Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2009.08.25 CC Agenda Packet
AGENDA Edmonds City Council Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex 250 5th Ave. North, Edmonds ______________________________________________________________ AUGUST 25, 2009 7:00 p.m. Call to Order and Flag Salute 1. Approval of Agenda 2. Approval of Consent Agenda Items A. Roll Call B. AM-2465 Approval of claim checks #113615 through #113748 dated August 20, 2009 for $1,408.875.15. Approval of payroll direct deposit and checks #48456 through #48523 for the pay period August 1 through August 15, 2009 for $893,257.73. C. AM-2460 Approval of list of businesses applying for renewal of their liquor licenses with the Washington State Liquor Control Board, August 2009. D. AM-2461 Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Dale Worrell ($50,000.00). 3. AM-2464 (15 Minutes) Presentation on the 2010 Census. 4. AM-2455 (30 Minutes) Presentation on the Aquatics Feasibility Study. 5.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)* *Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings. 6. AM-2463 (30 Minutes) Initial discussion on issues relating to roof design standards. 7. AM-2412 (20 Minutes) Discussion and potential action on a proposed Resolution related to delaying the removal of trees at 5th Avenue and Dayton Street, near the site of Horizon Bank. 8. AM-2462 (10 Minutes) Review and potential action on an interim zoning ordinance suspending the application of Chapter 23.90.040(C), Retention of Vegetation on Subdividable, Undeveloped Parcels. 9. (15 Minutes)Council reports on outside committee/board meetings. 10. (5 Minutes)Mayor's Comments 11. (15 Minutes)Council Comments Adjourn Packet Page 1 of 307 Packet Page 2 of 307 AM-2465 2.B. Approval of Claim Checks and Direct Deposit and Checks Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:08/25/2009 Submitted By:Debbie Karber Time:Consent Department:Finance Type:Action Review Committee: Committee Action:Approved for Consent Agenda Information Subject Title Approval of claim checks #113615 through #113748 dated August 20, 2009 for $1,408.875.15. Approval of payroll direct deposit and checks #48456 through #48523 for the pay period August 1 through August 15, 2009 for $893,257.73. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approval of claim checks and direct deposit and checks. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance #2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or non-approval of expenditures. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Year:2009 Revenue: Expenditure:$2,302,132.88 Fiscal Impact: Claims: $1,408,875.15 Payroll: $ 893,257.73 Attachments Link: Claim cks 8-20-09 Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 Finance Debra Sharp 08/20/2009 08:14 AM APRV 2 City Clerk Sandy Chase 08/20/2009 08:23 AM APRV 3 Mayor Gary Haakenson 08/20/2009 08:25 AM APRV 4 Final Approval Sandy Chase 08/20/2009 08:27 AM APRV Form Started By: Debbie Started On: 08/19/2009 05:20 Packet Page 3 of 307 Form Started By: Debbie Karber Started On: 08/19/2009 05:20 PM Final Approval Date: 08/20/2009 Packet Page 4 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 1 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113615 8/20/2009 070941 AAF INTERNATIONAL 272886 Fac Maint - Air Filters for City Fac Maint - Air Filters for City 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 482.28 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 45.82 Total :528.10 113616 8/20/2009 072867 AFFORDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL INC 274 Old PW Vinyl Asbestos Tile Removal Old PW Vinyl Asbestos Tile Removal 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 3,375.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 320.63 Total :3,695.63 113617 8/20/2009 069157 AIONA, CYNDI AIONA11215 HULA CLASSES HULA KIDS #11215 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 105.00 ADULT HULA #11214 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 252.00 Total :357.00 113618 8/20/2009 000850 ALDERWOOD WATER DISTRICT 8749 MONTHLY WHOLESALE WATER CHARGES FOR MONTHLY WHOLESALE WATER CHARGES FOR 411.000.654.534.800.330.00 209,408.26 Total :209,408.26 113619 8/20/2009 069751 ARAMARK 655-4435747 UNIFORM SERVICES PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES 001.000.640.576.800.240.00 34.04 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.240.00 3.23 Total :37.27 113620 8/20/2009 069751 ARAMARK 655-4423671 21580001 1Page: Packet Page 5 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 2 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113620 8/20/2009 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICE 411.000.656.538.800.240.00 92.71 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.240.00 8.81 Total :101.52 113621 8/20/2009 069751 ARAMARK 655-4428133 Fleet Uniform Svc Fleet Uniform Svc 511.000.657.548.680.240.00 15.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.240.00 1.43 Fac Maint Uniform Svc655-4435748 Fac Maint Uniform Svc 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 40.44 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.240.00 3.84 Total :60.71 113622 8/20/2009 071120 ASHLAND INC 92694951 441142 POLYMER 411.000.656.538.800.310.51 4,250.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.51 403.75 Total :4,653.75 113623 8/20/2009 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 592688 75179 DIESEL FUEL 411.000.656.538.800.320.00 892.01 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.320.00 84.74 Total :976.75 113624 8/20/2009 001835 AWARDS SERVICE INC 72387 TENNIS TROPHIES 2Page: Packet Page 6 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 3 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113624 8/20/2009 (Continued)001835 AWARDS SERVICE INC TENNIS TROPHIES 001.000.640.575.520.310.00 233.40 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.575.520.310.00 22.17 Total :255.57 113625 8/20/2009 072868 BACK BURNER LLC BACKBURNER0823 PARK CONCERT PRESENTER PARK CONCERT~ 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 400.00 Total :400.00 113626 8/20/2009 072581 BARK TIME BLOWER TRUCK SERVICE 10382 YARD WASTE YARD WASTE DUMP 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 151.60 Total :151.60 113627 8/20/2009 072319 BEACH CAMP LLC BEACHCAMP10882 WATERSPORT CAMP @ SUNSET BAY WATER SPORTS BEACH CAMP~ 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 1,204.00 Total :1,204.00 113628 8/20/2009 072870 BEHAR, MICHAEL & MICHELLE 1-29425 RE: 109190-SB UTILITY REFUND UB Refund 109190-SB/1-29425 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 83.28 Total :83.28 113629 8/20/2009 069218 BISHOP, PAUL 178 WEB SITE MAINTENANCE THRU 8/15/09 Web Site Maintenance thru 8/15/09 001.000.310.518.880.410.00 390.00 Web Site new pages & updates for Boards 001.000.310.518.880.410.00 408.42 Total :798.42 113630 8/20/2009 070803 BITCO SOFTWARE LLC 9/1/09 Conference Permit Trax Users Conference for Permit Trax Users Conference for 001.000.620.558.800.490.00 390.00 3Page: Packet Page 7 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 4 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :390.001136308/20/2009 070803 070803 BITCO SOFTWARE LLC 113631 8/20/2009 072872 BOLME, MARK & STEPHANIE 5-02700 RE: 7412 UTILITY REFUND UB Refund #7412/5-02700 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 65.58 Total :65.58 113632 8/20/2009 061966 CAMP FIRE BOYS & GIRLS CAMPFIRE10904 BABYSITTING BASICS BABYSITTING BASICS #10904 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 360.00 Total :360.00 113633 8/20/2009 071766 CAMPBELL, CONNIE CAMPBELL10863 INTRODUCTORY KAYAKING INTRODUCTORY KAYAKING @ MARINA BEACH~ 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 361.62 LACONNER/GOAT ISLAND KAYAK TOUR 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 248.40 Total :610.02 113634 8/20/2009 072828 CASE POWER AND EQUIPMENT SCI27927 Service Fees Service Fees 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 22.03 Total :22.03 113635 8/20/2009 069813 CDW GOVERNMENT INC PVP7033 Linksystem wireless adapter Linksystem wireless adapter 001.000.310.518.880.310.00 79.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.310.518.880.310.00 7.51 Total :86.51 113636 8/20/2009 068484 CEMEX / RINKER MATERIALS 9417513459 Water/Sewer - Cold Mix Asphalt 4Page: Packet Page 8 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 5 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113636 8/20/2009 (Continued)068484 CEMEX / RINKER MATERIALS Water/Sewer - Cold Mix Asphalt 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 212.08 Water/Sewer - Cold Mix Asphalt 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 212.07 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 20.15 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 20.14 Water/Sewer - Cold Mix Asphalt9417612804 Water/Sewer - Cold Mix Asphalt 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 210.80 Water/Sewer - Cold Mix Asphalt 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 210.80 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 20.03 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 20.02 Total :926.09 113637 8/20/2009 072532 CHAO, ROBERT 510-2328 CHAO ALS EXPENSES National registry fee 001.000.510.526.100.490.00 110.00 Training parking 001.000.510.526.100.430.00 175.00 uniform pants 001.000.510.526.100.240.00 81.58 Total :366.58 113638 8/20/2009 066382 CINTAS CORPORATION 460488675 UNIFORMS 5Page: Packet Page 9 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 6 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113638 8/20/2009 (Continued)066382 CINTAS CORPORATION Stn 17 - ALS 001.000.510.526.100.240.00 117.98 Stn 17 - OPS 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 117.99 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.510.526.100.240.00 11.21 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 11.21 OPS UNIFORMS460488697 Stn. 20 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 113.30 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 10.76 UNIFORMS460490812 Volunteers 001.000.510.522.410.240.00 21.16 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.410.240.00 2.01 OPS UNIFORMS460490839 Stn. 16 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 130.30 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 12.38 Total :548.30 113639 8/20/2009 063902 CITY OF EVERETT I09001819 Water Quality - Water Analysis Lab Work Water Quality - Water Analysis Lab Work 411.000.654.534.800.410.00 925.20 Total :925.20 113640 8/20/2009 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 7199 INV#7199, CUST #1430, EDMONDS PD VERIZON PHONE 07/09 - NARCS 104.000.410.521.210.420.00 51.72 Total :51.72 6Page: Packet Page 10 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 7 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113641 8/20/2009 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 7192 POSTAGE FOR CRAZE POSTAGE FOR MAILING OF THE CRAZE~ 001.000.640.574.200.420.00 5,318.78 Total :5,318.78 113642 8/20/2009 062975 COLLISION CLINIC INC 13080 Unit 7 - Collision Repairs Unit 7 - Collision Repairs 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 1,087.77 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.480.00 103.34 Total :1,191.11 113643 8/20/2009 069983 COMMERCIAL CARD SOLUTIONS 6669 ALLISON Bullard batteries 001.000.510.522.200.310.00 157.95 Total :157.95 113644 8/20/2009 072513 CONATY, LEANNE CONATY11029 SUMMER ART EXTRAVAGANZA SUMMER ART EXTRAVAGANZA~ 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 808.50 Total :808.50 113645 8/20/2009 005850 CRETIN, LAWRENCE 08132009 MONITOR FOR CITY HALL ECONOMIC DEV COMMI City hall monitor for Economic Dev 001.000.240.513.110.490.00 36.00 Total :36.00 113646 8/20/2009 070230 DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING Apr-Jul 09 STATE SHARE OF CONCEALED PISTOL State Share of Concealed Pistol 001.000.000.237.190.000.00 933.00 Total :933.00 113647 8/20/2009 064422 DEPT OF GENERAL ADMIN 18-1-51299 Q3-09 State purchasing Co-Op Q3-09 State purchasing Co-Op 511.000.657.548.680.490.00 1,000.00 Total :1,000.00 7Page: Packet Page 11 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 8 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113648 8/20/2009 072145 DISTINCTIVE WINDOWS INC 15917 City Hall - Replacement Glass City Hall - Replacement Glass 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 250.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 23.75 Total :273.75 113649 8/20/2009 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 12380 SUPPLIES ADHESIVE 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 5.58 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.53 SUPPLIES12736 OIL FILTERS 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 35.52 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 3.37 Total :45.00 113650 8/20/2009 062883 EDMONDS LANDSCAPING INC 68916 SENIOR CENTER WALKWAY SENIOR CENTER WALKWAY INSTALLATION 125.000.640.576.800.480.00 2,441.18 9.5% Sales Tax 125.000.640.576.800.480.00 231.91 HICKMAN PARK68917 BRUSH & FENCE REMOVAL~ 125.000.640.576.800.480.00 7,716.48 9.5% Sales Tax 125.000.640.576.800.480.00 733.07 Total :11,122.64 113651 8/20/2009 069523 EDMONDS P&R YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP DICKERSON0813 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP:~ 122.000.640.574.100.490.00 75.00 8Page: Packet Page 12 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 9 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113651 8/20/2009 (Continued)069523 EDMONDS P&R YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP YOUTH SCHOLARSHIPWHITE0812 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP:~ 122.000.640.574.100.490.00 75.00 Total :150.00 113652 8/20/2009 008688 EDMONDS VETERINARY HOSPITAL 177332 INV#177332 - CLIENT #308/EDMONDS PD EXAM.VACCINE/K9 DASH 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 111.15 INTERCEPTOR #12 WHITE 001.000.410.521.260.310.00 86.50 FRONTLINE/DOG 001.000.410.521.260.310.00 51.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.260.310.00 13.07 Total :261.72 113653 8/20/2009 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 1-00575 CITY PARK CITY PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 379.47 BRACKETT'S LANDING RESTROOM1-00825 BRACKETT'S LANDING RESTROOM 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 859.18 SPRINKLER1-00875 SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.62 CITY PARK SPRINKLER METER1-02125 CITY PARK SPRINKLER METER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 59.90 SPRINKLER1-03900 SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 40.98 SPRINKLER1-05125 SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 58.00 9Page: Packet Page 13 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 10 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113653 8/20/2009 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION GAZEBO IRRIGATION1-05285 GAZEBO IRRIGATION 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 33.41 CORNER PARK1-05340 CORNER PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 48.54 EDMONDS CITY PARK1-05650 EDMONDS CITY PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 22.06 PARKS MAINTENANCE SHOP1-05675 PARKS MAINTENANCE SHOP 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 1,141.21 EDMONDS CITY PARK1-05700 EDMONDS CITY PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 143.14 CORNER PARK1-09650 CORNER PARK 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 50.44 SW CORNER SPRINKLER1-09800 SW CORNER SPRINKLER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 54.22 PLANTER1-10780 PLANTER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 61.79 CORNER PLANTER ON 5TH1-16130 CORNER PLANTER ON 5TH 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 65.57 CITY HALL TRIANGLE1-16450 CITY HALL TRIANGLE 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 155.29 6TH & MAIN PLANTER BOX1-16630 6TH & MAIN PLANTER BOX 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 56.11 10Page: Packet Page 14 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 11 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113653 8/20/2009 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 5TH & DAYTON ST PLANTER1-17475 5TH & DAYTON ST PLANTER 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 44.76 PINE STREE PLAYFIELD1-19950 PINE STREE PLAYFIELD 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 48.27 WATER1-36255 1141 9TH AVE S 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 39.08 WATER8-40000 23700 104TH AVE W 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 3,591.31 Total :6,982.35 113654 8/20/2009 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 1-00650 LIFT STATION #7 LIFT STATION #7 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 22.06 LIFT STATION #81-00925 LIFT STATION #8 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 22.06 LIFT STATION #11-01950 LIFT STATION #1 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 23.95 LIFT STATION #21-02675 LIFT STATION #2 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 22.06 Public Works Fountain, Bldgs & Restrooms1-03950 Public Works Fountain, Bldgs & Restrooms 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 361.28 Public Works Meter Shop1-05350 Public Works Meter Shop 411.000.654.534.800.470.00 155.32 LIFT STATION #61-05705 LIFT STATION #6 411.000.655.535.800.470.00 44.90 11Page: Packet Page 15 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 12 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113654 8/20/2009 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION CITY HALL1-13975 CITY HALL 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 380.96 CITY HALL1-14000 CITY HALL 001.000.651.519.920.470.00 100.54 Total :1,133.13 113655 8/20/2009 070676 EFFICIENCY INC 208293 UPDATE TO RECORDING SYSTEM UPDATE TO RECORDING SYSTEM 001.000.230.512.500.490.00 728.17 UPDATE TO RECORDING SYSTEM 001.000.620.558.600.490.00 728.18 UPDATE TO RECORDING SYSTEM 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 728.18 Total :2,184.53 113656 8/20/2009 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 047408 COPIER MAINT COPIER MAINT 001.000.230.512.501.480.00 16.72 Total :16.72 113657 8/20/2009 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 047347 Canon 5870 Copier - color copies (7/7 - Canon 5870 Copier - color copies (7/7 - 001.000.610.519.700.480.00 32.73 Canon 5870 Copier - color copies (7/7 - 001.000.220.516.100.480.00 32.72 Canon 5870 Copier - color copies (7/7 - 001.000.210.513.100.480.00 32.73 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.610.519.700.480.00 3.11 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.220.516.100.480.00 3.11 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.210.513.100.480.00 3.11 12Page: Packet Page 16 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 13 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :107.511136578/20/2009 008812 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 113658 8/20/2009 069686 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING CO 73378 SOFTWARE SUPPORT SOFTWARE SUPPORT 411.000.656.538.800.410.11 995.00 Total :995.00 113659 8/20/2009 070033 EVERGREEN PRINT SOLUTIONS 34452 ALS PROF SERVICES medical refusal form printing 001.000.510.526.100.410.00 195.14 Freight 001.000.510.526.100.410.00 15.51 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.510.526.100.410.00 20.01 Total :230.66 113660 8/20/2009 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU17333 Fleet - Supplies Fleet - Supplies 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.53 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.05 Street - Sign mount hardware - RivetsWAMOU17425 Street - Sign mount hardware - Rivets 111.000.653.542.640.350.00 65.00 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.350.00 6.18 Total :71.76 113661 8/20/2009 072873 FINANCIAL CAPITAL INC 4-18700 RE: EA-16044-LB UTILITY REFUND UB Refund #EA-16044-LB/4-18700 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 25.68 Total :25.68 113662 8/20/2009 066659 FRANKLIN COVEY 31896684 INV#31896684 EDMONDS PD - THOMPSON 13Page: Packet Page 17 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 14 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113662 8/20/2009 (Continued)066659 FRANKLIN COVEY TUITION - 7 HABITS WORKSHOP 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 582.00 BINDER&MATERIALS FOR CLASS 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 168.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 15.96 INV #31896685 PLOEGER EDMONDS PD31896685 7 HABITS CLASS 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 582.00 BINDER & MATERIALS FOR CLASS 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 168.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 15.96 Total :1,531.92 113663 8/20/2009 072796 GIPPERT, WINFIELD GIPPERT0817 OUTDOOR VOLLEYBALL ATTENDANT OUTDOOR VOLLEYBALL ATTENDANT 001.000.640.575.520.410.00 162.00 Total :162.00 113664 8/20/2009 018495 GLACIER NW/CALPORTLAND CO 90795863 Street- Cement Street- Cement 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 321.96 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.610.310.00 30.58 Total :352.54 113665 8/20/2009 012199 GRAINGER 904663429 Library - V Belt Library - V Belt 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 41.48 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 3.94 Total :45.42 113666 8/20/2009 069332 HEALTHFORCE OCCMED 1030-131 Drug & alcohol testing services 14Page: Packet Page 18 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 15 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113666 8/20/2009 (Continued)069332 HEALTHFORCE OCCMED Drug & alcohol testing services 411.000.652.542.900.410.00 50.00 Total :50.00 113667 8/20/2009 069332 HEALTHFORCE OCCMED 2126-134 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MB,LJ,CG,DW,BMc,BN 001.000.510.522.200.410.00 3,894.00 Total :3,894.00 113668 8/20/2009 069332 HEALTHFORCE OCCMED 5651-23 INV# 5651-23 7/9/09 DIVE EXAM BASELINE DIVE EXAM 001.000.410.521.220.410.00 335.00 Total :335.00 113669 8/20/2009 072865 HEDGES, HOLLY 0253782/134236 SPRAY/NEUTER REFUND #0253782/134236 SPAY/NEUTER REFUND #0253782 001.000.000.343.930.000.00 50.00 SPAY/NEUTER REFUND #134236 001.000.000.343.930.000.00 50.00 Total :100.00 113670 8/20/2009 072869 HINES, JR, LORENZO 8/17/09 39.72 hours for the period 8/10 - 39.72 hours for the period 8/10 - 001.000.310.514.230.410.00 2,383.20 Total :2,383.20 113671 8/20/2009 072871 HSBC BANK USA NA 4-26675 RE: #09808337 UTILITY REFUND UB Refund #09808337/4-26675 411.000.000.233.000.000.00 55.42 Total :55.42 113672 8/20/2009 061546 INDUSTRIAL CONTROLS SUPPLY 902579 FS 16 - Supplies FS 16 - Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 18.12 Total :18.12 15Page: Packet Page 19 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 16 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113673 8/20/2009 071634 INTEGRA TELECOM 5728623 C/A 768328 PR1-2 City Phone Service thru 8/11/09 001.000.310.518.880.420.00 813.56 Total :813.56 113674 8/20/2009 069179 INTERWEST CONSTRUCTION INC E4GA.Pmt 4 E4GA Complete thru 3/31/09 E4GA Complete thru 3/31/09 412.300.630.594.320.650.00 322,452.14 E4GA Retainage Pmt 4 412.300.000.223.400.000.00 -14,723.84 E4GA Complete thru 7/31/09E4GA.Pmt 5 E4GA Complete thru 7/31/09 412.300.630.594.320.650.00 530,370.37 E4GA Retainage Pmt 4 412.300.000.223.400.000.00 -24,217.83 Total :813,880.84 113675 8/20/2009 069179 INTERWEST CONSTRUCTION INC E3JC.Pmt 2 E3JC COMPLETE THRU 5/31/09 E3JC Complete thru 5/31/09 412.100.630.594.320.650.00 232,378.05 E3JC Retainage Pmt 2 412.100.000.223.400.000.00 -10,610.87 Total :221,767.18 113676 8/20/2009 069264 J & K ASSOCIATES 19288 Street - Crack Sealer - NUVO Fomulation Street - Crack Sealer - NUVO Fomulation 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 4,640.35 Freight 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 399.00 Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 448.50 Total :5,487.85 113677 8/20/2009 015233 JOBS AVAILABLE 917014 FInance Director, #09-25 ad FInance Director, #09-25 ad 001.000.220.516.100.440.00 245.00 16Page: Packet Page 20 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 17 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :245.001136778/20/2009 015233 015233 JOBS AVAILABLE 113678 8/20/2009 070902 KAREN ULVESTAD PHOTOGRAPHY ULVESTAD11020 PHOTOGRAPHY CLASSES PHOTOGRAPHY CLASS #11020 001.000.640.574.200.410.00 455.00 Total :455.00 113679 8/20/2009 066913 KDL HARDWARE SUPPLY INC 400941 Street - Padlocks Street - Padlocks 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 89.40 Freight 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 5.17 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.310.310.00 8.49 PS - Cipher Lock Parts405623 PS - Cipher Lock Parts 001.000.410.521.310.310.00 25.00 PS - Cipher Lock Parts 001.000.310.518.880.490.00 24.99 Freight 001.000.410.521.310.310.00 2.59 Freight 001.000.310.518.880.490.00 2.58 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.310.310.00 2.62 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.310.518.880.490.00 2.62 17Page: Packet Page 21 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 18 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113679 8/20/2009 (Continued)066913 KDL HARDWARE SUPPLY INC PS - Mort Push Button Lock406135 PS - Mort Push Button Lock 001.000.410.521.310.310.00 212.63 PS - Mort Push Button Lock 001.000.310.518.880.490.00 212.62 Freight 001.000.410.521.310.310.00 3.80 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.310.310.00 20.56 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.310.518.880.490.00 20.56 Freight 001.000.310.518.880.490.00 3.79 Total :637.42 113680 8/20/2009 017050 KWICK'N KLEEN CAR WASH 08042009-01 INV#08042009-01 EDMONDS PD 65 CAR WASHES @$5.03 - 07/09 001.000.410.521.220.480.00 326.95 Total :326.95 113681 8/20/2009 017135 LANDAU ASSOCIATES INC 25383 0074158.010 C-311 ODOR CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS 412.400.656.594.380.410.00 9,336.01 Total :9,336.01 113682 8/20/2009 068711 LAWN EQUIPMENT SUPPLY 8009-195 TIRE TUBES STRAIGHT VALVE TIRE TUBES 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 29.70 Freight 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 5.73 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 3.37 18Page: Packet Page 22 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 19 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113682 8/20/2009 (Continued)068711 LAWN EQUIPMENT SUPPLY HEDGE TRIMMER SUPPLIES8009-207 REDMAX JOINT 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 12.79 Freight 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 9.68 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 2.13 Total :63.40 113683 8/20/2009 072874 MANSOURZADEH, ARYA August 09 Reimburse August 2009 Daycamp Expenses Reimburse August 2009 Daycamp Expenses 001.000.640.575.530.430.00 45.75 Reimburse August 2009 Daycamp Expenses 001.000.640.575.530.490.00 239.00 Total :284.75 113684 8/20/2009 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 603 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.25 INTERPRETER FEE623 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 88.25 INTERPRETER FEE624 INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.390.512.520.410.00 88.25 Total :264.75 113685 8/20/2009 019650 MASTER POOLS OF WASHINGTON INC 34048 YOST POOL SUPPLIES YOST POOL SUPPLIES:~ 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 17.25 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.64 19Page: Packet Page 23 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 20 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113685 8/20/2009 (Continued)019650 MASTER POOLS OF WASHINGTON INC YOST POOL SUPPLIES51621 RAINBOW SPRING LOADED WEIR 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 23.32 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 2.22 YOST POOL SUPPLIES51763 SILICA SAND, SODA ASH 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 239.66 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 22.77 YOST POOL SUPPLIES51915 YOST POOL SUPPLIES:~ 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 194.96 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 18.52 YOST POOL SUPPLIES51954 YOST POOL SUPPLIES:~ 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 336.29 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 31.95 Total :888.58 113686 8/20/2009 019920 MCCANN, MARIAN 57 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.290.00 6,061.50 Total :6,061.50 113687 8/20/2009 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 34728278 123106800 PIPE FITTING 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 165.92 Freight 411.000.656.538.800.310.21 6.87 Total :172.79 113688 8/20/2009 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 91638 Street - Poly-Cut Blades 20Page: Packet Page 24 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 21 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113688 8/20/2009 (Continued)020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC Street - Poly-Cut Blades 111.000.653.542.710.310.00 16.98 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.710.310.00 1.61 Sewer- 7" Grit Flex Discs93733 Sewer- 7" Grit Flex Discs 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 115.80 Used Rubber Backing Pad for GR 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 35.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 14.33 Total :183.72 113689 8/20/2009 064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC 0255548-IN Water/Sewer - First Aid Supplies - - Water/Sewer - First Aid Supplies - - 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 185.00 Water/Sewer - First Aid Supplies - - 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 185.00 Freight 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 6.22 Freight 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 6.22 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.310.00 18.17 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 18.16 Total :418.77 113690 8/20/2009 024600 NEUERT, L L 58 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement LEOFF 1 Reimbursement 009.000.390.517.370.230.00 4,000.00 Total :4,000.00 113691 8/20/2009 066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC 4526 260 21Page: Packet Page 25 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 22 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113691 8/20/2009 (Continued)066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC SODIUM BISULFITE 411.000.656.538.800.310.54 956.58 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.310.54 90.88 Total :1,047.46 113692 8/20/2009 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 0992100 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~ 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 98.02 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL0992149 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~ 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 758.96 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL0992152 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~ 001.000.640.576.800.450.00 180.29 Total :1,037.27 113693 8/20/2009 064215 NORTHWEST PUMP & EQUIP CO 1947770 184930 TANK MONITOR INSPECTION 411.000.656.538.800.480.21 117.05 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.480.21 11.12 Total :128.17 113694 8/20/2009 025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 657 Planning Board minutes on 8/12/09. Planning Board minutes on 8/12/09. 001.000.620.558.600.410.00 256.00 Total :256.00 113695 8/20/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 891348 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.230.512.500.310.00 113.36 Total :113.36 113696 8/20/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 614334 OFFICE SUPPLIES 22Page: Packet Page 26 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 23 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113696 8/20/2009 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC CALCULATOR, MAGNETIC CLIPS, SUCKERS FOR 001.000.640.574.200.310.00 23.29 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.200.310.00 2.21 OFFICE SUPPLIES683780 BINDER CLIPS, TISSUE, PENS 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 27.68 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 2.63 OFFICE SUPPLIES710995 PARK MAINTENANCE CARTRIDGES 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 141.57 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 13.44 OFFICE SUPPLIES711106 PARKS MAINTENANCE~ 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 43.20 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.11 OFFICE SUPPLIES737289 LAMINATING POUCHES, CORRECTION FLUID 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 38.02 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 3.61 OFFICE SUPPLIES753348 DISCOVERY PROGRAM SUPPLIES:~ 001.000.640.574.350.310.00 3.27 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.350.310.00 0.31 DISCOVERY PROGRAM SUPPLIES757340 DISCOVERY PROGRAM BATTERIES 001.000.640.574.350.310.00 9.80 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.350.310.00 0.94 23Page: Packet Page 27 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 24 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113696 8/20/2009 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC OFFICE SUPPLIES792178 CANARY COPY PAPER 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 20.52 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 1.94 OFFICE SUPPLIES834316 PRINT CARTRIDGE 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 99.80 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 9.49 OFFICE SUPPLIES836118 YELLOW INKJET CARTRIDGE 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 35.10 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.100.310.00 3.34 OFFICE SUPPLIES873581 INK FOR SUMMER CAMP PRINTER 001.000.640.575.530.310.00 36.96 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.575.530.310.00 3.51 DISCOVERY PROGRAM SUPPLIES891901 DISCOVERY PROGRAM SUPPLIES:~ 001.000.640.574.350.310.00 5.78 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.350.310.00 0.55 OFFICE SUPPLIES981160 CYAN INK CARTRIDGES FOR PARK MAINTENANCE 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 43.20 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.11 Total :578.38 113697 8/20/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 846898 OFFICE SUPPLIES 24Page: Packet Page 28 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 25 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113697 8/20/2009 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC Office Supplies 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 147.57 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 14.02 Total :161.59 113698 8/20/2009 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 847775 PW Admin Supplies - Stamps PW Admin Supplies - Stamps 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 16.57 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 1.58 PW Admin Supplies - Blank CD Supplies861613 PW Admin Supplies - Blank CD Supplies 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 46.57 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.650.519.910.310.00 4.43 Total :69.15 113699 8/20/2009 026200 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT 0054671 WATER 23700 104TH AVE W 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 6,451.34 Total :6,451.34 113700 8/20/2009 063750 ORCA PACIFIC INC 040379 YOST POOL SUPPLIES YOST POOL CHEMICALS 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 312.30 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 29.67 YOST POOL SUPPLIES040394 YOST POOL~ 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 250.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.310.00 23.75 Total :615.72 25Page: Packet Page 29 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 26 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113701 8/20/2009 070181 PACIFIC SIGNAL SUPPLY LLC 3160 Street - Signal Controller Repairs and Street - Signal Controller Repairs and 111.000.653.542.640.480.00 160.48 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.480.00 15.26 Total :175.74 113702 8/20/2009 066412 PARKS & RECREATION DAYCAMP CAMPCASH0817 DAYCAMP PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT PHOTO DEVELOPING 001.000.640.575.530.490.00 1.59 DAYCAMP SUPPLIES 001.000.640.575.530.310.00 102.13 Total :103.72 113703 8/20/2009 027280 PATRICKS PRINTING 38544 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.230.512.500.310.00 448.62 SUPPLIES38545 SUPPLIES 001.000.230.512.500.310.00 991.12 SUPPLIES38546 SUPPLIES 001.000.230.512.500.310.00 287.15 Total :1,726.89 113704 8/20/2009 064552 PITNEY BOWES 3833100au09 POSTAGE MACHINE LEASE Lease 7/30 to 8/30 001.000.250.514.300.450.00 866.00 Total :866.00 113705 8/20/2009 069447 POINTS SHARP STEEL INC 09-1970 Water/Sewer - Breaker Repair 26Page: Packet Page 30 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 27 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113705 8/20/2009 (Continued)069447 POINTS SHARP STEEL INC Water/Sewer - Breaker Repair 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 137.50 Water/Sewer - Breaker Repair 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 137.50 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.480.00 13.07 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.480.00 13.06 Total :301.13 113706 8/20/2009 071811 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR 177726 Street/Storm/Water/Sewer - Dept of L&I Street/Storm/Water/Sewer - Dept of L&I 111.000.653.542.900.420.00 2.16 Street/Storm/Water/Sewer - Dept of L&I 411.000.652.542.900.420.00 2.16 Street/Storm/Water/Sewer - Dept of L&I 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 2.16 Street/Storm/Water/Sewer - Dept of L&I 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 2.14 Street/Storm/Water/Sewer - Dept of L&I178041 Street/Storm/Water/Sewer - Dept of L&I 111.000.653.542.900.420.00 2.12 Street/Storm/Water/Sewer - Dept of L&I 411.000.652.542.900.420.00 2.12 Street/Storm/Water/Sewer - Dept of L&I 411.000.654.534.800.420.00 2.12 Street/Storm/Water/Sewer - Dept of L&I 411.000.655.535.800.420.00 2.11 Total :17.09 113707 8/20/2009 029117 PORT OF EDMONDS 03870 CITY OF EDMONDS STORMWATER Stormwater Rent & Leasehold tax 411.000.652.542.900.450.00 1,665.96 Total :1,665.96 27Page: Packet Page 31 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 28 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113708 8/20/2009 029117 PORT OF EDMONDS 04371 UNIT F1 B1 FUEL Fire Boat - Fuel 511.000.657.548.680.320.00 952.58 Total :952.58 113709 8/20/2009 072866 PREMIER MASONRY RESTORATION 7866/7880 BRICK COLUMNS PROJECT @ CEMETERY BRICK COLUMNS PROJECT @ CEMETERY 130.000.640.536.500.310.00 1,500.00 9.5% Sales Tax 130.000.640.536.500.310.00 142.50 BRICK COLUMNS PROJECT7889 CEMETERY BRICK COLUMNS PROJECT 130.000.640.536.500.310.00 100.00 9.5% Sales Tax 130.000.640.536.500.310.00 9.50 Total :1,752.00 113710 8/20/2009 064291 QWEST 206-Z02-0478-332B TELEMETRY TELEMETRY 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 138.52 Total :138.52 113711 8/20/2009 072736 RECONNECTIONS 1227 PS - Pocketalker Ultra with earbud and PS - Pocketalker Ultra with earbud and 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 152.15 Freight 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 3.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.350.00 14.45 Total :169.60 113712 8/20/2009 066786 RELIABLE SECURITY SERVICES 20218 INV#20218 - EDMONDS PD 28Page: Packet Page 32 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 29 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113712 8/20/2009 (Continued)066786 RELIABLE SECURITY SERVICES BOSCH STANDARD BURG PKG 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 333.20 RADIONICS ALPHA COMMAND CENTER 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 172.20 RADIONICS UNIVERSAL ENCLOSURE 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 34.44 BOSCH OUTDR PIR MICRO TRITECH 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 308.00 ALTRONIX 12VDC 2.5 AMP PWR 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 30.32 ALTRONIX 24/48 VAC 100VA ULPS 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 39.61 RADIONICS DUAL BATTERY HARNESS 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 8.96 YUASA-BAT-12V 7.5AH BATTERY 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 87.60 MCMASTER WASHDOWN OUTDR ENC 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 478.86 MCMASTER 28.2X22.2 PANEL 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 98.08 MCMASTER WASHDOWN OUTDR NEMA 4 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 63.48 WIRE, 18 AWG, CONDUCTOR 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 13.00 MISC MATERIAL 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 154.00 INSTALLATION OF ALARM SYSTEM 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 1,820.00 ELECTRICAL PERMIT ALLOWANCE 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 101.25 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.910.350.00 355.59 Total :4,098.59 113713 8/20/2009 069477 ROTARY OFFSET PRESS INC 16162 FALL CRAZE BULK MAIL PREP 29Page: Packet Page 33 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 30 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113713 8/20/2009 (Continued)069477 ROTARY OFFSET PRESS INC FALL CRAZE BULK MAIL PREP 001.000.640.574.200.490.00 93.33 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.200.490.00 8.87 CRAZE MAGAZINE - FALL 200916166 FALL 2009 CRAZE RECREATIONAL GUIDE 001.000.640.574.200.490.00 7,548.75 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.574.200.490.00 717.13 Total :8,368.08 113714 8/20/2009 071467 S MORRIS COMPANY 07/31/09 ACCT#70014, AMINAL CONTROL - EDMONDS PD #483376 4 NPC 06/29/09 001.000.410.521.700.410.00 42.72 #284444 1 NPC 07/06/09 001.000.410.521.700.410.00 10.68 #284373 3 NPC 07/20/09 001.000.410.521.700.410.00 32.04 #284338 7 NPC 07/27/09 001.000.410.521.700.410.00 74.76 Total :160.20 113715 8/20/2009 071979 SACKVILLE, JODI L 8/13/09 OT from sick leave buy back not bought OT from sick leave buy back not bought 001.000.410.521.220.110.00 6.09 OT from sick leave buy back not bought8/13/09 -1 OT from sick leave buy back not bought 001.000.410.521.220.110.00 88.31 Total :94.40 113716 8/20/2009 067076 SEATTLE PUMP AND EQUIPMENT CO 09-2411 Unit 106 & 31 - Vactor High Pressure Unit 106 & 31 - Vactor High Pressure 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 618.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 58.71 30Page: Packet Page 34 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 31 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :676.711137168/20/2009 067076 067076 SEATTLE PUMP AND EQUIPMENT CO 113717 8/20/2009 063444 SHARP SHOP INC 299193 Water - 14" CutQuick Saw Water - 14" CutQuick Saw 411.000.654.534.800.350.00 899.96 Diamond Blade 411.000.654.534.800.350.00 239.00 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.654.534.800.350.00 108.20 Total :1,247.16 113718 8/20/2009 036950 SIX ROBBLEES INC 14-203983 Fleet Shop Supplies - Hitch Pins Fleet Shop Supplies - Hitch Pins 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.96 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.76 Total :8.72 113719 8/20/2009 036955 SKY NURSERY 282424 Storm - Jute Netting, Turf Stakes Storm - Jute Netting, Turf Stakes 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 121.94 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.652.542.400.310.00 11.58 Total :133.52 113720 8/20/2009 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 5320018384 SIERRA PARK BALLFIELD SIERRA PARK BALLFIELD 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.39 Total :29.39 113721 8/20/2009 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 290089749 206-001-485-5 24400 HIGHWAY 99 RICHMOND PARK 411.000.656.538.800.471.62 29.14 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.471.62 1.75 31Page: Packet Page 35 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 32 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113721 8/20/2009 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 463-001-671-7701066375 8421 244TH RICHMON PARK 411.000.656.538.800.471.62 29.14 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.471.62 1.75 Total :61.78 113722 8/20/2009 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2470018124 SIGNAL LIGHT SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 35.58 SIGNAL LIGHT2880012519 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 29.89 Signal 220th & 84th3630573867 Signal 220th & 84th 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 77.27 BLINKING LIGHT3970013599 BLINKING LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 30.39 SIGNAL LIGHT4320010194 SIGNAL LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 35.90 TRAFFIC LIGHT5450016042 TRAFFIC LIGHT 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 137.45 SCHOOL FLASHING LIGHTS5470012336 SCHOOL FLASHING LIGHTS 111.000.653.542.640.470.00 30.39 Total :376.87 113723 8/20/2009 037376 SNO CO PUD NO 1 WO 366578-06 SERVICE ADD: 121 W DAYTON ST, EDMONDS Install New UG PRI Service for Edm L/S 412.300.630.594.320.650.00 6,131.80 Total :6,131.80 32Page: Packet Page 36 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 33 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113724 8/20/2009 006630 SNOHOMISH COUNTY I000229507 SOLID WASTE CHARGES SOLID WASTE CHARGES 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 1,035.74 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.640.576.800.470.00 37.26 Total :1,073.00 113725 8/20/2009 006630 SNOHOMISH COUNTY I000229534 5101 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL 411.000.656.538.800.490.00 39.57 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.490.00 1.43 Total :41.00 113726 8/20/2009 038700 SO SNO CO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 23871 Dues 9/1/09-9/1/10 Dues 9/1/09-9/1/10 001.000.390.519.900.490.00 600.00 Total :600.00 113727 8/20/2009 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 03584 RECYCLING RECYCLING 411.000.656.538.800.475.66 28.25 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.656.538.800.475.66 1.70 Total :29.95 113728 8/20/2009 070677 SPRINT 502779811-020 INV502779811-020 EDMONDS PD DATA CARDS 08/07 - 09/06/09 001.000.410.521.220.420.00 169.97 Total :169.97 113729 8/20/2009 071585 STERICYCLE INC 3000571844 INV#3000571844 CUST#6076358 EDMONDS PD DISPOSAL-MED BOX HAZ WASTE 001.000.410.521.910.410.00 51.52 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.910.410.00 1.85 33Page: Packet Page 37 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 34 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :53.371137298/20/2009 071585 071585 STERICYCLE INC 113730 8/20/2009 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY 1791265 Freight Freight 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.72 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.42 PS - Elect Supplies1943679 PS - Elect Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 137.41 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 13.05 PS - Elect Supplies1944906 PS - Elect Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 27.79 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.64 PS - Elect Supplies1948636 PS - Elect Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 85.85 Freight 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 13.87 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 9.47 Total :295.22 113731 8/20/2009 072555 SYSTEMS DESIGN ED0709 ALS PROF SERVICES EMS billing services 001.000.510.526.100.410.00 6,868.84 Total :6,868.84 113732 8/20/2009 042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY 15951 Unit 361 - Keys Unit 361 - Keys 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 17.25 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.64 34Page: Packet Page 38 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 35 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount (Continued)Total :18.891137328/20/2009 042800 042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY 113733 8/20/2009 061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY 8271521 Sewer - 6x14' PVC Pipe, 8x14' PVC Pipe, Sewer - 6x14' PVC Pipe, 8x14' PVC Pipe, 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 583.50 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 55.44 Sewer - Amount Overcharged on Invoice8287533 Sewer - Amount Overcharged on Invoice 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 -161.87 9.5% Sales Tax 411.000.655.535.800.310.00 -15.38 Total :461.69 113734 8/20/2009 062693 US BANK 1070 INV#1070-08/06/09-THOMPSON-EDMONDS PD PLAQUE (PERRY)/DARE/DUI UPDATE 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 59.79 LOCK BUSHING 001.000.410.521.910.310.00 13.63 LODGING/ACCREDITATION-BOREN 001.000.410.521.400.430.00 110.39 FOOD/POLICE FOUNDATION MTG 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 9.47 RETURN OF 2 CANON COPY MACHINES 001.000.410.521.100.490.00 355.74 DIVE LADDER W/STORAGE BRACKETS 001.000.410.521.220.310.00 266.46 35Page: Packet Page 39 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 36 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113734 8/20/2009 (Continued)062693 US BANK INV#3181 08/06/09 - BARD3181 AHA CLASS CANCEL - SHOEMAKE 001.000.410.521.400.490.00 -220.00 INV#3181 08/06/09 - BARD - EDMONDS PD3181 FOOD/7 HABITS CLASS 001.000.410.521.400.310.00 22.45 FOOD/ACCREDITATION 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 118.65 4 CANON POWERSHOT CAMERAS 001.000.410.521.220.350.00 752.59 INV#3314-08/06/09-LAWLESS-EDMONDS PD3314 FOOD/ACCREDITATION 001.000.410.521.100.310.00 48.11 Total :1,537.28 113735 8/20/2009 062693 US BANK 0067-3280 Finance Director, #09-25 ad Finance Director, #09-25 ad 001.000.220.516.100.440.00 200.00 WWTP MW I #09-25 ad 001.000.220.516.100.440.00 25.00 Total :225.00 113736 8/20/2009 062693 US BANK 2462 IT EXPENSES 36Page: Packet Page 40 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 37 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113736 8/20/2009 (Continued)062693 US BANK CDW-Network Cable & Jack 001.000.310.518.880.310.00 276.86 HP-SPS Keyboard 001.000.310.518.880.310.00 100.74 Cables to go-Fiber Cable 001.000.310.518.880.310.00 121.58 PLI-Supplies 001.000.310.518.880.310.00 124.80 PLI-Outlook License 001.000.310.518.880.490.00 29.95 Paypal WWWSellCell-Blackberry Battery 001.000.310.518.880.310.00 53.30 FMA-Adapter 001.000.310.518.880.310.00 13.25 Monoprice-Inwall installation cables 001.000.310.518.880.310.00 62.76 Monoprice-Cables 001.000.310.518.880.310.00 17.40 Network Solutions-Edmonds Fire Domain 001.000.310.518.880.490.00 19.98 Costco-Camcorder & HDTV for Video 001.000.230.512.500.350.00 985.48 Target-Tripod for court's Video 001.000.230.512.500.350.00 19.70 RadioShack-supplies 001.000.310.518.880.310.00 9.84 MyCableMart-supplies 001.000.310.518.880.310.00 30.17 Radioshack-2 Batteries F/S #17 001.000.310.518.880.310.00 33.92 FINANCE EXPENSES3298 GFOA-Submission of CAFR Certification 001.000.310.514.230.490.00 505.00 37Page: Packet Page 41 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 38 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113736 8/20/2009 (Continued)062693 US BANK Printing CAFR5531 Printing CAFR 001.000.310.514.230.490.00 55.31 Total :2,460.04 113737 8/20/2009 062693 US BANK 3462 CITY CLERK PURCHASE CARD Misc recorded documents 001.000.250.514.300.490.00 306.00 Recording of Utility Liens 411.000.654.534.800.490.00 219.00 Recording of Utility Liens 411.000.655.535.800.490.00 219.00 Notary Supplies 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 151.18 Total :895.18 113738 8/20/2009 062693 US BANK 3363 King Salmon - Unit M16 - Oil filter, King Salmon - Unit M16 - Oil filter, 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 622.56 Cascadia Int.- Unit eq51so - Keys 511.100.657.594.480.640.00 24.69 Fisheries Supply - Unit M16 - Bar for 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 125.60 Fisheries Supply - Unit M16 - Elements 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 111.56 Fisheries Supply - Unit M16 - Throtle 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 116.26 Svc Fees 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.00 Home Depot - Unit 62 - Outlet Surge 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 14.20 Fisheries Supply - Unit M16 - Returns3363 Fisheries Supply - Unit M16 - Returns 511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -55.78 38Page: Packet Page 42 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 39 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113738 8/20/2009 (Continued)062693 US BANK MIControls - Balance of Refund due3405 MIControls - Balance of Refund due 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 -22.34 Guardian Sec - Monthly Svc Fee3405 Guardian Sec - Monthly Svc Fee 001.000.651.519.920.480.00 55.00 Coast Prod - FAC Supplies 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 545.96 Svc Fees 001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.06 USPS - Fleet Return Shipping to Adv Tec3546 USPS - Fleet Return Shipping to Adv Tec 511.000.657.548.680.420.00 21.04 USPS - Street Return Shipping to HY-Tech 111.000.653.542.900.420.00 8.30 USPS - Fleet Return Shipping to NC Mach 511.000.657.548.680.420.00 13.23 Total :1,586.34 113739 8/20/2009 062693 US BANK 3173 ALLISON belts, axe sheaths 001.000.510.522.200.310.00 1,411.89 CORREIRA3223 shoes 001.000.510.522.200.240.00 153.53 HEPLER3272 Natn'l Acadmy travel 001.000.510.522.200.430.00 311.85 SMITH, M3371 Pub Ed/Prev supplies 001.000.510.522.300.310.00 380.00 WHITE3454 M16 stokes cover 001.000.510.522.200.310.00 8.99 39Page: Packet Page 43 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 40 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113739 8/20/2009 (Continued)062693 US BANK OPERATIONS3504 Operations supplies 001.000.510.522.200.310.00 958.14 Total :3,224.40 113740 8/20/2009 064423 USA BLUE BOOK 866031 Street - Paint Truck - Crush Proof Street - Paint Truck - Crush Proof 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 164.80 Freight 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 21.82 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.653.542.640.310.00 17.73 Total :204.35 113741 8/20/2009 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-744-1681 SEAVIEW PARK IRRIGATION MODEM SEAVIEW PARK IRRIGATION MODEM 001.000.640.576.800.420.00 42.79 SIERRA PARK IRRIGATION MODEM425-744-1691 SIERRA PARK IRRIGATION MODEM 001.000.640.576.800.420.00 42.13 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE FAX MODEM425-776-5316 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE FAX MODEM 001.000.640.576.800.420.00 108.18 Total :193.10 113742 8/20/2009 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425 712-0423 03 0260 1032797592 07 AFTER HOURS PHONE 411.000.656.538.800.420.00 56.08 Total :56.08 113743 8/20/2009 069889 VETERINARY SPECIALTY CENTER 97551 INV#97551 - EDMONDS PD 40Page: Packet Page 44 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 41 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113743 8/20/2009 (Continued)069889 VETERINARY SPECIALTY CENTER EMREGENCY SERV VISIT/ROCKY 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 99.00 HOSPITALIZATION LEVEL II 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 76.00 ADMINISTER FLUIDS W/CATHETER 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 268.18 RADIOGRAPH & STUDY W/DISC 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 124.87 TEST/INJECTIONS/ECG/FLUIDS 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 662.05 SURGICAL GROUP/INCISION W/DISC 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 1,217.13 HOSPITALIZATION LEVEL II W/DISC 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 13.18 HOSPITALIZATION LEVEL II W/DISC 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 63.13 TRAMADOL & CEPHALEXIN 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 40.84 BIOHAZARD FEE 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 4.99 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.410.521.260.410.00 6.49 Total :2,575.86 113744 8/20/2009 061485 WA ST DEPT OF HEALTH DRAN.FX.00056126 INV#DRAN.FX.00056126 EDMONDS PD-DAWSON ANNUAL PENTOBARBITAL PERMIT 001.000.410.521.700.490.00 40.00 Total :40.00 113745 8/20/2009 045912 WASPC INV022133 INV#022133 EDMONDS PD - ACCRED APP FEE ACCREDITATION APPLICATION FEE 001.000.410.521.100.410.00 100.00 Total :100.00 113746 8/20/2009 068106 WELCOME COMMUNICATIONS 6609 OPS SUPPLIES 41Page: Packet Page 45 of 307 08/19/2009 Voucher List City of Edmonds 42 5:15:05PM Page:vchlist Bank code :front Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount 113746 8/20/2009 (Continued)068106 WELCOME COMMUNICATIONS battery charger adapter plates 001.000.510.522.200.310.00 431.00 Freight 001.000.510.522.200.310.00 10.34 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.510.522.200.310.00 41.93 Total :483.27 113747 8/20/2009 049500 WEST PUBLISHING 818890837 CODE UPDATES RCW Updates 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 285.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.250.514.300.310.00 27.06 Total :312.06 113748 8/20/2009 070432 ZACHOR & THOMAS PS INC 908 AUGUST-09 RETAINER Aaug-09 Retainer 001.000.360.515.230.410.00 11,330.00 Total :11,330.00 Bank total : 1,408,875.15134 Vouchers for bank code :front 1,408,875.15Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report134 42Page: Packet Page 46 of 307 AM-2460 2.C. WSLCB List Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:08/25/2009 Submitted By:Linda Carl Submitted For:Gary Haakenson Time:Consent Department:Mayor's Office Type:Action Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Approval of list of businesses applying for renewal of their liquor licenses with the Washington State Liquor Control Board, August 2009. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Previous Council Action Narrative The City Clerk’s Office, the Police department, and the Mayor’s Office have reviewed the attached list and have no concerns with the Washington State Liquor Control Board renewing the liquor licenses for the listed businesses. Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: WSLCB list - August Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 08/18/2009 03:54 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 08/18/2009 03:56 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 08/19/2009 01:39 PM APRV Form Started By: Linda Carl Started On: 08/18/2009 02:25 PM Final Approval Date: 08/19/2009 Packet Page 47 of 307 Packet Page 48 of 307 AM-2461 2.D. Claim for Damages Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:08/25/2009 Submitted By:Linda Hynd Submitted For:Sandy Chase Time:Consent Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Dale Worrell ($50,000.00). Recommendation from Mayor and Staff It is recommended that the City Council acknowledge receipt of the Claim for Damages by minute entry. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Dale Worrell 24316 89th Place W. Edmonds, WA 98026 ($50,000.00) Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Worrell Claim for Damages Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 08/19/2009 01:14 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 08/19/2009 01:26 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 08/19/2009 01:39 PM APRV Form Started By: Linda Hynd Started On: 08/19/2009 11:40 AM Final Approval Date: 08/19/2009 Packet Page 49 of 307 Packet Page 50 of 307 Packet Page 51 of 307 AM-2464 3. Presentation on the 2010 Census Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:08/25/2009 Submitted By:Sandy Chase Time:15 Minutes Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Presentation on the 2010 Census. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff N/A Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Every ten years, everyone living in the United States is counted. Every year more than $300 billion in federal funds are awarded to states and communities based on Census data. For example, Census data helps to provide information for determining: Each state's number of seats in the U.S. House of Representatives Community planning for roads, hospitals, schools, and more Jobs Language services Health services A representative of the US Census Bureau will be present to provide public education on the importance of the 2010 Census. Attached is information on the 2010 Census provided by the US Census Bureau. Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: 2010 Census Overview Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 08/19/2009 01:38 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 08/19/2009 01:41 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 08/19/2009 01:42 PM APRV Form Started By: Sandy Started On: 08/19/2009 01:23 Packet Page 52 of 307 Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 08/19/2009 01:23 PM Final Approval Date: 08/19/2009 Packet Page 53 of 307 An Introduction to the 2010 Census Counting Everyone Once — and Only Once — and In the Right Place The foundation of our American democracy is dependent on fair and equitable representation in Congress. In order to achieve an accurate assessment of the number and location of the people living within the nation’s borders, the U.S. Constitution mandates a census of the population every 10 years. The census population totals determine which states gain or lose representation in Congress. It also determines the amount of state and federal funding communities receive over the course of the decade. 2010 Census data will directly affect how more than $3 trillion is allocated to local, state and tribal governments over the next 10 years. In order for this funding allocation to be accomplished fairly and accurately, the goal of the decennial census is to count everybody, count them only once, and count them in the right place. The facts gathered in the census also help shape decisions for the rest of the decade about public health, neighborhood improvements, transportation, education, senior services and much more. Reaching an Increasingly Diverse Population The goal of the 2010 Census is to count all residents living in the United States on April 1, 2010. The U.S. Census Bureau does not ask about the legal status of respondents in any of its surveys and census programs. To help ensure the nation’s increasingly diverse population can answer the questionnaire accurately and completely, about 13 million bilingual Spanish/English forms will be mailed to housing units in neighborhoods identified as requiring high levels of Spanish assistance. Additionally, questionnaires in Spanish, Chinese (Simplified), Korean, Vietnamese and Russian ⎯ as well as language guides in 59 languages ⎯ will be available on request. Recruiting Census Workers By 2010, there will be an estimated 310 million people residing in the United States. Counting each person is one of the largest operations the federal government undertakes. For example, the Census Bureau will recruit nearly 3.8 million applicants for 2010 Census field operations. Of these applicants, the Census Bureau will hire about 1.4 million temporary employees. Some of these employees will be using GPS-equipped hand-held computers to update maps and ensure there is an accurate address list for the mailing of the census questionnaires. 10 Questions, 10 Minutes to Complete With one of the shortest questionnaires in history, the 2010 Census asks for name, gender, age, race, ethnicity, relationship, and whether you own or rent your home. It takes only about 10 minutes for the average household to complete. Questions about how we live as a nation ⎯ our diversity, education, housing, jobs and more ⎯ are now covered in the American Packet Page 54 of 307 Community Survey, which is conducted every year throughout the decade and replaces the Census 2000 long-form questionnaire. Responses to the 2010 Census questionnaire are required by law. All responses are used for statistical purposes only, and all are strictly confidential. For more information, visit the 2010 Census Web site at <http://www.census.gov/2010>. -X- Packet Page 55 of 307 AM-2455 4. Presentation on the Aquatics Feasibility Study Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:08/25/2009 Submitted By:Brian McIntosh Time:30 Minutes Department:Parks and Recreation Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Presentation on the Aquatics Feasibility Study. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Review Aquatics Feasibility Study. Previous Council Action On August 5, 2008 Council authorized staff to advertise for Statements of Qulifications from consulting firms to perform an Aquatics Feasibility Study. On October 28, 2008 Council authorized the Mayor to sign a professional services agreement with NAC/Architecture to conduct the study. Narrative This Aquatics Feasibility Study was commissioned to assist the City of Edmonds in determining the direction of its aquatics future given the limited life expectancy for the current Yost Pool. Since their selection in November of last year the consultant team, an Advisory Team of citizens and staff, and hundreds of citizens have pooled their expertise and ideas to produce the report that is attached and will be presented tonight for your consideration. Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Aquatics Feasibility Study Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 08/19/2009 03:24 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 08/19/2009 03:27 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 08/19/2009 03:37 PM APRV Form Started By: Brian McIntosh Started On: 08/17/2009 12:30 PM Final Approval Date: 08/19/2009 Packet Page 56 of 307 August 25, 2009 Final Report Aquatic Feasibility Study City of Edmonds DRAFT Packet Page 57 of 307 FINAL REPORT CITY OF EDMONDS AQUATIC FEASIBILITY STUDY NAC Project Number: 111-08072 August 25, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments Executive Summary Goals Process Work Plan Public Meeting Notes Stakeholder Meeting Notes Public Meeting Concept Preferences Existing Facility Evaluation Site Evaluation Potential Sites Aerial Views Site Evaluations Potential Site Comparison Matrix Market Analysis Project Options Concept Option Diagrams Support Facilities Program Project Budgets Aquatic Project Budgets Operational Assessment Funding Options Recommended Option Images Appendix Executive Summary of Survey Results Packet Page 58 of 307 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AQUATIC FEASIBILITY STUDY TEAM Citizen Volunteers Jan Kavadas Phil Lovell Wendel Parker Dick Van Hollebeke City of Edmonds Representatives D.J. Wilson, Edmonds City Council Rich Lindsay, City of Edmonds, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Brian McIntosh, City of Edmonds, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Renee McRae, City of Edmonds, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Consultant Team Douglass Whiteaker, Water Technology, Inc. Ken Ballard, Ballard*King Associates Keith Comes, NAC|Architecture City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 1Packet Page 59 of 307 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Yost Pool has been a popular amenity for the Edmonds community for over 35 years. Yost Park is a beautiful natural setting for the pool and many citizens have passionate memories of Yost Pool and feel a strong attachment to this venue. Yost Pool has been well-maintained so the typical pool-user is not even aware of many problems with the facility. However, the pool does show signs of deterioration and parts for the pool’s failing mechanical systems are no longer available. Park and Recreation staff has actually fabricated some replacement parts when needed. Many users do notice that pool house is showing its age, the facility is not ADA accessible and that there is limited parking. The purpose for this study is to discover the desires for an aquatic center in the City of Edmonds. Knowing that Yost Pool is nearing the end of its life expectancy, what should be done? What are the potential options for an aquatic center that respond to the desires of the community? The intent of this report is to document the information discovered in a clear and focused manner to allow the City of Edmonds to make informed decisions regarding the next steps in planning for the future of aquatics. Process In order to determine the aquatic needs and desires, the consultant team conducted an evaluation of the existing Yost Pool and completed a market analysis of Edmonds’ primary, secondary and tertiary service areas. The analysis concludes that there a significant number of market opportunities f or new or expanded aquatic facilities in Edmonds. Two public meetings were held and the Study Committee met separately with interested stakeholders. Although stakeholders saw advantages to an aquatics facility near the waterfront in Edmonds, those attending the public meetings felt very strongly about keeping an aquatic facility at Yost Park. The City also hired Leisure Vision to conduct a scientifically valid survey regarding aquatic options for the Edmonds community. A key finding from the survey was an overwhelming desire for an indoor aquatic component in Edmonds. In the midst of the study, the City was forced to address severe financial issues that were forecasted. As a result of this fiscal crisis, it was proposed that Yost Pool would be closed for the upcoming season. Concerned citizens stepped forward and worked with the City to develop cost savings plans and raise funds to successfully keep the pool open. Despite the distraction of the potential pool closure, focus of the aquatic study remained on planning for the future of aquatics. This issue did highlight the vulnerability of aquatics in Edmonds and the need for long-range planning to avoid the closure of the pool in the future. Site Three potential sites, including Yost Park, were identified as a potential location for a new aquatics facility and a Site Analysis was conducted for each site. The site of the Antique Mall near the waterfront was an early consideration as a potential site. However, the owner of Harbor Square Athletic Club (HSAC) became aware of the study and indicated an interest in a partnership with the City to develop a new aquatic facility on property being leased by HSAC. As a result, the focus for a site near the waterfront was shifted to the Harbor Square site. The former Woodway High School was evaluated as a level school site, but the School District indicated that this site was currently fully utilized for school district uses and would not be available for the development of an aquatics facility at this time. Although the site analysis indicates Yost Park may not be the ideal physical site for an aquatic facility, it became apparent through the course of the study that any proposal without a pool at Yost Park would face vocal opposition. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 2Packet Page 60 of 307 Options Utilizing all the information gathered throughout the study, four concept options were developed by the consultant team with input from the Study Committee. Both the public meeting and the survey indicated that support for an aquatics venue at Yost Park was very strong. The survey also illustrated the overwhelming desire for an indoor aquatic component in Edmonds. These first four concepts which addressed these issues were more fully developed. Two additional options were added as a result of input received at the second public meeting. Concept options are as follows: Concept 1- Outdoor only lap and recreation pools at Yost Park Project cost budget: $8,200,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $35.51 Annual operation cost estimate: $0-$50,000 Concept 2- Indoor only lap and recreation pools at Yost Park Project cost budget: $21,900,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $95.40 Annual operation cost estimate: $200,000-$300,000 Concept 3- Indoor lap and warm-water wellness pools and outdoor recreation pools at Yost Park Project cost budget: $16,700,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $72.61 Annual operation cost estimate: $150,000-$250,000 Concept 4 plus Concept 1- Indoor pool and small outdoor pool in partnership with Harbor Square Athletic Club Outdoor only lap and recreation pools at Yost Park Project cost budget: $17,400,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $75.49 Annual operation cost estimate: $25,000-$125,000 Concept 5- At the second public meeting, a few of those attending the meeting requested the addition of a fifth option for consideration. That option was for a replacement of the existing poolhouse (primarily to address ADA access issues with the existing two-story facility) and renovation of the existing Yost Pool. This would essentially create a new version of what exists at Yost Park today. The estimated project budget for this option is approximately $5,000,000. With a renovation, Yost Pool would continue to operate at a similar cost deficit as it does currently and would be vulnerable to closure as it was in the 2009 season with the City’s budget issues. This concept did not receive much support in the informal “vote” and was not further developed. Concept 6- With this concept, there would be no changes. Yost Pool would remain as it is today with required maintenance continuing. Since Yost Pool is already over 35 years old, it is likely that mounting repair and maintenance costs would ultimately force its closure within a limited number of years. As an example Yost Pool will need to be re-plastered (an every 10 years maintenance project) no later than 2011 at a cost of $80,000 - $100,000. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 3Packet Page 61 of 307 Recommendations Based on the survey results, input from the public meetings and other relevant information accumulated as part of this study, it appears that Concept 3 provides the best balance for the City of Edmonds. Concept 3 provides an outdoor opportunity for the busiest time of year that will be a different experience from neighbors Mountlake Terrace and the renovation in progress at Lynnwood that both have indoor only pools. It also provides an indoor year-round pool still in the park setting and housed at the same site. Although dedicated lap swimmers are not able to continue to swim outdoors in the idyllic Yost Park setting, they are still provided a venue that allows year-round swimming. From virtually all input received, there was an overwhelming desire to retain an aquatic facility at Yost Park…any proposal that does not include a pool at Yost Park would face strong opposition. A larger aquatic facility at Yost Park and the associated parking will impact the park site and may create some opposition , although that opposition was not expressed in the course of this study except by few who advocated “no change”. Although the partnership with HSAC explored with Concept 4 is intriguing and has some advantages, it was not strongly supported. This potential partnership has many complexities and complications to resolve and without detailed answers there was some apprehension with this concept that, if pursued, likely would take significant time to resolve to the satisfaction of both the City and HSAC. There is compelling rationale for Option 1 as a secondary recommendation. It would be the only outdoor facility (lap plus recreation swimming) in the service area, since both Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace have indoor pools. It has a lower capital cost. Depending on the timing of a proposal and the economy this may be more appealing to taxpayers. It has the lowest operating cost and with near closure of Yost Pool this year reduction of operating cost is a valid consideration. Many of the most passionate and vocal community members do support an outdoor only aquatic facility and it may be argued that natural setting of Yost Park is best suited to an outdoor facility. HSAC may build additional indoor lap lanes regardless of what the City does (and maybe moves forward before the City) reducing the demand for indoor swimming. However, Concept 1 does somewhat ignore the survey results and the desire for an indoor facility. Certainly the timing to bring forward any proposal is not favorable with the City’s current fiscal issues. However, this current situation does not diminish the need – especially for a facility similar to Concept 3 that addresses well the desire for indoor, outdoor, recreation and lap swimming expressed by the Edmonds community. Along with excellent schools and other amenities, an aquatic center that appeals to a broad spectrum of users can assist in making a community a desirable place to stay or an attractive place for relocation. Recreation amenities have been shown to create a positive impact on the quality of life in a community and the aquatic concepts explored in this study may have an economic impact of $200,000 to $1,800,000 annually in the City of Edmonds. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 4Packet Page 62 of 307 www.nacarchitecture.com National talent, local focus City of Edmonds Aquatic Center Feasibility Study November 20, 2008 Overall Feasibility Study Goals 1. Discover the desires for an aquatic center in the City of Edmonds. 2. Discover the potential options for an aquatic center that responds to these desires and the specific opportunities at each of the identified sites. 3. Document the information discovered in a clear and focused manner to allow the City of Edmonds to make informed decisions regarding the next steps in planning for the future of aquatics. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 5Packet Page 63 of 307 PROCESS The study began in November of 2008 with a Project Initiation Meeting attended by the Aquatics Feasibility Study Committee which included citizen volunteers, City representatives and the consultant team. Study goals and strategy were discussed and a Work Plan was developed to guide the process. The Work Plan is included within this section of the report. In conjunction with the Initiation Meeting, relevant existing data (previous studies, planning documents and maintenance/operations information related to Yost Pool) was provided by the City representatives giving the consultant team a more in-depth understanding of the background related to the study. Site Evaluation The consultant team toured Yost Pool and two other sites identified by the Study Committee as a potential location for a new aquatics facility. Based on observations from the tour, the consultant team completed an Existing Facility Evaluation and a Site Analysis of each location. Refer to related sections in this report for additional information. Market analysis A market analysis was conducted in order to understand the demographics of the market area and to review the existing aquatics facilities in the area. Knowing the demographic and market realities is essential in evaluating the perceived needs of the community and in determining the feasibility of expanding the aquatic offerings within the City of Edmonds. Complete documentation of the market analysis is included in this report. Public Participation Engaging public participation and soliciting public input are critical components of this aquatic study. Public concerns, needs and priorities are the key factors in planning for the future of aquatics in the City of Edmonds . In addition to understanding public opinion, public participation has the potential to generate excitement and support for a project as those participating develop a sense of ownership and, as a result, buy-in to a project of which they were a part. As part of the public outreach process, the consultant team held two public meetings and a stakeholders meeting. The purpose of the first public meeting was to determine the level of satisfaction with current facilities, determine priorities and concerns, educate the public, assess willingness to pay and to generate excitement. On the same day as the first public meeting, the Study Committee also met with key community leaders and special interest group representatives to discuss needs, priorities and potential for the project. Notes for each of these meetings follows within this section of the report. Prior to the second public meeting, a scientific survey was conducted. The Study Committee worked with Leisure Vision, a firm that specializes in recreation-related surveys, to develop the content and questions for the survey. The most influential information drawn from the survey results was an overwhelming desire for an indoor aquatic component in Edmonds and a majority interest in continuing to have an aquatics venue at Yost Park. A complete summary of the survey results is included in the appendix of this report. Project Options With information from the public and stakeholder meeting, results of the survey, and input from the Study Committee, four concepts on two of the identified sites were developed. The concepts included both indoor and outdoor components with a wide range of estimated project costs. Supporting each of the concept diagrams were project budgets and an operational cost assessment of each concept. This information is included in it’s entirety in a following section of this report. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 6Packet Page 64 of 307 Public Reaction A second public meeting was held to update the public on the planning process (including the results of the survey) and present the four concepts that had been proposed to determine public reaction. An informal “vote” was taken to determine preferences of the options presented. From those in attendance, there was a definite preference for an outdoor-only aquatics facility at Yost Park. It was recognized, however, that those in attendance may have been there primarily to speak in favor of retaining an aquatic facility at Yost Park and that this “vote” does not possess the scientific validity of a random survey. The actual counts from that “vote” are included in this section. During the discussions at that meeting, there was a request to add a fifth option for consideration. That option was for renovation-only of the existing Yost Pool. With a renovation, Yost Pool would continue to operate at a similar cost deficit as it does currently and would be vulnerable to closure as it was in the 2009 season with the City’s budget issues. This concept did not receive much support in the informal “vote” and was not further developed. Final Report Utilizing all previous information as a foundation and including input from the Study Committee, the consultant team made a recommendation for a preferred concept. This recommendation and all previous documentation were compiled to create this report which was presented to the Edmonds City Council on August 25, 2009. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 7Packet Page 65 of 307 WORK PLAN City of Edmonds Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Date: November 12, 2008 Updated: August 25, 2009 1. Project Initiation Project Initiation meeting 9:00- November 14, 2008 Conduct Project Initiation meeting. Meeting attendees include the Aquatic Feasibility Team, NAC, BKA, and WTI. ▪ Establish goals and objectives/constraints and parameters ▪ Review existing data (see following heading) ▪ Review public participation process (see following headings) ▪ Review Work Plan and refine schedule/dates ▪ The Work Plan will identify tasks, specific work products, meeting dates, and completion times. ▪ Identify, discuss and visit potential sites (see following heading) ▪ Tour Yost Pool and other area service providers (see following heading) Products/Tasks: November 20, 2008 ▪ Document goals of Feasibility Study (complete) ▪ Update the Work Plan (complete) 2. Existing Data Review Project Initiation meeting, tours of Yost Pool and service area providers November 14, 2008 Relevant existing documents provided by the Feasibility Team will be reviewed during the Project Initiation meeting. The Feasibility Team will assist the Design Team in identifying service area providers and scheduling tours, if necessary. Tours will take place the day of the Initiation Meeting. Review of data will include: ▪ Review previously completed planning documents, surveys and studies ▪ Review plans, policies and procedures ▪ Determine demographic characteristics ▪ Evaluate Yost Pool and interview personnel ▪ Assess other market area providers ▪ Tour service area aquatic facilities Products/Tasks: ▪ Yost Pool evaluation report (complete) January 9, 2009 ▪ Data will be utilized for the developing the Project Options, Market, Operations and Funding Analysis 3. Evaluate Site Options Conduct site investigation November 14, 2008 Identify site options ▪ Site options will be identified by the Feasibility Team Discuss site criteria ▪ Criteria such as size, location, proximities, adjacencies, topography, infrastructure, etc. will be considered. Discuss initial site preferences ▪ Based on the site criteria, site preferences will be discussed. A strategy for addressing site alternatives with the public will also be discussed. Visit identified sites and analyze site options ▪ Site options identified will be evaluated and catalogued by the Design Team. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 8Packet Page 66 of 307 Work Plan City of Edmonds Aquatic Center Feasibility Study, 111-08072 - A302c Page 2 Products/Tasks: ▪ Site Evaluation Matrix (complete) November 20, 2008 4. Market Analysis Based on the identified service area and utilizing the existing data as starting point, a market analysis will be conducted. Components of the market analysis are as follows: ▪ Demographic characteristics/community profile ▪ Review of existing Yost Pool/programs/services ▪ Competitive market analysis ▪ Comparison with national, regional and local participation statistics and trends Products/Tasks: January 12, 2009 ▪ Market Analysis report (complete) 5. Survey Develop and conduct Citizen Survey ▪ City to engage services of a survey consultant ▪ Design Team to assist City and City’s consultant in developing survey que stions ▪ Design Team to assist City and City’s consultant in evaluating and interpreting survey results Products/Tasks: ▪ Engage services of a survey consultant December 2008 ▪ Develop survey questions/ survey ready to be administered January 27, 2009 ▪ Conduct survey January/ February 2009 Products/Tasks: Early February 2009 ▪ Survey results and evaluation report by survey consultant 6. Engage Public Participation Open House meeting, Stakeholder interview January 14, 2009 Conduct Stakeholder interview session ▪ Meet with key community leaders and special interest group representative to discuss needs, priorities and potential for the project. Conduct Open House Meeting ▪ The purpose of the initial Open House Meeting will be to determine the level of satisfaction with current facilities, determine priorities and concerns, educate the public, assess willingness to pay and to generate excitement. The Planning Committee will be responsible for advertising the Open House. Invitations to special interest groups will be included. Products/Tasks: ▪ Identify key community leaders and special interest groups December 2008 ▪ Develop invitation list, invitations and advertisements December 2008 ▪ Advertisements and Invitation to Open House by Feasibility Team early January 2009 ▪ Develop Open House format, agenda and materials early January 2009 ▪ Notes/conclusions from Stakeholder Interview and Open House (complete) February 19, 2009 City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 9Packet Page 67 of 307 Work Plan City of Edmonds Aquatic Center Feasibility Study, 111-08072 - A302c Page 3 7. Develop Project Options Aquatic Feasibility Team meeting 1:00- March 26, 2009 Develop Program ▪ Options for a functional program to meet identified needs and preferences will be developed by the Design Team. Propose a Minimum of Two Project Concepts ▪ Utilizing all previous information as a foundation, the design team will suggest concepts for addressing aquatics needs and preferences. Concepts will be briefly identified only as necessary to define the idea and general cost range with minimal graphics or development. Present Project Concepts to Aquatic Feasibility Team ▪ Review concept options and determine concept preferences ▪ Review preliminary site evaluation, determine preferences and public strategy ▪ Develop strategy for presentation to the public Products/Tasks: ▪ Program outline March 2009 ▪ Concept options March 2009 ▪ Refine program options and develop concept diagrams as necessary for Second Open House prior to second Open House 8. Determine Public Reaction/Preferences Open House meeting May 6, 2009 Conduct second Open House Meeting ▪ The purpose of the second Open House meeting will be to update the public on the planning process, describe the ideas and concerns that have been addressed (or not incorporated and why), and present concepts that have been proposed to determine public reactions and preferences. As with the previous Open House, the Planning Committee will be responsible for advertising the Open House. Invitations to key stakeholders and special interest groups will be included. Products/Tasks: ▪ Develop invitation and confirm invitation list Prior to meeting ▪ Advertisements and Invitations to Open House by Feasibility Team Prior to meeting ▪ Develop Open House format, agenda and materials (program/diagrams) Prior to meeting ▪ Notes/conclusions from Open House Following meeting 9. Develop Preferred Project Concept With information from the Public Open House, results of the Survey and Stakeholder interview, and input from the Feasibility Team, a preferred concept will be further developed. Products/Tasks: ▪ Conceptual site plan Summer 2009 ▪ Conceptual floor plan Summer 2009 ▪ Project capital cost estimate Summer 2009 ▪ Operations Analysis Summer 2009 ▪ Funding/financing options Summer 2009 City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 10Packet Page 68 of 307 Work Plan City of Edmonds Aquatic Center Feasibility Study, 111-08072 - A302c Page 4 ▪ Potential Economic Impact Summer 2009 ▪ Compile all information to develop draft report August 2009 10. Final Report Edmonds Planning Board and City Council meeting August 25, 2009 Complete Final Report compiling all previous products and with an Executive Summary. ▪ Refine preferred concept as necessary ▪ Present Final Report to Edmonds Planning Board and City Council Products: ▪ Written Final Report August 25, 2009 cl/P:\111-08072\300\A302\A302c-WorkPlan-090825.doc City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 11Packet Page 69 of 307 www.nacarchitecture.com National talent, local focus PUBLIC MEETING NOTES PROJECT: City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study PROJECT NO.: 111-08072 – A204a DATE: January 14, 2009 SUBMITTED BY: Keith M. Comes, AIA A Public Meeting was held on January 14, 2009 to gather input from the community on the future aquatic needs in the City of Edmonds. The meeting began with a presentation from the consulting team hired by the City to assist in conducting an aquatic feasibility study. The brief presentation addressed the following issues: 1. The deteriorating condition of Yost Pool is the impetus for the study. The pool is 35 years old, parts for the pool’s mechanical system are no longer available, the pool house is showing its age, the facility is not ADA accessible and the limited parking are key issues. 2. Potential options for addressing the aquatic needs in Edmonds are: Do nothing — in the next few years, doing nothing will likely cause the closure of Yost Pool. Remodel Yost Pool — remodeling would address maintenance and code issues at Yost Pool, but with minimal changes to the pool configuration and aquatic amenities. Expand Yost Pool — expansion of Yost Pool would include addressing maintenance and code issues plus could include expansion of the aquatic features such as adding an indoor pool and/or a leisure pool. The landscape and topography at Yost Park would be impacted by any expansion. Build a new facility — a new facility may be indoor and/or outdoor and include a competitive and/or a leisure pool or pools. Constructing a new facility in addition to Yost Pool has both capitol and operations cost impacts. 3. Site Options for a new facility that have been considered are: Yost Park — addressing the landscape and topography issues is necessary for any new development at Yost Park. The likely need for additional parking with a new facility would compound the impact to the park. Former Woodway High School — this site was previously considered with a study conducted in 1995, but is no longer a viable option. This site is currently fully utilized by the School District and land for a new aquatic facility and the associated parking is not available. Harbor Square Athletic Club — a partnership with Harbor Square Athletic Club has been discussed. Nati onal talent, local focus City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 12Packet Page 70 of 307 PUBLIC MEETING NOTES City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study, 111-08072 – A204a January 14, 2009 Page 2 Public comment topics had some commonality. Those topics and some general observations are as follows: 1. Because of the beauty of its natural setting, Yost Pool should remain in operation with replacement of equipment and the pool house as needed but without minimal changes to the amenities offered. Yost Pool is an aquatic facility that is unique to Edmonds and should be preserved. 2. An indoor pool is desirable, but preferably at a new site and in addition to the outdoor pool at Yost Park. There did not appear to be much support for an indoor pool at Yost Park, although the idea of a seasonal cover over the pool was discussed. 3. Many of those in attendance live near Yost Park (within approximately 6 blocks) and felt strongly about keeping Yost Pool in operation. 4. The location of Yost Park makes it more accessible for kids traveling from the surrounding neighborhoods. 5. It appeared that many of those in attendance were competitive or fitness swimmers and therefore were primarily interested in lap swimming. A few supported the idea of recreational amenities (mostly younger swimmers…a wave pool was suggested by one young user), but many thought that recreational amenities would diminish the experience at Yost Pool. 6. Operations costs were discussed. It was noted by the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department that Yost Pool requires a subsidy of over $100,000 each year to remain open. The consulting team noted that, in general, an outdoor leisure pool has the greatest potential for recovery of operating costs. Indoor pools are more expensive to operate, in general. Aquatic components on multiple sites have greater operational costs than a facility with the same components on a single site. It was suggested that increased rates for non-residents should be considered. 7. It was suggested that the School District should support an aquatic facility in some way due to the use by school swim teams. If the former Woodway High School site is not available, perhaps another School District property is available. (The Madrona School site was suggested. This is a currently active school and is not available at this time. It may be a possible site in the future depending on the District’s plans for future construction.) 8. A development of a partnership with Harbor Square Athletic Club would need to be carefully defined to avoid negative perception from the public. These comments are opinions of those in attendance only and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the Edmonds community. Next steps for the feasibility study include a survey and a second public meeting. P:\111-08072\200\A206\A206b\Final Report\4.2-A204a-PMN-090114.doc City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 13Packet Page 71 of 307 www.nacarchitecture.com National talent, local focus STAKEHOLDER MEETING NOTES PROJECT: City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study PROJECT NO.: 111-08072 – A204a DATE: January 14, 2009 SUBMITTED BY: Keith M. Comes, AIA ATTENDEES: Jan Vance, Edmonds Chamber of Commerce Bob Rinehart, Edmonds Chamber of Commerce Hallie Olson, South County Senior Center Cheryll Davis, South County Senior Center Jack Tawney, Harbor Square Athletic Club Stephen Clifton, City of Edmonds Economic Development Marla Miller, Edmonds School District Jan Beglau, Edmonds School District Chris Keuss, Port of Edmonds Jack Oharah, Edmonds Community College Kate Trettevik, Edmonds School District Swim Coach Bob Knowles, Stevens Hospital Aquatic Feasibility Team: Dick Van Hollebeke Jan Kavadas Wendel Parker D.J. Wilson, Edmonds City Council Rich Lindsay, City of Edmonds Phil Lovell, City of Edmonds Brian McIntosh, City of Edmonds Renee McRae, City of Edmonds Douglass Whiteaker, Water Technology, Inc. Ken Ballard, Ballard*King Keith Comes, NAC|Architecture A meeting with community leaders and those with a potential interest in aquatics was held on January 14, 2009 to gather input on the future of aquatics in the City of Edmonds. The meeting began with a presentation from the consulting team hired by the City to assist in conducting an aquatic feasibility study. The brief presentation addressed the following issues: 1. The deteriorating condition of Yost Pool is the impetus for the study. 2. Potential options for addressing the aquatic needs in Edmonds are: Do nothing — in the next few years, doing nothing will likely cause the closure of Yost Pool Remodel Yost Pool — remodeling would address maintenance and code issues at Yost Pool, but with minimal changes to the pool configuration and aquatic amenities National talent, local f ocus City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 14Packet Page 72 of 307 Stakeholder Meeting Notes City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study, 111-08072 – A204a January 14, 2009 Page 2 Expand Yost Pool — expansion of Yost Pool would include addressing maintenance and code issues plus could include expansion of the aquatic features such as adding an indoor pool and/or a leisure pool. The landscape and topography at Yost Park would be impacted by any expansion. Build a new facility — a new facility may be indoor and/or outdoor and include a competitive and/or a leisure pool or pools. Constructing a new facility in addition to Yost Pool has both capital and operations cost impacts. 3. Site Options for a new facility that have been considered are: Yost Park — addressing the landscape and topography issues is necessary for any new development at Yost Park. The likely need for additional parking with a new facility would compound the impact to the park. Former Woodway High School — this site was previously considered with a study conducted in 1995, but representatives from the School District indicated that this site is not a viable option at this time. This site is currently fully utilized by the School District and land for a new aquatic facility and the associated parking is not available. Harbor Square Athletic Club — a partnership with Harbor Square Athletic Club has been discussed. A comment was made that the economic impact potential with a facility in this location could be great. Comments from attendees were as follows: Bob Knowles, Stevens Hospital The hospital’s mission is to help people get healthy, so the hospital would support plans for an aquatic facility Bob personally thought features such as those at Boulder Beach at Silverwood in north Idaho would be fun A warm water therapy pool and a lap pool would be important The facility must be indoor and open year-round The hospital would primarily refer patients to the facility Hallie Olson, South County Senior Center Seniors would use an aquatic facility for rehabilitation and exercise so warm water and lap lanes are important Access to the facility, access to the pool and affordability are important An indoor facility that is open year-round is preferred Hallie noted that Harbor Square is close to the Senior Center Cheryll Davis, South County Senior Center Noted that many seniors use Harbor Square This use is paid by Group Health City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 15Packet Page 73 of 307 Stakeholder Meeting Notes City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study, 111-08072 – A204a January 14, 2009 Page 3 Kate Trettevik, Edmonds School District Swim Coach A 25 yard / 6-lane competitive pool that is open year-round for practice and meets is preferred Swim meets require space for 20+ spectators and 100+ swimmers and coaches 12 ft. depth is necessary for lifeguard training Shallow water for learn-to-swim programs would be desirable Kate noted that currently there is not a dive team partially because there is not a diving facility Accommodation for recreation swimming is positive A facility with multiple tanks and water temperatures is desirable Marla Miller, Edmonds School District Swimming programs for the District are supported by the General Fund (since funding is limited this may be a cause for concern) 2012 is the next planned levy While a partnership to develop an aquatic facility for therapy or other swimming programs is not a priority for the District, there is precedent- a partnership that includes capital funding from the District would need to follow a prescribed process The District is not interested in adding a pool facility to any currently operating school site Jan Beglau, Edmonds School District The District will probably not be adding programs in the near future (such as diving) A facility with a competitive pool for the swimming program is desirable Currently there are four swim teams in the District (about 150 swimmers total) Chris Keuss, Port of Edmonds The mission of the Port of Edmonds is economic development, so a ny expansion is supported Land acquisition on the Harbor Square property is possible through lease or purchase agreements A $10 million loan exists on the existing buildings A planning process is eminent for any development on the Harbor square property Jack Oharah, Edmonds Community College The Community College is not currently adding programs (such as swimming) Student fees may be a source of support for a swim club If the State continues some capital funding, some matching funds may be possible through a competitive process with other community colleges (a similar process was used for the Edmonds Center for Arts)- the first opportunity is two years away An aquatic facility is not a current priority for the Community College City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 16Packet Page 74 of 307 Stakeholder Meeting Notes City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study, 111-08072 – A204a January 14, 2009 Page 4 Jan Vance, Edmonds Chamber of Commerce The Chamber has interest in activities that bring people downtown so favors development at Harbor Square A regional facility is even more attractive No capital participation would be possible from the Chamber Jan Kavadas, Competitive Swimmer Jan has been involved in competitive swimming on many levels An aquatic facility is important for training and competitive events The local pool is a starting point for any competitive swimmer Jan’s preference is to maintain an outdoor pool in any case P:\111-08072\200\A204\A204a-StakeholderMtgNotes-090114.doc City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 17Packet Page 75 of 307 CITY OF EDMONDS Aquatic Feasibility Study Public Meeting No. 2 Informal Vote Concept Preferences by Those in Attendance Concept Fi r s t C h o i c e Se c o n d C h o i c e 1 Yost Park - Outdoor Only 15 5 2 Yost Park - Indoor Only 4 2 3 Yost Park - Indoor Lap Outdoor Rec 2 8 4 Harbor Square - Indoor and Small Outdoor plus Yost Park - Outdoor Only 1 1 5 Yost Park - Renovation Only 1 6 Note: This informal "vote" represents only the opinions of those attending the second public meeting and is not intended to represent the opinion of the Edmonds Community in general. cl/111-08072/200/A206/A204a-ConceptPreferences-090326.xls March 26, 2009 City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 18Packet Page 76 of 307 EXISTING FACILITY EVALUATION Introduction A community aquatic center is an amenity that helps to weave the threads of a community and enhance the quality of life, family, togetherness, and wellness of its residents. It serves a multi- generational public including seniors, parents, teenagers, young children, toddlers, and infants. There is recreational value that meets the needs of each demographic in a community. The Aquatic Center responds to the very basic needs and interests of the consumer. Aquatic facilities, due to the broad appeal to communities for educational needs, fitness and recreation, represent one factor in a complex interdependent relationship of factors that determine the quality of life a community offers to its citizens. Its emphasis is based upon the premise that the swimming pool visitor is primarily interested in a quality leisure experience that includes high entertainment and social values. The right blend of entertainment, along with the traditional aquatic requirements of competitive swimming, exercise and fitness, has proven successful for communities of all sizes. Consensus has shown that it is necessary to provide an aquatic center that appeals to a broad spectrum of users rather than serving just a specific user group. The consultant team discussed the versatility of various components to help provide the City with a facility that is multi- generational and used by the entire community. This provides a better opportunity for a steady income stream for the facility. Providing the greatest amount of programming opportunities for the users in the available space and within the City‟s budget is the optimal plan. The consultant team encouraged the City and representatives of potential user groups to think outside the box during programming. At the same time with the inclusion of Ballard King and the consultant teams‟ understanding of construction costs from the very beginning to make sure the project sticks to the budget model established in programming and operations of the facility. This section discusses goals of the City of Edmonds and presents data on how the population “plays” in an aquatic center and the different types of aquatic amenities available. ADA Accessibility was a concern amongst the groups so we have presented options and discussed means of entry for ADA Accessibility.This section also provides charts to compare the different competitive pool configurations and discuss the different types of buildings that are used in natatorium construction. It is our recommendation that the committee, stakeholders, and interested citizens tour nearby facilities to gain first hand visuals and knowledge of today‟s aquatic centers. We encourage you to discuss operations with their maintenance staff, programming with their aquatic directors, and stop a few swimmers along the way to find out what they like, and would like to improve, in their aquatic facility. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 19Packet Page 77 of 307 Needs and Programming Assessment During the Project Initiation Meeting with the Study Committee, several amenities were presented and options were discussed. The following is a synopsis of the goals and needs for the aquatic facility. GOALS Expand the recreational opportunities for the city of Edmonds by building a year round aquatic center with a lap pool, leisure pool and whirlpool. The pools should be accessible for the use of all citizens, including the disabled. The pools should serve multiple purposes, including: Competitive Swimming Competitive Diving Family Recreation Senior water walking and classes Instruction Learn to Swim Programs Fitness Lap Swimming Aquatic Aerobics Wellness / Therapy Provide for additional recreation needs in the community, especially when they increase revenues and reduce the operational subsidy. NEEDS Design for operations and cost of ownership Need for therapy pool/area that can be heavily programmed and have high usage The use of bulkheads for flexibility in the competition pool Lazy river for multiple programming use (i.e. therapy and recreation) Leisure and activities areas are very popular amongst population. 8 to 10 percent of swimming population swims competitively. Whirlpool options sensitive for handicapped access (i.e. raised whirlpool) Theming/Brand identification and wall murals to create excitement ADA Compliancy Minimize building footprint and maximize entertainment value per square foot (i.e. slide flumes penetrate the natatorium wall to continue the path on the exterior of the building and reenter prior to the plunge pool.) Interactive water features … bright, colorful, starting with younger kids and on up. Activity pool to appeal to the user groups of preteens, teens, high school age. This could include obstacle courses, climbing walls, basketball, volleyball There are 5 high schools in the school district. Four schools have competitive teams; all of these schools use the Lynnwood Recreation Center Pool. High school teams require a 25 yard program The desire for a 50 meter pool was discussed (more options for programming) Need a wall to separate competitive facilities from leisure components for acoustical separation and to facilitate the safe operation of the warm water components during competition practice and events. Possible springboard diving Birthday party rental rooms Instructional needs are usually the largest aquatic need in communities. Local pools often have waiting lists for swim lessons. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 20Packet Page 78 of 307 Aquatic aerobic classes are very popular for strength, conditioning and weight loss. Senior classes in warm water are particularly popular with retired people who have more time for exercise Support spaces of concessions, locker rooms, weight training room and coaches‟ offices will also be needed. While swim teams need deep water for competitive swimming and diving, they also need shallow water for instruction The swim team needs the water temperature to be around 81 to 82 degrees for practice and 79 to 80 degrees for meets. Instruction and recreational swimming needs water temperature in the range of 84 to 88 degrees. Whirlpool water temperature is usually 102 to 103 . An emerging trend is to provide a family whirlpool either in the warm water pool or as a separate body that operates in the temperature zone of 88 to 95. Separate pools are needed for proper water temperature Most communities that build deep water competition pools find the need for shallow water instructional/recreational pools. The warm, shallow pools provide for family recreation, water walking for seniors, aquatic aerobics, swim instruction, and a warm up/warm down area for competitive swimming. The deep water competition pool and the shallow water recreation pools are complementary. Intergenerational Aquatic Use Play /pleɪ/ :to engage in (a game, pastime, etc.) Play is a dynamic process that develops and changes as humans grow and evolve. The simple act of play actually becomes increasingly more varied and complex. It is an essential and integral part of a child‟s development and physical growth. The demands on today‟s children are much different from previous generations and consequently there is less play time in their lives. It is our responsibility as “professionals of fun” to understand this important lifelong skill and how to integrate play into our designs, facilities, and programming. Youth at Risk Watch the news. “Studies show early signs of heart disease found in US children. One in seven school aged children has three or more risk factors predisposing them to deadly cardiovascular conditions. 65% of all children 10 to 18 years cannot pass a minimum standard of fitness. One out of every four teenagers is dangerously overweight!” Additionally, drowning remains the second-leading cause of unintentional injury-related death for children ages 1 to 14 years, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. This is largely due to a lack of access to recreational water activities. We continuously preach exercise, but how do we “force” children to exercise? Perhaps we simply make it more fun. Humans have a natural affinity to water and it is associated with fun in many instances; bubble baths, open fire hydrants on a hot day, running through the sprinkler, and spending time at the lake or the ocean. This may account for census results that have proven swimming is only second to walking over all other recreation activities. In order to understand what aquatic trends will become popular and how to design for multi- generational programming we must first look at the fundamentals and benefits of play, what motivates an individual to participate, and how each age group plays in the water. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 21Packet Page 79 of 307 Physical Development Swimming can improve strength, balance and improve flexibility. It provides an aerobic benefit that is relatively injury free in comparison to other sports. “The water‟s unique properties allow the pool to provide an environment for people of all abilities” states the Aquatic Exercise Association. “Buoyancy creates a reduced impact exercise alternative that is easy on the joints, while the water‟s resistance challenges all the muscles. Water lends itself to a well -balanced workout that improves all major components of physical fitness- aerobic training, muscular strength and endurance, flexibility and body composition.” It is also a sport that can be a lifetime activity; participants may be 1 or 101 years old. Social Development Through social play children, and adults, learn to cooperate and appreciate the importance of taking others‟ needs and feelings into account. Playing together fosters awareness and understanding of a variety of values and attitudes. These great strides in development all happen while the person is laughing and establishing friendships; while they are having fun. Water is a safe sport for children of all ages and proficiency levels. Learn to swim and aqua classes can be socially enjoyable while at the same time provide fitness benefits. Psychological and Emotional Development A water sport promotes fitness and cultivates a positive attitude. An accomplishment of finally mastering the back float or competing in a swim meet can help to increase self esteem. Spend some time at a pool and count the times you hear “Watch me mom!” Playing in the water promotes increased energy levels and promotes children to strive for physical achievement. Water is iconic to stress relief; soothing waterfalls, gentle rains, calm waters. Swimming forces you to regulate breathing and allows more oxygen to flow into muscles. The warm water of a wellness pool or whirlpool can help to calm nerves, stimulate cardiovascular circulation, soothe the mind and body. Age Groups – How They Play Each age group plays and responds differently to areas of the pool and its amenities. An accomplished aquatic designer understands the “play needs” of each generation and translates this into their pool designs. This ensures that there are multiple options for everyone to engage users at the pool. Understanding the needs for multiple programming spaces is another design consideration often overlooked by an inexperienced team. Knowing what areas can double as teaching spaces, training areas and recreational swim/buy outs and rentals, while still meeting guest‟s needs is an acquired skill. For example, current channels or lazy rivers can be used for resistance or assistive walking classes during one time of the day and can then be used as a recreational river to serve another group. Warm water wellness pools provide a place for therapy and rehabilitation but also present adequate and appropriate depth and temperature for learn-to-swim lessons. Ultimately, it is important to provide a safe environment for any type of play, especially in the water. Supervision is imperative in any type of design. Understanding how these facilities operate help the design team to properly place offices, observation and seating areas for easy maintenance and safety. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 22Packet Page 80 of 307 0 to 3 Years Concentrating on their own needs, infants play alone while toddlers will play side by side. They engage in activities that stimulate their senses. Playing involves physical activity and it is closely related to the development and refinement of a child‟s motor skills and coordination process. Infants intuitively prefer high contrast edges and patterns and respond best to primary colors. The interactive play structures available today address to this theory and are popular within this age group. Modest sized water spray features initiate the quest for interacting with water in motion and stimulates rudimentary fantasy play. Infants respond visually and smaller toddlers will approach and interact. Many babies learn to swim before they walk because of the buoyancy they encounter in the water. Infant and toddler swim classes are also often the first social experience outside of the home. The zero depth edge of the pool presents a gradual, non-threatening entrance into warm water. Aquatic classes in the leisure and shallow water pools such as splash time and parent and tot classes are popular amongst this age group. 3-5 Years This age group plays in small groups, uses props, pretend plays and does it passionately with no absolute goals in mind. Blissful, Individually they are building confidence and socially they are learning to share and cooperate. In the water they respond to interactive play including small dumping buckets, floatables and children‟s slides. Slides that accommodate several children at once are timeless. The 3-year-old initially rides with the assistance of a parent, as they become more daring they go down in pairs holding hands, and eventually they are racing their peers down the same slide. Aquatic lessons should be fun and kept to smaller numbers, say five children per class. In the pre-school level skills will range from kicking their feet at the edge of the pool to swimming up to 25 yards on their front and back. 5 to 8 Years At this age kids begin to play formal and informal games with their peers. There may be a winner, per se, or just the common goal of accomplishing a task (e.g. hopscotch). This play helps them to refine their social skills and understand cooperation, teamwork and competition. Role playing is popular amongst this age group and imitating their role models is a popular pastime (playing house). Providing a multi-level play structures with props such as ropes, ladders, cubby spaces, and interactive play will encourage their imagination. It is imperative to a child of this age to be challenged and be provided the opportunity to demonstrate their talents and abilities (“Watch me dad!”). The leisure, activity pools and lazy rivers facilitate this type of play. It takes courage to ride the flume slide for the first time, engage in a game of water basketball, or hold your best friend‟s hand down the adventure channel and navigate an inflatable obstacle course. Aquatic programming begins to take the form of children‟s masters and diving classes. Students begin to build upon their learned abilities moving onto the next level in their swimming abilities. It is still important to continue to offer learn-to-swim classes, especially in underserved populations where children have not had the benefit of aquatic recreation. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 23Packet Page 81 of 307 8 to 13 Years At this age we become more organized and structured. Achievement becomes more important and we are starting to set goals and milestones for ourselves. The activity pool, with deeper water, provides the challenging environment. Flume slides, mat racer slides, activity pools, floatables, net walks, water basketball, aqua climbing walls, surf simulators, rope swings, etc. The more exciting and challenging the more appealing the activity becomes. Studies also show that playing can enhance the learning process - the more physical the play– moving, stretching, and resistive – the better. Programming includes junior lifeguarding, advanced swimming and diving. These help to build endurance, strength, speed and increase overall fitness levels. An activity night or designated swim night with peers is attractive as this age group is beginning to thrive socially outside the family unit. Teens It is common knowledge that during our teenage years our socialization moves from our families to our peer groups. We channel our energy (fun) into specialized clubs, youth groups, volunteer activities, and team sports. The complexity has moved from blissful play to that of self awareness and social standing. In addition to the entertainment value of the challenging environments of their previous peer group, teenagers desire separate social spaces. These often difficult-to-please demographics do not want to always hang out with mom and dad. An aquatic craze among those participants is the “Teen Zone”. This is a separate, yet very visible, section of the deck or grass area that is programmed for this specific group. Within their “own space” they can socialize, enjoy popular music, engage in social interactive activities like „rock and roll band, guitar hero or others” and just hang out to be social. Aquatic programming for this age group could include lifeguard and instructor training, and competitive swim groups. Adults We have a big lesson to relearn here. Play. Some where along the way we concluded that grown up play is viewed as a weakness and the successful people just work; we need permission to play again. We have just agreed that play is a mind and body integration and social necessity. Play is a relaxed spontaneity that should be embraced, even into adulthood. Adults should revisit what fun was for them as a child. Many adults that were involved in competitive swim groups are seeking out adult swim master programs, water exercise, aerobics, water polo, aqua jog and resistance walk programs translate into fun adult programming. Adults have fun on waterslides. Parents The pool is an ideal opportunity for parents of young children to meet like minded people who share common interests. Take a quick scan over the pool area and you will find moms and dads congregating in the zero depth area with their tots. It is also common to find parents floating down the lazy river with a baby or sleeping child strewn across their lap. It is also pretty cool to be able to tell your friends that you beat your dad down the mat racer slide. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 24Packet Page 82 of 307 Aquatic programming to support the parent network is important; parent/infant, parent/toddler and adult swim classes. Active Senior Adults Swimming is one of the best exercise and social environments available to seniors. It is safe and easy on the body, allowing people to move their bodies without bearing their weight. It is an ideal way for seniors to get in shape and improve their overall well being. For some disabled and seniors, water gives them a sense of freedom as they freely move around in the water. An aquatic fitness class is a great social outlet for seniors. Warm water lap lanes and wellness pools provide popular warm water activities such as silver sneakers, aqua restore (stay young with water) low impact aqua fitness, aqua walking, and underwater bikes. Vortex and lazy rivers offer assistive walking opportunities and whirlpools and social benches offer social spaces enjoyed by this age group. Do not forget about the non-aquatic amenities in any age group, let alone seniors. Areas that promote socialization outside of class, a café or comfortable deck seating are ideal. This is an attractive amenity that promotes return guests. How People Play Together Multi-generational recreation and fitness provide something for everyone under one roof; swimming is ageless. It is often said that families that play together, stay together. For example, recreational swimming provides seniors occasion to frequent the aquatic facility with their children and grandchildren. Teenagers can challenge their younger siblings or parents to a game of basketball in the water. Or we can just relax together floating down the lazy river. It is interesting to watch the interaction between age groups; best friends, rivals, siblings, parents, and grandparents. This is where a cross over into each area of the pool occurs and where we find a social interaction between generations. Water brings together generations and allows everyone an opportunity to benefit individually and together. Multi-generational Pool Amenities Americans love to swim. The traditional competitive venues are seeing a movement to include leisure components in their facilities. A variety of surveys and studies conducted throughout the nation have provided us with the conclusive evidence of the importance of swimming as a leisure activity. Swimming is now only second to walking as the most popular exercise in the United States, with more than 368 million annual visits to swimming pools. Swimming, however, ranks first among all ages as the most popular recreational activity in the nation. Combining competitive and leisure components into one facility creates a partnership that includes a full spectrum of activities that compliment each other well. A community aquatic facility is an amenity that helps to weave the threads of a community and enhance the quality of life, family, togetherness, and wellness of its residents. It serves a multi-generational public including seniors, parents, teenagers, young children, toddlers, and infants. There is recreational value that meets the needs of each demographic in a community. The Aquatic Center responds to the very basic needs and interests of the consumer. Its emphasis is based upon the premise that the swimming pool visitor is primarily interested in a quality leisure experience that includes high entertainment and social values. The right blend of City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 25Packet Page 83 of 307 entertainment, along with the traditional aquatic requirements of competitive swimming, exercise and fitness, has proven successful for communities of all sizes. Competitive Pools Competitive pools provide swimmers a place to practice and compete, as well as a venue for other water activities. While competitive pools must be rectangular, deeper and cooler than recreational pools, they also can accommodate fitness lap swimming, lifeguard training classes, swim instruction, water polo, synchronized swimming and countless other activities. The competition pool would have minimum 7‟-0” wide lanes for competition. It would be the regulation length for USA Swimming and high school use. Lower Use Component Extends Program Opportunities Competition Wellness, Fitness Orientation Deep Water Component Encourages Local Support Programming Opportunities: Competition Venues Aerobics Floatables Recreation Lap Swimming Life Saving Diving Deep Water Activities Swim Lessons Facility Rentals Age Use None Limited Moderate Excellent Tots and Toddlers (0-5) X Children/Youth (5-12) X Teens/Young Adults (13-25) X Adults X Seniors X Leisure / Recreational Pools Zero depth is probably one of the most popular features of the modern swimming pool. The zero depth entry is a shallow sloped entry that enables users of all ages, abilities and comfort levels to access the pool at their own speed. It is designed with passive and active zones for a graceful entry and shallow water play, respectively. User studies have shown that 47% of guests are in water less than 36”. The zero depth area has become a popular area for adults to socialize and play with their young toddlers, while keeping an eye on their older children. Warm water is another important distinguishing element that is credited to the appeal of leisure pools for recreation, education and fitness use. Water temperatures in the range of 84 to 88 are City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 26Packet Page 84 of 307 important for user comfort in these pools and have been a significant contribution in the multi- faceted programs offered for inter-generational appeal. People enjoy spraying, squirting, bubbling and falling water. The industry has responded with a variety of creative and highly entertaining water features. Participatory or interactive water features are those where a child or adult can actually control the water with various chains, squirt guns, valves etc. They are designed on a separate pumping system so that they can be turned off during programming and passive use times where spraying water is less desirable. Shallow Water Play Family/Youth Orientation Safe, Accessible, and Secure Interactive Water Play Programming Opportunities: Recreational Water Familiarity Interactive Activities Learn to Swim Programs None Limited Moderate Excellent Recreational X Instructional X Wellness/Fitness X Competitive X Age Use None Limited Moderate Excellent Tots and Toddlers (0-5) X Children/Youth (5-12) X Teens/Young Adults (13-25) X Adults X Seniors X The popularity of waterslides is obvious evidence of the influence of commercial waterparks on the community aquatic center. Body and tube flume slides are major components of community center pools. Drop, bowl and speed slides offer guests an exciting experience. The quickness of the ride and fast moving lines translate into a higher capacity attraction. The slide is a colorful architectural element that adds thrill and excitement to the facility. The slide plunge pool is also City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 27Packet Page 85 of 307 an ideal location to host learn to swim and other programmatic classes when the slide is turned off. For the younger children and toddlers, many creative kiddie slides are available. Many of them can be incorporated with a facility theme or mascot. One is only limited by their imagination. Fun and Exciting! High Capacity Feature Moving Water Multiple Ride Options Multiple Experience Levels Plunge Pool Programming Opportunities Programs None Limited Moderate Excellent Recreational X Instructional X (plunge pool) Wellness/Fitness X (plunge pool) Competitive X Age Use None Limited Moderate Excellent Tots and Toddlers (0-5) X Children/Youth (5-12) X X Teens/Young Adults (13-25) X Adults X Seniors X Vortex / Lazy River The vortex/lazy river feature in a facility services a multi-programming option. The vortex can be used as a recreational component during one part of the day and as a programmable amenity for exercise and rehabilitation during another part of the day. Lazy Rivers and vortex channels can offer both passive and active areas. They can serve as an alternative to the high energy areas of the FAC where guests can enjoy a relaxing float through the winding river. The river can also incorporate exciting features with rapids, squirting, dumping and splashing water. The current channel is multipurpose, serving the youth of all ages. In addition to its history as a fun leisure component for all, the current channel today is more often used for the therapeutic benefit of water walking with or against the current. Water walking, resistive and assistive, free suspension floating, and swimming against the current in channels and vortexes meets all of these physical fitness components. Facilities that have incorporated these amenities into their designs have been able to program their facilities to include water walking, water aerobics, fitness training and adult exercise classes into their programming offerings. It has served as an exceptional wellness and quality of life motivation in reaching segments of the community that are not usually served in the recreational aquatic City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 28Packet Page 86 of 307 center environment. It also opens up the facility for use by those who need aquatic exercise the most. Those groups are the senior population, residents with disabilities and those recovering from surgery, illness or injury. Underwater Bench Seating Located in 3‟- 6” of water, the underwater bench seating area is an ideal location for users to passively enjoy being in the pool. The majority of the bench is free of spraying water so that users can relax and enjoy social time without having to get their hair wet. Depending on the time of day, this area is frequented by moms and tots, teens, and the active senior population. Relaxing Social High Capacity Moving Water Group or Individual Use Social Capacity Programming Opportunities: Recreational Water Exercise Water Therapy Learn to Swim Kayak/Canoe Programs None Limited Moderate Excellent Recreational X Instructional X Wellness/Fitness X Competitive X Age Use None Limited Moderate Excellent Tots and Toddlers (0-5) X Children/Youth (5- 12) X Teens/Young Adults (13-25) X Adults X Seniors X Whirlpool The Whirlpool provides therapeutic benefits of warmth and water and serves as a social spot within the pool. Whirlpool/Spa- The whirlpool can be used by families or just adults, depending on the temperature programmed by the facility. Several community centers include two whirlpool City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 29Packet Page 87 of 307 spas to accommodate both groups of users. It is the ideal place to relax after a swim competition, water walking or water aerobics class. The whirlpool is equipped with therapy jets. Programs None Limited Moderate Excellent Recreational X Instructional X Wellness/Fitness X Competitive X Age Use None Limited Moderate Excellent Tots and Toddlers (0-5) X Children/Youth (5- 12) X Teens/Young Adults (13-25) X Adults X Seniors X Wellness / Therapy The therapeutic warm pool will be shallow area of the pool (and can be a separate pool) that also can be used for children's swim classes and a variety of aquatic classes. Warm water has the ability to relax muscles and decrease pain, often important during rehabilitation. Water has buoyancy and resistance that can help individuals who are physically functioning at a lower level, as well as individuals who are high level athletes. The benefits of a wellness pool include: Decrease pain Improve and maintain fitness Increase joint mobility and muscle flexibility Improve endurance and tolerance to activity Improve muscle strength and tone Improve circulation and respiration Simply relax, unwind and foster social interaction leading to better mental health Multi-program for fitness classes and learn-to-swim instructional programs Programs None Limited Moderate Excellent Recreational X Instructional X Wellness/Fitness X Competitive X City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 30Packet Page 88 of 307 Age Use None Limited Moderate Excellent Tots and Toddlers (0-5) X Children/Youth (5- 12) X Teens/Young Adults (13-25) X Adults X Seniors X Additional Support Spaces Spectator Seating: Seating on the deck is provided in most municipal pools. Temporary athlete and spectator seating on the deck is best provided by aluminum tip and roll bleachers which may be removed or tipped up when not in use. This equipment is loose and may be added at any time rather than during initial construction. Some facilities want to provide a raised spectator gallery, which is the best location for viewing competitive events. An upper viewing area was discussed during the meetings. A separated spectator seating area is preferred by competitive users and spectators for a better event experience. Birthday party/meeting rooms – It is recommended adding two rooms of approximately 300 SF each should have hard surfaced floors for birthday parties and other activities. These rooms would need to be located in close proximity to the pool area for prime viewing of the pools. Family Changing Rooms – In addition to locker rooms for men and women, modern recreation centers provide family dressing areas that allow families to change together as well as ADA accessible changing. During rehabilitation, spouses often assist each other during periods of temporary or permanent disability. The spaces included are corridors with oversize family lockers and changing rooms with diaper changing tables, showers, lavatories and toilets. ADA Accessibility The U.S. Access Board has developed a summary document that specifically addresses accessibility of swimming pools and spas. The guideline presented establishes minimum accessibility requirements only and should not be looked to as the best design solution for a specific project. It is recommended that any individual or group undertaking the development or renovation of these types of facilities exceed these guidelines where possible. It is also recommended that any owner or operator contracting with design professionals consider the application of Universal Design principles (aka “Inclusive Design” and “Design for all”) within the approach and culture of said individuals or companies being contracted. Accessible Routes An accessible route (referred to as an Accessible Means of Egress) is defined by ADAAG as “A continuous and unobstructed way of egress travel from any point in a building or facility that provides an accessible route to an area of refuge, a horizontal exit, or a public way.” In regards to aquatic amenities, an accessible route is required to all swimming areas and supporting amenities. Raised diving boards, platforms and waterslides are not required to comply. This means that walking surface slopes are not to be greater than 1:20 and clear widths are to be a City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 31Packet Page 89 of 307 minimum of 36 inches except at turns and passing areas which require larger „openings‟. Also included as part of an accessible route are ramps, curb ramps, doorways, elevators and platform lifts; all of which are required to comply with the applicable requirements stated in the technical documents. Types of Facilities Pool types are categorized into five (5) groups for defining the means of access. These categories are Swimming Pools, Aquatic Recreation Facilities, Catch Pools, and Spas. In addition, ADAAG identifies Water Play Components as a type with additional access guidelines. Swimming Pools Swimming pools require two (2) accessible means of entry if the perimeter of the pool is equal to or greater than 300 lineal feet. On pools that are less than 300 lineal feet, only one accessible means of entry is required. In either scenario one (1) of these means is to be either a pool lift or a sloped entry. Aquatic Recreation Facilities (ARFs) ARF is a designation to cover wave pools, rivers (lazy & action), sand bottom pools and other specialty pools where user access is limited to one area. These types require having only one accessible means provided that this method is a lift, sloped entry or transfer system. Catch Pools Catch pools, also known as Plunge Pools, do not require an accessible entrance/exit unless it is used for alternative purposes. An accessible route is required to the edge of the pool. Wading Pools A wading pool is required to have a sloped entry to the deepest part but is not required to have handrails. Additional forms may be provided. Most governing agencies limit wading pools to 1‟-6” or 2‟-0” of water depth. Spas (Whirlpools) A spa must provide one accessible means of entry. This method can be a pool lift, transfer wall or transfer system. If there are multiple spas arranged in a cluster at least one spa or 5% of the total in each cluster are to be made accessible. A footrest or retractable leg is not required but recommended. Water Play Components Water play components are required to comply with the play area guidelines as it pertains to accessible routes. However, if the component(s) are submerged, compliance is not required as it relates to floor or ground surfaces conditions and the slopes and cross slopes of walking surfaces and ramps. Means of Access The descriptions above indicated the various means of accessibility allowed. Below is a brief overview of each type. Pool Lifts Pool Lifts are to be located in an area where the water depth does not exceed 48 inches. If the water depth for the entire pool is greater than 48 inches, this requirement is waived. The center of the seat, in the “dry” position, shall be a minimum of 16 inches City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 32Packet Page 90 of 307 from the edge of the pool and a clear space 36 inches wide from 12 inches behind the seat to 48 inches forward. The seat height shall be between 16 and 19 inches above the surface of the deck and the seat is to be 16 inches wide. Footrests and armrests are required and are to be removable or foldable. The lift needs to be capable of unassisted operation from both the deck and water. The seat needs to submerge a minimum of 18 inches below the static water level and capable of lifting 300 pounds.. Sloped Entries Sloped entries need to comply with standard “ramp” definitions as stated in Chapter 4 of the ADAAG except for the following provisions. The surfaces are not required to be slip resistant. The sloped entry only needs to extend to a water depth between 24 and 30 inches or the deepest part of a wading pool. Two handrails are required with a spacing of between 33 and 38 inches except on wading pools which do not require handrails. Handrail extensions are not required at the bottom of the sloped entry. Handrails in those attractions designated as ARF are not required to follow the clear width requirements. Transfer Walls A transfer wall is a raised portion of the pool wall perimeter, along an accessible route, that provides for the person to move from their mobility device, onto the wall then into the pool. The top of the wall shall be between 16 and 19 inches above the deck and 12 to 16 inches wide for a distance length of 60 inches measured equal distance from the center of the grab bar(s). The grab bars themselves are required to extend the full width of the wall, have 24 inches clear to another obstruction and the gripping surface is to be between 4 and 6 inches above the wall. Transfer Systems A transfer system is comprised of a transfer wall and a series of transfer steps that allow for gradual descent into the pool. This is especially helpful in conditions with extended freeboards and upper body strength may be limited. Each system shall contain a platform on the deck that is 19 inches deep and 24 inches wide and between 16 and 19 inches above the deck. As with a Transfer Wall, this is to be located on an accessible route and have a clear space of 60 by 60 inches in front. The steps themselves are to have a maximum height (riser) of 8 inches and a depth (tread) of 14 to 17 inches and a minimum width of 24 inches. The steps are to extend to a water depth of 18 inches. Grab bar(s) are required on each step or along the entire length and shall be along at least one side and can not hinder movement. Stairs Accessible pool stairs offer assistance to individuals moving from the pool deck into the water and out by providing support and balance. The risers and treads are to be uniform in height and width, respectively to each other. Risers are to be closed and handrails must be provided between 20 and 24 inches apart. Handrail extensions required as per ADAAG 505.10 are required at the top (pool deck side) of the stairs but not at the bottom. The gripping surfaces are to be between 34 and 38 inches above the stair nosing and be clear of any sidewalls by 1.5 inches. The Americans with Disabilities Act was initiated to extend civil rights protection to people with disabilities. The modifications to the ADAAG and its pending adoption by the Department of Justice extend and enhance these rights and ensure that it continues to meet the needs of people with disabilities. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 33Packet Page 91 of 307 Yost Pool Evaluation The Yost Pool site is one of the most picturesque settings in the Northwest and perhaps the entire United States. The forest preserve atmosphere provides users a destination for aquatic activities and a convenient healthy escape from the user‟s daily lives. This wonderful natural setting has been fostered by carefully creating a multilevel lodge like entrance and bath house that serves users. The 60 parking spaces have been meticulously sculpted into the forest to preserve the sanctity of the trees and surroundings. The pool, whirlpool and ancillary equipment have been extremely well maintained over the years. The operations of the pool have been accomplished by a staff that is knowledgeable and dedicated to ensuring that the facility is as enjoyable and safe for the users as the setting is pristine. The pool programs offered to the citizens of Edmonds provide a sustainable balance of learn to swim, wellness activities, competitive swimming and family recreation. Since the site has been sculpted into the environment there is little room to provide expansion that would allow greater participation at the pool. There is a potential to add some additional outdoor pool features and accomplish some slight embellishment of the existing entrance bath house to attract a larger user group. The difficult task would be to create additional parking capacity for vehicles to support this expanded number. Traditionally seasonal pools that would function with successful programs and expanded recreational usage require parking capacities of between 150 to 200 cars to facilitate the parking demand. The wonderful natural environment that the Yost Pool enjoys presents a challenge to provide an expanded year round aquatic facility without significantly disrupting this setting. The challenge would be to gain community support to expand the facility which would disturb the existing forest park setting. I speculate that if the Yost Pool did not currently exist in this setting that if the community was considering placing a pool in the undisturbed site there would be an outcry of environmental and sustainable concerns if this site was a candidate for a new project. Therefore the options that should be considered are: 1. Continue the seasonal use of the pool and embellish the pool with updated features, new mechanical systems and proportionately increase the parking capacity. 2. Expand the aquatic program at the existing site with an easy to operate seasonal enclosure over the existing and expanded pool that could be partially open during the summer months and totally enclosed during the fall, winter and spring seasons. 3. Continue the seasonal use of the pool and embellish the pool with updated features, new mechanical systems and proportionately increase the parking capacity. Add a new indoor pool at another site with other recreation components creating a new more comprehensive recreational facility. 4. Create a new use for the existing Yost site that more properly aligns with the environment and design a new multifaceted aquatic faculty at a site that can respond to the community‟s needs. The existing Yost Pool condition is in excellent for a pool of its age. This is due to the efforts of the city staff to budget and maintain the pool in operational condition. The pool and whirlpool have been reported to be updated for compliance with the VGB Act for suction release and anti- entrapment. The pool shell has been well cared for with seasonal maintenance to ensure that the City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 34Packet Page 92 of 307 pool is filled with water to minimize damage caused by off season weather impacts. The major issues are the pool interior finish needs to be replaced and update of the mechanical operational systems for the pool and whirlpool. These replacement costs are outlined as follows. Maintenance update costs If Yost Pool would be upgraded and not replaced parks maintenance and the design team recommend the following major improvements to pool facility: Item Description Estimated Cost 1. Replace boiler with more efficient boiler to reduce pool operating costs. $ 45,000.00 2. Replace pool filtration with pressure Regenerative Media $175,000.00 3. Replace old air pneumatic system for pool heating and building heating systems with new energy electronic controls to reduce pool operating costs. $ 28,000.00 4. Remove existing pool interior and install special aggregate interior for more durability and ease of maintenance $ 95,000.00 5. Upgrade diving board platform $15,000.00 6. Install new perimeter pool plumbing and decks $195,000.00 7. Install whirlpool spa equipment in existing pool equipment building $65,000.00 8. Provide complimentary pool amenities to increase recreational attraction of pool $125,000.00 to $950,000.00 Existing Yost Pool Data ACTIVITIES/LAP/PROGRAM POOL Surface Area: 5047 s.f. Dimensions: 75’ by 45’ with an attached 38’ by 44’ diving well Water Temperature: 82-85 F Water Depths: 3’-0” TO 10’-0” Gallons: 250,000 Approximately Turn Over (complete): Turn Over Rate: 800 gpm Turn Over Time: 312 minutes Filtration Rate: 1.6 gpm/sf Backwash Rate: Hand clean Total Filtration Area: 500 s.f. 25 s.f. per grid using Harborlite media Filter: Vacuum Diatomaceous earth 20-38” by 48” grids Heater: Heat exchanger and 3.3 MBTU boiler Gutters: Grated deck level Additional Features: Chemtrol Automated system with liquid Chlorine and Muriatic Acid. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 35Packet Page 93 of 307 WHIRLPOOL Surface Area: s.f. Dimensions: Noted on plans Water Temperature: 103 F Water Depths: 3’0” Gallons: 1,500 Turn Over (complete): Turn Over Rate: 50 gpm Turn Over Time: .5 hours Filtration Rate: Medium rate sand 15 GPM/SF Backwash Rate: 15 GPM/SF Total Filtration Area Sand: 3.0 s.f. Filter: Vertical sand Heater: 175,000 Laars Heater Skimmers: Recessed Additional Features: One additional 15 HP feature pumps for Hydrotherapy Jets with timer control. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 36Packet Page 94 of 307 SITE EVALUATION Three sites were identified by the Study Committee as a potential location for a new aquatics facility and a Site Analysis was conducted for each site. A matrix was created to “score” each site’s attributes allowing a quantifiable comparison between the three sites. The first site was Yost Park at the location of the existing Yost Pool. The beautiful natural setting of Yost Park is its greatest asset and, simultaneously, its greatest challenge in the design of an expanded aquatic center. The topography and desire to preserve the mature trees will impact the potential for expanded aquatic facilities and additional parking. Initially, it appears that success of an aquatic center here is dependent on compromise – acceptance of fewer convenient parking stalls and the loss of some mature trees. The matrix illustrates that, comparatively, Yost Park is not the ideal site for an aquatic facility, but the historic and emotional issues attached to the existing Yost Pool make it a site that cannot be ignored. The site of the Antique Mall near the waterfront was an early consideration as a potential site. However, the owner of Harbor Square Athletic Club (HSAC) became aware of the study and indicated an interest in a partnership with the City to develop a new aquatic facility on property being leased by HSAC. As a result, the focus for a site near the waterfront was shifted to the Harbor Square site. The success of a facility on this site hinges on the partnership potential with the Harbor Squa re Athletic Club. The location in a commercial area may have a positive impact on the site’s vitality, but the specific site available is not highly visible from nearby arterials. Because of it’s location in a commercial area, the site does not have a strong connection to neighborhoods. The former Woodway High School site was evaluated as the third of the three potential sites as it was a site that had been considered previously. Although this site had some very positive attributes, the School District indicated that the site was currently fully utilized for school uses and would not be available for the development of an aquatics facility at this time. There was a suggestion in the first public meeting to consider a site at Madrona School, but this is a currently active school and is also not available at this time. Through the study process, it was discovered that the physical attributes of each site were not an overriding factor in site selection. The complexity and lack of support for a partnership with the HSAC made the Harbor Square site less attractive. Those realities combined with the vocal support for Yost Pool are primary factors considered in the recommendation for a facility at Yost Park. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 37Packet Page 95 of 307 Site Option 1: Yost Park City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 38Packet Page 96 of 307 Site Option 2: Harbor Square S U NWDAYTON S T E DM O ND S W Y /S R 1 0 4 AY 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 10 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 10 10 10 1 0 1 0 10 1 0 1 0 10 10 10 1 0 1 010 10 1 0 10 1 0 1 0 10 1 0 1 0 1 0 10 10 1 0 10 1 0 10 10 1 0 1 010 10 10 10 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 10 10 10 10 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 10 10 10 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 10 1 0 10 1 0 1 0 100 0 10050 Feet ±City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 39Packet Page 97 of 307 Site Option 3: Former Woodway High School City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 40Packet Page 98 of 307 YOST PARK SITE EVALUATION City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study Date: November 14, 2008 1. Size Size of park is adequate for an aquatic center. Topography and natural habitat will significantly influence/limit potential development. 60 parking stalls exist currently. 2. Topography Topography will directly influence facility design and affect construction cost. 3. Location within Edmonds Site is centrally located within Edmonds. 4. Accessibility Not directly accessible from an arterial. Easy access from the bus or bikes and pedestrians from the surrounding neighborhoods. 5. Visibility The park site is well known, but the aquatic center site is somewhat secluded from the perimeter streets. 6. Compatibility with Adjacent Properties The potential aquatic facility site is within a park and is surrounded by neighborhoods. 7. Views Views of the natural setting are appealing. 8. Aesthetic Quality/Beauty The natural setting and beauty of the site may be its most compelling asset. 9. Orientation A southwest exposure is possible, but mature trees will shade the site at times. 10. Availability/ Cost Site is owned by the City. Desire to protect natural setting and landscape will affect the ability to expand the existing facility and the cost of development. 11. Infrastructure Infrastructure is available. Verification of all utilities, especially sanitary sewer capacity, is recommended. Water tank below tennis courts will affect area for expansion. Emergency vehicle access easement north of the existing pool must be maintained. 12. Soils/ Other Construction Cost Impacts Site was formerly a gravel pit. Sandy soil is suspected. Organic material near surface is likely. Summary: The beautiful natural setting of Yost Park is its greatest asset and, simultaneously, its greatest challenge in the design of an expanded aquatic center. The topography and desire to preserve the mature trees will limit the potential for expanded aquatic facilities and additional parking. At first glance it appears that success of an aquatic center here is dependent on compromise – acceptance of fewer convenient parking stalls and the loss of some mature trees. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 41Packet Page 99 of 307 HARBOR SQUARE SITE EVALUATION City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study Date: January 9, 2009 1. Size There is adequate site area to the south for the Harbor Square Athletic Club Aquatic Facility currently in planning stages. For one that is larger as a result of partnership with the City, the HSAC child care facility may be relocated. For an independent facility, the site to the northwest of the Harbor Square Athletic Club has been discussed. This site may be adequate in size depending on requirements for the facility and necessary parking. 2. Topography Site is relatively flat. 3. Location within Edmonds Site is on the western edge of Edmonds in the commercial district. 4. Accessibility Site is adjacent to an arterial. 5. Visibility The Harbor Square Athletic Club is visible from Edmonds Way. An independent facility on the site to the northwest of the Harbor Square Athletic Club may be obscured from view from Edmonds Way. 6. Compatibility with Adjacent Properties An aquatic facility is compatible with an athletic club. Other adjacent development probably has a neutral or slight negative impact on an aquatic center. Future development changes to the area may have a positive impact. 7. Views Views of the adjacent Edmonds Marsh, a nature preserve, are positive. Views of adjacent commercial/warehouse development are not positive. 8. Aesthetic Quality/Beauty The adjacency to Edmonds Marsh is positive, other adjacent commercial/warehouse development and hardscape is not positive. 9. Orientation Southwest exposure is possible. 10. Availability/ Cost In partnership with the Harbor Square Athletic Club, the site may be available at no cost, depending on the partnership agreement. Depending on lease agreements with the Port, another site may be available at a favorable rate. 11. Infrastructure Due to the adjacent development density, it is assumed adequate utilities are available. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 42Packet Page 100 of 307 Edmonds Waterfront Site Evaluation Page 2 12. Soils/ Other Construction Cost Impacts Due to the adjacent development density, it is assumed soils conditions are not cost-prohibitive to development. A high water table may be present. Discovering the soils conditions encountered during construction of nearby development may be informative. Soils conditions closer to the marsh may be less conducive to building construction and environmental impacts due to the adjacent marsh should be evaluated. Summary: The partnership potential with the Harbor Square Athletic Club makes this site attractive. It does not have a strong connection to neighborhoods although it’s location in a commercial area may have a positive impact on its vitality. cl/P:\111-08072\200\A206\A206g\A206g-SiteEvaluation-HarborSquare-090109.doc City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 43Packet Page 101 of 307 FORMER WOODWAY HIGH SCHOOL SITE EVALUATION City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study Date: November 14, 2008 1. Size Size of site is ample if outdoor tennis/basketball courts at the northeast corner of the site can be displaced (it may be possible to relocate the outdoor courts on site, if necessary). Grass playfields could be displaced or relocated to allow for an aquatic center also, but playfields are thought to be more highly utilized than the outdoor courts. 260 parking stalls exist currently. 2. Topography Site is relatively flat. 3. Location within Edmonds Site is in southwest quadrant of Edmonds. 4. Accessibility Site is accessible from an arterial at the base of hill. Not easily accessible for pedestrians or bikes. 5. Visibility Site at the top of a low hill is somewhat hidden but is well known in Edmonds. 6. Compatibility with Adjacent Properties Due to its location at the top of the hill, the site is somewhat isolated from adjacent properties. Nearby property is primarily residential with some commercial development to the northeast. 7. Views Views are of the high school buildings and surrounding tree line at the perimeter of the site. 8. Aesthetic Quality/Beauty The aesthetic quality of the site is relatively neutral; trees at the edge of the hilltop are positive, the adjacent high school buildings are not a great asset from an aesthetic standpoint. The addition of landscaping in the immediate area of the potential aquatic center is important. 9. Orientation A southwest exposure is very possible. 10. Availability/ Cost Site is currently owned by the School District. Availability or agreement for use with the School District must be confirmed. Subsequent to this evaluation, the School District confirmed that this site is not available. 11. Infrastructure Due to the adjacent high school, it is assumed utilities are available. It is recommended that adequacy of utilities be verified. 12. Soils/ Other Construction Cost Impacts There is no evidence that negative issues with soils exist. The School District could be contacted to determine soils conditions that were encountered during construction of the high school. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 44Packet Page 102 of 307 Former Woodway High School Site Evaluation Page 2 Summary: A key factor in the success of this site is the agreement with the School District. Beyond that, it appears an aquatic center could be developed here with relatively few complications. Consideration to future compatible or shared uses with the existing facility should be given. For instance, could locker room facilities be shared? Programming with activities in the nearby gymnasium should be coordinated. This site does not have the aesthetic quality of Yost Park or potential vitality of the waterfront site but seems very viable for a successful aquatic center. cl/P:\111-08072\200\A206\A206g\A206g-SiteEvaluation-Woodway-081114.doc City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 45Packet Page 103 of 307 CITY OF EDMONDS Aquatic Feasibility Study POTENTIAL SITES COMPARISON MATRIX (weighted criteria) January 9, 2009 Potential Sites Si t e E v a l u a t i o n C r i t e r i a Si z e ( X 2 ) To p o g r a p h y y ( X 2 ) Lo c a t i o n w i t h i n E d m o n d s ( X 2 ) Ac c e s i b i l i t y f o r R e s i d e n t s Vi s i b i l i t y Co m p a t i b i l i t y w i t h A d j a c e n t P r o p e r t i e s Vi e w s ( X . 5 ) Ae s t h e t i c Q u a l i t y / B e a u t y ( X 2 ) Or i e n t a t i o n ( X . 5 ) Av a i l i b i l i t y / C o s t ( X 2 ) In f r a s t r u c t u r e So i l s / O t h e r C o n s t r u c t i o n C o s t I m p a c t WE I G H T E D T O T A L Yost Park 3 2 6 7 3 6 8 9 4 8 3 3 84 Former Woodway High School 8 8 4 5 3 6 5 5 7 0 5 6 81 Harbor Square 6 8 4 4 8 7 5 5 7 5 7 6 94 Criteria for each site is rated on a 1 to 10 scale. A score of 10 indicates the site is nearly ideal in that category; a score of 1 indicates the site does not possess characteristics that adequately address the criteria. In categories where the site's characteristics are unknown, the site will receive a score of 5. cl/111-08072/200/A206/A206g-SiteEvaluationMatrix-090109.xls City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 46Packet Page 104 of 307 MARKET ANALYSIS DEMOGRAPHIC SUMMARY AND MARKET REVIEW In an attempt to determine the feasibility of building a new community aquatic center in the City of Edmonds, a market analysis that looks at the demographic realities of the market area and reviews the existing aquatics facilities in the area has been undertaken. The following is a summary of the basic demographic characteristics of the Edmonds market area and a comparison with basic aquatic participation standards as produced by the National Sporting Goods Association. Service Area: The focus of the aquatic center will be to serve the residents of the City of Edmonds, Washington. However, it is normal for most aquatic facilities to have a service area that is different than just jurisdictional boundaries. The exact service area will depend on the type and magnitude of the aquatic center that is developed. As a result a primary, secondary and tertiary service area has been identified. The primary service area consists of the City of Edmonds while the secondary service area includes a much larger geographic area to the north, south and east. The tertiary service area covers an even larger area. The service areas were identified in cooperation with the City of Edmonds staff. Use by individuals outside of these identified service areas will be limited to special events or visitors to the area. Service areas can vary in size with the types of aquatic components that are included in a facility. An aquatic center that includes theme and branding along with interactive elements (zero depth entry, current channel, interactive spray features, current vortex, SCS play structure, slides, etc.) will generally have a larger service area than a normal flat water facility that may be geared to suite general lap swim or aquatic competition of some variety. The inclusion of a tradition flat water pool that can be used for a variety of aquatic competitions will give said facility a larger regional draw, but with the addition of those types of amenities will com e additional operating expense. Most public focused aquatic centers draw the vast majority of their users from a 10 to 15 minute driving distance in a more urban environment. Based upon the facilities proximity to major thoroughfares, along with amenities included in the facility, that driving distance may increase or decrease. Other factors impacting the use as it relates to driving distance are the presence of alternative service providers in the Edmonds area. Alternative service provides can have an impact upon membership, daily admissions and the associated penetration rates for programs. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 47Packet Page 105 of 307 Service Area Statistics and Comparison: Population Comparison: 2000 Census 2008 Estimate 2013 Projection Primary Service Area 39,515 40,846 43,211 Secondary Service Area 120,193 131,694 141,493 Tertiary Service Area 215,516 242,421 263,156 Number of Households Comparison: 2000 Census 2008 Estimate 2013 Projection Primary Service Area 16,904 18,061 19,311 Secondary Service Area 48,665 54,634 59,054 Tertiary Service Area 84,858 97,619 106,482 Number of Families Comparison: 2000 Census 2008 Estimate 2013 Projection Primary Service Area 10,815 11,395 12,039 Secondary Service Area 31,392 34,514 36,859 Tertiary Service Area 55,773 62,976 67,974 Average Household Size Comparison 2000 Census 2008 Estimate 2013 Projection Primary Service Area 2.32 2.24 2.21 Secondary Service Area 2.44 2.38 2.37 Tertiary Service Area 2.52 2.46 2.45 United States 2.59 2.59 2.59 Source – U.S. Census Bureau and ESRI City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 48Packet Page 106 of 307 Primary Service Area Map: City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 49Packet Page 107 of 307 Population Distribution by Age: Utilizing census information for the Primary Service Area, the following comparisons are possible. Table A – 2008 Primary Service Area Age Distribution (ESRI estimates) Ages Population % of Total Nat. Population Difference -5 1,933 4.7% 7.0% -2.3% 5-17 5,770 14.2% 17.3% -3.1% 18-24 3,083 7.6% 9.9% -2.3% 25-44 9,689 23.8% 27.4% -3.6% 45-54 6,781 16.6% 14.6% 2.0% 55-64 5,956 14.5% 11.1% 3.4% 65-74 3,596 8.8% 6.4% 2.4% 75+ 4,040 9.9% 6.2% 3.7% Population: 2008 census estimates in the different age groups in the service area. % of Total: Percentage of the service area population in the age group. National Population: Percentage of the national population in the age group. Difference: Percentage difference between the service area population and the national population. Chart A – 2008 Primary Service Area Age Group Distribution The demographic makeup of the Primary Service Area, when compared to the characteristics of the national population, indicates that they are different, with a larger population in the 44-54, 55-64, 65-74 and 75+ age groups and a smaller population in the -5, 5-17, 18-24 and 25-44 age groups. The greatest positive variance in percentage is in the 75+ age category with 3.7% and the greatest negative variance is in the 25-44 age category with -3.6%. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 -5 5yrs-17 18-25 25-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Primary Service Area National Population City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 50Packet Page 108 of 307 Population Distribution Comparison by Age: Utilizing census information from the Primary Service Area, the following comparisons are possible. Table B – 2008 Primary Service Area Population Estimates (U.S. Census Information and ESRI) Ages 2000 Population 2008 Population 2013 Population Percent Change Percent Change Nat’l -5 1,973 1,933 2,084 5.6% 18.1% 5-17 6,184 5,770 5,656 -8.5% 3.4% 18-24 2,763 3,083 3,373 22.1% 20.1% 25-44 10,838 9,689 9,876 -8.9% 0.7% 45-54 6,650 6,781 6,996 5.2% 27.6% 55-64 4,548 5,956 6,682 46.9% 69.3% 65-74 3,463 3,596 4,168 20.4% 25.7% 75+ 3,096 4,040 4,376 41.3% 24.5% Chart B – Primary Service Area Population Growth Table-B, looks at the growth or decline in age group numbers from the 2000 census until the year 2013. It is projected that all age categories will see an increase, except for that of the 5-17 and 25-44 age groups which will experience a decrease. It must be remembered that the population of the United States as a whole is aging and it is not unusual to find negative growth numbers in the younger age groups and net gains nearing 70% in the 45 plus age groupings in communities which are relatively stable in their population numbers. 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 -5 5yrs-17 18-24 25-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ 2000 2008 2013 City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 51Packet Page 109 of 307 Below is listed the distribution of the population by race and ethnicity for the Primary Service Area based on 2008 population estimates. Table C – Primary Service Area Ethnic Population and Median Age Ethnicity Total Population Percentage of Population Median Age Hispanic1 1,775 4.4% 28.0 White 34,983 85.6% 46.9 Black 599 1.5% 33.0 American Indian 335 0.8% 40.3 Asian 2,726 6.7% 36.4 Pacific Islander 107 0.3% 37.3 Other 630 1.5% 27.2 Multiple Races 1,467 3.6% 21.4 2008 Primary Service Area Total Population: 40,846 Residents Source – U.S. Census Bureau and ESRI 1 The Census Bureau and ESRI do not define “Hispanic” as an ethnicity, therefore if you add the percentages you will find them to be great than 100%. Hispanic is included because it is the opinion of Ballard*King & Associates that it important to have as broad of an understanding of the make-up of your service area as possible. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 52Packet Page 110 of 307 The pie-charts below simply provide a graphical representation of the information contained in Table C on the previous page. Table C, Illustration 1 – Total Hispanic Community Table C, Illustration 2 – Ethnicity-White v. Other Table C, Illustration 3 – Other-Black, American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islander, Other and Multiple Races 4.40% 95.60% Hispanic Other 1.50%0.80% 6.70%0.30% 1.50% 3.60% Black American Indian Asian Pacific Islander Other Multiple Races 85.60% 14.40% White Other City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 53Packet Page 111 of 307 Secondary Service Area Map: City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 54Packet Page 112 of 307 Population Distribution by Age: Utilizing census information for the Secondary Service Area, the following comparisons are possible. Table D – 2008 Secondary Service Area Age Distribution (ESRI estimates) Ages Population % of Total Nat. Population Difference -5 7,900 6.0% 7.0% -1.0% 5-17 20,339 15.5% 17.3% -1.8% 18-24 12,050 9.2% 9.9% -0.7% 25-44 35,839 27.2% 27.4% -0.2% 45-54 20,480 15.5% 14.6% 0.9% 55-64 16,057 12.2% 11.1% 1.1% 65-74 8,929 6.7% 6.4% 0.3% 75+ 10,100 7.7% 6.2% 1.5% Population: 2008 census estimates in the different age groups in the service area. % of Total: Percentage of the service area population in the age group. National Population: Percentage of the national population in the age group. Difference: Percentage difference between the service area population and the national population. Chart C – 2008 Secondary Service Area Age Group Distribution The demographic makeup of the Secondary Service Area, when compared to the characteristics of the national population, indicates that they are different, with a slightly larger population in the 45-54, 55-64, 65-74 and 75+ age groups and a slightly smaller population in the -5, 5-17, 18-24 and 25-44 age groups. The greatest positive variance in percentage is in the 55-64 age category with 1.1% and the greatest negative variance is in the 5-17 age category with -1.8%. When compared to the primary service are the secondary service area displays the same characteristics, but in smaller percentages. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 -5 5yrs-17 18-25 25-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Secondary Service Area National Population City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 55Packet Page 113 of 307 Population Distribution Comparison by Age: Utilizing census information from the Secondary Service Area, the following comparisons are possible. Table E – 2008 Secondary Service Area Population Estimates (U.S. Census Information and ESRI) Ages 2000 Population 2008 Population 2013 Population Percent Change Percent Change Nat’l -5 7,208 7,900 8,694 20.6% 18.1% 5-17 20,308 20,339 20,676 1.8% 3.4% 18-24 10,445 12,050 13,029 24.7% 20.1% 25-44 36,178 35,839 37,692 4.2% 0.7% 45-54 18,219 20,480 21,277 16.8% 27.6% 55-64 11,433 16,057 18,764 64.1% 69.3% 65-74 8,420 8,929 10,459 24.2% 25.7% 75+ 7,982 10,100 10,904 36.6% 24.5% Chart D – Secondary Service Area Population Growth Table-E, looks at the growth or decline in age group numbers from the 2000 census until the year 2013. It is projected that all age categories will see an increase. It must be remembered that the population of the United States as a whole is aging and it is not unusual to find negative growth numbers in the younger age groups and net gains nearing 70% in the 45 plus age groupings in communities which are relatively stable in their population numbers. 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 -5 5yrs-17 18-24 25-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ 2000 2008 2013 City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 56Packet Page 114 of 307 Below is listed the distribution of the population by race and ethnicity for the Secondary Service Area based on 2008 population estimates. Table F – Secondary Service Area Ethnic Population and Median Age Ethnicity Total Population Percentage of Population Median Age Hispanic2 8,047 6.1% 25.5 White 101,955 77.4% 42.7 Black 3,274 2.5% 29.9 American Indian 1,181 0.9% 35.3 Asian 15,776 11.9% 33.7 Pacific Islander 435 0.3% 33.2 Other 3,183 2.4% 25.5 Multiple Races 5,890 4.4% 20.1 2008 Secondary Service Area Total Population: 131,694 Residents Source – U.S. Census Bureau and ESRI 2 The Census Bureau and ESRI do not define “Hispanic” as an ethnicity, therefore if you add the percentages you will find them to be great than 100%. Hispanic is included because it is the opinion of Ballard*King & Associates that it important to have as broad of an understanding of the make-up of your service area as possible. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 57Packet Page 115 of 307 The pie-charts below simply provide a graphical representation of the information contained in Table F on the previous page. Table F, Illustration 1 – Total Hispanic Community Table F Illustration 2 – Ethnicity-White v. Other Table F, Illustration 3 – Other-Black, American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islander, Other and Multiple Races 6.10% 93.90% Hispanic Other 2.50%0.90% 11.90% 0.30% 2.40% 4.40% Black American Indian Asian Pacific Islander Other Multiple Races 77.40% 22.60% White Other City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 58Packet Page 116 of 307 Tertiary Service Area Map: City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 59Packet Page 117 of 307 Population Distribution by Age: Utilizing census information for the Tertiary Service Area, the following comparisons are possible. Table G – 2008 Tertiary Service Area Age Distribution (ESRI estimates) Ages Population % of Total Nat. Population Difference -5 15,590 6.5% 7.0% -0.5% 5-17 39,409 16.2% 17.3% -1.1% 18-24 23,132 9.5% 9.9% -0.4% 25-44 69,259 28.6% 27.4% 1.2% 45-54 38,030 15.7% 14.6% 1.1% 55-64 28,088 11.6% 11.1% 0.5% 65-74 14,343 5.9% 6.4% -0.5% 75+ 14,569 6.0% 6.2% -0.2% Population: 2008 census estimates in the different age groups in the service area. % of Total: Percentage of the service area population in the age group. National Population: Percentage of the national population in the age group. Difference: Percentage difference between the service area population and the national population. Chart E – 2008 Tertiary Service Area Age Group Distribution The demographic makeup of the Tertiary Service Area, when compared to the characteristics of the national population, indicates that they are different, with a slightly larger population in the 25-44, 45-54 and 55-64 age groups and a slightly smaller population in the -5, 5-17, 18-24, 65-74 and 75+ age groups. The greatest positive variance in percentage is in the 25-44 age category with 1.2% and the greatest negative variance is in the 5-17 age category with -1.1%. When compared to the primary service area the tertiary service area shows similar characteristics in the 24 and under age groups, but illustrates an increase in 25-44 and decreases in the 65+ age categories. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 -5 5yrs-17 18-25 25-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Tertiary Service Area National Population City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 60Packet Page 118 of 307 Population Distribution Comparison by Age: Utilizing census information from the Tertiary Service Area, the following comparisons are possible. Table H – 2008 Tertiary Service Area Population Estimates (U.S. Census Information and ESRI) Ages 2000 Population 2008 Population 2013 Population Percent Change Percent Change Nat’l -5 13,975 15,590 17,234 23.3% 18.1% 5-17 38,838 39,409 40,489 4.3% 3.4% 18-24 19,327 23,132 25,143 30.1% 20.1% 25-44 69,108 69,259 73,040 5.7% 0.7% 45-54 32,014 38,030 40,280 25.8% 27.6% 55-64 18,397 28,088 33,431 81.7% 69.3% 65-74 12,490 14,343 17,492 40.0% 25.7% 75+ 11,364 14,569 16,045 41.2% 24.5% Chart F – Tertiary Service Area Population Growth Table-H, looks at the growth or decline in age group numbers from the 2000 census until the year 2013. It is projected that all age categories will see an increase. It must be remembered that the population of the United States as a whole is aging and it is not unusual to find negative growth numbers in the younger age groups and net gains nearing 70% in the 45 plus age groupings in communities which are relatively stable in their population numbers. 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 -5 5yrs-17 18-24 25-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ 2000 2008 2013 City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 61Packet Page 119 of 307 Below is listed the distribution of the population by race and ethnicity for the Tertiary Service Area based on 2008 population estimates. Table I – Tertiary Service Area Ethnic Population and Median Age Ethnicity Total Population Percentage of Population Median Age Hispanic3 15,691 6.5% 25.0 White 186,689 77.0% 40.5 Black 6,115 2.5% 29.9 American Indian 2,230 0.9% 34.1 Asian 28,799 11.9% 33.8 Pacific Islander 891 0.4% 32.3 Other 6,376 2.6% 24.9 Multiple Races 11,316 4.7% 19.4 2008 Tertiary Service Area Total Population: 242,421 Residents Source – U.S. Census Bureau and ESRI 3 The Census Bureau and ESRI do not define “Hispanic” as an ethnicity, therefore if you add the percentages you will find them to be great than 100%. Hispanic is included because it is the opinion of Ballard*King & Associates that it important to have as broad of an understanding of the make-up of your service area as possible. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 62Packet Page 120 of 307 The pie-charts below simply provide a graphical representation of the information contained in Chart I on the previous page. Table I, Illustration 1 – Total Hispanic Community Table I, Illustration 2, Ethnicity-White v. Other Table I, Illustration 3 – Other-Black, American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islander, Other and Multiple Races 6.50% 93.50% Hispanic Other 2.50%0.90% 11.90% 0.40% 2.60% 4.70% Black American Indian Asian Pacific Islander Other Multiple Races 77.00% 23.00% White Other City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 63Packet Page 121 of 307 Next, the median age and household income levels are compared with the national number. Both of these factors are primary determiners of participation in recreation activities. The lower the median age, the higher the participation rates are for most activities. The level of participation also increases as the income level goes up. Median Age: 2000 Census 2008 Estimate 2013 Projection Primary Service Area 41.9 44.9 45.9 Secondary Service Area 38.0 39.5 39.9 Tertiary Service Area 36.1 37.6 38.1 Nationally 35.3 36.8 37.7 Chart G – Median Age As we can see in Chart-G, the median age for all 3 service areas are greater than the National median age. The service area the is most similar to the National level is the Tertiary Service Area, while the Primary Service Area median age is significantly higher than the National level and appears to be increasing at a more rapid rate. 0 10 20 30 40 50 2000 2008 2013 Primary Secondary Tertiary National City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 64Packet Page 122 of 307 Map of 2008 Median Age: The map below identifies the median age by census tract and illustrates the boundaries of the Secondary Service Area. This allows for a more accurate depiction of where particular age groups might be in location or proximity to the proposed site of an aquatic center in Edmonds. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 65Packet Page 123 of 307 Median Household Income: 2000 Census 2008 Estimate 2013 Projection Primary Service Area $54,047 $69,238 $78,653 Secondary Service Area $50,930 $66,104 $75,894 Tertiary Service Area $51,168 $66,606 $76,239 Nationally $42,164 $54,749 $64,042 Chart H – Median Household Income In the Primary Service Area the percentage of households with median income over $50,000 per year is 68.3% compared to 54.4% on a national level. Furthermore, the percentage of the households in the service area with median income less than $25,000 per year is 11.1% compared to a level of 21.1% nationally. In the Secondary Service Area the percentage of households with median income over $50,000 per year is 65.0% compared to 54.4% on a national level. The percentage of the households in the service area with median income less than $25,000 per year is 12.8% compared to a level of 21.1% nationally. In the Tertiary Service Area the percentage of households with median income over $50,000 per year is 66.1% compared to 54.4% on a national level. The percentage of the households in the service area with median income less than $25,000 per year is 11.9% compared to a level of 21.1% nationally. These statistics indicate that there is probably a higher level of discretionary income for recreational purposes, but this assumption must also be tempered with the cost of living in the Edmonds area. 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 2000 2008 2013 Primary Secondary Tertiary National City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 66Packet Page 124 of 307 Map of 2008 Median Income: The map below identifies the median household income by census tract and illustrates the secondary service area boundaries. This allows for a more accurate depiction of where households with more discretionary income might be in location or proximity to the proposed site of an aquatic center. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 67Packet Page 125 of 307 Places Rated Almanac: Ambience Housing Jobs Crime Transportation 92 9 96 43 88 Education Health Care Recreation Climate 89 85 100 86 Mean Score Rank 77 3 The 25th Anniversary Edition of the Places Rated Almanac provides the above listed statistics for the Seattle- Bellevue-Everett, WA area. In examining these statistics it is important to note that the end rank does not correlate in any direct fashion to a cost of living. The end rank simply states that out of the 379 major metropolitan areas scored the Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA area ranks 3rd. As it relates to recreation the Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA area ranks better than 100% of the major metropolitan areas scored. The other score that is worth taking note of is the Housing score of 9, which is important because a correlation can be drawn to housing and cost of living. From previous information we can garner that while the median household income for all service areas is greater the cost of housing and potential cost of living may be such that discretionary spending might only be average. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 68Packet Page 126 of 307 Summary of Service Areas Primary Service Area Demographic Summary: The population is expected to show modest growth over the next 5 to 10 years. The population density is generally medium to high. The median age is much higher than the national average and is expected to increase at a faster rate than the national average. Household size is lower than the national average indicating a slightly lower number of households with children. Median household income is greater than the national level. It is important to compare the median household income with the Housing rank from the Places Rated Almanac. The predominate race in the area is White with the second highest percentage being Asian. Secondary Service Area Demographic Summary: The population is expected to show moderate growth over the next 5 to 10 years.. The population density is generally medium to high. The median age is higher than the national average and is expected to increase at the same rate of the national average. Household size is lower than the national average indicating a slightly lower number of households with children. Also, when compared with the Primary Service Area, the household size is higher. Median household income is greater than the national level, but less than the Primary Service Area. It is important to compare the median household income with the Housing rank from the Places Rated Almanac. The predominate race in the area is White with the second highest percentage being Asian. The percentage of Asian population in the Secondary Service area is greater than the Primary Service Area. Tertiary Service Area Demographic Summary: The population is expected to show moderate growth over the next 5 to 10 years.. The population density is generally medium to high. The median age is slightly higher than the national average, but less than the Primary or Secondary Service Area. Median age is expected to increase at the same rate of the national average. Household size is lower than the national average indicating a slightly lower number of households with children. When compared to the Primary and Secondary Service Area the Tertiary household size is greater than both. Median household income is greater than the national level, but less than the Primary Service Area. It is important to compare the median household income with the Housing rank from the Places Rated Almanac. The predominate race in the area is White with the second highest percentage being Asian. The percentage of Asian population in the Tertiary Service area is identical to the Secondary service area and again higher than the Primary Service Area. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 69Packet Page 127 of 307 Recreation Activities Participation The National Sporting Goods Association (NSGA) conducts an annual in depth study and survey of how Americans spend their leisure time. This information provides the data necessary to overlay rates of participation onto the Primary and Secondary Service Areas to determine market potential. While the focus of this study is aquatics, there are other activities included in this section of the study. This information is important to consider when creating synergy between components of the aquatic center and other amenities. Comparison with National Statistics: Utilizing information from the National Sporting Goods Association and comparing them with the demographics from the service area, the following participation projections can be made (statistics were compared based on age, household income, regional population and national population). Table J – Participation Rates Primary Service Area Activity Age Income Region Nation Average Aerobic 10.8% 10.8% 12.3% 11.4% 11.3% Basketball 7.7% 7.8% 9.9% 9.1% 8.6% Exercise w/ Equipment 19.2% 19.6% 19.4% 19.9% 19.5% Exercise Walking 34.9% 34.6% 34.5% 33.8% 34.4% Running/Jogging 9.9% 11.0% 14.3% 11.4% 11.6% Swimming 18.0% 19.7% 20.2% 19.7% 19.4% Volleyball 3.9% 4.5% 3.9% 4.5% 4.2% Weightlifting 11.3% 12.7% 10.7% 12.5% 11.8% Workout @ Clubs 12.5% 14.4% 13.5% 12.7% 13.3% Secondary Service Area Activity Age Income Region Nation Average Aerobic 11.4% 10.8% 12.3% 11.4% 11.5% Basketball 8.4% 7.8% 9.9% 9.1% 8.8% Exercise w/ Equipment 19.9% 19.6% 19.4% 19.9% 19.7% Exercise Walking 34.4% 34.6% 34.5% 33.8% 34.3% Running/Jogging 11.0% 11.0% 14.3% 11.4% 11.9% Swimming 19.0% 19.7% 20.2% 19.7% 19.6% Volleyball 4.2% 4.5% 3.9% 4.5% 4.3% Weightlifting 12.3% 12.7% 10.7% 12.5% 12.0% Workout @ Clubs 12.8% 14.4% 13.5% 12.7% 13.4% Age: Participation based on average age of the service area, using NSGA age categories. Income: Participation based on the 2008 estimated median household income in the service area. Region: Participation based on regional statistics (Pacific). National: Participation based on national statistics. Average: Average of the four columns. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 70Packet Page 128 of 307 Market Potential – From the statistical data above, the following market potential estimates are possible. The estimated participation numbers indicated below are for recreation activities and do not translate into expected attendance figures for the service areas since many participants will utilize other facilities for recreation activities, including a persons home. Table K – Participation Rates from 2000 to 2013 Primary Service Area Activity Average 2000 Part. 2008 Part. 2013 Part. Difference Aerobic 11.3% 4,159 4,324 4,573 413 Basketball 8.6% 3,162 3,287 3,476 314 Exercise w/ Equipment 19.5% 7,165 7,448 7,877 712 Exercise Walking 34.4% 12,643 13,144 13,900 1,256 Running/Jogging 11.6% 4,276 4,445 4,700 425 Swimming 19.4% 7,120 7,401 7,827 708 Volleyball 4.2% 1,538 1,598 1,690 153 Weightlifting 11.8% 4,332 4,503 4,762 430 Workout @ Clubs 13.3% 4,869 5,061 5,353 484 TOTAL 49,262 51,212 54,158 4,896 Secondary Service Area Activity Average 2000 Part. 2008 Part. 2013 Part. Difference Aerobic 11.5% 12,627 13,864 14,879 2,252 Basketball 8.8% 9,692 10,641 11,421 1,729 Exercise w/ Equipment 19.7% 21,682 23,806 25,549 3,867 Exercise Walking 34.3% 37,776 41,476 44,513 6,737 Running/Jogging 11.9% 13,121 14,406 15,461 2,340 Swimming 19.6% 21,618 23,736 25,474 3,856 Volleyball 4.3% 4,717 5,179 5,558 841 Weightlifting 12.0% 13,254 14,552 15,618 2,364 Workout @ Clubs 13.4% 14,701 16,140 17,322 2,622 TOTAL 149,188 163,800 175,795 26,608 City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 71Packet Page 129 of 307 Anticipated Number of Times Participating Per Year: By taking the number of annual participants from Table-J, times the average number of times swum per year (from 2007 NSGA standards) will equal the total number of estimated uses per year. Table L – Annual Number of Swimmer Days Primary Service Area Average 2000 Uses 2008 Uses 2013 Uses % Change Swimming 39.32 279,958 291,007 307,758 +9.9% Average: The average number of times (by region, income, sex and nation) a person will swim in a year. Secondary Service Area Average 2000 Uses 2008 Uses 2013 Uses % Change Swimming 39.32 850,020 933,300 1,001,638 +17.8% Average: The average number of times (by region, income, sex and nation) a person will swim in a year. This table indicates that there is a high number of annual “swimmer days” (a swimmer day is calculated as on e individual swimming one day) from which to capture a sizable market share. It also must be remembered that many of these “swimmer days” are being satisfied by existing aquatic facilities. It is possible that a new aquatic center in Edmonds with a strong leisure orientation could capture approximately 10% to 20% of the annual swimmer days in the Primary Service Area. This could translate into 29,101 to 58,202 swimmer days annually (based on the 2008 population numbers for the service area). It is also possible that a new aquatic center could capture a portion of the Secondary Service Area as well. If the new aquatic center could capture approximately 5% to 10% of the annual swimmer days, this could translate into 46,665 to 93,300 swimmer days annually (based on the 2008 population numbers for the service area). City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 72Packet Page 130 of 307 Participation Correlation: One of the primary orientations of many community recreation facilities is often a significant aquatics area. With this in mind, and utilizing information provided by the National Sporting Goods Association's 2007 survey, the following correlation between people who participate in swimming and other recreational activities is possible. Table M – Participation Correlation Activity % of Swimmers % of Activity Participation Aerobic 21.6% 37.3% Basketball 18.7% 40.5% Exercise Walking 47.8% 27.9% Exercise w/ Equipment 32.2% 31.9% Running/Jogging 23.6% 40.7% Weightlifting 20.7% 32.7% Volleyball 9.7% 42.3% Percent of Swimmers: The percentage of swimmers who would participate in the given activity. Percent of Activity Participants: The percentage of the listed activity participants who would also participate in swimming. These correlation statistics indicate the strong relationship between those people who participate in aquatics and other activities. These statistics also indicate what other components may be included in an aquatic center so that it may translate into an increase in overall usage of the center. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 73Packet Page 131 of 307 Below are listed a variety of indoor recreation activities and the relative market strength and rate of participation. Summary of Sports Participation: The following chart summarizes participation in various sports and leisure activities utilizing information from the 2007 National Sporting Goods Association survey. Table N – Sports Participation Summary Sport National Rank National Participation in Millions Rank Primary Service Primary Service Participation Exercise Walking 1 89.8 1 34.4% Exercising w/ Equipment 2 52.8 3 19.5% Swimming 3 52.3 2 19.4% Work-Out at Club 8 33.8 4 13.3% Weightlifting 9 33.2 5 11.8% Running/Jogging 11 30.4 6 11.6% Aerobic Exercising 12 30.3 7 11.3% Basketball 15 24.1 8 8.6% Volleyball 24 12.0 9 4.2% Rank: Popularity of sport based on national survey. % Participation: Percent of population that would participate in this sport in the Primary Service Area. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 74Packet Page 132 of 307 Comparison of State Statistics with National Statistics: Utilizing information from the National Sporting Goods Association, the following charts illustrate the participation numbers in selected sports in the state of Washington. Washington participation numbers in selected indoor sports: As reported by the National Sporting Goods Association in 2007. Table O – Washington Participation Rates Sport Washington Participation (in thousands) Age Group Largest Number Exercise Walking 1,871 45-54 45-54 Exercising w/ Equipment 1,254 25-34 25-34 Swimming 1,563 7-11 35-44 Work-Out at Club 611 25-34 25-34 Weightlifting 642 25-34 25-34 Running/Jogging 565 18-24 25-34 Aerobic Exercising 602 25-34 25-34 Basketball 676 12-17 12-17 Volleyball 64 12-17 12-17 Washington Participation: The number of people (in thousands) in Washington who participated more than once in the activity in 2007 and were at least 7 years of age. Age Group: The age group in which the sport is most popular and the age group where the highest percentage of the age span participates in the activity. (Example: The highest percent of an age group that participates in exercise walking is 45-54.) This is a national statistic. Largest Number: The age group with the highest number of participants. Example: The greatest number of exercise walkers is in the 45-54 age group. (Note: This statistic is driven more by the sheer number of people in the age group than by the popularity of the sport in the age span.) This is a national statistic. Note: Age group participation is generally on a bell curve, with the age group noted having the highest rate and then declining from there. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 75Packet Page 133 of 307 Washington sport percentage of participation compared with the population percentage of the United States – Washington’s population represents 2.1% of the population of the United States (based on 2006 statistics). Table P – Washington Participation Correlation Sport Participation Percentages Swimming 3.0% Basketball 2.8% Exercising w/ Equipment 2.4% Exercise Walking 2.1% Aerobic Exercising 2.0% Weightlifting 1.9% Running/Jogging 1.9% Work-Out at Club 1.8% Volleyball 0.5% Note: Sports participation percentages refer to the total percent of the national population that participates in a sport that comes from the State of Washington. It is significant that in 4 activities the percentage of participation matches or exceeds the percentage of the national population. This indicates a relatively average rate of participation. Recreation Expenditures Spending Potential Index: In addition to participation in recreation activities ESRI also measures recreation expenditures in a number of different areas and then indexes this against national numbers. The following comparisons are possible. Table Q – Recreation Expenditures Spending Potential Index Primary Service State of Washington United States Average Spent SPI Average Spent SPI Average Spent SPI Fees for Participant Sports $153.02 134 $121.82 107 $114.20 100 Fees for Recreational Lessons $167.68 132 $134.85 106 $127.48 100 Social, Recreation, Club Membership $218.25 131 $176.71 106 $166.06 100 Exercise Equipment/Game Tables $118.32 114 $103.07 99 $104.24 100 Other Sports Equipment $18.93 125 $15.86 105 $15.12 100 Average Amount Spent: The average amount spent for the service or item in a year. SPI: Spending potential index as compared to the national number of 100. The SPI index indicates that in all areas the rate of spending is above the national average. This shows that there is probably a greater rate of discretionary spending for the types of services that an aquatic center may provide. Moreover this information is very important when determining price point for activities and cost recovery philosophy for the proposed center. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 76Packet Page 134 of 307 Map of Recreation Expenditure Spending Potential Index: City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 77Packet Page 135 of 307 Market Potential Index: Another method to measure possible participation in recreation and fitness activities is through the market potential index where rates of participation in the service area are compared with national numbers through the index rating. Utilizing information provided by ESRI, the following comparisons are possible. Table R – Sports & Leisure Market Potential Index Sport Number of Adults Percentage MPI Aerobics 2,983 8.2% 86 Basketball 3,184 8.7% 96 Jogging/Running 3,068 8.4% 84 Swimming 6,711 18.4% 102 Volleyball 1,379 3.8% 102 Walking for Exercise 9,485 26.0% 97 Weightlifting 3,922 10.7% 91 Yoga 1,308 3.6% 73 Number of Adults: The number of adults in the service area participating in the sport. Percentage: The percentage of adults in the service area participating in the sport. MPI: Market potential index as compared to the national average number of 100. The MPI (Market Potential Index) measures the relative likelihood of the adults in the specified trade area to exhibit certain consumer behavior or purchasing patterns compared to the U.S. average. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 78Packet Page 136 of 307 Aquatic Participation Trends: Without doubt the hottest trend in aquatics is the leisure pool concept. This idea of incorporating slides, lazy rivers (or current channels), fountains, zero depth entry and other water features into a pool’s design has proved to be extremely popular for the recreational user. The age of the conventional pool in most recreational settings is nearly dead. Leisure pools appeal to the younger kids (who are the largest segment of the population that swims) and to families. These types of facilities are able to attract and draw larger crowds and people tend to come from a further distance and stay longer to utilize such pools. This all translates into the potential to sell more admissions and increase revenues. It is estimated conservatively that a leisure pool can generate up to 30% more revenue than a comparable conventional pool and the cost of operation while being higher, has been offset through increased revenues. Of note is the fact that patrons seem willing to pay a higher user fee with this type of pool than a conventional aquatics facility. However, most all indoor leisure pools still cannot cover their cost of operation from user fees. Despite the recent emphasis on recreational swimming the more traditional aspects of aquatics (including competitive swimming, water polo, synchronized swimming, diving, lessons/instruction, and aqua fitness) remain as a part of most aquatic centers. The life safety issues associated with teaching children how to swim is a critical concern in most communities and competitive aquatic programs continue to be important. Another trend that is growing more popular in the aquatic’s field is the development of a raised temperature therapy pool for relaxation, socialization, and rehabilitation. This has been effective in bringing in swimmers who are looking for a different experience and non-swimmers who want the advantages of warm water in a different setting. The development of natural landscapes have enhanced this type of amenity and created a pleasant atmosphere for adult socialization. The multi-function indoor aquatic center concept of delivering aquatics services continues to grow in acceptance with the idea of providing for a variety of aquatics activities and programs in an open design setting that features a lot of natural light, interactive play features and access to an outdoor sun deck. The placing of traditional instructional/competitive pools, with shallow depth/interactive leisure pools and therapy water, in the same facility has been well received in the market. This idea has proven to be financially successful by centralizing pool operations for recreation service providers and through increased generation of revenues from patrons willing to pay for an aquatics experience that is new and exciting. Indoor aquatic centers have been instrumental in developing a true family appeal for community-based facilities. The keys to success for this type of center revolve around the concept of intergenerational use in a quality facility that has an exciting and vibrant feel in an outdoor like atmosphere. The family oriented outdoor water park concept has also gained in popularity by providing for a variety of interactive aquatics activities and programs in a park setting that features a lot of grass, shade structures, sand play areas and natural landscapes. This idea has proven to be financially successful with most outdoor aquatic centers being able to cover their operating costs with revenues generated by the facility itself. This has occurred by increasing the generation of revenues from patrons willing to pay for an aquatics experience that is new and exciting. This concept has carried over to indoor aquatic facilities as well. While the model has had to be modified to meet the demands and limitations of an indoor environment, the presence of a family aquatic center has proven to be very popular. A new concept is the spray ground, where a number of water spray features are placed in a playground setting where there is no standing water but the water is treated and recirculated much like a pool. This provides a fun yet safe environment where drowning is not a concern and lifeguards are not necessary. Also changing is the orientation of aquatic centers from stand alone facilities that only have aquatic features to more of a full-service recreation center that has fitness, sports and community based amenities. This change has allowed for a better rate of cost recovery and stronger rates of use of the aquatic portion of the facility as well as the other “dry side” amenities. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 79Packet Page 137 of 307 Swimming is second behind exercise walking in popularity of sports and leisure activities nationally, meaning that there is a significant market for aquatic activities. Approximately 18.7% of the population in the Pacific region of the country participates in aquatics activities. The largest age group for participation in aquatics activities is in the younger age groups, with over 44% of all kids’ ages 7-11 participating in swimming. More than 31% of all swimmers are under the age of 18 years, and nearly half are under the age of 25. Individuals that swim do so on a regular basis with an average of 40 days a year. This indicates that there is not only a large segment of the population that participates in aquatics activities but they do so on a relatively consistent basis. Within the state of Washington, swimming is the number four most participated in sports activity. Within the Pacific Northwest, and the State of Washington in particular, the newer trends of indoor leisure pools, therapy pools and the outdoor water park concept have been a little slower to catch on compared to other areas of the country. The area also has an unusually large number of stand alone, single purpose indoor aquatics centers than what is found in other areas of the country. The multi-function indoor aquatic center especially in conjunction with other indoor recreation amenities is still a relatively new phenomena in the Pacific Northwest. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 80Packet Page 138 of 307 Below are listed those sports activities that would often take place indoors in a community recreation center and the percentage of growth or decline that each has experienced nationally over the last 10 years (1998- 2007). Table S – National Activity Trend (in millions) Sport/Activity 1998 Participation 2007 Participation Percent Change Weightlifting 22.8 33.2 45.60% Running/Jogging 22.5 30.4 35.10% Skateboarding 7.7 10.1 31.20% Workout Club 26.5 33.8 27.50% Aerobics 25.8 30.3 17.40% Exercise Walking 77.6 89.8 15.70% Exercise w/ Equipment 46.1 52.8 14.50% Tennis 11.2 12.3 9.80% Soccer 13.2 13.8 4.50% Billiards 32.3 29.5 -8.70% Swimming 58.2 52.3 -10.10% Baseball 15.9 14 -11.90% Basketball 29.4 24.1 -18.00% Volleyball 14.8 12 -18.90% Softball 15.6 10 -35.90% 1998 Participation: The number of participants per year in the activity (in millions) in the United States. 2007 Participation: The number of participants per year in the activity (in millions) in the United States. Percent Change: The percent change in the level of participation from 1998 to 2007. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 81Packet Page 139 of 307 In an attempt to develop a more direct comparison between the rates of participation in various leisure activities, the NEA survey ranked the following activities. Table T – Rate of Participation in Leisure Activities in 2002 Chart I Correlation Activity Percentage A Went to Movies 60.0% B Exercised 55.1% C Gardening 47.3% D Arts Activity 39.0% E Home Improvements 42.4% F Theme Park 41.7% G Attended Sports Events 35.0% H Played Sports 30.3% I Camped/Hiked/Canoed 30.9% In relationship to sports participation and other leisure activities, participation in cultural arts is very high. One Element not included in this table that does impact leisure activities is watching television. The Survey of Public Participation in the Arts conducted in 2002 reports that adults spend an average of 2.9 hours per day watching television. Chart I Despite the recent decline in swimming participation, the sport overall still remains immensely popular. However, the focus of swimming has changed from an activity that was oriented around competitive aquatics with deeper and colder water to a more recreational approach that emphasizes shallow, warm water, socialization and interactive play. Consistent use of an aquatic’s facility by families and young children is dependent in large part on the leisure amenities. The sale of daily admissions and more importantly annual/season passes is also tied to the appeal of the leisure pool. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 A B C D E F G H I Percent City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 82Packet Page 140 of 307 Edmonds Area Aquatic Center Assessment: Within the greater Edmonds area there are a number of indoor and outdoor pools. Public and Non-Profit Providers The greatest number of indoor and outdoor aquatic facilities are provided by the public and non-profit sector in the Edmonds area. Outdoor Yost Pool – Located in Yost Park, this outdoor aquatic center features an L shaped design with a 6 lane lap area as well as a smaller deep end with a diving board. In addition there is a small spa area. This facility is in a beautiful park setting and the pool is owned and operated by the City of Edmonds. McCollum Park Pool – Operated by Snohomish County this Z shaped outdoor pool is located in the far north portion of the market area (Everett). Yost Pool Lynnwood Recreation Center Pool Indoor Lynnwood Recreation Center – The City of Lynnwood operates this facility which consists of an indoor/outdoor 6 lane x 25 yard pool, 4 racquetball courts, a small weight exercise room and a multi-purpose room. This facility will undergo an extensive renovation/expansion in the next year to include a permanent roof over the existing pool that will have retractable sections for summer use; the addition of a large indoor leisure pool, and the expansion of the fitness area. Mountlake Terrace Recreation Pavilion – Operated by the City of Mountlake Terrace this 33,000 sq. ft. center contains an extensive indoor leisure pool as well as a small gym, 4 racquetball courts, a cardio weight room, indoor playground, dance studio, pre-school room and other meeting rooms. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 83Packet Page 141 of 307 Shoreline Pool – This stretch 25 yard pool has a 6 lane lap area divided by a bulkhead from a smaller shallow/teaching end. The pool was built in the 1970’s as part of King County’s Forward Thrust pool initiative but the facility is now owned and operated by the City of Shoreline. Shoreline Pool Mountlake Terrace Recreation Pavilion Dale Turner YMCA – Located in Shoreline this new YMCA services the southern portion of the Edmonds market area. This membership based facility features a 6 lane competitive pool and small leisure aquatics area plus a gym, weight/cardio area, aerobics room, and other “dry side” amenities. Northshore YMCA – This facility has two gyms, racquetball courts, weight/cardio area, aerobics room, indoor track, youth center youth adventure zone, nursery and an indoor 6 lane, 25 yard lap pool. This facility is located on the far eastern boundary of the market area. When the inventory of public and non-profit aquatic facilities is analyzed it is apparent that there are a significant number of indoor aquatic facilities but very limited outdoor pools to serve not only the City of Edmonds but the entire secondary service area. Most of the indoor pools are more conventional bodies of water with relatively limited recreational appeal (Northshore YMCA, Dale Turner Family YMCA, and Shoreline Pool), however Mountlake Terrace has a facility with a strong recreational appeal and Lynnwood with their new leisure pool will have a state of the art recreational swim facility. The presence of the new Lynnwood pool will limit the market draw from this area for a similar indoor pool in Edmonds. There are really only two public outdoor pools in the area and both of these (Yost and McCollum) are conventional flat water pools leaving a very strong market for an outdoor leisure focused pool in the Edmonds area. Private The other provider of aquatics facilities is the private sector. These are primarily indoor clubs focused on adult fitness and sports. Below are listed some of the private facilities in the area. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 84Packet Page 142 of 307 Outdoor Klahaya Swim Club – This is a small outdoor swim club that has a traditional lap pool configuration. This club is located in Edmonds. Klahaya Swim Club Harbor Square Athletic Club Indoor Bally Total Fitness – This is a traditional private health club in Lynnwood that has a small lap pool. Harbor Square Athletic Club – Located in the port area of Edmonds this large full service athletic club has a large fitness area, gym, small lap pool, racquetball courts and a large number of tennis courts (both indoor and outdoor). The impact of the private sector on the aquatics market is minimal for the Edmonds area. All of the facilities noted above have very small flat water pools leaving the market significantly underserved. It should be noted that this is a representative listing of aquatic facilities in the area and is not meant to be a total accounting of all service providers. There may be other pools located in the area that have an impact on the Edmonds market as well (apartment and condo pools, hotels, etc.). Edmonds Area Aquatic Facilities Summary: The following is a summary of the Edmonds area aquatic facilities market. The City of Edmonds has only Yost Pool to meet the vast variety of aquatic needs in the community. This is a seasonal pool that can no longer accommodate the needs of the competitive swim market, the demand for programs and services, and has virtually no appeal to recreation swimmers. The city does not have an indoor pool so there is no opportunity for public year round swimming in Edmonds. The school district does not have their own pool for their programs and are reliant on other public and non-profit aquatic facilities to serve their needs. Often this results in inadequate indoor pools having to be utilized for this purpose. Most of the public and non-profit indoor aquatic centers (with the exception of Shoreline Pool) have pools that are part of a larger recreation facility that features other indoor sports and fitness amenities. There are a surprisingly small number of public outdoor pools in the area leaving a large market (Tertiary Service Area) for a new recreationally focused family aquatic center. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 85Packet Page 143 of 307 The recreational swim needs of the area are not being well served by existing facilities which are generally more conventional in nature (except for Mountlake Terrace) with deeper and colder water. However this situation will change when the new Lynnwood leisure pool opens in the near future but the size of this facility will limit its ability to serve the entire identified Edmonds Secondary Service Area. This still leaves a significant market for a similar facility in Edmonds. From the information noted above it is readily apparent that the greater Edmonds market is significantly underserved by the existing aquatic facilities in the area. This is particularly true for outdoor pools but also for indoor aquatic centers as well. Demographic and Market Conclusions: For the City of Edmonds, Yost Pool as a seasonal facility, has to serve a population base of over 40,000. With the variety of aquatic demands of the area and the seasonal nature and limitations of the facility, the pool is unable to adequately serve even the most basic needs of the area. Over the next few years the population is expected to increase at a modest rate while the median age will remain slightly older than the national numbers but the median household income level will be much higher. This will further increase the demand for more aquatic activities. While there are seemingly a significant number of aquatic facilities in the greater Edmonds area the reality is that there are limited public facilities or even non-profit centers of any magnitude to service the size of the market. Determining the focus for the type of aquatic facility to pursue will be critical. A new Edmonds Aquatic Center will need to serve a variety of aquatic needs from competitive swimming to aquatic programs and recreational swimming (see Section II) to ensure a strong financial base for the facility. Overall, there are a significant number of market opportunities for a new aquatic center in Edmonds that should be studied further to determine the financial viability of such a project. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 86Packet Page 144 of 307 MARKET ORIENTATION Based on the market information, the existing pools, and typical aquatic needs within a community, there are specific market areas that need to be addressed with a new aquatic facility. These include: 1. Leisure/recreation aquatic activities - This includes a variety of activities found at leisure pools with zero depth entry, warm water, play apparatus, slides, seating areas and deck space. These are often combined with other non-aquatic areas such as concessions and birthday party or other group event areas. 2. Instructional programming - The primary emphasis is on teaching swimming and life saving skills to many different age groups. These activities have traditionally taken place in more conventional pool configurations but should not be confined to just these spaces. Reasonably warm water, shallow depth with deeper water (4 ft. or more), and open expanses of water are necessary for instructional activities. Easy pool access, a viewing area for parents, and deck space for instructors is also crucial. 3. Fitness programming - These types of activities continue to grow in popularity among a large segment of the population. From aqua exercise classes, to lap swimming times, these programs take place in more traditional settings that have lap lanes and large open expanses of water available at a 3 1/2 to 5 ft. depth. 4. Therapy – A growing market segment for many aquatic centers is the use of warm, shallow water for therapy and rehabilitation purposes. Many of these services are offered by medically based organizations that partner with the center for this purpose. 5. Competitive swimming/diving - Swim team competition and training for youth, adults and seniors requires a traditional 6 to 10 lane pool with a 1 and/or 3 meter diving boards at a length of 25 yards or 50 meters. Ideally, the pool depth should be no less than 4 ft. deep (7 is preferred). Spectator seating and deck space for staging meets is necessary. This market is usually relatively small in number but very vocal on the demands for competitive pool space and time. 6. Specialized uses – Activities such as water polo and synchronized swimming can also take place in competitive pool areas as long as the pool is deep enough (7 ft. minimum) and the pool area is large enough. However these are activities that have small participant numbers and require relatively large pool areas. As a result it may be difficult to meet the needs of specialized uses on a regular basis. 7. Social/relaxation - The appeal of using an aquatics area for relaxation has become a primary focus of many aquatic facilities. This concept has been very effective in drawing non-swimmers to aquatic facilities and expanding the market beyond the traditional swimming boundaries. The use of natural landscapes and creative pool designs that integrate the social elements with swimming activities has been most effective in reaching this market segment. 8. Special events/rentals - There is a market for special events including kids birthday parties, corporate events, community organization functions, and general rentals to outside groups. The development of this market will aid in the generation of additional revenues and these events/rentals can often be planned for after or before regular hours or during slow use times. It is important that special events or rentals not adversely affect daily operations or overall center use. Specific market segments include: 1. Families - Within this market, an orientation towards family activities is essential. The ability to have family members of different ages participate in a fun and vibrant facility is essential. 2. Pre-school children - The needs of pre-school age children need to be met with very shallow or zero depth water which is warm and has play apparatus designed for their use. Interactive programming involving parents and toddlers can also be conducted in more traditional aquatic areas as well. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 87Packet Page 145 of 307 3. School age youth - A major focus of this project should be to meet the needs of this age group from recreational swimming to competitive aquatics. The leisure components such as slides, fountains, lazy rivers and zero depth will help to bring these individuals to the pool on a regular basis for drop-in recreational swimming. The lap lanes provide the opportunity and space necessary for instructional programs and aquatic team use. 4. Teens - Another aspect of this project should be meeting the needs of the teenage population. Serving the needs of this age group will require leisure pool amenities that will keep their interest (slides) as well as the designation of certain “teen” times of use. 5. Seniors - As the population of the United States and the Edmonds area continues to age, meeting the needs of an older senior population will be essential. As has been noted, a more active and physically oriented senior is now demanding services to ensure their continued health. Aqua exercise, lap swimming, therapeutic conditioning and even learn to swim classes have proven to be popular with this age group. 6. Special needs population - This is a secondary market, but with the A.D.A. requirements and the probable existence of shallow warm water and other components, the amenities are present to develop programs for this population segment. Association with a hospital and other therapeutic and social service agencies will be necessary to reach this market. 7. Special interest groups - This is a market that needs to be explored to determine the use potential from a variety of groups. These could include swim teams (and other aquatic teams), school district teams, day care centers and social service organizations. While the needs of these groups can be great, their demands on an aquatics center can often be incompatible with the overall mission of the facility. Care must be taken to ensure that special interest groups are not allowed to dictate use patterns for the center. With the proper utilization of the aquatics area, it is possible to meet all of the varied market orientations as outlined above. However, it is critical that a balance be struck between the different market segments and no one area or market segment should dominate the facility. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 88Packet Page 146 of 307 PROJECT OPTIONS With information from the public and stakeholder meeting, results of the survey and market analysis plus input from the Study Committee, four concept options were developed. Both the public meeting and the survey indicated that support for an aquatics venue at Yost Park was strong. Several options showing a range of development at Yost Park were explored to illustrate the potential expansion and impacts of development. The impact of an indoor pool and the related parking to the natural setting at Yost Park may create some opposition to any expansion of the existing pool. The survey also illustrated the desire for an indoor aquatic component in Edmonds. With this in mind, several concepts included both indoor and outdoor aquatic components. An alternative for addressing the need for an indoor pool is the pursuit of a partnership with Harbor Square Athletic Club (HSAC), so one concept was developed at Harbor Square. The scope of this concept option was based on discussions with the owner of HSAC. A separate concept diagram was also submitted by HSAC and is included in this section of this report. A brief description of each concept is as follows: Concept 1 Outdoor only lap and recreation pools at Yost Park Project cost budget: $8,200,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $35.51 Annual operation cost estimate: $0-$50,000 Reuse the existing lap pool shell. Replace the pool systems equipment. Replace the existing poolhouse. Add recreation pool with amenities (at the location of the existing play structure…grading must be reconfigured to allow ramped access from the level of the existing pool deck). Amenities include a lazy river, a water slide complex and other spray features. Recreation amenities are intended to improve appeal for the facility and therefore reduce the cost subsidy required for operations. Expand parking as needed. Concept 2 Indoor only lap and recreation pools at Yost Park Project cost budget: $21,900,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $95.40 Annual operation cost estimate: $200,000-$300,000 Demolish existing pool and poolhouse. Construct new indoor 25 yard, 8 lane lap pool, new indoor recreation pool with amenities and indoor support facilities. Recreation amenities are intended to improve appeal for the facility and therefore reduce the cost subsidy required for operations. Indoor pool envelop should have significant glazing and operable panels to allow connection to the outdoors during favorable weather conditions. Regrade, construct retaining walls and expand parking as necessary. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 89Packet Page 147 of 307 Concept 3 Indoor lap and warm-water wellness pools and outdoor recreation pools at Yost Park Project cost budget: $16,700,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $72.61 Annual operation cost estimate: $150,000-$250,000 Demolish existing pool and poolhouse. Construct new indoor 25 yard, 8 lane lap pool, warm-water wellness pool, whirlpool and indoor support facilities. Indoor pool envelop should have significant glazing and operable panels to allow connection to the outdoors during favorable weather conditions. Construct new outdoor recreation pool with amenities. Recreation amenities are intended to improve appeal for the facility and therefore reduce the cost subsidy required for operations. Regrade, construct retaining walls and expand parking as necessary (may have undesirable impact on Yost Park). Concept 4 plus Concept 1 Indoor pool and small outdoor pool in partnership with Harbor Square Athletic Club (HSAC) Outdoor only lap and recreation pools at Yost Park (Concept 1) Project cost budget: $17,400,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $75.49 Annual operation cost estimate: $25,000-$125,000 Intent is for HSAC to operate the facility and for HSAC to participate at some level in the capital cost of the facility. Details of the agreement would need to be developed to the satisfaction of both HSAC and the City. Construct new indoor 25 yard, 6 lane lap pool and indoor support facilities. Construct new outdoor 25 yard, 4 lane lap pool and outdoor spray deck. The minimal outdoor aquatic components would not create competition for the seasonal outdoor aquatics at Yost Park. Concept must be confirmed with owner of Harbor Square Athletic Club. Concept option diagrams, the square footage program for support facilities and related project and operational cost information for each concept are included on the following pages. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 90Packet Page 148 of 307 Concept 1: Yost Park, Outdoor Only Project cost budget: $8,200,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $35.51 Annual operation cost estimate: $0-$50,000 City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 91Packet Page 149 of 307 Concept 2: Yost Park, Indoor Only Project cost budget: $21,900,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $95.40 Annual operation cost estimate: $200,000-$300,000 City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 92Packet Page 150 of 307 Concept 3: Yost Park, Indoor Lap Pool, Outdoor Recreational Pool Project cost budget: $16,700,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $72.61 Annual operation cost estimate: $150,000-$250,000 City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 93Packet Page 151 of 307 Concept 4 + Concept 1: Harbor Square,Indoor & Small Outdoor Yost Park, Outdoor Only Project cost budget: $17,400,000 Estimated annual tax impact to average home: $75.49 Annual operation cost estimate: $25,000-$125,000 City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 94Packet Page 152 of 307 Concept 4 : Harbor Square,Indoor & Small Outdoor City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 95Packet Page 153 of 307 www.nacarchitecture.com National talent, local focus PROGRAM OF SPACE REQUIREMENTS PROJECT: City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study PROJECT NO.: 111-08072 – A206d RE: Support Facilities Program DATE: March 18, 2009 The following components are recommended for the pool house or aquatic facility support facilities: 1. Men’s Changing Room 900 sq. ft. 2. Women’s Changing Room 1,000 3. Family Changing Room(s) 350 4. Ticket Sales/Office 200 5. Manager’s Office (maybe combined with tickets) 100 6. Lifeguards 250 7. Sales/Concessions 850 8. Storage 350 9. Mechanical/Electrical/Chemicals 1,400 10. Optional Community/Party Room 400 ea. Total (including one Community Room) 5,800 sq. ft. The sizes of the spaces are approximate and may vary depending primarily on the extent of the project’s aquatic features. These sizes will serve a 5000 square foot leisure pool and a 25 yard, 8-lane lap pool. Sizes will increase for an indoor pool’s support facilities as the result of slightly larger lockers and corridor space. cl/P:\111-08072\200\A206\A206b\Final Report\8.2-A206d-PoolhouseProgram-090318.doc City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 96Packet Page 154 of 307 AQUATIC CONCEPTS- Project Budget City of Edmonds Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Date: May 6, 2009 NAC|Architcture OPTION 1 CONSTRUCTION COSTS Component Unit Unit Cost Total Cost Demolition 1 LS $125,000 Building (2-story, unconditioned)6,500 Sq. Ft.$275.00 Sq. Ft.$1,787,500 Sitework Allowance 1 LS $750,000 Pool Deck 28,000 Sq. Ft.$20.00 Sq. Ft.$560,000 Aquatics- renovate exist. lap pool 1 LS $400,000 - leisure pool 4,450 Sq. Ft.$210.00 Sq. Ft.$934,500 - equipment/amenities 1 LS $655,000 Parking Allowance 60 stalls $5,000.00 Ea.$300,000 Contingency 10%$551,200 Estimated Construction Cost $6,063,000 SOFT COSTS Sales tax at 9.5%9.5%$575,985 Soft costs 25.0%$1,515,750 Estimated Project Costs $2,091,735 TOTAL PROJECT COST $8,155,000 Estimated construction costs are for comparison of options only. For budgeting, costs may vary up to 10% plus or minus. The site work and parking costs are an allowance only. A survey and more detailed design to verify tree location, grading, cut and fill, etc. would be necessary to confirm these figures. Extension of off-site utilities is not included. Soils conditions are unknown and unusual or unconventional building or retaining wall foundation systems are not included. P:\111-08072\200\A206\A206b\Final Report\8.3-A306a-Budget-ConceptOptions1-4-090506.xls City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 97Packet Page 155 of 307 AQUATIC CONCEPTS- Project Budget City of Edmonds Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Date: May 6, 2009 NAC|Architecture OPTION 2 CONSTRUCTION COSTS Component Total Cost Demolition 1 LS $150,000 Building 31,000 Sq. Ft.$350.00 Sq. Ft.$10,850,000 Sitework Allowance 1 LS $750,000 Aquatics- lap pool 4,500 Sq. Ft.$200.00 Sq. Ft.$900,000 - equipment 1 LS $165,000 - leisure pool 4,875 Sq. Ft.$210.00 Sq. Ft.$1,023,750 - equipment/amenities 1 LS $670,000 Parking Allowance 60 stalls $5,000.00 Ea.$300,000 Contingency 10%$1,480,875 Estimated Construction Cost $16,290,000 SOFT COSTS Sales tax at 9.5%9.5%$1,547,550 Soft costs 25.0%$4,072,500 Estimated Project Costs $5,620,050 TOTAL PROJECT COST $21,910,000 Estimated construction costs are for comparison of options only. For budgeting, costs may vary up to 10% plus or minus. The site work and parking costs are an allowance only. A survey and more detailed design to verify tree location, grading, cut and fill, etc. would be necessary to confirm these figures. Extension of off-site utilities is not included. Soils conditions are unknown and unusual or unconventional building or retaining wall foundation systems are not included. Unit Unit Cost P:\111-08072\200\A206\A206b\Final Report\8.3-A306a-Budget-ConceptOptions1-4-090506.xls City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 98Packet Page 156 of 307 AQUATIC CONCEPTS- Project Budget City of Edmonds Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Date: May 6, 2009 NAC|Architecture OPTION 3 CONSTRUCTION COSTS Component Total Cost Demolition 1 LS $150,000 Building 19,500 Sq. Ft.$350.00 Sq. Ft.$6,825,000 Sitework Allowance 1 LS $750,000 Pool Deck 6,500 Sq. Ft.$20.00 Sq. Ft.$130,000 Aquatics- lap pool 4,500 Sq. Ft.$200.00 Sq. Ft.$900,000 - equipment 1 LS $165,000 - leisure pool 4,550 Sq. Ft.$210.00 Sq. Ft.$955,500 - equipment/amenities 1 LS $645,000 - therapy pool 1 LS $255,000 - whirlpool 1 LS $195,000 Parking Allowance 60 stalls $5,000.00 Ea.$300,000 Contingency 10%$1,127,050 Estimated Construction Cost $12,398,000 SOFT COSTS Sales tax at 9.5%9.5%$1,177,810 Soft costs 25.0%$3,099,500 Estimated Project Costs $4,277,310 TOTAL PROJECT COST $16,675,000 Estimated construction costs are for comparison of options only. For budgeting, costs may vary up to 10% plus or minus. The site work and parking costs are an allowance only. A survey and more detailed design to verify tree location, grading, cut and fill, etc. would be necessary to confirm these figures. Extension of off-site utilities is not included. Soils conditions are unknown and unusual or unconventional building or retaining wall foundation systems are not included. Unit Unit Cost P:\111-08072\200\A206\A206b\Final Report\8.3-A306a-Budget-ConceptOptions1-4-090506.xls City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 99Packet Page 157 of 307 AQUATIC CONCEPTS- Project Budget City of Edmonds Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Date: May 6, 2009 NAC|Architecture OPTION 4 CONSTRUCTION COSTS Component Total Cost Demolition 1 LS $35,000 Building 14,500 Sq. Ft.$310.00 Sq. Ft.$4,495,000 Sitework Allowance 1 LS $100,000 Pool Deck 3,000 Sq. Ft.$20.00 Sq. Ft.$60,000 Aquatics- indoor lap pool 3,225 Sq. Ft.$200.00 Sq. Ft.$645,000 - equipment 1 LS $65,000 - outdoor lap pool 2,250 Sq. Ft.$200.00 Sq. Ft.$450,000 - equipment 1 LS $65,000 - spray pad 1 LS $290,000 Parking Allowance 0 stalls $3,000.00 Ea.$0 Contingency 10%$620,500 Estimated Construction Cost $6,826,000 SOFT COSTS Sales tax at 9.5%9.5%$648,470 Soft costs 25.0%$1,706,500 Estimated Project Costs $2,354,970 TOTAL PROJECT COST $9,181,000 Estimated construction costs are for comparison of options only. For budgeting, costs may vary up to 10% plus or minus. The site work costs are an allowance only. Cost for expanded parking is not included. Extension of off-site utilities is not included. Soils conditions are unknown and unusual or unconventional building foundation systems are not included. Unit Unit Cost P:\111-08072\200\A206\A206b\Final Report\8.3-A306a-Budget-ConceptOptions1-4-090506.xls City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 100Packet Page 158 of 307 ELEMENT Leisure Pool Outdoor Leisure Pool with Gutters 4,450 SF x $210.00 $934,500 Recessed Bench Seat Allowance x $10,000.00 $10,000 Interactive Water Play Elements Waterspray Effects 1 LS x $30,000.00 $30,000 Water Play Feature w/ Slide 1 LS x $150,000.00 $150,000 Water Basketball 4 LS x $2,500.00 $10,000 River Propulsion Unit 120 lf 1 LS x $35,000.00 $35,000 Waterslide Complex with Concrete Tower and Stairs and Runout 1 LS x $320,000.00 $320,000 Ultra Violet Chloramine Mitigation System 2 LS x $35,000.00 $70,000 Regenerative Media Filtration System Upgrade 1 LS x $30,000.00 $30,000 Leisure Pool Subtotal $1,589,500 Existing Lap Pool Pool Renovation with Filtration System Upgrade 1 LS x $400,000.00 $400,000 Existing Lap Pool Subtotal $400,000 TOTAL ESTIMATED AQUATICS PROJECT COST (2009 Dollars)$1,989,500 Notes: 4. Estimate excludes: Buildings, All utility connections, Surge tanks, Site development, Design Fees & permits 3. Pool deck, fencing, landscaping and barriers are not included. QUANTITY COST 1. Estimate includes structure, gutters, pool finishes, deck equipment, safety ropes, pool mechanical systems, waterslide (installed) & concrete tower and stair with a dual slide capacity, waterslide mechanical system and piping, and water activities with mechanical systems and piping. 2. Estimate assumes all utilities & infrastructure to be brought to within 5 feet of the facility and does not include additional contingencies for unusual soil conditions or unknown development risk items. ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE AQUATIC PROGRAM COSTS EDMONDS, WASHINGTON OPTION 1 PROGRAM (YOST SITE) City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 101Packet Page 159 of 307 ELEMENT Leisure Pool Indoor Leisure Pool with Gutters 4,875 SF x $210.00 $1,023,750 Recessed Bench Seat Allowance x $25,000.00 $25,000 Interactive Water Play Elements Waterspray Effects 1 LS x $30,000.00 $30,000 Water Play Feature w/ Slide 1 LS x $150,000.00 $150,000 Water Basketball 4 LS x $2,500.00 $10,000 River Propulsion Unit 190 lf 1 LS x $35,000.00 $35,000 Waterslide Complex with Concrete Tower and Stairs and Runout 1 LS x $320,000.00 $320,000 Ultra Violet Chloramine Mitigation System 2 LS x $35,000.00 $70,000 Regenerative Media Filtration System Upgrade 1 LS x $30,000.00 $30,000 Leisure Pool Subtotal $1,693,750 Lap Pool Indoor 25YD x 8-Lane Lap Pool 4,500 SF x $200.00 $900,000 Competitive Equipment 1 LS x $65,000.00 $65,000 Ultra Violet Chloramine Mitigation System 2 LS x $35,000.00 $70,000 Regenerative Media Filtration System Upgrade 1 LS x $30,000.00 $30,000 Lap Pool Subtotal $1,065,000 TOTAL ESTIMATED AQUATICS PROJECT COST (2009 Dollars)$2,758,750 Notes: 4. Estimate excludes: Buildings, All utility connections, Surge tanks, Site development, Design Fees & permits 3. Pool deck, fencing, landscaping and barriers are not included. 1. Estimate includes structure, gutters, pool finishes, deck equipment, safety ropes, pool mechanical systems, waterslide (installed) & concrete tower and stair with a dual slide capacity, waterslide mechanical system and piping, and water activities with mechanical systems and piping. 2. Estimate assumes all utilities & infrastructure to be brought to within 5 feet of the facility and does not include additional contingencies for unusual soil conditions or unknown development risk items. QUANTITY COST ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE AQUATIC PROGRAM COSTS EDMONDS, WASHINGTON OPTION 2 PROGRAM (YOST SITE) City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 102Packet Page 160 of 307 ELEMENT Leisure Pool Outdoor Leisure Pool with Gutters 4,550 SF x $210.00 $955,500 Recessed Bench Seat Allowance x $10,000.00 $10,000 Interactive Water Play Elements Waterspray Effects 1 LS x $30,000.00 $30,000 Water Play Feature w/ Slide 1 LS x $150,000.00 $150,000 River Propulsion Unit 87 lf 1 LS x $35,000.00 $35,000 Waterslide Complex with Concrete Tower and Stairs and Runout 1 LS x $320,000.00 $320,000 Ultra Violet Chloramine Mitigation System 2 LS x $35,000.00 $70,000 Regenerative Media Filtration System Upgrade 1 LS x $30,000.00 $30,000 Leisure Pool Subtotal $1,600,500 Lap Pool Indoor 25YD x 8-Lane Lap Pool 4,500 SF x $200.00 $900,000 Competitive Equipment 1 LS x $65,000.00 $65,000 Ultra Violet Chloramine Mitigation System 2 LS x $35,000.00 $70,000 Regenerative Media Filtration System Upgrade 1 LS x $30,000.00 $30,000 Lap Pool Subtotal $1,065,000 Therapy Pool Wellness Therapy Pool with Bench 1,000 SF x $190.00 $190,000 Ultra Violet Chloramine Mitigation System 1 LS x $35,000.00 $35,000 Regenerative Media Filtration System Upgrade 1 LS x $30,000.00 $30,000 Therapy Pool Subtotal $255,000 Whirlpool Pool Family Whirlpool 1 LS x $195,000.00 $195,000 Whirlpool Subtotal $195,000 TOTAL ESTIMATED AQUATICS PROJECT COST (2009 Dollars)$3,115,500 Notes: 4. Estimate excludes: Buildings, All utility connections, Surge tanks, Site development, Design Fees & permits 1. Estimate includes structure, gutters, pool finishes, deck equipment, safety ropes, pool mechanical systems, waterslide (installed) & concrete tower and stair with a dual slide capacity, waterslide mechanical system and piping, and water activities with mechanical systems and piping. 2. Estimate assumes all utilities & infrastructure to be brought to within 5 feet of the facility and does not include additional contingencies for unusual soil conditions or unknown development risk items. 3. Pool deck, fencing, landscaping and barriers are not included. QUANTITY COST ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE AQUATIC PROGRAM COSTS EDMONDS, WASHINGTON OPTION 3 PROGRAM (YOST SITE) City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 103Packet Page 161 of 307 ELEMENT Outdoor Spray Pad Spray Pad 1,200 SF x $125.00 $150,000 Interactive Water Play Elements Waterspray Effects 1 LS x $75,000.00 $75,000 Ultra Violet Chloramine Mitigation System 1 LS x $35,000.00 $35,000 Regenerative Media Filtration System Upgrade 1 LS x $30,000.00 $30,000 Spray Pad Subtotal $290,000 Indoor Lap Pool Indoor 25YD x 6-Lane Lap Pool 3,225 SF x $200.00 $645,000 Ultra Violet Chloramine Mitigation System 1 LS x $35,000.00 $35,000 Regenerative Media Filtration System Upgrade 1 LS x $30,000.00 $30,000 Indoor Lap Pool Subtotal $710,000 Outdoor Lap Pool Outdoor 25YD x 4-Lane Lap Pool 2,250 SF x $200.00 $450,000 Ultra Violet Chloramine Mitigation System 1 LS x $35,000.00 $35,000 Regenerative Media Filtration System Upgrade 1 LS x $30,000.00 $30,000 Outdoor Lap Pool Subtotal $515,000 TOTAL ESTIMATED AQUATICS PROJECT COST (2009 Dollars)$1,515,000 Notes: 4. Estimate excludes: Buildings, All utility connections, Surge tanks, Site development, Design Fees & permits 1. Estimate includes structure, gutters, pool finishes, deck equipment, safety ropes, pool mechanical systems, and water activities with mechanical systems and piping. 2. Estimate assumes all utilities & infrastructure to be brought to within 5 feet of the facility and does not include additional contingencies for unusual soil conditions or unknown development risk items. 3. Pool deck, fencing, landscaping and barriers are not included. QUANTITY COST ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE AQUATIC PROGRAM COSTS EDMONDS, WASHINGTON OPTION 4 PROGRAM (HARBOR SQUARE SITE) City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 104Packet Page 162 of 307 Operational Assessment of the Proposed Concept Options The following is a basic operational assessment of the proposed four options for an aquatic center in Edmonds. These assessments are very preliminary and are based on basic information regarding the four options and with limited concept plans. At this point these estimates should only be utilized for degree of magnitude comparisons between the options. Concept 1 – Outdoor leisure pool is added to Yost Pool The addition of the leisure pool should increase the use of the pool for recreational purposes. It is possible that the current operating deficit of approximately $100,000 annually could be cut in half or even possibly eliminated. Operating Cost Estimate: $300,000 - $350,000 Revenue Estimate: $300,000 - $350,000 Difference: $0 - -$50,000 Assumptions: 1. The leisure pool will have slides, interactive play features and zero depth entry. 2. There will be a fee increase of at least 25% across the board. 3. There will be a new bath house and the existing lap pool will be rebuilt. Potential Economic Impact: This option would potentially double the number of pool users over the course of the summer season and as a result could have a significant economic impact. If paid admissions rose by 20,000 to 40,000 per year and based on $10 spent per visit this could result in a total of $200,000 to $400,000 in direct increases in spending. This option would have the smallest economic impact on the Edmonds area. Direct Economic Impact: $200,000 - $400,000 Note this is a basic estimate only with no multiplier attached. This includes all expenditures beyond center use fees. Concept 2 – Indoor 8 lane x 25 yard pool plus an indoor leisure pool at Yost Park While the indoor pools will allow for both recreational and competitive swimming to occur year round the cost of operating a significant indoor pool will be substantial. It is possible that the current operating deficit of approximately $100,000 annually would increase by at least twice the amount. This will be the most expensive option to operate. Operating Cost Estimate: $800,000 - $900,000 Revenue Estimate: $600,000 - $700,000 Difference: -$200,000 - -$300,000 City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 105Packet Page 163 of 307 Assumptions: 1. The leisure pool will have slides, interactive play features and zero depth entry. 2. There will be a fee increase of at least 25% across the board. 3. There will be strong year round aquatic programming and use of the competitive pool by the school district swim teams and other local USA swim teams at a market driven user fee. Potential Economic Impact: This option should dramatically increase the number of pool users over the course of the year and as a result could have a significant economic impact. If paid admissions rose by 60,000 to 120,000 per year and based on $10 spent per visit this could result in a total of $600,000 to $1,200,000 in direct increases in spending. Additional economic impact could come from swim meets and other year round activities. The level of economic impact from these events will depend on the size and magnitude of the activity and where the participants are coming from. Estimates for the economic impact from these events could be between $300,000 and $600,000 annually. This option would have the greatest economic impact on the Edmonds area. Direct Economic Impact: $900,000 - $1,800,000 Note this is a basic estimate only with no multiplier attached. This includes all expenditures beyond center use fees. Concept 3 – Indoor 8 lane x 25 yard pool with therapy pool plus an outdoor leisure pool at Yost Park The indoor lap pool will allow for lap/competitive swimming (and some limited recreation swimming) to occur year round but most of the recreational appeal of the facility will be limited to a seasonal outdoor leisure pool. There will also be an indoor therapy pool. The cost of operating this option will be substantially higher than a total outdoor pool but not as significant as option 2. Operating Cost Estimate: $600,000 - $700,000 Revenue Estimate: $450,000 - $550,000 Difference: -$150,000 - -$250,000 Assumptions: 1. The leisure pool will have slides, interactive play features and zero depth entry. 2. There will be a separate higher fee (at least 25% higher than current fees) for the summer season and the rest of the year will have a lower fee (10% to 15% higher than current fees). 3. The therapy pool will be utilized for lessons, aqua exercise and some therapy classes. 4. There will be strong year round aquatic programming and use of the competitive pool by the school district swim teams and other local USA swim teams at a market driven user fee. Potential Economic Impact: This option would significantly increase the number of pool users over the course of the year but the majority of users would still come in the summer months. However there would still be a substantial economic impact. If paid admissions rose by 30,000 to 60,000 per year and based on $10 spent per visit this could result in a total of $300,000 to $600,000 in direct increases in spending. Additional economic impact could come from swim meets and other year round activities. The level of economic impact from City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 106Packet Page 164 of 307 these events will depend on the size and magnitude of the activity and where the participants are coming from. Estimates for the economic impact from these events could be between $300,000 and $400,000 annually. This option would have the second greatest economic impact on the Edmonds area. Direct Economic Impact: $600,000 - $1,000,000 Note this is a basic estimate only with no multiplier attached. This includes all expenditures beyond center use fees. Concept 4 – Harbor Square - Indoor 6 lane x 25 yard pool plus a 4 lane outdoor lap pool and spray pad. The improvements as noted in option 1 are made at Yost Pool. A partnership with Harbor Square Athletic Club will result in an indoor lap pool that will allow for fitness and competitive swimming (and some limited recreation swimming) to occur year round and some seasonal outdoor fitness and exercise swimming. However, most recreational swimming will occur at the new outdoor leisure pool at Yost. The financial viability of this option is in large part dependent on the type of partnership that is developed with Harbor Square. It must also be realized that there will be some “competition” for swimmers between the two pools during the summer months. Yost Pool Operating Cost Estimate: $300,000 - $350,000 Revenue Estimate: $275,000 - $325,000 Difference: -$25,000 - -$75,000 Harbor Square It is assumed that Harbor Square will operate the indoor and outdoor pools while allowing access by the general public on a fee for service basis (pool area only). Depending on the fee structure that the City of Edmonds desires for the pool area there may have to be an annual fee contribution to Harbor Square. City Fee Payment to Harbor Square: $0 - $50,000 Total Difference: -$25,000 to -$125,000 Assumptions: 1. The City of Edmonds will own and operate Yost Pool as noted in option 1. The leisure pool will have slides, interactive play features and zero depth entry. There will be a fee increase of at least 25% across the board. There will be a new bath house and the existing lap pool will be rebuilt. 2. The Harbor Square indoor and outdoor pool will be operated by Harbor Square with all user fees being paid to them. Rates for use of the pool area by the general public will be negotiated between Harbor Square and the City of Edmonds as part of a partnership agreement. 3. The presence of two aquatic facilities in Edmonds will result in some loss of revenue by both facilities. Potential Economic Impact: This option would increase the number of pool users at Yost Pool in a similar manner as Option 1 but there would also be additional users as part of the new indoor/outdoor pool at Harbor Square. However City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 107Packet Page 165 of 307 the vast majority of users would still come in the summer months at Yost Pool. This option would still result in a substantial economic impact to the Edmonds area. At Yost the number of pool users would potentially double. If paid admissions rose by 20,000 to 40,000 per year and based on $10 spent per visit this could result in a total of $200,000 to $400,000 in direct increases in spending. For the Harbor Square portion of the project it is more difficult to estimate the true economic impact. With an indoor pool there would be year round use and a significant economic impact that would also be fueled by the location that is closer to downtown Edmonds. If paid admissions rose by 8,000 to 15,000 per year and based on $10 spent per visit this could result in a total of $80,000 to $150,000 in direct increases in spending. Additional economic impact could come from swim meets and other year round activities but this is expected to be rather minimal at this location and could be between $50,000 and $100,000 annually. This option would have the third greatest economic impact on the Edmonds area. Direct Economic Impact: $330,000 - $650,000 Note this is a basic estimate only with no multiplier attached. This includes all expenditures beyond center use fees. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 108Packet Page 166 of 307 FUNDING OPTIONS One of the major challenges for this project is determining a method for funding the capital development costs as well as the anticipated annual operating subsidy of a new Edmonds Aquatic Center. It is clear that a number of different funding sources may need to be utilized for the center to become a reality. As a result a number of possible funding sources were investigated. Although this is not meant to be an exhaustive list it does indicate possible available funding sources. These include: Capital Funding: City of Edmonds – If the City of Edmonds is going to be the primary funding agent for the aquatic center several options to acquire the necessary tax dollars for the project will need to be evaluated. It is likely that several of these options are already being utilized to their full legal potential and cannot be increased. General Fund – The utilization of any existing non allocated tax dollars for the project. This is highly unlikely considering the current financial status of the city. Capital Improvement Fund – Project funding from city resources allocated for major capital projects. Councilmatic Bonds – Bonds that are authorized by City Council for the project. Bond Measure – A voter passed (60% super majority) tax initiative to fund the project. Park Impact Fees – Utilization of development fees for the construction of the center. Real Estate Excise Tax – Use of revenues derived from taxes on the sale of real property. Utility Tax – Utilization of revenues generated from taxes on utilities. Certificates of Participation – A form of lease-purchase, COP’s are issued for debt periods similar to normal bonds but the building itself serves as the collateral. This funding mechanism does not require voter approval. It appears that one of the more likely options for city funding of the project would be through the issuance of bonds. The following is the estimated level of annual funding required to support the bond amounts for each facility development option. Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Principal $8,155,000 $21,910,000 $16,675,000 $9,181,000 Term 20 20 20 20 Interest Rate 4% 4% 4% 4% Annual Debt $600,059 $1,612,176 $1,226,976 $675,554 2009 AV $7,709,209,490 $7,709,209,490 $7,709,209,490 $7,709,209,490 Rate per Thou $0.078 $0.078 $0.078 $0.078 AV Aver. Home $456,200 $456,200 $456,200 $456,200 Annual Impact $35.51 $95.40 $72.61 $39.98 Monthly Impact $2.96 $7.95 $6.05 $3.33 Beyond City of Edmonds funding, there are other possible sources of capital funding. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 109Packet Page 167 of 307 Partnerships – The possibility of including equity (capital and/or operational funding) partners in the project is possible. This could occur through a partnership with Harbor Square, the Edmonds School District, or other as not yet identified partners. There will be limits on the number of these types of partners that can be established for the project due to possible competing interests. Partnership dollars received from other organizations is expected to be limited and probably will not be above 20%-30% of the total cost of the project. Partnership funding derived from corporate dollars may be able to increase the level of revenue from this source but a more detailed partnership assessment will be necessary to determine a realistic level of expectation. Fundraising – A possible source of capital funding could come from a comprehensive fundraising campaign in the city. Contributions from local businesses, private individuals and social service organizations should be targeted. To maximize this form of funding a private fundraising consultant may be necessary. A goal of fundraising could be to fund between 5% and 10% of the capital cost of the project. Grants/endowments – There are a number of grants and/or endowments that are available for recreation projects. It is more difficult to fund active recreation facilities than parks and open space from these sources, but an effort should be made to acquire limited funding from these sources. Key aspects of the facility that should be targeted for grants are serving youth, teens, seniors and families. Major funding from this source is unlikely but it never the less could provide assistance to the project for approximately 3% and 5% of the total project cost. Naming Rights and Sponsorships – Although not nearly as lucrative as for large stadiums and other similar facilities, the sale of naming rights and long term sponsorships could be a source of some capital funding as well. However, since Yost Pool already is named after an individual in the community, if the existing center is improved there may be difficulty in selling additional naming rights. It will be necessary to hire a specialist in selling naming rights and sponsorships if this revenue source is to be maximized to its fullest potential. No lifetime naming rights should be sold only 20 year maximum rights should be possible. Determining the level of financial contribution necessary to gain a naming right will be crucial. This could mean a contribution for up to 25% of the total cost of the entire project for overall facility naming rights or 50% to 100% for individual spaces (specific pools) within the center itself. It should be recognized that this source will probably not produce a level of funding above 20% of the project. Even when all of the potential funding sources noted above are combined, they will at best generate a funding level of 40% for the project. It is clear that the primary source of funding will have to come from tax dollars. As a result several other possible tax options were explored. Parks and Recreation Service Area – A PRSA is established using other jurisdictional boundaries to broaden the tax base for a new pool. The PRSA establishes the tax base for the center and would construct and operate the facility. The PRSA funds improvements and possible expansions of the center. This requires another level of taxation within the area as well as a vote of the people to establish the service area and the level of taxes. It should be kept in mind that establishing a PRSA may be difficult. Special Facilities District – Similar in many ways to a PRSA, a special facilities district is tightly controlled by the state but allows under certain circumstances a taxing district to be established in an area for the purpose of the develop of special facilities such as an aquatics center. State Legislative Funding – The state legislature has the ability through a general appropriation or state referendum to provide a grant for a new aquatic center. This source of funding will be highly difficult to obtain. Federal Funding – Obtaining some level of federal funding for the project is unlikely but not impossible. The availability of new economic stimulus dollars may be the best opportunity to attract federal funds. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 110Packet Page 168 of 307 Operations Funding: For most of the options it is projected that there will be a significant operations subsidy that will need to be funded each year. As a result a funding plan for the required subsidy will be necessary. City of Edmonds – It is anticipated that the major responsibility for the operational subsidy will fall on the city. However the city will need to identify how the subsidy will be handled and from what source the funding will come from. Considering the current budget situation that will be nearly impossible with existing tax dollars. As a result a tax increase to fund the anticipated operational subsidy will probably be needed. The following is an estimate of the tax requirements for different subsidy levels. Annual Amount Annual Impact $50,000 $3.00 $100,000 $6.00 $150,000 $9.00 $200,000 $12.00 $250,000 $15.00 $300,000 $18.00 Other possible sources of operational funding beyond the City of Edmonds include. Partnerships – With any partners for the project it is likely that the center could receive some operational funding from this source. A carefully worded partnership agreement will be necessary to confirm and guarantee the level of funding that is possible and the length of time that it should be expected. Parks and Recreation Service Area or Special Facilities District - With the establishment of a PRSA or SFD there is an opportunity to fund the subsidy as part of the tax levied for the project. This would spread the tax across a wider tax base. Endowment Fund – This would require additional fundraising to establish an operational endowment fund that would be designed to fund capital replacement and improvements at the center. It is often difficult to raise funds for operational endowments. Sponsorships – The establishment of sponsorships for different programs and services as well as funding for different aspects of the facility’s operation is possible. But in most cases this provides a relatively low revenue stream for funding day to day operating costs for recreation centers. Grants – There are grants that are available for programs and services that serve the disadvantaged, youth, teens and seniors. It may be possible to acquire funding for specific programs from this source. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 111Packet Page 169 of 307 Concept 3: Yost Park, Indoor Lap Pool, Outdoor Recreational Pool City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 112Packet Page 170 of 307 Concept 3: Yost Park, Indoor Lap Pool, Outdoor Recreational Pool City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 113Packet Page 171 of 307 Concept 3: Yost Park, Indoor Lap Pool, Outdoor Recreational Pool City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 114Packet Page 172 of 307 Concept 3: Yost Park, Indoor Lap Pool, Outdoor Recreational Pool City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 115Packet Page 173 of 307 Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Aquatic Feasibility Study Survey Executive Summary of Survey Results Overview of the Methodology The City of Edmonds conducted an Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey during January and February 2009 to help assess the future direction of aquatic facilities and services in the City. The survey was designed to obtain statistically valid results from households throughout the City of Edmonds. The survey was administered by phone. Leisure Vision worked with City of Edmonds officials, as well as members of the Ballard*King and Associates project team in the development of the survey questionnaire. This work allowed the survey to be tailored to issues of strategic importance to effectively plan the future system. The goal was to obtain a total of at least 300 completed surveys. This goal was accomplished, with a total of 324 surveys having been completed. The results of the random sample of 324 households have a 95% level of confidence with a precision of at least +/-5.4%. The following pages summarize major survey findings: City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 116Packet Page 174 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Use of Yost Park Pool During the Past Two Years Respondents were asked if any members of their household have used Yost Park Pool during the past two years. The following summarizes key findings: Forty percent (40%) of respondent households have used Yost Park Pool during the past two years. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 117Packet Page 175 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Reasons for Not Using Yost Park Pool During the Past Two Years Respondent households that have not used Yost Park Pool during the past two years were asked to indicate the main reason they’ve not used the Pool. The following summarizes key findings: Of the 60% of respondent households that have not used Yost Park Pool during the past two years, the most frequently mentioned reasons for not using the pool include: “don’t swim” (27%), “too busy/not enough time” (15%), and “use other facilities/swim at home” (10%). City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 118Packet Page 176 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Frequency of Using Yost Park Pool Respondent households that have used Yost Park Pool during the past two years were asked to indicate how often they used the pool. The following summarizes key findings: Of the 40% of respondent households that have used Yost Park Pool during the past two years, 64% have used the pool at least once a month, and 45% have used it at least once a week. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 119Packet Page 177 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Reasons for Using Yost Park Pool Respondent households that have used Yost Park Pool during the past two years were asked to indicate all of the reasons they have used the pool. The following summarizes key findings: Of the 40% of respondent households that have used Yost Park Pool during the past two years, 80% used it for recreational swimming. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 120Packet Page 178 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Condition of Yost Park Pool Respondent households that have used Yost Park Pool during the past two years were asked to rate the condition of the pool. The following summarizes key findings: Of the 40% of respondent households that have used Yost Park Pool during the past two years, 69% rated the physical condition of the pool as either excellent (17%) or good (52%). An additional 21% of respondents rated the pool as fair, and 4% rated it as poor or very poor. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 121Packet Page 179 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Visiting Yost Park for Reasons Other Than Using the Pool Respondents were asked if any members of their household have visited Yost Park over the past two years for reasons other than using the pool. The following summarizes key findings: Forty-nine percent (49%) of respondent households have visited Yost Park over the past two years for reasons other than using the pool. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 122Packet Page 180 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Reasons for Using Yost Park for Reasons Other Than the Pool Respondent households that have visited Yost Park during the past two years for reasons other than the pool were asked to indicate all of the reasons they have visited the park. The following summarizes key findings: Of the 49% of respondent households that have visited Yost Park for reasons other than the pool during the past two years, 81% visited the park for walking on the trails, and 36% visited it to enjoy nature. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 123Packet Page 181 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Potential Use of Improved Aquatic Features at Yost Park Pool From a list of 12 options, respondents were asked to indicate all of the aquatic features their household would use at an improved Yost Park Pool. The following summarizes key findings: The aquatic features that the highest percentage of respondent households would use at an improved Yost Park Pool include: lap lanes for exercise, lessons, lap swimming (58%), hot tub or Jacuzzi (57%), an area with deep water for diving, water polo, etc. (53%), and a lazy river with slow moving water (51%). City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 124Packet Page 182 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Improved Aquatic Features Respondents Would Be Most Likely to Use at Yost Park Pool From a list of 12 options, respondents were asked to select the three features they would be most likely to use at an improved Yost Park Pool. The following summarizes key findings: Based on the sum of their top three choices, the features that respondent households would be most likely to use at an improved Yost Park Pool include: hot tub or Jacuzzi (34%), lap lanes for exercise, lessons, lap swimming (33%), and a lazy river with slow moving water (26%). It should also be noted that lap lanes for exercise, lessons, lap swimming had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the feature they would be most likely to use at an improved Yost Park Pool. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 125Packet Page 183 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Options for Improving Yost Park Pool From a list of five options, respondents were asked to select the option they most support for improving Yost Park Pool. The following summarizes key findings: Thirty-two percent (32%) of respondents most support improving Yost Park Pool and enclosing it as an indoor pool. Twenty-eight percent (28%) prefer both an indoor pool and outoor pool, and 18% prefer to improve Yost Park Pool and continue to operate it as an outdoor pool. Only 10% of respondents do not favor any improvements to Yost Park Pool. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 126Packet Page 184 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Frequency of Using an Improved Outdoor Yost Pool Respondents were asked to indicate how often their household would use an improved outdoor Yost Pool if it had the types of features that are most important to their household. The following summarizes key findings: Seventy-three percent (73%) of respondents would use an improved outdoor Yost Pool if it had the types of features that are most important to their household. Fifty-three percent (53%) of respondent households would use an improved outdoor pool at least once a month, and 32% would use it at least once a week. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 127Packet Page 185 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Frequency of Using an Improved Indoor Yost Pool Respondents were asked to indicate how often their household would use an improved indoor Yost Pool if it had the types of features that are most important to their household. The following summarizes key findings: Eighty percent (80%) of respondents would use an improved indoor Yost Pool if it had the types of features that are most important to their household. Sixty-nine percent (69%) of respondent households would use an improved indoor pool at least once a month, and 47% would use it at least once a week. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 128Packet Page 186 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Harbor Square Athletic Club Members Respondents were asked to indicate if they are members of the Harbor Square Athletic Club in downtown Edmonds. The following summarizes key findings: Fourteen percent (14%) of respondent households are members of the Harbor Square Athletic Club in downtown Edmonds. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 129Packet Page 187 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Level of Support for Developing New Aquatic Center Adjacent to Harbor Square Athletic Club Respondents were asked to indicate their level of support for developing a new aquatic center adjacent to the Harbor Square Athletic Club. The following summarizes key findings: Fifty-seven percent (57%) of respondent households are either very supportive (31%) or somewhat supportive (26%) of developing a new aquatic center adjacent to the Harbor Square Athletic Club. Nineteen percent (19%) of respondent households are not supportive, and 24% indicated “not sure”. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 130Packet Page 188 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Reasons for Not Supporting a New Aquatic Center Adjacent to the Harbor Square Athletic Club Respondents who are either not sure or not supportive of developing a new aquatic center adjacent to the Harbor Square Athletic Club were asked to indicate the reason for their response. The following summarizes key findings: Of the 43% of respondents who are not sure or not supportive of developing a new aquatic center adjacent to the Harbor Square Athletic Club, 37% indicated they need more information. In addition, 16% would prefer a new pool at the Yost Park site. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 131Packet Page 189 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Frequency of Using a New Aquatic Center Adjacent to the Harbor Square Athletic Club Respondents were asked to indicate how often their household would use a new aquatic center located adjacent to the Harbor Square Athletic Club if the aquatic center had the features that are most important to their household. The following summarizes key findings: Seventy-one percent (71%) of respondents would use a new aquatic center located adjacent to the Harbor Square Athletic Club. Fifty-six percent (56%) of respondent households would use the new aquatic center at least once a month, and 36% would use it at least once a week. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 132Packet Page 190 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Options Regarding Improvements to Aquatic Facilities From a list of seven options, respondents were asked to select the one they most support regarding improvements to aquatic facilities in Edmonds. The following summarizes key findings: Twenty-six percent (26%) of respondents most support improving the existing Yost Park Pool and enclosing it as an indoor pool. In addition, 19% of respondents prefer building a new aquatic center with an indoor and outdoor pool at Yost Park, 16% prefer building a new indoor pool adjacent to the Harbor Square Aquatic Club, and 15% prefer improving the summer only outdoor Yost Park Pool. Only 9% of respondents indicated that no pool improvements are needed. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 133Packet Page 191 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Funding Improved Aquatic Facilities and Program Spaces Respondents were asked to indicate how they feel the costs for operating improved aquatic facilities and program spaces should be funded. The following summarizes key findings: Forty percent (40%) of respondents feel the costs for operating improved aquatic facilities and program spaces should be funded mostly from user fees. In addition, 26% of respondents feel the costs should be funded mostly from taxes, 15% feel the costs should be funded 100% from user fees, and 3% feel the costs should be funded 100% through taxes. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 134Packet Page 192 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Willingness to Support a Renovated/New Aquatic Facility with Additional Taxes Respondents were asked to indicate how willing they would be to support a renovated or new aquatic facility if they had to pay additional taxes. The following summarizes key findings: Fifty percent (50%) of respondents indicated they would be willing to support a renovated or new aquatic facility if they had to pay additional taxes. Twenty-eight percent (28%) of respondents would not be willing to pay additional taxes, and 22% are unsure. City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 135Packet Page 193 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Demographics City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 136Packet Page 194 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Demographics City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 137Packet Page 195 of 307 Aquatic Center Feasibility Survey for the City of Edmonds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary Demographics City of Edmonds Aquatic Feasibility Study| August 25, 2009| NAC|Architecture 138Packet Page 196 of 307 NAC inc NAC|Architecture 2201 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1405 Seattle, WA 98121 206.441.4522 phone 206.441.7917 fax 1203 West Riverside Avenue Spokane, WA 99201 509.838.8240 phone 509.838.8261 fax www.nacarchitecture.com Packet Page 197 of 307 AM-2463 6. Initial Discussion on Issues Relating to Roof Design Standards Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:08/25/2009 Submitted By:Rob Chave Submitted For:Ann Bullis/Rob Chave Time:30 Minutes Department:Planning Type:Information Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Initial discussion on issues relating to roof design standards. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Schedule further discussion on this subject for a subsequent work session. Previous Council Action None on the general subject. A discussion of issues related to the project at 523 Alder Street was held by Council on July 21, 2009. Narrative A recent project -- a single family building being constructed in a multifamily zone located at 523 Alder Street -- has caused staff to review how the "4-in-12" roof pitch rule has been applied over the past two-plus decades in RM multifamily zones. Staff is planning on summarizing how the zoning and building codes interact, the issues that have been identified in reviewing past practice, and how to proceed toward improving the code and developing standards that achieve what the city truly wants to "see" in terms of the design of RM-zoned buildings. This will necessarily be a short overview of the issues, given the short lead-time, but should set the stage for further discussions. Fiscal Impact Attachments No file(s) attached. Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 08/19/2009 01:38 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 08/19/2009 01:41 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 08/19/2009 01:42 PM APRV Form Started By: Rob Chave Started On: 08/19/2009 12:43 PM Final Approval Date: 08/19/2009 Packet Page 198 of 307 Packet Page 199 of 307 AM-2412 7. Trees at 5th Avenue and Dayton Street Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:08/25/2009 Submitted By:Kim Karas, Public Works Submitted For:Noel Miller Time:20 Minutes Department:Public Works Type:Action Review Committee: Committee Action:Recommend Review by Full Council Information Subject Title Discussion and potential action on a proposed Resolution related to delaying the removal of trees at 5th Avenue and Dayton Street, near the site of Horizon Bank. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff It is recommended that the City continue implementing the 2006 Street Tree Plan which would allow for the removal and replacement of street trees at 5th Avenue and Dayton Street intersection, along with street trees abutting the Horizon Bank parking lot frontage on Dayton Street. Previous Council Action Previous Council action includes the adoption of the Street Tree Plan in 2006. In addition the City Council authorized the Mayor to sign a right of entry agreement with Horizon Bank to remove and replace trees abutting their frontage on Dayton Street on May 26, 2009. Narrative This is a a continuation of a Council discussion regarding a change in City policy to protect existing City street trees, instead of replacing them in accordance with the 2006 Street Tree Plan. The advantages to continue to follow the 2006 Street Tree plan are: ♦ Planting trees that are more appropriate within the Street right-of-way for size and species; ♦ Reducing long term maintenance costs of both the trees and sidewalks; ♦ Reducing the City's overall claims risk. The advantages of protecting the existing street tree inventory are: ♦ Provides more shade; ♦ Absorbs more carbon dioxide; ♦ Preserves an aesthetically more mature streetscape. The overriding concern of the City's Administration is that preserving the existing trees will become an increasingly greater maintenance issue for an already over burdened street maintenance program and increases the City's liability risk from pedestrian falls and injuries. The disjointed edges of the sidewalks created by the ever expanding tree roots, will need to be Packet Page 200 of 307 periodically filled with unattractive asphalt. A patching cement can also be used although it can break away after a freeze-thaw cycle, creating greater maintenance issues. Grinding the disjointed sidewalk edges smooth has an even greater cost and over time, will reduce the thickness of the sidewalk, making it more susceptible to deterioration. As the tree roots grow larger, sections of the sidewalks will need to be replaced periodically creating mounded sections for pedestrians to traverse. This would not be a recommended walkway surface for our elderly population, particularly in the downtown areas of Edmonds. Based on the reasoning presented in this memo, staff respectfully requests that the City continue to implement the 2006 Street Tree Plan and replace the existing street trees. As was discussed at a previous Council meeting, staff finds it infeasible to plant 3 inch caliper trees but will replant with as large a caliper as possible which will fit within the prescribed sidewalk tree well opening. -------------------------- Councilmember Bernheim has submitted the following material for discussion on this topic: •Memorandum to the City Council from Councilmember Bernheim •Packet of Articles •20 slides from a commercial vendor's PowerPoint presentation on non-concrete sidewalks •Email message between Councilmember Bernheim and Andrea Mast, City of Kirkland Public Works Department, regarding rubber sidewalks •City of Kirkland rubber sidewalk photos •City of Kirkland rubber sidewalk costs •City of Kirkland rubber sidewalk follow up memo •City of Kirkland rubber sidewalk detail Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Exhibit 1: Street Tree Replacment Photo Presentation Link: Exhibit 2: WCIA Memo July 9, 2009 Link: Exhibit 3: Appendix F - Street Tree Plan Link: Exhibit 4: Councilmember Bernheim Memo to Council Link: Exhibit 5: Councilemmber Bernheim Packet of Articles Link: Exhibit 6: Edited Presentation on Non-concrete Sidewalks Link: Exhibit 7: Bernheim Email with City of Kirkland Link: Exhibit 8: City of Kirkland Rubber Sidewalk Photos Link: Exhibit 9: City of Kirkland Rubber Sidewalk Costs Link: Exhibit 10: City of Kirkland Rubber Sidewalk Follow up Memo Link: Exhibit 11: City of Kirkland Rubber Sidewalk Detail Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 07/28/2009 08:58 AM APRV Packet Page 201 of 307 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 07/28/2009 10:28 AM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 07/30/2009 10:23 AM APRV Form Started By: Kim Karas Started On: 07/21/2009 02:08 PM Final Approval Date: 07/30/2009 Packet Page 202 of 307 Pa c k e t Pa g e 20 3 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 20 4 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 20 5 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 20 6 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 20 7 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 20 8 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 20 9 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 0 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 1 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 2 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 3 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 4 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 5 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 6 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 7 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 8 of 30 7 Pa c k e t Pa g e 21 9 of 30 7 Packet Page 220 of 307 Packet Page 221 of 307 Packet Page 222 of 307 Packet Page 223 of 307 Packet Page 224 of 307 Packet Page 225 of 307 Packet Page 226 of 307 Packet Page 227 of 307 Packet Page 228 of 307 Packet Page 229 of 307 Packet Page 230 of 307 Packet Page 231 of 307 Packet Page 232 of 307 Packet Page 233 of 307 Packet Page 234 of 307 Packet Page 235 of 307 Packet Page 236 of 307 Packet Page 237 of 307 Packet Page 238 of 307 Memo to City Council re: Horizon Bank Trees Date: August 19, 2009 From: Steve Bernheim I submit the attached materials in connection with the question of what to do about the trees and the sidewalks in the vicinity of the Horizon Bank at Fifth and Dayton. The first item is a research paper by Kathleen L. Wolf, research scientist at the College of Forest Resources at the University of Washington. The conclusions of this paper are that trees positively influence the behaviour of city visitors and shoppers: “Survey respondents from all regions of the U.S. favor trees in retail settings, and this preference is further reflected in positive perceptions, patronage behavior, and product pricing. It is important to note that the highest ratings were granted to places having full, mature tree canopy, the result of careful maintenance across decades.” The second item is a handout from the City of Seattle regarding tree protection regulations adopted there, giving special protections to trees over six inches in diameter and “exceptional” trees that have significant value due to their size and species. The third item is another 2007 article by Kathleen Wolfe assessing the value of trees in connection with shopping psychology and concluding that trees have a positive influence on shoppers by creating a local identity and a comfortable, positive environment in which to shop. The fourth item is a promotional items from Rubbersidewalks, Inc., a company that specializes in installing tree-friendly pedestrian walkways. Rubbersidewalks’s product is eligible for LEED certification in certain projects. The fifth item is a technology bulletin from the USDA Forest Service outlining innovations in protecting tree roots while replacing sidewalks and curbs. The sixth item is a technical guide from the Rubbersidewalks company. The seventh item is a Fact Sheet from the College of Forest Resources at the University of Washington regarding the positive influence of mature tree canopy on Retail and Shopping Behavior. The eighth item is a publicity pamphlet from Rubbersidewalks regarding another of their tree-friendly products called Terrewalks. The ninth item is another technical pamphlet from Rubbersidewalks regarding the Terrewalks product. The city of Kirkland has installed some Rubbersidewalks products. The Kirkland contact for information in the public works department there is Andrea Mast, 425-587-3827, amast@ci.kirkland.wa.us. Below is an e-mail exchange I had with her: Packet Page 239 of 307 Hi Steve, In April 2007 we installed a test section of rubber sidewalks in one of our neighborhood that had very mature oak trees. The product has performed very well and we have not had to revisit the area for any follow up maintenance to date. Rubbersidewalks has introduced a new product called terrewalks which we are hoping to try later this year/early next year on another project. I’ve attached a reading file we prepared for our Council after construction was completed along with some before/after photos. I’d be happy to answer any questions you have or give you a quick tour of the install locations. I know Bellevue, Seattle and Issaquah have all installed rubber sidewalks in their cities. I’ve attached the contact information for the rep I’ve worked with from RubberSidewalks. He’s very knowledgeable and knows of all of the locations around the Puget Sound area. I hope this helps! ‐Andrea Andrea Mast, P.E. City of Kirkland | Public Works Department amast@ci.kirkland.wa.us "Caring for your infrastructure to keep Kirkland healthy, safe and vibrant." From: Stephen A. Bernheim [mailto:council@stevebernheim.com] Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 9:26 AM To: Andrea Mast Subject: rubber sidewalks? Hi, Andrea: We have some mature, healthy trees our city administration is planning to chop down because they are buckling sidewalks. I would like to try to save these mature, healthy trees, if possible and I see Kirkland has been using some "rubber sidewalks." Can you send me a brief re-cap of your projects so I can relate the information to our city administrators? Steve Bernheim Edmonds City Council # 6 http://www.ci.edmonds.wa.us/cp6.stm 512 Bell St. Edmonds WA 98020 Council Office Hours: after 4:30 p.m. 425-744-3021 (desk/message) 425 712 8418 (fax) 206 240 5344 (cell) council@stevebernheim.com Packet Page 240 of 307 The regional sales manager for Rubbersidewalks products is David Nellis, Rubbersidewalks, Inc., www.rubbersidewalks.com, 503-679-0044. Packet Page 241 of 307 Analysis using canopy mapping and tree inventories helps commu- nities recognize the environmental benefits of urban forests. However, many stakeholders may rely on direct experiences to shape their perceptions of trees. Retailers are often influential people in communities; their atti- tudes can affect political support for urban forestry. Merchants may overlook the indirect and long-term benefits of a quality urban for- est, instead focusing on direct costs (such as pruning and debris clean up). These attitudes can set the tone for program and budget decisions in local government. What are the benefits of trees in consumer environments? This article summarizes a research program that has explored consumer response to trees in business districts. Investing in trees does pay! Results across several studies are highlighted and additional design guidelines are offered. The Research Largely funded by the U.S. Forest Service, a series of shopper surveys were designed to assess if visual quality, place perceptions, shopper patronage, and pricing perceptions were influenced by trees. For these studies, visual quality describes settings that people find more pleasing and desirable. Place perceptions were defined as the mental representations or assumptions one holds for a place. Shopper patronage describes the frequency and duration of consu- mers’ actions, such as the length of a visit. Lastly, pricing perceptions measured consumers’ willingness-to-pay for products and services. Individual survey projects have covered central business districts for large cities (populations greater than 250,000) (Wolf 2003), a downtown shopping district for a mid-sized city (Athens, Georgia— population of approximately 100,000) (Wolf 2004a), and main street shopping districts in smaller cities and towns (having 10-20,000 pop- ulations) (Wolf 2005). Two additional surveys measured the affect of trees on businesses at the freeway edge (Wolf 2006), and small open- air or strip mall shopping centers (found on arterials) (Wolf 2008). All of the surveys were structured similarly. Each started with a preference ratings exercise, using images that depicted streetscapes with varying forest character. Each survey also contained a scenario that portrayed a shopping place and asked the respondent to project their shopping behavior using rating scales and categorical responses [see shopping behavior]. Scenarios basically differed as to whether they were “with trees” or had “no trees” in the streetscape. Those with trees portrayed a quality, well managed urban forest throughout a shopping district, rather than scattered or haphazardly placed trees. Surveys were randomly distributed to respondents by mail or during sidewalk intercepts [see survey method], using accepted social science practices of sampling and respondent recruitment, followed by data analysis. Visual Quality People were asked to rate up to 30 scenes per survey in response to “how much you like the image?” on a scale of 1 (low) to 5 (high). After sorting the images into clusters, mean ratings ranged from 1.65 to 4.00. Across all studies, consumer ratings increase steadily with the presence of trees. Visual preference scores were lower for places without trees, and much higher for places with trees. Image sets depicting business district settings having tidy sidewalks and quality buildings, but no trees, were at the low-end of the scores. Images having well-tended, large trees received the highest preference rat- ings, particularly when large trees form an orderly canopy over the sidewalk and street. Place Perceptions In a second survey section, respondents were asked to rate their level of agreement with statements while viewing one scenario. Means were compared between the forested and “no tree” conditions. Again, trees were associated with higher ratings of amenity and visual quality across the studies. Moving beyond the obvious visual content the respondents made inferences about the settings. Positive scores for maintenance were given to districts with trees, despite efforts to present the same level of building care and street tidiness. Judgments of products and merchants were more positive in forested places, as were inferences about product value, product quality, and merchant responsiveness. A consumer’s expectations about shopping experiences are initiated long before entering a store. Patronage Behavior Study participants indicated their probable patronage behavior while considering the street and sidewalk scenarios. Higher responses were found for places having trees, compared to no-tree settings, across cities of different sizes. Potential shoppers claim they are willing to travel more often, for more time, and over greater distance, and once arriving will spend more time in a retail district having trees. 22 www.isa-arbor.com ARBORIST • NEWS MORE IN STORE Research on City Trees and Retail By Kathleen L. Wolf What were the results? Respondents were asked to respond to perceptual verbal items using rating scales, and to specify likely patronage behavior within categorical indicators of time and distance. Both sets of metrics were derived from prior urban forestry perception and retail marketing studies. In each study, a sample frame of potential shoppers was identified within geographic range of study sites, and included cities of the northern and central U.S. Surveys were distributed by random sampling using commercial mailing lists or sidewalk intercepts. Survey mailings ranged in number from several hundred to several thousand, depending on the scope of each study. Response rates ranged from 10 to 80 percent across studies. shopping behavior survey method Packet Page 242 of 307 Why is patronage behavior important? For example, respondents claimed they would travel farther to visit a business district having trees. This could translate to an expanded trade area radius that adds thousands of people within urban population centers. Once there, they report they will stay longer, which could mean greater sales revenue (Underhill 1999). Product Pricing Wildland forests are harvested for market products, such as timber, but the urban forest is a public good, rarely generating products that can be readily bought and sold. Contingent valuation [see street tree valuation] was used to understand the impact of streetscape trees on local economics. Respondents were presented with a list of goods and services and were asked to state prices for each. There was some variability of price response between different sized cities and retail locations, yet trees were consistently associated with higher price points. Consumers claimed they were willing to pay 9 percent more in small cities and 12 percent more in large cities for equivalent goods and services in business districts having trees. Visitors also claim they will pay more for parking on streets with trees. Demographic Differences The surveys included demographics questions. Survey participants in the large and small city studies were generally slightly older, some- what more affluent, and less culturally diverse than the general U.S. populace. Respondents in Athens, the midsize city, were younger and had lower household incomes, not surprising for a college town. There were some minor differences in response associated with respondent traits. Yet the high degree of consistency across all studies has been remarkable. Business People Differ from Customers One study assessed response differences between shoppers and merchants (Wolf 2004b). Trees were highly preferred by both groups, although business people expressed slightly lower liking for visual categories containing trees. Differences in attitudes regarding tree benefits and annoyances were found, with business people rating tree benefits significantly lower than shoppers. Merchants have different, and lesser, appreciations for trees, and may assume that shoppers share their attitudes. Why These Results? We are in the throes of economic downturn. People may curb their spending, but commerce must continue as people shop to meet everyday needs. APRIL 2009 www.isa-arbor.com 23 LOW No Trees Mean 1.65 (sd 0.72) KA T H L E E N W O L F Economists utilize several strategies, including contingent valuation methods (CVM), to value nonmarket goods and services provided by nature and ecosystems. CVM surveys have been used to assess public willingness-to-pay for use, conservation or restoration of natural resources, with most applications in wildland or rural settings. Issues of CVM reliability and validity were carefully considered in the research design. street tree valuation D HIGH Green Streets Mean 4.00 (sd 0.60) MEDIUM Enclosed Sidewalk Mean 3.32 (sd 0.83) Packet Page 243 of 307 Positive response to street trees is part of the broader pattern of people’s appreciations for nature. Studies of the past 40 years about humans and landscape generally find that people of all ages and cultural backgrounds prefer natural views to built settings, and that trees enhance public judgment of visual quality in cities (Ulrich 1986; Smardon 1988). Business districts face many retail challenges, including giant discount stores and online or catalog purchasing. Retail managers and merchants must work together to create vibrant, memorable shopping experiences that attract and retain shoppers (Pine and Gilmore 1999). Effective retail planning addresses the full range of conditions that help a shopper to discover, enjoy, and then repeatedly return to a shopping area. Retail research about atmospherics examines how consumers’ store perceptions are affected by environmental cues. Light, sound, color, and product placement are all potential influences. General perceptions, in turn, influence reactions and behaviors. For instance, numerous studies find the music played in a store can have a sig- nificant impact on sales, perceptions of and actual time spent in the environment, in-store traffic flow, and response to visual stimuli. Atmospherics research is largely limited to store interiors (Turley and Milliman 2000). Outdoor conditions deserve greater attention, as store and shopping center exteriors present initial perceptual cues to consumers. Features such as storefronts and sidewalk character can create favorable or negative impressions that subconsciously affect what shoppers do. Trees in the streetscape are an important district improvement. Shoppers do not purchase goods and services just to meet needs. Many shoppers pursue positive experiences while shopping. The streetscape is an important part of creating a welcoming, interesting shopping place. Design Ideas The studies tested the effects of having tree and canopy throughout a business area or district. Places with scattered or neglected trees may not evoke such positive responses. A district-wide canopy helps create a sense of place for shoppers. As with any large-scale improvement, a comprehensive plan will guide a tree and landscape project to successful completion. When planned well, trees and associated plants can create a unique character or iden- tity for a business district that will last for decades. A comprehensive plan also helps garner support from community members, helps support project fund-raising, and ensures that details of the project are thought through and resolved in the best way. Following planning and planting, on-going maintenance is needed to assure maximum benefit, and to control costs. Careful plan- ning and maintenance of trees can prevent nuisances—such as reduced sign visibility, debris, and sidewalk damage. Trees are a living resource and change in character and form over time, providing many opportunities for positive shopper experiences. Here are design guidelines for integrating trees into the retail streetscape. 24 www.isa-arbor.com ARBORIST • NEWS More in Store: Research on City Trees and Retail (continued) Namba Parks (Osaka, Japan) is an extraordinary example of nature in a retail environment. It is a 120 tenant shopping mall containing offices, shops, and restaurants. The eight-level complex is draped with terraced rooftop forests and gardens. “Trees are Good for Business” is an ISA Pacific Northwest Chapter publication, and is an urban forest planning guide for merchants and business districts managers: http://www.cfr.washington.edu/ research.envmind/CityBiz/BizTech.pdf Packet Page 244 of 307 Place Branding Each species or cultivar has a distinct mature form, size, and other attributes. Plant selections can “brand” a place through subtle, yet observable, distinctions of texture, seasonal color, and plant massing. Within a shopping district, diverse tree groupings and arrange- ment help a person distinguish sub-zones, thereby providing cues for orientation and wayfinding. Working within a selected plant palette, the landscape designer can promote a mood of “variety within unity,” or a place perceived to be coherent overall and hav- ing attractive features. Conventional planting patterns have one tree for every 30 linear feet (or more) of sidewalk. Variations on this basic pattern make a shopping district more interesting and unique. For instance, double rows of trees can be planted if sidewalks are wide enough. Mixed species provide interesting visual patterns. Understory plantings of flowers and shrubs add color and focal points. Order and Tidiness Respondents preferred scenes where vegetation is presented in pat- terns, and where there is order within the street scene. Careful and routine maintenance is also important as tidiness improves prefer- ence ratings across all landscapes. Again, there is more to this than meets the eye. In interviews shoppers claimed that the level of care for plants in the sidewalk zone provided cues about the level of care and customer service they might expect from nearby merchants. Signs and Trees Merchants have concerns about trees and visibility of signs, awnings, and storefronts. Extra attention to design is needed to prevent tree and sign conflicts. Here are a few general principles. First is tree choice. Trees with a more open and airy canopy, rather than a thick, dense canopy will permit better views. Tree species having mature heights that are ultimately higher than sign heights are good choices. Trees take time to grow. Ongoing maintenance should include pruning to guide the shape of the tree’s canopy and remove any limbs that might be hazards. Once the tree grows, the canopy can be “limbed up” to raise branches and foliage above signs and store- fronts. The canopy can also be opened up with selective pruning to allow sunlight to filter down onto the sidewalk, making the street more pleasant for pedestrians. Topping is not the answer since it causes a flush of new branch and leaf growth that becomes a more dense visual obstruction. Repeated shearing of tree-tops often causes poor tree health in the long run. Consider signage design. Color and materials choices for signs should contrast with foliage, drawing the eye to visual accents. Monumental signage can be used to consolidate multiple, scattered signs into a single streetside structure that is readily seen and under- stood. Perhaps “iconic” signage, using quickly interpreted symbols for goods and services, could be placed, reducing the need for multiple, large, highly individualized signs that take more time for passing motorists to understand. Indeed, traffic calming approach- es may be another solution, as drivers moving through a business district at high speeds may not notice signs no matter how visible. Create Social Spaces Many consumers consider shopping to be a social and recreational experience, shared with family or friends. Outdoor seating areas should be given careful thought. Randomly placed benches on the sidewalk may not be comfortable or visually appealing. Benches and custom-made seating can wrap around a tree pit or planter to give customers a sense of shelter while watching activity on the street. Trees and planters can also be used to perceptually break up a large paved area into a series of “rooms,” making the space feel more human in scale and friendliness. Such small spaces offer places of respite for extended district stays, or used for outdoor dining. Trees Make Dollars and Sense City trees provide many environmental benefits, the usual justifica- tion for urban forestry investment, and an important concern as the public gains greater interest in urban sustainability. We now know that trees serve other functions, particularly for retail and commer- cial interests. A multi-study research program has investigated how consumers respond to trees in various business settings in cities and towns. APRIL 2009 www.isa-arbor.com 25 Place design using trees, planters, and accessory vegetation. KA T H L E E N W O L F Place design using trees and accessory vegetation (curbside planting complements tree planting on adjacent private property). KA T H L E E N W O L F D Packet Page 245 of 307 Results have been remarkably consistent. Trees positively affect judgments of visual quality, but more significantly, appear to influ- ence other consumer responses and behaviors. Survey respondents from all regions of the U.S. favor trees in retail settings, and this preference is further reflected in positive percep- tions, patronage behavior, and product pricing. It is important to note that the highest ratings were granted to places having full, mature tree canopy, the result of careful maintenance across decades. Trees and landscapes can be significant elements in place mar- keting. Economists have noted that shopping was once a utilitarian activity to fulfill needs and wants, but today shoppers are pursuing places that offer social, memorable experiences. Trees help create place and connect to deeply felt preferences and appreciations that people have for nature. The urban forest is an important part of the vibrant, satisfying places that shoppers enjoy. The full text of this article, with all citations included, can be downloaded online (at www.cfr.washington.edu/research.envmind/ CityBiz/Summary.pdf). Acknowledgement Several of the trees and retail studies were funded by the USDA Forest Service on recommendation of the National Urban and Community Forestry Advisory Council. Literature Cited Pine, B.J., and J.H. Gilmore. 1999. The Experience Economy: Work is Theatre and Every Business a Stage.Harvard Business School Press, Boston. Smardon, R.C. 1988. Perception and aesthetics of the urban envi- ronment: Review of the role of vegetation. Landscape and Urban Planning 15:85–106. 26 www.isa-arbor.com ARBORIST • NEWS Streetscape tree pruned for high, open canopy. KA T H L E E N W O L F More in Store: Research on City Trees and Retail (continued) Combined signage below tree canopy. KA T H L E E N W O L F Small areas in the streetscape. KA T H L E E N W O L F Packet Page 246 of 307 Turley, L.W., and Ronald E. Milliman. 2000. Atmospheric effects on shopping behavior: A review of the experimental evidence. Journal of Business Research 49:193–211. Ulrich, R.S. 1986. Human responses to vegetation and landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 13: 29–44. Underhill, P. 1999. Why We Buy: The Science of Shopping.Simon and Schuster, New York, NY. Wolf, K.L. 2003. Public response to the urban forest in inner-city business districts. Journal of Arboriculture 29, 3:117-126. Wolf, K.L. 2004a Trees and business district preferences: A case study of Athens, Georgia (USA). Journal of Arboriculture 30, 6:336–346. Wolf, K. L. 2004b. Nature in the retail environment: Comparing consumer and business response to urban forest conditions. Landscape Journal 23, 1:40–51. The Society of Municipal Arborists (SMA) has chosen Chinkapin oak (Quercus muehlenbergii) as its 2009 Urban Tree of the Year. The winner must be adaptable to a variety of harsh conditions and have strong ornamental traits. The contest has been running for fourteen years, and past winners include black tupelo (2008), baldcypress (2007), Kentucky coffeetree (2006), ‘Chanticleer’ flowering pear (2005), and ‘Autumn Blaze’ red maple (2004). SMA has 1300-plus members who practice urban forestry all over North America and beyond. Members submitted nominations for this year’s Urban Tree of the Year, and the majority voted for Chinkapin oak. “Here is an oak that prefers alkaline soil, is drought resistant, and is hardy to zone 5 or below,” Nina Bassuk, Director of the Cornell Urban Horticulture Institute, commented. “We have several years of experience with Quercus muehlenbergii in Ithaca, New York and we have been amazed.” “I estimate that it is in the middle range of oak transplant APRIL 2009 www.isa-arbor.com 27 Wolf, K.L. 2005. Trees in the small city retail business district: Comparing resident and visitor perceptions. Journal of Forestry 103, 8:390–395. Wolf, K.L. 2006. Assessing public response to the freeway roadside: urban forestry and context sensitive solutions. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1984: 102–111. Wolf, K.L. 2008. Community context and strip mall retail: Public response to the roadside landscape. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2060: 95–103. Kathleen Wolf is a research social scientist at the University of Washington, Seattle. Her work focuses on the human dimensions of urban forests and ecosystems. Information about Her research program can be found online (at www.cfr.washington.edu/research.envmind). ease—not as difficult as a white or bur oak, but not as easy as a swamp white oak. After the obligate ‘sleep, creep, leap,’ it truly seems to grow rapidly. With this accolade, I hope that Chinkapin oak will become a fixture in the nursery industry and on our streets.” Chinkapin oak has hand- some, shiny, chestnut-like leaves with coarse marginal teeth. The fall foliage can be a showy yellow to orange-brown. Municipal arborists from Albuquerque, New Mexico to Lansing, Michigan, sing the praises of Chinkapin oak, a tough, adapt- able tree for urban use. Of course, there is no one perfect tree for every situation, and Chinkapin oak has its limitations. It doesn’t tolerate wet soils well, and it should be given adequate space to grow; with proper tree care, the tree’s expected mature crown height and spread would be 40 to 60 ft. (12 to 18 m) tall and 50 to 60 ft. (15 to 18 m) wide, respectively. Michelle Buckstrup is the editor of City Trees, the journal of the Society of Municipal Arborists. SMA ANNOUNCES 2009 URBAN TREE OF THE YEAR By Michelle Buckstrup h h h h h h h hST E V E B A S K A U F Packet Page 247 of 307 www.seattle.gov/dpd City of Seattle Department of Planning & Development Gregory J. Nickels, Mayor Diane Sugimura, Director 700 5th Avenue, Suite 2000 P.O. Box 34019 Seattle, WA 98124-4019 (206) 684-8600 Seattle Permits CA MdpdDepartment of Planning and Development Client Assistance Memo — part of a multi-departmental City of Seattle series on getting a permit Printed on totally chlorine free paper made with 100% post-consumer fiber the 20th floor of Seattle Municipal Tower at 700 Fifth Ave., (206) 684-8467. CATEGORIES OF TREES AFFECTED The main categories of trees on which these regula- tions focus are: Trees over six inches in diameter, measured four and one-half feet above the ground Exceptional trees — trees that have significant value due to their size and species as defined in Direc- tor’s Rule (DR) 16-2008 which have unique historical, ecological or aesthetic value (see DR 6-2001) Hazardous trees — trees that pose a high risk of damage to persons or property IDENTIFYING TREE TYPES ON YOUR PROPERTY The tree protection regulations require you to have cer- tain information about existing trees on your property, including what species you have and whether they are healthy. Director's Rule (DR) 16-2008 and the "Common Seattle Trees" brochure will be helpful, although you may still find it necessary in some circumstances (e.g., a large development) to hire a professional. DR 16- 2008 is available at the PRC or online at www.seattle. gov/dpd/codes. Please visit DPD's Tree & Landscaping Regulations website at www.seattle.gov/dpd/codes/ tree_landscaping_regulations for the "Common Seattle Trees" brochure, plus many other helpful resources. DR 16-2008 defines exceptional trees and provides standards and procedures for their classification. All trees over a diameter threshold for that species are considered exceptional unless they are found to consti- tute a hazard as determined through a risk assessment undertaken by an arborist. "Common Seattle Trees" describes species of trees commonly occurring in Seattle. For each species, drawings of leaf shape and overall form of the tree are shown, in addition to comments on the fruit, flower, bark, cones (when applicable), and tree tip. Tree Protection Regulations in Seattle Updated April 1, 2009 Trees are valued in Seattle and legally protected in a variety of ways. Trees protection regulations are contained in the Tree Protection Ordinance, Seattle Municipal Code (SMC) 25,11, as well as the Envi- ronmentally Critical Area Code, SMC 25.09, which provides specific requirements for Environmentally Critical Areas (ECAs) including property adjacent to steep slopes, wetlands, streams, and shorelines. If you are considering cutting or removing trees on your property, you'll want to read this Client Assis- tance Memo (CAM), which summarizes the regula- tions enforced by the Department of Planning and Development (DPD) and references a number of documents you may find useful. DETERMINING WHICH REGULATIONS APPLY TO YOU Tree protection regulations vary by a number of fac- tors. To find which regulations apply to your circum- stances, you will need to have answers to the follow- ing questions: What is the zoning of your property? Is your property in an Environmentally Critical Area (ECA)? If so, what category of ECA (wetland, steep slope, etc.)? Is your property undeveloped? Are you planning new development? Does your property contain trees over six inches in diameter? Answers to zoning and ECA questions can be found at the DPD Public Resource Center (PRC), located on 242 Packet Page 248 of 307 DPD Client Assistance Memo #242—Tree Protection Regulations in Seattle page 2 LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This Client Assistance Memo (CAM) should not be used as a substitute for codes and regulations. The applicant is responsible for compliance with all code and rule requirements, whether or not described in this CAM. SUMMARY OF TREE PROTECTION CODE REQUIREMENTS Tree protection regulations vary based on location and are summarized below in three categories (Un- developed land, Developed land and Environmentally Critical Areas). Undeveloped Land No trees 6” in diameter or greater may be removed on undeveloped lots unless they are found to be haz- ardous (see Hazardous Tree section) or where tree removal is proposed as part of a development (see Tree Protections During Development section). Developed Land Tree removal on developed land is limited in all low- rise, midrise, and commercial zones and on single- family lots 5,000 sq ft in area or larger as follows unless they are found to be hazardous (see Hazard- ous Tree section) or where tree removal is proposed as part of a development (see Tree Protections During Development section) No exceptional trees may be removed. No more than 3 non-exceptional trees 6” in diameter or greater may be removed on a lot in any year period. No permits are required for removal of trees within these limits; however, removal of hazard trees or tree removal as part of a development may require submit- tal of documentation as discussed in those sections. On single family lots less than 5,000 sq ft, tree re- moval is allowed where no development is proposed, but may be limited according to the Tree Protections During Development section when development is proposed. Environmentally Critical Areas (ECAs) Tree removal in ECAs including steep slopes, creeks, wetlands and shorelines is regulated differently be- cause trees play a critical role in preventing erosion, protecting water quality, and providing habitat. In general, removal of trees and vegetation is only al- lowed in limited circumstances for normal and routine maintenance, removal when part of an issued building or grading permit, restoration, or mitigation of a haz- ard tree. Regulations for ECAs are contained in SMC 25.09.320 and are summarized in CAMs 331, ECA: Tree and Vegetation Overview, 331A, ECA: Vegetation Restoration, and 331B, Hazard Trees. HAZARD TREES Hazard trees are trees designated by a qualified pro- fessional that have a combination of structural defects and/or disease which makes it subject to a high prob- ability of failure and are located near potential targets. Steps for tree assessment and application instructions are contained in CAM 331B: Hazard Trees. Removal of a hazard tree will require approval by DPD prior to removal except in emergency situations where a tree may be removed prior to approval provided that docu- mentation is submitted afterward. If a hazard tree is located in an Environmentally Critical Area, replanting will also be required for removal of a hazard tree. TREE PROTECTION DURING DEVELOPMENT Tree protection requirements during development ex- ist in Single-family, Lowrise, Midrise, and Commercial zones as per SMC 25.11, Tree Protection. Develop- ment applications must identify all existing trees with a diameter of over six inches on the site plan (including location, size and species/common name). In gen- eral, exceptional trees must be retained unless doing so would prevent a project from meeting the develop- ment potential of the zone even after available depar- tures from development standards are considered. Specific standards are described by zone below. Most zones also have landscaping requirements that require minimum levels of trees and vegetation which may be met through new and/or retained trees and vegetation. Landscaping requirements are found in each zone’s Land Use Code chapter and are sum- marized at: http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/Codes/Tree_ Landscaping_Regulations. SINGLE FAMILY AND RESIDENTIAL SMALL LOT ZONES Exceptional trees may be removed only if protecting the tree during construction would prevent the maxi- mum allowed lot coverage from being achieved . A single family lot's allowed lot coverage is defined as 35% of the lot area or for lots less than 5,000 sq ft, 1,000 sq ft plus 15% of the lot area. Applicants must take advantage of allowed front and/or rear yard departures if this would allow preservation of the tree (see Figure 1). To protect the tree, homes and other structures (up to their "development potential") must be designed to avoid the tree's protection area. The tree protection area may be determined by an ar- borist based on the condition and location of the tree; however, it is generally considered to be the dripline (an horizontal area equal to the maximum extent of Packet Page 249 of 307 DPD Client Assistance Memo #242—Tree Protection Regulations in Seattle page 3 LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This Client Assistance Memo (CAM) should not be used as a substitute for codes and regulations. The applicant is responsible for compliance with all code and rule requirements, whether or not described in this CAM. Figure 2. Recovery of development potential by encroachment into front and/or rear setbacks in lowrise zones Lowrise Duplex/Triplex, Lowrise 1, Lowrise 2 and Lowrise 3 Zones If there is an exceptional tree on the site, the project must go through administrative design review, even if the project is below the design review threshold for number of units, unless the applicant proposes to preserve the tree without departures. Exceptional tree removal is permitted only in limited circumstances where protecting the tree during construction would prevent the maximum allowed floor area from being achieved. A site's allowed floor area in these zones is the total floor area that could be achieved with the maximum permitted development coverage and the height limit of the applicable lowrise zone. The project (up to its "development potential") must utilize one or tree protection area Figure 1. Example of tree protection in single family zones extension into yard(s) allowed (not more than 50% of yard, and not more than development potential lost in tree protection areas) all branches and leaves). If the development poten- tial cannot be achieved in this manner, or if avoiding development in the tree protection area would result in a portion of the house being less than 15 feet in width, then the tree may be removed. Protection of other non-exceptional trees over two feet in diameter is optional, but encouraged. Existing front and/or rear yard departures may be utilized to retain these trees. found in each zone’s Land Use Code chapter and are summarized at: http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/Codes/ Tree_Landscaping_Regulations. more of the following options if it would allow preserva- tion of the tree: Development standard departures through design review including extensions into required setbacks. See Figure 2. Increase in permitted height of five feet if needed to accommodate additional development on an additional floor. The amount of the additional floor area is limited to the amount of floor area lost by avoiding development within the tree protection area. See Figure 3. Reduction in number of required parking spaces (up to a 10% reduction). Protection of other non-exceptional trees over two feet in diameter is optional, but encouraged. Applicants may utilize any of the above departures to retain these trees. Packet Page 250 of 307 DPD Client Assistance Memo #242—Tree Protection Regulations in Seattle page 4 LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This Client Assistance Memo (CAM) should not be used as a substitute for codes and regulations. The applicant is responsible for compliance with all code and rule requirements, whether or not described in this CAM. Lowrise 4, Midrise, and all Commercial Zones If there is an exceptional tree on the site, the project must go through administrative design review, even in the project is below the design review threshold for number of units or square footage, unless the appli- cant proposes to preserve the tree without departures. An exceptional tree may be removed only if avoiding development in the tree protection area could not be achieved by development departures through design review and/or up to a 10% reduction in required park- ing spaces. Protection of other non-exceptional trees over two feet in diameter is optional, but encouraged. Applicants may utilize design review or parking space reductions to retain these trees. Other Zones Tree protection may be required as part of design review and/or SEPA evaluation. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK The Seattle Municipal Code (SMC) and DPD Direc- tor's Rules contains regulations concerning trees in a number of sections. The most important regulations and processes are found in the following documents: Seattle Municipal Code* Chapter 25.11 — Tree Protection Section 25.09.320 — Environmentally Critical Areas Trees and Vegetation Section 25.05.675N — State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Chapter 23.41 — Design Review (administrative design review process, waiver of development standards, and plan submittal requirements) Section 23.22.020 and 23.22.040 — Subdivisions Section 23.24.020 and 23.24.040 — Short plats DPD Director's Rules* Director's Rule 13-92 — Landscape Standards Director's Rule 16-2008 — Designation of Excep- tional Trees Client Assistance Memos* CAM 331, ECA: Tree and Vegetation Overview CAM 331A, ECA: Vegetation Restoration CAM 331B, Hazard Trees Design Review-Related Documents* CAM 238, Design Review: General Information, Ap- plication Instructions, and Submittal Requirements Design Review Guidelines for Multifamily and Com- mercial Buildings Figure 3. Recovery of development potential through increase in height to allow fourth floor in lowrise zones Links to electronic versions of DPD Client Assistance Memos (CAMs), Director's Rules, and the Seattle Municipal Code are available on the "Publications" and "Codes" pages of our website at www.seattle.gov/dpd. Paper copies of these documents, as well as additional regula- tions mentioned in this CAM, are available from our Public Resource Center, located on the 20th floor of Seattle Municipal Tower at 700 Fifth Ave. in downtown Seattle, (206) 684-8467. Access to Information Packet Page 251 of 307 DPD Client Assistance Memo #242—Tree Protection Regulations in Seattle page 5 LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This Client Assistance Memo (CAM) should not be used as a substitute for codes and regulations. The applicant is responsible for compliance with all code and rule requirements, whether or not described in this CAM. Tree Regulations For Non-ECA Sites Where New Construction Is Proposed Design Review If a project is under the Design Review threshold (see CAM 238) in Lowrise, Midrise, or Commercial zones, the project may still have to go through Administrative Design Review IF there are exceptional trees on the site. Ad- ministrative Design Review is optional if the site contains a non-exceptional tree over two feet in diameter. If the project is over the Design Review threshold, general design guidelines will apply to consideration of whether or not trees will be recommended for retention, whether the tree is "exceptional" or not. SEPA If over SEPA thresholds (see DR 23-2000) and not covered by Chapter 25.11, the project will still be reviewed for "exceptional" tree protection under SEPA policy 25.09.675N and DR 6-2001. Single Family Landscaping/Tree Planting RegulationsZones Tree Protection Regulations (SMC, Ch. 25.11) SMC 23.44.008 Ch. 25.11, especially 25.11.060 Lowrise Duplex/Triplex, Lowrise 1 and Lowrise 2 SMC 23.45.015 Ch. 25.11, especially 25.11.070 Lowrise 3 Ch. 25.11, especially 25.11.070SMC 23.45.015A and B DR 13-92 Lowrise 4, Midrise, High- rise and Commercial L4: SMC 23.45.015A/B MR: SMC 23.45.057 HR: SMC 23.45.073 Commercial: 23.47.016 DR 13-92 lists the num- ber of trees required in each zone All other zones See relevant chapter for each zone Ch. 25.11, especially 25.11.080 Not Applicable Packet Page 252 of 307 RESEARCH REVIEW, VOL. 14, NO. 3, 2007 39 Place, Perception and Consumer Behavior In recent decades social scientists documented the connection between the retail environment and shopper activity. Meanwhile, gardeners and philosophers have celebrated the pleasures of trees and nature for centuries, noting the role of plants in aesthetics, cultural symbolism and therapy. Research by psychologists and sociologists confirms the benefits that people gain from nature experiences. However, the two research pursuits – investigations of human experiences of retail place and studies of nature settings – have rarely intersected. More recently, atmospherics research has examined how consumers’ store perceptions are affected by environmental cues such as light, sound, color and product placement. Atmospherics studies find that general perceptions, in turn, influence behavior; however, the research is largely limited to store interiors.1 Taken together, the studies indicate that the behavior influences of indoor places include approach/ avoidance, time spent in the environment and sales. External conditions deserve greater attention, as store and shopping center exteriors present initial perceptual cues to consumers. Features such as storefronts, entrances, display windows, building architecture and parking lot character can create favorable or negative impressions that affect the frequency of return, amount spent during a visit, types of products purchased and time spent at the shopping venue. These place elements must be pleasing to the shopper to induce approach behaviors for a retail store or service to be successful. The lifestyle center is a recent concept that provides walkable, shared outdoor spaces that are tucked around shops and stores. A character of place derived from traditional “main streets” is the basis for these new shopping centers. The success of lifestyle centers may affirm that positive atmospherics start at the curb and sidewalk. Urban forestry addresses the planning and management of all city trees, whether they are street trees, in parks or around homes.2 The science of urban forestry covers a range of studies of human experience, perception and behavior in nature settings. One research program has explored the role of trees in consumer environments, with a focus on main streets and central business districts. This article will highlight and integrate some of the key conclusions from these studies. Survey Methodology Largely funded by the U.S. Forest Service, a battery of shopper surveys were designed to assess if visual quality, place perceptions, shopper patronage and pricing perceptions were influenced by trees. For these studies, visual quality describes settings that people find more pleasing and desirable. Place perceptions were defined as the mental representations or assumptions that people hold for a place. Shopper patronage describes the frequency and duration of consumers’ actions, such as length of a visit. Lastly, pricing perceptions measured the consumers’ willingness-to-pay for products and services. Individual survey projects covered central business districts for large cities (those with populations greater than 250,000), a downtown shopping district for a mid- sized city (Athens, Georgia, which has a population of approximately 100,000 people), and main street shopping districts in smaller cities and towns (having populations of 10,000-20,000.) Two additional surveys measured the affect of trees on regional malls (viewed The Environmental Psychology of Shopping Assessing the Value of Trees Kathleen L. Wolf* Abstract: A multi-study research program has investigated how consumers respond to trees in various business settings in cities and towns. Some studies focused on central business districts, others tested perceptions along freeways and arterials. Results are remarkably consistent. Trees not only positively affect judgments of visual quality but, more significantly, also appear to influence other consumer responses and behaviors. Survey respondents from all regions of the United States favor trees in retail settings, and this preference is further reflected in positive perceptions, patronage behavior and product pricing. An overview of the research is presented, followed by guidelines for design with trees. * Research Social Scientist, University of Washington, College of Forest Resources 1 L.W. Turley, and Ronald E. Milliman, “Atmospheric Effects on Shopping Behavior: A Review of the Experimental Evidence,” Journal of Business Research., Vol. 49, 2000, pp. 193–211. 2 E. Gregory McPherson, “Urban Forestry in North America,” Renewable Resources Journal, Vol. 24 (No. 3), 2006, pp. 8-12. Packet Page 253 of 307 RESEARCH REVIEW, VOL. 14, NO. 3, 2007 40 from freeways) and small open-air or strip shopping centers (located on arterials.) All of these surveys were structured similarly and used preference stimuli, contingent behavior and contingent valuation methods to elicit shopper response. Each survey started with a preference ratings exercise, using images depicting streetscapes with varying forest character while reducing the variability of other visual content. Some of the images were of actual settings with which participants were familiar; others images were of hypothetical conditions that were prepared using digital editing. Each survey also contained a scenario that portrayed a shopping place and asked respondents to project their shopping behavior using rating scales and categorical responses.3 Scenarios basically differed as to whether they were “with trees” or had “no trees” in the streetscape. Those with trees portrayed a quality, well- managed urban forest throughout, rather than trees that were scattered or haphazardly placed. The different versions were randomly distributed to respondents by mail or during sidewalk intercepts,4 using accepted social science practices of sampling and respondent recruitment, followed by data analysis. What Were the Results? Studies of the past 40 years about humans and landscape generally find that people of all ages and cultural backgrounds prefer natural views to built settings, and that trees enhance public judgment of visual quality in cities.5,6 Analysis across the trees and business studies add to our interpretations of perceptions and behavior. Visual Quality Image-preference ratings were sorted into three to five visual categories per study (each containing at least two images) with mean ratings ranging from 1.65 to 4.00 on a scale of 1 (low) to 5 (high). Chart 10-1 summarizes Chart 10-1 Summary of Image Preference Categories and Ratings Source study for image: + small city, ++ mid-size city, +++ large city 3 Respondents were asked to respond to perceptual verbal items using rating scales, and to indicate likely patronage behavior within categorical indicators of time and distance. Both sets of metrics were derived from prior urban forestry perception and retail marketing studies. 4 In each study, a sample frame of potential shoppers was identified within geographic range of study sites, and included cities in northern and central U.S. Surveys were distributed by random sampling using commercial mailing lists or sidewalk intercepts. Survey mailings ranged in number from several hundred to several thousand, depending on the scope of each study. Response rates ranged from 10% to 80% across studies. 5 Roger S. Ulrich, “Human Responses to Vegetation and Landscapes,” Landscape and Urban Planning. Vol. 13, 1986, pp. 29-44. 6 Richard C. Smardon “Perception and Aesthetics of the Urban Environment: Review of the Role of Vegetation,” Landscape and Urban Planning. Vol. 15, 1988, pp. 85-106. Packet Page 254 of 307 RESEARCH REVIEW, VOL. 14, NO. 3, 2007 41 the array of category content evaluated and the mean responses (with standard deviations) across the main street studies. Figure 10-1 shows sample category images. Across all of the studies, consumer ratings increased steadily with the presence of trees. Image categories depicting business district settings having tidy sidewalks and quality buildings, but no trees, were at the low end of the scores. Images having well- tended, large trees received the highest preference ratings, even though plants obscured other elements (such as historic buildings). Place Perceptions In a second survey section, respondents were asked to rate their level of agreement with statements while viewing one place scenario. The average responses were derived for categories, and then compared between the forested and “no tree” conditions. Again, trees were associated with higher ratings of amenity and visual quality across the studies. Moving beyond the obvious visual content the respondents made inferences about the settings. Positive scores for maintenance were given to districts with trees, despite efforts to present the same level of building care and street tidiness. Respondents also attributed social traits and characteristics for in-store experiences. Judgments of products and merchants were more positive in forested places, as were inferences about product value, product quality and merchant responsiveness. It seems that favorable expectations of shopping experiences are initiated long before a consumer enters a store. Patronage Behavior Study participants indicated their probable patronage behavior with regard to travel to the business district, visitation patterns and willingness-to-pay for parking while considering the street and sidewalk scenarios. Table 10-1 shows where higher responses were found for places having trees, compared to no-tree settings, within cities of different sizes. Patronage behavior is important. For example, respondents claimed they would travel farther to visit a business district having trees in both large and small cities. This could translate to an expanded trade area radius that adds thousands of people within urban population centers. Once there, they report that they will stay longer, which could mean greater sales revenue.7 Product Pricing Wildland forests are harvested for market products, such as timber; however, the urban forest is a public good, rarely generating products that can be readily bought and sold. Contingent valuation8 was used to understand the impact of streetscape trees on local economics. Respondents were presented with a list of goods and services and were asked to state the prices for each of them. While there was some price variability according to city size, trees were consistently associated with higher price points. Table 10-2 shows the stated Figure 10-1 Category Images of Trees Patronage Measures Large Cities Mid-sized City Small Cities Travel time *More time Travel distance *Greater distance *Greater distance Duration of visit *More time ^More time *More time Frequency of visits *More frequent ^More frequent *More frequent Parking fee willingness to pay *Higher fee *Higher fee Table 10-1 Patronage Behavior Comparisons—Places “With Trees” Compared to “No Trees” Note: p<.05=statistically significant income; * is p<.001, ^is p<.001 7 Paco Underhill, Why We Buy: The Science of Shopping. Simon and Schuster, New York, NY, 1999. 8 Economists utilize several strategies, including contingent valuation methods (CVM), to value non-market goods and services provided by nature and ecosystems. CVM surveys have been used to assess public willingness-to-pay for use, conservation or restoration of natural resources, with most applications in wildland or rural settings. Issues of CVM reliability and validity were carefully considered in the research design. Packet Page 255 of 307 RESEARCH REVIEW, VOL. 14, NO. 3, 2007 42 prices for different categories of products compared across “with tree” and “no tree” settings. After standardizing valuations, consumers claimed that they were willing to pay 9% more in small cities and 12% more in large cities for equivalent goods and services in business districts having an urban forest. Demographic Differences? Surveys included demographics questions. Survey participants in the large and small city studies were generally slightly older, somewhat more affluent and less culturally diverse than the general U.S. populace. Respondents in Athens, the mid-size city, were younger and had reduced household incomes, which is not surprising for a college town. While there were some minor differences in response associated with respondent traits, the high degree of consistency across all studies was remarkable. Better Design With Trees Trees are a living resource that change in character and form over many decades. This dynamic design element not only offers opportunities, but also can create tensions in the built environment. Here are some guidelines for integrating trees and other vegetation into the outdoor retail place. Place Branding Each species, or cultivar, has a distinct mature form, size and other attributes. Plant selections can “brand” a place through subtle, yet observable, distinctions of texture, seasonal color and plant massing. Within a shopping center, diverse tree groupings and arrangements help people distinguish sub-zones, thereby providing cues for orientation and wayfinding. Working within a selected plant palette, the landscape designer can promote a mood of variety within unity, or a place perceived to be coherent overall with pockets of great visual interest. Order and Tidiness Respondents preferred scenes where vegetation is presented in patterns, and there is order within the street scene. Careful and routine maintenance is also important, as tidiness improves preference ratings across all landscapes. Again, there is more to this than meets the eye; during interviews, shoppers claimed that the level of care for plants in the sidewalk zone provided cues about the level of care and customer service they might expect from nearby merchants. Signs and Forest Co-design An oft-repeated concern in merchant interviews was the tension between placement of trees and the visibility of signs, awnings and storefronts. Many of these visual conflicts can be avoided by the co-design of signage and vegetation. Compare sign height and mature tree height. Select and plant taller trees that will grow above signage. Routine pruning can be used to thin branches and lift canopy, enabling better views and more light to filter to the ground. Color and materials choices for signs should contrast with the foliage, drawing the eye to visual accents. Prevent Infrastructure Conflicts Other concerns of merchants relate to tree roots and branches interfering with utilities and pavings. Many of these conflicts can be avoided by designing planting spaces to expected tree size. Plants are genetically inclined to attain a certain size in both canopy and root areas. Conflicts arise when such growth zones are too confined for mature plant size. Tree technologies, such as structural soils, permit the installation of pavings and pipes near trees, yet provide for air, water, and nutrient needs of plants. Trees Make Dollars and Sense Across multiple studies a comprehensive measurement approach was used to better understand consumer perceptions and behavior in the presence of trees. Statistically significant differences were found on four groups of measures – visual quality, place perceptions, shopper patronage and product pricing – with forested districts having higher ratings and values. It is important to note that the highest ratings were granted to places having full, mature tree canopy, indicating careful maintenance across decades. Table 10-2 Pricing Comparisons for Products Note: All values in $U.S.; p<.05=statistically significant income; * is p<.001, ^is p<.0001 Products Category No Trees With Trees No Trees With Trees Convenience $8.98 $13.78 $5.93 $7.48 Shopping $33.52 $47.36 $69.42 $92.22 Specialty $51.88 $73.24 $63.96 $74.32 Large Cities ^Small Cities * Packet Page 256 of 307 RESEARCH REVIEW, VOL. 14, NO. 3, 2007 43 While not specifically studied, it is likely that comparable responses would be found for shopping centers, particularly those having active, outdoor spaces. There are many research opportunities. Additional studies could explore consumer response to nature in a variety of center settings, and provide benefit/cost analysis. City trees provide environmental benefits, the usual justification for urban forestry investment, and are an important concern as the public gains greater interest in urban sustainability. These studies demonstrate that trees serve other functions, particularly for retail and commercial interests. Trees and landscapes can be significant elements in place marketing. Economists have noted that shopping was once a utilitarian activity to fulfill needs and wants, but today’s shoppers are pursuing places that offer social, memorable experiences. Trees help create place and connect to deeply felt preferences and appreciations that people have for nature. The urban forest is an important part of the vibrant, satisfying places that shoppers enjoy. Dr. Kathleen L. Wolf is a research social scientist at the University of Washington, Seattle. Her work focuses on the human dimensions of urban forests and ecosystems, using theory and methods of environmental psychology. Additional information about urban greening research is at: www.cfr.washington.edu/research.envmind/ Packet Page 257 of 307 LEED Credits for TERREWALKS™ TERREWALKS interlocking open-grid 100% recycled rubber/waste plastic pedestrian paving system contributes credits in the following sections: 2.1, 2.2 - Construction Waste Management - TERREWALKS are made with a zero-waste manufacturing process. Any product recovered from a site can be relocated and reused at another site, or donated, or returned to Rubbersidewalks, Inc. in exchange for new product. Any product deemed no longer serviceable will be 100% recycled into newly manufactured product. No TERREWALKS or TERREWALKS material will end up in landfill or be incinerated. Intent: To divert construction and demolition debris from disposal in landfills and incineration facilities. Redirect recyclable recovered resources back to the manufacturing process and reusable materials to appropriate sites. Requirement: Recycle and/or salvage at least 50% or 75% (by weight or volume) of non-hazardous construction and demolition debris. Develop and implement a construction waste management plan quantifying material diversion goals. 4.1, 4.2 - Recycled Content - TERREWALKS are 100% recycled content including scrap car tires and waste plastic. Each TERREWALKS paver diverts 36 pounds of waste plastic and rubber from landfill. Intent: Increase demand for building products that incorporate recycled content materials, thereby reducing the impacts resulting from extraction and processing of virgin materials. Requirement: Use materials with recycled content such that the sum of post-consumer recycled content plus one-half of the pre-consumer content constitutes 10% or 20% (based on cost) of the total value of the materials in the project. 5.1, 5.2 - Regional Materials - TERREWALKS are manufactured in California and divert low density and high density polyethylene plastic and scrap tires from landfill. Intent: Increase demand for building materials and products that are extracted and manufactured within the region, thereby supporting the use of indigenous resources and reducing the environmental impacts resulting from transportation. Requirement: Use building products that have been extracted, harvested or recovered, as well as manufactured, within 500 miles of the project site for minimum of 10% or 20% (based on cost) of the total materials value. If only a fraction of the product is extracted, harvested or recovered and manufactured locally, then only that percentage (by weight) shall contribute to the regional value. 6.1, 6.2 – Storm water Design - TERREWALKS is an open-grid (pervious through seams) pavement system and allows over 97.2 in. per hr of storm water drainage. Its underbase channel system is designed for water capture. TERREWALKS can be combined with other storm water management solutions to further accommodate this LEED credit. Intent: Limit disruption of natural water hydrology by reducing impervious cover, increasing on-site infiltration, reducing or eliminating pollution from storm water runoff, and eliminating contaminants. Requirement: Implement a storm water management plan that decreases the volume of storm water runoff from the one- or two-year 24-hour design storm, reduces impervious cover, promotes infiltration, and captures and treats the storm water runoff using acceptable best management practices. 7.1 - Heat Island Effect - TERREWALKS is permeable which reduces heat island effect, and also available in a TerreCool version which provides an SRI of 44.26—exceeding the minimum requirement of 29. Intent: Reduce heat islands (thermal gradient differences between developed and undeveloped areas) to minimize impact on microclimate and human and wildlife habitat. Requirement: Provide any combination of the following for 50% of the site hardscape: shade (within 5 years occupancy), paving materials with a Solar Reflectance Index of at least 29, open grid pavement system. Or, place a minimum of 50% of parking spaces under cover. 1.1 - Innovation in Design - Rubbersidewalks, Inc. is the pioneer of modular pavement as an alternative to concrete and asphalt. TERREWALKS is used nationwide in applications to bring environmental performance and innovation to paved sites. Intent: To provide design teams and projects the opportunity to be awarded points for exceptional performance above the requirements set by the LEED Green Building Rating System and/or innovative performance in Green Building categories not specifically addressed by LEED. Requirement: Identify the intent of the proposed innovation credit, the proposed requirement for compliance, the proposed submittals to demonstrate compliance, and the design approach (strategies) that might be used to meet the requirements. The LEED™ Green Building rating system is the nationally accepted benchmark for the design and construction of Green buildings. The credits apply for New Construction (LEED-NC) and LEED for Existing Buildings (LEED-EB). Packet Page 258 of 307 10061 Talbert Avenue, #200 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 PH 714 964 1400 FX 714 964 8600 www.Rubbersidewalks.com LEED Neighborhood Development Credits forTERREWALKS™ The LEED for Neighborhood Development rating system, currently being developed, integrates the principles of smart growth, new urbanism and green building into the first national system for neighborhood design. The program is a collaborative effort among US Green Building Council, the Congress for the New Urbanism and the Natural Resources Defense Council. This rating system is built upon the LEED for Neighborhood Development pilot rating system, which nearly 240 projects have been using since July 2007 as part of a successful pilot program. Of the proposed 56 credits and prerequisites, over 20 of them are directly impacted by pedestrian pavement. The goals for neighborhood sidewalks and walkways include pavement which is pervious (allows storm water drainage), reduces heat island effect, is recycled material, and promotes walking. TERREWALKS interlocking open-grid 100% recycled rubber/waste plastic pedestrian paving system contributes credits in each of those areas, as per the criteria of the LEED™ green building rating system: 4.1, 4.2 - Recycled Content: TERREWALKS are 100% recycled content including scrap car tires and waste plastic. Each TERREWALKS paver diverts 36 pounds of waste plastic and rubber from landfill. 6.1, 6.2 – Storm water Design: TERREWALKS is a pervious pavement system and allows over 97.2 in. per hr of storm water drainage. Its underbase channel system is designed for water capture. 7.1 - Heat Island Effect: TERREWALKS is permeable which reduces heat island effect, and also available in TerreCool version with an SRI of 44.26—exceeding minimum requirement of 29. Innovation in Design: Rubbersidewalks, Inc. is the pioneer of modular pavement as an alternative to concrete and asphalt. TERREWALKS is used nationwide in applications to bring environmental performance and innovation to paved sites. LEED for Neighborhood Development Categories Impacted by Pedestrian Pavement Include: SMART LOCATION & LINKAGE NEIGHBORHOOD PATTERN & DESIGN Wetland and Water Body Conservation Walkable Streets Reduced Automobile Dependence Compact Development Transit Facilities GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE & BUILDINGS Universal Accessibility Construction Activity Pollution Prevention Tree-Lined and Shaded Streets Certified Green Buildings Neighborhood Schools Water Efficiency Landscaping Minimize Site Disturbance in Design and Construction Stormwater Management INNOVATION & DESIGN PROCESS Heat Island Reduction Innovation and Exemplary Performance Recycled Content in Infrastructure The LEED™ Green Building rating system is the nationally accepted benchmark for the design and construction of Green buildings. Packet Page 259 of 307 Packet Page 260 of 307 Packet Page 261 of 307 Packet Page 262 of 307 Packet Page 263 of 307 SECTION 32 14 00 UNIT PAVING Rubbersidewalks™ Recycled Tire Rubber Interlocking Modular Paving System PART 1 GENERAL 1.1 SECTION INCLUDES Rubbersidewalks™ Recycled Tire Rubber Interlocking Modular Paving System 1.2 RELATED SECTIONS A. Section 03 30 00 - Cast-in-Place Concrete. B. Section 31 00 00 – Earthwork. C. Section 31 05 19 – Geotextiles. D. Section 32 11 00 - Bases Courses. E. Section 32 11 16 – Subbase Courses. 1.3 REFERENCES A. ADAAG – Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Accessibility Guidelines; US Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board. B. ASTM B117: Standard Test Method for Salt Spray. C. ASTM C1026: Standard Test Method for Resistance of Freeze – Thaw Cycling. D. ASTM C1028: Standard Test Method for Determining the Static Coefficient of Friction. E. ASTM D3884: Standard Guide for Abrasion Resistance F. ASTM D6944: Standard Test Method for Impact Resistance to Thermal Cycling. G. ASTM E162: Standard Test Method for Surface Flammability. H. ASTM F355: Shock Absorbing Properties of Play Surfaces. 1.4 SUBMITTALS A. Submit under provisions of Section 01 30 00. B. Product Data: Manufacturer's data sheets on each product to be used, including: 1. Preparation instructions and recommendations. 2. Storage and handling requirements and recommendations. 32 14 00-1 Packet Page 264 of 307 32 14 00-2 3. Installation methods. C. Selection Samples: For each finish product specified, one set of samples representing manufacturer's range of available product. D. Certificate of Compliance: Submit manufacturer's certificate of compliance indicating materials comply with specified requirements. E. Manufacturer's Project References: 1. Submit list of successfully completed projects. 2. Include project name and location, name of customer official, or engineer, landscape architect, architect, etc. and type and quantity of surfacing furnished. F. Installer's Project References: 1. Submit list of successfully completed projects. 2. Include project name and location, customer official, or engineer, landscape architect, architect, etc., and type and quantity of surfacing installed. G. Maintenance Instructions: Submit manufacturer's maintenance and cleaning instructions. H. Warranty: Submit manufacturer's standard warranty. 1.5 QUALITY ASSURANCE A. Manufacturer's Qualifications: 1. Continuously engaged in manufacturing of surfacing products of similar type to that specified, with a minimum of 5 years successful experience. B. Installer's Qualifications: 1. Successful experience in installation of interlocking modular pavement, with a minimum of 15 projects completed within last 5 years. 2. Employ persons trained for installation of surfacing interlocking modular products. (ICPI accredited preferred.) 3. Approved by manufacturer. (Nonqualified installers may be considered if they attend training session. Cost of training to be assumed by installer.) 1.6 DELIVERY, STORAGE, AND HANDLING A. Delivery: Deliver materials to site in manufacturer's original, unopened containers and packaging, with labels clearly identifying product name and manufacturer. B. Storage: 1. Store materials in accordance with manufacturer's instructions. 2. Cover panels with plastic or use other packaging materials to prevent rust marks from steel strapping. C. Handling: Protect materials during handling and installation to prevent damage. 1.7 PROJECT CONDITIONS A. Maintain environmental conditions (temperature, humidity, and ventilation) within limits recommended by manufacturer for optimum results. Do not install products under environmental conditions outside manufacturer's absolute limits. 1.8 WARRANTY Packet Page 265 of 307 32 14 00-3 A. Materials and Workmanship: Rubbersidewalks shall be warranted for defects in materials and workmanship for ten (10) years. PART 2 PRODUCTS 2.1 MANUFACTURERS A. Acceptable Manufacturer: RUBBERSIDEWALKS, Inc. which is located at: 10061 Talbert Ave. #200, Fountain Valley, CA 92708; Toll Free Tel: 877-774-4326; Tel: 714-064-1400; Fax: 714-964-8600; Email: info@rubbersidewalks.com; Web: www.rubbersidewalks.com. B. Substitutions: Not permitted. B. Requests for substitutions will be considered in accordance with provisions of Section 01 60 00. 2.2 MODULAR INTERCONNECTED PAVER TILES A. Product: RUBBERSIDEWALKS are modular interconnected paving tiles. 1. Material: 100% recycled tire crumbed rubber, polyurethane binder and colorant, molded under compression. 2. Size: 2' x 2.5' x 1.875". Pre-drilled dowel holes, two per side. Design allows installation of minimum 4’ wide sidewalks. 3. Weight: 10.54 lbs per square foot (54 lbs. per paving tile). 4. Color: a. Gray b. Terra Cotta (brownish-red) c. As selected by Architect. 5. Under-base: Flat, solid black color B. Material Characteristics: 1. Hardness: Shore A 72. 2. Shock Attenuation: ASTM F355: Shock Absorbing Properties of Play Surfaces. G-max average: 187. Fall significantly less likely than on concrete to cause injury or broken bones. Product is not designed for playground use and is not a playground material. 3. Coefficient of Friction: ASTM C 1028: Dry=0.90; Wet=0.65 (OSHA guidelines require that all walking surfaces satisfy a 0.5 Static Coefficient of Friction rating. In new construction and alterations, ADA specifies that all walkways be stable, firm and slip resistant.) 4. Taber-Abrasion: ASTM C 501: 270 5. Weight Load: 3000 pounds per square inch 6. Salt/Chloride & Magnesium Chloride Exposure: ASTM B117: Product exposed for 24 hours. No change in surface; no stain or residue. 7. Xenon Arc Weathering: 200 hours UV testing. Lighting equivalent to outdoor daylight conditions and temperatures not exceeding 140 degrees Fahrenheit. No change after exposure to sunlight two-year equivalent. 8. Flame Spread: ASTM E 162: Index 131.18 at average temperature of 157.7 C (Surface flammability ANSI Z124.1 and Z124.1 allows Index of 450 or less). If exposed to open, constant fire, pavers are likely to smolder. Lit cigarettes, cigars or matches can burn on paver until they self-extinguish. 9. Porosity: ASTM F 1551: 2.2”/hr. Permeable at module seams. Immediate water drainage into ground. 10. Freeze-Thaw: ASTM C 1026: Product exposed to 15 cycles of freeze-thaw at 0 Degrees for 90 days. No change. No facial defects. No signs of crazing, Packet Page 266 of 307 32 14 00-4 chipping, spailing or cracking. Product frozen at 0° was subjected to impact with no change. 11. Thermal Expansion. Less that 2% thermal expansion/contraction when subjected to laboratory testing temperature ranges from -5° to 165°. 12. LEED Credit: Qualifies for possible 4 LEED credits for recycled content, storm water drainage and heat island effect, innovation of design, and regional materials. 13. Sound: RUBBERSIDEWALKS™ reduces sound of pedestrian or wheeled traffic. 14. ADA Compliance: Low vibration; concrete-to-RUBBERSIDEWALKS™ transition non-affective; high coefficient of friction both dry and wet; Shore A hardness supports all pedestrian and wheeled traffic, and transition on and off concrete or other hardscape. Product designed for 4 foot minimum width. 15. Modularity: RUBBERSIDEWALKS™ is a modular system. Pavers are interconnected with patented design and can be opened by professional contractors for tree root maintenance, utilities access, seismic adjustment, relocation, etc. 16. Other: Non-toxic. All components inert solids. No volatile organic compounds. No wet latex content. Packet Page 267 of 307 32 14 00-5 C. Subbase:**NOTE TO SPECIFIER ** Proper sub-base & base materials, and compaction are key. Except for Class 2 Permeable Base (which includes angular fines), no fines should be used as they can wash way over time. Rubbersidewalks is permeable and should have good drainage in all materials. Please consult RUBBERSIDEWALKS, Inc. about regional soil properties and available local materials prior to installation. 1. ¾” crushed angular rock & ½” crushed aggregate (angular cut) 1. Class 2 Permeable base (with angular fines). 2. Permeable woven geotextile (Mirafi 500X or equivalent) D. Accessories provided by product manufacturer: 1. Permaloc Spiral Steel Spikes 2. Permaloc Brick-Block Paver Restraints 3. Fiber-Glass 3” dowels PART 3 EXECUTION 3.1 EXAMINATION A. Do not begin installation until substrates have been properly laid and compacted according to manufacturer’s instructions, and inspected by an authority approved by customer. B. If substrate preparation is the responsibility of another installer, do not begin installation until substrates have been properly laid and compacted according to manufacturer’s instructions, and inspected by an authority approved by customer. C. Consulting arborist recommended for tree root inspection. Roots can be left intact up to 1.875” from grade (flush to base of paver) and any tree root trimming should be approved and supervised by a consulting arborist 3.2 PREPARATION A. Prepare surfaces in accordance with manufacturer's instructions and protocol. 3.3 INSTALLATION A. Install paving system in accordance with manufacturer's instructions at locations indicated on the Drawings. 3.4 CLEANING A. Clean surface in accordance with manufacturer's instructions. END OF SECTION Packet Page 268 of 307 Trees make business districts more pleasant places! Yet long-term care and maintenance is needed to gain the most benefit from trees in downtown business centers. Are the returns worth the costs? Several scientific studies indicate that trees are good for business! A recent study tested the response of shoppers and visitors in smaller cities throughout the U.S. Three general areas of re- sponse were evaluated: district perceptions, patronage behavior and product pricing. More positive responses were reported when people viewed shopping districts having trees. Merchants in many downtown business districts in the U.S. are working hard to create vital, com- petitive retail places. Why should trees be part of an action plan? This fact sheet summarizes the perceptions shoppers and visitors have of trees, and potential economic gains. 17 Trees on Main Street: Influences on Retail and Shopping Behavior HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF THE URBAN FOREST FACT SHEET #17 District 1 - No trees in the streetscape District 2 - With large, full-canopy trees Comparing Two Shopping Districts Studying How Shoppers React to Trees! Research Project A national study, conducted by the University of Washington, used survey questionnaires to assess public perceptions of trees in downtown business districts of smaller cities. Surveys were mailed to people who live in selected cities (10-20,000 population) in the states of Idaho, Oregon, Washington, Arkansas, Georgia, Nebraska and Virginia. Surveys were also sent to residents of large cities (>100,000 population) that are near the study cities. Potential visitors and shoppers were invited to participate. Their responses were compared to learn more about how trees might influence local retail economics, and how the urban forest contributes to tourism in smaller communities. Packet Page 269 of 307 KL WOLF – SEPTEMBER 2004 Our physical environment affects our behavior, often in ways that we are not aware of. Marketing studies of “atmospherics” test how interior store features influence buying behavior. For instance, a pleasant store atmosphere is correlated with higher spending intentions. Trees are a positive atmospheric for business districts. They create a retail mood that appeals to shoppers and visitors. Trees greet shoppers with a message of welcome even before entering a merchant’s door. Place Perceptions Each respondent rated a series of descriptions about one of the two hypothetical districts. Two categories of perceptions emerged from the ratings: Place Character Products and Merchants Ratings for both categories were significantly higher for the place that has large, full-canopy street trees. Place character (such as having a pleasant atmosphere and positive image) was rated 35% higher for the place having large trees. Judgments of products and merchants (such as customer service, informative merchants, and well-made products) were 10% more positive for places having trees. Consumers made judgments about their potential shopping experience based on tree cues. Patronage Behavior Actions follow perceptions. Respondents were asked to give opinions of their behavior regarding the two shopping districts, including travel time, travel dis- tance, length of visit, frequency of visits and willingness-to-pay for parking. For ALL behaviors, higher measures were reported in the districts having trees. Longer and more frequent visits means more revenue for merchants. Respondents also claimed they would be willing to pay more for parking in a shaded business district Although tree planting and care costs money, extra parking revenue could be dedicated to trees, generating benefits for all downtown merchants. Product Pricing Do trees influence how much people are willing to pay for goods? A method called contingent valuation was used to assess place- based consumer pricing. Survey respondents were asked to specify a price for each of nine items representing three categories of goods: convenience, shopping, specialty. All three indices were priced higher in the district with trees. Prices averaged about 9% more for products in the With Trees district, as compared to the No Tree district. This was true of low-price, impulse-buy conve- nience goods (such as lunch sandwich or flower bouquet), as well as bigger ticket, comparison-shopped items (such as camera or watch). Given the low profit margins of most retail businesses, trees appear to provide a significant “amenity margin.” Research Funding: USDA Forest Service on recommendation of National Urban and Community Forestry Advisory Council For more information, contact… PROJECT DIRECTOR: Kathleen L. Wolf, Ph.D.; College of Forest Resources, University of Washington PHONE: (206) 616-5758, E-MAIL: kwolf@u.washington.edu WEB SITE: www.cfr.washington.edu/research.envmind Packet Page 270 of 307 TERREWALKS™is the new generation of Rubbersidewalks. Like Rubbersidewalks, this interlocking modular paving system is a cost-effective and LEED accredited alternative to concrete sidewalks and pathways. Made of recycled tire rubber bound with waste plastic,TERREWALKS™ are fabricated with patented technology that produces a uniquely high- performance, low-environmental-impact product. TERREWALKS™ meets all requirements of sidewalk-worthiness, including stable grade, non-vibration in compliance with ADA, and high coefficient of friction for non-skid both dry and wet. TERREWALKS™ do not fade, break, crack or warp in any climate condition. Cities and site managers struggle with public safety concerns and financial burdens posed by concrete sidewalks damaged by tree roots, freeze-thaw, and vehicular traffic. TERREWALKS™ modular sidewalk systems accommodate tree root growth, frost heave and vehicles without breakage. •No breaking, chipping, or cracking – ever •Performs in all climates •Easy installation •Lowest cost, safest and most comfortable sidewalk •Specified by cities, counties and state DOTs nationwide •Reduces stormwater run-off,saves trees & stops trip hazards •Interlocking system designed for permanent and temporary installations •LEED Qualified •Minimal Impact Paving The unbreakable solution to broken sidewalks from this to this TerreGranite TerreCool 100% recycled & renewable interlocking modular paving systems TerreWalks Flyer.qxd:rbside.8.06.qxd 9/24/08 3:19 PM Page 1 Packet Page 271 of 307 Material:100% recycled crumb tire rubber & low density polyethylene waste plastic; colorant. Size:2' x 2.5' x 1.875" tabs extend additional 1.5” per side on all sides/allows 4’ or 5’ wide sidewalks. Weight:7.2 lbs per square foot (36 lbs. per paving tile). Surfaces:Granite gray ‘natural look’ surface (each part unique). Marble buff high-solar-reflectance surface (each part unique). Under-base:Patented channel design system to facilitate water drainage and accommodate tree root growth. Hardness:ShoreA93. Shock Attenuation:ASTM F355: Shock Absorbing Properties of Play Surfaces. G-max average: 489. Fall significantly less likely than on concrete to cause injury or broken bones. Product is not designed for playground use and is not a playground material. Coefficient of Friction:ASTM C 1028: Dry=0.69; Wet=0.50 (OSHA guidelines require that all walking surfaces satisfy a 0.5 Static Coefficient of Friction rating. In new construction and alterations, ADA specifies that a 0.6 Coefficient of Friction is recommended on all path of travel surfaces. TERREWALKS™ is 0.69.) Taber-Abrasion:ASTM D 3884: 1,000g weight load , H-22 (high abrasion) wheels at 12,000 cycles Material loss of 5.06% indicates high wear property. Compression Tolerance:ASTM D 4762: 50,000 5149 PSI Recovered 94%. Salt/Chloride & Magnesium Chloride Exposure:ASTM B117: Product exposed for 24 hours. No change in surface; no stain or residue. Xenon Arc Weathering:200 hours UV testing. Lighting equivalent to outdoor daylight conditions and temperatures not exceeding 140 degrees Fahrenheit. No change after exposure to sunlight two-year equivalent. Flame Spread:ASTM E 162: Index 131.18 at average temperature of 157.7 C (Surface flammability ANSI Z124.1 and Z124.1 allows Index of 450 or less). If exposed to open, constant fire, pavers are likely to smolder. Lit cigarettes, cigars or matches can burn on paver until they self-extinguish. Porosity:DIN 18035: Average time through 6" interconnected seam zone: 97.5” per hour. Indicates high permeability and water capture with no pooling. Underbase channel systems promotes water capture and immediate drainage. Thermal Emittance:.83 (TerreCool). Solar Reflectance:.402 (TerreCool). Solar Reflectance Index:44.26 (TerreCool). Freeze-Thaw:ASTM C 1026: Product exposed to 15 cycles of freeze-thaw at 0 Degrees. No change. No facial defects. No signs of crazing, chipping, spailing or cracking. Freeze Impact:ASTM D 6944: Product frozen at 0 degrees was subjected to missile impact with no change. Optical Density of Smoke:E662: Average Dm Corrected Flaming: 197 Non-Flaming 120 (450 or less is passing score). Maintenance:Sweep, hose down, mop, steam clean. LEED Credit:Qualifies for possible 4 LEED credits for recycled content, storm water drainage and heat island effect. Sound:TERREWALKS™ reduces sound of pedestrian or wheeled traffic. ADA Compliance:Low vibration; concrete-to- TERREWALKS™ transition non-affective; high coefficient of friction both dry and wet; Shore A hardness supports all pedestrian and wheeled traffic, and transition on and off concrete or other hardscape. Product designed for 4 foot minimum width. Modularity:TERREWALKS™ is a modular system. Pavers are interconnected with patented design and can be opened by professional contractors for tree root maintenance, utilities access, seismic adjustment, relocation, etc. Other:Non-toxic. All components inert solids. No volatile organic compounds. No latex content. All tests conducted and reported by accredited U.S. testing companies and performed under continuous direct supervision. The resources of the earth are limited. Recycling is limited only by our imagination and effort. Ph 714 964 1400 • Fax 714 964 8600 • 10061 Talbert Ave. #200, Fountain Valley, CA 92708 E-mail: info@rubbersidewalks.com • Web: www.Rubbersidewalks.com PRODUCT DESCRIPTION TERREWALKS™ are modular interlocking paving tiles made of 100% recycled tire rubber and waste plastic, and organic colorant then molded under compression.TERREWALKS™ meets all requirements of sidewalk-worthiness, including stable grade, non-vibration in compliance with ADA requirements, and high coefficient of friction for non-skid both dry and wet. SOLE SOURCE TERREWALKS™ is a sole source product, developed exclusively by Rubbersidewalks, Inc. for the public right of way and other landscaping applications,marketed and manufactured by Rubbersidewalks, Inc. TERREWALKS™ modular sidewalk system has been proven effective for use in public right of way applications (sidewalks, walkways, tree wells), and proven beneficial to the health and maintenance of urban trees. Rubbersidewalks, Inc. is a small, and woman-owned, California business. Contact us with your specific requirements. We’ll be happy to provide engineers with CAD drawings, technical data & information necessary for specifying TerreWalks™ for your needs. Rubbersidewalks, Inc. is a GSA Contract Holder and Disaster Recovery for State & Local Gov’t. Toll-Free: 877-RSI-4ECO (877-774-4326) © 2008 Rubbersidewalks, Inc. Contact Us to Discuss Sales Representative or Distributor Opportunities TerreWalks Flyer.qxd:rbside.8.06.qxd 9/24/08 3:19 PM Page 2 Packet Page 272 of 307 StormWaterTW_Sheet.doc 11/9/2008 Page 1 of 2 10061 Talbert Avenue, #200 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 714.964.1400 : : Phone 714.964.8600 : : Fax TERREWALKS™ LEED™ Advantages STORM WATER DESIGN - LEED™ credit 6.1, 6.2 The U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED™ rating system is the nationally accepted benchmark for the design and construction of Green buildings. TERREWALKS™ contributes credits in several areas, including capture of storm water. TERREWALKS™ modular paving system is a pervious pavement system and allows over 97.2 in. per hour of storm water drainage. Water drainage through seams which are interlocked in permeable joints. Domed paver design directs water to seams. ASTM F 1551: Average Time Thru 6” Zone: 63.5 Seconds Gal/min/yd²: 31.8 Inches/hour: 97.5 Each five square feet is bound by two 24” seams which drain 190.8 gallons per hour, and two 30” seams which drain 318 gallons per hour, for total drainage of 508.8 gallons per hour. TERREWALKS™ underbase channel system designed for maximum water drainage. TERREWALKS™ installation system requires permeable base materials and permeable geotextile for maximum evacuation of storm water. TERREWALKS™ facilitates a storm water management plan. Packet Page 273 of 307 Page 2 of 2 StormWaterTW_Sheet.doc 11/9/2008 LEED 6.1, 6.2 – Storm water Design Intent: Limit disruption of natural water hydrology by reducing impervious cover, increasing on-site infiltration, reducing or eliminating pollution from storm water runoff, and eliminating contaminants. Requirement: Implement a storm water management plan that decreases the volume of storm water runoff from the one- or two-year 24-hour design storm, reduces impervious cover, promotes infiltration, and captures and treats the storm water runoff using acceptable best management practices. In addition to Storm Water Management, TERREWALKS™ contributes LEED™ credits in these other sections: 4.1, 4.2 - Recycled Content TERREWALKS™ are 100% renewable/recycled rubber&plastic (Hybrinite™) Each TERREWALKS™ paver diverts 36 pounds of waste plastic and waste rubber. Intent: Increase demand for building products that incorporate recycled content materials, thereby reducing the impacts resulting from extraction and processing of virgin materials. Requirement: Use materials with recycled content such that the sum of post-consumer recycled content plus one-half of the pre-consumer content constitutes 10% or 20% (based on cost) of the total value of the materials in the project. 5.1, 5.2 - Regional Materials TERREWALKS™ are manufactured in California and divert low density polyethylene plastic and scrap tires from landfill from California and other states. Intent: Increase demand for building materials and products that are extracted and manufactured within the region, thereby supporting the use of indigenous resources and reducing the environmental impacts resulting from transportation. Requirement: Use building products that have been extracted, harvested or recovered, as well as manufactured, within 500 miles of the project site for minimum of 10% or 20% (based on cost) of the total materials value. If only a fraction of the product is extracted, harvested or recovered and manufactured locally, then only that percentage (by weight) shall contribute to the regional value. 909090909090909090000000000000000900909 7.1 - Heat Island Effect TERREWALKS™ is available in a TerreCool version which provides a minimum SRI of 44.26. Intent: Reduce heat islands (thermal gradient differences between developed and undeveloped areas) to minimize impact on microclimate and human and wildlife habitat. Requirement: Provide any combination of the following for 50% of the site hardscape: shade (within 5 years occupancy), paving materials with a Solar Reflectance Index of at least 29, open grid pavement system. Or, place a minimum of 50% of parking spaces under cover. Any roof used to shade covered parking must have an SRI of at least 29. 1.1 - Innovation in Design Rubbersidewalks, Inc. is the pioneer of modular interlocking pavement as an alternative to concrete and asphalt. Rubbersidewalks’ systems, including TERREWALKS™, are used nationwide in applications which bring environmental performance and innovation to paved sites. Intent: To provide design teams and projects the opportunity to be awarded points for exceptional performance above the requirements set by the LEED Green Building Rating System and/or innovative performance in Green Building categories not specifically addressed by LEED. Requirement: Identify the intent of the proposed innovation credit, the proposed requirement for compliance, the proposed submittals to demonstrate compliance, and the design approach (strategies) that might be used to meet the requirements. All credits apply for New Construction (LEED-NC) and LEED for Existing Buildings (LEED-EB). Packet Page 274 of 307 Pr e s e n t a t i o n T o : Da v i d N e l l i s Re g i o n a l S a l e s R e p r e s e n t a t i v e Ru b b e r s i d e w a l k s , I n c . Pa c k e t Pa g e 27 5 of 30 7 Tr i p a n d F a l l I s s u e s Tr i p a n d F a l l I s s u e s On c e a C i t y h a s b e e n N o t i f i e d o f T r i p Ha z a r d , T h e y a r e L i a b l e Th e A v e r a g e T r i p & F a l l P a y o u t i s $2 5 , 0 0 0 p e r I n c i d e n t Mo s t C i t i e s H a v e S i d e w a l k R e p a i r Ba c k l o g s M e a s u r e d i n Y e a r s Co n c r e t e C a n n o t b e M a i n t a i n e d , So i t M u s t b e C o n s t a n t l y R e p l a c e d Pa c k e t Pa g e 27 6 of 30 7 Ty p i c a l C i t y , U S A Co n c l u s i o n : Ov e r 14 ye a r s , t h e T y p i c a l C i t y h a d t o r e p a i r 3480 si t e s o n 2 1 s t r e e t s . 55 6 co n c r e t e i n s t a l l a t i o n s fa i l e d w i t h i n 4 - 7 y e a r s . By u s i n g Ru b b e r s i d e w a l k s ov e r t h e l a s t 5 y e a r s , th e c i t y i s b r e a k i n g e v e n o n t h e p r o d u c t a t y e a r 5 an d w i l l s a v e $ 2 0 p r s f o v e r t h e n e x t 1 5 y e a r s . Pa c k e t Pa g e 27 7 of 30 7 En v i r o n m e n t a l V a l u e o f En v i r o n m e n t a l V a l u e o f Ur b a n F o r e s t s Ur b a n F o r e s t s Ev e r y 1 0 % I n c r e a s e i n T r e e C a n o p y Re d u c e s T e m p e r a t u r e b y 1 - 2 d e g r e e s F At l a n t a , G A h a s s e e n r o u g h l y 8 d e g r e e F In c r e a s e i n S u m m e r Te m p e r a t u r e s D u e t o Tr e e C a n o p y R e d u c t i o n Ov e r a 1 0 - Y e a r P e r i o d Pa c k e t Pa g e 27 8 of 30 7 Gl o b a l W a r m i n g & C O Gl o b a l W a r m i n g & C O 2 2 Hi g h L e v e l s O f C a r b o n D i o x i d e ( C O 2 ) a n d O t h e r Ga s e s T r a p E a r t h ’ s H e a t , Pr e v e n t i n g i t f r o m E s c a p i n g i n t o S p a c e Ab o u t H a l f o f t h e Gr e e n h o u s e E f f e c t is C a u s e d b y C O 2 CO 2 Pr o d u c t i o n i s Re d u c e d b y T r e e s Pa c k e t Pa g e 27 9 of 30 7 St o r m W a t e r R u n O f f St o r m W a t e r R u n O f f Mo n o l i t h i c c o n c r e t e s i d e w a l k s a r e im p e r v i o u s . St o r m w a t e r r u n s o f f i n t o t h e g u t t e r an d i s l o s t Si d e w a l k s c a n b e m i l e s l o n g … Pa c k e t Pa g e 28 0 of 30 7 Th e S o l u t i o n Th e S o l u t i o n Mo d u l a r I n t e r l o c k i n g Re c y c l e d R u b b e r & Ru b b e r / P l a s t i c P a v i n g Sy s t e m s : Un b r e a k a b l e Ma i n t a i n a b l e Ca p t u r e s s t o r m w a t e r El i m i n a t e s t r i p & f a l l En d s c h r o n i c b r e a k o u t TE R R E W A L K S TE R R E W A L K S ™™ & R u b b e r s i d e w a l k s & R u b b e r s i d e w a l k s Ru b b e r s i d e w a l k s d o w e l s y s t e m Pa c k e t Pa g e 28 1 of 30 7 Tr e e s - E c o n o m i c B e n e f i t s Ea c h y e a r , P o r t l a n d Or e g o n ’s t r e e s p r o v i d e $ 2 7 mi l l i o n d o l l a r s i n en v i r o n m e n t a l b e n e f i t s . Po r t l a n d , O R r e c e i v e s $ 3 . 8 0 in e c o n o m i c b e n e f i t f o r e v e r y $1 . 0 0 i n v e s t e d i n t h e i r t r e e s . Ne w Y o r k C i t y r e c e i v e s $5 . 6 0 i n e c o n o m i c b e n e f i t f o r ev e r y $ 1 . 0 0 s p e n t o n t h e i r tr e e s Pa c k e t Pa g e 28 2 of 30 7 Mo d u l a r i t y i s K e y Mo d u l a r i t y i s K e y Al l o w s a c c e s s t o u t i l i t i e s li n e s a n d t r e e r o o t s Pr o v i d e s t e m p o r a r y pa t h w a y s Pr e v e n t s s t o r m w a t e r r u n - o f f Ac c o m m o d a t e s f r e e z e - t h a w Pa c k e t Pa g e 28 3 of 30 7 AD A C o m p l i a n t AD A C o m p l i a n t No n - S k i d s u r f a c e Lo w v i b r a t i o n Sa f e t r a n s i t i o n 4’ w i d t h m i n i m u m Pa c k e t Pa g e 28 4 of 30 7 Im p r o v e d A i r Q u a l i t y Im p r o v e d A i r Q u a l i t y C a r b o n S e q u e s t r a t i o n : Tr e e s A c t a s a C a r b o n S i n k by R e m o v i n g C a r b o n f r o m th e A i r a n d S t o r i n g I t a s Ce l l u l o s e i n t h e i r T r u n k , Br a n c h e s , L e a v e s a n d Ro o t s W h i l e R e l e a s i n g Ox y g e n B a c k i n t o t h e A i r Pa c k e t Pa g e 28 5 of 30 7 Di v e r t s W a s t e T i r e s Di v e r t s W a s t e T i r e s fr o m L a n d f i l l fr o m L a n d f i l l 10 0 % r e c y c l e d t i r e r u b b e r , f a b r i c a t e d in t o d e n s e , d u r a b l e m o d u l e s Pa c k e t Pa g e 28 6 of 30 7 Ha w t h o r n e , N Y Ne w R o c h e l l e , N Y Ne w a r k , N J Co r n w a l l , V T De l a n d , F L Ta l l a h a s s e e , F L Ho l l y w o o d , F L Sa v a n n a h , G A Ga r d e n C i t y , I D Ol y m p i a , W A Se a t t l e , W A Ta c o m a , W A Mc K i n n e y , T X Wa l - M a r t Le e C o l l e g e Ho u s t o n , T X Al a m e d a , C A Al h a m b r a , C A Al b a n y , C A Bu r b a n k , C A Ba k e r s f i e l d , C A Be r k e l e y , C A Ca m a r i l l o , C A Ca l v a r a s C o u n t y , C A Ce r r i t o s , C A Co n c o r d , C A Du b l i n , C A Fi l l m o r e , C A Fr e m o n t , C A Gl e n d a l e , C A He s p e r i a , C A In g l e w o o d , C A Le m o n G r o v e , C A Lo m p o c , C A Lo n g B ea c h , C A Lo s A n g e l e s , C A LA U n i f i e d S c h o o l D i s t r i c t Ma n t e c a , C A Me n l o P a r k , C A Mo r r o B a y , C A Mo t i o n P i c t u r e s F u n d No v a t o , C A Oa k l a n d , C A Re d w o o d C i t y , C A Ri v e r s i d e , C A Sa c r a m e n t o , C A Sa n F e r n a n d o , C A Sa n F r a n c i s c o , C A Sa n L e a n d r o , C A Sa n M a r i n o , C A Sa n D i e g o , C A Sa n t a B a r b a r a , C A Sa n t a F e S p r i n g s , C A Sa n t a M o n i c a , C A St o c k t o n , C A Th o u s a n d O a k s , C A Ve n t u r a , C A Ov e r 2 5 0 , 0 0 0 s . f . i n o v e r 9 0 c i t i e s , 1 7 s t a t e s , 14 5 I n s t a l l a t i o n s , s p e c ’ d b y c i t y e n g i n e e r s , pu b l i c w o r k s , a n d ‘ g r e e n ’ a r c h i t e c t s Wa s h i n g t o n , D C Au r o r a , C O Wa l - M a r t Cu r r e n t I n s t a l l a t i o n s Cu r r e n t I n s t a l l a t i o n s Ch i c a g o , I L Kn o x v i l l e , T N Al b a n y , O R Ce n t r a l P o i n t e , O R Sa l e m , O R Ba l t i m o r e , M D Mt . L e b a n o n , P A An n A r b o r , M I Ad r i a n , M I Po y n e t t e , W I Fi t c h b u r g , W I Pa c k e t Pa g e 28 7 of 30 7 TE R R E W A L K S TE R R E W A L K S ™™ Pe r m a n e n t U s e Te m p o r a r y U s e co n s t r u c t i o n n e e d s sp e c i a l e v e n t s E a s y - i n t e r l o c k i n g , cl i c k s t o g e t h e r . 10 0 % w a s t e pl a s t i c & r u b b e r Pa c k e t Pa g e 28 8 of 30 7 Ba l t i m o r e , N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 6 In s t a l l a t i o n In s t a l l a t i o n S i t e s Pa c k e t Pa g e 28 9 of 30 7 Sa n t a M o n i c a , C A M a y 2 0 0 4 In s t a l l a t i o n S i t e s Pa c k e t Pa g e 29 0 of 30 7 Wa s h i n g t o n , D C A u g u s t 2 0 0 6 In s t a l l a t i o n S i t e s In s t a l l a t i o n S i t e s Pa c k e t Pa g e 29 1 of 30 7 Au r o r a , C O J u l y 2 0 0 6 In s t a l l a t i o n S i t e s In s t a l l a t i o n S i t e s Pa c k e t Pa g e 29 2 of 30 7 Ho b o k e n , N J D e c 2 0 0 4 In s t a l l a t i o n S i t e s In s t a l l a t i o n S i t e s Pa c k e t Pa g e 29 3 of 30 7 Sa n F e r n a n d o , C A J u l y 2 0 0 4 In s t a l l a t i o n S i t e s In s t a l l a t i o n S i t e s Pa c k e t Pa g e 29 4 of 30 7 Packet Page 295 of 307 v Ci t y o f K i r k l a n d 20 0 6 S I D E W A L K M A I N T E N A N C E P R O J E C T RU B B E R S I D E W A L K I N S T A L L A T I O N S 65 1 3 1 0 3 RD Ave NE Af t e r Before Be f o r e Be f o r e Before Af t e r Af t e r Af t e r 67 1 6 & 6 7 0 8 1 0 3 RD Ave NE 65 0 8 1 0 2 RD A v e N E 65 2 6 1 0 3 RD A v e N E 65 1 3 65 2 6 67 0 8 67 1 6 65 0 8 Attachment B Pa c k e t Pa g e 29 6 of 30 7 Ru b b e r S i d e w a l k v s . C o n c r e t e S i d e w a l k (2 0 0 6 S i d e w a l k M a i n t e n a n c e P r o j e c t ) $8 7 $2 0 $2 0 $7 0 $6 0 $2 $ 4 $- $ 2 0 $ 4 0 $ 6 0 $ 8 0 $ 1 0 0 $ 1 2 0 $ 1 4 0 $ 1 6 0 $ 1 8 0 $ 2 0 0 Ru b b e r S i d e w a l k Co n c r e t e S i d e w a l k Co s t p e r S q u a r e Y a r d Materials*Remove Sidewalk Installation Base Rock (B a s e d o n L o w Bi d o f 1 6 5 S Y ) (B a s e d o n L o w Bi d o f 4 6 S Y ) To t a l C o s t / S Y $8 3 . 8 9 To t a l C o s t / S Y $1 7 9 . 2 2 * R u b b e r S i d e w a l k m a t e r i a l s w e r e p u r c h a s e d b y t h e Ci t y p r i o r t o t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n c o n t r a c t . M a t e r i a l s we r e p r o v i d e d t o t h e C o n t r a c t o r f o r i n s t a l l a t i o n . Attachment C-2 Pa c k e t Pa g e 29 7 of 30 7 Attachment C H:\Pw\CIP group\Project Files\NM\CNM0057\CNM0657\council\RSW2\AttachC- Rubber Sidewalk Followup.doc 8/21/2007 12:44:24 PM CITY OF KIRKLAND Department of Public Works 123 Fifth Avenue, Kirkland, WA 98033 425.587.3000 www.ci.kirkland.wa.us MEMORANDUM To: David Ramsay, City Manager From: Daryl Grigsby, Public Works Director Ray Steiger, P.E., Capital Projects Manager Date: August 3, 2007 Subject: RUBBER SIDEWALKS INSTALLATION AND FOLLOW-UP In February 2007, Council was presented with a Reading File Memo that discussed a City pilot project involving the installation of rubber sidewalks. In March, Council awarded a contract to Taggart Construction, Bothell, WA, and rubber sidewalk panels were installed in areas of the Lakeview Neighborhood during the month of April. With this memo we wish to update Council on the current status of the pilot project by providing an overview on final cost differences between the rubber sidewalk and conventional concrete sidewalk, an outline for monitoring the new installations and a recommendation for future rubber sidewalk installations within the City. CONSTRUCTION Kirkland’s rubber sidewalk pilot project consisted of installing rubber sidewalk panels in five locations (approximately 420 square feet) on 103rd Ave NE and 102nd Ave NE as part of the 2006 Sidewalk Maintenance Project. Please see Attachment C-1 for installation locations including before and after photos of each. The installation of the rubber sidewalk was fairly easy with construction starting with the removal of the broken concrete sidewalk panels and then exposing the root systems of the existing mature street trees. The City’s Arborist, Mark Padgett, and the contractor worked closely together to ensure the exposed roots were handled appropriately and not damaged in any way. Mark exposed the root systems using an air spade (a tool that removes soil and exposes the root system through the use of compressed air) and provided guidance on how to work around the roots without damaging the trees. After the roots were exposed, “structural soil” was placed around the existing root structure. Structural soil, or CU-Soil, is a soil mixture that was developed and patented by Cornell University and consists of larger aggregate in a matrix of clay topsoil and a hydrogel copolymer (which keeps the topsoil and larger aggregate from separating). Structural Soil has been shown to be beneficial for root structures as the larger aggregate provides adequate pore space and strength to support the loads from sidewalks and driveways while the topsoil promotes healthy root system development for the tree. A layer of geotextile fabric and a fine-grained crushed rock leveling course was then placed on top of the structural soil layer. The leveling course allowed the contractor to achieve a compact and level surface for placement of the Roots exposed under the old sidewalk panels. Packet Page 298 of 307 Memorandum to David Ramsay July 9, 2007 H:\Pw\CIP group\Project Files\NM\CNM0057\CNM0657\council\RSW2\AttachC- Rubber Sidewalk Followup.doc rubber sidewalk panels. The final step of installation consisted of connecting the rubber sidewalk panels to each other with fiberglass dowels and then securing the side panels in-place with a continuous aluminum edge restraint strip. The sides of the rubber panels were not always square and the pre-drilled dowel holes did not always line up perfectly. According to the Rubbersidewalks, Inc. representative the reason is because they are manufactured from recycled tires, however, they are currently working on improving the dowel connection system through tighter controls during the manufacturing process for the panels. The City’s contractor often had to change out panels in order to get a better fit and he hoped that future installations will be made easier through such improvements. During and after the installation we learned of several other agencies that are thinking about or are planning on installing rubber sidewalk in the near future. For our project we jointly purchased the rubber sidewalk materials with the City of Bellevue in order to save on shipping costs. At this time, Bellevue staff is waiting until Fall, 2007 to do their installation and they have expressed appreciation to us for our comments and insights gained through our construction experience. During the construction phase we were also contacted by staff members from the Cities of Portland, Bellingham and Redmond who are all very interested in receiving our feedback as they make plans to visit Kirkland’s installations. COSTS Based on bids received from the 2006 Sidewalk Maintenance Project, the cost of installing rubber sidewalk was over twice the cost of constructing conventional concrete sidewalk. Attachment C- 2 shows a comparison of the unit prices for constructing both rubber and concrete sidewalks based on the low bid received for the Project. Rubbersidewalks Inc. promotes the product life of the rubber sidewalk panels, when located adjacent to trees, as being 20+ years. However, the first rubber sidewalk installation was constructed nine years ago (1998) which is only half of the predicted product life span so only time will tell whether a potential reduction in maintenance costs will outweigh the known additional costs for the construction of the rubber sidewalks. From past Kirkland maintenance experiences, for the past ten years the City’s street crews have typically responded to the Lakeview Neighborhood area an average of twice a year to grind down or patch the specific sidewalk location that have now been replaced with rubber sidewalks. Compaction of fine crushed rock that serves as a base for the rubber sidewalk panels. Installation of rubber sidewalk panels Packet Page 299 of 307 Memorandum to David Ramsay July 9, 2007 H:\Pw\CIP group\Project Files\NM\CNM0057\CNM0657\council\RSW2\AttachC- Rubber Sidewalk Followup.doc MONITORING Public Works staff will visit the rubber sidewalk installation sites on a quarterly basis to observe the performance of the rubber sidewalk panels. Staff will photograph the sites in order to have historical documentation of the condition of the sidewalks. We will also monitor each location for the general condition of the panels looking for any shifting or lifting, as well as recording all maintenance activities, if required. Staff last visited the Lakeview Neighborhood site on June 26th, 2007. During the site visit we spoke with two property owners who live near the rubber sidewalk installations and both property owners provided positive feedback on the new installations, both being pleased with the final product. One resident even commented on how nice the feel of the rubber sidewalk is underfoot compared to traditional concrete sidewalks. A few of the sites had some grass growing up between the edges of the sidewalk panels but each location appeared to be performing as expected with no bulging or lifting of the panels being observed. OUTLOOK There appears to be many benefits in installing rubber sidewalks in locations where tree roots have damaged conventional sidewalks and where tree retention is desired. Those benefits need to be weighed against the additional cost of rubber sidewalk and the unknown long-term performance and maintenance requirements. The following table contains a list of pros and cons associated with rubber sidewalk installations: Staff will continue to monitor the existing rubber sidewalk installations while also exploring other solutions for repairing sidewalks damaged by tree growth. If, however, another opportunity presents itself, staff does recommend expanding the pilot program to include a different City location with trees of a different species than those along 103rd Ave NE and 102nd Ave NE. Engineering staff can work with the City’s staff arborist and the street maintenance department to determine an appropriate candidate for a future installation. Attachments (2) PROS CONS Uses recycled materials – diverts tires from landfills Company is based in California – is not local and shipping costs add to the final costs Increases water infiltration to roots Materials and installation costs are currently twice as expensive as conventional sidewalks Pavers are flexible & will bend versus breaking – reducing tripping hazards Irregularities in panels need to be improved by manufacturer to ease installation. Maintenance required less often in areas where trees exist Maintenance schedule (if/when required) unknown Sidewalk replacement required less often in areas where trees exist Long-term performance unknown Positive feedback from residents Completed rubber sidewalk installation Packet Page 300 of 307 Packet Page 301 of 307 AM-2462 8. Suspending the Application of Chapter 23.90.040(C), Retention of Vegetation Edmonds City Council Meeting Date:08/25/2009 Submitted By:Rob Chave Time:10 Minutes Department:Planning Type:Action Review Committee: Committee Action: Information Subject Title Review and potential action on an interim zoning ordinance suspending the application of Chapter 23.90.040(C), Retention of Vegetation on Subdividable, Undeveloped Parcels. Recommendation from Mayor and Staff Approve the draft ordinance. Previous Council Action This item was reviewed by Council on August 17, 2009, and continued for further review. Narrative This issue involves application of a provision in the city's critical areas regulations pertaining to native vegetation requirements in the RS-12 and RS-20 zones. A recent court case in King County invalidating its set-asides in rural areas -- which had some similarities to the city's provisions -- indicates some doubt as to the enforceability of the City's regulations. Discussions with the City Attorney's office have resulted in the draft ordinance (Exhibit 1). The current draft of the ordinance has been updated by the City Attorney's office to address the specific issue. An alternative approach, voiced during discussion on August 17th, would be to require site-specific critical areas studies in lieu of the uniform percentage approach required in the City's current provisions. This is something the Planning Board should consider in its review of the regulation; absent more specific standards for review, this type of analysis would be difficult to evaluate under the existing code. Fiscal Impact Attachments Link: Exhibit 1: Draft Ordinance Form Routing/Status Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status 1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 08/19/2009 01:14 PM APRV 2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 08/19/2009 01:26 PM APRV 3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 08/19/2009 01:39 PM APRV Form Started By: Rob Chave Started On: 08/19/2009 12:26 PM Packet Page 302 of 307 Final Approval Date: 08/19/2009 Packet Page 303 of 307 {BFP738815.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 1 - 0006.90000 BFP 08/19/09 ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING A ZONING MORATORIUM ON THE APPLICATION OF ECDC 23.90.040(C) DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - SPECIFIC HABITATS, SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING DATE, PROVIDING FOR PLANNING BOARD REVIEW, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, the Washington Court of Appeals, Division I, in Citizens Alliance for Property Rights v. Sims, 145 Wash. App. 649 (Div I, 2008) struck down an ordinance of King County imposing mandatory native growth set asides; and WHEREAS, the provisions of ECDC 23.90.040(C) directs the director to require retention of a minimum of 30 percent of native vegetation on undeveloped (or redeveloped), subdividable lands zoned as RS-12 or RS-20 per Chapter 16.10 ECDC; and WHEREAS, the Court of Appeals held that while King County demonstrated sufficient “nexus” between the identified public problem underlying the ordinance (excessive clearing) and the County’s proposed solution (restrictions on clearing) the Court of Appeals determined that the County’s regulatory approach was not necessarily “proportional” to the specific development impacts of each affected property; and WHEREAS, the use of setbacks and other open area has been a traditional zoning tool, and Packet Page 304 of 307 {BFP738815.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 2 - WHEREAS, the City deems it appropriate to suspend application of this provision of its critical areas ordinance unless or until the matter can be reviewed by its Planning Board, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A zoning moratorium is hereby declared on the application of subsection (C) of ECDC 23.90.040 to any new or pending development proposal on subdividable, undeveloped (or redeveloped) lands zoned as RS-12 or R-20. This moratorium shall be in effect from the effective date of this ordinance for a period of six months unless sooner terminated by action of the City Council. Application of other sections of ECDC 23.90.040 shall not be affected by the instant moratorium to subsection (C) thereof. Section 2. A public hearing is hereby set on this measure for __________ 2009, such date being within sixty (60) days of the adoption of this ordinance. Section 3. The issue of how critical areas tracts and their dedication to the City may be undertaken in conformance with State law is hereby forwarded to the Planning Board for review and recommendation. In the event that the Planning Board is unable to return a recommendation to the City Council within four months of the date of adoption of this ordinance, the Planning Board is requested to adopt a work plan and report that work plan to the City Council prior to the expiration of this moratorium. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi- cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. Packet Page 305 of 307 {BFP738815.DOC;1\00006.900000\ } - 3 - APPROVED: MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY W. SCOTT SNYDER FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Page 306 of 307 {BFP738815.DOC;1\00006.900000\ }- 4 - SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________ of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the ____ day of ___________, 2009, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING A ZONING MORATORIUM ON THE APPLICATION OF ECDC 23.90.040(C) DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - SPECIFIC HABITATS, SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING DATE, PROVIDING FOR PLANNING BOARD REVIEW, 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 ________________, 2009. CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE Packet Page 307 of 307