Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2024-11-04 Council Special Packet B
Agenda Edmonds City Council SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE COUNCIL CHAMBERS 250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 NOVEMBER 4, 2024, 7:00 PM 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://ZOOM.US/J/95798484261 BY PHONE: +1 253 215 8782 WEBINAR ID: 957 9848 4261 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE 2. 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 1. National Native American Heritage Month Proclamation (5 min) 2. Mayor's Finance Update (10 min) S. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 6. 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. 7. RECEIVED FOR FILING 1. Written Public Comments (0 min) 2. Budget Queries 3.0 - Council Budget Questions and Adminstration/Staff Responses (0 min) Edmonds City Council Agenda November 4, 2024 Page 1 8. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA 1. Adoption of Code Amendments for Permit Processing Timelines and Public Notice to Achieve Compliance with Mandates in SB 5290 and HB 1105 (file AMD2024-0002) 9. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Public Hearing on Disposition of Sewer Easement —Anthology Senior Living (20 min) 10. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. 2024 October Budget Amendment Ordinance (20 min) 2. Planning Board Preferred Growth Alternative and FLUM Discussion (45 min) 3. Council 2025-26 Budget Deliberations (45 min) 11. COUNCIL COMMENTS 12. MAYOR'S COMMENTS 13. EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION, RCW 42.30.110(1)(1) (30 MIN.) 14. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION ADJOURNMENT 10:00 PM Edmonds City Council Agenda November 4, 2024 Page 2 4.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/4/2024 National Native American Heritage Month Proclamation Staff Lead: Carolyn LaFave Department: Mayor's Office Preparer: Carolyn LaFave Background/History The first American Indian Day was celebrated in May 1916 in New York. The event culminated an effort by Red Fox James, a member of the Blackfeet Nation, who rode across the United States on horseback seeking approval from 24 state governments to designate a day to honor American Indians. In 1990, more than seven decades later, then -President George H.W. Bush signed a joint congressional resolution designating the month of November National American Indian Heritage Month. Similar proclamations have been issued every year since 1994 to recognize what is now called National Native American Heritage Month. Staff Recommendation n/a Narrative Mayor Rosen will read a proclamation in honor of National Native American Heritage Month. Attachments: NNAHM 2024 Packet Pg. 3 4.1.a City of Edmonds •Office of the Mayor National Native American Heritage Month WHEREAS; Native American Heritage Month is celebrated each November as a time of recognition for the significant contributions of the Indigenous peoples that have inhabited this land since time immemorial; and WHEREAS; Washington state is home to 29 federally recognized Indigenous tribes and well over 300,000 Washington residents identify as American Indian, Alaska Native, or Indigenous; and WHEREAS; the first inhabitants of Edmonds were the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes; and WHEREAS; the contributions of the first Americans and their descendants have been significant to the growth, development, prosperity, and greatness of the United States of America; and WHEREAS; the celebration of Native American Heritage Month creates an opportune time to educate the general public about the many tribes and to raise awareness of the lives of Native people both historically and in the present. NOW THEREFORE, I, Mike Rosen, Mayor of the City of Edmonds, do hereby proclaim November as National Native American Heritage Month in the City of Edmonds and encourage our communityto actively seek knowledge about the original inhabitants of North America and commit to preserve Native American heritage and traditions for generations to come. Mike Rosen, Mayor — November 4, 2024 Packet Pg. 4 4.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/4/2024 Mayor's Finance Update Staff Lead: Carolyn LaFave Department: Mayor's Office Preparer: Carolyn LaFave Background/History On July 2, 2024 the council voted to have a Mayor Update as an ongoing item all regular meeting agendas. This was in response to a recommendation from the Mayor's Blue Ribbon Panel. Staff Recommendation No action, informational Narrative The Mayor, or another member of the administration, will answer questions about City finances that have been requested by council in advance and will also share actions related to the fiscal emergency that have transpired since the last update. When there is nothing new to report, this agenda item will be the opportunity to share that there is nothing new to report. Packet Pg. 5 7.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/4/2024 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 October 24, 2024 and October 30, 2024. Attachments: Public Comment November 4, 2024 Packet Pg. 6 7.1.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — November 4, 2024 Online Form 2024-10-23 03:18 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 10/23/2024 6:18:40 PM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona FirstName Samuel LastName L CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Gymnastics program Comments I'd like to advocate for the gymnastics program to not be removed due to city budget cuts by emphasizing its inclusivity. This program caters to children of all backgrounds and abilities, ensuring everyone feels welcome and valued. It's important that we maintain such an accommodating environment for our diverse community. Online Form 2024-10-23 09:42 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 10/24/2024 12:42:19 AM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona FirstName Tom LastName Hafford Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Initiative 2117 Comments Please do not support poorly thought out Initiative 2117. Online Form 2024-10-23 09:51 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 10/24/2024 12:51:00 AM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona FirstName Joel LastName Newhouse Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Edmonds Gymnastics Comments City Council, The Edmonds Gymnastics programs were a staple for all three of our children and a regular part of their weekly routine. The staff always provided exceptional attention to our children and offered them some of their first ever structured activities. I am forever grateful to the Edmonds Gymnastics program and pray it continues to be open for many other families whose children will benefit like my own. Blessings, Joel Packet Pg. 7 7.1.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — November 4, 2024 Online Form 2024-10-24 12:46 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 10/24/2024 3:46:58 PM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona FirstName Amanda LastName Thompson Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Gymnastics program Comments I am reaching out to ask you to reconsider the decision to remove the gymnastics m program. Given that parents pay for classes, I don't believe this program is a financial burden on the city. E E It has been an integral part of my children's lives for years, consistently being the highlight of their week. v I'm also always impressed by the safety measures in place during the gymnastics classes. Thank you. 2 IL a� Online Form 2024-10-24 03:51 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 10/24/2024 6:51:23 PM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona FirstName Kimberly c LastName Bevington Email CityOfResidence Seattle AgendaTopic Proposed budget cut Comments Dear Members of the City Council, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed elimination of Jerrie Bevington's position as part of the budget cuts outlined in your October 1 address. As a senior citizen living on a fixed income, Ms. Bevington relies on this part-time job for financial stability. Her minimal hours of work are not only crucial for her well-being, but also represent a very small fraction of the city's overall budget. Cutting her position will not significantly contribute to solving the budget shortfall, yet it will have a negative impact on her life. While it has been suggested that her duties could be replaced by pre-programmed camera positions, her experience and presence bring a level of reliability that technology alone cannot replace. The small savings realized by eliminating her position would be outweighed by the human cost of depriving her of steady, reliable work. I understand the difficult decisions the city faces in addressing the $13 million budget gap, but I urge you to reconsider cutting the position of a dedicated employee who contributes so much to the community. A more thoughtful approach, one that considers the human impact of these cuts, would better serve both Ms. Bevington and the city as a whole. Online Form 2024-10-24 08:39 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 10/24/2024 11:39:18 PM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona Packet Pg. 8 7.1.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — November 4, 2024 FirstName Meg LastName Brown Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Budget cuts Comments I just wanted to reach out and say how important it is to keep the gymnastics program. Edmonds has already lost so many activities for kids, and this program is really special —nothing else compares! Coach Savannah always goes the extra mile to keep the kids engaged, having fun, and feeling welcome. There's really nothing like it, and it's been a part of our community for such a long time. It's truly an Edmonds staple. Please do not take this program away from the community. Online Form 2024-10-27 05:52 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 10/27/2024 8:52:08 AM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona FirstName Sara LastName Towner Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Gymnastics Comments I'm writing due to the risk of the gymnastics program no longer being offered through parks and rec at FAC. My two daughters are both currently enrolled in gymnastics and would be sad if the program was no longer offered. We have done gymnastics at three other gyms and have chosen to come back to FAC after trying classes elsewhere. We love the community at FAC and always see other families we know coming and going. The kids in the classes become friends and we have met other Edmonds families through this class. I know there are budget cuts that need to be made, but please keep the gymnastics program. Thank you. Online Form 2024-10-27 05:05 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 10/27/2024 8:05:08 PM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona FirstName Ron LastName Bussiere Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Centralized Purchasing Packet Pg. 9 7.1.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — November 4, 2024 Comments All question related to purchasing - 1. The City recently adopted a Purchasing Policy. The City has frequently been cited by the SAO for lack of GAAP based internal controls regarding record keeping and its money management. Does this new Purchasing Policy now include those GAAP based controls? 2. Does the City employ centralized or de -centralized procedures when purchasing supplies and assets? Explain the process that incorporates GAAP based internal controls such as: (1), Segregation of Duties; (2), Access Control; (3), Authorization; (4), GAAP record keeping; and (5), Validation. If it did to to centralized purchasing couldn't asset tagging or labeling be incorporated and logged at that one location? 3. In a previous SAO audit the SAO made the following observation and statement regarding its lack of GAAP based internal controls in numerous operating areas and I quote: "Effect of Condition: These conditions place the City at a higher risk for misappropriation or error. Should this occur, it would be difficult or impossible to determine who was responsible." What progress is being made to shore up GAAP based internal controls? Online Form 2024-10-27 05:15 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 10/27/2024 8:15:54 PM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona FirstName LastName Email CityOfResidence Ron Bussiere Edmonds AgendaTopic ERP System Comments All four questions related to ERP System: 1. Regarding this new ERP system the City is purchasing, we understand the initial price tag does not include coding service customization and Tyler will be charging extra for that. Does the City have a projected figure for those customization features? 2. Regarding this new ERP system has the city story -boarded all of the data input forms to tailor the software to its operations, to include all that it has been missing, including GAAP based internal controls, and presented that to Tyler for an estimate, or are those coding services for customization wide open with no foreseeable limit? 3. If a input screens have all been identified, has IT run fill time analysis with respect to man-hours to measure man power needs? 4. Regarding this new ERP system, in numerous SAO audits the City was cited for fail to properly train employees in the accounting process. Will this new ERP system have quick access to posting instructions while inside of each data input screen? For example, to ensure correct posting to the proper accounts will the instructions be stored on the server? Online Form 2024-10-28 08:28 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 10/28/2024 11:28:46 AM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona FirstName Tory LastName Amos m E E 0 U v 3 IL d e Packet Pg. 10 7.1.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — November 4, 2024 Email CityOfResidence Edmonds AgendaTopic Gymnastics Comments The gymnastics program at the FAC has been amazing and has provide my daughter the opportunity to participate in gymnastics. The instructors are incredible and she looks forward to attending every session! If this program is cut she will be devastated as this has allowed her the opportunity to participate in gymnastics. It has built more skill than just gymnastic skills. Online Form 2024-10-29 06:23 AM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 10/29/2024 9:23:54 AM (GMT- E 07:00) US/Arizona E 0 U FirstName Theresa Campa 2 LastName HUTCHISON 3 a d Email CityOfResidence EDMONDS AgendaTopic October 29 Public Hearing on budget Comments In 2016, Edmonds hired Fitch Associates, a regional fire/EMS consultant, to vet the SCFD/Edmonds contract. The study found that EMS calls make up nearby 86% of Fire District 1's overall call volume in Edmonds, with fire calls at just 10%. The following statement is taken from the Fitch Report: "Given that statistic, one of the alternatives calls for moving fire service capability away from Station 17 altogether, and instead staffing that station only with two dedicated paramedics. That move alone could save Edmonds $1.5 million annually - money that could be used to fund other important city services like street repair or additional police officers, or to shore up the city's reserve fund." That report was done in 2016. Nothing has been done since then to reform the business and operations model and do anything that has brought efficiencies to SCFD Edmonds. Can you Mayor Rosen or Council members speak to this? Online Form 2024-10-29 05:30 PM(MST) was submitted by Guest on 10/29/2024 8:30:58 PM (GMT- 07:00) US/Arizona FirstName Mario LastName Rossi Email CityOfResidence Edmonds/WA AgendaTopic Taxes increases, levies and tranferring the city's Fire and EMS to the RFA Packet Pg. 11 7.1.a Edmonds City Council Public Comments — November 4, 2024 Comments Due to lax and irresponsible spending practices, Edmonds' previous mayors and city councils put the city in financial trouble and one of the ways out of this mess that the current city council and mayor are planning is pushing the fire and EMS services to a 3rd party that will double the amount the city taxpayers currently pay, literally double taxing them, instead of adopting responsible conservative spending practices. Considering that a big percentage of Edmonds taxpayers have been living paycheck to paycheck and will barely be able to make ends meet with this new taxation, what do you suggest them doing not lose their houses? Work to only pay taxes and go to the food bank's growing lines for food? m E E 0 U v 3 a a� e Packet Pg. 12 7.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/4/2024 Budget Queries 3.0 - Council Budget Questions and Adminstration/Staff Responses Staff Lead: City Council Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History To help streamline and manage the many budget questions and emails from councilmembers to staff, a consolidated question/answer process has been coordinated by Council Staff. Published Queries with Responses are sent to Councilmembers by email, published under received for filing, and posted to the Budget section of the Finance webpage: https://www.edmondswa.gov/government/departments/finance/budget_reports Recommendation For Information Only. Narrative N/A Attachments: Budget Queries 3.0 published Packet Pg. 13 7.2.a Council Budget 2025-2026 Queries 3.0 Submitted by October 23, 2024 Published October 31, 2024 Q1 Interfund loan (pg20) 2025 and 2026 interfund loans What is the pay back and amortization schedule? Is a loan properly recognized as revenue? (CM Chen 10.10.2024) Q1.5 Admin Service (pg91) Interfund loan principal payments Can principal payments be pushed out to 2027? (CM Chen 10.10.2024) Answer KD In Washington State, interfund loans, including those from a utility fund to the General Fund, are regulated to ensure proper financial management and compliance with legal requirements. Here are some of the key regulations and considerations from SAO's website: • Short -Term Borrowing: Utility fund loans are generally used to address short-term cash flow problems in the General Fund and must have a clear purpose. The loan cannot be used to balance the General Fund permanently but should be a temporary measure until other revenues are available. • Repayment Plan: The loan must be repaid with interest, and a specific repayment schedule is required. We must include the repayment plan in the ordinance or resolution that approves the loan. I am researching to see if that plan can show no principal payments until 2027. • Interest Rates: The loan must charge an interest rate at least equal to what the utility fund would have earned if it had kept the money invested. This prevents the utility fund from losing potential income by loaning money to the General Fund. In the proposed budget, I assumed an interest rate of 5.4% which was the LGIP interest rate in August. This is probably high given the Fed may continue to reduce rates. • Repayment Timeline: A clearly defined repayment timeline must be established, ofte within one or two fiscal years, to avoid long-term borrowing that could impair the utility's financial position. SAO guidance is to repay loans in three or less years or it will appear the loan is a diversion of funds. o In the proposed budget, I have included principal and interest payments for both interfund loans (2025 and 2026) with an extended payback consideration of 10 years. This is shown on budget book page 20 under Expenditures - Debt Service. I did this to demonstrate our commitment to making these payments and avoiding any perceived diversion of funds from the Utilities to the General Fund and recognizing that this payback schedule is subject to many variables and Council decisions. o However, what is not currently reflected in the proposed budget is an accelerated repayment plan to pay off the loan in under three years, which would be a recommended approach. Additionally, it's important to note that the final loan amount is still to be determined and will be decided by the Packet Pg. 14 7.2.a Council Budget 2025-2026 Queries 3.0 Submitted by October 23, 2024 Published October 31, 2024 Council as part of the budget deliberation process. This decision will be an important factor in refining our payment strategy. Q2 GF reserve (Pg21)General Fund reserve replenishment plan Let's brainstorm ideas beyond 2027. (CM Chen 10.10.2024) A2 Answer KID The City administration fully supports collaborating with the City Council on developing a comprehensive reserve replenishment plan. The Mayor has emphasized on multiple occasions that the administration envisions this as a 10-year plan, in contrast to the 7-year timeline currently outlined in our financial policies. However, we remain open to considering all plans that effectively address community priorities and goals while ensuring the restoration of our reserves to an acceptable level. We look forward to working together to create a sustainable approach that aligns with the long-term financial health of our community. Q3 City Hall reduced hours If City Hall was open only 4 days a week in 2025 about how much would we save? (CM Dotsch 10/17/2024) A3 Answer KID I appreciate your question and the opportunity to address them. However, I do have a few clarifying questions outlined below to ensure we fully address your concerns. Please note that the administration is actively exploring options to address our current needs, including scenarios that may involve closing City Hall one day per week, or scenarios that look similar to the closing of city hall one day a week. As we examine these possibilities, we are mindful of our represented staff and are ensuring alignment with all collective bargaining agreements to uphold our commitments and also considering impacts on service delivery. 1. Intent and scope - Is the intent to reduce operational costs (utilities, maintenance, etc.), staffing costs, or both? Are there specific savings areas being targeted? 2. Staff work status - Would staff still work remotely on the closed day, or would the closure mean a furlough or reduced FTE for those who usually work at City Hall? Do you have something particular in mind or is the administration to develop various scenarios? 3. Closure Duration: Is the idea to close for one day indefinitely, seasonally, or for a trial period to assess potential savings? Q4 On pages 46-47 there are decision packets referenced with page numbers but no place to find them as in the past they were printed up with the budget book so the Packet Pg. 15 7.2.a Council Budget 2025-2026 Queries 3.0 Submitted by October 23, 2024 Published October 31, 2024 decision packets referenced could be seen side by side. Could you please clarify how to easily find them or could they be added to the budget book to reference as in years past? (CM Dotsch 10/17/2024) A4 Answer KID I sincerely apologize for any confusion caused by including a list of capital decision packages in the proposed budget with page references, without also providing the detailed descriptions on those pages. We have since made these details available on the City's website under the 2025-2026 proposed biennium budget section. Budget Reports - City of Edmonds, WA I would like to clarify that these decision packages pertain solely to capital projects. Additionally, detailed information about these capital projects was presented during the CIP Presentation and at the CIP Public Hearing. Thank you for your understanding, and please do not hesitate to reach out if further clarification is needed. Q5 Where can I easily find the 7 million proposed in 2025 budget cuts in this proposed budget book? Is it noted somewhere on one sheet as to which decision packets have those cuts and how much? (CM Dotsch 10/17/2024) A5 Answer KID The 2025-2026 Biennium budget process began by creating a comprehensive budget that assumed full employment across all departments and supported their initiatives and work plans. To clarify, "full employment" in this context means funding all authorized FTEs as listed in the City's authorized position ordinance, including COLA adjustments, and does not factor in vacancy rate adjustments. Given that we are required to propose a balanced budget, this initial fully loaded budget, supporting all departmental needs, was not balanced. As noted in the Mayor's budget address, this preliminary version totaled approximately $65 - $66 million in expenditures against estimated revenues of about $52 million. A budget in this form could not be proposed. As a result, the City administration conducted an internal reduction exercise. These reduction options are not presented as decision packages in the proposed budget because they represent decisions made by the Mayor and the administration. To help the Council and the community better understand the impacts, we have provided a list of positions that are going unfunded, and we will also share a list of non -labor reductions soon. Please stay tuned for the release of this non -labor reduction list. Q6 What are the dollar and percentage reductions for each department? (CM Paine, 10/24/2024) A6 This question will be forwarded to the next query. Mayor Department Packet Pg. 16 7.2.a Council Budget 2025-2026 Queries 3.0 Submitted by October 23, 2024 Published October 31, 2024 Q7 Mayor/Leadership — I would like to have the written list of all the projects that were administratively cancelled. What were the savings with the elimination of these projects that Council had approved. (CM Paine 10/14/2024) 7 Program/Project Savings Anticipated (Net) Administrative Services Department Q8 Can we charge back the credit card processing fees for all of our utility payments, permit fees, etc...? (CM Paine, 10/24/2024) A8 Answer KD: In 2023, the city engaged an outside professional service to conduct a comprehensive utility rate study. As part of this study, the consulting team analyzed and developed rates using, in part, the City's 2023 operating budgeted expenditures, as actual financial data for the year was not yet available. Merchant fees, being an operational expense, were included in this analysis to ensure we could recover those costs. However, the budgeted amount for merchant fees in 2023 budget was significantly lower than the actual expenditures. Consequently, while the rate study reflects the budgeted merchant fee expenses, it does not fully account for the higher actual costs incurred. Below is a table showing the utility rate increases as the rate study concluded. This fist does not include savings from Hiring Chill Elimination of Summer Day Camp program (city -provided) $7,800 Discontinuation of city -operated Meadowdale Preschool program/2 staff (June) NA (in budget) Discovery Program Elimination (Inter. Spec. staff, Beach Rangers, Visitor Station) $54,000 Elimination of Youth Commission position (June) $21,000 Satellite Park Maintenance Shop (76'� Ave) ($7K one month early) $7,000 Reductions in Supplies, Travel, Training, WRPA membership (Parks & Rec) $6,820 Reduction in Waterfront Center and Meadowdale Playfields Fees $61,725 Police Fence Cancelled $300,000 Staff Picnic $8,000 Brine Machine cancelled $70,000 Hook Lift System Cancelled $250,000 Sidewalk repairs $7,000 PD training and conferences $7,000 Police substation feasibility stud cancelled $56,000 Compass Health Social Worker Contract (they cancelled it) $65,000 Comp Plan Consultant Contract Reduction $105,000 Cancel National League of Cities Membership $4,356 Diversity Commission Coordinator $13,500 Economic Development Professional Services $30,000 Reduction of Lease/Rental in Community Services $30,000 Halt householdsu ort rants -ARPA $300,000 Halt business grants -ARPA $250,000 TOTAL $1,654,201 Packet Pg. 17 7.2.a Council Budget 2025-2026 Queries 3.0 Submitted by October 23, 2024 Published October 31, 2024 2024 2025 2026 Water Rate Increase 9.0% 9.0% 9.09�a Storm Rate Increase 8.5 b 8.59" 8.5�'b Sewer Rate Increase 10.5ub 10.54_� 10.09'b Police Department Q9 Regarding our prisoner care charges at the jail - Has there been an audit of our usage of and an analysis of the "credit" for days people were held at the jail under other city's warrants? (CM Paine, 10/24/2024) A9 This question will be forwarded to the next query. Q10 What would it take to reconstitute the Edmonds Police Foundation? (CM Paine, 10/24/2024) A10 This question will be forwarded to the next query. Public Works Q11 Joe Scordino asked an interesting question during the CIP/CFP public hearing, which was "is there a way to move staff scheduled to be laid off or have reduced hours into more protected, ie — non general fund positions?" (CM Paine, 10/24/2024) A11 Yes — there is a process for that as long as they meet the minimum qualifications for the requested Position. That is not often the case, but we should post all of our Enterprise Fund vacancies in locations where our employees will see them and be able to respond if they do meet the requirements Q12 Facilities and St Mtce/Engineering - Are there grants for a comprehensive ADA Transition Plan. The current ADA plan was written in 2017 and is out of date. Even a small grant for a specific update can open up other bigger grants once this ADA Transition plan is updated. (At our Council meeting, I asked about the Plan, and the answer was a listing of the ADA activities.) (CM Paine, 10/24/2024) Al2 This question will be forwarded to the next query. Q13 WWTP —Are we still allowing staff to stay at the Best Western for shift work? What are the costs and justification associated with this expense? (CM Paine, 10/24/2024) A14 This question will be forwarded to the next query. Q15 Is there any way to restore the CTR program? What is the usage of this program? (CM Paine, 10/24/2024) A15 The Cost would be $17,000 for 2025. 1 will check to see what the latest usage data indicates and pass that on Planning and Development 0 ri N d •L d C� 0 N 0 N LO N 0 N a� m a� Mn a 0 M N d •L a� C% a� a� m c a� E cu w a Packet Pg. 18 7.2.a Council Budget 2025-2026 Queries 3.0 Submitted by October 23, 2024 Published October 31, 2024 Q16 ECD and Planning and Development — Let's get Edmonds ready for World Cup in 2026. There will be 13 games in Seattle and 13 games in Vancouver BC. b. Planning and Development — Can we create a short-term rental program that is permitted, for the likely interest in visitors wanting to attend games? (CM Paine 10/14/2024) A16 This question will be forwarded to the next query. Q17 Describe the revenues brought in through permitting cover what percentage of staffing expenditures. (CM Paine, 10/24/2024) A17 This question will be forwarded to the next query. Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Q18 Could you share the City's Recreation programming detailed revenue and expenditure information for the current budget year? (CM Eck 10/14/2024) A18 This question will be forwarded to the next query. Q19 In your presentation, there was a mention of improving equity in Parks/Rec programming, it would be helpful to hear more about these efforts. (CM Paine, 10/24/2024) A19 This question will be forwarded to the next query. Q20 Joe Scordino asked an interesting question during the CIP/CFP public hearing, which was "is there a way to move staff scheduled to be laid off or have reduced hours into more protected, ie — non general fund positions?" (CM Paine, 10/24/2024) A20 One of the cost saving measures we are implementing for 2025 and beyond is changing 90% of the funding source for the Parks Capital Project Manager position from general fund to parks capital. This is probably the only position in the department in which this strategy applies. (AF 10/25/2024) 0 ri A) a� a ca N O N LO N 0 N m a� m m 3 a 0 Cl) N A) a� 3 a m E a Packet Pg. 19 8.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/4/2024 Adoption of Code Amendments for Permit Processing Timelines and Public Notice to Achieve Compliance with Mandates in SB 5290 and HB 1105 (file AMD2024-0002) Staff Lead: Mike Clugston Department: Planning Division Preparer: Michael Clugston Background/History This item was introduced to Council on September 24. A public hearing was held the same evening; no public comments were received. On October 29, Council reviewed the Planning Board- recommended version of the draft code together with the staff -recommended version and selected the Planning Board's draft to be codified. Staff Recommendation Adopt the attached ordinance and Planning Board -recommended language in Exhibit A. Narrative Proposed changes to comply with Senate Bill 5290 The following changes are proposed to relevant sections of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) to comply with the land use permit review timeline mandates in SB 5290. Consolidated Permits - The SB 5290 review timelines do not apply when land use permits are consolidated for review (ECDC 20.01.002). Permit Decision Table - The table in ECDC 20.01.003.D is updated to include the new permit review times: 1. 65 days for permits that do not require public notice (Type I staff review, no notice) 2. 100 days for permits that require public notice, but not a public hearing (Type 11 staff review with notice) 3. 170 days for permits that require public notice and a public hearing (quasi-judicial Type III & IV permits) Complete and Incomplete Applications, Requesting Additional Information - Update language in ECDC 20.02.003 about determining application completeness and incompleteness and clarify how staff requests additional information about a permit application. Notice of Final Decision - Update ECDC 20.02.007 to make issuance of final permit decisions consistent with the timelines in the Permit Decision Table in ECDC 20.01.003.B. Permit Review Timelines - New section in ECDC 20.02.008 containing general language about the permit timelines in ECDC 20.01.003.13, calculation of days, possible permit fee refunds, and the annual performance report to the Department of Commerce required by SB 5290. Regarding refunds, the City currently meets three of the criteria identified by Commerce to be exempt from having to issue refunds (imposing reasonable fees, maintain budget for on -call permitting Packet Pg. 20 8.1 assistance, and making housing types an outright permitted use). Additional criteria could also be met with some more work (making pre -application meetings optional, only requiring public hearings for applications that are required to have a public hearing by statute, or meeting with the applicant within 14 days of a second request for corrections during permit review). District -based Design Review -Update ECDC 20.12.005 to refer to the required 170-day review clock for Type III -A permits. • Subdivisions - Update ECDC 20.75 to remove outdated 120-day permit review reference and add reference to the permit decision table in ECDC 20.01.003.13. • Definitions - Update definition of "Project permit or project permit application" in ECDC 21.80.095 for consistency with the updated definition in SB 5290 and RCW 36.7013 (Local Project Review). Proposed changes to comply House Bill 1105 Amend "Public Notice Requirements" sections ECDC 20.03.002 (Notice of Application), ECDC 20.03.002 (Notice of Public Hearing), and ECDC 20.03.005 (Shoreline Master Program Notice) to include language about when the public can comment. Attachments: Ordinance Updating Permit Processing Timelines and Public Notice Requirements Exhibit A - PB Recommended SB 5290 HB 1105 Code Amendments redline strikeout Packet Pg. 21 8.1.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, UPDATING THE CITY'S PERMIT PROCESSING TIMELINES AND PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE WITH SB 5290 AND HB 1105. WHEREAS, in 2023, the Washington State Legislature enacted Senate Bill 5290, updating portions of the Local Project Review Act, Chapter 36.70B RCW; and WHEREAS, the intent of SB 5290 was to consolidate, streamline, and improve project review and permitting, with an emphasis on housing development, and to reduce the amount of time it takes for projects complying with local development regulations to receive approval; and WHEREAS, in 2024, the Washington State Legislature enacted House Bill 1105, requiring public agencies to enhance the contents notices for public comment; and WHEREAS, the planning board held a public hearing on August 28, 2024; and WHEREAS, the planning board recommendation was slightly different than the staff recommendation with regard to whether refund language should be included in the code; and WHEREAS, this item was introduced to city council on September 24, 2023; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held the same evening, but no public comments were received; and WHEREAS, Council selected the planning board recommendation on October 29; and WHEREAS, these code changes are solely procedural; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 20.01 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMITS," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in stFi ethr-eug ). Packet Pg. 22 8.1.a Section 2. Chapter 20.02 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in str4' ethfoug ). Section 3. Chapter 20.03 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in str4kethroug ). Section 4. Section 20.12.005 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Outline of process and statement of intent," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in str4ked.,.,,, gh) Section 5. Section 20.75.065 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Preliminary review," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in stfikethr-ough) Section 6. Section 20.75.070 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Formal subdivision — Time limit," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in stfi ethr-oug ). Section 7. Section 21.80.095 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Project permit or project permit application," is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in striket fough). Section 8. 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. Packet Pg. 23 8.1.a Section 9. 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: Im JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 24 8.1.a SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2024, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, UPDATING THE CITY'S PERMIT PROCESSING TIMELINES AND PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE WITH SB 5290 AND HB 1105. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of 52024. 4840-7251-8158, v. 1 il CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Packet Pg. 25 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b Chapter 20.01 TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMITS Sections: 20.01.000 Purpose and general provisions. 20.01.001 Types of actions. 20.01.002 Determination of proper procedure type. 20.01.003 Permit type and decision framework. 20.01.006 Legislative enactments not restricted. 20.01.007 Exempt projects. 20.01.000 Purpose and general provisions. A. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standard procedures, decision criteria, public notification, and timing for development project permit application decisions made by the city of Edmonds. These procedures are intended to: 1. Promote timely and informed public participation; 2. Eliminate redundancy in the application, permit review, and appeals processes; 3. Process permits equitably and expediently; 4. Balance the needs of permit applicants with neighbors; 5. Ensure that decisions are made consistently and predictably; and 6. Result in development that furthers city goals as set forth in the comprehensive plan These procedures provide for an integrated and consolidated land use permit process. The procedures integrate the environmental review process with land use procedures, decisions, and consolidated appeal processes. B. The provisions of this title supersede all other procedural requirements that may exist in other sections of the city code. When interpreting and applying the standards of this title, its provisions shall be the minimum requirements. Where conflicts occur within provisions of this 1 Packet Pg. 26 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b title and/or between this title and other city code provisions and regulations, the more restrictive provisions shall apply. Where conflict between the text of this title and the zoning map ensue, the text of this title shall prevail. C. Unless otherwise specified, all references to days shall be calendar days. Whenever the last day of a deadline falls on a Saturday, Sunday, legal holiday designated by RCW 1.16.050 or by a city ordinance, or any day when City Hall or the city's planning and development department is closed to the public by formal executive or legislative action, the deadline shall run until the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday or closed day. [Ord. 4299 § 37 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010]. 20.01.001 Types of actions. There are five main types of actions (or permits) that are reviewed under the provisions of this chapter. The types of actions are based on who makes the decision, the amount of discretion exercised by the decision -making body, the level of impact associated with the decision, the amount and type of public input sought, and the type of appeal opportunity. A. Administrative Decisions, Type I and II decisions are administrative decisions made by the planning and development director or his/her designee (hereinafter the "director"). Type I permits are ministerial decisions and are based on compliance with specific, nondiscretionary and/or technical standards that are clearly enumerated. Type 11 permits are administrative decisions where the director makes a decision based on standards and clearly identified criteria, but where public notice is required. Unless otherwise provided, appeals of Type 11 decisions shall be initiated as set forth in ECDC 20.06.030. B. Quasi-Judicia/Decisions, Type III, Type IV and appeal of Type II decisions are quasi-judicial decisions that involve the use of discretionary judgment in the review of each specific application. Quasi-judicial decisions are made by the hearing examiner, the architectural design board, and/or the city council. C. Legislative Decisions. Type V actions are legislative decisions made by the city council under its authority to establish policies and regulations regarding future private and public developments, and management of public lands. 1. Planning Board. The planning board shall hold a public hearing and make recommendations to the city council on Type V actions, except that the city council may Packet Pg. 27 8.1.b EXHIBIT A hold a public hearing itself on area -wide rezones to implement city policies, or amendments to zoning code text, development regulations or the zoning map. The public hearing shall be held in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 20.06 ECDC, RCW 36.70A.035 and all other applicable law. 2. City Council. The city council may consider the planning board's recommendation in a public hearing held in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 20.06 ECDC and RCW 36.70A.035 and all other applicable law. If the city council desires to hold a public hearing on area -wide rezones to implement city policies, or amendments to zoning code text, development regulations or the zoning map, it may do so without forwarding the proposed decision to the planning board for a hearing. 3. Public Notice. Notice of the public hearing or public meeting shall be provided to the public as set forth in Chapter 20.03 ECDC. 4. Implementation. City council Type V decision shall be by ordinance or resolution and shall become effective on the effective date of the ordinance or resolution. [Ord. 4299 § 38 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010]. 20.01.002 Determination of proper procedure type. A. Determination by Director. The director shall determine the proper procedure for all project applications. Questions concerning the appropriate procedure shall be resolved in favor of the higher numbered procedure. B. Optional Consolidated Permit Processing. An application that involves two or more procedures may be processed collectively under the highest numbered procedure required for any part of the application or may be processed individually under each of the application procedures identified in ECDC 20.01.003. The applicant may determine whether the application will be processed collectively or individually. If the applications are processed individually, the highest numbered type procedure shall be undertaken first, followed by the other procedures in sequence from the highest numbered to the lowest. When Type III -A and Type III-B permits are consolidated under this subsection, the project shall proceed under the Type III -A permit process. When two or more permits are consolidated under this subsection, the permit timelines for decisions on individual permits in ECDC 20.01.003(B) do not apply. C. Decisionmaker(s). Applications processed in accordance with subsection (B) of this section which have the same procedure number, but are assigned to different hearing bodies, shall be Packet Pg. 28 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b heard collectively by the highest decisionmaker; the city council being the highest body, followed by the hearing examiner, architectural design board or planning board, as applicable, and then the director. Joint public hearings with other agencies shall be processed according to ECDC 20.06.010. Concurrent public hearings held with the architectural design board and any other decisionmaker shall proceed with both decisionmakers present. [Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.01.003 Permit type and decision framework. A. Permit Types. TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE III-B TYPE IV TYPE V Zoning Contingent Essential Site specific compliance critical area public rezone letter review facilities Lot line Formal Shoreline Technological Development Zoning text adjustment interpretation substantial impracticality agreements amendment; of the text of development waiver for area -wide the ECDC by the permit, amateur zoning map director where public radio amendments hearing not antennas required per ECDC 24.80.100 Critical area SEPA Critical area Comprehensive determinations determinations variance plan amendments Shoreline Preliminary Contingent Conditional Annexations exemptions short plat critical area use permits review if (where public public hearing by hearing :] Packet Pg. 29 8.1.b EXHIBIT A TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE III-B TYPE IV TYPE V hearing examiner is requested required) Minor Land Shoreline Variances Development amendments clearing/grading substantial regulations to planned development residential permit, where development public hearing is required per ECDC 24.80.100 Minor Revisions to Shoreline preliminary shoreline conditional plat management use amendment permits Staff design Administrative Shoreline review, variances variance including signs Final short plat Land use Design review permit (where public extension hearing by requests architectural design board is required) Sales Preliminary office/model formal plat (ECDC 17.70.005) Final formal Innocent Preliminary plats purchaser planned determination 4) U) _ M J O w r Q E _ d E Q Q O U O _ O a O Q w 3 O m �L yr d m w m E a� E Q m O U LO 0 m x 0 rn N 0 m U d _ m E E O d m a 21 Packet Pg. 30 8.1.b EXHIBIT A TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE III-B TYPE IV TYPE V residential development Final planned Staff design residential review pursuant development to ECDC 20.12.010(B)(2) B. Decision Table. PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS (TYPE LEGISLATIVE I - IV) TYPE III - TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE IV TYPE V B Recommendation N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Planning board Planning board by: Final decision by: Director Director Director Hearing Hearing City council City council examiner/ADB examiner Notice of No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No application: Open record No Only if (1) If Yes, before Yes, Yes, before Yes, before planning public hearing or appealed, director hearing before planning board board which makes open record open decision examiner or hearing which makes recommendation to appeal of a final record is board to examiner recommendation council or council decision: hearing appealed, render final or board to council could hold its own before open decision to render hearing hearing record final examiner hearing decision before Packet Pg. 31 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS (TYPE LEGISLATIVE I - IV) TYPE III - TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE IV TYPE V B hearing examiner (2) If converted to Type III -A process Closed record No No No No Yes, Yes, before the review: before council the council Permit review 65 days 100 days 100 days 170 days 170 days 170 days Not applicable timelines (per ECDC 20.02): Judicial appeal: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes C. Any reference to'Type II" in the Edmonds Community Development Code without expressly being modified as "Type II-B" shall be construed to mean Type II -A for the purposes of this section unless the context clearly suggests otherwise. [Ord. 4360 § 7 (Exh. A), 2024; Ord. 4302 § 2 (Att. A), 2023; Ord. 4299 § 39 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 4072 § 7 (Att. G), 2017; Ord. 4026 § 4, 2016; Ord. 3982 § 4, 2014; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3806 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.01.006 Legislative enactments not restricted. Nothing in this chapter or the permit processing procedures shall limit the authority of the city council to make changes to the city's comprehensive plan or the city's development regulations 7 Packet Pg. 32 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b as part of the annual revision process. [Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.01.007 Exempt projects. A. The following projects are specifically excluded from the procedures set forth in this chapter: historic register designations, building permits, street vacations, street use permits, encroachment permits, and other public works permits issued under ECDC Title 18. B. Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.140(2), lot line or boundary adjustments, building and/or other construction permits, or similar administrative approvals categorically exempt from environmental review under SEPA (Chapter 43.21 C RCW and the city's SEPA/environmental policy ordinance, Chapter 20.15A ECDC), or permits/approvals for which environmental review has been completed in connection with other project permits, are excluded from the requirements of RCW 36.70B.060 and 36.70B.110 through 36.70B.130, which includes the following procedures: 1. Notice of application (ECDC 20.03.002) unless an open record hearing is allowed on the permit decision; 2. Except as provided in RCW 36.70B.140, optional consolidated permit review processing (ECDC 20.01.002(B)); 3. Joint public hearings (ECDC 20.06.010); 4. Single report stating all of the decisions and recommendations made as of the date of the report that do not require an open public record hearing (ECDC 20.06.050(C)); and 5. Notice of decision (ECDC 20.02.007). [Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. LV Packet Pg. 33 8.1.b EXHIBIT A Chapter 20.02 DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS Sections: 20.02.001 Optional preapplication conference. 20.02.002 Permit application requirements. 20.02.003 Su-mbi,,e«a^., and acceptance of ayolli.aUG Complete and incomplete applications, requesting additional information. 20.02.004 Effect of irreconcilable applications on the same property. 20.02.005 Referral and review of development project permit applications. 20.02.006 Resubmission of application after denial. 20.02.007 Notice of final decision. 20.02.008 Permit review timelines. 20.02.001 Optional preapplication conference. A. Prior to filing applications for Type II actions requiring a preliminary plat and Type III and IV actions, applicants are encouraged to participate in a preapplication conference. Preapplication meetings with staff provide an opportunity to discuss the proposal in general terms, identify the applicable city requirements and the project review process including the permits required by the action, timing of the permits and the approval process. Plans presented at the preapplication meeting are nonbinding and do not "vest" an application. B. The conference shall be held within 28 days of the request, upon payment of applicable fee(s) as set forth in the city's adopted fee resolution. C. The planning and development director or his/her designee (hereinafter the "director") shall provide the applicant with the following during the conference: Packet Pg. 34 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b 1. A form which lists the requirements for a completed application; 2. A general summary of the procedures to be used to process the application; 3. The references to the relevant code provisions or development standards which may apply to approval of the application; and 4. The city's design guidelines. D. Neither the discussions at the conference nor the information on the form provided by the director to the applicant under subsection (C) of this section shall bind the city in any manner or prevent the city's future application or enforcement of all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations. E. Requests for preapplication conferences for all other types of applications will be considered on a time -available basis by the director. [Ord. 4299 § 40 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 3817 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.02.002 Permit application requirements. An application shall consist of all materials required by the applicable development regulations and shall include the following general information: A. A completed land use application form; B. A verified statement by the applicant that the property affected by the application is in the exclusive ownership of the applicant, or that the applicant has submitted the application with the consent of all owners of the affected property; C. A property and/or legal description of the site for all applications, as required by the applicable development regulations; D. The applicable fee; and E. Cover letter describing how the proposal satisfies the applicable standards, requirements and criteria in the development regulations. [Ord. 3817 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 10 Packet Pg. 35 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b 20.02.003 Submission and acceptance of pplic tionComplete and incomplete applications, requesting additional information. A. Determination of Completeness. Within 28 days after receiving an application, the director must rh-ii mail or personally deliver to the applicant a determination Inihirh states that either �rovide a written determination to the applicant stating that:. The written determination must cute either• 1. The application is complete; or 2. The application is incomplete af�dbecause that -the procedural submission requirements have not been met. The determination sha4must specifically describe what information is needed i.yhat is necessary to make the application complete. When an application is determined to be complete, the director will note the date of acceptance for continued processing. B. Identification of Other Agencies withJurisdiction. To the extent known by the city, other agencies with jurisdiction over the project shall be identified in the determination of completeness. C. Failure to Provide Determination of Completeness An application is deemed procedurally complete on the 29th day after receiving a project permit application under this section if the director does not provide a written determination to the applicant that the application is incomplete as provided in subsection (A)(2) of this section. D. Incomplete Applications. 11 Packet Pg. 36 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b 1. Whenever the applicant receives a determination from the city pursuant to subsection (An of this section that the application is incomplete, the applicant shall have 90 days to submit the necessary requested information. If circumstances warrant, the applicant may apply in writing to the director requesting a one-time 90-day extension. The extension request must be received by the city prior to the end of the initial 90-day period.Wi*h n 14 days after an applicant h-;i!-; r-,lubmitted the requested additional information, the directer r�rrni. led in subsection (N of this section N 2. Within 14 days after an applicant has submitted the requested additional information, the director must make a determination of completeness and notify the applicant in the manner provided in subsection (A) of this section.%^Ihenever the applicant recei„ec a nsubsection (AYM of this sectmon to -he complete, ambigueus, otice undecipherable, days to submit the necessary r*rr, mstances WarraRt, the applicant may apply in writing to the director requeStiRg a ORe-time 90-day extension. The extensiori request must be received by the city prior to the end n-f t-he initial 90-day compliance 3. If the applicant does not submit the additional information requested within the 90-day period (or within the 90-day extension period, as applicable), the director shall make findings and issue a decision, according to the Type I procedure, that the application has lapsed for lack of information necessary to complete the review. The decision shall state that no further action will be taken on the application. 4. When the director determines that an application has lapsed because the applicant has failed to submit required information within the necessary time period, the applicant may request a refund of the application fee remaining after the city's determination of completeness. E. ReguestingAdditionallnformation. The determination of completeness does not preclude the director's ability to request additional information or ask for corrections to submitted materials whenever additional or updated information is required, or when substantial changes are made to the proposed rp omect. 12 Q Packet Pg. 37 8.1.b EXHIBIT A 1. Whenever the applicant receives a notice that the contents of the application, which had been previously determined to be complete under subsection (A)(1) of this section, is insufficient, ambiguous, undecipherable, or otherwise unresponsive of the information ° being sought, the applicant has 90 days to submit the requested information. If E circumstances warrant, the applicant may apply in writing to the director requesting a one- time 90-day extension. The extension request must be received by the city prior to the end E of the initial 90-day period. O U 2. If the applicant does not submit the additional information requested within the 90-day o c period (or within the 90-day extension period, as applicable), the director must make w a findings and issue a decision, according to the Tvpe I procedure, that the application has �° a lapsed for lack of information necessary to complete the review. The decision must state that no further action will be taken on the application. a°, Y •L 3. When the director determines that an application has lapsed because the applicant has failed to submit required information within the necessary time period, the applicant may L request a refund of the application fee remaining after the city's determination of completeness. °' E _ a� E plete under this section Of the directer does ROt provide a written determination to the O .c--;i.nt- t-.h-;;t- t-he application iS ORCOMplete as provided in subsection (A) of this ser-tien u Ln 0 ate of AcceptaRce of . m c acceptance fer rr-ntini ied nrecessinrr 4m N LO m Cn d _ d E E O 4,F. GtyDuty to Review. After the application is determined to be complete or additional materials are accepted following a request for additional information, acceptapc4a, the city must ma r,h;" begin or resum; processing the application. Under no circumstances shall the city place any application on "hold" to be processed -;t- sn-rne date, even if the request for the "hold" s made bythe applicant, and regardless A-f t-he requested length of the "hold iRg" Period x •Thissubsection does notapplyto applications placed on upon cletermiRation bythe citytha w m E t) ftf 13 Q Packet Pg. 38 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b add it. onal information is real aired in ordP-r to make Uq d-ecisinn [Ord. 4299 § 41 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 3817 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 20091. G. ApplicantmaySuspend Review. If at any time an applicant informs the city, in writing, that the applicant would like to temporarily suspend the review of the project for more than 60 days, or if an applicant is not responsive for more than 60 consecutive days after the city has notified the applicant, in writing, that additional information is required to further process the application, an additional 30 days will be added to the time periods for city action to issue a final decision for the permit. In addition, the city may set conditions for the temporary suspension of a permit application. 20.02.004 Effect of irreconcilable applications on the same property. A. If an applicant submits an application that cannot be reconciled with a previously submitted application on the same property, the previously submitted application shall be deemed withdrawn by the applicant and it shall be rendered null and void. The director shall notify the applicant that the previously submitted application has been deemed withdrawn and will not be processed any further. Withdrawal shall be deemed to occur even when the city has finished processing the previously submitted application. B. Many inconsistencies between applications can be reconciled through corrections that are made during the development review process. This section is not intended to treat all inconsistencies as effecting a withdrawal of the earlier application. C. Without limiting the generality of subsection (A) of this section, the following examples are intended to illustrate whether a subsequent application shall be deemed irreconcilable with an earlier application: 1. Examples of Irreconcilable Applications That Result in Withdrawal. a. Applicant submits an application for a four -lot short plat on a particular property. Subsequently, another application is submitted for a three -lot short plat on the same property. Assuming there is not enough land area for seven lots, the two applications are irreconcilable because one could not construct both short plats. Hence, the four -lot short plat is deemed withdrawn. 14 Packet Pg. 39 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b b. Applicant submits a design review application for a 20-unit multifamily housing development. Subsequently, another design review application is submitted for a 30- unit multifamily housing development whose footprint would substantially overlap with the footprint of the structure shown for the 20-unit application. Because both structures would occupy substantially the same space they are irreconcilable and the 20-unit application would be deemed withdrawn. 2. Examples ofApplications That May Be Inconsistent but Are Not Irreconcilable Resulting in Withdrawal. a. Applicant submits an application for a four -lot short plat on a particular property. Subsequently, a building permit application is submitted for a single-family home the footprint of which would encroach into the setbacks as measured from the proposed short plat lot lines. Because the building permit application could be corrected to properly locate the footprint, the applications are reconcilable and do not effect a withdrawal of the short plat application. b. Applicant submits a landscaping plan that is inconsistent in an insignificant way with civil site -improvement plans that are submitted for the same property. If the two sets of plans can be reconciled by submitting a corrected version of at least one of the two plans, then city staff would seek corrections and withdrawal would not be deemed to occur. [Ord. 4006 § 1, 2015]. 20.02.005 Referral and review of development project permit applications. Within 10 days of accepting an application, the director shall transmit a copy of the application, or appropriate parts of the application, to each affected government agency and city department for review and comment, including those responsible for determining compliance with state and federal requirements. [Ord. 3817 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.02.006 Resubmission of application after denial. Any permit application or other request for approval submitted pursuant to this title that is denied shall not be resubmitted or accepted by the director for review for a period of 12 15 Packet Pg. 40 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b months from the date of the last action by the city on the application or request unless, in the opinion of the director, there has been a significant change in the application or a significant change in conditions related to the impacts of the proposed project. [Ord. 4006 § 2, 2015; Ord. 3817 § 6, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009. Formerly 20.07.0071. 20.02.007 Notice of final decision. A. The director shall must issue a notice of final decision WithiR consistent with 120 days of tho final ni@t 30 dayS and a find short plat 30 daysthe timelines found in the Decision Table in ECDC 20.01.003(B). The notice shall include the SEPA threshold determination for the proposal and a description of any available administrative appeals. For Type II, III and IV permits, the notice shall contain the requirements set forth in ECDC 20.06.060(C) and explain that affected property owners may request a change in property tax valuation notwithstanding any program of revaluation. B. 4—The notice of final decision shall be mailed or otherwise delivered to the applicant, and to any person who submitted comments on the application or requested a copy of the decision, and to the Snohomish County assessor. W. Packet Pg. 41 8.1.b EXHIBIT A inform -term submitted is insufficient, the applicant _ nd the procedures set forth in subsection UD \ of J in perinrd shall apply r� _ d nmental impact statement (EIS) is hE Chapter 2-0T5.4 €E-DC--DCThe time peri� E rd by chanter 200.1 EA Grnr• Q O si once of a dericinn for administrative appeals of U O me all hnot me orthap Qn days for noon record C O w appeals, nlecc Innaer period is agreed to hw the Q- i iO Q O O -eed to by the director and the applicant in )nvritina d Y •L to jo not apply if a permit application: d C 'nnrehepciwe plan or a development regulation; i C d ntial public facility as provided in RON 26 70A 2nn E C d ad in Grnr 20.01 003/Al• or Q d icant, in which rare the time period shall start from O U Ln letenecc fnr the revised anpliration is icci led by the O , m O (D N Ley 20.02.008 Permit review timelines. U) A. Required Timelines. Permit review timelines are shown in the Decision Table in ECDC 20.01.003(B). The city's review timelines restart if an applicant proposes a change in use that E adds or removes commercial or residential elements from the original application that result in 0 a� a failure to meet the determination of procedural completeness for the new use. m a. B. Calculation ofDa�s. a The number of days an application is in review with the city is calculated from the day x w completeness is determined to the date a final decision is issued on the Dermit aaDlication, w a� E U ftf 17 Q Packet Pg. 42 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b consistent with ECDC 20.02.007. The number of days is calculated by counting every calendar day and excluding the following time period: 1. Any period between the day that the city has notified the applicant, in writing, that additional information is required to further process the application and the day when responsive information is resubmitted by the applicant; 2. Any period after an applicant informs the city, in writing, that they would like to temporarily suspend review of the permit application until the time that the applicant notifies the city, in writing, that they would like to resume the application; and 3. Any period after an administrative appeal is filed until the administrative appeal is resolved and any additional time period provided by the administrative appeal has expired. C. Annual Performance Report. Consistent with RCW 36.70B.080, the City must prepare an annual project permit performance report. Chapter 20.03 PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS Sections: 20.03.002 Notice of application. 20.03.003 Notice of public hearing. 20.03.004 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) notice. 20.03.005 Shoreline master program (SMP) notice. 20.03.006 Optional public notice. 20.03.002 Notice of application. A. Generally. A notice of application shall be provided by the director to the public, all city departments and agencies with jurisdiction of all Type II, III and IV development project permit applications in accordance with this chapter. The notice of application for these permits shall also be provided to the public by posting, publishing and mailing. W Packet Pg. 43 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b B. Issuance of Notice ofApplication. 1. A notice of application shall be issued within 14 days after the city has made a determination of completeness pursuant to ECDC 20.02.003. 2. If any open record predecision hearing is required for the requested development project permit(s), the notice of application shall be provided at least 15 days prior to the open record hearing. C. Contents. The notice of application shall include the following information in a format determined by the director: 1. The date of submission of the initial application, the date of the notice of completion and acceptance of the application, and the date of the notice of application; 2. A description of the proposed project and a list of the development project permits requested in the application and, if applicable, a list of any studies requested under Chapter 36.7013 RCW; 3. A description of other required permits not included in the application, to the extent known by the city at that time; 4. A description of existing environmental documents that evaluate the proposed project, and, if not otherwise stated on the document providing notice of application, the location where the application and any studies can be reviewed; 5. A statement setting forth: (a) the time for the public comment period, which shall be not less than 14 days following the date of notice of application; (b) the right of any person to comment on the application, receive notice of and participate in any hearings, and request a copy of the decision on the application; and (c) any appeal rights; 6. The date, time, place and type of hearing, if a hearing has been scheduled when the date of notice of application is issued. For Type II-B processes, the notice shall provide information regarding the process for requesting a public hearing in accordance with the applicable Type II-B permit application; 7. Any other information determined appropriate by the director such as the director's threshold determination, if complete at the time of issuance of the notice of application 19 Packet Pg. 44 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b D. MaiiedNotice. Notice of application shall be mailed to: 1. The owners of the property involved if different from applicant; and 2. The owners of real property within 300 feet of the boundaries of the property(ies) involved in the application (the distance is extended to 500 feet for Type II -A design review applications in the general commercial zone). Addresses for a mailed notice required by this code shall be obtained from the applicable county's real property tax records. The adjacent property owners list must be current to within six months of the date of initial application. 3. Type NPre/iminaryP/atActions. In addition to the above, requirements for mailed notice of filing for preliminary plats and proposed subdivisions shall also include the following: a. Notice of the filing of a preliminary plat adjacent to or within one mile of the municipal boundaries of any city or town, or which contemplates the use of any city or town utilities, shall be given to the appropriate city or town authorities; b. Notice of the filing of a preliminary plat of a proposed subdivision adjoining the boundaries of Snohomish County shall be given to the appropriate county officials; c. Notice of the filing of a preliminary plat of a proposed subdivision located adjacent to the right-of-way of a state highway shall be given to the Secretary of Transportation; 4. For a plat alteration or a plat vacation, notice shall be as provided in RCW 58.17.080 and 58.17.090. All mailed public notices shall be deemed to have been received on the next business day following the day that the notice is deposited in the mail. E. Published Notice. Notice of application shall be published in the city's official newspaper (The Everett Herald, as identified in Chapter 1.03 ECC). The format shall be determined by the director and the notice must contain the information listed in subsection (C) of this section F. Posting. Posting of the property for site specific proposals shall consist of one or more notice boards as follows: 1. A single notice board shall be placed: 20 Packet Pg. 45 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b a. At the midpoint of the street fronting the site or as otherwise directed by the director for maximum visibility; b. Five feet inside the street property line, except when the board is structurally attached to an existing building; provided, that no notice board shall be placed more than five feet from the street without approval of the director; c. So that the bottom of the notice board is between two and four feet above grade; and d. Where it is completely visible to pedestrians. e. The size of the notice board shall be determined by the director. 2. Additional notice boards may be required when: a. The site does not abut a public road; b. A large site abuts more than one public road; or c. The director determines that additional notice boards are necessary to provide adequate public notice. 3. Notice boards shall be: a. Maintained in good condition during the notice period; b. In place at least 14 days prior to the date of any hearing, and at least 14 days prior to the end of any required comment period; c. Removed within 30 days of the date of the project decision, unless the decision is appealed. If the project decision is appealed, the sign must be removed 30 days after the appeal decision is issued. 4. Removal of the notice board prior to the end of the notice period shall be cause for discontinuance of the department review until the notice board is replaced and remains in place for the specified time period. G. Public Comment on the Notice ofAppiication. All public comments in response to the notice of application must be received by the city's planning and development department between the day the notice is issued and 11:59 p.m. y 4L39 p47R on the last day of the comment period. 21 Packet Pg. 46 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b Comments in response to the notice of application received after the comment period has expired will not be accepted no matter when they were mailed or postmarked. Comments shall be mailed, emailed or personally delivered. Comments should be as specific as possible. [Ord. 4302 § 3 (Att. A), 2023; Ord. 4299 § 42 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4026 § 5, 2016; Ord. 4021 § 1, 2016; Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.03.003 Notice of public hearing. A. A notice of public hearing shall be provided by the city for Type III or Type IV actions, as well as appeals of Type II actions, by mailing, posting and publishing. B. Content of Notice ofPublic Hearing forAiiAppiications. The notice of a public hearing required by this chapter shall contain: 1. The name and address of the applicant and the applicant's representative; 2. A description of the subject property reasonably sufficient to inform the public of its location, including but not limited to a vicinity location or written description, a map or postal address, and a subdivision lot and block designation (complete legal description not required); 3. The date, time and place of the hearing; 4. The nature of the proposed use or development; 5. A statement that all interested persons may appear and provide testimony; 6. The sections of the code that are pertinent to the hearing procedure; 7. A statement explaining when information maybe examined, and when and how written comments addressing findings required for a decision by the hearing body may be admitted; 8. The name of a city representative to contact and the telephone number where additional information may be obtained; 9. A statement that a copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant, and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and that copies will be provided at the requestor's cost; and 22 Q Packet Pg. 47 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b 10. A statement explaining that a copy of the staff report will be available for inspection at no cost at least seven days prior to the hearing and that copies will be provided at the requestor's cost. C. Mailed Notice. Mailed notice of the public hearing shall be provided as follows: 1. The notice of the public hearing shall be mailed to: a. The applicant; b. The owner of the subject property, if different from applicant; c. All owners of real property, as shown by the records of the county assessor, within 300 feet of the boundaries of the property(ies) involved in the application; and d. Any person who submits public comments on an application; 2. Type NPreliminaryPlatActions. In addition to the above, requirements for mailed notice of public hearing for preliminary plats and proposed subdivisions shall also include the following: a. If the owner of the real property which is proposed to be subdivided owns another parcel or parcels of real property which lie adjacent to the real property proposed to be subdivided, notice under RCW 58.17.090(1)(b) shall be given to owners of real property located with 300 feet from any portion of the boundaries of the adjacent parcels owned by the owner of the real property to be subdivided. 3. For a plat alteration or a plat vacation, notice shall be as provided in RCW 58.17.080 and 58.17.090. 4. Procedure for Mailed Notice of Public Hearing. a. The records of the Snohomish County assessor's office shall be used for determining the property owner of record. Addresses for a mailed notice required by this code shall be obtained from the applicable county's real property tax records. b. All mailed public notices shall be deemed to have been received on the next business day following the day that the notice is deposited in the mail. D. Procedure for Posted or Published Notice of Public Hearing. 23 Packet Pg. 48 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b 1. Posted notice of the public hearing shall comply with requirements set forth in ECDC 20.03.002(F). 2. Notice of public hearing shall be published in the city's official newspaper (The Everett Herald, as identified in Chapter 1.03 ECC). The format shall be determined by the director and the notice must contain the information listed in subsection (B) of this section. E. Time of Notice of Public Hearing. Notice shall be mailed, posted and first published not less than 14 or more than 30 days prior to the hearing date. [Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009. Formerly 20.03.004]. F. Public Comment on the Notice of Public Hearing. All public comments in response to the notice of public hearing must be received by the city's planning and development department between the day the notice is issued and the close of the public hearing. 20.03.004 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) notice. A. Whenever possible, the city shall integrate the public notice required under this subsection with existing notice procedures for the city's nonexempt permit(s) or approval(s) required for the proposal. B. Whenever the city issues a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) under WAC 197-11- 340(2) or a determination of significance (DS) under WAC 197-11-360(3) the city shall give public notice as follows: 1. If public notice is required for a nonexempt license, the notice shall state whether a DS or DNS has been issued and when comments are due. 2. If an environmental document is issued concurrently with the notice of application, the public notice requirements for the notice of application in RCW 36.70B.110(4) will suffice to meet the SEPA public notice requirements in WAC 197-11-5100). 3. If no public notice is otherwise required for the permit or approval, the city shall give notice of the DNS or DS by: a. Posting the property, for site specific proposals; b. Mailed to real property owners as shown by the records of the county assessor within 300 feet of the boundary of the property, for site specific proposals; and 24 Packet Pg. 49 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b c. Publishing notice in the city's official newspaper (or if one has not been designated, in a newspaper of general circulation within the city). 4. Whenever the city issues a IDS under WAC 197-11-360(3), the city shall state the scoping procedure for the proposal in the IDS as required in WAC 197-11-408 and in the public notice. C. If a DNS is issued using the optional DNS process, the public notice requirements for a notice of application in RCW 36.7013.110(4) as supplemented by the requirements in WAC 197- 11-355 will suffice to meet the SEPA public notice requirements in WAC 197-11-51000). D. Whenever the city issues a draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) under WAC 197-11- 455(5) or a supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) under WAC 197-11-620, notice of the availability of those documents shall be given by: 1. Indicating the availability of the DEIS in any public notice required for a nonexempt license; 2. Posting the property, for site specific proposals; 3. Mailed to real property owners as shown by the records of the county assessor within 300 feet of the boundary of the property, for site specific proposals; and 4. Publishing notice in the city's official newspaper (or if one has not been designated, in a newspaper of general circulation within the city). E. Public notice for projects that qualify as planned actions shall be tied to underlying permit; the notice shall state that the project has qualified as a planned action. If notice is not otherwise required for the underlying permit, no special notice is required. F. Public Comment. All public comments in response to the notice of a comment period must be received by the city's planning and development department between the day the notice is issued and 11:59 p.m. on the last day of the comment period. The city may require an applicant to complete the public notice requirements for the applicant's proposal athis er her expense. [Ord. 3818 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010]. 25 Packet Pg. 50 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b 20.03.005 Shoreline master program (SMP) notice. A. Methods of Providing SMP Notice. Notice of the application of a permit under the purview of the city's shoreline master program shall be given by one or more of the following methods: 1. Mailing of the notice to real property owners as shown by the records of the county assessor within 300 feet of the boundary of the property upon which the proposed project is to be built; 2. Posting of the notice in a conspicuous manner, as determined by the director, on the property upon which the project is to be constructed; or 3. Any other manner deemed appropriate by the director to accomplish the objectives of reasonable notice to adjacent landowners and the public. B. Content ofSMP Notice. SMP notices shall include: 1. A statement that any person desiring to submit written comments concerning an application, or desiring to receive notification of the final decision concerning an application, may submit comments, or requests for the decision, to the director within 30 days of the last date that notice is published pursuant to this subsection; 2. A statement that any person may submit oral or written comments at the hearing; 3. An explanation of the manner in which the public may obtain a copy of the city's decision on the application no later than two days after its issuance. C. Public Comment onanSMPNotice.RU-N-cC^mmentR�r%^^! The public comment period r,h;" he is 30 days from the date of issuance of the notice until 11:59 p.m. on the final day of the notice period or until the close of any required public hearing. D. The director shall mail or otherwise deliver a copy of the decision to each person who submits comments or a written request forth e decision. [Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010]. 20.03.006 Optional public notice. The director, in his or her sole discretion, may: W. Packet Pg. 51 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b A. Notify the public or private groups with known interest in a proposal or type of proposal; B. Notify the news media; C. Place notices in appropriate regional or neighborhood newspapers or trade journals; D. Publish notice in agency newsletters or send notice to agency mailing lists, either general lists or lists for specific proposals or subject areas; and E. Mail notice to additional neighboring property owners. [Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009. Formerly 20.03.003]. Chapter 20.12 DISTRICT -BASED DESIGN REVIEW 20.12.005 Outline of process and statement of intent. The architectural design board (ADB) process has been developed in order to provide for public and design professional input prior to the expense incurred by a developer in preparation of detailed design. In combination, Chapter 20.10 ECDC and this chapter are intended to permit public and ADB input at an early point in the process while providing greater assurance to a developer that his general project design has been approved before the final significant expense of detailed project design is incurred. In general, the process is as follows: A. Public Hearing (Phase 1), The applicant shall submit a preliminary conceptual design to the city. Staff shall schedule the first phase of the ADB hearing within 30 days of staffs determination that the application is complete. Upon receipt, staff shall provide full notice of a public hearing, noting that the public hearing shall be conducted in two phases. The entire single public hearing on the conceptual design shall be on the record. At the initial phase, the applicant shall present facts which describe in detail the tract of land to be developed noting all significant characteristics. The ADB shall make factual findings regarding the particular characteristics of the property and shall prioritize the design guideline checklist based upon these facts, the provisions of the city's design guideline elements of the comprehensive plan and the Edmonds Community Development Code. Following establishment of the design guideline checklist, the public hearing shall be continued to a date certain requested by the applicant, not to exceed 120 days from the meeting date. The 1 d 170-day city review 27 Packet Pg. 52 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b period required by RCW 36.7013.080 commences with the application for Phase 1 of the public hearing. The 1120-day 170-day time period is suspended, however, while the applicant further develops their application for Phase 2 of the public hearing. This suspension is based upon the finding of the city council, pursuant to RCW 36.7013.080, that additional time is required to process this project type. The city has no control over the length of time needed or taken by an applicant to complete its application. B. Continued Public Hearing (Public Hearing, Phase2). The purpose of the continuance is to permit the applicant to design or redesign his initial conceptual design to address the input of the public and the ADB by complying with the prioritized design guideline checklist criteria. When the applicant has completed his design or redesign, he shall submit that design for final review. The matter shall be set for the next available regular ADB meeting date. If the applicant fails to submit his or her design within 180 days, the staff shall report the matter to the ADB who shall note that the applicant has failed to comply with the requirements of the code and find that the original design checklist criteria approval is void. The applicant may reapply at any time. Such reapplication shall establish a new 120 review period and establish a new vesting date. C. After completing the hearing process, the final detailed design shall be presented to the city in conjunction with the applicable building permit application. The city staffs decision on the building permit shall be a ministerial act applying the specific conditions or requirements set forth in the ADB's approval, but only those requirements. A staff decision on the building permit shall be final and appealable only as provided in the Land Use Petition Act. No other internal appeal of the staffs ministerial decisions on the building permit is allowed. [Ord. 4302 § 4 (Att. A), 2023; Ord. 3636 § 3, 2007]. Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS 20.75.065 Preliminary review. A. Responsibility for Review. The planning and development director, or a designated planning staff member, is in charge of administering the preliminary review of all subdivisions. The public works director and the fire department, and other departments if needed, shall 28 Q Packet Pg. 53 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b participate in preliminary review by appropriate recommendations on subjects within their respective areas of expertise. B. Repealed by Ord. 4314. Repealed. 9C. Formal Subdivision Review. The hearing examiner shall review a formal subdivision as a Type III -A decision in accordance with provisions of Chapter 20.06 ECDC. €D. Short Subdivisions -Staff Review. The director of planning and development shall review a short subdivision as a Type II decision (Staff decision - Notice required). PE. Appeal ofStaffDecision. Any person may appeal to the hearing examiner a Type II decision of the planning and development director on a short subdivision under the procedure set forth in Chapter 20.06 ECDC. [Ord. 4314 § 85 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4299 § 57 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4154 § 4 (Att. Q, 2019; Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3817 § 12, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 65, 2009; Ord. 3211 §§ 4, 5, 1998; Ord. 3112 §§ 17, 18, 19, 1996; Ord. 2379 § 2, 1983]. 20.75.070 Formal subdivision - Time limit. The city shall make its final decision on a proposed formal subdivision within an days of the date 'S the timelines found in the Decision Table in ECDC 20.01.003(B), unless the applicant agrees to extend the time. Where applicable, additional tintime needed to prepare and •� • . • 1 • • 4070 1 29 Packet Pg. 54 EXHIBIT A 8.1.b Title 21 DEFINITIONS 21.80.095 Project permit or project permit application. Project permit or project permit application for purposes of the ECDC means any land use or environmental permit or license required by the ECDC for a project action, including but not limited to building permits subdivisions, binding site plans, planned unit developments, conditional uses, shoreline substantial development permits, site plan review, permits or approvals required by critical areas ordinances, site -specific rezones authorized by comprehensive plan or sub -area niter,, which do not require a comprehensive plan amendment, but excluding the adoption or amendment of a comprehensive plan, subarea plan, or development regulations except as otherwise specifically included in this subsection. [Ord. 3112 § 36, 1996]. 30 Packet Pg. 55 9.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/4/2024 Public Hearing on Disposition of Sewer Easement — Anthology Senior Living Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Emiko Rodarte Background/History On March 8, 2022, this item was presented to the PPW Committee. While the committee had approved the item at that time to move forward with a public hearing, this action was put on hold by City staff in order to ensure compliance with RCW 35.94.040. In addition, due to utility conflicts that arose during construction, the proposed sewer connection for the project required redesign and therefore City staff also held off on bringing this item back to committee until that was resolved. October 15, 2024 - PPW Committee approved item for presentation at a public hearing. Resolution establishing easement as surplus moved forward to Oct 22"d consent agenda. October 22, 2024 - Resolution 1560 approved on council consent agenda. Staff Recommendation Approve release of sewer easement. Narrative A building permit has been issued for a 127-unit senior living facility at the southwest corner of 212th St SW & 72nd Ave W, addressed as 21200 72nd Ave W. The previous office building on the site was connected to the City's public sanitary sewer main through an easement at the south property line. With the development of the new senior living facility, this sewer line was cut and capped at the southerly property line and a new direct connection was provided to the City's public sewer main in 212th St SW. There is no future use for the public sanitary sewer easement and pursuant to Resolution 1560, the easement has been declared as surplus. The City Council may, by resolution and pursuant to a public hearing, release or otherwise sell, the surplus lands or property at its fair market value or the rent or consideration to be paid. The attached staff report and attachments includes a detailed analysis on the disposition of the sewer easement and provides a recommendation to the City Council. Attachments: Staff Report Disposition of Easement Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map Attachment 2 - Survey Sewer Easement Packet Pg. 56 9.1 Attachment 3 - Sewer Easement AFN7711230226 Attachment 4 - Easement Appraisal Attachment 5 - Project Owner Letter Attachment 6 - Improvements Attachment 7 - Ped and Utility Easement Council Approval 02152022 Attachment 8 - Resolution 1560 Easement Surplus Attachment 9 - Resolution disposition of easement Attachment 10 - MRSC ARTICLE RELEASING EASEMENT Attachment 11 - Presentation Disposition of Easement Packet Pg. 57 9.1.a 41)C. 189\J CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5ch Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT • ENGINEERING DIVISION REPORT & RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL Project: Disposition of sanitary sewer easement at 21200 72nd Ave W Date of Report: October 29, 2024 Staff: Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager Rob English, City Engineer I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL AND PROCESS A building permit has been issued for a 127-unit senior living facility at the southwest corner of 212th St SW & 72nd Ave W, addressed as 21200 72nd Ave W. The previous office building on the site was connected to the City's public sanitary sewer main through an easement at the south property line. With the development of the new senior living facility, this sewer line was cut and capped and a new direct connection provided to the existing public sewer in 212th St SW. As such, that portion of the easement that encumbers the subject property is no longer needed. RCW 35.94.040 addresses the release of surplus lands or property that were originally acquired for public utility purposes but are no longer required for providing continued public utility service. The City Council may, by resolution and pursuant to a public hearing, release or otherwise sell, the surplus lands or property at its fair market value or the rent or consideration to be paid. Municipal Research Services Center (MRSC) of Washington, a publication that provides discussion topics and opinion to municipal professionals, published an article on releasing an easement (Attachment 10). This article reports that releasing an easement that was granted independent of a plat is to be done in accordance with RCW 35.94.040 and that releasing a right-of-way can only be accomplished through a street or road vacation. This is consistent with the City's position that RCW 35.94.040 is the correct process for the subject release of easement. Resolution No. 1560 (Attachment 8), establishing the sanitary sewer easement as surplus, was approved by Council on October 22, 2024. The following is staff s evaluation of the disposition of easement. Apollo — Disposition of Easement Page I of 3 Packet Pg. 58 9.1.a IL GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Location: The subject disposition is for that portion of the sewer easement located at the south property line of and on the property addressed as 21200 72nd Ave W. Refer to Attachments 1 and 2 for vicinity map and survey of easement area. 2. Easement: The sanitary sewer easement was recorded in 1977 under auditor's file number 7711230226 (Attachment 3). The easement was intended for use by the subject property and the property to the south; however, the subject property was the only user of the easement area. The easement area is no longer in use. 3. Easement Area: That portion of the easement proposed for release is 216 square feet more or less. III. NOTICE Notice of the Public Hearing was published in the Everett Herald on October 19, 2024. In addition, the hearing notice was posted online on the city calendar and at City Hall and in the Public Safety building. IV. TECHNICAL REVIEW The subject property contains a 216 square foot sanitary sewer easement to the City of Edmonds. That portion of the sewer easement located on the subject property is no longer used for sanitary sewer purposes. The sewer line was cut and capped at the property line prior to demolition of the previous structure and a new direct connection is provided at the north property line to 212th St SW. The previously existing building structure was the only structure connected to the City's public sewer system located within the easement. In compliance with RCW 35.94.040, an appraisal was completed indicating a fair market value of $8,700 for the subject sanitary sewer easement area (Attachment 4). In assessing whether compensation should be made to the City for release of the easement, staff reviewed the appraisal, the letter received from a project owner representative (Attachment 5) and in addition gave consideration to the public benefits thought to be derived with completion of the proposed development project and grant of public easements. The proposed development will provide 127 senior living housing units within the City. The project will replace the existing sidewalks along 212th St SW and 72nd Ave W with a new wider public sidewalk and landscape buffer adjacent to the street. Street trees will be provided along both 212th St SW and 72nd Ae W where none currently exist. As the pedestrian improvements will not fit within the available right-of-way, public pedestrian easements will be granted to the City for those portions of the sidewalk to be constructed on private property. In addition, a public water meter vault easement will be provided on private property along the 212th St SW property frontage. Please refer to Attachment 6 for Anthology —Disposition of Easement Page 2 of 3 Packet Pg. 59 9.1.a location of improvements and proposed easements. All three easements to be granted to the City were approved by City Council on the February 15, 2022 consent agenda (Attachment 7). As a comparison of easement areas, the sanitary sewer easement area proposed for release is 216 square feet, while the pedestrian and water meter vault easement areas total approximately 1,823 square feet. V. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis in and the attachments to this report, staff recommends approval of the release of the sanitary sewer easement. For the reasons stated, staff recommends not seeking compensation for release of the easement. VI. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Survey of Sanitary Sewer Easement 3. Sewer Easement AFN7711230226 4. Appraisal Release of Easement 5. Project Owner Letter 6. Site Plan — Improvements 7. Pedestrian & Utility Easements — Council Approval 02-15-2022 8. Resolution 1560 Easement Surplus 9. Resolution XXXX Easement Disposition 10. MRSC Article Releasing an Easement Anthology —Disposition of Easement Page 3 of 3 Packet Pg. 60 I 9.1.b I City of Edmonds Anthology Senior Living — > �Q tnul i00 ST 9 1 SHT 10 S1 27N 1 ti20 T27.h-' L . _WVNWQOD R4E 20gTH ST SW EDMONDS I I ` I > -TH-STSW _ y. 0010 W 204TH ST SW SHT 13 SHT 14 Q S30 T27N S29 T27N R4E R4E ^.�IL t0 Jy I r � p ERAN , 220TH ST SW w �J E 1: 12,125 O 0 1,010.38 2,020.8 Feet 1,504.7 This ma is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is foi 18,056 p B p pp B reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate WGS_1984_Web-Mercator _Auxiliary -Sphere current, or otherwise reliable © City of Edmonds THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION Legend Notes Vicinity Map 21200 72nd Ave W FEW CL C d E t U Q U 2 r Q Packet Pg. 61 1 9.1.c i o co N39°59'21 "E 10.00' EXHIBIT C DEPICTION OF PORTION OF EASEMENT FOR RELINQUISHMENT 212TH ST SW M (PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY) LOT 4 TPN:00580700000401 PORTION OF EASEMENT TO BE RELINQUISHED POINT OF COMMENCEMENT N50"00'39"W SE COR. LOT 4 27.63' POINT OF BEGINNING N89`52'53"W 128.08' 10' SANITARY SEWER 15.65' 15.60 J \� EASEMENT REC. NO. N50°00'39"W� 7711230226 �------------- ---------------- ---------------------------------- LOT 3 CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT S-77 REC. NO. 7705310298 PARK 212 APT LLC - EXHIBIT NOTE - THIS EXHIBIT HAS BEEN PREPARED TO ASSIST IN THE INTERPRETATION OF THE ACCOMPANYING LEGAL DESCRIPTION. IF THERE IS A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE WRITTEN LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND THIS SKETCH, THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION SHALL PREVAIL. 30' 30' GRAPHIC SCALE NW 1/4, NW 1/4, SEC. 29, TWP. 27N., RGE. 4E., W.M. CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON www.axismap.com JOB NO. DATE 15241 NE 90TH ST, 18-210 04/27/23 PO SUITE 100 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY ODOaD REDMOND, WA 98052 JM WTB TEL. 425.823-5700 surww& FAX 425.823-6700 SCALE SHEET 1"=50' 3 OF 3 Packet Pg. 62 1/20/22. 12:46 PM Landmark Web Official Records Search 9.1.d III h , s° i j ^ g1ACli, G�,�r N . P.O. i,nz 1 7 i O L A S E M E N T Wh i ;4'iTON LyWYOOD, rr\ N r-4 IN CONSIDERATIOqoencto accrue to the grantors herein, the 11 undersigned, LAPIERRE INDUSTRIE_ INC.;LAPIrjiR1 F.NTERPRISFS, a a� rtnerahip td hereby grant to the t11Y Ol Eti+ 'lUS, a runici paT Corporation, a permanent ti easement for the installation ADS. ation, and maintenance of San�itar over, across, throuq an eh d b law the 0 owing s bed property, a�gr� a fuY4her right to re'ove trees, bushes, 'undergrowth and other obs tructionrinterferinq with the location, construction and maintenance of said utility orlutilities, tooether with the right of access q to the easement at any time for the �['ay purposes. r: The easement and right-of-way hLrr Brantad is located in the County ��O of Snohomish, State of :iashington, and more titularly described as follows: j See attached A 1- The CITY agrees to restore to substantially the on i dition such t' improvements as are disturbed during the construction, main a and repair of said utility or utilities; provided, the grantm•s, their h assigns o shall not construct any permanent structure over, upon or withi`' rmarent i easement. `_ I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said corporation has caused this instru� be i executed by its proper officers and its corporate seal to be hereu affixed this 16th day of November 19 77 Cl�d tt-�'•l-ve et 1, NO SALES TAX By Q:K ` «c_ Pr ident REQUIRED € Byf�l-4C NOV 21 1971 Seer �� STATE OF WASHINGTON& iBy[p$, 9sroziA;&* liiiM C COUNTY OF SNOHOML%FP — On this 16th day of November 19 77 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in an or t e State of Was iF ngton, duly I I!j connissioned and sworn, personally appeared E. J. LAPIERRE and ALDERT LAPIERRE z{ andx to me known to be Presi ant an g{ Secretary, respectively, of LAPIERRE F.NTEPPRISES and LAPIERRE INDCSTRIE$, INC. „ I� I the corporation that executed tTie foregoing instrument an ac no•.; edged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the L ' _I uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that they authorized l 1 to execute the said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of i said corporation. ,,\ Witness my hand and official,s�f--)eW- pixed the da year first above written. : j4;. II i� K o- a "a it Tri t't1e LT in a or to ate of,� '• > Was ington, residing at },. < . Yo11216 e e.498 17112302-2'6 https://www.snoco.org/RecordedDocuments/search/index?theme=.blue§ion=searchCriterialnstrumentNumber&quickSearchSelectid Packet Pg. 63 1/20/22, 12:46 PM Landmark Web Official Records Search I 9.1.d }I M,in 51�11�rEmonC,, W„� rlen 9603a • �}06i ))691)) file No. That portion of Tract 4, Solners Five -Acre Tracts accordthe plat thereof recorded In V01ume 7 of PIa [s on page 25, records of "'h ty, Wash ton, lying within a strip of land 10.00 feet In width bean eat on each side of the fallowing described can terline: Beyinning at a , n the east line of sa Id Tract 4, 50n16'25"W 19d.00 feet from the northea thereof; thence N88°52'l4"W 91.00 feet to a point hereinafter referred t ro int A, thence contlnuing N88n52'14"W 87.00 feet; thence S46n00'W 9y.00 :'0. ?I.el'I. terminusofthe centerlineherein described: ALSO, that portion of said Tract 4 lying within a strip ofland width, being 5.00 feet on each side of a centerline which begins at theta fore - mentioned "Point A" and extends N50.00'W 80.00 feet to the terminus of he centerline here In -described; - Situate In Snohomish County, Washington. t l https://www.snoco.org/RecordedDocuments/search/index?theme=.blue§ion=searchCriterialnstrumentNumber&quickSearchSelecti Packet Pg. 64 1/20/22. 12:46 PM Landmark Web Official Records Search 1 9.1 A I 0 i NF. Nn. 71 /02IB Q o � O E�rirf.:xJ L "3as: /a.� Se I V cnJ CPw%�'ne ofEalawr.H � i , F- I M � w 3 i Fbro/ .i of .Sbo�/ S bsr.'ren � j� a v C N . S/Z. Z2• — — NB8'4B'z5'W I DESCRIPTION ATTACHED ON SHEET 2 vm1216 Fxce500 EASEMENT MAP FOR 7711230226 LAPIC. CJRE IN TRA T 4 SOLNL Z> t- WE ASTRIES TRACTS CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASH. https://www.snoco.org/RecordedDocuments/search/index?theme=.blue§ion=searchCriterialnstrumentNumber&quickSearchSelecti Packet Pg. 65 CBRE VALUATION & ADVISORY SERVICES BEFORE -AND -AFTER APPRAISAL REPORT EDMONDS EASEMENT RELINQUISHMENT 21200 72ND AVE W. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 CBRE GROUP, INC. FILE NO. CB22US122192-IA ANTHOLOGY SENIOR LIVING 9.1.e VALUATION & ADVISORY SERVICES CBRE 1420 Fifth Ave. Ste. 1700 Seattle, WA 98101 S. Murray Brackett, MAI Director T 206-292-6121 F 206-292-1601 www.cbre.com June 4, 2023 Mr. Michael Duggan Executive Vice President ANTHOLOGY SENIOR LIVING 2401 East 2nd Avenue, Suite 500 Denver, Colorado 80206 RE: Appraisal of: Edmonds Redevelopment 21200 72nd Ave W. Edmonds, Snohomish County, Washington CBRE, Inc. File No. CB22US122192-1A Dear Mr. Duggan: At your request and authorization, CBRE, Inc. has prepared an appraisal of the market value of the referenced property. Our analysis is presented in the following Appraisal Report. The subject is a 0.81 acre (35,284 square foot) parcel of land located at 21200 72nd Ave West in Edmonds, Washington. The site is positioned for redevelopment of the former 6,750 square - foot medical office building. The subject currently has a 216 square -foot sanitary sewer easement that the City of Edmonds has agreed to relinquish. It is that the appraiser's conclusion that the improvements are not impacted by the proposed relinquishment of the easement. Based on the analysis contained in the following report, the appraiser's opinion of total compensation is concluded as follows: Concluded Market Value Appraisal Premise Value Conclusion Valuation Before $4,057,660 Valuation After ($4,066,354) Difference (Value Enhancement) $8,694 Rounded $8,700 Compiled by CBRE r Q Edmonds Redevelopment, Edmonds Easement Relinquishment CBRE Packet Pg. 67 9.1.e The report, in its entirety, including all assumptions and limiting conditions, is an integral part of, and inseparable from, this letter. The following appraisal sets forth the most pertinent data gathered, the techniques employed, and the reasoning leading to the opinion of value. The analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed based on, and this report has been prepared in conformance with, the guidelines and recommendations set forth in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), and the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute. The intended use and user of our report are specifically identified in our report as agreed upon in my contract for services and/or reliance language retained in the appraiser's workfile. As a condition to being granted the status of an intended user, any intended user who has not entered into a written agreement with CBRE in connection with its use of our report agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions of the agreement between CBRE and the client who ordered the report. No other use or user of the report is permitted by any other party for any other purpose. Dissemination of this report by any party to any non -intended users does not extend reliance to any such party, and CBRE will not be responsible for any unauthorized use of or reliance upon the report, its conclusions or contents (or any portion thereof). The report is not the appraisal but is the reporting of the appraisal to the named client or named intended user. Anyone else who attempts to rely on an appraisal report that is not a named user may be misled by the report. If you are not the client, you have no way of knowing if a later appraisal was done that replaces this report. Any changes will result in a different report date. Accordingly, this document may no longer contain the appraisers' opinions. Any subsequent reports, with a later report date, voids this document even to the client or intended user. ii Edmonds Redevelopment, Edmonds Easement Relinquishment CBRE Packet Pg. 68 9.1.e It has been a pleasure to assist you in this assignment. If you have any questions concerning the analysis, or if CBRE can be of further service, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, CBRE - VALUATION & ADVISORY SERVICES S. Murray Brackett, MAI WA License: 1100853 "` CBRE Edmonds Redevelopment, Edmonds Easement Relinquishment Packet Pg. 69 9.1.e 4 Edmonds Redevelopment, Edmonds Easement Relinquishment Packet Pg. 70 A ML 212TH ST SW p5 lo'Klo' PED AN9 UTILITY EASEMENT \ M _ FGL $ �� 10' STORM EASEMENT REC. NU- S 9407010224. \ Ni";2 4'W 211. 4'•s �U < 'FOUND 5/8- HEBAR T 730 ti �TiIN RIGHT TURN LANE ANp ,^,AP "RMA <5ER LCH AT CORNER 30' Li 50VH '<73 0STREETRIM 350.CC40T1=['�SETBACK30• CONIC IE34"O NSOPHIABWONG `�'/� 30" CONC IE 3J3.00 5NWCORNER CMUWALL IS 1.3'E OF I UNKNOWN LIDLINE. Q1 3' ELECTRICAL10' STORM EASEMENT EAMENTRELOf C EC. NO- 201805,6011NO. 770412015RIM 371.25 (33.926 S.F.)IE375.65 W ________-______________ _ ____ _____-_ ______________- LCT 11 r CONIC E 375 63 E _ HUNG CHUM iI s CHEN ET AL RIM 377.0' ; u 6" CONIC IE 374,30 W RIM 384.07 6" CONIC IE 3Ja.2] E 6 L` UNABLE TOCATE / 12• 3 ' IE OUT . hESER'PAANW6 -0 c i 10 CAROLTNTD BASILE' c ET AL 10' STREET • _ g 3 HY®E PARK Tfgb#°NH00.lES SETBACK 2 .. REC. NO. 2D1SGStB5DD1 15.1' . ` , GAS VAULT 48.3 4FFr=7.2 gz ♦17.T ABOVE GRADE '95.9 •• 54.2' I g N f\ CMU WALL RIDGES}958' 21200 72N0 WOOD W _ _ _ _ _ STORY W000 -------- FRAME BUILDING ^: 14• r I LOT P Y X • 16.750 SO- FT. iO IMPERIAL PROPERTY] I ,-----------iRRIDCE=J97.2' T 7232D LLC n RIDGE=}95.5' RIDGE----' Z 10' SANITARY SEWERRIOGE=395.6' t JEASEMENT REC. N0 61 - CONCRETE . 7711230226 PAVER PATH SW CORNER CMU 26.1, tat' LIDS WITH NOTHING INSIDE WALL IS 1.IE. aF _ f UNE. 25MF'H 2 5' CONCRETE WALL T11AE.`T� MATH 6'CLFNC N. HYDE PARK TOWNMOMES 3'LLFNC S. HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION SW CORNER CONCRETE WALL 5.2' IS 1.0'W OF I.E. I5.8' 4}.] 1 J.3 24.6 J.3 11•F 1"L 50 16-F-� 22•Fo 14"F 14i-I 1 Pt� = I 63:0' 12- < 24"F 16•F 12• 30' NB"2'53•W •_ ,1 v CMU wAL!_ TIMBER RET WALL . _ FACE OF CMU WALL CROSSES LINE 5.2'E. T OF CORNER. I 10 POWER LINE 6 EASEMEN7 REC. N0. 201't0050625 �DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE O 89'S2 • _ F fll PLAT Ae1D. NO. 1 PARK 212 T LLC _ LKWAY RIM 3]4.94 OF CROSSES UNE PROPERTY SOUTHEAST PROPERTY 6 CMP IE J74.74 8 CORNER. TOP CIRL STCTR J74.74 FOVNC S/8• REJAN 4W CAP 'EMERAU 30581' AT CORNER ` x s 2 M L Q Q Q rt+ 4) E 0 N M W C d E t t� to Q C N E s t� ca r r Q 5 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Packet Pg. 71 9.1.e Certification Subject Photographs Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Packet Pg. 72 9.1.e Certification TABLE OF CONTENTS SubjectPhotographs.......................................................................................................... 6 Certification...................................................................................................................... 8 ExecutiveSummary ........................................................................................................... 9 Scopeof Work................................................................................................................ 13 AreaAnalysis.................................................................................................................. 16 NeighborhoodAnalysis................................................................................................... 19 SiteAnalysis.................................................................................................................... 28 Zoning............................................................................................................................ 32 Taxand Assessment Data................................................................................................ 34 Highestand Best Use...................................................................................................... 38 AppraisalMethodology................................................................................................... 40 LandValue..................................................................................................................... 42 Analysis of Proposed Easement Relinquishment and Potential Impacts ............................... 47 Valuation of After Condition............................................................................................ 48 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions............................................................................... 53 ADDENDA Land Sale Data Sheets Project Information Qualifications Q 7 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Packet Pg. 73 9.1.e Certification Certification We certify to the best of our knowledge and belief: 1. The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. 2. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions and are our personal, impartial and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. 3. We have no present or prospective interest in or bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report and have no personal interest in or bias with respect to the parties involved with this assignment. 4. Our engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. 5. Our compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal. 6. Our analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, as well as the requirements of the State of Washington. 7. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute. 8. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. 9. As of the date of this report, S. Murray Brackett, MAI has completed the continuing education program for Designated Members of the Appraisal Institute, including Standard Business Practices and Ethics. 10. S. Murray Brackett, MAI has made a physical and personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report. The property owner, or the owner's designated representative, was given the opportunity to accompany the appraiser on the property inspection. 1 l . No one provided significant real property appraisal assistance to the persons signing this report. 12. Valuation & Advisory Services operates as an independent economic entity within CBRE, Inc. Although employees of other CBRE, Inc. divisions may be contacted as a part of our routine market research investigations, absolute client confidentiality and privacy were maintained at all times with regard to this assignment without conflict of interest. 13. S. Murray Brackett, MAI initially appraised this property in November, 2022. This appraisal is essentially a corrected version to reflect new information regarding the actual size of the easement to be relinquished. The effective date of value is unchanged. 14. This appraisal was developed, and the appraisal report prepared in conformance with the Appraisal Standards Board's Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. <� w a� S. Murray Brackett, MAI s WA License: 1100853 r Q Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 8 05 RE Packet Pg. 74 9.1.e Executive Summary Executive Summary Property Name Location Client Highest and Best Use As If Vacant As Improved Property Rights Appraised Date of Report Date of Inspection Estimated Exposure Time Estimated Marketing Time Land Area Zoning Improvements Property Type Buyer Profile SALIENT POINTS Edmonds Redevelopment 21200 72nd Ave W., Edmonds, Snohomish County, WA 98020 ANTHOLOGY SENIOR LIVING Mixed Use Former Office Fee Simple Estate June 4, 2023 11/7/22 and subsequent dates 6 - 12 Months 6 - 12 Months 0.81 AC 35,284 SF CG General Commercial Office recently demolished Developer Concluded Market Value Appraisal Premise Value Conclusion Valuation Before $4,057,660 Valuation After ($4,066,354) Difference (Value Enhancement) $8,694 Rounded $8,700 Compiled by CBRE The function of this appraisal is to assist with the relinquishment of a subsurface easement. No impacts to the property are foreseen as a result. EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTIONS An extraordinary assumption is defined as "an assignment -specific assumption as of the effective date regarding uncertain information used in an analysis which, if found to be false, could alter the appraiser's opinions or conclusions." ' • The appraiser is not qualified to detect the existence of potentially hazardous material or underground storage tanks which may be present on or near the site. The existence of hazardous materials or underground storage tanks may affect the value of the property. For this appraisal, CBRE, Inc. has specifically assumed that the property is not affected by any 1 The Appraisal Foundation, USPAP 2020-2027 (Effective January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2023) Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 9 05 RE Packet Pg. 75 9.1.e Executive Summary hazardous materials that may be present on or near the property. Furthermore, the appraiser is not aware of any hazardous materials that may be present on or near the property. The use of this assumption may affect the assignment results. HYPOTHETICAL CONDITIONS A hypothetical condition is defined as "a condition, directly related to a specific assignment, which is contrary to what is known by the appraiser to exist on the effective date of the assignment results but is used for the purposes of analysis." 2 • In the case of a change of property characteristics, the property is evaluated in the existing condition (Before) and in the Hypothetical After condition, in which the proposed easement relinquishment is assumed to have occurred. MARKET VOLATILITY We draw your attention to the fact that a combination of global inflationary pressures (leading to higher interest rates) and the recent geopolitical events in Ukraine, in addition to the on -going effects of the global Covid-19 pandemic in some markets, has heightened the potential for greater volatility in property markets over the short -to -medium term. Experience has shown that consumer and investor behavior can quickly change during periods of such heightened volatility and any lending or investment decisions should reflect this heightened level of volatility. Please note that the conclusions set out in this report are valid as at the valuation date only. Where appropriate, we recommend that the valuation is closely monitored, as we continue to track how market participants respond to current events. CURRENT ECONOMIC CONDITIONS The following is provided by CBRE Research as of September 21, 2022. • In September 2022, the Federal Reserve raised the federal funds rate by 75 basis points (bps) to a range of 3.00% to 3.25%. This was the Fed's third consecutive 75 bps rate hike in succession, and fifth increase for the calendar year. • The Fed also raised its inflation outlook to 5.4% (Personal Consumption Expenditures) and lowered its GDP growth forecast to 0.2% for 2022. • The Fed will increase the monthly reduction of its $8.8 trillion balance sheet to $95 billion from $47.5 billion beginning this month. This will put more upward pressure on long- term interest rates. • CBRE expects that an economic recession likely will occur in the first half of 2023, with the federal funds rate peaking as high as 4.50%. 2 The Appraisal Foundation, USPAP 2020-2027 (Effective January 1, 2020 through December 37, 2023) 10 05 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA RE Packet Pg. 76 9.1.e Executive Summary • Tighter financial and worsening economic conditions are causing commercial real estate investment volume to decline. The following ' summarizes the CBRE Research House View as of late -September 2022: 2023 2024-2028 Fed Funds Rate 3.50% to 3.75% 4.25% to 4.50% 1.75% to 20% 10-Year Treasury 3.20% 2.70% 290% The Fed will continue its aggressive monetary tightening until core inflation, which excludes volatile food and energy prices, nears its 2% target rate and the labor market loosens. The need for tighter monetary policy to tame inflation makes it more difficult for the economy to achieve a soft landing, although that is still possible. CBRE expects that inflation will moderate in the next six months as higher interest rates cool demand, supply chain disruptions ease and the strong dollar makes foreign goods cheaper. CBRE projects that inflation will end the year at around 8.00%. We expect that the federal funds rate will peak in 2023 at between 4.25% and 4.50%. Tighter financial and weaker macroeconomic conditions will weigh on real estate fundamentals, leading to lower real estate investment volume in Q4 2022 and the first half of 2023. Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 7 Packet Pg. 77 9.1.e Subject and Owner Identification IDENTIFICATION OF THE SUBJECT The subject is a 0.81-acre site currently utilized as a medical office. It is situated within the City of Edmonds and is identified by its property address at 21200 72nd Ave West. The improvements are not affected by the relinquishment of the current 2,910 square -foot sanitary sewer easement. IDENTIFICATION OF THE LARGER PARCEL The value of a property cannot be estimated without a determination of the property to be appraised. In some cases, multiple tax parcels are utilized together in one use or a larger tract of land may be legally, economically and physically divisible into smaller economic units. In this case, the subject is a single parcel of land, and therefore the larger parcel is the identified site. LEGAL DESCRIPTION The subject that is valued in this assignment has a lengthy legal description and is otherwise identified as Assessor Parcel Number 005807-000-004-01. OWNERSHIP According to the Snohomish County Assessor's Office, title to the property is currently vested in the name of CA SENIOR EDMONDS WAS PROPERTY OWNER LLC. The subject was purchased in March 2022 for $3,787,000, in an ostensibly arms -length transaction. CBRE is unaware of any other arm's length ownership transfers of the property within three years of the date of appraisal. Further, the property is not reportedly being offered for sale as of the effective date of value. The summary of ownership information is listed below. OWNER CONTACT We corresponded with Mr. Duggan of Anthology Senior Living on 10/24/22 as well as other dates. Mr. Duggan and/or associates provided a survey of the easement area to be relinquished. FURNITURE, FIXTURES AND EQUIPMENT (PERSONAL PROPERTY) No items of personal property were noted in the acquisition area. This analysis is limited to the valuation of the land only. 12 05 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA RE Packet Pg. 78 9.1.e Subject and Owner Identification Scope of Work REPORT OPTION Appraisal reports may be presented in an Appraisal Report or Restricted Appraisal Report option, per USPAP Standard Rule 2-2. This is an Appraisal Report. The report is also intended to comply with chapter 8.04 of the Revised Code of Washington and Washington Civil Jury Instructions, Chapter 150. The scope of the assignment relates to the extent and manner in which research is conducted, data is gathered, and analysis is applied. CLIENT The client is ANTHOLOGY SENIOR LIVING. INTENDED USER OF REPORT This appraisal is to be used by ANTHOLOGY SENIOR LIVING, its employees, agents, and assigns and no other user may rely on our report unless as specifically indicated in the report. Intended users are those who an appraiser intends will use the appraisal or review report. In other words, appraisers acknowledge at the outset of the assignment that they are developing their expert opinions for the use of the intended users they identify. Although the client provides information about the parties who may be intended users, ultimately it is the appraiser who decides who they are. This is an important point to be clear about: The client does not tell the appraiser who the intended users will be. Rather, the client tells the appraiser who the client needs the report to be speaking to, and given that information, the appraiser identifies the intended user or users. It is important to identify intended users because an appraiser's primary responsibility regarding the use of the report's opinions and conclusions is to those users. Intended users are those parties to whom an appraiser is responsible for communicating the findings in a clear and understandable manner. They are the audience. s INTENDED USE OF REPORT This appraisal is to be used for real property acquisition for the Edmonds Easement Relinquishment project and no other use is permitted. PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL The purpose of this appraisal is to assist the client in offering "fair market value" for the acquired rights and interests from the subject property. 3 Appraisal Institute, The Appraisal of Real Estate, 15th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2020), 40. 13 05 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA RE Packet Pg. 79 9.1.e Subject and Owner Identification DEFINITION OF VALUE "Fair Market Value" is defined as; the amount in cash which a well-informed buyer, willing but not obliged to buy the property, would pay, and which a well-informed seller, willing but not obligated to sell it would accept, taking into consideration all uses to which the property is adapted and might in reason be applied (Washington Pattern Instruction 150.08). The market value of the larger parcel in this appraisal is of the Unified Fee. That is to say, all interests are valued as owned by a single party, with the exception of existing encumbrances. INTEREST APPRAISED The value estimated represents the value of easement rights, based in turn, on the Fee Simple Estate. Definitions are as follows: Fee Simple Estate - Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power and escheat.' Leased Fee Interest - The ownership interest held by the lessor, which includes the right to receive the contract rent specified in the lease plus the reversionary right when the lease expires5 Leasehold Interest - The tenant's possessory interest created by a lease. b Going Concern — An established and operating business having an indefinite future life.' Easement: The right to use another's land for a stated purpose.' Extent to Which the Property is Identified The property is identified through the following sources: 1. postal address 2. assessor's records 3. legal description Extent to Which the Property is Inspected The property was inspected by S. Murray Brackett on 1 1 /7/2022 and subsequent dates. 4 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, bfh ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2015), 90. 5 Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 128. 6 Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 128. ' Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 102. 8 Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 71 14 05 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA RE Packet Pg. 80 9.1.e Subject and Owner Identification Effective Date The effective date of value is 1 1 /7/2022. Type and Extent of the Data Researched CBRE reviewed the following: 4. applicable tax data 5. zoning requirements 6. flood zone status 7. demographics 8. comparable data 9. existing easement surveyed information Type and Extent of Analysis Applied CBRE, Inc. analyzed the data gathered through the use of appropriate and accepted appraisal methodology to arrive at a probable value indication via each applicable approach to value. The steps required to complete each approach are discussed in the methodology section. Data Resources Utilized in the Analysis DATA SOURCES Item: Source(s): Site Data Whole Property and Acquisition Size Snohomish County Assessor Remainder Size Snohomish County Assessor Floodplain FEMA Zoning City of Edmonds GIS Site Improvement Sizes N/A Easements Alta Survey, Client Provided Data; Axis Survey for easement size. Improved Data Building Area Alta Survey No. Bldgs. Snohomish County Assessor, Alta Survey Parking Spaces Alta Survey Year Built/Developed Snohomish County Assessor Data Not Provided Title Report, Environmental Survey Compiled by CBRE 15 05 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA RE Packet Pg. 81 Area Analysis C Kent Tacoma , Span away C {pia 4 Graham t4 MO M L Q t2 Q yr C 4) E 0 to M W C d E t t� tts Q C N E s t� cts r r Q 16 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Packet Pg. 82 9.1.e Site Descrintinn The subject is located in Seattle -Tacoma -Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area. Key information about the area is provided in the following tables. POPULATION The area has a population of 4,131,015 and a median age of 39, with the largest population group in the 30-39 age range and the smallest population in the 80+ age range. Population has increased by 691,206 since 2010, reflecting an annual increase of 1.54%. Population is projected to increase by an additional 107,786 by 2027, reflecting 0.52% annual population growth. Compiled by CBRE; Source: Esri 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 21000,000 1,000,000 0 AREA POPULATION BYAGE IN 0-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80+ POPULATION BY YEAR 2010 2022 2027 Mn M L Q Q Q yr 4) E 0 N R W C d E t 0 to Q a N E s 0 ca r r Q 17 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Packet Pg. 83 9.1.e Site Description INCOME The area features an average household income of $146,753 and a median household income of $105,891. Over the next five years, median household income is expected to increase by 1 7.4%, or $3,681 per annum. EDUCATION A total of 46.0% of individuals over the age of 24 have a college degree, with 28.1 % holding a bachelor's degree and 17.9% holding a graduate degree. EMPLOYMENT Prof/Scientific/Tech Services Health Care/Social Assistance Retail Trade Manufacturing Educational Services Construction Accommodation/Food Services Transportation/W a rehousing Other Services (excl Publ Adm) MEDIAN INCOME BY YEAR $130,000 $125,000 $120,000 $115,000 $110,000 $10,000 $100,000 ' $95,000 2022 POPULATION BY DEGREE ■ Bachelor's Degree ■ Graduate Degree ■ Other Public Administration 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 2027 14% 16% The area includes a total of 2,166,094 employees and has a 3.7% unemployment rate. The top three industries within the area are Prof/Scientific/Tech Services, Health Care/Social Assistance and Retail Trade, which represent a combined total of 38% of the population. Compiled by CBRE; Source: Esri f4 Mn M L Q Q Q C 4) E 0 N R w a� E t 0 R y.+ yr Q r.+ a 0 E t V w+ Q 18 05 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Packet Pg. 84 9.1.e Site Description Neighborhood Analysis Perrinville 625, Lynnwood F Mountlake Terrace The subject property is located in the City of Edmonds, a suburban location in southwest Snohomish County. Edmonds is situated on the Interstate 5 corridor and is located approximately twelve miles north of the Seattle CBD. Edmonds has a ferry run with the terminal located west of the subject and running from Edmonds to Kingston in Kitsap County. BOUNDARIES The neighborhood boundaries are detailed as follows: North: Highway 524 South: City of Shoreline Northern Boundary East: Interstate 5 West: Puget Sound LAND USE Edmonds is a suburban community located north of the Seattle Central Business District. The land within the neighborhood boundaries is about 90 to 95 percent built -out with a combination of commercial and residential uses. Generally, the majority of the commercial uses are located a 19 05 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA RE Packet Pg. 85 9.1.e Site Description along Edmonds Way with intermittent residential uses. Residential is heavily developed just off of Edmonds Way as most the area is devoted to this use. Other retail concentrations are located to the east along Highway 99 or north along Main Street in downtown Edmonds. Surrounding the retail arterials are a large concentration of single and multifamily developments. Salish Crossing is the largest shopping center in the area located approximately five blocks west of the subject. It was originally developed as a Safeway anchored shopping center, but has since been redeveloped to include Cascadia Art Museum, 190 Sunset Restaurant, Brigid's Bottleshop, Spud Fish and Chips, and several other shop space tenants. Top Pot Doughnuts was recently completed at the northeast corner of the site. Downtown Edmonds has limited parking and most of the retail uses are storefront developments. A primary commercial intersection in the area is Edmonds Way and 100th Avenue West, roughly 1.5 miles southwest of the subject. At the northwest corner of this intersection is PCC, Walgreens and Starbucks. At the southeast corner of the intersection is Key Bank and an Ivor's fast-food restaurant. On the southwest corner of this intersection is Westgate, a Bartell Drug anchored shopping center. On the northwest corner is a QFC anchored shopping center. Edmonds Way continues to the northwest where it becomes Sunset Way. About 1/2 mile west of the subject property is Harbor Square Athletic Club, Amtrak Train Station and the Edmonds -Kingston Ferry Terminal. Along Highway 99, there is a larger concentration of retail development including Aurora Village that is anchored by Home Depot and Costco and has over 250,000 square feet of retail space when including shop space. Other noteworthy anchor tenants include Fred Meyer, Winco (formerly Top Foods), Safeway and Ranch 99. GROWTH PATTERNS There has been no recent retail development in Edmonds and limited retail development in the greater Lynnwood/Edmonds/Mountlake Terrace market area. The majority of the new construction in the area consists of residential development and going forward, the most likely additions to the retail supply are likely to be infill projects featuring ground floor space in mixed - use developments. Edmonds is still considered a residential city with retail uses relying primarily on the local residential base. ACCESS Interstate 5 is the primary north -south highway connecting the entire west coast of the United States from the Mexican to the Canadian Borders. Interstate 5 connects the City of Lynnwood to Everett to the north and Seattle and Tacoma to the south along with all the cities in between. Interstate 405 is located just northeast of the subject's neighborhood and connects the area to the east side of Lake Washington and the cities of Kirkland, Bellevue and Renton before heading west and connecting again to Interstate 5. In the western portion of the neighborhood, Highway 99 is another north -south regional roadway serving the region from Everett to the north through the subject's eastern portion of the neighborhood and continuing south till it terminates in Tacoma. 20 05 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA RE Packet Pg. 86 9.1.e Site Description Downtown Edmonds is laid out in a grid pattern and several collector streets provide convenient access through the neighborhood and to the residential communities that define the area. DEMOGRAPHICS Selected neighborhood demographics in 1-, 3-, and 5-mile radii from the subject are shown in the following table: SELECTED NEIGHBORHOOD DEMOGRAPHICS 21200 72nd Ave W. 1 Mile Radius 3 Mile Radius 5 Mile Radius Seattle -Tacoma - Edmonds, WA 98020 Bellevue, WA Population 2027 Total Population 10,616 69,516 183,768 4,238,801 2022 Total Population 10,428 68,425 176,810 4,131,015 2010 Total Population 9,433 62,889 157,362 3,439,809 2000 Total Population 8,903 62,167 154,996 3,043,878 Annual Growth 2022 - 2027 0.36% 0.32% 0.77% 0.52% Annual Growth 2010 - 2022 0.84% 0.71% 0.98% 1.54% Annual Growth 2000 - 2010 0.58% 0.12% 0.15% 1.23% Households 2027 Total Households 5,164 28,933 74,151 1,645,280 2022 Total Households 5,102 28,581 71,559 1,606,869 2010 Total Households 4,680 26,649 64,376 1,357,475 2000 Total Households 4,247 25,840 61,663 1,196,568 Annual Growth 2022 - 2027 0.24% 0.25% 0.71% 0.47% Annual Growth 2010 - 2022 0.72% 0.58% 0.89% 1.42% Annual Growth 2000 - 2010 0.98% 0.31% 0.43% 1.27% Income 2022 Median Household Income $112,292 $101,832 $97,892 $105,891 2022 Average Household Income $175,635 $146,888 $132,463 $146,753 2022 Per Capita Income $85,906 $61,176 $53,512 $57,174 2022 Pop 25+ College Graduates 5,378 25,791 59,784 1,335,962 Age 25+ Percent College Graduates - 2022 63.0% 50.0% 45.8% 46.0% Source: ESRI As shown above, the population within the subject neighborhood has experienced an increase over the past several years. The neighborhood is expected to experience population growth over the next five years. As a result, the demand for existing developments is expected to be average to good. The neighborhood appears to be well established and favorably accepted. CONCLUSION The subject neighborhood is an established mid to upper-class area that has shown relatively moderate growth and is expected to experience slightly increasing growth over the next five years. The neighborhood has a solid residential base with both single and multi -family uses, with commercial along the main arterials. The general outlook for the neighborhood is good over the s ca r Q 21 05 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA RE Packet Pg. 87 9.1.e Site Description longer term. Overall, the subject neighborhood is forecast to maintain a stable performance over the mid to long-term. 22 CE Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA ME Packet Pg. 88 9.1.e Site Description PARCEL MAP 212th St SW t 23 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Packet Pg. 89 9.1.e Site Description FLOOD PLAIN MAP National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette & FEMA V UVV Ct 250 500 1.000 1.500 2.000 Basemap. USGS National Map: Orthamagery, Data reM1eshetl October. 2020 Legend wnnwl ease FIDW Elewtloll laFei SPECIAL FLOOD with an or OapI HAZARD AREAS ilft—ry Hoopway 0.2%Ann111 Cha— Fh— Haza,d, Areas M I%annual chanre hoop wan average peplh less than one 1-1 or with manMge areas o1 kss roan one square mile ". Farina Cpnp XazerHate %Annual Chantt Fbop p : Area wllh Repucep il— R.1, due 10 OTHER AREAS OF levee. See Notes- - FLOOD HAZARD Area wlm Road III- due to Lewx: h A,ea of Mlnlmal Hood Hazard F Eft-Ne IOMR, OTHER AREAS Area of Undeterminaa Hoop Hazard GENERAL ---• CnannN. Culvert. a Sto,m-1 STRUCTURES hill.. Levee. Dlse.a Fbpdwall Cross — wrlhl%Annual Gantt ware, S,In— Eleraopn _ _ _ fAasldl nansecl Base In— El—i- Une IBFEI — umt or story dunsdlchon BouMary -.— FAUUI Tan— Baseline OTHER _ P,ollle Baseline FEATURES ll~ag— Feature dgnal Dale Aralla Dk No Digital Data Ar 1—I, MAP PANELS Unmapped OThe pn "I.I.I. on 1. ..on an approumate print select. to, the user and a— not represent an aumpntatrre property lo[atbn. ThH map complies wl[n "A'. senda,ps roc the ... f OlghI Hood maps if II n all rob as IE.W. M Delovp TM Dasemap shown mmplles I. iEMAs Wssemap a<cpecy stanaares The Aoud nalard lnfonnabon 6 denved directly Novn the "thontative NFHL we0 snvH'es provWep Dy F MA Th6 map as e—n. on 1�3 �'iitl iM and doM not enact changes endmems wosequenl to In. pMe MW Ilme. me NFHL and ettectne lnrorme[lon may change a Ixtpme superseded In, new data ova, Ilme. Thor map Image .cola II Ne Olx or more M the 1011—ing map elements do na appear. Da. —II Imagery, .— zone IeDels. legend. sets. oar. map CreatlOn Gate-COmmwtlty Dentlrle6. FIRM panel numDel. and HRM enecllre date. Map Images for mapped — —de... areas cannot De used NH egulatory purposes. 24 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Packet Pg. 90 9.1.e Site Description SOILS MAP r qIn r A& J Snohomish County Area, Washington (WA661) Snohomish County Area, Washington (WA661) Map Acres Percent of Unit Map Unit Name in AOI AOI Symbol 5 Alderwood-Urban 3.2 24.5% land complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes 6 Alderwood-Urban land complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes 51 Pits Totals for Area of Interest 6.5 49.5% �I. 3.4 25.9% 13.2 100.0% ft .f I - - A,A LM --w Mn M L Q 12 Q yr 4) E 0 N R LU C d E t 0 to Q C N E s 0 ca r r Q 25 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Packet Pg. 91 9.1.e Site Description NVIRONMENTAL MAP City of Edmonds Map Title a r-. N rl r ~ Legend 21 1 2TH ST SW _ _ _ _ = Creeks ® SeismicHazard Areas Earth Subsidence and Landslide i L! Minimum Buffer Adjacent to Haz 2� _ Zo0 Wetlands ram( I� Wetlands Boundary - _,. Wetlxb BUMaes Not Corn::- Wetlandxnoem Eaten. Flo plains 7234 ® A ® AE Yl ® x DOH Wellhead Protection Areas . B Monm 13'3" jM 7100 1 Year . SYert �a r ■ 10 Y— BMerzane Landslide Hazard Are. 40% Severe Erosion Hazard 15Y,40` 15 Erosion Hazard Areas 15%-401= Sections Boundary 7200 . Sections Edmonds Boundary 1: 1,516 Q Notes 0 t2a30 v_ 6 Feet 4257 188.1 llsu map e a user 6enerrted strtk ou[Wt from an �ntemet mappin6 sr[e and is for We—. only. Orta layers thrt appear on Mu map may or may not be acw—' WGS_19WWeb_Mercat _A...h.ry_Sphere cu"en4orotharwrser.Wble- s Ciry of Fslmonds THIS MAR IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION 26 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 7 Packet Pg. 92 9.1.e Site Description ZONING MAP 21244STS1 - it 1 Rq m �n ca Mn M L Q Q Q y.+ 0 E 0 N R W C d t t� to Q C N s t� ca r r Q 27 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Packet Pg. 93 9.1.e Site Description Site Analysis The following chart summarizes the salient characteristics of the subject site. SITE SUMMARY Physical Description Gross Site Area 0.810 Acres 35,284 Sq. Ft. Net Site Area 0.810 Acres 35,284 Sq. Ft. Primary Road Frontage 212th Street SW 200 Feet Secondary Road Frontage 72nd Avenue West 170 Feet Excess Land Area None n/a Surplus Land Area None n/a Shape Rectangular Topography Generally Level Zoning District CG General Commercial Flood Map Panel No. & Date 53061 C1292F 19-Jun-20 Flood Zone Zone X (Unshaded) Flood Notes Area of minimal flood hazard Earthquake Zone FEMA Zone D Soil Type Alderwood-Urban land complex Ingress/Egress Points 212th St. S.W., 72nd Ave W. Comparative Analysis Rating Access Good Visibility Average Functional Utility Good Traffic Volume Average Adequacy of Utilities Good Drainage Assumed Adequate Utilities Provider Availability Water City of Edmonds Yes Sewer City of Edmonds Yes Natural Gas Puget Sound Energy Yes Electricity Snohomish County PUD No. 1 Yes Telephone Various Yes Sound Transit, Community Transit, Mass Transit Edmonds Ferry Yes Other Yes No Unknown Detrimental Easements X Encroachments X Deed Restrictions X Reciprocal Parking Rights X Source: Various sources compiled by CBRE 28 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 7 Packet Pg. 94 9.1.e Site Description Utilities The subject property has access to all public utilities. Ingress/Egress The subject has access and frontage from 212'h Street Southwest, and 72nd Avenue West. Topography and Drainage The site has generally level topography. Flood Zone The subject is within a Zone X unshaded area, which corresponds with a 1 % chance of flood in any given year. Soils The USDA Websoil Survey indicates the site contains Alderwood Urban Land Complex with slopes of 8%-15%. No frequency of ponding or flooding is noted. Easements and Encroachments We were not provided with a Title Report for the subject property. We are unaware of any easements or encroachments significantly impacting the site that are considered to affect the marketability or highest and best use. It is recommended that the client/reader obtain a current title policy outlining all easements and encroachments on the property, if any, prior to making a decision. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions = •L There are no known covenants, conditions or restrictions impacting the site that are considered to affect the marketability or highest and best use, other than what is listed above. It is recommended that the client/reader obtain a copy of the current covenants, conditions and 3 restrictions, if any, prior to making a decision. a Environmental Issues - Site MO L We were not provided with an environmental report for the subject, but a search of the City of Q a a Edmonds GIS system revealed an erosion hazard of 15%-40% on portions of the property. The appraiser is not qualified to detect the existence of any potentially hazardous materials such as E lead paint, asbestos, urea formaldehyde foam insulation, or other potentially hazardous w construction materials on or in the improvements. The existence of such substances may affect the value of the property. For this appraisal, CBRE, Inc. utilizes a standard assumption that the property is not affected by any hazardous materials that may be present on or near the property. s Conclusion 2a The site is suitable for uses commensurate with the surrounding neighborhood. The site is well - located within the neighborhood. It is afforded good visibility and good access from the s roadways. The size of the site is typical for the area. There are no other known detrimental r a 29 05 RE Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Packet Pg. 95 9.1.e Site Description easements, encumbrances, or restrictions on the site. The property is located in a growing suburban city, proximate to several national employers with access to all necessary utilities for development. Overall, the site is suitable for a variety of mixed -use improvements. 30 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 7 Packet Pg. 96 9.1.e Site Description Improvements Analysis Until recently the subject was improved with a medical office building consisting of 6,750 square feet. It has since been demolished in favor of a Senior Living Complex currently under construction. This analysis consists effectively of land only. 31 CE Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA ME Packet Pg. 97 9.1.e Zoning Description Zoning The following chart summarizes the subject's zoning requirements. ZONING SUMMARY Current Zoning CG, General Commercial Zoning Legally Conforming Yes Uses Permitted Commercial, Retail, Residential, Office Zoning Change Not likely Primary Surrounding Land Use Commerical Category Zoning Requirement Minimum Lot Size None Minimum Lot Width None Maximum Height 75 Feet Minimum Setbacks Front Yard None Side Yard 0-15 Ft. Rear Yard 0-15 Ft. Maximum Bldg. Coverage None Parking Requirements Residential 1.2-2 spaces per DU Retail 1 space/ 300 sf of GBA Medical/Dental Office 1 space/ 200 sf of GBA Subject's Actual Parking 35 Spaces Source: City of Edmonds Planning & Zoning Dept. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION According to the City of Everett Planning and Zoning Department: "The CG zone has the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for business and commercial zones listed in Chapter 16.40 ECDC: A. Encourage economic vitality through businesses, investment, redevelopment, and efficient use of land; B. Encourage safe and comfortable access for pedestrians, transit, and motorists; C. Encourage attractive mixed -use development, affordable housing, and a variety of commercial uses; and D. Recognize the district's evolving identity and sense of place, including distinctions w between different parts of the district, and be sensitive to adjacent residential zones." s ca r Q 32 05 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA RE Packet Pg. 98 9.1.e Zoning Description The subject is being developed with a new Senior Living facility. This analysis reflects land only. Additional information may be obtained from the appropriate governmental authority. For purposes of this appraisal, CBRE has assumed the information obtained is correct. 33 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 7 Packet Pg. 99 9.1.e Neighborhood Analysis Tax and Assessment Data AD VALOREM TAX INFORMATION Parcel Assessor's Parcel No. SF 2021 2022 1 005807-000-004-01 35,284 $1,768,000 $1,715,000 Subtotal $1,768,000 $1,715,000 Assessed Value @ 100% 100% $1,768,000 $1,715,000 Effective Tax Rate (per $1,000 A.V.) Less: Adjustment for Excess Land Total Taxes Source: Snohomish County Assessor's Office 8.207579 $14,511 8.269971 $14,183 Washington State law requires all property assessments for tax purposes based on 100% of fair market value of both the land and improvements (if any). The Assessor values properties on a cyclical basis according to a revaluation plan filed with the state Department of Revenue. At a minimum, real property must be revalued every year and inspected every four years. Despite state laws mandating property assessment based on full market value, assessed values typically fall below this standard. This is likely due to the difficultly in accurately re -valuing properties on a massive scale relative to the potential value impacts of fluctuating real estate market cycles, as well as lagging comparable sale data. As a result, assessed values typically vary from 70-90% of market value depending upon the property type, amount of reliable comparable data, etc. However, properties selling for prices significantly greater (or lower) than assessed value will often trigger an adjustment upon the following re -assessment when the sale price is considered to reasonably reflect market value. Furthermore, prudent investors will consider the potential for a real estate tax adjustment if market value significantly differs from the existing assessed value. We note that over half of the assessed value is attributed to the improvements, which have been demolished. Based on our concluded land value and the current millage rate, a substantial increase in annual taxes would be anticipated. 34 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Packet Pg. 100 9.1.e Neighborhood Analysis Market Analysis Primary data sources used for this market analysis includes Costar's V Quarter 2022 market and submarket statistics report as well as the market and submarket overview reports. The larger metro market includes all Snohomish, King, and Pierce counties and covers a total of 29 submarkets. The subject is located in South Snohomish County and more specifically in the Lynnwood submarket as defined by Costar. OVERALL MARKET OVERVIEW The following chart illustrates overall market trends in vacancy, rental rates, rent growth, inventory, and absorption, according to Costar and as of Q3 2022. Vacancy Market Annual Rent Inventory Under Constr Under Constr % of 12 Mo Absorp Period Rate Rent/Unit Growth Units Units Inventory Units 2022 Q3 5.4% $1,984 5.1 % 371,469 24,826 6.7% 8,525 2022 Q2 5.3% $2,01 1 9.1 % 368,382 24,499 6.7% 9,965 2022 Q1 5.2% $1,935 10.7% 364,584 25,386 7.0% 14,311 2021 Q4 5.2% $1,879 10.3% 362,449 23,496 6.5% 17,294 2021 Q3 4.9% $1,887 9.8% 360,527 21,759 6.0% 17,514 2021 Q2 5.3% $1,843 5.6% 357,917 22,426 6.3% 13,327 2021 Q1 6.6% $1,748 -0.7% 354,912 22,060 6.2% 5,660 2020 Q4 7.2% $1,703 -2.1% 352,046 22,154 6.3% 2,613 2020 Q3 7.1 % $1,718 -1.0% 350,347 21,830 6.2% 3,715 2020 Q2 6.3% $1,745 0.1 % 347,243 23,303 6.7% 6,446 2020 Q1 5.9% $1,761 3.1 % 346,407 21,845 6.3% 10,999 2019 Q4 5.9% $1,741 3.7% 344,300 21,944 6.4% 12,446 2019 Q3 6.0% $1,735 3.4% 342,079 20,917 6.1% 11,597 2019 Q2 5.9% $1,743 3.5% 339,104 21,965 6.5% 1 1,01 1 2019 Q1 6.3% $1,708 3.0% 336,156 23,185 6.9% 10,197 2018 Q4 6.4% $1,678 3.1 % 332,872 23,208 7.0% 9,845 2018 Q3 6.0% $1,677 2.8% 329,726 21,979 6.7% 9,322 2018 Q2 5.8% $1,685 2.9% 326,874 23,340 7.1 % 8,791 2018 Q1 6.1% $1,657 3.0% 324,444 21,314 6.6% 7,961 2017 Q4 6.3% $1,627 3.3% 322,114 20,329 6.3% 7,567 2017 Q3 5.9% $1,631 4.2% 319,581 19,457 6.1% 9,149 2017 Q2 5.3% $1,637 4.7% 316,028 19,702 6.2% 10,091 2017 Q1 5.4% $1,609 5.0% 313,682 19,534 6.2% 10,423 2016 Q4 5.7% $1,575 4.8% 312,019 18,952 6.1% 10,148 2016 Q3 5.4% $1,565 5.2% 308,134 20,221 6.6% 9,998 2016 Q2 5.3% $1,563 6.2% 305,358 18,844 6.2% 10,755 2016 Q1 5.6% $1,533 6.6% 303,306 18,811 6.2% 10,417 2015 Q4 6.0% $1,502 6.5% 302,025 18,320 6.1% 10,572 2015 Q3 6.0% $1,487 6.6% 299,812 17,749 5.9% 9,462 2015 Q2 6.2% $1,472 6.4% 296,793 17,555 5.9% 7,871 2015 Q1 6.0% $1,438 4.9% 293,489 16,948 5.8% 8,381 2014 Q4 6.2% $1,410 3.6% 291,628 17,511 6.0% 8,046 2014 Q3 5.8% $1,395 3.0% 289,078 16,501 5.7% 8,219 2014 Q2 5.8% $1,384 3.1 % 287,431 13,804 4.8% 8,425 2014 Q1 5.9% $1,371 3.4% 284,317 13,318 4.7% 7,306 2013 Q4 5.6% $1,361 3.7% 281,303 14,562 5.2% 7,048 2013 Q3 5.9% $1,354 3.9% 280,526 13,136 4.7% 7,404 2013 Q2 5.9% $1,342 3.8% 278,846 13,215 4.7% 7,190 2013 Q1 6.1% $1,325 3.3% 277,387 12,612 4.5% 6,609 Source: CoStar Q3 2022 35 05 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA RE Packet Pg. 101 9.1.e Neighborhood Analysis According to this source, vacancy has steadily ranged from 4.9% to 7.2% since Q1 2013; however, it is noted that this includes all new deliveries in lease -up. As such, the vacancy statistics are skewed to a small extent. Prior to Q2 2021, rent growth was negative on a year -over -basis for three straight quarters; however, in the last six quarters, year -over year rent growth has ranged from 5.1 % to 10.7% and has averaged 8.5%. Inventory has increased from 277,387 units to 371,469 units over this time period, or a 32.8% increase. Total absorption has been 50,673 units since Q2 2017, with an average of 2,534 units per quarter over this time period. SUBMARKET OVERVIEW - LYNNWOOD SUBMARKET The following chart illustrates overall market trends in vacancy, rental rates, rent growth, inventory, and absorption, according to Costar and as of Q3 2022. Period Vacancy Rate Market Rent/Unit Annual Rent Growth Inventory Units Under Constr Units Under Constr % of Inventory 12 Mo Absorp Units 2022 Q3 5.5% $1,926 8.7% 14,637 1,141 7.8% 726 2022 Q2 7.1 % $1,91 1 1 1.1 % 14,625 949 6.5% 633 2022 Q1 6.1% $1,838 12.0% 14,123 1,451 10.3% 584 2021 Q4 5.3% $1,776 10.2% 13,884 1,137 8.2% 719 2021 Q3 3.3% $1,772 9.4% 13,556 1,081 8.0% 723 2021 Q2 4.4% $1,721 6.1% 13,556 1,069 7.9% 566 2021 Q1 6.4% $1,642 1.1 % 13,537 1,088 8.0% 332 2020 Q4 5.2% $1,612 0.4% 13,111 1,514 11.5% 117 2020 Q3 4.5% $1,619 1.2% 12,960 1,665 12.8% 177 2020 Q2 4.4% $1,621 0.4% 12,960 1,665 12.8% 220 2020 Q1 4.8% $1,624 3.0% 12,960 1,098 8.5% 153 2019 Q4 5.0% $1,605 4.3% 12,960 577 4.5% 131 2019 Q3 5.9% $1,600 2.5% 12,969 577 4.4% 16 2019 Q2 4.6% $1,615 4.0% 12,764 782 6.1% (64) 2019 Q1 4.6% $1,576 3.7% 12,777 782 6.1% (13) 2018 Q4 4.7% $1,540 3.3% 12,777 782 6.1% 38 2018 Q3 4.6% $1,561 4.5% 12,777 631 4.9% 6 2018 Q2 4.2% $1,552 3.5% 12,777 631 4.9% 20 2018 Q1 4.5% $1,519 3.3% 12,777 91 0.7% (17) 2017 Q4 5.0% $1,491 4.0% 12,777 0 0.0% (56) 2017 Q3 4.6% $1,495 4.2% 12,777 0 0.0% (2) 2017 Q2 4.4% $1,500 5.5% 12,777 0 0.0% 113 2017 Q1 4.4% $1,471 6.4% 12,777 0 0.0% 225 2016 Q4 4.5% $1,434 6.2% 12,777 0 0.0% 198 2016 Q3 4.6% $1,435 7.7% 12,777 0 0.0% 157 2016 Q2 4.9% $1,422 8.9% 12,735 42 0.3% 192 2016 Q1 5.8% $1,383 9.6% 12,725 52 0.4% 150 2015 Q4 5.7% $1,350 10.4% 12,725 52 0.4% 666 2015 Q3 5.5% $1,333 10.6% 12,725 52 0.4% 672 2015 Q2 5.3% $1,306 9.4% 12,589 188 1.5% 604 2015 Q1 5.9% $1,262 6.8% 12,589 188 1.5% 559 2014 Q4 6.1% $1,223 4.9% 12,072 695 5.8% 228 2014 Q3 5.9% $1,205 4.8% 12,072 695 5.8% 236 2014 Q2 6.3% $1,194 5.4% 12,072 563 4.7% 233 2014 Q1 6.5% $1,181 5.9% 12,072 563 4.7% 202 2013 Q4 4.9% $1,165 5.7% 11,689 946 8.1% 69 2013 Q3 4.8% $1,150 5.5% 11,689 920 7.9% 124 2013 Q2 4.2% $1,133 4.8% 11,566 997 8.6% 195 2013 Q1 4.2% $1,115 3.8% 11,566 997 8.6% 221 Source: CoStor Q3 2022 36 05 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA RE Packet Pg. 102 9.1.e Neighborhood Analysis According to this source, vacancy has ranged from 3.3% to 7.1 since Q1 2013; however, this survey accounts for all new deliveries in lease -up and therefore, the vacancy numbers are skewed to a small extent based on the deliveries over the last three years. Year -over -year rent growth up 8.7% followed by an average year -over -year rent growth of 9.8% over the prior five quarters. Inventory has increased from 11,566 units to 14,637 units over this time period, or a 26% increase. Total absorption has been 1,648 units since Q4 2017, with an average of 82 units per quarter over this time period. CONCLUSION CoStar's Lynnwood Multifamily Submarket includes the cities of Lynnwood, Edmonds, Woodway, Mountlake Terrace and Brier. This area provides a convenient location for commuting to job centers in Everett, Seattle and Bellevue. The submarket has seen a spate of development recently, and the area has benefited from renters seeking more space at better prices than can be found in urban cores. With a wave of construction completing at the start of 2022, vacancy rates are on the rise. However, this should recover as the properties lease up. Another wave of construction is due for completion toward the end of 2023 that will likely push vacancies up temporarily toward the start of 2024 as well. The vacancy rate for stabilized properties fell dramatically in 2021 and sits near a historic low of around 3%. Annual rent growth has been strong in the submarket and hit a new record in 22Q1. Lynnwood's strong rent growth will likely continue, though new supply will provide some headwinds. Light rail arriving in 2024 should support continuing strong demand in the submarket, and developers are picking up development sites near light rail stations. Hundreds of new units have already been added near these stations, and many more are in the planning stages. Based on the demographics, the rental and occupancy trends, and the employer base, the submarket should continue to experience stable occupancy with rent growth in -line with the larger metro area. 37 05 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA RE Packet Pg. 103 9.1.e Highest and Best Use Highest and Best Use In appraisal practice, the concept of highest and best use represents the premise upon which value is based. The four criteria the highest and best use must meet are: - Legal permissibility; - Physical possibility; - Financial feasibility; and - Maximum productivity. The highest and best use analysis of the subject is discussed below. AS VACANT Legal Permissibility The legally permissible uses were discussed in the Site Analysis and Zoning Sections. Essentially mixed use, commercial and multi -family are generally permitted, with maximum density being achieved under mixed use scenarios, when utilizing various available incentives. Physical Possibility The subject is adequately served by utilities, and has an adequate shape and size, sufficient access, etc., to be a developable site. There are no known physical reasons why the subject site would not support any legally probable development (i.e. it appears adequate for development). The location is also suitable for a variety of development options. Existing structures on similar sites provides additional evidence for the physical possibility of development. Financial Feasibility Potential uses of the site include mixed use, as well as some retail and commercial uses. The determination of financial feasibility is dependent primarily on the relationship of supply and demand for the legally probable land uses versus the cost to create the uses. As discussed in the market analysis, the subject commercial market is generally stabilized. Development of new mixed -use properties has occurred in the past few years. Alternative uses include mixed use residential. Based on current market conditions and preferences, residential uses would be well supported in this neighborhood. Maximum density is generally supported by new developments in the area due to the strong demand. Maximum Productivity - Conclusion The final test of highest and best use of the site as if vacant is that the use be maximally productive, yielding the highest return to the land. Based on the information presented above and upon information contained in the market and neighborhood analysis, we conclude that the highest and best use of the subject as if vacant would be the development of a mixed -use or residential property. More specifically, the existing zoning allows for an increase in height to 8 stories with incentives. That said, maximum 38 Packet Pg. 104 9.1.e Highest and Best Use residential density may vary among specific buyers, and it appears that in most cases maximum density would be viable. The proposed use of Senior Living will reportedly consist of 127 units, reflecting a density of 156 units per acre of land. This is consistent with market expectations. Our analysis of the subject and its respective market characteristics indicate the most likely buyer, as if vacant, would be a developer intending to develop mixed use or Senior product such as that which is proposed. AS IMPROVED The subject is effectively vacant land, thus an as improved analysis is not warranted. 39 Packet Pg. 105 9.1.e Valuation Methodology Appraisal Methodology In appraisal practice, an approach to value is included or omitted based on its applicability to the property type being valued and the quality and quantity of information available. Cost Approach The cost approach is based on the proposition that the informed purchaser would pay no more for the subject than the cost to produce a substitute property with equivalent utility. This approach is particularly applicable when the property being appraised involves relatively new improvements that represent the highest and best use of the land, or when it is improved with relatively unique or specialized improvements for which there exist few sales or leases of comparable properties. Sales Comparison Approach The sales comparison approach utilizes sales of comparable properties, adjusted for differences, to indicate a value for the subject. Valuation is typically accomplished using physical units of comparison such as price per square foot, price per unit, price per floor, etc., or economic units of comparison such as gross rent multiplier. Adjustments are applied to the physical units of comparison derived from the comparable sale. The unit of comparison chosen for the subject is then used to yield a total value. Economic units of comparison are not adjusted, but rather analyzed as to relevant differences, with the final estimate derived based on the general comparisons. Income Capitalization Approach The income capitalization approach reflects the subject's income -producing capabilities. This approach is based on the assumption that value is created by the expectation of benefits to be derived in the future. Specifically estimated is the amount an investor would be willing to pay to receive an income stream plus reversion value from a property over a period of time. The two common valuation techniques associated with the income capitalization approach are direct capitalization and the discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis. Methodology Applicable to the Subject Property The appraiser analyzed the data gathered through the use of appropriate and accepted appraisal methodology to arrive at a probable value indication via each applicable approach to value. The sales comparison approach for land is utilized to develop an opinion of land value since market participants rely on this method. We searched utilizing Costar and NWMLS databases, in addition to the CBRE proprietary comparables database, and contacted local brokers/market participants for sales occurring over the last three years, searching within this market areas, for properties with similar characteristics. The intended use of the appraisal is to assist with a valuation of a subsurface utility easement. Typically, such easements are acquired and a Before and After methodology is applied, whereby the diminished After value is subtracted from the intact Before value for a value of the easement 40 Packet Pg. 106 9.1.e Valuation Methodology acquired. In this instance the existing easement is being relinquished. The methodology will be applied similar to traditional easement acquisitions, however the After condition will result in a higher figure, and the difference will reflect the value of the easement rights relinquished. While we have prepared a Before/After analysis, the general guidance follows the reasoning found in Across The Fence (ATF) methodology utilized in the vacation of street Rights of Way. 41 C Packet Pg. 107 .. , .. . , . Land Value The sales utilized represent the best data available for comparison with the subject and were selected from the greater Redmond area. These sales were chosen based upon recent sales date, similar intensity of use and proximity. SUMMARY OF COMPARABLE LAND SALES Transaction Actual Sale Adjusted Sale Size Price No. Property Location Type Date Proposed Use Price Price r (SF) Per SF 1 21200 72nd Ave W. Sale Feb-22 Senior Living $3,787,000 $3,787,000 35,284 $107.33 Edmonds, WA 98020 Center 2 18005 Aurora Ave N Sale Oct-22 385-Unit $13,350,000 $13,350,000 158,195 $84.39 18002 Aurora Ave N Multifamily 18019 Aurora Ave N Shoreline, WA 98133 3 18553-18559, 18807 8th Avenue Sale Aug-22 240-unit Mixed- $7,129,785 $7,129,785 54,406 $131.05 NE Use Apartments 719, 721, 727 NE 189th St Shoreline, WA 98155 4 13711 Aurora Avenue Sale Jan-22 $4,500,000 $4,500,000 53,579 $83.99 Seattle, WA 98133 5 4301 Alderwood Mall Boulevard Sale Oct-21 Mid -Rise $5,500,000 $5,500,000 47,707 $115.29 Lynnwood, WA 98036 Apartment Building 6 19707 44th Avenue West Sale Aug-20 $2,700,000 $2,700,000 29,621 $91.15 Lynnwood, WA 98036 Subject 21200 72nd Ave W., Sale Feb-22 Senior Living $3,787,000 $3,787,000 35,284 $107.33 Edmonds, Washington Center Adjusted sale price for cash equivalency and/or development costs (where applicable) Compiled by CBRE The following map summarizes the comparable data used in the valuation of the subject site. A detailed description of each transaction is included in the addenda. <4 to L Q CL Q _ O 4) to M LU C d E t t� to Q C N E s t� ca r r Q 42 Packet Pg. 108 .. , .. . , . Edmonds LyflflWonn T7 52< O Mountlake Terrace Shoreline 9f B Lake Fores! Park 622 m Q 43 Packet Pg. 109 9.1.e Valuation Analysis The adjustments are presented qualitatively since all are reasonably recent and market participants compare land in this area as being similar, inferior, or superior to each other. DISCUSSION OF ADJUSTMENTS Based on our comparative analysis, the following chart summarizes the adjustments warranted to each comparable. RIGHTS TRANSFERRED This adjustment relates to the property rights associated with each sale in the context of the transaction. All of the sales are considered essentially full fee simple (subject to typical easements), and no adjustments are necessary. CONDITIONS OF SALE/FINANCING/EXPENDITURES IMMEDIATELY AFTER SALE All sales were indicated to be cash -to -seller transactions or financed by a third party at market terms and none appeared to occur under duress. As such, no adjustments for cash equivalency were necessary. In addition, most of the sales reflected arm's length transactions; therefore requiring no adjustments for conditions of sale. Sale 2, however, was an assemblage from multiple sellers, one of which was not actively marketed. In addition, significant structures needed to be demolished and an adjustment for Conditions of Sale is therefore applied. With regard to immediate expenditures on other sales, several had rather substantial older buildings which required removal by the buyers and adjustments are applied. MARKET CONDITIONS All of the sales are considered reasonably recent, though the market continues to demonstrate strong pricing. A modest upward adjustment was applied to each sale for market conditions. A market conditions adjustment is based upon a variety of factors including the general rent levels observed in the immediate market. Rents are up over the prior year, and over the past 5 years as well. During that time of increased rents the occupancy also increased, which speaks to overall supply/demand. Furthermore, conversations with agents and broker indicate the recent demand for mixed use tracts of land within the surrounding market area continues to be in demand. LOCATION Location can have a significant influence on value. Within the Edmonds/Lynnwood corridor only modest adjustments are necessary, however proximity to light rail has consistently been regarded as superior by market participants and adjustments are applied as appropriate. SIZE Typically, there is an inverse relationship between unit price and size, as larger tracts generally sell for less per square foot than smaller tracts. The Sales range from roughly 30,000 square feet 44 C Packet Pg. 110 9.1.e Valuation Analysis to the largest at 160,000 square feet (Sale 2), as compared to the subject at 35,000 square feet. All except Sale 2 are considered to be within the range deemed similarly valuable and marketable. No adjustment is applied for size. PHYSICAL FEATURES The subject exhibits a rectangular shape with no significant issues foreseen with respect to development. A modest downward adjustment is applied to Sale 3 for it's excellent frontage to depth ratio and equally mild topography. No other adjustments for shape were warranted. ZONING/DENSITY/LAND USE Our analysis reflects a price per square foot analysis, whereby higher density properties would be considered superior to a lower density property. Most of the comparables contain zoning designations that allow similar product, at various densities, and incentives and other site characteristics can render different feasible levels of density. Only where substantial differences in the allowable density have we applied adjustments to the sales. UTILITIES The subject, and all comparables, have access to all public utilities in the fronting street. No adjustments are warranted. Based on our comparative analysis, the following chart summarizes the adjustments warranted to each comparable. A detailed description of each transaction is included in the addenda. LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT GRID Comparable Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 Transaction Type Subject Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Transaction Date Feb-22 Oct-22 Aug-22 Jan-22 Oct-21 Aug-20 Proposed Use Senior Living 385-Unit 240-unit Mixed- Unk Mid -Rise Unk Center Multifamily Use Apartments Apartment Actual Sale Price $3,787,000 $13,350,000 $7,129,785 $4,500,000 $5,500,000 $2,700,000 Analysis Price $3,787,000 $13,350,000 $7,129,785 $4,500,000 $5,500,000 $2,700,000 Size (Acres) 0.81 3.63 1.25 1.23 1.10 0.68 Size (SF) 35,284 158,195 54,406 53,579 47,707 29,621 Price Per SF $107.33 $84.39 $131.05 $83.99 $115.29 $91.15 Price ($ PSF) $107.33 $84.39 $131.05 $83.99 $115.29 $91.15 Property Rights Conveyed Comparable Comparable Comparable Comparable Comparable Comparable Financing Terms' Comparable Comparable Comparable Comparable Comparable Comparable Conditions of Sale Comparable Inferior Comparable Comparable Comparable Comparable Market Conditions (Time) Slightly Inferior Similar Similar Slightly Inferior Inferior Inferior Location Comparable Superior Superior Superior Comparable Comparable Size Comparable Inferior Comparable Comparable Comparable Comparable Physical Features Comparable Comparable Superior Comparable Comparable Comparable Zoning/Density Comparable Inferior Superior Inferior Superior Comparable Utilities Comparable Comparable Comparable Inferior Comparable Comparable Overall Slightly Inferior Inferior Superior Inferior Similar Inferior Compiled by CBRE 45 Packet Pg. 111 9.1.e Valuation Analysis CONCLUSION — BEFORE CONDITION Based on the preceding analysis, Sales 2, 4 and 6 clearly establish the lower limit to value, at roughly $90 per square foot, while the prior sale of the Subject, adjusted for time, provides a likely value indication above $108 per square foot. Sale 3 establishes the upper limit to value at $131 per square foot, while Sale 5 was rated as Similar overall, at $115 per square foot. Given the recent sale and the range presented by the sales data a value of $115 per square foot is supported, as follows: Concluded Land Value - Before Condition Before Size (sf) $/sf Conclusion Valuation Before - Land Value 35,284 x $115 = $4,057,660 Compiled by CBRE 46 Packet Pg. 112 9.1.e Acquisition Analysis Analysis of Proposed Easement Relinquishment and Potential Impacts This analysis reflects an opinion of value for the easement which is proposed to be relinquished. No other acquisitions or easements are proposed. The following addresses issues relating to the property in the After condition. ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS The value of the remainder after the acquisition is subject to the Hypothetical Condition that, as of the effective date of appraisal, the proposed action has occurred, as described. Furthermore, we have made certain assumptions regarding terms, where not clarified. We anticipate no damages for the elimination of the easement and assume the existing piping would be abandoned in place or removed, at the property owners option. NEIGHBORHOOD FACTORS The project will not result in any significant changes to the neighborhood environment in the After condition. SUBJECT PROPERTY The subject property, after the proposed acquisition will have the same size and character. Some additional site utility or flexibility may be permitted due to the elimination of the subsurface easement. HIGHEST AND BEST USE The use potential of the remainder will be essentially identical to that of the Before Condition. 47 Packet Pg. 113 9.1.e Valuation in After Condition Valuation of After Condition Prior to the recapture of the subsurface easement the property value will be identical to that of the Before condition. The reclamation of subsurface utility rights can be addressed in the following section. Discussion of Easement to be Relinquished The previous (Before) value reflects a site with a subsurface utility encumbrance. Based on information provided by Axis Survey and Mapping, the easement area to be relinquished totals 216 square feet. A copy of this information is contained in the Addenda. The following discussion assists in the evaluation of the impacts of an easement. The analysis of an easement acquired involves a discount to the value of a property to account for the loss of property rights associated with the easement. Our analysis reflects the opposite in that the easement is to be relinquished, however the analysis remains relevant. In accordance with the "bundle of rights" theory of property, real property can be analyzed as a bundle of rights or a bundle of sticks with the fee interest representing the complete bundle. An easement under this analogy represents the loss or the taking of some of these rights, or sticks, in the bundle. Typically, the property is then of less value due to the owner's loss of some rights associated with fee ownership. Impacts due to easements are based upon actual sales, transactions by public and private entities, case studies, and literature published by the Appraisal Institute and the American Right of Way Association. Our easement experience includes numerous Appraisals of actual acquired easements including the following: Powerlines - Sewer lines - Natural gas lines - Water lines - Sidewalk, slope, and construction easements - Wall and wall maintenance easements - Road rights -of -way - Avigation easements - Conservation easements - Flowage easements Our experience reflects the full range of loss depending on utility for future use. Easement acquisition impacts are derived, in part, from ongoing surveys performed by our firm. The surveys involve interviews with numerous parties that either own significant corridors or rights -of -way 48 Packet Pg. 114 9.1.e Valuation in After Condition and/or are active in obtaining and granting easements, licenses, permits, and other similar instruments. We have interviewed representatives of the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), Puget Sound Energy (PSE), Seattle Public Utilities (SPU), and Snohomish County PUD, as well as employees at various cities and utility districts in the Puget Sound region. The surveys revealed that the calculation of easement damages for subterranean easements may range generally from 10% to 50% with the lower end of the range for easements along the periphery of property boundaries, or within areas that are otherwise not buildable due to setbacks required by zoning. Aerial and surface easements tend to reflect increased discounts above 50%, and in some cases, close to 100%. This higher discount reflects the increased reduction in potential uses afforded to the underlying fee simple property owner by such easements. The following are specific examples based on our surveys from various agencies for easements 49 Packet Pg. 115 9.1.e Valuation in After Condition Summary of Easement Support Information Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) Surface & High Voltage 25%to 100% * See Note 1 Aerial Power Transmission Lines * Low end of range paid by BPA for esmts. in rural and agricultural areas; Higher end (75-100%) of range is in urban areas Note 1) Typically released to owners at no cost. Theory being BPA has reached full benefit of that easement. In cases where acquired, but surplused & never used, can be amt. BPA paid, or FMV times a discount. No specific examples were available. City of Kenmore Surface Slope Easements 30% As part of the SR-522 Highway Improvement project, City of Kenmore acquired various surface and subsurface easements for the project. Puget Sound Energy_(PSE) Surface, Subsurface Road & Utility 50% No specific cases & Aerial Crossings Subsurface Linear Pipe 25% to 50% (37.5 % ** 25%to75% *** *Discount applied by PSE for minor esmt. crossings in urban areas. For remote locations, a min. fee of $500 is charged. **Granted by PSE to SPU for Tolt 2-wafer pipeline encumbering 30' of the 150' corridor *** Disc. Applied to the esmt area only for PSE acquired easements. Low end for esmts in required setbacks. Snohomish County PUD (SnOPUD) Surface & Subsurface Utility Crossings 50-100% No specific cases 10-20% *Discount applied by SnoPUD for significant encumbrance. **Discount applied for less signficant encumbrance, with low -end of discount pertaining to w/in setback areas. Sommamish Water & Sewer Surface & Subsurface Utility Crossings 15-50% No specific cases *Discount applied by Samm Water based on either Appraisal or Assessed Value. Seattle City Light Surface & Subsurface Utility Crossings 25-100% * No specific cases See Note 1 *Discount applied by Seattle City: 25-50%for less significant encumbrances; 75-100%for Transmission Lines. Note 1) No specific case for reversionary interests; however, would likely perform in reverse of easement acquisition (i.e. sell back @ same discount). Woodinville Water District Subsurface Utility Crossings 15-25% * No specific cases *Discount applied by Woodinville Water: 15-25%for easement encumbrances; based on either Appraisal or Assessed Value. Alderwood Water District Subsurface Utility Crossings 30-40% No specific cases *Discount applied by Alderwood Water: 30-40% depending on level of easement encumbrance. King County DOT Surface & Subsurface Road & Utility 50-100% No specific cases Crossings *Discount applied by King County DOT with 1 of 3 classes: A Class Road (DOT Paid for it & maintain it): Discount applied at 100% of Appraised or Assessed Value. B Class Road (DOT didn't pay for it but maintain it): Discount applied at 75% of Appraised or Assessed Value. C Class Road (DOT didn't pay for it & don't maintain it): Discount applied at 50% of Appraised or Assessed Value. Northshore Utility District (NUD) Subsurface Water & Sewer 25% to 50% Mains/Crossings *Low end of range paid by NUD using Assessed Value for esmt. in a yard setback; higher end reflecting site area outside of a required setback. Compiled by CBRE VAS Group The relative impacts from the easement are still analyzed pursuant to highest and best use of the subject. In addition to our survey and research, the following published information provides guidance for support of diminution in value for various easements: f4 Mn M L Q f2 Q 0 E 4) U) R W _ 6U E s 0 M a w a� E s V ca r a 50 Packet Pg. 116 9.1.e Valuation in After Condition Easement Rights Balance Sheet Appraisal of Easements under the State Rule, Appraisal Journal Negligible Restrictions None, ephemeral or No change to HBU or Nominal to 10% occasional Larger Parcel Physical joint use of Variable change to Variable Restrictions surface 0 HBU and/or Larger 50% more or less Parcel Exclusion of owners Substantial change in Exclusive Restrictions private use HBU; Severance from 90% to 100% Larger Parcel Compiled by CBRE VAS Group The above chart was written by Donald Sherwood, SR/WA for the May/June 2006 Right of Way Journal. It has been included here is as a general guide in examining the effect an easement may have on the total bundle of rights when considering the level of severity/impact of the easement, and whether or not there is a potential for change of the highest and best use of the site. Typical Easement Discounts Exclusive Surface Use 75% 100% Joint Surface Use/Access 25% 75% Air Rights (Gudeways, Powerlines) 25% 75% Subsurface 15% 50% Compiled by CBRE VAS Group The subsurface easement reflects a passive use that has little impact on the general use of the property. We note that we have not been provided with the specific easement language underlying this particular easement. We assume that construction above the area would be permitted provided that the area remained accessibly, therefore uses such as parking could be permitted. We have reflected the easement rights by applying an easement contribution of 35% of the fee value in the after condition. This is calculated as follows: 216 SF X $1 15/SF X 35% = $8,694 Conclusion of Value — After Condition The proposed relinquishment of a utility easement reflects an enhancement to the "After' value of the property. Accordingly, the following summarizes the value in the "After" condition: Concluded Value - After Condition Total Market Value in the After Condition Before Value $4,057,660 Easement Contributory Value $8,694 Total After Value $4,066,354 Compiled by CBRE 51 C Packet Pg. 117 9.1.e Summary of Compensation SUMMARY AND RECAPITULATION The following summarizes the Before and After values for the subject property: Concluded Market Value Appraisal Premise Value Conclusion Valuation Before $4,057,660 Valuation After ($4,066,354) Difference (Value Enhancement) $8,694 Rounded $8,700 Compiled by CBRE ANALYSIS OF DAMAGES OR BENEFITS Damages are a loss in value to the remainder property as a result of a partial acquisition. Conversely, benefits to the remainder property represent the increase in value to the remainder property as a result of a partial acquisition. Under the Federal Before and After methodology, any damages of benefits to the remainder should be reflected in the difference between the value of larger parcel before the take and the value of the remainder parcel after the take. No permanent acquisition has occurred in this instance. COMPENSIBLE DAMAGES — RESIDUE VALUE AFTER ACQUISITION There are no compensable damages in this instance. SPECIFIC BENEFITS — RESIDUE VALUE AFTER ACQUISITION There are no specific benefits to the remainder as a result of the project. 52 C Packet Pg. 118 9.1.e Assumptions and Limiting Conditions Assumptions and Limiting Conditions CBRE, Inc. through its appraiser (collectively, "CBRE") has inspected through reasonable observation the subject property. However, it is not possible or reasonably practicable to personally inspect conditions beneath the soil and the entire interior and exterior of the improvements on the subject property. Therefore, no representation is made as to such matters. The report, including its conclusions and any portion of such report (the "Report"), is as of the date set forth in the letter of transmittal and based upon the information, market, economic, and property conditions and projected levels of operation existing as of such date. The dollar amount of any conclusion as to value in the Report is based upon the purchasing power of the U.S. Dollar on such date. The Report is subject to change as a result of fluctuations in any of the foregoing. CBRE has no obligation to revise the Report to reflect any such fluctuations or other events or conditions which occur subsequent to such date. Unless otherwise expressly noted in the Report, CBRE has assumed that: — Title to the subject property is clear and marketable and that there are no recorded or unrecorded matters or exceptions to title that would adversely affect marketability or value. CBRE has not examined title records (including without limitation liens, encumbrances, easements, deed restrictions, and other conditions that may affect the title or use of the subject property) and makes no representations regarding title or its limitations on the use of the subject property. Insurance against financial loss that may arise out of defects in title should be sought from a qualified title insurance company. — Existing improvements on the subject property conform to applicable local, state, and federal building codes and ordinances, are structurally sound and seismically safe, and have been built and repaired in a workmanlike manner according to standard practices; all building systems (mechanical/electrical, HVAC, elevator, plumbing, etc.) are in good working order with no major deferred maintenance or repair required; and the roof and exterior are in good condition and free from intrusion by the elements. CBRE has not retained independent structural, mechanical, electrical, or civil engineers in connection with this appraisal and, therefore, makes no representations relative to the condition of improvements. CBRE appraisers are not engineers and are not qualified to judge matters of an engineering nature, and furthermore structural problems or building system problems may not be visible. It is expressly assumed that any purchaser would, as a precondition to closing a sale, obtain a satisfactory engineering report relative to the structural integrity of the property and the integrity of building systems. — Any proposed improvements, on or off -site, as well as any alterations or repairs considered will be completed in a workmanlike manner according to standard practices. — Hazardous materials are not present on the subject property. CBRE is not qualified to detect such substances. The presence of substances such as asbestos, urea formaldehyde foam insulation, contaminated groundwater, mold, or other potentially hazardous materials may affect the value of the property. — No mineral deposit or subsurface rights of value exist with respect to the subject property, whether gas, liquid, or solid, and no air or development rights of value may be transferred. CBRE has not considered any rights associated with extraction or exploration of any resources, unless otherwise expressly noted in the Report. — There are no contemplated public initiatives, governmental development controls, rent controls, or changes in the present zoning ordinances or regulations governing use, density, or shape that would significantly affect the value of the subject property. — All required licenses, certificates of occupancy, consents, or other legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, nor national government or private entity or organization have been or can be readily obtained or renewed for any use on which the Report is based. — The subject property is managed and operated in a prudent and competent manner, neither inefficiently or super -efficiently. — The subject property and its use, management, and operation are in full compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local regulations, laws, and restrictions, including without limitation environmental laws, seismic hazards, flight patterns, decibel levels/noise envelopes, fire hazards, hillside ordinances, density, allowable uses, building codes, permits, and licenses. — The subject property is in full compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). CBRE is not qualified to assess the subject property's compliance with the ADA, notwithstanding any discussion of possible readily achievable barrier removal construction items in the Report. 53 Packet Pg. 119 9.1.e Assumptions and Limiting Conditions — All information regarding the areas and dimensions of the subject property furnished to CBRE are correct, and no encroachments exist. CBRE has neither undertaken any survey of the boundaries of the subject property nor reviewed or confirmed the accuracy of any legal description of the subject property. Unless otherwise expressly noted in the Report, no issues regarding the foregoing were brought to CBRE's attention, and CBRE has no knowledge of any such facts affecting the subject property. If any information inconsistent with any of the foregoing assumptions is discovered, such information could have a substantial negative impact on the Report. Accordingly, if any such information is subsequently made known to CBRE, CBRE reserves the right to amend the Report, which may include the conclusions of the Report. CBRE assumes no responsibility for any conditions regarding the foregoing, or for any expertise or knowledge required to discover them. Any user of the Report is urged to retain an expert in the applicable field(s) for information regarding such conditions. • CBRE has assumed that all documents, data and information furnished by or behalf of the client, property owner, or owner's representative are accurate and correct, unless otherwise expressly noted in the Report. Such data and information include, without limitation, numerical street addresses, lot and block numbers, Assessor's Parcel Numbers, land dimensions, square footage area of the land, dimensions of the improvements, gross building areas, net rentable areas, usable areas, unit count, room count, rent schedules, income data, historical operating expenses, budgets, and related data. Any error in any of the above could have a substantial impact on the Report. Accordingly, if any such errors are subsequently made known to CBRE, CBRE reserves the right to amend the Report, which may include the conclusions of the Report. The client and intended user should carefully review all assumptions, data, relevant calculations, and conclusions of the Report and should immediately notify CBRE of any questions or errors within 30 days after the date of delivery of the Report. • CBRE assumes no responsibility (including any obligation to procure the same) for any documents, data or information not provided to CBRE, including without limitation any termite inspection, survey or occupancy permit. • All furnishings, equipment and business operations have been disregarded with only real property being considered in the Report, except as otherwise expressly stated and typically considered part of real property. • Any cash flows included in the analysis are forecasts of estimated future operating characteristics based upon the information and assumptions contained within the Report. Any projections of income, expenses and economic conditions utilized in the Report, including such cash flows, should be considered as only estimates of the expectations of future income and expenses as of the date of the Report and not predictions of the future. Actual results are affected by a number of factors outside the control of CBRE, including without limitation fluctuating economic, market, and property conditions. Actual results may ultimately differ from these projections, and CBRE does not warrant any such projections. • The Report contains professional opinions and is expressly not intended to serve as any warranty, assurance or guarantee of any particular value of the subject property. Other appraisers may reach different conclusions as to the value of the subject property. Furthermore, market value is highly related to exposure time, promotion effort, terms, motivation, and conclusions surrounding the offering of the subject property. The Report is for the sole purpose of providing the intended user with CBRE's independent professional opinion of the value of the subject property as of the date of the Report. Accordingly, CBRE shall not be liable for any losses that arise from any investment or lending decisions based upon the Report that the client, intended user, or any buyer, seller, investor, or lending institution may undertake related to the subject property, and CBRE has not been compensated to assume any of these risks. Nothing contained in the Report shall be construed as any direct or indirect recommendation of CBRE to buy, sell, hold, or finance the subject property. • No opinion is expressed on matters which may require legal expertise or specialized investigation or knowledge beyond that customarily employed by real estate appraisers. Any user of the Report is advised to retain experts in areas that fall outside the scope of the real estate appraisal profession for such matters. • CBRE assumes no responsibility for any costs or consequences arising due to the need, or the lack of need, for flood hazard insurance. An agent for the Federal Flood Insurance Program should be contacted to determine the actual need for Flood Hazard Insurance. • Acceptance or use of the Report constitutes full acceptance of these Assumptions and Limiting Conditions and any special assumptions set forth in the Report. It is the responsibility of the user of the Report to read in full, comprehend and thus become aware of all such assumptions and limiting conditions. CBRE assumes no responsibility for any situation arising out of the user's failure to become familiar with and understand the same. • The Report applies to the property as a whole only, and any pro ration or division of the title into fractional interests will invalidate such conclusions, unless the Report expressly assumes such pro ration or division of interests. 54 C Packet Pg. 120 9.1.e Assumptions and Limiting Conditions • The allocations of the total value estimate in the Report between land and improvements apply only to the existing use of the subject property. The allocations of values for each of the land and improvements are not intended to be used with any other property or appraisal and are not valid for any such use. • The maps, plats, sketches, graphs, photographs, and exhibits included in this Report are for illustration purposes only and shall be utilized only to assist in visualizing matters discussed in the Report. No such items shall be removed, reproduced, or used apart from the Report. • The Report shall not be duplicated or provided to any unintended users in whole or in part without the written consent of CBRE, which consent CBRE may withhold in its sole discretion. Exempt from this restriction is duplication for the internal use of the intended user and its attorneys, accountants, or advisors for the sole benefit of the intended user. Also exempt from this restriction is transmission of the Report pursuant to any requirement of any court, governmental authority, or regulatory agency having jurisdiction over the intended user, provided that the Report and its contents shall not be published, in whole or in part, in any public document without the written consent of CBRE, which consent CBRE may withhold in its sole discretion. Finally, the Report shall not be made available to the public or otherwise used in any offering of the property or any security, as defined by applicable law. Any unintended user who may possess the Report is advised that it shall not rely upon the Report or its conclusions and that it should rely on its own appraisers, advisors and other consultants for any decision in connection with the subject property. CBRE shall have no liability or responsibility to any such unintended user. • CBRE, Inc. is not qualified to detect the existence of any potentially hazardous materials such as lead paint, asbestos, urea formaldehyde foam insulation, or other potentially hazardous construction materials on or in the land or improvements. The existence of such substances may affect the value of the property. For the purpose of this assignment, we have assumed there are no hazardous materials that would cause a loss in value to the subject. • A soils analysis for the site has not been provided for the preparation of this appraisal. In the absence of a soils report, it is a specific assumption that the site has adequate soils to support the highest and best use. 55 Packet Pg. 121 9.1.e Addenda _ E cu w L 3 d cn cu w .E 0 cn 4- 0 _ 0 w .N 0 Q. 0 ADDENDA a _ •L cu a 71 m L Q Q. a _ d E d N m w Q Packet Pg. 122 9.1.e Addenda Addendum A LAND SALE DATA SHEETS Packet Pg. 123 Sale Mixed -Use I9.1.e Property Name Edmonds Redevelopment Address 21200 72nd AveW.I' Edmonds, WA 9802020 County Govt./Tax ID Land Area Net Land Area Gross Site Development Status Utilities Maximum FAR Min Land Bldg Ratio Shape Topography Flood Zone Class Flood Panel No./ Date Zoning Entitlement Status Transaction Details Type Interest Transferred Condition of Sale Recorded Buyer Buyer Type Recorded Seller Marketing Time Listing Broker Doc # Snohomish 005807-000-004-01 0.810 ac/ 35,284 sf 0.810 ac/ 35,284 sf Finished All Available N/A N/A Rectangular Generally Level Zone X (Unshaded) 53061 C1 292F/ Jun 2020 CG, General Commercial Zoning N/A Sale Fee Simple no atypical CA SENIOR EDMONDS WAS PROPERTY OWNER LLC N/A JAS GROUP LLC N/A N/A 202203017050 Primary Verification N/A Transaction Date 02/28/2022 Recording Date 02/28/2022 Sale Price $3,787,000 Financing All Cash Cash Equivalent $3,787,000 Capital Adjustment $0 Adjusted Price $3,787,000 Adjusted Price / ac and $4,675,309 / $107.33 / sf Adjusted Price/ FAR N/A Adjusted Price/ Unit N/A Comments I This is the February 2022 sale of 35,283.6 square feet of redevelopment land n Edmonds, Washington. The improvements were in poor condition and contributed little to no value to the sale price. The buyers intend to redevelop the site for a multi -family senior living facility. The improvements were previously used as a doctors office. There were no atypical conditions of sale. The property sold in February 2022 for $3,787,000, or $107.33 per square foot. Mn M L Q a Q C tv E 0 N R W C d E t 0 to Q C N E s 0 ca r r Q Packet Pg. 124 Under Contract Land - Multi Unit Residential I Property Name 152 Brea Apartments t r Address 18005 Aurora Ave N',; 18002 Aurora Ave N6. jl[�i. ' t 18019 Aurora Ave N Shoreline, WA 98133 + County King •� -' d Govt./Tax ID Multiple s� Land Area Net 3.632 ac/ 158,195 sf -- - ''� lJJ Land Area Gross 3.632 ac/ 158,195 sfwan t-J Site Development Status Finished w d` Utilities All to site ca Maximum FAR N/A _ Min Land Bldg Ratio N/A ca U) Shape LShaped C c Topography Generally Level 0 Flood Zone Class Zone X (Unshaded) O Flood Panel No./ Date 53033C0040G/ Aug 2020 C Zoning TC-2, Town Center Entitlement Status N/A 8� Transaction Details Type Under Contract Interest Transferred Fee Simple Condition of Sale None Recorded Buyer PENDING & Luxe Apts LLC Buyer Type Developer Recorded Seller Chih Pu Tsai, Highland Sports Center Marketing Time N/A Listing Broker N/A Doc # PENDING & 20221025000134 Primary Verification Selling Broker, PSA Transaction Date 1 1 /01 /2022 Recording Date N/A Sale Price $13,350,000 Financing Market Rate Financing Cash Equivalent $13,350,000 Capital Adjustment $0 Adjusted Price $13,350,000 Adjusted Price / ac and $3,675,964 / $84.39 /A Adjusted Price/ FAR N/A Adjusted Price/ Unit N/A This comparable represents an assemblage of five parcels totaling 3.63-acres or 158,195 square feet. The site is partially improved with three buildings (ice skating rink, single-family residence, and warehouse). The property is irregular in shape, and has frontage on N 182nd St, Linden Ave N and Aurora Ave N. The following addresses are associated with the site: 18002 Aurora Ave N, 18005 Aurora Ave N, 18019 Aurora Ave N, and 907 N 182nd St, in Shoreline, Washington. The property is currently under contract to sell for a total price of $13,350,000. There are two purchase and sale agreements associated with the purchase, one for $850,000 representing a single parcel and the second for $12,500,000 representing four parcels. The Highland Sports Center property was brought to market June 2020 by Marty Rood from Mr. 99 and Associates. The property was originally listed for $15,095,000 (based upon improvement value), and received four offers, three of which were from developers. The offers received were over and under the asking price. The buyer's offer was selected due to the buyer's reputation, and the certainty of closing. The Chih Pu Tsai property was not openly marketed, however the seller was represented by Todd Young of Windermere Midtown. According to the seller's agent, the seller had learned that the Highland Sports Center was under contract and asked their agent to contact the developer to sell their property. The price was negotiated between both parties. Our discussions with the buyer, and seller's representatives indicate that this is an arms -length transaction and neither party is under distress. The buyer intends to demolish the existing improvements in January 2023 and redevelop the site with two 6-story mid -rise apartment buildings which include on level of above -grade parking garage and one -level of below -grade parking and a total of 385-units. The larger site closed on October 21, 2022 for $12,500,000 while the remaining (smaller) site is still pending. Mn M L Q Q Q C tv E 0) N R W C d E s t� M Q c N E s 0 ca r Q Packet Pg. 125 Mixed -Use Sale I9.1.e Property Name Shoreline Assemblage —,ay Address 18553-18559, 18807 8th Avenue NE NE St f - T 719, 721, 727 189th Shoreline, WA 98155 t F/�.fFkr County King [ f Govt./Tax ID Multiple [f f -tf d Land Area Net 1.249 ac/ 54,406 sf t' F %".,I, " W Land Area Gross 1.249 ac/ 54,406 sf yt L Site Development Status N/A f/ . d Utilities N/A '! •F } f Maximum FAR N/A - C ; ca Min Land Bldg Ratio N/A Shape Irregular O Topography Level, At Street Grade = Flood Zone Class Zone X (Unshaded) Flood Panel No./ Date 53033C0040G/ Aug 2020 O CL Zoning MUR-70, Mixed -Use Residential A G Entitlement Status N/A , Transaction Details Type Sale Interest Transferred Fee Simple Condition of Sale Arm's-Length Recorded Buyer ACG Kinect Shoreline Owner Buyer Type Developer Recorded Seller Multiple Marketing Time N/A Listing Broker None Doc # 20220809000683, multiple Primary Verification Buyer Transaction Date 08/09/2022 Recording Date 08/09/2022 Sale Price $7,129,785 Financing Not Available Cash Equivalent $7,129,785 Capital Adjustment $0 Adjusted Price $7,129,785 Adjusted Price / ac and $5,708,395 / $131.05 /A Adjusted Price/ FAR N/A Adjusted Price/ Unit $29,707 This comparable is the assemblage of six single-family residences that are under contract and closed in Shoreline, Washington to develop a 240- unit mixed -use apartment project adjacent to the Light -Rail station at N. 185th Street. The developer assembled the six parcels which are a total of 54,406 square feet in a series of individual transactions originally negotiated from November 2020 through January 2021, for a sale price of $7,129,785 or $131.05 per SF, or $29,707 per unit. The buyer approached the individual sellers whose properties were upzoned to MUR-70, mixed -use, and were motivated to sell based on the construction of the light -rail station. The site is level, at -street grade and adjacent to Interstate 5 to the west. The transactions involving APNs 052604-901 1 and -9024 were recorded on June 30, 2022. The transactions involving APNs 394170-2310, -231 1, and -2315 were recorded on July 28, 2022. The sixth tax parcel, APN 397170-2316, closed in early August 2022. Mn M L Q tZ Q C O E O N R W c d E t 0 ca Q c N E s 0 ca r Q Packet Pg. 126 Sale . - Multi Unit Residential9.1.e Property Name Bitter Lake Development Site 1371 1 Aurora Avenue Address Seattle, WA 98133 County Govt./Tax ID Land Area Net Land Area Gross Site Development Status Utilities Maximum FAR Min Land Bldg Ratio Shape Topography Flood Zone Class Flood Panel No./ Date Zoning Entitlement Status Nsaction Details Type Interest Transferred Condition of Sale Recorded Buyer Buyer Type Recorded Seller Marketing Time Listing Broker Doc # King 016400-0069 1.230 ac/ 53,579 sf 1.230 ac/ 53,579 sf Finished To Site N/A N/A Rectangular Generally Level Zone X (Unshaded) 53033C0330G/ Aug 2020 C1-75 (M) N/A Sale Fee Simple Arm's Length Project S42 LLC Developer Vic & Jack LLC N/A N/A 202201141969 w. fn F. I Ff MN m W i Cl) Primary Verification N/A Transaction Date 01 /12/2022 Recording Date 01/12/2022 Sale Price $4,500,000 Financing Market Rate Financing Cash Equivalent $4,500,000 Capital Adjustment $0 Adjusted Price $4,500,000 Adjusted Price / ac and $3,658,537 / $83.99 /A Adjusted Price/ FAR N/A Adjusted Price/ Unit N/A This 1.23-acre parcel sold in January 2022 for $4,500,000 or $83.99 per square foot of land area. The buyer is a multifamily developer. A design proposal was submitted to the city in November 2021 by the buyer to construct a 7-story apartment building with live/work units at street level and garage parking. The most recent plans reportedly call for 414 units, with most units ranging in size from 315 SF to 450 SF. The site was built out with a car dealership at the time of sale. the existing improvements added no contributory value. Packet Pg. 127 Sale . Residential 9.1.e Property Name Redevelopment Site - Former Buca di Beppo Address 4301 Alderwood Mall Boulevard Lynnwood, WA 98036 To County Snohomish Govt./Tax ID 003726-007-019-05 Land Area Net 1.095 ac/ 47,707 sf Land Area Gross 1.095 ac/ 47,707 sf Site Development Status N/A Utilities All to Site Maximum FAR Min Land Bldg Ratio Shape Topography Flood Zone Class Flood Panel No./ Date Zoning Entitlement Status Transaction Details Type Interest Transferred Condition of Sale Recorded Buyer Buyer Type Recorded Seller Marketing Time Listing Broker Doc # N/A N/A Rectangular Varies Zone X (Unshaded) 53061C131OF/ Jun 2020 CC-C None Sale Fee Simple Arm's-Length Koz Development, LLC Developer DRK M2C LLC 12 Month(s) Alex Muir - 253-303-1983 202110130277 Primary Verification Listing Broker, CBA, Public Records Transaction Date 10/07/2021 Recording Date 10/13/2021 Sale Price $5,500,000 Financing All Cash Cash Equivalent $5,500,000 Capital Adjustment $0 Adjusted Price $5,500,000 Adjusted Price / ac and $5,021,914 / $115.29 /A Adjusted Price/ FAR N/A Adjusted Price/ Unit $28,947 This is the October 2021 sale of the former Buca di Beppo site in Lynnwood, located on Alderwood Mall Boulevard with excellent proximity to the future light rail station, as well as 1-5 and 1-405. The property is somewhat above street grade but is mostly level overall and is rectangular in shape. It is zoned CC-C by the City of Lynnwood, a generally mixed -use zone permitting building heights up to 350 feet. In July, 2021, prior to the sale, Sound Transit acquired a 24-month, 3,361-square-foot temporary construction easement in the southern portion of the lot (in addition to 645 square feet in fee). According to the listing broker, the TCE did not impact the sale price. The property previously sold in May of 2019 for $3.3 million. Per the listing broker, items contributing to the price increase between 2019 and 2021 included the strengthening multifamily market, the more imminent arrival of light rail, and a competitive sales process. The buyer plans to construct a 190-unit mid -rise complex on the site. The property sold on October 7, 2021, for $5,500,000, or $1 15.29 per square foot, or $28,947 per unit. Mn M L Q SZ Q C E 0 N R W C d E t 0 to Q C N E s 0 ca r r Q Packet Pg. 128 Sale Land - Mixed -Use 9.1.e Property Name The Northwood Site Address 19707 44th Avenue West Lynnwood, WA 98036 County Govt./Tax ID Land Area Net Land Area Gross Site Development Status Utilities Maximum FAR Min Land Bldg Ratio Shape Topography Flood Zone Class Flood Panel No./ Date Zoning Entitlement Status Nsaction Details Type Interest Transferred Condition of Sale Recorded Buyer Buyer Type Recorded Seller Marketing Time Listing Broker Snohomish 00372600701808 0.680 ac/ 29,621 sf 0.680 ac/ 29,621 sf Finished All to site N/A N/A Rectangular Generally Level N/A N/A CC-C, City Center Core N/A Sale Fee Simple None Bablie, LLC Developer Northwood Building, LLC 1 Month(s) Keith Honsberger - Kidder Mathews 425.450.1 107 Primary Verification Transaction Date Recording Date Sale Price Financing Cash Equivalent Capital Adjustment Adjusted Price Honsberger 08/27/2020 N/A $2,700,000 Cash to Seller $2,700,000 $0 $2,700,000 Listing Broker - Doc # 202008317036 Adjusted Price / ac and $3,970,588 / $91.15 / sf Adjusted Price/ FAR N/A Adjusted Price/ Unit N/A This comparable represents the August 2020 sale of a 0.68-acre mixed -use zoned site located at 19707 44th Avenue West in Lynnwood, Washington. The site is improved with a 9,790 SF office building that was occupied by short-term leases. The buyer purchased this for future development of a mixed -use property with a dental office. The property was on the market for less than one month, and sold for a price of $2,700,000 or $91.15 per square foot. There were no entitlements at the time of sale. The property is less than a mile northeast of the under construction Lynnwood Link Light Rail Station. Packet Pg. 129 9.1.e Addenda Addendum B PROJECT INFORMATION Packet Pg. 130 ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY 9.1.e t92UND NAIL IN MONUMENT �ICONCRETE IN CASE. (12/2018) ____OP 12" 32" 32" RIM 384.27 CONC IE 375.47 W CONC IE 375.31 NW CONC IE 375.31 SE \-P - SSMH 1305 RIM 386.15 8" PVC IE 374.90 S 8" PVC IE 374.85 W D-WLL 8" PVC IE 374.67 E _ YYLL 1130.91' YYLL _ � I O 1 01 FGL o M 1 z 2 D-WLL RIM 380.84 - 8" PVC IE 378.89 NE (5)10'X10' PED AND M WLL UTILITY EASEMENT REC. NO. 9407010224. d FOUND 5/8" REBAR BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE �i AND CAP "RMA 4551"77LCH 1� AT CORNER 30► (12/2018) r o c= 28 c� - 1- I 38"F 10' STREET SDMH 1473 ` ❑ 10 L0712 SETBACK 30" CONC IE 372.72N I SOPHIA B WONG 30" CONC IE 373.00 S IJ NW CORNER CMU }' WALL IS 1.3'E. OF UNKNOWN LID GIP z o LINE. I 10 3' ELECTRICAL o aP L007 11 HUNG CHUN CHEN ET AL. CB 1560 RIM 384.07 UNABLE TO LOCATE 6" IE OUT CV O LOOT 100 Oi CAROLYN D BASILE Lo ET AL. a�IDC� pLaG3� �0��✓�f�aOMC�O 3 REC. NO. 2016 318500001 00 CMU WALL L07 g IMPERIAL PROPER' 7232D LLC SW CORNER CMU - / RIM 384.90 12" CONC IE 379.75 W 32" CONC IE 375.55 NW 32" CONC IE 374.80 E ---OP ---OP ---OP N89°52'54"W 1374.51' o WLL 212TH ST SW M 10' STORM EASEMENT REC. NO. 201902140157� ° 1► RIM 382.02 8" PVC IE 379.42 NW 12" CONC IE 379.29 SDMH 1307 RIM 381.83 12" CONC IE 377.63 N 30" CONC IE 374.21 W 30" CONC IE 373.88 S ---OP ---OP ° 4 d O N89'52'54"W 213.54' "'%_ 10' STORM EASEMENT EASEMENT REC.-1 iCB 1080 LOT 4 NO. 7704120157 I N REC. N0. 201805160124 RIM 377.25 (33,926 S.F.) v I 86.9' ----6" DI IE 375.65 W------------------------------------------------------I Q I 6" CONC IE 375.63 E --- - --- -- --L --- /---------- II CB 1086 ------------- O RIM 377.02-------- r7 a 6" CONC IE 374.30 W Lo 6" CONC IE 374.27 E 1 J a 12" 3 d ° a4 < d RESERVES 'PARKING l 10' STREET M a SETBACK p a N -15.' a ° ° GAS VAULT Z 48.3 � a ° d ° a ° ° ° ° 00 r FFE=378.2' o a d a I ° d 54.2' a +17.7' ABOVE GRADE RIDGE=395.6' 21200 72ND AVE W 1 r 1 STORY WOOD ° -----------� FRAME BUILDING N F 14" i f6,750 SQ. FT. N s L------------XRIDGE=397.2' �-RIDGE=395.5' I RIDGE-395.5' --------------- L---------a<- 10' SANITARY SEWER RIDGE=395.6' 8-------------- 2-ICV .1 CONCRETE 3 1 EASEMENT REC. NO. / ® d 7711230226 PAVER PATH ° 1 I I WALL IS 1.1'E. O14.2' 28.1, LIDS WITH NOTHING INSIDE m LINE. 25MPH 12.5' CONCRETE WALL 42 1' 43.7 39 9 15 9 63.0' 1 30' WITH �G3LaC�� ggg 6'CLFNC N. 3.3 24.6 3.3 12" of OF PARK TOWNHOMES 3'CLFNC S. A14"F HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION SW CORNER 15.8' 14"F 22'F ® 11C F 16"F SD 12" a 24"F CONCRETE WALL 22"F 22"F 20"F N89'52'53"W 5.2' IS 1.0'W. OF LINE. 16"F ° 12" 1 30.00' 1 CMU WALL N89'52'53"W 201.00' 10' POWER LINE TIMBER RET WALL FF�© EASEMENT REC. LOT 3 CB 1387 NO. 201i 10050625 2.8' CONCRETE WALKWAY CITY OF EDMONDS RIM 374.94 CROSSES LINE 98.1'W. OF SHORT PLAT S-77 SOUTHEAST PROPERTY 6" CMP IE 372.74 18'> REC. NO. 7705310298 CORNER. TOP CTRL STCTR 374.74 ° FACE OF CMU WALL DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE PARK 212 APT LLC FOUND 5/8" REBAR AND CROSSES LINE 5.2'E. CAP "EMERALD 30581" OF CORNER. AT CORNER ---------------------------------- (12/2018) `-------------- ------------------------- CB 1561 RIM 372.05 ------------------------------ 6" PVC IE 371.09 N --------------------------------- ----------------------- CB 1375 RIM 372.73 6" CONC IE 371.28 W 8" PVC IE 371.03 S ALTA NOTES ALTA NOTES-CONT THIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE PARTIES PARKING SPACE COUNT d NAMED HEREIN. RIGHTS TO RELY ON OR USE THIS SURVEY DO NOT EXTEND REGULAR 33 TO ANY UNNAMED PARTY WITHOUT EXPRESS RECERTIFICATION BY AXIS HANDICAP 2 SURVEYING AND MAPPING AND THE PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR WHOSE STAMP TOTAL 35 IS SHOWN ON THIS SURVEY. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF RECENT EARTH MOVING WORK, BUILDING FOUND PUNCH IN 3/8" BRASS THIS PROPERTY HAS DIRECT AND UNIMPEDED PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR CONSTRUCTION, OR BUILDING ADDITIONS OBSERVED DURING THE THE PLUG IN 2"X2" LEAD IN CONCRETE ACCESS TO 72ND AVE. W., A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. PROCESS OF CONDUCTING THE FIELDWORK. MONUMENT DOWN 0.5' IN CASE. SURVEY BASED ON THE ALTA COMMITMENT BY CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE THERE ARE NOT ANY CHANGES IN STREET RIGHT OF WAY LINES EITHER (12/2018) COMPANY, ORDER NO. CCH11803366NT, DATED NOVEMBER 19, 2021, AT 8:00 COMPLETED OR PROPOSED, AND AVAILABLE FROM THE CONTROLLING A.M. JURISDICTION. FLOOD ZONE DESIGNATION OTHER AREAS ZONE X, AREAS DETERMINED TO BE THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF WETLAND MARKERS OBSERVED DURING THE OUTSIDE OF 500-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN, ACCORDING TO FLOOD INSURANCE PROCESS OF CONDUCTING THE FIELDWORK. RATE MAP (FIRM) NO. 53.061C1315, COMMUNITY NO. 530163, PANEL NO. 1315, SUFFIX E, PANEL 1315 OF 1575, EFFECTIVE DATE NOVEMBER 8, 1999, ZONING - CC -GENERAL COMMERCIAL KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AS PREPARED BY THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MINIMUM STREET SETBACK 10' MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA). MINIMUM SIDE/REAR SETBACK 0' ZONING PER CITY OF EDMONDS ZONING MAP SETBACKS PER ECDC 16.60.020 2021 ALTA CERTIFICATION TO CA SENIOR EDMONDS WA PROPERTY OWNER, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, HSRE-CA XVII, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, HSRE-CA XVIIA, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, HARRISON STREET REAL ESTATE CAPITAL, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP OR PLAT AND THE SURVEY ON WHICH IT IS BASED WERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2016 MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYS, JOINTLY ESTABLISHED AND ADOPTED BY ALTA AND NSPS, AND INCLUDES ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 4, 6(a), 6(b), 7(a), 7(b1), 7(c), 8, 9, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, AND 19 OF TABLE A THEREOF. THE FIELD WORK WAS COMPLETED ON DECEMBER 5, 2018 AND VERIFIED DECEMBER 2021. DAT F PL O/A-fllNUARY 3, 2022 Atl SURVEYOR'S NAME: W. TRAVIS BRADLEY REGISTRATION NUMBER: 48372 FOUND 'X' IN 1 1/4" BRASS DISK IN CONCRETE MONUMENT DOWN 0.7' IN CASE. (12/2018) TBM 'A' EL: 380.72 -(- -OP ---OP m C) D-WLL YYLL GRAPHIC SCALE 20 10 0 20 40 1"=20' BASIS OF BEARINGS HELD A BEARING OF NORTH 89"52'54" WEST ALONG THE MONUMENTED CENTERLINE OF 212TH ST SW BETWEEN 76TH AVE W AND 72ND AVE W PER SOLNER'S FIVE ACRE TRACTS RECORDED IN VOLUME 7 OF PLATS AT PAGE 25. HORIZONTAL DATUM NAD '83/2007 PER SNOHOMISH COUNTY CONTROL POINT ID 18523. LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE NORTH 159 FEET OF TRACT 4, SOLNER'S FIVE ACRE TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 7 OF PLATS, PAGE 25, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. EXCEPT THE WEST 100 FEET THEREOF. LEGEND (ALSO KNOWN AS LOT 4 OF CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT NO. S-20-77, RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 7705310298). POWER JUNCTION BOX ® HVAC SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. POWER VAULT PP 0 POWER TRANSFORMER SCHEDULE B SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS E- GUY ANCHOR EASEMENTS AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION ARE BASED ON THEALTA COMMITMENT UTILITY POLE W/ LIGHT & UNDERGROUND CONDUIT BY CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, ORDER NO. CCH11803366NT, DATED NOVEMBER 19, 2021, AT 8:00 A.M. UTILITY POLE W/ LIGHT, UNDERGROUND CONDUIT & TRANSFORMER UTILITY POLE W/UNDERGROUND CONDUIT 1 SUBJECT TO EASEMENT(S) FOR THE PURPOSE(S) SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO, AS GRANTED IN A DOCUMENT REGARDING cz_-::--- TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION AND/OR DISTRIBUTION PER RECORDING NUMBER O SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE 7704120157. --SHOWN-- 2 SUBJECT TO COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS, RECITALS, ❑ CATCH BASIN RESERVATIONS, EASEMENTS, EASEMENT PROVISIONS, DEDICATIONS, Q❑ STORM DRAIN MANHOLE BUILDING SETBACK LINES, NOTES AND STATEMENTS, IF ANY, BUT OMITTING ANY COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY, INCLUDING BUT FIRE HYDRANT NOT LIMITED TO THOSE BASED UPON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, m ICV IRRIGATION CONTROL VALVE SEXUAL ORIENTATION, FAMILIAL STATUS, MARITAL STATUS, DISABILITY, HANDICAP, NATIONAL ORIGIN, ANCESTRY, OR SOURCE OF INCOME, AS WATER VALVE SET FORTH IN APPLICABLE STATE OR FEDERAL LAWS, EXCEPT TO THE j� GAS VALVE EXTENT THAT SAID COVENANT OR RESTRICTION IS PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, AS SET FORTH ON CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT Q GIP GAS INDICATOR POST NO. S-20-77 PER RECORDING NUMBER 7705310298. n SIGN --NO EASEMENTS-- 3 SUBJECT TO EASEMENT(S) FOR THE PURPOSE(S) SHOWN BELOW AND D-WLL DASHED WHITE LANE LINE RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO, AS GRANTED IN A DOCUMENT SANITARY D-YLL DASHED YELLOW LANE LINE SEWERS PER RECORDING NUMBER 7711230226. --SHOWN-- 4 SUBJECT TO ANY RIGHTS, INTEREST OR CLAIMS WHICH MAY EXIST OR FGL FOGLINE ARISE BY REASON OF THE FOLLOWING MATTERS DISCLOSED BY SURVEY YYLL DOUBLE YELLOW LANE LINE RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 9212235001. WILL WHITE LANE LINE 5 SUBJECT TO EASEMENT(S) FOR THE PURPOSE(S) SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO, AS GRANTED IN A DOCUMENT REGARDING ® FOUND MONUMENT IN CASE SIGNAL LIGHT AND WALK PER RECORDING NUMBER 9407010224. O FOUND REBAR AND CAP AS NOTED --SHOWN-- 6 SUBJECT TO EASEMENT(S) FOR THE PURPOSE(S) SHOWN BELOW AND 0 SET REBAR AND CAP "AXIS 48372" RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO, AS GRANTED IN A DOCUMENT REGARDING 0 SET TACK IN LEAD UNDERGROUND AND/OR OVERHEAD ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION AND/OR DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM PER RECORDING NUMBER 201610050625. EXISTING RETAINING WALL --SHOWN PER RECORDED DOCUMENT, NO EVIDENCE OF UNDERGROUND CMU RETAINING WALL UTILITY-- 7 SUBJECT TO EASEMENT(S) FOR THE PURPOSE(S) SHOWN BELOW AND - OP OVERHEAD POWER LINE RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO, AS GRANTED IN A DOCUMENT REGARDING X X CHAIN LINK FENCE LINE (CLFNC) STORMWATER SYSTEM PER RECORDING NUMBER 201805160124. WOOD FENCE LINE (BFNC) --SHOWN, REVISED PER 201902140157-- 8 NOT SURVEY RELATED CONCRETE PAVING 9 NOT SURVEY RELATED 10 ANY UNRECORDED LEASEHOLD, RIGHT OF VENDORS AND HOLDERS OF SECURITY INTERESTS ON PERSONAL PROPERTY INSTALLED UPON THE LAND AND RIGHTS OF TENANTS TO REMOVE TRADE FIXTURES AT THE EXPIRATION OF THE TERMS. ASPHALT PAVING 11 ANY RIGHTS, INTERESTS, OR CLAIMS WHICH MAY EXIST OR ARISE BY REASON OF THE FOLLOWING MATTERS DISCLOSED BY SURVEY PREPARED BUILDINGS BY AXIS SURVEYING AND MAPPING, JULY 14, 2020 A. BUILDING LIES WITHIN EASEMENT AREA OF THAT EASEMENT FOR SANITARY SEWER RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 7711230226 B. CMU WALL LIES UP TO 1.3 FEET EAST OF WESTERN BOUNDARY FIR C. CMU WALL LIES UP TO 5.2 FEET EAST OF WESTERN BOUNDARY AT �12"F SOUTHWESTERN PORTION OF THE LAND 12"P PINE --SHOWN-- 12 ANY EASEMENTS NOT DISCLOSED BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS AS TO MATTERS AFFECTING TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY, WHETHER OR NOT SAID 0 12"M MAPLE EASEMENTS ARE VISIBLE AND APPARENT. NOTES EQUIPMENT NOTE THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS MAP REPRESENTS THE RESULTS OF A SURVEY CONCLUDED ON DECEMBER 5, 2018 AND VERIFIED DECEMBER 2021, AND CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED AS INDICATING THE GENERAL CONDITIONS EXISTING AT THAT TIME. EVIDENCE OF OCCUPATION OF LAND (FOR EXAMPLE: FENCES, STRUCTURES, PAVING, GRAVELED SURFACES, ETC.) MAY NOT COINCIDE WITH THE DEEDED BOUNDARY LINES AS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING. THERE ARE AREAS ON THIS SURVEY APPEARING TO HAVE DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE DEEDED BOUNDARY LINES AND CERTAIN EVIDENCE OF OCCUPATION. WHERE DISCREPANCIES EXIST AXIS RECOMMENDS THAT THE OWNER OR POTENTIAL PURCHASER CONSULT WITH LEGAL COUNSEL TO DETERMINE HOW BEST TO INTERPRET THEIR PROPERTY RIGHTS AND ADDRESS ANY POTENTIAL BOUNDARY DISPUTES. THIS SURVEY MEETS OR EXCEEDS RELATIVE ACCURACY STANDARDS SET BY WAC 332-130-080. PRIMARY CONTROL POINTS AND ACCESSIBLE MONUMENT POSITIONS WERE FIELD MEASURED UTILIZING GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (CPS) SURVEY TECHNIQUES USING LEICA GS14 GPS/GNSS EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT. MONUMENT POSITIONS THAT WERE NOT DIRECTLY OBSERVED USING GPS SURVEY TECHNIQUES WERE TIED INTO THE CONTROL POINTS UTILIZING LEICA ELECTRONIC 1201 TOTAL STATIONS FOR THE MEASUREMENT OF BOTH ANGLES AND DISTANCES. THIS SURVEY MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE STANDARDS SET BY WACS 332-130-080/090. REFERENCES R1 SOLNER'S FIVE ACRE TRACTS V.7 / PG.25. R2 CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT S-20-77 RECORDING NUMBER 7705310298. R3 RECORD OF SURVEY RECORDING NUMBER 9212235001 R4 HYDE PARK TOWNHOMES RECORDING NUMBER 201805185001 NW 1/4, NW 1/4, SEC. 29, TWP. 27N., RGE. 4E., W.M. CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON Packet Pg. 131 9.1.e EXHIBIT A PARCEL DESCRIPTION THE NORTH 159 FEET OF TRACT 4, SOLNER'S FIVE ACRE TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 7 OF PLATS, PAGE 25, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. EXCEPT THE WEST 100 FEET THEREOF. (ALSO KNOWN AS LOT 4 OF CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT NO. S-20-77, RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 7705310298). SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. ,�V,AVI g WAS v �c 48372 �ssl NALS L mgmgs www.axismap.com �DaQ��e Im JOB NO. DATE 15241 NE 90TH ST, 18-210 04/27/23 PO SUITE 100 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY AX ODOaD REDMOND, WA 98052 JM WTB TEL. 425.823-5700 surmv& I I FAX 425.823-6700 SCALE SHEET N/A 1 OF 3 Packet Pg. 132 9.1.e EXHIBIT B DESCRIPTION OF PORTION OF EASEMENT FOR RELINQUISHMENT THAT PORTION OF LOT 4 OF CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT NO. S-20-77, RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 7705310298, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 4; THENCE NORTH 89`52'53" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE THEREOF, 128.08 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 89"52'53" WEST 15.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 50°00'39" WEST 15.65 FEET; THENCE NORTH 39"59'21" EAST 10.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 50°00'39" EAST 27.63 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING AN AREA OF 216 S.F. MORE OR LESS �V,AVI �, OF RA y 5 rC 48372 �ssl GISTS44' www.axismap.com JOB NO. DATE 15241 NE 90TH ST, 18-210 04/27/23 PO SUITE 100 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY ODOaD REDMOND, WA 98052 JM WTB TEL. 425.823-5700 SUrMW & FAX 425.823-6700 SCALE SHEET N/A 2 OF 3 Packet Pg. 133 9.1.e i o i co N39°59'21 "E 10.00' EXHIBIT C DEPICTION OF PORTION OF EASEMENT FOR RELINQUISHMENT 212TH ST SW (PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY) LOT 4 TPN:00580700000401 PORTION OF EASEMENT TO BE RELINQUISHED POINT OF COMMENCEMENT N50°00'39"W SE COR. LOT 4 27.63' POINT OF BEGINNING N89`52'53"W 128.08' 10' SANITARY SEWER 15.65' 15.60 J \� EASEMENT REC. NO. N50°00'39"W� 7711230226 �------------- ---------------- ---------------------------------- LOT 3 CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT S-77 REC. NO. 7705310298 PARK 212 APT LLC - EXHIBIT NOTE - THIS EXHIBIT HAS BEEN PREPARED TO ASSIST IN THE INTERPRETATION OF THE ACCOMPANYING LEGAL DESCRIPTION. IF THERE IS A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE WRITTEN LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND THIS SKETCH, THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION SHALL PREVAIL. 30' 30' GRAPHIC SCALE NW 1/4, NW 1/4, SEC. 29, TWP. 27N., RGE. 4E., W.M. CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON www.axismap.com �DaQ��e m JOB NO. DATE 15241 NE 90TH ST, 18-210 04/27/23 PO I SUITE 100 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY AXODOaD REDMOND, WA 98052 JM WTB TEL. 425.823-5700 SUrMW & FAX 425.823-6700 SCALE SHEET 1"=50' 3 OF 3 Packet Pg. 134 9.1.e Addenda _ E cu w L 3 d cn cu w .E 0 cn 4- 0 _ 0 w .N 0 Q. 0 a� J L O v! 0 Addendum C _ a QUALIFICATIONS _ •L cu a 71 L Q Q. a _ d E d N w a Packet Pg. 135 9.1.e PROFILE Client Summary - Various Cities - Counties - Airports - Port Districts - Financial Institutions - Corporations/Non-Profits - Conservation Entities - Attorneys Education - Bachelor degree in Business Administration from Western Washington University - All courses requisite for the MAI designation by the Appraisal Institute. S. Murray Brackett, MAI Director of Right of Way, Aviation and Public Projects, Northwest Region T +1 206 2921600 M +1 206 5951068 E murray.brackett@?cbre.com WA. Lic.1100853 Professional Experience Mr. Brackett has been Appraising Real Property since 1985 and is currently a Directc with CBRE in the Valuation Advisory Services division. He was formerly a partne with ABS Valuation for over 20 years. Professional responsibilities include the fu range of commercial, industrial, residential product, including complex lan valuations up to 100,000 acres in size. A considerable portion of his work involve partial acquisitions relating to eminent domain and conservation easements. I addition, a wide variety of Aviation related appraisals have been completed, includin Ground lease revaluation efforts, Appraisals of leasehold positions in Hangars an other buildings, avigation easements and property for airport expansion. Improve and unimproved valuations have been performed for acquisitions in fee, leased fe and leasehold interests, and various partial interest assignments such a conservation easements, utility easements, subsurface, air rights and minorit interest acquisitions. UASFLA-compliant Appraisals have been prepared for a wid variety of agencies on a wide range of property types. Mr. Brackett has qualified a an expert witness in King, Kitsap, Pierce County Superior Courts, US District Cour and Federal Bankruptcy Court. Geographic experience includes Washington, Oregor Idaho, California, Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota, Alaska and British Columbia Clients RepresentedMn M Government a a Q m Cities: Anacortes, Arlington, Auburn, Bellevue, Bothell, Burien, Everet E a) Kenmore, Kent, Kirkland, Leavenworth, Lk Forest Park, Lynnwooc ca Maple Valley, Mount Vernon, North Bend, Port Angeles, Puyallul w Renton, Seattle, Snoqualmie, Tacoma, Woodinville. c Counties: Island, King, Kitsap, Pierce, Skagit, Thurston, Snohomish, Whatcom s Airports: Sea-Tac, Boeing Field, Paine Field, Renton Municipal, Auburr Arlington, Bellingham, Olympia, William Fairchild, Sanderson Fielc Q Felts Field, Centralia/Chehalis, Bremerton, Pullman, Orcas Islanc Friday Harbor. E s ca r Q Packet Pg. 136 9.1.e PROFILE Other: Ports of Everett, Grays Harbor, Anacortes, Seattle, Shelton, Olympia Bremerton, Port Angeles, Friday Harbor. Washington State DNF Wa.St. Parks, WSDOT (approved appraiser), U.S. IRS, FAA, Soun Transit, USACE, US Navy. Numerous School Districts. Financial Institutions Bank of America, US Bancorp, KeyBank, Wells Fargo Trust, Commerce Banl Homestreet, Umpqua, Charter Bank, Union Bank. Corporations/Non Profits Weyerhaeuser, WRECO, Tramco, Plum Creek, McDonalds Corp., PSE, Developmer Services of America, Lowe Enterprises, PACCAR, Hancock Natural Resources Groul The Trust for Public Land, Forterra, HDR, Sierra Pacific, Quadrant, Port Blakey CH2M-Hill, Parsons Brinckerhoff, New Ventures Group, Williams Pipeline, Mank lumber, Fletcher General, Costco, Nucor Steel. Attorneys Prosecuting Attorneys of numerous Cities and Counties, as well as Miller Nasl Williams & Williams, Karr Tuttle, Chmelik, Sitkin & Davis, PRK Livengood, Hillis Clarl Kenyon Disend, Perkins Coie, K&L Gates, Inslee Best, Tousley Brain Stephens, Davi Wright Tremaine, Pacifica Law Group, Betts Patterson Mines, Williams Kastner, FOStE Garvey. Other Experience Instructor - Runstad Real Estate Certification Program, University of Washington - Current - IRWA - Previously Qualified as Level 3 Facilitator - Former Income Property Appraisal Course Instructor, LWVT, Kirkland, Wa. Presentations - November 2019: Anatomy of an Appraisal Trial, The Seminar Group - December 2014: Appraising Airports and Airplane Hangars, Al - September 2009: Valuation of Airport Properties, WAMA - October 2003: The Valuation of Non -Water Dependent Properties, WPMA Professional Affiliations - Appraisal Institute. Received MAI Designation May 2,1997 (member # 11,258) - Past President, Seattle Chapter of the Appraisal Institute, 2003 - IRWA. Current Chapter Treasurer - Washington Airport Manager's Association (WAMA) - Associate Member Packet Pg. 137 CBRE VALUATION & ADVISORY SERVICES S. MURRAY BRACKETT, MAI Valuation & Advisory Services Director - Murray. Brackett@cbre.com www.cbre.com C 9.1.f CA Senior Edmonds Property Owner, LLC d/b/a Anthology of Edmonds 2401 E. 2nd Ave. Suite 500 Denver, CO 80206 City Council of City of Edmonds 121 5th Ave N Edmonds, WA 98020 Dear City Council and City Staff, This letter is being provided to accompany our request to release the currently unused sewer easement referenced in the attached survey exhibit. This sanitary sewer easement previously benefited the office buidling that existed at 21200 72nd Avenue W., which was demolished per an approved demolition permit issued by the City of Edmonds. That unoccupied office building is being replaced by the Anthology of Edmonds Independent Senior Living project. There is no longer a need for this easement because the Anthology of Edmonds project is serviced by a separate, direct connection to the existing sanitary sewer main in 72nd Avenue W. Because it is no longer needed, we are requesting the existing sanitary sewer easement be relinquished and vacated in its entirety. Because it is no longer in use, there is no negative impact to the public. Beyond not having a negative impact to the public, the Anthology of Edmonds project actually will provide significant community benefit both in the form of much -needed housing for seniors and also by creating jobs for local residents. Additionally, the development is providing several public improvements to both 2121" and 72nd. Those improvements include new curbs, landscaped strips between sidewalk and street, new sidewalks (including public pedestrian easements and new driveways on both roads. Based on the community benefit being provided as a result of the new development and the absence of any negative impact to the public, we believe monetary compensation to city is not necessary. We appreciate your consideration and assistance with this matter. Best, Anthology of Edmonds Team ANTHOLOGY SENIOR LIVING 24Ol Ea,t )_ Suite ,'.s Demo C _� �u2o6 AnthologySeniodiving.com Packet Pg. 139 9.1.g —1—= r r i 212TH STREET SW 212TH STREET SW - SECTION A SCALE: NTS 0 PROPOSED I' NIDE PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT & 1.5' LANDSCAPE WDTH VARIES SCREEN WALL �L 9' TRASH STAGING AREA SIDEWALK VARIES JIIIIDTH E%,A- TRASH STAGING AREA ELEVATION IAllli T, IS 0.00' TO OM' HOD THAN kI.AiN LANDSCAPE ON OUTSIDE EDGE OF SCREEN WALL SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 72ND AVE W - SECTION B SCALE: NTS N C d E d O Q. E TD 41) 0.5' CONCRETE CUkb E t AVE w V a C� G t C) rt+ w+ a Packet Pg. 140 9.1.h 3724 provides evidence that the 2009 city council believed that taskforces are established via ordinance. Should the taskforce to study homelessness have been established via ordinance and if not, why not? What governs the formation and use of taskforces by Edmonds city government? He urged the council and mayor to stop refusing to answer reasonable, basic questions. City officials may want to review Ordinance 3724; he was unable to find evidence that it had ever been repealed. Ordinance 3724 may require review and update; it contains reference to ESCA, an entity that disbanded in 2015. Two new references to ESCA were added to city code in 2020 and ESCA is still mentioned in city code in 2022. He questioned how this happened and why it wasn't immediately fixed. Mr. Reidy continued, Ordinance 3724 states the Disaster Recovery Plan is closely linked to the City's Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan, requiring coordination of activities and resources as the response phase of disaster operations begins to subside and recovery activities begin. Will Edmonds citizens ever be informed if there is a functional CEMP? Will they ever be told when the CEMP will be reviewed and updated? The approved meeting minutes for the January 4, 2022 regular meeting contain a blank line indicating who was present at the executive session; he requested the City disclose whose name should be disclosed on that blank line. When the regular city council meeting was reconvened on January 4'h, no action was taken as a result of meeting in executive session. On January 20, 2022, during the Mayor's state of the city address, Mayor Nelson mentioned acquisition discussions and negotiations with landowners for several parcels including Perrinville Woods and a 3-acre undeveloped parcel along Highway 99. He questioned whether the mayor had the authority to disclose acquisition discussions and negotiations with landowners and requested citizens be informed how that worked. Deborah Arthur, Edmonds, agreed it was dangerous in Edmonds particularly where she is. She reads the police reports and watches the neighborhood; there is a big problem near Stevens and the hospital does not have adequate security. She has heard about older women being hit in the head and the assailant running away. She said 76t1i was a disaster, she hears it and sees it. She suggested not trying to pack everything into Stevens Hospital. As a former outreach worker, she understands the problems with drugs, but there needs to be care for those people. She suggested Verdant be moved and questioned who they served. She did not support moving the fire station near the hospital. She objected to being awoken by garbage trucks at 6:40 a.m. this morning and at 6:55 every day by hundreds of white cars coming down 80' Street. She agreed it was dangerous, the other night she saw people moving in near at the Royal Terrace; they were gone two days later, leaving a great deal of garbage. 6. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT OLSON, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 22, 2022 2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 1, 2022 3. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 1, 2022 4. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 8, 2022 5. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT 6. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE PAYMENTS 7. POSITION DESCRIPTION REVISIONS - DAY CAMP Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q February 15, 2022 Page 4 Packet Pg. 141 9.1.h 8. SHERWOOD ELEMENTARY PLAYGROUND RENOVATION PROJECT 9. PRELIMINARY DECEMBER 2021 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT 10. ORDINANCE AMENDING ECC 1.02 PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS 11. APPROVAL OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT, DISPOSAL, AND TRANSPORT CONTRACT EXTENSION 12. PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN AND WATER METER VAULT EASEMENTS AT 21200 72ND AVE W 13. APPROVAL OF RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION DOCUMENTS FOR 22921 HIGHWAY 99 14. PUBLIC DEFENSE CONTRACT RENEWAL 15. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING EMPLOYEE PREMIUM PAYMENTS AND VACATION DAYS FOR ESSENTIAL WORKERS 16. NEIGHBORHOOD CITY OFFICE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT JOB DESCRIPTION 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS IMMEDIATE EMERGENCY MORATORIUM REGARDING BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS IN THE BD2 ZONE COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO ACCEPT AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING AN IMMEDIATE MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS FOR THE BD2 ZONED LOTS THAT DO NOT FRONT ON A DESIGNATED STREET FRONT TO BE IN EFFECT UNTIL THE CITY OF EDMONDS ADOPTS INTERIM DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR SUCH BD2 ZONED LOTS, SETTING TWO MONTHS AS THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THE MORATORIUM AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Councilmember K. Johnson asked about setting a date for the public hearing. Councilmember Paine advised the date of the public hearing was April 5, 2022. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE CODE AMENDMENT Senior Planner Eric Engmann advised the next topic of code amendments is EV charging infrastructure. He reviewed: • Tonight's agenda: an introductory discussion 1. The need for EVs and EV charging infrastructure 2. Highlights of proposed code amendments • Topic One: EV as part of a sustainable solution o EV Ties to Major Sustainability Goals Comprehensive Plan Transportation Encourage and promote the use of EV charging stations... including Element standards for new developments that provide parking facilities Policy 6.22 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q February 15, 2022 Page 5 Packet Pg. 142 9.1.i RESOLUTION NO. 1560 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DECLARING AS SURPLUS SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 21200 72ND AVE W IN EDMONDS, WASHSINGTON. WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds has issued a building permit for property located at the southwest corner of 2121h St SW and 72°d Ave W, with tax parcel number 00580700000401 (the "Subject Property"); and WHEREAS, in 1977, the city acquired a sanitary sewer easement, recorded under auditor's file number 7711230226 (the "Utility Easements"); and WHEREAS, the Utility Easement encumbers the Subject Property; and WHEREAS, the city has determined that it no longer needs the Utility Easement to provide continued public utility service to the Subject Property or any other property in the vicinity; and WHEREAS, the city has determined that it has no foreseeable future need for the Utility Easement; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.94.040 provides a process for disposing of surplus utility property; now therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Utility Easement described above are hereby determined to be surplus to the city's needs and is not required for providing continued public utility service. Section 2. Any disposition of the Utility Easements should proceed in accordance with RCW 35.94.040. RESOLVED this 22nd day of October, 2024 CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR,/MIKE ROSEN 1 Packet Pg. 143 9.1.i ATTEST: s CITY CLERK, SCO PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: I�Yo] Rm com aM • October 17, 2024 October 22, 2024 1560 Packet Pg. 144 9.1.j RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING DISPOSITION OF A SEWER UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF OF 21200 72ND AVE W IN EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds has issued a building permit for property located at the southwest corner of 212th St SW and 72nd Ave W, with tax parcel number 00580700000401 (the "Subject Property"); and WHEREAS, in 1977, the city acquired a sanitary sewer easement, recorded under auditor's file number 7711230226 (the "Utility Easement"); and WHEREAS, the Utility Easement was declared surplus with Resolution 1560; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.94.040 provides a process for disposing of surplus utility property; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.94.040 requires the disposition resolution to state the fair market value or the rent or consideration to be paid and such other terms and conditions for such disposition as the legislative authority deems to be in the best public interest; and WHEREAS, the appraised value of the 216 square foot area encumbered by the Utility Easement is $8,700; and WHEREAS, the project proposed for development on the subject property will provide the following new easements to the City: 1) a public pedestrian easement for that portion of the sidewalk to be constructed on private property along 212th St SW; and 2) a public pedestrian easement for that portion of the sidewalk to be constructed on private property along 72nd Ave W; and 3) a public water meter vault easement will also be provided on private property along the 212th St SW property frontage; and WHEREAS, the new easements being provided to the city amount to 1,823 square feet, which is substantially more area than the 216 square foot Utility Easement proposed for disposition; and WHEREAS, staff is recommending that the new easements provide sufficient consideration for the disposition of the Utility Easement and that no other money should be required as a condition of the disposition; and WHEREAS, on November 4, 2024, a public hearing was held on the proposed disposition of the Utility Easement; and 1 Packet Pg. 145 9.1.j WHEREAS, the city council, after hearing the staff presentation and the testimony provided at the public hearing would like to dispose of the Utility Easement in the manner described below; now therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The administration is hereby authorized to dispose of the Utility Easement described above by releasing and reconveying it to the property owner in exchange for, and after receipt of, the new easements described above. RESOLVED this day of , 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. 146 9.1.k In i MRSC - Easements X + _> C [t https://mrsc.org/Home/Explore-Topics/Legal/Planning/Easements.aspx#releasing City of Edmonds Releasing an Easement If the local government no longer needs an easement, the process for releasing (extinguishing/ vacating) the easement will depend on whether it was dedicated on the face of the plat (i.e., the map showing the decision of land into lots and the streets, alleys, dedications, easements, etc.) or if it was granted through a stand-alone document. Our Subdivisions topic page offers more information on plats. A local government is required to follow the process for plat alteration pursuant to RCW 64.04.175 to release an easement dedicated on the face of a plat. See M.K.K.I., Inc. v. Krueger (2006), which held that an easement depicted on a short plat could only be extinguished by formally amending the plat To release an easement granted independent of a plat, the legislative body will simply take action to extinguish the easement. One option is for the local government to follow its surplus property procedures, although this is not required. Note, however, RCW 35.94.040 provides that a city can only release a utility easement after it holds a public hearing and adopts a resolution declaring the easement surplus to the city's needs and no longer required for public utility purposes. For more information on surplus requirements, see our pages Surplus City or Town Property and Surplus County Property. Regardless of whether the easement was released by altering the plat, by simple action of the legislative body, or after a public hearing and adoption of a resolution, the local government should record a release of easement with the county to provide a clear chain of title. Releasing right-of-way can only be accomplished through the street or road vacation process. Packet Pg. 147 U Disposition of Sewer Easement Anthology Senior Living — ZZZoo 72nd Ave W City Council Public Hearing November 4, 2024 Prn-lpct I-ncratic a.- LYNNWOOD EDMONDS �i_.i > 192TH ST SW '7? KaT FONDS RAND rn 3 � Q Z SHT 10 S20 T27N RdE 208TH ST SW 00 �0 E g?, Cf- �N��PK �0 3 W tiHT iJ = 220TH ST SW - A Packet Pg. 149 9.1.1 11 EXHIBIT C DEPICTION OF PORTION OF EASEMENT FOR RELINQUISHMENT 212TH ST SW 0 'S M (PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY) GRAPHIC SCALE 30' 0 25 50 1"=50' LOT 4 TPN:00580700000401 3 PORTION OF W EASEMENT TO BE RELINQUISHED POINT OFA X: N39'59'21 "E COMMENCEMENT 10.00' SE COR. LOT 4 N50'00'39-W I ci �27. POINT OF BEGINNING N m 30' � a �% ,� N89'52'53"W 128.08' N50'00'39-W `�`�`� 10' SANITARY SEWER 15.65' 15.60' EASEMENT REC. NO. 7711230226 ---J ----------------- '4g,AV1 ---------4 ------------------ oFITAs 1� LOT 3 CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT S-77 REC. NO. 7705310298 PARK 212 APT LLC EXHHBIT 1 NOT S BEEN PREPARED TO ASSIST IN o��sg�AR THIS B THE INTERPRETATION OF THE ACCOMPANYING j0AAL LAN��jS LEGAL DESCRIPTION. IF THERE IS A CONFLICT �++ BETWEEN THE WRITTEN LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND THIS SKETCH, THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION SHALL NW 1/4, NW 1/4, SEC. 29, TWP. 27N., RGE. 4E., W.M. PREVAIL. CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON EASEMENT ENCUMBERS A PORTION OFSOUTH SIDE OF PROPERTY z16 sf EASEMENT AREA Packet Pg. 150 �r000sed L tv f ANTHOLOGY SENIOR LIVING 9.1.1 0 •L 3 • 127 SENIOR LIVING UNITS NEW FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS W 4- 0 _ SIDEWALKAND 0 w _ LANDSCAPING 0 CL-_ - N - ��- - 2121h ST SW and 72nd Ave V ' A r a C o � s t� ca Q Packet Pg. 151 MrST870"Urlare 10, 212TH STREET SW 8' Landscape buffer T Sidewalk - 8' Easement E(D - ...•........ ... Water Meter Vault 0 Easement w VM E• PROPOSED 6-FLOOR SENIOR LIVING FACILITY WITH 1-LEVEL UNDERGROUND PARKING r It . ............ Yr 1 w 216sf Easement Are �a no longer used 0 .2 New Sewer Connection • SUBJECT SEWER o EASEMENT ONLY 0 Property r Line SERVES SUBJECT PROPERTY v I 5'Sidewalk - 1' Easement • EXISTING PUBLIC 0 .2 0 '-/-o W > SEWER ABANDONED Landscape butter WITH PROJECT NEW SEWER CONNECTION DIREC TO 2121h ST SW E PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN M EASEMENT PUBLIC WATER VAULI E EASEMENT Disposition of Easement ➢ RCW 35-94-040 • By resolution and pursuant to a public hearing, City Council may release or otherwise sell, the surplus lands or property at its fair m value or rent or other consideration to be paid ➢ Resolution 156o approved by City Council 1.0/22/2024 ➢ Appraisal —Fair MarketValue $8,700 ➢ Other Consideration • City Ownership & Maintenance Responsibilities Eliminated • Public Pedestrian & WaterVault Easements Granted • Frontage Improvements Constructed— 2121h St SW & 72nd Ave W ➢ Easement Comparison • Pedestrian & Water Vault Easements to begronted - approx.1-82� • Sewer Easement proposed to be released — 216 sf Staff Recommendation ➢ APPROVE RELEASE OF SEWER EASEMENT ➢ NO MONETARY COMPENSATION ➢ ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN and WATER VAU LT EAS E M E NTS (Approved by City Council February 15, 2022) 10.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/4/2024 2024 October Budget Amendment Ordinance Staff Lead: Kim Dunscombe Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Kimberly Dunscombe Background/History Amend the 2024 Ordinance No. 4363 This item was on the October 22 agenda, but was pulled due to the late hour and has been rescheduled for November 4th. None of the attachments or totals have changed. At the October 15, 2024, Finance Committee meeting, Councilmember Chen raised significant concerns regarding the proposed budget request for a $550,000 increase in appropriation authority for the General Fund. His concerns centered on the necessity of the request, and he expressed hesitation in moving forward with approval without further deliberation. Councilmember Chen articulated his desire to avoid a "rubber stamping" of the appropriation and emphasized the importance of not approving the increase simply to avoid other potential consequences. He suggested that more discussion is required to explore alternative options to work within the current appropriation limits over the next two months, rather than relying on additional funding. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve Ordinance No. XXXX amending the 2024 Budget. Attachments: 2024 October Decision Package Exhibits 2024 October Budget Amendment Ordinance Packet Pg. 155 2024 October Budget Amendment 10.1.a Budget Amendment for: October 22, 2024 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) This decision package gives budget authority for the City of Edmonds' Employee Picnic ($8,169), Labor Relations training($890) and Public Risk Management Association Training ($3,670). The training expenditures received reimbursement from WCIA, and the Employee picnic was funded with a private donation. Resources Previously Approved Budget By Council 3rd Quarter Budget Amendment Partially Funded One -Time Fund 001 GENERAL Name: Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 001.000.22.518.10.31.00 Supplies $ 45 $ $ $ $ 001.000.22.518.10.31.10 Wellness Program Supplies 5,415 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 Miscellaneous 3,599 001.000.22.518.10.43.00 Travel 3,670 Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease) $ 12,729 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 001.000.367.00.000.00 Donation/Contributions $ 8,000 $ $ $ $ 001.000.337.09.000.00 Miscellaneous Interlocal Revenue 3,890 Total Revenue Increase (Decrease) $ 11,890 $ $ S $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ (839) $ $ $ $ Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) $ (839) $ $ $ $ Packet Pg. 156 2024 October Budget Amendment 10.1.a Budget Amendment for: October 22, 2024 Item Description: The police department received three grants to cover additional services or equpment for our officers and the community. We received the ARTG Grant that will cover the salary and benefits from July 2024 - February 2025 including the supervision costs. We recieved the WSCJTC Wellness Grant which provided a massage chair and professional services for nutritional counseling and recovery and stretching instruction for our officers. The Police department also recieved the WATPA grant which will cover two years of Flock services for the PD to utilize in the course of performing their jobs. Department: Police Department Fund Name: 001 GENERAL Division:7 I Title: �Preparer: Alexandra Ehlert Budget Amendment Type New Item For Council To Consider Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? 100% Ending Fund Balance What is the nature of the expenditure? On -Going Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Operating Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Fin out on -going costs & revenues Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 001.000.41.521.10.11.00 Salary for Erin Nathan - Social Worker S 33,929 $ 8,954 $ S $ 001.000.41.521.10.23.00 Benefits for Erin Nathan - Social Worker 2,876 1,013 00 1.000.41.521.10.4 1.00 Social Worker Supervision 1,080 270 001.000.41.521.10.35.00 Wellness Grant - Massage Chair 1,859 - 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 Wellness Grant - Professional Services 4,370 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 WATPA - Flock Grant 131,880 Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease) $ 175,994 $ 10,237 $ S S Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 001.00.334.01.110.00 WSCJTC - Officer Wellness Grant S 6,236 $ - $ S $ 001.00.334.00.000.00 AWC - Alternative Response Team Grant 37,885 10,237 001.00.334.00.000.00 WATPA - Flock Grant 131,873 - Total Revenue Increase (Decrease) S 175,994 $ 10,237 $ S $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) S S S S S Packet Pg. 157 2024 October Budget Amendment 10.1.a Budget Amendment for: October 22, 2024 Item Description: Throughout 2024, the city's financial story has been shaped by several factors that have significantly impacted the General Fund. As the Mayor has discussed on numerous occasions, the ambitious goal of achieving a $3.2 million vacancy rate in the General Fund has proven difficult to realize. Historical vacancy data, along with the complexities of under budgeted collective bargaining agreement (CBA) negotiations, and unbudgeted separation payouts, have contributed to this challenge. The initial vacancy assumption did not fully account for these factors, leaving the General Fund short of its target. To maintain financial transparency, compliance, and to avoid a finding in the upcoming audit related to overspending within the General Fund appropriation authority, I am requesting an amendment to increase the General Fund spending authority by $550,000. This adjustment is necessary to align the budget with forecasted expenditures and to ensure the citv remains in compliance with state budeetary laws. Fund ' 001 GENERAL Name: 11'reparer: IVim Dunscombe Budget Amendment Type New Item For Council To Consider Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? 100% Ending Fund Balance What is the nature of the expenditure? One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? 10perating Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 001.000.39.518.10.11.10 Offset vacancy rate adjustment $ 550,000 $ $ S $ Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease) $ 550,000 $ $ S $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 $ $ $ S S Total Revenue Increase (Decrease) $ $ $ S $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ (550,000) $ $ S S Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) $ (550,000) $ $ S S Packet Pg. 158 2024 October Budget Amendment 10.1.a Budget Amendment for: October 22, 2024 Item Description: In 2023 the City applied for a capital grant from the Washington State Arts Commission for the Edmonds Creative District to create a Gateway Art Project at Anway Park adjacent to the ferry holding lanes. A reimbursable grant of $60,000 was awarded 3/1/24. The required match of $60,000 was donated by the Edmonds Arts Festival Foundation with an additional donation up to $15,000 to cover costs of the initial artist selection process. A cooperative agreement with EAFF was signed by the City in May 2024. The RFQ was approved by City Council 6/18/24 and the selection process is underway. Initial funds will be expended by the end of 2024 with the remaining funds expended in 2025 to complete the project. Department: Community, Culture & Economic Development Fund Name: 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS Division: Cultural Services Title: Creative District capital grant and donations for Gateway Art Project Prevarer: Frances Chapin Budget Amendment Type Previously Discussed By Council Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? Jun 18 2024 How is this amendment funded? lReimbursed by Grants or Outside Agencies What is the nature of the expenditure? On -Going Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Capital Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Fill out on going costs & revenues Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 117.100.64.573.20.41.00 Professional Service $ 35,000 $ 100,000 $ $ $ Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease) $ 35,000 S 100, $ $ S Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 117.100.367.00.000.00 Private Donation $75,000 $ - $ $ $ 117.100.334.05.800.01 WA Arts Commission Capital Grant - 60,000 Total Revenue Increase (Decrease) $ 75,000 $ 60,000 $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 117.100.64.508.40.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 40,000 $ (40,000) $ $ $ Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) $ 40,000 $ (40,000) $ $ $ Packet Pg. 159 10.1.a 2024 October Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: October 22, 2024 Description: The city will receive unused ARPA funds from two beneficiaries. Shoreline Community College will return $75,000 of unused ARPA funds, and Washington Kids in Transition will return $40,000 in funds that were initially offered as a deposit at the beginning of the Housing Grant Program. This budget amendment adds the expenditure authority to use the returned ARPA funds towards the Edmonds Fire Contract before year's end, when all ARPA funds must be spent. Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) A Funds for Fire Contract Cain New Item For Council To Consider 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Operating Fund 001 GENERAL Name: Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 142.000.39.522.20.41.50 Fire Service Contract $ 115,000 $ $ $ $ Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease) $ 115,000 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 142.000.333.21.019.00 Coronavirus Relief Fund $ 115,000 $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase (Decrease) $ 115,000 $ $ S $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) $ $ $ $ $ Packet Pg. 160 10.1.a 2024 October Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: October 22, 2024 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) rd the 2024 bond issue for new water and storm funds along with the funding to refinance the 2013 revenue bonds. entry includes all the proceeds received, debt issue costs and refunding entries. Services Bond Issue and Previously Discussed By Council 5-28-2024 Ordiance#4358 Bond Ordinance 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund MULTIPLE FUNDS Name: Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 421.200.74.592.34.84.00 2024 Debt Issue Costs 90,951 $ $ $ $ 422.200.72.592.31.84.00 2024 Debt Issue Costs 23,936 421.000.74.592.34.84.00 2024 Debt Issue Costs 17,106 421.000.74.593.34.71.00 2024 Advance Refunding 2013 Bond Issue 753,175 421.000.74.5 99.34.7 1.00 2024 Payment to Escrow on 2013 Refunding 3,891,699 421.000.74.599.34.84.00 2024 Debt Issue Cost to Escrow on 2013 Refunding 19,295 424.000.71.597.30.55.00 Transfer Restricted Cash-2024 Bond Issue 278,030 422.000.72.592.31.84.00 2024 Debt Issue Costs 2,854 422.000.72.5 93.3 1.7 1. 00 2024 Advance Refunding 2013 Bond Issue 126,948 422.000.72.5 99.3 1.7 1. 00 2024 Payment to Escrow on 2013 Refunding 648,872 422.000.72.599.31.84.00 2024 Debt Issue Cost to Escrow on 2013 Refunding 3,220 424.000.71.597.30.55.00 Transfer Restricted Cash-2024 Bond Issue 117,953 423.000.75.592.35.84.00 2024 Debt Issue Costs 28,078 423.000.75.5 93.3 5.7 1. 00 2024 Advance Refunding 2013 Bond Issue 1,248,909 423.000.75.5 99.3 5.7 1. 00 2024 Payment to Escrow on 2013 Refunding 6,389,228 423.000.75.599.35.84.00 2024 Debt Issue Cost to Escrow on 2013 Refunding 31,672 424.000.71.597.30.55.00 Transfer Restricted Cash-2024 Bond Issue 446,533 Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease) 14,118,459 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 421.200.391.20.000.00 2024 Revenue Bond Proceeds 8,516,725 $ $ $ $ 421.200.392.20.000.00 2024 Revenue Bond Premium 1,074,252 422.200.391.20.000.00 2024 Revenue Bond Proceeds 2,241,300 422.200.392.20.000.00 2024 Revenue Bond Premium 282,662 421.000.393.00.000.00 2024 Refunding Bond 3,408,480 421.000.392.20.000.00 2024 Refunding Bond Premium 519,626 421.000.397.34.424.00 Transfer Restricted Cash-2024 Bond Issue 278,030 422.000.393.00.000.00 2024 Refunding Bond 568,616 422.000.392.20.000.00 2024 Refunding Bond Premium 86,338 422.000.397.38.424.00 Transfer Restricted Cash-2024 Bond Issue 117,953 423.000.393.00.000.00 2024 Refunding Bond 5,594,881 423.000.392.20.000.00 2024 Refunding Bond Premium 854,102 423.000.397.35.424.00 Transfer Restricted Cash-2024 Bond Issue 446,533 Total Revenue Increase (Decrease) 23,989,498 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 421.000.74.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance (475,139) $ $ $ S 421.200.74.508.19.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 9,500,026 422.000.72.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance (8,987) 422.200.72.508.19.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 2,500,026 423.000.75.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance (802,371) 424.000.71.508.19.00.00 Ending Fund Balance (842,516) Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) 9,871,039 $ $ $ S Packet Pg. 161 2024 October Budget Amendment 10.1.a Budget Amendment for: October 22, 2024 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Record the 2024 revenue bond issue debt payment for December 2024 and remove the 2013 that was originally budgeted. Services nee impartment Fund MULTIPLE FUNDS the 2024 Revenue Bond Payment and Remove the 2013 Debt Payment Name: Previously Discussed By Council 5-28-2024 Ordiance #4358 Bond Ordinance 100% Ending Fund Balance On -Going Operating Fill out on -going costs & revenues Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 421.000.74.591.34.72.30 2024 Revenue Bond Principal 170,205.00 $ $ $ S 421.000.74.592.34.83.30 2024 Revenue Bond Interest 258,380.00 422.000.72.591.31.72.30 2024 Revenue Bond Principal 44,916.00 422.000.72.592.31.83.30 2024 Revenue Bond Interest 60,882.00 423.000.75.591.35.72.30 2024 Revenue Bond Principal 124,881.00 423.000.75.592.35.83.30 2024 Revenue Bond Interest 121,223.00 424.000.71.591.31.72.00 2013 Revenue Bond Principal (15,000.00) 424.000.71.591.34.72.00 2013 Revenue Bond Principal (85,000.00) 424.000.71.591.35.72.00 2013 Revenue Bond Principal (150,000.00) 424.000.71.592.31.83.00 2013 Revenue Bond Interest (17,506.00) 424.000.71.592.34.83.00 2013 Revenue Bond Interest (104,765.00) 424.000.71.592.35.83.00 2013 Revenue Bond Interest (172,441.00) 421.000.74.597.34.55.24 Intefund Transfer to Fund 424 (189,765.00) 422.000.72.597.31.55.24 Intefund Transfer to Fund 424 (32,512.00) 423.000.75.597.35.55.24 Intefund Transfer to Fund 424 (322,441.00) Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease) (308,943.00) $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 424.000.397.31.422.00 Intefund Transfer to Fund 424 (32,512.00) $ $ $ $ 424.000.397.34.421.00 Intefund Transfer to Fund 424 (189,765.00) 424.000.397.35.423.00 Intefund Transfer to Fund 424 (322,441.00) Total Revenue Increase (Decrease) (544,718.00) $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2,024.00 2025 2026 2027 2028 421.000.74.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance (238,820.00) $ $ S S 422.000.72.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance (73,286.00) 423.000.75.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 76,337.00 424.000.75.508.19.00.00 Ending Fund Balance (6.00) Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) (235,775.00) $ $ S S Packet Pg. 162 2024 October Budget Amendment 10.1.a Budget Amendment for: October 22, 2024 Item Description: This budget adjustment is a continuation of the original carryforward adjustment from the 2023 budget that was submitted in January 2024. The original carryforward amendment submitted was for $1,600,000 and through capital project reductions and uncertanty of future project completions, the final carryforward was reduced to $690,000 with the intention to bring forward this remaining budget request at a later date. Completion of new police vehicle upfitting was uncertain in the beginning of 2024. Direction to complete these police vehicle projects require approval of the original funding from the 2023 budget. This amendment is to complete the upfitting of the 20 police vehicles that we received in September of 2023. Department: Public Works Fund Name: 511 EQUIPMENT RENTAL Division: Fleet Title: Fleet Manager Preparer: Carl Rues Budget Amendment Type Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? 100°/ Ending Fund Balance What is the nature of the expenditure? One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Icapital Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 Equipment B-Fund $ 445,000 $ $ $ $ Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease) $ 445,000 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Total Revenue Increase (Decrease) $ $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 511.100.77.508.89.00.00 Equipment B-Fund $ (445,000) $ $ $ $ Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) $ (445,000) $ $ $ $ Packet Pg. 163 10.1.b ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4363 AS A RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, previous actions taken by the City Council require Interfund Transfers and increases in appropriations; and WHEREAS, state law requires an ordinance be adopted whenever money is transferred from one fund to another; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the amended budget appropriations and information which was made available; and approves the appropriation of local, state, and federal funds and the increase or decrease from previously approved programs within the 2024 Budget; and THEREFORE, WHEREAS, the applications of funds have been identified; THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 1. of Ordinance No. 4363 adopting the final budget for the fiscal year 2024 is hereby amended to reflect the changes shown in Exhibits A, B, C, and D adopted herein by reference. 1 Packet Pg. 164 10.1.b Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR, MIKE ROSEN ATTEST/AUTHENTICATE: 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. 165 10.1.b SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the th day of July, 2024, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. XXXX. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4363 AS A RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2024. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY 3 Packet Pg. 166 10.1.b EXHIBIT "A": Budget Amendment Summary (October 2024) FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION 2024 UNAUDITED BEGINNING FUND BALANCE REVENUE EXPENDITURES 2024 ADJUSTED BUDGET ENDING FUND BALANCE 001 GENERAL FUND 2,492,460 51,490,376 52,776,516 1,206,320 009 LEOFF-MEDICAL I NS. RESERVE 139,774 250,000 367,140 22,634 011 RISK MANAGEMENT RESERVE FUND - - - - 012 CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND 2,228,672 - 2,228,672 014 HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND 8,944 - 11,701 (2,757) 016 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 3,756,168 112,290 1,533,453 2,335,005 017 MARSH RESTORATION & PRESERVATION FUND 853,595 - 15,000 838,595 018 EDMONDS HOMELESSNESS RESPONSE FUND 200,000 - - 200,000 019 EDMONDS OPIOID RESPONSE FUND 74,119 50,000 - 124,119 104 DRUG ENFORCEMENT FUND 40,843 4,520 39,000 6,363 111 STREET FUND 4,701 2,630,600 2,662,492 (27,191) 112 COMBINED STREETCONST/IMPROVE 2,734,808 5,396,813 5,395,315 2,736,306 117 MUNICIPALARTS ACQUIS. FUND 657,265 163,631 317,880 503,016 118 MEMORIAL STREETTREE - - - - 120 HOTEL/MOTEL TAX REVENUE FUND 151,247 124,371 131,400 144,218 121 EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND 83,814 38,900 106,880 15,834 122 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND 17,868 1,740 3,000 16,608 123 TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS 138,157 44,193 43,400 138,950 125 PARK ACQ/IMPROVEMENT 1,992,459 1,627,900 2,826,746 793,613 126 SPECIAL CAPITAL FUND 3,957,800 1,639,520 2,228,484 3,368,836 127 GIFTS CATALOG FUND 3,140,448 215,830 618,646 2,737,632 130 CEMETERY MAI NTENANCE/IMPROV 196,244 152,990 290,559 58,675 136 PARKS TRUST FUND - - - - 137 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE TRUST FD 1,212,121 55,580 99,500 1,168,201 138 SISTER CITY COMMISSION 18,681 5,680 11,900 12,461 140 BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FUND 37,682 79,209 103,545 13,346 141 AFFORDABLE & SUPPORTIVE HOUSING FUND 309,127 65,000 - 374,127 142 EDMONDS RESCUE PLAN FUND 36,932 6,984,475 6,984,475 36,932 143 TREE FUND 222,354 220,930 214,800 228,484 211 LID FUND CONTROL - - - - 231 2012 LTGO DEBT SERVICE FUND - 310,420 310,420 - 332 PARKS CONSTRUCTION 139,615 1,169,365 907,660 401,320 421 WATER 9,601,886 26,111,857 18,848,630 16,865,113 422 STORM 6,983,494 12,383,585 10,721,538 8,645,541 423 SEWER/ TREATMENT PLANT 14,903,525 26,915,284 31,019,057 10,799,752 424 BOND RESERVE FUND 843,961 1,451,552 2,286,634 8,879 511 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND 5,298,245 2,779,730 3,219,212 4,858,763 512 Technology Rental Fund 421,587 2,173,664 2,011,076 584,175 617 FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND - - - - Totals 1 62,898,596 1 144,650,005 1 146,106,059 1 61,442,542 r C O E C d E Q O 3 m L O V 0 le N CD N d C> C cC C L 0 r C d E C d E Q O co 3 m L d O w V 0 le N CD N C O E t t� R w Q Packet Pg. 167 10.1.b EXHIBIT "B": Budget Amendments by Revenue (October 2024) FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION Adopted Budget Ord.#4335 1/1/2024 Adopted Amendment Ord.#4349 2/27/2024 Adopted Amendment Ord.#4363 7/23/2024 Proposed Amendment Ord.# 10/22/2024 2024 Amended Revenue Budget 001 General Fund $ 51,056,792 $ $ 245,700 $ 187,884 $ 51,490,376 009 Leoff-Medical Ins. Reserve 250,000 - - 250,000 011 Risk Management Reserve Fund - - 012 Contingency Reserve Fund 014 Historic Preservation Gift Fund - - 016 Building Maintenance Fund 112,290 112,290 017 Marsh Restoration & Preservation Fund - - 018 Edmonds Homelessness Response Fund - - 019 Edmonds Opioid Response Fund 50,000 50,000 104 Drug Enforcement Fund 4,520 4,520 111 Street Fund 2,630,600 2,630,600 112 Combined StreetConst/Improve 4,946,998 449,815 5,396,813 117 Municipal Arts Acquis. Fund 87,776 855 75,000 163,631 120 Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Fund 124,371 124,371 121 Employee Parking Permit Fund 38,900 38,900 122 Youth Scholarship Fund 1,740 1,740 123 Tourism Promotional Fund/Arts 44,193 44,193 125 Park Acq/Improvement 1,627,900 1,627,900 126 Special Capital Fund 1,639,520 1,639,520 127 Gifts Catalog Fund 215,830 215,830 130 Cemetery Ma i ntena nce/I mprov 152,990 152,990 137 Cemetery Maintenance Trust I'd 55,580 55,580 138 Sister City Commission 5,680 5,680 140 Business Improvement District Fund 79,209 79,209 141 Affordable and Supportive Housing Fund 65,000 - 65,000 142 Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund 6,550,000 319,475 115,000 6,984,475 143 Tree Fund 220,930 - 220,930 211 Lid Fund Control - - 231 2012 LTGO Debt Service fund 310,420 310,420 332 Parks Construction 316,240 853,125 - 1,169,365 421 Water 12,314,744 - 13,797,113 26,111,857 422 Storm 8,499,216 472,500 115,000 3,296,869 12,383,585 423 Sewer/Treatment Plant 20,019,768 6,895,516 26,915,284 424 Bond Reserve Fund 1,996,270 - (544,718) 1,451,552 511 Equipment Rental Fund 2,706,730 73,000 2,779,730 512 Technology Rental Fund 2,173,664 - 2,173,664 617 Firemen's Pension Fund I - - Totals $ 118.297.871 $ 996,170 $ 1,533,300 $23,822,664 $ 144,650,005 r C O E C d E Q O 3 m L O C� 0 le N CD N d C> C cC C L 0 r C d E C d E Q O co 7 m d O w V 0 le N CD N C O E t t� R w Q Packet Pg. 168 10.1.b EXHIBIT "C": Budget Amendment by Expenditure (October 2024) FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION Adopted Budget Ord.#4335 1/1/2024 Adopted Amendment Ord.#4349 2/27/2024 Adopted Amendment Ord.#4363 7/23/2024 Proposed Amendment Ord.# 10/22/2024 2024 Amended Expenditure Budget 001 General Fund $ 51,892,793 $ $ 145,000 $ 738,723 $ 52,776,516 009 Leoff-Medical Ins. Reserve 367,140 - - 367,140 011 Risk Management Reserve Fund - - 012 Contingency Reserve Fund - - 014 Historic Preservation Gift Fund 11,701 - 11,701 016 Building Ma i ntena nce Fund 1,125,274 408,179 1,533,453 017 Marsh Restoration & Preservation Fund - 15,000 15,000 018 Edmonds Homelessness Response Fund - - 019 Edmonds Opioid Response Fund - - 104 Drug Enforcement Fund 39,000 39,000 111 Street Fund 2,662,492 2,662,492 112 Combined Street Const/I mprove 4,699,705 695,610 5,395,315 117 Municipal Arts Acquis. Fund 282,880 - 35,000 317,880 120 Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Fund 131,400 - 131,400 121 Employee Parking Permit Fund 26,880 80,000 106,880 122 Youth Scholarship Fund 3,000 - 3,000 123 Tourism Promotional Fund/Arts 43,400 - - 43,400 125 ParkAcq/Improvement 2,460,645 316,101 50,000 2,826,746 126 Special Capital Fund 1,379,355 714,754 134,375 2,228,484 127 Gifts Catalog Fund 618,646 - - 618,646 130 Cemetery Ma i ntena nce/I mprov 290,559 - 290,559 137 Cemetery Maintenance Trust I'd 25,000 74,500 99,500 138 Sister City Commission 11,900 - 11,900 140 Business Improvement District Fund 103,545 103,545 141 Affordable and Supportive Housing Fund - - - 142 Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund 6,550,000 319,475 115,000 6,984,475 143 Tree Fund 214,800 - - 214,800 211 Lid Fund Control - - 231 2012LTGO Debt Service Fund 310,420 - 310,420 332 Parks Construction 139,685 (85,150) 853,125 - 907,660 421 Water 13,568,408 269,176 - 5,011,046 18,848,630 422 Storm 8,495,157 1,202,265 145,000 879,116 10,721,538 423 Sewer / Treatment Plant 22,720,243 677,264 - 7,621,550 31,019,057 424 Bond Reserve Fund 1,988,830 - 297,804 2,286,634 511 Equipment Rental Fund 1,976,212 798,000 445,000 3,219,212 512 Technology Rental Fund 2,011,076 - - 2,011,076 617 Firemen's Pension Fund - - - Totals $ 124,150,146 $ 4,662,520 $ 2,150,154 $15,143,239 $ 146,106,059 r C O E C d E Q O 3 m N O t� O le N O N d C> C cC C L O r C d E C d E Q O co 3 m L d O V O le N C N C O E t t� R w Q Packet Pg. 169 EXHIBIT "D": Budget Amendment Summary (October 2024) 10.1.b Fund Number Proposed Amendment Change in Revenue Proposed Amendment Change in Expense Proposed Amendment Change in Ending Fund Balance 001 187,884 738,723 (550,839) 117 75,000 35,000 40,000 142 115,000 115,000 - 421 13,797,113 5,011,046 8,786,067 422 3,296,869 879,116 2,417,753 423 6,895,516 7,621,550 (726,034) 424 (544,718) 297,804 (842,522) 511 445,000 (445,000) Total Change 23,822,664 1 15,143,239 8,679,425 Packet Pg. 170 10.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/4/2024 Planning Board Preferred Growth Alternative and FLUM Discussion Staff Lead: Shane Hope Department: Planning & Development Preparer: Navyusha Pentakota Background/History Under Washington State's Growth Management Act (GMA), cities and counties must periodically update their Comprehensive Plans and development regulations to provide for sustainable growth and healthy communities. Our plan must be consistent with the GMA, PSRC Vision 2050 and Snohomish County countywide planning policies. Edmonds' periodic update must be adopted by December 31, 2024, addressing projected population and employment growth as well as housing needs through 2044. Under the GMA, the state Office of Financial Management forecasts population growth for Snohomish County. The growth amount is then allocated by the county among all cities and unincorporated urban growth areas so jurisdictions can plan for it. This time, Edmonds' key growth planning targets are: 3,000 new jobs 9,000 new housing units To accommodate our share of the countywide growth allocation, two growth scenarios were developed, incorporating community input, growth priorities, regulatory guidelines, prior plans and analyses, and the growth targets. These Growth Alternatives --Alternative A (Focused Growth) and Alternative B (Distributed Growth) --were approved by the City Council in April 2024 for further study and evaluation. Note: both alternatives included existing capacity in the areas of Highway 99, Westgate, etc. But they differed in addressing how and to what extent other growth should be accommodated. The alternative approaches provide "bookends" for meeting state housing and employment targets. A Draft Environmental Impact Study (DEIS) was conducted to assess potential impacts and mitigation strategies related to both growth alternatives, as well as to the "no action alternative". The DEIS was done at a high level to determine in part, whether the city has the infrastructure to incrementally handle growth that occurs, while making improvements that can be planned over time. In part, the DEIS was to identify whether any areas being proposed for growth were fatally flawed or for which environmental mitigation was not feasible. (A DEIS at a non -project (programmatic) level is typically not as detailed as for a specific project, such as a new bridge.) Regardless, when any future sites are actually proposed for development, they must go through an individual process for SEPA review. A final decision is now needed on the preferred Growth Alternative to guide the land use and housing elements, future land use maps, development regulations, capital facilities, and other city actions. This decision could be one of the proposed alternatives or a blend of both as studied in the DEIS. It cannot be outside the DEIS parameters. Not making a Preferred Alternative selection at this point would mean that Edmonds almost certainly would be unable to adopt a comprehensive plan by the end of the year. That's because direction from a Packet Pg. 171 10.2 Preferred Alternative is needed to finalize the list of capital projects, including for transportation, and to complete the future land use map and other components of the land use and housing elements. Staff Recommendation City Council selection on November 4th of a Preferred Alternative for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Narrative Two Growth Alternatives (aka "action alternatives") were proposed early this year. They were based on concepts to encourage healthy neighborhoods that could have suitable and affordable housing for a range of income levels.. A'No Action' Alternative (based on our current Comprehensive Plan and not meeting new state requirements for the next 20 years of growth) was also included for comparison. The final 2024 Comprehensive Plan could implement one of the proposed Action Alternatives or a combination of elements from each alternative. No Action Alternative: This alternative assumes no changes would be made to future land use designations and no policy, zoning, or other significant changes. Growth will generally follow current market trends. This alternative would continue the current 2015 Comprehensive Plan, as amended in 2020, and current zoning regulations. It would maintain the existing land use designations without modifications. The No Action Alternative is the baseline condition for comparison with other alternatives. Action Alternatives: Both action alternatives assume minimum compliance with recently adopted House Bills (HBs) 1110, 1337, and 1220. The concept of Neighborhood Centers and Neighborhood Hubs would be followed for both action alternatives at different scales to create housing opportunities, retail, jobs, restaurants and other services, making these areas key nodes for potential future development. Alternative A: Focused Growth: Under this alternative, growth would be focused primarily in the four proposed Neighborhood Centers while lesser growth would be encouraged in the proposed Hub locations. The City aims to promote efficient land use and reduce sprawl and associated infrastructure costs by concentrating development in the Centers. Alternative B: Distributed Growth: Under this alternative, growth would be distributed fairly evenly across the four Neighborhood Centers and seven proposed Neighborhood Hubs. By dispersing growth more evenly, the City aims to promote balanced development, improve access to jobs and services for more neighborhoods, and equitably distribute housing across the City. Planning Board The Planning Board, on October 23rd, evaluated and discussed both action alternatives, considering growth capacity and neighborhood form for all centers and hubs within each alternative. Ultimately, the Board recommended a Preferred Alternative that combined parts of both Alternative A and Alternative B. The full video of this meeting can be found here - <https://edmondswa.igm2.com/Citizens/SplitView.aspx?Mode=Video&MeetinglD=4711&Format=Agen da>. Attached to this memo is the Planning Board's recommendation in the form of draft minutes from the October 23 meeting and also as documented in memo form afterward, along with a diagram showing Planning Board recommendations for each hubs and center. NOTE: The Board's recommendations include more capacity than strictly required -amounting to about half the difference between Alternatives A and B. The selection of these alternatives reflect that the Planning Board looked at each neighborhood area individually and tried to reach agreement on the best option for that area. This effort On October 23rd did not include adding and subtracting capacity after identifying the preference for each area. At the Planning Board's October 30th meeting when the total capacity numbers (from adding each area) Packet Pg. 172 10.2 and the Draft Future Land Use Map were presented, the Board discussed that some final "buffer amount" in the total capacity might be reasonable and that further fine-tuning was also possible, either in the comprehensive plan process or the 2025 zoning code update process. The Board's recommended growth scenario, along with a corresponding Draft Future Land Use Map, will be presented to the City Council on November 4th. Next steps At its November 4th meeting, the City Council is asked to select a Preferred Alternative. The Council could follow the Planning Board's recommendation --in whole or part --for this or choose something entirely different, so long as the Preferred Alternative provides the needed growth capacity and is within the scope of the DEIS. After the Council selects the Preferred Alternative, key details of the draft Comprehensive Plan (including the corresponding list of transportation projects) can be completed over the following two weeks or so. Other revisions to the draft Plan will also be incorporated during this period to reflect Council, Planning Board and public input. This timing allows the Planning Board a narrow window to review the revised Draft Plan and make a recommendation, and for the City Council to review and decide on any final changes so that an updated Comprehensive Plan can be adopted by the end of 2024, Beginning in January 2025, updates to zoning and other regulations will be developed for City Council consideration. While the updated Comprehensive Plan will have provided important direction, various decisions about the details of implementation will still be needed. Edmonds, like other cities in our region, have until the end of July to adopt development regulations that are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and also with new state laws. Attachments: Growth Targets Explanation PB Preferred Alternative and FLUM FLUM - PB Preferred Alternative PB 10232024 Regular mtg draft Preferred Action Alternative_ revised Planning Board Preferred Alternative Diagrams Packet Pg. 173 Growth Targets Summarized County adopted housing units target (includes existing capacity including H-99) Edmonds currently has capacity for 5148 units, but only 4,946 units can be counted towards growth targets. • 4862 units that are multi family, senior apartments i.e low rise or mid rise • 84 units that must are middle housing • Capacity for ADUs has not previously been evaluated • 201 units that are single family (Not Counted as they do not satisfy HB 1220) 4,946 I Existing Capacity Per BLR 9,069 — 4,946 = 4,123 Required Typology for the total 4,123 1952 - low-rise or mid -rise multi -family apartment category. 2129 ADUs or low-rise or mid -rise multi- family apartment category. 42 units that are middle housing low-rise or mid -rise multi -family apartment category 4,946 Existing Capacity Per BLR 10.2.a 3 0 L L 2,019 L HB1110+Hb1337 Achieved Capacity 4W 300 units approx. Loss of units in UNOCAL 1,400 units City to find potential growth locations feasible to accommodate this additional housing --———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 175 10.2.a County Allocated Target Per BLR existing Capacity Total Units required (after excluding existing capacity: 9,060 - 4,946 ) ADUs and Middle Housing Capacities • Capacity achieved by applying HB 1337 — 1977 ADUs • Capacity achieved by HB1110 — 500- 600 approx. Middle Housing Units But only 42 can count towards growth targets coz of HB 1220 req. Loss of units due to change of UNOCAL Land Use (not included in the growth target, but city needs to compensate this) Total Housing units to plan for within Centei 9,069 — 4,946 4,123 1977 + 42 2,019 ace 2,400 Approx. 3 0 cD L a a L Q E 0 U _ C. x W y d CD L 3 0 'L^ V _ d E L Q -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 176 V7"I 7-�ON EpM_DS � 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 � •ZX'ftG ire • 84 126 0I0119I• + 300 units approx. Loss of units in UNOCAL 10.2.a 3 0 'L^ V L L a �a a m _ m s Q L Q E 0 U 0 �a c� a x w 0 d CD M s 3 ° � � — Approx 2400 unitslow-rise, 0 or mid -rise ADUs or low-rise, or mid- Middle Housing or 0 apartments/condos rise apartments/condos any other Must be Low rise, midrise apartments/condos/ADUs E Total E Total M Total To be accommodated in centers and hubs s 0 Existing per BLR A Achieved By HB1337 Q Required to meet E Required to meet Achieved by HB1110 Targets Targets --——————————————— —————————————— —————————————— ————————————————————————————— City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update ———————— I Packet Pg. 177 10.2.b • Planning Board Preferred Growth Alternative Recommendation • Draft Future Land Use Map Review City Council —Nov 4, 2024 10.2. b Jrono.s-ed 1.1 m a Q Packet Pg. 179 D auveA: , '� Transit Routes connecting the Centers and Hubs Bus Stop O� EpM ., High Capacity BRT Route voices Focused Growth Residential Dr, aNeighborhood OIYmPicView (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments t Neighborhood Center oo North Bowl Mid -scale mixed -use: Apartments or condos with retail/ .:,.•,,..•,.• 19ethSt. 4* Floors commercial/offices on ground floor in select locations •• Downtown/ Neighborhood Hub Waterfront ................ Medical District Low -scale mixed -use: Apartments or condos with retail/ Activity Center Expansion y ,, commercial/ offices on ground floor in select locations 3 Floors Five Corners 7 Main St. Transit Oriented Housing 212th St. v ; Q Q 30� a Total Capacity Enabled in ALT A - 3,860 --------------------------------------------- Note. Capacity metrics shown are approximate values Firdale Village .W 3 0 L U L Perrinville a _ _Pe 0 a a� East Sea view d 0_ 0 U H ighwal Subares Packet Pg. 180 E,,E: , Ahern; - Voices •Vision Plo, Distrih Neighborhood Residential (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments Neighborhood Center Mid -scale mixed -use: Apartments or condos with retail/ commercial/offices on ground floor in select locations 3* Floors Neighborhood Hub Low -scale mixed -use: Apartments or condos with retail/ commercial/ offices on ground floor in select locations T Floors Transit Oriented Housing M 0 *Maplewood Hub: Cannot count towards GMA Capacity Total Capacity Enabled in ALT B - 4, 285 --------------------------------------------- Note. Capacity metrics shown are approximate values Transit Routes connecting the C Bus Stop High Capacity BRT Route Downtown/ Waterfront Activity Center West Edmonds Firdale North Firdale Vil � North Bowl Maplewood' 196th St. �............. Medical District Expansion a ^` Five Corners i Main St. 7 .. 212th St. FI �o �a ty zzah St i. oy t 3 0 /L^ V Perrinville d a c 0 a a� c East Seavie% 0_ C 0 U Highwa, Subares South L Q Ballinger Packet Pg. 181 1 Alternative A: Focused Growth Total Capacity Enabled in ALT A - 3,860 Downtown/ Waterfront Activity Center Olympic View Or* Perrinville LNorth 13-0--11 East Sea view 196th Sr. ............................. ... • Medical District ae Expansion Five Corners Main St. ........................... .. . .... 2th St. 220th St. Firdale North _j Firdale Village Highway 99 1 Subarea Alternative B: Distributed Growth Total Capacity Enabled in ALT B - 410285 Olympic view Or- f Perrinville North Bowl Maplewood* East Seaview Downtown/ ................. Waterfront Medical District Activity Center Expansion ti Five Corners Main St . . . ........ 0 # Highway 99 2 2ft St. Subarea A -West Edmonds Way South Lake Firdale North Ballinger FirdaleVVilLlage. 0 Q M CL E 0 U Note: Capacil Q E metrics shows -e approximate 2w values < I Packet Pg. 182 1 10.2.b Planning Board Recommendation Planning Board Recommendation 10.2.b Or Impm 4 Floors, Bonus Floor height incentive Alt A as proposed allowed Alt A area extents 3 Floors 3, 4 Floors, C a Bonus Floor height incentive allowed on > Mix of Alt A + Alt B some parcels. 4 Floors, Bonus Floor height incentive Alt A as proposed allowed J LL 3 Floors Alt B as proposed Bonus Floor height incentive for few parcel. Alt A as proposed 3 Floors L 3 Floors a Modified Alt B Bonus Floor height incentive for few parcel; , 3 Floors, a. Alt B as proposed m Bonus Floor height incentive a Alt B as proposed 3 Floors E Alt B as proposed U 3 Floors a 3 Floors Packet Pg. 184 ERY�NE'S P Plnn . Board Transit Routes connecting the C Bus Stop .... High Capacity BRT Route tirnmendation Note: Capacity metrics are approximate values 750 11800 420 290 200 30 250 100 35 70 20 T Centers & Hubs 31965 --------------------------------------------- Downtown/ Waterfront Activity Center West Edmonds Firdale North Firdale Village •1 North Bowl Maplewood' 196th St. ................. - - Medical District Expansion Five Corners M '�- Main St. 112th St. v v Q Q Fay 220th St. 10.2. b 3 0 0 L Perrinville 1 L a. 0 M IL m c East Seaviei s 1 i E 0 U� i J LL CU L • Highway a Subarea L a m n w m E U fCs South L Q Ballinger Packet Pg. 185 EDMONS,� • 0 0 4,947 39965 1,977 42 42 Middle Housing ■ Existing ■ Centers & Hubs ■ ADUs ■ MU 10.2. b ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 186 � 9mmWn Planning Board Recommended oHwaaftd. Preferred Growth Alternative id Use Map Rm1 cow _ DawrWwn Mw:C Ccmn�y lanning Board mil Dowraown C(xwirk cr [__� Dawrrc M.cC RadarfL- // Omrwwn Mma Pan �r•, ShOGNM Ca Qr.32i 9dation0 m2sw Pan DOtO7�w,1 Low Dw" kSdON l 1 Law Dw" NMAwM 7 mod.oto Om" Rwlmmmi 4. MNMWW a _ MY618o 4 \ N go NwQd Usa — r ,' ® EAacnd," Cndv 0Hasp" ewedK21 ®p ± I - Pam r opw SPQc E t i ►sR �i � � I vrrwow A MAN R NI OWN — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — r A 1, Packet Pg. 187 10.2. b Q Packet Pg. 188 :� [� 1� 1 •I�l � � [�I�I• «:� � 1 �Am No Action Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Existing 3-4 Floors v Q r A Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School Bus Stops Alt A: Focused Growth Ah tMISPOWIEW Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 4 floors 2281 Neighborhood Residential (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quaciplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments 10.2.b 0 L Alt 6: Distributed Growth L L Neighborhood Commercial a. Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) L —11nn iiniy c E O U am Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Q subject to change with further study. --——————————————————————————————————————— City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 189 -JK Preterennem- \/\/P, ✓ Growth Area Extent: ALT AAS PROPOSED ✓ Heights: ALT AAS PROPOSED • I ['M 10.2.b 3 0 'L^ V Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 4 floors .N CL v a � 1800 units E am 228 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 190 UERIY�NE�S E � � ' PI v�S��„ . OI, votes Future Land Use Changes: Westgate 10.2. b :� [� 1� 1 •I�1 � � [�I�I• «:� � 1 �Am 10.2.b :ARK01 1 2 [: No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) ■ Up to 4 floors Up to 3 floors —800 units 212th St. ids 212th SL 1 � Fall Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School Bus Stops Neighborhood Residential (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments Alt 6: Distributed Growth Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) —350 units 0 212th SLR 1 Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Q subject to change with further study. --——————————————————————————————————————— City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 192 °lztiL s EDMON:..WMM -JK Preterencr-, Am ✓ Growth Area Extent: ALT AAS PROPOSED ✓ Heights: MAX HEIGHT OF 3 STORIES (NO BONUS) L)rner. 3 0 'L^ V d Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors _ a m N 420 UNITS 1� L A& AA CL C) D 2i2th St. LL _ L w+ 21 CL 41 _' -a --———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update 11Packet Pg. 193 �1LLs EDM�N, Am Comprehensive Plan 2020 Neighborhood Commercial 25' Single Family Urban 1 25' '.lOIO[: :AN101 1 2 [Ah : 10.2.b w 3 0 /L^ V L a _ M a m a� a� a 0 U D J LL _ M CU _ a L L a m a w Low Density Residential 1 E Multi Family Medium Density 25'-30' Moderate Density �. Residential a ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I I Packet Pg. 194 Comprehensive Plan 2024 Mixed Use 3 Up to 3 floors ®�IL 10.2.b is Medical•. E „o Voices No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth /L^ V 0 L Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) L 2 Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) a. Up to 4 floors Up to 3 floors —750 units —1500 unity C 212th St. 5 corners ; 21Zth St. 212th St. % expansion ■ .. % . J u_ K — J CU (v L L a M 220th St. 220th St. -Z 220th St. E Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial FCPFQAMfF Neighborhood Residential C ESPERANLE Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Q Multi -Family (Housing Bills Compliance) subject to change with further study._ School Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — — — _ — Bus Stops quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update Packet Pg. 195 PB Preference: Medical Districtvision , Pon � Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 4 floors Up to 3 floors 750 UNITS ✓ Growth Area Extent: ALT B AS PROPOSED ✓ Heights: Mix of what's proposed in Alt A, Alt B ■ Parcels on either side of 212th — Heights same as proposed in Alt A — Up to 4 floors (5 with incentives) ■ Rest of the parcels (E of 76th , west and south of woodway high school) — 3 Floors max (No incentives) U ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 196 E, EVERY�N r r � Vlsion . pi rI 3 Colleg,,..r Medical/Hwy Middle School - 8 - F 99 Activity � \� ,Y\\ ; �Il�jrj11111�11�11�11���/ : �\ I�I���IAIR.T Comprehensive Plan 2020 Mixed Use Commercial 25' — 75' Single Family Urban 1 25' Multi Family Medium Density 25-30' I 212th St. I 220th St. Comprehensive Plan 2024 - Mixed Use 5 (Medical) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Mixed Use 4 Up to 4 floors Mixed Use 3 Up to 3 floors Low Density Residential 1 Moderate Density residential 1- 30 L V _ M a d d CL 0 U 2 Packet Pg. 197 V[01N•IelI2[0I9IO«:iMitzi IWW1No No Action Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School Bus Stops 10.2.b •F:1[Ah : 3 0 L Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth L L Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) a. Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 3 floors Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) —30 units Neighborhood Residential (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments Up to 3 floors N _ L Q Q I_ 0 U I J —90 units / r_ L El L d d L a �290 units ^'290 u r a w E U Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Q subject to change with further study. --——————————————————————————————————————— City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update 11Packet Pg. 198 PB Preference: Firdale (Hub &Center)vision , Pon � O /L^ V L Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) a. r_ Up to 3 floors Firdale Center 0 ✓ SAME AS PROPOSED. ✓ ALT A and Alt B are exactly the same U_ —30 units Firdale HubCU L ✓ Growth Area Extent: ALT AAS PROPOSED a ✓ Heights: ALT AAS PROPOSED L L IL L —290 units m n w m E U f� Q City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 199 10.2.b SEDM�N D , a IrW 1 N I• REMW 3 i sx; a i J I°°T" IT sw '----� " I .I��11 Former s _ ,. Woodway Elementary :.°r" 1. IW L7 I " aor. .L sw � TL 3 e— _. 1°i °L SW 3 NI°T YL w- EI°°D VL SW I Madron K-8 Scho '.11161C •1:1[� 0 'L- V O U Comprehensive Plan 2020 Comprehensive Plan 2024 L L Mixed Use 5 Up to 4 floors (5 Q Neighborhood Commercial FVMU - Up to 52' with incentive) 0. BN- 25' a Mixed Use 3 Up to 3 floors; Single Family Urban 1 25' Low Density Residential 1 E Multi Family High Density 25 — 30' Moderate Density Residential a City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 200 _,�on ... Neighborhood Hub: North Bowl � No Action Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School Bus Stops F7 Neighborhood Residential (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments O /L^ V Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth L L Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) r_ Up to 3 floors ^'75 units ^'200 units O 0 I_ E 3 E 3 O o> o� J LL Cy C 196th St. W 196th St. r CU C L d a L r a � m —= n I_ U Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Q subject to change with further study. --——————————————————————————————————————— City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 201 PB Preference: Bowl 10.2.b ED - ✓ Growth Area Extent: ALT B AS PROPOSED ✓ Heights: ALT B AS PROPOSED Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Up to 3 floors -200 units •x 3 n, `o U --———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 202 MS ED�N,� PUGET DR i f I f � • I1 I' AY- dmn so '.11101C Comprehensive Plan 2020 Comprehensive Plan 2024 Neighborhood Commercial 25 Mixed Use 3 Up to 3 floors Single Family Urban 3 25 Mixed Use 4 Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Low Density Residential 2 10.2. b w 3 0 /L^ V L L a _ 0 a m as m L Q E 0 U D J LL _ M Cu _ a L L a IL m n w E U f� Q Packet Pg. 203 77w7o�L s EomoN� .. • • • No Action Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School Bus Stops 10.2.b Alk 0 L Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth L L Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) a Neighborhood Residential (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments m as m L Q I_ 0 U 2 J 0 LL a = Q. VM > _T CU L I m E U Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Q subject to change with further study. - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 204 PB Preference: Perrinvillevision , Pon � Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) ✓ Growth Area Extent: ALT B AS PROPOSED ✓ Heights: ALT B AS PROPOSED U ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 205 E'S E�ERy�N � "., Pi =I: Comprehensive Plan 2020 Neighborhood Commercial 25 Single Family Urban 1 25 Single Family Urban 3 25 Multi Family Medium Density 25-30 Ah '.l N I• [Z W= Ah Comprehensive Plan 2024 - Mixed Use 4 Low Density Residential 1 Low Density Residential 2 Moderate Density Residential 10.2. b Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) w 3 0 /L^ V L a _ 0 a _ CL 0 U J U- _ d _ d a L L a m a w m E U 0 a Packet Pg. 206 77w7o�L s EomoN� „ • • • No Action Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School Bus Stops •m w' Vro \ A [: 10.2.b 0 /L^ V Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth L L Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Up to 3 floors Neighborhood Residential (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments —80 units —350 units C 0 U J LL C c CITY OF ; LYNNWOOD, CU C 196th St. Y� 3 � L Q L d IL Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Q subject to change with further study. --——————————————————————————————————————— City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 207 °Izt]L s EDMON:..WMM :1 0.1:m NTH Am ✓ Growth Area Extent: Modified Alt B. Removed few parcels N of 196th ✓ Heights: ALT B AS PROPOSED 0 CI "M _ ' SQL 194TH PL SW 1947" W A& Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) �Upto3floors �_MWWNWI_ -7Z-- � =7 cell -- -- 196TH ST SW w to Lma 4 10.2.b U ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 208 _,�... Future Land Use Changes: East SeaView � � IIIIII� � • L L L a _ 0 a m as m L Q E 0 U D J U- _ M d r CU _ L Comprehensive Plan 2020 Comprehensive Plan 2024 d a a� L Single Family Urban 1 25 Mixed Use 3 Up to 3 floors as L Multi Family Medium Density 25-30 Mixed Use 4 Up to 3 floors (4 a CO with incentive) n Multi Family High Density 25-30 w Low Density Residential 1 E Moderate Density Residential a City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 209 77w7o�L s EomoN� • • • No Action Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School Bus Stops 0 =00, 0 ME M 07064TOM I M W401 i7ka owl F401 1 rrrert Neighborhood Residential (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments 10.2.b 0 /L^ V Alt 6: Distributed Growth L Up to 3 floors L a _ a m as r —70 units CL o � U J J u_ _ tee, Q � d Lake r CU Ballinger Q ppr Edr»onds way m d L a M n NE 205th St. w m E U Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Q ----------------------------------------- subject to change with further study. City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 210 �PB Preference: South Lake Ballinger 10.2.b Ep w 3 0 /L^ V L L L a Up to 3 floors r- a m as m ts ^'70 units CL 0 a E � U ✓ Growth Area Extent: ALT B AS PROPOSED VON, 3 � ✓ Heights: ALT B AS PROPOSED <e°° Q U- CU Lake = L Ballinger °' a fdn�onds LV L a m n NE 205th St. w m E U f� Q - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 211 Future Land Use Changes: South Lake Ballinger, Comprehensive Plan 2020 Single Family Urban 1 25 Single Family Urban 1 25 © Corridor Development 25-30 Comprehensive Plan 2024 Mixed Use 3 Up to 3 floors Low Density Residential 1 --———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 212 V101Nsle]12[0I9I0■i1I19M►I►I:Ma ReIIIM2to6"MU►L: No Action Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Fd 0 o,�os Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School Bus Stops PI Neighborhood Residential (Housing Bills Compliance) Middle housing: Duplexes, Triplexes, ADUs, townhomes, quadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments 10.2.b 0 /L^ V Alt 6: Distributed Growth L L Up to 3 floors a _ a m as —35 units L CL E 0 U F s oy u_ _ d r CU L I a 0 ■ L L I � d L a - m • n m M U Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Q subject to change with further study. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 213 F ow° L s D MPM EDM0N, -JK Preterencem- VVP, ✓ Growth Area Extent: ALT B AS PROPOSED ✓ Heights: ALT B AS PROPOSED • 10.2.b 3 0 'L^ V d L L Up to 3 floors M a m .N —35 units CL E Eat L) a� W — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 214 E'S EVERY�N / 1 � ".,.pi Comprehensive Plan 2020 Planned Neighborhood 25-30 /111101,16 Comprehensive Plan 2024 Mixed Use 3 Up to 3 floors 10.2. b ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 215 _,�... Neighborhood Hub: Maplewood 10.2.b 3 . 0 /L^ V No Action Alt B: Distributed Growth L L 0 a c a Iwl Maplewood' >_ c 196th 5t. t —200 units CL E l Medical District � V Fvnancinn 196th Sr. Y r CU C L d a L L L a n No incentives — PB - Agreed for 3 floors tU f� Q — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 216 05�°C L� EDM�Ns , -JK Preterence, •l [ZAT10I9I0 ✓ Growth Area Extent: ALT B AS PROPOSED ✓ Heights: 3 STORIES (NO HEIGHT INCENTIVE) - S 10.2.b 0 /L^ V L L Up to 3 floors a. a m N as m L Q E Q U 20 units J LL _ d r cu _ L d El m n Q - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I I Packet Pg. 217 _,�... Future Land Use Changes: Maplewood � Mal%�� ,�� M IA�F/i �i� „ �► -. Comprehensive Plan 2020 Comprehensive Plan 2024 cu = L d a Single Family Urban 1 25 Mixed Use 3 Up to 3 0- Multi Family Medium Density 25-30 floors L Low Density Residential 1 a Single Family Urban 3 25 m A Moderate Density w Residential E U f� Q - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update I Packet Pg. 218 L�r7 W�Z� � :..unS i QUESTIONS ? COMMENTS?. Email us @ everyonesedmonds@edmondswa.gov For more updates, visit edmondswa.gov/everyonesedmonds 10.2.b oy99Subarea Plan Boundary Bounda Planning Board Recommended Hi-Rise Node Preferred Growth Alternative Downtown/ Waterfront Activity Center _ Retail Core _ Arts Center Corridor Downtown Mixed Commercial Downtown Convenience Q Downtown Mixed Residential ® Downtown Master Plan m Shoreline Commercial Downtown Residence -Office 3 © Master Plan Development s 0 Low Density Residential 1 Low Density Residential 2 _ Moderate Density Residential atrmv vrew vr. - Mixed -Use 5 Mixed -Use 5 (Medical) Mixed -Use 3 - Mixed -Use 4 Highway 99 Mixed -Use ® Planned Neighborhood 4 JJJ}}} ® Edmonds Way Corridor 0 Hospital / Medical ® Public _ Park/ Open Space I Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center A a N 2 i Z71 ESPERANCE CRY OF LYNNWOOD 00.2.c 10.2.d CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Minutes of Hybrid Meeting October 23, 2024 Chair Mitchell called the hybrid meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Brackett Room at Edmonds City Hall and on Zoom. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The Land Acknowledgement was read by Board Member Maxwell. CALL TO ORDER — ROLL CALL Board Members Present Staff Present Jeremy Mitchell, Chair Lauren Golembiewski, Vice Chair George Bennett (alternate) Judi Gladstone Lee Hankins Nick Maxwell Steven Li Jon Milkey Isaac Fortin, Student Rep. Board Members Absent None Shane Hope, Interim Planning & Development Director Navyusha Pentakota, Urban Design Planner Brad Shipley, Senior Planner Mike Clugston, Acting Planning Manager Rob English, City Engineer Paul Sharman, Transpo Group Shreya Malu, VIA READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES None ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA There was unanimous consent to approve the agenda as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Sam (no last name given), addressed building heights in the 5 Corners area. He felt that a maximum of 3 floors with no incentive for a 4t' floor would provide sufficient units in that area to be consistent with the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and hubs and centers concept of the draft Comp Plan. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 1 of 13 Packet Pg. 221 10.2.d None PUBLIC HEARINGS None UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. 2024 Comprehensive Plan: Transportation, Climate, and Preferred Alternative Recommendation Interim Planning & Development Director Hope indicated that the Climate Element of the Comprehensive Plan had been reviewed previously by the Board but had remained on the agenda if further discussion was necessary. None was forthcoming so discussion moved to the Transportation Element. She introduced Paul Sharman, Transpo Group, and Rob English, City Engineer, to discuss the item. However, since the Transportation Element was not available for review in the Board's meeting packet, the Board agreed to table the topic and revisit it at a future meeting. Board members framed the discussion of the preferred growth alternative recommendation by agreeing that because a hybrid recommendation was likely (some mix of Preferred Alternatives A and B), that they would review each neighborhood hub and center area being considered, compare and contrast the alternatives, and then create an individual recommendation for each hub and center. A discussion of the Highway 99 area was also anticipated. Ms. Pentakota provided a presentation about the growth alternatives being analyzed, starting with a summary of the data supporting which hubs and centers were selected for further study as Growth Alternative A and Growth Alternative B. A No Action alternative was also included as a baseline, but it was noted that this alternative would not be compliant with the Growth Management Act (GMA). Alternative A, the Focused Growth option, would feature more intense development within four neighborhood centers (Westgate, Five Corners, Firdale Village, and Medical District Expansion). In these areas, buildings could have up to four floors with a possible fifth floor if certain public benefits were provided. Less intense development would occur within four hubs (Firdale North, North Bowl, East Seaview, and Perrinville). Buildings in the hubs could have a maximum of three floors, no option for a fourth. The two Activity Centers found in the current comprehensive plan (Downtown/Waterfront and Highway 99) would be carried forward and updated in the 2024 Plan. Alternative B, the Distributed Growth option, would feature a more balanced distribution of development within the four neighborhood centers (Westgate, Five Corners, Firdale Village, and Medical District Expansion) and seven hubs (Firdale North, North Bowl, East Seaview, and Perrinville, West Edmonds Way, Firdale North, and Maplewood). Buildings in both the centers and hubs could have up to three floors with incentives for a fourth floor if certain public benefits are provided. (Maplewood would not count towards GMA capacity). Less intense development would occur within four hubs (Firdale North, North Bowl, East Seaview, and Perrinville). The two Activity Center found in the current comprehensive plan (Downtown/Waterfront and Highway 99) would be carried forward and updated in the 2024 Plan. Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 2 of 13 Packet Pg. 222 10.2.d Prior to reviewing each of the proposed neighborhood center and hub growth alternatives, the Board discussed the possibility of spreading existing and planned housing capacity from the Highway 99 subarea the proposed hubs and centers. Unit counts and capacity for the area was discussed as well as the concept of takings if capacities in the Highway 99 subarea were reduced from those already existing. The concept of better defining centers and hubs within the Highway 99 subarea for placemaking purposes was discussed and staff agreed to update proposed goals for the Highway 99 subarea, as appropriate. In the future, the development code would be updated to implement better placemaking consistent with the goals and policies of the updated Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Pentakota then introduced each of the centers and hubs, comparing the No Action, Focused Growth (Alt. A), and Distributed Growth (Alt. B) alternatives. The Board reviewed and discussed each center/hub and created a recommendation for each. Westgate Alternative A There was a consensus among board members that taller buildings (up to 5 floors w/incentive) were appropriate in this area because of the topography and existing building heights. No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth Neighborhood Commercial — Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Existing 3-4 Floors Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 4 floors -1800 units Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial Neighborhood Residential Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Multi -Family (Mousing Bills compliance) subject to change with further study. School Middle housing: Duple , Tuple.es. ADUs. lowm times. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ � BUS STOPS Quadplexes (only with one affordable until. slacked Hats. conage style and counya,d apanmeMs City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update 1 12 Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 3 of 13 Packet Pg. 223 10.2.d Five Corners — Hybrid — Alternative A modified to restrict building heights to 3 stories There was consensus among board members regarding the extent or footprint of Alternative A but with height limited to three floors as shown in Alternative B. Staff indicated that three floors would likely not be economically feasible along the portion of 212th Street east of Five Corners but would be feasible on Bowdoin west of Five Corners. The Board recognized that the change may result in a reduced unit count but felt that could be made up for across the other neighborhood centers and hubs. No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth � Neighborhood Commercial eslllo Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) A� all Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi -Family School • Bus Stops J Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 4 floors Up to 3 floors -800 units elllllllllll Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) ellllllllllll Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Neighborhood Residential Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and (Housing Bins Compliance) subject to change with further study. Middle housing: Duplexes. Tnple,es. 4DUs. townhomes. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ guadple,es (onty wdh one affordable unit). stacked flats, cottage style and courtyard apartments City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update 1 13 Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 4 of 13 Packet Pg. 224 10.2.d Medical District Expansion — Hybrid of Alternative A modified to include additional areas in Alternative B Vice Chair Golembiewski disclosed that she is a property owner in this center but that she has already entitlements for a project at her site so that would not affect her ability to future development capacities in the area. Most board members supported 4 floor building heights at the corner of 212th St SW and 76th Ave W, as presented in Alternative A, with a 5th floor possible with public benefits. There was also support to expand the footprint of growth in this area as shown in Alternative B, but limiting the overall building height to 3 floors within the expanded area. No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) tttttttt■ Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) tttttt� Up to 4 floors Up to 3 floors -750 units expansion I - —1500 units H Mixed -Use fier"•" li .� I seeaI��--3�f� ANeighborhood commercial Neighborhood Residential 11110lir/cs are approximate, conceptual only and Multi.Family (Housing Bills Compliance) subject to change with further study. tillillillillit School Middle housing: Duplexes. Triple.., ADUs, townhomes. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ • BUS Stops quadplexes (only with one affordable umt), stacked flats. '.Wage s yle and '..rtyano apanments City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update 1 14 Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 5 of 13 Packet Pg. 225 10.2.d Firdale Village (center) & Firdale North (hub) — Alternative A Both alternatives for Firdale Village have building heights up to 5 floors (with public benefit), which the Board supported. While there was some interest in the expanded area of Alternative B for Firdale North, ultimately the majority preferred Alternative A as proposed. No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Alt 6: Distributed Growth h Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) rim ! Mixed -Use ! Neighborhootl Commercial ! Muhi-Family School • Bus Slops Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 3 floors —30 units 0 Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) ! Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Up to 3 floors t -90 units 14 -290 units \♦� -290 un Neighborhood Residential Metrics (Housing Bills Compliance) Metrics are approhang. with conceptual only and subject to change whh further study. Mlddk homing: Dudexes. Triplexes. 4DUs. fownfwmes. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ puadplexes (only with one affordable unit), stacked Ilan. corsage aryl. and couMard ap.nm.m, City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update 1 15 Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 6 of 13 Packet Pg. 226 10.2.d North Bowl Alternative B After discussion, there was a majority preference for Alternative B given the size of the hub and the existing development in the area. No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) eiiiiiiiiiii Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors iiiiiiiiiiiis Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Up to 3 floors ^75 units OIL ^200 units a f• Mixed -Use fi Neighborhood Commercial Neighborhood Residential Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and I� Multi -Family (Mousing Bills Compliencvl subject to change with further study. Sohool Middle housing: Duplexes. Triplexes. ADU,. t—hpmes. e Bus Stops guadplexes (only vnlh one ahordaole unit'. stacked eats. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — conage style and courtyard apartments City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update 1 16 a Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 7 of 13 Packet Pg. 227 10.2.d Perrinville Alternative B After discussion, there was a majority preference for Alternative B given the size of the hub and the existing development in the area. No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) eiiiiiiiiio Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors eiiiiiiiiiin Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial Neighborhood Residential Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Mull, -Family (Mousing Bills Compliance) subject to change with further study. School Middle housing: Duple.es. Triplexes. ADU, bwnhomes. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Bus Stops puadple.es (only wile one affo,dable unit). stacked flats. corsage style and courtyard apartments City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update 1 17 fY Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 8 of 13 Packet Pg. 228 10.2.d Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) l� Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Up to 3 floors East Seaview — Modified Hvbrid of Alternatives A and B The majority of board members agreed with including East Seaview in the final preferred alternative, recognizing that any additional housing capacity would not be counted toward the final unit count. The Board found that the taller building heights allowed in Alternative A were acceptable south of 195th St. SW but not on the north side of that street. Alternative B was acceptable to the west along 196th Street but the footprint was proposed to be reduced south of 196th Street, and north of the cul-de-sac at 190 Place SW. Final capacity numbers will be recalculated and the area discussed again at a future meeting. No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors .1 —80 units Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial Neighborhood Residential Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Multi.Family (Housing Bills Compliance) subject to change with further study. SChocl Middle housing: Duple,es. Triplexes. ADUs. lownn mes. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — e BUS SLOPS quadplexes (only ynth one affordable unit). slacked gals. conage style and cuunyard epanmems City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update 1 18 Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 9 of 13 Packet Pg. 229 10.2.d South Lake Ballinger Alternative B After discussion, there was a desire to include the hub in the preferred alternative and there was a majority preference for Alternative B given the size of the hub and the existing development in the area. No Action Alt B: Distributed Growth Neighborhood Commercial Up to 3 floors iiiiiiiiiiiiiiia Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) —70 units aStoJ 3 a ttot� 3 a n n Lake lake Ballinger Bollinger �flr� NE ZOSth StPFF .\�F [NE 105th St. Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial Neighborhood Residential Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Mulli.Family (Housing Bills Compliance) subject to change with further study. School Middle housing: Duplexes. Triplexes. ADUs. to —homes. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Bus Stops puadplexes (only with one affordable -m. stacked rats, conage style and courtyard apartments City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update 1 19 L +c+ C L 3 NNd L7� (V O LV M N O T_ m a m E 0 c� r w a Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 10 of 13 Packet Pg. 230 10.2.d West Edmonds Wav Alternative B After discussion, there was a majority preference for Alternative B given the size of the hub and the existing development in the area, recognizing that any additional housing capacity would not be counted toward the final unit count because redevelopment is not feasible due to the 3 floor height limit. No Action Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) k% Alt B: Distributed Growth Up to 3 floors IL � • 44 "35 units I = \ I \' Mixed -Use Neighborhood Commercial Neighborhood Residential Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and Multi -Family (Mousing Bills Compliance) subject to change with further study. — School Middle housing: Duplexes. Tnplexes. ADUs. lownhomes, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Bus Stops guadplexes (only wah one affordable unit). stacked Oats, ,..age style and courtyard aon—ts City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update 1 20 Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 11 of 13 Packet Pg. 231 10.2.d Maplewood — Alternative B MODIFIED to restrict building heights to 3 stories The Board supports including the Maplewood Alternative B in the preferred growth alternative but limiting the building heights to 3 floors consistent with other condos/buildings in the area. It was noted that intersection improvements at 196th St. and 88th Ave W are included in the current CEP making this expansion more feasible. No Action Alt B: Distributed Growth t .wl Maplewood' .. MMA Medical Distric, Frnancnn ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update 1 21 Ms. Malu indicated that the reductions in height across the centers and hubs discussed by the Planning Board may decrease the number of units below the required minimum capacity that must met. Staff agreed to update the center and hub maps and the unit calculations at a subsequent meeting but the Board felt confident that even with the proposed reductions, VICE CHAIR GOLEMBEWSKI RESTATED EACH OF THE BOARD'S RECOMMENDAITONS REGARDING THEIR PREFERRED ALTERNTAIVES FOR THE CENTERS AND HUBS. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER HANKINS, MOTION PASSED 6 — 0, WITH BOARD MEMBER MILKEY ABSTAINING. The Board agreed to create a memo for City Council summarizing their decision. NEW BUSINESS None SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 12 of 13 Packet Pg. 232 10.2.d None PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA None PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS None PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS None ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 13 of 13 Packet Pg. 233 10.2.e MEMORANDUM To: Edmonds City Councilmembers & Mayor Rosen From: Edmonds Planning Board Date: October 31, 2024 CC: Edmonds Planning Board, and Planning and Development Staff Re: Planning Board Recommendation of a Preferred Growth Alternative The Edmonds Planning Board is pleased to present this memorandum summarizing our recommendation for selection of a Preferred Growth Alternative for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan. The full Planning Board met on October 23, 2024, to review the two alternatives: Option A, Focused Growth and Option B, Distributed Growth; and to discuss a recommendation. Following a brief staff presentation, the Board very quickly established that we would prefer a hybrid between the two presented alternatives. With that in mind, we proceeded to walk through each of the proposed Neighborhood Hubs & Centers and selected the preferred growth alternative for each area. The compilation of these comprises the hybrid alternative that the Planning Board is recommending. A summary of our recommendation for each Neighborhood Hub & Center is described below and illustrated in the attached exhibit: Westgate — Alternative A There was a consensus among board members that Westgate is suitable as a center with four story buildings and an allowance for 5 floors with incentives because of the topography and the size of the center. Five Corners —Alternative A MODIFIED to restrict building heights to 3 stories Throughout the Comp Plan process, we have heard multiple times from the community in this area that they feel or 5 story buildings would negatively impact the surrounding neighborhood. With the further expansion of the Medical District nearby, the Board agreed to recommend lower building heights at Five Corners. However, we did like the expanded footprint of Alternative B and requested that it be included in the hybrid alternative. Medical District- Alternative A MODIFIED to include additional areas in Alternative B The majority of board members supported the 4 to 5 floor building heights on the corner of 2121h St SW and 761h Ave W as presented in Alternative A. For the recommended alternative, the Board agreed that it would be best to expand the area of the district as shown in Alternative B but limit the overall building height to 3 floors in the expanded area. Firdale — Alternative A The majority of the Planning Board supported Alternative A, in general, because North Firdale didn't seem suitable for buildings higher than three floors. Packet Pg. 234 10.2.e North Bowl, South Lake Ballinger, and West Edmonds Way —Alternatives B The majority preference for each of these hubs was Alternative B. The Planning Board members thought the area and allowable height of the buildings seemed suitable to those areas based on the nature of the surrounding areas. Perrinville The majority of Planning Board members agreed that Alternative B should be included in the hybrid alternative. There was some discussion about the potential impact to stormwater, but most members thought there would be little difference in stormwater runoff between Option A and B, and were satisfied that stormwater requirements and mitigation would suffice to prevent further issues in this area. East Seaview— Hybrid of Alternative A and B The majority of Board members agreed with including East Seaview in the final Growth Alternative, however our recommendation falls in between Alternative A and Alternative B. We preferred the taller building heights allowed in Alternative A, and some of the expanded area of Alternative B. Our red -lined preferred alternative does reduce the overall area of Alternative B because we felt that it encroached on the surrounding neighborhoods farther than we were comfortable with. Maplewood- Alternative B MODIFIED to restrict building heights to 3 stories The Board supports including the Maplewood Alternative B in the selected Growth Alternative but limiting the building heights to 3 floors consistent with other condos/buildings in the area. It was noted in the meeting that intersection improvements at 196th St. and 88th Ave W are included in the current CIP making this expansion more feasible. Following the area -specific discussion, the Vice Chair restated the recommendations for each area, which was followed by a vote to approve this recommendation to Council. The Vote was 6 YES, 0 NO, and 1 ABSTENTION. A few of the Board's hybrid or modified recommendations require recalculation of total unit capacity in the areas, even without those areas included we have calculated that our recommendation will exceed the minimum growth target required. We also understand that some of the expansion areas when limited to 3 floors are no longer counted in the total capacity calculation due to economic feasibility at this time. However, we believe that it would still be beneficial to include them in the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map for when it does become economically feasible. It should also be noted that the Growth Alternatives had no change in capacity in the downtown or Highway 99 areas and therefore the Planning Board has not included them in our recommendation. There was discussion regarding Highway 99 and a desire to encourage similarly focused development (Centers) along the corridor and some possible strategies to inspire that. End of Memo Packet Pg. 235 WESTGATE PB: ALT A 5-CORNERS F 10.2.f AS PROPOSED Alt A: Focused Growth Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 4 floors 1 —1800 units MEDICAL DISTRICT PB: ALT A WITH MAX HEIGHT OF 3 STORIES (NO BONUS) Alt A: Focused Growth Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with Incentive) Up to 4 floors CONSULTANT TO CONFIRM Up to 3 floors � PROPOSED UNIT COUNT 8 Suitt_ PB: (HYBRID) KEEP ALT A FOCUSED AREA HEIGHTS AS INDICATED, BUT OVERLAY AND ADD ALT B FOOTPRINT WITH THE ADDED FOOTPRINT MAXING OUT AT 3 FLOORS (NO INCENTIVES) Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Up to 4 floors Popp 3 floors CONSULTANT TO Pop M PROPOSED UNIT COUNT THIS CLUSTER OF PARCELS — — — — — REMAINS AS ALT A HEIGHTS INDICATE :-"-- 9 5 corners— i :,rensr. e. r--Y ■ ; REMAINING J FOOTPRINT IS 3 FLOOR MAX, NO HEIGHT INCENTIVE blili��l�ll . 2121Ase. Packet Pg. 236 FIRDALE PB: ALT A PROPOSED Alt A: Focused Growth Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 3 floors -30 units ' i ^290 units PERRINVILLE PB: ALT B AS PROPOSED Alt B: Distributed Growth Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) I 3 x NORTH BOWL PB: ALT B AS PROPOSED Alt B: Distributed Growth Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Up to 3 floors —200 units a SOUTH LAKE BALLINGER PB: ALT B AS PROPOSED Alt B: Distributed Growth Up to 3 floors Edrh�_woY NE 205th St. 10.2.f Lake Ballinger �s Packet Pg. 237 EAST SEAVIEW WEST EDMONDS WAY 10.2.f PB: ALT B AS MODIFIED PB: ALT B AS PROPOSED Alt B: Distributed Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth Existing Multi -Family (3 floors) ' Up to 3 floors Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) CONSULTANT TO CONFIRM Up to 3 floors PROPOSED UNIT COUNT 1350 arrits MAPLEWOOD PB: ALT B AS -IS LIMITED TO 3 STORIES (NO HEIGHT INCENTIVE) Alt B: Distributed Growth Fd?i o�os CONSULTANT TO CONFIRM PROPOSED UNIT COUNT 3 FLOORS MAX an -35 ur Packet Pg. 238 10.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 11/4/2024 Council 2025-26 Budget Deliberations Staff Lead: City Council Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History On August 13, Council was briefed on the outcome of the City of Edmonds Community Survey. On August 16, Council, Administration and Staff held a budget retreat. On September 10, Council adopted Resolution 1553 regarding Council's priorities for the 2025-26 Biennial Budget. On October 1, Mayor Rosen presented the proposed 2025-26 Biennial Budget. On October 8, 15 and 22 Council received budget presentations from each city department. On October 22 Council held a public hearing on property tax and revenue. On October 29 Council held a public hearing on the preliminary budget. On November 2, Council held a workshop on revenues and budget. Recommendation N/A Narrative Councilmembers will have discussion on the budget and amendments they would like to consider for the 20242-26 Biennial Budget. Packet Pg. 239