Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-11-04 Council Special Packet BAgenda Edmonds City Council SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE COUNCIL CHAMBERS 250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 NOVEMBER 4, 2024, 7:00 PM Edmonds City Council Agenda November 4, 2024 Page 1 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) 5. 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 2 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)(I) (30 MIN.) 14. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION ADJOURNMENT 10:00 PM 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 4.1 Packet Pg. 3 4.1.a Packet Pg. 4 At t a c h m e n t : N N A H M 2 0 2 4 ( N a t i o n a l N a t i v e A m e r i c a n H e r i t a g e M o n t h P r o c l a m a t i o n ) 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. 4.2 Packet Pg. 5 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 7.1 Packet Pg. 6 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 7.1.a Packet Pg. 7 At t a c h m e n t : P u b l i c C o m m e n t N o v e m b e r 4 , 2 0 2 4 ( W r i t t e n P u b l i c C o m m e n t s ) 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 program. Given that parents pay for classes, I don’t believe this program is a financial burden on the city. It has been an integral part of my children's lives for years, consistently being the highlight of their week. I’m also always impressed by the safety measures in place during the gymnastics classes. Thank you. 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 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 7.1.a Packet Pg. 8 At t a c h m e n t : P u b l i c C o m m e n t N o v e m b e r 4 , 2 0 2 4 ( W r i t t e n P u b l i c C o m m e n t s ) 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 7.1.a Packet Pg. 9 At t a c h m e n t : P u b l i c C o m m e n t N o v e m b e r 4 , 2 0 2 4 ( W r i t t e n P u b l i c C o m m e n t s ) 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 Ron LastName Bussiere Email CityOfResidence 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 7.1.a Packet Pg. 10 At t a c h m e n t : P u b l i c C o m m e n t N o v e m b e r 4 , 2 0 2 4 ( W r i t t e n P u b l i c C o m m e n t s ) 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- 07:00) US/Arizona FirstName Theresa Campa LastName HUTCHISON 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 7.1.a Packet Pg. 11 At t a c h m e n t : P u b l i c C o m m e n t N o v e m b e r 4 , 2 0 2 4 ( W r i t t e n P u b l i c C o m m e n t s ) 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? 7.1.a Packet Pg. 12 At t a c h m e n t : P u b l i c C o m m e n t N o v e m b e r 4 , 2 0 2 4 ( W r i t t e n P u b l i c C o m m e n t s ) 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 7.2 Packet Pg. 13 Council Budget 2025-2026 Queries 3.0 Submitted by October 23, 2024 Published October 31, 2024 General Budget Queries 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, often 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 7.2.a Packet Pg. 14 At t a c h m e n t : B u d g e t Q u e r i e s 3 . 0 p u b l i s h e d ( B u d g e t 2 0 2 5 - 2 0 2 6 Q u e r i e s 3 . 0 ) 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 KD 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 KD 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 7.2.a Packet Pg. 15 At t a c h m e n t : B u d g e t Q u e r i e s 3 . 0 p u b l i s h e d ( B u d g e t 2 0 2 5 - 2 0 2 6 Q u e r i e s 3 . 0 ) 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 KD 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 KD 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 7.2.a Packet Pg. 16 At t a c h m e n t : B u d g e t Q u e r i e s 3 . 0 p u b l i s h e d ( B u d g e t 2 0 2 5 - 2 0 2 6 Q u e r i e s 3 . 0 ) 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) A7 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. 7.2.a Packet Pg. 17 At t a c h m e n t : B u d g e t Q u e r i e s 3 . 0 p u b l i s h e d ( B u d g e t 2 0 2 5 - 2 0 2 6 Q u e r i e s 3 . 0 ) Council Budget 2025-2026 Queries 3.0 Submitted by October 23, 2024 Published October 31, 2024 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 qualifica tions 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 Pl an, and the answer was a listing of the ADA activities.) (CM Paine, 10/24/2024) A12 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. I will check to see what the latest usage data indicates and pass that on Planning and Development 7.2.a Packet Pg. 18 At t a c h m e n t : B u d g e t Q u e r i e s 3 . 0 p u b l i s h e d ( B u d g e t 2 0 2 5 - 2 0 2 6 Q u e r i e s 3 . 0 ) 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) 7.2.a Packet Pg. 19 At t a c h m e n t : B u d g e t Q u e r i e s 3 . 0 p u b l i s h e d ( B u d g e t 2 0 2 5 - 2 0 2 6 Q u e r i e s 3 . 0 ) 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 II 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.B, 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 8.1 Packet Pg. 20 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.B. • 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 36.70B (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 8.1 Packet Pg. 21 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 strikethrough). 8.1.a Packet Pg. 22 At t a c h m e n t : O r d i n a n c e U p d a t i n g P e r m i t P r o c e s s i n g T i m e l i n e s a n d P u b l i c N o t i c e R e q u i r e m e n t s ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e 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 strikethrough). 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 strikethrough). 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 strikethrough). 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 strikethrough). 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 strikethrough). 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 strikethrough). 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. 8.1.a Packet Pg. 23 At t a c h m e n t : O r d i n a n c e U p d a t i n g P e r m i t P r o c e s s i n g T i m e l i n e s a n d P u b l i c N o t i c e R e q u i r e m e n t s ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e 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: BY JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. 8.1.a Packet Pg. 24 At t a c h m e n t : O r d i n a n c e U p d a t i n g P e r m i t P r o c e s s i n g T i m e l i n e s a n d P u b l i c N o t i c e R e q u i r e m e n t s ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e 4 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 ________________, 2024. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY 4840-7251-8158, v. 1 8.1.a Packet Pg. 25 At t a c h m e n t : O r d i n a n c e U p d a t i n g P e r m i t P r o c e s s i n g T i m e l i n e s a n d P u b l i c N o t i c e R e q u i r e m e n t s ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 1 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 8.1.b Packet Pg. 26 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 2 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 II 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 II decisions shall be initiated as set forth in ECDC 20.06.030. B. Quasi-Judicial 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 8.1.b Packet Pg. 27 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 3 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 8.1.b Packet Pg. 28 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 4 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 compliance letter Contingent critical area review Essential public facilities Site specific rezone Lot line adjustment Formal interpretation of the text of the ECDC by the director Shoreline substantial development permit, where public hearing not required per ECDC 24.80.100 Technological impracticality waiver for amateur radio antennas Development agreements Zoning text amendment; area-wide zoning map amendments Critical area determinations SEPA determinations Critical area variance Comprehensive plan amendments Shoreline exemptions Preliminary short plat Contingent critical area review if public Conditional use permits (where public hearing by hearing Annexations 8.1.b Packet Pg. 29 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 5 TYPE I TYPE II-A TYPE II-B TYPE III-A TYPE III-B TYPE IV TYPE V hearing requested examiner is required) Minor amendments to planned residential development Land clearing/grading Shoreline substantial development permit, where public hearing is required per ECDC 24.80.100 Variances Development regulations Minor preliminary plat amendment Revisions to shoreline management permits Shoreline conditional use Staff design review, including signs Administrative variances Shoreline variance Final short plat Land use permit extension requests Design review (where public hearing by architectural design board is required) Sales office/model (ECDC 17.70.005) Preliminary formal plat Final formal plats Innocent purchaser determination Preliminary planned 8.1.b Packet Pg. 30 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 6 TYPE I TYPE II-A TYPE II-B TYPE III-A TYPE III-B TYPE IV TYPE V residential development Final planned residential development Staff design review pursuant to ECDC 20.12.010(B)(2) B. Decision Table. PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS (TYPE I – IV) LEGISLATIVE TYPE I TYPE II-A TYPE II-B TYPE III-A TYPE III- B TYPE IV TYPE V Recommendation by: N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Planning board Planning board Final decision by: Director Director Director Hearing examiner/ADB Hearing examiner City council City council Notice of application: No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Open record public hearing or open record appeal of a final decision: No Only if appealed, open record hearing before hearing examiner (1) If director decision is appealed, open record hearing before Yes, before hearing examiner or board to render final decision Yes, before hearing examiner or board to render final decision Yes, before planning board which makes recommendation to council Yes, before planning board which makes recommendation to council or council could hold its own hearing 8.1.b Packet Pg. 31 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 7 PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS (TYPE I – IV) LEGISLATIVE TYPE I TYPE II-A TYPE II-B TYPE III-A TYPE III- B TYPE IV TYPE V hearing examiner (2) If converted to Type III-A process Closed record review: No No No No Yes, before the council Yes, before the council Permit review timelines (per ECDC 20.02): 65 days 100 days 100 days 170 days 170 days 170 days Not applicable 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 8.1.b Packet Pg. 32 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 8 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 43.21C 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]. 8.1.b Packet Pg. 33 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 9 Chapter 20.02 DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS Sections: 20.02.001 Optional preapplication conference. 20.02.002 Permit application requirements. 20.02.003 Submission and acceptance of applicationComplete 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: 8.1.b Packet Pg. 34 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 10 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]. 8.1.b Packet Pg. 35 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 11 20.02.003 Submission and acceptance of applicationComplete and incomplete applications, requesting additional information. A. Determination of Completeness. Within 28 days after receiving an application, the director must shall mail or personally deliver to the applicant a determination which states that either: provide a written determination to the applicant stating that:. The written determination must state either: 1. The application is complete; or 2. The application is incomplete and because that the procedural submission requirements have not been met. The determination shall outlinemust specifically describe what information is needed what 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 with Jurisdiction. 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. C. Additional Information. An application is complete for the purposes of this section when it meets the submission requirements of ECDC 20.02.002 and the submission requirements of the applicable development regulations. The determination of completeness shall be made when the application is sufficiently complete for review, even though additional information may be required or project modifications may be undertaken subsequently. The determination of completeness shall not preclude the director’s ability to request additional information or studies whenever new information is required, or when substantial changes are made to the proposed project. D. Incomplete Applications. 8.1.b Packet Pg. 36 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 12 1. Whenever the applicant receives a determination from the city pursuant to subsection (A)(2) 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.Within 14 days after an applicant has submitted the requested additional information, the director shall make a determination of completeness and notify the applicant in the manner provided in subsection (A) of this section. 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.Whenever the applicant receives a notice that the contents of the application, which had been previously determined under subsection (A)(1) of this section to be complete, is insufficient, ambiguous, undecipherable, or otherwise unresponsive of the information being sought, the applicant shall have 90 days to submit the necessary 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 compliance period. 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. Requesting Additional Information. 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 project. 8.1.b Packet Pg. 37 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 13 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 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. 2. 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 must 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 must state that no further action will be taken on the application. 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 request a refund of the application fee remaining after the city’s determination of completeness. E. Director’s Failure to Provide Determination of Completeness. An application shall be deemed complete 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) of this section. F. Date of Acceptance of Application. Permit applications shall not be officially accepted until complete. When an application is determined to be complete, the director shall note the date of acceptance for continued processing. GF. City Duty to Review. After the application is determined to be complete or additional materials are accepted following a request for additional information, acceptance, the city must shall begin or resume processing the application. Under no circumstances shall the city place any application on “hold” to be processed at some later date, even if the request for the “hold” is made by the applicant, and regardless of the requested length of the “holding” period. This subsection does not apply to applications placed on “hold” upon determination by the city that 8.1.b Packet Pg. 38 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 14 additional information is required in order to make a decision. [Ord. 4299 § 41 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 3817 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. G. Applicant may Suspend 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. 8.1.b Packet Pg. 39 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 15 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 of Applications 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 8.1.b Packet Pg. 40 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 16 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 20.07.007]. 20.02.007 Notice of final decision. A. The director shall must issue a notice of final decision within consistent with 120 days of the issuance of the determination of completeness pursuant to ECDC 20.02.003; provided, that the time period for issuance of a notice of final decision on a preliminary plat shall be 90 days, for a final plat 30 days, and a final 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. 1. 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. 2. Notice of the decision shall be provided to the public by any means deemed reasonable by the director. B. In calculating the 120-day period for issuance of the notice of final decision, or other decision period specified in subsection (A) of this section, the following periods shall be excluded: 1. Any period during which the applicant has been requested by the director to correct plans, perform required studies, or provide additional required information. The period shall be calculated from the date the director notifies the applicant of the need for additional information until the earlier of the dates the director determines that the additional information provided satisfies the request for information, or 14 days after the date the additional information is provided to the city; 8.1.b Packet Pg. 41 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 17 2. If the director determines that the information submitted is insufficient, the applicant shall be informed of the deficiencies and the procedures set forth in subsection (B)(1) of this section for calculating the exclusion period shall apply; 3. Any period during which an environmental impact statement (EIS) is being prepared pursuant to Chapter 43.21C RCW and Chapter 20.15A ECDC. The time period for preparation of an EIS shall be governed by Chapter 20.15A ECDC; 4. Any period for consideration and issuance of a decision for administrative appeals of development project permits, which shall be not more than 90 days for open record appeals and 60 days for closed record appeals, unless a longer period is agreed to by the director and the applicant; 5. Any extension of time mutually agreed to by the director and the applicant in writing. C. The time limits established in this title do not apply if a permit application: 1. Requires an amendment to the comprehensive plan or a development regulation; 2. Requires siting approval of an essential public facility as provided in RCW 36.70A.200; 3. Is a Type IV permit process identified in ECDC 20.01.003(A); or 4. Is substantially revised by the applicant, in which case the time period shall start from the date that a determination of completeness for the revised application is issued by the director pursuant to ECDC 20.02.003 and RCW 36.70B.070. [Ord. 4154 § 10 (Att. D), 2019]. 20.02.008 Permit review timelines. 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 adds or removes commercial or residential elements from the original application that result in a failure to meet the determination of procedural completeness for the new use. B. Calculation of Days. The number of days an application is in review with the city is calculated from the day completeness is determined to the date a final decision is issued on the permit application, 8.1.b Packet Pg. 42 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 18 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. 8.1.b Packet Pg. 43 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 19 B. Issuance of Notice of Application. 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 36.70B 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. 8.1.b Packet Pg. 44 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 20 D. Mailed Notice. 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 III Preliminary Plat Actions. 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: 8.1.b Packet Pg. 45 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 21 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 of Application. 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. by 4:30 p.m. on the last day of the comment period. 8.1.b Packet Pg. 46 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 22 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 of Public Hearing for All Applications. 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 may be 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 8.1.b Packet Pg. 47 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 23 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 III Preliminary Plat Actions. 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. 8.1.b Packet Pg. 48 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 24 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 197-11-510(1). 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 8.1.b Packet Pg. 49 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 25 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 DS under WAC 197-11-360(3), the city shall state the scoping procedure for the proposal in the DS 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 36.70B.110(4) as supplemented by the requirements in WAC 197- 11-355 will suffice to meet the SEPA public notice requirements in WAC 197-11-510(1)(b). 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 at his or her expense. [Ord. 3818 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010]. 8.1.b Packet Pg. 50 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 26 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 of SMP 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 on an SMP Notice.Public Comment Period. The public comment period shall be 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 for the decision. [Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010]. 20.03.006 Optional public notice. The director, in his or her sole discretion, may: 8.1.b Packet Pg. 51 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 27 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 staff’s 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 120-day170-day city review 8.1.b Packet Pg. 52 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 28 period required by RCW 36.70B.080 commences with the application for Phase 1 of the public hearing. The 120-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 36.70B.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, Phase 2). 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-day 170-day 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 staff’s 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 staff’s 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 8.1.b Packet Pg. 53 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 29 participate in preliminary review by appropriate recommendations on subjects within their respective areas of expertise. B. Repealed by Ord. 4314. Repealed. C. Time Limits for Staff Review. Staff review shall be completed within 120 days from the date of filing. DC. 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. ED. Short Subdivisions – Staff Review. The director of planning and development shall review a short subdivision as a Type II decision (Staff decision – Notice required). FE. Appeal of Staff Decision. 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. C), 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 90 days of the date of filing the timelines found in the Decision Table in ECDC 20.01.003(B), unless the applicant agrees to extend the time. Where applicable, additional time needed to prepare and circulate an environmental impact statement shall not be included within said 90 days. [Ord. 4154 § 4 (Att. C), 2019; Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. 8.1.b Packet Pg. 54 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e EXHIBIT A 30 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 a comprehensive plan or sub-area plan, 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]. 8.1.b Packet Pg. 55 At t a c h m e n t : E x h i b i t A - P B R e c o m m e n d e d S B 5 2 9 0 H B 1 1 0 5 C o d e A m e n d m e n t s r e d l i n e s t r i k e o u t ( A d o p t i o n o f C o d e A m e n d m e n t s t o L a n d U s e 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 22nd 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 9.1 Packet Pg. 56 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 9.1 Packet Pg. 57 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT • ENGINEERING DIVISION Apollo – Disposition of Easement Page 1 of 3 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. 9.1.a Packet Pg. 58 At t a c h m e n t : S t a f f R e p o r t D i s p o s i t i o n o f E a s e m e n t ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Anthology – Disposition of Easement Page 2 of 3 II. 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 9.1.a Packet Pg. 59 At t a c h m e n t : S t a f f R e p o r t D i s p o s i t i o n o f E a s e m e n t ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Anthology – Disposition of Easement Page 3 of 3 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 9.1.a Packet Pg. 60 At t a c h m e n t : S t a f f R e p o r t D i s p o s i t i o n o f E a s e m e n t ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) 18,056 1,504.7 © City of Edmonds THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Feet Notes Vicinity Map 21200 72nd Ave W Legend This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. 1,010.380 1:12,125 Anthology Senior Living 2,020.8 9.1.b Packet Pg. 61 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 1 - V i c i n i t y M a p ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f 9.1.c Packet Pg. 62 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 2 - S u r v e y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) 1/20/22, 12:46 PM Landmark Web Official Records Search https://www.snoco.org/RecordedDocuments/search/index?theme=.blue&section=searchCriteriaInstrumentNumber&quickSearchSelection=#1/3 U n o f f i c i a l D o c u m e n t 9.1.d Packet Pg. 63 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 3 - S e w e r E a s e m e n t A F N 7 7 1 1 2 3 0 2 2 6 ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r 1/20/22, 12:46 PM Landmark Web Official Records Search https://www.snoco.org/RecordedDocuments/search/index?theme=.blue&section=searchCriteriaInstrumentNumber&quickSearchSelection=#2/3 U n o f f i c i a l D o c u m e n t 9.1.d Packet Pg. 64 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 3 - S e w e r E a s e m e n t A F N 7 7 1 1 2 3 0 2 2 6 ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r 1/20/22, 12:46 PM Landmark Web Official Records Search https://www.snoco.org/RecordedDocuments/search/index?theme=.blue&section=searchCriteriaInstrumentNumber&quickSearchSelection=#3/3 U n o f f i c i a l D o c u m e n t 9.1.d Packet Pg. 65 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 3 - S e w e r E a s e m e n t A F N 7 7 1 1 2 3 0 2 2 6 ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r CBRE VALUATION & ADVISORY SERVICES EDMONDS EASEMENT RELINQUISHMENT 21200 72ND AVE W. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 CBRE GROUP, INC. FILE NO. CB22US122192-1 A ANTHOLOGY SENIOR LIVING B EFORE-AND-AFTER APPRAISAL REPORT 9.1.e Packet Pg. 66 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) i Edmonds Redevelopment, Edmonds Easement Relinquishment VALUATION & ADVISORY SERVICES 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 9.1.e Packet Pg. 67 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) ii Edmonds Redevelopment, Edmonds Easement Relinquishment 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 68 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) iii Edmonds Redevelopment, Edmonds Easement Relinquishment 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 9.1.e Packet Pg. 69 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) 4 Edmonds Redevelopment, Edmonds Easement Relinquishment Aerial View of Subject 9.1.e Packet Pg. 70 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Certification 5 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Site Plan and Sanitary Sewer Easement Easement 9.1.e Packet Pg. 71 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Certification 6 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Subject Photographs Photo 1 Looking south toward the subject property Photo 2 This shows the SE corner of the site, looking westerly 9.1.e Packet Pg. 72 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Certification 7 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA TABLE OF CONTENTS Subject Photographs .......................................................................................................... 6 Certification ...................................................................................................................... 8 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 9 Scope of Work ................................................................................................................ 13 Area Analysis .................................................................................................................. 16 Neighborhood Analysis ................................................................................................... 19 Site Analysis .................................................................................................................... 28 Zoning ............................................................................................................................ 32 Tax and Assessment Data ................................................................................................ 34 Highest and Best Use ...................................................................................................... 38 Appraisal Methodology ................................................................................................... 40 Land Value ..................................................................................................................... 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 9.1.e Packet Pg. 73 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Certification 8 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 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. 11. 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. S. Murray Brackett, MAI WA License: 1100853 9.1.e Packet Pg. 74 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Executive Summary 9 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 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 0.81 AC 35,284 SF Zoning Improvements Property Type Office Buyer Profile 6 - 12 Months 6 - 12 Months CG General Commercial Edmonds Redevelopment 11/7/22 and subsequent dates Fee Simple Estate Former Office Mixed Use 21200 72nd Ave W., Edmonds, Snohomish County, WA 98020 June 4, 2023 ANTHOLOGY SENIOR LIVING 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 SALIENT POINTS 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.” 1 • 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 2020-2021 (Effective January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2023) 9.1.e Packet Pg. 75 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Executive Summary 10 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 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 2020-2021 (Effective January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2023) 9.1.e Packet Pg. 76 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Executive Summary 11 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA • 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: 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 77 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Subj ect and Owner Identification 12 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 78 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Subj ect and Owner Identification 13 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 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. 3 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 79 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Subj ect and Owner Identification 14 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 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. 4 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 expires 5 Leasehold Interest - The tenant’s possessory interest created by a lease. 6 Going Concern – An established and operating business having an indefinite future life. 7 Easement: The right to use another’s land for a stated purpose. 8 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 11/7/2022 and subsequent dates. 4 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th ed. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2015), 90. 5 Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 128. 6 Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 128. 7 Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 102. 8 Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 71 9.1.e Packet Pg. 80 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Subj ect and Owner Identification 15 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Effective Date The effective date of value is 11/7/2022. 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 9.1.e Packet Pg. 81 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 16 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Area Analysis 9.1.e Packet Pg. 82 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 17 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA POPULATION Compiled by CBRE; Source: Esri The subject is located in Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue,WA Metropolitan Statistical Area. Key information about the area is provided in the following tables. 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. 3,439,809 4,131,015 4,238,801 0 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 2010 2022 2027 POPULATION BY YEAR 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 0-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80+ AREA POPULATION BY AGE 9.1.e Packet Pg. 83 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 18 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA INCOME EDUCATION EMPLOYMENT Compiled by CBRE; Source: Esri 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. 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 17.4%, or $3,681 per annum. 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. $105,891 $124,294 $95,000 $100,000 $105,000 $110,000 $115,000 $120,000 $125,000 $130,000 2022 2027 MEDIAN INCOME BY YEAR 28.1% 17.9% 54.0% POPULATION BY DEGREE Bachelor's Degree Graduate Degree Other 0%2%4%6%8%10%12%14%16% Public Administration Other Services (excl Publ Adm) Transportation/Warehousing Accommodation/Food Services Construction Educational Services Manufacturing Retail Trade Health Care/Social Assistance Prof/Scientific/Tech Services 9.1.e Packet Pg. 84 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 19 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Neighborhood Analysis 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 9.1.e Packet Pg. 85 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 20 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 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 Ivar’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 ½ 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 86 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 21 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 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: 21200 72nd Ave W. Edmonds, WA 98020 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 SELECTED NEIGHBORHOOD DEMOGRAPHICS Seattle-Tacoma- Bellevue, WA 1 Mile Radius 3 Mile Radius 5 Mile Radius 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 9.1.e Packet Pg. 87 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 22 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA longer term. Overall, the subject neighborhood is forecast to maintain a stable performance over the mid to long-term. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 88 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 23 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA PARCEL MAP 9.1.e Packet Pg. 89 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 24 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA FLOOD PLAIN MAP Subject 9.1.e Packet Pg. 90 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 25 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA SOILS MAP Subject 9.1.e Packet Pg. 91 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 26 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA ENVIRONMENTAL MAP Subject 9.1.e Packet Pg. 92 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 27 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA ZONING MAP Subject 9.1.e Packet Pg. 93 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 28 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 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 Topography Zoning District Flood Map Panel No. & Date 53061C1292F 19-Jun-20 Flood Zone Zone X (Unshaded) Flood Notes Earthquake Zone Soil Type Ingress/Egress Points Comparative Analysis Access Visibility Functional Utility Traffic Volume Adequacy of Utilities Drainage Utilities Availability Water Yes Sewer Yes Natural Gas Yes Electricity Yes Telephone Yes Mass Transit Yes Other Yes No Unknown Detrimental Easements X Encroachments X Deed Restrictions X Reciprocal Parking Rights X Source: Various sources compiled by CBRE Rating Average Good Average Rectangular Generally Level CG General Commercial FEMA Zone D Area of minimal flood hazard 212th St. S.W., 72nd Ave W. Good Alderwood-Urban land complex Good Provider City of Edmonds Assumed Adequate Sound Transit, Community Transit, Edmonds Ferry City of Edmonds Puget Sound Energy Snohomish County PUD No. 1 Various 9.1.e Packet Pg. 94 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 29 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Utilities The subject property has access to all public utilities. Ingress/Egress The subject has access and frontage from 212th 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 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 restrictions, if any, prior to making a decision. Environmental Issues - Site We were not provided with an environmental report for the subject, but a search of the City of 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 lead paint, asbestos, urea formaldehyde foam insulation, or other potentially hazardous 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. Conclusion 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 roadways. The size of the site is typical for the area. There are no other known detrimental 9.1.e Packet Pg. 95 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 30 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 96 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) S ite Description 31 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 97 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Zoning Description 32 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Zoning The following chart summarizes the subject’s zoning requirements. ZONING SUMMARY Current Zoning Legally Conforming Uses Permitted Zoning Change Primary Surrounding Land Use 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. Commerical CG, General Commercial Zoning Yes Commercial, Retail, Residential, Office Not likely 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 between different parts of the district, and be sensitive to adjacent residential zones.” 9.1.e Packet Pg. 98 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Zoning Description 33 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 99 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Neighborhood An alysis 34 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 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.)8.207579 8.269971 Less: Adjustment for Excess Land Total Taxes $14,511 $14,183 Source: Snohomish County Assessor's Office 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 100 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Neighborhood An alysis 35 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA Market Analysis Primary data sources used for this market analysis includes CoStar’s 3rd 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. Period Vacancy Rate Market Rent/Unit Annual Rent Growth Inventory Units Under Constr Units Under Constr % of Inventory 12 Mo Absorp Units 2022 Q3 5.4% $1,984 5.1% 371,469 24,826 6.7% 8,525 2022 Q2 5.3% $2,011 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% 11,011 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 SEATTLE METRO MARKET STATISTICS (2013 - Q3 2022) 9.1.e Packet Pg. 101 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Neighborhood An alysis 36 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 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% $1,911 11.1% 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: CoStar Q3 2022 LYNNWOOD SUBMARKET STATISTICS (2013 - Q3 2022) 9.1.e Packet Pg. 102 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Neighborhood A n alysis 37 Edmonds Easement Relinquishment, Edmonds, WA 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 103 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Highest and Best Use 38 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 9.1.e Packet Pg. 104 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Highest and Best Use 39 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 105 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) V aluation Methodology 40 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 9.1.e Packet Pg. 106 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) V aluation Methodology 41 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 107 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Valuation Analysis 42 Land Val ue 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 Actual Sale Adjusted Sale Size Price No.Property Location Type Date Proposed Use Price Price 1 (SF) Per SF 1 21200 72nd Ave W. Edmonds, WA 98020 Sale Feb-22 Senior Living Center $3,787,000 $3,787,000 35,284 $107.33 2 18005 Aurora Ave N 18002 Aurora Ave N 18019 Aurora Ave N Shoreline, WA 98133 Sale Oct-22 385-Unit Multifamily $13,350,000 $13,350,000 158,195 $84.39 3 18553-18559, 18807 8th Avenue NE 719, 721, 727 NE 189th St Shoreline, WA 98155 Sale Aug-22 240-unit Mixed- Use Apartments $7,129,785 $7,129,785 54,406 $131.05 4 13711 Aurora Avenue Seattle, WA 98133 Sale Jan-22 $4,500,000 $4,500,000 53,579 $83.99 5 4301 Alderwood Mall Boulevard Lynnwood, WA 98036 Sale Oct-21 Mid-Rise Apartment Building $5,500,000 $5,500,000 47,707 $115.29 6 19707 44th Avenue West Lynnwood, WA 98036 Sale Aug-20 $2,700,000 $2,700,000 29,621 $91.15 Subject 21200 72nd Ave W., Edmonds, Washington Sale Feb-22 Senior Living Center $3,787,000 $3,787,000 35,284 $107.33 1 Adjusted sale price for cash equivalency and/or development costs (where applicable) Compiled by CBRE Transaction 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 108 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Valuation Analysis 43 9.1.e Packet Pg. 109 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Valuation Analysis 44 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 9.1.e Packet Pg. 110 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Valuation Analysis 45 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 Center 385-Unit Multifamily 240-unit Mixed- Use Apartments Unk Mid-Rise Apartment Unk 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 1 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 9.1.e Packet Pg. 111 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Valuation Analysis 46 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 9.1.e Packet Pg. 112 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Acquisition Analysis 47 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 113 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Valuation in After Condition 48 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. D iscussion 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 9.1.e Packet Pg. 114 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Valuation in After Condition 49 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: 9.1.e Packet Pg. 115 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Valuation in After Condition 50 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% a** 25% to 75%*** *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-water 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. Sammamish 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 Summary of Easement Support Information 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: 9.1.e Packet Pg. 116 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Valuation in After Condition 51 Appraisal of Easements under the State Rule, Appraisal Journal Negligible Restrictions None, ephemeral or occasional No change to HBU or Larger Parcel Nominal to 10% Variable Restrictions Physical joint use of surface Variable change to HBU and/or Larger Parcel 50% more or less Exclusive Restrictions Exclusion of owners private use Substantial change in HBU; Severance from Larger Parcel 90% to 100% Compiled by CBRE VAS Group Easement Rights Balance Sheet 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. 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 Typical Easement Discounts 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 $115/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 9.1.e Packet Pg. 117 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Summary of Compensation 52 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 118 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 53 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 119 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 54 — 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 120 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 55 • 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 121 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Addenda ADDENDA 9.1.e Packet Pg. 122 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Addenda Addendum A LAND SALE DATA S HEETS 9.1.e Packet Pg. 123 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Sale Land - Mixed-Use No. 1 Property Name Edmonds Redevelopment Address 21200 72nd Ave W. Edmonds, WA 98020 County Snohomish Govt./Tax ID 005807-000-004-01 Land Area Net 0.810 ac/ 35,284 sf Land Area Gross 0.810 ac/ 35,284 sf Site Development Status Finished Utilities All Available Maximum FAR N/A Min Land Bldg Ratio N/A Shape Rectangular Topography Generally Level Flood Zone Class Zone X (Unshaded) Flood Panel No./ Date 53061C1292F/ Jun 2020 Zoning CG, General Commercial Zoning Entitlement Status N/A Transaction Details Type Sale Primary Verification N/A Interest Transferred Fee Simple Transaction Date 02/28/2022 Condition of Sale no atypical Recording Date 02/28/2022 Recorded Buyer CA SENIOR EDMONDS WAS PROPERTY OWNER LLC Sale Price $3,787,000 Buyer Type N/A Financing All Cash Recorded Seller JAS GROUP LLC Cash Equivalent $3,787,000 Marketing Time N/A Capital Adjustment $0 Listing Broker N/A Adjusted Price $3,787,000 Doc #202203017050 Adjusted Price / ac and / sf $4,675,309 / $107.33 Adjusted Price/ FAR N/A Adjusted Price/ Unit N/A Comments 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 124 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Under Contract Land - Multi Unit Residential No. 2 Property Name 152 Brea Apartments Address 18005 Aurora Ave N 18002 Aurora Ave N 18019 Aurora Ave N Shoreline, WA 98133 County King Govt./Tax ID Multiple Land Area Net 3.632 ac/ 158,195 sf Land Area Gross 3.632 ac/ 158,195 sf Site Development Status Finished Utilities All to site Maximum FAR N/A Min Land Bldg Ratio N/A Shape L Shaped Topography Generally Level Flood Zone Class Zone X (Unshaded) Flood Panel No./ Date 53033C0040G/ Aug 2020 Zoning TC-2, Town Center Entitlement Status N/A Transaction Details Type Under Contract Primary Verification Selling Broker, PSA Interest Transferred Fee Simple Transaction Date 11/01/2022 Condition of Sale None Recording Date N/A Recorded Buyer PENDING & Luxe Apts LLC Sale Price $13,350,000 Buyer Type Developer Financing Market Rate Financing Recorded Seller Chih Pu Tsai, Highland Sports Center Cash Equivalent $13,350,000 Marketing Time N/A Capital Adjustment $0 Listing Broker N/A Adjusted Price $13,350,000 Doc #PENDING & 20221025000134 Adjusted Price / ac and / sf $3,675,964 / $84.39 Adjusted Price/ FAR N/A Adjusted Price/ Unit N/A Comments 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 125 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Sale Land - Mixed-Use No. 3 Property Name Shoreline Assemblage Address 18553-18559, 18807 8th Avenue NE 719, 721, 727 NE 189th St Shoreline, WA 98155 County King Govt./Tax ID Multiple Land Area Net 1.249 ac/ 54,406 sf Land Area Gross 1.249 ac/ 54,406 sf Site Development Status N/A Utilities N/A Maximum FAR N/A Min Land Bldg Ratio N/A Shape Irregular Topography Level, At Street Grade Flood Zone Class Zone X (Unshaded) Flood Panel No./ Date 53033C0040G/ Aug 2020 Zoning MUR-70, Mixed-Use Residential Entitlement Status N/A Transaction Details Type Sale Primary Verification Buyer Interest Transferred Fee Simple Transaction Date 08/09/2022 Condition of Sale Arm's-Length Recording Date 08/09/2022 Recorded Buyer ACG Kinect Shoreline Owner Sale Price $7,129,785 Buyer Type Developer Financing Not Available Recorded Seller Multiple Cash Equivalent $7,129,785 Marketing Time N/A Capital Adjustment $0 Listing Broker None Adjusted Price $7,129,785 Doc #20220809000683, multiple Adjusted Price / ac and / sf $5,708,395 / $131.05 Adjusted Price/ FAR N/A Adjusted Price/ Unit $29,707 Comments 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 052604-9011 and -9024 were recorded on June 30, 2022. The transactions involving APNs 394170-2310, -2311, and -2315 were recorded on July 28, 2022. The sixth tax parcel, APN 397170-2316, closed in early August 2022. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 126 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Sale Land - Multi Unit Residential No. 4 Property Name Bitter Lake Development Site Address 13711 Aurora Avenue Seattle, WA 98133 County King Govt./Tax ID 016400-0069 Land Area Net 1.230 ac/ 53,579 sf Land Area Gross 1.230 ac/ 53,579 sf Site Development Status Finished Utilities To Site Maximum FAR N/A Min Land Bldg Ratio N/A Shape Rectangular Topography Generally Level Flood Zone Class Zone X (Unshaded) Flood Panel No./ Date 53033C0330G/ Aug 2020 Zoning C1-75 (M) Entitlement Status N/A Transaction Details Type Sale Primary Verification N/A Interest Transferred Fee Simple Transaction Date 01/12/2022 Condition of Sale Arm's Length Recording Date 01/12/2022 Recorded Buyer Project S42 LLC Sale Price $4,500,000 Buyer Type Developer Financing Market Rate Financing Recorded Seller Vic & Jack LLC Cash Equivalent $4,500,000 Marketing Time N/A Capital Adjustment $0 Listing Broker N/A Adjusted Price $4,500,000 Doc #202201141969 Adjusted Price / ac and / sf $3,658,537 / $83.99 Adjusted Price/ FAR N/A Adjusted Price/ Unit N/A Comments 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 127 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Sale Land - Multi Unit Residential No. 5 Property Name Redevelopment Site - Former Buca di Beppo Address 4301 Alderwood Mall Boulevard Lynnwood, WA 98036 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 N/A Min Land Bldg Ratio N/A Shape Rectangular Topography Varies Flood Zone Class Zone X (Unshaded) Flood Panel No./ Date 53061C1310F/ Jun 2020 Zoning CC-C Entitlement Status None Transaction Details Type Sale Primary Verification Listing Broker, CBA, Public Records Interest Transferred Fee Simple Transaction Date 10/07/2021 Condition of Sale Arm's-Length Recording Date 10/13/2021 Recorded Buyer Koz Development, LLC Sale Price $5,500,000 Buyer Type Developer Financing All Cash Recorded Seller DRK M2C LLC Cash Equivalent $5,500,000 Marketing Time 12 Month(s)Capital Adjustment $0 Listing Broker Alex Muir - 253-303-1983 Adjusted Price $5,500,000 Doc #202110130277 Adjusted Price / ac and / sf $5,021,914 / $115.29 Adjusted Price/ FAR N/A Adjusted Price/ Unit $28,947 Comments 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 I-5 and I-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 $115.29 per square foot, or $28,947 per unit. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 128 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Sale Land - Mixed-Use No. 6 Property Name The Northwood Site Address 19707 44th Avenue West Lynnwood, WA 98036 County Snohomish Govt./Tax ID 00372600701808 Land Area Net 0.680 ac/ 29,621 sf Land Area Gross 0.680 ac/ 29,621 sf Site Development Status Finished Utilities All to site Maximum FAR N/A Min Land Bldg Ratio N/A Shape Rectangular Topography Generally Level Flood Zone Class N/A Flood Panel No./ Date N/A Zoning CC-C, City Center Core Entitlement Status N/A Transaction Details Type Sale Primary Verification Public Records, Listing Broker - Keith Honsberger Interest Transferred Fee Simple Transaction Date 08/27/2020 Condition of Sale None Recording Date N/A Recorded Buyer Bablie, LLC Sale Price $2,700,000 Buyer Type Developer Financing Cash to Seller Recorded Seller Northwood Building, LLC Cash Equivalent $2,700,000 Marketing Time 1 Month(s)Capital Adjustment $0 Listing Broker Keith Honsberger - Kidder Mathews 425.450.1107 Adjusted Price $2,700,000 Doc #202008317036 Adjusted Price / ac and / sf $3,970,588 / $91.15 Adjusted Price/ FAR N/A Adjusted Price/ Unit N/A Comments 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 129 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Addenda Addendum B PROJECT INFORMATION 9.1.e Packet Pg. 130 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) HYDE PARK TOWNHOMES REC. NO. 201805185001 LOT 12 LOT 11 LOT 10 LOT 9 TRACT 999 212TH ST SW 72 N D A V E W LOT 3 CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT S-77 REC. NO. 7705310298 LOT 4 76 T H A V E W ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY OF 21200 72ND AVE W. EDMONDS, WA NAVIX ENGINEERING 11235 SE 6TH ST SUITE 150 BELLEVUE, WA 98004 18-210 1/3/2022 JM/JRP WTB 1"=20'1 OF 1 REV#DESCRIPTION OF REVISION DATE BY JOB NO. DRAWN BY SCALE DATE CHECKED BY SHEET 15241 NE 90TH ST REDMOND, WA 98052 TEL. 425.823-5700 FAX 425.823-6700 www.axismap.com NW 1/4, NW 1/4, SEC. 29, TWP. 27N., RGE. 4E., W.M. CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON N GRAPHIC SCALE 0 1"=20' 20 401020 9.1.e Packet Pg. 131 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) JOB NO. 18-210 CHECKED BY WTB SHEET 1 OF 3 SCALE N/A DRAWN BY JM EXHIBIT A PARCEL DESCRIPTION www.axismap.com DATE 04/27/23 9.1.e Packet Pg. 132 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) EXHIBIT B DESCRIPTION OF PORTION OF EASEMENT FOR RELINQUISHMENT www.axismap.com JOB NO. 18-210 CHECKED BY WTB SHEET 2 OF 3 SCALE N/A DRAWN BY JM DATE 04/27/23 9.1.e Packet Pg. 133 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) 212TH ST SW 72 N D A V E W LOT 3 CITY OF EDMONDS SHORT PLAT S-77 REC. NO. 7705310298 LOT 4 30 ' 30 ' 30' 30' EXHIBIT C DEPICTION OF PORTION OF EASEMENT FOR RELINQUISHMENT www.axismap.com N GRAPHIC SCALE 0 1"=50' 25 50 NW 1/4, NW 1/4, SEC. 29, TWP. 27N., RGE. 4E., W.M. CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON JOB NO. 18-210 CHECKED BY WTB SHEET 3 OF 3 SCALE 1"=50' DRAWN BY JM DATE 04/27/23 9.1.e Packet Pg. 134 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Addenda Addendum C QUALIFICATIONS 9.1.e Packet Pg. 135 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) 1 ©2021 CBRE, INC. PROFILE S.Murray Brackett, MAI Director of Right of Way, Aviation and Public Projects, Northwest Region T +1 206 292 1600 M +1 206 595 1068 E murray.brackett@cbre.com WA. Lic. 1100853 Professional Experience Mr. Brackett has been Appraising Real Property since 1985 and is currently a Director with CBRE in the Valuation Advisory Services division. He was formerly a partner with ABS Valuation for over 20 years. Professional responsibilities include the full range of commercial, industrial, residential product, including complex land valuations up to 100,000 acres in size. A considerable portion of his work involves partial acquisitions relating to eminent domain and conservation easements. In addition, a wide variety of Aviation related appraisals have been completed, including Ground lease revaluation efforts, Appraisals of leasehold positions in Hangars and other buildings, avigation easements and property for airport expansion. Improved and unimproved valuations have been performed for acquisitions in fee, leased fee and leasehold interests, and various partial interest assignments such as conservation easements, utility easements, subsurface, air rights and minority interest acquisitions. UASFLA-compliant Appraisals have been prepared for a wide variety of agencies on a wide range of property types. Mr. Brackett has qualified as an expert witness in King, Kitsap, Pierce County Superior Courts, US District Court and Federal Bankruptcy Court. Geographic experience includes Washington, Oregon, Idaho, California, Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota, Alaska and British Columbia. Clients Represented Government Cities: Anacortes, Arlington, Auburn, Bellevue, Bothell, Burien, Everett, Kenmore, Kent, Kirkland, Leavenworth, Lk Forest Park, Lynnwood, Maple Valley, Mount Vernon, North Bend, Port Angeles, Puyallup, Renton, Seattle, Snoqualmie, Tacoma, Woodinville. Counties: Island, King, Kitsap, Pierce, Skagit, Thurston, Snohomish, Whatcom Airports: Sea-Tac, Boeing Field, Paine Field, Renton Municipal, Auburn, Arlington, Bellingham, Olympia, William Fairchild, Sanderson Field, Felts Field, Centralia/Chehalis, Bremerton, Pullman, Orcas Island, Friday Harbor. 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. 9.1.e Packet Pg. 136 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) 2 ©2021 CBRE, INC. PROFILE Other: Ports of Everett, Grays Harbor, Anacortes, Seattle, Shelton, Olympia, Bremerton, Port Angeles, Friday Harbor. Washington State DNR, Wa.St. Parks, WSDOT (approved appraiser), U.S. IRS, FAA, Sound Transit, USACE, US Navy. Numerous School Districts. Financial Institutions Bank of America, US Bancorp, KeyBank, Wells Fargo Trust, Commerce Bank, Homestreet, Umpqua, Charter Bank, Union Bank. Corporations/NonProfits Weyerhaeuser, WRECO, Tramco, Plum Creek, McDonalds Corp., PSE, Development Services of America, Lowe Enterprises, PACCAR, Hancock Natural Resources Group, The Trust for Public Land, Forterra, HDR, Sierra Pacific, Quadrant, Port Blakely, CH2M-Hill, Parsons Brinckerhoff, New Ventures Group, Williams Pipeline, Manke lumber, Fletcher General, Costco, Nucor Steel. Attorneys Prosecuting Attorneys of numerous Cities and Counties, as well as Miller Nash, Williams & Williams, Karr Tuttle, Chmelik, Sitkin & Davis, PRK Livengood, Hillis Clark, Kenyon Disend, Perkins Coie, K&L Gates, Inslee Best, Tousley Brain Stephens, Davis Wright Tremaine, Pacifica Law Group, Betts Patterson Mines, Williams Kastner, Foster 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, AI - 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 9.1.e Packet Pg. 137 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Addenda S. MURRAY BRACKETT, MAI Valuation & Advisory Services Director- Murray.Brackett@cbre.com www.cbre.com A. CBRE VALUATION & ADVISORY SERVICES 9.1.e Packet Pg. 138 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 4 - E a s e m e n t A p p r a i s a l ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) 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 212th 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 9.1.f Packet Pg. 139 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 5 - P r o j e c t O w n e r L e t t e r ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) 9.1.g Packet Pg. 140 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 6 - I m p r o v e m e n t s ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r E a s e m e n t ) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 15, 2022 Page 4 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 4th, 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 run ning away. She said 76th 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 80th 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 9.1.h Packet Pg. 141 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 7 - P e d a n d U t i l i t y E a s e m e n t C o u n c i l A p p r o v a l 0 2 1 5 2 0 2 2 ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 15, 2022 Page 5 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 2 2921 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 1. 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 Element Policy 6.22 Encourage and promote the use of EV charging stations…including standards for new developments that provide parking facilities 9.1.h Packet Pg. 142 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 7 - P e d a n d U t i l i t y E a s e m e n t C o u n c i l A p p r o v a l 0 2 1 5 2 0 2 2 ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f 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 WIN EDMONDS, WASHSINGTON. WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds has issued a building permit for property located at the southwest comer of 212th St SW and 72 nd 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 22 nd day of October, 2024 CITY OF EDMONDS 1 9.1.i Packet Pg. 143 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 8 - R e s o l u t i o n 1 5 6 0 E a s e m e n t S u r p l u s ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r ATTEST: PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. October 17, 2024 October 22, 2024 1560 2 9.1.i Packet Pg. 144 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 8 - R e s o l u t i o n 1 5 6 0 E a s e m e n t S u r p l u s ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r 1 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 9.1.j Packet Pg. 145 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 9 - R e s o l u t i o n d i s p o s i t i o n o f e a s e m e n t ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r 2 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. 9.1.j Packet Pg. 146 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 9 - R e s o l u t i o n d i s p o s i t i o n o f e a s e m e n t ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y S e w e r 9.1.k Packet Pg. 147 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 1 0 - M R S C A R T I C L E R E L E A S I N G E A S E M E N T ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n A n t h o l o g y S e n i o r L i v i n g - D i s p o s i t i o n o f S a n i t a r y CIT Y O F EDMO N D S Inc.1 8 9 0 Disposition of Sewer Easement Anthology Senior Living – 21200 72nd Ave W November 4, 2024 City Council Public Hearing 9.1.l Packet Pg. 148 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 1 1 - P r e s e n t a t i o n D i s p o s i t i o n o f E a s e m e n t ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n CIT Y O F EDMO N D S Inc.1 8 9 0 Project Location 21200 72nd Ave W 2 9.1.l Packet Pg. 149 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 1 1 - P r e s e n t a t i o n D i s p o s i t i o n o f E a s e m e n t ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n 3 CIT Y O F EDMO N D S Inc.1 8 9 0 Survey of Sewer Easement EASEMENT ENCUMBERS A PORTION OF SOUTH SIDE OF PROPERTY 216 sf EASEMENT AREA 3 9.1.l Packet Pg. 150 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 1 1 - P r e s e n t a t i o n D i s p o s i t i o n o f E a s e m e n t ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n CIT Y O F EDMO N D S Inc.1 8 9 0 Proposed Development ANTHOLOGY SENIOR LIVING 4 •127 SENIOR LIVING UNITS •NEW FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS •SIDEWALK AND LANDSCAPING •212th ST SW and 72nd Ave W 9.1.l Packet Pg. 151 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 1 1 - P r e s e n t a t i o n D i s p o s i t i o n o f E a s e m e n t ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n CIT Y O F EDMO N D S Inc.1 8 9 0 Proposed Development •SUBJECT SEWER EASEMENT ONLY SERVES SUBJECT PROPERTY •EXISTING PUBLIC SEWER ABANDONED WITH PROJECT •NEW SEWER CONNECTION DIRECT TO 212th ST SW •PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT •PUBLIC WATER VAULT EASEMENT 5 9.1.l Packet Pg. 152 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 1 1 - P r e s e n t a t i o n D i s p o s i t i o n o f E a s e m e n t ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n CIT Y O F EDMO N D S Inc.1 8 9 0 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 market value or rent or other consideration to be paid ➢Resolution 1560 approved by City Council 10/22/2024 ➢Appraisal – Fair Market Value $8,700 ➢Other Consideration •City Ownership & Maintenance Responsibilities Eliminated •Public Pedestrian & Water Vault Easements Granted •Frontage Improvements Constructed – 212th St SW & 72nd Ave W ➢Easement Comparison •Pedestrian & Water Vault Easements to be granted - approx. 1823 sf •Sewer Easement proposed to be released – 216 sf 6 9.1.l Packet Pg. 153 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 1 1 - P r e s e n t a t i o n D i s p o s i t i o n o f E a s e m e n t ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n CIT Y O F EDMO N D S Inc.1 8 9 0 Staff Recommendation ➢APPROVE RELEASE OF SEWER EASEMENT ➢NO MONETARY COMPENSATION ➢ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN and WATER VAULT EASEMENTS (Approved by City Council February 15, 2022) 7 9.1.l Packet Pg. 154 At t a c h m e n t : A t t a c h m e n t 1 1 - P r e s e n t a t i o n D i s p o s i t i o n o f E a s e m e n t ( P u b l i c H e a r i n g o n 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 $550,000 increase in appropriation authority for the General Fund. His concerns centered on the necessity of the request, and he expressed hesitation in moving forward with approval without further deliberation. Councilmember Chen articulated his desire to avoid a “rubber stamping” of the appropriation and emphasized the importance of not approving the increase simply to avoid other potential consequences. He suggested that more discussion is required to explore alternative options to work within the current appropriation limits over the next two months, rather than relying on additional funding. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve Ordinance No. XXXX amending the 2024 Budget. Attachments: 2024 October Decision Package Exhibits 2024 October Budget Amendment Ordinance 10.1 Packet Pg. 155 Budget Amendment for: Item Description: Department: Division: Title: Preparer: Budget Amendment Type How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure?One-Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital?Operating Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 001.000.22.518.10.31.00 45$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 001.000.22.518.10.31.10 5,415 - - - - 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 3,599 - - - - 001.000.22.518.10.43.00 3,670 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease)12,729$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 001.000.367.00.000.00 8,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 001.000.337.09.000.00 3,890 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Revenue Increase (Decrease)11,890$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 (839)$ -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease)(839)$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Description Donation/Contributions Miscellaneous Interlocal Revenue Description Ending Fund Balance Description Supplies Wellness Program Supplies Miscellaneous Travel October 22, 2024 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 ($3,670). The training expenditures received reimbursement from WCIA, and the Employee picnic was funded with a private donation. Human Resources 001 GENERALFund Name: Emily Wagener Previously Approved Budget By Council 3rd Quarter Budget Amendment Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? Partially Funded 2024 October Budget Amendment 1 10.1.a Packet Pg. 156 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r D e c i s i o n P a c k a g e E x h i b i t s ( 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t ) Budget Amendment for: Item Description: Department: Division: Title: Preparer: Budget Amendment Type How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure?On-Going Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital?Operating Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 001.000.41.521.10.11.00 33,929$ 8,954$ -$ -$ -$ 001.000.41.521.10.23.00 2,876 1,013 - - - 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 1,080 270 - - - 001.000.41.521.10.35.00 1,859 - - - - 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 4,370 - - - - 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 131,880 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease)175,994$ 10,237$ -$ -$ -$ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 001.00.334.01.110.00 6,236$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 001.00.334.00.000.00 37,885 10,237 - - - 001.00.334.00.000.00 131,873 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Revenue Increase (Decrease)175,994$ 10,237$ -$ -$ -$ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease)-$ -$ -$ -$ -$ October 22, 2024 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. Police Department 001 GENERALFund Name: Alexandra Ehlert New Item For Council To Consider Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? 100% Ending Fund Balance Fill out on-going costs & revenues Description Salary for Erin Nathan - Social Worker Benefits for Erin Nathan - Social Worker Social Worker Supervision Wellness Grant - Massage Chair Wellness Grant - Professional Services WATPA - Flock Grant Description WSCJTC - Officer Wellness Grant AWC - Alternative Response Team Grant WATPA - Flock Grant Description 2024 October Budget Amendment 2 10.1.a Packet Pg. 157 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r D e c i s i o n P a c k a g e E x h i b i t s ( 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t ) Budget Amendment for: Item Description: Department: Division: Title: Preparer: Budget Amendment Type How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure?One-Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital?Operating Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 001.000.39.518.10.11.10 550,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease)550,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Revenue Increase (Decrease)-$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 (550,000)$ -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease)(550,000)$ -$ -$ -$ -$ October 22, 2024 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 $550,000. This adjustment is necessary to align the budget with forecasted expenditures and to ensure the city remains in compliance with state budgetary laws. Non-Department 001 GENERALFund Name: Kim Dunscombe New Item For Council To Consider Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? 100% Ending Fund Balance Description Offset vacancy rate adjustment Description Description Ending Fund Balance 2024 October Budget Amendment 3 10.1.a Packet Pg. 158 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r D e c i s i o n P a c k a g e E x h i b i t s ( 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t ) Budget Amendment for: Item Description: Department: Division: Title: Preparer: Budget Amendment Type How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure?On-Going Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital?Capital Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 117.100.64.573.20.41.00 35,000$ 100,000$ -$ -$ -$ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease) 35,000$ 100,000$ -$ -$ -$ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 117.100.367.00.000.00 $75,000 -$ -$ -$ -$ 117.100.334.05.800.01 - 60,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Revenue Increase (Decrease) 75,000$ 60,000$ -$ -$ -$ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 117.100.64.508.40.00.00 40,000$ (40,000)$ -$ -$ -$ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) 40,000$ (40,000)$ -$ -$ -$ Description Private Donation WA Arts Commission Capital Grant Description Ending Fund Balance Fill out on-going costs & revenues Description Professional Service October 22, 2024 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 $15,000 to cover costs of the initial artist selection process. A cooperative agreement with EAFF was signed by the City in May 2024. The RFQ was approved by City Council 6/18/24 and the selection process is underway. Initial funds will be expended by the end of 2024 with the remaining funds expended in 2025 to complete the project. Community, Culture & Economic Development 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS Cultural Services Fund Name:Creative District capital grant and donations for Gateway Art Project Frances Chapin Previously Discussed By Council Date of Discussion or Budget Approval?Jun 18 2024 Reimbursed by Grants or Outside Agencies 2024 October Budget Amendment 4 10.1.a Packet Pg. 159 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r D e c i s i o n P a c k a g e E x h i b i t s ( 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t ) Budget Amendment for: Item Description: Department: Division: Title: Preparer: Budget Amendment Type How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure?One-Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital?Operating Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 142.000.39.522.20.41.50 115,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease) 115,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 142.000.333.21.019.00 115,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Revenue Increase (Decrease) 115,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Description Description Coronavirus Relief Fund Description Fire Service Contract New Item For Council To Consider Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? 100% Ending Fund Balance October 22, 2024 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 $40,000 in funds that were initially offered as a deposit at the beginning of the Housing Grant Program. This budget amendment adds the expenditure authority to use the returned ARPA funds towards the Edmonds Fire Contract before year's end, when all ARPA funds must be spent. Finance 001 GENERALFund Name:ARPA Funds for Fire Contract Marissa Cain 2024 October Budget Amendment 5 10.1.a Packet Pg. 160 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r D e c i s i o n P a c k a g e E x h i b i t s ( 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t ) Budget Amendment for: Item Description : Department: Division: Title: Preparer: Budget Amendment Type How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure?One-Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital?Capital Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 421.200.74.592.34.84.00 90,951 -$ -$ -$ -$ 422.200.72.592.31.84.00 23,936 - - - - 421.000.74.592.34.84.00 17,106 - - - - 421.000.74.593.34.71.00 753,175 - - - - 421.000.74.599.34.71.00 3,891,699 - - - - 421.000.74.599.34.84.00 19,295 - - - - 424.000.71.597.30.55.00 278,030 - - - - 422.000.72.592.31.84.00 2,854 422.000.72.593.31.71.00 126,948 422.000.72.599.31.71.00 648,872 422.000.72.599.31.84.00 3,220 - - - - 424.000.71.597.30.55.00 117,953 423.000.75.592.35.84.00 28,078 423.000.75.593.35.71.00 1,248,909 423.000.75.599.35.71.00 6,389,228 423.000.75.599.35.84.00 31,672 424.000.71.597.30.55.00 446,533 - - - - - - - - - Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease)14,118,459 -$ -$ -$ -$ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 421.200.391.20.000.00 8,516,725 -$ -$ -$ -$ 421.200.392.20.000.00 1,074,252 422.200.391.20.000.00 2,241,300 - - - - 422.200.392.20.000.00 282,662 - - - - 421.000.393.00.000.00 3,408,480 - - - - 421.000.392.20.000.00 519,626 - - - - 421.000.397.34.424.00 278,030 - - - - 422.000.393.00.000.00 568,616 422.000.392.20.000.00 86,338 422.000.397.38.424.00 117,953 423.000.393.00.000.00 5,594,881 423.000.392.20.000.00 854,102 423.000.397.35.424.00 446,533 - - - - - - - - - - Total Revenue Increase (Decrease)23,989,498 -$ -$ -$ -$ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 421.000.74.508.89.00.00 (475,139) -$ -$ -$ -$ 421.200.74.508.19.00.00 9,500,026 - - - - 422.000.72.508.89.00.00 (8,987) - - - - 422.200.72.508.19.00.00 2,500,026 - - - - 423.000.75.508.89.00.00 (802,371) - - - - 424.000.71.508.19.00.00 (842,516) - - - - - - - - - Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease)9,871,039 -$ -$ -$ -$ Transfer Restricted Cash-2024 Bond Issue Description 2024 Revenue Bond Proceeds 2024 Revenue Bond Premium Transfer Restricted Cash-2024 Bond Issue 2024 Debt Issue Costs 2024 Advance Refunding 2013 Bond Issue 2024 Payment to Escrow on 2013 Refunding 2024 Debt Issue Cost to Escrow on 2013 Refunding Description Ending Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance Description 2024 Debt Issue Costs 2024 Debt Issue Costs Transfer Restricted Cash-2024 Bond Issue 2024 Debt Issue Cost to Escrow on 2013 Refunding 2024 Debt Issue Cost to Escrow on 2013 Refunding 2024 Debt Issue Costs 2024 Advance Refunding 2013 Bond Issue 2024 Payment to Escrow on 2013 Refunding 2024 Debt Issue Costs 2024 Advance Refunding 2013 Bond Issue 2024 Payment to Escrow on 2013 Refunding Transfer Restricted Cash-2024 Bond Issue 2024 Refunding Bond Premium 2024 Revenue Bond Proceeds 2024 Revenue Bond Premium 2024 Refunding Bond 2024 Refunding Bond 2024 Refunding Bond Premium Transfer Restricted Cash-2024 Bond Issue 2024 Refunding Bond 2024 Refunding Bond Premium Transfer Restricted Cash-2024 Bond Issue October 22, 2024 Record the 2024 bond issue for new water and storm funds along with the funding to refinance the 2013 revenue bonds. This entry includes all the proceeds received, debt issue costs and refunding entries. Administrative Services MULTIPLE FUNDSFinance Department Fund Name:2024 Bond Issue and Refinancing Deb Sharp Previously Discussed By Council Date of Discussion or Budget Approval?5-28-2024 Ordiance #4358 Bond Ordinance 100% Ending Fund Balance 2024 October Budget Amendment 6 10.1.a Packet Pg. 161 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r D e c i s i o n P a c k a g e E x h i b i t s ( 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t ) Budget Amendment for: Item Description: Department: Division: Title: Preparer: Budget Amendment Type How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure?On-Going Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital?Operating Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 421.000.74.591.34.72.30 170,205.00 -$ -$ -$ -$ 421.000.74.592.34.83.30 258,380.00 - - - - 422.000.72.591.31.72.30 44,916.00 - - - - 422.000.72.592.31.83.30 60,882.00 - - - - 423.000.75.591.35.72.30 124,881.00 - - - - 423.000.75.592.35.83.30 121,223.00 - - - - 424.000.71.591.31.72.00 (15,000.00) - - - - 424.000.71.591.34.72.00 (85,000.00) - - - - 424.000.71.591.35.72.00 (150,000.00) - - - - 424.000.71.592.31.83.00 (17,506.00) - - - - 424.000.71.592.34.83.00 (104,765.00) - - - - 424.000.71.592.35.83.00 (172,441.00) - - - - 421.000.74.597.34.55.24 (189,765.00) - - - - 422.000.72.597.31.55.24 (32,512.00) - - - - 423.000.75.597.35.55.24 (322,441.00) - - - - - - - - Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease) (308,943.00) -$ -$ -$ -$ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 424.000.397.31.422.00 (32,512.00) -$ -$ -$ -$ 424.000.397.34.421.00 (189,765.00) - - - - 424.000.397.35.423.00 (322,441.00) - - - - - - - - Total Revenue Increase (Decrease) (544,718.00) -$ -$ -$ -$ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2,024.00 2025 2026 2027 2028 421.000.74.508.89.00.00 (238,820.00) -$ -$ -$ -$ 422.000.72.508.89.00.00 (73,286.00) - - - - 423.000.75.508.89.00.00 76,337.00 - - - - 424.000.75.508.19.00.00 (6.00) - - - - Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) (235,775.00) -$ -$ -$ -$ October 22, 2024 Record the 2024 revenue bond issue debt payment for December 2024 and remove the 2013 that was originally budgeted. Administrative Services MULTIPLE FUNDSFinance Department Fund Name:Add the 2024 Revenue Bond Payment and Remove the 2013 Debt Payment Deb Sharp 2024 Revenue Bond Interest Previously Discussed By Council Date of Discussion or Budget Approval?5-28-2024 Ordiance #4358 Bond Ordinance 100% Ending Fund Balance Fill out on-going costs & revenues Description 2024 Revenue Bond Principal 2024 Revenue Bond Interest 2024 Revenue Bond Principal 2024 Revenue Bond Principal 2024 Revenue Bond Interest 2013 Revenue Bond Principal 2013 Revenue Bond Principal 2013 Revenue Bond Principal 2013 Revenue Bond Interest 2013 Revenue Bond Interest 2013 Revenue Bond Interest Intefund Transfer to Fund 424 Intefund Transfer to Fund 424 Intefund Transfer to Fund 424 Description Intefund Transfer to Fund 424 Intefund Transfer to Fund 424 Intefund Transfer to Fund 424 Ending Fund Balance Description Ending Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 2024 October Budget Amendment 7 10.1.a Packet Pg. 162 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r D e c i s i o n P a c k a g e E x h i b i t s ( 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t ) Budget Amendment for: Item Description: Department: Division: Title: Preparer: Budget Amendment Type How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure?One-Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital?Capital Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 445,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Expenditure Increase (Decrease) 445,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Revenue Increase (Decrease) -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 511.100.77.508.89.00.00 (445,000)$ -$ -$ -$ -$ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) (445,000)$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Description Description Equipment B-Fund Description Equipment B-Fund October 22, 2024 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. Public Works 511 EQUIPMENT RENTALFleetFund Name:Fleet Manager Carl Rugg Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? 100% Ending Fund Balance 2024 October Budget Amendment 8 10.1.a Packet Pg. 163 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r D e c i s i o n P a c k a g e E x h i b i t s ( 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t )   1    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 WHEREAS, the applications of funds have been identified; THEREFORE, 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. 10.1.b Packet Pg. 164 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t O r d i n a n c e ( 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t )   2    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: BY JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. 10.1.b Packet Pg. 165 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t O r d i n a n c e ( 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t )   3    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 10.1.b Packet Pg. 166 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t O r d i n a n c e ( 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t ) EXHIBIT “A”: Budget Amendment Summary (October 2024)  4    2024 2024 UNAUDITED ADJUSTED BUDGET FUND FUND BEGINNING ENDING NO. DESCRIPTION FUND BALANCE REVENUE EXPENDITURES FUND BALANCE 001 GENERAL FUND 2,492,460                51,490,376              52,776,516              1,206,320                 009 LEOFF‐MEDICAL INS. 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 STREET CONST/IMPROVE 2,734,808                5,396,813                5,395,315                2,736,306                 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS  ACQUIS. FUND 657,265                    163,631                    317,880                    503,016                    118 MEMORIAL STREET TREE ‐                              ‐                              ‐                              ‐                             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 MAINTENANCE/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 62,898,596              144,650,005            146,106,059            61,442,542               10.1.b Packet Pg. 167 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t O r d i n a n c e ( 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t ) EXHIBIT “B”: Budget Amendments by Revenue (October 2024)  5      Adopted  Adopted Adopted Proposed 2024 Budget Amendment Amendment Amendment Amended FUND FUND Ord. #4335 Ord. #4349 Ord. #4363 Ord. # Revenue NO. DESCRIPTION 1/1/2024 2/27/2024 7/23/2024 10/22/2024 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 Street Const/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 Maintenance/Improv 152,990               ‐                            ‐                        ‐                      152,990                    137 Cemetery Maintenance Trust Fd 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 ‐                            ‐                            ‐                        ‐                       ‐                                  Totals 118,297,871$   996,170$           1,533,300$   23,822,664$ 144,650,005$          10.1.b Packet Pg. 168 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t O r d i n a n c e ( 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t ) EXHIBIT “C”: Budget Amendment by Expenditure (October 2024)    6      Adopted  Adopted Adopted Proposed 2024 Budget Amendment Amendment Amendment Amended FUND FUND Ord. #4335 Ord. #4349 Ord. #4363 Ord. #Expenditure NO. DESCRIPTION 1/1/2024 2/27/2024 7/23/2024 10/22/2024 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 Maintenance 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/Improve 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 Park Acq/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 Maintenance/Improv 290,559              ‐                           ‐                          ‐                      290,559               137 Cemetery Maintenance Trust Fd 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$    10.1.b Packet Pg. 169 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t O r d i n a n c e ( 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t ) EXHIBIT “D”: Budget Amendment Summary (October 2024)    7               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            15,143,239               8,679,425                    10.1.b Packet Pg. 170 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t O r d i n a n c e ( 2 0 2 4 O c t o b e r B u d g e t A m e n d m e n t ) 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 10.2 Packet Pg. 171 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.iqm2.com/Citizens/SplitView.aspx?Mode=Video&MeetingID=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) 10.2 Packet Pg. 172 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 10.2 Packet Pg. 173 City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | Growth Targets Summarized 10.2.a Packet Pg. 174 At t a c h m e n t : G r o w t h T a r g e t s E x p l a n a t i o n ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 2 9,069 County adopted Target Housing 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) 4,123 4,946 Existing Capacity Per BLR City to Plan 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 Existing Capacity Per BLR HB1110+Hb1337 Achieved Capacity 2,104 4,946 300 units approx. Loss of units in UNOCAL + = 2,400 units City to find potential growth locations feasible to accommodate this additional housing 9,069 – 4,946 = 4,123 2,019 City to Plan 10.2.a Packet Pg. 175 At t a c h m e n t : G r o w t h T a r g e t s E x p l a n a t i o n ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 3 County Allocated Target 9,069 Per BLR existing Capacity 4,946 Total Units required (after excluding existing capacity: 9,060 - 4,946 )4,123 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. 1977 + 42 = 2,019 Remaining units to plan for (excluding ADU, Middle Housing Capacities: 4,123 – 2,019) 2,104 Loss of units due to change of UNOCAL Land Use (not included in the growth target, but city needs to compensate this) 300 Total Housing units to plan for within Centers & Hubs 2,400 Approx. Existing Capacity 4,946 Capacity achieved by ADUs & Middle Housing (1,977 + 42) = 2,019+2,104 Required Low-rise, Mid rise, Multi family+ TOTAL Capacity achieved – 9,069 10.2.a Packet Pg. 176 At t a c h m e n t : G r o w t h T a r g e t s E x p l a n a t i o n ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 4 Required Housing Units per Typology 6814 4862 1952 2129 1977 152 84 42 126 Total low-rise, or mid-rise apartments/condos ADUs or low-rise, or mid- rise apartments/condos Middle Housing or any other Existing per BLR Required to meet Targets Total Achieved By HB1337 Required to meet Targets Total Existing Per BLR Achieved by HB1110 Approx 2400 units + 300 units approx. Loss of units in UNOCAL Must be Low rise, midrise apartments/condos/ADUs To be accommodated in centers and hubs 10.2.a Packet Pg. 177 At t a c h m e n t : G r o w t h T a r g e t s E x p l a n a t i o n ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | •Planning Board Preferred Growth Alternative Recommendation City Council_Nov 4, 2024 •Draft Future Land Use Map Review 10.2.b Packet Pg. 178 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | Proposed Alts 10.2.b Packet Pg. 179 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 3 Alternative A: Focused Growth Note: Capacity metrics shown are approximate values 1,800 800 750 290 Firdale North 30 North Bowl 75 Perrinville 35 East Sea view 80 Existing capacity 4,100 Total Capacity Enabled in ALT A - 3,860 10.2.b Packet Pg. 180 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 4 Alternative B: Distributed Growth *Maplewood Hub: Cannot count towards GMA Capacity 1,100 350 1500 90 290 200 100 350 70 35 Note: Capacity metrics shown are approximate values Total Capacity Enabled in ALT B - 4,285 200 10.2.b Packet Pg. 181 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 1,800 800 750 290 Firdale North 30 North Bowl 75 Perrinville 35 East Sea view 80 Existing capacity 4,100 1,100 350 1500 90 290 200 100 350 70 35 Alternative B: Distributed Growth Alternative A: Focused Growth Note: Capacity metrics shown are approximate values Existing capacity 4,100 Total Capacity Enabled in ALT A - 3,860 Total Capacity Enabled in ALT B - 4,285 200 10.2.b Packet Pg. 182 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | Planning Board Recommendation 10.2.b Packet Pg. 183 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | Planning Board Recommendation PB Decision Height limit Centers Westgate Alt A as proposed 4 Floors, Bonus Floor height incentive allowed 5 Corners Alt A area extents 3 Floors Medical District Expansion Mix of Alt A + Alt B 3, 4 Floors, Bonus Floor height incentive allowed on some parcels. Firdale Village Alt A as proposed 4 Floors, Bonus Floor height incentive allowed Hubs North Bowl Alt B as proposed 3 Floors Bonus Floor height incentive for few parcels Firdale North Alt A as proposed 3 Floors East Seaview Modified Alt B 3 Floors Bonus Floor height incentive for few parcels Perrinville Alt B as proposed 3 Floors, Bonus Floor height incentive West Edmonds Way Alt B as proposed 3 Floors South Lake Ballinger Alt B as proposed 3 Floors Maplewood Alt B 3 Floors 10.2.b Packet Pg. 184 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 8 Planning Board Recommendation 1,180 450 750 30 290 200 100 250 70 35 Note: Capacity metrics shown are approximate values 20 Preferred PB Alt Centers Medical District Expansion 750 Westgate 1,800 5 Corners 420 Firdale Village 290 Hubs North Bowl 200 Firdale North 30 East Seaview 250 Perrinville 100 West Edmonds Way 35 South Lake Ballinger 70 Maplewood 20 Total Capacity from Centers & Hubs 3,965 10.2.b Packet Pg. 185 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 9 Total Capacity Enabled Existing Capacity per BLR 4,947 Total Capacity from Centers & Hubs 3,965 ADUs 1,977 Middle Housing Units 42 Total Capacity 10,931 City’s Growth Target 9,069 Surplus Capacity -1,862 Existing Centers & Hubs ADUs MU 4,947 Existing capacity 42 Middle Housing 3,965 Capacity from centers and hubs 1,977 ADUs 10.2.b Packet Pg. 186 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 10 Future Land Use Map Based on Planning Board Recommendation 10.2.b Packet Pg. 187 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | Draft Area Details 11 With capacity achieved 10.2.b Packet Pg. 188 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 12 Neighborhood Center: Westgate No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth Mixed-Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi-Family School Bus Stops Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and subject to change with further study. Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 4 floors Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Existing 3-4 Floors Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) ~1800 units ~1100 units 10.2.b Packet Pg. 189 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 13 PB Preference: Westgate Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 4 floors 1800 units ✓Growth Area Extent: ALT A AS PROPOSED ✓Heights: ALT A AS PROPOSED 10.2.b Packet Pg. 190 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 14 Future Land Use Changes: Westgate Comprehensive Plan 2020 Comprehensive Plan 2024 Community Commercial 45’ max Single Family Urban 1 25’ Mixed Use 5 Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Mixed Use 4 Up to 4 floors Low density Residential 1 10.2.b Packet Pg. 191 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | Neighborhood Center: Five Corners No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and subject to change with further study. 15 Mixed-Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi-Family School Bus Stops Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 4 floors Up to 3 floors Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) ~800 units ~350 units 10.2.b Packet Pg. 192 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 16 PB Preference: Five Corners Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors ✓Growth Area Extent: ALT A AS PROPOSED ✓Heights: MAX HEIGHT OF 3 STORIES (NO BONUS) 420 UNITS 10.2.b Packet Pg. 193 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 17 Future Land Use Changes: Five Corners Neighborhood Commercial 25’ Single Family Urban 1 25’ Multi Family Medium Density 25’-30’ Mixed Use 3 Up to 3 floors Low Density Residential 1 Moderate Density Residential Comprehensive Plan 2020 Comprehensive Plan 2024 10.2.b Packet Pg. 194 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 18 Medical District Expansion No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth 5 corners expansion Mixed-Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi-Family School Bus Stops Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Up to 3 floors Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 4 floors Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and subject to change with further study. ~750 units ~1500 units 10.2.b Packet Pg. 195 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 19 ✓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) PB Preference: Medical District Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 4 floors Up to 3 floors 750 UNITS 10.2.b Packet Pg. 196 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | Future Land Use Changes: Medical District Expansion Mixed Use Commercial 25’ – 75’ Single Family Urban 1 25’ Multi Family Medium Density 25-30’ 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 Comprehensive Plan 2020 Comprehensive Plan 2024 10.2.b Packet Pg. 197 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | Neighborhood Center and Hub: Firdale No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth 21 Mixed-Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi-Family School Bus Stops Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and subject to change with further study. Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 3 floors Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Up to 3 floors ~30 units ~90 units ~290 units~290 units 10.2.b Packet Pg. 198 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 22 PB Preference: Firdale (Hub & Center) ✓Growth Area Extent: ALT A AS PROPOSED ✓Heights: ALT A AS PROPOSED ~30 units Firdale Center Firdale Hub ✓SAME AS PROPOSED. ✓ALT A and Alt B are exactly the same Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Up to 3 floors ~290 units 10.2.b Packet Pg. 199 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 23 Future Land Use Changes: Firdale Neighborhood Commercial FVMU - Up to 52’ BN- 25’ Single Family Urban 1 25’ Multi Family High Density 25 – 30’ Mixed Use 5 Up to 4 floors (5 with incentive) Mixed Use 3 Up to 3 floors Low Density Residential 1 Moderate Density Residential Comprehensive Plan 2020 Comprehensive Plan 2024 10.2.b Packet Pg. 200 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 24 Neighborhood Hub: North Bowl No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth Mixed-Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi-Family School Bus Stops Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Up to 3 floors Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and subject to change with further study. ~75 units ~200 units 10.2.b Packet Pg. 201 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 25 PB Preference: North Bowl ✓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 10.2.b Packet Pg. 202 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 26 Future Land Use Changes: North Bowl Neighborhood Commercial 25 Single Family Urban 3 25 Mixed Use 3 Up to 3 floors Mixed Use 4 Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Low Density Residential 2 Comprehensive Plan 2020 Comprehensive Plan 2024 10.2.b Packet Pg. 203 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 27 Neighborhood Hub: Perrinville No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth Mixed-Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi-Family School Bus Stops Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and subject to change with further study. ~35 units ~100 units 10.2.b Packet Pg. 204 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 28 PB Preference: Perrinville ✓Growth Area Extent: ALT B AS PROPOSED ✓Heights: ALT B AS PROPOSED Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) ~100 units 10.2.b Packet Pg. 205 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | Future Land Use Changes: Perrinville Neighborhood Commercial 25 Single Family Urban 1 25 Single Family Urban 3 25 Multi Family Medium Density 25-30 Mixed Use 4 Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Low Density Residential 1 Low Density Residential 2 Moderate Density Residential Comprehensive Plan 2020 Comprehensive Plan 2024 10.2.b Packet Pg. 206 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 30 Neighborhood Hub: East Seaview 30 No Action Alt A: Focused Growth Alt B: Distributed Growth Mixed-Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi-Family School Bus Stops Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Up to 3 floors Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and subject to change with further study. ~80 units ~350 units 10.2.b Packet Pg. 207 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 31 PB Preference: East SeaView ✓Growth Area Extent: Modified Alt B. Removed few parcels N of 196th ✓Heights: ALT B AS PROPOSED Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors 10.2.b Packet Pg. 208 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 32 Future Land Use Changes: East SeaView Single Family Urban 1 25 Multi Family Medium Density 25-30 Multi Family High Density 25-30 Mixed Use 3 Up to 3 floors Mixed Use 4 Up to 3 floors (4 with incentive) Low Density Residential 1 Moderate Density Residential Comprehensive Plan 2020 Comprehensive Plan 2024 10.2.b Packet Pg. 209 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 33 Neighborhood Hub: South Lake Ballinger 33 No Action Alt B: Distributed Growth Mixed-Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi-Family School Bus Stops Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and subject to change with further study. ~70 units 10.2.b Packet Pg. 210 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 34 PB Preference: South Lake Ballinger ✓Growth Area Extent: ALT B AS PROPOSED ✓Heights: ALT B AS PROPOSED Up to 3 floors ~70 units 10.2.b Packet Pg. 211 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 35 Future Land Use Changes: South Lake Ballinger Single Family Urban 1 25 Single Family Urban 1 25 Corridor Development 25-30 Mixed Use 3 Up to 3 floors Low Density Residential 1 Comprehensive Plan 2020 Comprehensive Plan 2024 10.2.b Packet Pg. 212 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 36 Neighborhood Hub: West Edmonds Way 36 No Action Alt B: Distributed Growth Mixed-Use Neighborhood Commercial Multi-Family School Bus Stops Neighborhood Commercial Existing Multi-Family (3 floors) Up to 3 floors Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and subject to change with further study. ~35 units 10.2.b Packet Pg. 213 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 37 PB Preference: West Edmonds Way ✓Growth Area Extent: ALT B AS PROPOSED ✓Heights: ALT B AS PROPOSED Up to 3 floors ~35 units 10.2.b Packet Pg. 214 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 38 Future Land Use Changes: W Edmonds Way Planned Neighborhood 25-30 Mixed Use 3 Up to 3 floors Comprehensive Plan 2020 Comprehensive Plan 2024 10.2.b Packet Pg. 215 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 39 Neighborhood Hub: Maplewood No Action Alt B: Distributed Growth ~200 units No incentives – PB - Agreed for 3 floors 10.2.b Packet Pg. 216 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 40 PB Preference: Maplewood ✓Growth Area Extent: ALT B AS PROPOSED ✓Heights: 3 STORIES (NO HEIGHT INCENTIVE) Up to 3 floors 20 units 10.2.b Packet Pg. 217 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | 41 Future Land Use Changes: Maplewood Mixed Use 3 Up to 3 floors Low Density Residential 1 Moderate Density Residential Single Family Urban 1 25 Multi Family Medium Density 25-30 Single Family Urban 3 25 Comprehensive Plan 2020 Comprehensive Plan 2024 10.2.b Packet Pg. 218 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Update | QUESTIONS ? COMMENTS? Email us @ everyonesedmonds@edmondswa.gov For more updates, visit edmondswa.gov/everyonesedmonds 10.2.b Packet Pg. 219 At t a c h m e n t : P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h 10.2.c Packet Pg. 220 At t a c h m e n t : F L U M - P B P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 1 of 13 DRAFT 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 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 Staff Present 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 4th 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 10.2.d Packet Pg. 221 At t a c h m e n t : P B 1 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 R e g u l a r m t g d r a f t ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 2 of 13 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. 10.2.d Packet Pg. 222 At t a c h m e n t : P B 1 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 R e g u l a r m t g d r a f t ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 3 of 13 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. 10.2.d Packet Pg. 223 At t a c h m e n t : P B 1 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 R e g u l a r m t g d r a f t ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 4 of 13 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. 10.2.d Packet Pg. 224 At t a c h m e n t : P B 1 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 R e g u l a r m t g d r a f t ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 5 of 13 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. 10.2.d Packet Pg. 225 At t a c h m e n t : P B 1 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 R e g u l a r m t g d r a f t ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 6 of 13 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. 10.2.d Packet Pg. 226 At t a c h m e n t : P B 1 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 R e g u l a r m t g d r a f t ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 7 of 13 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. 10.2.d Packet Pg. 227 At t a c h m e n t : P B 1 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 R e g u l a r m t g d r a f t ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 8 of 13 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. 10.2.d Packet Pg. 228 At t a c h m e n t : P B 1 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 R e g u l a r m t g d r a f t ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 9 of 13 East Seaview — Modified Hybrid 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 194th Place SW. Final capacity numbers will be recalculated and the area discussed again at a future meeting. 10.2.d Packet Pg. 229 At t a c h m e n t : P B 1 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 R e g u l a r m t g d r a f t ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 10 of 13 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. 10.2.d Packet Pg. 230 At t a c h m e n t : P B 1 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 R e g u l a r m t g d r a f t ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 11 of 13 West Edmonds Way — 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. 10.2.d Packet Pg. 231 At t a c h m e n t : P B 1 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 R e g u l a r m t g d r a f t ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 12 of 13 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 CIP making this expansion more feasible. 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 10.2.d Packet Pg. 232 At t a c h m e n t : P B 1 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 R e g u l a r m t g d r a f t ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes October 23, 2024, Page 13 of 13 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. 10.2.d Packet Pg. 233 At t a c h m e n t : P B 1 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 R e g u l a r m t g d r a f t ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) 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 4 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 212th St SW and 76th 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. 10.2.e Packet Pg. 234 At t a c h m e n t : P r e f e r r e d A c t i o n A l t e r n a t i v e _ r e v i s e d [ R e v i s i o n 1 ] ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) 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 10.2.e Packet Pg. 235 At t a c h m e n t : P r e f e r r e d A c t i o n A l t e r n a t i v e _ r e v i s e d [ R e v i s i o n 1 ] ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) WESTGATE PB: ALT A AS PROPOSED 5-CORNERS PB: ALT A WITH MAX HEIGHT OF 3 STORIES (NO BONUS) MEDICAL DISTRICT 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) CONSULTANT TO CONFIRM PROPOSED UNIT COUNT CONSULTANT TO CONFIRM PROPOSED UNIT COUNT THIS CLUSTER OF PARCELS REMAINS AS ALT A HEIGHTS INDICATE REMAINING FOOTPRINT IS 3 FLOOR MAX, NO HEIGHT INCENTIVE 10.2.f Packet Pg. 236 At t a c h m e n t : P l a n n i n g B o a r d P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e D i a g r a m s ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) FIRDALE PB: ALT A PROPOSED NORTH BOWL PB: ALT B AS PROPOSED PERRINVILLE PB: ALT B AS PROPOSED SOUTH LAKE BALLINGER PB: ALT B AS PROPOSED 10.2.f Packet Pg. 237 At t a c h m e n t : P l a n n i n g B o a r d P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e D i a g r a m s ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) EAST SEAVIEW PB: ALT B AS MODIFIED WEST EDMONDS WAY PB: ALT B AS PROPOSED MAPLEWOOD PB: ALT B AS-IS LIMITED TO 3 STORIES (NO HEIGHT INCENTIVE) 3 FLOORS MAX CONSULTANT TO CONFIRM PROPOSED UNIT COUNT CONSULTANT TO CONFIRM PROPOSED UNIT COUNT 10.2.f Packet Pg. 238 At t a c h m e n t : P l a n n i n g B o a r d P r e f e r r e d A l t e r n a t i v e D i a g r a m s ( C o m p r e h e n s i v e P l a n P r e f e r r e d G r o w t h A l t e r n a t i v e a n d F L U M D i s c u s s i o n ) 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. 10.3 Packet Pg. 239