. Coordinating with PNWR and tourist partners. Chris Arkills made a couple observations including his support for speed and reliability improvements. He believes we need to move towards high-speed rail to help relieve pressure on SeaTac and PDX airports. Didn't see that much time savings by cutting out the stops in between and inter -city connections are critical for smaller towns. A — At the end of this preliminary service development plan, WSDOT will start State Rail Plan and the public transportation department will be doing their plan, part of which addresses intercity transit. WSDOT has come before the board to talk high-speed, now that program belongs to a different part of WSDOT, but they too are working through FRA process. High- speed and Cascades should be complimentary. High-speed is being planned in coordination with 1-5 project. Packet Pg. 221 7.2.j Co -Chair Goldman asked if plans are addressing solutions to freight and passenger sharing rails? A — Absolutely. It's important for us to coordinate. Co -Chair Goldman shared that the train should be as competitive with driving in -terms of travel time, more comfortable than flying, and it is better for the environment. Genevieve kicked off the letters of support discussion by reminding the board of how this issue came to be, reminded participants of the review of the draft process last month, and described two changes made by other boards: a lengthening from six weeks to two months for the process; an additional question that ties in the legislative agenda and a strengthening of the language around how this impacts the board's subarea from "nexus" to "benefit." CM Pobee expressed support for the time extension. CM Goldman commented that the legislative agenda addition was appropriate. The letters of support process passed unanimously. Co -Chair Goldman opened good of the order by sharing that most SeaShore meetings are on Zoom. State requirements are that when the boards has a virtual meeting, if the board wants to have public comment, there must be a physical space provided. The boards has two options: 1) Meeting 95% on Zoom but have designated physical space where public is able to gather, requiring staff, 2) No longer have public comment on Zoom. Co -Chair Goldman was in favor of option one. Jim Hammond shared that he is happy to continue to host the in -person option even though no one has showed up so far. If Jim were to leave, he can't necessarily confirm that Shoreline would choose to assign staff to do this but is happy to provide option now. The board decided to continue with option one by meeting largely on zoom and having space available each month at Shoreline City Hall. Co -Chair Goldman then shared that WSDOT will be talking about safety next month, and he asked that cities come prepared next time to share about their safety efforts in their jurisdictions. The meeting was adjourned 8:38am. Attendees• Amanda Pleasant -Brown (she/they), King County Metro April, Ai -Media Captioner Brock Howell, Snohomish County Transportation Coalition Chris Arkills, King County Metro Chris Eaves, Seattle DOT Dana, Ai -Media Captioner Eben Pobee, Shoreline Councilmember Erin Murray, Mountlake Terrace Councilmember Genevieve Jones, (she/her) King County Metro Heather Marx, Office of Seattle City Councilmember Rob Saka Jamyang Dorjee, Community Transit Packet Pg. 222 7.2.j Jason Beloso, WSDOT Jim Hammond, Shoreline Government Relations Kyoko Matsumoto -Wright, Mountlake Terrace Mayor Jeffrey Perrigo, Lake Forest Park Public Works Larry Goldman, Lake Forest Park Councilmember Matthew Kenna, WSDOT Mike Dee, Member of the public Nathan Loutsis, Kenmore Councilmember Oscar Antillon, Edmonds Director of Public Works Paul Krueger, WSDOT Phillip Hill, Lake Forest Park Susan Paine, Edmonds Councilmember Tom French, Lake Forest Park Mayor Links• • Metro Student Transit Champion Applications due May 12 • Link to meeting video and CCA Presentation • Link to Climate Commitment Act Presentation PSRC Exec Board Packet Pg. 223 7.2.k SNOHOMISH COUNTY SNOHOMISH COUNTY 911 BOARD OF DIRECTORS BOARD MEETING AGENDA s = May 16, 2024 at 8:30 a.m. Web Conference — Join Zoom Meeting https://uso2web.zoom.us/i/86274396181 Meeting ID: 860 00 46 6014, Passcode: 195881 or dial +1 253 215 8782 Physical location: 1121 SE Everett Mall Way, Everett Police Department, South Precinct. Please note that most Board members and staff attend the meeting remotely. However, pursuant to RCW 42.30, a physical location is also provided. 1. Call to Order A. Roll Call B. Announcements C. Public Comment: Public Comments limited to 3 minutes on discussion items related to agency business. 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Consent Agenda A. Minutes from the April 18, 2024 Regular Board Meeting B. April 2024 Blanket Voucher & Payroll Approval Form: i. Checks 1042-1044, and 18717-18830, for a total of $3,547,371.26 ii. Payroll Direct Deposit, in the amount of $1,379,711.82 C. APF - PAM 6.10 (PFML) Policy Change 4. Executive Session A. Legal Briefing 5. Old Business A. Legislative Approvals of ILA Changes B. Nurse Navigation Program Update 6. New Business A. EMS Joint Taskforce Presentation (30 Min.) B. APF - ECSF Biennial Budget Request C. APF - New 911 CPE Fund 86 Proposal 7. Reports A. Agency Report B. Radio Replacement Project (RRP) Packet Pg. 224 7.2.k C. Police TAC D. Fire TAC 8. Committee Reports A. Finance Committee B. Personnel Committee i. Open Committee position (Current: 2 Law, 1 Fire, 0 elected) C. Future Facility Committee i. Water Mitigation Report D. EMS Joint Task Force E. County EESCS Committee (formerly County E911 Office) F. County ECSF Program Advisory Board 9. Good of the Order 10. Adjourn - The next meeting is scheduled for June 20, 2024 Packet Pg. 225 Log in 7.2.1 Sign up Log in to Box to save all files you view in your Recents and return to them at any time. V J�VL�LT NAME 05.02.24 CEO Report.pdf 05.02.24 Board Packet.pdf March 2024 Vouchers.pdf Details Folder Properties Owner Board Administrator Enterprise Owner Community Transit Created Apr 25, 2024 at 8:26 AM Modified May 2, 2024 at 12:41 PM Size 2.7 M B Packet Pg. 226 7.2.1 N O O_ d d d E E O U c cu rn L MO W w O O L Q cn d O w .N L �C C E O U Iq N N O LO O C d E t L) ftf Q Packet Pg. 227 Log in 7.2.m Sign up Log in to Box to save all files you view in your Recents and return to them at any time. V J�VL�LT NAME 05.02.24 CEO Report.pdf 05.02.24 Board Packet.pdf March 2024 Vouchers.pdf Details Folder Properties Owner Board Administrator Enterprise Owner Community Transit Created Apr 25, 2024 at 8:26 AM Modified May 2, 2024 at 12:41 PM Size 2.7 M B u Packet Pg. 228 7.2.m 0 Q. a� a: m a� E E 0 U c 0 N L M0 W 0 .N O �L Q Q d rt+ C E i d d E .y C L E E 0 U N N O LO O C d E t V fC w Q Packet Pg. 229 7.2.n E11L co mm unitytransit ' Memorandum To: Board of Directors From: Ric Ilgenfritz, Chief Executive Officer Date: May 2, 2024 Subject: CEO Report Regional Engagement & Partnership Updates Activities April activities included co -hosting the Washington State Transportation Commission along Snohomish County and Edmonds. We provided transportation for a tour of county transportation projects and Sound Transit's representative and I presented our plans to the WSTC regarding how we will integrate our service network in the fall. We hosted the April SCCIT meeting at Community Transit, at which WSTC reported on the Snohomish County visit and I provided updates you earlier received on the Everett Transit/Community Transit consolidated network. This is part of the series of updates we are conducting jointly with the City of Everett after having briefed the Board, the City Council, and our labor leaders. Last week, staff and I attended a ribbon cutting ZeroAvia held at their new manufacturing facility just down the road. ZeroAvia manufacturers hydrogen -electric engines for zero -emission flight, and we have already begun conversations about our shared interest in fleet transition, and hydrogen in particular. I also attended the CEO Rountable hosted by the City of Lynnwood. Last Wednesday I travelled to Redmond along with Mayor Frizzell and several other Snohomish County dignitaries to participate in a preview ride of the Sound Transit 2 Line. Several members of our team were on hand Saturday as service to the public officially launched on this starter line. Congratulations to our friends at Sound Transit on this project. We eagerly await Sound Transit's opening of Lynnwood Link August 30, and after that completion of the 2 Line across Lake Washington, anticipated for next year, and the ability to increase service to and from Lynnwood to full frequency. Legislative Report In late April, we submitted our application to the Low or No Emissions FTA Grant program, our largest request yet for fleet transition support. As a required companion piece to the grant, we also submitted our Zero Emissions Transition plan to the FTA. This is a plan that provides specifics about our agency's transition to a zero -emission fleet. This plan will soon be available to the public on our website, and you will receive a copy. Next week, I'll join the Economic Alliance of Snohomish County for its annual D.C. Fly -in. Councilmember Fulcher and County Councilmember Peterson will also attend, along with several other partners. We will meet with our Congressional delegation to promote Snohomish County interests, including the importance of continued federal investment in transportation infrastructure. Packet Pg. 230 7.2.n Programs & Projects Alderwood Zip Shuttle As shared with the Finance, Performance, and Oversight Committee, I've approved a change order to increase contract funding by $820,000 to increase Zip Alderwood shuttle service. This additional funding will help us meet current and increasing customer demand and prepare for additional program utilization as Lynnwood Light rail activates on Aug. 30. The 2024 adopted budget includes sufficient funding for this change order. Finance The annual Transit Development Plan (TDP) is in progress. The Board can expect an informational presentation at your June meeting, a public hearing at the July meeting, and a request for Board adoption at your August meeting. The State Audit Entrance conference is scheduled for Monday, May 13 at 10 a.m. The Board and the public are invited to attend. Agency News Chief Human Resources Officer Cesar Portillo will be leaving us effective May 3. He is taking an executive position with Eastern Washington University, following his career -long involvement in higher education. Cesar has been a tremendous partner and friend during my tenure here, and has made significant contributions to our success in the areas of labor relations, recruiting & training, DEI, and organizational development. I have very exciting news to report from the American Public Transportation Association's International Bus Roadeo in Portland, OR. On Sunday, a group of 77 coach operators from around the country participated in this annual competition, and I am proud to report that Community Transit coach operator Matt Chomjak placed second overall. The top four finishers were all from the state of Washington. Congratulations, Matt! Page 2 Packet Pg. 231 7.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/4/2024 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 May 21, 2024 and May 27, 2024. Attachments: Public Comment June 4, 2024 Packet Pg. 232 7.3.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments —June 4, 2024 Online Form 2024-05-24 05:54 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 5/24/2024 8:54:03 PM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona Name Value FirstName Bill LastName Krepick Email CityOfResidence Woodway AgendaTopic Edmonds Fire Dept alternative should be analyzed before RFA Annexation Resolution is approved Comments Chairperson Olson- I once again appreciate the time you've taken to reply to my questions. While I don't agree with all of your answers , I do thank you for your honest insights. I have changed this email into a Public Comment for next Tuesday's 5/28/24 Council Meeting. I notice in the agenda that there is no time set aside for verbal public comments on the agenda topic of RFA Annexation Resolution? That's why I have changed this to a written Public Comment. Please enter it into the records. It seems to me one of the major `holes' in the City's approach to evaluating alternative fire service solutions is the absence of an objective financial expert who can review the existing RFA/Edmonds contract and analyze what it would really cost to own and operate the 3 fire stations (including utilizing the contract commitment for returned fire trucks and equipment) and to staff the fire stations with 51 personnel — most of whom would be laid off by RFA given the loss of Edmonds' contact. I wonder if the Mayor's Blue Ribbon Panel, who I believe are all financial experts, could weigh in on the Edmonds Fire Department alternative? Sorry to say, but I really have no confidence in the Fitch Assoc report — as it seems very superficial and biased toward the RFA. I believe they did not even uncover the clause in the RFA-Edmonds contract that required RFA to return Edmonds equipment at blue book value? Nor did they analyze why RFA's costs have increased at annual rates way above population growth increases and COL indices. Given the availability of returned fire trucks, and given there are around 51 laid -off firefighters available for Edmonds' fire department, and give the 3 fire stations are available, it is hard to believe that Edmonds cannot save $3 -$4 million per year vs. an RFA alternative. I don't believe that the Mayor and Council are doing the necessary financial due diligence without having the detailed and objective financial analysis of the Edmonds fire department alternative. I also don't understand how RFA comes off as a `well managed' operation given the astronomical cost increases in the past few years, and their total lack of publishing performance metrics that deal with per capita and per service call costs over time. I'm not saying change is easy, but I think you have the unique opportunity to put taxpayers first and to make dramatic changes in a business model that is broken. In order to do that I think you need to put the `RFA preferred alternative' on hold, and have the Blue Ribbon Panel initiate a comprehensive, objective and transparent financial analysis of the Edmonds Fire Department alternative. e Packet Pg. 233 8.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/4/2024 Approval of Committee Meeting Minutes May 14, 2024 Staff Lead: Council Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Nicholas Falk Background/History N/A Recommendation Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda. Narrative Council meeting minutes are attached. Attachments: 2024-05-14 Council FIN Minutes Packet Pg. 234 8.1.a FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING May 14, 2024 Elected Officials Present Staff Present Councilmember Will Chen (Chair) Kim Dunscombe, Deputy Admin. Serv. Director Councilmember Jenna Nand Oscar Antillon, Public Works Director Council President Vivian Olson (ex-officio) Scott Passey, City Clerk Mayor Mike Rosen Guests Present Mike Bailey Scott Bauer, Northwest Municipal Advisors Marc Greenough, Bond Counsel CALL TO ORDER The Edmonds City Council Finance Committee meeting was called to order virtually and in the City Council Conference Room, 121 — 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, at 5:31 pm by Councilmember Chen. 2. COMMITTEE BUSINESS 1. Financial Policies Mike Bailey reviewed a draft financial policy framework: • Financial reporting policy o Annual comprehensive financial reports o Interim financial reports shall: ■ Identify any issues or items of note on the cover page ■ Provide beginning fund balance, revenues, expenditures and ending fund balance on a modified accrual basis for all funds ■ Provide the unreserved and reserved cash balances for all City funds ■ Indicate any interfund borrowing necessary to maintain positive cash balances in a manner consistent with the City's interfund loan policy ■ YTD status of all major fund revenue and expenditures of the City ■ Cash flow report for the General Fund illustrating anticipated receipts and disbursements for each future month and the actual receipts and disbursement for past months ■ Project reports shall be presented on major projects (operating and capital projects) previously identified by the committee ■ Investment balances along with YTD interest earnings o Mid -year financial review ■ Review of the prior year's audit ■ Review of the current biennial budget to date ■ Preview of the future budgetary expectations Fund Balance Reserve Policy o Introduction o Goals of the Fund Balance Reserve Policy o Fund Balance Reserve Policy o Objectives o Factors that Influence the Appropriate Size of Reserves o Reserve levels for City Major Operating Funds ■ General Fund ■ Contingency Reserve Fund Packet Pg. 235 8.1.a 05/14/24 Finance Committee Minutes, Page 2 ■ Water Utility Fund ■ Sewer/Wastewater Treatment Plant Fund o Utilization of Fund Balances or Reserves ■ Limitations of fund balance reserve use o Fund balance and reserve replenishment Questions and discussion followed regarding a suggestion to have audited financial reports come to the finance committee and/or city council for review, 30 day period for the mayor to declare a fiscal emergency on behalf of the administration, the mayor presenting an annual replenishment plan within 60 days, adding language to the interfund loan policy regarding how the interfund loan impacts CIP projects, short term versus long term debt policy, requiring the administration to identify the length of short term debt, monitoring, not using one-time revenues to support ongoing expenditures, timeline for utilizing fund balances or reserves, the council's role in monitoring, whether lowering the General Fund Unassigned Fund Balance would impact the City's credit rating, and whether a 12% reserve level for the Water Utility and Sewer/WWTP Funds was adequate. Mr. Bailey continued his review: • Interfund Loan Policy o Long Term Interfund Loans o Short-term Debt Policies • Budget Policy o Purpose o References o Operating Budget Policy o Long Range Financial Strategy o Revenue Policy o Expenditure Policy Questions and discussion continued regarding policies related to maintaining assets at a level that protects the City's capital investment and minimizes future maintenance and replacement costs, the City maintaining an equipment replacement and maintenance needs analysis and updating the projection every two years, whether City buildings are insured to their replacement value, defining long range planning, what constitutes conservative revenue estimates, how conservative revenue estimates differ from Finance's standard operating procedure, diversifying the City's revenue streams, policy related to the City refraining from making budgetary decisions outside of the biennial budget process or the formal budget amendment process, timing of budget amendments, understanding how the City reached the current fiscal emergency, recognizing increased maintenance costs as a result of capital projects (such as Civic Playfield and landscaping on Highway 99), not spending staff time on projects until they have been prioritized, process for adopting framework policies, how the framework would change how staff does business and how the council interacts with the administration, and utilizing project numbers to ensure transparency regarding expenditures. Committee recommendation: Return to finance committee next month 2. Utility Bond Issue Mr. Bailey advised a bond issue is contemplated to support, 1) refinance of existing outstanding debt to save money, and 2) borrow additional resources to complete significant water and stormwater projects. Scott Bauer, Northwest Municipal Advisors, reviewed: Background March 2023 Reviewed Refunding with City April 2023 Presented refunding to Finance Committee June 2023 Council adopted refunding bond ordinance (Ordinance No. 4309) Packet Pg. 236 8.1.a 05/14/24 Finance Committee Minutes, Page 3 Had received indicative rates indicating a refunding through a bank could be close to the public markets Informed the council that we would proceed with an RFP for bank financing, then make decision based on results. July 2023 Issued RFP to banks for refunding the 2013 bonds Best bid showed NPV savings <$500K, less than half the estimated savings from the public market August 2023 City decided to proceed with refunding via public issuance Financing process was to restart toward the end of 2023 January 2024 Restarted the financing; new money for water and stormwater projects included May 2024 Finance committee and city council to consider new money Bond Ordinance Current bond market o Long-term interest rates increased for much of 2022 and peaked in October 2023 o Rates are below the 2022 and 2023 peaks Bond Buyer 20•Bond Getseral o b ligation I ride x November 2%19e6 to May 9, 2024 9.50 a.so 750 x 6.50 5.50 4SO 3.50 2.w I.50 M 19 I" 1%rD 1992 1994 19 19M 20M 2M2 2004 2006 2C08 MO 2012 2M4 2016 Me 2020 2M2 Limited Tax General Obligation Debt Bond Buyer 20•Bond General Obligation Index Jai Z020 to May 20Z4 a eD A IL 4 30 3 80 Or mo Y L8D L30 I aD.A .A 2012 Bonds Currently Callable tkg Qhw- I—ileer, tell No savings due to rates on t now t M_ :' Mn IM ln. wla. outstanding debt versus La"o LIln.9uaei I— u601. mil• I. Mr un/MM 2IM tM wan current bond market rates M.IM.aM 1.2/AMl IlNl.l1 2M /M U"u" L4Mlr eel UAI%Mf tM IM U'". s uraaw t aalaMl Bonds remain callable and %MW outstanding MAMA 2016 Bond Placed with 11 Morgan ttswlaM ar/M Callable 11/1/2023 No savings expected due to s rates on outstanding debt * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 6 versus current bond market .11ro4MALM` aed .IMDYMa .umais .I.mrrosl .Imr2wa.w rates Continue to monitor Water and Sewer Revenue Debt etJi3ae.r (Ague wri kentu er van. , Mea s ltlMlr u1i 4M.sM 61n 2013Bonds Mr nswr unaMl IM ..M 4,10L' n^ IUgaM si tM tM y'MY Iw Callable Starting on and after s n ni t Mwr June 1. 2023 Avg. Coupon = 4.57% rMm"MMllaebll 5 suar t VA MI lM a M Mlr 14.Mr 2021A LTGO Bonds alMr Portion of the 2011 water and s3araM Sewer Revenue Bonds $) W M refunded by the 2021A LTGO urn - Bonds tsvar Payable from utility revenues urn I nmr g 4' 4' 4 I *0 1O 4{4' f *******' • .. , .ma.eu ."%.= 2024 Bonds Financing Plan Packet Pg. 237 05/14/24 Finance Committee Minutes, 8.1.a e4 r�nr nw� 1WA waM rw ►a •i:-- M,Y11111 1.am U-b" ARAM WUN. f�irr�rrrr+ �► wu>. i - 'W'.... . , . ► 1fMr1 , -i M to. NY �r '►�a •11111111111111 ►lY �1lilill ► . tfilflili'I►v�il/III�I'�II' Refund $13,045,000 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds,2013 - Esuinated NPV $avmas of $1,015,000 or 7.8%of refunded bonds - Release 52.129,031from Reserve Account and contribute to refunding ' lord corA,pow sowngs of Sa.073.000, mckn ve of Rewr►+e Account contnburan New Capital Project Proceeds for Water and Stormwater - 59.5 million for Water - 52 5 million for Stormwater - Eevet debt service - final maturity 1211120" Schedule and Next Steps o Tues, May 14 Finance Committee (ordinance introduced) o Tues, May 21 Council meeting to consider bond ordinance o Thurs, May 23 Rating call o Mon, June 3 Receive rating o Wed, June 5 Post Preliminary Official Statement o Thurs, June 13 Competitive Bond Sale o Tues, June 25 Closing Marc Greenough, bond counsel, was present to answer questions. Questions and discussion followed regarding stormwater and water projects that would be funded by the bonds, why the City would borrow when there is cash balance in the utility funds, difference between cash balance and restricted cash balance, 2024 budget for the stormwater and water utilities, rate analysis that considered upcoming projects, $25 million in stormwater and water projects in the next 5 years, potential impact on rates without bonding, providing council the financial modeling associated with decisions described in the background, use of net present value savings to determine if refunding is advantageous, net present value savings net of issuance costs, expected next steps, and risks of deferring a decision. Committee recommendation: Full council 3. March 2024 Quarterly Financial Report Ms. Dunscombe advised she did not prepare a presentation for the March report but could respond to questions. Questions and discussion followed regarding differences in the cash balance in the All Funds Financial Summary and in the General Fund Overview, journal entry done annually rather than monthly to separate cash and investments for financial statements, short term borrowing, restricted cash in two CDs as collateral, and funds the General Fund borrowed from the cash pool. Committee recommendation: Received for Filing 4. April 2024 Monthly Financial Report Ms. Dunscombe highlighted the following: • General Fund o Revenue growth in 2024 compared to 2023 o Decline in utility tax revenue compared to budget o Development services revenues are up due to Edmonds Green Apartments paying a large permit fee Packet Pg. 238 8.1.a 05/14/24 Finance Committee Minutes, Page 5 o Park revenues are improving due to programming • Street Fund o Increased revenue from TBD vehicle tab fees beginning in March • REET o Revenues are 19.5% or $145,444 higher than last year. Projections indicate REET revenues are on track to meet budget target of $3 million. Questions and discussion followed regarding whether to change revenue forecasts mid -year, the General Fund 001 Cash Flow Forecast Report, and outstanding AR and AP. Committee recommendation: Received for Filing 5. Council Rules of Procedure Section 1 & 2 Authority and Council Organization Committee recommendation: Schedule at future meeting 3. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:36 pm. Packet Pg. 239 8.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/4/2024 Approval of Council Meeting Minutes May 21, 2024 Staff Lead: Council Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Nicholas Falk Background/History N/A Recommendation Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda. Narrative Council meeting minutes are attached. Attachments: 2024-05-21 Council Minutes Packet Pg. 240 8.2.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES May 21, 2024 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Rosen, Mayor Will Chen, Council President Pro Tern Chris Eck, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Vivian Olson, Council President 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Kim Dunscombe, Deputy Admin. Serv. Dir. Susan McLaughlin, Planning & Dev. Dir. Rob English, City Engineer Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Mgr Rose Haas, Planner Royce Napolitino, PW Executive Assistant 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 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Q Councilmember Tibbott 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 0 0 3. ROLL CALL N City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of Council President Olson. 4. PRESENTATIONS 1. PUBLIC WORKS WEEK PROCLAMATION Mayor Rosen read a proclamation proclaiming the week of May 19-25, 2024 as Public Works Week in Edmonds. He presented the proclamation to Public Works Executive Assistant Royce Napolitino and City Engineer Rob English. Mr. Napolitino thanked the mayor and council for the opportunity to serve the community, relaying Public Works takes its work very seriously and aims to serve the public to the highest level. 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 1 Packet Pg. 241 8.2.a COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM CHEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Richard Marin, Edmonds, accompanied by Joan Longstaff, Edmonds, members of the Edmonds Cemetery Board, invited the council, mayor and public to join them on Monday, May 27 at 11 am for the City's Memorial Day program at the cemetery. He was wearing his uniform, not to show off, but to make a point that Memorial Day was not instituted as a holiday in the United States so that people could get a discount on a refrigerator or have fun, but to take time to think about the sacrifices of those who made it possible to enjoy freedoms in the United States. The event will include context provided by Mayor Rosen followed by this year's principal speaker, Greg Copeland, a KING 5 news anchor who will describe an epic battle that took place off the Philippines in 1944 that ultimately led to the liberation of the Philippines. Mr. Copeland's grandfather, Bob Copeland, was a commanding officer of a destroyer escort, who took his crew and ship into this battle against cruisers and a battleship that was ultimately sunk. He will share what formed his thinking as young boy to get him to the point where he could take his crew and ship into battle, a David and Goliath situation, and the person he was afterward. He assured this would be a program where participants will come away with good in their heart about those who served and their place in the community. Ms. Longstaff said she was born October 4, 1941, and it was a privilege to serve on the cemetery board. She thanked the council and mayor for their service. Gordon Black, Edmonds, board member of the North Sound Bicycle Advocates (previously Edmonds 3 Bicycle Advocacy Group/EBAG), commended Edmonds Public Works for their great work completing the v bicycle lanes on 1001h Avenue. As a cyclist who often rides on 100th/9th, the bike lanes make a difference to 0 his safety. He hoped the safer conditions provided by the bike lanes will encourage more people to bike on daily errands. He recognized it will take time for some drivers to get used to the new road layout, but if it o reduces the volume of cars using 100th, it will be worth the effort for the health of the planet and individuals n choosing to bike rather than drive. He commended the City for their efforts to create a true network of Q connected bike routes to make it easier for more people to consider cycling for transportation. A key component of that future network is joining the two ends of the Interurban Trail. North Sound Bicycle Advocates is advocating for a safer, more inviting crossing. He expressed the group's appreciation for individual councilmember's support for the bridge concept; a majority of councilmembers have seen the _ trail up close on one of the group's site visits. Last night members of the Shoreline City Council agreed to contribute funds to a study to examine how a bridge might become a reality. He invited Edmonds City c Council to match Shoreline's contribution. King County has also indicated their willingness to make a v r contribution to a study. This collaboration recognizes the trail is truly a regional asset that deserves a joint N Ln effort from the communities it serves. As the City prepares the Transportation Improvement Plan for 2025 0 and begins budgeting, he hoped Edmonds would be a good neighbor and help fund this route study on how N best to connect the Interurban Trail. N Richard , referred to the council's comments about revenue and suggested a study on a public -private funded parking garage to include revenue generation, a joint program with City businesses and City government, a combined effort of the chamber and downtown merchants using public -private funds. The Public Works building is very ecological, friendly and visually attractive; a garage could be also be visually attractive. Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, referred to the agenda item related to issuing bonds, commenting it seemed premature, particularly since the Blue Ribbon Panel has not released a strategic plan regarding how the City's finances will be managed in the future which he assumed would include bonding. Recognizing the bonds are related to the utility funds, he questioned the proposal for approximately $11.5 million for utilities Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 2 Packet Pg. 242 8.2.a when the City already has $35 million in utility spendable reserves. In addition, last year the council approved utility rate increases for at least the next three years which is an accumulated $4 million for the utility funds. He summarized utility fund revenue is growing at the end of the year versus using it for constructive purposes. He asked whether the administration intended to borrow money from the utility funds to support other City services or needs. He suggested pausing issuance of bonds until a holistic plan is in place as it is not time sensitive. He also recommended waiting until the Blue Ribbon Panel has issued their report which will allow the council to make a cohesive assessment of the need. Joan Longstaff, Edmonds, commended the council and mayor on the fantastic job they are doing. She hears from the business community and the private sector who want to be heard that the council and mayor are listening. Bill Krepick, Woodway, referred to his previous comments to council regarding the fire service alternatives, noting a few things have come up since then. One of the council committees announced their selection of annexation as a preferred alternative and he wondered why when it seemed the City had let the RFA off the hook justifying their $18 million costs for 2026. Edmonds needs to gain leverage, not capitulate to what he believed was biased and very conflicted input from the consultants as it seemed to him Fitch always defaults to annexation as the best solution. The council needs to put taxpayers first, get true costs and financial details and a commitment from the RFA to manage future costs. Second, The RFA's 2024 budget shows fire and EMS revenues increased from $52.8 million to $55.5 million between 2019 and 2022, a 5.3% increase over 3 years which seemed reasonable considering the small population growth and small cost of living during that time. Between 2022 and 2023, the RFA's costs increased by 19.1% and increased another 14.4% between 2023 and 2024, a 33.4% increase in a few years. The RFA's response was it was due to annexation of Brier and Mountlake Terrace. The writing is on the wall; the same will happen to Edmonds taxpayers after annexation and he did not understand how the council could say annexation was the preferred alternative with that type of outcome. Mr. Krepick relayed his third point, regional scaling is a total myth as illustrated by the RFA's recent cost n increases. He opined the RFA was absolutely mismanaged and their practices are unsustainable. The a council should demand the RFA provide a five year history of cost per capita and cost per service call and -- explain their broken business model. Fourth, it was his understanding a clause in the current RFA contract states if service is terminated, the City has the right to buy back fire trucks at blue book value, an important part of the equation in determining whether an Edmonds Fire Department might be a preferred solution rather than annexation. c 7. RECEIVED FOR FILING C V 1. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS 2. MARCH 2O24 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT 3. APRIL 2024 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT 4. 2023 TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT REPORT 8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES MAY 7, 2024 2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 7, 2024 3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS 4. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE PAYMENTS Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 3 Packet Pg. 243 8.2.a 5. AMENDING ECC 5.24.010 -FIREARMS AND DANGEROUS WEAPONS 6. AMENDMENT TO THE FIBER CONSORTIUM INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT 7. JOB ORDER CONTRACTING - PROPOSAL AND AGREEMENT EXTENSION 8. FLEET MECHANIC JOB DESCRIPTION REVISION 9. PRESENTATION OF AMENDMENT TO PSA WITH HERRERA FOR THE STORM AND SURFACE WATER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 10. APPROVAL OF PSA WITH CONSULTANT, ROCK PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC (ROCK), FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, ENGINEERING & INSPECTION SERVICES 11. AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE 2024 UTILITY REPLACEMENT PROJECT 12. AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO GRANITE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR 2024 OVERLAY PROGRAM 9. PUBLIC HEARING 1. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW FOR DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS — "EXPANDING HOUSING OPTIONS BY EASING BARRIERS TO THE CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH HB 1337." Planning & Development Director Susan McLaughlin introduced Planner Rose Haas, Planning Board Chair Jeremy Mitchell, and Planning Board Member Nick Maxwell. Ms. Haas reviewed: Accessory Dwelling Unit Code Update Timeline o Council Introduction — November 14, 2023 o Planning Board Introduction — December 13, 2023 o Planning Board Discussion 1 — January 10, 2024 o Planning Board Discussion 2 — January 24, 2024 o Council Discussion 1 — February 27, 2024 o Planning Board Public Hearing — February 28, 2024 o Council Study Session — March 5, 2024 o Planning Board Discussion 3 — April 10, 2024 o Council Public Hearing — May 21, 2024 o Anticipated Council Adoption — June 5, 2024 What are ADUs? o An accessory dwelling unit is a small residence that shares a single-family lot with a primary dwelling. o An ADU is self-contained, with its own kitchen or kitchenette, bathroom and living/sleeping area. o An attached ADU is a dwelling unit located within or attached to another housing unit. o A detached ADU (DADU) is separate and unconnected to the other housing unit. • What are the benefits of ADUs? BASEMENT CONVERSION DETACHED ADU CONVERTED GARAGE ' ATTACHED / ryos o;.om,nma. e,.., ADU si Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 4 Packet Pg. 244 8.2.a HOMEFORA YOUNG FAMILY AT-HOME WORKSPACE AGE -IN -PLACE _\ � � RENTAL FOR RETIREMENT OPTION EXTRA INCOME h 7 1 1 1 POST -SURGERY STUDIO SPACE FOR A RECOVERY SPACE HOME BUSINESS APARTMENT FOR ADULT CHILDREN • What guidance did we use? HOUSE BILL REPORT EHB 1337 u e.r.4n.nr.. 3 eLrwS.relmr.•`',�,. u.ie...r...r.„�.... ,r t.nr,., Nr.r��w v...r eirn,�nM1.n. uneum ReN. t�FnWt. Delia Te p vnW • ��., �'x5 II. o Support aging in place. o Provide additional financial support for homeowners. o Add value: Properties with an ADU are priced 35% higher. o Offer an efficient, low-cost way to build housing. o Meet diverse needs - suited well for young couples, small families, friends, young people, and seniors. o Allow multi -generational living. W. The ABCs of ADUs Iv P.NMr.r •-- 'long ■i : : ii : � to one in THE EDMONDS CITIZENS' HOUSING COMMISSION WANTSTO HEAR FROM You. HB 1337 MRSC and Department of HARP Best Practices Commerce Guide Citizens Housing Commission Survey • Why DADUs in Edmonds today? o In 2021, the Citizens' Housing Commission stated the following policy recommendation for updating the ADU code to include DADUs: ■ "Allow either one attached or detached accessory unit on a property in the SFR area, with clear and definitive development requirements such as size, ownership, and parking, under the standard permitting process and not require a conditional use permit." o According to the 2021 American Community Survey, 21.5% of Edmonds' residents are over 65 years of age. o The most frequent over the counter ADU question: "Are DADUs allowed for `aging in place'?" • What will HB 1337 require? o State legislation mandates that HB 1337 must be implemented no later than six months after the next Comprehensive Plan due date. Commerce language will supersede, preempt, and invalidate any conflicting local development regulations if Edmonds does not adopt policy by June 30, 2025. o The requirements for the City of Edmonds will be as follows: ■ Allow two ADUs per lot (any configuration of ADU and DADU). ■ No owner -occupancy requirements. ■ Allow separate sale of ADUs. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 5 Packet Pg. 245 8.2.a ■ No parking required within a half -mile of a major transit stop, as defined in RCW 36.70A.696(8). ■ Maximum size limitation no less than 1,000 sf of gross floor area. — Gross Floor Area is defined as the "interior habitable area of an accessory dwelling unit, including basements and attics but not including unconditioned space, such as a garage or non -habitable accessory structures." ■ Allow DADUs to be sited at a rear lot line when the lot line abuts a public alley. ■ No setback requirements, yard coverage limits, tree retention mandates, restrictions on entry door locations, or aesthetic requirements that are more restrictive than for the principal unit. ■ Allow ADUs of at least 24-feet in height. ■ Impact fees cannot be more than 50% of fees charged for the principal unit. • What does ECDC currently allow? Permit needed YES- Conditional Use Permit - Type II decision. Type of Unit Attached ADU only. Number of Units May have accessory dwelling unit per lot Size ✓ Must not exceed 40%of the livable floor area of the principal dwelling, up to a maximum of 800 square feet. ✓ No more than two bedrooms. ✓ An exception allows increased size up to 50%of the floor area of the principal dwelling if the ADU is all on a single floor. Design Architecturally match with the primary residence. Entrance Side entrance that should be unobtrusive when viewed from the street. Parking One off-street parking space in addition to the parking spaces normally required for the principal dwelling, but no less than three spaces per lot. Occupancy Either the primary dwelling or the accessory dwelling unit must be owner -occupied. • Planning board and staff recommendations include the following policies: o ADU size restrictions o ADU setback reductions o Parking restrictions o Impact fees • Staff and planning board recommendations Permit needed Permitted secondary use; Can be permitted in PRDs. Type of Unit DADUs and AADUs Number of Units: Allow two ADUs on all lots in any configuration. Size Max height 24'. Provide incentives for reduced DADU Provide incentives for reduced DADU heights in heights in the No less than 1,000 square feet gross floor area. In RS-10, RS-12, and RS-20 zones no In RS-10, RS-12, and RS-20 zones no more than more than 1,200 square feet gross floor area. 1,200 square feet gross floor area. Setbacks If rear lot line abuts a public alley, no rear Rear setbacks may be reduced to a Rear setbacks may be reduced to a minimum of setbacks are required for DADUs. (5-feet for DADUs 5-feet for DADUs that are 15' in height or less that are 15' in height or less) in the RS-6 in the RS-6 and RS-8 zones and RS-8 zones. Design No design restrictions. Parking No additional parking required for ADUs within Y, mile of a major transit stop. Occupancy Owner not required to reside in one of the units. Allow sale as condominium. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 6 Packet Pg. 246 8.2.a (Yellow highlights identify differences between staff and planning board recommendations) Development Standards o AADUs and DADUs are subject to the same permitting requirements as any other dwelling unit and must meet all health and safety standards, including: ■ Building Codes, Energy Codes ■ Public Works requirements ■ Utility requirements ■ Environmental Codes (Critical Area regulations) Recommendations: Size o Staff and planning board shared recommendations ■ Limiting ADUs to 1,000 sf of gross floor area on small lots (RS-6 and RS-8) ■ Allowing ADUs to have up to 1,200 sf of gross floor area on one or two floors on large lots (RS-10, RS-12, RS-20) ■ Remember: - Gross floor area is defined as the "interior habitable area of an accessory dwelling unit, not including unconditioned space." - Habitable space can be divided by two floors limited at 24-feet in height. Recommendations: Height and Setbacks o Staff and planning board differing recommendations ■ Planning Staff- - Decreasing rear setback requirements to allow for more flexibility on smaller lots (RS- 6 and RS-8) • Allowing a minimum of 10-foot rear setback for DADUs on small lots • Allowing a minimum of 5-foot rear setback for ADUs on small lots that limit ADU height to 15-feet ■ Planning board: - Setback reduction incentives on small parcels only if property owners limit height of ADU to 15' to preserve privacy and views of existing neighborhoods in all zones • Allowing a minimum 5-foot rear setback for ADUs on RS-6 and RS-8 lots • Allowing a minimum 15-foot rear setback for ADUs on RS-10, RS-12 and RS-20 zones o Illustration of planning staff and planning board recommendations Planning Staff 10' 000 Sf zo' i =5• 15' 35' 35' Rear setbacks may be reduced to a minimum of 10-feet (5-feet for DADUs that are 15' in height or less) in the RS-6 and RS-8 zones. 15' 15' zo' 000 Sf -q 000 Sf 20 ,o' 35' 35' -6 iJ Planning Board Rear setbacks may be reduced to a minimum of 5-feet for DADUs that are 15' in height or less in the RS-6 and RS-8 zones and to 15-feet in all othrr mn . ADUS and DADUs subject to 35% lot coverage for all zones RS-6 through RS-20 Recommendations: Parking Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 7 Packet Pg. 247 8.2.a o Staff and planning board differing recommendations ■ Planning staff: - No additional parking required for ADUs - 2 parking spaces are currently required for all single family homes. - Current regulations allow ADU parking to be tandem or within the existing driveway - High cost of providing additional parking may limit some homeowners' ability to create additional housing. - Many lots do not have the capacity for a third parking space. Planning board: - No additional parking required for first ADU - One additional parking space required for second ADU Distance to Transit Stop for RS Parcels Legend - Bus Routes � _Eghl O'aft hf ib - f hide Half Mde Oua�br - Half Mde from Myor Trance S fA Recommendations: Impact Fees o Staff and planning board shared recommendations: ■ Count ADUs toward density requirements, consistent with 2024 comprehensive plan update and GMA requirements - HB 1337 requires that assessment of impact fees cannot be more than 50% of what would be imposed on the principal unit - Will result in required impact fees for ADUs Next Steps: What about Pre -Approved Designs? o After ADU code adoption, providing pre -approved design options or prefabricated units can lower costs for homeowners and align designs with community vision ■ Development staff pre -approves architectural plans for compliance with building and development codes ■ Typically approved in shorter timeframe with reduced permit fees Planning Board Chair Jeremy Mitchell commented the ADU/DADU code amendment is a popular topic among citizens although as expected, the planning board received mixed input from the community. Some people wanted nothing to do with HB 1337 and others viewed it as an opportunity for investment, provide multigenerational housing, or provide a variety of housing types. Most citizen input outside those high level concerns were related to massing and height of ADUs/DADUs. With regard to the overall massing, HB 1337 requires no less than 1,000 square feet gross floor area. Many citizens were opposed to anything over 1,000 square feet; the planning board agreed to allow up to 1,200 square feet in zones where the lot sizes could accommodate that size. The planning board was interested in regulations that allowed for some flexibility, incentivizing "Edmonds -friendly" type massing such as using setbacks to result in a one-story ADU/DADU. Planning Board Chair Mitchell continued, with regard to parking which was also a controversial topic, the board met the community halfway; some did not want parking to be a barrier and others wanted to require an abundance of parking to accommodate these structures. The planning board agreed with staff s recommendation that no additional parking was required for the first ADU as the principal structure already requires two parking spaces, but recommended requiring one additional off-street parking space for a s, Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 8 Packet Pg. 248 8.2.a second ADU. The planning board agreed with staff s recommendation regarding impact fees due to the need for that revenue to make infrastructure improvements to accommodate growth. Councilmember Nand thanked the planning department, specifically Ms. Haas, and the planning board for their hard work, recognizing there has been a very robust public process related to this new housing model. She was personally excited to see how it will shape up, especially with the strong concern about displacement. This gives property owners the opportunity to leverage their space to either age in place, accommodate family members, or afford to continue living in Edmonds versus being forced to sell and having a developer subdivide their lot and build luxury houses. She relayed her understanding in California, where there has been a similar affordable housing crisis, ADUs have exploded in popularity. She has read if an alleyway is a principal manner of access/egress for a zero lot line development, it can cause difficulty with vehicular access. She asked if there were any alleyways in Edmonds where a zero lot line could potentially affect the ability to access the property. Ms. Haas answered ADUs/DADUs will go through engineering review; therefore, if a property owner applied for an ADU on the rear lot line, it would be subject to utilities and public works review. Typically public works would address any right-of-way issues. Councilmember Nand recognized HB 1337 establishes a basic floor for state requirements; and suggested a cascading table related to impact fees to incentivize behaviors when property owners build an ADU. For example, could the City offer a percentage reduction if the architecture of the DADU and the principal residence was similar or if the unit would be used for a family member and not for commercial purposes. If a DADU was constructed for commercial purposes, she felt the property owner should pay the full impact fee because it was part of a business model, but if the DADU was constructed to house family members, particularly multigenerational housing, she would support reducing the impact fee. She asked if that was a possibility. Ms. McLaughlin answered legally, impact fees must be linked to the impacts of growth which typically relate to infrastructure needs. She would be concerned about linking the impact fee amount to something other than infrastructure or growth. At City Attorney Jeff Taraday's request, Councilmember Nand repeated her question; if someone were n building a DADU for commercial purposes like an Airbnb, she would be in favor of requiring payment of a the full impact fee. If the property owner was building a DADU as a residence for a family member, she -- would support reducing it to 25% to incentivize construction of a more affordable housing option. She asked if that would be legally allowed. Mr. Taraday answered if it was something the council wanted to pursue, he would need to research it. The state has provided clear areas where the City can exempt impact fees, but he was unsure those were the only exemptions. c Councilmember Eck expressed appreciation for the planning department and planning board's work as well 0 as the public input. She relayed a concern she has heard regarding requirements related to permeable N surfaces. It was her understanding the requirements would be same as for single family homes. Ms. Haas ,n answered ADUs/DADUs will go through the permit process which includes evaluation of impervious I? surfaces which relate to public works requirements as well as critical area requirements. There is no change c based on whether it is an ADU; in terms of impervious surfaces and critical areas, it will be same as any N w other development such as a new driveway, an accessory structure such as an art studio, etc. Ms. McLaughlin asked if Councilmember Eck was referring to the 35% lot coverage regulation. Ms. Haas t advised structural lot coverage is different than impervious surfaces. The development code requires any structure over 3 feet can only utilize only 35% of the lot; the public works code related to stormwater a management and impervious surfaces such as paving, structures, gravel, etc. That will not change with an ADU; it will be treated like any other structure. Councilmember Eck commented she liked the idea of recommended designs, finding merits such as ease for the builder and property owner, providing the City an element of control with design, etc. She asked if it would be possible to provide an incentive for a property owner selecting a recommended design. Ms. Haas answered the incentive would be the shortened permit time and lower cost. She was unsure if there Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 9 Packet Pg. 249 8.2.a could be another incentive such as reduction in setbacks. Councilmember Eck said that may be something to look into, anticipating a recommended design would make an ADU/DADU more attractive. Ms. McLaughlin explained by their nature, incentives reduce barriers to development which would not conflict with the state mandate as it would provide a more expeditious process along with more design controls. She offered to respond to that question when this comes back to council on June 5. Councilmember Paine expressed appreciation for everyone's hard work on this issue, recognizing there were a lot of state requirements to deal with. She asked if there was a way to financially incentivize conversions of existing principal residences rather than increasing impervious surface which would reduce tree removal, construction of driveways, etc. Ms. Haas answered the state requires that existing structures be allowed to be converted into ADUs which may be a nonconforming garage or studio. Councilmember Paine repeated her question, whether that can be incentivized to reduce environmental impact and recognizing a remodel is easier than new construction, Ms. Haas referred to the development standard that allows 35% lot coverage; often single family homes max out to that 35%. The 35% is in place to protect impervious surfaces; the public works code also protects impervious surfaces. She was uncertain about incentivizing that. Councilmember Paine said she was referring to the conversion of a daylight basement or adding a second story above a garage. Ms. McLaughlin answered that tool currently exists in the code. She offered to speak to that at the next meeting, but the easy answer is there can be incentives, the question is the tradeoff of an incentive such as reduced setbacks, reduced fees, etc. Councilmember Paine asked whether staff was expecting that a developer would buy a parcel and put in a principal house and an ADU and a DADU, whether staff had gotten any idea from the development community about what to expect. Ms. Haas answered that is a possibility similar to what happens with older housing stock. Typically when older housing stock is sold nowadays, it is razed to the ground and built to the 35% maximum which could happen with ADUs as well. She pointed out the massing will not be that much different than what is being built now. Councilmember Paine asked if there were plans to adopt the state code related to condominiumization and have that internal review in the City such as looking at the CC&Rs versus the way it is handled now via the county. She suggested adding that to the list of considerations, whether the City wants to do that and whether there could be a consumer protection focus to ensure it looks good for all participants in the creation of the condominiumization. Ms. Haas relayed the state requires the City allow condominiumization. Councilmember Paine said she was interested in a local review versus at the county. Mr. Taraday answered 3 the City does not typically look at CC&Rs and condominium declarations; that is a private matter between t� the declarant of condo and the future owners of the condominium units. It is up to the due diligence of the N buyer to ensure they are getting the rights they need in the condominium declaration. Cities don't typically ,n do that and it would add cost to the review if the City wanted to undertake that. c mp Councilmember Paine said the City of Seattle does it because she did it for years for Seattle and it offers a lot of consumer protection. It may be an interesting topic to consider and decide whether the City wants to do that. Ms. McLaughlin pointed out it would definitely require resource allocation that staff currently is unable to meet. Councilmember Dotsch said she preferred to think more holistically, commenting this is the first step with the housing bills and the cumulative effects of the housing bills and the proposed incentive programs need to be looked at as a package due to how they impact each other. For example, HB 1110, the two units per lot required bill, two ADUs are allowed on each lot. The SEPA analysis said everything in Edmonds is the same, which is not true and she preferred to dive into all the pieces that will impact each individual lot in single family neighborhoods. One of the other requirements with HB 1110 is no more than one parking Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 10 Packet Pg. 250 space per unit can be required for 6,000 square foot or smaller lots and no parking is required for housing within'/a mile of a major transit stop. Councilmember Dotsch referred to the green incentive program, which appears to allow an extra 5 feet, increasing from 35% to 40% lot coverage, reduced parking, and minimizing setbacks on larger lots to match smaller lot setbacks. She feared those would have big impacts on neighbors, pointing out 5 feet from a fence line is very close and with 1,000 square feet, it can be nearly the size of a regular house. In reading posts on Nextdoor, a lot of these type of projects are built in Maple Leaf which has resulted in a loss of light, privacy, trees, green space, etc. In Maple Leaf, developers are purchasing smaller houses, demolishing them and constructing multiple dwelling units. In looking at these piecemeal, it doesn't seems too bad, but in looking at the regulations together, there will be a lot of impacts on lots in single family zones. When most people think about living in a single family house in Edmonds, this type of development isn't what they think about happening next door. She assumed most people were unaware this was being contemplated and feared a lot of people would be surprised as this moves ahead. She urged caution in how much the City allowed upfront, how much was allowed beyond what was required as what was required would already be quite impactful. Councilmember Dotsch asked how heights are measured on sloped lots. Ms. Haas reminded staff must follow the critical area code as well as the tree regulations and cannot treat ADUs differently than a single family home. She hears people say developers will come in and build ADUs, but many lots are already maxed out the lot coverage; whether it is an ADU or a single family home, that is already happening. With regard to 5 feet from the property line, staff and the planning board's recommendation is to allow that only in the RS-6 and RS-8 for DADUs 15 feet or less, one story DADUs. The current code allows accessory buildings such as a garage, playhouses, etc. to be 5 feet from the rear lot line. She recognized those structures were a little smaller but that has already been happening. With regard to how height is reviewed on building permits is the average original grade which is based on the smallest rectangle that can be drawn around the development; an elevation is taken from each corner and averaged. Councilmember Dotsch observed the side of a structure could be taller than 25 feet depending on the slope. Ms. Haas agreed. Councilmember Dotsch asked if a property owner of a single family house on a sloped lot wanted to build a DADU whether it could be higher than the primary unit. Ms. Haas answered yes, for example if the primary was a single story ranch style house, a 2-story DADU up to 24 feet could be constructed under the c state requirements. Councilmember Dotsch observed the placement on the sloped lot could also impact the height. Ms. Haas answered that would apply to any single family home or accessory structure. c Councilmember Dotsch commented an ADU is attached to a house and it is often used by a family member 0 and is not supposed to be an Airbnb. DADUs will be quite different than existing ADUs because it can be N a short term rental. She expressed interest in seeing a bigger picture of the impacts to single family lots ,n rather than looking at it in a vacuum. She inquired about short term rentals. Ms. Haas answered short term � rentals are currently an allowed use; a homeowner can currently have a short-term rental in their ADU c although the owner needs to live on the site where the ADU located. N Councilmember Dotsch asked if owner occupancy would still be required under the new regulations. Mr. Taraday responded the City cannot require owner occupancy anymore, that is the main change. Councilmember Dotsch asked if the City could require rentals of 30 days or more. Mr. Taraday answered the general rule is they have to be treated the same way single family homes are treated. Ms. Haas clarified unless the City changed the requirements for short term rentals throughout the City, that could not be required specifically for DADUs. There cannot be separate rules for ADUs or DADUs. Council President Pro Tem Chen expressed appreciation for the planning board and planning department for bringing this topic to the council for multiple touches. He also thanked the public for voicing their opinions and concerns. He relayed his understanding that ADUs and DADUs would be attached to the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 11 Packet Pg. 251 8.2.a original single family land deed and not subdivided. Ms. Haas answered it cannot be subdivided but it can be condominiumized. Council President Pro Tem Chen referred to the state requirement that allows separate sale of ADUs and asked how that would happen; if the units are on the same deed, how was the ADU sold separately. Ms. Haas answered hopefully the property owner would develop a homeowners association (HOA) and there potentially could be two separately owned structures and the land would be a shared area. For things to go smoothly, it would be beneficial for the homeowners to develop a private agreement, typically an HOA. Council President Pro Tem Chen observed that would result in a different sale arrangement. Council President Pro Tem Chen said he liked the idea of a pre -approved design so the City has some control over what appeared in neighborhoods as well as reduce costs and speed up the permitting process. He assumed the City would come up with preapproved designs. Ms. McLaughlin answered that was definitely an interest and would be beneficial to the program on both sides; however, it will require funding. There are grants available, but that will be a 2025 pursuit. Council President Pro Tem Chen commended the planning board and the planning department for coming up with different recommendations. Ms. Haas advised the only policies the City has control over are related to size, setbacks, parking, and impact fee; incentives will typically have to be related to one of those topics. She suggested thinking about what the City can incentivize before thinking about how to do it would be a good exercise. Councilmember Tibbott asked for clarification, 35% is the lot coverage of the dwelling units so 65% has to remain open. He commented that is an important percentage; in his neighborhood smaller houses have been taken down and larger houses constructed that maximize the full 35%. He asked if 600 square feet of that 35% coverage remained, whether someone could theoretically construct a 600 square foot DADU with 2- stories for a total of 1,200 square feet. Ms. Haas answered yes, reminding it would be subject to the building code. Councilmember Tibbott observed 1,200 square feet on larger lots was the total DADU size, not the n footprint. Ms. Haas answered it was the total gross floor area, not the footprint, the livable area, which a could be divided between two floors. Garages and unheated, unconditioned spaces are not included in total -- gross floor area. There could potentially be a DADU with 1,200 gross floor area and additional parking. Although theoretically it could happen, there will be development constraints that limit it. Most people who c want an ADU on their property do not want to use up their structural lot coverage on a garage or deck. Councilmember Tibbott asked if a 1,200 footprint DADU and a second story above for a total of 2,400 3 square feet would be allowed. Ms. Haas answered it would not be allowed. Mr. Taraday clarified it would 0 be allowed because the state law specifically states two ADUs have to be allowed in any configuration. N Someone could have a 2-story DADU with a 1,200 square feet on each floor and that would comply with ,n state law. Councilmember Tibbott clarified there could be a 1,200 square foot unit on the first floor and c 14 another 1,200 square foot unit on the second floor. Ms. Haas answered yes. c Councilmember Tibbott asked about disadvantages of having an ADU or DADU on a property. One that came to his mind was adding a DADU would increase the property taxes which could be disadvantage for some people. Ms. Haas answered it is very subjective; for someone who wants to protect their view, a tall ADU is a disadvantage versus someone who wants to use their structural lot coverage to provide multigenerational housing, it can be an advantage. Councilmember Tibbott said in the enthusiasm of considering allowing ADUs and DADUs, there may disadvantages that have not been discussed. For example, it was his understanding the cost per square foot is significant higher for a small units compared to a larger unit. Councilmember Eck pointed out not everybody wants zoning changes to occur and not everybody will want to build an ADU or DADU. That has been the experience in other cities across country, whether due to Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 12 Packet Pg. 252 8.2.a cost, the homeowner doesn't have a need or a myriad other reasons. She asked the percentage of property owners who end up building at least one ADU after this type of zoning change is made. Ms. McLaughlin answered for the assumption in comprehensive plan, the Department of Commerce guidance was used. Because it was felt this housing typology was advantageous to meet affordability levels allowed per the GMA growth targets, the threshold allowed by the Department of Commerce to be used for the City's growth targets was maxed out, 10% which equates to 2,000 ADUs by 2044. She was unable to say she believed the City would reach that number, but that was what was allowed per the Department of Commerce guidance and that housing typology meets the City's needs. Unless ADUs were incentivized and a lot of barriers were removed, she did not realistically think the City would see that many units. Ms. Haas pointed out that assumption is based on 10% of the eligible lots building two ADUs. ADUs are a form of middle housing, not a low cost form of housing. Building an ADU or DADU is very expensive, typically $150,000- N $300,000 for even prefabricated ones. An ADU/DADU is a big investment for a homeowner and a choice N whether they want to be a landlord, etc. There are a lot of factors and she did not expect ADUs would be r built everywhere. N ea Councilmember Eck commented it is a choice that property owners can make. For example, she and her husband are members of the sandwich generation and have been actively talking to her mother-in-law about an ADU in their backyard where she could have privacy and downsize and they could be nearby for her safety. An ADU could be an option and beneficial for vulnerable family members. She also has a daughter a in her late 20s who may not be able to afford a single family home in Edmonds so an ADU could be a short E term opportunity to provide her housing while she finds a job, etc. Councilmember Eck said she has had 4) conversations with others who are in similar situations. Not one size fits all; the City is considering an array 2 of housing choices as mandated by the state and how to shape that for Edmonds. She summarized this is a .5 very important conversation to have, but not everyone will choose to build an ADU. 0 t� Councilmember Nand assumed part of the cost associated with DADUs or ADUs is utility hookup. She 0 asked if the building code allows a compost toilet and/or a water tank to be off the grid which would lower > the cost of building these structures. Ms. McLaughlin answered the recent building code update does not n lend itself to cost efficiencies, but it does allow green building techniques. Being off grid creates problems a related to wastewater, etc. as the City would not allow onsite wastewater treatment. a� Councilmember Nand relayed, as a member of the millennial generation, she knows people who are c building off -grid structures with solar, compost toilets, water tanks, etc. and it's much more affordable. Ms. McLaughlin answered water tanks and solar are allowed per the building code. c Mayor Rosen opened the public hearing 0 t� r Joseph Herr, Edmonds, recently retired after building 2,500 houses during his career, said he hash developed short and long plats and neighborhoods and anything developed in the last 50 ears has been ' p g P g Yt g p Y built to capacity. Edmonds does not have a lot of new plats, but nothing new in Edmonds would ever allow c an ADU because there is no lot coverage remaining. He also served two terms on the Edmonds Architectural N w Design Board. The state took a heavy hand saying cities have to do this. The City can say they are unable to meet the requirements due to the unique situation in Edmonds. He questioned the thinking that 2,000 t ADUs would be built in Edmonds in the next 20 years. He suggested looking at every lot that could possibly support an ADU, anticipating there were not many. Older houses are set back from the street and have small a backyards with no room for an ADU. When someone works inside their house and the work exceeds a certain amount, the entire house has to be brought up to current codes including energy codes, fire codes, etc. Fire sprinklers are required in new construction in Edmonds and units 10 feet from a primary unit will require fire sprinklers in the existing structure. The idea of turning split level homes into duplexes; currently the building code does not allow two kitchens in a single house; the only way to do it is to separate the two units which changes the zoning from single family to duplex. The cost to bring the entire structure up to code would likely exceed most of the benefits the homeowner thought they would realize. There is only Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 13 Packet Pg. 253 one plat ever built successfully, Issaquah Highlands, where they incentivized building ADUs over the garage; out of 40 houses, 2 opted to build an ADU. Victor Martinez, Edmonds, relayed when his mom turned 78 two years ago, she was diagnosed with Alzheimer's and moved into his rec room. They went through the permitting process for an ADU which is under construction now. There are homeowners constructing ADUs; it's work, but it can be done. He hoped the council would not add barriers because there are citizens building ADUS now for their parents. He wasn't willing to wait for the proposed changes because he didn't want to miss the summer building season awaiting a political process. He suggested engineering address the cost of a 1-inch water meter and the general facilities charges; the addition of a kitchen requires a 1-inch water meter which is expensive. They had to drive 26 piles on their property for their ADU due to poor soil which was still 20% cheaper than a 1-inch water meter. It is very expensive to build an ADU and any cost savings help. Janelle Cass, Edmonds, explained she has done environmental assessments for the past two decades. Her comment is related to the SEPA analysis or lack thereof on this policy. She felt for staff because on the outset this doesn't look like a project, but rather a policy change, but she suggested imagining if when Paine Field decided to allow commercial aircraft, they said that's not a project, it's just a policy change. When the City writes code, they will come; in this case this policy has a downstream effect on the number of dwelling units in the City. The simple SEPA Checklist wasn't the appropriate analysis to give decision a makers the right information. It was segregated from the comprehensive plan process and should be folded E into the EIS process. For example, the section on public services, the SEPA Checklist said ADUs may not 4) increase the overall density of single family neighborhoods and would not significantly increase the need for public services which is contrary to what was discussed tonight. She suggested the council rethink that and if it is included in the EIS, she encouraged the council to delay a decision and make it part of the 3 0 comprehensive plan process since this doesn't need to be enacted until 2025 when the City could just accept v the state's regulations instead of Edmonds ordinances which are above and beyond the state's requirements. 0 She suggested the DEIS or a revised SEPA analysis include a table that compares the no -action alternative, > the state alternative and the City alternative so the council can see the true environmental impacts of a n decision like this. She has yet to see any analysis of this kind of densification, either from the state or the a City. She encouraged the council to do really good data analysis. a� Jon Milkey, Edmonds, thanked Councilmember Dotsch for identifying the accumulation of the potential impacts. Green build incentives, potential 5-foot height changes, 40% lot coverage and reduced setbacks result in a lot of accumulated impacts between all the housing bills. He thanked Councilmembers Paine and Nand for identifying the possibility of incentives for existing housing stock to provide both more affordable 3 type housing and minimize the impact to neighborhoods by utilizing existing housing stock. He found 0 t� Planning Board Chair Mitchell's comment, good neighborhood type philosophy while implementing code N updates, refreshing. The public doesn't get to see the interaction, just proposed code updates that are a huge ,n change to existing conditions. He supported requiring an additional off-street parking space for ADUs. I? ADUs are a more affordable type of housing used to age in place or by younger families, both of whom c need off-street parking. He referred to the recommended 1,200 square foot gross floor area, pointing out a N w garage is not counted in gross floor area so someone could easily have a 1,600 square foot building. The costs to build ADUs is high; he is working on a DADU in Seattle that costs $1000/square foot. Expanding t the size of a DADU to 1,200 misses the goal of providing an affordable type housing; the bigger it is the more expensive it is and the less affordable it is. Per the Department of Commerce guidance, the City can a enact occupancy requirements for short term rentals, RCW 36.70A.680. Chase Kepler, Edmonds, owner of a 12,000 square foot lot, voiced his support and requested this be passed as soon as possible. Joan Longstaff, Edmonds, a real estate broker since 1971 and owner of her own company in Edmonds since 1980, commented on the importance of multigenerational housing. She has worked with a lot of Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 14 Packet Pg. 254 families trying to meet those needs to care for their loved ones. She is familiar with this issue in Seattle including a 3,000 square foot lot on Queen Anne where a prefab unit was being hand -carried in because of the lack of off-street parking. Greg Brewer, Edmonds, commented the code changes the City is about to adopt are sweeping and all- inclusive. The City has found its way to recommending changes above and beyond the state mandate, an approach he disagreed with. He believed the City should implement the minimum state mandate, learn more about the opportunities and impacts and then revisit expanding the mandates in the future. He expressed concern with the lack of parking requirements and recommended Section 16.20.050.0 include some parking for additional units, ideally one space per unit. Even the state mandate and the planning board recommends including some parking. Once the door is open to development with no parking required, it will be impossible to shut it. The notion that newcomers will not have/want/need a car for transportation will be the exception not the rule. Planning for the exception is dangerous and a dereliction of sound urban planning. This is a citywide code change; not all City streets can accommodate additional street parking. Some streets are full, some lack curbs and sidewalks, forcing people to walk in the streets, other areas have open ditches leaving no place to park or walk safely. Parking will be an issue in the future development of the City. Mr. Brewer relayed another concern is Section 16.20.050.F.2 which states only one domestic water service and meter is allowed per parcel. He disagreed with this restriction as new property owners should have the option to have their own meter if desired especially when ADUs and DADUs will be allowed to be sold separately. Not everyone will want to spend the extra money for separate metering, but they should not be denied the opportunity to do so. The council packet included a SEPA Checklist prepared by staff, an alarming number of questions were answered with the statement, the proposal is a non -project, non -site specific action. While this may be technically true, consultants have told the City to expect 100 new units/year. The SEPA checklist does not seem to take pending development into consideration; it feels like the impacts are being severely downplayed by staff and he wondered how this lack of information will impact the council's decision. He urged the council to take time to fully understand the impacts of the code changes and make the appropriate adjustments to include parking and access to individual unit water meters. Mackey Guenther, Edmonds, thanked planning division staff for their stewardship of the code update and council for their stewardship of its implementation. This is an exciting point in the history of Edmonds, re - legalizing something that has been part of the City's history for at least 100 years. ADUs were originally called carriage houses in the early days of Edmonds; often converted from garages and there are still some downtown. ADUs are the best of Edmonds, a living demonstration that we take what we have and we make 3 it work for us; if you don't need a garage, turn it into a house. The region is dealing with a housing shortage t� because the 35 cities in the Seattle area have underbuilt homes relative to job growth. Legalizing backyard r cottages and in -home apartments is great for Edmonds residents as they make decisions for their unique Ln housing needs. Overall ADUs are flexible, affordable homes that unlock opportunities for many people. c With regard to parking minimums for ADUs, one of the main points of contention, every home in Edmonds c already has two off-street parking spaces. This is America; if people want more parking spaces, they should N w have the freedom to build them and if they don't want parking spaces, they shouldn't be arbitrarily required to have them. He understood the regulation of parking spaces was intended to protect public right-of-way t from a tragedy of the commons, parked cars filling every street, but in reality people should be able to make choices that make the most sense for them. Mr. Guenther continued, if there is a concern there won't be enough ADUs with parking, the City should just allow more housing overall. Attached family sized homes are illegal in 88% of Edmonds residential land. If there is concern about limitation for new housing options, the envelope needs to be increased. A 2020 Seattle -specific study of parking minimums found 70% of developments in Seattle with no parking requirements did include some parking, quantitative local evidence that the lack of a parking requirement does not lead to the neglect of parking for those who want or need it. He concluded ADUs are great; parking Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 15 Packet Pg. 255 8.2.a minimums are an overreach for a country so proud of giving people the autonomy to make the choices that work best for them. If the City requires parking spaces, it should also require chocolate fondue fountains and maybe a statue of Rick Steves. Ken Reidy, Edmonds, said the City's ADU code amendment refers to a public alley, but fails to define a public alley. On September 25, 1990, City Engineering Coordinator Gordy Hyde issued a memorandum that mentions 7.5 feet of City alley. Mr. Reidy wondered if something 7.5 feet wide was ever a public alley. Ordinance 3729 deals with what the City called an unopened alley right-of-way between 8th Avenue North and 9th Avenue North; this so-called alley right-of-way was only 7.5 feet wide. Contrary to the above and related to a 7.5 foot wide easement, City employee JoAnne Zulauf stated the following in a letter dated December 5, 2014, the width of the right-of-way is only 7.5 feet wide and therefore not an alley, but only a strip of unimproved City property right-of-way. These inconsistencies point out how important it is to use clear and accurate definitions in the code. The proposed code amendment also fails to address whether the easement area must be improved and opened for public ingress/egress before it can be considered to be a public alley. He believed the code should differentiate between open and unopened rights -of -way. Mt. Reidy continued, the code says an alley is a publicly dedicated right-of-way which provides a secondary means of access. The definition of street shall include an alley provided however that an alley shall not be considered a street for the purposes of calculating the setback and front yard requirements. No lot fronting on a street and an alley shall be considered either a corner lot or a lot having two street frontages. He questioned if that definition in the code was true and had it been considered in this effort to amend the ADU code. The definition of easement in the City code is as follows: land which has specific air surface or subsurface rights conveyed for use by an entity other than the owner of the subject property or to benefit some property other than the subject property. Ordinance 2924 January 1993, an easement is not land. He requested this error in the code be corrected, the code has contained this error since 1993. He requested all these issues be addressed as part of the ADU code amendment, an opportunity to make needed improvements to the code, a code with so many needs. He requested the council not allow new code to be adopted that is not clear and accurate. Mayor Rosen closed the public hearing and declared a brief recess. a� 10. COUNCIL BUSINESS c 1. UTILITY BOND ISSUE — c Deputy Administrative Services Director Kim Dunscombe introduced Scott Bauer, Northwest Municipal v Advisors. Mr. Bauer reviewed: r • Water and Sewer Improvement and Refunding Revenue Bonds, 2024 LO o Refunding 2013 Water and Sewer Bonds for savings 14 o Funding for water and stormwater projects c • Background N March 2023 Reviewed Refunding with City = d April 2023 Presented refunding to Finance Committee E June 2023 Council adopted refunding bond ordinance (Ordinance No. 4309) Had received indicative rates indicating a refunding through a bank could be close a to the public markets Informed the council that we would proceed with an RFP for bank financing, then make decision based on results. July 2023 Issued RFP to banks for refunding the 2013 bonds Best bid showed NPV savings <$500K, less than half the estimated savings from the public market August 2023 City decided to proceed with refunding via public issuance Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 16 Packet Pg. 256 8.2.a Financing process was to restart toward the end of 2023 January 2024 Restarted the financing; new money for water and stormwater projects included May 2024 Finance committee and city council to consider new money Bond Ordinance Current bond market o Long-term interest rates increased for much of 2022 and peaked in October 2023 o Rates are below the 2022 and 2023 peaks Bond Buyer 20-Bond General Obligation Index January ZOZO to May Z024 am <.20 3 80 at a 130 } 28D 2.x1 o e, M10 11 M1M1 . M1> > > > 4 M1~ � M1M1 M1 M1a M1a ,3 pl+,le-41- Limited Tax General Obligation Debt Pu Ou -MIn. G1611* 1 11,1 Matuav Lwmn P.nv. 1,11 Dw 5 755.00D 5 755.000 12/1/2011 1.80% - 2.25% 1211/202, 1,008.918 1A08.918 12/1/2026 1.67% 12/1/2021 3.000.0(p 2.230.00D 12/1/2019 2.13% - S.oD% 6/1/2029 i0600A(Iri 1.225.000 121111M1 2.00% 5.00% 1i/1/7031 2,160.00(1 1.160.000 121112M1 I.O01t 2, 60% 12/11201, Te%I l9aDa.nb O.N $ 11,112391. 5 86989t6 s,,'tlge% $2WD/NPI s1.roD,o2o BE ON 0 • 1 $soo,000 . ■ ■ ■ ■ �,p■ ■ �a� �,p' , '7 �M1u M1o� M1°'p M1°' ^E�M1 M1°'; M1°'p 11P '9' 1* 10 11 -e . LTGO P.MU(U—fu" •LTW Pf Mtb .LTW 2019 .LTWWM21A • LTWW2021B)—WI) Water and Sewer Revenue Debt >arOssLandisn 'c""6 Par and Mn. W�mm Rmae i{al Wte 5 11.016.0I10 6 11.015,000 12/1/7016 100% � 5DL1a. 6/1/2073 11.195 (><I0 13.s10,000 121117NO 3W% 4.1— 6/1/2U2S 13L150D0 11973,OM 11/1/2M3 2W% - 22S% 6!1/7030 14ad YYa"ahaO aaafte M 5 111ISMI) 5 10W W) LIG02W1AIP.f2011M8mds) 5 5,520.000 $ 22/1/2011 5.00% Nm. 5c,sao.000 u..000.o9D sl.sm sDD 51.am,oaG - s2.sm.DPo - - - 52aa0.o00 — 51,am— SSOO.000 U1TG02021ALPd201l W5Bma1 .W5P.v2011 •WSINv2015 •WSP.v2020 2024 Bonds Financing Plan 2012 Bonds Currently Callable No savings due to rates on outstanding debt versus current bond market rates Bonds remain callable and outstanding 2016 Bond Placed with JP Morgan Callable 12/1/2023 No savings expected due to rates on outstanding debt versus current bond market rates Continue to monitor 2013 Bonds Callable starting on and after June 1, 2023 Avg. Coupon = 4.57% 2021A LTGO Bonds Portion of the 2011 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds refunded by the 2021A LTGO Bonds Payable from utility revenues Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 17 Packet Pg. 257 8.2.a �In wss..ms s aoo $ i,sJo,eos I-- Reu T010 t;e15.UW .3,e75,ero Iil41e.5 >. I. 1.1514 a; Ji�J[ I�im.OW )..00.ee0 IiJLJOM 41 AF..OWi 6fJia3� _�• . i,em,000 IL110N GI..F Jeer 6fJI03. T.YIWMr.nI Y.W WLO.N �$ .e,IIe.UW $ .1,51;Wm 1iti]3011AIF•INtl Vn aurb, �$ i5m.000 s - Ii,vmal 1— e. .. N.enJ.mo sxros.aoa � � a ■ � �• — $I,aJ� ��►�� ►��iiiiiiiii sl.rco,mo ssro,neo a' 41 " ,a' $' 41 es - .011 e -el ;s' e 4 A ,s" .0 a 3 0 fiP 3 I:JtL0 mi4;eelJP.1 WS.-I ..1 My;- •Nrs-11 ..1e mm mPG4,a1•F .>N•w. Lbrq Refund $13,045,000 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 2013 — Estimated NPV Savings of 51,015,000 or 7.8% of refunded bonds — Release $2,129,031from Reserve Account and contribute to refunding • Total coshflow savings of $4,073,000, inclusive of Reserve Account contribution New Capital Project Proceeds for Water and Stormwater — $9.5 million for Water — $2.5 million for Stormwater — Level debt service — Final maturity 12/1/2044 Schedule and Next Steps Tues, May 14 Finance Committee (ordinance introduced) Tues, May 21 Council meeting to consider bond ordinance Thurs, May 23 Rating call Mon, June 3 Receive rating Wed, June 5 Post Preliminary Official Statement Thurs, June 13 Competitive Bond Sale Tues, June 25 Closing COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO APPROVE THE DELEGATION BOND ORDINANCE AND FORWARD TO THE NEXT AVAILABLE COUNCIL MEETING FOR FULL COUNCIL DISCUSSION. Councilmember Nand complimented Ms. Dunscombe and Mr. Bauer for laying out the process, savings, and financial modeling and answered questions at the finance committee meeting. She was comfortable proceeding as recommended by staff tonight. Councilmember Paine asked which projects were not pursued last year and whether they were the water reservoir replacements. City Engineer Rob English answered no projects were deferred; the $9.5M in water projects is primarily related to the Seaview and Yost reservoir projects that are in design now and construction is planned in 2025 and 2026. Councilmember Paine commented there are transportation elements attached to those projects. Mr. English said he was not aware of any transportation element to those projects. Councilmember Paine referred to attachment C, Description of Plan Additions, that states the Water Fund contribution to the Transportation Projects that include water infrastructure for replacement and rehabilitation. Mr. English answered that could be related to projects such as 76`f' & 220`f' which is an intersection improvement project that includes water main replacement. Councilmember Paine concluded this looks like a good deal. Council President Pro Tem Chen thanked Mr. English, Ms. Dunscombe and Mr. Bauer. He relayed his understanding that the purpose of issuing the 2024 bond was to refinance the 2013 bond and provide funding for water and sewer projects. He asked what kind of projects would be funded. Mr. English answered the $9.5M for water is primarily the two reservoir projects, Yost and Seaview. The $2.5M is related to stormwater projects including the lower Perrinville project. He recalled during the rate study it was pointed out the $2.5M will serve as a cash match for grants received for that project. Council President Pro Tem Chen asked if the $35M cash in the water utility account was not available for funding the water reservoir projects and the Perrinville project which total $12M. Mr. English recalled during last year's modeling effort it was pointed out the watermain and sewer replacement programs as well as operation costs are funded with the rate structure. The rate increases approved by council covered those costs and those significantly bigger capital projects, the two reservoirs and lower Perrinville, were to s, Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 18 Packet Pg. 258 be funded by the bond. Ms. Dunscombe commented of the $35M that Council President Pro Tern Chen referenced, a significant portion, $16M, is sewer. The smaller cash balances in water and storm are where these projects are funded from, so it is imperative to pass the bond so those CIP projects are funded. Council President Pro Tern Chen asked if staff had been looking for federal or state grants to help fund those projects and not just borrow money. Mr. English answered yes, there are 1-2 grants for lower Perrinville that fit that type of project scope of work. BNSF has worked with the Tribes to apply for funding to pay for construction along the railroad. He assured staff was always looking for opportunities to fund projects with grants. Council President Pro Tem Chen referred to net present value savings by retiring the 2013 bond totals $1,015,000 which represents the savings by retiring the bond. He referred to the bond issuance cost and the interest incurred over the lifetime of the new 2024 bonds, commenting those costs need to be evaluated compared to the net present value savings. He asked for an estimate of those costs. Mr. Bauer answered looking specifically at the refunding/refinancing portion, the cost is estimated at about $139,000. When net present value is reported, that incorporates issuance costs associated with the bonds. With regard to savings, the net present value savings is comparing existing principal and interest payments versus new principal and interest payments and does take into account interest on the new bonds and the differential between the two is how the net present value savings are calculated. Council President Pro Tern Chen observed with the issuance of new bonds for 2024, the proceeds are used to pay off the 2013 bonds. Mr. Bauer agreed, explaining bond proceeds will be used to pay off the 2013 plus about $2.1M of restricted reserves will be released that the City will contribute to the financing; those two together will be sufficient to pay off the 2013 bonds. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. ORDINANCE CHANGING THE DATE OF MONTHLY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS COUNCILMEMBER ECK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE CHANGING COMMITTEE MEETINGS FROM THE SECOND TO THE THIRD TUESDAY ON THE NEXT AVAILABLE CONSENT AGENDA. Council President Pro Tern Chen explained this change will allow time for Finance to develop the monthly c financial report and have it available for review by the finance committee. Historically the committee has c waited an additional month to review the prior month's financial report. V Councilmember Nand clarified while this change was originated by Finance staff, the reason she and Council President Pro Tern Chen discussed changing all committee meetings to the third Tuesday and not just the finance committee was to avoid a perception of hiding the ball by holding finance committee meetings on a separate date. She apologized for changing the date for all the committee, but it will be better for the public if all the committee meetings are cohesive and sequential on a single day. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION, RCW 42.30.110(1)(D At 9:20 pm, the Council convened in executive session to discuss pending or potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) for a period of 20 minutes. 12. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 19 Packet Pg. 259 8.2.a The meeting reconvened at 9:40 p.m. 13. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Nand commented since it is Asian American/Pacific Islander Month, she wanted to share a story about one of her heroes, her grandmother, Kamalpatti Shandil, who was 95 years old. She moved to Edmonds almost 30 years ago in 1995 and passed away last Wednesday. She remembered her coming to a council meeting, and Chief Hovis helping to escort her. Even in her 90s, she was very active and engaged in the community. She was born in the Fiji Islands in the South Pacific in 1928. She excelled in school and was a great athlete, and then WWII happened. An unintentional effect of the war was that allied soldiers moving across the Pacific Theater to attack Japan accidentally brought tuberculosis to the Fiji Islands and killed over half her family because people on small islands have no immunity when a disease like that is introduced. Her grandmother was forced to quit school and never went beyond the sixth grade. She read books like Lady Chatterley's Lover and other Victorian novels by the cooking fire in her house in Fiji where she raised her eight children which included Councilmember Nand's mother. Councilmember Nand continued, her grandmother ensured her children had access to books and could go to school and made sure her mom graduated from high school and was the first persons in her family to go to college at the University of the South Pacific. Her family immigrated to the United States in 1979 where her dad worked in a factory. On their first day, he and his brother were walking around Seattle and being from a tropical island, had never seen snow and didn't have coats. Newly immigrated, they didn't know anyone; usually when people immigrate, they look for people who speak their language and understand their culture. They were able to provide that for other people who immigrated here. Councilmember Nand relayed comments people made to her, thanking her for sharing her grandmother o with them. She did not realize until her grandmother passed away how many people she touched in the community. She was astonished by the kindness of the Edmonds community to her family in this time of grief, her colleagues have been so kind and supportive and Council President Pro Tem Chen and n Councilmember Eck attended her grandmother's funeral. She wrote her grandmother's obituary very a quickly and sent it to Teresa Whipple, asking to have it published before her funeral on Sunday and Ms. Whipple offered to post it immediately. She wanted to wear a bracelet her grandmother gave her to her funeral but it was broken; a jewelry designer in Edmonds, Sabrina Shultz, repaired it for her and refused payment. On Saturday, Lily at the Branding Iron kept her store open past closing to print her grandmother's funeral program. 0 Councilmember Nand continued, her community, the Fiji Indian community, felt so loved and embraced r and that is a great example of what Asian American and American Pacific Islander month is supposed to N be about, celebrating stories and sharing loved ones and heroes who have an impact on the community. Her grandmother became a U.S. citizen in 1995 and did not miss voting in a single mid-term or presidential c year election. The last time she voted was for her. She loved sharing her grandmother with everyone and `" she thanked everyone for their kindness to her, her family and her community in their time of grief. Councilmember Paine thanked Councilmember Nand for sharing her family with everyone; they are all such lovely people and she was sorry for her entire family's loss, noting her grandmother clearly knew what she was doing. Councilmember Paine referred to the discussion earlier on the agenda regarding ADUs, recalling when she ran for office four years ago, having a discussion with an Edmonds family who had a detached ADU that was approved via a conditional use, allowed only with permission from the City. Both parents had cancer and needed to stay near family. The process they described was the mayor at the time said no and the resident explained their parents were in the last days of their life and need care. She was glad the council Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 20 Packet Pg. 260 8.2.a was discussing ADUs, commenting most would be used for family members, to keep taxes at bay, provide economic opportunity for family members, ensure a family focused environment at the household level, and make sure nice things happen for the rest of the family. The last several months were good for that family because they were able to be together. It is time to legalize ADUs/DADUs so families can put together systems that work well for them. Councilmember Dotsch thanked Councilmember Nand for sharing the story about her grandmother. She assured the public that she read every comment beginning with the planning board process. It is important to hear from the community and that the council listen and take the time to review their input as well as input from planning board and staff. She appreciated the variety of information and opinions from the community that help make this process better for Edmonds. Council President Pro Tern Chen encouraged the public to spend time on Memorial Day to pay their respects to those who sacrificed their lives so we can enjoy freedoms. He looked forward to the Memorial Day program at the cemetery, noting this year Mayor Rosen and Greg Copeland will relay stories. Councilmember Eck relayed she has been thinking about the increasing division across the country and locally and is often asked how it is going on council. She tells people she feels the council is trying hard to work together and show a level of respect and professionalism, walk the talk, and be good role models, something the community is also seeing. She was optimistic if that can happen in Edmonds, it can be done in other places. She appreciated her fellow councilmembers and the mayor. 14. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Rosen had no comments. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, the council meeting was adjourned at 9:50 pm. s, Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 21 Packet Pg. 261 8.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/4/2024 Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes May 21, 2024 Staff Lead: Council Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Nicholas Falk Background/History N/A Recommendation Approval of Council Meeting minutes as part of the Consent Agenda. Narrative Council meeting minutes are attached. Attachments: 2024-05-21 Council Special Minutes Packet Pg. 262 8.3.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING 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 DRAFT MINUTES May 21, 2024 STAFF PRESENT Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator The Edmonds City Council special meeting was called to order at 4:30 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council Chambers, 250 5tn Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. 2. INTERVIEW CANDIDATES FOR APPOINTMENT TO MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE POSITION Mayor Rosen described the interview process; each candidate will provide a three minute introduction and then each councilmember will ask one question with three minutes for both the question and answer. If time allows, councilmembers can ask follow-up questions. Councilmembers interviewed the following candidates (responses in italics): Robert Grant I live in Edmonds with my wife and three children. We moved to Edmonds in 2017, purchasing my wife's childhood home when her parents downsized. Given Edmonds is a special community to us, we wanted to raise our children here, reintroduce ourselves to the community. I don't think we will ever leave Edmonds, we've built our roots, we're building our family here, and we value Edmonds. I've spent almost my entire career in public service as an attorney in Snohomish County, a law clerk, a deputy prosecutor and now an assistant attorney general in the environmental protection division. That office is primary downtown; we work from home a lot. When I'm asked why I want to be the next Edmonds Municipal Court Judge, I give two quick, easy answers: I really enjoy it and I really value Edmonds. I have spent a very long time as a prosecutor and as a pro tem, about eight years. There is something special about being a neutral arbitrator; you don't have to be in an adversarial proceeding where you are an adversary which isn't always the funniest time. As a judge you get to look at the facts, apply the law and do what you think is fair and just. Although I could be old fashioned, I think a judge should be fair and impartial. That's what I enjoy about being the judge pro tem which I've done for about eight years, starting in Edmonds. When it comes to valuing Edmonds, we live here, this is our community, we're raising our family here and I feel it's an opportunity to give back to the community which is why I'm applying for this position. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 1 Packet Pg. 263 8.3.a Councilmember Paine asked his opinion of alternative dispositions. Cases can be disposed of via therapeutic courts. There is deferred prosecution where a person does a series of treatment and their prosecution eventually gets dismissed. There's stipulated order of continuances where theprosecution and the defense get to come up with a resolution and as long as somebody complies with those conditions, it gets dismissed. What are you specifically asking? Councilmember Paine asked his opinion, whether he found them helpful for municipal court situations. Ideally yes. There are two happy days in court; adoption days which is in superior court and graduation from a therapeutic court. I've had the opportunity to see family court; I was a law clerk and you watch people who are struggling with mental health and addiction. That therapeutic court allows people to get their families back together, develop skills, do counseling, medication if needed. The same is true for mental health courts and drug courts. I think those are very important tools because the one thing all courts, at least municipal courts and district courts, the whole purpose of probation is for rehabilitation. If you can prevent them from coming back into the stream of the criminal justice system which tends to be a revolving door, I'm all for that. Council President Olson commented in addition to the all-important role of ruling on issues of justice, the municipal judge is also the manager of the judicial branch of the Edmonds government. She asked what strengths he brings to the management side of the role and whether he would feel any responsibility to look for cost savings at the court as the other department heads of other the other city branches and departments are being asked to do. That's a two part question; I would rely heavily on my court administrator and some of my other judges around the county as to how to best manage the situation. I'm an Edmonds resident, I understand the financial situation we find ourselves in. I am committed to looking into anything that might benefit the city while still maintaining the judicial branch. There are a few simple things that I think can easily be done. For one time costs, there are a lot of grants for purchasing; I know other courts have purchased metal detectors through grants, software that allows paperless courts, audio equipment. That's something the court must look at. I am willing and eager to look through everything to see if there is any room for the court to cut costs. As a resident and a branch of government, you have a duty to be a good steward of the resources and that's what I would endeavor to do. Councilmember Eck said as the municipal judge, he would be expected to work cooperatively with a variety of staff in the municipal court. She asked how he would go about establishing relationships with the staff and therefore trust I'm relatively good at establishing trust. I don't know if you've been able to review my entire application packet; one of the things I thought was important was to give a broad spectrum of my work as a pro tem. I included in the packet a couple staff members, letters from either probation or clerks, describing how we've interacted. I think that kind of reflects how I would treat and interact with the court staff. I have the good fortune of knowing the court administrator fairly well; we met when I was a brand new prosecutor back in 200912010 and we have a pretty collegial relationship and could work well with her. Councilmember Tibbott commented the municipal court hears a variety of cases and occasionally there are repeat offenders. Suppose one of those repeat offenders comes into the court and has not responded well to the corrective actions previously recommended. He asked how he would treat that case differently than a first time offender, and what he would suggest as a follow-up. This might be a lawyer answer, but it depends. I cannot say how I would rule on any particular case without knowing the facts before me. I look at every case and every individual uniquely as they appear before me. The way it is structed in general, there are laws on the books, for example DUI, you get your first DUI, there's mandatory minimums. For a second DUI, those minimums increase and so forth and so on. Legislation has indicated if there is a repeat offender, perhaps the initial deterrent punishment wasn't sufficient so it increases as it goes on. There are times, depending on the individual, they may have hit their rock bottom. One of the things I find in the criminal justice system is a vast majority of thepeople who enter the criminal justice system where they are the defendant, they are struggling with substance abuse, mental health or a combination. There are times Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 2 Packet Pg. 264 where that is their rock bottom and they do respond to probation or the resources provided by the court. I provided a letter where that happened in Lynnwood, where the person was in and out of the courts for five years and I had a conversation with her, saying she was either going to jail for a year or she was going to utilize the treatment. She was at her rock bottom so although she was in the revolving door, she has been clean and sober, a productive member of society. Councilmember Chen commented the Edmonds community is becoming more and more diverse in terms of racial diversity but also social economic and other factors. He asked about his experience working with a diverse population when it comes to judging cases in front of him. Are you asking since this community is changing, how have I changed throughout my career, how do I address that change when I'm either on the bench or a prosecutor? Councilmember Chen clarified his question was how he has addressed the change as a judge, a lawyer, and as a person. It depends on the person before me. One of the things I've learned over the years is the criminal justice system is not built the same or equal for everyone. That shouldn't be too controversial of a statement and here's why. Historically there has been a disproportional impact. Some of the laws, such as cocaine, crack cocaine and powder cocaine were sentenced differently federally. Crack cocaine was sentenced far more severely than powder cocaine. Crack cocaine was predominantly African American community so the laws on the books treated people disproportionately. I find as a prosecutor that the laws have disproportionately impacted victims too, maybe not the laws but the distrust for the system which is quite sad. The system needs to be somewhere everyone feels safe and comfortable coming to the courtroom. As an environmental lawyer, I've noticed the pollution that occurs throughout the state; I have to be in all 39 counties, it has a disproportional impact on communities of color and poor communities. People feel they can dump their pollution on the lower income people and not care. You have to factor in everybody; everybody has a unique life experience and I am committed whenever a person appears before me, regardless of their socioeconomic class or your background, you will be treated with dignity and respect and I will factor in your personal situation, I will continue to educate myself on how your personal situation makes you view the court system and how the court system has traditionally viewed you and continue to move forward in making this a courtroom where everybody feels they matter and will be heard. Councilmember Dotsch asked how he planned to manage a caseload and prioritize cases. The best that I can. I have been in all the courts of limited jurisdiction; there are courts that are run efficiently and smoothly where cases aren't continued, calendars are more cost effective and efficient. For example, interpreter calendars, they combine all the interpreter matters on one day to lower interpreter costs and minimize court time. I look at everything in the court system and try to take my eight years `experience as a pro tem judge and distill it down to make calendars more efficient. I do not like delays or court being late. One of the benefits of Zoom is most people should be on time for court, at least their attorneys should be, and cutting down on the in -court time can improve efficiency in all the other aspects. Councilmember Nand asked if he was appointed to the Edmonds Municipal Court, whether he intended to continue the community court function. I would like to sit down and see everything we have. I am not at all intending to eliminate anything. Idon't have thepurse strings. Ideally, Ilove therapeutic courts; whenever you're in court, as a judge or an attorney, people aren't happy to see you. In therapeutic courts, they are; you feel like you get an opportunity to be heard, to be treated like a human being, and to be given the resources you desperately need. I personally like therapeutic courts; I've utilized therapeutic courts as a prosecutor. Those are some of my favorite calendars to preside over as a pro tem so I don't have any intention to eliminate anything at this time, but we need to look at everything as a whole and how effective it is. If there is a way to run it more efficiently, I would look at that as well. Councilmember Tibbott said there is a good chance there will be more cases with repeat offenders for a variety of circumstances. While he appreciated the answer, it depends, he realized there may be times when there is not enough background, research or time with the person. He asked what could be done in situations Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 3 Packet Pg. 265 to improve the efficiency of the process such as the number of people or minor offenses. If it's a minor third offense, as a judge what do I do? I'm not trying to be cavalier, but one of things you cannot commit to as a judicial candidate or a judge is how you'd rule on any particular case which is why I gave you the lawyer answer. There is a time and place for jail if that's what you're asking. I do think there's a time and place that jail's not appropriate. Have I put people in jail? Yes, I have. Have I put people on probation? Yes, I have. Have I terminated and notput them on probation because I didn't think it would be effective? That's true as well. I don't know how to answer your question in a way that gets to what you're asking without violating judicial ethics or canons I'm supposed to uphold. Can you ask it a different way? Councilmember Tibbott answered he'd have to have a specific case and he did not. Watch me in court and you'll have a flavor for how I'll rule. Councilmember Paine referred to re -offense and asked if he had any experience with Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT) and whether he had opinions or thoughts about it. I have opinions and thoughts about most things. When I was pro tem in Edmonds when Judge Coburn was the judge, Omar was the probation officer, now the assistant administrator. At that time Omar was probation officer of the year and was in charge of MRT and did a phenomenal job with it. Domestic violence is a horrible crime, everyone can agree with that, getting to the root cause can break the cycle of violence which is to everyone's benefit. Councilmember Eck followed up on Councilmember Chen's question, thinking about diverse community members who may not be native English speaking, she asked whether he thought local courts could do a better job serving non-English native speakers. Absolutely, 100% we can definitely do better. Igo to 39 counties as an environmental prosecutor. One of the things I've noticed I King County does pretty effectively is provide pamphlets and information in several languages. When I was a prosecutor or pro tem in Snohomish County, information was provided in Spanish and maybe Mandarin; Snohomish County does not do a good job in terms and languages that are accessible and that people can easily read. I don't know the cost or how hard that would be, but that is one of the areas we need to do better at making the processes known and having it not be a scary place and do it in a manner that is easily understandable for people unfamiliar with the system. Councilmember Nand referred to the legislative fix for Blake and the recriminalization of simple possession, and asked how to move beyond the failed model for the "war on drugs," and emphasize rehabilitative justice in response to the opioid epidemic. As a judge, I don't get to make the laws; I get to enforce the laws on the books. Back when marijuana was illegal, one of the commissioners who hated that it was illegal would still sentence following the law. I'm obligated to follow the law; that being said, before law school, before pro temingg. I used to be a case manager at an in patient treatment facility in Sedro Woolley. I know the depths of addiction, I know the depth people find themselves in, I understand when people hit rock bottom. Not very many major crime cases occurred without some type of drug addiction or the involvement of drugs. I can think of maybe two murders where drugs weren't involved, either a drug rip or somebody who was impaired by drugs or alcohol. Same with robberies; most robberies occur because someone is trying to feed their addiction or they are vulnerable because they have an addiction and they are easily preyed upon. Councilmember Nand commented the state is shifting toward recriminalization and how that is implemented and the impacts on people's lives is a good topic of discussion. Mayor Rosen recognized Judge Fair in the audience. Nathan Suiza Thank you forgiving me the opportunity to address each of you in this forum today. I'm impressed to see such a robustprocess for the selection of the next Edmonds Municipal Court Judge in such a short timeline. I grew up in Vancouver, Washington. I did not know any lawyers when I was growing up, but quickly found my way north to the University of Washington in Seattle where I studied English and political science. Went to Seattle University Law School shortly after when I realized being a lawyer is something you can do after Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 4 Packet Pg. 266 8.3.a college; I had no idea that was how it worked. Once I learned that, I knew that was the path for me. Shortly after law school, I started at Snohomish County Superior Court, clerkingfor Judge George Apple, watching trials and being in the courtroom which is where I first learned I wanted to be in the courtroom, at least for the beginning of my career. Shortly thereafter, I joined the Snohomish County Prosecutor's Office where I served as a career prosecutor, trying cases to juries in misdemeanor and felony cases. I then became a member of the Appellate Unit where I focused largely on looking at those same trial cases but with a deeper perspective, examining if there were potential errors committed by parties involved or by the trial judge. My experiences personally and professionally have come to this moment. Another important thing to know about me is I am a resident of southeast Edmonds and I and my family are engaged in the Edmonds community and want to see the City succeed. Councilmember Tibbott said in thinking about the court cases in Edmonds' court, he suspected there would be times when a defendant has been a repeat offender and there is an effort to determine the best course of action. He asked how Mr. Sugg would treat a case of a repeat offender differently the second, third or fourth time they have been in front of him as a judge; how he would handle it, what remedies he would consider and how that would help the community. This is a practice I've had to engage in as a prosecutor throughout my career. When you are deciding the sentencing recommendation that you make as a prosecutor to the judge, it is a similar question as what the judge has to do. There are certain factors to consider and interests to be balanced. In examining cases of repeat offenders, a judge should look at the criminal history of that offender and factor that in. Oftentimes that means the sanctions increase in felony court. In superior court there is a legislatively established guideline. District and municipal courts do not have the same guidelines; judges are afforded a lot of discretion in imposing anything from zero days and 364 days. In the case of repeat offenders, generally the consequences get more severe. That focus is largely on what the harms are and what the court believes the causes of those harms were. Both my philosophy as a prosecutor and my philosophy pro-teming for the Edmonds Municipal Court have largely focused on correcting what that harm was. If someone is before you for a third or fourth time, we start to reach a point where we're not going to be able to correct that harm. If good faith efforts are no longer being made to fix the underlying problem that produces the harm in the community, then different results are warranted. Jail is one tool in a judicial officer's toolbox; it is not a hammer and every problem is not a nail, but there is a time and place for it. As a judicial officer, especially in situations where there are repeat offenses, no attempt to treat the underlying causes of the behavior, then jail is the appropriate solution in order to gain compliance. Councilmember Chen said the Edmonds community has grown in terms of diversity, not only race, but also socioeconomic and political preferences. He asked as a judge, how he would handle the growing diversity in the city. It is important for every judicial officer to engage in a certain amount of self -refection. Whenever it comes to ensuring we're building an inclusive environment, either in the courtroom or in any government institution, first and foremost, that starts with us as individuals. I have been involved in the equity and inclusion taskforce for Snohomish County government; I was appointed to that taskforce by Executive Dave Somers with the goal of taking a hard look at Snohomish County government's practices in the diversity, equity and inclusion space and coming up with concrete recommendations to improve hiring, retention, and overall inclusion in county government. Many of the practices that taskforce recommended would be directly applicable to creating an inclusive environment in the courtroom. It is making sure the courtroom is doing the outreach, but also having adequate training for court personnel, awareness of cultural and linguistic differences. With regard to the linguistic front, a large number of different languages come through the Edmonds Municipal Court. Making sure every court user, attorney as well as clerks and clerk office staff are well versed and trained in effectively using interpreters can make a big difference. There are many court -certified interpreters, meaning they've had training, but only certain languages are certified by the Administrative Office of the Court. With uncertified interpreters, it is the judge's obligation to ensure the interpreters are being used in a way that make the proceedings fair and accessible to every person that comes through the court. Having an open mind, being aware of your own blind spots, putting in the time to educate yourself and demonstrating that for those around you. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 5 Packet Pg. 267 8.3.a Councilmember Dotsch asked how he planned to manage caseload and prioritize cases. Prioritization of caseloads largely comes down to the two categories of cases that come through the court. In 2023 the court had approximately 500 criminal cases and about 3, 000 infractions. With the installation of school speed zone cameras, infractions are expected to be 12, 000 this year, a 4-fold increase. Making sure the court has efficiency built into it to address those is important. First, to make sure people who do not want to take a day off and come to court to argue to have their ticket reduced or say they didn't do it, if they want to do it online, the court's website needs to be very clear how to do that. Many of the models Edmonds looked at in adopting camera infraction systems were based on Lynnwood's model and Lynnwood's website has an option for showing up digitally, accessing and entering information via a portal and more hearings are presented in that manner. People still have the option of coming to court and talking face -to face with the judge if they choose, but ensuring people who do not want to take a day off from work can do it digitally increases the efficiency of the court. Second, criminal cases that come before the court such as DUI, Assault 4, domestic violence, Theft 3, trespass and other types of cases, those generally fall within continuances. Frequently a defense attorney appears saying they need a continuance; the reasons are largely negotiation which can happen and at times the prosecutor or the city would also need a continuance, but the level of pressing the court does when those are the reasons can do a lot when it comes to controlling caseload. If the court simply accepts that an prosecutor needs additional time to negotiate on the 6'-8' continuance, you can see what that would do to the caseloads. If the court asks what negotiations have been done, what else do you need to investigate, what witnesses do you need to talk to and probes the underlying comments, you can set realistic deadlines rather than engaging in a 30 day continuance. As a pro tem, I recently saw a case that had 20 continuances; the 20`h continuance the case gets a little long in the tooth and we should probably be pushing those cases through a bit quicker. Councilmember Nand asked if you he was appointed to Edmonds Municipal Court, did he intend to continue to community court function. Yes, I do. I began looking at this when I began pro teming in this court in 2021 and when I was escalated to the presiding judge pro tem by Judge Whitney Rivera and Uneek Maylor,, in that position I was asked to fill in if Judge Rivera were to have suffered any illness and could not continue serving. It was a nice voice of confidence and I felt imposed upon me a duty to study the ways the community court operates and the ways it could. In my study of the way the community court operates, no two jurisdiction's community courts are the same. They vary a lot throughout the country. The ones that are successful are all focused on the same things, looking at upstream behavior and trying to correct that in certain qualifying offenses. For the cases that come to the community court, persons with limited or no criminal history, defendants have the opportunity to earn a dismissal of the case if they engage with conditions related to the offense. For example, if they were stealing food from WinCo, we want to ensure they have an EBT card, that they can access food at the food bank, that they know how to take those steps. Those conditions can afford someone the opportunity to correct a one-time mistake. Repeat offenders, after someone has had those opportunities and demonstrated they can receive an EBT card, that they know how to access food at the food bank, but are still engaging in the same behavior, the court needs to take a hard look at whether the community court is still the appropriate place for those cases. Yes, I would engage in community court. Whether it would be the same as it has always existed, I hope there would be certain innovations as each judge who has come to Edmonds has made innovations in the court. I believe in the overall principles and think community courts are great at reducing recidivism for those certain types of cases that find their way into the community court and I believe we should continue to have that in Edmonds. Councilmember Paine asked his opinion of alternative dispositions at the municipal court level. I believe your question is focused on a couple we receive in Edmonds Municipal Court which probably fall under the community court type cases as well as stipulated orders of continuance. Those are a pre-trial diversion agreement between the city and the criminal defendants. It generally looks similar to a community court style outcome where a defendant would be asked to complete certain conditions through an agreement with the prosecutor's office. The court would then have the authority to accept that agreement and put a judicial Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 6 Packet Pg. 268 imprimatur on that agreement. If the conditions are completed satisfactorily within the time window, that matter would then be dismissed. I believe those are the two primary alternatives to prosecution that we see in the Edmonds Municipal Court. It think these are great tools to have in the toolbox. There are certain types of cases that absolutely benefit from this. At the prosecutor's office, we frequently hear victims say I only want the defendant to receive treatment, I only want the defendant to fix whatever problem causes this behavior. Those are the types of solutions that really allow the court to ensure the underlying causes are rectified while preserving public safety in our community. I am in favor of those alternatives. As a judge I would do what I could to bring the stakeholders together to ensure those continue to be strong opportunities in Edmonds Municipal Court. Having alternatives to prosecution requires buy -in from prosecutors, defense attorneys; for community court, there needs to be buy -in from community members most affected by the crimes that come through that court. Having appropriate stakeholders there is an essential role and a judge's role in putting together a system like that. Councilmember Paine clarified her question was alternative dispositions. When the sentencing judge has to impose a disposition, generally there are two potentially three that can be imposed. The time for response to the question expired, Mayor Rosen suggested it be addressed during follow-up questions. Council President Olson said her question was related to the dual role; in addition to the important role of ruling on issues of justice, the municipal court judge is also the manager of the judicial branch of Edmonds government. She asked what strengths he brings to the management side of the role and would he feel any responsibility to look for cost savings at the court as department heads of other city branches and departments are being asked to do. Yes, I agree, a judge should be judged in all three arenas, their work in the courtroom and their experience there, their work in the clerk's office as an administrator of what goes on behind the courtroom, as well as in the community. My experience behind the clerk's office largely comes from my work with Local 18 PA which is a union of ASFCME; since 2016, I have been the president of that organization, working to unify the voices of the approximately 65 deputy prosecutors andpresenting that message to decision makers in county government. Trying to develop a unified message of 65 attorneys is not always easy. I have generally thought of my experience in that role as a facilitator, not a role I get paid for, but I believe my job is to make sure everyone has the information they need to make good decisions, promote uniformed consensus to the extent we can, present that, and be the voice of that consensus. That is the style most of my leadership takes. In that role I worked internally and had experience leading that group, but have also had opportunity in that role to engage with county governments. I've worked with stakeholders in county government related to budget and in the prosecutor's office related to disciplinary issues on occasion when deputy prosecutors have done things that landed them on the front page of the Herald, often quickly followed by discipline. I have been on the other side of the table in all those situations so I have rather extensive experience knowing how to work with a unionized workforce and the obligations that come along with that. I have the experience of knowing the lay of that complicated employment land through the eight years I've served in that role and also my philosophy is to largely try to promote consensus, make sure the information in the hands of those who know and arrive at a conclusion that works well for everyone. Councilmember Eck commented as a municipal judge, he would be expected to work cooperatively with a variety of staff in the municipal court. She asked how he would go about establishing a relationship with staff and therefore trust. In law offices you often find a division between staff and attorneys; I think it's just a natural consequence of the credential. In my practice, I've always felt that was garbage and have always worked to reduce that vibe or barrier in the officer wherever I could. As the union president, we would host social functions where staff members were celebrated. What goes a long way is personal interaction; not a judge that comes and leaves via the back entrance, but someone spending time listening not just to the workplace experiences of those they work with, but actually building a relationship and investing time in those relationships. I personally can't see any other way that someone could run an organization without Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 7 Packet Pg. 269 developing those personal relationships and connections. It's just something I've always done and can't really comprehend how to do the job well otherwise. Councilmember Paine asked his opinion of alternative dispositions at the municipal court level. When a judge is imposing sentence after accepting a guilty plea or someone has been convicted at trial, the judge largely has two options when it comes to the type of sentence imposed. They can suspend a sentence which would then allow a certain amount of jail time to be held such that if theprobation conditions imposed were not followed through, the jail time could be used to encourage them to comply. The goal is always that the judge would be able to talk someone into compliance, that they could use their social skills and ability to encourage that without having to impose jail time. There is also deferred sentences; a deferred sentence is much more in line with a stipulated order of continuance (SOC); a SOC is a pre -conviction tool, the deferred sentence is largely the same tool but exists in a post -conviction arena. The defendant would receive a sentence, conditions would be imposed, potentially jail time could be imposed and if those conditions were satisfied, that conviction would result in a dismissal at the conclusion of the probationary period or the deferred sentence period. Those are the two typical forms of dispositions that would imposed at the time of sentencing. The one that I would call a deferred prosecution, that's strictly DUR In that realm, an individual can go through alcohol treatment, but it only exists in that limited context of DUI cases, seeking to address the underlying behavior to earn a dismissal in advance of conviction for those cases. Councilmember Tibbott asked assuming a defendant is a repeat offender, how would he use the probation system available in Edmonds instead of jail time. Edmonds is very fortunate to have an award -winning probation team that is certified in Moral Reconation Therapy. That tool has seen very positive empirical results and has done well in Edmonds. Using that in lieu of jail time is always the first option. As I indicated, there may become a point where the court is no longer satisfied that someone was engaged in doing that work to prevent the behavior next time, then the court has to look to other tools. I think almost every case should involve some form of initial opportunity for an individual to engage with the underlying harm that go them into the situation. Of course, that's not every case, there are some in which the harm to the community is too great to be afforded those opportunities, but the court should be engaged in balancing that. We've seen some cities in Washington that have gone to a stricter sentencing guideline based on what the city council has imposed in those cities and I don't think that's the right way. The city would generally want someone to take a hard look at the individual circumstances of each case to figure out the right solution based on that individual's past, their past criminal history, and the harm created in each specific case. Councilmember Tibbott recalled Judge Coburn had days where people would come in after their probationary period and talk about the life change they experienced as a result of following through the process. Those were inspirational stories and also served the city well. Councilmember Nand asked with the legislative fix for Blake and the recriminalization of simple position, how can we move beyond the failed war on drugs model and emphasize rehabilitative justice in response to the opioid epidemic. I was largely tasked with the implementation of Blake which involved the vacating of a massive number of criminal convictions in Snohomish County Superior Court and I served that role on behalf of the prosecutor's office, had my name attached to approximately 7, 000 motions to vacate those prior criminal convictions. Now that possession of a controlled substance has been made a gross misdemeanor by the legislature, we're in a position where I think some of the same policies that were underlying the court's decision in Blake or may have driven it, now fall to individual judges in their sentencing decisions. That means we're talking about the harms that landed thatperson in court and what the harms are in possession of a controlled substance case. Typically those are substance use disorder issues that when an individual is ready for treatment and engages with treatment, will generally rectify the harm in our community. The court needs to be very aware of alternatives to prosecution when we look at those cases. Despite having been a career prosecutor, I don't think I know anyone who believes in imposing jail time for low level drug offenses; those type of cases instead call for a more compassionate response, Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 8 Packet Pg. 270 8.3.a focusing on healing the person who is engaged in substance use disorder, helping them find a solution to those problems and in turn rectifying the harm it creates in our community. Council President Olson asked if he would feel any responsibility to look for cost savings at the court as department heads are being asked to do. As a unit of government, the judicial branch bears an obligation and has an opportunity topartner with the rest of the city to ensure Edmonds achieves its goals. That means where it can, the municipal court should work with council and the mayor's office in achieving those results. Specific cost savings the court can have will first come from making sure the court is as efficient as possible in dealing with its infraction caseload. As those rise, the court will need to examine workflows throughout the court as well as make sure we are finding resource efficiencies where possible. A second arena where cost savings can be had is in the use of interpreters. Currently when interpreters are scheduled, there is a two-hour minimum; almost every calendar I've pro temed had an interpreter, typically for a matter that will last for 2-3 minutes, but the interpreter is paid for 1-2 hours. Instead the court should create an interpreter calendar that keeps those matters together and fully utilize the expense of an interpreter for the full 1-2 hours they are contractedfor, handle multiple matters and save on theprofessional services budget. Those are the two ideas I've come up with at this point, but ultimately Iam fully committed to working with council and the mayor's office in solving the structural deficit that the city finds itself in. Nell We.1CC I'm an attorney and my practice is primarily in Everett and I practice primarily in Snohomish County. My practice now consists of quite a bit of dependency work, cases involving parents, families and children involved with CPS along with court appointed work. That's part of my law firm, ABC Law Group, where I'm a partner. Along with that work comes administration. My work also includes the First Legal Clinic, a nonprofit legal clinic that I and my law partners established in 2019 where we represent parents, pregnant parents andparents of newborns at risk of CPS intervention to try to prevent that intervention or removal of their children. I also administer that legal clinic as well. Along with that I do pro tem work for several courts in Snohomish County; I have significant experience in the Edmonds Municipal Court, as well aspro tem in the Everett, Monroe and Lynnwood Municipal Courts as well as the four county district courts. In the past my practice has included more significant criminal law, protection orders, guardianships, family law, civil litigation, workers compensation. I am also a board member for a local nonprofit, Sound Pathways. In terms of qualities that make me especially qualified for this position, I believe I am hardworking which is an important judicial quality. I'm intellectually curious; I like learning things and like listening to arguments in terms of the law in front of me. The most important characteristic of any judge is empathy and I care about improving things around me. I have diverse work experience, significant administrative experience with my private firm and the nonprofit andprogram development experience in the nonprofit and significant experience working with many clients who suffer from substance use disorder along with mental health issues. Along with administrative experience, I have technology and data experience as well. Councilmember Dotsch asked how he planned to manage caseload and prioritize cases. Currently in Edmonds Municipal Court there is a pretty good management system in terms of the caseload. The calendars for example, Wednesdays have preliminary calendars in the morning and the in -custody calendar in the afternoon, infractions are on Friday. In terms of my management of the caseload, I have significant experience managing the caseloads in the district courts which have very heavy caseloads. Of course community court along with post -conviction matters that are reviewed on Mondays which can be especially heavy calendars in Edmonds, so there have been moments where in terms of managing those calendars, the court needs to take action to ensure cases are heard. Calling cases ready to go, ensuring counsel is ready to go, shifting between the 1, 1:30 and 2: 30 pm in -custody calendar. I have direct experience in Edmonds Municipal Court effectively managing those calendars in terms of the caseload. From an administrative point of view, staff is well versed in terms of managing the caseload behind the scenes whether that is infractions or criminal cases coming before the court. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 9 Packet Pg. 271 8.3.a Councilmember Nand asked if you he was appointed to Edmonds Municipal Court, did he intend to continue the community court function. Absolutely. I would say the community court function is one of the most exciting reasons for me to apply for and be interested in the position. I'm especially interested in expanding community court. To give some background on my experience, especially with First Legal Clinic, that legal clinic consists of many partners but primarily myself, two of my law partners and two of what we call parent allies, people with lived experience who work with our clients. Since 2019 we've served 800 families. We utilize other parent allies and other attorneys, but it is primarily that core group of people. We work with and help our clients using existing community resources, using case management services such as substance use disorder treatment services, community based services around birth to three services because they serve clients who are pregnant and have newborns. A lot of these services exist and may be overwhelmed and overloaded and are already looking for new avenues and ways to serve their clients, meet clients and get referrals. There is a way to use existing community resources to expand the community court. Our legal clinic was asked to help Auburn at their community court and be present once a week. As a small group, we cannot be there once a week, but may be able to dedicate 10-30 minutes where we can be available by phone. There are a lot of options with community providers to do that, not asking them to be at community court as a partner once a week, but provide a way to contact them. I would like to work with the existing community providers in Edmonds and Snohomish County to expand that. Councilmember Paine asked his opinion about alternative dispositions. I think alternative dispositions are an incredibly important tool for the court. There are a lot of tools for the court to effect behavioral change, whether that's a charge itself, conditions of release, conviction itself, post -conviction requirements like treatment, no contact or incarceration, and in terms of that list of tools for the toolbox, alternative dispositions fall right into that. It's an incredible incentive for people, whether it is considered a negative or a positive, if there was a finding of guilt and they were able to have that vacated or otherwise dismissed. I think that's an important incentive for many people; not all, because every person's different so different tools need to be used for different people, but for many people it's a powerful tool to effect behavioral change in the goal of reducing recidivism. Council President Olson referred to the dual role of the judge, the all-important role of ruling on issues of justice as well as the manager of the judicial branch of Edmonds' government. She asked what strengths he brings to the management side of the role and would he feel any responsibility to look for cost savings at the court. There's a court rule, GR29, that goes to the administrative function of the court. Edmonds is unique in that it is a one judge court and the responsibilities of administration are related to ensuring cases are run effectively and that justice is properly administered. My strengths are related to my administrative background. I am a partner in ABC Law Group, a law firm that has fluctuated from 8-12 employees over the years I've been a partner depending on needs and staff which is a very similar size to the municipal court and our revenues and expenses are similar. In terms of my other administrative experience with First Legal Clinic, that entailed founding that clinic from scratch in 2019, starting the business entity. I have direct experience working from an administrative point of view in an organization similar in size to the Edmonds Municipal Court which includes budgeting, personnel, administration, technology, and everything you can image that goes on with the administration. Our law firm doesn't have an accountant; that is part of my responsibility. We don't have an IT department, I'm essentially the IT department so significant administration there. Part of my work as a board member of Sound Pathways has included administration and looking at costs. In terms of cost savings that apply to the court, it's no secret what's happening with the municipality, that there are issues related to funding. My view of that is that the court is part of the city team. When it comes to making funding decisions and looking at things in terms of belt - tightening, that's important for the court to look at too. Councilmember Eck said as a municipal court judge, he would be expected to work cooperatively with a variety of staff in the municipal court. She asked how he would go about establishing a relationship with Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 10 Packet Pg. 272 8.3.a the staff and therefore trust. I'm fortunate in that I have already worked with the staff a significant amount. I feel I already have a very good relationship with the existing staff in the municipal court. Of course, the change would be from my role as a pro tem coming in to cover versus being the person who would now be the head administrator for the court. I would compare it to what I do at my law firm; I have an open door policy. It's important for everyone to feel they can ask me a question or talk to me. At our law firm, we frequently eat meals together and discuss issues. We have meetings to ensure if there any confusion about policies orprocedures, it is discussed in a team setting, discussed in a way that is collaborative and ideally come to some sort of agreement. There is a great atmosphere with this court and everybody who works here is working together to achieve the things the court is trying to do and really maintain that. It's important to note Edmonds Municipal Court has been an award -winning court in terms of probation services. Maintaining and recognizing that and recognizing things from the staff and not coming in and saying let's change things. Instead keep the trajectory the court has been on which is award -winning and keep that moving forward. Councilmember Tibbott commented as a judge it's possible there could be a defendant who is a repeat offender and have been before the court 2-3 times. He asked how a case like that would be handled, what his approach would be, how he would use the probation system, etc. Of course any decision that comes before me will be a case -by -case decision; it will be different depending on that person's circumstances. Of course, it's a hypothetical question and my answer will be hypothetical. There are a lot of tools in the toolbelt to help someone with behavioral change. I've worked with clients in every range you can imagine, but I've seen people, maybe it's a requirement for treatment, substance use disorder treatment, or regular check -ins with the probation counselor that will change their behavior. Maybe it's having a weekly or monthly court hearing, maybe it's having a discussion with them, hearing them and engaging with them and working with the court in a therapeutic way. It's important to understand the obstacles for people, finding out what's going on that's causing the issue, whether it's mental health and they don't have access to treatment, transportation, insurance, substance use disorder, housing, determining the obstacles the person is experiencing. There are clients for whom being incarcerated made a difference in their life; being incarcerated, having the time to detox, using that time to get inpatient treatment and coming out and having a stable support system. This would be a case -by -case determination, but really understanding thatperson 's obstacles and reducing their personal recidivism rate. Councilmember Chen commented Edmonds has grown to be a more diversified community, not only in terms of race but also economic, social status and political preference to name a few. As a judge, how do you manage and handle cases from this diverse community. The first step and the tool for dealing with that is what I believe is the most important judicial quality, empathy, understanding where people are coming from and what their circumstances are. As you said, this is a diverse group that comes from all walks of life; really trying to put yourself in someone's shoes and understand their background and how they got where they are now. Not just looking at cases from the standpoint of you're here today because you have this charge and that's what you're here for is to have that adjudicated, but really understanding their background. For the clients I work with, that may be growing up in the foster care system and whether that influenced their behavior. Didyou have issues with being unhoused or substance use issue that led to what's going on? Understanding that and understanding first and foremost that the people appearing in front of you are human, they deserve respect, deserve to have their case heard fairly and approaching every case like that, trying to understand that there can be implicit bias or prejudice against them and trying to avoid that as much as possible in deciding their case. Councilmember Chen commented he is one of the few attorneys with an accounting degree. There are a few that I know, a few who have an accounting undergrad degree surprised him. Councilmember Tibbott asked how becoming a judge in Edmonds would affect his current law practice with ABC Law Group. It's a tough question; the reality is this is a full-time position and I'd have to give that up. There's no easy way to put it; the people I work with are my best friends and it'll be really hard. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 11 Packet Pg. 273 8.3.a Leaving work that I'm passionate about, leaving clients that I care about would be really difficult but at the end of the day, I think this goes back to Councilmember Nand's question about community court, I think there's a lot of really great things and great opportunities with this court that make up for those losses that I would have with my current work circumstances. Councilmember Tibbott pointed out he would also be running for election at some point. That's true as well; it wouldn't be taking up any time. Following up on Councilmember Tibbott's question about failure to stick with a court order, Councilmember Paine asked his thoughts about Moral Reconation Therapy. My understanding is it's an evidenced -based service and therapy. In my experience as an attorney and what used to come up as an issue with previous modalities of domestic violence treatment was the evidence that came out wasn't evidence based. Courts were ordering compelled service that didn't show it reduced recidivism at all and one study showed it actually got worse with the treatment. Domestic Violence Moral Reconation Therapy (DVMRT) was shown to be an evidence -based service and over my career I've seen it replace previous domestic violence therapies. The bottom line is I think evidence based services and therapeutic approaches are the best path to take when trying to effect behavioral change for people. Councilmember Nand asked with the legislative fix for Blake and the recriminalization of simple possession, how can we move beyond the failed war on drugs model and emphasize rehabilitative justice in response to the opioid epidemic. I think it's a huge question because there's so much involved with what goes into substance use disorder. It's really such a multi faceted problem; somebody using just because it's their substance use disorder issue or is it because it's a lack of housing, self -medicating for an ongoing mental health issue, their family circumstances, or incredible stress? The biggest way to resolve it is to make sure that people's basic needs are met, housing, healthcare services including mental health services and substance use disorder treatment, food, getting work if they're able. I personally think that while it's important for our community to look at and expand those issues as much aspossible, they're massive issues that frankly go beyond a municipal court and even a municipality to resolve by itself. There are problems that need to be addressed at the state and federal level through funding and those sort of services. That's the most important way to do it, meeting people's basic needs is the most helpful and important way to address chronic substance use disorder. 3. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO EVALUATE THE QUALIFICATIONS OF AN APPLICANT FOR PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(G) At 6 pm, the Council convened in executive session to evaluate the qualifications of an applicant for public employment per RCW 42.30.110(1)(g) for a period of 30 minutes. EXECUTIVE SESSION EXTENSION At 6:30 p.m., Mayor Rosen announced that the executive session would be extended for 5 minutes. The executive session concluded at 6:35 p.m. 4. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION Mayor Rosen reconvened the meeting at 6:35 pm. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, the special council meeting was adjourned at 6:35 pm. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes May 21, 2024 Page 12 Packet Pg. 274 8.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/4/2024 Approval of claim checks and wire payment. Staff Lead: Kimberly Dunscombe Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Nori Jacobson Background/History Approval of claim checks #262713 through #262800 dated May 23, 2024 for $359,873.72 and wire payment of $24,498.70. Staff Recommendation Approval of claim checks and wire payment. 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 05-23-24 Agenda copy Packet Pg. 275 8.4.a apPosPay Positive Pay Listing Page: 1 5/23/2024 2:13:57PM City of Edmonds Document group: jacobson Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount 079330 76 INVESTMENT LLC 262713 5/23/2024 3,789.24 070322 A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC 262714 5/23/2024 700.00 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 262715 5/23/2024 109.40 000135 ABSCO ALARMS INC 262716 5/23/2024 28,936.35 078469 AGUIRRE, RAUL 262717 5/23/2024 130.00 074718 AQUATIC SPECIALTY SERVICES INC 262718 5/23/2024 4,136.08 071377 ARGUELLES, ERIN 262719 5/23/2024 220.00 078237 ARIAS, ADRIAN 262720 5/23/2024 130.00 073878 ASTROF CONCRETE HARDWARE 262721 5/23/2024 584.02 064341 AT&T MOBILITY 262722 5/23/2024 1,748.82 079382 ATWELL LLC 262723 5/23/2024 1,289.25 001801 AUTOMATIC WILBERT VAULT CO 262724 5/23/2024 2,012.00 028050 BILL PIERRE FORD INC 262725 5/23/2024 1,010.83 077181 BOYER ELECTRIC CO INC 262726 5/23/2024 265.20 018495 CALPORTLAND COMPANY 262727 5/23/2024 566.10 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 262728 5/23/2024 1,752.67 069437 CANOPY WORLD INC 262729 5/23/2024 153.60 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY 262730 5/23/2024 52.54 076829 CRYE PRECISION LLC 262731 5/23/2024 332.93 005965 CUES INC 262732 5/23/2024 1,144.00 046150 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 262733 5/23/2024 175.00 076319 DIAMOND MOWERS INC 262734 5/23/2024 62.26 075160 DIMENSIONAL COMMUNICATIONS 262735 5/23/2024 483.44 076172 DK SYSTEMS 262736 5/23/2024 6,051.55 064640 DMCMA 262737 5/23/2024 200.00 007253 DUNN LUMBER 262738 5/23/2024 877.48 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 262739 5/23/2024 5.51 076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE 262740 5/23/2024 286.89 008550 EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT #15 262741 5/23/2024 192.00 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 262743 5/23/2024 36,501.49 075200 EDUARDO ZALDIBAR 262744 5/23/2024 130.00 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 262745 5/23/2024 669.54 079517 ELECTRONIC MOBILE SOLUTIONS 262746 5/23/2024 2,386.80 079584 ESTATE OF R GREGORY PAYNE 262747 5/23/2024 1,348.04 079585 ESTATE OF R GREGORY PAYNE 262748 5/23/2024 587.69 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD 262749 5/23/2024 125.56 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 262750 5/23/2024 13,107.67 072493 FIRSTLINE COMMUNICATIONS INC 262751 5/23/2024 292.83 075538 GAMEZ, OMAR 262752 5/23/2024 345.00 078226 GEIGLE SAFETY GROUP INC 262753 5/23/2024 179.92 079488 GRADER, SHARON M 262754 5/23/2024 1,000.00 012199 GRAINGER 262755 5/23/2024 126.85 012560 HACH COMPANY 262756 5/23/2024 13,904.23 078272 HARRINGTON, SHEILAANNE 262757 5/23/2024 130.00 074966 HIATT CONSULTING LLC 262758 5/23/2024 200.00 076240 HM PACIFIC NORTHWEST INC 262759 5/23/2024 384.02 061013 HONEY BUCKET 262760 5/23/2024 3,904.72 079489 HUANG, AI-CHUN 262761 5/23/2024 1,000.00 069733 ICONIX WATERWORKS INC 262762 5/23/2024 5,888.69 072422 JE HORTON INTERPRETING SVCS 262763 5/23/2024 130.00 067568 KPG PSOMAS INC 262764 5/23/2024 30,498.43 075159 LIFE INSURANCE CO OF NO AMER 262765 5/23/2024 17,157.50 074263 LYNNWOOD WINSUPPLY CO 262766 5/23/2024 85.43 Page: 1 Packet Pg. 276 apPosPay Positive Pay Listing 5/23/2024 2:13:57PM City of Edmonds Document group: jacobson Vendor Code & Name Check # Check Date Amount 067235 MARYS TOWING INC 262767 5/23/2024 701.68 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 262768 5/23/2024 434.24 018950 NAPA AUTO PARTS 262769 5/23/2024 117.18 072739 O'REILLYAUTO PARTS 262771 5/23/2024 42.10 076902 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CTR OF WA 262770 5/23/2024 486.00 078895 PADILLA, TRACIE 262772 5/23/2024 440.96 072507 PEACE OF MIND OFFICE SUPPORT 262773 5/23/2024 376.00 079464 PERKINS EASTMAN ARCHITECTS DPC 262774 5/23/2024 34,353.03 012900 PIERRE FORD OF LYNNWOOD 262775 5/23/2024 4,755.39 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY 262776 5/23/2024 8.28 079586 PORCHFEST EDMONDS 262777 5/23/2024 500.00 075770 QUADIENT FINANCE USA INC 262778 5/23/2024 4,000.00 062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL COMPANY 262779 5/23/2024 1,345.40 079565 RIGOR, ROGELIO N 262780 5/23/2024 130.00 074834 ROBINSON, JASON 262781 5/23/2024 320.25 067802 SAN DIEGO POLICE EQUIP CO 262782 5/23/2024 81,379.79 075637 SCHNEIDER, P DIANE 262783 5/23/2024 142.73 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC 262784 5/23/2024 340.61 070495 SEPULVEDA, PABLO 262785 5/23/2024 308.75 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 262786 5/23/2024 25,869.05 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE 262787 5/23/2024 1,900.00 038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS 262788 5/23/2024 208.16 079583 TRIMBLE, BREANNA 262789 5/23/2024 320.25 069751 VESTIS 262790 5/23/2024 238.97 069751 VESTIS 262791 5/23/2024 47.48 067917 WALLY'S TOWING INC 262792 5/23/2024 280.92 065568 WATER SERVICES NW INC 262793 5/23/2024 163.82 075635 WCP SOLUTIONS 262794 5/23/2024 1,823.25 064800 WEHOP 262795 5/23/2024 1,049.66 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 262796 5/23/2024 79.83 069605 WEST COAST CODE CONSULTANTS 262797 5/23/2024 6,175.22 063008 WSDOT 262798 5/23/2024 64.94 078389 ZENNER USA 262799 5/23/2024 2,992.39 011900 ZIPLY FIBER 262800 5/23/2024 995.82 GrandTotal: 359,873.72 Total count: 87 Page: 2 Packet Pg. 277 8.5 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/4/2024 Resolution Recognizing Ride Transit Month Staff Lead: Councilmember Susan Paine Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History This resolution is brought forward to recognize the important benefits of using our local transit systems. Recommendation Approve the resolution recognizing Ride Transit Month. Narrative June is Ride Transit Month when the community is encouraged to use their local transit options, recognizing the broad benefits of transit options that link communities and services together. This year, 2024, will see major transit improvements in our region that improve access to locales, goods, and services throughout the south Snohomish County region. Attachments: 2024-06-04 resolution for Ride Transit Month Packet Pg. 278 8.5.a RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DESIGNATING DUNE 2024 AS "RIDE TRANSIT MONTH". WHEREAS Edmonds is a multi -modal hub with a ferry terminal and Sound Transit Sounder commuter rail station; and WHEREAS Community Transit operates the Swift Blue Line and Routes 102, 119, 130, 166, and 416, connecting Edmonds to Lynnwood, Everett, Silver Firs, and Seattle; and WHEREAS Community Transit recently opened the Swift Orange Line, connecting Edmonds College with Lynnwood City Center and Mill Creek, and in its first month of operation, the new bus rapid transit line provided 50,355 trips; and WHEREAS Sound Transit will begin operating light rail service from Nortbgate to Lynnwood City Center on August 30, 2024; and WHEREAS Community Transit will implement its largest service change ever on September 14, 2024, increasing local fixed -route service and connectivity to the light rail system; and WHEREAS more than 8 percent of Edmonds residents commute to work by transit; and WHEREAS approximately 25 percent of Washingtonians cannot or do not drive and may rely on public transit; and WHEREAS recent research shows that 1 in 4 adults in the United States suffers from transportation insecurity, suggesting thousands of Edmonds residents cannot regularly move from place to place in a safe or timely manner because they lack the resources necessary for transportation; and WHEREAS a 2021 study from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine concluded that the energy saved by passengers in the United States using public transit rather than personal vehicles saved 63 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2018—roughly the equivalent of taking 16 coal-fired power plants offline for a year; and WHEREAS Community Transit and Washington State Ferries are committed to converting to zero -emission fleets, improving the air and sound quality of our communities, and addressing climate change; and Packet Pg. 279 WHEREAS public transportation investments generate 31 percent more jobs per dollar than new construction of roads and bridges. Investment in transit can yield 49,700 jobs per $1 billion invested and offers a 5 to 1 economic return; and WHEREAS transit -oriented development of housing and businesses is an essential economic and climate strategy for the City of Edmonds and the region; and WHEREAS greater transit use is associated with higher levels of physical activity, which is associated with lower health risks and better health outcomes; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Edmonds City Council designates June 2024 as Ride Transit Month and urges all people to join in observance and to ride transit. RESOLVED this day of June, 2024. CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR, MIKE ROSEN ATTEST: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. Packet Pg. 280 9.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/4/2024 Accessory Dwelling Unit Code Amendment to allow for Detached Accessory Dwelling Units — "Expanding housing options by easing barriers to the construction and use of accessory dwelling units in accordance with HB 1337." Staff Lead: Rose Haas Department: Planning Division Preparer: Rose Haas Background/History The Housing Element in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan recommends the following strategy to promote affordable housing: o The City [should substantially revise] its accessory dwelling regulations, providing clearer standards and streamlining their approval as a standard option for any single family lot (2020 Comprehensive Plan, p. 92). In 2021, the Citizens' Housing Commission stated the following policy recommendation for updating the ADU code to include detached accessory dwelling units (DADUs): o Allow either one attached or detached accessory unit on a property in the SFR area, with clear and definitive development requirements such as size, ownership, and parking, under the standard permitting process and not require a conditional use permit. In the spring of 2023, the state legislature passed HB 1337 which requires jurisdictions like Edmonds to update their development codes to allow for DADUs and make related code changes to make it easier to create accessory dwelling units. In late October of 2023, City Council indicated that they wished to allow detached accessory dwelling units (DADUs) in anticipation of conforming with the state mandate that takes effect in July 2025 (HB 1337). Staff introduced the proposal to allow for DADUs as well as to fully comply with the upcoming required State of Washington mandate at Council Committee on November 14, 2023. Staff held a live public webinar on November 30, 2023, with an online comment period from November 30- December 31, 2023. Staff introduced the proposal at Planning Board on December 13, 2023. Staff discussed the proposal at Planning Board on January 10, 2024, and January 24, 2024. The preliminary discussion touched on the following topics: § Regulation of units in lots that contain critical areas; § Maximum unit square footage; § Setback reductions; § Utilities connections, metering, and Public Works' requirements; § Nullification of existing owner -occupancy covenants. Staff reintroduced the proposal and presented draft code amendments to City Council on February Packet Pg. 281 9.1 27, 2024. Planning Board held a Public Hearing on the Proposal on February 28, 2024. Legal notice for the Public Hearing was published and posted on February 14, 2024. Written comments gathered by staff were presented prior to the hearing. Council and Staff held a study session on March 5, 2024. On March 15, 2024, Notice of SEPA Determination of Non -significance was published. No comments were received. (Attachment 1). Planning Board and Staff reconvened on April 10, 2024, to discuss possible policy recommendations. On April 24t", Planning Board discussed their policy recommendations for review by City Council and began work on their policy memorandum. The project returned to City Council on May 21, 2024, for a Public Hearing. Legal notice for the Public Hearing was published and posted on May 7, 2024. In addition to the Public Hearing, Planning Board presented their recommendations alongside Planning Staff recommendations. City Council anticipates adoption of the ADU updates to the ECC and ECDC on June 7th. Staff has updated the webpage (Edmondswa.gov/ADU <https://www.edmondswa.gov/government/departments/development services/planning division /code modernization/accessory dwelling units code update>) throughout the entire process. The webpage includes the recorded webinar, draft code amendments, FAQs, self -guided slide shows, and has provided a forum for ongoing public comment. Staff Recommendation Staff recommended code language is shown as Attachment 2. Staff recommends adopting clear and objective code language that aligns with Washington State Law (HB 1337) prior to the required June 30, 2025, adoption deadline. State law requires the following: Allow two ADUs per lot (any configuration of ADU and DADU). No owner -occupancy requirements. Allow separate sale of ADUs. Maximum size limitation no less than 1,OOOsf. Allow DADUs to be sited at a rear lot line, if the lot line abuts a public alley. No setback requirements, yard coverage limits, tree retention mandates, restrictions on entry door locations, or aesthetic requirements that are more restrictive than for the principal unit. Allow ADUs of at least 24-feet in height. No parking required within a half -mile of a major transit stop, as defined in RCW 36.70A.696(8). Allow impact fees of no more than 50% of the fees imposed on the principal unit. In addition, Planning Staff recommends the following development standards: 1. ADU size restrictions: Maximum size limitation no less than 1,200sf in the RS-10, RS-12, RS-20 zones. 2. ADU setback reductions: Rear setbacks may be reduced to a minimum of 10-feet (5-feet for DADUs that are 15-feet in height or less) in the RS-6 and RS-8 zones. 3. Parking restrictions: No additional parking required for ADUs. 4. Impact fees: No longer waive impact fees for ADUs. Charge impact fees no more than 50% of the fees imposed on the primary unit. Packet Pg. 282 9.1 Planning Board Recommendations: The Planning Board policy recommendation is shown as Attachment 3. In accordance with Staff, Planning Board recommends adopting clear and objective code language that aligns with Washington State Law (HB 1337) prior to the required June 30, 2025, adoption deadline. In accordance with Staff, the Planning Board recommends the following development standards: 1. ADU size restrictions: Maximum size limitation no less than 1,200sf in the RS-10, RS-12, RS-20 zones. 2. ADU setback reductions: Rear setbacks may be reduced to a minimum of 5-feet for DADUs that are 15-feet in height or less in the RS-6 and RS-8 zones. 3. Impact fees: No longer waive impact fees for ADUs. Charge impact fees no more than 50% of the fees imposed on the primary unit. Differing with Staff, the Planning Board recommends the following development standards: 4. ADU setback reductions: No automatic rear setback reduction for DADUs in the RS-6 and RS-8 zones. Rear setback may be reduced to a minimum of 15-feet for DADUs that are 15-feet in height or less in the RS-10, RS-12, and RS-20 zones. 5. Parking restrictions: No additional parking required for one ADU, but one additional parking space required for a second ADU. Narrative The core obiectives of the ADU code update are as follows: 1. To allow DADUs in the City of Edmonds. 2. To align with HB 1337 in terms of development standards. 3. To provide clear and objective guidance for those who choose to add ADUs or DADUs to their property. 4. To provide code standards for height, floor area, parking, utilities, etc. Accessory dwelling units provide additional affordable housing options within existing single-family neighborhoods. Edmonds has allowed accessory dwelling units (ADUs) since 2000 but only when they are in or attached to a primary residence (ECDC 20.21). State legislation mandates that HB 1337 must be implemented no later than six months after the next Comprehensive Plan due date, or by June 30, 2025. While work on updating the Comprehensive Plan continues, changes to the accessory dwelling unit code can be made now using existing City policy guidance and the ADU guidance provided by the Department of Commerce. There is existing demand for this housing option; Planning staff receives significant interest through phone inquiries, a -mails and counter visits from community members on a weekly basis. Community members are interested in having accommodation for families to age in place or to help offset rising housing -related costs. Packet Pg. 283 9.1 Any proposed ADU will be subject to the same permitting requirements as any other dwelling unit, including: building codes, energy codes, public works requirements, fire code, utility requirements, and all environmental regulations per Title 23 ECDC. While ADUs provide additional units on single-family zoned lots, they do not change the maximum density prescribed by the single-family zone (ECDC 16.20.030). The attached SEPA checklist (Attachment 1) reflects the zoning impacts of ADUs and does not reflect the fact that the City of Edmonds can use ADUs to meet residential density requirements as part of the Comprehensive Plan update. The cumulative effects of all of the housing bills will be part of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Comprehensive Plan update. RCW 43.21C.495 prohibits administrative and judicial SEPA appeals for regulations stemming from HB 1337. Public comments received after the May 21" Council meeting are shown as Attachment 4. Draft ordinance and adoption language are shown as Attachment 5. Attachments: Attachment 1- AMD2023-0008 Notice SEPA Attachment 2 - DRAFT Redline strikethrough Code Amendment v.11 Attachment 3 - Planning Board Policy Memorandum Attachment 4 - Public Comments Attachment 5 - 2024-05-29 Ordinance ADU revisions Attachment 6 - DRAFT PPT Presentation Packet Pg. 284 9.1.a CITY OF EDMONDS NOTICE OF SEPA DETERMINATION of NONSIGNIFICANCE `nC. 1013 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Edmonds has issued a Determination of Nonsignificance for the following project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendments to accessory dwelling unit standards and processes to align with House Bill 1337 as codified in RCW 36.70A.680, RCW 36.70A.681, and RCW 36.70A.696. The project would amend chapters in the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) and the Edmonds City Code (ECC) to be consistent with the new regulations and other implement best practices: impact fees in Chapter 3.36 ECC; uses and standards in ECDC 16.20, 20.21 and 20.35; parking in ECDC 17.50 and 17.115; nonconforming code in ECDC 17.40; land use processes in Chapter 20.01; and related definitions in ECDC Title 21. NAME OF APPLICANT: City of Edmonds PROJECT LOCATION: City-wide; this is a non -project action. FILE NO.: AMD2023-0008 DATE OF ISSUANCE: March 15, 2024 COMMENTS ON PROPOSAL DUE: March 29, 2024 Relevant materials can be reviewed by visiting the City's website at https://www.edmondswa.gov/services/public_involvement/public_ notices/ development_ notices, or by contacting the City contact noted below. Comments may be mailed or emailed. Please refer to the application file number for all inquiries. SEPA APPEAL: Consistent with RCW 43.21 C.495, adoption of ordinances, development regulations and amendments to such regulations, and other non -project actions taken by a city consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A.680 and 36.70A.681 are not subject to administrative orjudicial appeals. CITY CONTACT: Rose Haas, Planner rose.haas@edmondswa.gov 425-771-0220 PUBLISH: March 15, 2024 Packet Pg. 285 9.1.a °a. ED,y� CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220 DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of proposal: Amendments to accessory dwelling unit standards and processes to align with House Bill 1337 as codified in RCW 36.70A.680, RCW 36.70A.681, and RCW 36.70A.696. The project would amend chapters in the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) and the Edmonds City Code (ECC) to be consistent with the new regulations and other implement best practices: impact fees in Chapter 3.36 ECC; uses and standards in ECDC 16.20, 20.21 and 20.35; parking in ECDC 17.50 and 17.115; nonconforming code in ECDC 17.40; land use processes in Chapter 20.01; and related definitions in ECDC Title 21. Proponent: City of Edmonds Location of proposal, including street address if any: City-wide; 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 March 29, 2024. Project Planner: Rose Haas, Planner 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: March 15, 2024 Signature: kx /6�� -�, /,� XX Consistent with RCW 43.21C.495, adoption of ordinances, development regulations and amendments to such regulations, and other non -project actions taken by a city consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A.680 and 36.70A.681 are not subject to administrative or judicial appeals. XX Posted on March 15, 2024, at City Hall, the Edmonds Public Safety Building, and the Edmonds Library. 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 any associated documents can be obtained online at https://www.edmondswa.gov/services/public involvement/public notices/development notices under permit number AMD2023-0008, by emailing the project planner (rose.haas@edmondswa.gov), or by calling the City of Edmonds at 425-771-0220. Page 1 of 2 AMD2023-0008 SEPA DNS FOR DADU CODE AMENDMENT 3l13/24.SEPA Packet Pg. 286 9.1.a Distribution List: This DNS and SEPA checklist were distributed to the following: ❑ Applicant ❑ Parties of Record ❑ US Army Corps of Engineers ❑ US Fish and Wildlife ❑X Puget Sound Energy ❑N Snohomish PUD ❑N Olympic View Water & Sewer ❑ Alderwood Water District ❑N Edmonds School District ❑ Port of Edmonds ❑N South County Fire ❑N Swedish Hospital ❑N Community Transit pc: File No. SEPA Notebook ❑X Dept. of Ecology ❑ Dept. of Ecology - Shorelands ❑X Dept. of Natural Resources ❑X Dept. of Commerce ❑X WSDOT ❑ WSDOT— Ferries ❑X Dept. of Fish & Wildlife ❑X Dept. of Health — Drinking Water ❑X Dept. of Arch. & Historic Pres. ❑X Dept. of Parks and Rec. Commission ❑X Puget Sound Clean Air Agency ❑X Puget Sound Regional Council ❑X Puget Sound Partnership ❑X Tulalip Tribe ❑ City of Everett ❑X City of Lynnwood ❑X City of Mountlake Terrace ❑ City of Mukilteo ❑X City of Shoreline ❑X Town of Woodway ❑ Snohomish Co. Public Works ❑X Snohomish Co. PDS ❑X Snohomish Co. Health Dept. ❑ King County - Transit ❑ King County — Environ. Planning ❑ Other Page 2 of 2 AMD2023-0008 SEPA DNS FOR DADU CODE AMENDMENT 3/13/24.SEPA packet pg. 287 9.1.a SEPA1 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 a a Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the UUJ) 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 z threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the c completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. c M N N Use of checklist for nonproject proposals a 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 D). 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 a the proposal. _ as E w r Q ' https:Hecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/Checklist-guidance SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 1 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 288 9.1.a A.Background Find help answering background questions' 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Edmonds Community Development Code ordinance update amending the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) section and other applicable sections. (AMD2023-0008). 2. Name of applicant: City of Edmonds 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Rose Haas, Planner City of Edmonds Planning Division 121 5th Ave N Edmonds, WA 98020 4. Date checklist prepared: February 12, 2024 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Edmonds 6. Proposed timing of schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The Edmonds City Council is expected to consider the adoption of new ADU regulations in April 2024. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. State Legislation, including House Bill 1337 will be implemented in full on July 1, 2025 along with regulations relating to House Bill 1110. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Not known. 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 development code amendments need the following approvals: 2 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-A-Background SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 2 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 289 9.1.a • 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 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.) In the spring of 2023, the Washington State legislature passed HB 1337 which requires jurisdictions to update their development codes to allow for DADUs and make related code changes to make it easier to create accessory dwelling units. State legislation mandates that HB 1337 must be implemented no later than six months after the next Comprehensive Plan due date, or by June 30, 2025. The requirements for the City of Edmonds will be as follows: • Allow two ADUs per lot (any configuration of ADU and DADU). • No owner -occupancy requirements. • Allow separate sale of ADUs. • No parking required within a half -mile of a major transit stop, as defined in RCW 36.70A.696(8). • Maximum size limitation no less than 1/000sf. • Allow DADUs to be sited at a rear lot line, the lot line abuts a public alley. • No setback requirements, yard coverage limits, tree retention mandates, restrictions on entry door locations, or aesthetic requirements that are more restrictive than for the principal unit. • Allow ADUs of at least 24-feet in height. Following the policy recommendations of the City of Edmonds Citizens' Housing Commission in 2021, Edmonds will update the development code to allow for detached accessory dwelling units (DADUs). Additionally, the City plans to meet, and in some cases exceed, the HB 1337 policy requirements prior to the 2025 implementation date. 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. SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 3 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 290 9.1.a The proposed ADU regulations will apply within all single-family residential zones within the City of Edmonds. The attached zoning map shows the entirety of single-family residential zoning within the City of Edmonds boundary. B.Environmental Elements Find help answering earth auestions3 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. The soil survey of Snohomish County indicates that the predominant soils found across the City are Alderwood gravelly sand loam, Everett gravelly sandy loam, and Alderwood urban land complex. Other soils with much small extent include Kitsap silt loam, McKenna gravelly silt loam and Mukilteo muck. There is no designated prime farmland in the City of Edmonds. s https://ecology.wa.gov/regulations-permits/sepa/environmental-review/sepa-guidance/sepa-checklist- gui dance/sepa-checklist- section -b-environmental -elements/environmental-elements -earth SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 4 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 291 9.1.a d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Yes, particularly in an area designated as the North Edmonds Earth Subsidence Landslide Hazard Area (ESLHA) in the area as identified in a 2007 report by Landau Associates. There have been multiple historic landslides in the ESLHA and any development in the area is subject to special review in accordance with ECDC 19.10. 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. This is a non -project action with no specific construction leading to erosion. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? This is a non -project action with no specific action that will affect impervious surfaces. While the proposal may result in development activity, the allowable building footprint in all impacted areas will not increase. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any. Erosion control for specific projects would be addressed on a project level through the City's stormwater regulations, critical areas ordinance, and clearing and grading codes. 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. This is a non -project action with no specific action that will affect emissions. While the proposal may result in development activity, emissions during construction will not differ from allowed activities. An increase in ADU usage may result in denser development, which could potentially lead to decreased car -related carbon emissions. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. a https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-Air SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 5 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 292 9.1.a lHOU c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: This is a non -project action with no specific action that will affect emissions. Any resulting development activity will follow all applicable codes to reduce/control emissions. 3. Water Find help answering water auestions5 a. Surface: Find help answering surface water questions6 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 City of Edmonds sits along the western shores of the Puget Sound and contains a number of relatively small streams including Willow Creek, Shellabarger Creek, Shell Creek, Hindley Creek, Northstream, Fruitdale Creek, Perrinville Creek, Meadowdale Creek and a number of smaller unnamed creeks. Portions of Lake Ballinger are also located within the City of Edmonds' jurisdiction. 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 specific work near water. Any resulting development activity must follow all applicable critical area regulations in Title 23 (Natural Resources) and Title 24 (Shoreline Master Program) ECDC. 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. 5 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-3-Water 6 https:Hecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-3-Water/Environmental- elements-Surface-water SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 6 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 293 9.1.a The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which will not require specific work near water. Any resulting development activity would not permit fill and dredge material in or removed from surface water or wetlands. 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 will not require specific work near water. Any resulting development activity would not permit surface water withdrawals or diversions. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. The 100-year flood plain is mapped for the City of Edmonds on the Snohomish County Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance rate maps. Within Edmonds, the 100-year flood plain is shown around the Edmonds Marsh, the Port of Edmonds, near the mouths of Shell Creek and Perrinville Creeks. The flood plan is also mapped around the shoreline of Lake Ballinger. 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 which will not require specific work near water. Any resulting development activity would not permit discharges of waste materials to surface waters. b. Ground: 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 ADU regulations. ' https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-3-Water/Environmental- elements-Groundwater SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 7 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 294 9.1.a 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. It is unknown whether there are any remaining residential septic systems in Edmonds, but the majority of Edmonds is served by public wastewater systems operated by the City of Edmonds or Olympic View Water and Sewer District. 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. While the proposal may result in development activity, the allowable hard surfaces in all impacted areas will not increase. Any resulting development activity that may result in an increase in hard surfaces will be managed per item 4 below. 3. Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which will not specifically alter or affect drainage patterns. While the proposal may result in development activity, the allowable hard surfaces in all impacted areas will not increase. Any resulting development activity that may result in an increase in hard surfaces will be managed per item 4 below. SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 8 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 295 9.1.a 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 II 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 September 2023 Page 9 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 296 9.1.a 4. Plants Find help answering plants questions a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: ❑X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ® evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other ❑X shrubs ❑X grass ❑ pasture ❑ crop or grain ❑ orchards, vineyards, or other permanent crops. ❑x 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 specific alteration of plants and vegetation. Any resulting development activity that may result in tree removal will be regulated by Chapter 23.10 ECDC (Tree Related Regulations). 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 will not lead to specific alteration of plants and vegetation. Any resulting development activity that may result in tree removal will be regulated by Chapter 23.10 ECDC (Tree Related Regulations). 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. SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 10 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 297 9.1.a 5. Animals Find help answering animal auestions$ 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. 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 specific measures to preserve or enhance wildlife. Any resulting development must meet the requirements of Chapter 23.90 ECDC (fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas). s https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-5-Animals SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 11 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 298 9.1.a 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 any more than currently allowed development activities. No known invasive animal species are within Edmonds. 6. Energy and natural resources Find help answeriniz enerev and natural resource auestions9 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 with no specific energy needs. Any resulting development that includes HVAC equipment and exterior envelope assemblies must meet the 2021 Washington State Energy Code. 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 will not affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties more than currently allowed development activities. 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. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action with no specific energy conservation features. Any resulting development that includes HVAC equipment and exterior envelope assemblies must meet the 2021 Washington State Energy Code. 7. Environmental health Health Find help with answering environmental health auestions10 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. No. 1. Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. 9 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-6-Energy-natural-resou 10 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-7-Environmental-health SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 12 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 299 9.1.a The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not lead to any environmental health hazards. 2. 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 City of Edmonds. 3. 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. 4. 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. 5. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action which would not lead to any environmental health hazards. b. Noise 1. 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 specific noise impacts. Any resulting development that may affect traffic, equipment, and operation must meet the noise criteria in Chapter 5.30 ECC (Noise Abatement and Control). 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 specific noise impacts. Any resulting development that may affect traffic, equipment, and operation must meet the noise criteria in Chapter 5.30 ECC (Noise Abatement and Control). 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Any resulting development that may affect traffic, equipment, and operation must meet the noise criteria in Chapter 5.30 ECC (Noise Abatement and Control). SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 13 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 300 9.1.a 8. Land and shoreline use 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. Edmonds is composed primarily of single-family residential development with multifamily and commercial areas along major arterials. The proposal will allow up to two ADUs on all single-family parcels consistent with State mandate (HB 1337). 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? No. 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? [Line c. Describe any structures on the site. Nearly all parcels are built out with single family residences and appurtenances, except for the few parcels zoned and developed for business/commercial. 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 specific demolition of any structures. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The proposal will affect all single-family zones within the City of Edmonds. Affected zoning will be RS-6, RS-8, RS-10, RS-12, and RS-20. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The proposal will affect the following designations: Single-family Urban 1, Single-family Urban 2, Single-family Urban 3, and Single-family Resource. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? " https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-8-Land-shoreline-use SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 14 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 301 9.1.a The proposal will affect the following shoreline designations: Shoreline Residential I, Shoreline Residential II, and Shoreline Residential III. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. Environmentally sensitive or critical areas in the City of Edmonds include geologically hazardous areas (landslide hazard, erosion, and seismic hazards), wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, and fish and wildlife habitat areas (streams and the marine shoreline). i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? According to the 2020 Decennial Census the population of Edmonds is 42,853, with 19,305 housing units, the majority occurring within single-family zones. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The proposal will increase the supply of housing and would not likely result in any displacement. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. The proposal will increase the supply of housing and would not likely result in any displacement. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any. The proposal is compatible with the Housing Element of the 2020 City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with Washington State mandated growth management legislation (HB 1337). 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 questionS12 a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. VIA — Perkins Eastman Consulting group has estimated that legislation mandated by FIB 1337 could produce up to 1,642 accessory dwelling units within the City of Edmonds. " https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-9-Housing SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 15 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 302 9.1.a Production of ADUs is a private decision that is initiated by individual households and may result fewer housing units. The proposal is intended to supply middle housing options, but incidentally may also provide high and low-income housing. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. The proposal will increase the supply of housing and would not likely result in the elimination of any housing units. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: The proposal will increase the supply of housing and would not likely result in the elimination of any housing units. Any resulting development must meet the requirements of Chapter 16.20 ECDC (Single -Family Residential) and other applicable development codes. 10. Aesthetics Find help answering aesthetics auestions13 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 will allow ADUs of up to 24-feet in height. State legislation (HB 1337) does not allow for the regulation of exterior building materials for aesthetic purposes that are more restrictive than design restrictions to single-family dwelling units. Any resulting development must follow all applicable Building city and state building regulations. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action that will affect views. While the proposal may result in development activity, the allowable building height in all impacted areas will not increase. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: State legislation (HB 1337) does not allow for the regulation of aesthetic impacts related to ADU development that are more restrictive than design restrictions to single-family dwelling units. Any resulting development activity must meet the requirements of Chapter 16.20 ECDC (Single -Family Residential) and other applicable development codes. 13 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-1 O-Aesthetics SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 16 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 303 9.1.a 11. Light and glare Find help answering light and glare auestionS14 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 and will not likely produce light or glare. 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 and will not likely produce 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 and will not likely produce 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 and will not likely produce light or glare. 12. Recreation Find help answering recreation questions a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Numerous parks, schools, and community facilities are located throughout single-family zones. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. It is unlikely that the proposal will displace any existing recreational uses since ADUs must be developed in conjunction with single-family development. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: It is unlikely that the proposal will displace any existing recreational uses since ADUs must be developed in conjunction with single-family development. 14 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-ll-Light-glare SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 17 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 304 9.1.a 13. Historic and cultural preservation Find help answering historic and cultural Dreservation auestionS15 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 old. 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 City of Edmonds. c. 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. The proposal is a non -project, non -site -specific action and will not impact specific cultural and historic resources. If the City discovers an historic or cultural resource, the location will be secured, and the City will contact the appropriate agencies and/or tribes. 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 and will not impact specific cultural and historic resources. If the City discovers an historic or cultural resource, the location will be secured, and the City will contact the appropriate agencies and/or tribes. 14. Transportation Find help with answering transDortation auestions16 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. Edmonds is served by a series of State and local roads. SR 104 runs from the east at Interstate 5 through the southern part of Edmonds, ending at the State of Washington " https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checkli st-Secti on-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-l3-Historic-cultural-p 16 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checkli st-Secti on-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-l4-Transportation SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 18 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 305 9.1.a Ferry Terminal. SR 524 begins in Lynnwood at Interstate 5 and runs west through the center of Edmonds from the crest of the hill and down into the city center. Local roads provide access throughout Edmonds. These roads provide access for Community Transit, the commuter bus service for South Snohomish County. Commuter Park and Ride lots are located throughout Edmonds and are served by Community Transit bus service. The rail lines along the Edmonds' shoreline are primarily used by BNSF for freight service, but also provide Amtrak passenger train service through Edmonds. Sound Transit provides daily commuter service to and from Seattle. Washington State Ferries operates ferry service from Edmonds to Kingston providing access to the Olympic Peninsula. This is one of the busiest commuter ferry terminals in Puget Sound, as well as one of the major access points from the east side of Puget Sound to the west. 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 City of Edmonds is served by Community Transit bus service, Washington State ferries, Sound Transit commuter rail and Amtrak passenger train service. The majority of households in Edmonds can access transit within 1/2 mile of their homes. 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 may not require impact fees or new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle, or state transportation facilities. d. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. IM071 e. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or 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? Per ECC 3.36.040(A)(6), the City's traffic model does not assign additional trips to the network as a result of ADUs. 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. No. SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 19 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 306 9.1.a g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: ADUs may not increase the overall density of single-family neighborhoods. 15. Public services Find help answering Dublic service auestionS17 a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. ADUs may not increase the overall density of single-family neighborhoods and therefore would not significantly result in the need for public services. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16. Utilities Find help answerine utilities auestions18 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. Specific resulting projects will include utility services. Utilities will likely include electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, and septic systems. 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. Specific resulting projects will include utility services. Utilities will likely include electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, and septic systems. " https:Hecology.wa.gov/regulations-permits/sepa/environmental-review/sepa-guidance/sepa-checklist- guidance/sepa-checklist-section-b-environmental-elements/environmental-elements-l5-public-services is https://ecology.wa.gov/regulations-permits/sepa/environmental-review/sepa-guidance/sepa-checklist- guidance/sepa-checklist-section-b-environmental-elements/environmental-elements-l6-utilities SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 20 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 307 9.1.a C.Signature Find help about who should sign19 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. 3/12/2024 X Rose Haas Signed by: Rose Haas Type name of signee: Rose Haas Position and agency/organization: Planner, City of Edmonds Date submitted: 02/29/2024 D.Supplemental sheet for nonproject actions Find help for the nonoroiect actions worksheet20 Do not 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; production, 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 • Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Since increased impacts are not anticipated, there are no specific measures proposed. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? 19 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-C-Signature 20 https://ecology.wa.gov/regulations-permits/sepa/environmental-review/sepa-guidance/sepa-checklist- guidance/sepa-checklist-section-d-non-project-actions SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 21 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 308 9.1.a The proposal would not directly affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life more than currently allowable development. • Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Any resulting development activities must meet the requirements of Title 23 ECDC (Natural Resources). 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? The proposal would not directly deplete energy or natural resources • Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: Any resulting development activities must meet the requirements of Title 23 ECDC (Natural Resources). 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, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? The proposal would not affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated for governmental protection more than currently allowable development. • Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: Any resulting development activities must meet the requirements of Title 23 ECDC (Natural Resources). 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 proposal would not affect land and shoreline use more than currently allowable development. The proposal would encourage land use that is consistent with the Housing Element of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. • Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: Any resulting development activities must meet the requirements of the Title 24 ECDC (Edmonds Shoreline Master Program). 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? ADUs may not increase the overall density of single-family neighborhoods and therefore are unlikely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities more that currently allowed single-family development. • Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: No specific measures are proposed since no negative impacts are anticipated as part of the proposal. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 22 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 309 9.1.a The proposal does not conflict with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Any resulting development must meet all requirements of Titles 23 and 24 ECDC. SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 23 (WAC 197-11-960) Packet Pg. 310 9.1.a Legal Invoice Sound Publishing, Inc. Unit Attn: A/R PO Box 930 Everett WA 98206-0930 Bill To: City of Edmonds - LEGAL ADS Attn: Scott Passey 121 - 5th Ave N Edmonds WA 98020 Legal Description: Nonsignificance (DNS) Desc: AMD2023-0008 DNS Ordered By: ROSE HAAS Issues Ordered: 1 Date: 03/15/2024 Everett Daily Herald Customer Account #: 14101416 Legal Description: EDH993126 Legal #: EDH993126 Ad Cost: $ 61.92 Published: Everett Daily Herald Start Date: 03/15/2024 End Date: 03/15/2024 Due: S 61.92 Please return this with payment. Questions? Call 1-800-485-4920 City of Edmonds - LEGAL ADS Account #: 14101416 Attn: Scott Passey Invoice #: EDH993126 121 - 5th Ave N Edmonds WA 98020 Due: $ 61.92 7 1F h� 1111.] MAR 2 2 2024 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COUNTER Packet Pg. 311 9.1.a Everett Daily Herald Affidavit of Publication State of Washington } County of Snohomish } ss Michael Gates being first duly sworn, upon oath deposes and says: that he/she is the legal representative of the Everett Daily Herald a daily newspaper. The said newspaper is a legal newspaper by order of the superior court in the county in which it is published and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of the first publication of the Notice hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continually as a daily newspaper in Snohomish County, Washington and is and always has been printed in whole or part in the Everett Daily Herald and is of general circulation in said County, and is a legal newspaper, in accordance with the Chapter 99 of the Laws of 1921, as amended by Chapter 213, Laws of 1941, and approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of Snohomish County, State of Washington, by order dated June 16, 1941, and that the annexed is a true copy of ED1-1993126 AMD2023-0008 DNS as it was published in the regular and entire issue of said paper and not as a supplement form thereof for a period of I issue(s), such publication commencing on 03/15/2024 and ending on 03/15/2024 and that said newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of said period. The amou of the fee A suc r $61.92. Subscribed and sworn before me on this r,'Tcr day of a Notary Public in and for the State o Washington. City of Edmonds -LEGAL ADS 1 I J I U 141 R ROSE HAAS =APPOIntment .�a.ft�.,s,,.,.�,.„�illipsublic hington es 8/29r2025 r 44t) of "- wmww Packet Pg. 312 9.1.a Classified Proof CITY OF EDMONDS NOTICE OF SEPA DETERMINATION of NONSIGNIFICANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Edmonds has issued a Determina0on of Nonsigniricance for the following project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendments to accessory dwelling unit standards and processes to align with House Bill 1337 as codified In RCW 36.70A.680, RCW 36.70A.681, and RCW 36.70A.696. The project would amend chapters In the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) and The Edmonds City Code (ECC) to be consistent vnth the new regulations and other implement best practices: impact fees in Chapter 3.36 ECC; uses and standards In ECDC 16,20, 20.21 and 20,35; parking in ECDC 17.50 and 17.115, nonconforming code in ECDC 17.40: Land use processes in Chapter 20.01: and related definitions in ECDC Title 21. NAME OF APPLICANT: City of Edmonds PROJECT LOCATION: City-wide; this is a non -project action. FILE NO.: AMD2023-00oe DATE OF ISSUANCE: March 15, 2024 COMMENTS ON PROPOSAL DUE: March 29, 2024 Relevant materials can be reviewed by visiting the City's webslte at https://www.edmonds%va.gov/services/pubgc_involvemant/public 1101ices/development notices, or by contacting the City contact noted below. Comments may be malled or emailed, Please refer 10 the application file nunber for all Inquiries. SEPA APPEAL: Consistent with RCW 43.21C.495, adopton of ordinances, development regulations and amendments to such regulations, and other non -project actions taken by a city consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A.680 and 36 70A.681 are not subject to admirdstialive or judicial appeals CITY CONTACT: Rose Haas, Planner rose haas@admondswa.gov 425-771-0220 Published: March 15, 2024. EDH993126 Proofed by Phillips, Linda, 03/15/2024 02:38:27 pm Page: 2 Packet Pg. 313 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE - 1337 v.11 DRAFT ADU Code Amendments v.11 3.36.030 Assessment and payment of impact fees A. Required. The city shall collect impact fees, based on the rates in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125, from any applicant seeking development approval from the city for any development activity within the city as provided herein, including the expansion of existing structures or uses or change of existing uses that creates additional demand for public facilities. 1. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include miscellaneous improvements that do not add any demand for public facilities, including, but not limited to, fences, walls, swimming pools accessory to a residential use, and signs. 2. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include replacement of a residential structure with a new residential structure of the same type at the same site or lot when such replacement occurs within 12 months of the demolition or destruction of the prior residential structure. Replacement of a residential structure with a new residential structure of the same type shall be interpreted to include any residential structure for which there is no increase in the number of residential units. 3. For the purposes of this chapter, development activity shall not include alterations, expansions, enlargement, remodeling, rehabilitation or conversion of an existing dwelling unit where no additional dwelling units are created and the use is not changed. ^'Qte: accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are not considered to- cre-ate -add-itional dvvellin units heca a CCDC-:20 71 020 dopy not consider ADD io as increasing the overall density of a .,gle family residential r, ighbQncc)Qd B. Timing and Calculation of Fees. Impact fees shall be assessed based upon the impact fee rates in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit, including but not limited to change of use permit or remodel permit. 1. For a change in use of an existing building or dwelling unit, including any alteration, expansion, replacement or new accessory building, the impact fee shall be the applicable impact fee for the new use, less an amount equal to the applicable impact fee for the prior use. Commented [RH7]: 1 added Comments for annot whether the code is being deleted, moved or added why. Or, whether more info is needed m 0 U a1 C Z G o fn N N v t� Q c 0 c 0 v Q Ta c 0 IL Packet Pg. 314 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 2. For mixed use developments, impact fees shall be imposed for the proportionate share of each land use based on the applicable measurement in the impact fee rates set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125. 3. Where the impact fees imposed are determined by the square footage of the development, the building official will establish the gross floor area created by the proposed development. 4. Applicants that have been awarded credits prior to the submittal of the complete building permit application pursuant to ECC 3.36.050 shall submit, along with the complete building permit application, a copy of the letter or certificate prepared by the director pursuant to ECC 3.36.050 setting forth the dollar amount of the credit awarded. 5. Applicants shall pay an administrative fee that covers the cost of staff time in administering the impact fee program. The amount of the administrative fee shall be established and updated from time to time by resolution of the city council. C. Payment. Unless deferred pursuant to ECC 3.36.160, impact fees shall be paid at the time the building permit or business license is issued by the city. The department shall not issue the required building permit or business license or other approval unless and until the impact fees set forth in ECC 3.36.120 and 3.36.125 have been paid in the amount that they exceed exemptions or credits provided pursuant to ECC 3.36.040 or 3.36.050; provided, that building permits may be issued without impact fee payment when payment is deferred in accordance with ECC 3.36.160. [Ord. 4048 § 1, 2016; Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.040 Exemptions. A. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from the payment of all impact fees under this chapter: 1. Alteration of an existing nonresidential structure that does not involve a change in use and does not expand the usable space or add any residential units; 2. Miscellaneous improvements that do not expand usable space or add any residential units, including, but not limited to, fences, walls, swimming pools, and signs; 3. Demolition or moving of a structure; Packet Pg. 315 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 4. Expansion of an existing structure that results in the addition of 100 square feet or less of gross floor area; 5. Replacement of a structure with a new structure of the same size and use at the same site or lot when a building permit application for such replacement is submitted to the city within 12 months of the demolition or destruction of the prior structure. Replacement of a structure with a new structure of the same size shall be interpreted to include any structure for which the gross square footage of the building will not be increased by more than 100 square feet; or 6. Alterations, expansions, enlargement, remodeling, rehabilitation or conversion of an existing dwelling unit where no additional dwelling units are created and the use is not changed. (accessory dweirn., ,nits (ADi is) are not GORsidered to aate additional dwelling nits hecai-ta FCDC :20 71 WO doer not conrider ADi Is; g the overall .Density of a single-family residential neighborhood, and because the city's traffic model doe-s not assign nddiriGRal trips to the net%yerk it of ADi s) B. Low-income housing units shall be exempt from paying 80 percent of the street impact fees to the extent the units satisfy this subsection. Such exemption shall be conditioned upon the developer recording a covenant that prohibits using the low-income housing units for any purpose other than for low-income housing. At a minimum, the covenant must address price restrictions and household income limits for the low-income housing development, and that if the property is converted to a use other than for low-income housing, the property owner must pay the applicable impact fees in effect at the time of conversion. The covenant shall also require the owner to submit an annual report to the city along with supporting documentation that shows that the low-income units are continuing to be rented in compliance with the covenant. The covenant shall be an obligation that runs with the land upon which the housing is located. The covenant shall be in a form acceptable to the city attorney and shall be recorded upon the developer's payment of the remaining 20 percent of the street impact fee. C. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from the payment of park impact fees under this chapter: 1. Low-income housing provided by nonprofit organizations such as, but not limited to, Habitat for Humanity. Owners of low-income single-family dwelling units, condominiums and other low-income housing shall execute and record a lien against the property, in favor of the city, for a period of 10 years guaranteeing that the dwelling unit will continue to be Packet Pg. 316 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 used for low-income housing or that impact fees from which the low-income housing is exempted, plus interest, shall be paid. The lien against the property shall be subordinate only to the lien for general taxes. In the event that the development is no longer used for low-income rental housing, the owner shall pay the city the impact fee from which the owner or any prior owner was exempt, plus interest at the statutory rate. Any claim for an exemption for low-income owner occupied housing must be made no later than the time of application for a building permit. Any claim not so made shall be deemed waived. D. Early learning facilities shall be exempt from paying 80 percent of street and park impact fees; provided, that the early learning facility satisfies the conditions of this subsection. Such exemption shall be conditioned upon the developer recording a covenant that requires that at least 25 percent of the children and families using the early learning facility qualify for state subsidized child care, including early childhood education and assistance under Chapter 43.216 RCW, and that provides that if the property is converted to a use other than for an early learning facility, the property owner must pay the applicable impact fees in effect at the time of conversion, and that also provides that if at any point during a calendar year the early learning facility does not achieve the required percentage of children and families qualified for state subsidized child care using the early learning facility, the property owner must pay the remaining impact fee that would have been imposed on the development had there not been an exemption. The covenant shall also require the owner to submit an annual report to the city along with supporting documentation that shows that the early learning facility is in compliance with the covenant. The covenant shall be an obligation that runs with the land upon which the early learning facility is located. The covenant shall be in a form acceptable to the city attorney and shall be recorded upon the developer's payment of the remaining 20 percent of the impact fees. E. The director shall be authorized to determine whether a particular development activity falls within an exemption identified in this section, in any other section, or under other applicable law. Determinations of the director shall be in writing and shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in ECC 3.36.070. [Ord. 4268 § 1, 2022; Ord. 4048 § 1, 2016; Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.120 Park impact fee rates. The park impact fee rates in this section are generated from the formula for calculating impact fees set forth in the rate study, which is incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise Packet Pg. 317 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE -1337 v.11 provided for independent fee calculations in ECC 3.36.130, exemptions in ECC 3.36.040 and credits in ECC 3.36.050, all new developments in the city will be charged the park impact fee applicable to the type of development as follows: A. Effective October 1, 2014: 1. Single-family house: $2,734.05 per dwelling unit. 2. Accessory dwelling units: $1,367.03 per dwelling unit. 3. 2. Multifamily residential housing: $2,340.16 per dwelling unit. 4. -. Nonresidential development: $1.34 per square foot. [Ord. 4048 § 1, 2016; Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3934 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013]. 3.36.125 Street impact fee rates. The street impact fee rates in this section are generated from the formula for calculating impact fees set forth in the rate study, which is incorporated herein by reference. Except as otherwise provided for herein, all new developments in the city will be charged the street impact fee applicable to the type of development as follows in the table below. For properties zoned BD - Downtown Business, an ITE Land Use Code of 814 - Specialty Retail shall be applied. 2016 (w/ 2017 (w/ 2018 (w/ 2019 and ITE Land Use Code - Fee $1,049.41 $2,543.01 $4,036.61 beyond (w/ Description Calculation cost per cost per cost per $5,530.21 cost trip) trip) trip) per trip) 110 - Light Industrial per square foot $1.50 $3.64 $5.77 $7.91 140 - Manufacturing per square foot $1.12 $2.72 $4.32 $5.92 151 - Mini -warehouse per square foot $0.40 $0.97 $1.54 $2.10 210 - Single-family house per dwelling $1,196.33 $2,873.60 $4,561.37 $6,249.14 unit E m O tU w C O 3 G O rn rn N t� t� Q c O Commented [HR2]: Per RCW 36.70A.681(l)(a), tl C of county may not assess impact fees on the construct accessory dwelling units that are greater than 50 pe 6 >f the impact fees that would be imposed on the princ Q iit. c O O a Packet Pg. 318 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE - 1337 v.11 ITE Land Use Code - Description Fee Calculation 2016 (w/ $1,049.41 cost per trip) 2017 (w/ $2,543.01 cost per trip) 2018 (w/ $4,036.61 cost per trip) 2019 and beyond (w/ $5,530.21 cost per trip) 215 - Accessory dwelling units per dwelling 13,124.57 unit 220 -Apartment per dwelling unit $776.56 $1,881.83 $2,987.09 $4,092.36 230 - Condominium per dwelling unit $629.65 $1,525.81 $2,421.97 $3,318.13 240 - Mobile home per dwelling unit $671.62 $1,627.53 $2,583.43 $3,539.33 251 - Senior Housing per dwelling unit $157.41 $584.89 $928.42 $1,271.95 320 - Motel per room $629.65 $1,525.81 $2,421.97 $3,318.13 420 - Marina per boat berth $188.89 $457.74 $726.59 $995.44 444 - Movie theater per screens $13,166.00 $31,905.90 $50,645.37 $69,384.85 492 - Health/fitness club per square foot $2.78 $6.74 $10.98 $14.66 530 - High school per square foot $0.82 $1.98 $3.15 $4.31 560 - Church per square foot $0.69 $1.68 $2.67 $3.65 565 - Day care center per square foot $6.57 $15.77 $25.02 $34.29 620 - Nursing home per bed $199.39 $483.17 $766.96 $1,050.74 710 - General office per square foot $2.07 $5.01 $7.95 $10.89 720 - Medical office per square foot $3.81 $9.54 $15.14 $20.74 Commented [HR3]: $3124.57 is 50% of the prims (single-family) unit fee. Per RCW 36.70A.681(1)(a), t of county may not assess impact fees on the constn accessory dwelling units that are greater than 50 pe the impact fees that would be imposed on the princ Df A lit Packet Pg. 319 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE -1337 v.11 ITE Land Use Code - Description Fee Calculation 2016 (w/ $1,049.41 cost per trip) 2017 (w/ $2,543.01 cost per trip) 2018 (w/ $4,036.61 cost per trip) 2019 and beyond (w/ $5,530.21 cost per trip) 820 - Shopping center per square foot $1.34 $3.26 $5.17 $7.08 826 - Specialty retail per square foot $0.93 $2.06 $3.27 $4.48 850 - Supermarket per square foot $4.80 $10.50 $16.84 $22.84 850 - Convenience market 15 - 16 hrs per square foot $5.80 $14.07 $22.38 $30.58 912 - Drive-in bank per square foot $7.00 $15.97 $25.41 $34.73 932 - Restaurant: sit-down per square foot $4.70 $10.04 $15.95 $21.84 933 - Fast food, no drive -up per square foot $9.19 $22.28 $35.36 $48.44 934 - Fast food with drive -up per square foot $11.23 $26.24 $41.66 $57.07 936 - Coffee/donut shop, no drive -up per square foot $5.73 $13.88 $22.04 $30.19 938 - Coffee/donut shop, drive- up, no indoor seating per square foot $10.55 $25.56 $40.37 $55.58 945 - Gas station with convenience per vehicle fueling position $3,347.62 $6,916.99 $10,979.58 $15,042.18 [Ord. 4048 § 1, 2016; Ord. 4037 § 1 (Att. A), 2016]. Packet Pg. 320 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.11 7.30.030 Water rates - Meter installation charges. A. Base Rate. The bimonthly rates of water supplied through meters shall be fixed at the following levels: Effective Date Current 1/1/24 1/1/25 1/1/26 Single-family residence (per unit) $44.08 $48.05 $52.37 $57.08 Duplex, accessory dwelling unit(s) $38.82 $42.31 $46.12 $50.27 (attached and detached), apartment houses, condos and other multiunit residences (per unit) Effective Date Current Meter 1/1/24 1/1/25 1/1/26 All other $53.30 3/4" $58.10 $63.33 $69.03 customers $108.51 1" $118.28 $128.92 $140.52 $200.66 11/2" $218.72 $238.40 $259.86 $305.92 2" $333.45 $363.46 $396.18 $659.94 3" $719.33 $784.07 $854.64 $934.80 4" $1,018.93 $1,110.64 $1,210.59 $1,895.91 6" $2,066.54 $2,252.53 $2,455.26 B. Variable Rate. In addition to the base rate set forth above, the customer shall be charged the following rate per 100 cubic feet of water consumed: 8 Packet Pg. 321 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 Effective Date Variable Rate Current 1/1/24 1/1/25 1/1/26 $4.60 $5.01 $5.47 $5.96 For the purposes of understanding the reference to the "effective date" in the above tables, all water base rate and variable rate charges on water utility bills mailed on or after January 1 st of each year shall be based on the adopted rates for that effective date even if the utility service period reflected on the bill includes time from before the effective date. C. Meter Installation Charges. Fees shall be at set forth in ECDC 15.00.020. 1. New service line and meter installation charges are required. 2. The actual cost of street restoration (with regard to all surface streets) shall be added to any meter installation charge, if applicable. D. All rates set forth in this section shall be exclusive of any applicable taxes. E. Repealed by Ord. 3618. [Ord. 4333 § 4 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4330 § 1, 2023; Ord. 4286 § 1, 2022; Ord. 4169 § 1, 2019; Ord. 4052 § 1, 2016; Ord. 3945 § 1, 2013; Ord. 3903 § 1, 2012; Ord. 3802 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3618 § 2, 2006; Ord. 3616 §§ 1 - 3, 2006; Ord. 3400 § 1, 2002; Ord. 3339 § 2, 2000; Ord. 2974 §§ 1 and 2, 1994; Ord. 2898 § 1, 1992; Ord. 2880 § 1, 1992; Ord. 2657 § 1, 1988; Ord. 2361 § 1, 1983; Ord. 2339 § 2, 1982; Ord. 2305 § 2, 1982; Ord. 2255 § 1, 1981; Ord. 2211 § 1, 1981; Ord. 2197 § 1, 1981; Ord. 2139, 1980; Ord. 1963 § 1, 1977; Ord. 1898 § 1, 1977; Ord. 1709 § 1, 1974; Ord. 1457 § 1, 1970; Ord. 1385 § 2, 1968; Ord. 1263 § 1, 1967; Ord. 0901, 1961; Ord. 0786 § 2, 1959]. 7.30.035 Water and sewer utility general facilities charges. A general facilities charge (GFC) (formerly known as a "connection charge") shall be paid by each customer connecting to the city s water or sewer system in accordance with the following requirements: A. Sewer System GFC. The sanitary sewer GFC shall be paid at the time of side sewer permit issuance. The payment amount shall be established based upon the GFC in effect on the date of side sewer permit application. Sewer GFCs shall be in an amount per equivalent residential unit (ERU) added as a result of the development as set forth below; provided, that 9 Packet Pg. 322 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 nonresidential building permit and business license applicants shall pay sewer system GFC when the proposed structure and/or business activity would generate additional probable sewer usage. 1. Sewer system GFCs before the year 2024 shall be assessed on $4,417.00 equivalent residential unit per (ERU) basis as follows: a. A single-family residential applicant shall pay a GFC equal to one ERU per dwelling unit. b. A multifamily residential applicant shall pay a GFC equal to 0.67 ERU per dwelling unit. c. Applicants for nonresidential development shall pay a GFC equal to the ERU determination that is made by the public works director. This determination shall be made by estimating the probable sewer usage of the proposed development. In estimating the probable sewer usage, the public works director may consider, among other factors, the average winter water consumption for similar existing development in the city. If the applicant disagrees with the director's ERU determination, the applicant may submit additional information and analysis from a qualified engineer, with an additional $200.00 review fee, in support of a request for an alternate ERU determination. The director shall review the request for an alternate ERU determination and may accept the alternate calculation, revise the earlier ERU determination based on the new information, or uphold the earlier ERU determination. Once the director has made a final ERU determination, the applicant may pay the GFC under protest and appeal the determination, along with the underlying permit, to the hearing examiner. 2. Sewer system GFCs in the year 2024 and beyond shall be assessed on $6,598.00 equivalent residential unit (ERU) basis as follows: a. A single-family residential applicant shall pay a GFC equal to one ERU per dwelling unit. b. A multifamily residential applicant shall pay a GFC equal to 0.67 ERU per dwelling unit. 10 Packet Pg. 323 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.11 c. An accessory dwelling unit (attached or detached) shall pay a GFC equal to 0.67 ERU per dwelling unit. d.F Applicants for nonresidential development shall be assessed GFCs as follows: i. The sewer system GFC for a development without an existing water meter shall be paid upon, and according to the date of, application for sewer service, and based upon an ERU equivalent for the size of the water meter to be installed, as set forth in the table below. ii. The sewer system GFC for a development with an existing water meter shall be paid upon, and according to the date of, application for sewer service, and based upon the difference in the upsize of water meter to be installed, as set forth in the table above. iii. A sewer system GFC shall not be assessed for a dedicated fire service. Sewer GFC - ERU Equivalent Water Meter Size Effective 2024 and Beyond 3/4" Meter $6,598.00 1" Meter $16,495.00 1 1/2" Meter $32,990.00 2" Meter $52,784.00 3" Meter $105,568.00 4" Meter $164,950.00 6" Meter $329,900.00 8" Meter $527,840.00 B. Water System GFC. The water system GFC shall be paid at the time of issuance of the water meter permit. The payment amount shall be established based upon the GFC in effect on the 11 Packet Pg. 324 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 date of application for water meter. Water GFCs shall be based upon the size of the meter to be installed, as set forth below: Water GFC per Water Meter Size Effective Before 2024 Effective 2024 and Beyond 3/4" meter $5,050.00 $6,358.00 1" meter $12,624.00 $15,895.00 1 1/2" meter $25,248.00 $31,790.00 2" meter $40,397.00 $50,864.00 3" meter $80,794.00 $101,728.00 4" meter $126,240.00 $158,950.00 6" meter $252,480.00 $317,900.00 8" meter $403,968.00 $508,640.00 1. Water system GFCs before the year 2024 shall be assessed on the size of water meter to be installed as set forth in the table above. 2. Water system GFCs in the year 2024 and beyond shall be assessed as follows: a. The water system GFC for a development without an existing water meter shall be based upon the size of the water meter to be installed, asset forth in the table above. b. The water system GFC for a development with an existing water meter shall be based upon the difference in upsize of the water meter to be installed, as set forth in the table above. c. For single water connections that provide fire protection and domestic service through a combination water line, the GFC shall be based on domestic service demand alone and shall not be subject to the cost differential when an up -sized water meter is required to meet the design flow rate for an automatic fire sprinkler system. All other 12 Packet Pg. 325 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 costs, including the expense of a larger meter, a general facility charge attributable to the meter sized for the domestic service alone, and other permits and fees, shall remain the responsibility of the owner. This provision only applies to a building containing one or two dwelling units constructed under the International Residential Code (I RC). 3. A water system GFC shall not be assessed for a dedicated fire service. 4. No water GFCs shall be levied for connections to water mains installed pursuant to local Improvement Districts Nos. 115, 146, and 152 by properties which participated in the establishment of said local improvement districts. 5. For the purposes of this section a water meter shall be considered an "existing water meter" if a prior structure served by a water meter is replaced with a new structure on the same site or lot when a water meter application for such replaced structure is submitted to the city within 12 months of the demolition or destruction of the prior structure. [Ord. 4323 § 1 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 3883 § 1 (Att. A), 2012; Ord. 3339 § 3, 2000]. 13 Packet Pg. 326 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 7.30.040 Utility charges - Sanitary sewer. The utility charges for sanitary sewer service set forth in this section shall be added to and made a part of the bimonthly or monthly rates for water supplied through the meters as set forth in ECC 7.30.030: A. The following rates shall be charged on all billings after the effective date shown with respect to the following customers and/or service: Effective Date Current 1/1/24 1/1/25 1/1/26 Single-family residence Connected $106.11 $117.25 $129.56 $142.52 (bimonthly per unit) Unconnected $17.14 $18.94 $20.93 $23.02 Duplex, accessory dwelling Connected $85.26 $94.21 $104.10 $114.52 unit(s) (attached and Unconnected $17.14 $18.94 $20.93 $23.02 detached), apartment houses, condos, and other multiunit residences (bimonthly per unit) All other customers Fixed rate $12.05 $13.32 $14.71 $16.18 (bimonthly per unit) Volume charge $6.84 $7.56 $8.35 $9.19 (per ccf)* * per 100 cubic feet (1 unit) of metered water consumption For the purposes of understanding the reference to the "effective date" in the above tables, all sanitary sewer rates and charges on sewer utility bills mailed on or after January 1 st of each year shall be based on the adopted rates for that effective date even if the utility service period reflected on the bill includes time from before the effective date. B. For customers who are not served by city waterlines but who are connected to city sewers, the charges shall be the same as set forth in subsection A of this section and its subparagraphs. 14 Packet Pg. 327 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 C. These rates do not apply to industries or manufacturing concerns which have industrial wastes. These, together with other activities not covered in this chapter, shall be dealt with on a special basis and have special rates set for the particular business by the water/utility administrative staff, subject to review and approval by the city council. D. All property owners within an area served by a sanitary sewer system in the city of Edmonds are hereby directed and compelled to connect their private drains and sewers to the city system. Failure to do so within 30 days of written notice to connect by the city shall subject the property owner to a monthly penalty equal to that charge imposed by subsections A, B and/or C above. Said penalty shall be billed to the property owner, and they shall be subject to payment, collection and enforcement in all respects as though they were utility customers of the city. All penalties collected shall be considered revenues of the sewer utility system. 7.50.050 Stormwater rates and charges. A. The following rates shall be charged on all billings with respect to the following customers and/or service: Effective Date Category Current 1/1/24 1/1/25 1/1/26 Single-family residential, accessory dwelling unit(s) (attached and detached). and multifamily residential (bimonthly per unit) $46.90 $50.89 $55.21 $59.90 All other customers per ESU (bimonthly) $46.90 $50.89 $55.21 $59.90 For the purposes of understanding the reference to the "effective date" in the above tables all stormwater rates and charges on stormwater utility bills mailed on or after January 1 st of each year shall be based on the adopted rates for that effective date even if the utility service period reflected on the bill includes time from before the effective date. B. An ESU is hereby defined to be the impervious surface area estimated to contribute an amount of runoff which is approximately equal to that created by an average single-family 15 Packet Pg. 328 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.11 residential parcel. A single-family residential parcel is one ESU. For all other parcels, one ESU is equivalent to 3,000 square feet of impervious surface area. 16 Packet Pg. 329 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.11 Chapter 16.20 RS - SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Sections: 16.20.000 Purposes. 16.20.010 Uses. 16.20.020 Subdistricts. 16.20.030 Table of site development standards. 16.20.040 Site development exceptions. 16.20.045 Site development standards - Single-family master plan. 16.20.050 Site development standards - Accessory dwelling units. 16.20.06050 Site development standards - Accessory buildings. 16.20.000 Purposes. The RS zone has the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for residential zones of ECDC 16.00.010 and 16.10.000: A. To reserve and regulate areas primarily for family living in single-family dwellings; B. To provide for additional nonresidential uses which complement and are compatible with single-family dwelling use. [Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005]. 16.20.010 Uses. A. Permitted Primary Uses. 1. Single-family dwelling units; 2. Churches, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.020; 3. Primary schools subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050(G) through (R); 17 Packet Pg. 330 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE - 1337 v.11 4. Local public facilities that are planned, designated, and sited in the capital improvement plan, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050; 5. Neighborhood parks, natural open spaces, and community parks with an adopted master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070. B. Permitted Secondary Uses. 1. Foster homes; 2. Accessory dwelling units subject to the requirements of 16.20.050 ECDC; 3. Home occupation, subject to the requirements of Chapter 20.20 ECDC; �4. The renting of rooms without separate kitchens to one or more persons; 5. 4. The following accessory buildings: a. Fallout shelters, b. Private greenhouses covering no more than five percent of the site, c. Private stables, d. Private parking for no more than five cars, e. Private swimming pools and other private recreational facilities; 6. 5, Private residential docks or piers; 7._ra.- Family day-care in a residential home; 8. � Commuter parking lots that contain less than 10 designated parking spaces in conjunction with a church, school, or local public facility allowed or conditionally permitted in this zone. Any additionally designated parking spaces that increase the total number of spaces in a commuter parking lot to 10 or more shall subject the entire commuter parking lot to a conditional use permit as specified in subsection (D)(5) of this section, including commuter parking lots that are located upon more than one lot as specified in ECDC 21.15.075; 9.8: Bed and breakfasts, as in ECDC 20.23.020(A)(1). 18 m O U a1 C O 3 G O rn w d v t� Q c O C O Commented [MC4]: ADUs will be a permitted sec y Q use. ADUs currently require a conditional use perm addition to any building permit requirements. Redu 20 +� permitting time and cost. � O IL Packet Pg. 331 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.11 C. Primary Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit. 1. High schools, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050(G) through (R); 2. Local public facilities that are not planned, designated, and sited in the capital improvement plan, subject to ECDC 17.100.050; 3. Regional parks and community parks without a master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070. D. Secondary Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit. 1. Preschools; 2. Guest house; 3. Amateur radio transmitting antennas; A Dccessery -welling units; 4— Commuter parking lots with 10 or more designated parking spaces in conjunction with a church, school, or local public facility allowed or conditionally permitted in this zone; and 6. �5-. Bed and breakfasts, as in ECDC 20.23.020(A)(2). [Ord. 3988 § 7, 2015; Ord. 3900 § 4, 2012; Ord. 3702 § 1, 2008; Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005]. 16.20.020 Subdistricts. There are established seven subdistricts of the RS zone in order to provide site development standards for areas which differ in topography, location, existing development and other factors. These subdistricts shall be known as the RS-6 zone, the RS-8 zone, the RS-10 zone, the RS-12 zone, the RSW-12 zone, the RS-20 zone, and the RS-MP zone. [Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005]. 19 Packet Pg. 332 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.11 16.20.030 Table of site development standards. Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum Maximum Minimum Sub Maximum Side Rear Maximum Lot Area Lot Street Coverage Parking District (Sq.Ft.) Density' Height (%) Spaces2 Width Setback Setback Setback RS-20 20,000 2.2 100, 25' 3513 & 25' 25' 35% 2 10, RS-12 12,000 3.7 80' 25' 10, 25' 25' 35% 2 RSW- 12,000 3.7 — 15' 10, 35' 25' 35% 2 124 RS-10 10,000 4.4 75' 25' 10, 20' 25' 35% 2 RS-8 8,000 5.5 70' 25' 7-1/2' 15' 25' 35% 2 RS-6 6,000 7.3 60' 20' S' 15' 25' 35% 2 RS-MPS 12,0005 3.75 8015 2515 10'5 25'5 25' 35% 2 1 Density means "dwelling units per acre" determined by dividing the total lot area by the density allowed by the underlying zoning; the number of lots or units permitted shall be rounded down to the nearest whole number. 2 See Chapter 17.50 ECDC for specific parking requirements. 3 Thirty-five feet total of both sides, 10 feet minimum on either side. 4 Lots must have frontage on the ordinary high water line and a public street or access easement approved by the hearing examiner. 5"MP" signifies "master plan." The standards in this section show the standards applicable to development without an approved master plan. Properties in this zone may be developed at a higher urban density lot pattern equivalent to RS-8 but this shall only be permitted in accordance with a duly adopted master plan adopted under the provisions of ECDC 16.20.045. [Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005]. 20 Packet Pg. 333 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.11 16.20.040 Site development exceptions. A. Average Front Setback. If a block has residential buildings on more than one-half of the lots on the same side of the block, the owner of a lot on that block may use the average of all the setbacks of the existing residential buildings on the same side of the street as the minimum required front setback for the lot. Detached structures such as garages; carports; and uncovered porches, decks, steps and patios less than 30 inches in height, and other uncovered structures less than 30 inches in height shall not be included in the "average front setback' determination. An applicant for such a determination shall provide a drawing which locates the street property line for the entire block, as well as the existing street setbacks of all buildings required to be used for the purpose of calculating the "average front setback." The drawing shall be prepared and stamped by a land surveyor registered in the state of Washington. B. Eaves and Chimneys. Eaves and chimneys may project into a required setback not more than 30 inches. C. Porches and Decks. Uncovered and unenclosed porches, steps, patios, and decks may project into a required setback not more than one-third of the required setback, or four feet, whichever is less; provided, that they are no more than 30 inches above ground level at any point. D. Reserved. E. Corner Lots. Corner lots have no rear setback; all setbacks other than the street setbacks shall be side setbacks. F. Docks, Piers, Floats. 1. Height. The height of a residential dock or pier shall not exceed five feet above the ordinary high water mark. The height of attendant pilings shall not exceed five feet above the ordinary high water mark or that height necessary to provide for temporary emergency protection of floating docks. 2. Length. The length of any residential dock or pier shall not exceed the lesser of 35 feet or the average length of existing docks or piers within 300 feet of the subject dock or pier. 3. Width. The width of any residential dock or pier shall not exceed 25 percent of the lot width when measured parallel to the shoreline. 21 Packet Pg. 334 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE -1337 v.11 4. Setbacks. All residential docks or piers shall observe a minimum 10-foot side yard setback from a property line or a storm drainage outfall. joint use docks or piers may be located on the side property line; provided, that the abutting waterfront property owners shall file a joint use maintenance agreement with the Snohomish County auditor in conjunction with, and as a condition of, the issuance of a building permit. joint use docks or piers shall observe all other regulations of this subsection. 5. Number. No lot shall have more than one dock or pier or portion thereof located on the lot. 6. Size. No residential dock or pier shall exceed 400 square feet. 7. Floats. Offshore recreational floats are prohibited. 8. Covered Buildings. No covered building shall be allowed on any residential dock or pier. [Ord. 3845 § 5, 2011; Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005]. 16.20.045 Site development standards - Single-family master plan. A. General. The "single-family -master plan" zone is intended to apply to the area lying along the south side of SR-104 north of 228th Street SW, where there are development constraints related to access and traffic on SR-104. Development in this zone may be approved at RS-12 standards without an approved master plan. An approved master plan is required before any development can occur at RS-8 densities. B. Criteria for Approving a Master Plan. Properties seeking to develop at RS-6 or RS-8 densities shall be developed according to a master plan (such as through a PRD) that clearly demonstrates the following: 1. That access and lot configurations shall not result in additional curb cuts or unmitigated traffic impacts on SR-104; at a minimum, a traffic study prepared by a traffic engineer approved by the city shall clearly demonstrate this requirement. 2. That the configuration and arrangement of lots within the master plan area provide for setbacks on the perimeter of the proposed development that are compatible with the zoning standards applied to adjoining developed properties. For example, a master plan adjoining developed lots in an RS-MP zone that were developed under RS-12 standards 22 Packet Pg. 335 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 shall have RS-12 setbacks along common property lines, although the lot sizes, widths, and other bulk standards may conform to the higher density lot configuration approved through the master plan. [Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005]. 16.20.050 Site development standards - (Accessory dwelling units A. General. Accessory dwelling units must meet all of the standards of Chapter 16.20 ECDC except as specifically provided in this section. B. Number of Units. A principal dwelling unit may have two accessory dwelling units in the following configurations: one attached and one detached accessory dwelling units, two attached accessory dwelling units, or two detached accessory dwelling units. C. Table of ADU development standards. Sub District Maximum ADU Minimum Maximum DADU Minimum Parkine Gross Floor DADU Rear Heigh t Spaces Area (Sq. Ft.) Setback',' R 1.200 25' — 24' — �— 0 RS-12 1.200 25' 24' 0 RS-10 1,200 20' 24' 0 RS-8 11000 10'3 24' 0 RS-6 1.000 10'3 24' 0 1W Commented [MCS]: Moving and updating ADU Iz currently in ECDC 20.21. ADUs are only allowed in si family (RS) zones so it is reasonable to include the A related standards in the IRS zoning chapter. At the s; time, the standards are being updated to be consist HB 1337 and best practices. Commented [RH6]: HB 1337 will require gross flc up to 1,000sf. Gross floor area is defined by RCW 36 as "the interior habitable area of a dwelling unit Intl basements and attics but not including a garage or z structure." 1 INo rear Setbacks are required for detached accessory dwelling units from the rear lot line if Commented [MC7]: Consistent with HB 1337 that lot line abuts a public alley, regardless of detached accessory dwelling unit size; provided Commented [RHSR7]: If there is a garage in the i then the structure may need to be setback to provic that separation from overhead electrical facilities and vehicular sight distance requirements can site lines. For residential this is currently 5-ft, but or be met.- angled walls, step back walls, etc. help achieve sight distance. 2 Standard street and side setbacks per ECDC 16.20.030 apply. 23 Packet Pg. 336 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 3 The normally required rear setback may be reduced to a minimum of five feet for a detached accessory dwelling units 15' in height or less. D. Types of Building. A manufactured or modular dwelling unit may be used as an accessory dwelling unit. Detached accessory dwelling units are allowed to be created in existing legally permitted buildings, including detached garages. Legal nonconforming buildings converted for use as an accessory dwelline unit must meet the reauirements of 17.40.020(D). E. Driveways. Access to the principal unit and any residential units shall comply with city codes and policies as established by ECDC Title 18. 1 F. Utilities. 1. Utility Access. Occupants of accessory dwelling units and the primary unit must have unrestricted access to utility controls for systems (Including water, electricity, and gas) in each respective unit or in a common area. 2. Water. Only one domestic water service and meter is allowed per parcel to serve the principal unit and each accessory dwelling unit. Private submetering on the property is allowed, but the City is not involved with installing or reading the submeter. 3. Sewer. Only one sewer lateral is allowed per parcel to serve the principal unit and each accessory dwelling unit. Separate connections to the main trunk line will not be permitted. ' 4. Septic System. Refer to ECDC Chapter 18.20. 5. Storm. Refer to ECDC Chapter 18.3a NW 6. Other Utilities, All new or extended utilities must be undergrounded in accordance with ECDC 18.05.010. 7. Mailboxes. Additional mailboxes may be added for each permitted unit as approved by the Post Office. G. Health and Safety. Accessory dwelling units must comply with all the applicable requirements of the current building codes adopted by ECDC Title 19 and must comply in all respects with the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Accessory dwelling units will be required to have separate ingress/egress from the principal dwelling unit. 24 Packet Pg. 337 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 H. Previously approved accessory dwelling units. ADUs that were previously approved by the City of Edmonds may continue and are not subject to the standards of this subsection. If expansion or modification to an approved unit is proposed, the ADU must come into full compliance with the requirements of this section. 16.20.060 16.'�o Site development standards - Accessory buildings. A. General. Accessory buildings and structures shall meet all of the standards of ECDC 16.20.030 except as specifically provided in this section. B. Height. Height shall be limited to 15 feet, except for amateur radio transmitting antennas and their supporting structures. Garages or other accessory buildings attached by a breezeway, hallway, or other similar connection to the main building which results in a separation exceeding 10 feet in length may not exceed the 15-foot height limit. The separation shall be determined by the minimum distance between the outside walls of the main building and accessory building, exclusive of the connecting structure. C. Rear Setbacks. The normally required rear setback maybe reduced to a minimum of five feet for accessory buildings covering less than 600 square feet of the site. D. Satellite Television Antenna. A satellite television antenna which measures greater than one meter or 1.1 yards in diameter shall comply with the following regulations: 1. General. Satellite television antennas must be installed and maintained in compliance with the Uniform Building and Electrical Codes as the same exist or are hereafter amended. A building permit shall be required in order to install any such device. 2. Setbacks. In all zones subject to the provisions contained herein, a satellite television antenna shall be located only in the rear yard of any lot. In the event that no usable satellite signal can be obtained in the rear lot location or in the event that no rear lot exists as in the case of a corner lot, satellite television antennas shall then be located in the side yard. In the event that a usable satellite signal cannot be obtained in either the rear or side yard, then a roof -mounted location may be approved by the staff, provided, however, that any roof -mounted satellite antenna shall be in a color calculated to blend in with existing roof materials and, in the case of a parabolic, spherical or dish antenna, shall not exceed nine 25 Packet Pg. 338 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.11 feet in diameter unless otherwise provided for by this section. In no event shall any roof - mounted satellite television antenna exceed the maximum height limitations established by this section. 3. Aesthetic. Satellite television antennas shall be finished in a nongarish, nonreflective color and surface which shall blend into their surroundings. In the case of a parabolic, spherical or dish antenna, said antenna shall be of a mesh construction. No commercial advertising of any kind shall be displayed on the satellite television antenna. 4. Size and Height. Maximum size for a ground -mounted parabolic, spherical or dish antenna shall be 12 feet in diameter. No ground -mounted antenna shall be greater than 15 feet in height unless otherwise approved for waiver as herein provided. The height of roof - mounted satellite television antennas shall not exceed the lesser of the height of the antenna when mounted on a standard base provided by the manufacturer or installer for ordinary operation of the antenna or the height limitation provided by the zoning code. 5. Number. Only one satellite television antenna shall be permitted on any residential lot or parcel of land. In no case shall a satellite television antenna be permitted to be placed on wheels or attached to a portable device for the purpose of relocating the entire antenna on the property in order to circumvent the intentions of this section. E. Amateur Radio Antennas. 1. The following applications for the following approvals shall be processed as a Type II development project permit application (see Chapter 20.01 ECDC): a. Requests to utilize an amateur radio antenna dish which measures greater than one meter or 1.1 yards in diameter; b. Requests to utilize an antenna which: i. Would be greater than 12 feet in height above the principal building on a site. The height of the antenna shall be determined by reference to the highest point of the roof of the principal building, exclusive of the chimney or other roof -mounted equipment. The request to locate a 12-foot antenna on a building is limited to buildings whose height conforms to the highest limit of the zone in which the building is located. 26 Packet Pg. 339 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.11 ii. Would exceed the height limit of the zone when mounted on the ground or on any accessory structure (see subsection (E)(2)(d) of this section). 2. The application shall comply with the following regulations: a. Definition. "Amateur radio antenna" means an antenna, or any combination of a mast or tower plus an attached or mounted antenna, which transmits noncommercial communication signals and is utilized by an operator licensed by the Federal Communications Commission. Guy wires for amateur radio antennas are considered part of the structure for the purpose of meeting development standards. b. General. Amateur radio antennas must be installed and maintained in compliance with the Uniform Building and Electrical Codes, as the same exist or are hereafter amended. A building permit shall be required to install an amateur radio antenna. c. Location. Amateur radio antennas may be ground- or roof -mounted, however, these devices shall: i. Be located and constructed in such a manner as to reasonably ensure that, in its fully extended position, it will not fall in or onto adjoining properties; ii. Not be located within any required setback area; and iii. Be retracted in inclement weather posing a hazard to the antenna. d. Height. The height of a ground -mounted tower or roof -top antenna may not exceed the greater of the height limit applicable to the zone or 65 feet when extended by a telescoping or crank -up mechanism unless an applicant obtains a waiver (see subsection (F) of this section). i. Only telescoping towers may exceed the height limits established by subsection (E)(1)(b) of this section. Such towers shall comply with the height limit within the applicable zone and may only exceed the height limit of the applicable zone and/or 65-foot height limit when extended and operating and if a waiver has been granted. ii. An antenna located on a nonconforming building or structure which exceeds the height limit of the zone in which it is located shall be limited to height limit of the zone plus 12 feet. 27 Packet Pg. 340 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 e. Aesthetic. To the extent technically feasible and in compliance with safety regulations, specific paint colors may be required to allow the tower to blend better with its setting. F. Technological Impracticality -Request for Waiver. 1. The owner, licensee or adjacent property owner may apply for a waiver if: a. Strict application of the provisions of this zoning code would make it impossible for the owner of a satellite television antenna to receive a usable satellite signal; b. Strict application of the provisions of this zoning code would make it impossible for the holder of any amateur radio license to enjoy the full benefits of an FCC license or FCC protected right; or c. An adjacent property owner or holder of an FCC license or right believes that alternatives exist which are less burdensome to adjacent property owners. 2. The request for waiver shall be reviewed by the hearing examiner as a Type III -A decision and may be granted upon a finding that one of the following sets of criteria have been met: a. Technological Impracticality. i. Actual compliance with the existing provisions of the citys zoning ordinance would prevent the satellite television antenna from receiving a usable satellite signal or prevent an individual from exercising the rights granted to him or her by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) by license, law or FCC regulation; or ii. The alternatives proposed by the property owner or licensee constitute the minimum necessary to permit acquisition of a usable satellite signal by a satellite television antenna or to exercise the rights granted pursuant to a valid FCC license, law or FCC regulation. b. Less Burdensome Alternatives. The hearing examiner is also authorized to consider the application of adjacent property owners for a waiver consistent with the provisions of subsection (F)(1)(c) of this section without the requirement of a finding that a usable satellite signal cannot be acquired when the applicant or adjacent property owner(s) 28 Packet Pg. 341 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 establish that the alternatives proposed by the applicant are less burdensome to the adjacent property owners than the requirements which would otherwise be imposed under this section. For example, adjacent property owners may request alternative or additional screening or the relocation of the antenna on the licensee's property. In the interactive process described in subsection (F)(3) of this section, the hearing examiner shall attempt to balance the impact of the tower on the views of adjacent properties, as well as the impacts of alternative screening and relocation in order to equitably distribute any negative impacts among the neighbors while imposing reasonable conditions on the antenna, its location and screening that do not impair the rights granted by the FCC to the licensee. 3. The process shall bean interactive one in which the hearing examiner works with the licensee to craft conditions which place the minimum possible burden on adjacent property owners while permitting the owner of the satellite antenna or holder of an amateur radio license to fully exercise the rights which he or she has been granted by federal law. For example, the number of antennas and size of the array shall be no greater than that necessary to enjoy full use of the FCC license. Conditions may include but are not limited to requirements for screening and landscaping, review of the color, reflectivity and mass of the proposed satellite television antenna or amateur radio facilities, and other reasonable restrictions. Any restriction shall be consistent with the intent of the city council that a waiver to the antenna owner be granted only when necessary to permit the satellite television antenna to acquire usable satellite signal or to allow the licensee to exercise the rights granted by Federal Communications Commission license after consideration of aesthetic harmony of the community. The process employed should involve the interaction of the licensee or owner and the neighborhood. Certain issues have been preempted by federal law and shall not be considered by the hearing examiner. Such issues include, but are not limited to, the impacts of electromagnetic radiation, the potential interference of the amateur radio facility with electronic devices in the neighborhood and any other matter preempted by federal law or regulation. Impact on view and on the values of neighboring properties may be considered in imposing reasonable conditions but shall not be a basis for denial of a permit to construct the antenna. 4. The application fee and notification for consideration of the waiver by an owner of a satellite television antenna shall be the same as that provided for processing a variance. No fee shall be charged to the holder of a valid FCC amateur radio license. 29 Packet Pg. 342 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 5. In the event that an applicant for waiver is also obligated to undergo architectural design review, the architectural design board shall defer any issues relating to the antenna and/or other amateur radio equipment to the hearing examiner. The hearing examiner may, at his or her discretion, request the architectural design board review and comment regarding required screening and landscaping and its integration into sight and landscaping plans. No additional fee shall be required of the applicant upon such referral. G. The provisions of subsections (D), (E) and (F) of this section shall be interpreted in accordance with the regulations of the Federal Communications Commission including but not limited to PRB-1. In the event of ambiguity or conflict with any of the apparent provisions of this section, the provisions of federal regulations shall control. [Ord. 3735 §§ 8, 9, 2009; Ord. 3728 § 3, 2009; Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005]. �17.40.020 Nonconforming building and/or structure. A. Definition. A nonconforming building is one which once met bulk zoning standards and the site development standards applicable to its construction, but which no longer conforms to such standards due to the enactment or amendment of the zoning ordinance of the city of Edmonds or the application of such ordinance in the case of a structure annexed to the city. Subject to the other provisions of this section, an accessory building that is not an accessory dwelling unit shall be presumptively nonconforming if photographic or other substantial evidence conclusively demonstrates that the accessory building existed on or before January 1, 1981. In the case of a property that was annexed after January 1, 1981, then the date shall be that of the effective date of the annexation of the city of Edmonds. Such presumption may be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence. B. Continuation. A nonconforming building or structure may be maintained and continued, unless required to be abated elsewhere in this chapter or section, but it may not be changed or altered in any manner which increases the degree of nonconformity of the building except as expressly provided in subsections u through-" of this section. C. Historic Buildings and Structures. Nothing in this section shall prevent the full restoration by reconstruction of a building or structure which is either listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the Washington State Register of Historic Places, the Washington State Cultural Resource Inventory, or the Edmonds Register of Historic Places, or is listed in a council - approved historical survey meeting the standards of the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. "Restoration" means reconstruction of the historic building or structure 30 Commented [HR9]: Per HB 1337, a city or a coun allow detached accessory dwelling units to be cone from existing structures, including but not limited tc detached garages, even if they violate current code requirements for setbacks or lot coverage Packet Pg. 343 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 with as nearly the same visual design appearance and materials as is consistent with full compliance with the State Building Code and consistent with the requirements of Chapter 20.45 ECDC, Edmonds Register of Historic Places. The reconstruction of all such historic buildings and structures shall comply with the life safety provisions of the State Building Code. D. Maintenance and Alterations. 1. Ordinary maintenance and repair of a nonconforming building or structure shall be permitted. 2. Solar Energy Installations on Buildings That Exceed Existing Height Limits. A rooftop solar energy installation mounted on a nonconforming building that exceeds the existing height limit may be approved as a Type II staff decision if: a. The installation exceeds the existing roof height by not more than 36 inches. b. The installation is designed and located in such a way as to provide reasonable solar access while limiting visual impacts on surrounding properties. 3. Alterations which otherwise conform to the provisions of the zoning ordinance, its site development and bulk standards, and which do not expand any nonconforming aspect of the building, shall be permitted. 4. In an effort to provide modular relief, minor architectural improvements in commercial and multifamily zones may encroach into the nonconforming setback adjacent to an access easement or public right-of-way not more than 30 inches. Minor architectural improvements may also be permitted in nonconforming side or rear yard setbacks only if they intrude not more than 30 inches nor one-half of the distance to the property line, whichever is less. "Minor architectural improvements" are defined as and limited to bay windows, eaves, chimneys and architectural detail such as cornices, medallions and decorative trim. Such improvements shall be required to obtain architectural design review. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to exempt such improvements in compliance with the State Building and Fire Codes. 5. Alterations required bylaw or the order of a public agency in order to meet health and safety regulations shall be permitted. E. Relocation. Should a nonconforming building or structure be moved horizontally for any reason for any distance, it shall thereafter come into conformance with the setback and lot 31 Packet Pg. 344 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 coverage requirements for the zone in which it is located. Provided, however, that a building or structure may be moved on the same site without full compliance if the movement reduces the degree of nonconformity of the building or structure. Movement alone of a nonconforming building or structure to lessen an aspect of its nonconformity shall not require the owner thereof to bring the building or structure into compliance with other bulk or site development standards of the city applicable to the building or structure. F. Restoration. 1. If a nonconforming building or structure is destroyed or is damaged in an amount equal to 75 percent or more of its replacement cost at the time of destruction, said building shall not be reconstructed except in full conformance with the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Determination of replacement costs and the level of destruction shall be made by the building official and shall be appealable as a Type II staff decision under the provisions of Chapter 20.06 ECDC. Damage of less than 75 percent of replacement costs may be repaired, and the building returned to its former size, shape and lot location as existed before the damage occurred, if, but only if, such repair is initiated by the filing of an application for a building permit which vests as provided in ECDC 19.00.025(G) et seq. within 18 months of the date such damage occurred. The director may grant a one-time extension of up to 180 days if a written extension request has been received from the applicant prior to the expiration of the initial 18 months. 2. Residential Buildings. Existing nonconforming buildings in use solely for residential purposes, or structures attendant to such residential use, may be reconstructed without regard to the limitations of subsections LE) and u of this section, if, but only if, the following conditions are met: a. If a nonconforming multifamily residential building or a mixed use building containing multiple residential units is damaged in excess of 75 percent of its replacement cost at the time of destruction, the building may be restored to the same density, height, setbacks or coverage as existing before the destruction or damage occurred if, but only if, an application for a building permit which vests as provided in ECDC 19.00.025(G) et seq. is filed within 18 months of the date the damage occurred. The director may grant a one-time extension of up to 180 days if a written extension request has been received from the applicant prior to the expiration of the initial 18 months. 32 Packet Pg. 345 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 b. All provisions of the State Building and Electrical Codes can be complied with entirely on the site. No nonconforming residential building may be remodeled or reconstructed if, by so doing, the full use under state law or city ordinance of a conforming neighboring lot or building would be limited by such remodel or reconstruction. c. These provisions shall apply only to the primary residential use on site and shall not apply to nonconforming accessory buildings or structures. d. A nonconforming residential single-family building maybe rebuilt within the defined building envelope if it is rebuilt with materials and design which are substantially similar to the original style and structure after complying with current codes. Substantial compliance shall be determined by the city as a Type II staff decision. The decision of the hearing examiner shall be final and appealable only as provided in ECDC 20.06.150. 3. The right of restoration shall not apply if: a. The building or structure was damaged or destroyed due to the unlawful act of the owner or the owner's agent; b. The building is damaged or destroyed due to the ongoing neglect or gross negligence of the owner or owner's agents; or c. The building was demolished for the purpose of redevelopment. G. Accessory Dwelling Units. A legal nonconforming detached accessory building may be converted into an accessory dwelling unit provided it meets the standards in ECDC 16.20.050(E), (F), and (G). -Minor exterior modifications required for conversion into conditioned space or other minor exterior modifications required by the International Residential Code adopted by ECDC Title 19 may be permitted. 'Minor exterior modifications' include, but are not limited to, egress windows, exhaust vents, and other minor modifications that are required for health and safety as determined by the Building Official. FAH. Subject to the other provisions of this section, an accessory building that is not an accessory dwelling unit shall be presumptively nonconforming if photographic or other substantial evidence conclusively demonstrates that the accessory building existed on or before January 1, 1981. In the case of a property that was annexed after January 1, 1981, then the date 33 Packet Pg. 346 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 shall be that of the effective date of the annexation to the city of Edmonds. Such presumption may be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence. kl. BD5 Zone. The BIDS zone was created in part to encourage the adoption and reuse of existing residential structures for live/work and commercial use as set forth in ECDC 16.43.030(B)(5). In the BIDS zone, conforming and nonconforming buildings may be converted to commercial or other uses permitted by ECDC 16.43.020 without being required to come into compliance with the ground floor elevation requirements of ECDC 16.43.030(B). )—LThe antenna and related equipment of a nonconforming wireless communication facility may be completely replaced with a new antenna and related equipment; provided, that, upon replacement, the applicant shall use the best available methods and materials to enhance the appearance of the antenna and related equipment and/or screen it from view in a manner that improves the visual impact or the conspicuity of the nonconformity. [Ord. 4154 § 6 (Att. D), 2019; Ord. 4151 § 2 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3961 § 3, 2014; Ord. 3866 § 2, 2011; Ord. 3781 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 §§ 13, 14, 2009; Ord. 3696 § 1, 2008]. 34 Commented [MCI 0]: Old code that is no longer N part of this update. Packet Pg. 347 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.11 dateS such construction i.A1_aS initiated -and %A/_aS completed. [Ord. 4154 § 7 (Att. D), 2019; Ord. 3696 § 1, 2()081. 17.40.030 Nonconforming lots. A. Definition. A nonconforming lot is one which met applicable zoning ordinance standards as to size, width, depth and other dimensional regulations at the date on which it was created but which, due to the passage of a zoning ordinance, the amendment thereof or the annexation of property to the city, no longer conforms to the current provisions of the zoning ordinance. A lot which was not legally created in accordance with the laws of the local governmental entity in which it was located at the date of the creation is an illegal lot and will not be recognized for development. B. Continuation. A nonconforming lot maybe developed for any use allowed by the zoning district in which it is located, even though such lot does not meet the size, width, depth and other dimensional requirements of the district, so long as all other applicable site use and development standards are met or a variance from such site use or development standards has been obtained. In order to be developed a nonconforming lot must meet minimum lot size standards established by the provisions of this code, subject to the provisions of subsection u of this section. C. Combination. If, since the date on which it became nonconforming due to its failure to meet minimum lot size or width criteria, an undeveloped nonconforming lot has been in the same ownership as a contiguous lot or lots, the nonconforming lot is to be and shall be deemed to have been combined with such contiguous lot or lots to the extent necessary to create a conforming lot and thereafter may only be used in accordance with the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code, except as specifically provided in subsection a of this section. D. Exception forSingle-Family Dwelling Units. An applicant may build one single-family residence, and accessory dwelling units as permitted in ECDC 16.20.050, on a lot or parcel regardless of the size of the lot or parcel if, but only if, one of the following exceptions applies: 1. In an RS zone, such nonconforming lot may be sold or otherwise developed as any other nonconforming lot pursuant to the following conditions and standards: 35 Packet Pg. 348 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 a. The lot area of the nonconforming lot is not less than the minimum lot area specified in the table below for the zoning district in which the subject property is located; and b. Community facilities, public utilities and roads required to serve the nonconforming lot are available concurrently with the proposed development; and c. Existing housing stock will not be destroyed in order to create anew buildable lot. Lot Area Table Lot Sized Needed Needed Zone for for Legal Legal Lot Lot (1) RS-20 60% 12,000 (2) RS-12 70% 8,400 (3) RS-10 75% 7,500 (4) RS-8 80% 6,400 (5) RS-6 90% 5,400 2. An applicant applies for necessary permits to construct the unit within five years of the date the lot or parcel was annexed into the city and the lot or parcel was lawfully created under provisions of Snohomish County subdivision and zoning laws as well as the laws of the state of Washington; or 3. An applicant may remodel or rebuild one residence on a nonconforming lot without regard to the 75 percent destruction requirement of ECDC 17.40.020(F) if a fully completed 36 Packet Pg. 349 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.11 building permit application is submitted within one year of the destruction of the residence and all other development requirements of this code are complied with; or 4. The lot lines defining the lot or parcel were recorded in the Snohomish County recorder's office prior to December 31, 1972, and the lot or parcel has not at anytime been simultaneously owned by the owner of a contiguous lot or parcel which fronts on the same access right-of-way subsequent to December 31, 1972, and the lot or parcel has access to an access right-of-way which meets the minimum requirements established by this code. [Ord. 3696 § 1, 2008]. 17.50.020 Parking space requirements. [Refer to ECDC 17.50.010(C) and 17.50.070 for standards relating to the downtown business area.] A. Residential. 1. Single-family and multifamily. a. Single-family dwellings: two spaces per principal dwelling unit, except: b. Multiple residential according to the following table: Required parking Type of multiple spaces per dwelling dwelling unit unit Studio 1.2 1 bedroom 1.5 2 bedrooms 1.8 37 Packet Pg. 350 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.11 Required parking Type of multiple spaces per dwelling dwelling unit unit 3 or more 2.0 bedrooms 2. Boarding house: one space per bed. 3. Rest home, nursing home, convalescent home, residential social welfare facilities: one space per three beds. B. Business. 1. Retail stores, including art galleries, convenience stores, department stores, discount stores, drug stores, grocery stores, supermarkets: one space per 300 square feet; 2. Furniture, appliances, and hardware stores: one space per 600 square feet; 3. Services uses, including barber shops, beauty shops, dry cleaners, laundries, repair shops: one space per 600 square feet; 4. Medical, dental and veterinarian offices, banks and clinics: one space per 200 square feet; 5. Business and professional offices with on -site customer service: one space per 400 square feet; 6. Offices not providing on -site customer service: one space per 800 square feet; 7. Bowling alley: four spaces per bowling lane; 8. Commercial recreation: one space per 500 square feet, or one space for each customer allowed by the maximum permitted occupant load; 9. Car repair, commercial garage: one space per 200 square feet; 38 Packet Pg. 351 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 10. Drive-in restaurants, automobile service station, car dealer, used car lot: one space per 500 square feet of lot area; 11. Restaurant, tavern, cocktail lounge: if less than 4,000 square feet floor area, one per 200 square feet gross floor area; if over 4,000 square feet floor area, 20 plus one per 100 square feet gross floor area in excess of 4,000 square feet; 12. Plant nurseries (outdoor retail area): one space per five square feet of outdoor retail area; 13. Motels and hotels: one space per room or unit; 14. Retail warehouse, building materials yard: one space per 1,000 square feet of lot area or one per three employees; 15. Manufacturing, laboratories, printing, research, automobile wrecking yards, kennels: one space per two employees on largest shift; 16. Mortuary: one space per four fixed seats or per 400 square feet of assembly area, whichever is greater; 17. Marina: to be determined by the hearing examiner, using information provided by the applicant, and the following criteria: a. The type of storage facility (moorage, dry storage, trailer parking) and intended use (sailboats, fishing boats, leisure boats), b. The need to accommodate overflow peak parking demand from other uses accessory to the marina, c. The availability and use of public transit; 18. Storage warehouse: one space per employee; 19. Wholesale warehouse: one space per employee; 20. Adult retail store: one space per 300 square feet; 21. Sexually oriented business (except adult retail store): one space for each customer allowed by the maximum permitted occupant load. 39 Packet Pg. 352 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE —1337 v.11 C. Community Facilities. 1. Outdoor places of public assembly, including stadiums and arenas: one space per eight fixed seats, or per 100 square feet of assembly area, whichever is greater; 2. Theaters: one space per five seats; 3. Indoor places of public assembly, including churches, auditoriums: one space per four seats or one space per 40 square feet of assembly area, whichever is greater; 4. Elementary schools, junior high schools, boarding schools (elementary through senior high), residential colleges and universities: six spaces per classroom, or one space per daytime employee, whichever is greater; 5. Nonresidential colleges and universities: one space per daytime employee; 6. High schools (senior): one space per daytime employee; 7. Museums, libraries, art galleries: one space per 250 square feet; 8. Day-care centers and preschools: one space per 300 square feet, or one per employee, plus one per five students, whichever is larger; 9. Hospitals: three spaces per bed; 10. Maintenance yard (public or public utility): one space per two employees. D. Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Infrastructure Parking Standards. See Chapter 17.115 ECDC for parking standards relating to electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure. [Ord. 4251 § 2 (Exh. A), 2022; Ord. 3496 § 2, 2004]. 20.01.003 Permit type and decision framework. A. Permit Types. 40 Packet Pg. 353 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE III - B TYPE IV TYPE V Zoning Accessory Contingent Essential Site specific compliantwel4+ng- critical area public rezone e letter review facilities Lot line Formal Shoreline Technological Development Zoning text adjustment interpretatio substantial impracticality agreements amendment; n of the text development waiver for area -wide of the ECDC permit, amateur zoning map by the where public radio amendments director hearing not antennas required per ECDC 24.80.100 41 Commented [MCI1]: ADUs will no longer require conditional use permit but rather only a building pe similar to a single family residence. Commented [MCI 2]: Moved to ECDC 16.20 and consistent with HB 1337 and best practices Packet Pg. 354 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE - 1337 v.11 42 Packet Pg. 355 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE - 1337 v.11 43 Packet Pg. 356 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE - 1337 v.11 44 N C d E L t,1 lC r.+ r.+ Q C N E t t� O r Q Packet Pg. 357 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE -1337 v.11 45 Packet Pg. 358 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 20.35.020 Applicability. A. Planned residential developments (PRDs) may be located in any residential zone of the city Uses permitted in the PRD shall be governed by the use regulations of the underlying zoning classification. 1. PRDs in single-family zones shall be comprised of detached dwelling units on individual lots, and any appurtenant common open space, recreational facilities or other areas or facilities. a. The PRD process is not available to single-family lots that are incapable of further subdivision. b. The PRD process shall not be used to reduce any bulk or performance standard not specifically referenced herein. Bulk standards not referenced may be varied only in accordance with Chapter 20.85 ECDC, Variances, or through the modification provision provided through the subdivision process as outlined in Chapter 20.75 ECDC. B. Property included in a PRD application must be under the ownership of the applicant, or the applicant must be authorized pursuant to a durable power of attorney or other binding contractual authorization in a form which may be recorded in the land records of Snohomish County to process the application on behalf of all other owners. C. Accessory dwelling units and h Home use occupations restricted by ECDC 20.20.010(B) 9a�5 B} shall not be permitted within a PRD. [Ord. 3465 § 1, 2003]. 21.05.015 Accessory dwelling unit, ttacrrc-c��d. An at�h^e'^�' accessory dwelling unit is = Str„a- urn ott-ached to Ar rAnrtr,rtpd Within ; ^^'^- family (ADU) is a subordinate dwelling unit added to, created within, or detached from a principal dwelling unit, providing independent living facilities that include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation. Accessory dwelling unit does not include recreational vehicles or mobile homes. which haS ° ^^^ f_3 inting_ fnr Ann inr6„irL.ol ^ limited to o kitchen bathroom, and oln^Winn nuortora An Af11 I oholl not have ito GWA a"bo . 46 Commented [MCI 3]: The PRD code currently prc ADUs. That restriction is proposed to be eliminated PRD is just another type of single family residential subdivision. As long as the PRD lot can meet the AD requirements proposed in ECDC 16.20.050, it could ADU. Commented [MC14]: Consistent with RCW 36.7C Packet Pg. 359 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 water meter, gas meter, and all garbage must be kept within a screened area common to the ^^ie family hemam [Ord. 3294 § 2, 2000]. 21.20.050 Dwelling unit. Dwelling unit means a residential living unit that provides complete independent living facilities hu ildim., or 0rri.,m thereof providing complete housekeeping faGil 4s for one -or more erp sons #aff4ly, which includes permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation. Dwelling unit does not include recreation vehicles or mobile homes. (See also, Multiple Dwelling Units any Faamai T.) (Ord.4260 § 3 (Exh. A), 2022]. 21.30.010 Family. A. Family means individuals related or unrelated by genetics, adoption, or marriage living in a dwelling unit. B. The term "family" shall include: 1. State licensed adult family homes required to be recognized as residential use pursuant to Chapter 70.128 RCW; 2. State licensed foster family homes and group care facilities as defined in RCW 74.15.180, subject to the exclusion of subsection u of this section; 3. Group homes for the disabled required to be accommodated as residential uses pursuant to the Fair Housing Act amendments as the same exists or is hereafter amended. C. The term "family" shall exclude individuals residing in halfway houses, crisis residential centers as defined in RCW 74.15.020(1)(c), group homes licensed forjuvenile offenders, or other facilities, whether or not licensed by the state, where individuals are incarcerated or otherwise required to reside pursuant to court order under the supervision of paid staff and personnel. 47 Commented [MCI51: Consistent with RCW 36.7C 21 El M Packet Pg. 360 9.1.b DRAFT ADU CODE UPDATE — 1337 v.11 D. E—Nothing herein shall be interpreted to limit normal hosting activities associated with residential use. [Ord. 4260 § 4 (Exh. A), 2022; Ord. 3571 § 1, 2005; Ord. 3184 § 1, 1998]: 21.35.013 Gross Floor Area. An interior habitable area of an accessory dwelling unit, including basements and attics but not including unconditioned space, such as a garage or non -habitable accessory structures. L21.80.075 Principal dwelling unit Primary housing unit located on the same lot as an accessory dwelling unit. 21.90.080 Single-family dwelling (unit). Single-family dwelling (and single-family dwelling unit) means a detached building configured as described herein and occupied or intended to be occupied by one family, limited to one per lot. A single-family dwelling shall be limited to one mailbox, electric meter, gas meter, and water meter. It will also have common access to and common use of all living, kitchen, and eating areas within the dwelling unit. en-addi+• nai rpailhnx can hp ;4ddod tQ +ho lot f + +e rm. 1-M-1 7-1:n:T.nrr.Errr:sryr-ranwLgSr paa:ra.-r17. 48 Commented [RH16]: Consistent with RCW 36.70 Commented [RH77]: Consistent with RCW 36.70 q 21 C O c O v a 10 Packet Pg. 361 9.1.c MEMORANDUM To: Edmonds City Councilmembers & Mayor Rosen From: Edmonds Planning Board Date: 5/14/24 CC: Edmonds Planning Board, and Planning and Development Staff Re: ADU/DADU Code — Planning Board Recommendation The Edmonds Planning Board is pleased to present this memorandum summarizing our recommendation for revising Edmonds code for Attached Dwelling (ADU) and Detached Accessory Dwelling Unit (DADU) development. The recommendation takes into consideration requirements established by law through HB 1337 that cities must allow for ADU/DADU construction in currently zoned single family residential areas (RS zones) starting by2025.Our recommendation is to adopt code that aligns with HB 1337 ahead of the required timeline, to provide clear and objective guidance for those wishing to build an ADU/DADU. Meetings & Discussion: The Planning Board met and discussed the ADU/DADU code update six times between December 2023 and April 2024 including holding one Public Hearing on February 28, 2024. The meeting dates included: Planning Board Introduction — December 13, 2023 Planning Board Discussion 1 —January 10, 2024 Planning Board Discussion 2 — January 24, 2024 Planning Board Public Hearing — February 28, 2024 Planning Board Discussion 3—April 10, 2024 Planning Board Discussion & Recommendation —April 24, 2024 Citizen Input: Residents expressed general support for ADUs and DADUs to the Planning Board, although there were some that opposed HB1337 having been passed to begin with and requested that compliance with HB1337 be as restrictive as possible. Most concerns were about specific provisions of the code, with the majority being about the height of ADU's/DADU's and parking, and some about overall square footage. Those who expressed concerns about ADU/DADU height wanted lower heights than the law required, and less square footage than the original staff proposal of 1200 sq ft in all single family residential (RSRS) zones. There was mixed input on regarding parking. There were requests for requiring additional off-street parking spaces beyond the two spaces already required for single-family parcels, based on a concern that allowing additional housing without additional off-street parking will lead to increased on -street parking. There were opposing requests to not require any additional off-street parking, based on a concern about the environmental harm of increased impervious surfaces, and a desire to move away from car -oriented development. Packet Pg. 362 9.1.c Recommendation: The Planning Board recommendation addresses specific areas in which Edmonds can add, modify, and/or clarify elements of the ADU/DADU code that are in compliance with HB 1337, but not more restrictive than the development codes regulating the principal unit, and while promoting development consistent with the Edmonds Vision Statement and Comprehensive Plan. 1. Size Limitations and Setbacks —While HB 1337 sets the maximum size limitation at no less than 1,000 sq ft, the original staff recommendation was for 1200 sq ft in all RS zones. Staff modified that recommendation in response to the Planning Board discussion to allow for the 1200 sq ft maximum only in the larger sub districts of the RS zone. The Planning Board agrees this is appropriate for RS-10, RS-1 2, and RS-20 zoned parcels. For setbacks, the Planning Board recommends maintainingthe same setbacks for DADUs as are required for RS zone principal units, except for reducing the setbacks for DADUs with a building height of 15' or less. Recommended Table of ADU Development Standards: Sub District Maximum ADU Gross Floor Area (Sq. Ft.) Minimum DADU Rear Setback'•' Maximum DADU Height RS-20 1200' 25" 24' RS-12 1200' 25" 24' RS-10 1200' 20" 24' RS-8 1000' 1514 24' RS-6 1000' 1514 24' ' No rear setbacks are required for detached accessory dwelling units from the rear lot line if that lot line abuts a public alley, regardless of detached accessory dwelling unit size per HB 1337. 2 Standard Street and side setbacks per ECDC 16.20.030 apply. 'The normally required rear setback may be reduced to a minimum of fifteen feet for a detached accessory dwelling units 15' in height or less. 4 The normally required rear setback may be reduced to a minimum of five feet for a detached accessory dwelling units 15' in height or less. Rationale: By allowing a reduced rear setback in exchange for shorter building heights, the Planning Board felt this would open development opportunity on smaller or awkwardly shaped lots, without imposing on the neighboring properties. Responding to input for shorter DADU heights, this was intended to inspire more one story DADUs. 2. Parking — On lots with more than one (1) accessory dwelling unit, there shall be one (1) off- street parking space provided unless the property is located within one- half -mile of a major transit stop, as defined in RCW 36.70A.696(8) Packet Pg. 363 9.1.c Rationale: The Planning Board received differing viewpoints from residents regarding requiring parking for ADU/DADUs. While understanding the concern of not having enough parking, ADUs may be occupied by people who do not own cars and therefore requiring parking would be an added expense without benefit to those individuals. In addition, requiring parking will increase impervious surfaces and create additional stormwater runoff. We felt this recommendation offered a compromise as the current requirement for two parking spaces for the principal dwelling allowed for one space for the main dwelling and one for an ADU or DADU. 3. Impact Fees -The Planning Board feels Impact fees are necessaryfor Edmonds to accommodate the growth anticipated with HB 1337. The Planning Board recommends requiring street and park impact fees at 50% of the amounts imposed on single family development and does not believe this will deter ADU/DADU development. 4. Utilities -Initially the Planning board was presented information regarding utility connections. However, we agreed during our April 24, 2024 meeting that decisions regarding utilities were outside the purview of the Planning Board. Packet Pg. 364 9.1.d Haas, Rose From: Joan Bloom <joanbloom@hey.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2024 2:50 PM To: Council; Rosen, Mike Cc: Planning Subject: Public hearing ADUs Agenda item 9.1 b Council, support ACE's recommendation to allow no larger than 1000 sq.ft ADUs, as required by H131337. ACE's statement is true: "New two -bedroom, one -bath units in South Snohomish County are being built between 950 and 1,025 sq ft. Building the higher square footage will only add to the cost burden of the ADU/DADU." 1000 sqft is ample space to meet the claimed goal of ADUs, to support "aging in place." ADUs need only be large enough to support that goal, as well as to support providing housing for other family as defined "21.30.010 Family. A. Family means individuals related or unrelated by genetics, adoption, or marriage Living in a dwelling unit.." I also support ACE's recommendation of a two-step process: "Step one is making the necessary changes without going beyond what is mandated as far as size, parking, etc. Step two would be analyzing the data and then drafting further code revisions to address the continuing barriers for this type of living unit. Evaluation should always be a planned part of any revision process." There must be an evaluation period to assess how the new code works for the benefit of CURRENT property owners. Allowing more square footage will increase the attractiveness of properties to developers, and will potentially result in more homeowners selling their property to developers. One can easily see the results of this throughout Seattle. There are likely many property owners who are viewing their homes as where they want to "age in place," with family surrounding them. Let's not make it easier for developers to take over more properties and reap enormous profits by doing so. Please choose to support current Edmonds' property owners. Respectfully, Joan Bloom Joan Bloom Packet Pg. 365 9.1.d Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2024 4:49 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-05-21 04:48 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-05-21 04:48 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 5/21/2024 7:48:55 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value All of the ADU do need parking. Our streets are too narrow to have cars parked on both side of the street from these ADU's. That is absolutely a textarea-1700597715163-0 necessity. Have you driven on streets with cars parked on both sides. There isn't enough room for two lanes of traffic. 1200 square feet is just too big. Our city will look like Seattle, a mess of houses. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20290373&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 366 9.1.d Haas, Rose From: Greg Brewer <edmondsremodel@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2024 1:12 PM To: Council; Rosen, Mike; Planning; McLaughlin, Susan; LaFave, Carolyn Subject: Comments for public hearing ADUs and DADUs ISome people who received this message don't often get email from edmondsremodel@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Hello Mayor, Council and city staff, The code changes we as a city are about to adopt are sweeping and all inclusive. Consultants have estimated Edmonds may add 100+ units per year. The City has found its way to recommending changes above and beyond the State's mandate. I disagree with this approach. I believe we should implement the minimum State mandate, learn more what the opportunities and impacts are, then we can revisit expansion of these mandates in the future. A big concern regards lack of parking requirements. 16.20.050 Section C should include some parking for additional units. Ideally, one space per unit. Even the State mandate and our city planning board recommends including some parking. Once the door is opened to development with no parking required, it will be impossible to shut. The notion that newcomers will not have, want or need a car for transportlon will be the exception not the rule. Planning for the exception is dangerous and a dereliction of sound urban planning. This is a city wide code change. Not all of our city streets are set up for additional street parking. Some streets are full, some streets lack curbing and sidewalks, forcing people to walk in the street. Other areas have open ditches leaving no place to park or walk safely. Parking will be an issue in the future development of our city. Another concern is 16.20.050 Section F Number 2 which states only one domestic water service and meter is allowed per parcel. I disagree with this restriction. Property owners should have the option to have their own meter if desired. Especially if units are to be allowed to be sold off separately. Not everyone will want to spend the extra money for separate metering but they should not be denied the option to do so. Finally, the council packet included a Sepa checklist prepared by staff. An alarming number of the questions were answered with the statement, "The proposal is a non -project, non -site specific action." While this may technically be true, consultants have told the City we should expect 100+ new units per year. This Sepa checklist doesn't seem to take the pending development into consideration. If the council is supposed to make a sound decision based on the checklist information, we have a serious problem. Council does not have a clear picture of the impacts as they are being severely downplayed by staff. In conclusion, please take the time to fully understand the impacts of these code changes and make the appropriate adjustments to include parking and access to individual unit water meters. Packet Pg. 367 Thank you for considering my comments. 9.1.d Greg Brewer a Packet Pg. 368 9.1.d Haas, Rose From: Ken Reidy <kenreidy@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 6:01 AM To: Olson, Vivian Cc: Rosen, Mike; McLaughlin, Susan; Haas, Rose; Zulauf, JoAnne Subject: Is something 7 -112 feet wide ever a Public Alley? Attachments: JoAnne Zulauf Letter dated December 5, 2014 (4) (1).pdf Dear City Council President Vivian Olson (full council, planning board blind cc'd), As a follow up to my comments made last evening, hopefully City Council will take steps to properly define the following in our City Code: 1. Public Alley 2. Easement 3. Opened Right -of -Way 4. Unopened Right -of -Way 5. Strip of unimproved City property right of way (See Joanne Zulauf's attached letter) 6. Planned Right -of -Way Is something 7 -1/2 feet wide ever a Public Alley? Please also consider the following general rule from MRSC contributor Bob Meinig titled What is the Nature of a Public Right -of -Way? As a general rule, a city or county right-of-way is an easement for public travel. (An easement is a privilege or a right, distinct from ownership, to use in some way the land of another.) So, typically, a city or county does not own the fee title to the property underlying the public right-of-way; the abutting property owners have that fee title, and that title usually extends to the centerline of the right-of-way. (Because this is a "general rule," there are always exceptions.) The right-of-way easement generally extends beyond the improved roadway and includes sidewalks, if any, and parking strips (the area between the sidewalk and the paved street or road). Meinig goes on to point out that in some circumstances, the abutting property owner on only one side of the right-of-way may own the fee title to the property underlying the entire width of the right-of-way. Please consider this also as you amend our ADU Code. My opinion is only those who have dedicated easement rights to the public to create a right-of-way should be allowed to site DADUs at a rear lot line when the lot line abuts a public alley. Please consider this as you amend our ADU Code. Please appreciate the city's history going to great lengths to promote the use of city easements by third parties who have not dedicated the related easement to the city. Why would third parties ever have rights to use another's fee title property when the city has never improved or opened a street or alley? Meinig also states that if the right-of-way has not been opened and so is not improved, obstruction of public travel is, of course, not an issue, and the property owner is not subject to the same restrictions as when it is open and improved. Typically, property owners ,1 u5e lne unopeneu, unrrnproveu ngnL-oi-way a5 uley can uie re5L or ineir properiy, but subject to the possibility of it being opened and improved at some point in the future. Packet Pg. 369 9.1.d Following are further questions about rights -of way that I have been asking for years: 1. What is a "planned right-of-way"? A search of the City Code for "planned right-of-way" yields no results. 2. How does a "planned right-of-way" get added to the City's Official Street Map? 3. Why would a planned right-of-way be 50' wide instead of 60' wide? 4. How does something not yet dedicated get added to the City's Official Street Map? 5. Does a right-of-way have to be both dedicated and accepted? 6. How did City stormwater utilities get located on private property rather than within the 20-foot right-of- way that had already been dedicated for 203rd St SW? 7. Did the placement of City stormwater utilities within the "planned right-of-way" open the right-of-way or is a right-of-way only opened when it is improved so that it can be used for ingress/egress? 8. What is the difference between a "planned right-of-way" and an "unopened right-of-way"? 9. Please refer to the March 8, 2022 Committee Agenda Packet, page 224. Please note that the "planned right-of-way" curves through an existing house at 8002 203rd St SW. How did this happen? 10. Planned rights -of -way exist on our Official Street Map. As such, how is it possible that our Official Street Map would not indicate a planned right-of-way where 50% of the required easement width for an alley has already been dedicated? Please refer to Holy Rosary's property north of Daley Street. 11. Who maintains the Official Street Map? 12. Why is the Official Street Map allowed to be incomplete? 13. Why are some property owners and/or developers made to deal with planned rights -of -way whereas others aren't? 14. Do some developers simply get lucky because the Official Street Map is incomplete? 15. Do planned rights -of -way impact where setbacks are measured from? Thanks for considering all the above and the attached letter. Ken Reidy Citizen of Edmonds Packet Pg. 370 9.1.d Haas, Rose From: notification@civiclive.com Sent: Friday, May 24, 2024 2:00 PM To: Haas, Rose Subject: Comments 2024-05-24 02:00 PM(MST) Submission Notification Comments 2024-05-24 02:00 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 5/24/2024 5:00:17 PM (GMT-07:00) US/Arizona Name Value textarea-1700597715163-0100% in favor and please have an expedited permit process. To view this form submission online, please follow the link below: https://edmondswa.gov/form/one.aspx?objectld=20296857&contextld=l 9931715&returnto=submissio ns Packet Pg. 371 9.1.e ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS (ADU), AMENDING THE EDMONDS CITY CODE AND EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AS THEY PERTAIN TO ADU UTILITY REQUIREMENTS, ADU IMPACT FEES, NONCONFORMING ADU REGULATIONS, ADU PARKING REQUIREMENTS, ADU DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, ADU PERMIT PROCESSING REQUIREMENTS, ADU RELATED DEFINITIONS, ADU USE RESTRICTIONS, AND ADU RELATED SINGLE FAMILY ZONING STANDARDS AND AUTHORIZING CITY STAFF TO RELEASE PREVIOUSLY RECORDED ADU COVENANTS AND REPEALING CERTAIN ADU RELATED CODE SECTIONS. WHEREAS, in 2023, the state legislature passed HB 1337 which requires jurisdictions like Edmonds to update their development codes to allow for both attached and detached accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and make related code changes to make it easier to create ADUs; and WHEREAS, two of the most significant sections of HB 1337 have subsequently been codified as RCW 36.70A.680 and RCW 36.70A.681; and WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.680(1) invalidates and preempts local laws that conflict with that section and RCW 36.70A.681, stating: (1)(a) Cities and counties planning under this chapter must adopt or amend by ordinance, and incorporate into their development regulations, zoning regulations, and other official controls the requirements of this section and of RCW 36.70A.681, to take effect six months after the jurisdiction's next periodic comprehensive plan update required under RCW 36.70A.130. (b) In any city or county that has not adopted or amended ordinances, regulations, or other official controls as required under this section, the requirements of this section and RCW 36.70A.681 supersede, preempt, and invalidate any conflicting local development regulations. Packet Pg. 372 9.1.e WHEREAS, the city council held a public hearing on these proposed code revisions on May 21, 2024; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. ADU Impact Fee Requirements. The following sections of the Edmonds City Code are hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in s*r-ikedwoug `), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth: ECC 3.36.030, entitled "Assessment and payment of impact fees;" ECC 3.36.040, entitled "Exemptions;" ECC 3.36.120, entitled "Park impact fee rates;" and ECC 3.36.125, entitled "Street impact fee rates." Section 2. ADU Utility Requirements. The following sections of the Edmonds City Code are hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in s#il ough), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth: ECC 7.30.030, entitled "Water rates — Meter installation charges;" ECC 7.30.035, entitled "Water and sewer utility general facilities charges;" ECC 7.30.040, entitled "Utility charges — Sanitary sewer;" and ECC 7.50.050, entitled "Stormwater rates and charges." Section 3. Amendments to Single Family Zoning Code. Chapter 16.20 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "RS — Single Family Residential," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in tr-ikethfoug ), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth. Section 4. Nonconforming ADU Regulations. The following sections of the Edmonds Community Development Code are hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in stfikethr-oug ), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth: ECDC 17.40.020, entitled "Nonconforming building and/or structure;" and ECDC 17.40.030, entitled "Nonconforming lots." Packet Pg. 373 9.1.e Section 5. Repeal of Prior Nonconforming ADU Regulations. Section 17.40.025 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Vested nonconforming or illegal accessory dwelling units," is hereby repealed as set forth in Exhibit A (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in stfikedwough), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth. Section 6. ADU Parking Requirements. Section 17.50.020 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Parking space requirements," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in str4ketIffeug ), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth. Section 7. ADU Permit Processing. The following sections of the Edmonds Community Development Code are hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in st-Fikethr-oug ), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth: ECDC 20.01.003, entitled "Permit type and decision framework;" and ECDC 20.35.020 entitled "Applicability." Section 8. Repeal of Prior ADU Development Standards and Requirements. Chapter 20.21 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Accessory dwelling units," is hereby repealed as set forth in Exhibit A (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in stfikethFeug ), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth. Section 9. ADU Related Definitions. The following sections of the Edmonds Community Development Code are hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A(new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in st+iket roug ), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth: ECDC 21.05.015, entitled "Accessory dwelling unit, attached;" ECDC 21.20.050, entitled "Dwelling unit;" ECDC 21.30.010, entitled "Family;" ECDC 21.35.013, entitled "Gross floor area;" ECDC 21.80.075 entitled "Principal dwelling unit;" and ECDC 21.90.080 entitled "Single family dwelling (unit)". Section 10. Effect of Previously Recorded Covenants. The city shall not enforce the provisions of previously recorded ADU covenants that conflict with state law for as long as state law prohibits cities from requiring those covenants. Packet Pg. 374 9.1.e Section 11. 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 12. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an administrative function of the city council, 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: M. JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 375 9.1.e 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, RELATING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS (ADU), AMENDING THE EDMONDS CITY CODE AND EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AS THEY PERTAIN TO ADU UTILITY REQUIREMENTS, ADU IMPACT FEES, NONCONFORMING ADU REGULATIONS, ADU PARKING REQUIREMENTS, ADU DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, ADU PERMIT PROCESSING REQUIREMENTS, ADU RELATED DEFINITIONS, ADU USE RESTRICTIONS, AND ADU RELATED SINGLE FAMILY ZONING STANDARDS AND AUTHORIZING CITY STAFF TO RELEASE PREVIOUSLY RECORDED ADU COVENANTS AND REPEALING CERTAIN ADU RELATED CODE SECTIONS. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2024. 4840-7251-8158,v. 1 E CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Packet Pg. 376 9.1.f Accessory Dwelling Unit Code Update AMD2023-0008 Council Action June 4, 2024 Packet Pg. 377 9.1.f ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT CODE UPDATE TIMELINE: • Council Introduction - November 14, 2023 • Planning Board Introduction - December 13, 2023 • Planning Board Discussion 1 -January 10, 2024 • Planning Board Discussion 2 -January 24, 2024 • Council Discussion 1 - February 27, 2024 • Planning Board Public Hearing - February 28, 2024 • Council Study Session - March 5, 2024 • Planning Board Discussion 3 - April 10, 2024 • Council Public Hearing - May 21, 2024 • Anticipated Council Adoption - June 5, 2024 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS Q, What guidance did we use? HOUSE BILL REPORT EHB 1337 As Passed legislature Title: An act relating to expanding housing options by easing barriers to the construction and use of accessory dwelling units. Brief Description: Expanding housing options by easing barriers to the construction and use of accessory dwelling units. Sponsors: Representatives Gregerson, Barkis, Berry, Christian, Duerr, Fitzgibbon, Taylor. Ramel. Reeves, Simmons, Walen, Graham, Bateman, Reed, Lekanoff, Doglio, Tharinger, Cones. Macri and Stonier. Brief History: Committee Activity: Housing: 1/23/23, 2/2t23 [DP]. Floor Activity: Passed House: 3/2/23, 81-15. Senate Amended. Passed Senate: 4/6123, 39-7. House Concurred. Passed House: 4/14/23, 85-11. Passed Legislature. Brief Summary of Engrossed Bill • Requires fully planning cities and counties to allow accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in urban growth areas (UGAs). • Prohibits certain ADU regulations within UGAs. Allows cities and counties to offer incentives for the development or construction of ADUs within UGAs. 1101 SE ('O OWNH I TEE ON HOUSING H B 1337 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS MRSC and Department of Commerce Guide The ABCs of ADUsThe he ABCsofADUs A guide to Accessory Dwelling Units and how they o°e expand housing options for people of all ages 1 Flntl Ihla publlcatlon antl mots: .:.I>.a^.,,.�..._«,u„«•««,.«. AARP.org/ADUs IN( I I I on I I I .n e o. mile .. I-!rj • IMM0100 THE EDMONDS CITIZENS' HOUSING COMMISSION WANTSTO HEAR FROM AARP Best Practices Citizens Housing Commission Survey 9.1.f Q, 9.1.f Why DADUs in Edmonds today? o In 2021, the Citizens' Housing Commission stated the following policy recommendation for updating the ADU code to include DADUs: 'Allow either one attached or detached accessory unit on a property in the SFR area, with clear and definitive development requirements such as size, ownership, and parking, under the standard permitting process and not require a conditional use permit." o According to the 2021 American Community Survey, 21.5% of Edmonds' residents are over 65 years of age. The most frequent over-the-counter ADU question: "Are DADUs allowed for 'aging in place?" ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS Young professionals/ couple Grand parents `1 M) 4m Young family Teenager Credit: City of Redlands 1 1 0 owner M renter Q, What will HB 1337 require? State legislation mandates that HB 1337 must be implemented no later than six months after the next Comprehensive Plan due date. Commerce language will supersede, preempt, and invalidate any conflicting local development regulations if Edmonds does not adopt policy by June 30, 2025. The requirements for the City of Edmonds will be as follows: • Allow two ADUs per lot (any configuration of ADU and DADU). • No owner -occupancy requirements. • Allow separate sale of ADUs. • No parking required within a half -mile of a major transit stop, as defined in RCW 36.70A.696(8). • Maximum size limitation no less than 1000sf of gross floor area. • Gross Floor Area is defined as the "interior habitable area of an accessory dwelling unit, including basements and attics but not including unconditioned space, such as a garage or non -habitable 9.1.f accessory structures." • Allow DADUs to be sited at a rear lot line when the lot line abuts a public alley. • No setback requirements, yard coverage limits, tree retention mandates, restrictions on entry door locations, or aesthetic requirements that are more restrictive than for the principal unit. • Allow ADUs of at least 24-feet in height. • Impact fees cannot be more than 50% of fees charged for the principal unit._ Q, DUE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS [M7 1 1 -. WN I M, M, n- a Planning Board and Staff recommendations include the following policies: 0 ADU size restrictions 21 op ADU setback reductions �0 Parking restrictions 91 Impact fees ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS Permit needed Type of Unit Number of Units: Size Setbacks Design Parking Occupancy Permitted secondary use; Can be permitted in PRDs. DADUs and AADUs Allow two ADUs on all lots in any configuration. Max height 24. Provide incentives for reduced DADU I heights in the No less than 1,000 square feet gross floor area. In RS-10, RS-12, and RS-20 zones no more than 1,200 square feet gross floor area. If rear lot line abuts a public alley, no rear Rear setbacks may be reduced to a setbacks are required for DADUs. - - (5-feet for DADUs No design restrictions. No additional parking required for ADUs within % mile of a major transit stop. Owner not required to reside in one of the units. Allow sale as condominium. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS that are 15' in height or less) in the RS-6 and RS-8 zones. No additional parking required for ADUs. Provide incentives for reduced DADU height In RS-10, RS-12, and RS-20 zones no mo 1,200 square feet gross floor area. Rear setbacks may be reduced to a minima 5-feet for DADUs that are 15' in height or IE in the RS-6 and RS-8 zones 9.1.f DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 0 AADUs and DADUs are subject to the same permitting requirements as any other N dwelling unit and must meet all health and safety standards, including: 0 0 a o Building Codes, Energy Codes a o Public Works Requirements ° o Fire Code Requirements o Utility Requirements o Environmental Codes (Critical Area Regulations, Tree Code) ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS 9.1.f RECOMMENDATIONS: SIZE 0 Staff and Planning Board Shared Recommendations: U Q C O C O w o Limiting ADUs to 1,000 sf of gross floor area on small lots (RS-6 and RS-8). a w o Allowing ADUs to have up to 1,200 sf of gross floor area on one or two floors on large lots (RS-10, RS-12, RS-20) 0 • Remember: • gross floor area is defined as the "interior habitable area of an accessory dwelling unit, not including unconditioned space." • habitable space can be divided by two floors limited at 24 feet in height. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS 9.1.f RECOMMENDATIONS: HEIGHT AND SETBACRS Staff and Planning Board Differing Recommendations: U U Q C Planning Staff: w Decreasing rear setback requirements to allow for more flexibility on smaller lots (RS-6 and RS-8 • Allowing a minimum 10-foot rear setback for DADUs on small lots. • Allowing a minimum 5-foot rear setback for ADUs on small lots that limit ADU height to 15-feet. Planning Board: Setback reduction incentives on small parcels only if property owners limit height of ADU to 15' t preserve privacy and views of existing neighborhoods in all zones. • Allowing a minimum 5-foot rear setback for ADUs on RS-6 and RS-8 lots. • Allowing a minimum 15-foot rear setback for ADUs on RS-10, RS-12, and RS-20 zones. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS RECOMMENDATIONS: HEIGHT AND SETBACKS 10' 20' 15' 35' Planning Staff Rear setbacks may be reduced to a minimum of 10-feet (5-feet for DADUs that are 15' in height or less) in the RS-6 and RS-8 zones. 10' 25' 35' Planning Board 15' 20' 10' 35' 9.1.f Rear setbacks may be reduced to a minimum of 5-feet for DADUs that a are 15' in height or less in the RS-6 and RS-8 zones and to 15-feet in all other zones. Packet Pg. 387 RECOMMENDATIONS: PARKING Staff and Planning Board Differing Recommendations: Planning Staff: No additional parking required for ADUs • 2 parking spaces are currently required for all single-family home • Current regulations allow ADU parking to be tandem or within the existing driveway. • High cost of providing additional parking may limit some homeow ability to create additional housing. • Many lots do not have the capacity for a 3rd parking space. • 2020 Study shows between 2012-2017, 70% of developments in Seattle with no parking requirements included parking.* Planning Board: No additional parking required for first ADU • 1 additional parking space required for second ADU Distance to Transit Stop for RS Parcels Legend Bus Routes - Eighth Mile _ Quarter Mile IMMMIALTAnn- = Half Mile from Major Transit *Gabbe, C. l., Pierce, G., & Clowers, G. (2020). Parking policy: The effects of residential minimum parking requirements in Seattle. Land Use Policy, 91, 104053. N ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS A 1:43, 344 RECOMMENDATIONS: IMPACT FEES Staff and Planning Board Shared Recommendations: Count ADUs toward density requirements, consistent with 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update and GMA requirements. • HB 1337 requires that assessment of impact fees cannot be more than 50% of what would be imposed on the principal unit. • Will result in requiring impact fees for ADUs. Credit: Trip Advisor ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS 9.1.f 9.1.f NEXT STEPS: What about Pre -Approved Designs? After ADU code adoption, providing pre -approved design options or prefabricated units can lower costs for homeowners and align designs with community vision. o Development staff pre -approves architectural plans for compliance with building and development codes. o Typically approved in shorter timeframe with reduced permit fees Mona 3MMM ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS A Prefab DADU, Source: City of Seattle pre -approved DADU design, Source: CAST Architecture Q, STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: o Comply with HB 1337 prior to June 30, 2025, deadline o Allow 10-foot setback for all DADUs in RS-6,, RS-8 zones. o Provide 5-foot setback incentive for reduced DADU height in RS-6,, RS-8 zones. o Allow AD U s up to 1,200sf i n RS-1 0,, RS-1 2,, and RS-20 zones. o No additional parking requirements. o Require impact fees. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS 9.1.f Q, El the0 a 9.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 06/4/2024 Landmark 99- Financing Options/Developer Negotiations Staff Lead: Susan McLaughlin and Todd Tatum 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 22"d Staff received two submissions to the RFP, 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 representative properties were then undertaken to gain a better understanding of the character and quality of the developer's projects. On May 7, 2024, staff presented a summary to Council of the proposal that was preferred by the evaluation committee (the J2 Proposal). The Council did not make any motions on May 7th with respect to the J2 Proposal. Staff indicated that it intended to return in early June 2024 to seek authorization to enter into negotiations with proposed developer towards a Memorandum of Due Diligence (or similar document). Staff Recommendation Hear report from the City's bond counsel on financing tools that would be available in the event that the City decides to exercise the Option. Ask related questions of bond counsel. Hear report from City staff on intended next steps for negotiation with J2. Ask related questions of City staff. Council would need to approve any future Memorandum of Due Diligence (or similar document) with J2; however, no Council action is needed to authorize the commencement of those negotiations. Staff plans to proceed with negotiations after this Council update on financing options. Narrative Packet Pg. 392 9.2 The Option to Purchase requires the Purchaser (City and/or assignees) to place $1,000,000 in earnest money down on the property by March 31, 2025, and close on the $37,000,000 property no later than September 30, 2025. The means to finance such a large acquisition, and the various possible deal structures may not be intuitive to some. And the Council may want to understand the financing options that would be available to the City before it authorizes spending on additional due diligence activities. Marc Greenough of Foster Garvey, the City's bond counsel, will give a high-level presentation on this subject and take questions. He will be joined by Scott Bauer of NW Municipal Advisors, who may be able to provide an estimate on the rates that would likely apply in various financing scenarios. Over the next several weeks, Staff intends to engage in discussions with J2 concerning the various investigations, timelines, commitments, financing responsibilities, and milestones that would need to occur before exercising the Option. These negotiations may lead to a document - tentatively described as a Memorandum of Agreement on Due Diligence - which would govern the steps leading to the Council's decision to execute/not execute the Option. If Staff is able to negotiate favorable terms with J2 on such a document, Staff would return to Council, most likely in July, to authorize the mayor to sign that agreement and to seek an appropriation to fund the City's share of the due diligence activities. Packet Pg. 393